Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Changes from June 18, 2019 to June 21, 2019
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: Issues and Legislation
June 18, 2019
Updated June 21, 2019
(R45342)
Jump to Main Text of Report
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the worldU.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the world’'s largest water supply s largest water supply
Charles V. Stern
projects. The CVP covers approximately 400 miles in California, from Redding to projects. The CVP covers approximately 400 miles in California, from Redding to
Specialist in Natural
Bakersfield, and draws from two large river basins: the Sacramento and the San Joaquin. Bakersfield, and draws from two large river basins: the Sacramento and the San Joaquin.
Resources Policy
It is composed of 20 dams and reservoirs and numerous pieces of water storage and It is composed of 20 dams and reservoirs and numerous pieces of water storage and
conveyance infrastructure. In an average year, the CVP delivers more than 7 million conveyance infrastructure. In an average year, the CVP delivers more than 7 million
Pervaze A. Sheikh
acre-feet of water to support irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and fish and wildlife acre-feet of water to support irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and fish and wildlife
Specialist in Natural
needs, among other purposes. About 75% of CVP water is used for agricultural needs, among other purposes. About 75% of CVP water is used for agricultural
Resources Policy
irrigation, including 7 of Californiairrigation, including 7 of California’'s top 10 agricultural counties. The CVP is operated s top 10 agricultural counties. The CVP is operated
jointly with the State Water Project (SWP), which provides much of its water to jointly with the State Water Project (SWP), which provides much of its water to
municipal users in Southern California.municipal users in Southern California.
CVP water is delivered to users that have contracts with Reclamation. These contractors receive varying levels of CVP water is delivered to users that have contracts with Reclamation. These contractors receive varying levels of
priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with
Reclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin RiversReclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers’' confluence with the San confluence with the San
Francisco Bay (Francisco Bay (Bay-Delta or or Delta) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta ) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta
receive water that is receive water that is“exported”"exported" from north of the Delta. from north of the Delta.
Development of the CVP resulted in significant changes to the areaDevelopment of the CVP resulted in significant changes to the area’'s natural hydrology. However, construction of s natural hydrology. However, construction of
most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the
current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were
not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Thus, multiple ongoing efforts to protect species not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Thus, multiple ongoing efforts to protect species
and restore habitat have been authorized and are incorporated into project operations.and restore habitat have been authorized and are incorporated into project operations.
Congress has engaged in CVP issues through oversight and at times legislation, including provisions in the 2016 Congress has engaged in CVP issues through oversight and at times legislation, including provisions in the 2016
Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) that, among other things, authorized Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) that, among other things, authorized
changes to operations in an attempt to provide for delivery of more water under certain circumstances. Although changes to operations in an attempt to provide for delivery of more water under certain circumstances. Although
some stakeholders are interested in further operational changes to enhance CVP water deliveries, others are some stakeholders are interested in further operational changes to enhance CVP water deliveries, others are
focused on the environmental impacts of operations.focused on the environmental impacts of operations.
Various state and federal proposals are currently under consideration and have generated controversy for their Various state and federal proposals are currently under consideration and have generated controversy for their
potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In late 2018, the State of California finalized revisions to its potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In late 2018, the State of California finalized revisions to its
Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and
Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and thus would Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and thus would
further restrict water supplies for other users). The changes have generally been opposed by the Trump further restrict water supplies for other users). The changes have generally been opposed by the Trump
Administration. At the same time, the Trump Administration is pursuing efforts to increase CVP water supplies Administration. At the same time, the Trump Administration is pursuing efforts to increase CVP water supplies
for users, including changes to CVP operations under an October 2018 White House memorandum on western for users, including changes to CVP operations under an October 2018 White House memorandum on western
water supplies. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance are also being considered: The state is water supplies. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance are also being considered: The state is
proposing a new water conveyance project (known as the California WaterFix) that would bypass the Bay-Delta proposing a new water conveyance project (known as the California WaterFix) that would bypass the Bay-Delta
and, under certain conditions, increase exports from north to south for some users. Additionally, new storage and, under certain conditions, increase exports from north to south for some users. Additionally, new storage
projects are under study by federal and state entities; these projects would aim to increase CVP and/or SWP water projects are under study by federal and state entities; these projects would aim to increase CVP and/or SWP water
supplies.supplies.
In the In the 116th116th Congress, legislators may consider bills and conduct oversight on efforts to increase CVP water Congress, legislators may consider bills and conduct oversight on efforts to increase CVP water
exports compared to current baselines. Congress is considering whether to approve funding for new water storage exports compared to current baselines. Congress is considering whether to approve funding for new water storage
projects, and may also consider legislation to extend or amend previously enacted CVP authorities (e.g., WIIN projects, and may also consider legislation to extend or amend previously enacted CVP authorities (e.g., WIIN
Act authorities that are expiring or have exceeded their appropriations ceiling).
Congressional Research Service
link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 10 link to page 13 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 19 link to page 20 link to page 22 link to page 23 link to page 24 link to page 24 link to page 27 link to page 27 link to page 27 link to page 29 link to page 30 link to page 30 link to page 31 link to page 31 link to page 32 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 12 link to page 16 link to page 26 link to page 28 link to page 14 link to page 15 link to page 17 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Recent Developments ...................................................................................................................... 1
Background ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview of the CVP and California Water Infrastructure ....................................................... 3
Central Valley Project Water Contractors and Allocations ........................................................ 6
CVP Allocations .................................................................................................................. 9
State Water Project Allocations ................................................................................................ 11
Combined CVP/SWP Operations ............................................................................................. 11
Constraints on CVP Deliveries ...................................................................................................... 13
Water Quality Requirements: Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan .................................... 14
Bay-Delta Plan Update ..................................................................................................... 15
Endangered Species Act .......................................................................................................... 16
Central Valley Project Improvement Act................................................................................. 18
Ecosystem Restoration Efforts ...................................................................................................... 19
Trinity River Restoration Program .......................................................................................... 20
San Joaquin River Restoration Program ................................................................................. 20
CALFED Bay-Delta Restoration Program .............................................................................. 23
New Storage and Conveyance ....................................................................................................... 23
New and Augmented Water Storage Projects .......................................................................... 23
California WaterFix ................................................................................................................. 25
Congressional Interest ................................................................................................................... 26
CVP Operational Authorities Under the WIIN Act ................................................................. 26
Other Proposed Changes to CVP Operations .................................................................... 27
New Water Storage Projects .................................................................................................... 27
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 28
Figures
Figure 1. Central Valley Project (CVP) and Related Facilities ....................................................... 5
Figure 2. Shasta Dam and Reservoir ............................................................................................... 6
Figure 3. Central Valley Project: Maximum Contract Amounts ...................................................... 8
Figure 4. Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) Exports ......................... 12
Figure 5. San Joaquin River Restoration Program: Costs, Benefits, and Project Status ............... 22
Figure 6. CALFED Surface Water Storage Studies ....................................................................... 24
Tables
Table 1. CVP Water Allocations by Water Year, 2011-2019 .......................................................... 10
Table 2. California State Water Project (SWP) Allocations by Water Year, 2012-2019 ................. 11
Table 3. COA Regulatory Requirements for CVP/SWP In-basin Storage Withdrawals ............... 13
Congressional Research Service
link to page 33 link to page 35 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Appendixes
Appendix. CVP Water Contractors ................................................................................................ 29
Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 31
Congressional Research Service
link to page 9 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Introduction
Act authorities that are expiring or have exceeded their appropriations ceiling).
the multipurpose federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in California, one of the worldthe multipurpose federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in California, one of the world’'s largest s largest
water storage and conveyance systems. The CVP runs approximately 400 miles in California, water storage and conveyance systems. The CVP runs approximately 400 miles in California,
from Redding to Bakersfield from Redding to Bakersfield (Figure 1). It supplies water to hundreds of thousands of acres of . It supplies water to hundreds of thousands of acres of
irrigated agriculture throughout the state, including some of the most valuable cropland in the irrigated agriculture throughout the state, including some of the most valuable cropland in the
country. It also provides water to selected state and federal wildlife refuges, as well as to some country. It also provides water to selected state and federal wildlife refuges, as well as to some
municipal and industrial (M&I) water users.municipal and industrial (M&I) water users.
This report provides information on hydrologic conditions in California and their impact on state This report provides information on hydrologic conditions in California and their impact on state
and federal water management, with a focus on deliveries related to the federal CVP. It also and federal water management, with a focus on deliveries related to the federal CVP. It also
summarizes selected issues for Congress related to the CVP.summarizes selected issues for Congress related to the CVP.
Recent Developments
The drought of 2012-2016, widely considered to be among CaliforniaThe drought of 2012-2016, widely considered to be among California’'s most severe droughts in s most severe droughts in
recent history, resulted in major reductions to CVP contractor allocations and economic and recent history, resulted in major reductions to CVP contractor allocations and economic and
environmental impacts throughout the state.environmental impacts throughout the state.11 These impacts were of interest to Congress, which These impacts were of interest to Congress, which
oversees federal operation of the CVP. Although the drought ended with the wet winter of 2017, oversees federal operation of the CVP. Although the drought ended with the wet winter of 2017,
many of the water supply controversies associated with the CVP predated those water shortages many of the water supply controversies associated with the CVP predated those water shortages
and remain unresolved. Absent major changes to existing hydrologic, legislative, and regulatory and remain unresolved. Absent major changes to existing hydrologic, legislative, and regulatory
baselines, most agree that at least some water users are likely to face ongoing constraints to their baselines, most agree that at least some water users are likely to face ongoing constraints to their
water supplies. Due to the limited water supplies available, proposed changes to the current water supplies. Due to the limited water supplies available, proposed changes to the current
operations and allocation system are controversial.operations and allocation system are controversial.
As a result of the scarcity of water in the West and the importance of federal water infrastructure As a result of the scarcity of water in the West and the importance of federal water infrastructure
to the region, western water issues are regularly of interest to many lawmakers. Legislation to the region, western water issues are regularly of interest to many lawmakers. Legislation
enacted in the enacted in the114th114th Congress (Title II of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Congress (Title II of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
[WIIN] Act; P.L. 114-322) included several CVP-related sections.[WIIN] Act; P.L. 114-322) included several CVP-related sections.22 These provisions directed These provisions directed
pumping to pumping to“maximize”"maximize" water supplies for the CVP (including pumping or water supplies for the CVP (including pumping or “exports”"exports" to CVP to CVP
water users south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Riverswater users south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers’' confluence with the San Francisco confluence with the San Francisco
Bay, known as the Bay, known as the Bay-Delta or or Delta) in accordance with applicable biological opinions (BiOps) ) in accordance with applicable biological opinions (BiOps)
for project operations.for project operations.33 They also allowed for increased pumping during certain storm events They also allowed for increased pumping during certain storm events
generating high flows, authorized actions to facilitate water transfers, and established a new generating high flows, authorized actions to facilitate water transfers, and established a new
standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species. In addition to operational standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species. In addition to operational
provisions, the WIIN Act authorized funding for construction of new federal and nonfederal water provisions, the WIIN Act authorized funding for construction of new federal and nonfederal water
storage projects. CVP projects are among the most likely recipients of this funding.
1 For more information on drought in general, see CRS Report R43407, Drought in the United States: Causes and
Current Understanding, by Peter Folger.
2 For more information, see CRS Report R44986, Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act:
Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions, by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Nicole T. Carter.
3 The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires that a federal agency proposing an action that may have an effect on a
listed species consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service (i.e., regulatory
agencies). The action agency will commonly complete a biological assessment on potential effects to the fish or its
habitat and submit it to the regulatory agency. The regulatory agency then renders a biological opinion, or BiOp, to the
action agency making the proposal. The intent of a BiOp is to ensure that the proposed action will not reduce the
likelihood of survival and recovery of an ESA-listed species. BiOps typically include conservation recommendations
intended to further recovery of the ESA-listed species.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 9 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
storage projects. CVP projects are among the most likely recipients of this funding.
Due to increased precipitation and disagreements with the state, among other factors, the WIIN Due to increased precipitation and disagreements with the state, among other factors, the WIIN
Act’Act's CVP operational authorities did not yield significant new water exports south of the Delta s CVP operational authorities did not yield significant new water exports south of the Delta
in 2017 and 2018. However, the authorities may be more significant in years of limited in 2017 and 2018. However, the authorities may be more significant in years of limited
precipitation and thus may yield increased supplies in the future. Although use of the new precipitation and thus may yield increased supplies in the future. Although use of the new
operational authorities was limited, Reclamation received funding for WIIN Act-authorized water operational authorities was limited, Reclamation received funding for WIIN Act-authorized water
storage project design and construction in FY2017-FY2019; a significant amount of this funding storage project design and construction in FY2017-FY2019; a significant amount of this funding
has gone to CVP-related projects.has gone to CVP-related projects.
Several state and federal proposals are also currently under consideration and have generated Several state and federal proposals are also currently under consideration and have generated
controversy for their potential to significantly alter CVP operations. In mid-2018, the State of controversy for their potential to significantly alter CVP operations. In mid-2018, the State of
California proposed revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would California proposed revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would
require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the California Bay-require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the California Bay-
Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and would thus further restrict water Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and would thus further restrict water
supplies for other users). At the same time, the Trump Administration is exploring options to supplies for other users). At the same time, the Trump Administration is exploring options to
increase CVP water supplies for users.increase CVP water supplies for users.
Background
Background CaliforniaCalifornia’'s Central Valley encompasses almost 20,000 square miles in the center of the state s Central Valley encompasses almost 20,000 square miles in the center of the state
(Figure 1). It is bound by the Cascade Range to the north, the Sierra Nevada to the east, the . It is bound by the Cascade Range to the north, the Sierra Nevada to the east, the
Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Coast Ranges and San Francisco Bay to the west. The Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Coast Ranges and San Francisco Bay to the west. The
northern third of the valley is drained by the Sacramento River, and the southern two-thirds of the northern third of the valley is drained by the Sacramento River, and the southern two-thirds of the
valley are drained by the San Joaquin River. Historically, this area was home to significant fish valley are drained by the San Joaquin River. Historically, this area was home to significant fish
and wildlife populations.and wildlife populations.
The CVP was originally conceived as a state project; the state studied the project as early as 1921, The CVP was originally conceived as a state project; the state studied the project as early as 1921,
and the California state legislature formally authorized it for construction in 1933. After it became and the California state legislature formally authorized it for construction in 1933. After it became
clear that the state was unable to finance the project, the federal government (through the U.S. clear that the state was unable to finance the project, the federal government (through the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE) assumed control of the CVP as a public works Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE) assumed control of the CVP as a public works
construction project authority provided under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935.construction project authority provided under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935.44 The Franklin The Franklin
D. Roosevelt Administration subsequently transferred the project to Reclamation.D. Roosevelt Administration subsequently transferred the project to Reclamation.55 Construction Construction
on the first unit of the CVP (Contra Costa Canal) began in October 1937, with water first on the first unit of the CVP (Contra Costa Canal) began in October 1937, with water first
delivered in 1940. Additional CVP units were completed and came online over time, and some delivered in 1940. Additional CVP units were completed and came online over time, and some
USACE-constructed units have also been incorporated into the project.USACE-constructed units have also been incorporated into the project.66 The New Melones Unit The New Melones Unit
was the last unit of the CVP to come online; it was completed in 1978 and began operations in was the last unit of the CVP to come online; it was completed in 1978 and began operations in
1979.1979.
The CVP made significant changes to CaliforniaThe CVP made significant changes to California’'s natural hydrology to develop water supplies s natural hydrology to develop water supplies
for irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and hydropower, among other things. Most of the CVPfor irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and hydropower, among other things. Most of the CVP’s
4 49 Stat. 1028.
5 Transfer of the project to Reclamation was pursuant to a presidential directive in 1935 and subsequent congressional
enactment of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1937 (50 Stat. 844, 850).
6 Although Reclamation constructed much of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and maintains control over its
operations, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has also been involved in the project over the course of its
history. Some dams, such as Folsom Dam and New Melones Dam, initially were built by USACE but have been turned
over to Reclamation for operations and maintenance and incorporated into the CVP. Additionally, USACE constructed
and continues to operate several major dams in and around the Central Valley for flood control and other purposes,
including Terminus Dam, Isabella Dam, Pine Flat Dam, and Success Dam in the San Joaquin Valley. Since USACE
operates these dams for flood control, Reclamation administers contracts to use surplus water from these reservoirs for
irrigation.
Congressional Research Service
2
link to page 9 link to page 10 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
's major units, however, predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws major units, however, predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws
such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544) and the such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544) and the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq), among others. Thus, much National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq), among others. Thus, much
of the current debate surrounding the project revolves around how to address the projectof the current debate surrounding the project revolves around how to address the project’s
's changes to Californiachanges to California’'s hydrologic system that were not major considerations when it was s hydrologic system that were not major considerations when it was
constructed.constructed.
Today, CVP water serves a variety of different purposes for both human uses and fish and wildlife Today, CVP water serves a variety of different purposes for both human uses and fish and wildlife
needs. The CVP provides a major source of support for California agriculture, which is first in the needs. The CVP provides a major source of support for California agriculture, which is first in the
nation in terms of farm receipts.nation in terms of farm receipts.77 CVP water supplies irrigate more than 3 million acres of land in CVP water supplies irrigate more than 3 million acres of land in
central California and support 7 of Californiacentral California and support 7 of California’'s top 10 agricultural counties. In addition, CVP s top 10 agricultural counties. In addition, CVP
M&I water provides supplies for approximately 2.5 million people per year. CVP operations are M&I water provides supplies for approximately 2.5 million people per year. CVP operations are
also critical for hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife protection. In addition to fisheries also critical for hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife protection. In addition to fisheries
habitat, CVP flows support wetlands, which provide habitat for migrating birds.habitat, CVP flows support wetlands, which provide habitat for migrating birds.
Overview of the CVP and California Water Infrastructure
The CVP The CVP (Figure 1) is made up of 20 dams and reservoirs, 11 power plants, and 500 miles of is made up of 20 dams and reservoirs, 11 power plants, and 500 miles of
canals, as well as numerous other conduits, tunnels, and storage and distribution facilities.canals, as well as numerous other conduits, tunnels, and storage and distribution facilities.88 In an In an
average year, it delivers approximately 5 million acre-feet (AF) of water to farms (including some average year, it delivers approximately 5 million acre-feet (AF) of water to farms (including some
of the nationof the nation’'s most valuable farmland); 600,000 AF to M&I users; 410,000 AF to wildlife s most valuable farmland); 600,000 AF to M&I users; 410,000 AF to wildlife
refuges; and 800,000 AF for other fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. A separate refuges; and 800,000 AF for other fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. A separate
major project owned and operated by the State of California, the State Water Project (SWP), major project owned and operated by the State of California, the State Water Project (SWP),
draws water from many of the same sources as the CVP and coordinates its operations with the draws water from many of the same sources as the CVP and coordinates its operations with the
CVP under several agreements. In contrast to the CVP, the SWP delivers about 70% of its water CVP under several agreements. In contrast to the CVP, the SWP delivers about 70% of its water
to urban users (including water for approximately 25 million users in the San Francisco Bay, to urban users (including water for approximately 25 million users in the San Francisco Bay,
Central Valley, and Southern California); the remaining 30% is used for irrigation.Central Valley, and Southern California); the remaining 30% is used for irrigation.
At their confluence, the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers flow into the San Francisco Bay (the At their confluence, the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers flow into the San Francisco Bay (the
Bay-Delta, or Delta). Operation of the CVP and SWP occurs through the storage, pumping, and Bay-Delta, or Delta). Operation of the CVP and SWP occurs through the storage, pumping, and
conveyance of significant volumes of water from both river basins (as well as trans-basin conveyance of significant volumes of water from both river basins (as well as trans-basin
diversions from the Trinity River Basin in Northern California) for delivery to users. Federal and diversions from the Trinity River Basin in Northern California) for delivery to users. Federal and
state pumping facilities in the Delta near Tracy, CA, export water from Northern California to state pumping facilities in the Delta near Tracy, CA, export water from Northern California to
Central and Southern California and are a hub for CVP operations and related debates. In the Central and Southern California and are a hub for CVP operations and related debates. In the
context of these controversies, context of these controversies, north of Delta (NOD) and (NOD) and south of Delta (SOD) are important (SOD) are important
categorical distinctions for water users.categorical distinctions for water users.
CVP storage is spread throughout Northern and Central California. The largest CVP storage CVP storage is spread throughout Northern and Central California. The largest CVP storage
facility is Shasta Dam and Reservoir in Northern California facility is Shasta Dam and Reservoir in Northern California (Figure 2), which has a capacity of , which has a capacity of
4.5 million AF. Other major storage facilities, from north to south, include Trinity Dam and 4.5 million AF. Other major storage facilities, from north to south, include Trinity Dam and
Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Folsom Dam and Reservoir (977,000 AF), New Melones Dam and Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Folsom Dam and Reservoir (977,000 AF), New Melones Dam and
Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Friant Dam and Reservoir (520,000 AF), and San Luis Dam and Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Friant Dam and Reservoir (520,000 AF), and San Luis Dam and
Reservoir (1.8 million AF of storage, of which half is federal and half is nonfederal).Reservoir (1.8 million AF of storage, of which half is federal and half is nonfederal).
The CVP also includes numerous water conveyance facilities, the longest of which are the Delta-The CVP also includes numerous water conveyance facilities, the longest of which are the Delta-
Mendota Canal (which runs for 117 miles from the federally operated Bill Jones pumping plant in Mendota Canal (which runs for 117 miles from the federally operated Bill Jones pumping plant in
7 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Cash Receipts by State, Commodity Ranking and Share
of U.S. Total, 2016, at https://data.ers.usda.gov/reports.aspx?ID=
17843#Pcb53fbff4c3c47c9b0afcc74d03a7403_3_17iT0R0x5.
8 Bureau of Reclamation, “About the Central Valley Project,” at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvp/about-cvp.html.
Congressional Research Service
3
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
the Bay-Delta to the San Joaquin River near Madera) and the Friant-Kern Canal (which runs 152 the Bay-Delta to the San Joaquin River near Madera) and the Friant-Kern Canal (which runs 152
miles from Friant Dam to the Kern River near Bakersfield).miles from Friant Dam to the Kern River near Bakersfield).
Non-CVP water storage and infrastructure is also spread throughout the Central Valley and in Non-CVP water storage and infrastructure is also spread throughout the Central Valley and in
some cases is integrated with CVP operations. Major non-CVP storage infrastructure in the some cases is integrated with CVP operations. Major non-CVP storage infrastructure in the
Central Valley includes multiple storage projects that are part of the SWP (the largest of which is Central Valley includes multiple storage projects that are part of the SWP (the largest of which is
Oroville Dam and Reservoir in Northern California), as well as private storage facilities (e.g., Oroville Dam and Reservoir in Northern California), as well as private storage facilities (e.g.,
Don Pedro and Exchequer Dams and Reservoirs) and local government-owned dams and Don Pedro and Exchequer Dams and Reservoirs) and local government-owned dams and
infrastructure (e.g., Oinfrastructure (e.g., O’'Shaughnessy Dam and Hetch-Hetchy Reservoir and Aqueduct, which are Shaughnessy Dam and Hetch-Hetchy Reservoir and Aqueduct, which are
owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission).owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission).
In addition to its importance for agricultural water supplies, CaliforniaIn addition to its importance for agricultural water supplies, California’'s Central Valley also s Central Valley also
provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory birds and other species. As such, it is home to provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory birds and other species. As such, it is home to
multiple state, federal, and private wildlife refuges north and south of the Delta. Nineteen of these multiple state, federal, and private wildlife refuges north and south of the Delta. Nineteen of these
refuges (including 12 refuges within the National Wildlife Refuge system, 6 State Wildlife refuges (including 12 refuges within the National Wildlife Refuge system, 6 State Wildlife
Areas/Units, and 1 privately managed complex) provide managed wetland habitat that receives Areas/Units, and 1 privately managed complex) provide managed wetland habitat that receives
water from the CVP and other sources. Five of these units are located in the Sacramento River water from the CVP and other sources. Five of these units are located in the Sacramento River
Basin (i.e., North of the Delta), 12 are in the San Joaquin River Basin, and the remaining 2 are in Basin (i.e., North of the Delta), 12 are in the San Joaquin River Basin, and the remaining 2 are in
the Tulare Lake Basin.9
9 Tulare Lake, a freshwater dry lake in the San Joaquin River Valley, historically was one of the largest freshwater
lakes west of the Great Lakes. Under most normal (nonflood) conditions, the lake was “terminal,” meaning it had no
outlet and did not drain downstream. Damming in the mid-20th century by the USACE of the Kaweah (Terminus Dam),
Kern (Isabella Dam), Kings (Pine Flat Dam), and Tule Rivers (Success Dam), coupled with development of the basin
for irrigated agriculture, dried up the lake bed under most conditions.
Congressional Research Service
4
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
the Tulare Lake Basin.9
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Notes:
Notes: Colored areas are based on water and irrigation district boundaries and do not correspond to the Colored areas are based on water and irrigation district boundaries and do not correspond to the
amount of water delivered from the Central Valley Project or the State Water Project. For example, some large amount of water delivered from the Central Valley Project or the State Water Project. For example, some large
areas have relatively small contracts for water compared with other, smaller areas.areas have relatively small contracts for water compared with other, smaller areas.
Congressional Research Service
5
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Figure 2. Shasta Dam and Reservoir
Source: Bureau of Reclamation.
Central Valley Project Water Contractors and Allocations
In normal years, snowpack accounts for approximately 30% of CaliforniaIn normal years, snowpack accounts for approximately 30% of California’'s water supplies and is s water supplies and is
an important factor in determining CVP and SWP allocations. Water from snowpack typically an important factor in determining CVP and SWP allocations. Water from snowpack typically
melts in the spring and early summer, and it is stored and made available to meet water needs melts in the spring and early summer, and it is stored and made available to meet water needs
throughout the state in the summer and fall. By late winter, the statethroughout the state in the summer and fall. By late winter, the state’'s water supply outlook is s water supply outlook is
typically sufficient for Reclamation to issue the amount of water it expects to deliver to its typically sufficient for Reclamation to issue the amount of water it expects to deliver to its
contractors.contractors.1010 At that time, Reclamation announces estimated deliveries for its 250 CVP water At that time, Reclamation announces estimated deliveries for its 250 CVP water
contractors in the upcoming water year.contractors in the upcoming water year.11
11
More than 9.5 million AF of water per year is More than 9.5 million AF of water per year is potentially available from the CVP for delivery available from the CVP for delivery
based on contracts between Reclamation and CVP contractors.based on contracts between Reclamation and CVP contractors.1212 However, most CVP water However, most CVP water
contracts provide exceptions for Reclamation to reduce water deliveries due to hydrologic contracts provide exceptions for Reclamation to reduce water deliveries due to hydrologic
conditions and other conditions outside Reclamationconditions and other conditions outside Reclamation’'s control.s control.1313 As a result of these stipulations, As a result of these stipulations,
10 A water contractor, as described in this report, has a contract for specified water deliveries from conveyance
structures managed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 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).
11 A water year is a hydrologic unit for measuring a 12-month total for which precipitation totals are measured. In
California, the water year typically is measured from October 1 of one year to September 30 of the following year.
12 Water service contracts charge users a per-acre foot rate based on the amount of water delivered. In contrast,
repayment contracts (the most common type of Reclamation contract outside of the Central Valley Project [CVP])
charge users based on the amount of water storage allocated to a contractor, among other things.
13 See U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region, Final Form of Contract,4-19-2004, Articles 3b, 11, 12a, and
12b, at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpia/3404c/lt_contracts/index.html.
Congressional Research Service
6
link to page 9 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Reclamation regularly makes cutbacks to actual CVP water deliveries to contractors due to Reclamation regularly makes cutbacks to actual CVP water deliveries to contractors due to
drought and other factors.drought and other factors.
