City Council and Concurrent Authorities
July 7, 2026

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

3. Winter-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Endangered

4. Spring-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Threatened These species and only these species are hereinafter referred to as "Covered Species." Impacts to Covered Species:

The Project activities described above and their resulting impacts are expected to result in the incidental take of individuals of the Covered Species as follows:

Construction
Individuals of the Covered Species may be incidentally taken as a result of mortality due to instream cofferdam construction and project related dewatering. Specifically, preconstruction dredging will remove approximately 6,700 cubic yards of native river bank and channel bottom material; construction of the facility will permanently remove 0.32 acres of instream habitat; the waterside portion of the construction area will then be isolated from the main channel by permanent sheet pile wing walls and a temporary sheet pile cofferdam; approximately 833 cubic yards of rock riprap will be placed along the permanent wing walls of the intake structure; and the area within the cofferdam and the existing levee will be pumped dry and filled with approximately 1300 cubic yards of material to allow for construction activities to occur.

Operation
Impacts of the proposed taking also include the temporary and permanent impacts to the Covered Species resulting from the operation of the Project. The Covered Species may be incidentally taken as a result of mortality due to Project operations including entrainment/ salvage, increased habitat degradation, and the Project's incremental contribution to cumulative impacts. To compensate for impacts, the City will be required to uphold minimization and mitigation measures regarding flows, screening of intakes, effectiveness monitoring, habitat restoration, and land acquisition. The design of the fish screens will protect Chinook salmon and longfin and Delta smelt greater than 20mm.

Incidental Take Authorization of Covered Species:

This ITP authorizes incidental take of the Covered Species and only the Covered Species. 5 The Fish and Game Commission has approved a petition to list the longfin smelt as a threatened species. The longfin smelt's legal status will officially change upon conclusion of the rulemaking process that was initiated to modify regulations to update the species' status. The same take prohibitions apply to candidate, threatened and endangered species, and therefore this ITP will remain in effect after the status change.

Page4
Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
With respect to incidental take of the Covered Species, DFG authorizes the Permittee, its employees, contractors, and agents to take Covered Species incidentally in carrying out the Project, subject to the limitations described in this section and the Conditions of Approval identified below. This ITP does not authorize take of Covered Species from activities outside the scope of the Project as described above, take of Covered Species resulting from violation of this ITP, or intentional take of Covered Species, except for capture and relocation of Covered Species as authorized by this ITP.

Conditions of Approval:

Unless specified otherwise, the following measures shall pertain to all ground- or vegetation­ disturbing activities (including in-water work) within the Project construction boundaries, including areas used for ingress and egress routes during construction. DFG's issuance of this ITP and Permittee's authorization to take the Covered Species are subject to Permittee's compliance with and implementation of the following Conditions of Approval:

1. Permittee shall comply with all applicable state, federal, and local laws in existence on the effective date of this ITP or adopted thereafter.

2. Permittee shall implement and adhere to the mitigation measures related to the Covered Species in the Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2003112060) certified by the Permittee as lead agency for the Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) on November 8, 2005.

3. Permittee shall fully implement and adhere to the conditions of this ITP within the time frames set forth below and as set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which is included as Attachment 1 to this ITP.

4. General Provisions:

4.1. Before initiating ground-disturbing activities, the Permittee shall designate a representative (Designated Representative) responsible for communications with DFG and for overseeing compliance with this ITP. The Permittee shall notify DFG in writing prior to commencement of ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities of the Designated Representative's name, business address, and contact information, and shall notify DFG in writing if a substitute Designated Representative is selected or identified at any time during the term of this ITP.

4.2. The Permittee shall hire a biologist knowledgeable and experienced in the biology and natural history of the Covered Species (Designated Biologist). The Designated Biologist shall monitor construction activities within the Project area.

At least 30 days prior to ground-disturbing activities, the Permittee shall submit to DFG in writing the proposed Designated Biologist's name, qualifications, business

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DEL TA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
address, and contact information for review and approval. The Permittee shall not commence ground-disturbing activities until DFG approves the Designated Biologist.

4.3. The Designated Biologist shall have authority to require Project-related personnel to immediately stop any activity that is not in compliance with this ITP, and to order any reasonable measure to avoid the unauthorized take of an individual of the Covered Species. Neither the Designated Biologist nor DFG shall be liable for any costs incurred in complying with the Conditions of Approval, including cease-work orders issued by DFG.

4.4. All in-water work within Honker Cut, Bishop Cut, Pixley Slough and San Joaquin River shall be conducted within sheetpile cofferdams and in isolation from the flowing water. Installation of all sheetpile cofferdams shall be limited to August 1 through October 31. Work within cofferdams may occur outside of this work period. Alternative cofferdam designs shall only be used if approved by DFG. The Permittee shall use a vibratory hammer to install all cofferdams.

4.5. Piles will only be driven for one 80 mgd pumping unit. Piles shall only be driven during the period August 1 through October 31.

4.6. A minimum buffer zone of 25 feet shall be implemented at entry and exit points during boring under Honker Cut and Bishop Cut. The pipeline shall be tunneled at sufficient depth to avoid the potential for a fracture in the streambed (frac-out).

4.7. Erosion control measures shall be utilized throughout all phases of operation in areas where soil, silt, dirt and/or sediment from project activities threatens to enter waters of the State. Runoff and sedimentation will be prevented by the implementation of appropriate construction best management practices (BMPs).

The stockpiled soil will be protected from the elements. At no time shall any of these materials be allowed to enter or be placed where it may enter waters of the State. Erosion control matting will not include monofilament or plastic; the matting will be composed of jute, straw, coconut matting, or other natural fibers.

4.8. Construction and trench dewatering activities shall comply with a permit issued by the California Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) before being discharged. Surface areas disturbed by the open trenching activities will be restored to their original condition. Unpaved areas will be replanted with grasses, shrubs, and trees as required by DFG.

4.9. Permittee shall employ trenchless construction techniques such as bore and jack and microtunneling to pass under sensitive areas, such as the waterways of Page6
Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Bishop and Honker Cuts. Spoils from the excavation will be placed alongside the pits outside of the channel for future use as backfill. Staging and storage areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricants, and solvents shall be located outside of the channel and banks. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, generators, compressors, and welders, located within or adjacent to the channel, shall be positioned over drip pans. Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjacent to the channel shall be checked and maintained daily to prevent leaks of materials that if introduced to water could be deleterious to aquatic life.

Vehicles shall be moved away from the channel prior to refueling and lubrication.

4.10. Poured concrete shall be excluded from the wetted channel for a period of 30 days after it is poured. During that time the poured concrete shall be kept moist, and runoff from the concrete shall not be allowed to enter waters of the State.

Commercial sealants (e.g. Deep Seal, Elasto-Deck BT Reservoir Grade) may be applied to the poured concrete surface where difficulty in excluding water flow for a long period may occur. If sealant is used, water shall be excluded from the site until the sealant is dry.

4.11. Permittee shall conduct an education program for all persons employed or otherwise working on the Project site prior to performing work on-site. Instruction shall consist of a presentation by the Designated Biologist that includes a discussion of the biology and general behavior of the Covered Species, information about the distribution and habitat needs of the Covered Species, sensitivity of the Covered Species to human activities, their status under CESA including legal protection, recovery efforts, penalties for violations and Project-specific protective measures described in this ITP. In particular, the education program shall instruct workers to notify the Designated Biologist during fish rescue operations (as described in Condition 6.4) if fish are observed and specify that activities shall cease until additional fish have been relocated. The Designated Biologist will remain at the site to rescue additional fish if the workers observe them within the dewatering area. Interpretation shall be provided for non-English speaking workers, and the same instruction shall be provided for any new workers prior to on-site Project activity. Copies of this ITP shall be maintained at the worksite with the Project Manager. Permittee shall prepare and distribute wallet-sized cards or a fact sheet handout containing this information for workers to carry on-site. Upon completion of the program, employees shall sign an affidavit stating they attended the program and understand all protection measures. These forms shall be filed at the City of Stockton offices and be available to DFG upon request.

4.12. Project-related personnel shall access the Project site during construction and development activities using existing routes and shall not cross habitat outside of pre-approved access roads. To the extent possible, the Permittee shall use

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
previously disturbed areas within the Project site for temporary storage areas, laydown sites, and any other surface-disturbing activities. If construction of offsite routes of travel will be required, DFG shall be contacted prior to carrying out such an activity. DFG may require an amendment to this ITP if additional take of Covered Species may result from Project modification.

4.13. The Permittee shall provide DFG representatives with reasonable access to the Project site and mitigation lands under its control, and shall otherwise fully cooperate with DFG efforts to verify compliance with or effectiveness of mitigation measures set forth in the ITP.

4.14.Upon Project completion, the Permittee shall remove from the site and properly dispose of all construction refuse, including, but not limited to, broken equipment parts, wrapping material, cords, cables, wire, rope, strapping, twine, buckets, metal or plastic containers, and boxes.

4.15. Notwithstanding any expiration date on this ITP's take authorization, the Permittee's obligations under this ITP do not end until DFG accepts as complete the Permittee's Final Mitigation Report required by Condition 5.8 of this ITP.

5. Notificationand Reporting Provisions:

5.1. The Permittee shall notify DFG and shall document compliance with all pre­ construction Conditions of Approval before initiating ground-disturbing activities.

5.2. Weekly Status Report: The Designated Representative shall provide DFG with a single status report every Monday on all activities authorized by this ITP. The status report shall list the schedule of events (beginning dates, work in progress, and completion dates) and shall be submitted until the list of authorized activities is complete or there are scheduled periods of inactivity. The status report shall be sent via email transmittal to [email protected].

5.3. Monthly Compliance Report: The Designated Biologist shall be on-site daily while construction and/or surface-disturbing activities are taking place to minimize take of the Covered Species and to check for compliance with all mitigation and avoidance measures. These inspections shall be compiled into a Monthly Compliance Report and submitted to DFG at the office listed below or via e-mail to DFG's regional representative at [email protected]. DFG may at any time increase the timing and number of compliance inspections and reports required under this provision depending upon the results of previous compliance inspections. If DFG determines the reporting schedule is inadequate, DFG will notify Permittee by letter of the new reporting schedule.

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

5.4. The Permittee shall immediately notify DFG in writing if it determines that it is not in compliance with any condition of approval of this ITP, including but not limited to any actual or anticipated failure to implement mitigation measures within the time periods indicated in this ITP and/or the MMRP. Permittee shall report any non­ compliance during the construction phase to DFG within 24 hours.

5.5.AII observations of Covered Species during Project activities shall be conveyed to the Permittee's Designated Representative or Designated Biologist. This information shall be included in the next weekly status report (see Condition 5.2) submitted to DFG by the Permittee.

5.6. If a Covered Species is killed by Project-related activities during construction, or if a Covered Species is otherwise found dead, the Designated Biologist shall be immediately notified and a written report will be sent to DFG within two (2) calendar days. The report will include the date, time of the finding or incident, location of the carcass, and the circumstances.

5.7.Annual Status Report: Beginning with issuance of the ITP and continuing until DFG accepts the Final Mitigation Report identified below, Permittee shall provide DFG an Annual Status Report (ASR) no later than January 31 of every year. Each ASR shall include, at a minimum: 1) a general description of the status of the Project site and construction activities, including actual or projected completion dates, if known; 2) a copy of the table in the MMRP with notes showing the current implementation status of each mitigation measure; and 3) an assessment of the effectiveness of each completed or partially completed mitigation measure in minimizing and compensating for Project impacts.

5.8. Final Mitigation Report: No later than 45 days after completion of construction, including completion of all mitigation measures, Permittee shall provide DFG with a Final Mitigation Report. The Final Mitigation Report shall be prepared by the Designated Biologist and shall include, at a minimum: 1) a copy of the table in the MMRP with notes showing when each of the mitigation measures was implemented; 2) all available information about Project-related incidental take of Covered Species; 3) information about other Project impacts on the Covered Species; 4) construction dates; 5) an assessment of the effectiveness of the ITP's conditions of approval in minimizing and mitigating for Project impacts; 6) recommendations on how mitigation measures might be changed to more effectively minimize and mitigate the impacts of future projects on the Covered Species; and 7) any other pertinent information, including the level of take of the Covered Species associated with the Project.

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

6. Take Minimization Measures:

Take avoidance of Covered Species is the first priority of this ITP. Relocation of Covered Species discovered within the work area prior to ground- or vegetation­ disturbing activities, as well as during Project construction, is the second priority of this ITP. Permittee shall implement and adhere to the following conditions to minimize take of Covered Species.

