City Council and Concurrent Authorities
July 7, 2026

Exhibit 1
Exhibit 1
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
MAIL FORM AND ATTACHMENTS TO:

Please indicate County where State Water Resources Control Board your project is located here: DIVISION OF WATER RIGHTS
P.O. Box 2000, Sacramento, CA 95812-2000
San Joaquin Tel: (916) 341-5300 Fax: (916) 341-5400
http:/Awww.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights

PETITION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 842
Application 30531A Permit 21176
Separate petitions are required for each water right. Incomplete forms may not be accepted. Complete this form if the time previously allowed in your permit within which to complete construction work and/or use of water has either expired or will expire and you require additional time. Provide attachments if necessary.

Water Code section 1396 requires an applicant to exercise due diligence in developing a water supply for beneficial use.

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) will review the facts presented to determine whether: (a) due diligence has been exercised, (b) failure to comply with previous time requirements has been occasioned by obstacles which could not reasonably be avoided, and (c) that satisfactory progress will be made if an extension of time is granted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 844.) If an extension of time is not granted, the State Water Board may initiate formal action to either: (a) issue a license for the amount of water heretofore placed to beneficial use under the terms of the permit, or (b) revoke the permit.

If this is your first extension of time, answer the questions below for the permitted construction and water use development period. If previous extensions have been approved, answer these questions for the most recently approved extension period (for example, if a ten-year extension was previously granted, list the activities completed during the ten- year period).
| (we) request a 20 year extension of time to complete construction work and/or beneficial use of water.

Construction
Estimate the date construction work will begin, list the actions taken toward commencing or completing construction, and list the reasons why construction of the project was not completed.

Construction of Phase | of the City of Stockton's Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP) is complete. Phase | includes the Drinking Water Treatment Plant (DWTP) on approximately 60 acres off of Lower Sacramento Road. The 30 million gallons per day (mgd) DWTP includes ozone pre-treatment, flocculation and sedimentation, membrane ultra-filtration processes followed by chlorine disinfection and chloramine residual for distribution. The DWSP also includes twelve miles of 54-inch RCP raw water pipeline installed along Eight Mile Road capable of conveying 60 mgd, and the 80 mgd Intake Pump Station (IPS) diversion works housing four, 250-hoursepower pumps (each rated at 6,950 gallons per minute) and state-of-the-art fish screens located on the southwest tip of Empire Tract in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The DWSP was dedicated for operation in May 2012, three and one-half years ahead of the schedule mandated in Permit 21176. See Attachment 1 for further information.

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: 1
Complete Use of Water
List reasons why use of water was not completed within time previously allowed.

Please see Attachment 1, Section 2, for reasons why the City of Stockton will not complete use of water by December 21, 2020.
whale kere ChE V0i0\\40 ive irre him VA AB l0.00 Rik B50 — Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: 1 SW CAT EXHIBIT 2
STKN-18
Quantities Diverted
For direct diversion projects, list the cubic feet per second (cfs) or gallons per day (gpd) diverted during the maximum month of use, and the acre-feet per annum (afa) and identify the year this occurred. For storage projects, identify the maximum amount collected to storage and withdrawn for beneficial use in afa and identify the year this occurred.

Year Maximum Diversion Rate Maximum Annual Amount
(cfs or gpd) (afa)
Direct Diversion 2019 37.30 11,246.00
Storage
11,246.00 Beneficial Use
Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: 2 2
Information on Beneficial Uses
Number of Acres Irrigated 0.00
Number of Houses or People Served 180,000
Per Capita Residential Water Use During the Maximum 30-day Period (gpd) 134.00 Extent of Past Use of Water for Any Other Purpose (identify gpd, cfs or afa) 0 Insert the attachment number here, if applicable:

Approximate Amount Spent on Project $ 223,000,000.00
Water Conservation — If water conservation is required by your permit, provide the information below.

Water Conservation Measures In Effect
List the water conservation measures that are in effect within the place of use.

Permit Term 16 states that Stockton will implement cost-effective measures identified in the UWMP. Stockton's 2015 UWMP identified several Demand Management Measures(DMM's). Current DMM's include: 1) Water Waste Prohibition (SMC 13.28); 2); Metering; 3) Tiered water rates; 4) Public Education & Outreach; 5) Distribution system loss analysis; 6) Part-time Water Conservation Coordinator; 7) Other Demand Management Measures including: a) Residential Water Survey Programs, b) Residential Plumbing Retrofit Kits, c) Cll Conservation Programs, d) Landscape Conservation Programs i) Model Water Efficiency MWELO; ii) Large Landscape Water Users.

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable:

Water Conservation Measures Planned
List the water conservation measures that are feasible within the place of use and the date the measures will be implemented. Identify the quantities estimated to be conserved when the measures are implemented.

Additional Demand Management Measures in progress include (from above referenced UWMP DMM's), 6) Full-time Water Conservation Coordinator; 7e) (i) implement the MWELO and (ii) Large Landscape Water Conservation Program.

Estimates of water quantity to be conserved with these additional measures is approximately 1,300 acre-feet per year.

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: 1
All Right Holders Must Sign This Form: | (we) declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge and belief. Dated 09//4/2020 at Stelctm., CA

L il
Right Holder pr Authorized Agent Signature Right Holder or Authorized Agent Signature

NOTE: All petitions must be accompanied by:
(1) the form Environmental Information for Petitions, available at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/publications_forms/forms/docs/pet_info.pdf (2) Division of Water Rights fee, per the Water Rights Fee Schedule, available at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/fees/ (3) Department of Fish and Wildlife fee of $850 (Pub. Resources Code, § 10005)

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
City of Stockton Water Right Permit 21176
Petition for Extension of Time
ATTACHMENT 2
The City of Stockton ("Stockton" or "City") submits this Petition for Extension of Time ("Petition") to the State Water Resources Control Board ("State Board") for its consideration and approval. The Petition requests an extension of time to put water to beneficial use under Water Right Permit 21176 ("Permit 21176").

The State Board will approve a petition for extension of time when the following criteria are met:
(1) Due diligence was exercised;
(2) The failure to comply with previous time requirements can be excused because of obstacles which could not reasonably be avoided;
(3) That satisfactory progress will be made if an extension of time is granted; and (4) Approval of the extension is in the public interest. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 844.)
As explained below, the City has satisfied all criteria and should be granted an extension of time for Permit 21176. 1

1. The City Has Exercised Due Diligence With the Construction and Operation of a New Drinking Water Treatment Proiect and Diversion of Water for Beneficial Use Under Permit 21176
The City's water right is based on Water Code section 1485 where diversions for beneficial use cannot exceed the amount of water discharged by the City's Regional Wastewater Control Tertiary Facility (RWCF). (Declaration of Robert Granberg in Support of Petition for Extension of Time to Put Water to Beneficial Use Under Permit 21176 [Granberg Deel.], ,r 4, and Exh. A thereto.) The 15-day running average of diversions must be less than or equal to the 15-day running average of the discharges of properly treated effluent discharged by the RWCF. (Ibid.) In other words, the City can only divert as much water as it discharges to the San Joaquin River from the point of discharge located just downstream of the Stockton Swing Bridge on Highway 4. Under this indirect potable use strategy, the City removes only as much water as it puts into the San Joaquin River for treatment and delivery to its customers. This approach ensures the reliability of the City's surface water supply and protects downstream beneficial uses by other Delta diverters.

A. Delta Water Supply Project Construction and Operation In September 2009, the City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department (COSMUD), following years of extensive development, planning, design, and financing activities, began construction on the first phase of the Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP), which included the Drinking Water Treatment Plant 1 In Application 30531, the City initially applied for a water right in excess of 33,600 acre-feet per year (af/yr). The State Board bifurcated the City's Application 30531 into 30531A and 30531B, and ultimately issued Permit 21176 on Application 30531A. Application 30531B is not the subject of this Petition. 1 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
(DWTP) on approximately 60 acres off Lower Sacramento Road. The 30 million gallons per day (mgd) DWTP includes ozone pre-treatment, settling basins, and membrane ultra-filtration processes, followed by chloramine disinfection and distribution. The DWSP also includes 12 miles of 54-inch RCP raw water pipeline installed along Eight Mile Road capable of conveying 60 mgd, and the 80 mgd-capacity Intake Pump Station (IPS) diversion works housing four 250-horsepower pumps (each rated at 6,950 gallons per minute) and state-of-the-art fish screens located on the southwest tip of Empire Tract (see Figure 1 — Project Area Map). The DWSP was dedicated for operation in May 2012, 3-1/2 years ahead of the schedule mandated under Permit 21176. The cost to complete the project was more than $220 million. It was the largest public works project in the City’s history. (Granberg Decl., §/ 5, and Exh. B thereto.) FIGURE 1. Delta Water Supply Project Area Map
\

Empire
cla
Late}
oe s) : IE Yare!

B. Diversions to Beneficial Use
The first phase of the DWTP is configured to treat 30 mgd, or 33,600 af/yr, which is the maximum annual diversion volume currently allowed for beneficial use under Permit 21176. (Granberg Decl., 6, and Exh. C thereto, pp. 5-7.) The City has acted with due diligence by constructing and initiating operation of the DWTP, and has consistently put to beneficial use water granted under Permit 21176, as shown in Table 1.

C. Use of Groundwater In Lieu of Surface Water
As documented in the City’s Progress Reports on file with the State Board, in 2016, 2017, and 2018, the City used groundwater in lieu of surface water under Permit 21176. (Granberg Decl., 7, and Exh. D thereto.) The City met its water demand in 2016 by conjunctively using 71% of supply from surface water and 29% from groundwater. In 2017, demand was met with 87% surface water and 13% groundwater, and in 2018, with 76% surface water and 24% groundwater. In 2016, 2017, and 2018, the water available for diversion by the City, with Endangered Species Act (ESA) pumping limitations, exceeded the combined amount of water the City diverted under Permit 21176 and pumped from groundwater. (Granberg Decl., 4 7.) During those months, surface water was available for the City to use, but it forwent its right to use surface water in order to conjunctively use groundwater. This use of groundwater in lieu of surface water constitutes beneficial use under Permit 21176. Therefore, such groundwater use demonstrates diligence in putting Permit 21176 water to beneficial use.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
TABLE 1. City of Stockton Metropolitan Area (COSMA)
Water Demand and Diversions under Permit 21176 (acre-feet)

Water Year | Total COSMA | Total RWCF Water Available for Water Diverted by Water Demand Discharge Diversion by City Under City Under Permit 21176 with ESA Permit 21176
pumping restrictions
2012-13 64,445 24,685 18,346 6,392
2013-14 63,531 25,531 18,995 6,730
2014-15 56,699 25,546 19,066 4,612
2015-16 48,793 24,387 18,144 9,756
2016-17 49,700 28,711 21,361 9,951
2017-18 53,225 27,502 20,461 10,862
2018-19 56,113 26,753 19,904 9,855
() Water Year is April — March.

2. The City has Experienced Obstacles That Could Not Reasonably Have Been Avoided A. Statewide Drought
Due to the 2013-15 drought and state-mandated conservation measures, the City’s overall water demand was reduced by nearly 29 percent in 2015 compared to 2013. Stockton continued to meet this demand through Permit 21176 water, and increased groundwater pumping to compensate for restricted surface supplies from the Stockton East Water District (Stockton East) and Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID). (Granberg Decl., { 8, and Exh. E thereto.) The drought occurred shortly after the DWTP began operations under these reduced demands, but it allowed the City to demonstrate how its conjunctive use program, made possible by Permit 21176, could effectively manage hydrologic change during a significant drought. COSMUD experienced a significant reduction in revenue due to the historic drought and implementation of mandatory conservation measures that reduced demand for City water by nearly 29 percent. As a result, revenues declined by approximately $3 million in 2014 and 2015. Due to the budget shortfall, COSMUD was forced to curtail its capital improvement program for water projects and fund only essential maintenance projects planned for Fiscal Year 2016-2017. (Granberg Decl., | 9, and Exh. F thereto.)
The City continued its water management efforts in 2016, 2017, and 2018, as evidenced by the City’s progress reports filed with the State Board, which demonstrate that the City has effectively managed its water resource portfolio. (See Granberg Decl., { 7, and Exh. D thereto.) Through conjunctive use, Stockton has been able to reduce reliance on groundwater resources when surface water is available, and then conjunctively use groundwater in years when surface water is curtailed. As demand for water in Stockton continues to increase, and planned distribution system improvements are completed, the City will be able to utilize more of its Permit 21176 water while maintaining flexibility to conjunctively use groundwater resources.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
B. Regulatory Requirements Have Limited Distribution of Permit 21176 Water As shown in Figure 2, the COSMA is served by three retail water providers. COSMUD serves the north and south systems; the California Water Service Company (CalWater), an investor-owned utility, serves the central area; and San Joaquin County operates two water systems within the City boundaries. The City has distribution system interconnections to County service areas and operates a water system interconnected to the CalWater system. (Granberg Decl., § 10.)
FIGURE 2. COSMA Water Providers

City of Stockton Municipal
Utilities Department
HERBY stockton cast water District
: ree | San Joaquin County

23 served by City
[__] California Water Service Company] ©

mn
City of Stockton Urban Water Management Plan

Water Service Area

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
Application 30531, submitted to the State Board on January 6, 1996, defined the place of use coincident with the 1990 General Plan Boundary, which included the COSMUD north and south service areas, the CalWater service area, and a few San Joaquin County maintenance districts. (Granberg Decl., { 11, and Exh. G thereto, p. 2-2, Figure 2-1.) To meet this projected demand, the City anticipated distribution of treated water throughout the place of use, including the CalWater service area, using existing interties. (Jd. at Exh. G, p. 2-1.) Due to restrictions brought about by changes in drinking water quality regulations and a limitation of the system pipeline network, distribution of water diverted pursuant to Permit 21176 through the DWTP has only occurred within the COSMUD north service area and San Joaquin County maintenance districts, including Lincoln Village and Colonial Heights. (Granberg Decl., J 12, and Exh. H thereto.)
C. Stockton Was Impacted by the Economic Downturn
Population and corresponding water demand were projected to increase from 73,526 af/yr in 2005 to 125,066 af/yr in 2030. (Granberg Decl., | 13, and Exh. G thereto, p. 2-10, Table 2-3.) In 2005, the City projected an unmet water demand of 34,000 af by 2025 within the Permit 21176 place of use. (Granberg Decl., § 14, and Exh. G thereto, p. 2-11.) In order to meet that increased demand, the City determined that 33,600 af/yr from the DWSP would need to be developed in order to meet demand, replace declining contracted supply, and maintain groundwater sustainability. The Stockton City Council adopted the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the DWSP and approved the DWSP in late 2005, and Permit 21176 was granted in early 2006. (Granberg Decl., § 15.) The subprime mortgage crisis from 2007 to 2009 significantly reduced economic growth in the entire region and led to an historic recession and slowdown in the construction of dwelling units in the City, both of which slowed urban population growth and water demand. (Granberg Decl., J 16, and Exh. C thereto, p. 2-6.) These unforeseen events have resulted in less demand for Permit 21176 water than the City anticipated at the time it secured Permit 21176.

