Bay City News
Oakley-based Diablo Water District this week filed a protest against the state Department of Water Resources' request to add two water diversion points to the Delta Conveyance Project -- the controversial tunnel project known by several names over the decades.
The protest follows DWR's Feb. 22 petition to the State Water Resources Control Board to request changes to DWR's existing water rights. If granted, this change would allow for the addition of two screened intakes 2.3 miles apart along the lower Sacramento River between the unincorporated town of Freeport and Sutter Slough in the northern Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
DWR director Karla Nemeth stated in her February letter to the Water Board that the additional intakes are an important step forward in ensuring the continued reliability of State Water Project water supplies.
"In pursuing this project, DWR seeks to address the effects of sea level rise and climate change, minimize water supply disruption caused by an earthquake and provide operational flexibility to improve aquatic conditions in the Delta," Nemeth wrote.
According to DWR's website, should the petition be granted, it would not alter the maximum permitted diversion amount under DWR's water right permits. The change petition says the proposed intakes would augment the ability to capture excess flows without exceeding water rights allocations.
Opponents like Diablo Water District say the change petition contradicts the regional objective of protecting and restoring the Delta.
Dan Muelrath, Diablo Water District general manager, explained that Diablo Water District has opposed the overall project in its various forms over the years. But with regard to the addition of the intakes, he wasn't sure why they were needed and raised concerns that potential impacts weren't sufficiently studied.
"Which is why it's not as simple as saying, 'Instead of 1,000 gallons per minute over here, we're just going to go to this other part of the river and do it.' Well, you need to model what that looks like, so that you can understand the impacts of the Delta as a whole," Muelrath said. "They haven't studied the impacts of what this proposed move of those intakes will do to the local community."
Despite Diablo Water District's opposition to the tunnel, Muelrath said he wasn't against sending water to Southern California -- a region he highlighted as a prime example of successful water reuse programs that could stand as statewide models for a no-tunnel water resiliency alternative.
"It's tunnel or no tunnel. It's not water to Southern California or no water to Southern California. We know water is still going to get transferred to existing facilities," he said. "It's not about limiting. It's about the local investment."
Once the State Water Board receives all protests, it will send accepted protests to DWR, which will have 15 days to respond to each protest. By the end of the year, if resolution efforts are unsuccessful, DWR's change petition will proceed to a formal hearing before the State Water Board.
"We are committed to holding accountable state agencies proposing actions that could harm the precious water resources of the Delta," said Muelrath. "We stand as a collective voice for the well-being of the fish, the environment, the water quality, and communities that will be devastated by the detrimental impacts of this project."
Copyright © 2024 Bay City News, Inc. All rights reserved. Republication, rebroadcast or redistribution without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited. Bay City News is a 24/7 news service covering the greater Bay Area.
Most Popular
Comments / 0