Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 Flood Control Zone 7CITY CLE K� File # 7&�i�- AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 6, 1999 SUBJECT: Presentation by Zone 7, Flood Control re: Draft Environmental Impacts for Zone 7's Water Supply Planning Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: 1) Letter from Zone 7 Representative 2) Summary Section from Draft Environmental Report RECOMMENDATION: 1) Receive presentation �/U r 2) Ask questions, if appropriate 3) Provide direction to Staff for Environmental Report comments, if necessary FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The purchase of new water rights and the upgrade of Zone 7 systems will undoubtedly increase the cost of service hook-up charges and the cost of water usage. DESCRIPTION: Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7, has prepared a report for future water supply planning and has now released an environmental document covering this planning work. Zone 7 has asked to make a presentation to the Dublin City Council to explain Zone 7's planning impacts, including its affect on the Del Valle Reservoir Dublin's Planning Department Staff is presently reviewing the environmental report to determine the impact on Dublin and to offer comments. Staff is recommending that the City Council receive Zone Ts presentation, ask questions, if appropriate, and provide direction to Staff regarding comments on the Environmental Report, if necessary. COPIES TO: g Aagenmisc\z7envrpt. doc ITEM NO. 54,j JOF (�J ;~ ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONT'ROl AN~ WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 5997 PARKSIDE DRIVE 'I PLEASANTON. CAI.IFORNIA 94588-5127 ; PHONE (925) 484-2500 rM (925) 462-3914 March 30, 1999 Mr. Lee Thompson Director of Public Works - City ofDubIin P.o. Box 2340 Dublin. CA 94568 Dear Mr. Thompson: . .As you are aware a draft environmental impact report on Zone 71s water supply planning is currently being circulated for public comments. Zone 7 staff and its consultant, Leslie Moulton from E,nvironmental Services Associates, have made presentations to the Livennore and Pleasanton City Councils. Accordingly, we are offering to make a prese~tation to your City Council at its next meeting on April 6, 1999. Please let me know if the City would be interested in k'1lowing about our future water supply plans and possible impacts on Lake Del Valle at this meeting_ . Sincerely, 'k)~fi4/r~~ ~nt; Dennis R Garnbs, Chief Water Supply Engineering II DHG:bkm cc: Dale Myers Ed Cummings Leslie Moulton .. 'TT - ('"f'- ..~....... l 7" ,_ F, . ,!1.'i__"" .. ~ ~ -. t, r...ll~ f -y ,. . .""'. .f":. _ nt~.l.- ., ___ ~_.~~_ "--- I RECEIVED ;-.,', 2 .~. '!Qq~ ....J....,.... ell r vr lIUbLIN Draft :'""' ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY - WATER SUPPLY PLANNING PROGRAM Progranz Envl1vnnzental Inzpact Repo11 ESA 4l'T"-('W~ ;';;:7\iT ; " ~ti...;'i :.\'r:-.,.. r,,... r~f~~ _ h""',:,, I "~"'"".~.~ !::'.(~t~' , -, -,- -. :rO-_'j_"'''''' ~...- r-:~~~(~; . :; ~ ':"" .:. ~ . Environmentol S:ie;,:e Asso:iotes . 2.. . .e ~e s. SUMMARY S.l INTRODUCTION This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) assesses the potential environmental impacts of the Zone 7 Water Agency's Water Supply Planning Program. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statute and guidelines. The Zone 7 Water Agency (Zone 7) is the lead agency for this CEQA process. Inquiries about the project and the CEQA process should be directed to: Dennis Gambs Zone 7 Water Agency 5997 Parkside Drive Pleasanton, California, 94588-5127 (925) 484-2600 ext. 224 8.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND Zone 7 is engaged in a Water Supply Planning Program to plan for its long-term water supply and facility needs through the year 2020. This planning program will lead an overall Water' Supply Master Plan for Zone 7. The planning program consists of several, concurrent, planning efforts that address potential water supply options, groundwater management, and conveyance d f '1" ~ an treatment aCl ltles. ,f As a primary component of the planning program, the District has prepared the Water Supply Planning Study Update (Water Transfer Associates, January 1999). This study updated projected water demands within the Zone 7 service area through the year 2020, based upon adopted General Plans. The study then identified several water supply options based on average, wet and dry year scenarios, and recommended a phased supply acquisition program for consideration. ~ ....:;.~-::~-.("-~~7~2.,T.';\.~":'"'".:--...-.-.-.~----r'. ~~ .~_:~~~T'~~"T--~~~;t~';:~:;'~~;t-~~~"'77~~f~~;'~ '; ~~~d,ppon Jh~. uPq'!t~~ P~oJE?~t!O~;. ZQ.~.e~?. e~tlni~es tfja~ ~~~;deIp~?j;~n exc~~9. ItS. eXlstmg (S~~~~3~.!~I~}jir~t~?~;i~~90 acr~~~(p!=<{iiI[~m'(~~ Based upon Zone 7 planning criteria, existing sustainable supplies are anticipated to be exceeded in the near term by the year 2000. Thus, there is an immediate need for Zone 7 to acquire additional water supplies. Zone 7 has prepared this Program ErR to analyze in detail near-term acquisition of supply, and, at the same time, to present and analyze at a general, program-level its broader, long-range water supply program, still in development. The near-term supply project proposed by Zone 7 involves Zone 7 W"Iet' Supply PI..nning Progmm - Progmm EIR Drnn Progmm EIR ESA I 970378 5-1 S. SUMMARY the transfer of water from willing sellers. Water transfers are a common element of the long- range water supply options under consideration. . S.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Zone 7 is preparing a Program EIR in accordance with CEQA (Guidelines S15168) to evaluate the following aspects of the Water Supply Planning Program: Near- Term Proiect . Contract for 20,000 afa of additional water supply through two specific water transfers. This would provide an average year supply of ] 3,300 afa. . Byron-Bethany Irrigation District Water Transfer. In 1993, Zone 7 entered into a short-term (5-year) agreement for the transfer of water supplies from the Byron-Bethany Irrigation District (BBID) to Zone 7. Zone 7 has entered into a new IS-year contract, subject to CEQA compliance, for 5,000 afa of surplus water with a minimum delivery of 2,000 afa. . State Water Project Entitlement Transfers. Transfer of up to ]5,000 afa of SWP entitlements from member districts of the Kern County Water Agency (KCW A). The average annual reliability of SWP deliveries is estimated at 75 percent of entitlements. Therefore, acquisition of ]5,000 afa can be expected to represent approximately] 1,300 afa of average year water supply. Purchase of the DWR South Bay Aqueduct's Future Contractor Share. Zone 7 would purchase the Future Contractor Share of the South Bay Aqueduct (SBA), which is operated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR). The Future Contractor Share was designed to provide capacity for an additional Future Contractor to be served by the SBA. Acquisition of this additional SBA capacity by Zone 7 would provide conveyance capacity of 22,000 afa. Purchase of Storage in the ~emitropic Groundwater Banking Program. Zone 7 would purchase 22,000 acr'7-feet of storage from the Semitropic Water Storage District (Semitropic). This additional storage would be purchased in order to increase the reliability of Zone 7 supplies during dry years. This will have an average dry-year yield of 3,000 acre-feet. .. . . . Advance Purchase of Additional State Water Project Entitlements: An additional 1 0,000 afa of SWP entitlement could be purchased by Zone 7 from KCW A member districts, contingent upon financing. This would represent 7,500 afa of average year water supply. Purchase of additional SWP Entitlements is identified under Phase II of the Water Supply Planning Study Update (WTR, 1999). However, due to their current availability, Zone 7 proposes an "advance purchase" of these entitlements as part of the Near-Term Project. Lon!!- Term Pro!!ram . Acquire over the long-term up to 40,400 afa of average year water supply for use within the Zone 7 service area through the year 2020. This amount includes supply . acquired under the Near-Term Project. Zone 7 Wnlef Supply Plnnning Progrom - Program EIR $-2 Drofl Progrom EIR ESA 1970378 . . . . S. SUMMARY . Acquire over the long~term up to 27,800 afa of additional dry year water supply to meet Zone 7's long term goal of 100% reliability through the year 2020. This amount includes supply acquired under the Near- Te~ Project. . Implement necessary treatment, conveyance, and groundwater management facilities andlor programs to meet projected water demands through the year 2020. Using the Program EIR approach, the Zone will consider, at a program level, the broad environmental issues associated with it's overall goal of obtaining up to 40,400 afa of additional average year supply to meet water demand within its service area. This supply will include approximately 27,800 afa of supplemental "dry-year" supply to meet Zone 7's long~tenn goal of 100 % reliability. At a project level, Zone 7 wiII consider the specific impacts associated with the proposed near~term water transfers, purchase of groundwater storage capacity, and use of the South Bay Aqueduct (SBA) system. 