South of Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for Certain Lands Overlying the Kern County Subbasin

South of the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (SoKR GSAs) | July 27th, 2022

Southeast California Regional Basin Study

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | September 1st, 2015

The United States Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow) Basin Study Program is a 21st Century approach to help

The United States Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow) Basin Study Program is a 21st Century approach to help address water supply challenges. The Southeast California Regional Basin Study (Study) takes a collaborative approach to solve local water supply and regional conveyance and storage issues. As part of this Study, the Bureau of Reclamation’s Southern California Area Office cooperated with the Borrego Water District (BWD), Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and other interested regional stakeholders to assess water supply and demand challenges in the Southeast California region. This Study’s report is comprised of seven chapters; they are: introduction, supply, demand, alternative strategies, alternative analysis, findings, and references. Three appendices provide additional details regarding climate change modeling results, engineering design and economic analysis. The Study focuses on a regional area encompassing the Coachella, Borrego and Imperial Valleys. The Study addresses current and future supply and demand imbalances, provides an assessment of existing infrastructure resources, and develops options and alternatives to solve identified issues and help plan for an uncertain water supply future. The local stakeholders provided substantial informational resources on historical and projected supply and demand, and existing infrastructure. The water districts’ background information includes numerous groundwater, urban water and integrated regional planning studies, all of which were produced and/or updated between 2010 and 2012. Extensive supply and demand studies for the Colorado River Basin and California’s Central Valley – the two imported water supply sources for the Study area – also contributed data to this Study. Reclamation’s Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study (Colorado River Basin Study) (Reclamation, 2012) and the California Department of Water Resources biennial State Water Project (SWP) report (State of California, 2012 a and b) were both completed in 2012. Reclamation’s Colorado River Basin Study included several technical analyses related to optimal water utilization, conveyance and storage alternatives relative to climate change and future water supply uncertainty. Because the Southeast California Basin Study region is dependent on both Colorado River and SWP imports, several sections of the Study reference and/or summarize both reports extensively. Existing data was used to develop structural and non-structural options to resolve supply-demand imbalances and future uncertainty. Non-structural options included governance, and regulatory or operational changes that could facilitate stakeholder processes to better conserve water or improve the use of existing facilities to convey and store water. Non-structural options were addressed qualitatively due to the complexity of interagency negotiations that would likely be involved. The structural options involved an appraisal level design effort to evaluate pipeline alignments to convey water supplies between the Study stakeholders. Both the structural and non-structural options were assessed in their capability to resolve regional water supply and demand relative to future climate uncertainties. Climate change scenarios analyzed the potential impacts increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation may have on supply and demand across the Study area. The analysis addressed both local and imported supply sources. Climate change is expected to result in increasing temperatures across the Study area and in the Colorado River and SWP basins over time. As temperatures continue to increase, annual precipitation will become more variable. Precipitation changes may affect recharge of the Study area’s local groundwater aquifers and the Colorado River and SWP snowpacks. The climate effects on imported supply have been extensively discussed in the Colorado River Basin Study and the biennial SWP report. Increasing temperatures will increase both supply and demand uncertainty. CVWD could see an increase in SWP supply deliveries under average or greater precipitation-snowpack conditions. Dry years or extended droughts could substantially decrease SWP deliveries. However, CVWD and IID receive the majority of their supply from the Colorado River. Future climate scenarios indicate an increased potential for lower basin shortages. As senior water right holders and under the Secretary of the Interior’s Colorado River Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages and Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead, IID and CVWD would not be impacted by short-term shortage issues. The Colorado River Basin Study analysis indicates these shortage vulnerabilities could be mitigated by up to 50% through a variety of management actions and operational changes. Each Study option was assessed as an adaptive strategy to climate change. The structural options to convey and store water in the Borrego Valley groundwater basin are not viable at the present time. A non-structural option may be more cost-effective for the Study region, have the potential to meet the Study objectives, and may offset climate change uncertainty that is impacting available imported water supplies. Further study effort could include fostering groundwater sustainability in the Borrego Valley and promoting opportunities for additional groundwater banking between IID and CVWD in the Coachella Valley, per an October 2003 agreement. Other water and related resource options generated from discussions during the course of this Study include increasing storage opportunities at Lake Henshaw Dam, implementing best practices for flood control basins, and brackish desalination. These options may all play a greater role in diversifying the region’s water supply in the future. However, additional study is required to assess these water resource options.

