Independent Forensic Team Report: Oroville Dam Spillway Incident

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 5th, 2018

The Oroville Dam spillway incident was caused by a long-term systemic failure of the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), regulatory, and general i

The Oroville Dam spillway incident was caused by a long-term systemic failure of the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), regulatory, and general industry practices to recognize and address inherent spillway design and construction weaknesses, poor bedrock quality, and deteriorated service spillway chute conditions. The incident cannot reasonably be “blamed” mainly on any one individual, group, or organization. During service spillway operation on February 7, 2017, water injection through both cracks and joints in the chute slab resulted in uplift forces beneath the slab that exceeded the uplift capacity and structural strength of the slab, at a location along the steep section of the chute . The uplifted slab section exposed the underlying poor quality foundation rock at that location to unexpected severe erosion, resulting in removal of additional slab sections and more erosion . Responding to the damage to the service spillway chute necessitated difficult risk tradeoffs while the lake continued to rise. The resulting decisions, made without a full understanding of relative uncertainties and consequences, allowed the reservoir level to rise above the emergency spillway weir for the first time in the project’s history, leading to severe and rapid erosion downstream of the weir and, ultimately, the evacuation order. . . . There were many opportunities to intervene and prevent the incident , but the overall system of interconnected factors operated in a way that these opportunities were missed. Numerous human , organizational, and industry factors led to the physical factors not being recognized and properly addressed, and to the decision-making during the incident.

Independent Review Panel (IRP) Report for the 2014 Long-Term Operations Biological Opinions (LOBO) Annual Science Review

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | December 1st, 2014

Independent Review Panel (IRP) Report for the 2015 Long-Term Operations Biological Opinions (LOBO) Annual Science Review

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | December 1st, 2015

This report presents findings and opinions of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) assembled by the Delta Science Program to inform the National Marine Fisheries Service (N

This report presents findings and opinions of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) assembled by the Delta Science Program to inform the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) as to the efficacy of water operations and certain regulatory actions prescribed by their respective Long-term Operations Biological Opinions’ (LOBO) Reasonable and Prudent Alternative Actions (RPAs) as applied from October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015 (Water Year 2015).  This year’s annual review focused primarily on: (1) Shasta Reservoir and Sacramento River temperature monitoring, modeling, and management, (2) the River Assessment for Forecasting Temperature (RAFT) decision support tool (model), (3) an Enhanced Particle Tracking Model (E-PTM), and (4) a USFWS report on past, present, and future approaches to incidental take of Delta Smelt.  After reviewing a required set of written documents (Appendix 1), the IRP convened at a public workshop in Sacramento, CA on 5-6 November 2015. The first day of the 2-day workshop included agency presentations and provided a forum for the IRP to interact and consider information presented on water operations, temperature modeling, monitoring and RPA Actions as implemented in yet another critically dry 2015 water year. On the second day, the IRP deliberated in a private session beginning at 9:00 a.m. in order to prepare and present their initial findings at the public workshop at 2:00 p.m., after which there was an opportunity for agency representatives, members of the public, and the IRP members to comment and otherwise exchange impressions and information. Subsequent IRP communication and deliberations were conducted via email and conference calls in the course of drafting this final report. Click here for federal agency response letter

Independent Review Panel (IRP) Report for the 2017 Long-term Operations Biological Opinions (LOBO) Biennial Science Review (January 24, 2018)

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | January 31st, 2018

Information for the Future: The West Side San Joaquin Valley Project

West Side San Joaquin Valley Coordinating Council, University of California, Water Resources Center | September 1st, 1970

Inhabiting the Delta: A Landscape Approach to Transformative Socio-Ecological Restoration

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | September 19th, 2017

Current legislation and plans for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) call for large-scale restoration of aquatic and terrestrial habitats, which will require sign

Current legislation and plans for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) call for large-scale restoration of aquatic and terrestrial habitats, which will require significant changes in waterways, land uses, and cultural patterns. These re-made landscapes will be subject to a variety of new human uses, which Delta planning and adaptive management literature has yet to adequately consider. Failing to account for human uses and evolving place values can lead to diminished performance and public support for Delta restoration efforts. Our empirical study examined restored and naturalized Delta landscapes using an integrative landscape approach that seeks to reconcile multiple goals and land-use agendas that span ecological, social, economic, and political domains. The research design consisted of six overlapping methods that included a planning, policy, and law review specific to the Delta; surveys and interviews with approximately 100 land managers, scientists, land-owners, law-enforcement personnel, agency representatives, and Delta residents; nine case studies of restored and naturalized delta landscapes; GIS mapping; and extensive field work. Findings derived from the synthesis of these methods show that human uses of the Delta’s re-wilded landscapes are diverse and pervasive. Given the infrastructural and urbanized context of the region, these environments are subject to multiple and sometimes conflicting uses, perceptions, and place values. Though these myriad uses cannot be fully predicted or controlled (nor should they be), findings showed that more proactive and inclusive planning for human uses can encourage or discourage particular uses while also building constituency, support, and active engagement in ecological restoration efforts. We conclude that reconciling human uses with ecological recovery in the Delta will require a more localized, multi-functional, and creative approach to designing and adaptively managing these emergent landscapes. We recommend that more resources and experimental prototyping be dedicated to such work.