Thus, water use, discussed in Petition Section 1 above, reflects only a portion of the use anticipated at the time the City secured Permit 21176. Future water distribution system pipeline network connectivity, and development activity currently planned in the City’s five-year capital improvement program, will ensure more surface water will be available to customers who now are served more predominately from groundwater supplies, thereby more fully utilizing water under Permit 21176. (Granberg Decl., § 17, and Exh. I thereto, pp. 264-270, 277-278.) D. Diversion Limitations to Protect Delta and Longfin Smelt Permit 21176 provides for diversions at Empire Tract in all months; however, subsequent conditions imposed in 2008 as part of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion on the Proposed City of Stockton’s Delta Water Supply Project (BiOp), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Incidental Take Permit No. 2081-2009-005-03 (ITP), limited the diversion rate and time available for diversions at the IPS between February and June in order to protect Delta and Longfin smelt. (Granberg Decl., § 18, and Exhs. J-K thereto.) Condition 6.2 of the ITP imposes a 50 percent limitation on diversions from February 15 to March 15, and May 21 to June 15, and a prohibition on diversions from March 15 to May 20.

These regulatory limitations have effectively reduced the quantity of water available under EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
Permit 21176 and will likely limit diversions for the foreseeable future. (Granberg Decl., ¥ 19, and Exh. J thereto, p. 10.)
Further, the BiOp and ITP only provide incidental take coverage for a maximum diversion rate of 30 mgd. (Granberg Decl., 20; Exh. J thereto, pp. 2, 10; and Exh. K thereto, pp. 48, 51.) To mitigate for ESA restrictions on diversions and ensure water treatment plant operations for the entire year, the City entered into a 40-year agreement to purchase Mokelumne River water from WID under pre-1914 water rights (Statement of Diversion and Use 8015557). (Granberg Decl., § 21, and Exh. L thereto, Recitals d.-h. & § 3, p. 5.) The City's water purchase contract with WID provides for delivery of up 6,500 af/yr to meet demand during Delta pumping restriction periods. (Granberg Decl., 22, and Exh. L thereto, § 1, p. 2.) In summary, the historic drought of 2013-15 and economic downturn resulted in decreased water demand. These factors, together with distribution system restrictions, diversion limitations, and utility budget shortfalls, were significant obstacles to maximizing diversions under Permit 21176 that the City could neither anticipate nor avoid.

3. Satisfactory Progress Will Be Made If the State Water Board Grants an Extension to Stockton

A. Stockton Will Increase Use of Its Water Right
In spite of regulatory and other unexpected restrictions, the City will continue to make satisfactory progress to apply its full water right to beneficial use. The City’s recently adopted update to its General Plan (2040) includes a specific action item to use its Permit 21176 water supply. It states that the City will “[{cJontinue to discharge treated effluent to the Delta and reuse that water through the City’s California Water Code Section 1485 water right.” (Granberg Decl., {| 23, and Exh. M, Action SAF-3.4C, p. 5-23.)
Consistent with the General Plan, the City is currently constructing a $198 million modifications and improvements project for its RWCF that will ensure continued discharge of treated wastewater to the San Joaquin River, as the source of water permitted under Permit 21176. The modifications project will eliminate the evaporation basins used as oxidation ponds, which will reduce evaporation and increase discharges from the RWCF. By 2025, the City will have completed Phase 1 of the project, which will increase the RWCF’s average annual discharges to approximately 31,420 af/yr. (Granberg Decl., J 24.) The City has revised its estimates for population growth and water demand, and while these figures are more modest than previously anticipated, the City is still on track to maximize use of its Permit 21176 water in the next 20 years. The City reevaluated its growth projections, and now anticipates that COSMUD service area population of approximately 182,000 will grow by 1.3% per year, such that the COSMUD service area population will be approximately 236,000 by 2040. (Granberg Decl., § 25, and Exh. C thereto, p. 2-6, Table 2-3.) The City anticipates that its total water demand within the COSMUD service area will be approximately 44,465 af/yr by 2040. (Granberg Decl., § 26, and Exh. C thereto, p. 3-5, Table 3-5.) Thus, by 2040, the City anticipates that its annual water demand within the COSMUD service area will exceed the 33,600 af total supply available under Permit 21176.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
While the City anticipates annual water demand in 2040 in excess of its total Permit 21176 right, the RWCF discharge rate and associated allowable diversion rate, as well as ESA-driven pumping limits at the DWTP, create certain challenges to fully using Permit 21176 water by 2040. Table 2 presents the compilation of total COSMA potable water demand and corresponding RWCF treated wastewater discharges to the San Joaquin River, both historical and projected through 2040. Table 2 also presents anticipated water available for diversion under Permit 21176 with ESA-driven pumping restrictions. Current ESA restrictions limit diversions to 24,964 af/yr. Extending the time to license water use under this permit will allow the City additional time to fully utilize Permit 21176 water under current regulatory restrictions, evaluate potential modifications to current regulatory restrictions, and develop and implement plans to maximize use of Permit 21176 by 2040.

TABLE 2. COSMA Water Demand, RWCF Discharge, and Water
Available for Diversion Under Permit 21176 Through 2040 (acre-feet)

Water Year Total COSMA Total RWCF Water Available for Diversion Under Water Demand? Discharge Permit 21176 with ESA Pumping
Restrictions
2012-13 64,445 24,685 18,346
2013-14 63,531 25,531 18,995
2014-15 56,699 25,546 19,066
2015-16 48,793 24,387 18,144
2016-17 49,700 28,711 21,361
2017-18 53,225 27,502 20,462
2018-19 56,113 26,753 19,904
2020 64,520 26,964° 20,062
2025 66,852 31,420° 23,377
2030 70,957 33,350 24,812
2035 73,810 34,691 24,9644
2040 76,905 36,145 24,964
* 2020-2040 Demand from City of Stockton and California Water Service Company 2015 Urban Water Management Plans and County Service Area historical average > 2020 RWCF Discharge Equals 47% of Total COSMA Demand minus evaporative losses c 4 water Available in 2025-2040 assumes no evaporative losses at RWCF 4 Diversion limit under Permit 21176 with ESA pumping restrictions As a first step to evaluating how the City might use its full entitlement under Permit 21176 during the extension period, the City has prepared a COSMA 2040 demand curve showing monthly demand assuming an annual demand of 44,465 af/yr. (See Table 3.) Given that the City’s ability to meet this demand using its Permit 21176 water depends upon the 15-day running average of RWCF discharges, ESA-driven pumping restrictions, and the existing capacity of diversion infrastructure, Table 3 includes 2040 monthly RWCF discharge and diversion volumes. Table 3 also includes monthly water treatment volumes assuming existing DWTP infrastructure, which currently limits treatment capacity to 27 mgd.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
Given the difference between the City’s projected 2040 diversion capacity assuming existing infrastructure and regulatory limitations, and the face value of Permit 21176, Table 3 also includes potential monthly diversion volumes under the following assumed conditions:

(1) The City obtains regulatory approval for an increase in the diversion rate up to the RWCF discharge rate during periods not currently restricted to a diversion rate less than 30 mgd;
(2) The City obtains regulatory approval for an increase in the diversion rate up to the RWCF discharge rate during periods not currently restricted to a diversion rate less than 30 mgd and February and June, and
(3) The City implements a groundwater banking program during the time period of the extension.

TABLE 3. 2040 Monthly Water Demand Curve (acre-feet)
Month 2040 2040 Current 2040 2040 2040
Monthly RWCF DWTP Diversion Diversion Diversion to
Demand | Discharges | Treatment | Capacity (1) | Capacity (2) | Groundwater Capacity Banking (3)
(at 27 mgd)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
January 2,371 3,281 2,569 3,281 3,281 910
February 2,239 3,265 2,320 2,277 3,265 1,026
March 2,684 3,560 2,569 690 690 575
April 3,178 3,129 2,486 0 0 0
May 4,394 2,850 2,569 506 506 0
June 4,958 2,367 2,367 1,874 2,367 0
July 5,438 2,822 2,569 2,822 2,822 253
August 5,200 3,121 2,569 3,121 3,121 552
September 4,676 2,919 2,486 2,919 2,919 434
October 4,001 3,038 2,569 3,038 3,038 470
November 2,900 2,916 2,486 2,916 2,916 430
December 2,426 2,878 2,569 2,878 2,878 452
Total 44,465 36,145 30,125 26,323 27,804 5,102
(d) Permit 21176 diversion capacity, increased to RWCF discharge limit in non-ESA months. (e) Permit 21176 diversion capacity with no ESA restrictions in February and June, increased to RWCF discharge limit in non-ESA months.
(f) Potential diversion to groundwater storage (f=e-a when c is greater than a, f=e+c-a when Permit 21176 is ESA- restricted and a is greater than c, or f=e-c when e is greater than c; all assumed under Condition 2).

B. Potential Projects to Maximize Water Diversion and Beneficial Use The City will more fully investigate and pursue the following projects in order to maximize use of Permit 21176 by 2040.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
Increasing DWTP Treatment Capacity: The ability to fully capture RWCF discharges for potable water treatment could be enhanced through an increase in the DWTP’s treatment capacity from 30 mgd to 40 mgd. This increase in capacity can be readily accomplished through a combination of operational changes that would increase the volume of water passing through the plant’s membrane filters to more fully utilize their rated capacity, and additional membrane units readily added to the treatment train to further accommodate the increased capacity and operational flexibility.

Increasing IPS Diversion Rate: Permit 21176 allows for a diversion rate that shall not exceed 317 cubic feet per second (cfs) up to the annual amount of 33,600 af. Subsequent to permit issuance, the ITP limited the instantaneous diversion rate to 47 cfs, or 30 mgd. The City’s ability to maximize the available diversions for potable water treatment depends on further authorizations from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As previously mentioned, plant capacity to treat more than 30 mgd can be readily accomplished though operational changes and additional membrane units.

DWSP Phase II - Recharge Basin Improvements Project: In addition to expanding the use of Permit 21176 water throughout the City’s water distribution system network, the City continues to evaluate the potential of a groundwater banking project at the DWTP site to optimize use of Permit 21176, and plans to complete an engineering feasibility and geotechnical investigation. (Granberg Decl., § 27, and Exh. G thereto, pp. 2-3, 5-6.) A groundwater banking project would allow the City to divert water under Permit 21176 when potable water demand is low, and bank the water for later use when potable water demand is high or when the diversion restrictions are in place due to the BiOp and ITP. A groundwater banking project would also allow the City to recharge the Eastern San-Joaquin Subbasin to maintain or restore the groundwater gradient necessary to limit saline intrusion. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 670 [defining water quality beneficial use].)
Initial groundwater infiltration testing was conducted at the potential recharge pond site in 2008. With an assumed infiltration pond size of 70 acres and a wetted period of 228 days per year, an estimated 12,768 af/yr could potentially be stored to the groundwater basin. A more detailed technical analysis of the timing and quantity of water supply will be necessary. For example, if all the available water was typically available during a three-month period per year, the potential storage volume would be 5,040 af/yr (based on a 90-day application period). (Granberg Decl., § 28, and Exh. N thereto, pp. 5-6.)
To complete the Recharge Basin Improvements Project, the City is planning to complete additional engineering feasibility and environmental studies in the next year. These studies will demonstrate the validity of the groundwater banking project and allow for the permitting and construction of the project, which is estimated to be completed in 2024-25, to achieve the City’s water supply and drought protection goals and provide benefits to the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The City would also file, and the State Board will need to issue, an Underground Storage Supplement for Permit 21176 for the City to be able to divert and store water underground for later withdrawal and application to beneficial use. At the same time, the City would also file for the addition of Water Quality Use as a beneficial use of Permit 21176 water.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
Potential Use by 2040: Table 3 demonstrates that in 2040, under current assumed water demand forecasts, the City could divert between 26,323 and 27,804 af/yr if the City is able to increase the diversion rate in months not currently restricted to a diversion rate less than 30 mgd in February and June. The ability of the City to direct the diversions shown in columns (e) and (f) to the DWTP for treatment and delivery require the City to successfully increase the DWTP treatment capacity through operational changes and installation of additional membrane units discussed above. Further, Table 3 demonstrates that the City could direct as much as 5,102 af/yr to groundwater recharge and conjunctive use, assuming maintenance of the existing DWTP treatment capacity of 27 mgd.

C. Revenue for Future Infrastructure Projects
The City undertook a water rate study in 2015 in order to determine the revenue requirement and possible future rate structure that would make up the funding gaps caused by reduced demand associated with future drought and regulations mandating conservation. The City adopted the recommendations of the water rate study completed in 2016 to incrementally raise water rates by 38.5 percent through 2021 and implement drought surcharges to ensure adequate revenue for its capital improvement projects. (Granberg Decl., § 29, and Exh. O thereto.)
COSMUD will reevaluate its water rate structure under a new cost of service rate study scheduled for City Council adoption in 2021. The regular review of updated water rate structures will allow the City to fund capital improvement projects, which will ultimately allow the City to expand the use of Permit 21176 water through its distribution system to meet the increased demand for water and apply its water right to beneficial use.

4. Approval of the Extension of Time Is in the Public Interest With 318,000 residents, Stockton is the largest municipality wholly within the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. It has a large environmental justice community and higher than statewide average percentage of residents who live below the poverty line. Stockton derives a substantial percentage of its water supply from Permit 21176. The well-being of the City, its residents, economy, and public interest is thus inextricably linked to the Delta, the quantity and quality of Delta water supplies, and the Delta ecosystem.

A. Continue Stockton’s In-Delta Municipal Diversion for Beneficial Use Stockton relies on a portfolio of water supply sources and supporting infrastructure to meet existing and future demands. COSMUD provides potable drinking water to a service population of more than 180,000, which is approximately 55 percent of the M&I potable water demand of the COSMA. Stockton’s water supply includes Permit 21176 contract surface water supplies and groundwater. Stockton’s most significant source of water is its DWSP. The DWTP treats water diverted under Permit 21176 and water purchased from the WID from the Mokelumne River. Stockton’s acquisition of Permit 21176 and construction of the DWTP was key in reducing the City’s historic reliance on groundwater through an active and in-lieu conjunctive use program.
10 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
As an In-Delta Municipal water user, the City’s DWSP project objectives have been consistent with the Delta Reform Act’s coequal goals of improving water supply reliability and protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem, as well as the Legislature’s directive that “‘coequal goals shall be achieved in a manner that protects and enhances the unique cultural, recreational, natural resource, and agricultural values of the Delta as an evolving place.” (Wat.