Even under normal hydrological circumstances, the CVP often delivers much less than the Even under normal hydrological circumstances, the CVP often delivers much less than the
maximum contracted amount of water; since the early 1980s, an average of about 7 million AF of maximum contracted amount of water; since the early 1980s, an average of about 7 million AF of
water has been made available to CVP contractors annually (including 5 million AF to water has been made available to CVP contractors annually (including 5 million AF to
agricultural contractors). However, during drought years deliveries may be significantly less. In agricultural contractors). However, during drought years deliveries may be significantly less. In
the extremely dry water years of 2012-2015, CVP annual deliveries averaged approximately 3.45 the extremely dry water years of 2012-2015, CVP annual deliveries averaged approximately 3.45
million AF.million AF.14
14
CVP contractors receive varying levels of priority for water deliveries based on their water rights CVP contractors receive varying levels of priority for water deliveries based on their water rights
and other related factors, and some of the largest and most prominent water contractors have a and other related factors, and some of the largest and most prominent water contractors have a
relatively low allocation priority. Major groups of CVP contractors include relatively low allocation priority. Major groups of CVP contractors include water rights
contractors (i.e., senior water rights holders such as the Sacramento River Settlement and San contractors (i.e., senior water rights holders such as the Sacramento River Settlement and San
Joaquin River Exchange Contractors, see box below), North and South of Delta water service Joaquin River Exchange Contractors, see box below), North and South of Delta water service
contractors, and Central Valley refuge water contractors. The relative locations for these groups contractors, and Central Valley refuge water contractors. The relative locations for these groups
are shown are showninin Figure 1.
Water Rights Contractors
California’
California's system of state water rights has a profound effect on who gets how much water and when, particularly s system of state water rights has a profound effect on who gets how much water and when, particularly
during times of drought or other restrictions on water supply. Because the waters of California are considered to during times of drought or other restrictions on water supply. Because the waters of California are considered to
be be“"the property of the people of the State," anyone wishing to use those waters must acquire a right to do so. the property of the people of the State," anyone wishing to use those waters must acquire a right to do so.
California fol owsCalifornia follows a dual system of water rights, recognizing both the riparian and prior appropriation doctrines. a dual system of water rights, recognizing both the riparian and prior appropriation doctrines.
Under the riparian doctrine, a person who owns land that borders a watercourse has the right to make Under the riparian doctrine, a person who owns land that borders a watercourse has the right to make
reasonable use of the water on that land (riparian rights). Riparian rights are reduced proportionally during times reasonable use of the water on that land (riparian rights). Riparian rights are reduced proportionally during times
of shortage. Under the prior appropriation doctrine, a person who diverts water from a watercourse (regardless of shortage. Under the prior appropriation doctrine, a person who diverts water from a watercourse (regardless
of his location relative thereto) and makes reasonable and beneficial use of the water acquires a right to that use of his location relative thereto) and makes reasonable and beneficial use of the water acquires a right to that use
of the water (appropriated rights). Appropriated rights are of the water (appropriated rights). Appropriated rights arefil edfilled in order of seniority during times of shortage. in order of seniority during times of shortage.
Before exercising the right to use the water, appropriative users must obtain permission from the state through a Before exercising the right to use the water, appropriative users must obtain permission from the state through a
permit system run by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).permit system run by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
Both the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) acquired rights for water use from the Both the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) acquired rights for water use from the
State of California, receiving several permits for water diversions at various points between 1927 and 1967. Since State of California, receiving several permits for water diversions at various points between 1927 and 1967. Since
the Bureau of Reclamation found it necessary to take the water rights of other users to construct the CVP, it the Bureau of Reclamation found it necessary to take the water rights of other users to construct the CVP, it
entered into entered into settlement or or exchange contracts with water users who had rights predating the CVP (and thus were contracts with water users who had rights predating the CVP (and thus were
senior users in time and right). Many of these special contracts were entered into in areas where water users senior users in time and right). Many of these special contracts were entered into in areas where water users
were diverting water directly from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.were diverting water directly from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.
Sacramento River Settlement Contractors include the contractors (both individuals and districts) that diverted Sacramento River Settlement Contractors include the contractors (both individuals and districts) that diverted
natural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVPnatural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVP’'s construction and executed a settlement agreement s construction and executed a settlement agreement
with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of water rights. San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of water rights. San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors
are the irrigation districts that agreed to are the irrigation districts that agreed to“exchange”"exchange" exercising their water rights to divert water on the San exercising their water rights to divert water on the San
Joaquin and Kings Rivers for guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (Joaquin and Kings Rivers for guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (typical ytypically in the form of deliveries from the in the form of deliveries from the
Delta-Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). In contrast to water service contractors, water rights Delta-Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). In contrast to water service contractors, water rights
contractors receive 100% of their contracted amounts in most water-year types. During water shortages, their contractors receive 100% of their contracted amounts in most water-year types. During water shortages, their
annual maximum entitlement may be reduced but not by more than 25%.annual maximum entitlement may be reduced but not by more than 25%.
The largest contract holders of CVP water by percentage of total contracted amounts are The largest contract holders of CVP water by percentage of total contracted amounts are
Sacramento River Settlement Contractors, located on the Sacramento River. The second-largest Sacramento River Settlement Contractors, located on the Sacramento River. The second-largest
group are SOD water service contractors (including Westlands Water District, the CVPgroup are SOD water service contractors (including Westlands Water District, the CVP’'s largest s largest
contractor), located in the area south of the Delta. Other major contractors include San Joaquin contractor), located in the area south of the Delta. Other major contractors include San Joaquin
River Exchange Contractors, located west of the San Joaquin River and Friant Division River Exchange Contractors, located west of the San Joaquin River and Friant Division
contractors, located on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. Central Valley refuges and several contractors, located on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. Central Valley refuges and several
14 CRS analysis of CVP contract water delivery information by the Bureau of Reclamation, October 3, 2018.
Congressional Research Service
7
link to page 12 link to page 33 link to page 34 link to page 22 
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
smaller contractor groups (e.g., Eastside Contracts, In-Delta-Contra Costa Contracts, and SOD smaller contractor groups (e.g., Eastside Contracts, In-Delta-Contra Costa Contracts, and SOD
Settlement Contracts) also factor into CVP water allocation discussions.15Settlement Contracts) also factor into CVP water allocation discussions.15 Figure 3 depicts an depicts an
approximate division of approximate division of maximum available CVP water deliveries pursuant to contracts with available CVP water deliveries pursuant to contracts with
Reclamation. The largest contractor groups and their relative delivery priority are discussed in Reclamation. The largest contractor groups and their relative delivery priority are discussed in
more detail in more detail inthethe Appendix to this report.to this report.
(relative share of total maximum contracted CVP supplies)(relative share of total maximum contracted CVP supplies)
Source: CRS, using 2016 Bureau of Reclamation contractor data.CRS, using 2016 Bureau of Reclamation contractor data.
Notes: SOD = South-of-Delta; M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors. Sacramento River SOD = South-of-Delta; M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors. Sacramento River
Settlement Contractors includes both Settlement Contractors includes both“base”"base" water rights supplies (18.6%) and additional CVP water rights supplies (18.6%) and additional CVP “project”"project" supplies supplies
(3.5%). For SOD Refuges, chart does not reflect (3.5%). For SOD Refuges, chart does not reflect“"Level 4Level 4”" supplies (for more information on Level 4 supplies, supplies (for more information on Level 4 supplies,
see below section,see below section, “ "Central Valley Wildlife Refuges").
CVP Allocations
Central Valley Wildlife Refuges”).
15 Central Valley Project refuges are discussed more in the below section, “Central Valley Project Improvement Act.”
Congressional Research Service
8
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
CVP Allocations
Reclamation provided its allocations for the 2019 water year in a series of announcements in Reclamation provided its allocations for the 2019 water year in a series of announcements in
early 2019. As was the case in 2018, over the course of the spring Reclamation increased its early 2019. As was the case in 2018, over the course of the spring Reclamation increased its
allocations for some contractors from initially announced levels.allocations for some contractors from initially announced levels.
Most CVP contractor groups were allocated 100% of their maximum contracted amounts in 2019. Most CVP contractor groups were allocated 100% of their maximum contracted amounts in 2019.
One major exception is SOD agricultural water service contractors, who were allocated 75% of One major exception is SOD agricultural water service contractors, who were allocated 75% of
their contracted supplies. Prior to receiving a full allocation in 2017, the last time these their contracted supplies. Prior to receiving a full allocation in 2017, the last time these
contractors received a 100% allocation was 2006. They have received their full contract contractors received a 100% allocation was 2006. They have received their full contract
allocations only four times since 1990.16
16 Full allocations were made in 1995, 1998, 2006, and 2017. Bureau of Reclamation, “Summary of Water Supply
Allocations,” at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/water_allocations_historical.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
9
link to page 14
allocations only four times since 1990.16
Table 1. CVP Water Allocations by Water Year, 2011-2019
10%a
(percentage of maximum contract allocation made available)
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019 (est.)
North-of-Delta
Users
Agricultural
100%
100%
75%
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
M&I
100%
100%
100%
50%
25%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Settlement
100%
100%
100%
75%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Contractors
Refuges (Level 2)
100%
100%
100%
75%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
American River M&I
100%
100%
75%
50%
25%
100%
100%
100%
100%
In Delta- Contra
100%
100%
75%
50%
25%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Costa
South-of-Delta
Users
Agricultural
80%
40%
20%
0%
0%
5%
100%
50%
75%
M&I
100%
75%
70%
50%
25%
55%
100%
70%
95%
Exchange Contractors
100%
100%
100%
65%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Refuges (Level 2)
100%
100%
100%
65%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Eastside Division
100%
100%
100%
55%
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
Friant Class I
100%
50%
62%
0%
0%
65%
100%
88%
100%
Friant Class 2
20%
0%
0%
0%
0%
13%
100%
9%
10%a
Source: U.S.U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, CVP Historical Water Supply Allocations and 2019 Allocations, available at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/Bureau of Reclamation, CVP Historical Water Supply Allocations and 2019 Allocations, available at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/
water_allocations_historical.pdfwater_allocations_historical.pdf.
. Notes: CVP = Central Valley Project. M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors. CVP = Central Valley Project. M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors.“Settlement”"Settlement" refers to contractors on the Sacramento River (north of refers to contractors on the Sacramento River (north of
Delta), and Delta), and“Exchange”"Exchange" refers to contractors on the San Joaquin River (south of Delta) with special contracts and minimum delivery levels recognizing state water rights 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 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.represent individual or groups of water contractors.
a. “Uncontrol ed”
a. "Uncontrolled" Class 2 releases for Friant Contractors Class 2 releases for Friant Contractors are available through June 30, 2019.available through June 30, 2019.
CRS-10
link to page 15 link to page 16 link to page 17 link to page 17 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
State Water Project Allocations
The other major water project serving California, the SWP, is operated by CaliforniaThe other major water project serving California, the SWP, is operated by California’s
's Department of Water Resources (DWR). The SWP primarily provides water to M&I users and Department of Water Resources (DWR). The SWP primarily provides water to M&I users and
some agricultural users, and it integrates its operations with the CVP. Similar to the CVP, the some agricultural users, and it integrates its operations with the CVP. Similar to the CVP, the
SWP has considerably more contracted supplies than it typically makes available in its deliveries. SWP has considerably more contracted supplies than it typically makes available in its deliveries.
SWP contracted entitlements are 4.17 million AF, but average annual deliveries are typically SWP contracted entitlements are 4.17 million AF, but average annual deliveries are typically
considerably less than that amount.considerably less than that amount.
SWP water deliveries were at their lowest point in 2014 and 2015, and they were significantly SWP water deliveries were at their lowest point in 2014 and 2015, and they were significantly
higher in the wet year of 2017. SWP water supply allocations for water years 2012-2019 are higher in the wet year of 2017. SWP water supply allocations for water years 2012-2019 are
shown in Table 2.
Table 2. California State Water Project (SWP) Allocations by Water Year, 2012-2019
(percentage of maximum contract allocation)(percentage of maximum contract allocation)
2019
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
(est.)
State Water Project
65%
35%
5%
20%
60%
85%
35%
70%
Source: California Department of Water Resources, “Notices to State Water Project Contractors,”
Source: California Department of Water Resources, "Notices to State Water Project Contractors,"
https://water.ca.gov/Programs/State-Water-Project/Management/SWP-Water-Contractorshttps://water.ca.gov/Programs/State-Water-Project/Management/SWP-Water-Contractors.
.
Combined CVP/SWP Operations
The CVP and SWP are operated in conjunction under the 1986 Coordinated Operations The CVP and SWP are operated in conjunction under the 1986 Coordinated Operations
Agreement (COA), which was executed pursuant to P.L. 99-546Agreement (COA), which was executed pursuant to P.L. 99-546.17.17 COA defines the rights and COA defines the rights and
responsibilities of the CVP and SWP with respect to in-basin water needs and provides a responsibilities of the CVP and SWP with respect to in-basin water needs and provides a
mechanism to account for those rights and responsibilities. Despite several prior efforts to review mechanism to account for those rights and responsibilities. Despite several prior efforts to review
and update the agreement to reflect major changes over time (e.g., water delivery reductions and update the agreement to reflect major changes over time (e.g., water delivery reductions
pursuant to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, the Endangered Species Act pursuant to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, the Endangered Species Act
requirements, and new Delta Water Quality Standards, among other things), the 1986 agreement requirements, and new Delta Water Quality Standards, among other things), the 1986 agreement
remains in place.remains in place.18
18
Combined CVP and SWP exports (i.e., water transferred from north to south of the Delta) is of Combined CVP and SWP exports (i.e., water transferred from north to south of the Delta) is of
interest to many observers because it reflects trends over time in the transfer of water from north interest to many observers because it reflects trends over time in the transfer of water from north
to south (i.e., to south (i.e., exports) by the two projects, in particular through pumping. Exports of the CVP and ) by the two projects, in particular through pumping. Exports of the CVP and
SWP, as well as total combined exports since 1978, have varied over SWP, as well as total combined exports since 1978, have varied overtimetime (Figure 4). Most . Most
recently, combined exports dropped significantly during the 2012-2016 drought but have recently, combined exports dropped significantly during the 2012-2016 drought but have
rebounded since 2016. Prior to the drought, overall export levels had increased over time, having rebounded since 2016. Prior to the drought, overall export levels had increased over time, having
averaged more from 2001 to 2011 than over any previous 10-year period. The 6.42 million AF of averaged more from 2001 to 2011 than over any previous 10-year period. The 6.42 million AF of
combined exports in 2017 was the second most on record, behind 6.59 million AF in 2011.combined exports in 2017 was the second most on record, behind 6.59 million AF in 2011.
Over time, CVP exports have decreased on average, whereas SWP exports have increased. Over time, CVP exports have decreased on average, whereas SWP exports have increased.
Additionally, exports for agricultural purposes have declined as a subset of total exports, in part Additionally, exports for agricultural purposes have declined as a subset of total exports, in part
due to those exports being made available for other purposes (e.g., fish and wildlife).due to those exports being made available for other purposes (e.g., fish and wildlife).
17 “Agreement Between the United States of America and the State of California for Coordinated Operation of the
Central Valley Project and the State Water Project,” No. 7-07-20-WO551. November 24, 1986.
18 For more information on water delivery restrictions as they apply to the CVP, see below section, “Constraints on
CVP Deliveries.”
Congressional Research Service
11
link to page 17 
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
(exports in millions of acre-feet, 1978-(exports in millions of acre-feet, 1978-2017)
2018)
Source: CRS from data provided by the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, email CRS from data provided by the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, email
communication, communication,March 29, 2018June 19, 2019, , Total Annual Pumping at Banks, Jones, and Contra Costa Pumping Plants 1976-2017
2018 (MAF)..
Previously, some observers argued that CVP obligations under COA were no longer proportional Previously, some observers argued that CVP obligations under COA were no longer proportional
to water supplies that the CVP receives from the Delta, thus the agreement should be to water supplies that the CVP receives from the Delta, thus the agreement should be
renegotiated.renegotiated.1919 Dating to 2015, Reclamation and DWR conducted a mutual review of COA but Dating to 2015, Reclamation and DWR conducted a mutual review of COA but
were reportedly unable to agree on revisions. On August 17, 2018, Reclamation provided a were reportedly unable to agree on revisions. On August 17, 2018, Reclamation provided a
Notice of Negotiations to DWR.Notice of Negotiations to DWR.20
20 Following negotiations in the fall of 2018, Reclamation and DWR agreed to an addendum to Following negotiations in the fall of 2018, Reclamation and DWR agreed to an addendum to
COA in December 2018.COA in December 2018.2121 Whereas the original 1986 agreement included a fixed ratio of 75% Whereas the original 1986 agreement included a fixed ratio of 75%
CVP/25% SWP for the sharing of regulatory requirements associated with storage withdrawals CVP/25% SWP for the sharing of regulatory requirements associated with storage withdrawals
for Sacramento Valley in-basin uses (e.g., curtailments for water quality and species uses), the for Sacramento Valley in-basin uses (e.g., curtailments for water quality and species uses), the
revised addendum adjusted the ratio of sharing percentages based on water year types revised addendum adjusted the ratio of sharing percentages based on water year types(Table 3).
19 For example, see Joint Letter to the Bureau of Reclamation from Placer County Water Agency, City of Folsom,
Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, et al., March 1, 2016, at http://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/1854.
20 Letter from David G. Murillo, Regional Directory, Bureau of Reclamation, to Karla Nemeth, Director, California
Department of Water Resources, August 17, 2018.
21See Bureau of Reclamation and California Department of Water Resources, Addendum to the Agreement Between the
United States of America and the Department of Water Resources of the State of California for Coordinated Operation
of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project, December 12, 2018.
Congressional Research Service
12
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
(Table 3).
Table 3. COA Regulatory Requirements for CVP/SWP In-basin Storage Withdrawals
(requirements pursuant to 1986 and 2018 agreements)(requirements pursuant to 1986 and 2018 agreements)
Water Year Type
1986 COA
COA with 2018 Addendum
All
75% CVP, 25% SWP
NA
Wet & Above Normal
NA
80% CVP, 20% SWP
Below Normal
NA
75% CVP, 25%SWP
Dry
NA
65% CVP, 35% SWP
Critically Dry
NA
60% CVP, 40% SWP
Source: Addendum to the Agreement Between the United States of America and the Department of Water Resources of
the State of California for Coordinated Operation of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project, December December
12, 2018.12, 2018.
The 2018 addendum also adjusted the sharing of export capacity under constrained conditions. The 2018 addendum also adjusted the sharing of export capacity under constrained conditions.
Whereas under the 1986 COA, export capacity was shared 50/50 between the CVP and the SWP, Whereas under the 1986 COA, export capacity was shared 50/50 between the CVP and the SWP,
under the revised COA the split is to be 60% CVP/40% SWP during excess conditions, and 65% under the revised COA the split is to be 60% CVP/40% SWP during excess conditions, and 65%
CVP/35% SWP during balanced conditions.CVP/35% SWP during balanced conditions.2222 Finally, the state also agreed in the 2018 revisions Finally, the state also agreed in the 2018 revisions
to transport up to 195,000 AF of CVP water through the to transport up to 195,000 AF of CVP water through the SWP's California Aqueduct, during certain California Aqueduct, during certain
conditions.conditions.
Constraints on CVP Deliveries
Concerns over CVP water supply deliveries persist in part because even in years with high levels Concerns over CVP water supply deliveries persist in part because even in years with high levels
of precipitation and runoff, some contractors (in particular SOD water service contractors) have of precipitation and runoff, some contractors (in particular SOD water service contractors) have
regularly received allocations of less than 100% of their contract supplies. Allocations for some regularly received allocations of less than 100% of their contract supplies. Allocations for some
users have declined over time; additional environmental requirements in recent decades have users have declined over time; additional environmental requirements in recent decades have
reduced water deliveries for human uses. Coupled with reduced water supplies available in reduced water deliveries for human uses. Coupled with reduced water supplies available in
drought years, some have increasingly focused on what can be done to increase water supplies for drought years, some have increasingly focused on what can be done to increase water supplies for
users. At the same time, others that depend on or advocate for the health of the San Francisco Bay users. At the same time, others that depend on or advocate for the health of the San Francisco Bay
and its tributaries, including fishing and environmental groups and water users throughout and its tributaries, including fishing and environmental groups and water users throughout
Northern California, have argued for maintaining or increasing existing environmental Northern California, have argued for maintaining or increasing existing environmental
protections (the latter of which would likely further constrain CVP exports).protections (the latter of which would likely further constrain CVP exports).
Hydrology and state water rights are the two primary drivers of CVP allocations. However, at Hydrology and state water rights are the two primary drivers of CVP allocations. However, at
least three other regulatory factors affect the timing and amount of water available for delivery to least three other regulatory factors affect the timing and amount of water available for delivery to
CVP contractors and are regularly the subject of controversyCVP contractors and are regularly the subject of controversy
:State water quality requirements pursuant to state and the federal water quality State water quality requirements pursuant to state and the federal water quality
laws (including the Clean Water Act [CWA, 33 U.S.C. §§1251-138]);laws (including the Clean Water Act [CWA, 33 U.S.C. §§1251-138]);
Regulations and court orders pertaining to implementation of the federal Regulations and court orders pertaining to implementation of the federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA, 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544);23 and
22 “Balanced” conditions refer to those conditions under which reservoir releases and unregulated flows in the Delta are
equal to the water supply needed to meet Sacramento Valley-in-basin uses plus exports. Excesss conditions are periods
in which releases and unregulated flows exceed the aforementioned uses.
23 Requirements of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) currently are being satisfied through
implementation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) due to a California state determination that project
operations under the federal biological opinions are consistent with requirements under CESA. Presumably, if
protections afforded to threatened and endangered species under the federal ESA were no longer in place, the State of
Congressional Research Service
13
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Endangered Species Act (ESA, 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544);23 and
Implementation of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA; P.L. Implementation of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA; P.L.
102-575102-575).24).24
Each of these factors is discussed in more detail below.Each of these factors is discussed in more detail below.
Water Quality Requirements: Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan
California sets water quality standards and issues permits for the discharge of pollutants in California sets water quality standards and issues permits for the discharge of pollutants in
compliance with the federal CWA, enacted in 1972.compliance with the federal CWA, enacted in 1972.2525 Through the Porter-Cologne Act (a state Through the Porter-Cologne Act (a state
law), California implements federal CWA requirements and authorizes the State Water Resources law), California implements federal CWA requirements and authorizes the State Water Resources
Control Board (State Water Board) to adopt water quality control plans, or basin plans.Control Board (State Water Board) to adopt water quality control plans, or basin plans.2626 The The
CVP and the SWP affect water quality in the Bay-Delta depending on how much freshwater the CVP and the SWP affect water quality in the Bay-Delta depending on how much freshwater the
projects release into the area as projects release into the area as“"unimpaired flowsunimpaired flows”" (thereby affecting area salinity levels). (thereby affecting area salinity levels).
The first Water Quality Control Plan for the Bay-Delta (Bay-Delta Plan) was issued by the State The first Water Quality Control Plan for the Bay-Delta (Bay-Delta Plan) was issued by the State
Water Board in 1978. Since then, there have been three substantive updates to the plan—in 1991, Water Board in 1978. Since then, there have been three substantive updates to the plan—in 1991,
1995, and 2006. The plans have generally required the SWP and CVP to meet certain water 1995, and 2006. The plans have generally required the SWP and CVP to meet certain water
quality and flow objectives in the Delta to maintain desired salinity levels for in-Delta diversions quality and flow objectives in the Delta to maintain desired salinity levels for in-Delta diversions
(e.g., water quality levels for in-Delta water supplies) and fish and wildlife, among other things. (e.g., water quality levels for in-Delta water supplies) and fish and wildlife, among other things.
These objectives often affect the amount and timing of water available to be pumped, or exported, These objectives often affect the amount and timing of water available to be pumped, or exported,
from the Delta and thus at times result in reduced Delta exports to CVP and SWP water users from the Delta and thus at times result in reduced Delta exports to CVP and SWP water users
south of the Delta.south of the Delta.2727 The Bay-Delta Plan is currently implemented through the State Water The Bay-Delta Plan is currently implemented through the State Water
Board’Board's Decision 1641 (or D-1641), which was issued in 1999 and placed responsibility for plan s Decision 1641 (or D-1641), which was issued in 1999 and placed responsibility for plan
implementation on the stateimplementation on the state’'s largest two water rights holders, Reclamation and the California s largest two water rights holders, Reclamation and the California
DWR.28
DWR.28
Pumping restrictions to meet state-set water quality levels—particularly increases in salinity Pumping restrictions to meet state-set water quality levels—particularly increases in salinity
levels—can sometimes be significant. However, the relative magnitude of these effects varies levels—can sometimes be significant. However, the relative magnitude of these effects varies
depending on hydrology. For instance, Reclamation estimated that in 2014, water quality depending on hydrology. For instance, Reclamation estimated that in 2014, water quality
restrictions accounted for 176,300 AF of the reduction in pumping from the long-term average for restrictions accounted for 176,300 AF of the reduction in pumping from the long-term average for
CVP exports.CVP exports.2929 In 2016, Reclamation estimated that D-1641 requirements accounted for 114,500 In 2016, Reclamation estimated that D-1641 requirements accounted for 114,500
AF in reductions from the long-term export average.
California could invoke protections under CESA.
24 P.L. 102-575, Title 34, 106 Stat. 4706.
25 The CWA requires the states to implement water quality standards that designate water uses to be protected and
adopt water quality criteria that protect the designated uses. For application to California, see United States v. State
Water Resources Control Board (Racanelli), 182 Cal. App. 3d 82, 109 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986).
26 See Cal. Water Code §13160.
27 Inability to reach agreement on water quality objectives through deliberation and litigation nearly shut down Delta
pumping in the early 1990s and was a significant factor in the creation of the Bay-Delta Accord—a partnership
between federal and state agencies with projects, responsibilities, and activities affecting the Delta. Habitat protection
commitments in the accord were incorporated into the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan, as were actions called for
under the Vernalis Adaptive Management Program, and were included by the State Water Board in D-1641. (See U.S.
Department of the Interior (DOI), Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region, Long-Term Central Valley Project
Operations Criteria and Plan, Sacramento, CA, May 22, 2008, pp. 2-6.)
28 California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board, “Revised Water Right Decision
1641,” March 15, 2000. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/board_decisions/adopted_orders/decisions/
d1600_d1649/wrd1641_1999dec29.pdf.
29 Personal communication with the Bureau of Reclamation, October 15, 2015.
Congressional Research Service
14
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Bay-Delta Plan Update
AF in reductions from the long-term export average.
Bay-Delta Plan Update
In mid-2018, the State Water Board released the final draft of the update to the 2006 Bay Delta In mid-2018, the State Water Board released the final draft of the update to the 2006 Bay Delta
Plan (i.e., the Bay-Delta Plan Update) for the Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta. It Plan (i.e., the Bay-Delta Plan Update) for the Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta. It
also announced further progress on related efforts under the update for flow requirements on the also announced further progress on related efforts under the update for flow requirements on the
Sacramento River and its tributaries.Sacramento River and its tributaries.3030 The Bay-Delta Plan Update requires additional flows to The Bay-Delta Plan Update requires additional flows to
the ocean (generally referred to in these documents as the ocean (generally referred to in these documents as“"unimpaired flowsunimpaired flows”") from the San Joaquin ) from the San Joaquin
River and its tributaries (i.e., the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers). Under the proposal, River and its tributaries (i.e., the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers). Under the proposal,
the unimpaired flow requirement for the San Joaquin River would be 40% (within a range of the unimpaired flow requirement for the San Joaquin River would be 40% (within a range of
30%-50%); average unimpaired flows currently range from 21% to 40%.30%-50%); average unimpaired flows currently range from 21% to 40%.3131 The state estimates The state estimates
that the updated version of the plan would reduce water available for human use from the San that the updated version of the plan would reduce water available for human use from the San
Joaquin River and its tributaries by between 7% and 23%, on average (depending on the water Joaquin River and its tributaries by between 7% and 23%, on average (depending on the water
year type), but it could reduce these water supplies by as much as 38% during critically dry year type), but it could reduce these water supplies by as much as 38% during critically dry
years.years.32
32
A more detailed plan for the Sacramento River and its tributaries is also expected in the future. A A more detailed plan for the Sacramento River and its tributaries is also expected in the future. A
preliminary framework released by the state in July 2018 proposed a potential requirement of preliminary framework released by the state in July 2018 proposed a potential requirement of
55% unimpaired flows from the Sacramento River (within a range of 45% to 65%).55% unimpaired flows from the Sacramento River (within a range of 45% to 65%).3333 According According
to the State Water Board, if the plan updates for the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers are to the State Water Board, if the plan updates for the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers are
finalized and water users do not enter into voluntary agreements to implement them, the board finalized and water users do not enter into voluntary agreements to implement them, the board
could take actions to require their implementation, such as promulgation of regulations and could take actions to require their implementation, such as promulgation of regulations and
conditioning of water rights.conditioning of water rights.34
34
Reclamation and its contractors would likely play key roles in implementing any update to the Reclamation and its contractors would likely play key roles in implementing any update to the
Bay-Delta Plan, as they do in implementing the current plan under D-1641. Pursuant to Section 8 Bay-Delta Plan, as they do in implementing the current plan under D-1641. Pursuant to Section 8
of the Reclamation Act of 1902,of the Reclamation Act of 1902,3535 Reclamation generally defers to state water law in carrying out Reclamation generally defers to state water law in carrying out
its authorities, but the proposed Bay Delta Plan Update has generated controversy. In a July 2018 its authorities, but the proposed Bay Delta Plan Update has generated controversy. In a July 2018
letter to the State Water Board, the Commissioner of Reclamation opposed the proposed letter to the State Water Board, the Commissioner of Reclamation opposed the proposed
standards for the San Joaquin River, arguing that meeting them would necessitate decreased water standards for the San Joaquin River, arguing that meeting them would necessitate decreased water
in storage at New Melones Reservoir of approximately 315,000 AF per year (a higher amount in storage at New Melones Reservoir of approximately 315,000 AF per year (a higher amount
than estimated by the State Water Board). Reclamation argued that such a change would be than estimated by the State Water Board). Reclamation argued that such a change would be
contrary to the CVP prioritization scheme as established by Congress.36
30 For more information, see the State Water Resources Control Board Bay Delta Plan update website at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/.