SSALTS Final Phase 3 Report: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) | October 31st, 2016

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to provide input for consideration during development of the Salt and Nitrate Management Plan (SNMP) for the region under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Water Board). The findings have been used to guide discussions regarding establishment of regional salt management policies and the need for changes to the existing Central Valley Water Board Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans) to facilitate salt disposal in a manner that is most beneficial to the region and consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board’s (State Water Board) Recycled Water Policy. This work is being conducted under the direction of the Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) initiative, which is developing the SNMP for the Central Valley. The SSALTS project has been conducted in three phases (Figure 1-1): Phase 1: Identify and Characterize Existing Salt Accumulation Study Areas – The selection of representative study areas served as archetype situational examples to facilitate discussions regarding salt accumulation and disposal in the Central Valley. Each of these study areas was characterized to establish baseline information that was subsequently used to support development of salt disposal alternatives in Phases 2 and 3. Phase 2: Develop Potential Salt Management Strategies – Phase 2 of SSALTS developed potential long-term salt disposal alternatives in three parts: (1) in-valley alternatives; (2) out-of-valley alternatives; and (3) hybrid alternatives that combined in-valley and out-of valley salt disposal options. Phase 3: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation – Alternatives developed under Phase 2 were evaluated in this report using selected feasibility criteria (e.g., regulatory, institutional, economic, technological, etc.). The outcome of this evaluation was the identification and prioritization of acceptable salt disposal alternatives for potential incorporation into Central Valley SNMP as salt management implementation measures. The Phase 1 and Phase 2 SSALTS final reports were submitted to the CV-SALTS Executive Committee in December 2013 and September 2014, respectively (CDM Smith 2013; CDM Smith 2014). The Phase 3 SSALTS draft report was submitted to the CV-SALTS Executive Committee in March 2015. Comments were received and incorporated into the Phase 3 SSALTS draft report. The Executive Committee recommended postponing the finalization of the Phase 3 SSALTS report until a draft of the Nitrate Implementation Measures Study (NIMS) report was completed, so that salt and nitrate implementation measures and mitigation strategies could be coordinated. While based on the March 2015 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report – and thus including the changes based on the March 2015 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report – and thus including the changes based on the original comments, the September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report had major changes in terms of content and structure. The September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report was sent to the Project Committee on September 20, 2016 and comments were received on October 5, 2016. The second set of comments were addressed and incorporated into this October 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS final report. Appendix E. provides the comments and responses on the September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report. The Phase 3 SSALTS report provides a path forward, based on the foundation of Phases 1 and 2 and CV-SALTS Executive Committee discussions.

Stacked Incentives: Co-Funding Water Customer Incentive Programs

Pacific Institute | June 1st, 2021

Water utilities throughout the United States offer customer incentives to motivate action and foster engagement. Incentive programs can take many forms, such as rebate

Water utilities throughout the United States offer customer incentives to motivate action and foster engagement. Incentive programs can take many forms, such as rebates for high-efficiency fixtures and appliances, technical assistance for installing cisterns and rain gardens, and educational programs about water reuse. In addition to providing water-related benefits, many of these programs generate additional co-benefits, including reductions in energy use for heating or treating water and wastewater, increased carbon sequestration in landscapes, enhancements to local biodiversity, and more. These co-benefits present water utilities with an opportunity to build collaborative partnerships and co-funding for customer incentive programs through “stacked incentives.”

State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance

California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) | March 14th, 2018

The climate across California is changing, and the effects, such as rising average temperatures, shrinking mountain snowpack, more intense storms, and higher sea

The climate across California is changing, and the effects, such as rising average temperatures, shrinking mountain snowpack, more intense storms, and higher sea levels are expected to continue and worsen in the coming decades. Sea-level rise is caused by the thermal expansion of warming ocean water and melting of land ice as the Earth warms. It is one of the most obvious manifestations of the trend of climate change and is an immediate and real threat to lives, livelihoods, transportation, economies, and the environment in California. In April 2017, catalyzed by direction from Governor Brown and the need to ensure that best available science was informing sea-level rise planning decisions in California, a Working Group of the California Ocean Protection Council’s Science Advisory Team (OPC-SAT) released a report, entitled “Rising Seas in California: An Update on Sea-Level Rise.” The Rising Seas Report was prepared and peer-reviewed by some of the nation’s foremost experts in coastal processes, climate and sea-level rise science, observational and modeling science, the science of extremes, and decision-making under uncertainty. The report synthesized the current state of sea-level rise science, including advances in modeling and improved understanding of the processes that could drive extreme global sea-level rise as a result of ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. The report found that: Scientific understanding of sea-level rise is advancing at a rapid pace. The direction of sea-level change is clear; sea levels are rising. The rate of ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets is increasing, and California is particularly vulnerable to sea-level rise caused by ice loss from West Antarctica. New scientific evidence has highlighted the potential for extreme sea-level rise. Probabilities of specific sea-level increases can inform decisions. Current policy decisions are shaping our coastal future. Waiting for scientific certainty is neither a safe nor prudent option. The increased understanding of sea-level rise projections and polar ice sheet loss warranted an update to the State’s sea-level rise guidance document to ensure decisions were based on the best available science. Additionally, an increased policy focus requiring state and local governments to incorporate climate change into decision making merited an update to address the needs of both state and local audiences. This updated document, the “State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance” (Guidance), provides a bold, science-based methodology for state and local governments to analyze and assess the risks associated with sea-level rise, and to incorporate sea-level rise into their planning, permitting, and investment decisions. This Guidance provides: 1. A synthesis of the best available science on sea- level rise projections and rates for California; 2. A step-by-step approach for state agencies and local governments to evaluate those projections and related hazard information in decision making; and 3. Preferred coastal adaptation approaches.

