ISFRulesWkshpMemo

• Board Meeting Date: 5/20/2008
• Description: ISF Section - Proposed Revisions to ISF Rules Workshop
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Other

-2-
b. The Board will only accept an Injury with Mitigation proposal if:
1) The proponent establishes that no other reasonable alternative exists to
provide full protection of the I SF water right; and
2) Mitigation is proposed that will allow the depletion to take place while
continuing to preserve or improve the natural environment to a reasonable
degree.
c. When evaluating the reasonableness of alternatives, the Board may consider economic
and environmental consequences of each alternative.
d. The Board will only consider mitigation in an area other than the affected stream reach if
no reasonable alternatives exist for mitigation on the affected stream reach.
3. Process for Submittal and Processing of Injury with Mitigation Proposals
a. Staff Review. To initiate CWCB staff review of an Injury with Mitigation proposal, the
proponent must provide the following information in writing:
1) Location of injury (stream(s) affected, length of affected reach(es))
2) Quantification of injury (amount, timing and frequency)
3) Type of water use causing the injury
4) Hydrologic analysis showing why full ISF protection is not possible
5) Detailed description of the proposed mitigation, including any measures taken to
reduce or minimize the injury
6) Statement of how the proposed mitigation will enable the Board to continue to
preserve or improve the natural environment of the affected stream to a reasonable
degree in spite of the injury
7) Identification and feasibility analysis of any other alternatives considered, including
discussion of environmental and economic benefits and consequences of each
alternative
8) A discussion of the reasonableness of each alternative considered
b. DOW Consultation. After receipt and review of the required information, staff will
consult with the DOW and with the entity that originally recommended the affected ISF
water rights(s) (if other than DOW) to determine whether additional field work is
necessary and to identify any scheduling concerns. Staff will request a recommendation
from the DOW as to whether the proposed mitigation will enable the Board to continue to
preserve or improve the natural environment of the affected stream to a reasonable degree
in spite of the injury, including a discussion of the reasonableness of the alternatives
consl ere .
c. Board Review. Using the two meeting process required by ISF Rule 8i.(3), staff will
bring the proposal to the Board for preliminary consideration after completing its review
of the proposal and consultation with DOW. Staff will work with the proponent and
interested parties to address any preliminary concerns prior to bringing a proposal to the
Board. Preliminary consideration by the Board may result in requests for more
information or for changes to the proposal. Staff will work with the proponent and
Flood Protection • Water Project Planning and Finance ~ Stream and Lake Protection
Water Supply Protection • Conservation Planning