Code, § 85054.)
B. Management of Surface and Groundwater Resources Under SGMA Stockton’s DWSP was developed with three main objectives; namely to (1) manage groundwater resources for environmental benefit and to ensure long-term sustainable yield, (2) satisfy future demands by conjunctively using groundwater and surface water, and (3) provide the COSMA with a more flexible water supply portfolio to control how and from what sources water demands are met. (Granberg Decl., 30, and Exh. P thereto.) The Eastern San Joaquin Sub-basin is an historically overdrafted groundwater basin that has been subject to saline migration and elevated chloride levels. (Granberg Decl., { 31, and Exhs. Q-R thereto.) A principle objective of the DWSP, as a conjunctive use project, was to reduce groundwater pumping in favor of available surface water supply, resulting in higher groundwater levels to protect the groundwater basin from further saline water intrusion and water quality degradation. Stockton is a recognized Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) and a member of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (GWA), a joint powers authority consisting of 16 GSAs that overlie the subbasin and which is responsible for the management of the 2020 Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). The success of the GSP’s implementation, and the region as a whole, requires that the conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater be maximized in order to relieve the demand that was historically placed on the groundwater basin. (Granberg Decl., § 32, and Exh. S thereto, p. ES-9.) Stockton’s DWSP is a prime example of how urban water users can reduce reliance on and sustainably manage groundwater supplies by using available surface water for beneficial uses.

Providing Stockton with an extension of time will allow the City time to maximize use of Permit 21167 so it can maintain a diverse water supply portfolio and ensure that the City’s residents have a reliable water supply at a reasonable cost. In addition to groundwater and the City’s surface water right, the City derives an important portion of its supply through a treated water purchase contract with Stockton East. (Granberg Decl., { 33, and Exh. T thereto.) Reductions in surface water deliveries from Stockton East Water District during the last drought placed additional reliance on the DWSP to meet urban demand and further protect groundwater resources, thereby demonstrating the importance of Permit 21176 to City customers during dry periods. Beginning in 2013 and before the drought had an impact on water supply to the COSMA, Stockton East water met 67 percent of the COSMA total demand, with the DWSP contributing 22 percent. In 2014, as the drought impact on water supply was becoming more apparent, Stockton East reduced deliveries to meet approximately 53 percent of the COSMA total demand. At the peak of the drought in 2015 and 2016, Stockton East water met approximately 45 percent of COSMA demand. In response, DWSP deliveries increased to 30 percent and 39 percent, respectively, with groundwater being used conjunctively to meet overall demand that was reduced throughout the COSMA due to conservation. At the end of the 11 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
ATTACHMENT 1
drought in 2017, COSMA demand continued to be met predominantly through available surface supply provided by SEWD (50 percent) and DWSP (40 percent), thereby reducing groundwater to only 10 percent of demand. (Granberg Decl., 7 34.)
C. Enable Regional Water Resilience
Extending the time under which the City may divert and use the full amount of water authorized under Permit 21176 is consistent with and will further the goals of the state’s Water Resilience Portfolio (July 2020) and its directive that state government “focus on enabling regional resilience.” (See Granberg Decl. Exh. U, p. 17.) In addition to operating a conjunctive use potable water system, maintaining the City’s ability to access surface water so that it may bank water diverted from the Delta when demand is low (as discussed further above) will strengthen the resilience of the City’s water system by enabling it to “maintain and diversify water supplies to enable flexibility as conditions change” under a warming climate. (See Granberg Decl. Exh. U, p. 15 [Water infrastructure and management must be updated to allow capture of water when it is available in increasingly intense bursts and to provide water supplies and protect the environment during prolonged dry periods”’].)
It will also enable Stockton to “prepare for new threats,” including deeper droughts and hotter temperatures and associated water quality threats, such as harmful algal blooms, which may affect the City’s ability to divert and use surface water in warmer months. (See Granberg Decl. Exh. U, pp. 5 [Executive Summary], 13-14.) Finally, retaining the City’s access to Permit 21176 for direct use and groundwater banking will both enable water security and “make possible opportunity and prosperity” for the City’s residents. (See Granberg Decl. Exh. U, p. 5 [Executive Summary].) In these many ways, the Petition furthers the Water Resilience Portfolio goals outlined by the state.

Granting Stockton’s Petition is in the public interest because it would give the City the opportunity to continue to develop its Delta surface water supply to the greatest extent possible, thereby minimizing its use of local groundwater supplies and helping maintain and enhance the sustainable yield of the groundwater basin.

For the reasons stated herein, the City of Stockton respectfully requests that the State Board approve its Petition.
12 EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
State of California
State Water Resources Control Board

DIVISION OF WATER RIGHTS
P.O. Box 2000, Sacramento, CA 95812-2000
Tel: (916) 341-5300 Fax: (916) 341-5400
http:/Awww.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights

ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FOR PETITIONS
This form is required for all petitions.

Before the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) can approve a petition, the State Water Board must consider the information contained in an environmental document prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This form is nota CEQA document. If a CEQA document has not yet been prepared, a determination must be made of who is responsible for its preparation. As the petitioner, you are responsible for all costs associated with the environmental evaluation and preparation of the required CEQA documents. Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability and submit any studies that have been conducted regarding the environmental evaluation of your project. If you need more space to completely answer the questions, please number and attach additional sheets.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES OR WORK REMAINING TO BE COMPLETED For a petition for change, provide a description of the proposed changes to your project including, but not limited to, type of construction activity, structures existing or to be built, area to be graded or excavated, increase in water diversion and use (up to the amount authorized by the permit), changes in land use, and project operational changes, including changes in how the water will be used. For a petition for extension of time, provide a description of what work has been completed and what remains to be done. Include in your description any of the above elements that will occur during the requested extension period.

The City of Stockton is petitioning for an extension of time to put water to beneficial use pursuant to Permit 21176.

Construction of Phase | of the City of Stockton's Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP) is complete. Phase | includes the Drinking Water Treatment Plant (DWTP) on approximately 60 acres off of Lower Sacramento Road. The 30 million gallons per day (mgd) DWTP includes ozone pre-treatment, settling basins and membrane ultra-filtration processes followed by chloramine disinfection and distribution. The DWSP also includes twelve miles of 54-inch RCP raw water pipeline installed along Eight Mile Road capable of conveying 60 mgd, and the 80 mgd Intake Pump Station (IPS) diversion works housing four, 250-hoursepower pumps (each rated at 6,950 gallons per minute) and state-of-the-art fish screens located on the southwest tip of Empire Tract in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The DWSP was dedicated for operation in May 2012, three and one-half years ahead of the schedule mandated in Permit 21176. During the requested extension, the City of Stockton will increase water diversion and use up to the amount authorized by Permit 21176. The City of Stockton's plans to increase water use are described in Attachment 1 to its Petition for Extension of Time.

In 2005, the City of Stockton certified the Program Environmental Impact Report for the Delta Water Supply Project (PEIR), which evaluated the construction and long-term operation of the DWSP, including diversion and treatment of up to 125,900 acre-feet per year (af/yr) from the San Joaquin River and ways in which the City of Stockton would use the water. The PEIR provides project-level evaluation of construction and operation up to 30 mgd and programmatic evaluation of operation to 160 mgd. In 2005, the City of Stockton only approved Phase | (diversion and treatment up to 30 mgd). Because the exercise of the City's approved water right was described in the PEIR, to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City is preparing an addendum to the PEIR that would address, among other items, updated demand factors, operational limitations that have been imposed under state and federal permits, and the factors in Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162.

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: [

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Coordination with Regional Water Quality Control Board
For change petitions only, you must request consultation with the Regional Date of Request Water Quality Control Board regarding the potential effects of your proposed change on water quality and other instream beneficial uses. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 794.) In order to determine the appropriate office for consultation, see: NA http://Awww.waterboards.ca.gov/waterboards_map.shtml. Provide the date you submitted your request for consultation here, then provide the following information.

Will your project, during construction or operation, (1) generate waste or wastewater containing such things as sewage, industrial chemicals, metals, O Yes © No or agricultural chemicals, or (2) cause erosion, turbidity or sedimentation? Will a waste discharge permit be required for the project? O Yes © No If necessary, provide additional information below:

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: [|
Local Permits

For temporary transfers only, you must contact the board of supervisors for the Date of Contact county(ies) both for where you currently store or use water and where you propose to transfer the water. (Wat. Code § 1726.) Provide the date you submitted N/A your request for consultation here.

For change petitions only, you should contact your local planning or public works department and provide the information below.

Person Contacted: Date of Contact:

Department: Phone Number:

County Zoning Designation:

Are any county permits required for your project? If yes, indicate type below. O Yes © No [] Grading Permit [ | Use Permit [| Watercourse [| Obstruction Permit [| Change of Zoning [|General Plan Change [ | Other (explain below) If applicable, have you obtained any of the permits listed above? If yes, provide copies. O Yes O No If necessary, provide additional information below:

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable: []

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Federal and State Permits
Check any additional agencies that may require permits or other approvals for your project:
[| Regional Water Quality Control Board [ ] Department of Fish and Game [ ] Dept of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams [| California Coastal Commission [| State Reclamation Board [ | U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [| U.S. Forest Service [ ] Bureau of Land Management [ ] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [| Natural Resources Conservation Service
Have you obtained any of the permits listed above? If yes, provide copies. O Yes O No For each agency from which a permit is required, provide the following information:

Agency Permit Type Person(s) Contacted Contact Date Phone Number

If necessary, provide additional information below:

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable] |
Construction or Grading Activity
Does the project involve any construction or grading-related activity that has significantly () Yes (@) No altered or would significantly alter the bed, bank or riparian habitat of any stream or lake? If necessary, provide additional information below:

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Archeology
Has an archeological report been prepared for this project? If yes, provide a copy. O Yes @) No Will another public agency be preparing an archeological report? Ovyes © No Do you know of any archeological or historic sites in the area? If yes, explain below. OyYes @) No If necessary, provide additional information below:

Insert the attachment number here, if applicable |
Photographs
For all petitions other than time extensions, attach complete sets of color photographs, clearly dated and labeled, showing the vegetation that exists at the following three locations:

[] Along the stream channel immediately downstream from each point of diversion [_] Along the stream channel immediately upstream from each point of diversion [ | At the place where water subject to this water right will be used Maps
For all petitions other than time extensions, attach maps labeled in accordance with the regulations showing all applicable features, both present and proposed, including but not limited to: point of diversion, point of rediversion, distribution of storage reservoirs, point of discharge of treated wastewater, place of use, and location of instream flow dedication reach. (Cal. Code Regs.., tit. 23, §§ 715 et seq., 794.)

Pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 23, section 794, petitions for change submitted without maps may not be accepted.

All Water Right Holders Must Sign This Form:
| (we) hereby certify that the statements | (we) have furnished above and in the attachments are complete to the best of my (our) ability and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Dated| a7//4/27a0) Jat | S&yktm, CA ie

L< /, Vy / YZ - _
/ Vb L| 6CE
WateyRight Holder or Authorized Agent Signature Water Right Holder or Authorized Agent Signature _“
NOTE:
e Petitions for Change may not be accepted unless you include proof that a copy of the petition was served on the Department of Fish and Game. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 794.) e Petitions for Temporary Transfer may not be accepted unless you include proof that a copy of the petition was served on the Department of Fish and Game and the board of supervisors for the county(ies) where you currently store or use water and the county(ies) where you propose to transfer the water. (Wat. Code § 1726.)

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation

SOMACH SIMMONS & DUNN
A Professional Corporation
AARON A. FERGUSON (SBN 271427)
500 Capitol Mall, Suite 1000
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 446-7979
Facsimile: (916) 446-8199
Email: [email protected]

Attorneys for CITY OF STOCKTON

BEFORE THE

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF CITY OF STOCKTON | DECLARATION OF ROBERT WATER RIGHT PERMIT 21176 GRANBERG IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF STOCKTON’S PETITION FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME TO PUT WATER

TO BENEFICIAL USE UNDER
PERMIT 21176

I, Robert Granberg, declare that the following matters are within my own personal knowledge, and if called upon to testify, I would competently testify thereto.

1. In 2018, I founded Granberg & Associates, Inc., and provide engineering consulting and project management services to public agencies in water and wastewater sectors.

2. I formerly served as the Assistant Director of the City of Stockton’s Department of Municipal Utilities (COSMUD). In addition to assisting the Director of COSMUD, in the organizational direction of the department, I provided overall leadership and management for the Engineering Services, Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations, and Maintenance Divisions. Prior to this position, I served as Deputy Director of Water Resources Planning, in which capacity I managed all aspects of water supply planning, water treatment, and water distribution.

3. I hold a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering and am a California registered Professional Civil Engineer.

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -1-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation

4. The City of Stockton’s (““Stockton” or the “City”) water right Permit 21176, based on Water Code section 1485, cannot exceed the amount of water discharged by the City’s Regional Wastewater Control Facility (RWCF). The 15-day running average of diversions must be less than or equal to the 15-day running average of the discharges of properly treated effluent discharged by the RWCF. (See Permit for Diversion and Use of Water, Permit 21176 [Water Right Permit 21176], { 15.a.2., a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit A.')

5. In September 2009, COSMUD, following years of extensive development, planning, design and financing activities, began construction on the first phase of the Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP), which included the Drinking Water Treatment Plant (DWTP) on approximately 60 acres off Lower Sacramento Road. The 30 million gallons per day (mgd) DWTEP includes ozone pretreatment, settling basins, and membrane ultra-filtration processes followed by chloramine disinfection and distribution. The DWSP also includes 12 miles of 54-inch RCP raw water pipeline installed along Eight Mile Road capable of conveying 60 mgd, and the 80 mgd capacity Intake Pump Station (IPS) diversion works housing four 250-horsepower pumps (each rated at 6,950 gallons per minute) and state-of-the-art fish screens located on the southwest tip of Empire Tract. The DWTP was dedicated for operation in May 2012, 3-1/2 years ahead of the schedule mandated under Permit 21176. The cost to complete the project was more than $220 million. It was the largest public works project in the City’s history. (See the Delta Water Supply Project Cost Estimates and Updates (June 2013), a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit B.)

