Margie J. Wheeler Orange County Business Council May 14, 2013

Metropolitan Water District Bay Delta Conservation Plan Overview and purpose Costs Administrative Draft Conveyance Facility Conservation Measures Benefits/Costs/Economic Impacts of BDCP Proposed Project and Alternatives State Water Project Critical supply for Southern California Schedule

MWD Service Area Six-County Service Area: 5,200 square miles Population: 19 million Gross Domestic Product: $1 Trillion Projected growth: ~170,000 people/year 50%+ of region’s supply

25% Colorado River supplies 30% State Water Project (flowing through the Delta) 45% Local Supplies Los Angeles Aqueduct Conservation Recycling Groundwater Desalination 4

5

Source: Governor’s Delta Vision Report (Estimated total annual runoff maf) Pacific Ocean 48% Upstream Consumptive Use 31% Delta Exports 17% MWD 4% In-Delta Consumptive Use 4% 6

Federal Agencies Council on Environmental Quality Department of Interior Department of Commerce Department of Agriculture US Environmental Protection Agency Department of the Army State Agencies Natural Resources Agency Department of Water Resources Department of Fish/Game 7 Public Water Agencies State Water Contractors Central Valley Project Contractors Environmental Organizatio ns American Rivers Defenders of Wildlife Environmental Defense Natural Heritage Institute The Bay Institute The Nature Conservancy

Increased reliability Comprehensive restoration for the Delta Basis for permits Federal and state endangered species laws Sources of funding and new methods of decision-making Adaptive management and monitoring to adjust as conditions change and new information is available Streamline permitting for projects covered by the plan

Users pay – new conveyance & associated mitigation Beneficiaries pay – habitat conservation & other state-wide benefits Average cost for Southern Californians ~ $5 - 6/month per householdImprovementsCapital Annual O&M Funding Source Conveyance$14 billion$83 millionWater Contractors Eco-Restoration & Other Stressors $3.6 billion$46 million Fed/State/Water Contractors/Other 9 Metropolitan’s share is approximately 25 percent The $14 billion estimate per the Governor’s announcement (July 25, 2012) Other cost information from Dec-2010 BDCP document

10

Joint document Habitat Conservation Plan Natural Community Conservation Plan 57 species 11 fish species 46 terrestrial species 214 Biological goals and objectives 22 Conservation measures Adaptive management Research and monitoring 11

March 14 – Released Chapters 1-4 Introduction, Existing Conditions, Conservation Strategy and Covered Actions March 20 – Public WorkshopMarch 20 – Public Workshop March 27 – Released Chapters 5-7 Effects Analysis, Plan Implementation, Implementation Structure April 4 – Public Workshop Late May– Scheduled release of Chapters 8-12 Implementation Costs & Funding Sources, Alternatives to Take, Integration of Independent Science, List of Preparers, Glossary TBD– Public Workshop 12

Sacramento 13 SWP Pumps CVP Pumps Sac River Stockton SJ River Tunnels Dual Conveyance South Delta (existing) North Delta (new) Three intakes/pumping plants State-of-the-art fish screens Forebay temporarily stores water pumped from river Two gravity flow tunnels (35 miles long; 9,000 cfs) Dual Conveyance South Delta (existing) North Delta (new) Three intakes/pumping plants State-of-the-art fish screens Forebay temporarily stores water pumped from river Two gravity flow tunnels (35 miles long; 9,000 cfs) North Diversion South Diversion

Conveyance Tidal Marsh Yolo Bypass Floodplain Restoration Natural Communities ConstructionConstruction 20 projects 62,455 acres 65,000 acres 10,000 acres 20 linear miles Some activities ongoing/others on as needed basis Channel Margin Other Stressors YEARS

Prepared by ICF International and The Brattle Group Costs and funding sources May BDCP Chapter 8 Alternatives to “take” May Analysis of alternative that may avoid harm to various species covered in the BDCP BDCP Chapter 9 Economic benefits to participating water agencies July Statewide economic impact May Employment impacts (published February 2013) Socioeconomic impacts May EIR/EIS Chapter 16 Administrative Draft 15

16

SWP supplies are essential to alternative supply options SWP provides baseline supplies that we conserve and recycle SWP provides valuable water quality benefits Colorado River & groundwater blending Recycling Feasibility of alternative supplies 17

Heavy dependence on imported supply and SWP Diversions Emphasis on Conservation, Local Supplies, and Storage & Transfers Local Supplies State Water Project Colorado River Aqueduct Storage & Transfers Conservation Conservation 18

19 Conservation: 900,000 af/yr Recycling: 335,000 af/yr Groundwater Recovery:111,000 af/yr Seawater: 46,000 af/yr (planned) Conservation represents regional actions both active & passive Recycling & groundwater represents total regional production 2012 (MWD & member agency) Seawater represents 3 planned local projects