8.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The primary objective of the proposed project is to implement identified water transfers in order to meet projected immediate and near~tenn M&I and agricultural demands within the Zone 7 service area. The long~term objective of Zone 7 is to pursue a multi~source water supply strategy utilizing imported surface water, increased conjunctive use, recycled water, and demand reduction/water conservation to provide reliable water supplies to meet projected buildout under the various General Plans within its service area. Additional specific objectives utilized in the Water Supply Planning Program include the following; Near- Term Objective . Secure additional water supply to meet projected M&I and agricultural demands within the Zone 7 service area in the immediate future. Long-Term Obiectives . J . Meet 100% of the M&I and agricultural demands on an annual basis. . Manage groundwater levels in the Main Basin such that groundwater is maintained above historic lows during any given dry year or extended drought period. . Maintain the ability to blend different sources of water within its operational capabilities to provide water of approximately equal quality to its customers. . Pursue multiple sources of water supply (i.e., imported surface water, recycled water demand reduction/water conservation, increased conjunctive use of the groundwater basin) as part of the water supply planning strategy. . Develop water supplies and facilities that allow for operational flexibility in future policy decisions (i.e. salt management). . Reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level where economically feasible. Zone 7 Water Supply Pl:>nning Progrnm - Progr:lm EIR Draft PrOp;ltn EIR ESA I 970378 S-3 S. SUMMARY Allocate the cost of new water supply and expansion project among new users, and develop an economically efficient project schedule based upon non-debt financing. · To the degree feasible, maximize use of existing Zone 7 and DWR infrastructure. . e · Provide opportunities to phase proposed conveyance facilities and provide implementation flexibility in response to chaflging demand conditions. S.5 ROLE OF THE EIR Zone 7 intends to use this EIR to: a) support approval of the proposed near-term water transfers, the purchase of additional groundwater storage capacity, and acquisition of the remaining unallocated SBA conveyance capacity, and; b) provide the foundation for tiering future CEQA review and documentation on specific future program actions proposed to obtain additional supply, manage demand, and develop the necessary additional treatment, storage, and transmission facilities to serve long.tenn demand. As necessary, these future components will be examined in future CEQA documents, as provided under CEQA S 15162 and 15168. Following certification, this EIR is intended to support the following discretionary approvals by Zone 7: . Purchase of 5,000 afa of surplus water supply from Byron~Bethany Irrigation District, with minimum delivery of 2.000 afa. e- . Purchase of 15,000 afa of State Water Project (SWP) entitlements from KCW A member districts, providing an average year supply of 11,300 afa. . Purchase of conveyance capacity remaining in the South Bay Aqueduct system owned by the Department of Water Resources. · Purchase of 22,000 af of storage capacity in the Semi tropic Groundwater Banking Program. ,i · Advance purchase of 10,000 afa 6f SWP entitlement from KCW A member districts, providing an average year supply of 7,500 afa. These entitlements would be purchased due to their current availability. The EIR is also intended to be used by responsible agencies that have review and permit authority over the Project. These agencies include DWR, State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), BBID, KWCA, and potential "willing sellers", which include Lost Hills Water District, Belridge Water Supply District, Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa Water District, and Berrenda Mesa Water District. Additional agencies which may issue permits during future implementation steps of the Water Supply Master Plan include the Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alameda County, City of Dublin, City of Pleasanton, Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), City e.. Zone 7 Water Supply Planning ProglOlm - ProglOlm EIR 5-4 Dr.lft Prol'lOlm EIR ESA 1970378 -... '. . . ::. S. SUMMARY of Livermore, Caltrans, BART, East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD), and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). S.6 SUMl\1ARY OF IMPACTS AND l\1ITIGATIONS The following provides a brief summary narrative regarding the environmental issues associated the proposed project. 5.6.1 NEAR-TERM PROJECT The proposed Near-Term Project includes acquisition of water supplies, storage capacity, and conveyance capacity within existing facilities. No new facilities are needed. As such, potential impacts are limited to those associated with the transfer and use of water supplies, rather than construction or disturbance-related impacts that would typically be associated with projects involving development of new infrastructure. IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH ACQUISITION OF H~4.TER SUPPLIES AND STORAGE C.4.PACITY The transfer of water supplies identified by Zone 7 for acquisition under the Near-Term Project has been previously examined by the agencies transferring water supplies in the certified CEQA documents identified below. . EIRfor the Transfer of State Water Project Entitlement from Belridge Water Storage District, Lost Hills Water District, and Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa Water Storage District (State Clearinghouse No. 98021041, April, 1998). . EIRfor the Transfer of Water Entitlementfrom the Berrenda Mesa Water Districtfor Use in the Dougherty Valley Area, prepared and certified by the Berrenda Mesa Water District (State Clearinghouse No. 9503304~, February 29, 1996). . . Negative Declaration, Five Year Water Transfer Agreement with Byron Bethany Irrigation District, prepared and certified by Zone 7 Water Agency, July 20, 1994. . Semitropic Groundwater Banking Project, prepared and certified by Semitropic Water Storage District and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (State Clearinghouse No. 93072024, June, 1994). These documents are incorporated by reference, and are available for review at Zone 7 Administrative Offices, located at 5997 Parkside Drive, in Pleasanton. Acquisition of supplies under the proposed Near-Term Project is within the scope of the projects previously examined in these documents. Due to the nature of water transfers, and the availability of unused supply within each identified transfer agency, potential impacts with the service areas of Byron Bethany Irrigation District, the KCW A member districts, and the Semitropic Groundwater Storage District were identified as less than significant. Zone 7 Wal~ Suppl)' PI,nning Prog= - Progr.tm ElR Dr.tn Progr.tm EIR ESA I 970378 s-s S. SUMMARY IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PURCHASE OF THE FUTURE CONTRACTOR SHARE CAPACITY OF THE SOUTH BAY AQUEDUCT . Potentially Significant, But Mitigable Cumulative Impact - Conveyance Capacity Zone 7 proposes to convey acquired water supplies into its service area through purchase of the Future Contractor Share capacity of the South Bay Aqueduct (SBA). The SBA is owned and operated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR), and the SBA Design Capacity is 210,000 acre-feet per annum (afa). Of this total capacity, 188,000 afa- has been allocated to 3 SBA Contractors - Zone 7, Alameda County Water District (ACWD) and Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). The remaining capacity, 22,000 afa, is available for purchase as the Future Contractor Share. Currently, the SBA is operated below the 3 Contractor Capacity of 188,000 afa. DWR has indicated that delivery of 22,000 afa of supply is available through use of the Future Contractor Share. This 22,000 afa of conveyance capacity would be utilized by Zone 7 to convey the combination of SWP entitlements and BBID transfer supplies available in a given year. It is anticipated that Zone 7 will fully utilize the Future Contractor Share capacity by the year 2009. In those years when available transfer supplies exceed the available conveyance capacity of the Future Contractor Share, Zone 7 would utilize purchased storage capacity in Semitropic, or schedule conveyance to the service area based upon available pumping and storage capacity. Therefore potential impacts associated with the Near-Term Project are considered less than significant. .