6. The DWTP is currently configured to treat 30 mgd, or 33,600 acre-feet per year (af/yr), which is the maximum annual volume of water allowed to be used under Water Right Permit 21176. (See City of Stockton 2015 Urban Water Management Plan [July 2016], § 5.3, p. 5-7, a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit C [2015 Urban Water Plan].)

7. As documented in the City’s Progress Reports on file with the State Water Board, in 2016, 2017 and 2018, the City used groundwater in lieu of surface water under Water Right

' Due to the size of many of the exhibits referenced in this Declaration, the exhibits are being “attached” in electronic format only and may be accessed by means of the flash drive provided with the Declaration.

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -2-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation
Permit 21176. (Exhibit D contains true and correct copies of Progress Reports by Permittee for the City of Stockton for the years 2012 through 2019.) In 2016, 2017 and 2018, the water available for diversion by the City, with Endangered Species Act (ESA) pumping limitations, exceeded the combined amount of water the City diverted under Water Right Permit 21176 and pumped from groundwater.

8. Due to the drought (2013-2015), and state-mandated conservation goals, Stockton’s overall water demand was reduced by nearly 29 percent in 2015 compared to 2013, and Stockton met demand through its Water Right Permit 21176 supply and increased groundwater pumping to compensate for reduced surface supply from the Stockton East Water District. The City again continued its water management efforts in 2016, 2017 and 2018, as evidenced by the City’s monthly reports filed with the State Water Board, which demonstrate that the City has effectively managed its water resource portfolio. (See Exhibit E, true and correct excerpts from the State Water Board June 2014 — June 2017 Urban Water Supply Monthly Reports, which are located in their entirety at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/conservation_portal/docs/2020_reports/u

w_supplier_data080420.xIsx.)

9. COSMUD experienced a significant reduction in revenue due to the historic drought and implementation of mandatory conservation measures that reduced demand for City water by nearly 29 percent. As a result, revenues declined by approximately $3 million dollars in 2014 and 2015. Due to the shortfall, the City was forced to curtail its capital improvement program for water projects, and fund only essential projects planned for fiscal year 2016-2017. (Attached as Exhibit F are true and correct copies of City of Stockton’s Annual Budgets for fiscal years 2015-16 and 2016-17.)

10. The City of Stockton Metropolitan Area (COSMA) is served by three potable water systems. COSMUD serves the north and south, the California Water Service Company (CalWater), an investor-owned utility, serves the central area, and San Joaquin County operates water systems within the City boundary. The City has interconnections to County service areas, and the City operates a water system interconnected to the CalWater system.

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -3-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation

11. Application 30531, submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) on January 6, 1996, defined the place of use coincident with the 1990 General Plan Boundary, which includes the COSMUD retail area, the area served by CalWater, and a few San Joaquin County maintenance districts. (See Exhibit G, a true and correct copy of the Delta Water Supply Project Draft Program EIR [Delta EIR], p. 2-2, Figure 2-1.) To meet this projected demand, the City anticipated distribution of treated water throughout the Permit 21176 place of use, including the CalWater service area, using existing interties. (See Exhibit G, p. 2-1.)

12. Due to restrictions brought about by drinking water regulations and a limitation of the system pipeline network, distribution of water diverted pursuant to Water Right Permit 21176 has only occurred within the COSMUD north service area and San Joaquin County maintenance districts — i.e., Lincoln Village and Colonial Heights. (See Exhibit H, a true and correct copy of the CDM Delta Water Supply Project Basis of Design Report Appendix G, Water Quality Memorandum Re Water Quality and Testing — Results and Implications, dated April 24, 2009.)

13. Population and corresponding water demand were projected to increase from 73,526 af/yr in 2005 to 125,066 af/yr in 2030. (Exhibit G [Delta EIR], p. 2-10, Table 2-3.)

14. In 2005, the City projected an unmet water demand of 34,000 acre-feet by 2025 in the Permit 21172 place of use. (Exhibit G [Delta EIR], p. 2-11.)

15. In order to meet that increased demand, the City determined that 33,600 af/yr from the DWSP would need to be developed in order to meet demand, replace declining existing contracted supply and maintain groundwater sustainability. The Stockton City Council adopted the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and approved the DWSP in late 2005, and Water Right Permit 21176 was granted in early 2006.

16. The subprime mortgage crisis from 2007 to 2009 significantly reduced economic growth and led to an historic recession and slowdown in the construction of dwelling units in the City, both of which slowed urban population growth and water demand. (See Exhibit C [2015 Urban Water Plan], p. 2-6.)

17. Future water distribution system pipeline network connectivity, currently planned in the City’s five-year capital improvement program, will ensure more Delta water will be

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -4-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation
available to customers who now are served more predominately from groundwater supplies, thereby more fully utilizing water use under Water Right Permit 21176. (See Exhibit I, a true and correct copy of the City of Stockton’s Proposed Capital Improvement Program [Stockton CIP], pp. 264-270, 277-278.)

18. | Water Right Permit 21176 provides for diversions at Empire Tract in all months; however, subsequent conditions imposed as part of federal and state regulatory approvals in 2008 have limited the diversion rate and time available for diversions at the DWTP between February and June in order to protect Delta smelt and Longfin smelt. (See California Department of Fish and Wildlife Incidental Take Permit No. 2081-2009-005-03 [ITP], a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit J; see also United States Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion on the Proposed City of Stockton’s Delta Water Supply Project, San Joaquin County, California [Stockton Delta BiOp], a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit K.)

19. | Condition 6.2 of the ITP imposes a 50 percent limitation on diversions from February 15 to March 15, and May 21 to June 15, and a prohibition on diversions from March 15 to May 20. These regulatory limitations have effectively reduced the quantity of water available under Water Right Permit 21176, and will likely limit diversions for the foreseeable future. (Exhibit J [ITP], p. 10.)

20. Further, the Stockton Delta BiOp and ITP only provide incidental take coverage for a maximum diversion rate of 30 mgd. (Exhibit J [ITP], pp. 2, 10; Exhibit K [Stockton Delta BiOp], pp. 48, 51.)

21. To mitigate for Endangered Species Act (ESA) restrictions on Delta diversions and ensure water treatment plant operations for the entire year, the City entered into a 40-year agreement to purchase Mokelumne River water from Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) under pre-1914 water rights (Statement of Diversion and Use S015557). (See Exhibit L, a true and correct copy of the Agreement for Purchase of Water Froom the Woodbridge Irrigation District by the City of Stockton dated January 22, 2008 [Stockton-WID Contract], Recitals d.-h., and § 3, p. 5.)

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -5-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation

22. The City's water purchase contract with WID is for delivery of up 6,500 af/yr to meet demand during Delta pumping restriction periods. (Exhibit L [Stockton-WID Contract], § 1, p. 2.)

23. The City recently adopted an update to its general plan to include a specific action item to use its Permit 21176 water supply. It states that the City will “[c]ontinue to discharge treated effluent to the Delta and reuse that water through the City’s California Water Code Section 1485 water right.” (Attached as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan, adopted December 4, 2018 [2040 General Plan], Action SAF-3.4C, p. 5-23.)

24. Consistent with the 2040 General Plan, the City is currently constructing a $198 million modifications and improvements project for its RWCF that will ensure continued discharge of treated wastewater to the Delta, as the source of water permitted under Permit 21176.

The modifications project will eliminate the evaporation basins used as oxidation ponds, which will reduce evaporation and increase discharges from the RWCF. By 2025, the City will have completed Phase | of the project, which will increase the RWCF’s average annual discharges to approximately 31,420 af/yr.

25. The City has reevaluated its growth projections, and now anticipates that its current COSMUD service area population of 182,000 will grow by 1.3 percent per year, such that COSMUD service area population will be approximately 236,000 by 2040. (Exhibit C [2015 Urban Water Plan], p. 2-6, Table 2-3.)

26. The City anticipates that its total water demand within the COSMUD service area will be approximately 44,465 af/yr by 2040. (Exhibit C [2015 Urban Water Plan], p. 3-5, Table 3-5.)

27. In addition to expanding the use of Delta water throughout the City’s water distribution system network, the City continues to evaluate the potential of a groundwater banking project at the DWTP site to optimize use of Delta water, and plans to complete an engineering feasibility and geotechnical investigation in the coming year. (See Exhibit G, pp. 2-3, 5-6.)

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -6-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation

28. Initial groundwater infiltration testing was conducted at the potential recharge pond site in 2008. With an assumed infiltration pond size of 70 acres and a wetted period of 228 days per year, an estimated 12,768 af/yr could potentially be stored to the groundwater basin.

A more detailed technical analysis of the timing and quantity of water supply will be necessary.

For example, if all the available water was typically available during a three-month period per year, the potential storage volume would be 5,040 af/yr (based on a 90-day application period). (See Exhibit N, a true and correct copy of a Draft CDM Delta Water Supply Project Memorandum re Groundwater Recharge Program Evaluation dated March 24, 2009, at pp. 5-6.)

29. The City undertook a water rate study in 2015 in order to determine the revenue requirement and possible future rate structure that would make up the funding gaps caused by reduced demand associated with future drought and regulations mandating conservation. The City adopted the recommendations of the water rate study completed in 2016 to incrementally raise water rates by 38.5 percent through 2021 and implement drought surcharges to ensure adequate revenue for its capital improvement projects. (See Exhibit O, a true and correct copy of the City Municipal Utilities Department’s May 2016 Water Rate Study Final Report prepared by HDR Engineering, dated June 16, 2016.)

30. Stockton’s DWSP was developed with three main objectives, namely to:
(a) manage groundwater resources for environmental benefit and to ensure a long-term sustainable yield; (b) satisfy future demands by conjunctively using groundwater and surface water; and (c) provide the COSMA with the flexibility to control how and from what sources water demands are met. (See Exhibit P, a true and correct copy of the City’s January 2003 Delta Water Supply Project Final Feasibility Report.)

31. | The Eastern San Joaquin Basin is an historically overdrafted basin that has been subject to saline migration and elevated chloride levels. (See Exhibit Q, a true and correct copy of the State of California Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118-80 dated January 1980; see also Exhibit R, a true and correct copy of the 2014 Eastern San Joaquin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, as downloaded from the Greater San Joaquin Regional Water Coordinating Committee Website at http://www.esjirwm.org/IRWMP/2014-IRWMP.)

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -7-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A
Professional
Corporation
ao nN A \o
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 32. Stockton is a recognized Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, and is a member of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (GWA), a joint powers authority consisting of 16 GSAs that overlie the subbasin and which is responsible for the development of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). The success of the GSP’s implementation, and the region as a whole, requires that the conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater be maximized in order to relieve the demand that was historically placed on the groundwater basin. (See Exhibit S, a true and correct copy of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin, Groundwater Sustainability Plan, Executive Summary, p. ES-9.)

33. In addition to groundwater and the City’s surface water right, the City derives an important portion of its supply through a treated water purchase contract with Stockton East Water District. (A true and correct copy of the Second Amended Contract Among the Stockton East Water District, ... [and] the City of Stockton ... Providing for the Sale of Treated Water [City of Stockton-Stockton East Water District contract] is attached as Exhibit T.)

34. Reductions in surface water deliveries during the last drought from Stockton East placed additional reliance on the DWSP to meet urban demand and further protect groundwater resources. Beginning in 2013 and before the drought had an impact on water supply to the COSMA, Stockton East water met 67 percent of the COSMA total demand, with the DWSP contributing 22 percent. In 2014, as the drought impact on water supply was becoming more apparent, Stockton East reduced deliveries to meet approximately 53 percent of the COSMA total demand. At the peak of the drought in 2015 and 2016, Stockton East water met approximately 45 percent of COSMA demand. In response, DWSP deliveries increased to 30 percent and 39 percent, respectively, with groundwater being used conjunctively to meet overall demand that was reduced throughout the COSMA due to conservation. At the end of the drought in 2017, COSMA demand continued to be met predominantly through available surface supply provided by SEWD (50 percent) and DWSP (40 percent), thereby reducing groundwater to only 10 percent of demand.

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG -8-
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
SOMACH

SIMMONS
&
DUNN
A Professional Corporation
a
DH
A
N i?)
10 Li
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 35. | Exhibit U contains a true and correct copy of the State of California’s Water Resilience Portfolio, July 2020.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this 304 day of Septen: be,2020, in Fece Jorn , California.

Mth ly

RobereGranberg

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18

EXHIBITS TO

DECLARATION OF ROBERT GRANBERG
IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF STOCKTON’S

PETITION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO

PUT WATER TO BENEFICIAL USE
UNDER PERMIT 21176

ARE IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT AND

SAVED TO USB DRIVE PROVIDED
RGranberg Decl Exhibits
Name
“L. Exhibit A - Final Permit 21176(A030531A)-dated 03-08-06 (00091672x02C75).PDF "J. Exhibit B - DWSP Project Budget (00093006xD2C75),PDF "1. Exhibit C - Stockton MUD 2015_Urban_Water_Management_Plan (00091697xD2C75).PDF ™L. Exhibit D - Progress Reports Years 2012-2019 (complete) (00091856xD2C75).PDF "3. Exhibit E - June 2014-June2017 Urban Water Supplier Monthly Reports (00092091xD2C75).PDF "I. Exhibit F - Stockton Adopted Budgets 2015-16 and 2016-17 (00092094xD2C75).PDF “I. Exhibit G - 04012005 Draft EIR Stockton Delta Water Supply Project Volume | (00091674xD2C75).PDF “I. Exhibit H - Delta Water Design Project Basis of Design Report Appendix G Water Quality Memo (00092098x0... "1 Exhibit | - City of Stockton 2020-25_Proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) (00092100xD2C75).PDF “1 Exhibit J - City of Stockton Smelt Incidental Take Permit for Delta Water Supply Project (00091682xD2C75).PDF "i. Exhibit K - City of Stockton Delta Water Supply Project BiOp, SIC dated 06272007 (00091681xD2C75).PDF "I. Exhibit L - Stockton-Woodbridge ID 40-yr Ag} at for Purchase of Water dated 01222008 (00092101xD2C7... ). Exhibit M - Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan Adopted 12042018 (00091706xD2C75).PDF "3. Exhibit N - Draft CDM 03242009 DWSP Groundwater Recharge Program Evaluation memo (00092105xD2C75... "J. Exhibit O - Water Rate Study May 2016 - Final (00092106xD2C75).PDF I Exhibit P - Delta Water Supply Project Jan 2003 Final Feasibility Report (00092108xD2C75).PDF I. Exhibit Q - 1980 DWR Bulletin 118-80 Ground Water Basins in CA (0009171 1xD2C75).PDF "I. Exhibit R - 2014 Eastern San Joaquin IRWMP (00092683xD2C75).PDF J. Exhibit S - ESJ Final GW Sustainability Plan 11052019 (00091734-1xD2C75).PDF "J. Exhibit T - City of Stockton-Stockton East Water District Contract for Treated Water (0009210xD2C75).PDF “i. Exhibit U - California-Water-Resilience-Portfolio-July 2020 FINAL (00091840xD2C75).PDF Date modified
4/26/2016 10:20 AM

020 11:46 AM
020 4:22 PM
1:14PM
5,
9 9/14/2020 1:15 PM
1 9

0/29/2019 9:18 AM
14/2020 1:15 PM

9 9/8/2020 12:39 PM
9/14/2020 1:15 PM
9/14/2020 1:16 PM
9/14/2020 1:16 PM
9/8/2020 1:20 PM
23/2020 3:40 PM
Type
Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D..