31 California Water Boards, “State Water Board Seeks Public Comment on Final Draft Bay-Delta Plan Update for the
Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta,” July 6, 2018, at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/
water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/Bay-Delta_Plan_Update_Press_Release.pdf.
32 California Water Boards, “Summary of Proposed Amendments to the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan,” July 6,
2018, at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/sed/
lsjr_sdwq_summary_070618.pdf.
33 California Water Boards, “July 2018 Framework for the Sacramento/Delta Update to the Bay-Delta Plan,” July 6,
2018, at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/sed/
sac_delta_framework_070618%20.pdf. Hereinafter California Water Boards, “July 2018 Framework.”
34 California Water Boards, “July 2018 Framework.”
35 43 U.S.C. §383.
36 Letter from Brenda Burman, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, DOI, to Felicia Marcus, Chair, State Water
Resources Control Board, July 27, 2018. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/
bay_delta/docs/comments_lsjr_finalsed/Brenda_Burman_BOR.pdf. Hereinafter Letter from Brenda Burman to Felicia
Marcus.
Congressional Research Service
15
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
contrary to the CVP prioritization scheme as established by Congress.36
On December 12, 2018, the State Water Board approved the Bay Delta Plan Update in Resolution On December 12, 2018, the State Water Board approved the Bay Delta Plan Update in Resolution
1018-0059.1018-0059.3737 According to the state, the plan establishes a According to the state, the plan establishes a “"starting pointstarting point”" for increased river for increased river
flows but also makes allowances for reduced river flows on tributaries where stakeholders have flows but also makes allowances for reduced river flows on tributaries where stakeholders have
reached voluntary agreements to pursue both flow and reached voluntary agreements to pursue both flow and“"non-flownon-flow”" measures. measures.3838 The conditions in The conditions in
the Bay-Delta Plan Update would be implemented through water rights conditions imposed by the Bay-Delta Plan Update would be implemented through water rights conditions imposed by
the State Water Board; these conditions are to be implemented no later than 2022.the State Water Board; these conditions are to be implemented no later than 2022.
On March 28, 2019, the Department of Justice and DOI filed civil actions in federal and state On March 28, 2019, the Department of Justice and DOI filed civil actions in federal and state
court against the State Water Board for failing to comply with the California Environmental court against the State Water Board for failing to comply with the California Environmental
Quality Act.Quality Act.39
39
Endangered Species Act
Several species that have been listed under the federal ESA are affected by the operations of the Several species that have been listed under the federal ESA are affected by the operations of the
CVP and the SWP.CVP and the SWP.4040 One species, the Delta smelt, is a small pelagic fish that is susceptible to One species, the Delta smelt, is a small pelagic fish that is susceptible to
entrainment in CVP and SWP pumps in the Delta; it was listed as threatened under ESA in 1993. entrainment in CVP and SWP pumps in the Delta; it was listed as threatened under ESA in 1993.
Surveys of Delta smelt in 2017 found two adult smelt, the lowest catch in the history of the Surveys of Delta smelt in 2017 found two adult smelt, the lowest catch in the history of the
survey.survey.4141 These results were despite the relatively wet winter of 2017, which is a concern for These results were despite the relatively wet winter of 2017, which is a concern for
many stakeholders because low population sizes of Delta smelt could result in greater restrictions many stakeholders because low population sizes of Delta smelt could result in greater restrictions
on water flowing to users. It also raises larger concerns about the overall health and resilience of on water flowing to users. It also raises larger concerns about the overall health and resilience of
the Bay-Delta ecosystem. In addition to Delta smelt, multiple anadromous salmonid species are the Bay-Delta ecosystem. In addition to Delta smelt, multiple anadromous salmonid species are
listed under ESA, including the endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, the listed under ESA, including the endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, the
threatened Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon, the threatened Central Valley steelhead, threatened Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon, the threatened Central Valley steelhead,
threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon, and the threatened Central threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon, and the threatened Central
California Coast steelhead.California Coast steelhead.
Federal agencies consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in DOI or the Federal agencies consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in DOI or the
Department of CommerceDepartment of Commerce’'s (DOCs (DOC’'s) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to determine if s) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to determine if
a federal project or action might jeopardize the continued existence of a species listed under ESA a federal project or action might jeopardize the continued existence of a species listed under ESA
or adversely modify its habitat. If an effect is possible, formal consultation is started and usually or adversely modify its habitat. If an effect is possible, formal consultation is started and usually
concludes with the appropriate service issuing a BiOp on the potential harm the project poses and, concludes with the appropriate service issuing a BiOp on the potential harm the project poses and,
if necessary, issuing reasonable and prudent measures to reduce the harm.if necessary, issuing reasonable and prudent measures to reduce the harm.
FWS and NMFS each have issued federal BiOps on the coordinated operation of the CVP and the FWS and NMFS each have issued federal BiOps on the coordinated operation of the CVP and the
SWP. In addition, both agencies have undertaken formal consultation on proposed changes in the SWP. In addition, both agencies have undertaken formal consultation on proposed changes in the
operations and have concluded that the changes, including increased pumping from the Delta,
37 California State Water Resources Control Board, Resolution No. 1018-0059, Adoption of Amendments to the Water
Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary and Final Substitute
Environmental Document, December 12, 2018, https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/
resolutions/2018/rs2018_0059.pdf.
38 California Water Boards, “State Water Board Adopts Bay-Delta Plan Update,” press release, December 12, 2018,
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/press_room/press_releases/2018/pr121218_bay-delta_plan_update.pdf.
39 Department of Justice, “United States Files Lawsuit Against California State Water Resources Control Board for
Failure to Comply With California Environmental Quality Act,” press release, March 28, 2019,
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-files-lawsuit-against-california-state-water-resources-control-board-
failure.
40 Act of December 28, 1973, P.L. 93-205; 87 Stat. 884, codified at 16 U.S.C. §§1531 et seq. This report assumes a
basic knowledge of the act; an overview of the ESA and its major provisions may be found in CRS Report RL31654,
The Endangered Species Act: A Primer, by Pervaze A. Sheikh.
41 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fall Midwater Trawl Monthly Abundance Index for Delta Smelt, at
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/delta/data/fmwt/indices.asp, accessed August 2, 2018.
Congressional Research Service
16
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
operations and have concluded that the changes, including increased pumping from the Delta, would jeopardize the continued existence of several species protected under ESA. To avoid such would jeopardize the continued existence of several species protected under ESA. To avoid such
jeopardy, the FWS and NMFS BiOps have included Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) jeopardy, the FWS and NMFS BiOps have included Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
for project operations.for project operations.
CVP and SWP BiOps have been challenged and revised over time. Until 2004, a 1993 winter-run CVP and SWP BiOps have been challenged and revised over time. Until 2004, a 1993 winter-run
Chinook salmon BiOp and a 1995 Delta smelt BiOp (as amended) governed Delta exports for Chinook salmon BiOp and a 1995 Delta smelt BiOp (as amended) governed Delta exports for
federal ESA purposes. In 2004, a proposed change in coordinated operation of the SWP and CVP federal ESA purposes. In 2004, a proposed change in coordinated operation of the SWP and CVP
(including increased Delta exports), known as OCAP (Operations Criteria and Plan) resulted in (including increased Delta exports), known as OCAP (Operations Criteria and Plan) resulted in
the development of new BiOps. Environmental groups challenged the agenciesthe development of new BiOps. Environmental groups challenged the agencies’' 2004 BiOps; this 2004 BiOps; this
challenge resulted in the development of new BiOps by the FWS and NMFS in 2008 and 2009, challenge resulted in the development of new BiOps by the FWS and NMFS in 2008 and 2009,
respectively. These BiOps placed additional restrictions on the amount of water exported via SWP respectively. These BiOps placed additional restrictions on the amount of water exported via SWP
and CVP Delta pumps and other limitations on pumping and release of stored water.and CVP Delta pumps and other limitations on pumping and release of stored water.4242 The CVP The CVP
and SWP are currently operated in accordance with these BiOps, both of which concluded that and SWP are currently operated in accordance with these BiOps, both of which concluded that
the coordinated long-term operation of the CVP and SWP, as proposed in Reclamationthe coordinated long-term operation of the CVP and SWP, as proposed in Reclamation’'s 2008 s 2008
Biological Assessment, was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species and Biological Assessment, was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species and
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Both BiOps included RPAs designed to destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Both BiOps included RPAs designed to
allow the CVP and SWP to continue operating without causing jeopardy to listed species or allow the CVP and SWP to continue operating without causing jeopardy to listed species or
destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitat. Reclamation accepted and then destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitat. Reclamation accepted and then
began project operations consistent with the FWS and NMFS RPAs, which continue to govern began project operations consistent with the FWS and NMFS RPAs, which continue to govern
operations.operations.
The exact magnitude of reductions in pumping due to ESA restrictions compared to the The exact magnitude of reductions in pumping due to ESA restrictions compared to the
aforementioned water quality restrictions has varied considerably over time. In absolute terms, aforementioned water quality restrictions has varied considerably over time. In absolute terms,
ESA-driven reductions are typically greater in wet years than in dry years, but the proportion of ESA-driven reductions are typically greater in wet years than in dry years, but the proportion of
ESA reductions relative to deliveries is not necessarily constant and depends on numerous factors. ESA reductions relative to deliveries is not necessarily constant and depends on numerous factors.
For instance, Reclamation estimated that ESA restrictions accounted for a reduction in deliveries For instance, Reclamation estimated that ESA restrictions accounted for a reduction in deliveries
of 62,000 AF from the long-term average for CVP deliveries in 2014 and 144,800 AF of CVP of 62,000 AF from the long-term average for CVP deliveries in 2014 and 144,800 AF of CVP
delivery reductions in 2015 (both years were extremely dry). In 2016, ESA reductions accounted delivery reductions in 2015 (both years were extremely dry). In 2016, ESA reductions accounted
for a much larger amount (528,000 AF) in a wet year, when more water is delivered.for a much larger amount (528,000 AF) in a wet year, when more water is delivered.4343 Some Some
scientists estimate that flows used to protect all species listed under ESA accounted for scientists estimate that flows used to protect all species listed under ESA accounted for
approximately 6.5% of the total Delta outflow from 2011 to 2016.approximately 6.5% of the total Delta outflow from 2011 to 2016.44
44
During the 2012-2016 drought, implementation of the RPAs (which generally limit pumping During the 2012-2016 drought, implementation of the RPAs (which generally limit pumping
under specific circumstances and call for water releases from key reservoirs to support listed under specific circumstances and call for water releases from key reservoirs to support listed
species) was modified due to temporary urgency change orders (TUCs). These TUCs, issued by species) was modified due to temporary urgency change orders (TUCs). These TUCs, issued by
the State Water Resources Control Board in 2014 and again in 2015, were deemed consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board in 2014 and again in 2015, were deemed consistent with
the existing BiOps by NMFS and FWS. Such changes allowed more water to be pumped during the existing BiOps by NMFS and FWS. Such changes allowed more water to be pumped during
certain periods based on real-time monitoring of species and water conditions. DWR estimates certain periods based on real-time monitoring of species and water conditions. DWR estimates
that approximately 400,000 AF of water was made available in 2014 for export due to these that approximately 400,000 AF of water was made available in 2014 for export due to these
orders.45
42 Among other things, the 2009 National Marine Fisheries Service biological opinion requires temperature
considerations for the benefit of species in the Sacramento River and in the Bay-Delta. Operations of Shasta Dam and
related facilities are thus affected by a separate plan, the Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan.
43 Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2016 CVIPA §3406(b)(2) Accounting, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/
vungvari/FINAL_wy16_b2_800TAF_table_20170930.pdf.
44 Peter B. Moyle, James A. Hobbs, and John R. Durand, “Delta Smelt and Water Politics in California,” Fisheries
Magazine, vol. 43, no. 1 (January 2018), pp. 42-60.
45 California Environmental Protection Agency and State Water Resources Control Board, March 5, 2015 Order
Modifying an Order That Approved in Part and Denied in Part a Petition for Temporary Urgency Changes to Permit
Terms and Conditions Requiring Compliance with Delta Water Quality Objectives in Response to Drought Conditions,
Congressional Research Service
17
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
orders.45
In August 2016, Reclamation and DWR requested reinitiation of consultation on long-term, In August 2016, Reclamation and DWR requested reinitiation of consultation on long-term,
system-wide operations of the CVP and the SWP based on new information related to multiple system-wide operations of the CVP and the SWP based on new information related to multiple
years of drought, species decline, and related data.years of drought, species decline, and related data.4646 In December 2017, the Trump In December 2017, the Trump
Administration gave formal notice of its intent to prepare an environmental impact statement Administration gave formal notice of its intent to prepare an environmental impact statement
analyzing potential long-term modifications to the coordinated operations of the CVP and the analyzing potential long-term modifications to the coordinated operations of the CVP and the
SWP.SWP.4747 According to the notice, the actions under consideration will include those with the According to the notice, the actions under consideration will include those with the
potential to potential to“maximize”"maximize" water and power supplies for users and that modify existing regulatory water and power supplies for users and that modify existing regulatory
requirements, among other things.requirements, among other things.4848 The effort is widely viewed as an initial step toward potential The effort is widely viewed as an initial step toward potential
long-term changes to CVP operations and existing BiOp requirements.long-term changes to CVP operations and existing BiOp requirements.
The Biological Assessment (BA) proposing changes for the operation of the CVP and SWP was The Biological Assessment (BA) proposing changes for the operation of the CVP and SWP was
sent to FWS and NMFS by Reclamation on January 31, 2019.sent to FWS and NMFS by Reclamation on January 31, 2019.4949 The BA discusses the operational The BA discusses the operational
changes proposed by Reclamation and mitigation factors to address listed species. The changes changes proposed by Reclamation and mitigation factors to address listed species. The changes
reflect provisions in the WIIN Act and efforts to maximize water supplies for users. The BA also reflect provisions in the WIIN Act and efforts to maximize water supplies for users. The BA also
states that nonoperational activities will be implemented to augment and bolster listed fish states that nonoperational activities will be implemented to augment and bolster listed fish
populations. These activities include habitat restoration and introducing hatchery-bred Delta populations. These activities include habitat restoration and introducing hatchery-bred Delta
smelt. Operational changes include increasing flows to take into account additional water from smelt. Operational changes include increasing flows to take into account additional water from
winter storms and increasing base flows when storage levels are higher.winter storms and increasing base flows when storage levels are higher.
The Trump Administration has also indicated its intent to expedite other regulatory changes under The Trump Administration has also indicated its intent to expedite other regulatory changes under
ESA. On October 19, 2018, President Trump issued a memorandum that directed DOI and DOC ESA. On October 19, 2018, President Trump issued a memorandum that directed DOI and DOC
to identify water infrastructure projects in California for which they have responsibilities under to identify water infrastructure projects in California for which they have responsibilities under
ESA. Per the memorandum, the agencies are to identify regulations and procedures that ESA. Per the memorandum, the agencies are to identify regulations and procedures that burden
the projects and develop a plan to the projects and develop a plan to“"suspend, revise, or rescindsuspend, revise, or rescind”" those regulations. those regulations.5050 The White The White
House memorandum also directed that the aforementioned joint BiOps be completed by June 15, House memorandum also directed that the aforementioned joint BiOps be completed by June 15,
2019.2019.51
51
Central Valley Project Improvement Act
In an effort to mitigate many of the environmental effects of the CVP, Congress in 1992 passed In an effort to mitigate many of the environmental effects of the CVP, Congress in 1992 passed
the CVPIA as Title 34 of P.L. 102-575. The act made major changes to the management of the the CVPIA as Title 34 of P.L. 102-575. The act made major changes to the management of the
CVP. Among other things, it formally established fish and wildlife purposes as an official project CVP. Among other things, it formally established fish and wildlife purposes as an official project
purpose of the CVP and called for a number of actions to protect, restore, and enhance these purpose of the CVP and called for a number of actions to protect, restore, and enhance these
resources. Overall, the CVPIAresources. Overall, the CVPIA’'s provisions resulted in a combination of decreased water s provisions resulted in a combination of decreased water
availability and increased costs for agricultural and M&I contractors, along with new water and
p. 4, at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/tucp/tucp_order030515.pdf.
46 Letter from David Murillo, Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation, and Mark W. Cowin, Director, Department of
Water Resources, to Ren Lohoefener, Pacific Southwest Regional Director, August 2, 2016, at https://www.fws.gov/
sfbaydelta/documents/08-02-2016_BOR-DWR_Reinitiation_Letter.pdf.
47 Bureau of Reclamation, “Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Revisions to the
Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project, and Related Facilities,” 82
Federal Register 61789-61791, December 29, 2017. Hereinafter Reclamation, “Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental
Impact Statement.”
48 Reclamation, “Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement.”
49 Bureau of Reclamation, Updates to the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the CVP and SWP and Related
Facilities, January 2019, https://www.usbr.gov/mp/bdo/lto.html.
50 White House, “Presidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West,”
October 19, 2018. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-memorandum-promoting-reliable-
supply-delivery-water-west/. Hereinafter, 2018 White House Memo on Western Water.
51 2018 White House Memo on Western Water.
Congressional Research Service
18
link to page 33 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
availability and increased costs for agricultural and M&I contractors, along with new water and funding sources to restore fish and wildlife. Thus, the law remains a source of tension, and some funding sources to restore fish and wildlife. Thus, the law remains a source of tension, and some
would prefer to see it repealed in part or in full.would prefer to see it repealed in part or in full.
Some of the CVPIASome of the CVPIA’'s most prominent changes to the CVP included directives tos most prominent changes to the CVP included directives to
double certain anadromous fish populations by 2002 (which did occur);double certain anadromous fish populations by 2002 (which did occur);52
52
allocate 800,000 AF of allocate 800,000 AF of “"(b)(2)(b)(2)”" CVP yield (600,000 AF in drought years) to fish CVP yield (600,000 AF in drought years) to fish
and wildlife purposes;and wildlife purposes;53
53
provide water supplies (in the form of provide water supplies (in the form of “"Level 2Level 2”" and and “"Level 4Level 4”" supplies) for 19 supplies) for 19
designated Central Valley wildlife refuges;designated Central Valley wildlife refuges;54
54
establish a fund, the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (CVPRF), to be establish a fund, the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (CVPRF), to be
financed by water and power users for habitat restoration and land and water financed by water and power users for habitat restoration and land and water
acquisitions.acquisitions.
Pursuant to prior court rulings since enactment of the legislation, CVPIA (b)(2) allocations may Pursuant to prior court rulings since enactment of the legislation, CVPIA (b)(2) allocations may
be used to meet other state and federal requirements that reduce exports or require an increase be used to meet other state and federal requirements that reduce exports or require an increase
from baseline reservoir releases. Thus, in a given year, the aforementioned export reductions due from baseline reservoir releases. Thus, in a given year, the aforementioned export reductions due
to state water quality and federal ESA restrictions are counted and reported on annually as (b)(2) to state water quality and federal ESA restrictions are counted and reported on annually as (b)(2)
water, and in some cases overlap with other stated purposes of CVPIA (e.g., anadromous fish water, and in some cases overlap with other stated purposes of CVPIA (e.g., anadromous fish
restoration). The exact makeup of (b)(2) water in a given year typically varies. For example, in restoration). The exact makeup of (b)(2) water in a given year typically varies. For example, in
2014 (a critically dry year), out of a total of 402,000 AF of (b)(2) water, 176,300 AF (44%) was 2014 (a critically dry year), out of a total of 402,000 AF of (b)(2) water, 176,300 AF (44%) was
attributed to export reductions for Bay-Delta Plan water quality requirements.attributed to export reductions for Bay-Delta Plan water quality requirements.5555 Remaining (b)(2) Remaining (b)(2)
water was comprised of a combination of reservoir releases classified as CVPIA anadromous fish water was comprised of a combination of reservoir releases classified as CVPIA anadromous fish
restoration and NMFS BiOp compliance purposes (163,500 AF) and export reductions under the restoration and NMFS BiOp compliance purposes (163,500 AF) and export reductions under the
2009 salmonid BiOp (62,200 AF).2009 salmonid BiOp (62,200 AF).5656 In 2016 (a wet year), 793,000 AF of (b)(2) water included In 2016 (a wet year), 793,000 AF of (b)(2) water included
528,000 AF (66%) of export pumping reductions under FWS and NMFS BiOps and 114,500 AF 528,000 AF (66%) of export pumping reductions under FWS and NMFS BiOps and 114,500 AF
(14%) for Bay-Delta Plan requirements. The remaining water was accounted for as reservoir (14%) for Bay-Delta Plan requirements. The remaining water was accounted for as reservoir
releases for the anadromous fish restoration programs, the NMFS BiOp, and the Bay-Delta releases for the anadromous fish restoration programs, the NMFS BiOp, and the Bay-Delta
Plan.Plan.57
57
Ecosystem Restoration Efforts
Development of the CVP made significant changes to CaliforniaDevelopment of the CVP made significant changes to California’'s natural hydrology. In addition s natural hydrology. In addition
to the aforementioned CVPIA efforts to address some of these impacts, three ongoing, to the aforementioned CVPIA efforts to address some of these impacts, three ongoing,
congressionally authorized restoration initiatives also factor into federal activities associated with congressionally authorized restoration initiatives also factor into federal activities associated with
the CVP
52 CVPIA’s “fish doubling” goal was established on a baseline of average population levels during the period of 1967-
1991.
53 “(b)(2) water” references the provision in CVPIA that required these allocations.
54 Authorized refuge water supply under CVPIA is divided into two categories: Level 2 and Level 4 supplies. Level 2
supplies (approximately 422,251 AF, except in critically dry years, when the allocation is reduced to 75%) are the
historical average of water deliveries to the refuges prior to enactment of CVPIA. Reclamation is obligated to acquire
and deliver this water under CVPIA, and costs are 100% reimbursable by CVP contractors through the Central Valley
Project Restoration Fund. For more information, see Appendix.
55 Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2014 CVPIA Section 3406(b)(2) Operations and Accounting, January 28, 2015,
at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/data/FINAL_WY14_b2_presentation.pdf.
56 Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2014 CVPIA Section 3406(b)(2) Operations and Accounting, January 28, 2015,
at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/data/FINAL_WY14_b2_presentation.pdf.
57 Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2016 CVIPA §3406(b)(2) Accounting, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/
vungvari/FINAL_wy16_b2_800TAF_table_20170930.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
19
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
the CVP:The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), administered by Reclamation, The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), administered by Reclamation,
attempts to mitigate impacts and restore fisheries impacted by construction of the attempts to mitigate impacts and restore fisheries impacted by construction of the
Trinity River Division of the CVP.Trinity River Division of the CVP.
The San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP) is an ongoing effort to The San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP) is an ongoing effort to
implement a congressionally enacted settlement to restore fisheries in the San implement a congressionally enacted settlement to restore fisheries in the San
Joaquin River.Joaquin River.
The California Bay-Delta Restoration Program aims to restore and protect areas The California Bay-Delta Restoration Program aims to restore and protect areas
within the Bay-Delta that are affected by the CVP and other activities.within the Bay-Delta that are affected by the CVP and other activities.
In addition to their habitat restoration activities, both the TRRP and the SJRRP involve the In addition to their habitat restoration activities, both the TRRP and the SJRRP involve the
maintenance of instream flow levels that use water that was at one time diverted for other uses. maintenance of instream flow levels that use water that was at one time diverted for other uses.
Each effort is discussed briefly below.Each effort is discussed briefly below.
Trinity River Restoration Program
TRRP—administered by DOI—aims to mitigate impacts of the Trinity Division of the CVP and TRRP—administered by DOI—aims to mitigate impacts of the Trinity Division of the CVP and
restore fisheries to their levels prior to the Bureau of Reclamationrestore fisheries to their levels prior to the Bureau of Reclamation’'s construction of this division s construction of this division
in 1955. The Trinity Division primarily consists of two dams (Trinity and Lewiston Dams), in 1955. The Trinity Division primarily consists of two dams (Trinity and Lewiston Dams),
related power facilities, and a series of tunnels (including the 10.7-mile tunnel Clear Creek related power facilities, and a series of tunnels (including the 10.7-mile tunnel Clear Creek
Tunnel) that divert water from the Trinity River Basin to the Sacramento River Basin and Tunnel) that divert water from the Trinity River Basin to the Sacramento River Basin and
Whiskeytown Reservoir. Diversion of Trinity River water (which originally required that a Whiskeytown Reservoir. Diversion of Trinity River water (which originally required that a
minimum of 120,000 AF be reserved for Trinity River flows) resulted in the near drying of the minimum of 120,000 AF be reserved for Trinity River flows) resulted in the near drying of the
Trinity River in some years, thereby damaging spawning habitat and severely depleting salmon Trinity River in some years, thereby damaging spawning habitat and severely depleting salmon
stocks.stocks.
Efforts to mitigate the effects of the Trinity Division date back to the early 1980s, when DOI Efforts to mitigate the effects of the Trinity Division date back to the early 1980s, when DOI
initiated efforts to study the issue and increase Trinity River flows for fisheries. Congress initiated efforts to study the issue and increase Trinity River flows for fisheries. Congress
authorized legislation in 1984 (P.L. 98-541) and in 1992 (P.L. 102-575) providing for restoration authorized legislation in 1984 (P.L. 98-541) and in 1992 (P.L. 102-575) providing for restoration
activities and construction of a fish hatchery, and directed that 340,000 AF per year be reserved activities and construction of a fish hatchery, and directed that 340,000 AF per year be reserved
for Trinity River flows (a significant increase from the original amount). Congress also mandated for Trinity River flows (a significant increase from the original amount). Congress also mandated
completion of a flow evaluation study, which was formalized in a 2000 record of decision (ROD) completion of a flow evaluation study, which was formalized in a 2000 record of decision (ROD)
that called for additional water for instream flows,that called for additional water for instream flows,5858 river channel restoration, and watershed river channel restoration, and watershed
rehabilitation.rehabilitation.59
59
The 2000 ROD forms the basis for TRRP. The flow releases outlined in that document have in The 2000 ROD forms the basis for TRRP. The flow releases outlined in that document have in
some years been supplemented to protect fish health in the river, and these increases have been some years been supplemented to protect fish health in the river, and these increases have been
controversial among some water users. From FY2013 to FY2018, TRRP was funded at controversial among some water users. From FY2013 to FY2018, TRRP was funded at
approximately $12 million per year in discretionary appropriations from Reclamationapproximately $12 million per year in discretionary appropriations from Reclamation’'s Fish and s Fish and
Wildlife Management and Development activity.Wildlife Management and Development activity.
