• Home
• 2008 VAMP Peer Review
• SJRG Agreement
• Executive Summary
• SJRG Background
• VAMP annual reports
• Final EIS/EIR
• Supplemental EIS/EIR
• Operations and Technical Data
• Fish Program
• Head of Old River
• Administration
• Notices
• VAMP Newsletter

FINAL Supplemental EIS/EIR

Acquisition of Additional Water for Meeting the San Joaquin River Agreement Flow Objectives, 2000 – 2010

2. ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION

Index

This chapter describes two alternatives, a No Action and a Proposed Action, and incorporates by reference the range of alternatives that were evaluated as potential options to the Proposed Action in the Meeting Flow Objectives for the San Joaquin River Agreement, 1999-2010, Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Final EIS/EIR, Reclamation 1999). No Action represents existing flow conditions based on existing hydrology and operations within the Bay-Delta watershed with implementation of the San Joaquin River Agreement (SJRA). The Proposed Project/Action is the acquisition of up to 47,000 acre-feet of "supplemental" water if needed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) from the San Joaquin River Group Authority (SJRGA) and its members (specifically Modesto Irrigation District [MID], Turlock Irrigation District [TID], and Merced Irrigation District [Merced ID]) to provide full Vernalis Adaptive Management Plan (VAMP) test flow conditions at Vernalis in April and May during "double-step years" for Water Years 2001 through 2010. This water would supplement, under Paragraph 8 of the SJRA, the water provided by the SJRA, which has previously been analyzed in the Final EIS/EIR (Reclamation 1999). The water is needed to support the VAMP during the pulse flow period and to assist Reclamation in meeting the Anadromous Fish Restoration Program, Bay-Delta flow objectives as required by State Water Resources Control Board Water Right Decision 1641 (State Board 1999), and the Delta Smelt Biological Opinion (Service 1995a).

2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative represents the existing condition of up to 110,000 acre-feet for the VAMP Target Flow and assumes implementation of the SJRA. It includes three components of flow:

• Up to 110,000 acre-feet per year towards meeting the VAMP Target Flow. Water provided under this component will be divided among the SJRGA members pursuant to the SJRGA Division Agreement. This water is to be used only during the VAMP 31-day test flow period.
• Additional water from Merced (12,500 acre-feet) during October. This flow will be provided above the "existing flow" in the Merced River during October.
• Additional water (15,000 acre-feet) from Oakdale Irrigation District (OID) to be available to Reclamation. In addition to this water, any of the (up to) 11,000 acre-feet of OID VAMP water not provided towards meeting the VAMP Target Flow will be made available to Reclamation.

The water currently provided by the SJRGA is provided by several potential means, including the increased release of water from tributary reservoir storage.

2.2 PROPOSED ACTION

The Proposed Project/Action for this National Environmental Protection Act/California Environmental Quality Act analysis is the acquisition of up to 47,000 acre-feet of "supplemental" water by Reclamation from willing SJRGA members on the Tuolumne and/or Merced rivers, if needed, to achieve full target flows at Vernalis during April and May for Water Years 2001 through 2010. The SJRGA members that may be providing the supplemental water are MID, TID, and Merced ID. This water is intended to supplement flows of the San Joaquin River to achieve full VAMP test flows, which otherwise may not be achieved during certain years due to the SJRA cap of 110,000 acre-feet. The supplemental water would be provided under the willing seller provision of the SJRA.

2.2.1 Location

The affected portions of the San Joaquin River and its tributaries (Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced rivers) are located in the Central Valley of California (Figure 2-1). The rivers and related storage and conveyance facilities are located in the following counties: Mariposa, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Calaveras. The Project Area is defined by river as follows:

• San Joaquin River: From Vernalis to its confluence with the Merced River
• Stanislaus River: From its confluence with the San Joaquin River to and including New Melones Dam and Reservoir
• Tuolumne River: From its confluence with the San Joaquin River to and including New Don Pedro Dam and Reservoir
• Merced River: From its confluence with the San Joaquin River to and including New Exchequer Dam/Lake McClure

These rivers are located between the community of Vernalis in the north and the city of Merced in the southeast.

2.2.2 Determination of VAMP Water for 2001 through 2010

The SJRA defines the determination of water to be provided for VAMP by the SJRGA’s members. The SJRGA members will provide, during the pulse flow period, the amount of water needed to achieve the VAMP Target Flow or 110,000 acre-feet, whichever is less. Additional water may be provided to meet the VAMP Target Flow under the willing seller provision of the SJRA. The water that would be provided by the SJRGA members is determined as the sum of flows released in excess of flows that would otherwise have been released during the pulse flow period.

The VAMP Target Flow is determined by a series of procedures and conditions based on the flow at Vernalis that would occur in the absence of the SJRA (referred to as "existing flow"), and the San Joaquin Valley Water Year Hydrologic Classification. The SJRA provides a VAMP Target Flow that will be incrementally larger than the existing flow at Vernalis. Table 2-1 shows the VAMP Target Flows for the existing flows.

Table 2-1
VAMP Target Flows and Existing Flows

* For the purpose of determining water required by the SJRGA’s members. The VAMP Target Flow is 3,200 cubic feet per second (cfs).

