< Back to Current Version

Central Valley Project Operations: Background and Legislation

Changes from April 13, 2016 to June 10, 2016

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.


Central Valley Project (CVP) Operations: In Brief

April 13June 10, 2016 (R44456)
Jump to Main Text of Report

Summary

California is in its fifth year of drought. Rain and snowstorms in Northern and Central California in the winter of 2015-2016 improved hydrologic conditions but did not eliminate the state's ongoing drought. As of March 29drought conditions in the state. According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, as of May 31, 2016, approximately 7359% of the state was suffering from severe drought conditions. This figure represents an improvement from one year ago, when 9394% of the state fellwas under thea severe drought designation.

The stress on water supplies due to the drought has resulted in cutbacks in water deliveries to districts receiving water from federal and state facilities, in particular the federal Central Valley Project (CVP, operated by the Bureau of Reclamation within the Department of the Interior) and the State Water Project (SWP, operated by the state of California). These cutbacks are continuing in 2016, although their exact magnitude has yet to be finalized. In 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown mandated a 25% reduction in water use for nonagricultural users. In November 2015, Governor Brown directed2016, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to extend restrictions if drought conditions persisted. The SWRCB extended and revised emergency conservation regulations on February 2, 2016. Arelaxed some of these restrictions and set new requirements for drought operations and planning. However, the drought declaration made by Governor Brown on January 17, 2014, also remains in effect.

On April 1, 2016, the Bureau of Reclamation announced its initial water allocations for CVP contractors for the 2016 water year. Despite the improved precipitation and water supplies in 2016, (especially in the northern and central parts of the state), some CVP contractors are projected to see a fourth straight year of curtailments to their water supplies. Particularly hard hit have been contractors south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers' Delta (Bay Delta). Congress is considering legislative proposals that would attempt to address western drought issues in several pending bills in the 114th Congress. These bills include, among other approaches, , some CVP contractors (in particular those south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers' Delta) are projected to see a fourth straight year of significant curtailments to their water supplies.

Several bills proposed to address drought in the 114th Congress (as well as in previous Congresses) have included, among other approaches, CVP-related provisions that would alter the Bureau of Reclamation's authorities to operate the project. The ongoing cutbacks to CVP contractors during a timeCVP, as well as provisions that would affect Bureau of Reclamation projects throughout the West. The two bills that have received the most attention to date are H.R. 2898 and S. 2533; however, several related bills have incorporated drought-related text and could be acted upon in 2016. Cutbacks in water supplies to CVP contractors during a period of increased precipitation have caused some to criticize the Bureau of Reclamation andmanagement of the CVP by the Bureau of Reclamation and insist that more water should be pumped to users. Some also question the extent to which other factors beyond drought (e.g., restrictions to protect endangered species and other regulatory requirements) are the underlying cause of water shortages. Some supporters of the CVP-related provisions in these bills contend that the provisions would make available needed waterthese bills contend that the proposed congressionally directed changes in the operation of the CVP would result in much-needed increases to water allocations for agriculture and municipal contractors. Opponents argue that the provisionssome of the proposed changes would undercut environmental regulations, result in harm toharm fish and wildlife, and potentially lower water quality. Opponents further contend that operations related to protecting endangered species are guided by science and should not be altered to increase water suppliessome of the proposed provisions in these bills would alter the implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), potentially resulting in a precedent for all listed species. However, supporters of the bills note all provisions would be implemented in a way that is consistent with existing laws, including ESA.

This report provides an abbreviated summary of recent hydrologic conditions (including precipitation and reservoir levels) in California as of early April 2016 and their effect on water deliveries, in particular those related to the federal CVP. The report also provides a table specifying initial water allocation estimates for water contractors associated with the CVP in recent years (see Table 1). In addition, it includes a summary ofIn addition, it summarizes some of the issues pertaining to CVP operations that are being debated in the 114th Congress.


Central Valley Project (CVP) Operations: In Brief

Background

California is in its fifth year of drought. Rain and snowstorms in Northern and Central California in the winter of 2015-2016 improved hydrologic conditions but did not eliminate the state's ongoing drought. As shown below in Figure 1, as of April 5May 31, 2016, approximately 7459% of the state was suffering from severe drought conditions. This figure represents an improvement from three months ago, when 8883% of the state was in the severe drought category, and one year ago, when 9394% of the state fell under this designation. The current drought is the result of extensive dry conditions in recent years. The previous four years have been classified as below normal (2012), dry (2013), and critically dry (2014 and 2015).