San Joaquin River Restoration Program
Historically, the San Joaquin River supported large Chinook salmon populations. After the Historically, the San Joaquin River supported large Chinook salmon populations. After the
Bureau of Reclamation completed Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River in the late 1940s, much Bureau of Reclamation completed Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River in the late 1940s, much
58 The additional flows outlined in the 2000 record of decision are based on water-year type and range from 369,000
AF in critically dry years to 815,000 AF in extremely wet years. A greater proportion of Trinity River water goes to the
river in dry years, and a greater proportion of the water goes to CVP contractors in wet years.
59 DOI, Record of Decision for Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Final Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report, December 2000, at http://www.restoresjr.net/?wpfb_dl=2163.
Congressional Research Service
20
link to page 26 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
of the river’of the river's water was diverted for agricultural uses and approximately 60 miles of the river s water was diverted for agricultural uses and approximately 60 miles of the river
became dry in most years. These conditions made it impossible to support Chinook salmon became dry in most years. These conditions made it impossible to support Chinook salmon
populations upstream of the Merced River confluence.populations upstream of the Merced River confluence.
In 1988, a coalition of environmental, conservation, and fishing groups advocating for river In 1988, a coalition of environmental, conservation, and fishing groups advocating for river
restoration to support Chinook salmon recovery sued the Bureau of Reclamation. A U.S. District restoration to support Chinook salmon recovery sued the Bureau of Reclamation. A U.S. District
Court judge eventually ruled that operation of Friant Dam was violating state law because of its Court judge eventually ruled that operation of Friant Dam was violating state law because of its
destruction of downstream fisheries.destruction of downstream fisheries.6060 Faced with mounting legal fees, considerable uncertainty, Faced with mounting legal fees, considerable uncertainty,
and the possibility of dramatic cuts to water diversions, the parties agreed to negotiate a and the possibility of dramatic cuts to water diversions, the parties agreed to negotiate a
settlement instead of proceeding to trial on a remedy regarding the courtsettlement instead of proceeding to trial on a remedy regarding the court’'s ruling. This settlement s ruling. This settlement
was agreed to in 2006 and enacted by Congress in 2010 (Title X of P.L. 111-11was agreed to in 2006 and enacted by Congress in 2010 (Title X of P.L. 111-11).).
The settlement agreement and its implementing legislation form the basis for the SJRRP, which The settlement agreement and its implementing legislation form the basis for the SJRRP, which
requires new releases of CVP water from Friant Dam to restore fisheries (including salmon requires new releases of CVP water from Friant Dam to restore fisheries (including salmon
fisheries) in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam (which forms Millerton Lake) to the fisheries) in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam (which forms Millerton Lake) to the
confluence with the Merced River (i.e., 60 miles). The SJRRP also requires efforts to mitigate confluence with the Merced River (i.e., 60 miles). The SJRRP also requires efforts to mitigate
water supply delivery losses due to these releases, among other things. In combination with the water supply delivery losses due to these releases, among other things. In combination with the
new releases, the settlementnew releases, the settlement’'s goals are to be achieved through a combination of channel and s goals are to be achieved through a combination of channel and
structural modifications along the San Joaquin River and the reintroduction of Chinook salmon structural modifications along the San Joaquin River and the reintroduction of Chinook salmon
(Figure 5). These activities are funded in part by federal discretionary appropriations and in part . These activities are funded in part by federal discretionary appropriations and in part
by repayment and surcharges paid by CVP Friant water users that are redirected toward the by repayment and surcharges paid by CVP Friant water users that are redirected toward the
SJRRP in SJRRP in P.L. 111-11.P.L. 111-11.
60 NRDC v. Patterson, 333 F. Supp. 2d 906, 925 (E.D. Cal. 2004).
Congressional Research Service
21
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Figure 5. San Joaquin River Restoration Program: Costs, Benefits, and Project Status
(program details as of May 2018)(program details as of May 2018)
Source: Bureau of Reclamation, San Joaquin River Restoration Program, May 2018, at http://www.restoresjr.net/Bureau of Reclamation, San Joaquin River Restoration Program, May 2018, at http://www.restoresjr.net/
?wpfb_dl=?wpfb_dl=2131.
2131.
Because increased water flows for restoring fisheries (known as Because increased water flows for restoring fisheries (known as restoration flows) would reduce ) would reduce
CVP diversions of water for off-stream purposes, such as irrigation, hydropower, and M&I uses, CVP diversions of water for off-stream purposes, such as irrigation, hydropower, and M&I uses,
the settlement and its implementation have been controversial. The quantity of water used for the settlement and its implementation have been controversial. The quantity of water used for
restoration flows and the quantity by which water deliveries would be reduced are related, but the restoration flows and the quantity by which water deliveries would be reduced are related, but the
relationship is not necessarily one-for-one, due to flood flows in some years and other mitigating relationship is not necessarily one-for-one, due to flood flows in some years and other mitigating
factors. Under the settlement agreement, no water would be released for restoration purposes in factors. Under the settlement agreement, no water would be released for restoration purposes in
the driest of years; thus, the agreement would not reduce deliveries to Friant contractors in those the driest of years; thus, the agreement would not reduce deliveries to Friant contractors in those
years. Additionally, in some years, the restoration flows released in late winter and early spring years. Additionally, in some years, the restoration flows released in late winter and early spring
may free up space for additional runoff storage in Millerton Lake, potentially minimizing may free up space for additional runoff storage in Millerton Lake, potentially minimizing
reductions in deliveries later in the year—assuming Millerton Lake storage is replenished. reductions in deliveries later in the year—assuming Millerton Lake storage is replenished.
Consequently, how deliveries to Friant water contractors may be reduced in any given year is Consequently, how deliveries to Friant water contractors may be reduced in any given year is
likely to depend on many factors. Regardless of the specifics of how much water may be released likely to depend on many factors. Regardless of the specifics of how much water may be released
for fisheries restoration vis-à-vis diverted for off-stream purposes, the SJRRP will impact existing for fisheries restoration vis-à-vis diverted for off-stream purposes, the SJRRP will impact existing
surface and groundwater supplies in and around the Friant Division service area and affect local surface and groundwater supplies in and around the Friant Division service area and affect local
economies. SJRRP construction activities are in the early stages, but planning efforts have economies. SJRRP construction activities are in the early stages, but planning efforts have
targeted a completion date of 2024 for the first stage of construction efforts.targeted a completion date of 2024 for the first stage of construction efforts.61
61 For more information, see San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP), Funding Constrained Framework for
Implementation, May 2018.
Congressional Research Service
22
link to page 29 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
61
CALFED Bay-Delta Restoration Program
The Bay-Delta Restoration Program is a cooperative effort among the federal government, the The Bay-Delta Restoration Program is a cooperative effort among the federal government, the
State of California, local governments, and water users to proactively address the water State of California, local governments, and water users to proactively address the water
management and aquatic ecosystem needs of Californiamanagement and aquatic ecosystem needs of California’'s Central Valley. The CALFED Bay-s Central Valley. The CALFED Bay-
Delta Restoration Act (P.L. 108-361), enacted in 2004, provided new and expanded federal Delta Restoration Act (P.L. 108-361), enacted in 2004, provided new and expanded federal
authorities for six agencies related to the 2000 ROD for the CALFED Bay-Delta Programauthorities for six agencies related to the 2000 ROD for the CALFED Bay-Delta Program’s
's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.6262 These authorities were extended through These authorities were extended through
FY2019 under the WIIN Act. The interim action plan for CALFED has four objectives: a FY2019 under the WIIN Act. The interim action plan for CALFED has four objectives: a
renewed federal-state partnership, smarter water supply and use, habitat restoration, and drought renewed federal-state partnership, smarter water supply and use, habitat restoration, and drought
and floodplain management.and floodplain management.63
63
From FY2013 to FY2018, Reclamation funded its Bay-Delta restoration activities at From FY2013 to FY2018, Reclamation funded its Bay-Delta restoration activities at
approximately $37 million per year; the majority of this funding has gone for projects to address approximately $37 million per year; the majority of this funding has gone for projects to address
the degraded Bay-Delta ecosystem and includes federal activities under California WaterFix (see the degraded Bay-Delta ecosystem and includes federal activities under California WaterFix (see
below section, below section, "“California WaterFix”).64").64 Other agencies receiving funding to carry out authorities Other agencies receiving funding to carry out authorities
under CALFED include DOIunder CALFED include DOI’'s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey; the s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey; the
Department of AgricultureDepartment of Agriculture’'s Natural Resources Conservation Service; the Department of s Natural Resources Conservation Service; the Department of
Defense’Defense's Army Corps of Engineers; the Department of Commerces Army Corps of Engineers; the Department of Commerce’'s National Oceanic and s National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration; and the Environmental Protection Agency. Similar to Reclamation, Atmospheric Administration; and the Environmental Protection Agency. Similar to Reclamation,
these agencies report on CALFED expenditures that involve a combination of activities under these agencies report on CALFED expenditures that involve a combination of activities under
“base”"base" authorities and new authorities that were provided under the CALFED authorizing authorities and new authorities that were provided under the CALFED authorizing
legislation. The annual CALFED crosscut budget records the funding for CALFED across all legislation. The annual CALFED crosscut budget records the funding for CALFED across all
federal agencies. The budget is generally included in the Administrationfederal agencies. The budget is generally included in the Administration’'s budget request and s budget request and
contains CALFED programs, their authority, and requested funding. For FY2019, the contains CALFED programs, their authority, and requested funding. For FY2019, the
Administration requested $474 million for CALFED activities. This figure is an increase from the Administration requested $474 million for CALFED activities. This figure is an increase from the
FY2018 enacted level of $415 million.FY2018 enacted level of $415 million.
New Storage and Conveyance
Reductions in available water deliveries due to hydrological and regulatory factors have caused Reductions in available water deliveries due to hydrological and regulatory factors have caused
some stakeholders, legislators, and state and federal government officials to look at other methods some stakeholders, legislators, and state and federal government officials to look at other methods
of augmenting water supplies. In particular, proposals to build new or augmented CVP and/or of augmenting water supplies. In particular, proposals to build new or augmented CVP and/or
SWP water storage projects have been of interest to some policymakers. Additionally, the State of SWP water storage projects have been of interest to some policymakers. Additionally, the State of
California is pursuing a major water conveyance project, the California WaterFix, with a nexus to California is pursuing a major water conveyance project, the California WaterFix, with a nexus to
CVP operations.CVP operations.
New and Augmented Water Storage Projects
The aforementioned CALFED legislation (P.L. 108-361) also authorized the study of several new The aforementioned CALFED legislation (P.L. 108-361) also authorized the study of several new
or augmented CVP storage projects throughout the Central Valley that have been ongoing for a or augmented CVP storage projects throughout the Central Valley that have been ongoing for a
number of years. These studies include Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, North of the number of years. These studies include Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, North of the
62 CALFED Bay-Delta Program, Programmatic Record of Decision, August 28, 2000, at http://www.calwater.ca.gov/
content/Documents/ROD8-28-00.pdf. Other key documents available at http://www.calwater.ca.gov/calfed/library/
Archive_ROD.html.
63 Interim Federal Action Plan for the California Bay-Delta, December 22, 2009, at http://www.doi.gov/news/doinews/
upload/CAWaterWorkPlan.pdf.
64 In addition to funding under its CALFED authorities, Reclamation counts funding under its other CVP restoration
authorities (e.g., CVPIA, SJRRP) as CALFED activities in its annual reporting.
Congressional Research Service
23
link to page 28 
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Delta Offstream Storage Investigation (also known as Sites Reservoir), In-Delta Storage, Los Delta Offstream Storage Investigation (also known as Sites Reservoir), In-Delta Storage, Los
Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion, and Upper San Joaquin River/Temperance Flat Storage Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion, and Upper San Joaquin River/Temperance Flat Storage
Investigation Investigation (Figure 6). Although the recommendations of these studies would normally be . Although the recommendations of these studies would normally be
subject to congressional approval, Section 4007 of the WIIN Act authorized $335 million in subject to congressional approval, Section 4007 of the WIIN Act authorized $335 million in
Reclamation financial support for new or expanded federal and nonfederal water storage projects Reclamation financial support for new or expanded federal and nonfederal water storage projects
and provided that these projects could be deemed authorized, subject to a finding by the and provided that these projects could be deemed authorized, subject to a finding by the
Administration that individual projects met certain criteria.Administration that individual projects met certain criteria.65
65
Source: California Department of Water Resources, A Resource Management Strategy of the California Water California Department of Water Resources, A Resource Management Strategy of the California Water
Plan, July 29, 2016.Plan, July 29, 2016.
In 2018 reporting to Congress, Reclamation recommended an initial list of seven projects that it In 2018 reporting to Congress, Reclamation recommended an initial list of seven projects that it
concluded met the WIIN Act criteria. The projects were allocated $33.3 million in FY2017 concluded met the WIIN Act criteria. The projects were allocated $33.3 million in FY2017
funding that was previously appropriated for WIIN Act Section 4007 projects. Congress approved funding that was previously appropriated for WIIN Act Section 4007 projects. Congress approved
the funding allocations for these projects in enacted appropriations for FY2018 (P.L. 115-141). the funding allocations for these projects in enacted appropriations for FY2018 (P.L. 115-141).
Four of the projects receiving FY2017 funds ($28.05 million) were CALFED studies that would Four of the projects receiving FY2017 funds ($28.05 million) were CALFED studies that would
address water availability in the address water availability in theCVP66
CVP:66Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project ($20 million for design and Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project ($20 million for design and
preconstruction);preconstruction);
North-of-Delta Off-Stream Storage Investigation/Sites Reservoir Storage Project North-of-Delta Off-Stream Storage Investigation/Sites Reservoir Storage Project
($4.35 million for feasibility study);($4.35 million for feasibility study);
Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation ($1.5 million for feasibility Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation ($1.5 million for feasibility
study); and
65 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10626, Reclamation Water Storage Projects: Section 4007 of the Water
Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act, by Charles V. Stern.
66 The study of several projects (including the Shasta, Sites, and Upper San Joaquin investigations) was originally
authorized under P.L. 108-361.
Congressional Research Service
24
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
study); and
Friant-Kern Canal Subsidence Challenges Project ($2.2 million for feasibility Friant-Kern Canal Subsidence Challenges Project ($2.2 million for feasibility
study).study).
The enacted FY2018 Energy and Water appropriations bill further stipulated that $134 million of The enacted FY2018 Energy and Water appropriations bill further stipulated that $134 million of
the amount set aside for additional water conservation and delivery projects be provided for the amount set aside for additional water conservation and delivery projects be provided for
Section 4007 WIIN Act storage projects (i.e., similar direction as FY2017). The enacted FY2019 Section 4007 WIIN Act storage projects (i.e., similar direction as FY2017). The enacted FY2019
bill set aside another $134 million for these purposes.bill set aside another $134 million for these purposes.6767 Future reporting and appropriations Future reporting and appropriations
legislation is expected to propose allocation of this and any other applicable funding. Congress legislation is expected to propose allocation of this and any other applicable funding. Congress
also may consider additional directives for these and other efforts to address water supplies in the also may consider additional directives for these and other efforts to address water supplies in the
CVP, including approval of physical construction for one or more of these projects.CVP, including approval of physical construction for one or more of these projects.
Funding by the State of California may also influence the viability and timing of construction for Funding by the State of California may also influence the viability and timing of construction for
some of the proposed projects. For example, in June 2018, the state announced significant bond some of the proposed projects. For example, in June 2018, the state announced significant bond
funding for Sites Reservoir ($1.008 billion), as well as other projects.funding for Sites Reservoir ($1.008 billion), as well as other projects.68
68
California WaterFix
In addition to water storage, some have advocated for a more flexible water conveyance system In addition to water storage, some have advocated for a more flexible water conveyance system
for CVP and SWP water. An alternative was the California WaterFix, a project initiated by the for CVP and SWP water. An alternative was the California WaterFix, a project initiated by the
State of California in 2015 to address some of the water conveyance and ecosystem issues in the State of California in 2015 to address some of the water conveyance and ecosystem issues in the
Bay-Delta. The objective of this project was to divert water from the Sacramento River, north of Bay-Delta. The objective of this project was to divert water from the Sacramento River, north of
the Bay-Delta, into twin tunnels running south along the eastern portion of the Bay-Delta and the Bay-Delta, into twin tunnels running south along the eastern portion of the Bay-Delta and
emptying into existing pumps that feed water into the CVP and SWP. In the spring of 2019, emptying into existing pumps that feed water into the CVP and SWP. In the spring of 2019,
Governor Newsom of California canceled the plans for this project and introduced an alternative Governor Newsom of California canceled the plans for this project and introduced an alternative
plan for conveying water through the Delta.plan for conveying water through the Delta.
DWR is creating plans to construct a single tunnel to convey water from the Sacramento River to DWR is creating plans to construct a single tunnel to convey water from the Sacramento River to
the existing pumps in the Bay-Delta. DWRthe existing pumps in the Bay-Delta. DWR’'s stated reasons for supporting this approach are to s stated reasons for supporting this approach are to
protect water supplies from sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and earthquakes.protect water supplies from sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and earthquakes.6969 The new plan is The new plan is
expected to take a expected to take a“portfolio”"portfolio" approach that focuses on a number of interrelated efforts to make approach that focuses on a number of interrelated efforts to make
water supplies climate resilient. This approach includes actions such as strengthening levees, water supplies climate resilient. This approach includes actions such as strengthening levees,
protecting Delta water quality, and recharging groundwater, according to DWR.protecting Delta water quality, and recharging groundwater, according to DWR.7070 This project This project
will require a new environmental review process for federal and state permits. It is being led by will require a new environmental review process for federal and state permits. It is being led by
the Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority, a joint powers authority created by the Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority, a joint powers authority created by
public water agencies to oversee the design and construction of the new conveyance system.public water agencies to oversee the design and construction of the new conveyance system.71
71 DWR is expected to oversee the planning effort. The cost of the project is anticipated to be DWR is expected to oversee the planning effort. The cost of the project is anticipated to be
largely paid by public water agencies. The federal governmentlargely paid by public water agencies. The federal government’'s role in this project beyond s role in this project beyond
evaluating permit applications and maintaining related CVP operations has not been defined.
67 See CRS In Focus IF10841, Bureau of Reclamation: FY2019 Appropriations, by Charles V. Stern.
68 California Water Commission, “Commission Approves Investing $2.7 Billion in Eight Water Storage Projects,” July
24, 2018, at https://cwc.ca.gov/-/media/CWC-Website/Files/Documents/Press/MCEDPressRelease_072418.pdf.
69 California Department of Water Resources, “State Withdraws WaterFix Approvals, Initiates Planning and Permitting
for a Smaller Single Tunnel,” press release, May 2, 2019, https://water.ca.gov/News/News-Releases/2019/May/State-
Withdraws-WaterFix-Approvals. Hereinafter “DWR May 2019 Press Release.”
70 DWR May 2019 Press Release.
71 California Department of Water Resources, Modernizing Delta Conveyance Infrastructure Q&A, California
Department of Water Resources, https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Delta-Conveyance/
Delta-Conveyance-QA.pdf?la=en&hash=373E0DBCD7AD988C9987A3197304E55D9115F798.
Congressional Research Service
25
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Congressional Interest
evaluating permit applications and maintaining related CVP operations has not been defined. Congressional Interest Congress plays a role in CVP water management and has previously attempted to make available Congress plays a role in CVP water management and has previously attempted to make available
additional water supplies in the region by facilitating efforts such as water banking, water additional water supplies in the region by facilitating efforts such as water banking, water
transfers, and construction of new and augmented storage. In 2016, Congress enacted provisions transfers, and construction of new and augmented storage. In 2016, Congress enacted provisions
aiming to benefit the CVP and the SWP, including major operational changes in the WIIN Act aiming to benefit the CVP and the SWP, including major operational changes in the WIIN Act
and additional appropriations for western drought response and new water storage that have and additional appropriations for western drought response and new water storage that have
benefited (or are expected to benefit) the CVP. Congress also continues to consider legislation benefited (or are expected to benefit) the CVP. Congress also continues to consider legislation
that would further alter CVP operational authorities and responsibilities related to individual units that would further alter CVP operational authorities and responsibilities related to individual units
of the project. The below section discusses some of the main issues related to the CVP that may of the project. The below section discusses some of the main issues related to the CVP that may
receive attention by Congress.receive attention by Congress.
CVP Operational Authorities Under the WIIN Act72
Act72 Title II, Subtitle J of the WIIN Act (enacted in December 2016) included multiple provisions Title II, Subtitle J of the WIIN Act (enacted in December 2016) included multiple provisions
related to the Bureau of Reclamationrelated to the Bureau of Reclamation’'s operations of the CVP. Most of the WIIN Acts operations of the CVP. Most of the WIIN Act’s
's operational provisions are set to expire in 2021 (five years after the billoperational provisions are set to expire in 2021 (five years after the bill’'s enactment). In addition s enactment). In addition
to overseeing the implementation of these operational provisions, Congress may also consider to overseeing the implementation of these operational provisions, Congress may also consider
their amendment, extension, or repeal.their amendment, extension, or repeal.
The WIIN Act directed Reclamation to The WIIN Act directed Reclamation to “maximize”"maximize" CVP pumping (in accordance with applicable CVP pumping (in accordance with applicable
BiOps), allowed for increased pumping during certain temporary storm events, and authorized BiOps), allowed for increased pumping during certain temporary storm events, and authorized
expedited reviews of water transfers, among other things.expedited reviews of water transfers, among other things.7373 The WIIN Act also established a new The WIIN Act also established a new
standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species listed as endangered or standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species listed as endangered or
threatened under the ESA, allowing most of the billthreatened under the ESA, allowing most of the bill’'s actions to go forward unless they are s actions to go forward unless they are
determined to cause additional adverse effects on listed species beyond the range of the effects determined to cause additional adverse effects on listed species beyond the range of the effects
anticipated to occur for the duration of the species BiOp.anticipated to occur for the duration of the species BiOp.
Although the WIIN Act included some provisions from legislation that had been proposed dating Although the WIIN Act included some provisions from legislation that had been proposed dating
back to the back to the112th112th Congress, many of the controversial provisions from prior bills were not Congress, many of the controversial provisions from prior bills were not
included in the act. Supporters of WIIN Act operational changes contended that these changes included in the act. Supporters of WIIN Act operational changes contended that these changes
had the potential to make additional water available to users facing curtailed deliveries, while also had the potential to make additional water available to users facing curtailed deliveries, while also
improving the flexibility and responsiveness of the management and operations of the CVP and improving the flexibility and responsiveness of the management and operations of the CVP and
SWP.SWP.7474 Opponents worried that the changes may have detrimental effects on species Opponents worried that the changes may have detrimental effects on species’' survival in survival in
both the short and long terms and may limit agency efforts to manage water supplies for the both the short and long terms and may limit agency efforts to manage water supplies for the
benefit of species.benefit of species.7575 Some of the notable CVP operational provisions in the WIIN Act aimed to Some of the notable CVP operational provisions in the WIIN Act aimed to
provide the Administration with authority to make available more water supplies during periods provide the Administration with authority to make available more water supplies during periods
in which pumping otherwise would have been limited.
72 For more information on these provisions, see CRS Report R44986, Water Infrastructure Improvements for the
Nation (WIIN) Act: Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions, by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh,
and Nicole T. Carter.
73 Pursuant to Section 4013 of the WIIN Act, most of the CVP operational provisions expire in December 2021.
74 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Statement of Dan Keppen, Executive Director,
Family Farm Alliance, 114th Cong., 1st sess., October 8, 2015, p. 4, at http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
hearings-and-business-meetings?Id=65220e15-0479-492e-8423-ca1a381c1078&Statement_id=378db42f-6b60-44a7-
a16c-3d2b7d712984.
75 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Statement of Michael L. Connor, Deputy
Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, 114th Cong., 1st sess., October 8, 2015, p. 1, at
http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=fb299e7d-7de8-41c8-b8a2-365d544c8911.
Congressional Research Service
26
link to page 20 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
in which pumping otherwise would have been limited.
According to Reclamation, some changes authorized under the WIIN Act were implemented According to Reclamation, some changes authorized under the WIIN Act were implemented
during the winter of 2017-2018. In particular, communication and transparency were reportedly during the winter of 2017-2018. In particular, communication and transparency were reportedly
increased for some operational decisions, allowing for reduced or rescheduled pumping increased for some operational decisions, allowing for reduced or rescheduled pumping
restrictions. Additionally, as of spring 2018, WIIN Act allowances relaxed restrictions on inflow-restrictions. Additionally, as of spring 2018, WIIN Act allowances relaxed restrictions on inflow-
to-export ratios related to the voluntary sale, transfer, or exchange of water that were used to to-export ratios related to the voluntary sale, transfer, or exchange of water that were used to
affect a transfer resulting in additional exports of 50,000-60,000 AF.affect a transfer resulting in additional exports of 50,000-60,000 AF.76
76
Reclamation has noted that hydrology has affected its ability to implement some of the actReclamation has noted that hydrology has affected its ability to implement some of the act’s
's provisions. Many of the WIIN Act changes have the potential to make their greatest impact provisions. Many of the WIIN Act changes have the potential to make their greatest impact
during drought years. At the same time, some federal operational changes pursuant to the WIIN during drought years. At the same time, some federal operational changes pursuant to the WIIN
Act were reportedly proposed but were deemed incompatible with state requirements.Act were reportedly proposed but were deemed incompatible with state requirements.7777 Despite Despite
these limitations, WIIN Act authorities are likely to continue as a topic of congressional interest.these limitations, WIIN Act authorities are likely to continue as a topic of congressional interest.
Other Proposed Changes to CVP Operations
Previous Congresses have considered legislation that proposed additional changes to CVP Previous Congresses have considered legislation that proposed additional changes to CVP
operations.operations.7878 For instance, in the For instance, in the 115th115th Congress, H.R. 23, the Gaining Responsibility on Water Congress, H.R. 23, the Gaining Responsibility on Water
Act (GROW Act), incorporated a number of provisions that were included in previous California Act (GROW Act), incorporated a number of provisions that were included in previous California
drought legislation in the drought legislation in the112th, 113th, and 114th112th, 113th, and 114th Congresses but were not enacted in the WIIN Act. Congresses but were not enacted in the WIIN Act.
Generally speaking, the GROW Act included provisions that would have loosened some Generally speaking, the GROW Act included provisions that would have loosened some
environmental protections and restrictions that are imposed under the CVPIA, ESA, CWA, and environmental protections and restrictions that are imposed under the CVPIA, ESA, CWA, and
SJRRP, and had the potential to increase exports under some scenarios. This legislation was not SJRRP, and had the potential to increase exports under some scenarios. This legislation was not
enacted.enacted.
In addition to legislation proposing operational changes, the Administration has indicated its In addition to legislation proposing operational changes, the Administration has indicated its
intent to propose administrative changes to CVP operations, including through reinitiation of intent to propose administrative changes to CVP operations, including through reinitiation of
consultation on long-term, system-wide operations of the CVP and SWP (see earlier section, consultation on long-term, system-wide operations of the CVP and SWP (see earlier section,
"“Endangered Species Act”)"). A 2018 White House memorandum directed DOC and DOI to . A 2018 White House memorandum directed DOC and DOI to
finalize their new BiOps for the coordinated operation of the CVP and SWP by June 15, 2019, finalize their new BiOps for the coordinated operation of the CVP and SWP by June 15, 2019,
and to and to“"suspend, revise, or rescindsuspend, revise, or rescind”" regulations that unduly burden the project. regulations that unduly burden the project.7979 It is unclear how It is unclear how
the latter process might unfold or what particular regulations will be addressed.the latter process might unfold or what particular regulations will be addressed.
New Water Storage Projects
As previously noted, Reclamation and the State of California have funded the study of new water As previously noted, Reclamation and the State of California have funded the study of new water
storage projects in recent years, and future appropriations legislation and reporting may provide storage projects in recent years, and future appropriations legislation and reporting may provide
additional direction for these and other efforts to develop new water supplies for the CVP. As additional direction for these and other efforts to develop new water supplies for the CVP. As
such, Congress may consider oversight, authorization, and/or funding for these projects. Some such, Congress may consider oversight, authorization, and/or funding for these projects. Some
projects, such as the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project, have the potential to projects, such as the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project, have the potential to
augment CVP water supplies but have also generated controversy for their potential to conflict augment CVP water supplies but have also generated controversy for their potential to conflict
with the intent of certain state laws.with the intent of certain state laws.8080 Although Reclamation has indicated its interest in pursuing the Shasta Dam raise project, the state has opposed the project under Governor Jerry Brown's Although Reclamation has indicated its interest in pursuing
76 This provision of the WIIN Act generally lessened existing restrictions on the amount of water that could be exported
for water transfers. Personal communication with the Bureau of Reclamation, April 18, 2017.