Diversion of Water

6.1. The initial capacity of the Project shall be limited to 30 million gallons per day (mgd) and a maximum instantaneous rate of diversion of 47 cfs. Further expansion of the Project is not covered under this ITP and will require additional take authorization from DFG.

6.2. The Project intake shall be operated to minimize entrainment of Delta and longfin smelt larvae by reducing and curtailing diversion during sensitive time periods.

Pumping rate shall not exceed 24 cfs during the periods February 15 and March 15 and May 21 through June 15. Pumping shall cease during the period of March 15 through May 20. The Permittee may divert up to 47 cfs outside of these time frames.

6.3. Smelt Monitoring Plan: To evaluate the effectiveness of the minimization measures, the Permittee shall develop and implement a plan to monitor and quantify the entrainment of the Covered Species at the Project intake. A Smelt Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to DFG for approval prior to any water diversion. In addition to quantifying the amount of take, the monitoring shall assess the effectiveness of the period of curtailment and reduced pumping and evaluate if other periods would provide better protection. An annual Smelt Monitoring Report, which is separate from and in addition to the ASR identified in Condition 5.7, shall be submitted to DFG for review and comment by December 31 of each year.

6.4. Fish Rescue Plan: The Permittee shall submit a Fish Rescue Plan to be implemented during cofferdam dewatering operations for DFG approval prior to any in-water work. The plan shall include at minimum the following:
a) Cofferdams shall only be closed during low tide events to minimize fish capture. b) Prior to fully dewatering the cofferdams, remaining fish in the work area will be rescued. Efforts will be made to reduce collecting and handling stress, minimize the time that fish are held in buckets, and minimize handling stress during processing and release. Immediately after collection, fish will be identified, measured, and counted.

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
c) Under the direct supervision of the Designated Biologist, longfin smelt and Delta smelt shall be processed first and released as soon as possible. Species name and length data shall be recorded on data sheets, as well as time, date, location, gear type, water temperature, and any other pertinent observations of the fish. d) No employee or contractor shall remove any fish, dead or alive, from the site for personal use. All efforts to reduce the time that live fish are out of the water shall be made so as to reduce the chances of incidental take during the fish rescue. All fish are to be promptly returned to the water with the exception of any dead longfin smelt or Delta smelt.
e) During the fish rescue, there is potential for fish mortality. If any Covered Species suffers mortality, the individuals will be preserved via freezing or placing in a container with 10 percent formalin solution. Information on time and exact location of any incidental take, method of take, length of time from death to preservation, water temperature, and any other relevant information shall be recorded in writing. Preserved individuals will be brought to DFG laboratories. f) After completing the fish rescue, the Designated Biologist shall prepare a brief documentation report. The report shall include information on the personnel conducting the fish rescue, methods used, numbers of each species collected and relocated, length data, and estimate of the survival offish immediately after release. Photographs of the site and rescue operations shall be included. The report shall be provided by the Permittee to DFG within 30 days of completing the fish rescue. This report is separate from, and in addition to, the reports required by Condition 5 of this ITP.
g) After the fish rescue effort is completed, dewatering of the area within the cofferdams may continue. If additional fish are observed, dewatering activities shall cease until those fish have been relocated. The Designated Biologist shall remain at the site to rescue additional fish if the workers observe them within the dewatering area.

6.5. Pumps used to dewater the area behind the cofferdam will be screened to protect the Covered Species and other aquatic species. Pumps used to dewater cofferdams shall be screened as follows:
a) Perforated plate: screen openings shall not exceed 3/32 inches (2.38 mm), measured in diameter.

1. Woven wire: screen openings shall not exceed 3/32 inches (2.38 mm), measured diagonally.

2. Screen material shall provide a minimum of 27% open area.

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

3. Approach velocity shall not exceed 0.33 feet per second.

7. Full Mitigation for Take:

DFG has determined that implementation of both of the following measures is necessary and required under CESA to fully mitigate impacts of the taking on Covered Species that will result from implementation of this Project.
7 .1 Condition 6.2 shall be implemented to ensure diversion of water is reduced or ceased during the most sensitive periods for the Covered Species. The implementation of Condition 6.2 not only minimizes take, but partially mitigates the take caused by the Project by providing additional freshwater inflows through the delta, thus increasing available aquatic habitat.

7.2 Habitat Management Land Acquisition and Funding Assurances:

Prior to initiating ground- or vegetation-disturbing Project activities, or no later than 18 months from the effective date of this ITP if Security is provided pursuant to Condition 8 below, the Permittee shall acquire, restore, enhance and permanently preserve 5.96 acres of tidal wetland habitat that shall be the Habitat Management Lands (HM Lands). The required acreage includes 0.96 acres to compensate the permanent loss of 0.32 acres of shallow water habitat and 5.0 acres to mitigate the loss of Covered Species during Project operations. This determination is based on an assessment of timing and quantity of the aquatic habitat impacted by the Project, an evaluation of the potential ongoing impacts due to operation, and an assessment of the value of the other mitigation provided. Permittee shall provide the HM Lands as follows:

7.2.1 A minimum of three months prior to acquisition of the HM Lands, the Permittee shall submit to DFG for approval a formal Proposed Lands for Acquisition Form (see Attachment 28) identifying the land to be purchased as mitigation for the Project's impacts on Covered Species. As part of this condition, Permittee shall:
7 .2.1.1 Transfer fee title to the HM Lands to DFG or another entity under terms approved by DFG. If fee title is held by an entity other than DFG, a conservation easement in a form approved by DFG shall be recorded on title of the HM Lands. The grantee of the conservation easement must be approved by DFG and may be DFG, a DFG­ approved non-profit organization qualified pursuant to California Government Code section 65965, or a public agency authorized to hold conservation easements. If a DFG-approved non-profit organization or authorized public agency are grantee on a conservation easement, DFG shall be named third party beneficiary;

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DEL TA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
7 .2.1.2 Provide a recent preliminary title report, initial hazardous materials survey report, and other necessary documents (see Attachment 2A and 28). All documents conveying the HM Lands and all conditions of title are subject to the approval of DFG, and if applicable, the Wildlife Conservation Board and the Department of General Services;

7.2.1.3 Provide for the initial protection and enhancement of HM Lands as determined by DFG once Permittee identifies the HM Lands. DFG estimates that initial protection and enhancement will cost approximately $10,000.00/acre for 5.96 acres;

7.2.1.4 Conduct a Property Analysis Record (PAR) or PAR-like analysis once the HM Lands have been identified to determine the appropriate endowment amount to fund the in-perpetuity management of the 5.96 acres of required HM Lands. Permittee shall provide the required endowment to DFG or a DFG authorized third party after DFG reviews and approves the analysis. Permittee shall provide funding assurances for the endowment in the Security (see Condition 8 below). Interest from the endowment amount shall be available for reinvestment in the principal and for the long-term operation, management, and protection of the HM Lands, including reasonable administrative overhead, biological monitoring, improvements to biological carrying capacity, law enforcement measures, and any other action designed to protect or improve the habitat values of the HM Lands. Any monies received by DFG pursuant to this Condition shall be deposited in a special deposit account established pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 13014. Alternatively, endowment funds may be held by a DFG-approved non-profit organization qualified to hold endowment funds. DFG may pool the endowment with other
endowments for the operation, management and protection of HM Lands for local populations of the Covered Species;

7.2.1.5 Reimburse DFG for reasonable expenses incurred during title and documentation review, expenses incurred from other state agency reviews, and overhead related to transfer of HM Lands to DFG. DFG estimates that this Project will create an additional cost to DFG of no more than $3,000 for every fee title deed or easement processed.

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

8. Performance Security:

8.1. Permittee may proceed with ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities before completing all of the required mitigation (including acquisition of HM Lands), monitoring, and reporting activities only if Permittee ensures funding to complete those activities by providing to DFG prior to commencing ground- or vegetation disturbing activities or within thirty (30) days after the effective date of this ITP, whichever occurs first, an irrevocable letter of credit in the form of Attachment 4 or another form of security (Security) approved by DFG's Office of the General Counsel.

The Security shall allow DFG to draw on the principal sum if DFG, at its sole discretion, determines that Permittee has failed to comply with the Conditions of Approval of this ITP. The Security shall be in the amount of $119,200.00 based on the following estimated costs of implementing the ITP's mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements:

8.1.1. Land acquisition costs for impacts to habitat, calculated at $5,000.00/acre for

5.96 acres: $29,800.00;

8.1.2. Costs of initial protection and enhancement/restoration of HM Lands, calculated at $10,000.00/acre for 5.96 acres: $59,600.00;

8.1.3. Endowment estimate, calculated at$ 5,000.00/acre for 5.96 acres: $29,800.00.

Even if the Security is provided, the Permittee must complete the required acquisition, protection and transfer of all HM Lands and record the required conservation easements in favor of DFG no later than 18 months after the start of the ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities.

Amendment:

This ITP may be amended without the concurrence of the Permittee if DFG determines that continued implementation of the Project under existing ITP conditions would jeopardize the continued existence of a Covered Species or that Project changes or changed biological conditions necessitate an ITP amendment to ensure that impacts to the Covered Species are minimized and fully mitigated. DFG may also amend the ITP at any time without the concurrence of the Permittee as required by law.

Stop-Work Order:

DFG may issue Permittee a written stop-work order to suspend any activity covered by this ITP for an initial period of up to 25 days to prevent or remedy a violation of ITP conditions (including but not limited to failure to comply with reporting, monitoring, or habitat acquisition obligations) or to prevent the illegal take of an endangered, threatened, or candidate species.

Permittee shall comply with the stop-work order immediately upon receipt thereof. DFG may

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
extend a stop-work order under this provision for a period not to exceed 25 additional days, upon written notice to the Permittee. DFG shall commence the formal suspension process pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 783.7 within five working days of issuing a stop-work order.

Compliance with Other Laws:

This ITP contains DFG's requirements for the Project pursuant to CESA. This ITP does not necessarily create an entitlement to proceed with the Project. Permittee is responsible for complying with all other applicable state, federal, and local laws.

Notices:

The Permittee shall deliver the fully executed duplicate original ITP by first class mail or overnight delivery to the following address:

Habitat Conservation Planning Branch
California Department of Fish and Game
Attention: CESA Permitting Program
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1260
Sacramento, CA 95814
Written notices, reports and other communications relating to this ITP shall be delivered to DFG by first class mail at the following addresses, or at addresses DFG may subsequently provide the Permittee. Notices, reports, and other communications should reference the Project name, Permittee, and ITP Number (2081-2009-005-03) in a cover letter and on any other associated documents.

Original cover with attachment(s) to:

Charles Armor, Regional Manager
Bay Delta Region
PO Box47
Yountville, California 94599
Telephone (707) 944-5517
Fax(707)944-5553
Copy of cover without attachment(s) to:

And:

Office of the General Counsel ·
California Department of Fish and Game
1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Habitat Conservation Planning Branch
California Department of Fish and Game

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1260
Sacramento, CA 95814
Unless Permittee is notified otherwise, DFG's Regional Representative for purposes of addressing issues that arise during implementation of the ITP is:

Corinne Gray, Environmental Scientist
Post Office Box 47
Yountville, California 94599
Telephone (707) 944-5526
Fax (707) 944-5595
Compliance with CEQA:

DFG's issuance of the ITP is subject to CEQA. DFG is a responsible agency under CEQA with respect to the ITP because of prior environmental review of the Project by the Permittee as lead agency for the Project. (See generally Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21067, 21069.) The lead agency's prior environmental review of the Project is set forth in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 2003112060) that the Permittee certified for the Delta Water Supply Project on November 8, 2005. At the time the lead agency certified the EIR and approved the Project it also adopted all mitigation measures identified in the El R as conditions of Project approval.

In fulfilling its obligations as a responsible agency, DFG's obligations under CEQA are more limited than the lead agency. DFG, in particular, is responsible for considering only the effects of those activities involved in the Project which it is required by law to carry out or approve and mitigating or avoiding only the direct or indirect environmental effects of those parts of the Project which it decides to carry out, finance, or approve. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002.1, subd. (d); CEQA Guidelines,§§ 15041, subd. (b), 15096, subds. (f)-(g).)6 Accordingly, because DFG's exercise of discretion is limited to issuance of the ITP, DFG is responsible for considering only the environmental effects that fall within its permitting authority under CESA.