20 $1, ,500+/AF $ ,500/AF $1, ,500+/AF $1, ,300/AF Local Supply Avg. ~ $1,500/AF SWP Existing ($650/AF) + Delta Improvements ($200/AF) = ~ $850/AF is committed to meeting future additional Metropolitan is committed to meeting future additional water supply needs through local resources and conservation Revised: December 18, 2012

Status Quo Ecosystem decline Pumping restrictions (supply reduced 30%) Major Levee Failure Up to three-year disruption of water deliveries $40 billion estimated impact to California’s economy 21

May 10 Consultant Administrative Draft EIR/EIS Released Late May Administrative Draft BDCP Chapters 8-12 TBDPublic Workshop October 1 Public Draft BDCP and EIR/EIS Release WinterFinal BDCP and EIR/EIS May DSC expected to certify EIR and adopt Final Delta Plan May 2013 Proposed regulations sent to OAL for 30 day review June-July OAL approves or disapproves regulations July 1- October 1 Regulations enforceable and DSC begins 22 BDCPBDCP DSC Delta Plan

SacramentoSacramento StocktonStockton Suisun Bay State & Federal Pumping Plants

24

BDCP Delta Facilities San Francisco PUC Hetch Hetchy Project Repairs to protect against future seismic events, and to meet current building codes and drinking water regulations Contra Costa Water District’s Los Vaqueros Project Improves water quality and provides emergency storage 25 BDCP Economic Benefits and Financial Strategies, SCWC/The PFM Group, February 2012

MWD share of BDCP Cost MWD Diamond Valley Reservoir/Inland Feeder projects Primarily an emergency storage facility but also provides drought and water quality benefits SDCWA Emergency Storage Project Enhances reliability of the water supply of San Diego in the event of seismic disruption 26 BDCP Economic Benefits and Financial Strategies, SCWC/The PFM Group, February 2012

Seismic Risk Bay Area Faults 27 Fishery Declines Delta smelt Subsidence

ChapterTitle 1Introduction 2Existing Ecological Conditions 3Conservation Strategy 4Covered Actions 5Effects Analysis 6Plan Implementation 7Implementation Structure 8Implementation Costs and Funding Sources 9Alternatives to Take 10Integration of Independent Science into BDCP 11List of Preparers 12Glossary

Local Los Angeles Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct State Water Project 29

30 Drinking Water for 25 Million Californians Northern California Southern Californi a Central Valley Irrigation for half of the Nation’s Fruits and Vegetables

Board Approved Delta Action PlanJune 2007 Delta Conveyance CriteriaSept 2007 Delta Governance PrinciplesAug 2008 Delta Vision ImplementationJan 2009 Delta-Related LegislationApr 2009 Board Authorized Execution of Planning Agreement for BDCPOct 2006 Execution of BDCP Cost-Sharing AgreementNov 2006 Execution of amendments to Planning AgreementDec 2009 Execution of amendment (additional funds)July 2010 Execution of amendment to MOAAug 2011 Planning costs: $170 million Metropolitan share: 25% 31

Toxic pollutants Invasive species Predator control Illegal poaching Hatchery practices 32

Objectives Improve export quality to meet Public Health standards & reduce treatment costs Support actions to minimize salinity imports Meet 500 mg/l blending goal Some Basin Plans have low TDS objectives Could restrict extended recharge of high salinity Colorado River water * OrangeCounty Main San Gabriel Raymond Chino San Jacinto 33 Las Posas Cucamonga Warner Valley Elsinore Upper San Juan San Mateo & San Onofre Six Basins SylmarSylmar VerdugoVerdugo East San Fernando Fernando *Some of the highlighted basins do not currently receive MWD recharge supplies

43 miles Above ground open channel 35 miles Underground gravity tunnels Fully isolatedDual conveyance allowing through-Delta operations 21,800 cfs9,000 cfs (tentative) 13 1 (Addressing salmon and striped bass only) 3 (Advanced technology; comprehensive goal to protect more fish species) 34 * A final decision on the proposed conveyance facility awaits the completion of regulatory and environmental review and public input consideration. Source: BDCP : A 21 st century Strategy.

Approximately 6,600 acres Approximately 2,400 acres** Avoid jeopardyConserve/contribute to recovery No (HCP not law until 1982) Yes No (State law not enacted until 1991) Yes 35 Source: BDCP : A 21 st century Strategy. ** Additional acres of agricultural land would be impacted due to disposal of dirt and material during construction. The Peripheral Canal proposal did not quantify such materials in detail. * A final decision on the proposed conveyance facility awaits the completion of regulatory and environmental review and public input consideration.