Draft Recommendations of theDraft Recommendations of theSan Joaquin Water Quality San Joaquin Water Quality

Management GroupManagement Group

Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO ObjectivesObjectives

2/1/052/1/05

Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO ObjectivesObjectives

Overview

Group and Objectives

General Structure and Strategy

Tools and Management Strategies Evaluated

Draft Recommendations

Critical Implementation Issues

Next Steps

Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO ObjectivesPlan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO ObjectivesList of ParticipantsList of Participants

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Department of Water Resources

USFWS

California Dept. Fish and Game

Central California Irrigation District

Friant Water Users Authority

Grassland Water District

James Irrigation District

Merced Irrigation District

Modesto Irrigation District

Oakdale Irrigation District

San Luis Canal Company

San Joaquin County and Delta Water Quality Coalition

San Joaquin County RCD

San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority

San Joaquin Valley Drainage Authority

San Joaquin River Group

San Luis and Delta MendotaWater Authority

South San Joaquin Irrigation District

State Water Contractors

South Delta Water Agency

Stockton East Water District

Tranquility Irrigation District

Turlock Irrigation District

Venice Island RD 2023

California Farm Bureau

Western Growers

Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO ObjectivesDO Objectives

• Group Objective: Prepare and implement a plan to meet the water quality objectives for Salt and Boron at Vernalis and Dissolved Oxygen at the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel in coordination with CALFED Stage I objectives

Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO ObjectivesDO Objectives

• Salinity/Boron Objectives: April-August - 0.7 EC; September-March – 1.0 EC

• Dissolved Oxygen – 6.0 mg/l September – November 6.0 between Turner Cut and Stockton, 5.0 mg/l all other Delta locations, all times

Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and Plan for Achieving Salinity/Boron and DO Objectives – Tools and Strategies DO Objectives – Tools and Strategies

EvaluatedEvaluated• Flow Related Actions• Recirculation• Tributary Coordination:

– Operations– Transfers/exchanges– VAMP Modifications

• Management of Urban Wastewater Flows

• South Delta Improvements Project

• Refuge operational modifications

• Load Related Actions• Sub-basin load reduction,

west side of SJ Valley, and others

• Accretion Flow Diversion• Franks Tract Modifications

• Other• Dissolved Oxygen Aerator• Stockton WWTP control• Additional real-time

monitoring

Evaluation with SANMAN Model

• Model predicts salinity at Vernalis based on upstream actions

• Uses revised baseline data – the problem is less than previously believed for salinity

• Operates available recirculation and New Melones storage to achieve salinity objective

• Does not model Dissolved Oxygen but can tell you about flow

Elements of SJRWQMGDraft Preferred Alternative Elements

• A phased solution is necessary:

• Long Term 5+years: Full implementation of certain West Side drainage improvements (SJRIP) eliminates salinity violations @ Vernalis

• Short Term 0-5 years:

– Phased implementation of improvements (SJRIP)

Elements of SJRWQMGDraft Preferred Alternative Elements (cont’d)

• Short –term continued

– Permitted Banks Pumping Plant capacity at 8500 cfs and S. Delta Improvements

– Mid- or high-priority DMC re-circulation July-September

– Move compliance location for Stanislaus River dissolved oxygen upstream to location of Steelhead habitat.

– Strategic water transfers from the SJR Group members

– Continued evaluation/implementation of Refuge actions to help in critical winter/spring periods

Elements of SJRWQMGDraft Preferred Alternative Elements (cont’d)

• Dissolved Oxygen Solution: additional measures

– Additional HOR Barrier use in April-May and July-November to augment LSJR flows.

– Additional recirculation as available July-Sept.

– Implementation of City of Stockton’s ammonia removal project

– Implementation of aeration project in the Stockton DWSC

– Additional real-time monitoring and gap analysis

SJRWQMP Implementation Issues

• Technical– Lowered flows on Lower SJR – evaluating

additional recirculation and HORB use– Brandt Bridge salinity objective – evaluating

additional recirculation and HORB use

• Policy– Allocation of costs and benefits of recirculation for

both salinity purposes and lowering dissolved oxygen; high vs. mid priority recirculation

– Assignment of implementation roles

Vernalis Flow: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative HP-100

Critical Year Average

Vernalis Flow: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative HP-100

Critical Year Average

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Mar Apr1 Apr2 May1 May2 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

Flo

w (

cfs

)

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

Flo

w R

ed

uc

tio

n (

cfs

)

Flow Reduction Base Action

Solution Beneficiaries

• Assuming resolution of low-flow issues:– Public/environment – SJR fisheries benefit– Lower SJR water users – reliability/quality– Exporters – improved water quality and 8500 impediment– Upstream users – defined contributions– New Melones users – lessening of other demands– Port of Stockton – aeration partners, other tools– USBR – reduced drainage solution demands, reduced New

Melones conflict, meet permit conditions

SJRWQMP Implementation Issues cont.

NEXT STEPS • Resolution of low flows impact/SDIP

compatibility; finalize recommendation• Form Negotiating Forum/participants for

development of an implementation MOU• Seek element funding

– $40-50 million in drainage actions– Newman wasteway upgrades? $5m

extras

Water Supply Impactswith Phased SJRIP Implementation:

Critical Year Average High vs. Mid Priority Recirculation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

SJRIP Load Reduction (%)

Cri

tic

al

Yr

Wa

ter

Co

st

(TA

F)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Cri

tic

al

Yr

Re

cir

cu

lati

on

Wa

ter

Co

st

(TA

F)

High Priority (Recirc) Mid Priority (Recirc) High Priority Mid Priority

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative HP-20

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative HP-20

4

15

25

49

77

31

79

69

0 0 0

14

31

8

28 27

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Wet Above Normal Below Normal Dry Critical 1922-94 1929-34 1987-92

Water Year Type

Wat

er C

ost

s (1

000

acre

-ft

per

yea

r)

Delta Re-circulation

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative HP-100

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative HP-100

12

28

42

69

118

50

112

104

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 10

20

40

60

80

100

120

Wet Above Normal Below Normal Dry Critical 1922-94 1929-34 1987-92

Water Year Type

Wat

er C

ost

s (1

000

acre

-ft

per

yea

r)

Delta Re-circulation

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative MP-20

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative MP-20

4

15

25

35

46

23

51

41

0 0 0 0 2 0 03

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Wet Above Normal Below Normal Dry Critical 1922-94 1929-34 1987-92

Water Year Type

Wat

er C

ost

s (1

000

acre

-ft

per

yea

r)

Delta Re-circulation

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative MP-100

Water Cost: SJRWQMG Preferred Alternative MP-100

12

28

42

68

118

50

112

104

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00

20

40

60

80

100

120

Wet Above Normal Below Normal Dry Critical 1922-94 1929-34 1987-92

Water Year Type

Wat

er C

ost

s (1

000

acre

-ft

per

yea

r)

Delta Re-circulation

Aeration Project Aeration Project AreaArea