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Adobe Acrobat D...

Size
443 KB
14 KB
9,122 KB
956 KB
129 KB
59,746 KB
70,851 KB
8,125 KB
34,316 KB
1,460 KB
4,903 KB
5,411 KB
55,209 KB
172 KB
1,419 KB
39,320 KB
11,141 KB
27,700 KB
58,793 KB
2,669 KB
53,746 KB
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 2
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
U.S.

FISIL& WILDLIFE

SERVICE
United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, California 95825-1846

’ IN REPLY REFER TO:
1-1-05-F-0029
Mr. Michael Finan
Chief, Delta Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
1325 J Street
Sacramento, California 95814-2922
Subject: ~ Biological Opinion on the Proposed City of Stockton’s Delta Water Supply Project, San Joaquin County, California
Dear Mr. Finan:

This is in response to your November 17, 2004, request for formal consultation with the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the proposed construction of a water pumping plant, raw water pipelines, water treatment plant, and treated water distribution pipelines for delivery of water to the City of Stockton in San Joaquin County, California. Your request was received in this Field Office on November 19, 2004. This document represents the Service’s biological opinion on the effects of the action on the threatened delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) and threatened giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas). This document is issued pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act). _ This biological opinion is based on: (1) your letter with enclosures; (2) the revised February 2006 biological assessment, revised February 2006 wetland delineation report, and the October 2005 modeling technical appendix to the Draft Environmental Impact Report; (3) a letter from the Environmental Science Associates dated February 24, 2006, and received on February 28, 2006, providing some of the additional information previously requested by the Service; (4) a letter from ESA to the Service dated September 5, 2006, proposing an operation scenario for the protection of delta smelt; (5) several informal and formal meetings, phone conversations, and electronic mail between the Service and the applicant and applicants consultants; and (6) other information available to the Service.

Tiering the proposed Stockton Delta Water Supply Project to the Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion for adverse effects to the giant garter snake The May 31, 2001, Jntra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion (Service File 1-1-00-F- 0231) is the opinion of the Service’s Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (SFWO) on the issuance of an incidental take permit for implementation of the San Joaquin Multi-Species Conservation Plan (SJMSCP) pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act in accordance with section 7 of the Act. The Service has issued an incidental take permit for.15 federally-listed - species to various entities, including the City of Stockton, under authority of this section 10(a)(1)(B) for a period of 50 years. The permit analyzed take for the giant garter snake from STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan
urban development and infrastructure expansion occurring in the City as described in the SJMSCP; however, this take was permitted to non-Federal entities. This biological opinion utilizes the pertinent effects analysis from the Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion for impacts to giant garter snake from the construction of the (1) intake structure, (2) treated and raw water pipelines, and (3) water treatment plant. The Intra-Service and Biological and Conference Opinion specifically excluded “water diversion and conveyance” as a covered action, so effects to giant garter snake, delta smelt, and delta smelt critical habitat from the proposed operation of the intake are considered separately in this biological opinion.

The implementation of the SJMSCP will result in conversion and loss of a maximum of 14,202 acres of natural habitat and 57,635 acres of agricultural land within an approximately 900,000- acre planning area. Permitted activities as described in Section 8.2 of the SJMSCP include but © are not limited to urban development; aggregate mining; highway construction and maintenance; culvert replacement; excavating for inspection, repair and/or replacement; maintenance of drainages along rights of ways; and maintenance of river crossings for utilities such as aqueducts.

Direct and indirect effects from all of the above activities could result in killing or injury to © SJMSCP-covered species, damage to covered plants and their habitat, harm to covered wildlife species resulting from habitat loss, and harassment due to noise of machinery and other activity associated with land clearing and construction.

Consultation History
November 19, 2004:

September 9, 2005:

November 30, 2005:
_ February 28, 2006:

The Service received a letter from the Corps, dated November 17, 2004, requesting formal consultation for the City of Stockton’s Delta Water Supply Project. Enclosed with the letter were relevant reports providing a description of the proposed project, the area that would be affected by the proposed action, listed species and designated habitat present within the project area, and a description of effects on listed species.

Ryan Olah of the Service sent an electronic mail to Michael Finan of the Corps requesting additional information on fish screen design, in water footprint, and compensation for loss of shallow water habitat and giant garter snake habitat.

The Service sent a letter to the Corps requesting additional information for the City of Stockton’s Delta Water Supply Project.

Chris Nagano of the Service received a letter dated February 24, 2006, from Michele S. Stern with ESA that partially provided the additional information requested in the Service’s November 30, 2006, letter to the Corps. Enclosed with the letter were the February 2006 revised biological assessment, the October 2005 Modeling Technical Appendix to the Draft Environmental Impact Report developed by MWH, and the February 2006 Stockton Delta Water Supply Project Revised Wetland Delineation Report developed by ESA.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan
April 12, 2006:

May 18, 2006:

May 25, 2006:

August 14, 2006:

August 21, 2006:

September 5, 2006:

September 8, 2006:

September 26, 2006:
uo
Peter Johnsen of the Service sent an electronic mail to Ms. Stern requesting clarification of the exact scope of the proposed project, information on effects from pile driving, proposed protection measures for delta smelt larvae, and growth inducement.

Representatives from the City of Stockton, ESA, Walter Yep, Inc., the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Service met to discuss the section 7 consultation process, final Delta intake description, project related effects on listed species, need for additional information, and the schedule for completion of the biological opinion. ; ~
Mr. Johnsen informed Ms. Stern that growth inducing effects would be covered under the existing San Joaquin Habitat Conservation Plan.

The Service received a Technical Memorandum written by Chuck Hanson on the seasonal distribution of delta smelt near the proposed intake site as an attachment in an electronic mail from Ms. Stern to Mr. Johnsen.

Andrew Draper with MWH, Robert Granberg of the City of Stockton, Chuck Hanson with Hanson Environmental, Leslie Moulton with ESA, Ms. Stern, and Mr. Johnsen met to discuss effects to Delta hydrology and water quality, fish screen, measures to minimize take of delta smelt larvae, and compensation for effects to giant garter snake habitat. Mr. Hanson presented the proposed pumping reduction and curtailment period for protection of delta smelt. The City of Stockton proposed to maintain a 50 percent pumping rate from March 15 through April 15 and May 21 through June 20, and a 100 percent curtailment from April 16 through May

20. It was discussed if it would be possible to compensate for effects to giant garter snake through the existing San Joaquin Habitat Conservation Plan. Mr. Johnsen requested additional analysis of operations.

As an attachment to an electronic mail from Ms. Stern, Mr. Johnsen received an electronic copy of a September 5, 2006, letter to the Service describing the proposed operation scenario to minimize take of delta smelt.

Mr. Johnsen received an electronic mail from Ms. Stern regarding SDWP effects on the location of X2, on water exports at the state and Federal Delta water diversion facilities, and the Environmental Water Account.

Mr. Johnsen received an electronic mail from Ms. Stern with an attached letter from MWH dated September 20, 2006, containing information on annual average changes in flow in the Delta.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 4
December 11, 2006: Representatives for the City of Stockton, and Service and HDR staff made a site visit to the SDWP project site.

February 14,2007: The Habitat Technical Advisory Committee for the SIMSCP approved coverage for the Project for the construction of the intake structure, treated and raw water pipelines, and water treatment plant. Effects resulting from the operation of the intake were not considered in the Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion; thus, they will be assessed and covered separately in this biological opinion.

April 27, 2007: The Service issued a letter to Mr. Granberg requesting that the City pay the updated SJMSCP compensation fees that went into effect on April 1, 2007. The City had paid their fees on March 30, 2007, prior to the updated fee going into effect. However, the SJMSCP was amended in 2006 to require payment of the fee no greater than 30 days prior to groundbreaking. The City would not have their federal and state permits in time to begin groundbreaking within 30 days of April 1, 2007.

May 3, 2007: Mr. Steve Mayo of the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) e- mailed Mr. Granberg explaining that they would reimburse the fees, and that fee payment would be accepted when all required state and federal permits are received. .
- BIOLOGICAL OPINION
Description of the Proposed Project
The City of Stockton (City) proposes to install a new water intake facility on the San Joaquin River, new pipelines to convey the raw water to a new WTP in the area north of the City of Stockton Metropolitan Area (COSMA), and new treated water pipelines to deliver water to the City’s current water distribution system in San Joaquin County, California (the Stockton Delta Water Supply Project (DWSP)). The DWSP is designed as a conjunctive use water supply program for the COSMA, which will integrate surface water and ground water management under one program. The City anticipates that the DWSP would be expanded incrementally to keep pace with the COSMA’s needs, based on the timing of existing supply.reductions and increased demand over time.
_ The City’s water rights application with State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) addresses a long-term planning horizon through 2050, requesting an ultimate diversion of 125,900 acre feet (AF) a year. However, the SWRCB bifurcated the water nghts application into two separate applications, application 30531A and 30531B, Application 30531A covers only the initial phase of the DWSP up to 30 million gallon per day (mgd; 47 cubic feet per second (cfs)) (33,600 AF/year) and the place of use is confined to the current 1990 General Plan Boundary.

The proposed project includes a new screened intake facility with a capacity to pump 47 cfs on the San Joaquin river, a new 54-inch diameter pipeline to convey Delta water to anew 30 mgd capacity water treatment plant (WTP) located just north of the COSMA, and new treated water pipelines to deliver water to the City’s existing water distribution system.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan , 5
The intake and pump station will be constructed in two 80 mgd increments. The new water intake facility will be designed to facilitate these expansion and to avoid extensive future construction in the river and sloughs. The initial capacity of the DWSP will be 30mgd, with staged incremental expansions to an ultimate capacity of 160 mgd (250 cfs). Forinitial construction of the intake and pump station facility, piles would be driven for the ultimate 160 mgd capacity; concrete work would support an 80 mgd capacity; and mechanical would support the initial 30 mgd capacity. The WTP will be constructed for an initial capacity to treat and deliver up to 30 mgd or 33,600 AF per year.

Two parallel pipelines will eventually be installed to convey raw water from the intake to the WTP for the treatment of 160 mgd. The proposed project, however, includes only the installation of a 54-inch diameter pipeline to convey water for the treatment of up to 60 mgd. A 72-inch diameter pipeline will be installed parallel to the 54-inch pipe when and if the WTP is expanded to a 160 mgd capacity. Because the intake screen and pipeline will not be sized to accommodate the 160 mgd diversion during the initial-phase of the DWSP, additional permitting in the future would trigger section 7 consultation. .

Existing interties with the California Water Service Company (Cal Water) will be used to distribute the DWSP’s treated water throughout Cal Water’s service area within the COSMA. - The groundwater component will include coordinated groundwater and surface water management. Ultimately, groundwater levels will be injected into the groundwater basin underlying the COSMA, for later extraction during periods of limited surface supply. The construction of facilities and distribution system for injection of ground water is, however, not part of the proposed action.

The project is located north and northwest of the City of Stockton, California. The project boundary includes the pumping facility at Empire Tract; the alignment for the raw-water pipeline along Eight Mile Road to the WTP west of Sacramento Road; the WTP site located just west of Sacramento Road and approximately 0.5 mile north of Eight Mile Road; and the treated water pipe alignments along Davis Road, Sacramento Road, and West Lane south of Eight Mile Road.

The UTM for the Intake Structure is NAD 83, zone 10, 631848E 4211720N and the UTM for the WTP is 647820E 4214688N. Construction is anticipated to start in 2007 with a target date for initial operation of the SDWP in 2009
Intake Structure and Pump Station Facilities

The proposed intake site is on the southwestern tip of Empire Tract adjacent to the San Joaquin River, California. The general area designated for the intake structure is on a bend of the river, which creates two shorelines (south and west banks of Empire Tract). The selected intake site is located approximately 350 feet from the edge of the dredged Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel.

Water flows at the south bank location average 15,010 cfs (tidally driven), which will assist in maintaining the desired sweeping velocity of 0.4 fps across the intake fish screen. Medford island is located to the west across from the intake site. Several smaller islands, tidal influenced wetlands, and shallow water areas are located west of the deep-water ship canal between the project site and Medford Island.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 6
The proposed in-bank intake and pump station facility will utilize flat plate screens and will be sized to accommodate the ultimate 160 mgd intake capacity predicted for year 2050. The proposed construction of the intake and pump station will create two individual units, each sized to handle an 80 mgd capacity. The fish screen and intake channel for the pump station facility will be built into the levee bank of the existing levee. The proposed construction footprint for the in-bank facility will encompass approximately 5.7 acres (250 feet wide by 1,000 linear feet of riverbank). Of this, approximately 1.57 acres of terrestrial habitat and 0.44 acre of perennial stream habitat in the San Joaquin River, including 176 feet of river bank shoreline will be permanently removed by the finished facility.

In order to accomplish this, a setback levee on the land side of the existing levee will be | constructed to provide flood protection to Empire Tract. The area between the existing levee and the setback levee will be backfilled with earthen fill (6,900 cubic yards) to provide a level area above the flood elevation for access to the pump station and ancillary facilities and structures.

Preconstruction dredging will remove approximately 6,700 cubic yards of native river bank and channel bottom material. The waterside portion of the construction area will then be isolated from the main channel by permanent sheet pile wing walls and temporary cofferdam of sheet piles driven into the bottom of the channel across the mouth of the water intake channel.

Approximately 833 cubic yards of rock riprap will be placed along the permanent wing walls of the intake structure. The area within the cofferdam and the existing levee will be pumped dry to allow for construction activities to occur. The void between the existing levee and the newly placed wing walls will be filled with imported material (1,300 cubic yards) and compacted to provide support for the intake structure. The dredging, cofferdam installation, removal of water from behind the cofferdam and backfilling of soil is expected to take approximately 60 days to complete.