2.2.3 Assumed Division of VAMP Flow for 2001 throught 2010

The SJRA assigns a numeric adjunct (60-20-20 Indicator) to the San Joaquin Valley Water Year Hydrologic Classification: a Wet year is assigned the numeric value of 5, an Above Normal year is assigned the numeric value of 4, a Below Normal year is assigned the numeric value of 3, a Dry year is assigned the numeric value of 2, and a Critical (Critically Dry) year is assigned the numeric value of 1. In any year when the sum of the current year’s 60-20-20 Indicator and previous year’s 60-20-20 Indicator is 7 or greater, the 31-day target flow will be the target flow one level higher than that established by Table 2-1 (e.g., if the existing flow is 3,500 cfs then the target flow will be 5,700 cfs). This condition is referred to as a “double-step.”

Although the hierarchy described above for providing VAMP flows is established by the Division Agreement, the SJRA also allows for other arrangements between the members to provide water, so long as the VAMP pulse flow is met. At times, it is assumed that the South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID) and the OID would arrange for the MID to provide its share of VAMP test flows through releases to the Tuolumne River. This arrangement is necessary because the releases by Reclamation at Goodwin Dam to the Stanislaus River can at times be limited at 1,500 cfs during the pulse flow period.

Table 2-2
Division of VAMP Pulse Flow Water, up to 110,000 Acre-Feet

Under the willing seller provision of the SJRA, the TID, MID, and Merced ID may provide up to 47,000 acre-feet of supplemental water that may be needed to achieve the full VAMP Target Flow during double-step years. The provision and division of the supplemental water among the three districts is unknown due to the uncertainty of hydrologic conditions that will occur in any particular year or sequence of years although it is known to be within the range of potential circumstances analyzed in this document. To evaluate the full range of potential divisions of this supplemental water, two circumstances are analyzed: (1) the supplemental water is supplied entirely from the Tuolumne River, and (2) the supplemental water is supplied entirely from the Merced River. These circumstances are extreme and the actual division would be less, attenuating the impacts that are discussed in the following chapters.

2.2.4 Water Potentially Provided Under the San Joaquin River Agreement During 2001 through 2010

Water potentially provided under the SJRA is depicted in Tables 2-3 and 2-4.

Table 2-3
Tuolumne River Providing 47,000 Acre-Feet of Supplemental Water

Table 2-4
Merced River Providing 47,000 Acre-Feet of Supplemental Water

2.2.5 Operations Plan

The Hydrology Group of the San Joaquin River Technical Committee will develop an annual operations plan for each year the SJRA is in effect. The committee is also reviewing biological and hydrological information to determine the specific timing of the flow in April-May and concerns relating to the operation of VAMP in 2001 and each subsequent year to 2010. One of the concerns, the potential for juvenile stranding subsequent to the pulse flow period, is required mitigation under the Final EIS/EIR. The pulse flow is expected to start around April 15 but is determined based on the specific hydrology and biology for the year.

2.2.6 Required Approvals and Permits

No alterations of stream channels would occur under the Proposed Action. No permit would be required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to implement the flows. The State Board (1999) in Water Right Decision 1641 (Adopted December 29, 2000; Revised March 15, 2000) approved the SJRGA agencies’ petitions for long-term changes in purpose of use and place of use of water under the water rights of MID, TID, and Merced ID, subject to terms and conditions.  That approval did not address the provision by TID, MID, and Merced ID of supplemental water for the Spring Pulse Flow above the 110,000 acre-feet to be supplied by the SJRGA members.

The SJRGA and its members participating in this portion of the SJRA will petition the State Board for a change of place and purpose of use under Water Code Sections 1707 and 1735. 

2.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT EVALUATED IN DETAIL

Twenty-six alternatives for providing water for the pulse flows were evaluated in the Final EIS/EIR including the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action. The analysis in Section 2.4 of the Final EIS/EIR provides additional information on these alternatives. In summary, this analysis of the initial 26 alternatives resulted in six alternatives that were considered in more detail, and most of these were subsequently eliminated from further consideration. One alternative, the Water Right Priority System, was carried through the full impact analysis as a reasonable alternative. Water Right Decision 1641 (State Board 1999) supersedes/modifies this alternative. Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources are conducting further investigations of the recirculation alternative under the South Delta Improvement Program, and the status of these investigations is included in Chapter 14, cumulative effects.

The involvement of other water purveyors in San Joaquin Valley to provide the needed supplemental water of up to 47,000 acre-feet for 2001-2010 is infeasible and speculative, particularly given other commitments by SJRGA members. The additional water must be available no later than the last part of the spring pulse flow. Only MID, TID, and Merced ID are proposing to consider providing supplemental water, and the specific quantities from each seller remain to be determined based on the hydrologic circumstances at the time. Relative to water quantities, it is not known what the exact quantity would be for any particular year due to the hydrology that may exist and the adaptive nature of the VAMP. The Proposed Project/Action is intended to provide a varying amount of supplemental flow and has been evaluated in that context given historical hydrologic conditions as a basis of events that may occur in the future. Therefore, it would be highly speculative and unproductive to analyze acquisition of amounts less than those needed to achieve the VAMP flows provided by the Proposed Project/Action. By analyzing the effects of acquiring up to an additional 47,000 acre-feet on each affected tributary, all impacts associated with lesser amounts would be addressed.

2.4 SUMMARY COMPARISON OF IMPACTS

Table ES-1, contained in the Executive Summary, provides a comparison of impact statements for the two options under the Proposed Action. In summary, the effects of the two options are similar and neither is environmentally superior to the other. Table 2-5, below, is an abbreviated comparison of characteristics of No Action (SJRA) and the Proposed Action.

Table 2-5
Comparison of No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives