|
<br />.-I
<br />lfj
<br />C,,)
<br />C\J
<br />
<br />Tf?case boiled down to (Wo main
<br />iss~s 1) the definition of CVP yield
<br />and 2) how to account for changes in
<br />project yield.
<br />In March 1999, Wanger ruled that
<br />the 1997 plan was unlawful because it
<br />failed to calculate CVP yield and did
<br />not account for b2 water. He told
<br />Interior to develop a new proposal
<br />\vhich used "no more and no less than
<br />800.000 acre-feet" for the 1999 water
<br />year.
<br />In July, Wanger held a trial on the
<br />use of b2 warer in the 1999 water year,
<br />as applied within Interior's interim
<br />accounting plan. The final version of
<br />the plan, with minor changes, was
<br />released in October. The plan contains
<br />three methods of accounting:
<br />. From October through January
<br />each year, Interior will measure h2
<br />water upstream of the Delta based on
<br />net change in storage in reservoirs. If
<br />storage is less at the end of January
<br />than it would be without b2 actions,
<br />then that water is charged to the h2
<br />total. For example, if Shasta Lake
<br />would have held 5 million acre-feet
<br />Jan. 31 without b2 actions and the
<br />current year finds storage at 4.8
<br />million acre-feet. then 200,000 acre-
<br />feer of h2 warer has heen used.
<br />. From February through Septem~
<br />bel', the upstream measure shifts to net
<br />change in releases. If Shasta would
<br />have released 4,000 cubic feet per
<br />second (cfs) under planned operations
<br />and now releases 5,000 cfs to imple~
<br />rnent a b2 measure, the difference of
<br />1,000 cfs times the number of days of
<br />such a release is charged to h2.
<br />. In the Delta, during the entire
<br />Oct. 1 to Sept. 30 water year, curtail~
<br />ment of the export pumps is the b2
<br />measure. If pumping is reduced by
<br />2,000 cfs for one week, that water is
<br />charged to b2.
<br />However, because Interior is
<br />required to dedicate 800,000 acre feet
<br />of project )'ield, if the reservoirs re~fil1
<br />before Feb. 1, whatever water was
<br />released between October and the end
<br />of J anllary does not coun t as b2
<br />dedication. For example, if 100,000
<br />acre-feet is released from Shasta and
<br />
<br />January/February 2000
<br />
<br />50,000 acre-feet is regained through
<br />Mother Naturc, that 50,000 acre-feet
<br />must be taken out of the system at the
<br />Delta export pumps. Water users point
<br />to the Jan. 31 refill deadlinc as in-
<br />creasing water supply uncertainty.
<br />Lowell Ploss, operations manager
<br />for the Bureau's Mid~Pacific region,
<br />acknowledges that the plan "leaves
<br />everyone kind of gambling on what
<br />the weather will be, whether that
<br />water counts against b2 or not."
<br />However, he said, the Bureau hist:ori~
<br />cally has not announced expected
<br />water deliveries to CVP users until
<br />Feb. 15 of each year. (Typically, the
<br />
<br />Timeline
<br />1991 - U.S. Sen. Bill Bradley and Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez intro-
<br />duce CVPIA. Rep. Cal Dooley, D-Visalia, and U.S, Sen. John Seymour
<br />follow with their own version of a "reform" bill.
<br />October 1992 - CVPIA (Miller-Bradley bill) signed into law by President
<br />Bush.
<br />January 1993 - CVPIA goes into effect; USFWS and Bureau officials begin
<br />to implement the act.
<br />1994 - ,Westlands Water District sues, contending the Bureau is required to
<br />carry out an environmental impact assessment prior to implementing
<br />certain CVPIA provisions. The suit is dismissed.
<br />1995 - Irrigators support effort to amend the CVPIA in Congress through
<br />Rcp. John Doolittle's, R-Rocklin, HR 2738. Bill dies in Congress.
<br />1995.1997 -Interior Deputy Secretary John Garamendi leads consensus
<br />process with competing stakeholders in attempt to resolve some of the
<br />contentious issues.
<br />1997 - Interior releases b2 plan in which fishery actions is the focus. San
<br />Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority sues the following day.
<br />1998 - Environmental groups sue Interior over the 1997 b2 plan because it
<br />would not guarantee full amount of water to fish each yeat. Later that year,
<br />federal Judge Oliver Wanger conducts courr hearing on main legal issues.
<br />March 1999 - Wanger throws out the 1997 b2 plan, saying Interior did not
<br />account for the water. Gives Interior six months (later reduced to four)
<br />to develop new plan.
<br />July 1999 -Interior releases dtaft interim b2 plan for 1999. Wanger holds a
<br />trial on the plan.
<br />October 1999 - Final b2 plan for 1999 released. Plan accounts for the b2
<br />water measured against annual yield and includes a methodology for
<br />ensuring the 800,000 acre-feet comes out of project yield.
<br />December 1999 - Wanger issues an inconclusive ruling. On one hand, he
<br />rulcs Interior has broad discretion to calculate CVP yield. However, he
<br />also announces need for an impartial, court~appointed expert to assist
<br />him, and says the court must reconvene to uresolve the issues of explana~
<br />tion and demonstration of the calculation methodology for the 1999-
<br />2000" mcasurcment of h2.
<br />January 2000 - Wanger holds hearing on his questions.
<br />
<br />7
<br />
|