Within the area identified as the footprint for the intake structures, a network of 14-inch diameter pre-stressed concrete piles will be driven into the soil to a depth of 75 feet. These concrete piles will provide support to the poured concrete slab foundation of the intake facility and the related concrete structural elements of the fish screen and pumping platform. The number of piles. driven will be sufficient for both of the 80 mgd pumping modules. The City proposes to drive all piles during the period from July 1 through November 30. The concrete work proposed for the current consultation will allow for only one of the 80 mgd modules to be built. The second intake module, should it be built, will be permitted under a future consultation. However, to avoid redeploying the pile driving equipment a second time, all piles for both modules will be driven in one mobilization of the pile driving rig.

The proposed in-bank intake will extend into the river approximately 60 feet from the levee face _and will be approximately 350 feet from the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel. Placement of the cofferdam during construction will require approximately a 20-foot clearance for working space. a
Fish Screen Design |
The vertical screen height of the fish screen will be 15 feet with a nominal structure length of 120 feet (at 160 mgd build out). The fish screen may be slightly angled away from vertical to better conform to the established slope of the levee. The fish screen will be designed to meet the STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 7
current fish screen criteria established by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Service, and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The proposed screen will have the following structural operational characteristics:

Screen Orientation. The screen will be oriented so that the screen face will be parallel to river flow; upstream and downstream transitions will minimize eddies.

Approach Velocity. A uniform approach velocity of less than 0.2 fps as well as an adjustment for flow patterns will be provided across the face of the screen. For an ultimate capacity of 160 mgd, a minimum of 1,240 square feet of screen area will be provided, excluding the area for structural supports.

Screen Cleaning. The entire fish screen will be capable of completing an automatic cleaning cycle once every five minutes. The screen will be cleaned with either an automatic rotating brush or hydraulic screen cleaner.

Sweeping Velocity. The sweeping velocity design criteria for river intakes is at least twice the approach velocity (1.e., 0.4 fps or higher). Except during periods of tidal flow reversal, sweeping flow velocity will be at least two times the approach velocity. With a river channel cross-sectional flow area of approximately 18,000 square feet, flow rates must exceed 7,200 cfs to meet the sweeping velocity criteria of 0.4 fps. This occurs about 80 to 85 percent of the time at the intake site. The City plans to work with the Corps, NMES, the Service, and CDFG to develop site-specific requirements for the DWSP.

Screen Openings. The opening size of the screen will not exceed 1.75 millimeters (mm); the minimum open area will be 27 percent of the screen’s surface area.

Screen Materials. The screen will be fabricated of rigid, corrosion-resistant material with no sharp edges or projections (e.g., stainless-steel or copper-nickel alloy using wedge wire).

Pumping and Electrical Requirements
Electric pumps will lift water from the intake and deliver it to the proposed WTP, pumping it approximately 51 feet above sea level in the process. The transfer of this water will be through the initial installation of a 54-inch-diameter pipe to the WTP.

For the initial pump station capacity of 30 mgd, the total connected electrical load for the intake facility would be approximately 850 kilovolt-amperes (kVA). Ultimate electrical capacity for the intake pump station and interim phasing would depend on the timing for construction of the parallel 72-inch-diameter raw water pipeline. An upgrade to the electrical infrastructure would be required to efficiently meet the facility’s initial and ultimate needs.

High voltage electrical transmission lines are located west and parallel to I-5. Electrical service requirements at the WIP wouid.be even higher than at the intake pumping station, so developing primary service voltage for the WTP would provide an opportunity to coordinate service to the intake pumping station. Electrical service for the intake pump station will be routed to a new substation near the intake site from the substation located at Eight Mile Road and I-5. Overhead STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan - 8
poles are located in the road nght-of-way from the northwest comer of J-5 and Eight Mile Road to the intake site.

Water Pipelines
Raw Water Pipelines
Approximately 67,000-foot (12.7-mile) of raw water pipelines will be constructed to connect the intake facility with the WTP. In open areas with sufficient space, an 80-foot-wide construction corridor would be used to maximize construction efficiency. In areas encumbered by existing improvements, high-volume roadways, or environmentally sensitive areas,a narrower construction corridor will be used. The minimum width for a practicable construction corridor would be 47 feet, which will provide space for the width and turning movements of equipment such as a large excavator. It is anticipated that the initial raw water pipeline could be constructed in about 12 to 13 months.

The alignment of the pipeline will follow the western edge of Empire Tract northwards from the intake facility to Eight Mile Road, paralleling the inside of the levee along Little Connection Slough for approximately 1.5 miles. At Eight Mile Road, the pipeline alignment will turn east and parallel the northern side of the road for approximately 2.1 miles before crossing under Honker Cut. The pipeline will continue east for another 2.25 miles before crossing under Bishop Cut. From this point, the pipeline will continue approximately 6 miles east to Sacramento Road before turning north to the proposed location of the WTP.

A 54-inch-diameter pipeline would be installed to provide for the initial 30 mgd WTP and future expansion to a 60 mgd capacity. When the demands for water reach the level that additional capacity in excess of the 60 mgd is needed, an additional 72-inch pipeline will be installed parallel to the existing 54-inch pipeline alignment. The applicant anticipates that this enlargement of the carrying capacity of the raw water pipelines will be considered under a future biological opinion which addresses the co-occurring enlargement of the diversion capacity at the intake structure.

The majority of the raw water pipelines would be installed using open cut trenching using conventional cut and cover construction techniques. Where minor ditch crossings (less than 15 feet in width) are required, the ditches would be temporarily dammed prior to open cut trenching. _ In areas where open cut trenching is not possible due to limited construction area, geotechnical conditions, or sensitive areas (1.e., at the intersection of Empire Tract Road and Eight Mile Road and at Bishop Cut, Honker Cut, the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, and Interstate 5), trenchless construction techniques (e.g., jack and bore, horizontal directional drilling, or microtunneling) would be employed.

The width and depth of the trench would vary, depending on the location along the route. In agricultural areas where the pipeline would not be in a road right-of-way, it would be buried with a minimum cover of seven feet. In other areas, the pipeline will be buried at a minimum of five feet to avoid potential conflicts with existing and future adjacent utilities. The trench for the 54- inch pipeline will be approximately seven to eight feet wide. Excavated soil will be hauled to a STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 9
suitable temporary storage area with no or low biological sensitivity until 1t is returned to the construction site. Stored soil will be protected from wind and rain erosion, sedimentation, and runoff. Soil in excess of backfill requirements will be hauled to a suitable disposal area or made available for other uses.

In areas with shallow groundwater levels, dewatering would be required. If the groundwater seepage cannot be contained onsite, it will be pumped into holding tanks (Baker tanks or other suitable receptacles) where the sediment will be separated from the groundwater and the “clean” groundwater redistributed into surrounding upland areas or irrigation ditches. The return water will comply with the 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.

Trenchless construction techniques will be used when sensitive surface obstructions or otherwise difficult conditions preclude the open trench techniques previously described. Typically, trenchless construction techniques require that the bore of the tunnel pass under the sensitive surface obstruction, such as the waterways of Bishop and Honker Cuts, and resurface on the opposite side of the obstruction. Bore and jack and microtunneling boring are two of the techniques being considered for channel crossings. Typically, a bore pit would be constructed on each side of the waterway. These pits, approximately 25 to 30 feet long by 10 to 15 feet wide, would be excavated with a backhoe outside of the natural channel boundaries. Depth of the pits will depend on final pipeline depth below grade. The boring equipment is lowered into the pit and the drilling bore is advance into the substrate. Once a tunnel is constructed, the pipes are installed. Spoils from the excavation will be placed alongside the pits outside of the channel for future use as fill. Minimum buffer zones for entry and exit point on either side of the stream and a minimum vertical Clarence beneath the streambed will be maintained to avoid or minimizes the potential environmental impacts resulting from the crossing activities. At this time, the setback distance and minimum boring depths required to maintain this safety margin have not been determined.

Any groundwater encountered during drilling would be pumped out of the bore pits and discharged per Regional Board requirements. The procedure employed would be determined during final design. Upon completion of the pipeline installation, the excavated areas would be backfilled, compacted, re-contoured, and restored to natural conditions.

HDD 1s a specialized boring technique that can be used to drill an arc that would travel under larger waterbodies such as Honker- or Bishop Cuts. Lubrication containing water and bentonite clay, referred to as drilling mud, would be used to aid the drilling and to coat the walls to maintain the opening. A wire line magnetic guidance system would be used to ensure that the angle, depth, and exit point abide by the detailed engineering plans drawn up for the crossing.

Once the hole is approximately 12 inches larger than the pipe, the pipeline is pulled through the drilled hole from the point of entry to the point of exit. The workspace requirements for the HDDs extend to an area 200 feet wide by 200 feet long. It may be needed to excavate mud pits to retain the drilling mud exiting from the bore opening at either end of the crossing.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 10
Treated Water Pipelines ;
At the initial plant capacity of 30 mgd, a 54-inch diameter pipeline would connect the process area of the WTP to the existing distribution system. Approximately 38,730 feet (7.3 miles) of piping would be required. The treated water pipeline would parallel the east side of Lower Sacramento Road south to the south side of Eight Mile Road. A minimum 10-foot horizontal separation would be provided between the raw water and treated water pipelines to meet California Department of Health Services standards and to facilitate construction.

From the intersection of Lower Sacramento and Eight Mile Roads, the pipeline would connect with the existing distribution system as follows:
e From the intersection of Lower Sacramento and Eight Mile Roads, south along Lower Sacramento Road to Wakefield Road
e From the intersection of Lower Sacramento and Eight Mile Roads, east along Eight Mile Road to West Lane, then south on West Lane to Wakefield Road e From the intersection of Lower Sacramento and Eight Mile Roads, west along Eight Mile Road to Davis Road, then south on Davis Road to about Whistler Way e From the intersection of Eight Mile and Davis Roads, west along Eight Mile Road to Trinity Parkway
The minimum width of the construction corridor would be between 37 and 47 feet, depending on pipe diameter and construction means and methods. Thus, the total footprint will be approximately 42 acres (47-foot wide corridor X 38,730 feet). Two staging areas for storing equipment and materials and for parking a construction office trailer would be required along the pipeline alignment.

The majority of the treated water pipelines would be installed using open cut trenching as described for the raw water pipelines. In developed areas, a vertical or near-vertical trench would be constructed to limit replacement of the structural road and reduce the width of the construction corridor. Trench depth will range from five to 12 feet, depending on pipe diameter and depth of cover. All excavation is expected to be above groundwater; however, limited perched groundwater may be encountered near slough crossings. Typical open cut installation rates would vary from 300 to 400 feet per day, depending on the number of utilities encountered during excavation, required traffic control, and hours of work. .

In areas where open cut trenching is impossible due to a limited construction area, geotechnical conditions, or sensitive areas (i.e., Interstate 5 at Eight Mile Road; Pixley Slough at Davis Road, Eight Mile Road, and Lower Sacramento Road; Union Pacific Railroad tracks at Eight Mile Road; and Bear Creek at West Lane), trenchless construction techniques would be employed as described for raw water pipelines. .

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | 11
Water Treatment Plant

The WTP will be located approximately three miles east of Interstate 5 and 0.5 mile north of Eight Mile Road along Lower Sacramento Road. The facility will be constructed on a 126-acre parcel, with 56 acres devoted to the plant development and 86 acres left as farmland. The City anticipates that it will take approximately two years to complete the construction of the WTP.

Raw water will enter the plant via the proposed 54-inch-diameter pipeline. The water will be treated either by (1) conventional treatment using ozone or deep bed granular activated charcoal or (2) amembrane filtration treatment with a pretreatment of powdered activated charcoal. Both treatment types will utilize grit basins, flash mix (coagulation), flocculation/sediment basins, and clearwell storage. The WTP will operate continuously, 24 hours per day, year round at various flow rated during the year with ongoing operation and maintenance protocols. Treated water will be distributed through existing and newly constructed delivery pipelines to supply the water needs of the COSMA. Because there is no public sewer in the vicinity of the WTP site, domestic waste from the operations and administration building will be disposed of using onsite treatment methods such as a septic tank and leach field.

Operations of the DWSP Intake
The City will manage and operate the DWSP intake to minimize entrainment of delta smelt egg and larvae during the spring by reducing or curtailing diversion. The City no longer proposes a flexible reduction or curtailment period. Instead the City proposes to each year reduce pumping by half during the periods March 15 through Apml 15 and May 21 through June 15, and to curtail all pumping during the period April 16 through May 20 (Stern in lit. September 5, 2006). During the reminder of the year the City will divert up to its full capacity of 47 cfs.

Conservation Measures

The City will compensate for impacts and conversion of giant garter snake and delta smelt habitat, an estimated total of 181.5 acres, as a result of construction of the facilities by paying a fee as determined by the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) as designated in the | SJMSCP and Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion prepared by the Service (Service 2001). In addition, the City will abide by the giant garter snake and delta smelt “Incidental Take Minimization Measures” issued by the SJCOG, including restricting construction to the giant garter snake active period (May 1 — October 1) for all areas within 200 feet of potential giant garter snake aquatic habitat, which includes the intake structure.

Action Area
The action area includes all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action (50 CFR 402.2). The physical location of the DWSP is on the southwestern tip of Empire Tract in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the inner portion of the Empire Tract along Eight Mile Road, and an area extending approximately three mile east of I-5. The intake will be located on the southern shore of Empire Tract, slightly east of Federal navigation marker “11” on the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel (DWSC). The raw water pipelines will cross Honker Cut and Bishop Cut slightly north of the alignment of the STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 12
Eight Mile Road bridges over these waterways. The alignment then would turn north and parallel the west side of Lower Sacramento Road to the proposed WTP site. The proposed WTP site is located on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road, just north of Stockton and approximately three miles east of Interstate 5. The proposed treated-water pipeline would parallel the east side of Lower Sacramento Road south to the south side of Eight Mile Road.

From the intersection of Lower Sacramento and Eight Mile Roads, the pipeline would go south along Lower Sacramento Road, and east and west along Eight Mile Road to connect with the existing City and California Water Service Company distribution systems. These four locations will be the sites of any direct effects from the construction phase of the project.