State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance—2018 Update

Ocean Protection Council (OPC) | March 4th, 2018

This updated document, the “State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance” (Guidance), provides a bold, science-based methodology for state and local governments to ana

This updated document, the “State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance” (Guidance), provides a bold, science-based methodology for state and local governments to analyze and assess the risks associated with sea-level rise, and to incorporate sea-level rise into their planning, permitting, and investment decisions. This Guidance provides:  A synthesis of the best available science on sea-level rise projections and rates for California;  A step-by-step approach for state agencies and local governments to evaluate those projections and related hazard information in decision making; and  Preferred coastal adaptation approaches. 

State of the Estuary 2019 Update

San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP) | October 22nd, 2019

The San Francisco Estuary is a large and diverse system. Hundreds of miles of coastline stretch from the wide valleys of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers to the stee

The San Francisco Estuary is a large and diverse system. Hundreds of miles of coastline stretch from the wide valleys of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers to the steep headlands of the Golden Gate, with vast agricultural fields in the Delta and urbanized shorelines in Silicon Valley and many of the region’s cities. The complexity and scale of this system means it can take years to detect and assess changes. This interim State of the Estuary Report checks in on a few indicators of health and explores where the assessment should head over time. In the four years since the 2015 State of the Estuary Report, two issues have emerged as critical to how we assess the health of the estuarine ecosystem at the heart of the Bay Area and the Delta. First, the health of the Estuary and of the people who live near it and depend on it are inextricably linked. We need a healthy Bay and Delta to protect our shorelines from sea level rise, help keep our waters clean, provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife, and give people a place to enjoy nature. We also need to think more about human communities as we assess the health of natural communities. This focus means addressing environmental injustices that are deeply embedded in our culture and patterns of development. The second critical issue to emerge is the need for a greater focus on landscape resilience—how well the Bay and the Delta are equipped to respond to change—so that people and wildlife can thrive as climate change progresses. Taking these two ideas together, this report focuses on the nexus of social and ecological resilience as we look toward the future. The first section of the Report updates indicators of ecological health that span the entire extent of the San Francisco Estuary (Bay and Delta). Recent data show continued progress along the trajectories of the past decade. Tidal marsh restoration is proceeding at a brisk pace in the Bay and gaining traction in the Delta, while urban water conservation continues to meet mandated benchmarks, even during the drought. On the other hand, flows through the Estuary and across its floodplains continue to be well below levels that could increase and restore ecosystem health. Freshwater flows are a lynchpin of ecosystem processes that sustain physical habitats, fuel the food web, and regulate water quality. Creative approaches to using and re-using fresh water for environmental purposes are needed. Long-term trend analysis shows that fish communities in the Bay are declining. This analysis scores an index of 10 attributes of a healthy fish community. The index focuses on fish in offshore areas, and may not capture benefits to fish from near-shore wetland restoration projects. Despite this slow decline, fish communities in the saltier parts of the Estuary remain in good condition, while those in the brackish and freshwater areas are in poor condition. The next section of the report discusses three emerging indicators of Estuary health, offering options for how to assess resilience in future reports. Here, for the first time, the resilience of the Estuary’s shores is evaluated through the lens of subsidence and nature-based features. Elevation relative to sea level is a basic currency that must be tracked as the Pacific Ocean rises into the Estuary. The potential for the Estuary shore to be resilient to climate change and continue to provide benefits to people is related to how much of the shore zone is nature-based. The final emerging indicator, urban green space, is a first attempt to assess how access to nature is distributed across more and less advantaged communities. More work is needed to finalize all these emerging indicators before they can be included in any future quantitative assessment of the State of the Estuary. These emerging and updated indicators will help focus efforts to restore the Estuary’s health. In addition to continuing the successful aspects of restoration and conservation that this report describes, we need more investment in creative ways to use and restore flows for environmental health, to expand and build resilient shorelines and to weave considerations of social equity more strongly into efforts to improve environmental health. - J. Letitia Grenier, Lead Scientist

State Plan of Flood Control Descriptive Document (2010)

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 15th, 2010

This report provides an inventory and description of the existing flood control works (facilities), lands, programs, plans, conditions, and mode of operations and mainten