In conjunction with the issuance of the ITP, DFG is adopting an Addendum to the El R pursuant to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines§ 15164.) The Addendum describes changes to the Project required by the ITP, including: monitoring requirements, dewatering activities, implanting a fish rescue plan, installing DFG approved fish screens, and restricting diversions to times that Delta and longfin smelt are likely not to be in the system. Further, the Addendum concludes that the recent decision of the Fish and Game Commission to approve • The "CEQA Guidelines" are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
a petition to list the longfin smelt as threatened does not constitute a new significant or substantially more severe impact.

Therefore, DFG finds that substantial evidence in the record shows that the changes described in the Addendum are not substantial changes that would require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Moreover, since the adoption of the EIR, there have been no significant changes in the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, nor has any new information of substantial importance become available. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15164(b) and 15162, an Addendum is the appropriate environmental document for these changes.

This ITP, along with DFG's CEQA findings for the ITP and Project, which are available as a separate document, provide evidence of DFG's consideration of the EIR for the Project and the environmental effects related to issuance of the ITP. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15096, subd. (f).) DFG has considered the adopted EIR and the environmental effects described therein, in conjunction with the Addendum, prior to making a decision on the issuance of the ITP.

DFG finds that issuance of the ITP will not result in any previously undisclosed potentially significant effects on the environment or a substantial increase in the severity of any potentially significant environmental effects previously disclosed by the lead agency.

Furthermore, to the extent the potential for such effects exists, DFG finds adherence to and implementation of the Conditions of Project Approval adopted by the lead agency, as well as adherence to and implementation of the Conditions of Approval imposed by DFG through the issuance of this ITP, will avoid or reduce to below a level of significance any such potential effects. DFG consequently finds that issuance of the ITP will not result in any significant, adverse impacts on the environment. DFG finds that the EIR and the Addendum are adequate under CEQA to support approval of this ITP.

Findings under CESA:

These findings are intended to document DFG's compliance with the specific findings requirements set forth in CESA and related regulations. (Fish & G. Code§ 2081, subs. (b)­ (c); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 783.4, subds, (a)-(b), 783.5, subd. (c)(2).) DFG finds that issuance of this ITP complies and is consistent with the criteria governing the issuance of ITPs under CESA:
(1) Take of Covered Species as defined in the ITP will be incidental to the otherwise lawful activities covered under the ITP;
(2) Impacts of the taking of the Covered Species will be minimized and fully mitigated through the implementation of measures required by this ITP and as described in the

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
MMRP. Measures include: 1) Permanent habitat protection and management; 2) Monitoring and Compliance Reports; 3) establishment of avoidance zones; 4) seasonal operations and work restrictions; and 4) worker education. As part of making this determination, DFG evaluated the quality of the habitat on the Project site, the scope and extent of direct impacts, the scope and extent of indirect impacts, and other relevant information available to DFG or provided by the Permittee. Based on this evaluation, DFG determined that the protection and management in perpetuity of 5.96 acres of compensatory habitat that is contiguous with other protected Covered Species habitat and/or is of higher quality than the habitat being destroyed by the Project, along with the minimization, monitoring, reporting, and funding requirements of this ITP, meet the CESA issuance criteria;
(3) The take avoidance and mitigation measures required pursuant to the conditions of this ITP and its attachments are roughly proportional in extent to the impact of Permittee's take;
(4) The measures required by this ITP maintain Permittee's objectives to the greatest extent possible;
(5) All required measures are capable of successful implementation; (6) The ITP is consistent with any regulations adopted pursuant to Fish and Game Code sections 2112 and 2114;
(7) Permittee has ensured adequate funding to implement the measures required by the ITP as well as for monitoring compliance with, and the effectiveness of, those measures for the Project; and
(8) Issuance of the ITP will not jeopardize the continued existence of the Covered Species based on the best scientific and other information reasonably available, and this finding includes consideration of the species' capability to survive and reproduce, and any adverse impacts of the taking on those abilities in light of (a) known population trends; (b) known threats to the species; and (c) reasonably foreseeable impacts on the species from other related projects and activities. Moreover, DFG's finding is based, in part, on DFG's express authority to amend the terms and conditions of the ITP without concurrence of the Permittee as necessary to avoid jeopardy and as required by law.

Attachments:

Figure 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2A,2B
Map
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Habitat Management Lands Checklist; PLFAF Form

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4
Mitigation Payment Transmittal Form
Letter of Credit Form

ISSUED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
on r/w.1, ~.Pf, 2001
Charles Armor, Regional Manager

BAY DELTA REGION
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~
Thomas Gibson
Deputy General Counsel

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The undersigned: 1) warrants that he or she is acting as a duly authorized representative of the Permittee, 2) acknowledges receipt of this ITP, and 3) agrees on behalf of the Permitlee to comply with all terms and conditions of the ITP.

By:_~~'7---=~"---=~=----,~&-.___ ______ Date: _ _,_J ,._,,/ },,'-"t-::.Lf .::...o '1...1___ __ Printed Name: J 6, o fl.:D o rJ

Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Attachment 1

DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
CALIFORNIA INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT NO. 2081-2009-005-03
PERMITTEE: City of Stockton
PROJECT: Stockton Delta Water Supply Project

PURPOSE OF THE MMRP
The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure that the impact minimization and mitigation measures required by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) for the above­ referenced Project are properly implemented, and thereby to ensure compliance with section 2081(b) of the Fish and Game Code and section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. A table summarizing the mitigation measures required by DFG is attached. This table is a tool for use in monitoring and reporting on implementation of mitigation measures, but the descriptions in the table do not supersede the mitigation measures set forth in the California Incidental Take Permit (ITP) and in attachments to the ITP, and the omission of a ITP requirement from ihe attached table does not relieve the Permittee of the obligation to ensure the requirement is performed.

OBLIGATIONS OF PERMITTEE
Mitigation measures must be implemented within the time periods indicated in the table that appears below. Permittee has the primary responsibility for monitoring compliance of all mitigation measures and for reporting to DFG on the progress in implementing those measures. These monitoring and reporting requirements are set forth in the ITP itself and are summarized at the front of the attached table.

VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE, EFFECTIVENESS
DFG may, at its sole discretion, verify compliance with any mitigation measure or independently assess the effectiveness of any mitigation measure. 1 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

TABLE OF MITIGATION MEASURES
The following items are identified for each mitigation measure: Mitigation Measure, Source, Implementation Schedule, Responsible Party, and Status/Date/Initials. The "Mitigation Measure" column summarizes the mitigation requirements of the ITP. The "Source" column identifies the ITP document that sets forth the mitigation measure.

The "Implementation Schedule" column shows the date or phase when each mitigation measure will be implemented. The "Responsible Party" column identifies the person or agency that is primarily responsible for implementing the mitigation measure. The "Status/Date/Initials" column shall be completed by the Permittee during preparation of each Status Report and the Final Mitigation Report, and must identify the implementation status of each mitigation measure, the date that status was determined, and the initials of the person determining the status.
2 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
.

Implementation Responsible
Mitigation Measure Source Schedule Party Status I Date / Initials

BEFORE DISTURBING SOIL OR VEGETATION
1 Before initiating ground-disturbing activities, the Permittee shall designate a representative ITP Before commencing Permittee (Designated Representative) responsible for communications with DFG and for overseeing Condition ground- or compliance with this ITP. The Permittee shall notify DFG in writing prior to commencement of # 4.1 vegetation- ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities of the Designated Representative's name, business disturbing activities/ address, and contact information, and shall notify DFG in writing if a substitute Designated Entire Project Representative is selected or identified at any time during the term of this ITP. 2 The Permittee shall hire a biologist knowledgeable and experienced in the biology and natural ITP Before commencing Permittee history of the Covered Species (Designated Biologist). The Designated Biologist shall monitor Condition ground- or construction activities within the Project area. At least 30 days prior to ground-disturbing #4.2 vegetation- activities, the Permittee shall submit to DFG in writing the proposed Designated Biologist's disturbing activities name, qualifications, business address, and contact infom,ation for review and approval. The Permittee shall not commence ground-disturbing activities until DFG approves the Designated Biologist.
3 Permittee shall conduct an education program for all persons employed or otherwise working ITP Before commencing Permittee on the Project site prior to performing work on-site. Instruction shall consist of a presentation Condition ground- or by the Designated Biologist that includes a discussion of the biology and general behavior of # 4.11 vegetation- the Covered Species, infonnation about the distribution and habitat needs of the Covered disturbing ac;:tivities / Species, sensitivity of the Covered Species to human activities, their status under CESA Entire Project including legal protection, recovery efforts, penalties for violations and Project-specific protective measures described in this ITP. In particular, the education program shall instruct workers to· notify the Designated Biologist during fish rescue operations (as described in Condition 6.4) if fish are observed and specify that activities shall cease until additional fish have been relocated. The Designated Biologist will remain at the site to rescue additional fish if the workers observe them within the dewatering area. Interpretation shall be provided for non-English speaking workers, and the same instruction shaJJ be provided for any new workers prior to on-site Project activity. Copies of this ITP shall be maintained at the worksite with the Project Manager. Permittee shall prepare and distribute wallet-sized cards or a fact sheet handout containing this information for workers to carry on-site. Upon completion of the program, employees shall sign an affidavit stating they attended the program and understand all protection measures. These forms shall be filed at the City of Stockton offices and be available to DFG upon request
5 The Pem,ittee shall submit a Fish Rescue Plan to be implemented during cofferdam ITP Before commencing Permittee dewatering operations for DFG approval prior to any in water work. The Plan shall conform Condition in water activities to the requirements described in Condition 6.4 of the ITP # 6.4 Entire Project 6 Prior to initiating ground- or vegetation-disturbing Project activities, or no later than 18 months ITP Before commencing Pennittee from the effective date of this ITP if Security is provided pursuant to Condition 8 below, the Condition ground- or Permittee shall acquire, restore, enhance and permanently preserve 5.96 acres of tidal #7.2 vegetation- wetland habitat that shall be the Habitat Management Lands (HM Lands). The required disturbing activities acreage includes 0.96 acres to compensate the permanent loss of 0.32 acres of shallow water or no later than 18 habitat and 5.0 acres to mitigate the loss of covered species during project operations. HM months from Lands shall be provided in accordance with Condition 7.2 of the JTP effective date Entire Project
1 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Implementation Responsible
Mitigation Measure '.: --· ;so11rce Schedule Party Status I Date/ Initials 8 The Permittee shall notify DFG and sha!I document compliance with all pre-construction ITP Before commencing Permittee Conditions of Approval before initiating ground-disturbing activities. Condition# ground-or

5.1 vegetation-
disturbing activities

DURING CONSTRUCTION
9 The Designated Representative shall provide DFG with a single status report every Monday on ITP Entire Project Permittee all activities authorized by this ITP. The status report shall list the schedule of events Condition (beginning dates, work in progress, and completion dates) and shall be submitted until the list #5.2 of authorized activities is complete or there are scheduled periods of inactivity. The status report shall be sent via email transmittal to [email protected]. 10 The Designated Biologist sha!I be on-site daily while construction and/or surface-disturbing ITP Entire Project Permittee activities are taking place to minimize take of the Covered Species, to check for compliance Condition with all mitigation and avoidance measures. These inspections shall be compiled into a #5.3 Monthly Compliance Report and submitted to DFG at the office listed below or via e-mail to DFG's regional representative at [email protected]. DFG may at any time increase the timing and number of compliance inspections and reports required under this provision depending upon the results of previous compliance inspections. If DFG determines the reporting schedule is inadequate, DFG will notify Permittee by letter of the new reporting schedule.
11 Permittee shall immediately notify DFG in writing if it determines that it is not in compliance ITP Entire Project Permittee with any condition of approval of the ITP, including but not limited to any actual or anticipated Condition failure to implement mitigation measures within the time periods indicated. Permittee shall # 5.4 report any non-compliance during the construction phase to DFG within 24 hours. 12 All observations of Covered Species during Project activities shall be conveyed to the ITP Entire Project Permittee Permittee's Designated Representative or Designated Biologist. This information shall be Condition included in the next weekly status report submitted to DFG by the Permittee. #5.5 13 If a Covered Species is killed by Project-related activities during construction, or if a Covered ITP Entire Project Permittee Species is otherwise found dead, the Designated Biologist shall be immediately notified and a Condition written report will be sent to DFG within two (2) calendar days. The report will include the # 5.6 date, time of the finding or incident, location of the carcass, and the circumstances. 14 Beginning with issuance of the ITP and continuing until DFG accepts the Final Mitigation ITP Entire Project Permittee Report identified below, Permlttee shall provide DFG an annual Status Report no later than Condition January 31 of every year. Each Status Report shall include, at a minimum: 1) a general #5.7 description of the status of the Project site and construction activities, including actual or projected completion dates, if known; 2) a copy of this table with notes showing the current implementation status of each mitigation measure; and 3) an assessment of the effectiveness of each completed or partially completed mitigation measure in minimizing and compensating for Project impacts.
2 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
.