- As water demands within the service areas of the 3 SBA Contractors increase over time, improvements to the SBA system would be required to deliver the SBA Design Capacity of 210,000 afa to the 3 SBA Contractors. Therefore, although adequate capacity is available to convey supplies identified under the Near-Term Project, full utilization of the Future Contractor Share would contribute to a cumulative Veduction in available capacity within the SBA system until the improvements are made. Mitigation for this cumulative impact involves improvements to the SBA system to provide the SBA Design Capacity (210,000 afa). Improvements would include upgrade of the South Bay Pumping Plant's Unit I to provide an additional 45 cfs capacity, and installation of new surge towers on the Brushy Creek pipdine segment of SBA Reach I. These improvements, as well as other facility improvements necessary to meet demands within Zone 7's service area, have been identified by Zone 7 in conjunction with DWR as part of it's Long-Term Program - Facilities Plan. Potentially Significant, Unavoidable Cumulative Impact - Recreation Project implementation would result in the use of the Future Contractor Share, with subsequent system operation at the SBA Design Capacity (210,000 afa). To meet water demands at the SBA . Zone 7 W~ler Supply Pl~nning Program - Progr:lm ElR $-6 Dr.1fl Program EIR ESA I 970378 . -- :-:. S. SUMMARY Design Capacity, full utilization of the regulatory storage pool of 30,000 afa at Del Valle Reservoir, would occur. Because SBA Contractors have not required full delivery of their entitlement, the full regulatory storage pool capacity provided by Del Valle Reservoir has not been utilized to date. DWR currently utilizes only 2,500 af, or 8 percent of the available regulatory storage pool of 30,000 afa provided by Del Valle Reservoir. Under existing operations, DWR maintains water storage at or near 40,000 9-f from May through September, providing a water elevation'of 703 feet msl during summer and fall months. In September, the reservoir is drawn down to provide capacity for storage of local winter inflow from Arroyo Del Valle. The reservoir is drawn down to 25,000 af, providing a \vater elevation of 678 feet ms!. The reservoir is then filled to 40,000 af by May (Memorial Day) through local runoff and/or DWR delivery of SWP supplies. As demands increase within the service areas of the 3 SBA Contractors, use of the SBA will approach the 3 Contractor Capacity of 188,000 afa. This will require increased use of Del Valle Reservoir to meet summer peak demands, and will result in a shift in the water drawdown pattern of the reservoir. At the 3 Contractor Capacity, . drawdown of water elevations from May through October at a rate of approximately 8 to 10 feet per month would occur, resulting in a September water sulface elevation of 673 feet ms!. and a low water elevation of 668 feet msl by October. This is approximately 28 feet below water levels currently experienced at the reservoir in September. Under the SBA Design Capacity of 210,000 afa, operations will require drawdown of water surface elevations from May through October, at an increased rate of approximately 20 feet per month, resulting in a water surface elevation of 649 feet msl by September, and a low water elevation of 635 feet msl by October. Water elevations in September and October would be approximately 24 and 33 feet, below the elevations that would be experienced under the 3 Contractor Capacity, respectively. When considered with the 28-foot reduction in September water surface elevations associated with the 3 Contractor Capacity, the additional 24-foot reduction in September water surface ele(lations associated with the Future Contractor Share would result in a cumulative drawdown of approximately 52 feet below the September elevations currently experienced at Del Valle Reservoir. The additional 24-foot reduction in September water surface elevations associated with the Future Contractor Share would contribute to a cumulative impact on recreational uses. Due to their location on the upstream bank of the reservoir, existing recreational facilities would be affected by seasonal fluctuations in water levels occurring at the full SEA Design Capacity operation. Additionally, drawdown of the reservoir would occur during summer and fall months, which represent peak summer recreational use periods. At September storage levels under the SBA Design Capacity, the main water body would be located approximately 1 mile from existing boat dock and beach facilities. Therefore, direct access to the main water body from the existing recreational facilities along the southern shoreline of the lake would be significantly reduced or eliminated. As identified in the discussion above, a draw down of up to 28- feet in Zone 7 Waler Supply Planning Program - Prngrllm EIR Draft Progrllm EIR ESA /970378 $-7 S. SUl\fMARY . September would occur under the 3 Contractor Capacity, without the proposed project. However, the additional drawdown of up to 24 feet resulting from SBA Design Operation would . contribute to a cumulative impact upon recreational activities and park attendance. Several potential mitigation strategies have been examined to potentially reduce the effects of operation of the SBA Design Capacity at Del Valle Reservoir. Each strategy offers varying degrees of mitigation effectiveness, implementation feasibility ?ond cost requirements. Additionally, implementation of these mitigation strategies would result in secondary environment impacts, and would likely require their own separate environmental analysis. In general these mitigation strategies fall into two primary categories: . Expansion of the SBA Capacity: This would allow peak summer demands to be met by expanding the SBA conveyance system, reducing the use of Del Valle Reservoir for seasonal storage and subsequent drawdown. . Modification of Recreational Facilities: This would improve existing facilities to provide access to the main water body during low storage conditions. In order to provide full disclosure and comply with CEQA, analysis contained within this EIR has examined the worst case scenario, operation at SBA Design Capacity. However, the timing and severity of impacts to Del Valle Reservoir are dependant upon several factors, including demands for imported waters supply by the 3 SBA Contractors, the use of the SBA system to import water supplies to meet these demands, particularly in the SCVWD service area, and DWR's ability to serve 100 percent of SWP entitlements. Consideration of mitigation measures must therefore take into account that the worst case impact identified in this document will not likely occur within the immediate planning horizon of 5 years, and may not even occur within the near-term planning horizon of 10 years. However, eventually operation at SBA Design Capacity wiII be required. 'I The fact that this cumulative impact will not occur immediately with project implementation but will develop over several years provides an opportunity for the implementation of appropriate planning activities to identify potential facilities, improvements, or other actions to reduce impacts to recreational uses associated with operation of the SBA at its full design capacity. Zone 7 does not have the authority to make specific recommendations regarding recreational facilities or impose mitigation that would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, it is recommended that EBRPD, in coordination with State Parks and DWR, be responsible for update and revision of the 1967 Del Valle Reservoir Master Plan, or other appropriate planning efforts, to identify the appropriate facilities, improvements, or other measures that could be implemented to reduce potential impacts associated with the planned water level drawdown that has always been part of the intended SBA operational design. Zone 7 shall enter into discussions with DWR, EBRPD and State Parks, to identify Zone 7' s participation in this planning effort. Zoo= 7 Wal=r Supply Planning Progr:lm - Program EIR Dmfl Pro,!'r:lm EIR ESA I 970378 S-8 . . . ,..