77 Personal communication with the Bureau of Reclamation, April 18, 2017.
78 For more information, see CRS Report R44889, H.R. 23, the Gaining Responsibility on Water Act of 2017 (GROW
Act), by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Marnie Kremer.
79 2018 White House Memo on Western Water.
80 In particular, Section 5093.542 of the California State Public Resources Code prevents participation (other than
technical or economic feasibility studies of the Shasta dam raise project) by state departments or agencies in facilities
that would have an adverse effect on the free-flowing condition of the McCloud River. In previous documents,
Congressional Research Service
27
Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
the Shasta Dam raise project, the state has opposed the project under Governor Jerry Brown’s
Administration, and it is unclear how such a project might proceed absent state regulatory Administration, and it is unclear how such a project might proceed absent state regulatory
approvals and financial support. As previously noted, in early 2018, Reclamation proposed and approvals and financial support. As previously noted, in early 2018, Reclamation proposed and
Congress agreed to $20 million in design and preconstruction funding for the project.Congress agreed to $20 million in design and preconstruction funding for the project.8181 An An
additional $75 million was recommended by the Trump Administration in February 2019.additional $75 million was recommended by the Trump Administration in February 2019.
In addition to the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project, Congress approved In addition to the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project, Congress approved
Reclamation-recommended study funding for Sites Reservoir/North of Delta Offstream Storage Reclamation-recommended study funding for Sites Reservoir/North of Delta Offstream Storage
(NODOS), Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation, and the Friant-Kern Canal (NODOS), Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation, and the Friant-Kern Canal
Subsidence Challenges Project. Overall, from FY2017 to FY2019 Congress provided Subsidence Challenges Project. Overall, from FY2017 to FY2019 Congress provided
Reclamation with $335 million for new water storage projects authorized under Section 4007 of Reclamation with $335 million for new water storage projects authorized under Section 4007 of
the WIIN Act. A significant share of this total is expected to be used on CVP and related water the WIIN Act. A significant share of this total is expected to be used on CVP and related water
storage projects in California. Once the appropriations ceiling for these projects has been reached, storage projects in California. Once the appropriations ceiling for these projects has been reached,
funding for storage projects under Section 4007 would need to be extended by Congress before funding for storage projects under Section 4007 would need to be extended by Congress before
projects could proceed further.projects could proceed further.
Legislation in the Legislation in the 116th116th Congress has proposed to expedite certain water storage studies in the Congress has proposed to expedite certain water storage studies in the
Central Valley, and could also provide mandatory funding for their eventual construction. For Central Valley, and could also provide mandatory funding for their eventual construction. For
instance, Section 5 of H.R. 2473 would direct the Secretary to complete, as soon as practicable, instance, Section 5 of H.R. 2473 would direct the Secretary to complete, as soon as practicable,
the ongoing feasibility studies associated with Sites Reservoir, Del Puerto Canyon Reservoir, Los the ongoing feasibility studies associated with Sites Reservoir, Del Puerto Canyon Reservoir, Los
Vaqueros Reservoir, and San Luis Reservoir. Section 2 of the same legislation would authorize Vaqueros Reservoir, and San Luis Reservoir. Section 2 of the same legislation would authorize
$100 million per year for fiscal years 2030 to 2060, without further appropriation (i.e., mandatory $100 million per year for fiscal years 2030 to 2060, without further appropriation (i.e., mandatory
funding) for new Reclamation surface or groundwater storage projects.funding) for new Reclamation surface or groundwater storage projects.
Conclusion
Conclusion The CVP is one of the largest and most complex water storage and conveyance projects in the The CVP is one of the largest and most complex water storage and conveyance projects in the
world. Congress has regularly expressed interest in CVP operations and allocations, in particular world. Congress has regularly expressed interest in CVP operations and allocations, in particular
pumping in the Bay-Delta. In addition to ongoing oversight of project operations and previously pumping in the Bay-Delta. In addition to ongoing oversight of project operations and previously
enacted authorities, a number of developing issues and proposals related to the CVP have been of enacted authorities, a number of developing issues and proposals related to the CVP have been of
interest to congressional decisionmakers. These include study and approval of new water storage interest to congressional decisionmakers. These include study and approval of new water storage
and conveyance projects, updates to the stateand conveyance projects, updates to the state’'s Bay-Delta Water Quality Plan, and a multipronged s Bay-Delta Water Quality Plan, and a multipronged
effort by the Trump Administration to make available more water for CVP water contractors, in effort by the Trump Administration to make available more water for CVP water contractors, in
particular those south of the Delta. Future drought or other stressors on California water supplies particular those south of the Delta. Future drought or other stressors on California water supplies
are likely to further magnify these issues.
Reclamation has indicated that this requirement could limit some state agency participation in the project.
81 This funding was provided from a pool of funds appropriated for FY2017 that was designated for water storage
projects authorized under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act. Enacted appropriations in FY2018 and FY2019 have included
similar funding amounts. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10692, Bureau of Reclamation: FY2018
Appropriations, by Charles V. Stern.
Congressional Research Service
28
link to page 24 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
Appendix. are likely to further magnify these issues.
Appendix. CVP Water Contractors
The below sections provide a brief discussion some of the major contractor groups and individual The below sections provide a brief discussion some of the major contractor groups and individual
contractors served by the CVP.contractors served by the CVP.
Sacramento River Settlement Contractors and San Joaquin River
Exchange Contractors (Water Rights Contractors)
CVP water is generally made available for delivery first to those contractors north and south of CVP water is generally made available for delivery first to those contractors north and south of
the Delta with water rights that predate construction of the CVP: the Sacramento River Settlement the Delta with water rights that predate construction of the CVP: the Sacramento River Settlement
Contractors and the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors. (These contractors are sometimes Contractors and the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors. (These contractors are sometimes
referred to collectively as referred to collectively as water rights contractors.) Water rights contractors typically receive .) Water rights contractors typically receive
100% of their contracted amounts in most water year types. During water shortages, their annual 100% of their contracted amounts in most water year types. During water shortages, their annual
maximum entitlement may be reduced, but not by more than 25%.maximum entitlement may be reduced, but not by more than 25%.
Sacramento River Settlement Contractors include the 145 contractors (both individuals and Sacramento River Settlement Contractors include the 145 contractors (both individuals and
districts) that diverted natural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVPdistricts) that diverted natural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVP’'s construction s construction
and executed a settlement agreement with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of and executed a settlement agreement with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of
water rights. Reclamation entered into this agreement in exchange for these contractors water rights. Reclamation entered into this agreement in exchange for these contractors
withdrawing their protests related to Reclamationwithdrawing their protests related to Reclamation’'s application for water rights for the CVP.s application for water rights for the CVP.
The San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors are four irrigation districts that agreed to The San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors are four irrigation districts that agreed to
“exchange”"exchange" exercising their water rights to divert water on the San Joaquin and Kings Rivers for exercising their water rights to divert water on the San Joaquin and Kings Rivers for
guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (typically in the form of deliveries from the Delta-guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (typically in the form of deliveries from the Delta-
Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). During all years except for when critical Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). During all years except for when critical
conditions are declared, Reclamation is responsible for delivering 840,000 AF of conditions are declared, Reclamation is responsible for delivering 840,000 AF of“substitute”
"substitute" water to these users (i.e., water from north of the Delta as a substitute for San Joaquin River water to these users (i.e., water from north of the Delta as a substitute for San Joaquin River
water). In the event that Reclamation is unable to make its contracted deliveries, these Exchange water). In the event that Reclamation is unable to make its contracted deliveries, these Exchange
Contractors have the right to divert water directly from the San Joaquin River, which may reduce Contractors have the right to divert water directly from the San Joaquin River, which may reduce
water available for other San Joaquin River water service contactors.water available for other San Joaquin River water service contactors.
Friant Division Contractors
CVP’
CVP's Friant Division contractors receive water stored behind Friant Dam (completed in 1944) in s Friant Division contractors receive water stored behind Friant Dam (completed in 1944) in
Millerton Lake. This water is delivered through the Friant-Kern and Madera Canals. The 32 Millerton Lake. This water is delivered through the Friant-Kern and Madera Canals. The 32
Friant Division contractors, who irrigate roughly 1 million acres on the San Joaquin River, are Friant Division contractors, who irrigate roughly 1 million acres on the San Joaquin River, are
contracted to receive two contracted to receive two“classes”"classes" of water: Class 1 water is the first 800,000 AF available for of water: Class 1 water is the first 800,000 AF available for
delivery;delivery;8282 Class 2 water is the next 1.4 million AF available for delivery. Some districts receive Class 2 water is the next 1.4 million AF available for delivery. Some districts receive
water from both classes. Generally, Class 2 waters are released as water from both classes. Generally, Class 2 waters are released as“"uncontrolled flowsuncontrolled flows”" (i.e., for (i.e., for
flood control concerns), and may not necessarily be scheduled at a contractorflood control concerns), and may not necessarily be scheduled at a contractor’'s convenience.s convenience.
Deliveries to the Friant Division are affected by a 2009 congressionally enacted settlement Deliveries to the Friant Division are affected by a 2009 congressionally enacted settlement
stemming from Friant Damstemming from Friant Dam’'s effects on the San Joaquin River.s effects on the San Joaquin River.8383 The settlement requires The settlement requires
reductions in deliveries to Friant users for protection of fish and wildlife purposes. In some years, reductions in deliveries to Friant users for protection of fish and wildlife purposes. In some years,
some of these some of these“"restorations flowsrestorations flows”" have been made available to contractors for delivery as Class 2 have been made available to contractors for delivery as Class 2
water.
82 This water typically is provided for municipal and industrial use or for districts without access to groundwater.
83 When constructed, Friant Dam impounded the entire flow of the San Joaquin River, except for releases to manage
flooding and provide water for some riparian water rights holders immediately below the dam. For more information,
see below section, “San Joaquin River Restoration Program.”
Congressional Research Service
29
link to page 12 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
water.
Unlike most other CVP contractors, Friant Division contractors have converted their water Unlike most other CVP contractors, Friant Division contractors have converted their water
service contracts to repayment contracts and have repaid their capital obligation to the federal service contracts to repayment contracts and have repaid their capital obligation to the federal
government for the development of their facilities. In years in which Reclamation is unable to government for the development of their facilities. In years in which Reclamation is unable to
make contracted deliveries to Exchange Contractors, these contractors can make a make contracted deliveries to Exchange Contractors, these contractors can make a“call”"call" on water on water
in the San Joaquin River, thereby requiring releases from Friant Dam that otherwise would go to in the San Joaquin River, thereby requiring releases from Friant Dam that otherwise would go to
Friant contractors.Friant contractors.
South-of-Delta (SOD) Water Service Contractors: Westlands Water
District
District As shown As showninin Figure 3, SODSOD water service contractors account for a large amount (2.09 million water service contractors account for a large amount (2.09 million
AF, or 22.1%) of the CVPAF, or 22.1%) of the CVP’'s contracted water. The largest of these contractors is Westlands Water s contracted water. The largest of these contractors is Westlands Water
District, which consists of 700 farms covering more than 600,000 acres in Fresno and Kings District, which consists of 700 farms covering more than 600,000 acres in Fresno and Kings
Counties. In geographic terms, Westlands is the largest agricultural water district in the United Counties. In geographic terms, Westlands is the largest agricultural water district in the United
States; its lands are valuable and productive, producing more than $1 billion of food and fiber States; its lands are valuable and productive, producing more than $1 billion of food and fiber
annually.annually.8484 Westlands Westlands’' maximum contracted CVP water is in excess of 1.2 million AF, an amount maximum contracted CVP water is in excess of 1.2 million AF, an amount
that makes up more than half of the total amount of SOD CVP water service contracts and that makes up more than half of the total amount of SOD CVP water service contracts and
significantly exceeds any other individual CVP contactor.significantly exceeds any other individual CVP contactor.8585 However, due to a number of factors, However, due to a number of factors,
Westlands often receives considerably less water on average than it did historically.Westlands often receives considerably less water on average than it did historically.
Westlands has been prominently involved in a number of policy debates, including proposals to Westlands has been prominently involved in a number of policy debates, including proposals to
alter environmental requirements to increase pumping south of the Delta. Westlands is also alter environmental requirements to increase pumping south of the Delta. Westlands is also
involved in a major proposed settlement with Reclamation, the San Luis Drainage Settlement. involved in a major proposed settlement with Reclamation, the San Luis Drainage Settlement.
The settlement would, among other things, forgive WestlandsThe settlement would, among other things, forgive Westlands’' share of federal CVP repayment share of federal CVP repayment
responsibilities in exchange for relieving the federal government of its responsibility to construct responsibilities in exchange for relieving the federal government of its responsibility to construct
drainage facilities to deal with toxic runoff associated with naturally occurring metals in area drainage facilities to deal with toxic runoff associated with naturally occurring metals in area
soils.soils.
Central Valley Wildlife Refuges
The 20,000 square mile California Central Valley provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory The 20,000 square mile California Central Valley provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory
birds and other species. As such, it is the home to multiple state and federally-designated wildlife birds and other species. As such, it is the home to multiple state and federally-designated wildlife
refuges north and south of the Delta. These refuges provide managed wetland habitat that refuges north and south of the Delta. These refuges provide managed wetland habitat that
receives water from the CVP and other sources.receives water from the CVP and other sources.
The Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA; P.L. 102-575The Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA; P.L. 102-575),86),86 enacted in 1992, sought to enacted in 1992, sought to
improve conditions for fish and wildlife in these areas by providing them coequal priority with improve conditions for fish and wildlife in these areas by providing them coequal priority with
other project purposes. CVPIA also authorized a Refuge Water Supply Program to acquire other project purposes. CVPIA also authorized a Refuge Water Supply Program to acquire
approximately 555,000 AF annually in water supplies for 19 Central Valley refuges administered approximately 555,000 AF annually in water supplies for 19 Central Valley refuges administered
by three managing agencies: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife by three managing agencies: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and Grassland Water District (a private landowner). Pursuant to CVPIA, Reclamation Service, and Grassland Water District (a private landowner). Pursuant to CVPIA, Reclamation
entered into long-term water supply contracts with the managing agencies to provide these entered into long-term water supply contracts with the managing agencies to provide these
supplies.
84 Westlands Water District, “Who We Are,” at https://wwd.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/wwd-who-we-are.pdf.
85 CRS analysis of Bureau of Reclamation, “Central Valley Project Water Contractors,” March 30, 2016, at
https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvp-water/docs/latest-water-contractors.pdf.
86 P.L. 102-575, Title 34, 106 Stat. 4706.
Congressional Research Service
30
link to page 22 link to page 22 Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation
supplies.
Authorized refuge water supply under CVPIA is divided into two categories: Level 2 and Level 4 Authorized refuge water supply under CVPIA is divided into two categories: Level 2 and Level 4
supplies. Level 2 supplies (approximately 422,251 AF, except in critically dry years, when the supplies. Level 2 supplies (approximately 422,251 AF, except in critically dry years, when the
allocation is reduced to 75%) are the historical average of water deliveries to the refuges prior to allocation is reduced to 75%) are the historical average of water deliveries to the refuges prior to
enactment of CVPIA.enactment of CVPIA.8787 Reclamation is obligated to acquire and deliver this water under CVPIA, Reclamation is obligated to acquire and deliver this water under CVPIA,
and costs are 100% reimbursable by CVP contractors through a fund established by the act, the and costs are 100% reimbursable by CVP contractors through a fund established by the act, the
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (CVPRF; see previous section, Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (CVPRF; see previous section, "“Central Valley Project
Improvement Act”"). Level 4 supplies (approximately 133,264 AF) are the additional increment of ). Level 4 supplies (approximately 133,264 AF) are the additional increment of
water beyond Level 2 supplies for optimal wetland habitat development. This water must be water beyond Level 2 supplies for optimal wetland habitat development. This water must be
acquired by Reclamation through voluntary measures and is funded as a 75% federal cost acquired by Reclamation through voluntary measures and is funded as a 75% federal cost
(through the CVPRF) and 25% state cost.(through the CVPRF) and 25% state cost.
In most cases, the Level 2 requirement is met; however, Level 4 supplies have not always been In most cases, the Level 2 requirement is met; however, Level 4 supplies have not always been
provided in full for a number of reasons, including a dearth of supplies due to costs in excess of provided in full for a number of reasons, including a dearth of supplies due to costs in excess of
available CVPRF funding and a lack of willing sellers. In recent years, costs for the Refuge Water available CVPRF funding and a lack of willing sellers. In recent years, costs for the Refuge Water
Supply Program (i.e., the costs for both Level 2 and Level 4 water) have ranged from $11 million Supply Program (i.e., the costs for both Level 2 and Level 4 water) have ranged from $11 million
to $20 million.
Author Information
Charles V. Stern
Pervaze A. Sheikh
to $20 million.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
For more information, see the State Water Resources Control Board Bay Delta Plan update website at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
White House, "Presidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West," October 19, 2018. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-memorandum-promoting-reliable-supply-delivery-water-west/. Hereinafter, 2018 White House Memo on Western Water.
51.
52.
53.
54.
Authorized refuge water supply under CVPIA is divided into two categories: Level 2 and Level 4 supplies. Level 2 supplies (approximately 422,251 AF, except in critically dry years, when the allocation is reduced to 75%) are the historical average of water deliveries to the refuges prior to enactment of CVPIA. Reclamation is obligated to acquire and deliver this water under CVPIA, and costs are 100% reimbursable by CVP contractors through the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund. For more information, see Appendix.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
Westlands Water District, "Who We Are," at https://wwd.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/wwd-who-we-are.pdf.
85.
86.
87.
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
87 Although this represents the historical average for deliveries, prior to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act Although this represents the historical average for deliveries, prior to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(CVPIA; P.L. 102-575), refuges only had a legal entitlement to 121,700 acre-feet (AF).(CVPIA; P.L. 102-575), refuges only had a legal entitlement to 121,700 acre-feet (AF).
Congressional Research Service
R45342 · VERSION 10 · UPDATED
31
Contents
- Introduction
- Recent Developments
- Background
- Overview of the CVP and California Water Infrastructure
- Central Valley Project Water Contractors and Allocations
- CVP Allocations
- State Water Project Allocations
- Combined CVP/SWP Operations
- Constraints on CVP Deliveries
- Water Quality Requirements: Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan
- Bay-Delta Plan Update
- Endangered Species Act
- Central Valley Project Improvement Act
- Ecosystem Restoration Efforts
- Trinity River Restoration Program
- San Joaquin River Restoration Program
- CALFED Bay-Delta Restoration Program
- New Storage and Conveyance
- New and Augmented Water Storage Projects
- California WaterFix
- Congressional Interest
- CVP Operational Authorities Under the WIIN Act
- Other Proposed Changes to CVP Operations
- New Water Storage Projects
- Conclusion
Figures
- Figure 1. Central Valley Project (CVP) and Related Facilities
- Figure 2. Shasta Dam and Reservoir
- Figure 3. Central Valley Project: Maximum Contract Amounts
- Figure 4. Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) Exports
- Figure 5. San Joaquin River Restoration Program: Costs, Benefits, and Project Status
- Figure 6. CALFED Surface Water Storage Studies
Tables
Appendixes
Summary
The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water project owned and operated by the The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water project owned and operated by theU.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the worldU.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the world
priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with
Reclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin RiversReclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers
Francisco Bay (Francisco Bay (Bay-Delta or or Delta) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta ) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta
receive water that is receive water that is
most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the
current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were
not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Thus, multiple ongoing efforts to protect species not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Thus, multiple ongoing efforts to protect species
and restore habitat have been authorized and are incorporated into project operations.and restore habitat have been authorized and are incorporated into project operations.
Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) that, among other things, authorized Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) that, among other things, authorized
changes to operations in an attempt to provide for delivery of more water under certain circumstances. Although changes to operations in an attempt to provide for delivery of more water under certain circumstances. Although
some stakeholders are interested in further operational changes to enhance CVP water deliveries, others are some stakeholders are interested in further operational changes to enhance CVP water deliveries, others are
focused on the environmental impacts of operations.focused on the environmental impacts of operations.
potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In late 2018, the State of California finalized revisions to its potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In late 2018, the State of California finalized revisions to its
Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and
Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and thus would Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and thus would
further restrict water supplies for other users). The changes have generally been opposed by the Trump further restrict water supplies for other users). The changes have generally been opposed by the Trump
Administration. At the same time, the Trump Administration is pursuing efforts to increase CVP water supplies Administration. At the same time, the Trump Administration is pursuing efforts to increase CVP water supplies
for users, including changes to CVP operations under an October 2018 White House memorandum on western for users, including changes to CVP operations under an October 2018 White House memorandum on western
water supplies. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance are also being considered: The state is water supplies. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance are also being considered: The state is
proposing a new water conveyance project (known as the California WaterFix) that would bypass the Bay-Delta proposing a new water conveyance project (known as the California WaterFix) that would bypass the Bay-Delta
and, under certain conditions, increase exports from north to south for some users. Additionally, new storage and, under certain conditions, increase exports from north to south for some users. Additionally, new storage
projects are under study by federal and state entities; these projects would aim to increase CVP and/or SWP water projects are under study by federal and state entities; these projects would aim to increase CVP and/or SWP water
supplies.supplies.
exports compared to current baselines. Congress is considering whether to approve funding for new water storage exports compared to current baselines. Congress is considering whether to approve funding for new water storage
projects, and may also consider legislation to extend or amend previously enacted CVP authorities (e.g., WIIN projects, and may also consider legislation to extend or amend previously enacted CVP authorities (e.g., WIIN
Act authorities that are expiring or have exceeded their appropriations ceiling).
Introduction
The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), part of the Department of the Interior (DOI), operates The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), part of the Department of the Interior (DOI), operatesthe multipurpose federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in California, one of the worldthe multipurpose federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in California, one of the world
water storage and conveyance systems. The CVP runs approximately 400 miles in California, water storage and conveyance systems. The CVP runs approximately 400 miles in California,
from Redding to Bakersfield from Redding to Bakersfield (Figure 1). It supplies water to hundreds of thousands of acres of . It supplies water to hundreds of thousands of acres of
irrigated agriculture throughout the state, including some of the most valuable cropland in the irrigated agriculture throughout the state, including some of the most valuable cropland in the
country. It also provides water to selected state and federal wildlife refuges, as well as to some country. It also provides water to selected state and federal wildlife refuges, as well as to some
municipal and industrial (M&I) water users.municipal and industrial (M&I) water users.
and federal water management, with a focus on deliveries related to the federal CVP. It also and federal water management, with a focus on deliveries related to the federal CVP. It also
summarizes selected issues for Congress related to the CVP.summarizes selected issues for Congress related to the CVP.
The drought of 2012-2016, widely considered to be among CaliforniaThe drought of 2012-2016, widely considered to be among California
recent history, resulted in major reductions to CVP contractor allocations and economic and recent history, resulted in major reductions to CVP contractor allocations and economic and
environmental impacts throughout the state.environmental impacts throughout the state.
oversees federal operation of the CVP. Although the drought ended with the wet winter of 2017, oversees federal operation of the CVP. Although the drought ended with the wet winter of 2017,
many of the water supply controversies associated with the CVP predated those water shortages many of the water supply controversies associated with the CVP predated those water shortages
and remain unresolved. Absent major changes to existing hydrologic, legislative, and regulatory and remain unresolved. Absent major changes to existing hydrologic, legislative, and regulatory
baselines, most agree that at least some water users are likely to face ongoing constraints to their baselines, most agree that at least some water users are likely to face ongoing constraints to their
water supplies. Due to the limited water supplies available, proposed changes to the current water supplies. Due to the limited water supplies available, proposed changes to the current
operations and allocation system are controversial.operations and allocation system are controversial.
to the region, western water issues are regularly of interest to many lawmakers. Legislation to the region, western water issues are regularly of interest to many lawmakers. Legislation
enacted in the enacted in the
[WIIN] Act; P.L. 114-322) included several CVP-related sections.[WIIN] Act; P.L. 114-322) included several CVP-related sections.
pumping to pumping to
water users south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Riverswater users south of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers
Bay, known as the Bay, known as the Bay-Delta or or Delta) in accordance with applicable biological opinions (BiOps) ) in accordance with applicable biological opinions (BiOps)
for project operations.for project operations.
generating high flows, authorized actions to facilitate water transfers, and established a new generating high flows, authorized actions to facilitate water transfers, and established a new
standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species. In addition to operational standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species. In addition to operational
provisions, the WIIN Act authorized funding for construction of new federal and nonfederal water provisions, the WIIN Act authorized funding for construction of new federal and nonfederal water
in 2017 and 2018. However, the authorities may be more significant in years of limited in 2017 and 2018. However, the authorities may be more significant in years of limited
precipitation and thus may yield increased supplies in the future. Although use of the new precipitation and thus may yield increased supplies in the future. Although use of the new
operational authorities was limited, Reclamation received funding for WIIN Act-authorized water operational authorities was limited, Reclamation received funding for WIIN Act-authorized water
storage project design and construction in FY2017-FY2019; a significant amount of this funding storage project design and construction in FY2017-FY2019; a significant amount of this funding
has gone to CVP-related projects.has gone to CVP-related projects.
controversy for their potential to significantly alter CVP operations. In mid-2018, the State of controversy for their potential to significantly alter CVP operations. In mid-2018, the State of
California proposed revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would California proposed revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would
require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the California Bay-require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the California Bay-
Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and would thus further restrict water Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and would thus further restrict water
supplies for other users). At the same time, the Trump Administration is exploring options to supplies for other users). At the same time, the Trump Administration is exploring options to
increase CVP water supplies for users.increase CVP water supplies for users.
Background CaliforniaCalifornia
(Figure 1). It is bound by the Cascade Range to the north, the Sierra Nevada to the east, the . It is bound by the Cascade Range to the north, the Sierra Nevada to the east, the
Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Coast Ranges and San Francisco Bay to the west. The Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Coast Ranges and San Francisco Bay to the west. The
northern third of the valley is drained by the Sacramento River, and the southern two-thirds of the northern third of the valley is drained by the Sacramento River, and the southern two-thirds of the
valley are drained by the San Joaquin River. Historically, this area was home to significant fish valley are drained by the San Joaquin River. Historically, this area was home to significant fish
and wildlife populations.and wildlife populations.
and the California state legislature formally authorized it for construction in 1933. After it became and the California state legislature formally authorized it for construction in 1933. After it became
clear that the state was unable to finance the project, the federal government (through the U.S. clear that the state was unable to finance the project, the federal government (through the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE) assumed control of the CVP as a public works Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE) assumed control of the CVP as a public works
construction project authority provided under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935.construction project authority provided under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935.
D. Roosevelt Administration subsequently transferred the project to Reclamation.D. Roosevelt Administration subsequently transferred the project to Reclamation.
on the first unit of the CVP (Contra Costa Canal) began in October 1937, with water first on the first unit of the CVP (Contra Costa Canal) began in October 1937, with water first
delivered in 1940. Additional CVP units were completed and came online over time, and some delivered in 1940. Additional CVP units were completed and came online over time, and some
USACE-constructed units have also been incorporated into the project.USACE-constructed units have also been incorporated into the project.
was the last unit of the CVP to come online; it was completed in 1978 and began operations in was the last unit of the CVP to come online; it was completed in 1978 and began operations in
1979.1979.
for irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and hydropower, among other things. Most of the CVPfor irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and hydropower, among other things. Most of the CVP
such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544) and the such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544) and the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq), among others. Thus, much National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq), among others. Thus, much
of the current debate surrounding the project revolves around how to address the projectof the current debate surrounding the project revolves around how to address the project
's changes to Californiachanges to California
constructed.constructed.
needs. The CVP provides a major source of support for California agriculture, which is first in the needs. The CVP provides a major source of support for California agriculture, which is first in the
nation in terms of farm receipts.nation in terms of farm receipts.
central California and support 7 of Californiacentral California and support 7 of California
M&I water provides supplies for approximately 2.5 million people per year. CVP operations are M&I water provides supplies for approximately 2.5 million people per year. CVP operations are
also critical for hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife protection. In addition to fisheries also critical for hydropower, recreation, and fish and wildlife protection. In addition to fisheries
habitat, CVP flows support wetlands, which provide habitat for migrating birds.habitat, CVP flows support wetlands, which provide habitat for migrating birds.
