2004-01-27 SubmittalJan 26 04 03:40p Tupper Hull
916-451-9201
Fax Cover Sheet ci,": 2
West lands Water District
3130 N. Fresno Street
Fresno, California 93703
(559) 241-6200
• i 0
To: Members, City Council, City of Alameda
Fax Number: 510-747-4805
From: Thomas W. Birmingham, Westlands Water District
Message:
This letter is in reference to tomorrow evening's City Council discussion of litigation
in regards to thc Trinity River_ The original letter is being delivered via overnight
express delivery.
lf you have questions, please contact Tupper Hull at (916) 451-9200
Number of pages (including cover): 9
p.1
Re: Special Joint City Council and
Public Utilities Board Meeting
1-27-04
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
Mayor, Councilmembers, CM,
CA, AP&T General Manager
Jan 26 04 03:40p Tupper Hull
916- 451 -9201 p.2
Westiands Water District
3130 N. Fresno Street, P.O. Box 6056, Fresno, California 93703 -6056, (559) 224 -1523, FAX (559) 241 -6277
January 26, 2004
The Honorable Beverly Johnson
Mayor, City of Alameda
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
Via Facsimile
Dear Mayor Johnson:
I am writing in regard to the January 27, 2004 meeting of the Alameda City
Council and the Public Utilities Board to discuss ongoing litigation over the Trinity
River between several entities that benefit from the Central Valley Project (CVP)
and the United States Department of the Interior. According to a January 15
article in the Oakland Tribune, the City of Alameda has been asked to withdraw
from this lawsuit. My purpose is not to request, or advise you on, any particular
course of action. Instead, it is to make you aware of facts in this matter about
which you might not be fully aware.
Briefly, Westiands is one of several beneficiaries of CVP water that sued the
Department of the Interior to block a 2000 Record of Decision by former Interior
Secretary Bruce Babbitt. The Northern California Power Association, of which the
City of Alameda is a member, joined in that action. The Record of Decision. if
implemented, would immediately reduce Trinity River diversions to the
Sacramento River, diminishing CVP water supplies and power generation.
Among the issues raised in the litigation was whether or not the Department of
the Interior had conducted an adequate review of the environmental impacts of
reducing flows in the Sacramento River /San Francisco Bay Delta. In 2002,
United States District Judge Oliver Wanger ruled in favor of NCPA, Westlands
and others by ordering the Record of Decision to be stayed pending adequate
environment review. That decision was appealed and we presently are awaiting
a decision from the 9`" Circuit Court of Appeals.
My purpose for reviewing these facts is not to re -argue that lawsuit. Rather, as
your own utility manager noted in the Oakland Tribune, reducing Trinity River
diversions will have far - reaching adverse impacts, including environmental
Jan 26 04 03:40p Tupper Hull
Tho Honorable Beverly Johnson
January 26, 2004
Page 2
916 -451 -9201 p.3
impacts. The construction of Lewiston Dam on the Trinity River in 1963 and the
subsequent diversion of water to the Central Valley project benefits millions of
Californians. As part of the Central Valley Project, Trinity River water currently is
used to generate clean, inexpensive electricity for California consumers, protect
endangered salmon and steelhead in the Sacramento River and the Bay /Delta
estuary, maintain Delta water quality, and is used to irrigate farms in Central
California.
These beneficial uses notwithstanding, Westlands recognizes the time has come
to provide meaningful restoration of the Trinity fishery. That is why Westlands
developed a settlement proposal that will provide nearly 92 percent of the flows
called for in the Record of Decision and closely mirrors the peak flow regimes
that were a part of the Record of Decision. These minor modifications to the
Record of Decision flow regimes are designed to fully and immediately restore
the Trinity River fishery without unnecessarily harming the interests of other CVP
water users. including the City of Alameda and the Westlands Water District.