Figure 1. U.S. Drought Monitor: California

(conditions as of April 5May 31, 2016)

Source: United States Drought Monitor, "U.S. Drought Monitor: California," at http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Home/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA.

The stress on water supplies due to the drought has resulted in cutbacks in water deliveries to districts receiving water from federal and state facilities. These cutbacks are continuing in 2016, although their exact magnitude remains to be seen in some cases. A drought declaration made by California Governor Jerry Brown on January 17, 2014, remains in effect. In 2015, the governor also mandated a 25% the first-ever 25% statewide reduction in water use for nonagricultural users. In November 2015, he directed1 On May 18, 2016, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to extend restrictions if drought conditions persisted. The SWRCB extended and revised emergency conservation regulations on February 2, 2016.1adopted a new regulation that replaces the prior percentage reduction-based water conservation standard with a localized "stress test" approach.2

On April 1, 2016, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation; part of the Department of the Interior) announced its estimated annual water allocations for federal Central Valley Project (CVP) contractors in water year 2016 (October 2015 through September 2016).23 For many contractors, allocations are expected to be significantly below contracted amounts.

This report provides high-level summary information on precipitation and reservoir levels in California and their impact on water deliveries (in particular, on those deliveries related to the federal CVP). It also summarizes some of the issues pertaining to CVP operations that are being debated in the 114th Congress.

Hydrologic Status

As noted above, as of early Aprillate May 2016, 7459% of California remained in severe drought, with 5442% in extreme drought and 3521% in exceptional drought.34 These figures all represent significant improvements over both the beginning of the water year and one year ago. Improvements arewere due in part to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation phenomenon, which has led to increased precipitation and streamflows in some parts of the state in the winter of 2015-2016.

As a result of the recent uptick in precipitation, water levels at several of California's largest reservoirs rebounded in early 2016 (see Figure 2). In particular, heavy rains in Northern and Central California in January and March 2016 significantly improved conditions at the state's two largest reservoirs: Shasta Reservoir (operated by Reclamation) and Lake Oroville (operated by the state of California). As of early Aprillate May 2016, both reservoirs held more water than 100% of their historical averages for that date. Notably, other major reservoirs (especially those south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers' Delta confluence with the San Francisco Bay, known as the Bay-Delta) did not benefit to the same extent from the higher precipitation levels, and the southern part of the state is expected to remain under drought status.4

5

Figure 2. Water Levels at California's Five Largest Reservoirs

(percentage of historical average, August 2014-April 2016)

Source: CRS, based on data from California Department of Water Resources, "California Data Exchange Center—Reservoirs," at http://cdec.water.ca.gov/reservoir.html.

Another important hydrologic metric is the water content in snow in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. In normal years, the snowpack provides for approximately 30% of California's water needs. Water from snowpack typically melts in the spring and early summer, thus addressing water needs for the state in the late summer and fall. The April 1 snow water equivalent is another important measure of California's water supplies. As of early April 2016, statewide snow-water equivalent was 19.4 inches, or 70% of normal for this time of year. This. Although this figure represents a significant improvement from this time in recent years but still fallsand helped to ameliorate the widespread drought present at the end of 2015, it was short of both normal levels and the record precipitation that would likely be needed to end the current drought. A comparison of snow-water content as of April 1, 2016, in the northern, central, and southern Sierra Nevada Mountains is shown below in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Snow-Water Content Comparison

(December 2015- April 2016, compared to other years of note)

Source: California Department of Water Resources, California Data Exchange Center, "California Snow Water Content," at http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/snow/PLOT_SWC.

Note: Years of note represent totals for a typical dry year (1977-1978) and wet year (1982-1983).

Federal and State Water6 Federal and State Water Project Deliveries

Recent proposals and debates related to state and federal water allocations in California revolve around two major water projects that are significant for the state's agricultural and municipal water suppliers: the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP). Major CVP and SWP pumps that supply water for Central and Southern California are located at the southern end of the Bay-Delta. Thus, CVP allocations typically distinguish between "North-of-Delta" and "South-of-Delta" users.

Central Valley
Project Deliveries

Each year, Reclamation announces estimated deliveries for its CVP contractors in the upcoming water year.57 The CVP—which covers approximately 400 miles in California, from Redding to Bakersfield—supplies water to hundreds of thousands of acres of irrigated agriculture throughout the state, as well as to some wildlife refuges and municipal and industrial (M&I) water users. In a normal water year, the CVP delivers, on average, approximately 7 million acre-feet of water to contractors (including 5 million acre-feet to agricultural contractors). In recent years, Reclamation has made significant cutbacks to water deliveries for many CVP contractors due to the drought, among other factors.