Implementation Responsible
Mitigation Measure .: ... ·_ ' - Source Schedule Party Status I Date/ Initials 15 DFG may issue Permittee a written stop-work order to suspend any activity covered by this ITP Entire Project Department of ITP for an initial period of up to 25 days to prevent or remedy a violation of ITP conditions Fish and Game (including but not limited to failure to comply with reporting, monitoring, or habitat acquisition obligations) or to prevent the illegal take of an endangered, threatened, or candidate species.

Permittee shall comply with the stop-work order immediately upon receipt thereof. DFG may extend a stop-work order under this provision for a period not to exceed 25 additional days, upon written notice to the Permittee. DFG shall commence the formal suspension process pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 783.7 within five working days of issuing a stop-work order.

PRIOR TO DIVERSION
16 Smelt Monitoring Plan: To evaluate the effectiveness of the minimization measures, the ITP Entire Project Department of Permittee shall develop and imp!ement a plan to monitor and quantify the entrainment of the Condition Fish and Game Covered Fish Species at the Project intake. A Smelt Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to # 6.3 DFG for approval prior to any water diversion. In addition to quantifying the amount of take, the monitoring shall assess the effectiveness of the period of curtailment and reduced pumping and evaluate if other periods would provide better protection. An annual Smelt Monitoring report, separate from and in addition to the Project Annual Status Report identified above, shall be submitted to DFG for review and comment by December 31 of each year.

POST-CONSTRUCTION
17 No later than 45 days after completion of the Project, including completion of all mitigation ITP Post-construction Permittee measures, Permittee shall provide the DFG with a Final Mitigation Report. The Final Mitigation Condition and after completion Report shall be prepared by the Designated Biologist and shall include, at a minimum: 1) a # 5.8 of mitigation copy of this table with notes showing when each of the mitigation measures was implemented; 2) all available information about Project-related incidental take of the Covered Species; 3) information about other Project impacts on the Covered Species; 4) construction dates; 5) an assessment of the effectiveness of the ITP's Conditions of Approval in minimizing and compensating for Project impacts; 6) recommendations on how mitigation measures might be changed to more effectively minimize and mitigate the impacts of future projects on the species; and 7) any other pertinent information, including the level of tale pf the Covered Species associated with the Project.
18 DFG accepts the Final Mitigation Report as complete. ITP Post-construction Department of Condition Fish and Game
#4.15
3 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
To:

ATTACHMENT2A

DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

HABITAT MANAGEMENT LAND ACQUISITION PACKAGE CHECKLIST FOR PROJECT APPLICANTS The following checklist is provided to inform you of what documents are necessaiy to expedite Depaitment processing ofyonr Habitat Management Land acquisition proposal. Any land acquisition processing requests which are incomplete when received, will be returned. The Region contact will review and approve the document package and forward it to the Lands and Facilities Branch (LFB) Realty Services Coordinator with a request to process the land acquisition for formal acceptance.

Charles Armor
From:

Regional Manager, Region Name
City of Stockton
Project Applicant
Phone:

Tracking#: 2081-2009-005-03
CDFG assigned permit or agreement#
Project Name: --~S~to~c~kt~o~1~1 ~D~e~lt~a~W=a~te~r~S~1""1p"'p""l"y2 P~r~o.,,j e~c..,t Enclosed is the complete package for the D Conservation Easement OR D Grant Deed Documents in this package include:

D Fully executed, approved as to form Conservation Easement Deed or Grant Deed.

Date executed: _________ _
D Proposed Lands for Acquisition Fmm (PLFAF)
D Phase I Environmental Site Assess!I\ent Report Date on report: _____________ _ (An existing report may be used, but it must be less than two years old.) D Prelinlinary Title Report(s) for subject property is enclosed and has been reviewed for encumbrances and other easements. The title report must be less than six months old when final processing is conducted.

Included are additional documents:

D document(s) to suppmttitle exceptions
D document(s) to explain title encumbrances
D a plot or map of easements/encumberances on the property D Policy of Title Insurance (an existing title policy is not acceptable) D County Assessor Parcel Map(s) for subject prope1ty
D Site Location Map (Site location wifu property boundaries outline on a USGS 1 :24,000 scale topo) D Final Permit or Agreement (or oilier appropriate instrument) Type of agreement: D Bank Agreement D Mitigation Agreement D Permit Other: _____________ _
(write in lype of permit)
D Final Management Plan (if required prior to fmalizing permit or agreement or if this package is for a Grai1t Deed)
D Biological Resources Repmt
D Draft Stl1lilllary of Transactions D hard copy D electronic copy (both are required) EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 2B
PROPOSED LANDS FOR ACQUISITION FORM /"PLFAF")
Date: ________ _
TO: Regional Representative
Facsimile:

FROM: __________ _
Applicant proposes that the following parcel of land be considered for approval by the Department as suitable for purposes of habitat management lands to replace the adverse environmental impacts of the Project:

Section Township Range
Current Legal Owner/s), include Parcel Number(s):

Location of Parcel:

APPROVED

REJECTED
By:. ________ ~
Region
Number of Acres
DATE:. ______ _
Explanation:. _______________________ _
Jan 2003
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mitigation Payment Transmittal Form
Project Applicant Instructions: Please fill out and attach this form to payment. For conservation banks also attach theBill(s) of Sale for credits sold. One fonn may be used for multiple transactions, BUT YOU "MUST USE A SEP ARA TE FOR.J.'1 FOR EACH CHECK YOU TRANSMIT. Make sure to include Project Name, Project Tracking Number, and FASB Mitigation Tracking Number (if available) on the attached payment type.
(1) DATE:

TO: Charles Armor
[CDFG Regional Manager]
P.O. Box 47 Yountville CA 94599
[CDFG Region Office Address]
(2) FROM: ------------------
Name
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip
Telephone Number/FAX Number
(3) RE: Stockton Delta Water Supply Project
[Project Name as appears on permit/agreement]
(4) AGREEMENT/ACCOUNT INFORMATION:
( Check the applicable type)
X 2081 Permit o Conservation Bank o 1802 Agreement
o 2835 NCCP
2081-2009-005-03
o Other _______ _
[Project Tracking Number]
[FASB Mitigation Tracking Number (if available)]
Index ___________ PCA. _________ _
(5) PAYMENT TYPE ( One check per form only): The following funds are being remitted in connection with the above referenced project:

Check information:

Total$. _________ _ Check No. __________ _
Account No. ________ _ Bank Routing No. _______ _
a. Endowment: for Long-Term Management Subtotal $ -------- b. Habitat Enhancement Subtotal $, ______ _
c. Security:

I. Cash Refundable Security Deposit Subtotal $ ·--------

2. Letter of Credit Subtotal $ --------

1. Financial Institution: ______________ _

2. Letter of Credit Number: ___________ _

3. Dale of Expiration: ______________ _
Mitigation Payment Trnnsmiual Form
2081-2009-005-03
City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department
Stockton Delta Water Supply Project
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. [number)
Issue Date: [date)
Beneficiary:

Department of Fish and Game
1416 Ninth Street, 121h Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Attn: Office of the General Counsel
Amount: U.S. $[dollar number) [(dollar amount))
Expiry: [Date] at our counters,
Dear Sirs:

1. At the request and on the instruction of our customer, [name of applicantj_ __ ("Applicant"), we, [name of bankL("lssuer"), hereby establish _in favor of the_ beneficiary, the California Department of Fish and Game ("Department"), this irrevocable standby letter of credit ("Credit") in the principal sum of U.S. $[dollar number) [(do//aramount)l[('Principal Sum''). _ ____________________ _ ____ _ Comment: Bank or Applicant wilt
complete the heading (i.e., the
infom,ation above this comment box).

The heading will be subject to change
by bank on a bank-by-bank basis.

DFG will verify the amount and expiry
date are correct.
1 Comment: Bank or Applicant will
comp!ele.

Comment: Bank or Applicant will
comp!ete.

Comment: Applicant or DFG will
insert amount. If the former, DFG will
verify the amount is correct. 2. We are informed this Credit is and has been established for the benefit of the Department pursuant to the terms of the incidental take permit for the [name of projectj issued by_the Department to_the A[Jplicant _o_n_ [ date l_( No._ [numberjJJ __ __ ---.-_ .- -- ("Permit").

Comment: Applicant or DFG should
insert.project name. If the former,
DFG will verify the name is correct.

3. We are further informed that pursuant to the Permit, the Applicant has agreed to complete certain mitigation requirements, as set forth in Conditions [numbersj_in the Permit ("Mitigation Requirements").

4. We are finally informed that this Credit is intended by the Department and the Applicant to serve as a security device for the performance by the Applicant of the Mitigation Requirements.
--.

5. The Department shall be entitled to draw upon this Credit only by presentation of a duly executed Certificate for Drawing ("Certificate") in the same form as Attachment A, which is attached hereto, at our office located at [name and address of bank].[___ ____________ __________________________________ _

6. The Certificate shall be completed and signed by an "Authorized Representative" of the Department as defined in paragraph 12 below. Presentation by the Department of a completed Certificate may be made in person or by registered mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight courier.

DFG Template.No Reduction
Rev.11/08
Comment: Applicant or DFG should
insert date and number. If the former,
DFG will verify the information is
correct.·
--~mment: DFG will insert numbers. j
Comment: Bank or Applicant wl!!
complete.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

7. Upon presentation of a duly executed Certificate as above provided, payment shall be made to the Department, or to the account of the Department, in immediately available funds, as the Department shall specify.

8. If a demand for payment does not conform to the terms and conditions of this Credit, we shall give the Department prompt notice that the demand for payment was not effected in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Credit, state the reasons therefore, and await further instruction.

9. Upon being notified that the demand for payment was not effected in conformity with the Credit, the Department may correct any such non-conforming demand for payment under the terms and conditions stated herein.

10.AII drawings under this Credit shall be paid with our funds. Each drawing honored by us hereunder shall reduce, pro tanto, the Principal Sum. By paying to the Department an amount demanded in accordance herewith, we make no representations as to the correctness of the amount demanded.

11. This Credit will be cancelled upon receipt by us of Certificate of Cancellation, which: (i) shall be in the form of Attachment B, which is attached hereto, and (ii) shall be completed and signed by an Authorized Representative of the Department, as defined in paragraph 12 below.

12.An "Authorized Representative" shall mean either the Director of the Department of Fish and Game, the General Counsel of the Department of Fish and Game, or a Regional Manager of the Department of Fish and Game.

13. This Credit shall be automatically extended without amendment for additional periods of one year from the present or any future expiration date hereof, unless at least sixty (60) days prior to any such date, we notify the Department in writing by registered mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight courier that we elect not to consider this Credit extended for any such period.

14. Communications with respect to this Credit shall be in writing and addressed to us at [name and address of bank),_ specifically referrin_g_ upon __ s_uch writing to __ this credit by number. The address for notices with respect to this Credit shall be: (i) for the Department: Department of Fish and Game, Office of the General Counsel, 1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor, Sacramento, California 95814-2090 Attn: General Counsel; and (ii) for the Applicant: [name and address of ApplicantL_

15. This Credit may not be transferred.

DFG Template.No Reduction
Rev. 11/08
Comment: Bank or Applicant wilt
complete.

Comment: Bank or Applicant will
complete.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

16. This Credit is subject to the International Standby Practices 1998 ("ISP 98"). As, __ .. / to matters not covered by the ISP 98 and to the extent not inconsistent with the ISP 98, this credit shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the Uniform Commercial Code, Article 5 of the State of California.

Comment: Paragraph 16 ls subject
to change by bank on a bank-by-bank
basis. OGG will review and approve
final language.

17. This Credit shall, if not cancelled, expire on [expiration dateLc,r_any extended ________ ./1 comment, sank or Applicant, or · 1· d t DFGwillcomplete. lfthefonner,
exptra ion a e. DFG will verify the date ls correct.

18. We hereby agree with the Department that documents presented in compliance with the terms of this Credit will be duly honored upon presentation, as specified herein.