-, . :.. S. SUMMARY Upon its completion, Zone 7, DWR, EBRPD and State Parks shall review EBRPD's recommendations regarding facilities, improvements, or other measures to address this cumulative impact. Zone 7 shall then enter into discussions with these three agencies to determine Zone 7' s reasonable fair share participation in measures agreed upon by all parties. Once agreement is reached, Zone 7 shall implement measures as agreed upon by the four agencIes. This will partially mitigate the significant cumulative impact on recreation that will result from the cumulative water level drawdown associated with SBA Design Capacity. However, this mitigation measure would not fully reduce potential impacts to the existing recreational opportunities at Del Valle Reservoir to a less than significant level. Therefore, potential impacts to recreational uses at Del Valle Reservoir must be considered cumulatively significant, and unavoidable. S.6.2 LONG-TERM PROGRAM Under the Long-Term Program, Zone 7 proposes to meet this future "".mer demand using a combination of supply-side options. This integrated water supply program includes components identified in Table S-l. There are several potential supply options for each component of the Long-Term Program available to Zone 7. The specific water supply options available to Zone 7 in the future will be subject to a variety of dynamic economic, engineering, operational, and regulatory factors. Zone 7 will use this Long-Term Program as a framework to guide its future water supply acquisition and management projects, but it can not identify all specific future projects at this time. WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM ,/ In general, certain types of impacts are common to water supply acquisition. The level of impact, and its potential significance, is dependant upon site specific parameters associated with each individual transfer scenario. Similarly, the ability to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level will be dependant upon a variety of specific parameters. The following discussion provides an overview of the types of impacts that could be associated with the water supply sources identified by Zone 7 as part of the Long-Term Program, and identifies poter.tial mitigation strategies that could be utilized to reduce potential impacts. Potential impacts and mitigation strategies are identified in Table S-l. Several of the water supply options identified in the Long-Term Program are conceptual in nature, and will require additional feasibility analysis to fully define project parameters. As such, project level analysis of potential impacts is not possible at this time. Therefore, this EIR presents a program level analysis for the future supply options that Zone 7 may pursue, as per Zon= 7 Water Suppl)' Pl.nning Program - Program fIR Draft Program EIR ESA 1970;;78 5-9 S. SUMMARY TABLE 5-1 LONG-TERM PROGRAM COMPONENTS AND 'VATER SUPPLY OPTIONS e WATER SUPPLY PLANNING PROGRAM Watex:- Supply Type Water Supply Options WATER TRANSFERS - A verage Year Supply Dry Year Supply Dry Year Storage Wet Year Supply CONJUNCTIVE USE CONSERV A TIONI DEMAND M.ANAGEMENT RECYCLED WATER Byron Bethany Irrigation District South Bay Aqueduct Exchanges North of Delta Transfers Butte County Yuba County Water Agency City of Modesto South of Delta Kern County Water Agency Nickel Enterprises .. , American Basin Conjunctive Use State Water Bank Glen Colusa Irrigation District Browns Valley Irrigation District Placer County Irrigation District Reclamation District 2068 State Options Program . Non-Local Storage Semi tropic Increased Pumpback Program Mojave Water District San Benito County Water District Local Storage Main Basin Chain of La~Fs Upper Del Valle Reservoir Purchase of Turned Back Entitlements Interruptible Entitlement Water Purchase BBIDWet Year Water Increased Local Runoff Increase Main Basin Use Mocho I Subbasin Storage Demand side management based upon BMPs outlined in the 1994 DWR Memorandum of Understanding for Urban Water Conservation and 1997 Exhibit 1. Recycled water use for irrigation or groundwater recharge (if permitted) implemented under RWQCB Master Permit in partnership with DSRSD. Livermore, Pleasanton, or Bay Area Recycling Program. e. Zone 7 Willer Supply Plannin~ Progl;lm - Progl;lm EIR S-10 Drafl Prop;lm EIR ESA I 970378 --. \ -. . ~.:. S. SUMMARY CEQA g ] 5168. As Zone 7 develops these supply sources further and identifies specific projects for implementation, it wiII evaluate the need for additional, project-specific CEQA review and documentation, tiering from the impact analysis provided in this Program EIR. As such, the responsibility for mitigating potential impacts associated with identified water supply options lies with the lead agencies responsible for implementation of specific projects. Until these projects are fully developed, and Zone 7' s participation defined, Zone 7' s responsibility for any mitigation associated with the supply options identified in Table 5-2 would be limited to those projects under its direct authority. SALT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Section 5.3 discusses Zone 7's Salt Management Program, which is currently in development. Reduction in net salt loading can be achieved through either a reduction in salt import or an increase in the amount of salt exported from the Main Basin. Potential salt management strategies are organized into three general categories: increased conjunctive use, wellhead demineralization, and seasonal groundwater export. Final implementation of the Program would likely include a combination of these various salt management strategies, and would be dependant upon final operational and policy decisions. Potential strategies currently under consideration by Zone 7 include: . . . Conservation Existing Groundwater Basin Management Strategy Maximum Stream Recharge Conjunctive Use Strategy Paired Injection/Extraction Well Conjunctive Use Zone 7 ASR Well Operation Strategy Wellhead Demineralization Demineralized Recycled Water Injection Seasonal Groundwater Export Cal-Fed Bay-Delta Program . . . . . . I' Potential impacts associated with the Salt Management Program would be dependant upon the final management strategies selected for implementation. In general, implementation of all strategies would result in a beneficial impact to groundwater quality, with subsequent beneficial impacts to delivered water quality. The use of wellhead demineralization has been identified to date as the preferred management strategy. Implementation of this strategy would include installation of demineralization systems at existing well sites, and incorporation of demineralization systems into future well design. Additional impacts could be associated with disposal of brine generated through implementation of demineralization. An appropriate disposal mechanism, most likely the LA VWMA disposal line, would have to be identified, as in valley disposal would likely be prohibited. As the Salt Management Program is further defined, and an approved salt management strategy identified, Zone 7 will evaluate the need for additional, project-specific CEQA review and documentation, tiering from the impact analysis provided in this Program EIR Zon= 7 W:ll=r Supply Pl:l.nnin~ Pro!,r:lm - Prognm EIR Program Onfl EIR ESAI970378 $-11 S. SUMMARY TABLE S-2 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM IMPACTS AND MITIGA TION STRATEGIES. . Typical Impacts Potential Miti~ation Strategies Water Transfers - Average, Dry, Wet Year . Delta Fisheries. Potential impacts to sensitive . Delta fisheries including: Winter-Run, Spring- Run Chinook S~lmon, Delta Smelt, Steelhead trout, and Delta splinail. . Delta Flow Impacts - Wheeling. Potential . impacts to flows associated with wheeling North of Delta Transfers through the Delta. Could result in secondary impacts to Delta fisheries. Delta Water Quality, Potential impacts to . water quality, including salinity, bromides and temperature. . . Transfer Agency \\'ater Resources/Service. . Potential impacts to irrigation supplies or service availability. . Agricultural ResourceslLand Conversion. . Potential impacts to land use associated with conversion pressures from agricultural to urban uses. l' . Groundwater Resources. Potential for . increased dependence upon groundwater resources, resulting in basin overdraft, increased pumping costs, reduced water quality. . Impacts to Conve)'ance Infrastructure. . Reduced facility capacity for conveyance of water supplies. Construction Related Impacts of New . Infrastructure. Potential construction disturbance impacts: geology, water resources, biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, traffic, noise, land use, hazardous materials, aesthetics. . Pumping Restriction Compliance. Compliance with existing and future pumping requirements, including: 1995 SWRCB Water Rights Decision 95.06; 1993 NMSF Biological Opinion - Winter Run Chinook Salmon; 1995 USFWS Biological Opinion - Delta smelt. Flow Analysis- Wheeling. Examination of flow impacts, and potential secondary effects on biological resources. Timing of delivery to be modified to minimize impacts and meet pumping restrictions. Properly coordinated water transfers can also have a beneficial impact on Delta flows. Water Qualit). Compliance. Compliance with additional restrictions identified by the pending EIRJEIS for the CALFED Bay Delta program, the CVPIA Programmatic EIS, and the State Water Resources Control Board Draft EIR for the 1995 Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. Properly coordinated water transfers can also improve water quality. Water Resource Agency Approval. Demonstrate availability through review/approval of proposed water transfers by applicable regulatory agency, Depending upon the type of water transfer, could include: DWR: transfers between State Water Contractors or utilizing SWP facilities Bureau of Reclamation: transfers involving Central Valley Project supplies or facilities. State Water Resources Control Board. Reduce Crop Conversion Pressure Demonstrate surplus water supply availability. Include farming interests in decision making process to identify balance between resource impacts and transfer benefits( I). Avoid fallowing or shifting crops that require high input and output expenditures (I). Improve waters supply reliability for agricultural uses (I), Ensure dry year supplies. Establish Ground"'ater Management Measures Use iterative analysis to assess basin safe yield and establish appropriate monitoring methodology (I ). Establishment of groundwater monitoring wells and program (I). Regulate groundwater withdrawals to ensure compliance with safe yield requirements (I). Creation of additional groundwater or surface water storage facilities (I). DWR/Bureau Approval. Review and approval by appropriate agency to confinn available conveyance capacity. Implement Standard Construction Measures Similar to construction measures identified to reduce construction impacts associated with Zone 7 facilities, as identified in Table S-3. ; , .