On April 1, 2016, Reclamation announced its initial allocations for the upcoming water year (allocations for 2016 are shown below in Table 1). In contrast to recent years, Reclamation estimated that, as a result of recent rains, it would be able to provide some level of water supplies for most CVP agricultural and M&I water service contractors. Sacramento River Settlement Contractors and San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors with senior water rights predating the CVP are expected to receive their full contract allotments in 2016.68 (These contractors saw reduced allocations in 2014 and 2015.) However, most CVP South-of-Delta contractors,79 including those in many of the state's largest and most prominent agricultural areas, will see severely curtailed water supplies for the fourth consecutive year.

Table 1. Water Allocations for CVP Contractors, 2012-2016

(percentage of maximum contract allocation)

 

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016 (est.)

North-of-Delta Users

 

 

 

 

 

Agricultural

100%

75%

0%

0%

100%

M&I

100%

100%

50%

25%

100%

Settlement

100%

100%

75%

75%

100%

Refuges

100%

100%

75%

75%

100%

American River M&I

100%

75%

50%

25%

100%

In Delta- Contra Costa

100%

75%

50%

25%

100%

South-of-Delta Users

 

 

 

 

 

Agricultural

40%

20%

0%

0%

5%

M&I

75%

70%

50%

25%

55%

Exchange

100%

100%

65%

75%

100%

Refuges

100%

100%

65%

75%

100%

Eastside Division

100%

100%

55%

0%

0%

Friant Class I

45%

45%

0%

0%

3065%

Friant Class 2

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

Source: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, "Summary of Water Supply Allocations," at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/water_allocations_historical.pdf.

Notes: CVP = Central Valley Project. "M&I" indicates municipal and industrial water service contractors. "Settlement" refers to contractors on the Sacramento River (North-of-Delta), and "Exchange" refers to contractors on the San Joaquin River (South-of-Delta) with special contracts and minimum delivery levels recognizing state water rights predating those acquired by the Bureau of Reclamation for construction and operation of the CVP. Contra Costa, Eastside Division, and Friant Class 1 and Class 2 represent individual or groups of water contractors.

State Water Project Deliveries The other major water project serving California, the State Water Project (SWP, SWP, is operated by the state of California), announced a slight increase in water deliveries for 2016 over 2015, but its deliveries remain very low (15% of contracted supply).8 The SWP primarily provides water to M&I users and some agricultural users. Major CVP and SWP pumps that supply water for Central and Southern California are located at the southern portion of the Bay-Delta. Approximately 22 million people receive water from the Bay-Delta annually.

's Department of Water resources (DWR). The SWP primarily provides water to M&I users and some agricultural users. For 2016, SWP water deliveries are expected to be significantly higher than they were in 2015. On April 21, 2016, DWR estimated that in 2016, the SWP would be able to meet 60% of requested deliveries, or 2.5 million acre-feet.10 The 2015 allocation was 20% of deliveries. Recent SWP deliveries are shown below in Table 2. Table 2. California State Water Project Allocations

(percentage of maximum contract allocation)

 

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016 (est.)

State Water Project

50%

65%

35%

5%

50%

Source: California Department of Water Resources, "State Water Project Allocation Increased," April 21, 2016, at http://www.water.ca.gov/news/newsreleases/2016/042116.pdf.

What Is at Stake?

The widespread nature of drought conditions—coupled with previous low water supplies in the state's major reservoirs and regulatory restrictions on CVP and SWP operations—has affected sectors and areas throughout California. Many cities and counties have instituted water rationing, some species populations have declined, and mandatory cutbacks have been put in place.

Although agriculture constitutes a much smaller percentage of California's economy than it did historically, California agriculture is still the nation's largest producer in terms of cash farm receipts—accounting for 12% of the U.S. total in 2014, the last year for which national data are available. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service Crop Year Report, California farm and ranch receipts totaled $56 billion in 2014, an increase of $2 billion over 2013.911 Those agricultural users with access to groundwater or other supplies have seen receipts grow despite the drought, but others have had to fallow land or uproot trees and shrubs. Some livestock producers have had to purchase supplemental hay and grain. Hundreds of thousands of acres have been fallowed because sufficient water was not available.1012 Fruit and nut orchards continue to rely on irrigation to keep trees alive.