Although Westlands continues to have concerns about the approach adopted in
the Record of Decision, our proposal puts asides those differences. Under our
proposal, peak spring and early summer flows are identical to those contained in
the Record of Decision. Base flows in the summer and fall are only slightly less
than those contained in the Record of Decision. Our settlement proposal still will
result in significant reductions in water and hydroelectric power for CVP
beneficiaries but will do so in a way that minimizes the adverse impacts on the
beneficiaries.
I am attaching for your review hydrographs that demonstrate how we have
proposed settling this lawsuit. Separate hydrographs have been developed for
each of the year types used in the Record of Decision — wet, normal. dry and
critically dry. I am also attaching a chart comparing the historic flows in the
Trinity to flows under the Record of Decision and the Westlands proposal. As
you can see, there are very minor differences between the amount of water that
would be released under our proposal compared to water that would be released
under the Record of Decision.
The Hoopa Valley Tribe does not support our proposal, however, we believe it
deserves serious consideration by all parties as a good faith effort to settle this
litigation. Rather than withdraw from the litigation, the City of Alameda may wish
to support efforts to settle this lawsuit in a manner that is fair, balanced and will
allow restoration efforts to begin immediately while still providing some measure
of protection for the farmers, cities and fish that now rely upon these Trinity River
water supplies.
Jan 26 04 03:40p Tupper Hull
The Honorable Beverly Johnson
January 26, 2004
Page 3
916 - 451 -9201 p.4
appreciate you taking the time to review this material. Please do not hesitate to
contact me if you have questions abut Westlands and our settlement proposal.
Sincerely,
Thomas W. Birming
General Manager /General Counsel
Jan 26 04 03:40p Tupper Hull
916- 451 -9201
Q
F
O
A
O
8N
Discharge (cfs)
O O O
p.5
I
l
r
Z _
1. the period 1912 -1960. The green
and blue lines trace the 2D day
craving average value plus and
4.
.
/•'
�---
....Ir....Ire' �. '
r
-
cu pc+. n1vv.,w , ifrlean rr rjs sia
error)
`
I
p.5
Jan 26 04 03:41p Tupper Hull
916- 451 -9201
N
0
n
(D
L
N
P
L
7
0
0
N
Z
O
SN
P
Discharge (cfs)
App (pJl
O W O 8
Of
O
8
I �
c
period 1912 1960. The green and
blue lines trace the 20 day moving
average value plus and minus one
standard error of the mean. These
I
_
CV p 4. new. Avg. Lirean)
- -- 20 per. Mov. Avg. (mean mir3s sld
ertor)
J1'8A Ii:WJON
p.6
Jan 26 04 03:41p Tupper Hull
O
9
0
c0
L
9
k •
w
N
CO
Q)
b
0
z
O
Discharge (cfs)
0 0 0 0
916 -451 -9201 p.7
8 8
0
0
(ueaw) BAN/ nosy Jad OZ
uo!s5,30j3 p.0081
c
N
Jan 26 04 03:41p Tupper Hull
916 - 451 -9201 p.8
a 0
CD
N
0
P
0
co
A
N
CO
O
w
r
7
U
0
N
0
0
O
Discharge (cfs)
O O O
I
j
1
prior to the diversion project over
the period 1912 -1960. The green
and blue lines trace the 24 day
-�
g/_ 2
cu yc.. muv_ r,vg. mean plus sra errop
JeaA''a Alie3' !J3
Jan 26 04 03:41p Tupper Hull
2
0
m
916 - 451 -9201 p.9
Yield (TAF)
- s IV IV
01 0 01 O 01
0 0 o 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1912
1914
1916
1918
1920
1922
1924
1926
1928
1930
1932
113
ID
'' 1936
CD 1938
1940
1942
1944
1946
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
c)
0
3
A
0
1
o
a�
74
f9 • N.
N '�
o -1
• 70
0
� 0
a
m • 0
0
0.
doh 9
a, »
Lb V
1
Crbgb
O
a_
0