- ;' J ; t i -, .: Zone 7 W ~Ier Supply Pl~nning Propam - Prop-am E1R 5-12 Program Omft ElR ESAI970;\78 . . i,. S. SUMMARY TABLE 8-2 (Continued) SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM IMPACTS AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES, Typical 1m pacts Potential Mitigation Strategies Storage Non Local Storage . Transfer Agency Water- Resources/Service . Agricultural Resources/Land Conversion . Groundwater Resources . Conveyance Infrastructure . Construction Impacts Local Storage Chain of lAkes . Groundwater Resources . Potential impacts to local water resources. . Construction Related Impacts Upper Del Valle . Joint SBA Contractor Project . Biological Resources . Cultural Resources . Surface Water Resources . Geology and Soils . Dam Inundmion . Construction Relmed Impacts Increased Conjunctive Use . Increased groundwater fluctuation. . Salt management benefit. . Potential impact on short-term reliability . Construction related impacts. Recycled Water Projects . Main, Basin operations and water quality · issues. · . Potential groundw<tter quality impacts. I ' . Beneficial salt management impacts due to · injection of low TDS supply to Main Basin. · . Construction impacts associated with facility installation. CALFED Draft Programmatic ErR, 1998. . Water Resources Agency' Approval . Reduce Crop Conversion Pressure . Groundwater Mana!!ement . DWR!Bureau Appr;vaI . Standard Construction Mitigation . Groundwater Mannl!ement . Site specific grounlwmer infiltration an<tlysis. . Standard Construction Mitigation . Additional feasibility analysis to define project. . Habitat Conser\'<ttion Plan (HC?) . Survey and Recovery Program . Erosion Control Best Management Pr<tctices . Geotechnical Analysis . Inund<ttion Hazard Analysis . Standard Construction Measures . Maintain operations within defined operational storage parameters under Zone 7 existing groundwater management policy. . No mitigation requirements anticipated. . Implement with Chain of Lakes or other storage project to maintain reliability. . Standard Construction Measures . Continue Zone 7 involvement in project review. Impacts and mitigation measures identified in Clean Warer Revival Project Final EIR (January, ] 998) and Cit)' of livennore Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Project Implementation. Initial Sniffy/Mitigated Negative Declaration, (November, ]996). Implement monitoring programs established in EIR, in compliance with DHS and pending RWQCB approval. No mitigation requirement anticipated. Standard Construction Mitigation Zone 7 \VOler Supply Plnnning Progr:>.m - Progr:>.m EtR 5-13 Progr:>.m Dr:lf, EtR ESAI970~78 S. SUMMARY FACILITIES PROGRAlt1 e Potential environmental impacts that could be associated with cqnstruction of potential Zone 7 facilities are summarized in Table S~3. In keeping with the program level of analysis, this table is intended to frame potential environmental impacts associated with future Zone 7 facilities, and to present potential mitigation strategies to reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. As Zone 7 d~velops these progra!TIs further and identifies specific projects for implementation, it will evaluate the need for additional, project-specific CEQA review and documentation, tiering _ from the impact analysis provided in this Program EIR. S.7 AL TERNA TIVES Chapter 9, Alternatives, evaluates the potential alternatives to the proposed project. There is only one significant impact that warrants a discussion of alternatives to the project. It is the cumulative impact at Del Valle Reservoir to recreation activities that would occur as a result of an increased seasonal drawdown. Potential alternatives examined for the proposed project include: · No Project Alternative . Alternative] - Upper Del Valle Reservoir e- . Alternative 2 - SBA Capacity Expansion (29 cfs), No Purchase of the Future Contractor Share . Alternative 3 - Reduced SBA Capacity Expansion (39 cfs) and Purchase of the Future Contractor Share S.7.1 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE DISCUSSION :/ In general, the Proposed Project and the alternatives present a trade-off between water supply needs/impacts and recreation needs/impacts. The project would make use of existing water supply facilities within their intended design capacity, which would have cumulative impacts to recreational benefits at Del Valle Reservoir associated with lowering of water levels. The alternatives to expand the SBA would not make use of existing, available water delivery capacity and instead would involve the construction and operation of new facilities, which would help reduce or avoid the recreation cumulative impacts. Of the alternatives presented, Alternative 1, Upper Del Valle Reservoir, would result in the greatest amount of additional environmental impact from new facility construction and operation, due to: the extensive loss of habitat and recreational facilities, and potential increases in dam inundation hazards from potentially unsuitable geologic conditions within the Arroyo De] Valle watershed. Therefore, this alternative is not considered environmentally superior. e-- Zone 7 W~ler Supply PI~nning Progrom - Progrom EIR $-}4 Progrom Or.lfl EIR ESA/970378 e'; .J ... . I ] 1 1 ~. ~U~.\' .1 .J 'fAilLE S-3 SUMMARY OIr I'OTENTIAL IMI'ACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FOR FACILITIES PLAN ENVIllONl\tENTAL IM1'ACT l\lLTIGATION MEASUlms Druinuge, l'looding, and Water Quality . Excavation, grading, trenching, and · installation of the water supply system · i nf rastructure within the 100- year 11 oodplain or within drainage channels would result in potcntially significant drainage, 1100ding, and · water quality impacts. Regional Ecology . New facilities could be installed in ..... uudevclopcd areas thai contain naLive habitat cOlllmunities and could be occupied by special slatus species. . Riparian and seasonal wetlands could be · impacted by the inslallation of Project in frasLructure Water su ppl y treatment and storage r aci Ii I ies shall be conslructed above the 100- year 11 oodpl ai n. Install adequate sLorm drainage facilities within areas proposed for new water supply facilities. Local drainage illl provelllents shall be desi gned for thc 10- year nuud eve nt and shall meet zone 7' s 11 ood prolection design criteria. ImplemenL an SWPPP in conformance wilh the rcquirements of the RWQCB and Alameda Cuunty. . Prior to conslruction ill the areas of drainngc channels or other waters, a jurisdictional delineation shall be performed. If these areas are considered jurisdictional and cannot feasibly be avoideu, a weLlandmitigalion plan shall be prepared. The plan shall be prepared by a qualified wetland biologist pursuanlto, or through consultation with, the USACOE guidelines. Prior to issuance of a grading pcrmit for gmding activitics in areas where jurisdil,;tional wetlands have been delineated, all rcquired permits and approvals shall be obtained from the USACOE (Section 404 Permit), the cora (Section 160 I - 1603 Streambcd Alleralion Agrecment), and the Rcgiunal WaLer Quality Conlrol Uoanl tR WQCU) Sel:lioll 4U I \Vute!" llllilliLy celliril:lItioll. Zone 7 shall aHcmpllu IUl,;atc facililies uutside areas ol,;cupieu by spcdal sLatus spedcs. In the event that any improvements arc pruposed to be IOl,;aleu in potential special status spedes habitat, surveys shall be cundul,;teu prior tu construl,;tiull uf such improvements. These surveys will be conducteutu verify whcther special staLus plant or animal species will be impal,;Led. If spcl,;ial status specics arc fuund in thcse al cas, Lhl,;y sllall be pl'Utecteu by redesign of the improvemcnls Lu avoid these areas or suitable mitigatiun cunsisting of habitat restoration, enhanccmcnt, or recrcatiulI shall be implementcd illl,;OOldinaliol1 with USACOE, usrws, and/or CDFa. Pre-construction bUlTuwing owl survcys shall be conducted to determine owl nu lIlbers , locatiuns, and brceuing acti v Hies. If ow Is arc d i SCUVCI ed ncsti n gin the area proposcd for Project i mpl'OVelllents, new nesting habitatmuy be created and lclocation/avoidunce tcchniques employed in accOldance with cora guidelines. Protective fcncing shall bc installed alung lice spccies that will be preservcd ill areas where construction activities could result in mot dalllage ur other indirect illlpal,;ts. Construction activities shall be lesllideu ill hahitat fur special status species durillg the breeding seasulI. Signs shall be placcd along hails allll uthel recrcatiunal and conshuctioll interfacc areas to explain the sensiti vity of the riparian hahitat. . . . . . '!Allie 7 Waler SUPI" Y l'lalllli 11& 1'10 gl am - I 'lOg1 a III E lit S-15 Program DmU ElR ES^ 1'170.1111 S. SUI\II\IAln' TAllLE 8-3 (COlltiUUCtJ) . SUIVIMARY Ol~ POTENTIAL IMI'ACTS AND MITIGATION 1\1EASUltES Fon I~ACILITIES PLAN ENVJUONMENTAL IMI'ACT Regional Ecology (cont) Gcology lJud Soils · Shorl-lefln erosiun and grading impacLs . during cunstrucliun uf water sysLem infrasLructure. . · Pussible expusure of lIew or expanded infrastructure to seismic and geologic hazards. -.. Air Quality ShorL-term construction activities could result in impacts to air (IUality associated with emissions and dust gcncration. Long-term operation of trcatmenL plants and pump stations could contribute dircctly or indirectly to rcgional air quality impacts. _ Z"tI.cnl~r 5u1'l'Iy l'l:ll~i:~ l'r"gfal;~-:l'f:~ralll EIR : . .. .