Co-Authors: Mario Manzo USBR Ibrahim Khadam MWH Kana Matsui MWH American Water Resources Association Annual Conference Tysons Corner, VA November 5, 2014 Bill Swanson MWH Water Resources Practice Leader
The Setting
Sierra Nevada Mountains Sacramento - San Joaquin Bay Delta is Largest Estuary on West Coast Central Valley
San Francisco Friant Division 1 million acres High value crops Small family farms Los Angeles Friant Dam Completed in 1942 San Diego
Shasta Dam San Francisco Delta-Mendota Canal Replaces water to San Joaquin River Los Angeles San Diego Friant Dam Completed in 1945 First Contracts 1948 Stopped river flow 1951
DEID Declining Friant Division Deliveries Ground and Groundwater Water Elevation Levels Change Avg. Depth to Groundwater Friant Division Delivery Subsidence 1925-75 3.5 Average Depth to Groundwater (feet) -95-115 -135-155 -175-195 -215-235 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Friant Division Deliveries (Acre Feet per Acre) 1955 1977
Service Area 4 Counties / $5B Ag Economy 1.2 Million Ac / 15,000 Farmers Porterville I.D. Saucelito I.D. Shafter-Wasco I.D. Southern San Joaquin M.U.D. Stone Corral I.D. Tea Pot Dome W.D. Terra Bella I.D. Tri-Valley Tulare I.D. Conjunctive Use Water Deliveries 2-class contract system Class 1 first 800 TAF Class 2 up to next 1,400 TAF Average 1.3 MAF/yr 25 Ag and 5 M&I contractors Fresno Merced Madera Canal Millerton Lake Visalia Friant- Kern Canal Bakersfield
1948 Initial 40-year water contracts signed for Friant Division 1988 Contract renewal challenged under ESA and State law Plaintiffs: 14 Environmental interest groups Defendants: Federal government and 22 irrigation districts 2006 Settlement reached after 18 years 2009 Congress authorized implementation by Reclamation
Restoration Goal To restore and maintain fish populations in good condition, including naturally reproducing and self-sustaining populations of salmon and other fish Water Management Goal To reduce or avoid adverse water supply impacts to all of the Friant Division longterm contractors that may result from the Interim Flows and Restoration Flows
Varies according to available supply Year-round base flow Peak spring flows mimic snow-melt patterns
Restoration Year Type Estimated Average Delivery (TAF/yr) Without SJRRP With SJRRP Estimated Average Delivery Reduction (TAF/yr) Change in Class 1 Change in Class 2 Wet 1,967 1,802 0-165 Normal-Wet 1,627 1,340 0-287 Normal-Dry 1,095 892 0-203 Dry 778 627-151 0 Critical-High 525 389-136 0 Critical-Low 322 319-3 0
Identify, evaluate, and rank projects that could help achieve the Water Management Goal Support decisions to fund projects Objective Reduce Recovered Water Account balances
~ 500 ~ 140 ~ 60 ~ 20
Project Types Groundwater banking Canal capacity restoration Flood water diversion Distribution inter-connections River diversions Regional conveyance Non-Structural projects
Performance & Cost Yield (long-term average) RWA balance reduction (long-term average) Total cost Non-federal cost-share Overall cost-effectiveness Federal cost of RWA benefit
Implementation Factors (Complexity) Environmental Compliance Requirements Permitting Requirements Water Rights, Institutional Land Acquisition Timeframe for Implementation
Completeness of Project Definition Facilities & Costs Yield & RWA Reduction Approach Finance
Other Potential Benefits Groundwater Overdraft Reduction Hydropower Flood Damage Reduction Recreation Ecosystem Water Quality
Overall Scores Overall Cost Effectiveness Implementation Complexity Project Definition Composite Weighted Score (for all four criteria)
More Cost Effective Implementation Complexity Score (Higher Score = Less Complex Project Implementation) 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 $1 709 702 Evaluations highlight weaknesses or deficiencies Motivated proponents to refine project descriptions Less Cost Effective 726 911 101 105 811 Highly Complex or Potentially Difficult to Implement 225 404 910 804 227 311 409 810 209 215 114 917 226 727 805 104 801 223 321 232 401 305 314 921 115920 922 918 601 602 913 113 230 319 310 231 504 219 716 306 701 Bubble Size Represents Level of Project Definition (Bigger Size = Higher Project Definition Score) 318 $10 $100 $1,000 $10,000 Less Complex or Potentially Easier to Implement Federal Cost of RWA Benefit ($/acre-foot)
Lowest cost per acre-foot regardless of implementation complexity or project definition completeness
Blends lowest cost per acrefoot with lower complexity Incomplete project definitions highlight uncertainty
Blends lowest cost per acrefoot with project definition completeness Disregards implementation complexity
10% Other Benefits 15% Completeness 25% Complexity 50% Cost Effective
Appraisal-level designs and cost estimates Implementation schedule and budgets for major project phases Planning / NEPA / CEQA Design, Permitting Acquisitions, Agreements Construction Rank Priority Projects for funding
Project definitions were updated to be more consistent Cost effectiveness became primary differentiator
Project yields did not consider effects of multiple projects on available supply Project combination permutations were run to test competition Water Source # of Projects # of Project Combination Permutations San Joaquin River Recapture of SJRRP Flows 3 6 Surplus Kaweah River Flows 5 120 Recirculation of Recaptured Supplies 7 5,040 Surplus San Joaquin River Flows 9 362,880
30 San Joaquin River Recapture 18.0 Recirculation of Recaptured Water 25 16.0 14.0 20 12.0 Yield (TAF) 15 10 Yield (TAF) 10.0 8.0 6.0 5 4.0 2.0 0 ID_920 ID_921 ID_922 0.0 ID_232 ID_115 ID_602 ID_709 ID_504 ID_810 ID_716 16 Surplus Kaweah River Flows 9 Surplus San Joaquin River Flows 14 8 12 7 Yield (TAF) 10 8 6 4 Yield (TAF) 6 5 4 3 2 2 1 0 ID_306 ID_311 ID_314 ID_318 ID_321 0 ID_227 ID_232 ID_306 ID_311 ID_314 ID_321 ID_401 ID_602 ID_716
The Investment Strategy is a transparent method to rank projects for the SJRRP Water Management Goal Provides clarity on how to improve project rankings The method is transferrable to other funding programs
Mario Manzo Reclamation MManzo@usbr.gov 916.978.5462 Ibrahim Khadam MWH Ibrahim.Khadam@us.mwhglobal.com 916.418.8406 Bill Swanson MWH William.R.Swanson@mwhglobal.com 916.296.3503 Kana Matsui MWH MWHKana.Matsui@us.mwhglobal.com 916,418.8277