19. This Credit sets forth in full the terms of our undertaking. Such undertaking shall not in any way be modified, amended or amplified by reference to any document or instrument referred to herein or in which this Credit is referred to or to which this Credit relates and any such reference shall not be deemed to incorporate herein by reference any document or instrument.
[Name of bank]
By:-----------
Name: ____________ _
Title: ____________ ...J.

DFG Template.No Reduction
Rev. 11/08
1 Comment: Bank will complete.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
To:

AITACHMENT ~
IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. [number]

CERTIFICATE FOR DRAWING
[Name and address of bank]
Re: Incidental Take Permit No. [permit number]
The undersigned, a duly Authorized Representative of the Department of Fish and Game ("Department"), as defined in paragraph 12 in the above-referenced Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit ("Credit"), hereby certifies to the Issuer that:

1. [Insert one of the following statements: "In the opinion of the Department, the Applicant has failed to complete the Mitigation Requirements referenced in paragraph 3 of the Credit." or "As set forth in paragraph 13, the Issuer has informed the Department that the Credit will not be extended and the Applicant has not provided the Department with an equivalent security approved by the Department to replace the Credit."]

2. The undersigned is authorized under the terms of the Credit to present this Certificate as the sole means of demanding payment on the Credit.

3. The Department is therefore making a drawing under the Credit in amount of U.S.$. _____ _

4. The amount demanded does not exceed the Principal Sum of the Credit.

Therefore, the Department has executed and delivered this Certificate as of the _day of ____ , __ .

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
BY: ___________________ _
[Insert one of the following: "DIRECTOR" or"GENERAL COUNSEL" or"REGIONAL MANAGER, [NAME OF REGIONAL OFFICE]"]
DFG Template.No Reduction
Rev. 11/08
Comment: DFG will complete this
Certificate if it determines that
drawing is required.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
To:

ATTACHMENT B
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. [number]

CERTIFICATE FOR CANCELLATION
[Name of bank and address]
Re: Incidental Take Permit No. [permit number]
The undersigned, a duly Authorized Representative of the California Department of Fish and Game ("Department"), as defined in the paragraph 12 in the above-referenced Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit ("Credit"), hereby certifies to the Issuer that:

1. [Insert one of the following statements: "The Applicant has presented documentary evidence of full compliance with the Mitigation Requirements referenced in paragraph 3 of the Credit." or"The natural expiration of this Credit has occurred."]

2. The Department therefore requests the cancellation of the Credit.

Therefore, the Department has executed and delivered this Certificate for Cancellation as of the __ day of _____ , __ _

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
BY:-----------------
[Insert one of the following: "DIRECTOR" or "GENERAL COUNSEL" or "REGIONAL MANAGER, [NAME OF REGIONAL OFFICE]"]
DFG Template.No Reduction
Rev.11/08
Comment: DFG will complete this
Certificate if it detem1ines the Letter
of Credit may be canceled.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 4
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

Final

STOCKTON DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Analysis 2011-2021
Prepared for July 2023
City of Stockton
ry ESA
Final

STOCKTON DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Analysis 2011-2021
Prepared for July 2023
City of Stockton
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Final

STOCKTON DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Analysis 2011 -2021
Prepared for July 2023
City of Stockton
2600 Capitol Avenue
Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95816
916.564.4500
esassoc.com
Atlanta
Bend
Camarillo
Irvine
Los Angeles
Mobile
Oakland
Orlando
Palm Beach County
Pasadena
Pensacola
Petaluma
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Sarasota
Seattle
Tampa
D202200643.00
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our operations. This document was produced using recycled paper.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project i ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Stockton Delta Water Supply Project
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Analysis 2011-2021
Page
Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 2 Background ........................................................................................................................... 3 Methods ....................................................................................................................... .......... 5 Interagency Ecological Program Fish Monitoring Studies .............................................. 5 Analytical Approach ....................................................................................................... 7 Results ................................................................................................................................... 9 Summary of Findings ......................................................................................................... 12 Fish Screen Mesh Size ................................................................................................ 12 Reduced Approach Velocities ...................................................................................... 12 Curtailment and Reduced Pumping Periods ................................................................ 12 Conclusions ................................................................................................................... ..... 12 Entrainment Monitoring ................................................................................................ 12 Operational Periods ..................................................................................................... 13 References ........................................................................................................................... 13

List of Figures
Figure 1 Map of the sampled stations within 10km of the DWSP Intake Structure (yellow star at center). .......................................................................................... 9 Figure 2 Mean annual delta smelt catch within 10km of the intake facility for each size class as a percentage of the annual total catch within the Delta. ................ 10 Figure 3 Mean annual longfin smelt catch within 10km of the intake facility for each size class as a percentage of the annual total catch within the Delta. ................ 10

List of Tables
Table 1 Sacramento – San Joaquin De lta Fish Monitoring Surveys ..................................... 4 Table 2 Total Catch and Mean Percent of Annual Catch in the Vicinity of the DWSP Intake During Each Operational Phase ............................................................... 11

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Table of Contents

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project ii ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 Appendices
A. Survey Stations In cluded in Analysis ..........................................................................A-1 B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021 ................................................................................B-1 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 1 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023

STOCKTON DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Analysis 2011-2021
Introduction
The City of Stockton (City) received an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) in 2009 and Biological Opinions (BOs) from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in 2006 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2007 for the City’s Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP). The City completed construction and commenced operation of a screened intake structure located on the lower San Joaquin River as part of the DWSP in 2012.

The intake was designed and constructed in accordance with CDFW, and NMFS fish screening criteria (NMFS 1996; CDFW 2000) and regulatory permit requirements. The intake screen (screen) is designed to effectively exclude juvenile and adult fish inhabiting the Delta but not completely exclude fish eggs and larvae (Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2009). The screen is designed to have an approach velocity equal to or less than 0.2 feet per second (fps). Tuning vanes behind the screen allow for adjustment of the approach velocity to equalize flow patterns across the face of the screen and to minimize any “hot” spots which may occur. The screen is designed to have openings no more than 1.75 millimeters (mm) wide to exclude juvenile and larger fish from being entrained into the intake and diversion. The screen is approximately 50.83 ft by 14.75 ft leading to a surface area of 749.74 square feet. At the permitted maximum diversion rate of 46.4 cubic feet per second (cfs), the constructed screen approach velocity is 0.062 fps, or 31% of the maximum 0.2 fps fish screening criteria. Operations are seasonally reduced to minimize entrainment of delta and longfin smelt. The reduced operational limit of 24 cfs leads to an approach velocity of 0.03 fps, or 15% of the maximum 0.2 fps fish screening criteria.

The ITP and BOs issued for the construction and operation of the intake include a range of design and operational conditions intended to reduce incidental take of listed species. In addition, the ITP and BOs included two specific requirements for fish monitoring:

1. NMFS BO: Conduct pre-operational and post-operational surveys in the area of the intake prior to and after one year of operation to characterize the predator population surrounding the intake structure (Predator Survey). Results of the predator surveys are presented in Environmental Science Associates (2012a and 2014); and

2. CDFW ITP and USFWS BO: Develop and implement a plan to monitor and quantify entrainment of delta and longfin smelt and other covered fish through the screened intake and assess the effectiveness of the proposed period of curtailment and reduced diversions on reducing the risk of entrainment of larval smelt too small to be excluded by the screen.

Results of the first year smelt surveys are presented in Environmental Science Associates (2012b).

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 2 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023 Additionally, condition 19 of Water Right Permit 21176 for Diversion and Use of Water requires development and implementation of a similar yearly monitoring plan for larval delta smelt conducted between February 15 and July 31.

The City and its consultants coordinated with USFWS and CDFW on the development of a study plan (Larval Smelt Surveys) to meet these conditions. During a coordination meeting held on April 27, 2012, it was noted that the fish agencies (i.e., CDFW, NMFS, USFWS) requested the City to analyze and summarize existing data, including data from other intakes (i.e., Contra Costa Water District [CCWD] Old River intake), and that entrainment monitoring behind the DWSP screen would not be required. It was also requested that the study plan evaluate if curtailment windows and percentages of curtailment are effective. The study plan was submitted to the fish agencies for review and implemented in 2012 (ESA 2012b).

The report concluded that, based on results of the extensive fishery monitoring conducted to evaluate the performance of the CCWD Old River intake screen in excluding larval and juvenile fish from entrainment into the diversion, the DWSP fish screen is effective in reducing and avoiding entrainment of larval and juvenile fish. Further, the report found that, based on results of CDFW larval and juvenile smelt seasonal distribution data, it was recommended that consideration be given to revising the seasonal periods for reduced diversion operations by the DWSP project. Recommended revisions to the seasonal diversion operations included eliminating the reduced diversion period from May 21 through June 15 and extending the reduced diversion period from January 1 through February 15. Additional years of monitoring were not conducted.

Therefore, the following report provides an updated analysis of historical data from 2011 through 2021; conducted to fulfill the monitoring requirement in the CDFW ITP, USFWS BO, and condition 19 of Permit 21176. This analysis followed similar methods used for the 2012 analysis and report, relying on existing data. Specifically, the multi-agency Interagency Ecological Program (IEP) has been collecting standardized data at multiple sample sites close (<10km) to the DWSP intake for the period of interest and the currently available datasets were determined to be adequate for this analysis.

Purpose
The purpose and objective of this analysis is to analyze the risk of larval and early juvenile smelt entrainment at the Stockton DWSP intake to satisfy the requirement for annual monitoring stipulated within the ITP and Permit 21176 and includes:
 evaluation of the potential for entrainment of delta smelt and other protected fish species (e.g., longfin smelt larvae) during operation of the intake;  evaluation of the effectiveness of the proposed curtailment and reduced pumping periods identified in the ITP and BOs
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 3 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 Background
The fish screen for the DWSP intake was designed and constructed to meet current fish screen criteria for Delta applications similar to several other protective fish screens that are currently in operation in the Delta. The DWSP fish screen operates at no more than 31% of the maximum approach velocity of current established fish screen criteria . The protectiveness of such screens has been established through ongoing entrainment monitoring programs associated with other fish screens in the Delta. A previous review of fishery monitoring results from the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) Old River intake, which is similar in design and operation to the DWSP intake, evaluated existing monitoring data to determine the effectiveness of the intake screen design in excluding larval and early lifestages of delta and longfin smelt, juvenile Chinook salmon and steelhead, and other fish from entrainment into the diversion (Environmental Science Associates 2012b). This analysis concluded that the CCWD fish screen, and therefore the DWSP, is effective at reducing and avoiding entrainment of larval and juvenile fish and this is further enhanced at the DWSP by the seasonal reductions of diversion operations.

Results of previous fishery monitoring conducted by CDFW and USFWS in the lower San Joaquin River and Delta have shown that both longfin and delta smelt inhabit the area in the vicinity of the DWSP intake structure seasonally and would potentially be vulnerable to entrainment losses from an unscreened or improperly screened intake (Environmental Science Associates 2012b; Bashevkin et al. 2022). The DWSP intake includes both physical features (a fish screen), operational limits (reduced approach velocities), and constraints (curtailment and reduced pumping periods) that have been specifically developed to avoid and/or minimize entrainment of larval and early juvenile delta and longfin smelt that are too small to be effectively excluded by the screen. Project specific permits and approvals currently require that pumping rates shall not exceed 24 cubic feet per second (cfs) during the periods from February 15 to March 15 and from May 21 through June 15 and that all water diversions cease during the period from March 15 through May 20. These are periods of the year when larval and early juvenile lifestages of both longfin and delta smelt are potentially present in the vicinity of the intake and would potentially be vulnerable to entrainment.

Data from eight
1 different fish monitoring surveys conducted in the Delta, including in the vicinity of the DWSP intake, from 2011-2021 were used to assess the effectiveness of these periods of reduced diversion operations in protecting larval delta and longfin smelt from entrainment (Bashevkin et al. 2022). The surveys contained within the selected dataset, their governing agency, and their temporal coverage are shown in Table 1.