The operations phase of the DWSP will affect the delta smelt and critical habitat designated for the delta smelt in several locations but at variable levels. The most direct and significant effect to the delta smelt will be at the site of the intake screen itself, where water is withdrawn from the Delta. Lower levels of effects will be present within the water conveyance systems of the Central Valley (i.e. the Sacramento River below Shasta Dam, the Feather River below Oroville Dam, and the American River below Folsom Dam), and will be dependent upon the changes in water delivery required to meet water delivery obligations and water quality standards required of the state and Federal water programs as they compensate for the additional water being diverted fro the DWSP. The computer modeling (CALSIM I) run by the applicant’s consultant to compare the effects of the project on the current and future water delivery operations indicates that small impacts related to the DWSP project can be measured even in the reservoir operations of Lake Shasta. However, it should be noted that these effects are relatively minor, and deemed insignificant by the applicant, as far as effects to the water delivery system operations are concerned. The scope and sensitivity of these effects will be discussed in the effects analysis section of this opinion.

One of the objectives outlined in the Final Environmental Impacts Report (ESA 2005) of the Stockton Delta Water Supply project is “to provide adequate water supply to accommodate planned growth.” The initial 30 mgd intake operation is expected to meet the water supply needs of build-out anticipated in the 1990 Stockton General Plan. The action area for this biological opinion therefore includes all areas planned for build-out in the 1990 Stockton General Plan.

Status of the Species and Critical Habitat
Delta Smelt
Delta smelt was listed as a threatened species on March 5, 1993 (Service 1993a). The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Native Fishes Recovery Plan was completed in 1996 (Service 1996). The Five Year Status Review for the delta smelt was completed on March 31, 2004 (Service 2004). Critical habitat for delta smelt was designated on December 19, 1994 (Service 1994a). The final rule designated critical habitat for the delta smelt in the following geographic areas—areas of all water and all submerged lands below ordinary high water and the entire water column bounded by and contained in Suisun Bay (including the contiguous Grizzly and Honker Bays); the length of Goodyear, Suisun, Cutoff, First Mallard (Spring Branch), and Montezuma sloughs; and the existing contiguous waters contained within the Delta, as defined in section 12220 of the California Water Code.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
’ Mr. Michael Finan 13
Delta smelt are slender-bodied fish that typically reach 60-70 mm standard length (measured from tip of the snout to origin of the caudal fin), although a few may reach 120 mm standard length. The mouth is small, with a maxilla that does not extend past the midpoint of the eye.

The eyes are relatively large; with the orbit width contained approximately 3.5-4 times in the head length. Small, pointed teeth are present on the upper and lower jaws. The first gill arch has 27-33 gill rakers and there are 7 branchiostegal rays (paired structures on either side and below the jaw that protect the gills). Counts of branchiostegal rays are used by taxonomists to identify fish. The pectoral fins reach less than two-thirds of the way to the bases of the pelvic fins. There are 9-10 dorsal fin rays, 8 pelvic fin rays, 10-12 pectoral fin rays, and 15-17 anal fin rays. The lateral line is incomplete and has 53-60 scales along it. There are 4-5 pyloric caeca. Live fish are nearly translucent and have a steely-blue sheen to their sides. Occasionally there may be one _chromatophore (cellular organelle containing pigment) between the mandibles, but usually there is none. Delta smelt belong to the family Osmeridae, a more ancestral member of the order Salmoniformes which also includes the family Salmonidae (salmon, trout, whitefish, and graylings) (Moyle and Cech 1988).

Distribution
Delta smelt are endemic to the upper Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary. They occur in the Delta primarily below Isleton on the Sacramento River, below Mossdale on the San Joaquin River, and in Suisun Bay. Adult delta smelt move into freshwater in late fall to spawn (ranging from January to July). Spawning is believed to occur in the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River, and Suisun Marsh based on observations of spent females. Some spawning may also occur in Napa River. Once hatched, most juveniles move downstream into the low saline waters of the lower Delta and Suisun Bay where they maintain growth during the summer and fall. They reach adult size within one year and will move into freshwater to spawn in their first winter. The majority exhibit a one-year life cycle but a small portion of the population may survive to spawn the subsequent year. Depending on season, the delta smelt can occur in: (1) the Sacramento River as high as Sacramento, (2) the Mokelumne River system, (3) the Cache Slough region, (4) the Delta, and, (5) Montezuma Slough, (6) Suisun Bay, (7) Suisun Marsh, (8) Carquinez Strait, (9) Napa River, and (10) San Pablo Bay. It is not known if delta smelt in San Pablo Bay are a permanent population or if they are washed into the Bay during high outflow periods. Since 1982, the center of delta smelt abundance has been the northwestern Delta in the channel of the Sacramento River. In any month, two or more life stages (adult, larvae, and juveniles) of delta smelt have the potential to be present in Suisun Bay (Califormia Department of Water Resources (DWR) and Reclamation 1994; Molye 1976; Wang 1991). Delta smelt are also captured seasonally in Suisun Marsh.

Swimming Behavior
Observations of delta smelt swimming in a swimming flume and in a large tank show that these fish are unsteady, intermittent, slow speed swimmers (Swanson and Cech 1995). At low velocities in the swimming flume (<3 body lengths per second), and during spontaneous, unrestricted swimming in a 1 m tank, smelt consistently swam with a stroke and glide behavior.

This type of swimming is very efficient; Weihs (1974) predicted energy savings of about 50% for “stroke and glide” swimming compared to steady swimming. However, the maximum speed STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | 14
smelt are able to achieve using this mode of swimming is less than 3 body lengths per second, and the fish did not readily or spontaneously swim at this or higher speeds (Swanson and Cech 1995). Although juvenile delta smelt appear to be stronger swimmers than adults, forced swimming at 3 body lengths per second in a swimming flume was apparently stressful; the smelt - were prone to swimming failure and extremely vulnerable to impingement (Swanson and Cech 1995). Delta smelt swimming performance was limited by behavioral rather than physiolog gical or metabolic constraints (Brett 1976).

Habitat Requirements
Delta smelt are euryhaline (a species that tolerates a wide range of salinities) fish that generally occur in water with less than 10-12 parts per thousand (ppt) salinity. However, delta smelt have been collected in the Carquinez Strait at 13.8 ppt and in San Pablo Bay at 18.5 ppt (CDFG 2000).

In recent history, they have been most abundant in shallow areas where early spring salinities are around 2 ppt. However, prior to the 1800's before the construction of levees that created the Delta Islands, a vast fluvial marsh existed in the Delta and the delta smelt probably reared in these upstream areas. During the 1987-92 drought, delta smelt were concentrated in deep areas in the lower Sacramento River near Emmaton, where average salinity ranged from 0.36 to 3.6 ppt for much of the year (DWR and Reclamation 1994). During years with wet springs (such as 1993), delta smelt may continue to be abundant in Suisun Bay during summer even after the 2 ppt isohaline (an artificial line denoting changes in salinity in a body of water) has retreated upstream (Sweetnam and Stevens 1993). Fall abundance of delta smelt is generally highest in | years when salinities of 2 ppt are in the shallows of Suisun Bay during the preceding spring (p <

0.05, r= 0.50) (Herbold 1994) (p is a statistical abbreviation for the probability of an analysis showing differences between variables, r is a statistical abbreviation for the correlation coefficient, a measure of the linear relationship of two variables). Herbold (1994) found a significant relationship between number of days when 2 parts per thousand was in Suisun Bay during April with subsequent delta smelt abundance (p < 0.05, r= 0.49), but noted that ' autocorrelations (interactions among measurements that make relationships between measurements difficult to understand) in time and space reduce the reliability of any analysis that compares parts of years or small geographical areas. It should also be noted that the point in the estuary where the 2 ppt isohaline is located (X2) does not necessarily regulate delta smelt distribution in all years. In wet years, when abundance levels are high, their distribution is normally very broad. In late 1993 and early 1994, delta smelt were found in Suisun Bay region despite the fact that X2 was located far upstream. In this case, food availability may have influenced delta smelt distribution, as evidenced by the Eurytemora found in this area by CDFG.

In Suisun Marsh, delta smelt larvae occur in both large sloughs and small dead end sloughs.

New studies are under way to test the hypothesis that adult fall abundance 1s dependent upon geographic distribution of juvenile delta smelt.

Critical thermal maxima for delta smelt was reached at 25.4 degrees Celsius in the laboratory (Swanson et al., 2000); and at water temperatures above 25 degrees Celsius delta smelt are no longer found in the delta.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 15
Life History
Wang (1986) reported spawning taking place in fresh water at temperatures of about 7°-15° Celsius (C). However, ripe delta smelt and recently hatched larvae have been collected in recent years at temperatures of 15°-22°C, so it is likely that spawning can take place over the entire 7°- 22° C range. Temperatures that are optimal for survival of embryos and larvae have not yet been determined, although R. Mager, University of California at Davis (UCD), (unpublished data) found low hatching success and embryo survival from spawns of captive fish collected at higher temperatures. Delta smelt of all sizes are found in the main channels of the Delta and Suisun Marsh and the open waters of Suisun Bay where the waters are well oxygenated and temperatures relatively cool, usually less than 20°-22°C in summer. When not spawning, they tend to be concentrated near the zone where incoming salt water and out flowing freshwater mix (mixing zone). This area has the highest primary productivity and is where zooplankton populations (on which delta smelt feed) are usually most dense (Knutson and Orsi 1983; Orsi and Mecum 1986). .

At all life stages delta smelt are found in greatest abundance in the top 2 m of the water column and usually not in close association with the shoreline.

Delta smelt inhabit open, surface waters of the Delta and Suisun Bay, where they presumably school. In most years, spawning occurs in shallow water habitats in the Delta. Shortly before spawning, adult smelt migrate upstream from the brackish-water habitat associated with the mixing zone to disperse widely into river channels and tidally-influenced backwater sloughs (Radtke 1966; Moyle 1976, 2002; Wang 1991). Migrating adults with nearly mature eggs were taken at the Central Valley Projects’s (CVP) Tracy Pumping Plant, located in the south Delta, from late December 1990 to April 1991 (Wang 1991). In February 2000, gravid adults were found at both CVP and the State Water Projects’ (SWP) fish facilities in the south Delta.

Spawning locations appear to vary widely from year to year (DWR and Reclamation 1993).

Sampling of larval smelt in the Delta suggests spawning has occurred in the Sacramento River, Barker, Lindsey, Cache, Georgiana, Prospect, Beaver, Hog, and Sycamore sloughs, in the San Joaquin River off Bradford Island including Fisherman’s Cut, False River along the shore zone between Frank’s and Webb tracts, and possibly other areas (Wang 1991). In years of moderate to high Delta outflow, smelt larvae are often most abundant in Suisun Bay and sloughs of Suisun Marsh, but it is not clear the degree to which these larvae are produced by locally spawning fish and the degree to which they originate upstream and are transported by river currents to the bay and marsh. Some spawning probably occurs in shallow water habitats in Suisun Bay and Suisun Marsh during wetter years (Sweetnam 1999 and Wang 1991). Spawning has also been recorded in Montezuma Slough near Suisun Bay (Wang 1986) and also may occur in Suisun Slough in Suisun Marsh (P. Moyle, UCD, unpublished data).

The spawning season varies from year to year, and may occur from late winter (December) to early summer (July). Pre-spawning adults are found in Suisun Bay and the western delta as early as September (DWR and Reclamation 1994). Moyle (1976, 2002) collected gravid adults from December to April, although ripe delta smelt were common in February and March. In.1989 and 1990, Wang (1991) estimated that spawning had taken place from mid-February to late June or early July, with peak spawning occurring in late April and early May. A recent study of delta smelt eggs and larvae (Wang and Brown 1993 as cited in DWR and Reclamation 1994) STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | 16
confirmed that spawning may occur from February through June, with a peak in April and May.

Spawning has been reported to occur at water temperatures of about 7° to 15° C. Results from a ~ UCD study (Swanson and Cech 1995) indicate that although delta smelt tolerate a wide range of temperatures (<8° C to >25° C), warmer water temperatures restrict their distribution more than colder water temperatures. .

Delta smelt spawn in shallow, fresh, or slightly brackish water upstream of the mixing zone (Wang 1991). Most spawning occurs in tidally-influenced backwater sloughs and channel edgewaters (Moyle 1976, 2002; Wang 1986, 1991; Moyle et a/. 1992). Although delta smelt spawning behavior has not been observed in the wild (Moyle et a/. 1992), some researchers believe the adhesive, demersal eggs attach to substrates such as cattails, tules, tree roots, and submerged branches in shallow waters (Moyle 1976, 2002; Wang 1991).

Laboratory observations have indicated that delta smelt are broadcast spawners (DWR and Reclamation 1994) and eggs are démersal (sinks to the bottom) and adhesive, sticking to hard substrates such as: rock, gravel, tree roots or submerged branches, and submerged vegetation (Moyle 1976, 2002; Wang 1986). At 14°-16° C, embryonic development to hatching takes 9 -14 days and feeding begins 4-5 days later (R. Mager, UCD, unpublished data). Newly hatched delta smelt have a large oil globule that makes them semi-buoyant, allowing them to maintain themselves just off the bottom (R. Mager, UCD, unpublished data), where they feed on rotifers (microscopic crustaceans used by fish for food) and other microscopic prey. Once the swimbladder (a gas-filled organ that allows fish to maintain neutral buoyancy) develops, larvae become more buoyant and rise up higher into the water column. At this stage, 16-18 mm total length, most are presumably washed downstream until they reach the mixing zone or the area immediately upstream of 1t. Growth is rapid and juvenile fish are 40-50 mm long by early August (Erkkila et al. 1950; Ganssle 1966; Radtke 1966). By this time, young-of-year fish dominate trawl catches of delta smelt, and adults become rare. Delta smelt reach 55-70 mm standard length in 7-9 months (Moyle 1976, 2002). Growth during the next 3 months slows down considerably (only 3-9 mm total), presumably because most of the energy ingested is being directed towards gonadal development (Erkkila et al. 1950; Radtke 1966). There is no correlation between size and fecundity, and females between 59-70 mm standard lengths lay 1,200 to 2,600 eggs (Moyle et al. 1992). The abrupt change from a single-age, adult cohort during spawning in spring to a population dominated by juveniles in summer suggests strongly that most adults die after they spawn (Radtke 1966 and Moyle 1976, 2002). However, in El Nino years when temperatures rise above 18° C before all adults have spawned, some fraction of the unspawned population may also hold over as two-year-old fish and spawn in the subsequent year.

These two-year-old adults may enhance reproductive success in years following El Nino events.

In a near-annual fish like delta smelt, a strong relationship would be expected between number of spawners present in one year and number of recruits to the population the following year.