- J _~_...1 M..._ l__.... MITIGATION MEASURES · Tree replacement shall occur ill accordance with the applicable tree replacement ratios established within each respective jurisdictiun. . Compliance wiLh valious regulatory permit re(luirelllcnLs (including implemclltation of a SLorm Water Pollution Preventiun Plan) All facility design and constructiun shall cunform to Uniform Building Code, American Water Wurk AssuciaLion, and/or othcr appropriate design criLcria. Facility designs within undevelopcd upen space shall include a grading plan fur the specific project iln pro velllcnts. A siLe specific, design level geutechnical and geulugic report shall be prepared concurrent with the design level gradill~ studies. Specific foullllation recullllllendations shall be incorporated into the design of the infrastructure. Water reservoirs and water treaLment plants shall be constructed uver cO.lllpetent bedrock. The construction of reservoirs or trcatment plants on highly weathered or sheared ruck shuuld also be avoided. All new water supply infrastructure shall be sited meas with low geulugk: and seismic risk, where feasible. All underground infrastructure slHlil be designed to ac(;onllllodate estimaLed seU[elJ1ent without failure, particularly ill 10caLiolls where pipelines extend across transitions between fills and cuts. . . . · Equipment and manpower shall be provided fur watering all exposed or disturbeu soil surfuces. W ateri ng of exposed su r faces sh a I I ill vul ve the use uf rec I ai Illcd wustewater, to tile e xtellt f easi ble. · Individual construction sties shall be sunOUllded with wind breaks, using berms to prcvellt soil piles from spilling onto adjacent roadways or properties. · All trucks hauling soil, sand and ulher loose materials shall be covered or all trucks will be rcquired to maintain at least two feet uf freeboard. · All paved access roads, parking areas, staging areas, and maintenance m cas in the vicinity of existing and proposed water facilities shall be swept daily. · Hydruseeding or soil stabili;wrs shall be upplicd on inacti ve constructiun areas (previously gladed arcas inactive for 10 days or more). ~ ..1 ..,. . __. I -- . 1 S. SUI\I. .J TAllLE S-3 (COlltiIlUCtl) SUMIVIARY OF POTENTIAL IIVlPACTS AND I\UTIGATION IVIEASURES Ii'OR FACILITIES PLAN ENVIIlONr.IENTAL IMI'ACT MiTIGATION 1\1EASUllES Air Quality (cout.) Noise . ShurHenll noise impacts during construction. · . Long-term stationary noise impacts due to · operation of pump stations and other · mcchanical equipmcnt Land Use . Possiblc long-tcrlll impacts at construction · sitcs due to conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses. . Potential land use connicts with existing uses. . . Stockpilcs shall be enclosed, covered, watered twice daily or covered with a soil binder. Traffic speeds shall bc limited to 15 mph 011 unpaved roads ill the vicinity of residences or other uses affccted by construction activity, to the cxtcnt feasible. Alternatively, unpaved roads used by construction vehicles can be paved to reduce dust emissions. Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff from impacting nearby public roadways. Vegetation shall be replanted in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Trcatment plant and pump station facilities shall conform with BAAQMD rcquircmcnts rcgarding emissions. . . . . --. . Limit noisy construction activitics to the hours specified in the applil.:able noise mdinance. All construction equipment shall be equippeu with IlIUmerS, Contractors shall be rcquired to use "new technology" puwer cunstruction equipment with state-of- the-art noise sh ieldi ng and lIlU III i n g dev ices. All cquipmcnt shall be in gootllllechanical condition. Install noise controlllleasules fur allY ll1echallical ctjlliplllellt wilhiu the vicinily ur noise sellsiti ve receptors to achievc acceptable noise exposures. . . Facilities shall be sited within areas where public utility and inrmstructural uses arc allowed under currcnt Gcneral Plan, zoning, and other hUld use cUlltrols or appropriate land use ilPprovals shall be obtained frum the relcVl\1lt jurisdiction. Screening materials such as vcgetation or decorative walls shall be inslalled around pump stalions, watcr trcall\lent plants, stora~e facilities, and other abovcground systems Lo visually separate existing land uscs f rum these f aci Ii tics, thercby avo id i ng potcntial i ncompali IJ i Ii {y. Ncw facilities shall be localed on JllOperties cUlrenlly occupied by other ulility inrrastructurc to thc extent feasible. . Ncw facilities would be sited to avoid existing occupied buildings and slructmcs by IOl.:ating pipelines within existing roadway ri~hts-or-way and by constructing wells, pump stations, and water trealmenl and storage facililies in unucveloped meas, to the cxlcnt fcasiblc. . ZllllC 1 Walel Supply Plalluing J'wg' am -l'fOgram EIR 5-17 l'fOgralll O",U EIR ESA 1970.17~ S. SUI\IMAUY TAllLE S-3 (Coulillucll) SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FOR FACILITIES PLAN ENVIIWNMENTAI, IMl'Acr MIl'lGATION MEASUUES Circulation · Short-telll1 construction acti vities could affect traffic now ill the vicinity of construction sites. . Conslruction related traffic, including truck trips and cunstruction worker trips, woulu contribute to short-term increases ill traffic volumes anu parking requirements. Recreation ShorL-terlu impacts Juring construcLion of new or expanueu facilities in a manner thaL restrict access tu recreational areas. Public Services and Utilities Short-term relocatiun or inLerruptiun of service impacls to uLilities at consLruction sites. Energy · Long-term impacts would include increased use of energy to pump and treaL waLer. · Minor increase in energy use due to cunsLruction acLivities. "'.line 7 \el'l'lY 1'lmlll!lI!: 1'lOgIUI11-1'IOI\I,UII clR . . , . ..,...J .... . I.. · ConstrucLion !ramc mallugeJlJenL plans shall be ucveloped and illlplelllenteu tu plevent circulatiun problems in Lhe vicinity of construl.:LiulJ sites. · Construl.:Lion activities shall he limited to apprupriule pcak huurs, to the extenL feasible, as L1etcrlllined by local rouLl permits. · Traffic Control Plans shall inclur..!e plOvisiuus fur lrul.:k haul rouLes, ollloar..! areas, UIJr..! cOl1strul.:Liotl worker parking. -:::, · Waler sysLelll dislribuLion, treatment, aur..! storage fal.:ilities shaJl be IOl.:ateu oulside uf exisling arroyos and recreaLional areas, to the extent feasible. · Where avoir..!allce uf rel.:realional Dreas is infeasiblc due tu engineering or u\her l.:UllSLmints, Zune 7 shall assist in relocaling Ihe rel.:realiunal uses from incumpaLible utility infrastrucLurc. · Landscaping alld olher screening measures shull be inslllJlcr..! alOunu fadlilies COllstrul.:ted adjal.:ellllo recreational areas to buffer the rel.:Icational uses frolll incompatible utility infmsLruclure. · S ig nage shall be installed al Project fad I i tics 10 Lliscoulage v isi tors to Ihe lecreaLiollal areas from trespassing 011 properly cUlltaining the water supply system infraslrul.:ture. · UtiliLy crossings will be identified at l.:unslrUl.:lion siLes, and measures impleJ1Jenleu Iu prevclltlung- term service interrupLiuns during l.:unslrul.:lioll. Such measures woulu indude coorLlinuting service intcrruptions wi.th the affectcLl service proviuer, nolifying service customers, anu locating new waler . supply infrastructure so thai Lhe likelihood ur servil.:e interrupLion is rninilllizeu. . None required. SO. I Program ... ESA 8 ,. .... -- , ,I . J , J ~.