Home Table of Contents

§ 6007. Technical Review.

23 CA ADC § 6007BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

Barclays Official California Code of Regulations Currentness
Title 23. Waters
Division 7. California Water Commission
Chapter 1. Water Storage Investment Program
Article 3. Commission Methodology and Evaluation Criteria
23 CCR § 6007
§ 6007. Technical Review.
(a) The following project components shall be evaluated and scored by Staff and provided to the Commission. The sum of the components' score shall be considered the expected return for public investment:
(1) Public benefit ratio and non-monetized public benefits;
(2) Relative environmental value;
(3) Resiliency; and
(4) Implementation risk
(b) Public benefit ratio and non-monetized public benefits.
(1) Staff shall evaluate information provided in the application to assess a project's public benefit ratio as follows:
(A) The monetized public benefits must be public benefits defined in Water Code section 79753. Staff shall review and evaluate the supporting information for the following components and consider the reasonableness of the assumptions, completeness and quality of analysis, and appropriate use of data and analytical methods to calculate the public benefit ratio pursuant to section 6004:
1. Preliminary operations plan;
2. Analytical methods and results;
3. Magnitude of physical, biological, or chemical benefit that could be monetized; and
4. Cost allocation.
(B) Staff shall rely on information supplied by the applicant and may perform independent calculations. If a public benefit ratio component is not supported by the information submitted in the application, Staff may adjust it. If the methods used or values supplied are not supported and Staff cannot adjust the public benefit ratio, the public benefit value shall be removed from the public benefit ratio calculation. Adjustments made to the public benefit ratio shall result in adjustments to the project's Program cost share. Following this review, Staff shall publish on the Commission's website the public benefit ratio and Program cost share approved or modified by Staff for each application with comments indicating the reasons for any modifications.
(C) Staff's revised value for the public benefit ratio may be greater than or less than the value stated in the application, based on Staff's evaluations. If Staff revised the public benefit ratio, the applicant may appeal, pursuant to section 6008 of these regulations.
(D) Public benefits claimed that were not monetized will be evaluated using the operations plan, modeling and analytical methods and results, magnitude of benefits claimed, and quality of analysis. Staff shall note if the claimed benefit is supported or if the claim lacks supporting information or documentation.
(c) Relative environmental value.
(1) Based on information supplied in the application, CDFW and the State Water Board shall each calculate a relative environmental value for the ecosystem improvements and water quality improvements, respectively. These two scores will be combined, pursuant to section 6009, and become the total relative environmental value. Relative environmental value criteria outlined in Tables 2 and 4 for ecosystem and water quality improvements, respectively, shall be used to determine a project's relative environmental value for each of the CDFW and State Water Board priorities (shown in Tables 1 and 3, respectively) claimed by the applicant.
(A) Ecosystem Improvements Relative Environmental Value.
1. CDFW shall determine the relative environmental value for ecosystem improvements provided by a project. CDFW shall consider information supporting ecosystem benefits including the analytical methods, modeling results, and physical, chemical, or biological information.
Table 1. Ecosystem Priorities
In accordance with Water Code section 79754, CDFW has identified ecosystem priorities that could be realized by water storage projects. These priorities, which are not listed in rank order and are considered equal, are presented below:
Flow and Water Quality
1. Provide cold water at times and locations to increase the survival of salmonid eggs and fry.
2. Provide flows to improve habitat conditions for in-river rearing and downstream migration of juvenile salmonids.
3. Maintain flows and appropriate ramping rates at times and locations that will minimize dewatering of salmonid redds and prevent stranding of juvenile salmonids in side channel habitat.
4. Improve ecosystem water quality.
5. Provide flows that increase dissolved oxygen and lower water temperatures to support anadromous fish passage.
6. Increase attraction flows during upstream migration to reduce straying of anadromous species into non-natal tributaries.
7. Increase Delta outflow to provide low salinity habitat for Delta smelt, longfin smelt, and other estuarine fishes in the Delta, Suisun Bay, and Suisun Marsh.
8. Maintain or restore groundwater and surface water interconnection to support instream benefits and groundwater dependent ecosystems.
Physical Processes and Habitat
9. Enhance flow regimes or groundwater conditions to improve the quantity and quality of riparian and floodplain habitats for aquatic and terrestrial species.
10. Enhance the frequency, magnitude, and duration of floodplain inundation to enhance primary and secondary productivity and the growth and survival of fish.
11. Enhance the temporal and spatial distribution and diversity of habitats to support all life stages of fish and wildlife species.
12. Enhance access to fish spawning, rearing, and holding habitat by eliminating barriers to migration.
13. Remediate unscreened or poorly screened diversions to reduce entrainment of fish.
14. Provide water to enhance seasonal wetlands, permanent wetlands, and riparian habitat for aquatic and terrestrial species on State and Federal wildlife refuges and on other public and private lands.
15. Develop and implement invasive species management plans utilizing techniques that are supported by best available science to enhance habitat and increase the survival of native species.
16. Enhance habitat for native species that have commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational uses.
2. CDFW shall apply the following relative environmental value criteria to score each of the priorities listed in Table 1 that an applicant claims would be provided by the project. The score shall be assigned by evaluating the degree of change between with and without project conditions, and the degree to which ecosystem improvements associated with each claimed priority would be provided by a project. CDFW shall consider each criterion listed in Table 2:
Table 2. Ecosystem Relative Environmental Value Criteria
1. Number of different ecosystem priorities claimed.
2. Magnitude of ecosystem improvements.
3. Spatial and temporal scale of ecosystem improvements.
4. Inclusion of an adaptive management and monitoring program that includes measurable objectives, performance measures, thresholds, and triggers to achieve the ecosystem benefits.
5. Immediacy of ecosystem improvement actions and realization of benefits.
6. Duration of ecosystem improvements.
7. Consistency with species recovery plans and strategies, initiatives, and conservation plans.
8. Location of ecosystem improvements and connectivity to areas already being protected or managed for conservation values.
9. Efficient use of water to achieve multiple ecosystem benefits.
10. Resilience of ecosystem improvements to the effects of changing environmental conditions, including hydrologic variability and climate change.
(B) Water Quality Improvements Relative Environmental Value
1. The State Water Board shall determine the relative environmental value for water quality improvements provided by a project. The State Water Board shall consider information supporting water quality benefits including the analytical methods, modeling results, and physical or chemical information.
Table 3. Water Quality Priorities
In accordance with Water Code section 79754, the State Water Board has identified water quality priorities that could be realized by water storage projects. These priorities, which are not listed in rank order and are considered equal, are presented below:
1. Improve water temperature conditions in surface water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards for temperature.
2. Improve dissolved oxygen conditions in surface water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards for dissolved oxygen.
3. Improve nutrient conditions in surface water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards for nutrients.
4. Improve mercury conditions in surface water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards for mercury.
5. Improve salinity conditions in surface water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards for sodium, total dissolved solids, chloride, or specific conductance/electrical conductivity.
6. Protect, clean up, or restore groundwater resources in high- and medium-priority basins designated by the Department.
7. Achieve Delta tributary stream flows that resemble natural hydrograph patterns or other flow regimes that have been demonstrated to improve conditions for aquatic life.
8. Reduce current or future water demand on the Delta watershed by developing local water supplies and improving regional water self-reliance.
9. Provide water for basic human needs, such as drinking, cooking, and bathing, in disadvantaged communities, where those needs are not being met.
2. The State Water Board shall apply the following relative environmental value criteria to score each of the priorities listed in Table 3 that an applicant claims would be provided by the project. The score shall be assigned by evaluating the degree of change between with and without project conditions and the degree to which water quality improvements associated with each claimed priority would be provided by a project. State Water Board shall consider each criterion listed in Table 4:
Table 4. Water Quality Relative Environmental Value Criteria
1. Number of different water quality priorities claimed.
2. Magnitude of water quality improvements.
3. Spatial scale of water quality improvements.
4. Temporal scale of water quality improvements.
5. Inclusion of an adaptive management and monitoring program that includes measurable objectives, performance measures, thresholds, and triggers for managing water quality benefits.
6. Immediacy of water quality improvement actions.
7. Immediacy of the realization of water quality benefits.
8. Duration of water quality improvements.
9. Consistency with water quality control plans, water quality control policies, and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (2014).
10. Connectivity of water quality improvements to areas that support beneficial uses of water or are being managed for water quality.
11. Resilience of water quality improvements to the effects of climate change and extended droughts.
12. Extent to which undesirable groundwater results that are caused by extractions are corrected.
(d) Resiliency.
(1) Resiliency shall be comprised of two subcomponents, integration/flexibility and response to an uncertain future.
(A) Staff shall evaluate the integration/flexibility of the project based on the quality of the analysis and information provided pursuant to section 6003 of these regulations. Staff will note where the integration and flexibility claims are not supported by information provided in the application.
(B) Staff shall evaluate the response to an uncertain future, based on the quality of analysis provided in the uncertainty analysis and the project performance during a drought provided in the application pursuant to section 6004 of these regulations. Staff shall consider the reasonableness of the assumptions, calculations used to support the conclusions, the project's ability to sustain public benefits under future uncertainties, and the quality of analysis. Staff shall note if conclusions are supported or conclusions lack supporting information or documentation.
(e) Implementation risk.
(1) Staff shall consider the project's schedule and the following items when evaluating a project's implementation risk and shall score them as described in section 6009 of these regulations:
(A) Technical feasibility, as described in Technical Reference, section 3.5;
(B) Financial feasibility, as described in Technical Reference, section 3.5;
(C) Economic feasibility, as described in Technical Reference, section 3.5;
(D) Environmental feasibility, as described in Technical Reference, section 3.5, and status and schedule of permits.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 79705, 79711, 79750, 79751, 79752, 79753, 79755 and 79757, Water Code. Reference: Sections 79705, 79711, 79750, 79751, 79752, 79753, 79755 and 79757, Water Code.
HISTORY
1. New section filed 3-7-2017; operative 3-7-2017 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(b)(3) (Register 2017, No. 10).
This database is current through 6/24/22 Register 2022, No. 25
23 CCR § 6007, 23 CA ADC § 6007
End of Document