The CVP The CVP (Figure 1) is made up of 20 dams and reservoirs, 11 power plants, and 500 miles of is made up of 20 dams and reservoirs, 11 power plants, and 500 miles of
canals, as well as numerous other conduits, tunnels, and storage and distribution facilities.canals, as well as numerous other conduits, tunnels, and storage and distribution facilities.
average year, it delivers approximately 5 million acre-feet (AF) of water to farms (including some average year, it delivers approximately 5 million acre-feet (AF) of water to farms (including some
of the nationof the nation
refuges; and 800,000 AF for other fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. A separate refuges; and 800,000 AF for other fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. A separate
major project owned and operated by the State of California, the State Water Project (SWP), major project owned and operated by the State of California, the State Water Project (SWP),
draws water from many of the same sources as the CVP and coordinates its operations with the draws water from many of the same sources as the CVP and coordinates its operations with the
CVP under several agreements. In contrast to the CVP, the SWP delivers about 70% of its water CVP under several agreements. In contrast to the CVP, the SWP delivers about 70% of its water
to urban users (including water for approximately 25 million users in the San Francisco Bay, to urban users (including water for approximately 25 million users in the San Francisco Bay,
Central Valley, and Southern California); the remaining 30% is used for irrigation.Central Valley, and Southern California); the remaining 30% is used for irrigation.
Bay-Delta, or Delta). Operation of the CVP and SWP occurs through the storage, pumping, and Bay-Delta, or Delta). Operation of the CVP and SWP occurs through the storage, pumping, and
conveyance of significant volumes of water from both river basins (as well as trans-basin conveyance of significant volumes of water from both river basins (as well as trans-basin
diversions from the Trinity River Basin in Northern California) for delivery to users. Federal and diversions from the Trinity River Basin in Northern California) for delivery to users. Federal and
state pumping facilities in the Delta near Tracy, CA, export water from Northern California to state pumping facilities in the Delta near Tracy, CA, export water from Northern California to
Central and Southern California and are a hub for CVP operations and related debates. In the Central and Southern California and are a hub for CVP operations and related debates. In the
context of these controversies, context of these controversies, north of Delta (NOD) and (NOD) and south of Delta (SOD) are important (SOD) are important
categorical distinctions for water users.categorical distinctions for water users.
facility is Shasta Dam and Reservoir in Northern California facility is Shasta Dam and Reservoir in Northern California (Figure 2), which has a capacity of , which has a capacity of
4.5 million AF. Other major storage facilities, from north to south, include Trinity Dam and 4.5 million AF. Other major storage facilities, from north to south, include Trinity Dam and
Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Folsom Dam and Reservoir (977,000 AF), New Melones Dam and Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Folsom Dam and Reservoir (977,000 AF), New Melones Dam and
Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Friant Dam and Reservoir (520,000 AF), and San Luis Dam and Reservoir (2.4 million AF), Friant Dam and Reservoir (520,000 AF), and San Luis Dam and
Reservoir (1.8 million AF of storage, of which half is federal and half is nonfederal).Reservoir (1.8 million AF of storage, of which half is federal and half is nonfederal).
Mendota Canal (which runs for 117 miles from the federally operated Bill Jones pumping plant in Mendota Canal (which runs for 117 miles from the federally operated Bill Jones pumping plant in
miles from Friant Dam to the Kern River near Bakersfield).miles from Friant Dam to the Kern River near Bakersfield).
some cases is integrated with CVP operations. Major non-CVP storage infrastructure in the some cases is integrated with CVP operations. Major non-CVP storage infrastructure in the
Central Valley includes multiple storage projects that are part of the SWP (the largest of which is Central Valley includes multiple storage projects that are part of the SWP (the largest of which is
Oroville Dam and Reservoir in Northern California), as well as private storage facilities (e.g., Oroville Dam and Reservoir in Northern California), as well as private storage facilities (e.g.,
Don Pedro and Exchequer Dams and Reservoirs) and local government-owned dams and Don Pedro and Exchequer Dams and Reservoirs) and local government-owned dams and
infrastructure (e.g., Oinfrastructure (e.g., O
owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission).owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission).
provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory birds and other species. As such, it is home to provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory birds and other species. As such, it is home to
multiple state, federal, and private wildlife refuges north and south of the Delta. Nineteen of these multiple state, federal, and private wildlife refuges north and south of the Delta. Nineteen of these
refuges (including 12 refuges within the National Wildlife Refuge system, 6 State Wildlife refuges (including 12 refuges within the National Wildlife Refuge system, 6 State Wildlife
Areas/Units, and 1 privately managed complex) provide managed wetland habitat that receives Areas/Units, and 1 privately managed complex) provide managed wetland habitat that receives
water from the CVP and other sources. Five of these units are located in the Sacramento River water from the CVP and other sources. Five of these units are located in the Sacramento River
Basin (i.e., North of the Delta), 12 are in the San Joaquin River Basin, and the remaining 2 are in Basin (i.e., North of the Delta), 12 are in the San Joaquin River Basin, and the remaining 2 are in
Figure 1. Central Valley Project (CVP) and Related Facilities
amount of water delivered from the Central Valley Project or the State Water Project. For example, some large amount of water delivered from the Central Valley Project or the State Water Project. For example, some large
areas have relatively small contracts for water compared with other, smaller areas.areas have relatively small contracts for water compared with other, smaller areas.
Figure 2. Shasta Dam and Reservoir
Source: Bureau of Reclamation.
In normal years, snowpack accounts for approximately 30% of CaliforniaIn normal years, snowpack accounts for approximately 30% of California
an important factor in determining CVP and SWP allocations. Water from snowpack typically an important factor in determining CVP and SWP allocations. Water from snowpack typically
melts in the spring and early summer, and it is stored and made available to meet water needs melts in the spring and early summer, and it is stored and made available to meet water needs
throughout the state in the summer and fall. By late winter, the statethroughout the state in the summer and fall. By late winter, the state
typically sufficient for Reclamation to issue the amount of water it expects to deliver to its typically sufficient for Reclamation to issue the amount of water it expects to deliver to its
contractors.contractors.
contractors in the upcoming water year.contractors in the upcoming water year.
based on contracts between Reclamation and CVP contractors.based on contracts between Reclamation and CVP contractors.
contracts provide exceptions for Reclamation to reduce water deliveries due to hydrologic contracts provide exceptions for Reclamation to reduce water deliveries due to hydrologic
conditions and other conditions outside Reclamationconditions and other conditions outside Reclamation
drought and other factors.drought and other factors.
maximum contracted amount of water; since the early 1980s, an average of about 7 million AF of maximum contracted amount of water; since the early 1980s, an average of about 7 million AF of
water has been made available to CVP contractors annually (including 5 million AF to water has been made available to CVP contractors annually (including 5 million AF to
agricultural contractors). However, during drought years deliveries may be significantly less. In agricultural contractors). However, during drought years deliveries may be significantly less. In
the extremely dry water years of 2012-2015, CVP annual deliveries averaged approximately 3.45 the extremely dry water years of 2012-2015, CVP annual deliveries averaged approximately 3.45
million AF.million AF.
and other related factors, and some of the largest and most prominent water contractors have a and other related factors, and some of the largest and most prominent water contractors have a
relatively low allocation priority. Major groups of CVP contractors include relatively low allocation priority. Major groups of CVP contractors include water rights
contractors (i.e., senior water rights holders such as the Sacramento River Settlement and San contractors (i.e., senior water rights holders such as the Sacramento River Settlement and San
Joaquin River Exchange Contractors, see box below), North and South of Delta water service Joaquin River Exchange Contractors, see box below), North and South of Delta water service
contractors, and Central Valley refuge water contractors. The relative locations for these groups contractors, and Central Valley refuge water contractors. The relative locations for these groups
are shown are shown
during times of drought or other restrictions on water supply. Because the waters of California are considered to during times of drought or other restrictions on water supply. Because the waters of California are considered to
be be
Under the riparian doctrine, a person who owns land that borders a watercourse has the right to make Under the riparian doctrine, a person who owns land that borders a watercourse has the right to make
reasonable use of the water on that land (riparian rights). Riparian rights are reduced proportionally during times reasonable use of the water on that land (riparian rights). Riparian rights are reduced proportionally during times
of shortage. Under the prior appropriation doctrine, a person who diverts water from a watercourse (regardless of shortage. Under the prior appropriation doctrine, a person who diverts water from a watercourse (regardless
of his location relative thereto) and makes reasonable and beneficial use of the water acquires a right to that use of his location relative thereto) and makes reasonable and beneficial use of the water acquires a right to that use
of the water (appropriated rights). Appropriated rights are of the water (appropriated rights). Appropriated rights are
Before exercising the right to use the water, appropriative users must obtain permission from the state through a Before exercising the right to use the water, appropriative users must obtain permission from the state through a
permit system run by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).permit system run by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
Both the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) acquired rights for water use from the Both the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) acquired rights for water use from the
State of California, receiving several permits for water diversions at various points between 1927 and 1967. Since State of California, receiving several permits for water diversions at various points between 1927 and 1967. Since
the Bureau of Reclamation found it necessary to take the water rights of other users to construct the CVP, it the Bureau of Reclamation found it necessary to take the water rights of other users to construct the CVP, it
entered into entered into settlement or or exchange contracts with water users who had rights predating the CVP (and thus were contracts with water users who had rights predating the CVP (and thus were
senior users in time and right). Many of these special contracts were entered into in areas where water users senior users in time and right). Many of these special contracts were entered into in areas where water users
were diverting water directly from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.were diverting water directly from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.
Sacramento River Settlement Contractors include the contractors (both individuals and districts) that diverted Sacramento River Settlement Contractors include the contractors (both individuals and districts) that diverted
natural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVPnatural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVP
with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of water rights. San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of water rights. San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors
are the irrigation districts that agreed to are the irrigation districts that agreed to
Joaquin and Kings Rivers for guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (Joaquin and Kings Rivers for guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (
Delta-Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). In contrast to water service contractors, water rights Delta-Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). In contrast to water service contractors, water rights
contractors receive 100% of their contracted amounts in most water-year types. During water shortages, their contractors receive 100% of their contracted amounts in most water-year types. During water shortages, their
annual maximum entitlement may be reduced but not by more than 25%.annual maximum entitlement may be reduced but not by more than 25%.
Sacramento River Settlement Contractors, located on the Sacramento River. The second-largest Sacramento River Settlement Contractors, located on the Sacramento River. The second-largest
group are SOD water service contractors (including Westlands Water District, the CVPgroup are SOD water service contractors (including Westlands Water District, the CVP
contractor), located in the area south of the Delta. Other major contractors include San Joaquin contractor), located in the area south of the Delta. Other major contractors include San Joaquin
River Exchange Contractors, located west of the San Joaquin River and Friant Division River Exchange Contractors, located west of the San Joaquin River and Friant Division
contractors, located on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. Central Valley refuges and several contractors, located on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. Central Valley refuges and several
Settlement Contracts) also factor into CVP water allocation discussions.15Settlement Contracts) also factor into CVP water allocation discussions.15 Figure 3 depicts an depicts an
approximate division of approximate division of maximum available CVP water deliveries pursuant to contracts with available CVP water deliveries pursuant to contracts with
Reclamation. The largest contractor groups and their relative delivery priority are discussed in Reclamation. The largest contractor groups and their relative delivery priority are discussed in
more detail in more detail in
Figure 3. Central Valley Project: Maximum Contract Amounts
Notes: SOD = South-of-Delta; M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors. Sacramento River SOD = South-of-Delta; M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors. Sacramento River
Settlement Contractors includes both Settlement Contractors includes both
(3.5%). For SOD Refuges, chart does not reflect (3.5%). For SOD Refuges, chart does not reflect
see below section,see below section,
early 2019. As was the case in 2018, over the course of the spring Reclamation increased its early 2019. As was the case in 2018, over the course of the spring Reclamation increased its
allocations for some contractors from initially announced levels.allocations for some contractors from initially announced levels.
One major exception is SOD agricultural water service contractors, who were allocated 75% of One major exception is SOD agricultural water service contractors, who were allocated 75% of
their contracted supplies. Prior to receiving a full allocation in 2017, the last time these their contracted supplies. Prior to receiving a full allocation in 2017, the last time these
contractors received a 100% allocation was 2006. They have received their full contract contractors received a 100% allocation was 2006. They have received their full contract
(percentage of maximum contract allocation made available)
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019 (est.)
North-of-Delta Users
Agricultural
100%
100%
75%
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
M&I
100%
100%
100%
50%
25%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Settlement Contractors
100%
100%
100%
75%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Refuges (Level 2)
100%
100%
100%
75%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
American River M&I
100%
100%
75%
50%
25%
100%
100%
100%
100%
In Delta- Contra Costa
100%
100%
75%
50%
25%
100%
100%
100%
100%
South-of-Delta Users
Agricultural
80%
40%
20%
0%
0%
5%
100%
50%
75%
M&I
100%
75%
70%
50%
25%
55%
100%
70%
95%
Exchange Contractors
100%
100%
100%
65%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Refuges (Level 2)
100%
100%
100%
65%
75%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Eastside Division
100%
100%
100%
55%
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
Friant Class I
100%
50%
62%
0%
0%
65%
100%
88%
100%
Friant Class 2
20%
0%
0%
0%
0%
13%
100%
9%
water_allocations_historical.pdfwater_allocations_historical.pdf
. Notes: CVP = Central Valley Project. M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors. CVP = Central Valley Project. M&I = municipal and industrial water service contractors.
Delta), and Delta), and
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 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.represent individual or groups of water contractors.
The other major water project serving California, the SWP, is operated by CaliforniaThe other major water project serving California, the SWP, is operated by California
's Department of Water Resources (DWR). The SWP primarily provides water to M&I users and Department of Water Resources (DWR). The SWP primarily provides water to M&I users and
some agricultural users, and it integrates its operations with the CVP. Similar to the CVP, the some agricultural users, and it integrates its operations with the CVP. Similar to the CVP, the
SWP has considerably more contracted supplies than it typically makes available in its deliveries. SWP has considerably more contracted supplies than it typically makes available in its deliveries.
SWP contracted entitlements are 4.17 million AF, but average annual deliveries are typically SWP contracted entitlements are 4.17 million AF, but average annual deliveries are typically
considerably less than that amount.considerably less than that amount.
higher in the wet year of 2017. SWP water supply allocations for water years 2012-2019 are higher in the wet year of 2017. SWP water supply allocations for water years 2012-2019 are
shown in Table 2.
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019 (est.)
State Water Project
65%
35%
5%
20%
60%
85%
35%
70%
https://water.ca.gov/Programs/State-Water-Project/Management/SWP-Water-Contractorshttps://water.ca.gov/Programs/State-Water-Project/Management/SWP-Water-Contractors
The CVP and SWP are operated in conjunction under the 1986 Coordinated Operations The CVP and SWP are operated in conjunction under the 1986 Coordinated Operations
Agreement (COA), which was executed pursuant to P.L. 99-546Agreement (COA), which was executed pursuant to P.L. 99-546
responsibilities of the CVP and SWP with respect to in-basin water needs and provides a responsibilities of the CVP and SWP with respect to in-basin water needs and provides a
mechanism to account for those rights and responsibilities. Despite several prior efforts to review mechanism to account for those rights and responsibilities. Despite several prior efforts to review
and update the agreement to reflect major changes over time (e.g., water delivery reductions and update the agreement to reflect major changes over time (e.g., water delivery reductions
pursuant to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, the Endangered Species Act pursuant to the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, the Endangered Species Act
requirements, and new Delta Water Quality Standards, among other things), the 1986 agreement requirements, and new Delta Water Quality Standards, among other things), the 1986 agreement
remains in place.remains in place.
interest to many observers because it reflects trends over time in the transfer of water from north interest to many observers because it reflects trends over time in the transfer of water from north
to south (i.e., to south (i.e., exports) by the two projects, in particular through pumping. Exports of the CVP and ) by the two projects, in particular through pumping. Exports of the CVP and
SWP, as well as total combined exports since 1978, have varied over SWP, as well as total combined exports since 1978, have varied over
recently, combined exports dropped significantly during the 2012-2016 drought but have recently, combined exports dropped significantly during the 2012-2016 drought but have
rebounded since 2016. Prior to the drought, overall export levels had increased over time, having rebounded since 2016. Prior to the drought, overall export levels had increased over time, having
averaged more from 2001 to 2011 than over any previous 10-year period. The 6.42 million AF of averaged more from 2001 to 2011 than over any previous 10-year period. The 6.42 million AF of
combined exports in 2017 was the second most on record, behind 6.59 million AF in 2011.combined exports in 2017 was the second most on record, behind 6.59 million AF in 2011.
Additionally, exports for agricultural purposes have declined as a subset of total exports, in part Additionally, exports for agricultural purposes have declined as a subset of total exports, in part
due to those exports being made available for other purposes (e.g., fish and wildlife).due to those exports being made available for other purposes (e.g., fish and wildlife).
Figure 4. Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) Exports
communication, communication,
2018 (MAF).
to water supplies that the CVP receives from the Delta, thus the agreement should be to water supplies that the CVP receives from the Delta, thus the agreement should be
renegotiated.renegotiated.
were reportedly unable to agree on revisions. On August 17, 2018, Reclamation provided a were reportedly unable to agree on revisions. On August 17, 2018, Reclamation provided a
Notice of Negotiations to DWR.Notice of Negotiations to DWR.
COA in December 2018.COA in December 2018.
CVP/25% SWP for the sharing of regulatory requirements associated with storage withdrawals CVP/25% SWP for the sharing of regulatory requirements associated with storage withdrawals
for Sacramento Valley in-basin uses (e.g., curtailments for water quality and species uses), the for Sacramento Valley in-basin uses (e.g., curtailments for water quality and species uses), the
revised addendum adjusted the ratio of sharing percentages based on water year types revised addendum adjusted the ratio of sharing percentages based on water year types
|
Water Year Type |
1986 COA |
COA with 2018 Addendum |
|
All |
75% CVP, 25% SWP |
NA |
|
Wet & Above Normal |
NA |
80% CVP, 20% SWP |
|
Below Normal |
NA |
75% CVP, 25%SWP |
|
Dry |
NA |
65% CVP, 35% SWP |
|
Critically Dry |
NA |
60% CVP, 40% SWP |
12, 2018.12, 2018.
Whereas under the 1986 COA, export capacity was shared 50/50 between the CVP and the SWP, Whereas under the 1986 COA, export capacity was shared 50/50 between the CVP and the SWP,
under the revised COA the split is to be 60% CVP/40% SWP during excess conditions, and 65% under the revised COA the split is to be 60% CVP/40% SWP during excess conditions, and 65%
CVP/35% SWP during balanced conditions.CVP/35% SWP during balanced conditions.
to transport up to 195,000 AF of CVP water through the to transport up to 195,000 AF of CVP water through the SWP's California Aqueduct, during certain California Aqueduct, during certain
conditions.conditions.
Concerns over CVP water supply deliveries persist in part because even in years with high levels Concerns over CVP water supply deliveries persist in part because even in years with high levels
of precipitation and runoff, some contractors (in particular SOD water service contractors) have of precipitation and runoff, some contractors (in particular SOD water service contractors) have
regularly received allocations of less than 100% of their contract supplies. Allocations for some regularly received allocations of less than 100% of their contract supplies. Allocations for some
users have declined over time; additional environmental requirements in recent decades have users have declined over time; additional environmental requirements in recent decades have
reduced water deliveries for human uses. Coupled with reduced water supplies available in reduced water deliveries for human uses. Coupled with reduced water supplies available in
drought years, some have increasingly focused on what can be done to increase water supplies for drought years, some have increasingly focused on what can be done to increase water supplies for
users. At the same time, others that depend on or advocate for the health of the San Francisco Bay users. At the same time, others that depend on or advocate for the health of the San Francisco Bay
and its tributaries, including fishing and environmental groups and water users throughout and its tributaries, including fishing and environmental groups and water users throughout
Northern California, have argued for maintaining or increasing existing environmental Northern California, have argued for maintaining or increasing existing environmental
protections (the latter of which would likely further constrain CVP exports).protections (the latter of which would likely further constrain CVP exports).
least three other regulatory factors affect the timing and amount of water available for delivery to least three other regulatory factors affect the timing and amount of water available for delivery to
CVP contractors and are regularly the subject of controversyCVP contractors and are regularly the subject of controversy
California sets water quality standards and issues permits for the discharge of pollutants in California sets water quality standards and issues permits for the discharge of pollutants in
compliance with the federal CWA, enacted in 1972.compliance with the federal CWA, enacted in 1972.
law), California implements federal CWA requirements and authorizes the State Water Resources law), California implements federal CWA requirements and authorizes the State Water Resources
Control Board (State Water Board) to adopt water quality control plans, or basin plans.Control Board (State Water Board) to adopt water quality control plans, or basin plans.
CVP and the SWP affect water quality in the Bay-Delta depending on how much freshwater the CVP and the SWP affect water quality in the Bay-Delta depending on how much freshwater the
projects release into the area as projects release into the area as
Water Board in 1978. Since then, there have been three substantive updates to the plan—in 1991, Water Board in 1978. Since then, there have been three substantive updates to the plan—in 1991,
1995, and 2006. The plans have generally required the SWP and CVP to meet certain water 1995, and 2006. The plans have generally required the SWP and CVP to meet certain water
quality and flow objectives in the Delta to maintain desired salinity levels for in-Delta diversions quality and flow objectives in the Delta to maintain desired salinity levels for in-Delta diversions
(e.g., water quality levels for in-Delta water supplies) and fish and wildlife, among other things. (e.g., water quality levels for in-Delta water supplies) and fish and wildlife, among other things.
These objectives often affect the amount and timing of water available to be pumped, or exported, These objectives often affect the amount and timing of water available to be pumped, or exported,
from the Delta and thus at times result in reduced Delta exports to CVP and SWP water users from the Delta and thus at times result in reduced Delta exports to CVP and SWP water users
south of the Delta.south of the Delta.
implementation on the stateimplementation on the state
levels—can sometimes be significant. However, the relative magnitude of these effects varies levels—can sometimes be significant. However, the relative magnitude of these effects varies
depending on hydrology. For instance, Reclamation estimated that in 2014, water quality depending on hydrology. For instance, Reclamation estimated that in 2014, water quality
restrictions accounted for 176,300 AF of the reduction in pumping from the long-term average for restrictions accounted for 176,300 AF of the reduction in pumping from the long-term average for
CVP exports.CVP exports.
Plan (i.e., the Bay-Delta Plan Update) for the Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta. It Plan (i.e., the Bay-Delta Plan Update) for the Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta. It
also announced further progress on related efforts under the update for flow requirements on the also announced further progress on related efforts under the update for flow requirements on the
Sacramento River and its tributaries.Sacramento River and its tributaries.
the ocean (generally referred to in these documents as the ocean (generally referred to in these documents as
River and its tributaries (i.e., the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers). Under the proposal, River and its tributaries (i.e., the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers). Under the proposal,
the unimpaired flow requirement for the San Joaquin River would be 40% (within a range of the unimpaired flow requirement for the San Joaquin River would be 40% (within a range of
30%-50%); average unimpaired flows currently range from 21% to 40%.30%-50%); average unimpaired flows currently range from 21% to 40%.
that the updated version of the plan would reduce water available for human use from the San that the updated version of the plan would reduce water available for human use from the San
Joaquin River and its tributaries by between 7% and 23%, on average (depending on the water Joaquin River and its tributaries by between 7% and 23%, on average (depending on the water
year type), but it could reduce these water supplies by as much as 38% during critically dry year type), but it could reduce these water supplies by as much as 38% during critically dry
years.years.
preliminary framework released by the state in July 2018 proposed a potential requirement of preliminary framework released by the state in July 2018 proposed a potential requirement of
55% unimpaired flows from the Sacramento River (within a range of 45% to 65%).55% unimpaired flows from the Sacramento River (within a range of 45% to 65%).
to the State Water Board, if the plan updates for the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers are to the State Water Board, if the plan updates for the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers are
finalized and water users do not enter into voluntary agreements to implement them, the board finalized and water users do not enter into voluntary agreements to implement them, the board
could take actions to require their implementation, such as promulgation of regulations and could take actions to require their implementation, such as promulgation of regulations and
conditioning of water rights.conditioning of water rights.
Bay-Delta Plan, as they do in implementing the current plan under D-1641. Pursuant to Section 8 Bay-Delta Plan, as they do in implementing the current plan under D-1641. Pursuant to Section 8
of the Reclamation Act of 1902,of the Reclamation Act of 1902,
its authorities, but the proposed Bay Delta Plan Update has generated controversy. In a July 2018 its authorities, but the proposed Bay Delta Plan Update has generated controversy. In a July 2018
letter to the State Water Board, the Commissioner of Reclamation opposed the proposed letter to the State Water Board, the Commissioner of Reclamation opposed the proposed
standards for the San Joaquin River, arguing that meeting them would necessitate decreased water standards for the San Joaquin River, arguing that meeting them would necessitate decreased water
in storage at New Melones Reservoir of approximately 315,000 AF per year (a higher amount in storage at New Melones Reservoir of approximately 315,000 AF per year (a higher amount
than estimated by the State Water Board). Reclamation argued that such a change would be than estimated by the State Water Board). Reclamation argued that such a change would be
1018-0059.1018-0059.
flows but also makes allowances for reduced river flows on tributaries where stakeholders have flows but also makes allowances for reduced river flows on tributaries where stakeholders have
reached voluntary agreements to pursue both flow and reached voluntary agreements to pursue both flow and
the Bay-Delta Plan Update would be implemented through water rights conditions imposed by the Bay-Delta Plan Update would be implemented through water rights conditions imposed by
the State Water Board; these conditions are to be implemented no later than 2022.the State Water Board; these conditions are to be implemented no later than 2022.
court against the State Water Board for failing to comply with the California Environmental court against the State Water Board for failing to comply with the California Environmental
Quality Act.Quality Act.
Several species that have been listed under the federal ESA are affected by the operations of the Several species that have been listed under the federal ESA are affected by the operations of the
CVP and the SWP.CVP and the SWP.
entrainment in CVP and SWP pumps in the Delta; it was listed as threatened under ESA in 1993. entrainment in CVP and SWP pumps in the Delta; it was listed as threatened under ESA in 1993.
Surveys of Delta smelt in 2017 found two adult smelt, the lowest catch in the history of the Surveys of Delta smelt in 2017 found two adult smelt, the lowest catch in the history of the
survey.survey.
many stakeholders because low population sizes of Delta smelt could result in greater restrictions many stakeholders because low population sizes of Delta smelt could result in greater restrictions
on water flowing to users. It also raises larger concerns about the overall health and resilience of on water flowing to users. It also raises larger concerns about the overall health and resilience of
the Bay-Delta ecosystem. In addition to Delta smelt, multiple anadromous salmonid species are the Bay-Delta ecosystem. In addition to Delta smelt, multiple anadromous salmonid species are
listed under ESA, including the endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, the listed under ESA, including the endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, the
threatened Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon, the threatened Central Valley steelhead, threatened Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon, the threatened Central Valley steelhead,
threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon, and the threatened Central threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon, and the threatened Central
California Coast steelhead.California Coast steelhead.
Department of CommerceDepartment of Commerce
a federal project or action might jeopardize the continued existence of a species listed under ESA a federal project or action might jeopardize the continued existence of a species listed under ESA
or adversely modify its habitat. If an effect is possible, formal consultation is started and usually or adversely modify its habitat. If an effect is possible, formal consultation is started and usually
concludes with the appropriate service issuing a BiOp on the potential harm the project poses and, concludes with the appropriate service issuing a BiOp on the potential harm the project poses and,
if necessary, issuing reasonable and prudent measures to reduce the harm.if necessary, issuing reasonable and prudent measures to reduce the harm.
SWP. In addition, both agencies have undertaken formal consultation on proposed changes in the SWP. In addition, both agencies have undertaken formal consultation on proposed changes in the
jeopardy, the FWS and NMFS BiOps have included Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) jeopardy, the FWS and NMFS BiOps have included Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
for project operations.for project operations.