~u~.y 'fAilLE S-3 (Conlillllcll) SUMMARY OIi' POTENTIAL 11\'11' ACTS AND MITIGATION MEASUnES Il'O n FACILITIES PLAN EN"I nONMI~NTAI. IMI' ACt' MITIGATION lVIEASUllliS Aesthetics . Short-term and long-term impacts at construction sites due to above ground faci I ities . Short-term impacts due to the construction of underground pipelines. Culluml Resources Potential impacts to archaeological and historical resources at construction sites. · Attempt to locate new water supply facilities in areas of low visual sensitivity. · Construclllew water storage facilities in a manlier that minimizes sidewall exposure through use of berms, vegetative screens, an earth tone color. · Revegetate graded slopes and other arcas of conslruction. · Comlucl Phase 1 Cultural Resources survey of facilily locations to identify known cultural resources -:;:' and potentially sensitive areas. To the exlent feasible, avoid known cultural resources. · Construction personnel involved ill eillthmoving activities shall be instructed to stop work if historic artifacts arc encountered. · An archaeological monitoring program shall be formulaled and implemented for cultum! rCSOUlces, including monitors during excavation. · Noti fication of Nati ve American Heri tage Corn Iniss ion if preh istoric reso un:es are found. · Preservation of structure in current cunditiuns. · Preservation uf struclUl es wi lh urcll i tec IUI all y apl1l'upri ale rcstorati 011. · Relucatiun of existing histuric structUlCS. · Arch itectural recordat i on or slandi II g strud u rcs to lIle standards of tile II istoric Alllerican B u j]d i ngs Survey (Le. HAllS) or lesser standards. · Demolition of structures withuut formal architectural recordation according to HAllS standarus. · Screening maintenance facilitics, pump statiolls, water storage facilities, and treatmcnt plants that me locatcd ill proximity to historic resourccs to prevcnt thc design of the water supply system rrum compromising the integrity of the historic structures. Screening would incl,ude enclosing the water system facilities within architecturally treatcd walls; installing landscape buffers between the water system facilitics and the historic resuurces, and siting the new racilities as rar away as feasible frol11 historic resuurces. bmc 7 W~lcr SUl'l'l~ I'lanlling l'rugr~II1-1'[(l&r"ll\ E R S-llJ l'rugraIU Drall Em ES^ I \I1U.'78 S. SUMMARY Implementation of Alternative 2 - SBA Expansion (39 cfs), No Purchase of the Future Contractor Share, would reduce the project's contribution to cumulative drawdown of summer water levels at Del Valle Reservoir summer water levels associated with operation at SBA Design Capacity. However, the seasonal shift in Del Valle Reservoir drawdown from winter to summer months associated with the 3 Contractor Capacity, resulting in a 28-foot reduction in September water levels, would still occur. This alternative would also result in construction related impacts associated with installation of approximately I I miles of pipeline and capacity . . expansions of approximately 5 miles of existing canal. In effect, Alternative 2 represents implementation of a large scale capital improvements project to provide for storage capacity that is currently available within the SEA Design Capacity at Del Valle, in an effort to preserve the recreational benefit that has been provided by existing operations at Del Valle Reservoir. Implementation of this alternative would not meet Zone 7 near-tenn capacity requirements, and would not preclude the use of the Future Contractor Share, with subsequent cumulative impacts to Del Valle Reservoir, by some other contractor at some point in the future. Alternative 3 - Reduced SBA Expansion (29 cfs) and Purchase of the Future Contractor Share, presents the same trade-off as Alternative 2. It involves implementation of a large scale capital improvement project to provide an alternative to storage capacity that is currently available within the SBA Design Capacity, in an effort to preserve the recreational benefit that has been provided by existing operations at Del Valle Reservoir. However, Alternative 3 presents a middle ground between the Project and Alternative 2 in that: a) the SBA expansion requirements (4.5 miles of new pipeline, 2.1 miles of canal improvements) are only about half those required for Alternative 2; b) Zone 7 would purchase and utilize the Future Contractor Share conveyance capacity, thereby providing conveyance capacity for water demands projected in the immediate planning horizon, and; c) the cumulative drawdown at Del Valle Reservoir would be partially mitigated by completion of the SEA improvements. However, the seasonal shift in Del Valle Reservoir drawdown from winter to summer months associated with the 3 Contractor Capacity, resulting in a 28-foot reduction in Septe~ber water levels, would still occur. Although Alternative 3 represents the "middle ground" with respect to balancing the cumulative impacts to Del Valle Reservoir versus the construction-related impacts associated with SEA expansion, implementation of this alternative would increase the nature and magnitude of environmental impacts compared to the proposed project. This alternative would require extensive capital improvement of the SBA system to provide capacity that is currently available for its intended use under the SBA Design Capacity. Further, implementation of this alternative would not completely mitigate the cumulative impact on recreation at Del Valle to a less than significant level. The reservoir water level drawdown that will result from full use by the existing 3 SBA contractors will occur with or without Zone 7' s acquisition and use the Future Contractor Share. Even with implementation of this alternative, recreational uses will still experience water level drop over the summer with a 28-foot drawdown by September, compared to current conditions. Zone 7 Water Suppl~' Planning Program - Program EIR Program Dr.1ft EIR ESA /970378 S-20 e : I , . I i :.l . . \ e: . ~. -e ~-'. S. SUMMARY Implementation of Alternative 3 would require Zone 7 to both purchase the Future Contractor Share and implement improvements to the SBA. This is the most expensive alternative. As such, this alternative does not meet stated project objectives with'respect to development of an economically efficient project or maximized use of existing facilities. Implementation of this, alternative would increase total project costs by approximately $80 million, or approximately 35 percent, compared to the proposed project. Assuming a 35-year planning period, this would increase water costs approximately $50 per acre-foot (40 percent), a cost that would ha~e to be factored i'nto Zone 7 water rates. This additional cost would be passed onto new users, including both urban development and new agricultural users. As previously discussed in Section 2.0, development within the Zone 7 service area, particularly proposed vineyard development within the Livermore sphere of influence, is sensitive to water costs. Such a cost increase could affect the economic viability of these types of agricultural land uses within the Zone 7 service area. CONCLUSIONS Although Alternative 3 would reduce the cumulative impact on recreation caused by use of the Future Contractor Share, it would not avoid the water level drawdown that will occur with the existing 3 Contractor Capacity. At the same time, it will increase the siting and construction- related impacts associated with building new pipelines and canals. However, the proposed project is preferred by Zone 7 project for the following reasons: I) The Future Contractor Share represents existing conveyance and storage capacity within the SBA Design Capacity that is already available for its intended use. 2) Alternative 3 would require implementation of a major capital improvement project to avoid using this available capacity within the existing system. This would increase the nature and scale of environmental impact associated with implementation of the Near- Term Project. Additionally, Alternative 3 would take several years to implement, and would not provide conveyance caPr.city needed in the near-term. With the exception of the cumulative impact to recreational uses, and regional growth related issues, no other significant impacts have been identified for the Near-Term Project. 3) Alternative 3 would only mitigate that portion of drawdown associated with the Future Contractor Share. When operated at the 3 Contractor Capacity, a seasonal shift in drawdown, reducing September water levels by approximately 28-feet from existing conditions, would still occur. 