The availability of other water supplies (e.g., groundwater or transferred surface water) has helped some agricultural users adjust to dry conditions. However, with much of the state categorized as a drought disaster area, whether other supplies will continue to be available is uncertain. Some areas already are experiencing low groundwater levels and land subsidence due to increased groundwater pumping. Groundwater provides about 45% of California's water supply in an average year; however, under drought conditions, such as in 2015, groundwater may supply as much as 65% of the state's water needs. Further, groundwater supplies may be limited or become too expensive to pump. California has enacted a statewide law that will increase groundwater planning and monitoring, but implementation will take many years.1113

Drought also affects resource sectors other than agriculture. Certain water flows are critical for hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife. For example, cool temperatures are needed in waterways and lakes to maintain aquatic ecosystems and species viability. Some salmon runs experienced a 95% loss of eggs laid in 2015, and surveys of Delta smelt found fewer than five fish that year. In addition, recreational reservoirs, river-rafting opportunities, and recreational and commercial fisheries are all potentially at risk. California wetlands also provide Pacific Flyway habitat, which is critical to migrating birds.

Regulatory Factors

Complicating the hydrologic situation and water supply allocations is a complex web of state and federal regulatory requirements on CVP and SWP operations. These requirements affect how much water is delivered from the projects. They address releases of water from reservoirs and limits on pumping from the Bay-Delta to protect habitat, threatened and endangered species (e.g., salmon and Delta smelt), and water quality. In some years, pumping restrictions to protect state-set water quality levels, particularly increases in salinity levels, are greater than restrictions to protect endangered species.1214

In wet years, however, restrictions under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. §§1531 et seq.) may have a higher nominal impact on exports than water quality restrictions, and they may have proportionally higher impacts in certain months. Due to overlapping state and federal restrictions, there is disagreement over how much water might be available absent such restrictions. Further, the percentage of restrictions due to ESA varies in most water years. Reclamation estimated that ESA restrictions accounted for a reduction of 62 thousand144,000 acre-feet from the long-term average for CVP deliveries in 2014; in 2015, it, while water quality restrictions accounted for 176,000 acre-feet. For 2015, Reclamation estimated that ESA accounted for approximately 144 thousand,000 acre-feet of total reductions.13 The SWP estimated that reductions from the long-term average and has yet to provide an update for water quality restrictions. For its part, DWR estimated that SWP ESA restrictions resulted in a reduction of 47 thousand,000 acre-feet in water year 2014 and a reduction of 92 thousand,000 acre-feet in water year 2015. Such figures are not readily available for water quality restrictions.14

15

The ongoing cutbacks to CVP contractors in 2016 despite the recent increases in precipitation and water supplies in Northern and Central California have led some to criticize Reclamation's operation of the CVP and highlight the extent to which factors other than the drought (e.g., endangered species and water quality requirements) may bear responsibility for the curtailments. To address these concerns and provide more water to agricultural and municipal contractors, some have proposed, among other approaches, that Congress change Reclamation's authorities to operate the CVP, including its implementation of certain regulatory requirements under ESA that may restrict pumping operations. Others, however, are opposed to modifying the implementation of ESA regulations and propose water conservation, water recycling, and increased storage, among other strategies, to provide more water for users.

FederalCongressional Response

Congress plays a role in CVP water management and has addressed the drought by facilitating water banking, water transfers, and new storage. In recent years, Congress has enacted other drought-related provisions, including extending authorization for the Emergency Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act (P.L. 102-250), providing authority to incorporate water storage into dam safety projects (P.L. 114-113), and providing additional funding to Reclamation for western drought response in the FY2015 ($50 million) and FY2016 ($100 million) Energy and Water appropriations bills.

Legislation that addresses SWP and CVP operations, among other drought-related issues, has been introduced and is under consideration in the 114th Congress. Several bills in the House and Senate address SWP and CVP issues. Selected billsSelected bills receiving significant congressional and media attention include H.R. 2898, which was passed by the House on July 17, 2015;. H.R. 2898's provisions are included in Division C, Title I of the House version of S. 2012, the Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016 (passed by the House on May 25, 2016); S. 1894, which was introduced in the Senate on July 29, 2015; and S. 2533, which was introduced on February 10, 2016. Several other bills containing provisions that are similar to one or more of these bills have recently been introduced or acted upon.16 These bills propose similar approaches to addressing drought on somesome drought issues and different approaches onto other issues, including how federal agencies would deliver CVP water supplies in relation to existing laws and regulations. For more on these bills and other drought-related issues, see CRS Report R44180, Drought Legislation: Comparison of Selected Provisions in H.R. 2898 and S. 1894, and CRS Report R43649, Federal Response to Drought in California: An Analysis of S. 2198 and H.R. 3964.

