Long-Term Operations for the Central Valley Project and State Water Project Fish and Aquatic Effects Analysis Review Panel

Background

Long-term operations (LTO) of the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) are needed to meet authorized purposes for flood control and navigation, water supply, fish and wildlife mitigation, protection, restoration and enhancement, and power generation. Their operations also provide recreational and water quality benefits. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) operates the CVP, and the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) operates the SWP.

The CVP is a 400-mile, complex, multi-purpose network of dams, reservoirs, canals, power plants, and other facilities. The CVP reduces flood risk for the Central Valley, supplies water to major urban centers in the Sacramento and San Francisco Bay areas, produces electrical power, and offers recreational opportunities. In addition, the project provides water to restore and protect fish and wildlife and to enhance water quality.

The California SWP is a multi-purpose water storage and delivery system that extends more than 705 miles – two-thirds the length of California. A collection of canals, pipelines, reservoirs, and hydroelectric power facilities delivers clean water to 27 million Californians, 750,000 acres of farmland, and businesses throughout our state.

The purpose of this independent scientific expert review of the Draft Fish and Aquatic Effects Analysis (Draft Effects Analysis) is to evaluate its content and improve the science used as the basis of decisions that are important to the people of California and listed species facing extinction.

Reclamation is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), a report mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), to analyze potential modifications to the LTO of the CVP and SWP. The purpose of the Proposed Action considered in the EIS is to continue the operation of the CVP and SWP, for authorized purposes, in a manner that (1) meets requirements under applicable federal and state laws, (2) satisfies Reclamation’s contractual obligations and agreements, and (3) implements authorized CVP fish and wildlife project purposes.

Reclamation reinitiated Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 consultation for the LTO of the CVP and SWP based on anticipated modifications to the Proposed Action that may cause effects to ESA-listed species or designated critical habitats not analyzed in the 2019 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinions. The Draft Effects Analysis is a portion of the EIS that is being developed by Reclamation for the LTO of the CVP and SWP. This Draft Effects Analysis includes numerous technical appendices describing the literature, models, and tools to evaluate the effects of different project alternatives on fish and the aquatic environment. The purpose of the analysis is to: (1) systematically evaluate the potential effects and outcomes of the LTO NEPA Alternatives on specific life stages, (2) assess the population-level consequences of LTO NEPA Alternatives on ESA-listed populations, and (3) support a Biological Assessment. The analyses inform a Biological Assessment, which is necessary when a Federal Agency is proposing an action that may affect ESA-listed species. The USFWS and NMFS will then evaluate the Biological Assessment to determine whether the Proposed Action will jeopardize listed species.

The Draft Effects Analysis to be reviewed was developed with additive input from state and federal fishery and water agencies and interested parties through the scoping, initial alternative development, and other opportunities. This input was incorporated into various fish and aquatic analyses presented in the LTO Initial Alternatives Report and NEPA Public Draft Alternatives documents.

An Independent Scientific Review Panel (Panel) will review the Draft Effects Analysis and evaluate the analytical approach used to assess how the LTO of the CVP and SWP affect the aquatic environment and the exposure, response, and risk to select ESA-listed species (individuals and populations), and whether quantitative and qualitative methods and risk assessment tools are used appropriately. The findings and recommendations of the Panel will provide guidance in an effort to improve the Draft Effects Analysis and will be used to inform the final Biological Assessment.

Panel Letter Review

The Delta Science Program coordinates reviews in accordance with its mission to provide the best possible unbiased scientific information to inform water and environmental decision-making. As requested by Reclamation, the review will include a Panel Letter that is developed by the entire panel and will address the Review Questions based on their expertise.

View Reclamation’s request letter to Delta Lead Scientist, Dr. Laurel Larsen.

View Dr. Larsen’s response in PDF format.

Panel Letter Review Materials

The Draft Effects Analysis to be reviewed includes numerous technical appendices describing the literature, models, and tools to evaluate the effects of different project alternatives on fish and the aquatic environment.

Background documents