Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a February 27, 2018 Recap of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a February 27, 2018

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 2 February 27, 2018

Recap of Water Planning & Stewardship Committee February meeting Stage 1 Economic Analysis Modeling analyses Alternative financing considerations for the 9,000 cfs facility

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 3 February 27, 2018

Recap

Discussed State’s proposed Cal WaterFix staged construction Provided analysis of Stage 1 facilities Water supply Costs (capital, O&M, MWD rate impacts, household costs)

Recap of February meeting

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 4 February 27, 2018 Special Committee on Bay

Stage 1 Economic Analysis

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 5 February 27, 2018

Stage 1 California WaterFix

Report prepared by Dr. David Sunding, Professor, UC Berkeley Cost-benefit analysis to SWP & Federal Contractors under various cost-sharing and financing scenarios Monetized benefits include water supply reliability, water quality, seismic safety reliability

Climate change resiliency benefits discussed but not included

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 6 February 27, 2018

Stage 1 California WaterFix

Key Findings and Conclusions

CA WaterFix Stage 1 provides positive cost-benefit for State Water Contractors in both urban & agricultural sectors, and for Federal Contractors when using a portion of project capacity Trading of project costs and benefits among State Water Contractors is beneficial to agricultural contractors Potential reduced financing costs (i.e. WIFIA) reduces cost impacts and improves cost benefit for all participants

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 7 February 27, 2018 Special Committee on Bay Item 3a Slide

Additional Modeling Analyses

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 8 February 27, 2018

Both Stage 1 & full implementation improve water quality, help protect human health & enhance local water management Stage 1 alone provides less water quality benefits for project water

Water Quality Constituent

(Dry Year; Combined SWP/CVP)

6,000 cfs1 Improvement 9,000 cfs Improvement

Electrical Conductivity 16% 20% Total Dissolved Solids 15% 19% Bromide 24% 31%

• 1. Preliminary analysis - subject to revision

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 9 February 27, 2018

Reoperation Analysis (Winter 2013)

20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 Nov Dec Jan Feb

Flows (cfs) Delta Flows Historic SWP/CVP Exports 6,000 cfs CA WaterFix 9,000 cfs CA WaterFix

Increased export: 9,000 cfs facility ~ 781,000 AF; 6,000 cfs Stage 1 facility ~ 590,000 AF (preliminary analysis) SWP/CVP export losses due to BioOp ~ 800,000 AF (larger amount of SWP loss) Analysis by State Water Contractors

Historic Exports

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 10 February 27, 2018

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Million Acre-Feet Exceedance 9,000 cfs CA WaterFix

Existing

State & Federal Projects

10% 20% 40% Drier Period 70% 80% 90% Wetter Period Scenario Transfer Capability

(@50% exceedance)

Existing 0.2 million AF 6,000 cfs 0.8 million AF 9,000 cfs 1.1 million AF

• Data represents modeled transfer capability; Seller willingness & actual deliveries not represented
• Preliminary State Water Contractor analysis - subject to revision

6,000 cfs CA WaterFix

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 11 February 27, 2018 Item 3a Slide 11 February 27, 2018 Item 3a Slide 11 February 27, 2018

SWP Pumps

Item 3a Slide Item 3a Slide Item 3a Slide Item 3a Slide

CVP Pumps

11

Reverse Flows Downstream Flows

Elimination of Reserve Flow Enhances Fish Flow Conditions

January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average

Existing Avg.

January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average

• January thru June average

January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average January thru June average

2,172 cfs 6,000 cfs WaterFix -405 cfs 9,000 cfs WaterFix +53 cfs +53 cfs +53 cfs

Special Committee on Bay Special Committee on Bay Special Committee on Bay Special Committee on Bay Special Committee on Bay Special Committee on Bay

Preliminary analysis - subject to revision

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 12 February 27, 2018 Special Committee on Bay Item 3a Slide

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 13 February 27, 2018

Approach Securing Metropolitan’s investment Structure of debt and relationship to SWP Contract Option contracts/commitments from other contractors

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 14 February 27, 2018

Considerations

February 27, 2018

Keep fish near desirable habitat, not near pumps

Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Natural Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits flow direction enhances habitat Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits and Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits Existing facility operations limit restoration benefits water quality

Enhance flexibility to pump where fish presence Enhance flexibility to pump where fish presence is less Enhance flexibility to pump where fish presence Enhance flexibility to pump where fish presence

One pump location limits operational flexibility Capturing excess storm flow is more eco sensitive

Special Committee on Bay-Delta Item 3a Slide 15 February 27, 2018 February 27, 2018

Considerations

Summary

Stage 1 (2 Stage 1 (2 Stage 1 (2- Stage 1 (2 Stage 1 (2 Stage 1 (2 intakes, 1 intakes, 1- intakes, 1 tunnel) would cost about a Stage 1 (2 Stage 1 (2 Stage 1 (2 intakes, 1 intakes, 1 intakes, 1 intakes, 1 intakes, 1 tunnel) would cost about a tunnel) would cost about a tunnel) would cost about a third less, but the water supply benefits also would be impacted by one-third While some Stage 1 benefits are nearly the same, , the project’s lessened capacity would impact the system’s flexibility to handle:

earthquakes climate change climate change climate change climate change climate change fish take climate change climate change reverse flow risks

http://mwdh2o.com/PDFWWACurrentBoardAgendas/02272018%20BayDelta%203a%20Presentation.pdf