Author Contact Information

[author name scrubbed], Specialist in Natural Resources Policy ([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])
[author name scrubbed], Specialist in Natural Resources Policy ([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])
[author name scrubbed], Acting Senior Advisor to the Director and Senior Specialist ([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])

Footnotes

3. 7.
1.

See California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), "Water Conservation Portal—Emergency Conservation Regulation," at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/emergency_regulation.shtml, and California Environmental Protection Agency, SWRCB, "Adopted Text of Emergency Regulation: Article 22.5, Drought Emergency Water Conservation," at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/docs/emergency_reg/final_reg_enacted.pdf.

2Although not mandated by the governor, some agricultural water contractors with senior water rights voluntarily reduced their water usage by 25%, as well. See California Water Boards, "State Water Board Approves Voluntary Cutback Program for Delta Riparian Water Rights," press release, May 22, 2015, at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/press_room/press_releases/2015/pr052215_riparian_proposal.pdf.
2.

The standards require local water agencies to ensure a three-year supply assuming three more dry years like those the state experienced from 2012 to 2015. Agencies that would face shortages under these scenarios must meet a conservation standard equal to the amount of shortage. For more information, see California Water Boards, "36 Month Urban Water Supply Now Basis for Local Emergency Water Conservation Efforts," updated May 18, 2016, at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/docs/factsheet/fs051816_mediaemergreg.pdf.

The contract year for most Central Valley Project (CVP) contractors runs from March 1 to February 28.

34.

United States Drought Monitor, "U.S. Drought Monitor: California," April 5May 31, 2016, at http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Home/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA.

45.

National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center, "U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook: March 17-June 30, 2016," at http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/sdo_summary.php.

56.

Snow-water equivalent to date is available at http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/snowapp/sweq.action.

Reclamation typically estimates these deliveries as a percentage of the total contract allocation to be made available for contractors within certain divisions, geographic areas, and/or contractor types (e.g., South-of-Delta Agricultural Contractors).

68.

Senior water rights holders are those known as the Sacramento River Settlement Contractors north of the Bay-Delta and the Exchange Contractors south of the Bay-Delta. Senior water rights holders have a combined first priority to approximately 3.0 million acre-feet of CVP water.

79.

South-of-Delta refers to contractors who reside south of the Bay-Delta, or south of the pumping stations that convey water into the CVP and the State Water Project (SWP).

810.

See Association of California Water Agencies, "DWR Increases 2016 California Department of Water Resources, "State Water Project Allocation Increased," April 21, 2016, at http://www.water.ca.gov/news/newsreleases/2016/042116.pdfState Water Project Allocation from 10% to 15%," January 26, 2016, at http://www.acwa.com/news/ca-drought-update/dwr-increases-2016-state-water-project-allocation-10-15-0.

911.

See U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, "State Fact Sheets," at http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/state-fact-sheets.aspx.

1012.

One study has reported that the 2015 drought resulted in an estimated 550,000 acres fallowed. See Richard Howitt et al., Economic Analysis of the 2015 Drought for California Agriculture, UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, August 17, 2015.

1113.

California's groundwater law establishes a framework that requires local agencies to manage groundwater in a sustainable manner. The law sets out a schedule that begins with the California Department of Water Resources adopting regulations for evaluating groundwater sustainability plans by June 1, 2016. It also requires formation of regional groundwater sustainability agencies, identifies high- and medium-priority basins in critical groundwater overdraft status, and implements the plans.

1214.

Through the Porter-Cologne Act (a state law), California implements federal Clean Water Act requirements and authorizes the SWRCB to adopt water quality control plans, or basin plans (see Cal. Water Code §13160). The SWRCB oversees the allocation of water resources to various entities, has regulatory authority to protect water quality, and addresses flow requirements for fish.

1315.

These data are typically calculated and released by Reclamation at the end of the water year. Thus, no year-to-date data are available on reductions related to the Endangered Species Act inPersonal communication between the author and the California Department of Water Resources, March 30, 2016.

1416.

Personal communication between the author and the California Department of Water Resources, March 30, 2016For example, some or all of the House Appropriations Committee recommendations for the Bureau of Reclamation in the FY2017 Energy and Water Appropriations bill (H.R. 5055, §§204-206) also contained several provisions comparable to those in H.R. 2898. Finally, H.R. 5247, introduced on May 15, 2016, is identical to S. 2533.