1 Although data from a ninth study, the Suisun Marsh Study, wa s included within the original dataset, this data was excluded from current analyses due to its distance from the study area.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 4 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023 TABLE 1
SACRAMENTO – SAN JOAQUIN DELTA FISH MONITORING SURVEYS
Survey Name Abbreviation
Temporal Coverage
of Surveys
Years of
Analysis for this
Report
Mean Captured Length
of Smelt
(Min – Max) (mm)
CDFW
Bay Study BS 1980 – 2021 2011 – 2021 66 (15 – 203)
Fall Midwater Trawl FMWT 1967 – 2021 2011 – 2021 69 (15 – 282) 20mm Trawl Survey 20mm 1995 – 2021 2011 – 2021 21 (3 – 183) Spring Kodiak Trawl Survey SKT 2002 – 2021 2011 – 2021 63 (15 – 135) Summer Townet STN 1959 - 2021 2011 – 2021 39 (7 – 141) Smelt Larva Survey SLS 2009 – 2021 2011 – 2021 8 (4 – 80) USFWS
Delta Juvenile Fish
Monitoring Program
DJFMP 1976 – 2019 2011 – 2021 70 (8 – 210)
San Francisco Estuary
Enhanced delta smelt
Monitoring Program
EDSM 2016 – 2021 2011 – 2021 43 (6.1 – 132)

SOURCE: ESA 2023

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 5 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 Methods
Interagency Ecological Program Fish Monitoring Studies
As part of the Interagency Ecological Program (IEP), multiple agencies have been involved with fish monitoring efforts within the Delta, leading to nine ongoing monitoring studies, eight of which have stations within 10km of the DWSP. These study data were collected using different methods briefly outlined below, with method descriptions taken from the respective data sources.

Bay Study
The Bay Study was initiated in 1980 with the intent of determining the effects of freshwater outflow on the abundance and distribution of fish and invertebrates in the San Francisco Estuary (Estuary). From 2011 to 2021 only midwater trawls (sampling primarily pelagic organisms) and otter trawls (sampling primarily benthic organisms) were conducted, generally from January to December of each year at 52 stations
2, 1 of which occurs within 10km of the DWSP.

The otter trawl has a 4.9 meter (m) headrope, a 2.5 centimeter (cm) stretch mesh body, and a

1.3cm stretch mesh cod-end. The otter trawl is deployed with a 5:1 scope to keep the trawl on the bottom and towed for five minutes against the current. The assumed door spread of the trawl was

2.4m (70% of 3.4m maximum spread).

The midwater trawl has a mouth opening of 3.7m
2, which is slightly reduced under tow. The
mesh of the midwater trawl net is graduated in 9 sections from 20.3 cm stretch mesh at the mouth to 1.3cm at the cod-end. A 5:1 scope was also used to deploy the midwater trawl. The midwater trawl was towed for approximately 12 minutes and then retrieved obliquely to sample the entire water column. Further information about the Bay Study methods can be found in Baxter et al. (1999).

Fall Midwater Trawl
The Fall Midwater Trawl study (FMWT) was initiated in 1967, specifically targeting age-0 Striped Bass (Morone saxitilis) in the Estuary. delta smelt and longfin smelt have been captured during surveys. The FMWT samples 122 stations each month from September to December, seven of these stations are within 10km of the DWSP.

The midwater trawl has a mouth opening of 3.7m
2, which is slightly reduced under tow. The
mesh of the midwater trawl net is graduated in 9 sections from 20.3 cm stretch mesh at the mouth to 1.3cm at the cod-end. A 5:1 scope was also used to deploy the midwater trawl. The midwater trawl is retrieved obliquely to sample the entire water column, according to a tow schedule which is dependent on depth. Further information about the Fall Midwater Trawl methods and activities can be found in the most recent FMWT summary reports (White 2020, 2021, 2022).

2 Not all Stations were sampled in all years
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 6 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023 20mm Trawl Survey
The 20mm Trawl Survey, or “20mm”, was initiated in 1995 to monitor the distribution and abundance of post-larval and juvenile delta smelt. The 20mm survey currently samples 47 stations at fixed locations from San Pablo Bay through Suisun Bay and into the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta every other week from March to July. During high outflow years, 5 additional stations are sampled in San Pablo Bay to provide greater spatial coverage of potential delta smelt habitat. At each station, three 10-minute stepped oblique tows are conducted for fish.

Each stepped oblique tow follows a tow schedule to sample the entire water column, and the volume of water sampled is estimated using a General Oceanics flowmeter. The net is a cone shaped plankton net composed of 1600μm mesh and measuring 5.5 meters in length with a mouth area of 1.51m2 lashed onto a rigid D-frame with skis. Additional information and data from the 20mm survey is found in IEP et al. (2021a).

Spring Kodiak Trawl Survey
The Spring Kodiak Trawl Survey (SKT) was initiated in 2002 to improve the detection of adult delta smelt as an extension of the Fall Midwater Trawl Survey. The SKT operates 6 monthly surveys from December through May each lasting 4-5 days in length. Each survey, 40 stations are sampled using a standard 10 minute Kodiak trawl. The trawl net has a total length of 19.8m and a fully expanded mouth opening of 7.6m by 1.8m. The net mesh is graduated in size from 5cm knotted stretched mesh at the mouth and decreasing by 1.3cm through a series of 5 panels to a minimum 0.6cm knotless stretched mesh at the cod-end. Additional information and data is found in IEP et al. (2021b).

Summer Townet
The Summer Townet (STN) survey was initiated in 1959 to determine relative distribution and abundance age-0 Striped Bass in the Delta. As with the FMWT, Delta and longfin smelt are both captured during STN Surveys. The STN samples 41 stations throughout the Delta, with 4 stations occurring within 10km of the DWSP. Beginning in 2003, CDFW standardized sampling to 6 surveys annually, starting in early June and running on alternate weeks through August. Two 10 minute stepped oblique tows are performed at each station. The townet has two sections; the first is made of 1.3cm stretched knotted mesh 1.8m long, tapering down to an additional 0.6m "fyke".

This "fyke" fits entirely within the second section, a 2.7m section of woven mesh with approximately 8 holes per 2.5cm. The entire net measures approximately 4.6m in total, and is lashed directly to a fixed metal "D" frame. The "D" frame is in turn mounted on a 10kg sled.

Additional information can be found in the latest STN Survey reports (Malinich 2021, 2023).

Smelt Larva Survey
The Smelt Larva Survey (SLS) was initiated by CDFW in 2009 to monitor the distribution and abundance of newly-hatched longfin smelt in the San Francisco Estuary. Surveys are conducted bi-weekly and sampling begins early January and continues through March. The surveys sample at fixed stations, from Carquinez Strait through Suisun Bay and into the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Each survey consists of 44 stations, four of which occur within 10km of the DWSP.

At each station, one 10 minute stepped-oblique (bottom to top) tow is made following a EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 7 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 prescribed tow schedule. The net is a conical 505µm mesh lashed to a D shaped frame mounted on skis. Further information can be found in IEP et al. (2022).

Delta Juvenile Fish Monitoring Program
The Delta Juvenile Fish Monitoring Program (DJFMP) was initiated in 1976 to monitor the distribution and abundance of juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and other fish species within the Estuary. Currently the DJFMP consists of three trawl stations and 58 beach seine stations, sampled weekly or biweekly. Trawl samples consist of either ten 20-mintue Kodiak or midwater trawls between 7am and 1pm at all stations.

The mesh of the midwater trawl net is graduated in 6 sections from 20.3 cm stretch mesh at the mouth to 0.6cm before the cod-end, the cod-end is 0.3cm mesh. The maximum mouth opening of the net is 4.15m x 5m. The midwater trawl is retrieved obliquely to sample the entire water column, according to a tow schedule which is dependent on depth. Further information about the DJFMP can be found at
https://www.fws.gov/lodi/juvenile_fish_monitoring_program/jfmp_index.htm.

Enhanced Delta Smelt Survey
The Enhanced delta smelt Monitoring Program (EDSM) was initiated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2016, and is focused on providing data on delta smelt distribution and abundance in near-real-time to managers and decision-makers. Sampling is done year-round via Kodiak and 20mm trawls. Stations are chosen via stratified random sampling. Over the course of a week, field crews sample between 18 and 41 random sites. A minimum of two tows are conducted at each site. The Kodiak and 20mm gear used in the EDSM are comparable to the Kodiak and 20mm gear described above. Further information and data from the EDSM can be found in USFWS et al. (2021).

Analytical Approach
Data from the above eight surveys was retrieved from Bashevkin et al. (2022) using code supplied by the repository within R (R Core Team 2021). The data were first filtered to include only those surveys with:

1. longfin or delta smelt data,

2. collected between 2011 and 2021, and

3. at stations located within 10km of the intake facility A 10km boundary (or buffer) was established based on the previous work in ESA (2012b) which identified 3 stations for their analysis with a maximum distance of ~10km.

A total of 163 unique stations in the Lower San Joaquin River occurred within 10km of the DWSP intake structure. A table of each station, the survey(s) conducted, and the years of each survey (from 2011 – 2021) are found in Appendix A. Once the data were filtered, the data were plotted to visually compare the spatial distribution of smelt observations within 10km of the intake facility.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 8 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023 Smelt data was divided by length size classes (<20mm and ≥20mm) based on findings on the susceptibility of delta smelt entrainment through a 1.75mm mesh opening from Appendix 6.A of the Biological Assessment for the California Waterfix (ICF International 2016).

Finally, the temporal distribution of smelt observations was analyzed. The total catch of each size class for each species was added together within 7 day periods (week) within each year. This was then divided by the total annual catch for that species and size class for the entire Delta, to derive the percent of total annual catch for each week of each year. Individual plots for each year are provided in Appendix B. This value was then averaged by week to derive a mean percent of total annual catch for each week. This temporal occurrence was then overlaid on top of the operational period identified in the operating permits for reduced diversion rates (February 15 – March 15 and May 21 – June 15) and curtailment of diversions (March 15 – May 20) at the DWSP intake.

The relative percentage of each size class smelt which occurred outside of the reduced or curtailed operations periods were calculated by dividing the total catch of each species which occurred within each period (February 15 – March 15 (Reduced), March 16 – May 20 (Curtailed), May 21 – June 15 (Reduced), June 16 – February 14(Normal) by the total catch of each species for the entire period January to December.

SOURCE: ESA 2023 Stockton Delta Water Supply – Larval Smelt 2011-2021 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 9 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 Results
Of the 163 stations sampled from 2011 – 2021, 44 station surveys detected smelt (Figure 1).

Temporal detection data from January through June are presented for delta smelt and longfin smelt in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. The presented percentage is the mean of the percent of each year’s total catch for each species and size class caught within 10km of the intake facility.

These composite data approximate the general spatial and temporal distribution of smelt in the vicinity of the intake.

SOURCE: ESA 2023 Stockton Delta Water Supply – Larval Smelt 2011-2021 Figure 1
Map of the sampled stations within 10km of the DWSP Intake Structure (yellow star at center). Small x’s mark samples at stations with 0 smelt observations in the last 10 years, colored circled represent samples at stations with at least 1 smelt (Delta or Longfin) observation.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 10 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023

SOURCE: ESA 2023 Figure 2
Mean annual delta smelt catch within 10km of the intake facility for each size class as a percentage of the annual total catch within the Delta. Yellow areas indicate current periods of reduced pumping (24 cfs) and red areas indicate periods of pumping curtailment.

SOURCE: ESA 2023 Figure 3
Mean annual longfin smelt catch within 10km of the intake facility for each size class as a percentage of the annual total catch within the Delta. Yellow areas indicate current periods of reduced pumping (24 cfs) and red areas indicate periods of pumping curtailment.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 11 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 The total number of individuals caught between 2011 and 2021 within 10km of the intake facility for each operational period are presented in Table 2 alongside the average annual percentage of the total Delta catch within each period.

TABLE 2

TOTAL CATCH AND MEAN PERCENT OF ANNUAL CATCH IN THE VICINITY OF THE DWSP INTAKE DURING EACH

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Total Catch
(2011 – 2021)
Operational Period Catch (Mean Annual % of Total Delta Catch) Jan 1 – Feb 14
Normal
Feb 15 – Mar 15
Reduced
Mar 15 – May 20
Curtailed
May 21 – Jun 15
Reduced
Jun 16 – Dec 31
Normal
Delta Smelt
<20mm 63 -- 2 (3.23%) 45 (2.99%) 16 (1.8%) --
≥20mm 33 11 (0.4%) 10 (0.18%) 5 (0.17%) -- 7 (0.42%)
Longfin Smelt
<20mm 247 64 (0.11%) 151 (0.12%) 32 (0.13%) -- --
≥20mm 2 -- 2 (0.04%) -- -- --

SOURCE: ESA 2023

Catch data show that the reduced diversion period (February 15 – June 15) is inclusive of delta smelt presence within the vicinity of the intake for fish small enough to be entrained (<20mm).

While the reduced period does not cover the winter period (Dec-Jan) of elevated presence of larger delta smelt (≥20mm), these fish are large enough to be physically excluded and therefore represent a lower risk of entrainment. However, longfin smelt <20mm do appear within the vicinity as early as January, before pumping restrictions are in effect (Figure 3 and Table 2).