This report provides an inventory and description of the existing flood control works (facilities), lands, programs, plans, conditions, and mode of operations and maintenance (O&M) for the State-Federal flood protection system in the Central Valley of California. This flood protection system is composed of federally authorized project levees and related facilities for which the State has provided assurances1 of cooperation to the federal government. These State-provided assurances are an important distinction for what constitutes the State-federal flood protection system since other flood protection facilities in the Central Valley are not covered by State assurances and are not part of the State-federal system. Collectively, the facilities, lands, programs, conditions, and mode of O&M for the State-Federal flood protection system in the Central Valley are referred to as the State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC). This SPFC Descriptive Document is the first time that an inventory of the SPFC has been compiled or referenced in a single document. Until now, much of the information on the SPFC has been individually maintained for each of the many flood protection projects that constitute State-federal flood protection along the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and tributaries. For example, much of the information contained in sections of this report originates in 118 individual project (unit-specific) O&M manuals. The O&M manuals provide key information about each project and how it should be operated and maintained (see reference digital versatile disc (DVD) at the back of this report). In addition, since the individual projects for the system were implemented over almost a century, some information may have been lost or never obtained. In those cases, gaps exist in the information presented in this report and further research is required. It is important to note that the SPFC is only a portion of the larger system that provides flood protection for the Central Valley. The SPFC relies on many other features that do not meet the definition of the SPFC. For example, non-SPFC reservoirs provide substantial regulation of flows to levels that SPFC facilities can mostly handle. Private levees, locally operated drainage systems, and other facilities work in conjunction with SPFC facilities. Management practices such as emergency response, floodplain management, and other practices are part of the overall flood protection system. All parts of the system, including the SPFC, depend on other parts of the system to operate as a unit. This report is structured as a reference document for the SPFC. It includes narrative descriptions, tables, and figures, especially maps, to help the reader find information for this complex flood management system. Some sections include summary sections for readers who only need an overview of the subject. RELATED DOCUMENT: State Plan of Flood Control Descriptive Document 2016 Update

State Plan of Flood Control Descriptive Document 2016 Update

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 14th, 2016

The November 2016 State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC) Descriptive Document Update (2016 Update) is intended to serve as a reference for flood management planners and opera

The November 2016 State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC) Descriptive Document Update (2016 Update) is intended to serve as a reference for flood management planners and operators at the local, State, and federal levels. It is not a stand-alone document; rather, it works in conjunction with the November 2010 SPFC Descriptive Document, builds upon information presented in the original report, and documents changes to the SPFC that have occurred between November 2010 and July 2016. The 2016 Update documents the inventory of flood control projects and works (facilities), lands, programs, plans, conditions, and mode of operations and maintenance for the State-federal flood management system in the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River watersheds of California, as well as informs the 2017 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Update. In 2006 and 2007, California voters approved the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006 and the Central Valley Flood Protection Act of 2008 respectively. These acts defined the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River federal-State flood control projects as the SPFC, and required DWR to develop, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board to adopt, a Central Valley Flood Protection Plan. The Central Valley Flood Protection Plan is broader than the SPFC, affecting the entire watersheds of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. A complex system of dams and reservoirs, levees, weirs, bypasses, and other features constructed piecemeal over the last 100 years protects urban and rural areas against most flooding. This system has prevented billions of dollars in damage in its lifetime. A portion of this complex flood protection system includes State and federally authorized projects for which the Central Valley Flood Protection Board or DWR has provided assurances of cooperation to the federal government, known as the SPFC. These statutory authorizations include provisions regarding responsibility for operation and maintenance of the flood control facilities. The California Legislature has authorized funding for numerous flood control projects throughout the Sacramento and San Joaquin River watersheds. As the SPFC evolves, updates to the SPFC Descriptive Document will be useful in determining funding eligibility for funding for facility improvements. RELATED DOCUMENT:  State Plan of Flood Control (2010)

State Water Project and Central Valley Project Drought Contingency Plan May 1, 2021 – September 30, 2021

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | May 28th, 2021

This Drought Contingency Plan (Drought Plan) is prepared by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in an effo

This Drought Contingency Plan (Drought Plan) is prepared by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in an effort to provide updated information about areas of potential concern given the current dry hydrology of 2021. DWR and Reclamation operate the State Water Project (SWP) and the Central Valley Project (CVP), respectively, to the 2020 Record of Decision (ROD) as analyzed in the 2019 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Opinion and 2019 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinion on the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project (Collectively the 2019 Biological Opinions), and DWR also operates the SWP to the 2020 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Incidental Take Permit (ITP). This updated Drought Plan will be submitted by DWR to CDFW in response to Condition 8.21 of CDFW’s ITP. Concurrently, this plan will be shared with the Water Operations Management Team (WOMT) which includes representatives from DWR, Reclamation, USFWS, NMFS, CDFW, and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (collectively referred to as Agencies). This report was first drafted in February and subsequently updated in March, April, and May 2021.