Initial Alternatives Information Report for the North/Central Delta Improvement Study (Delta Cross Channel, Franks Tract, and Through- Delta Facility Evaluation)

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | March 17th, 2010

The U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior) Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) are evaluating the feasibility o

The U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior) Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) are evaluating the feasibility of using conveyance and operations actions in the north and central region of the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) to improve water quality and fish conditions. Specifically, Reclamation is evaluating the feasibility of these actions in the North/Central Delta Improvement Study (NoCDIS or Study). The Initial Alternatives Information Report (IAIR) identifies, discusses, and screens measures to address the problems and opportunities. These measures are used to develop initial alternatives. Initial alternatives from the IAIR will be incorporated into and refined in the subsequent Plan Formulation Report (PFR). Subject to continued appropriations and a determination of federal interest, the Study should culminate in an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) and a Feasibility Report. Reclamation is the federal lead agency for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, and DWR is the state lead agency for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance.

Innovation in Monitoring: The U.S. Geological Survey Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, California, Flow-Station Network

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 1st, 2016

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) installed the first gage to measure the flow of water into California’s Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta from the Sacramento River

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) installed the first gage to measure the flow of water into California’s Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta from the Sacramento River in the late 1800s. Today, a network of 35 hydro-acoustic meters measure flow throughout the delta. This region is a critical part of California’s freshwater supply and conveyance system. With the data provided by this flow-station network—sampled every 15 minutes and updated to the web every hour—state and federal water managers make daily decisions about how much freshwater can be pumped for human use, at which locations, and when. Fish and wildlife scientists, working with water managers, also use this information to protect fish species affected by pumping and loss of habitat. The data are also used to help determine the success or failure of efforts to restore ecosystem processes in what has been called the “most managed and highly altered” watershed in the country.

Insights into estuary habitat loss in the western United States using a new method for mapping maximum extent of tidal wetlands

PLOS | August 14th, 2019

Effective conservation and restoration of estuarine wetlands require accurate maps of their historical and current extent, as well as estimated losses of these va

Effective conservation and restoration of estuarine wetlands require accurate maps of their historical and current extent, as well as estimated losses of these valued habitats. Existing coast-wide tidal wetland mapping does not explicitly map historical tidal wetlands that are now disconnected from the tides, which represent restoration opportunities; nor does it use water level models or high-resolution elevation data (e.g. lidar) to accurately identify current tidal wetlands. To better inform estuarine conservation and restoration, we generated new maps of current and historical tidal wetlands for the entire contiguous U.S. West Coast (Washington, Oregon, and California). The new maps are based on an Elevation-Based Estuary Extent Model (EBEEM) that combines lidar digital elevation models (DEMs) and water level models to establish the maximum historical extent of tidal wetlands, representing a major step forward in mapping accuracy for restoration planning and analysis of wetland loss. Building from this new base, we also developed an indirect method for mapping tidal wetland losses, and created maps of these losses for 55 estuaries on the West Coast (representing about 97% of historical West Coast vegetated tidal wetland area). Based on these new maps, we estimated that total historical estuary area for the West Coast is approximately 735,000 hectares (including vegetated and nonvegetated areas), and that about 85% of vegetated tidal wetlands have been lost from West Coast estuaries. Losses were highest for major river deltas. The new maps will help interested groups improve action plans for estuarine wetland habitat restoration and conservation, and will also provide a better baseline for understanding and predicting future changes with projected sea level rise.

Instream Flow Studies for the Protection of Public Trust Resources: A Prioritized Schedule and Estimate of Costs

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | February 18th, 2011

Chapter 5 of the 2009-10 Seventh Extraordinary Session (SB X7 1, Simitian) directs the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) to submit to the Legislatur

Chapter 5 of the 2009-10 Seventh Extraordinary Session (SB X7 1, Simitian) directs the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) to submit to the Legislature, by December 31, 2010, a prioritized schedule and estimate of costs to complete instream flow studies for two categories of rivers and streams, by two specific deadlines: 1) high priority rivers and streams in the Delta watershed that were not covered in the Board’s “Final Report on Development of Flow Criteria for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Ecosystem” by 2012; and 2) all major rivers and streams outside the Sacramento River watershed by 2018. The definition of the two stream categories is ambiguous. There are a number of tributaries that are both in the Delta watershed and outside the Sacramento River watershed, including the San Joaquin, Calaveras, Cosumnes, and Mokelumne Rivers. The State Water Board interprets the first category to mean all Delta and Sacramento River tributaries not covered under the Board’s “Final Report on Development of Flow Criteria for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Ecosystem.” Two additional schedules are prioritized for “all major rivers and streams outside the Sacramento River watershed.” This report identifies 138 rivers and streams for instream flow studies. The total estimated cost to conduct scientific instream flow studies for the high priority rivers and streams tributary to the Delta is $32.46 million. The total estimated cost to conduct scientific instream flow studies for the high priority rivers and streams outside the Delta watershed is $107.25 million. The detailed schedules and costs are preceded with a few short discussions on the timelines given in the directive, the organization of schedules, the cost estimates for instream flow studies, and cost estimates for the next logical step: setting instream flow objectives.