These individuals would be more vulnerable to being entrained through the 1.75mm intake screen mesh given the higher intake rates.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 12 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023 Summary of Findings
The DWSP intake includes both physical features (a fish screen), operational limits (reduced approach velocities), and constraints (curtailment and reduced pumping periods) that have been specifically developed to avoid and/or minimize entrainment of larval and early juvenile delta and longfin smelt. Below is a summary of each of these features and an assessment of their protectiveness for larval smelt.

Fish Screen Mesh Size
Monitoring conducted at the nearby Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) Old River intake screen has shown the effectiveness of 2.4mm mesh at excluding larval fish as small as 10mm in length (Environmental Science Associates 2012b). The DWSP intake mesh is smaller (1.75mm) and therefore is expected to be as effective, if not more effective, at excluding larvae >10mm.

Reduced Approach Velocities
The DWSP fish screen is designed to have an approach velocity equal to or less than 0.2 feet per second (fps) (equating to a maximum diversion rate of 159 cfs) as required by CDFW and NMFS screening criteria to protect early life stages of delta smelt (NMFS 1996; CDFW 2000), and described in the DWSP ITP. However, the DWSP ITP further requires adherence to the reduced initial diversion rate for the project authorized under Water Rights Permit 21176, which equates to an approach velocity of less than 0.062 fps (31% of the maximum 0.2 fps), corresponding to a maximum diversion rate of 46.4 cfs. Protectiveness of larval fish is further improved by seasonal reductions in pumping operations, which reduces the approach velocity at the screen to 0.03 fps (maximum diversion rate of 24 cfs) during periods of smelt presence.

Curtailment and Reduced Pumping Periods
Catch data show that the reduced diversion period (February 15 – June 15) is inclusive of delta smelt presence within the vicinity of the intake for fish small enough to be entrained (<20mm) and likely effective at avoiding entrainment of delta smelt. Longfin smelt <20mm do appear within the vicinity as early as January, before pumping restrictions are in effect (Figure 3 and Table 2) and may be at higher risk of entertainment during January 1 – February 14 prior to reductions starting on February 15. However, when putting these early winter catches of larval longfin smelt in context of the overall delta population, the observed larval longfin smelt seen in the vicinity of the DWSP during January 1 – February 14 in years 2011-2021 only represents

0.11% of the total annual catch of larval longfin smelt captured in the entire Delta during that time.

Conclusions
Entrainment Monitoring
The previous recommendation made in ESA (2012b) was to not include entrainment monitoring at the DWSP intake facility due to extensive monitoring results demonstrating the effectiveness of the comparable CCWD fish screen at Old River in excluding larval and juvenile fish from entrainment. Given the protectiveness of the fish screen mesh size, the reduced approach EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 13 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 June 2023 velocities at the fish screen, continued operational management to reduce impacts, and the presumed low population level impact (especially for longfin smelt), no changes to the recommendation are made at this time.

Operational Periods
As summarized above, the current reduction and curtailment periods are expected to be protective for delta smelt given that the time periods completely capture the timing of larval delta smelt presence in the vicinity of the DWSP intake. And while the timing of larval longfin smelt presence begins prior to the beginning of the reduction period in mid-February, the portion of the overall population of longfin smelt potentially exposed to the intake during this time is very small, estimated as 0.11%. Therefore, no changes to the operational periods are recommended at this time.

References
Bashevkin, S. M., J. W. Gaeta, T. X. Nguyen, L. Mitchell, and S. Khanna. 2022. Fish abundance in the San Francisco Estuary (1959-2021), an integration of 9 monitoring surveys.

Environmental Data Initiative.

Baxter, R., K. Hieb, S. DeLeon, K. Fleming, and J. Orsi. 1999. Report on the 1980-1995 fish, shrimp, and crab sampling in the San Francisco estuary, California. Page J. Orsi, editor.

Interagency Ecological Program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, Sacramento.

CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2000. Exhibit A. Department of Fish and Game Fish Screening Criteria. Department of Fish and Game Bay Delta Region, Yountville, CA.

Environmental Science Associates. 2012a. Stockton Delta Water Supply - Intake Predation Report. Page 46. City of Stockton, Final Report, Sacramento, CA.

Environmental Science Associates. 2012b. Stockton Delta Water Supply: Fish Survey Report - Larval Smetl. Page 26. City of Stockton, Final Report, Sacramento, CA.

ICF International. 2016. Biological Assessment for the California Waterfix. Prepared for the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Sacramento, CA, ICF 00237.15., Sacramento, CA.

Interagency Ecological Program (IEP), L. Damon, and A. Chorazyczewski. 2021a. Interagency Ecological Program San Francisco Estuary 20mm Survey 1995 - 2021. Environmental Data Initiative.

Interagency Ecological Program (IEP), L. Damon, and A. Chorazyczewski. 2021b. Interagency Ecological Program San Francisco Estuary Spring Kodiak Trawl Survey 2002 - 2021.

Environmental Data Initiative.

Interagency Ecological Program (IEP), L. Damon, V. G. Mora, and J. A. Jimenez. 2022.

Interagency Ecological Program San Francisco Estuary Smelt Larva Survey 2009 – 2022.

Environmental Data Initiative.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021

Stockton Delta Water Supply Project 14 ESA / D202200643.00 Larval Smelt Entrainment Risk Evaluation 2011-2021 July 2023 Malinich, T. D. 2021. The Summer Townet Survey - 2021 Season Report. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bay Delta Region, End of Season Report, Stockton, CA.

Malinich, T. D. 2023. The Summer Townet Survey - 2022 Season Report. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bay Delta Region, End of Season Report, Stockton, CA.

NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. NMFS Juvenile Fish Screen Criteria for Pump Intakes Addendum. Environmental and Technical Services Division, Portland, OR.

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2009. Biological performance of intake screen alternatives to reduce annual impingement mortality and entrainment at Merrimack Station.pdf. Page

56. Public Service of New Hampshire, Environmental Services, R-21351.001, New Hampshire.

R Core Team. 2021. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

United States Fish And Wildlife Service, T. Senegal, R. Mckenzie, J. Speegle, B. Perales, D.

Bridgman, K. Erly, S. Staiger, A. Arrambide, and M. Gilbert. 2021. Interagency Ecological Program and US Fish and Wildlife Service: San Francisco Estuary Enhanced Delta Smelt Monitoring Program data, 2016-2021. Environmental Data Initiative.

White, J. 2020. Fall Midwater Trawl Survey End of Season Report: 2020. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bay Delta Region, End of Season Report, Stockton, CA.

White, J. 2021. Fall Midwater Trawl Survey End of Season Report: 2021. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bay Delta Region, End of Season Report, Stockton, CA.

White, J. 2022. Fall Midwater Trawl Survey End of Season Report: 2022. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bay Delta Region, End of Season Report, Stockton, CA.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix A
Survey Stations Included in
Evaluation
ESA
Appendix A
Survey Stations Included in
Evaluation
ESA

Appendix A
Survey Stations Included in
Evaluation
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix A. Survey Stations Included in Evaluation
A-1
TABLE A1
SAMPLING STATIONS AND STUDIES WITHIN 10KM OF DWSP INTAKE STRUCTURE Survey Station Temporal Coverage
815
20mm 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 SKT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 SLS 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 STN 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 865 Bay Study 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 904 FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 905 FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 906 20mm 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 SKT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 SLS 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 STN 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 908 FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 909 FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 910 20mm 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

FMWT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 SKT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 SLS 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 STN 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 919 20mm 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

SKT 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 SLS 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 STN 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 DS002S DJFMP 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 DS01 EDSM 2017, 2018
DS02 EDSM 2018
DS101 EDSM 2017
DS103 EDSM 2017
DS104 EDSM 2017
DS202 EDSM 2017
DS203 EDSM 2017
DS204 EDSM 2017
DS51 EDSM 2017
DS53 EDSM 2017
HC01 EDSM 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
HC02 EDSM 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
HC101 EDSM 2017
HC102 EDSM 2017
HC103 EDSM 2017
HC104 EDSM 2017
HC105 EDSM 2017
HC203 EDSM 2017
HC206 EDSM 2017
HC51 EDSM 2017
HC52 EDSM 2017
HC53 EDSM 2017
HC54 EDSM 2017
HC55 EDSM 2017
MI01 EDSM 2017, 2018
MI02 EDSM 2017
MI101 EDSM 2017
MI104 EDSM 2017
MI105 EDSM 2017
MI106 EDSM 2017
MI108 EDSM 2017
MI203 EDSM 2017
MI205 EDSM 2017
MI208 EDSM 2017
MI210 EDSM 2017
MI212 EDSM 2017
MI52 EDSM 2017
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix A. Survey Stations Included in Evaluation
A-2
Survey Station Temporal Coverage
MI59 EDSM 2017
MI60 EDSM 2017
MIW01 EDSM 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
MIW02 EDSM 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
MIW03 EDSM 2018, 2019, 2020
MIW04 EDSM 2018
MKR01 EDSM 2017, 2018
MKR02 EDSM 2017, 2018
MKR03 EDSM 2017
MKR101 EDSM 2017
MKR102 EDSM 2017
MKR104 EDSM 2017
MKR107 EDSM 2017
MKR202 EDSM 2017
MKR203 EDSM 2017
MKR205 EDSM 2017
MKR208 EDSM 2017
MKR212 EDSM 2017
MKR213 EDSM 2017
MKR215 EDSM 2017
MKR219 EDSM 2017
MKR52 EDSM 2017
MKR59 EDSM 2017
MKR60 EDSM 2017
PP01 EDSM 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
PP02 EDSM 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
PP03 EDSM 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021
PP04 EDSM 2016, 2019, 2020
PP05 EDSM 2020
PP06 EDSM 2016
PP07 EDSM 2016
PP08 EDSM 2016
PP09 EDSM 2016
PP10 EDSM 2016
PP101 EDSM 2017
PP102 EDSM 2017
PP103 EDSM 2017
PP104 EDSM 2017
PP105 EDSM 2017
PP106 EDSM 2017
PP107 EDSM 2017
PP11 EDSM 2016
PP110 EDSM 2017
PP111 EDSM 2017
PP112 EDSM 2017
PP113 EDSM 2017
PP114 EDSM 2017
PP115 EDSM 2017
PP116 EDSM 2017
PP117 EDSM 2017
PP119 EDSM 2017
PP13 EDSM 2016
PP14 EDSM 2016
PP17 EDSM 2017
PP19 EDSM 2017
PP20 EDSM 2017
PP202 EDSM 2017
PP203 EDSM 2017
PP204 EDSM 2017
PP207 EDSM 2017
PP208 EDSM 2017
PP209 EDSM 2017
PP21 EDSM 2017
PP210 EDSM 2017
PP211 EDSM 2017
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix A. Survey Stations Included in Evaluation
A-3
Survey Station Temporal Coverage
PP22 EDSM 2017
PP23 EDSM 2017
PP24 EDSM 2017
PP25 EDSM 2017
PP26 EDSM 2017
PP27 EDSM 2017
PP52 EDSM 2017
PP53 EDSM 2017
PP55 EDSM 2017
PP57 EDSM 2017
PP58 EDSM 2017
PP59 EDSM 2017
PP60 EDSM 2017
PP61 EDSM 2017
PP63 EDSM 2017
PP64 EDSM 2017
PP65 EDSM 2017
PP67 EDSM 2017
PP68 EDSM 2017
PP69 EDSM 2017
PP70 EDSM 2017
PP71 EDSM 2017
PP72 EDSM 2017
PP73 EDSM 2017
PP75 EDSM 2017
PP77 EDSM 2017
PP78 EDSM 2017
SJ026S DJFMP 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 SJ032S DJFMP 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 SJS01 EDSM 2017, 2018
SJS102 EDSM 2017
SJS201 EDSM 2017
SJS202 EDSM 2017
SJS204 EDSM 2017
SJS51 EDSM 2017
SJS57 EDSM 2017
SOURCE: EDI 2022, ESA 2023
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B
Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
ESA
Appendix B
Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
ESA

Appendix B
Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021

Total Catch
Delta Smelt 2011 Longfin Smelt 2011
404
304
SizeClass s SizeClass
2 204
|| 220mm 2 | < 20mm
F
104 |
a | , |

B-1
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
B-1
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021

Delta Smelt 2012 Longfin Smelt 2012
154 407
304
104
s SizeClass £ SizeClass
8 Bs
1S) < [S) 4 < 3 i 20mm Tas i 20mm
i i 220mm - || = 20mm
54 | / | o | | | o4 lL. .
% % % % % tb % Yt Ww % % Cy ta, % % % ty % My Uy Ye Be % “0, *o, 0, 0, %o, 0, °, ~o, °0, oO %o, °o, “o, “o, “0, °o, °0, %o, O, “0, Oo, %0, oO O, 0, “0, Delta Smelt 2013 Longfin Smelt 2013
154 404
304
SizeClass
i < 20mm
SizeClass
204
| < 20mm
i 220mm
54 | 104

0. i | il of . k |
Total Catch
Total Catch

©. wv za y
% OO “S& Hi % % %, %, Ko, ‘ % % “S& % ~% %
0, 0, “0, "0, 0, 0, 07 0, 0, 0, 0, Oz

Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
B-2
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021

Total Catch Total Catch

Delta Smelt 2014 Longfin Smelt 2014
154 404
304
104
SizeClass < .
oO 2 SizeClass
<20mm 2 204
B DN) < 20mm
i 220mm F
54 104 |
7 fl ul | | re
bh & % &% & & & & 4&4 YF & Q a 4&4 & 6 & & & & & & & F& %, %, ey, Y K ie Ss) G, ©, O, © y is) %, %, %, Y % (7; S) 3) “o, “0, So, 0, %0, 0, “a, *o, 0, 0; %o, 0, “a, “o, “0, “0, 0, *o, “0, "a, *o, %0, Or So, 0, “a, Delta Smelt 2015 Longfin Smelt 2015
404
304

2. gs .