4) Alternative 3 would increase total project costs by approximately $80 million, or approximately 35 percent, compared to the proposed project. Assuming a 35-year planning period, this would increase water costs approximately $50 per acre-foot (40 percent), a cost that would have to be factored into Zone 7 water rates. This could affect the viability of proposed agricultural land uses within the Zone 7 service area. 5) The mitigation for Zone 7 to contribute to the modification and supplementation of recreational facilities at Del Valle Reservoir would result in some reduction to potential Zone' W~ler Supply Planning PrO!;filln - Progrom EIR Progrnm Dr:lfl EIR ESA I 9'0318 S-21 S. SUMMARY impacts associated with the cumulative drawdown. Although full mitigation is not available, the implementation of these mitigation strategies in conjunction with the proposed project, is considered more effective mitigation, and avoids the additional, potentially significant impacts associated with capital improvement of the SBA. e.. S.8 CUl\1ULATIVE Il\1PACTS 5.8.1 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGABLE IMPACTS Concurrent construction of several infrastructure projects within the project area would result in cumulative short-term impacts associated with construction activities. These include short-term impacts to surface water quality, noise, air quality, land use, traffic, and visual resources. Zone 7 shall coordinate construction activities of identified facilities under the Long-Term Program with appropriate sponsoring agencies, consolidate, avoid, or reduce the occurrence of short-term construction-related impacts, to the extent feasible. r , -. Depending upon the future water transfers selected for implementation by Zone 7 under the Long- Term Program, future water supplies identified by the Water Supply Planning Program could contribute to cumulative impacts to Delta hydrodynamics, water quality, and aquatic resources. In general, Zone 7' s cumulative contribution to these types of impacts would be limited to the "North of Delta" water transfers identified under the Long-Term Program, as these types of transfers would include transfer of water through the Delta. If the North of Delta water transfers identified under the Long Term Program are implemented at some point in the future by Zone 7, implementation could, in conjunction with otherregional programs, result in cumulative hydrologic changes in the Delta. These include cumulative changes in channel flows. reductions in water supply availability, changes in water quality, and related impacts on aquatic resources. Should Zone 7 chose to implement these types of water transfers under the Long-Term Program, the potential for cumulative impacts within the context of the larger programs would be examined in future CEQA documents, at necessary. . On a statewide basis, implementation of water transfer programs will meet part of the ":~:~. demand that has been identified by DWR as being unmet by current water supplies. 'lbe DWR identifies 2.9 to 4.9 million acre-feet of projected water demand that would not be met by existing water facilities, water conservation and wastewater reclamation if all entitlements and water rights continue to be delivered to existing users. Water transfers can be used in the future to reduce the currently uomet future demand. Therefore, water transfers may be beneficial from a cumulative statewide perspective. Cumulative impacts associated with the transfer of water must consider the impacts of other water transfers that would occur throughout the Central Valley. The U. S. Bureau of Reclamation has purchased water in the San Joaquin Valley from water rights holders on the Merced River and the Stanislaus River. The purchased water has been used to improve instream e Zone 7 W:nef Suppl)' Plnnning Progrom - Progn.m EIR S-22 Progrom Draft EIR ESA I 970378 -. ~ -. .--.0: 1- ; -.-e - - S. SUMMARY fishery flows on these rivers and to improve conditions in the Delta. Water also has been purchased on an annual basis by agricultural users on both the eastern and western sides of the San Joaquin Valley to improve water reliability. Water users located within the watersheds of the upper Sacramento, Feather, Yuba, and Bear rivers have participated or are considering participation in short-term water transfers of one to five year periods for water supplies and/or fish and wildlife uses. However: projects and locations have not been identified at this time. Ongoing water transfers may reduce the ability of other agencies to purchase and transfer water. If the amount of water available for transfers is reduced, the users who do not purchase the water will either increase groundwater withdrawals, which may lead to increased rates of overdraft and subsidence, or purchase more expensive water supplies which could increase the cost of agricultural crops or reduce net revenues. 5.9 SECONDARY EFFECTS OF GROWTH 5.9.1 SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE IMPACTS The proposed project would support a level of growth that is consistent with the growth planned and approved by the planning agencies within Zone 7' s Service Area. No appreciable growth in population or employment would occur as a direct result of construction or operation of the pipeline and auxiliary facilities. However, the growth accommodated by the project would result in secondary environmental effects. SOffie of these secondary effects of growth are significant and unavoidable; others are significant but can be mitigated. Significant, unavoidable impacts could occur as a result of planned growth in the following areas: traffic and traffic congestion, air pollution, loss of agricultural land and open space, loss of wildlife habitat, alteration of the Valley's visual character, grading and permanent changes in topography, increased traffic noise, increased demand for solid waste disposal capacity, seismic hazards, impacts to wildlife habitat. growth pressures for land conversion, lacIC of wastewater disposal capacity, cumulative demand for schools and parks, increased flooding potential, increased urban runoff pollutants, and increased energy demand. Zone 7 does not have the authority to make land use and development decisions. It does not approve growth but rather seeks to provide adequate water supply and service capacity to respond to the planned growth approved by the cities and unincorporated county areas within its service area: Zone 7 does have the ability to mitigate the impacts of growth on water service by providing adequate supply and service capacity. It does not have the authority or jurisdiction to implement mitigation measures necessary to address many of the identified significant, secondary effects of planned growth. Authority to implement such measures lies with the land use/development approval agencies (Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore and Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), which enforce local, state, and federal regulations/mitigation requirements through the permit process. Zone 7 Water Supply Planning Prov:>-m - Prov:>-m ElR Progrom o...fl ElR ESA I 970378 5.23 S. SUM:MARY S.10 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND CONCERN . In accordance with CEQA, the NOP for the EIR was distributed on March 31,1998 to public agencies, elected officials, community groups, and other interested parties to solicit comments on environmental issues of concern. The following summarizes the issues of concern raised by agencies and members of the public: Alameda Countv Water District · Potential impacts to downstream water quality associated with increased water use within the Alameda Creek Watershed. · Potential impacts to SBA operations associated with use of the Future Contractor Share. East Bav Regional Park District · Potential impacts to recreational uses at Del Valle Reservoir and Arroyo Del Valle. · Potential impacts to sensitive species (bald eagle) at Del Valle Reservoir. · Potential impacts to Bethany Reservoir and/or the SBA alignment that could affect future recreational uses. California Department of Fish and Game · Growth Inducement and secondary effects on wildlife habitat and sensitive species, including San Joaquin kit fox. .. DERWA CDSRSD-EBMUD Recycled Water Authority) · Potential impacts to surface and groundwater quality resulting from increased potable water use to proyide landscape and agricultural irrigation. Margaret Tracy - Safe Water Committee · Potential water quality impaits associated with indirect potable reuse of recycled water. City of Livermore · Effect of demand projections on distribution and use of groundwater by retailers. . Consideration of drought conditions, conservation, recycling, and North Livermore water demands in Zone 7 demand projections, and analysis of potential impacts. · Effects of supply outside of the Zone 7 service area. · Economic analysis of future costs. . Potential impacts of water delivery system improvements and quality of delivered water supply. . Zone 7 W~ler Supply Pl~nnin!: PrD!:~m - Prog~m EIR 5-24 Prog~m Dro.fl EIR ESA I 970378 'I -. ~. ~-:. S. SUMMARY S.11 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED Purchase and use of the Future Contractor Share by Zone 7 would result in a cumulatively significant, unavoidable impact to existing recreational benefits at Del Valle Reservoir. Several potential mitigation strategies have been examined by Zone 7 in an attempt to identify measures that would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Zone 7 does not have the authority to make specific recommendations regarding recreational facilities or impose mitigation that would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures established for this impact require coordination between Zone 7, DWR, EBRPD and State Parks to identify the appropriate facilities, improvements, or other measures that could be implemented to reduce potential impacts associated wirh the planned water level drawdown that has always been part of the intended SBA operational design. f.' Zene 7 W~ler Supply Plnnning Program - Program EIR Prognlm Dr.lfl EIR ESA /970378 5-25