Chinook salmon BiOp and a 1995 Delta smelt BiOp (as amended) governed Delta exports for Chinook salmon BiOp and a 1995 Delta smelt BiOp (as amended) governed Delta exports for
federal ESA purposes. In 2004, a proposed change in coordinated operation of the SWP and CVP federal ESA purposes. In 2004, a proposed change in coordinated operation of the SWP and CVP
(including increased Delta exports), known as OCAP (Operations Criteria and Plan) resulted in (including increased Delta exports), known as OCAP (Operations Criteria and Plan) resulted in
the development of new BiOps. Environmental groups challenged the agenciesthe development of new BiOps. Environmental groups challenged the agencies
challenge resulted in the development of new BiOps by the FWS and NMFS in 2008 and 2009, challenge resulted in the development of new BiOps by the FWS and NMFS in 2008 and 2009,
respectively. These BiOps placed additional restrictions on the amount of water exported via SWP respectively. These BiOps placed additional restrictions on the amount of water exported via SWP
and CVP Delta pumps and other limitations on pumping and release of stored water.and CVP Delta pumps and other limitations on pumping and release of stored water.
and SWP are currently operated in accordance with these BiOps, both of which concluded that and SWP are currently operated in accordance with these BiOps, both of which concluded that
the coordinated long-term operation of the CVP and SWP, as proposed in Reclamationthe coordinated long-term operation of the CVP and SWP, as proposed in Reclamation
Biological Assessment, was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species and Biological Assessment, was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species and
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Both BiOps included RPAs designed to destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Both BiOps included RPAs designed to
allow the CVP and SWP to continue operating without causing jeopardy to listed species or allow the CVP and SWP to continue operating without causing jeopardy to listed species or
destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitat. Reclamation accepted and then destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitat. Reclamation accepted and then
began project operations consistent with the FWS and NMFS RPAs, which continue to govern began project operations consistent with the FWS and NMFS RPAs, which continue to govern
operations.operations.
aforementioned water quality restrictions has varied considerably over time. In absolute terms, aforementioned water quality restrictions has varied considerably over time. In absolute terms,
ESA-driven reductions are typically greater in wet years than in dry years, but the proportion of ESA-driven reductions are typically greater in wet years than in dry years, but the proportion of
ESA reductions relative to deliveries is not necessarily constant and depends on numerous factors. ESA reductions relative to deliveries is not necessarily constant and depends on numerous factors.
For instance, Reclamation estimated that ESA restrictions accounted for a reduction in deliveries For instance, Reclamation estimated that ESA restrictions accounted for a reduction in deliveries
of 62,000 AF from the long-term average for CVP deliveries in 2014 and 144,800 AF of CVP of 62,000 AF from the long-term average for CVP deliveries in 2014 and 144,800 AF of CVP
delivery reductions in 2015 (both years were extremely dry). In 2016, ESA reductions accounted delivery reductions in 2015 (both years were extremely dry). In 2016, ESA reductions accounted
for a much larger amount (528,000 AF) in a wet year, when more water is delivered.for a much larger amount (528,000 AF) in a wet year, when more water is delivered.
scientists estimate that flows used to protect all species listed under ESA accounted for scientists estimate that flows used to protect all species listed under ESA accounted for
approximately 6.5% of the total Delta outflow from 2011 to 2016.approximately 6.5% of the total Delta outflow from 2011 to 2016.
under specific circumstances and call for water releases from key reservoirs to support listed under specific circumstances and call for water releases from key reservoirs to support listed
species) was modified due to temporary urgency change orders (TUCs). These TUCs, issued by species) was modified due to temporary urgency change orders (TUCs). These TUCs, issued by
the State Water Resources Control Board in 2014 and again in 2015, were deemed consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board in 2014 and again in 2015, were deemed consistent with
the existing BiOps by NMFS and FWS. Such changes allowed more water to be pumped during the existing BiOps by NMFS and FWS. Such changes allowed more water to be pumped during
certain periods based on real-time monitoring of species and water conditions. DWR estimates certain periods based on real-time monitoring of species and water conditions. DWR estimates
that approximately 400,000 AF of water was made available in 2014 for export due to these that approximately 400,000 AF of water was made available in 2014 for export due to these
system-wide operations of the CVP and the SWP based on new information related to multiple system-wide operations of the CVP and the SWP based on new information related to multiple
years of drought, species decline, and related data.years of drought, species decline, and related data.
Administration gave formal notice of its intent to prepare an environmental impact statement Administration gave formal notice of its intent to prepare an environmental impact statement
analyzing potential long-term modifications to the coordinated operations of the CVP and the analyzing potential long-term modifications to the coordinated operations of the CVP and the
SWP.SWP.
potential to potential to
requirements, among other things.requirements, among other things.
long-term changes to CVP operations and existing BiOp requirements.long-term changes to CVP operations and existing BiOp requirements.
sent to FWS and NMFS by Reclamation on January 31, 2019.sent to FWS and NMFS by Reclamation on January 31, 2019.
changes proposed by Reclamation and mitigation factors to address listed species. The changes changes proposed by Reclamation and mitigation factors to address listed species. The changes
reflect provisions in the WIIN Act and efforts to maximize water supplies for users. The BA also reflect provisions in the WIIN Act and efforts to maximize water supplies for users. The BA also
states that nonoperational activities will be implemented to augment and bolster listed fish states that nonoperational activities will be implemented to augment and bolster listed fish
populations. These activities include habitat restoration and introducing hatchery-bred Delta populations. These activities include habitat restoration and introducing hatchery-bred Delta
smelt. Operational changes include increasing flows to take into account additional water from smelt. Operational changes include increasing flows to take into account additional water from
winter storms and increasing base flows when storage levels are higher.winter storms and increasing base flows when storage levels are higher.
ESA. On October 19, 2018, President Trump issued a memorandum that directed DOI and DOC ESA. On October 19, 2018, President Trump issued a memorandum that directed DOI and DOC
to identify water infrastructure projects in California for which they have responsibilities under to identify water infrastructure projects in California for which they have responsibilities under
ESA. Per the memorandum, the agencies are to identify regulations and procedures that ESA. Per the memorandum, the agencies are to identify regulations and procedures that burden
the projects and develop a plan to the projects and develop a plan to
House memorandum also directed that the aforementioned joint BiOps be completed by June 15, House memorandum also directed that the aforementioned joint BiOps be completed by June 15,
2019.2019.
In an effort to mitigate many of the environmental effects of the CVP, Congress in 1992 passed In an effort to mitigate many of the environmental effects of the CVP, Congress in 1992 passed
the CVPIA as Title 34 of P.L. 102-575. The act made major changes to the management of the the CVPIA as Title 34 of P.L. 102-575. The act made major changes to the management of the
CVP. Among other things, it formally established fish and wildlife purposes as an official project CVP. Among other things, it formally established fish and wildlife purposes as an official project
purpose of the CVP and called for a number of actions to protect, restore, and enhance these purpose of the CVP and called for a number of actions to protect, restore, and enhance these
resources. Overall, the CVPIAresources. Overall, the CVPIA
would prefer to see it repealed in part or in full.would prefer to see it repealed in part or in full.
acquisitions.acquisitions.
be used to meet other state and federal requirements that reduce exports or require an increase be used to meet other state and federal requirements that reduce exports or require an increase
from baseline reservoir releases. Thus, in a given year, the aforementioned export reductions due from baseline reservoir releases. Thus, in a given year, the aforementioned export reductions due
to state water quality and federal ESA restrictions are counted and reported on annually as (b)(2) to state water quality and federal ESA restrictions are counted and reported on annually as (b)(2)
water, and in some cases overlap with other stated purposes of CVPIA (e.g., anadromous fish water, and in some cases overlap with other stated purposes of CVPIA (e.g., anadromous fish
restoration). The exact makeup of (b)(2) water in a given year typically varies. For example, in restoration). The exact makeup of (b)(2) water in a given year typically varies. For example, in
2014 (a critically dry year), out of a total of 402,000 AF of (b)(2) water, 176,300 AF (44%) was 2014 (a critically dry year), out of a total of 402,000 AF of (b)(2) water, 176,300 AF (44%) was
attributed to export reductions for Bay-Delta Plan water quality requirements.attributed to export reductions for Bay-Delta Plan water quality requirements.
water was comprised of a combination of reservoir releases classified as CVPIA anadromous fish water was comprised of a combination of reservoir releases classified as CVPIA anadromous fish
restoration and NMFS BiOp compliance purposes (163,500 AF) and export reductions under the restoration and NMFS BiOp compliance purposes (163,500 AF) and export reductions under the
2009 salmonid BiOp (62,200 AF).2009 salmonid BiOp (62,200 AF).
528,000 AF (66%) of export pumping reductions under FWS and NMFS BiOps and 114,500 AF 528,000 AF (66%) of export pumping reductions under FWS and NMFS BiOps and 114,500 AF
(14%) for Bay-Delta Plan requirements. The remaining water was accounted for as reservoir (14%) for Bay-Delta Plan requirements. The remaining water was accounted for as reservoir
releases for the anadromous fish restoration programs, the NMFS BiOp, and the Bay-Delta releases for the anadromous fish restoration programs, the NMFS BiOp, and the Bay-Delta
Plan.Plan.
Development of the CVP made significant changes to CaliforniaDevelopment of the CVP made significant changes to California
to the aforementioned CVPIA efforts to address some of these impacts, three ongoing, to the aforementioned CVPIA efforts to address some of these impacts, three ongoing,
congressionally authorized restoration initiatives also factor into federal activities associated with congressionally authorized restoration initiatives also factor into federal activities associated with
Trinity River Division of the CVP.Trinity River Division of the CVP.
Joaquin River.Joaquin River.
maintenance of instream flow levels that use water that was at one time diverted for other uses. maintenance of instream flow levels that use water that was at one time diverted for other uses.
Each effort is discussed briefly below.Each effort is discussed briefly below.
TRRP—administered by DOI—aims to mitigate impacts of the Trinity Division of the CVP and TRRP—administered by DOI—aims to mitigate impacts of the Trinity Division of the CVP and
restore fisheries to their levels prior to the Bureau of Reclamationrestore fisheries to their levels prior to the Bureau of Reclamation
in 1955. The Trinity Division primarily consists of two dams (Trinity and Lewiston Dams), in 1955. The Trinity Division primarily consists of two dams (Trinity and Lewiston Dams),
related power facilities, and a series of tunnels (including the 10.7-mile tunnel Clear Creek related power facilities, and a series of tunnels (including the 10.7-mile tunnel Clear Creek
Tunnel) that divert water from the Trinity River Basin to the Sacramento River Basin and Tunnel) that divert water from the Trinity River Basin to the Sacramento River Basin and
Whiskeytown Reservoir. Diversion of Trinity River water (which originally required that a Whiskeytown Reservoir. Diversion of Trinity River water (which originally required that a
minimum of 120,000 AF be reserved for Trinity River flows) resulted in the near drying of the minimum of 120,000 AF be reserved for Trinity River flows) resulted in the near drying of the
Trinity River in some years, thereby damaging spawning habitat and severely depleting salmon Trinity River in some years, thereby damaging spawning habitat and severely depleting salmon
stocks.stocks.
initiated efforts to study the issue and increase Trinity River flows for fisheries. Congress initiated efforts to study the issue and increase Trinity River flows for fisheries. Congress
authorized legislation in 1984 (P.L. 98-541) and in 1992 (P.L. 102-575) providing for restoration authorized legislation in 1984 (P.L. 98-541) and in 1992 (P.L. 102-575) providing for restoration
activities and construction of a fish hatchery, and directed that 340,000 AF per year be reserved activities and construction of a fish hatchery, and directed that 340,000 AF per year be reserved
for Trinity River flows (a significant increase from the original amount). Congress also mandated for Trinity River flows (a significant increase from the original amount). Congress also mandated
completion of a flow evaluation study, which was formalized in a 2000 record of decision (ROD) completion of a flow evaluation study, which was formalized in a 2000 record of decision (ROD)
that called for additional water for instream flows,that called for additional water for instream flows,
rehabilitation.rehabilitation.
some years been supplemented to protect fish health in the river, and these increases have been some years been supplemented to protect fish health in the river, and these increases have been
controversial among some water users. From FY2013 to FY2018, TRRP was funded at controversial among some water users. From FY2013 to FY2018, TRRP was funded at
approximately $12 million per year in discretionary appropriations from Reclamationapproximately $12 million per year in discretionary appropriations from Reclamation
Wildlife Management and Development activity.Wildlife Management and Development activity.
Historically, the San Joaquin River supported large Chinook salmon populations. After the Historically, the San Joaquin River supported large Chinook salmon populations. After the
Bureau of Reclamation completed Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River in the late 1940s, much Bureau of Reclamation completed Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River in the late 1940s, much
became dry in most years. These conditions made it impossible to support Chinook salmon became dry in most years. These conditions made it impossible to support Chinook salmon
populations upstream of the Merced River confluence.populations upstream of the Merced River confluence.
restoration to support Chinook salmon recovery sued the Bureau of Reclamation. A U.S. District restoration to support Chinook salmon recovery sued the Bureau of Reclamation. A U.S. District
Court judge eventually ruled that operation of Friant Dam was violating state law because of its Court judge eventually ruled that operation of Friant Dam was violating state law because of its
destruction of downstream fisheries.destruction of downstream fisheries.
and the possibility of dramatic cuts to water diversions, the parties agreed to negotiate a and the possibility of dramatic cuts to water diversions, the parties agreed to negotiate a
settlement instead of proceeding to trial on a remedy regarding the courtsettlement instead of proceeding to trial on a remedy regarding the court
was agreed to in 2006 and enacted by Congress in 2010 (Title X of P.L. 111-11was agreed to in 2006 and enacted by Congress in 2010 (Title X of P.L. 111-11).
requires new releases of CVP water from Friant Dam to restore fisheries (including salmon requires new releases of CVP water from Friant Dam to restore fisheries (including salmon
fisheries) in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam (which forms Millerton Lake) to the fisheries) in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam (which forms Millerton Lake) to the
confluence with the Merced River (i.e., 60 miles). The SJRRP also requires efforts to mitigate confluence with the Merced River (i.e., 60 miles). The SJRRP also requires efforts to mitigate
water supply delivery losses due to these releases, among other things. In combination with the water supply delivery losses due to these releases, among other things. In combination with the
new releases, the settlementnew releases, the settlement
structural modifications along the San Joaquin River and the reintroduction of Chinook salmon structural modifications along the San Joaquin River and the reintroduction of Chinook salmon
(Figure 5). These activities are funded in part by federal discretionary appropriations and in part . These activities are funded in part by federal discretionary appropriations and in part
by repayment and surcharges paid by CVP Friant water users that are redirected toward the by repayment and surcharges paid by CVP Friant water users that are redirected toward the
SJRRP in SJRRP in P.L. 111-11.
?wpfb_dl=?wpfb_dl=
CVP diversions of water for off-stream purposes, such as irrigation, hydropower, and M&I uses, CVP diversions of water for off-stream purposes, such as irrigation, hydropower, and M&I uses,
the settlement and its implementation have been controversial. The quantity of water used for the settlement and its implementation have been controversial. The quantity of water used for
restoration flows and the quantity by which water deliveries would be reduced are related, but the restoration flows and the quantity by which water deliveries would be reduced are related, but the
relationship is not necessarily one-for-one, due to flood flows in some years and other mitigating relationship is not necessarily one-for-one, due to flood flows in some years and other mitigating
factors. Under the settlement agreement, no water would be released for restoration purposes in factors. Under the settlement agreement, no water would be released for restoration purposes in
the driest of years; thus, the agreement would not reduce deliveries to Friant contractors in those the driest of years; thus, the agreement would not reduce deliveries to Friant contractors in those
years. Additionally, in some years, the restoration flows released in late winter and early spring years. Additionally, in some years, the restoration flows released in late winter and early spring
may free up space for additional runoff storage in Millerton Lake, potentially minimizing may free up space for additional runoff storage in Millerton Lake, potentially minimizing
reductions in deliveries later in the year—assuming Millerton Lake storage is replenished. reductions in deliveries later in the year—assuming Millerton Lake storage is replenished.
Consequently, how deliveries to Friant water contractors may be reduced in any given year is Consequently, how deliveries to Friant water contractors may be reduced in any given year is
likely to depend on many factors. Regardless of the specifics of how much water may be released likely to depend on many factors. Regardless of the specifics of how much water may be released
for fisheries restoration vis-à-vis diverted for off-stream purposes, the SJRRP will impact existing for fisheries restoration vis-à-vis diverted for off-stream purposes, the SJRRP will impact existing
surface and groundwater supplies in and around the Friant Division service area and affect local surface and groundwater supplies in and around the Friant Division service area and affect local
economies. SJRRP construction activities are in the early stages, but planning efforts have economies. SJRRP construction activities are in the early stages, but planning efforts have
targeted a completion date of 2024 for the first stage of construction efforts.targeted a completion date of 2024 for the first stage of construction efforts.
The Bay-Delta Restoration Program is a cooperative effort among the federal government, the The Bay-Delta Restoration Program is a cooperative effort among the federal government, the
State of California, local governments, and water users to proactively address the water State of California, local governments, and water users to proactively address the water
management and aquatic ecosystem needs of Californiamanagement and aquatic ecosystem needs of California
Delta Restoration Act (P.L. 108-361), enacted in 2004, provided new and expanded federal Delta Restoration Act (P.L. 108-361), enacted in 2004, provided new and expanded federal
authorities for six agencies related to the 2000 ROD for the CALFED Bay-Delta Programauthorities for six agencies related to the 2000 ROD for the CALFED Bay-Delta Program
's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.
FY2019 under the WIIN Act. The interim action plan for CALFED has four objectives: a FY2019 under the WIIN Act. The interim action plan for CALFED has four objectives: a
renewed federal-state partnership, smarter water supply and use, habitat restoration, and drought renewed federal-state partnership, smarter water supply and use, habitat restoration, and drought
and floodplain management.and floodplain management.
approximately $37 million per year; the majority of this funding has gone for projects to address approximately $37 million per year; the majority of this funding has gone for projects to address
the degraded Bay-Delta ecosystem and includes federal activities under California WaterFix (see the degraded Bay-Delta ecosystem and includes federal activities under California WaterFix (see
below section, below section, "
under CALFED include DOIunder CALFED include DOI
Department of AgricultureDepartment of Agriculture
Atmospheric Administration; and the Environmental Protection Agency. Similar to Reclamation, Atmospheric Administration; and the Environmental Protection Agency. Similar to Reclamation,
these agencies report on CALFED expenditures that involve a combination of activities under these agencies report on CALFED expenditures that involve a combination of activities under
legislation. The annual CALFED crosscut budget records the funding for CALFED across all legislation. The annual CALFED crosscut budget records the funding for CALFED across all
federal agencies. The budget is generally included in the Administrationfederal agencies. The budget is generally included in the Administration
contains CALFED programs, their authority, and requested funding. For FY2019, the contains CALFED programs, their authority, and requested funding. For FY2019, the
Administration requested $474 million for CALFED activities. This figure is an increase from the Administration requested $474 million for CALFED activities. This figure is an increase from the
FY2018 enacted level of $415 million.FY2018 enacted level of $415 million.
Reductions in available water deliveries due to hydrological and regulatory factors have caused Reductions in available water deliveries due to hydrological and regulatory factors have caused
some stakeholders, legislators, and state and federal government officials to look at other methods some stakeholders, legislators, and state and federal government officials to look at other methods
of augmenting water supplies. In particular, proposals to build new or augmented CVP and/or of augmenting water supplies. In particular, proposals to build new or augmented CVP and/or
SWP water storage projects have been of interest to some policymakers. Additionally, the State of SWP water storage projects have been of interest to some policymakers. Additionally, the State of
California is pursuing a major water conveyance project, the California WaterFix, with a nexus to California is pursuing a major water conveyance project, the California WaterFix, with a nexus to
CVP operations.CVP operations.
The aforementioned CALFED legislation (P.L. 108-361) also authorized the study of several new The aforementioned CALFED legislation (P.L. 108-361) also authorized the study of several new
or augmented CVP storage projects throughout the Central Valley that have been ongoing for a or augmented CVP storage projects throughout the Central Valley that have been ongoing for a
number of years. These studies include Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, North of the number of years. These studies include Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, North of the
Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion, and Upper San Joaquin River/Temperance Flat Storage Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion, and Upper San Joaquin River/Temperance Flat Storage
Investigation Investigation (Figure 6). Although the recommendations of these studies would normally be . Although the recommendations of these studies would normally be
subject to congressional approval, Section 4007 of the WIIN Act authorized $335 million in subject to congressional approval, Section 4007 of the WIIN Act authorized $335 million in
Reclamation financial support for new or expanded federal and nonfederal water storage projects Reclamation financial support for new or expanded federal and nonfederal water storage projects
and provided that these projects could be deemed authorized, subject to a finding by the and provided that these projects could be deemed authorized, subject to a finding by the
Administration that individual projects met certain criteria.Administration that individual projects met certain criteria.
Figure 6. CALFED Surface Water Storage Studies
Plan, July 29, 2016.Plan, July 29, 2016.
concluded met the WIIN Act criteria. The projects were allocated $33.3 million in FY2017 concluded met the WIIN Act criteria. The projects were allocated $33.3 million in FY2017
funding that was previously appropriated for WIIN Act Section 4007 projects. Congress approved funding that was previously appropriated for WIIN Act Section 4007 projects. Congress approved
the funding allocations for these projects in enacted appropriations for FY2018 (P.L. 115-141). the funding allocations for these projects in enacted appropriations for FY2018 (P.L. 115-141).
Four of the projects receiving FY2017 funds ($28.05 million) were CALFED studies that would Four of the projects receiving FY2017 funds ($28.05 million) were CALFED studies that would
address water availability in the address water availability in the
the amount set aside for additional water conservation and delivery projects be provided for the amount set aside for additional water conservation and delivery projects be provided for
Section 4007 WIIN Act storage projects (i.e., similar direction as FY2017). The enacted FY2019 Section 4007 WIIN Act storage projects (i.e., similar direction as FY2017). The enacted FY2019
bill set aside another $134 million for these purposes.bill set aside another $134 million for these purposes.
legislation is expected to propose allocation of this and any other applicable funding. Congress legislation is expected to propose allocation of this and any other applicable funding. Congress
also may consider additional directives for these and other efforts to address water supplies in the also may consider additional directives for these and other efforts to address water supplies in the
CVP, including approval of physical construction for one or more of these projects.CVP, including approval of physical construction for one or more of these projects.
some of the proposed projects. For example, in June 2018, the state announced significant bond some of the proposed projects. For example, in June 2018, the state announced significant bond
funding for Sites Reservoir ($1.008 billion), as well as other projects.funding for Sites Reservoir ($1.008 billion), as well as other projects.
In addition to water storage, some have advocated for a more flexible water conveyance system In addition to water storage, some have advocated for a more flexible water conveyance system
for CVP and SWP water. An alternative was the California WaterFix, a project initiated by the for CVP and SWP water. An alternative was the California WaterFix, a project initiated by the
State of California in 2015 to address some of the water conveyance and ecosystem issues in the State of California in 2015 to address some of the water conveyance and ecosystem issues in the
Bay-Delta. The objective of this project was to divert water from the Sacramento River, north of Bay-Delta. The objective of this project was to divert water from the Sacramento River, north of
the Bay-Delta, into twin tunnels running south along the eastern portion of the Bay-Delta and the Bay-Delta, into twin tunnels running south along the eastern portion of the Bay-Delta and
emptying into existing pumps that feed water into the CVP and SWP. In the spring of 2019, emptying into existing pumps that feed water into the CVP and SWP. In the spring of 2019,
Governor Newsom of California canceled the plans for this project and introduced an alternative Governor Newsom of California canceled the plans for this project and introduced an alternative
plan for conveying water through the Delta.plan for conveying water through the Delta.
the existing pumps in the Bay-Delta. DWRthe existing pumps in the Bay-Delta. DWR
protect water supplies from sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and earthquakes.protect water supplies from sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and earthquakes.
expected to take a expected to take a
water supplies climate resilient. This approach includes actions such as strengthening levees, water supplies climate resilient. This approach includes actions such as strengthening levees,
protecting Delta water quality, and recharging groundwater, according to DWR.protecting Delta water quality, and recharging groundwater, according to DWR.
will require a new environmental review process for federal and state permits. It is being led by will require a new environmental review process for federal and state permits. It is being led by
the Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority, a joint powers authority created by the Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority, a joint powers authority created by
public water agencies to oversee the design and construction of the new conveyance system.public water agencies to oversee the design and construction of the new conveyance system.
71 DWR is expected to oversee the planning effort. The cost of the project is anticipated to be DWR is expected to oversee the planning effort. The cost of the project is anticipated to be
largely paid by public water agencies. The federal governmentlargely paid by public water agencies. The federal government
evaluating permit applications and maintaining related CVP operations has not been defined. Congressional Interest Congress plays a role in CVP water management and has previously attempted to make available Congress plays a role in CVP water management and has previously attempted to make available
additional water supplies in the region by facilitating efforts such as water banking, water additional water supplies in the region by facilitating efforts such as water banking, water
transfers, and construction of new and augmented storage. In 2016, Congress enacted provisions transfers, and construction of new and augmented storage. In 2016, Congress enacted provisions
aiming to benefit the CVP and the SWP, including major operational changes in the WIIN Act aiming to benefit the CVP and the SWP, including major operational changes in the WIIN Act
and additional appropriations for western drought response and new water storage that have and additional appropriations for western drought response and new water storage that have
benefited (or are expected to benefit) the CVP. Congress also continues to consider legislation benefited (or are expected to benefit) the CVP. Congress also continues to consider legislation
that would further alter CVP operational authorities and responsibilities related to individual units that would further alter CVP operational authorities and responsibilities related to individual units
of the project. The below section discusses some of the main issues related to the CVP that may of the project. The below section discusses some of the main issues related to the CVP that may
receive attention by Congress.receive attention by Congress.
Act72 Title II, Subtitle J of the WIIN Act (enacted in December 2016) included multiple provisions Title II, Subtitle J of the WIIN Act (enacted in December 2016) included multiple provisions
related to the Bureau of Reclamationrelated to the Bureau of Reclamation
's operational provisions are set to expire in 2021 (five years after the billoperational provisions are set to expire in 2021 (five years after the bill
to overseeing the implementation of these operational provisions, Congress may also consider to overseeing the implementation of these operational provisions, Congress may also consider
their amendment, extension, or repeal.their amendment, extension, or repeal.
BiOps), allowed for increased pumping during certain temporary storm events, and authorized BiOps), allowed for increased pumping during certain temporary storm events, and authorized
expedited reviews of water transfers, among other things.expedited reviews of water transfers, among other things.
standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species listed as endangered or standard for measuring the effects of water operations on species listed as endangered or
threatened under the ESA, allowing most of the billthreatened under the ESA, allowing most of the bill
determined to cause additional adverse effects on listed species beyond the range of the effects determined to cause additional adverse effects on listed species beyond the range of the effects
anticipated to occur for the duration of the species BiOp.anticipated to occur for the duration of the species BiOp.
back to the back to the
included in the act. Supporters of WIIN Act operational changes contended that these changes included in the act. Supporters of WIIN Act operational changes contended that these changes
had the potential to make additional water available to users facing curtailed deliveries, while also had the potential to make additional water available to users facing curtailed deliveries, while also
improving the flexibility and responsiveness of the management and operations of the CVP and improving the flexibility and responsiveness of the management and operations of the CVP and
SWP.SWP.
both the short and long terms and may limit agency efforts to manage water supplies for the both the short and long terms and may limit agency efforts to manage water supplies for the
benefit of species.benefit of species.
provide the Administration with authority to make available more water supplies during periods provide the Administration with authority to make available more water supplies during periods
during the winter of 2017-2018. In particular, communication and transparency were reportedly during the winter of 2017-2018. In particular, communication and transparency were reportedly
increased for some operational decisions, allowing for reduced or rescheduled pumping increased for some operational decisions, allowing for reduced or rescheduled pumping
restrictions. Additionally, as of spring 2018, WIIN Act allowances relaxed restrictions on inflow-restrictions. Additionally, as of spring 2018, WIIN Act allowances relaxed restrictions on inflow-
to-export ratios related to the voluntary sale, transfer, or exchange of water that were used to to-export ratios related to the voluntary sale, transfer, or exchange of water that were used to
affect a transfer resulting in additional exports of 50,000-60,000 AF.affect a transfer resulting in additional exports of 50,000-60,000 AF.