SizeClass 2 SizeClass
© 204 DY = 20mm E DN) < 20mm
104
i 0 = = io
“2 > ©& SF & & & 4&4 & 4, &, Q % 2 & & & F ye Y 4 8 ey, th, % iS) ca) %G, ©, C) g %, %, %, Y %“ % 9 ) %o, *o, % 20, 80, ‘0, *o, Ho, 2, 0, OQ, 0, %, 0, %o, “0, Ko, te 20, 6, 2, 0, *o, 0, 20, OQ, 0, o, %o,

Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
B-3
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021

Total Catch

Delta Smelt 2016 Longfin Smelt 2016
154 40 4
304
104
s SizeClass £ .
g 2 SizeClass
° i <20mm~ ° 204
g 5 BD < 20mm F i 220mm F
5 104

0. cy | of ii
Ww % % xs & 4, %, % % 4 &. Q %, 2 % 4s %, 4 %, % % 4 8. %, %, ey, Y K ie Ss) G, ©, O, © is) %, %, %, Y % (7; S) %o, *o, % 20, 6, 2, *o, *o, a 20, ‘0, 0, Oo %o, “0, *o, ial 0, 20, 6, 2, 0, *o, O, 20, Oy 0, 0, “0, Delta Smelt 2017 Longfin Smelt 2017
154 40 4
304
104

2. gs .

SizeClass 2 SizeClass
© 204 I > 20mm g I) 20mm
5 104
of o4 =
bh & %& %&% & & &® & & Y & oa %&*§ 2&2 & & & & & & & & & 2 %, th % iS) ) ©, O, © is) %, %, %, Y th, ie Ss) %G, %o, Ko, % 20, 80, ‘0, *o, 0, 20, Oy 0, %, 0, %o, “0, ho, 8, 0, 6, 2, *o, *o, 0, 20, 0, 0, %o, “0,

Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
B-4
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021

Total Catch Total Catch

Delta Smelt 2018 Longfin Smelt 2018
154 407
304
104
x P |
4G 8 SizeClass
oP 2 204
O g < 20mm
W . 54
104
04 04
Q % 4 %, x %, % % 4 & Q % S%, %& 4 &, % % 4 &. & ©) C) » % , %, %, % %K % S) on & o) % y 2, o) %, %“% % g co) “0, Xo, %, °0, ‘0, "0, 4 %o, ‘0, 0, Go, 0, “0, “0, *o, 0, 7% *o, %o, ‘0, Oy %o, 20, “o, Delta Smelt 2019 Longfin Smelt 2019
154 407
304
104
cx s oo A 5 A cP 2 204 oP
x
°°
ce) F WO
54 104
04 04
2 % 4 %, 4, %, % % 4 &. Q %, % 4s ty, 4 %, % % 4 8. & ‘, e ® % %3, 0, %, % K % iS) & X ©, @ Y, % 3, 2, 3, %, KX 7; 9 on “0, a, Oo, 0, 0, o, O, % So, 0, “0, “o, “0, oy oO, % %, “ao, oO, C0, 0, “Oy

Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
B-5
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021

Delta Smelt 2020 Longfin Smelt 2020
154 404
304
104
cat x .
2 «oe 2 SizeClass
g ios 2 20;
g G g < 20mm
" yw ° 5
104
07 o4 a =
2 % a & 4, ty % % 4 8 4, 4 %&% & & & & & YF & ) ©) ) on % % S, Gp, %“ % S) on ro) o) %, %, % % % %, % % g O “o, “0, %o, 0, ‘0, 0, “O, Oy 0, Oo 0, "0, “0, *o, 0, 90, “0, “0, “%o, 70, “ 80, 0, “o, Delta Smelt 2021 Longfin Smelt 2021
154 404
304
104
cat x . § <oe 8 SizeClass
° p> © 204
g G g < 20mm
" vw . 5
104
. 5 |
2 % a & 4, ty % % 4 8 4, 4 %&% & & & & & YF & ) ©) ) on % %, S, % %“ % S) co) ro) o) , %, %, % 2, % %, % % g O “o, “0, %o, 0, ‘0, 0, “O, Oy O, Oo 0, "0, “ao, “0, “0, %, %o, “0, “a “%o, 70, “ 80, 0, “a,

Appendix B. Yearly Smelt Catch 2011 - 2021
B-6
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Exhibit 5
Exhibit 5
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
memorandum
date December 24, 2025
to Benjamin Huffer, CDFW
cc Travis Small, City of Stockton;
Brenda Blinn, CDFW;
Mel Lytle, City of Stockton;
Kelley Taber, Somach Simmons & Dunn
Robert Granberg, Granberg & Associates, Inc
Chris Fitzer, Environmental Science Associates
from Taylor Spaulding, Environmental Science Associates subject RE: ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT: ITP 2081-2024-058-03 (Stockton Delta Water Supply Project)
Dear Mr. Huffer,
Environmental Science Associates (ESA), on behalf of the City of Stockton (City), has reviewed the Administrative Draft Incidental Take Permit (Draft ITP; Permit No. 2081-2024-058-03) for the Stockton Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP). We appreciate the effort invested in preparing the Draft ITP; however, we have significant concerns regarding the scientific basis for the effects conclusions and the justification for the associated mitigation requirements. As currently drafted, the ITP does not demonstrate a defensible nexus between the project’s minimal impacts and the scale of mitigation prescribed, nor does it acknowledge mitigation already in place to address operational impacts for the permitted 30 mgd project diversion. Specific concerns are summarized below:

Insufficient Effects Analysis
The effects characterization in the Draft ITP is almost entirely qualitative and does not include a meaningful quantitative evaluation of the effects of diversion operations on listed species or their habitat.

In the absence of a defensible analytical foundation, the magnitude of effects asserted in the Draft ITP remains unsupported, and the resulting mitigation requirements lack proportionality to actual project risk.

We request that the ITP be revised to include appropriate scientific justification, including a quantitative assessment of take risk, to support any proposed mitigation measures.

Outsized Mitigation Requirements
The City believes that the mitigation requirements included in the Draft ITP are substantially disproportionate to the actual impacts of DWSP operations, based on several key considerations summarized below.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Area of Influence
The Draft ITP relies on a 10-kilometer area of influence around the intake facilities, derived from the ITP application’s use of a 10-kilometer radius in the entrainment risk analysis. This spatial extent substantially overstates the scale at which potential aquatic effects could reasonably occur.

The 10-kilometer extent used in the City’s entrainment risk analysis was selected to maintain consistency with the original 2009 ITP analysis and to encompass Interagency Ecological Program (IEP) monitoring locations with detections of Delta Smelt and Longfin Smelt, given the extreme rarity of these species in the area and the spacing of available monitoring stations. It was not intended to represent the expected biological area of effect or the hydrodynamic footprint of the facility. In practice, the hydrodynamic influence of the facility, even at the maximum permitted diversion rate of 46.4 cubic feet per second (cfs), is expected to be confined to the immediate vicinity of the intake screen, likely on the order of less than 2 meters.

Hydraulic Influence
The Draft ITP does not adequately acknowledge the extremely small proportion of total, tidally driven discharge diverted at the intake location. A recent run of DSM2 by DWR calculated the average tidal discharge of the San Joaquin River at the site is approximately 13,658 cfs, while the facility’s maximum diversion rate is 46.4 cfs, representing roughly 0.3 percent of flow under peak diversion conditions. This level of hydrologic influence is well below what would be observable in the field and does not substantively alter water movement, fish distribution, or habitat conditions beyond the immediate vicinity of the intake screens. Additionally, during periods when Delta Smelt and Longfin Smelt are present within the area (late winter and early spring) flows are considerably higher and diversion rates considerably less under permit-curtailed diversions, representing even lower hydraulic influence. During the summer, when the Draft ITP assumes that diversion will potentially impact downstream water quality, because tidal discharge at the site during summer (June – August) remains ~13,658, the diversion rate continues to remain small enough (0.3 percent) that impacts would not realistically be observed and differentiated from the natural fluctuation in these factors.

Protective Design and Operation
The DWSP intake facilities were designed to accommodate higher future capacities that may be required as the City’s population increases; however, those higher capacities are neither currently needed nor permitted. As a result, the realized approach velocity at maximum diversion is approximately 0.062 feet per second (fps), or about 30 percent of the 0.2 fps approach velocity considered protective for Delta Smelt and Longfin Smelt. This conservative operational condition further reduces an already low entrainment risk and should be appropriately reflected in the effects analysis and mitigation rationale.

Summary of Mitigation Concerns
In summary, the City considers the Draft ITP’s mitigation requirements to be outsized relative to the actual risk posed to Delta Smelt and Longfin Smelt. The limited discussion of effects provided in the Draft ITP does not present sufficient evidence to support the magnitude of mitigation specified. The DWSP’s hydrologic and ecological effects are extremely small and highly localized, whereas the mitigation requirements appear to be scaled to a project with substantially greater impacts. Moreover, the EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ITP does not reflect that as part of the original ITP permit condition (CDFW 2009), the City purchased a total of 5.96 acres of land acquisition credits to comply with Take Mitigation requirement 7.2. The required acreage included 0.96 acres to compensate for the permanent loss of 0.32 acres of shallow water habitat associated with construction activities and 5.0 acres to fully mitigate effects to Covered Species during Project operations. As described in the ITP permit (CDFW 2009), this determination was based on an assessment of timing and quantity of the aquatic species impacted by the Project and an evaluation of the potential ongoing impacts due to operation. The City’s position continues to be that the substantial mitigation land credits purchased under the original ITP (for operations that began less than 13 years ago), are protected in perpetuity, providing permanent protection for the species, and are not limited to 5 years (or any other permit duration) and thus should be sufficient to address ongoing operations Additional Concerns
The Draft ITP includes several General Provisions related to construction monitoring and terrestrial impacts that appear to be outside the scope of the proposed action, which is the continued operation of an existing facility. These provisions include requirements related to biological monitoring, erosion control, and project access routes, none of which are applicable given that the project does not involve new construction or ground-disturbing activities.

Additionally, under the Take Minimization Measures, the requirement for fish screen cleaning at five- minute intervals would effectively result in continuous cleaning. This approach is energetically demanding and excessive based on observed fouling conditions at the DWSP and fails to acknowledge the sweeping effect of tidal action parallel to the screen. The City’s current screen cleaning program operates at intervals of once every 24 hours, with an additional manual cycle twice a week during inspections and has been sufficient to prevent debris accumulation that could affect hydrodynamics or increase entrainment risk for listed species
Request for Coordination
The City would appreciate the opportunity to discuss these concerns with CDFW staff in an in-person meeting. The City is willing to host the meeting at its Water Treatment Facility or, alternatively, to meet at a location preferred by CDFW personnel.

We look forward to continued coordination and are available to provide additional technical detail as needed.

Sincerely,
Taylor Spaulding
Senior Fisheries Biologist
Environmental Science Associates
On behalf of the City of Stockton
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18