's provisions. Many of the WIIN Act changes have the potential to make their greatest impact provisions. Many of the WIIN Act changes have the potential to make their greatest impact
during drought years. At the same time, some federal operational changes pursuant to the WIIN during drought years. At the same time, some federal operational changes pursuant to the WIIN
Act were reportedly proposed but were deemed incompatible with state requirements.Act were reportedly proposed but were deemed incompatible with state requirements.
these limitations, WIIN Act authorities are likely to continue as a topic of congressional interest.these limitations, WIIN Act authorities are likely to continue as a topic of congressional interest.
operations.operations.
Act (GROW Act), incorporated a number of provisions that were included in previous California Act (GROW Act), incorporated a number of provisions that were included in previous California
drought legislation in the drought legislation in the
Generally speaking, the GROW Act included provisions that would have loosened some Generally speaking, the GROW Act included provisions that would have loosened some
environmental protections and restrictions that are imposed under the CVPIA, ESA, CWA, and environmental protections and restrictions that are imposed under the CVPIA, ESA, CWA, and
SJRRP, and had the potential to increase exports under some scenarios. This legislation was not SJRRP, and had the potential to increase exports under some scenarios. This legislation was not
enacted.enacted.
intent to propose administrative changes to CVP operations, including through reinitiation of intent to propose administrative changes to CVP operations, including through reinitiation of
consultation on long-term, system-wide operations of the CVP and SWP (see earlier section, consultation on long-term, system-wide operations of the CVP and SWP (see earlier section,
"
finalize their new BiOps for the coordinated operation of the CVP and SWP by June 15, 2019, finalize their new BiOps for the coordinated operation of the CVP and SWP by June 15, 2019,
and to and to
the latter process might unfold or what particular regulations will be addressed.the latter process might unfold or what particular regulations will be addressed.
As previously noted, Reclamation and the State of California have funded the study of new water As previously noted, Reclamation and the State of California have funded the study of new water
storage projects in recent years, and future appropriations legislation and reporting may provide storage projects in recent years, and future appropriations legislation and reporting may provide
additional direction for these and other efforts to develop new water supplies for the CVP. As additional direction for these and other efforts to develop new water supplies for the CVP. As
such, Congress may consider oversight, authorization, and/or funding for these projects. Some such, Congress may consider oversight, authorization, and/or funding for these projects. Some
projects, such as the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project, have the potential to projects, such as the Shasta Dam and Reservoir Enlargement Project, have the potential to
augment CVP water supplies but have also generated controversy for their potential to conflict augment CVP water supplies but have also generated controversy for their potential to conflict
with the intent of certain state laws.with the intent of certain state laws.
Administration, and it is unclear how such a project might proceed absent state regulatory Administration, and it is unclear how such a project might proceed absent state regulatory
approvals and financial support. As previously noted, in early 2018, Reclamation proposed and approvals and financial support. As previously noted, in early 2018, Reclamation proposed and
Congress agreed to $20 million in design and preconstruction funding for the project.Congress agreed to $20 million in design and preconstruction funding for the project.
additional $75 million was recommended by the Trump Administration in February 2019.additional $75 million was recommended by the Trump Administration in February 2019.
Reclamation-recommended study funding for Sites Reservoir/North of Delta Offstream Storage Reclamation-recommended study funding for Sites Reservoir/North of Delta Offstream Storage
(NODOS), Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation, and the Friant-Kern Canal (NODOS), Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation, and the Friant-Kern Canal
Subsidence Challenges Project. Overall, from FY2017 to FY2019 Congress provided Subsidence Challenges Project. Overall, from FY2017 to FY2019 Congress provided
Reclamation with $335 million for new water storage projects authorized under Section 4007 of Reclamation with $335 million for new water storage projects authorized under Section 4007 of
the WIIN Act. A significant share of this total is expected to be used on CVP and related water the WIIN Act. A significant share of this total is expected to be used on CVP and related water
storage projects in California. Once the appropriations ceiling for these projects has been reached, storage projects in California. Once the appropriations ceiling for these projects has been reached,
funding for storage projects under Section 4007 would need to be extended by Congress before funding for storage projects under Section 4007 would need to be extended by Congress before
projects could proceed further.projects could proceed further.
Central Valley, and could also provide mandatory funding for their eventual construction. For Central Valley, and could also provide mandatory funding for their eventual construction. For
instance, Section 5 of H.R. 2473 would direct the Secretary to complete, as soon as practicable, instance, Section 5 of H.R. 2473 would direct the Secretary to complete, as soon as practicable,
the ongoing feasibility studies associated with Sites Reservoir, Del Puerto Canyon Reservoir, Los the ongoing feasibility studies associated with Sites Reservoir, Del Puerto Canyon Reservoir, Los
Vaqueros Reservoir, and San Luis Reservoir. Section 2 of the same legislation would authorize Vaqueros Reservoir, and San Luis Reservoir. Section 2 of the same legislation would authorize
$100 million per year for fiscal years 2030 to 2060, without further appropriation (i.e., mandatory $100 million per year for fiscal years 2030 to 2060, without further appropriation (i.e., mandatory
funding) for new Reclamation surface or groundwater storage projects.funding) for new Reclamation surface or groundwater storage projects.
Conclusion The CVP is one of the largest and most complex water storage and conveyance projects in the The CVP is one of the largest and most complex water storage and conveyance projects in the
world. Congress has regularly expressed interest in CVP operations and allocations, in particular world. Congress has regularly expressed interest in CVP operations and allocations, in particular
pumping in the Bay-Delta. In addition to ongoing oversight of project operations and previously pumping in the Bay-Delta. In addition to ongoing oversight of project operations and previously
enacted authorities, a number of developing issues and proposals related to the CVP have been of enacted authorities, a number of developing issues and proposals related to the CVP have been of
interest to congressional decisionmakers. These include study and approval of new water storage interest to congressional decisionmakers. These include study and approval of new water storage
and conveyance projects, updates to the stateand conveyance projects, updates to the state
effort by the Trump Administration to make available more water for CVP water contractors, in effort by the Trump Administration to make available more water for CVP water contractors, in
particular those south of the Delta. Future drought or other stressors on California water supplies particular those south of the Delta. Future drought or other stressors on California water supplies
The below sections provide a brief discussion some of the major contractor groups and individual The below sections provide a brief discussion some of the major contractor groups and individual
contractors served by the CVP.contractors served by the CVP.
Exchange Contractors (Water Rights Contractors)
CVP water is generally made available for delivery first to those contractors north and south of CVP water is generally made available for delivery first to those contractors north and south of
the Delta with water rights that predate construction of the CVP: the Sacramento River Settlement the Delta with water rights that predate construction of the CVP: the Sacramento River Settlement
Contractors and the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors. (These contractors are sometimes Contractors and the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors. (These contractors are sometimes
referred to collectively as referred to collectively as water rights contractors.) Water rights contractors typically receive .) Water rights contractors typically receive
100% of their contracted amounts in most water year types. During water shortages, their annual 100% of their contracted amounts in most water year types. During water shortages, their annual
maximum entitlement may be reduced, but not by more than 25%.maximum entitlement may be reduced, but not by more than 25%.
districts) that diverted natural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVPdistricts) that diverted natural flows from the Sacramento River prior to the CVP
and executed a settlement agreement with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of and executed a settlement agreement with Reclamation that provided for negotiated allocation of
water rights. Reclamation entered into this agreement in exchange for these contractors water rights. Reclamation entered into this agreement in exchange for these contractors
withdrawing their protests related to Reclamationwithdrawing their protests related to Reclamation
guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (typically in the form of deliveries from the Delta-guaranteed water deliveries from the CVP (typically in the form of deliveries from the Delta-
Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). During all years except for when critical Mendota Canal and waters north of the Delta). During all years except for when critical
conditions are declared, Reclamation is responsible for delivering 840,000 AF of conditions are declared, Reclamation is responsible for delivering 840,000 AF of
"substitute" water to these users (i.e., water from north of the Delta as a substitute for San Joaquin River water to these users (i.e., water from north of the Delta as a substitute for San Joaquin River
water). In the event that Reclamation is unable to make its contracted deliveries, these Exchange water). In the event that Reclamation is unable to make its contracted deliveries, these Exchange
Contractors have the right to divert water directly from the San Joaquin River, which may reduce Contractors have the right to divert water directly from the San Joaquin River, which may reduce
water available for other San Joaquin River water service contactors.water available for other San Joaquin River water service contactors.
Millerton Lake. This water is delivered through the Friant-Kern and Madera Canals. The 32 Millerton Lake. This water is delivered through the Friant-Kern and Madera Canals. The 32
Friant Division contractors, who irrigate roughly 1 million acres on the San Joaquin River, are Friant Division contractors, who irrigate roughly 1 million acres on the San Joaquin River, are
contracted to receive two contracted to receive two
delivery;delivery;
water from both classes. Generally, Class 2 waters are released as water from both classes. Generally, Class 2 waters are released as
flood control concerns), and may not necessarily be scheduled at a contractorflood control concerns), and may not necessarily be scheduled at a contractor
stemming from Friant Damstemming from Friant Dam
reductions in deliveries to Friant users for protection of fish and wildlife purposes. In some years, reductions in deliveries to Friant users for protection of fish and wildlife purposes. In some years,
some of these some of these
service contracts to repayment contracts and have repaid their capital obligation to the federal service contracts to repayment contracts and have repaid their capital obligation to the federal
government for the development of their facilities. In years in which Reclamation is unable to government for the development of their facilities. In years in which Reclamation is unable to
make contracted deliveries to Exchange Contractors, these contractors can make a make contracted deliveries to Exchange Contractors, these contractors can make a
in the San Joaquin River, thereby requiring releases from Friant Dam that otherwise would go to in the San Joaquin River, thereby requiring releases from Friant Dam that otherwise would go to
Friant contractors.Friant contractors.
District As shown As shown
AF, or 22.1%) of the CVPAF, or 22.1%) of the CVP
District, which consists of 700 farms covering more than 600,000 acres in Fresno and Kings District, which consists of 700 farms covering more than 600,000 acres in Fresno and Kings
Counties. In geographic terms, Westlands is the largest agricultural water district in the United Counties. In geographic terms, Westlands is the largest agricultural water district in the United
States; its lands are valuable and productive, producing more than $1 billion of food and fiber States; its lands are valuable and productive, producing more than $1 billion of food and fiber
annually.annually.
that makes up more than half of the total amount of SOD CVP water service contracts and that makes up more than half of the total amount of SOD CVP water service contracts and
significantly exceeds any other individual CVP contactor.significantly exceeds any other individual CVP contactor.
Westlands often receives considerably less water on average than it did historically.Westlands often receives considerably less water on average than it did historically.
alter environmental requirements to increase pumping south of the Delta. Westlands is also alter environmental requirements to increase pumping south of the Delta. Westlands is also
involved in a major proposed settlement with Reclamation, the San Luis Drainage Settlement. involved in a major proposed settlement with Reclamation, the San Luis Drainage Settlement.
The settlement would, among other things, forgive WestlandsThe settlement would, among other things, forgive Westlands
responsibilities in exchange for relieving the federal government of its responsibility to construct responsibilities in exchange for relieving the federal government of its responsibility to construct
drainage facilities to deal with toxic runoff associated with naturally occurring metals in area drainage facilities to deal with toxic runoff associated with naturally occurring metals in area
soils.soils.
The 20,000 square mile California Central Valley provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory The 20,000 square mile California Central Valley provides valuable wetland habitat for migratory
birds and other species. As such, it is the home to multiple state and federally-designated wildlife birds and other species. As such, it is the home to multiple state and federally-designated wildlife
refuges north and south of the Delta. These refuges provide managed wetland habitat that refuges north and south of the Delta. These refuges provide managed wetland habitat that
receives water from the CVP and other sources.receives water from the CVP and other sources.
improve conditions for fish and wildlife in these areas by providing them coequal priority with improve conditions for fish and wildlife in these areas by providing them coequal priority with
other project purposes. CVPIA also authorized a Refuge Water Supply Program to acquire other project purposes. CVPIA also authorized a Refuge Water Supply Program to acquire
approximately 555,000 AF annually in water supplies for 19 Central Valley refuges administered approximately 555,000 AF annually in water supplies for 19 Central Valley refuges administered
by three managing agencies: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife by three managing agencies: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and Grassland Water District (a private landowner). Pursuant to CVPIA, Reclamation Service, and Grassland Water District (a private landowner). Pursuant to CVPIA, Reclamation
entered into long-term water supply contracts with the managing agencies to provide these entered into long-term water supply contracts with the managing agencies to provide these
supplies. Level 2 supplies (approximately 422,251 AF, except in critically dry years, when the supplies. Level 2 supplies (approximately 422,251 AF, except in critically dry years, when the
allocation is reduced to 75%) are the historical average of water deliveries to the refuges prior to allocation is reduced to 75%) are the historical average of water deliveries to the refuges prior to
enactment of CVPIA.enactment of CVPIA.
and costs are 100% reimbursable by CVP contractors through a fund established by the act, the and costs are 100% reimbursable by CVP contractors through a fund established by the act, the
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (CVPRF; see previous section, Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (CVPRF; see previous section, "
Improvement Act
water beyond Level 2 supplies for optimal wetland habitat development. This water must be water beyond Level 2 supplies for optimal wetland habitat development. This water must be
acquired by Reclamation through voluntary measures and is funded as a 75% federal cost acquired by Reclamation through voluntary measures and is funded as a 75% federal cost
(through the CVPRF) and 25% state cost.(through the CVPRF) and 25% state cost.
provided in full for a number of reasons, including a dearth of supplies due to costs in excess of provided in full for a number of reasons, including a dearth of supplies due to costs in excess of
available CVPRF funding and a lack of willing sellers. In recent years, costs for the Refuge Water available CVPRF funding and a lack of willing sellers. In recent years, costs for the Refuge Water
Supply Program (i.e., the costs for both Level 2 and Level 4 water) have ranged from $11 million Supply Program (i.e., the costs for both Level 2 and Level 4 water) have ranged from $11 million
Author Contact Information
Charles V. Stern, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])
Pervaze A. Sheikh, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])
Footnotes
For more information on drought in general, see CRS Report R43407, Drought in the United States: Causes and Current Understanding, by Peter Folger.
For more information, see CRS Report R44986, Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act: Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions, by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Nicole T. Carter.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires that a federal agency proposing an action that may have an effect on a listed species consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service (i.e., regulatory agencies). The action agency will commonly complete a biological assessment on potential effects to the fish or its habitat and submit it to the regulatory agency. The regulatory agency then renders a biological opinion, or BiOp, to the action agency making the proposal. The intent of a BiOp is to ensure that the proposed action will not reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of an ESA-listed species. BiOps typically include conservation recommendations intended to further recovery of the ESA-listed species.
49 Stat. 1028.
Transfer of the project to Reclamation was pursuant to a presidential directive in 1935 and subsequent congressional enactment of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1937 (50 Stat. 844, 850).
Although Reclamation constructed much of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and maintains control over its operations, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has also been involved in the project over the course of its history. Some dams, such as Folsom Dam and New Melones Dam, initially were built by USACE but have been turned over to Reclamation for operations and maintenance and incorporated into the CVP. Additionally, USACE constructed and continues to operate several major dams in and around the Central Valley for flood control and other purposes, including Terminus Dam, Isabella Dam, Pine Flat Dam, and Success Dam in the San Joaquin Valley. Since USACE operates these dams for flood control, Reclamation administers contracts to use surplus water from these reservoirs for irrigation.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Cash Receipts by State, Commodity Ranking and Share of U.S. Total, 2016, at https://data.ers.usda.gov/reports.aspx?ID=17843#Pcb53fbff4c3c47c9b0afcc74d03a7403_3_17iT0R0x5.
Bureau of Reclamation, "About the Central Valley Project," at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvp/about-cvp.html.
Tulare Lake, a freshwater dry lake in the San Joaquin River Valley, historically was one of the largest freshwater lakes west of the Great Lakes. Under most normal (nonflood) conditions, the lake was "terminal," meaning it had no outlet and did not drain downstream. Damming in the mid-20th century by the USACE of the Kaweah (Terminus Dam), Kern (Isabella Dam), Kings (Pine Flat Dam), and Tule Rivers (Success Dam), coupled with development of the basin for irrigated agriculture, dried up the lake bed under most conditions.
A water contractor, as described in this report, has a contract for specified water deliveries from conveyance structures managed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 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).
A water year is a hydrologic unit for measuring a 12-month total for which precipitation totals are measured. In California, the water year typically is measured from October 1 of one year to September 30 of the following year.
Water service contracts charge users a per-acre foot rate based on the amount of water delivered. In contrast, repayment contracts (the most common type of Reclamation contract outside of the Central Valley Project [CVP]) charge users based on the amount of water storage allocated to a contractor, among other things.
See U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region, Final Form of Contract,4-19-2004, Articles 3b, 11, 12a, and 12b, at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpia/3404c/lt_contracts/index.html.
CRS analysis of CVP contract water delivery information by the Bureau of Reclamation, October 3, 2018.
Central Valley Project refuges are discussed more in the below section, "Central Valley Project Improvement Act."
Full allocations were made in 1995, 1998, 2006, and 2017. Bureau of Reclamation, "Summary of Water Supply Allocations," at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/water_allocations_historical.pdf.
"Agreement Between the United States of America and the State of California for Coordinated Operation of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project," No. 7-07-20-WO551. November 24, 1986.
For more information on water delivery restrictions as they apply to the CVP, see below section, "Constraints on CVP Deliveries."
For example, see Joint Letter to the Bureau of Reclamation from Placer County Water Agency, City of Folsom, Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority et al, March 1, 2016, at http://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/1854.
Letter from David G. Murillo, Regional Directory, Bureau of Reclamation, to Karla Nemeth, Director, California Department of Water Resources, August 17, 2018.
See Bureau of Reclamation and California Department of Water Resources, Addendum to the Agreement Between the United States of America and the Department of Water Resources of the State of California for Coordinated Operation of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project, December 12, 2018.
"Balanced" conditions refer to those conditions under which reservoir releases and unregulated flows in the Delta are equal to the water supply needed to meet Sacramento Valley-in-basin uses plus exports. Excess conditions are periods in which releases and unregulated flows exceed the aforementioned uses.
Requirements of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) currently are being satisfied through implementation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) due to a California state determination that project operations under the federal biological opinions are consistent with requirements under CESA. Presumably, if protections afforded to threatened and endangered species under the federal ESA were no longer in place, the State of California could invoke protections under CESA.
P.L. 102-575, Title 34, 106 Stat. 4706.
The CWA requires the states to implement water quality standards that designate water uses to be protected and adopt water quality criteria that protect the designated uses. For application to California, see United States v. State Water Resources Control Board (Racanelli), 182 Cal. App. 3d 82, 109 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986).
See Cal. Water Code §13160.
Inability to reach agreement on water quality objectives through deliberation and litigation nearly shut down Delta pumping in the early 1990s and was a significant factor in the creation of the Bay-Delta Accord—a partnership between federal and state agencies with projects, responsibilities, and activities affecting the Delta. Habitat protection commitments in the accord were incorporated into the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan, as were actions called for under the Vernalis Adaptive Management Program, and were included by the State Water Board in D-1641. (See U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region, Long-Term Central Valley Project Operations Criteria and Plan, Sacramento, CA, May 22, 2008, pp. 2-6.)
California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board, "Revised Water Right Decision 1641," March 15, 2000. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/board_decisions/adopted_orders/decisions/d1600_d1649/wrd1641_1999dec29.pdf.
Personal communication with the Bureau of Reclamation, October 15, 2015.
California Water Boards, "State Water Board Seeks Public Comment on Final Draft Bay-Delta Plan Update for the Lower San Joaquin River and Southern Delta," July 6, 2018, at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/Bay-Delta_Plan_Update_Press_Release.pdf.
California Water Boards, "Summary of Proposed Amendments to the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan," July 6, 2018, at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/sed/lsjr_sdwq_summary_070618.pdf.
California Water Boards, "July 2018 Framework for the Sacramento/Delta Update to the Bay-Delta Plan," July 6, 2018, at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/sed/sac_delta_framework_070618%20.pdf. Hereinafter California Water Boards, "July 2018 Framework."
California Water Boards, "July 2018 Framework."
43 U.S.C. §383.
Letter from Brenda Burman, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, DOI, to Felicia Marcus, Chair, State Water Resources Control Board, July 27, 2018. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/docs/comments_lsjr_finalsed/Brenda_Burman_BOR.pdf. Hereinafter Letter from Brenda Burman to Felicia Marcus.
California State Water Resources Control Board, Resolution No. 1018-0059, Adoption of Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary and Final Substitute Environmental Document, December 12, 2018, https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/resolutions/2018/rs2018_0059.pdf.
California Water Boards, "State Water Board Adopts Bay-Delta Plan Update," press release, December 12, 2018, https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/press_room/press_releases/2018/pr121218_bay-delta_plan_update.pdf.
Department of Justice, "United States Files Lawsuit Against California State Water Resources Control Board for Failure to Comply With California Environmental Quality Act," press release, March 28, 2019, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-files-lawsuit-against-california-state-water-resources-control-board-failure.
Act of December 28, 1973, P.L. 93-205; 87 Stat. 884, codified at 16 U.S.C. §§1531 et seq. This report assumes a basic knowledge of the act; an overview of the ESA and its major provisions may be found in CRS Report RL31654, The Endangered Species Act: A Primer, by Pervaze A. Sheikh.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fall Midwater Trawl Monthly Abundance Index for Delta Smelt, at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/delta/data/fmwt/indices.asp, accessed August 2, 2018.
Among other things, the 2009 National Marine Fisheries Service biological opinion requires temperature considerations for the benefit of species in the Sacramento River and in the Bay-Delta. Operations of Shasta Dam and related facilities are thus affected by a separate plan, the Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan.
Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2016 CVIPA §3406(b)(2) Accounting, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/FINAL_wy16_b2_800TAF_table_20170930.pdf.
Peter B. Moyle, James A. Hobbs, and John R. Durand, "Delta Smelt and Water Politics in California," Fisheries Magazine, vol. 43, no. 1 (January 2018), pp. 42-60.
California Environmental Protection Agency and State Water Resources Control Board, March 5, 2015 Order Modifying an Order That Approved in Part and Denied in Part a Petition for Temporary Urgency Changes to Permit Terms and Conditions Requiring Compliance with Delta Water Quality Objectives in Response to Drought Conditions, p. 4, at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/tucp/tucp_order030515.pdf.
Letter from David Murillo, Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation, and Mark W. Cowin, Director, Department of Water Resources, to Ren Lohoefener, Pacific Southwest Regional Director, August 2, 2016, at https://www.fws.gov/sfbaydelta/documents/08-02-2016_BOR-DWR_Reinitiation_Letter.pdf.
Bureau of Reclamation, "Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Revisions to the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project, and Related Facilities," 82 Federal Register 61789-61791, December 29, 2017. Hereinafter Reclamation, "Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement."
Reclamation, "Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement."
Bureau of Reclamation, Updates to the Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the CVP and SWP and Related Facilities, January 2019, https://www.usbr.gov/mp/bdo/lto.html.
2018 White House Memo on Western Water.
CVPIA's "fish doubling" goal was established on a baseline of average population levels during the period of 1967-1991.
"(b)(2) water" references the provision in CVPIA that required these allocations.
Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2014 CVPIA Section 3406(b)(2) Operations and Accounting, January 28, 2015, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/data/FINAL_WY14_b2_presentation.pdf.
Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2014 CVPIA Section 3406(b)(2) Operations and Accounting, January 28, 2015, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/data/FINAL_WY14_b2_presentation.pdf.
Bureau of Reclamation, Water Year 2016 CVIPA §3406(b)(2) Accounting, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/FINAL_wy16_b2_800TAF_table_20170930.pdf.
The additional flows outlined in the 2000 record of decision are based on water-year type and range from 369,000 AF in critically dry years to 815,000 AF in extremely wet years. A greater proportion of Trinity River water goes to the river in dry years, and a greater proportion of the water goes to CVP contractors in wet years.
DOI, Record of Decision for Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report, December 2000, at http://www.restoresjr.net/?wpfb_dl=2163.
NRDC v. Patterson, 333 F. Supp. 2d 906, 925 (E.D. Cal. 2004).
For more information, see San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP), Funding Constrained Framework for Implementation, May 2018.
CALFED Bay-Delta Program, Programmatic Record of Decision, August 28, 2000, at http://www.calwater.ca.gov/content/Documents/ROD8-28-00.pdf. Other key documents available at http://www.calwater.ca.gov/calfed/library/Archive_ROD.html.
Interim Federal Action Plan for the California Bay-Delta, December 22, 2009, at http://www.doi.gov/news/doinews/upload/CAWaterWorkPlan.pdf.
In addition to funding under its CALFED authorities, Reclamation counts funding under its other CVP restoration authorities (e.g., CVPIA, SJRRP) as CALFED activities in its annual reporting.
For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10626, Reclamation Water Storage Projects: Section 4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act, by Charles V. Stern.
The study of several projects (including the Shasta, Sites, and Upper San Joaquin investigations) was originally authorized under P.L. 108-361.
See CRS In Focus IF10841, Bureau of Reclamation: FY2019 Appropriations, by Charles V. Stern.
California Water Commission, "Commission Approves Investing $2.7 Billion in Eight Water Storage Projects," July 24, 2018, at https://cwc.ca.gov/-/media/CWC-Website/Files/Documents/Press/MCEDPressRelease_072418.pdf.
California Department of Water Resources, "State Withdraws WaterFix Approvals, Initiates Planning and Permitting for a Smaller Single Tunnel," press release, May 2, 2019, https://water.ca.gov/News/News-Releases/2019/May/State-Withdraws-WaterFix-Approvals. Hereinafter "DWR May 2019 Press Release."
DWR May 2019 Press Release.
California Department of Water Resources, Modernizing Delta Conveyance Infrastructure Q&A, California Department of Water Resources, https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Delta-Conveyance/Delta-Conveyance-QA.pdf?la=en&hash=373E0DBCD7AD988C9987A3197304E55D9115F798.
For more information on these provisions, see CRS Report R44986, Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act: Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions, by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Nicole T. Carter.
Pursuant to Section 4013 of the WIIN Act, most of the CVP operational provisions expire in December 2021.
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Statement of Dan Keppen, Executive Director, Family Farm Alliance, 114th Cong., 1st sess., October 8, 2015, p. 4, at http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?Id=65220e15-0479-492e-8423-ca1a381c1078&Statement_id=378db42f-6b60-44a7-a16c-3d2b7d712984.
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Statement of Michael L. Connor, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, 114th Cong., 1st sess., October 8, 2015, p. 1, at http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=fb299e7d-7de8-41c8-b8a2-365d544c8911.
This provision of the WIIN Act generally lessened existing restrictions on the amount of water that could be exported for water transfers. Personal communication with the Bureau of Reclamation, April 18, 2017.
Personal communication with the Bureau of Reclamation, April 18, 2017.
For more information, see CRS Report R44889, H.R. 23, the Gaining Responsibility on Water Act of 2017 (GROW Act), by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Marnie Kremer.
2018 White House Memo on Western Water.
In particular, Section 5093.542 of the California State Public Resources Code prevents participation (other than technical or economic feasibility studies of the Shasta dam raise project) by state departments or agencies in facilities that would have an adverse effect on the free-flowing condition of the McCloud River. In previous documents, Reclamation has indicated that this requirement could limit some state agency participation in the project.
This funding was provided from a pool of funds appropriated for FY2017 that was designated for water storage projects authorized under Section 4007 of the WIIN Act. Enacted appropriations in FY2018 and FY2019 have included similar funding amounts. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10692, Bureau of Reclamation: FY2018 Appropriations, by Charles V. Stern.
This water typically is provided for municipal and industrial use or for districts without access to groundwater.
When constructed, Friant Dam impounded the entire flow of the San Joaquin River, except for releases to manage flooding and provide water for some riparian water rights holders immediately below the dam. For more information, see below section, "San Joaquin River Restoration Program."
CRS analysis of Bureau of Reclamation, "Central Valley Project Water Contractors," March 30, 2016, at https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvp-water/docs/latest-water-contractors.pdf.
P.L. 102-575, Title 34, 106 Stat. 4706.
(CVPIA; P.L. 102-575), refuges only had a legal entitlement to 121,700 acre-feet (AF).(CVPIA; P.L. 102-575), refuges only had a legal entitlement to 121,700 acre-feet (AF).