Instead, the stock-recruit relationship for delta smelt is weak, accounting for about a quarter of the variability in recruitment (Sweetnam and Stevens 1993). This relationship does indicate, however, that factors affecting numbers of spawning adults (e.g., entrainment, toxics, and predation) can have an effect on delta smelt numbers the following year. | .

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 17
Delta smelt feed primarily on (1) planktonic copepods (small crustaceans used by fish for food), (2) cladocerans (small crustaceans used by fish for food), (3) amphipods (small crustaceans used by fish for food) and, to a lesser extent, (4) on insect larvae. Larger fish may also feed on the opossum shrimp (Neomysis mercedis). The most important food organism for all sizes seems to:
be the euryhaline copepod (Eurytemora affinis), although in recent years the exotic species, Pseudodiaptomus forbesi, has become a major part of the diet (Moyle et al. 1992). Delta smelt are a minor prey item of juvenile and subadult striped bass (Morone saxatilis) in the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta (Stevens 1966). They also have been reported from the stomach contents of white catfish (Ameiurus catus) (Turner 1966 in Turner and Kelley (eds) 1966) and black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus) (Turmer 1966 in Turmer and Kelley 1966) in the Delta.

Abundance and Population Dynamics
The smelt is endemic to Suisun Bay upstream of San Francisco Bay and throughout the Delta, in Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano and Yolo counties, California. Historically, the smelt is thought to have occurred from Suisun Bay and Montezuma Slough, upstream to at least Verona on the Sacramento River, and Mossdale on the San J oaquin. River (Moyle et al. 1992, Sweetnam and Stevens 1993).

Since the 1850s, however, the amount and extent of suitable habitat for the delta smelt has declined dramatically. The advent in 1853 of hydraulic mining in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers led to an increase in siltation and the alteration of the circulation patterns of the Estuary (Nichols et al. 1986, Monroe and Kelly 1992). The reclamation of Merritt Island for agricultural purposes, in the same year, marked the beginning of the present-day cumulative loss of 94% of the Estuary’s tidal marshes (Nichols ef al. 1986, Monroe and Kelly 1992). The extensive levee system in the Delta has led to a loss of seasonally flooded habitat and significantly changed the hydrology of the Delta ecosystem, restricting the ability 0 of suitable habitat substrates to re-vegetate.

Delta smelt were once one of the most common pelagic (living in open water away from the bottom) fish in the upper Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary, as indicated by its abundance in CDFG trawl catches (Erkkila e¢ al. 1950; Radtke 1966; Stevens and Miller 1983). Delta smelt abundance from year to year has fluctuated greatly in the past, but between 1982 and 1992 their population was consistently low. The decline became precipitous in 1982 and 1983 due to extremely high outflows and continued through the drought years 1987-1992 (Moyle et al. 1992).

In 1993, numbers increased considerably, apparently in response to a wet winter and spring.

During the period 1982-1992, most of the population was confined to the Sacramento River - channel between Collinsville and Rio Vista (D. Sweetnam, CDFG unpublished data). This was still an area of high abundance in 1993, but delta smelt were also abundant in Suisun Bay. The actual size of the delta smelt population is not known. However, the pelagic life style of delta smelt, short life span, spawning habits, and relatively low fecundity indicate that a fairly substantial population probably is necessary to keep the species from becoming extinct.

Recreation in the Delta has resulted in the presence and propagation of predatory non-native fish such as striped bass. Additionally, recreational boat traffic has led to a loss of habitat from the building of docks and an increase in the rate of erosion resulting from boat wakes. In addition to the loss of habitat, erosion reduces the water quality and retards the production of phytoplankton in the Delta.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan . 18
In addition to the degradation and loss of estuarine habitat, delta smelt have been increasingly subject to entrainment, upstream or reverse flows of waters in the Delta and San Joaquin River, and constriction of low salinity habitat to deep-water river channels of the interior Delta (Moyle et al. 1992). These adverse conditions are primarily a result of the steadily increasing proportion of river flow being diverted from the Delta by the Projects, and occasional droughts (Monroe and Kelly 1992).

Reduced water quality from agricultural runoff, effluent discharge and boat effluent has the potential to harm the pelagic larvae and reduce the availability of the planktonic food source.

When the mixing zone is located in Suisun Bay where there is extensive shallow water habitat within the euphotic zone (depths less than four meters), high densities of phytoplankton and zooplankton may accumulate (Arthur and Ball 1978, 1979, 1980). The introduction of the Asian clam (Potamocorbula amurensis), a highly efficient filter feeder, presently reduces the concentration of phytoplankton in this area.

Population Dynamics and Trends
According to seven abundance indices which provide information on the status of the delta smelt, this species was consistently at low population levels through the 1980's (Stevens ef al. 1990).

These same indices also showed a pronounced decline from historical levels of abundance (Stevenset al. 1990). For a large part of its annual life span, this species is associated with the freshwater edge of the mixing zone, where the salinity is approximately 2 ppt. (also described as X2) (Ganssle 1966, Moyle et al. 1992, Sweetnam and Stevens 1993). The relationship between the portion of the smelt population west of the Delta as sampled in the summer townet survey and the natural logarithm of Delta outflow from 1959 to 1988, indicates the summer townet index increased dramatically when outflow was between 34,000 and 48,000 cubic feet per second, placing X2 between Chipps and Roe islands (DWR and Reclamation 1994).

Specifically, the summer townet abundance index constitutes one of the more representative indices because the data have been collected over a wide geographic area (from San Pablo Bay upstream through most of the Delta) for the longest period of time (since 1959) (CDFG 2007).

The summer townet abundance index measures the abundance and distribution of juvenile delta smelt and provides data on the recruitment potential of the species (CDFG 2007). Since 1983, (except for 1986, 1993, and 1994), this index has remained at consistently lower levels than previously found (CDFG 2007)(Figure 1). These consistently lower levels correlate with the 1983 to 1992 mean location of X2 upstream of the confluence (CDFG 2001). The final summer townet index for 2000 was 8.0, a decline from the 11.9 index for the 1999 summer townet. Both of these indices represent an increase from the 1998 index of 3.3. These higher townet indices were followed by the 2001 (3.5), 2002 (4.7), 2003 (1.6), 2004 (2.9) and 2005 (0.3) indices which were well below the pre-decline average of 20.4 (1959-1981, no sampling in 1966-68) (CDFG 2007).

The second longest running survey (since 1967), the fall midwater trawl survey (FMWT), measures the abundance and distribution of late juveniles and adult delta smelt in a large geographic area from San Pablo Bay upstream to Rio Vista on the Sacramento River and Stockton on the San Joaquin River (Stevens et al. 1990, CDFG 1999). The FMWT indicates the abundance of the adult population just prior to upstream spawning migration (CDFG 1999). The STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 19
index calculated from the FMWT uses numbers of sampled fish multiplied by a factor related to the volume of the area sampled (CDFG 1999). Until recently, except for 1991, this index has declined irregularly over the past 20 years (CDFG 1999) (Figure 2). Since’1983, the delta smelt population has exhibited more low FMWT abundance indices, for more consecutive years, than previously recorded (CDFG 1999). The 1994 FMWT index of 101.2 was a continuation of this trend (CDFG 1999). This occurred despite the high 1994 summer townet index for reasons . unknown (CDFG 1999). The low 1995 summer fownet index value of 3.3 was followed by a high FMWT index of 839 reflecting the benefits of higher flows due to an extremely wet year (CDFG 1999, 2001). The 1999 FMWT index of 717, which is an increase from 1998's index (417.6), is the third highest since the start of decline of delta smelt abundance in 1982 (CDFG 1999). The FMWT abundance index (127) for 1996 represented the sixth lowest on record (CDFG 1999). The 1997 abundance index (360.8) almost tripled since the 1996 survey, despite the low summer townet index (4.0) (CDFG 1999, 2001).

Both 2001 TNS and FMWT abundance indices for delta smelt decreased from 2000 (Souza and Bryant 2002, CDFG 1999 and 2001). The 2001 TNS delta smelt index (3.5) is less than 1999 (11.9) and 2000 (8.0) but comparable to recent years (1995, 1997, and 1998) when the index ranged from 3.2 to 4.0 (Souza and Bryant 2002, CDFG 2001). The 2001 FMWT delta smelt index (603) decreased by 20% from 2000 (756) (Souza and Bryant 2002, CDFG 2001). Both surveys exhibited an overall trend of decline in the last three years, but this decline seems more pronounced in the TNS where the 2001 delta smelt index is 95% lower than the greatest index of record (62.5) in 1978 (Souza and Bryant 2002, CDFG 2001). The 2002 TNS was 4.7 and then dropped to 1.6 in 2003. The 2004 TNS index increase to 2.9 but then fell in 2005 to 0.3. The 2002 FMWT index (139) was the seventh lowest on record and the 2003 index was 210. The 2004, 2005, and 2006 FMWT abundance indices fell to their lowest levels of 74, 26, and 41, respectively. The lowest indices on record for both surveys occurred in 2005 (CDFG 2007).

The Delta Smelt Larval Survey (DSLS), an additional survey initiated in 2005 by CDFG, will help determine timing, distribution, and abundance of larvae within the upper San Francisco Estuary. The new survey will also help estimate larval delta smelt losses and determine the magnitude of entrainment of larval delta smelt at the CVP and SWP intakes.

Summary of the Five Year Review: In summary, the threats of the destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range resulting from extreme outflow conditions, the operations of the State and Federal water projects, and other water diversions as described in the original listing remain. The only new information concerning the delta smelt’s population size and ‘extinction probability indicates that the population is at risk of falling below an effective _ population size and therefore in danger of becoming extinct. Although the Vernalis Adaptive Management Program and Environmental Water Account have helped to ameliorate these threats, it is unclear how effective these will continue to be over time based on available funding and future demands for water. In addition, there are increased water demands outside the CVP and the SWP, which could also impact delta‘smelt. The increases in water demands are likely to result in less suitable rearing conditions for delta smelt, increased vulnerability to entrainment, and less water available for maintaining the position of X2. The importance of exposure to toxic chemicals on the population of delta smelt is highly uncertain. Therefore, a recommendation to delist the delta smelt 1s inappropriate.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan : ~ 20
In addition, many potential threats have not been sufficiently studied to determine their effects, such as predation, disease, competition, and hybridization. Therefore, a recommendation of a change in classification to endangered is premature.

In his August 24, 2003, letter, the foremost delta smelt expert, Dr. Peter B. Moyle, stated that the delta smelt should continue to be listed as a threatened species (Moyle 2003). In addition, in their January 23, 2004, letter, CDFG fully supported that the delta smelt should retain its threatened status under the Act (CDFG 2004).

Delta Smelt Critical Habitat

In determining which areas to designate as critical habitat, the Service considers those physical and biological features that are essential to a species' conservation and that may require special management considerations or protection (50 CFR §424.12(b)).

The Service is required to list the known primary constituent elements together with the critical habitat description. Such physical and biological features include, but are not limited to, the following:

L. space for individual and population growth, and for normal behavior;

2. food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements,

3. cover or shelter;
4, sites for breeding, reproduction, rearing of offspring, germination, or seed dispersal; and:
5 generally, habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological distributions of a species.

In designating critical habitat for the delta smelt, the Service identified the following primary constituent elements essential to the conservation of the species: physical habitat, water, river flow, and salinity concentrations required to maintain delta smelt habitat for spawning, larval and juvenile transport, rearing, and adult migration. Specific areas that have been identified as important delta smelt spawning habitat include Barker, Lindsey, Cache, Prospect, Georgiana, Beaver, Hog, and Sycamore sloughs and the Sacramento River in the Delta, and tributaries of northern Suisun Bay. .

Larval and juvenile transport. Adequate river flow is necessary to allow larvae from upstream spawning areas to move to rearing habitat in Suisun Bay and to ensure that rearing habitat is maintained in Suisun Bay. To ensure this, X2 must be located westward of the confluence of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers, located near Collinsville (Confluence), during the period when larvae or juveniles are being transported, according to historical salinity conditions. X2 is important because the “entrapment zone” or zone where particles, nutrients, and plankton are “trapped,” leading to an area of high productivity, is associated with its location. Habitat conditions suitable for transport of larvae and juveniles may be needed by the species as early as STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 21
February | and as late as August 31, because the spawning season varies from year to year and may start as early as December and extend until July.

Rearing habitat. An area extending eastward from Carquinez Strait, including Suisun, Grizzly, and Honker bays, Montezuma Slough and its tributary sloughs, up the Sacramento River to its confluence with Three Mile Slough, and south along the San Joaquin River including Big Break, defines the specific geographic area critical to the maintenance of suitable rearing habitat. Three Mile Slough represents the approximate location of the most upstream extent of historical tidal incursion. Rearing habitat is vulnerable to impacts of export pumping and salinity intrusion from the beginning of February to the end of August.

Adult migration. Adequate flow and suitable water quality is needed to attract migrating adults in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river channels and their associated tributaries, including Cache and Montezuma sloughs and their tributaries. These areas are vulnerable to physical disturbance and flow disruption during migratory periods.

The Service’s 1994 and 1995 biological opinions on the operations of the CVP and SWP provided for adequate larval and juvenile transport flows, rearing habitat, and protection from entrainment for upstream migrating adults (Service 1994c, 1995). Please refer to 59 FR 65255 for additional information on delta smelt critical habitat.

Giant Garter Snake

The Service published a proposal to list the giant garter snake as an endangered species on December 27, 1991 (56 FR 67046). The Service reevaluated the status of the snake before adopting the final rule. The snake was listed as a threatened species on October 20, 1993 (58 F 54053).

Description
The giant garter snake is one of the largest garter snakes species reaching a total length of approximately 64 inches (162 centimeters). Females tend to be slightly longer and proportionately heavier than males. The weight of adult female snakes is typically 1.1-1.5 pounds (500-700 grams). Dorsal background coloration varies from brown to olive with a cream, yellow, or orange dorsal stripe and two light colored lateral stripes. Some individuals have a checkered pattern of black spots between the dorsal and lateral stripes. Background coloration and prominence of the checkered pattern and three yellow stripes are geographically and individually variable; individuals in the northern Sacramento Valley tend to be darker with more pronounced mid-dorsal and lateral stripes (Hansen 1980; Rossman et al. 1996). Ventral coloration is variable from cream to orange to olive-brown to pale blue with or without ventral markings (Hansen 1980).

Historical and Current Range
Giant garter snakes formerly occurred throughout the wetlands that were extensive and widely distributed in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley floors of California (Fitch 1940; Hansen STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan . 22
and Brode 1980; Rossman and Stewart 1987). The historical range of the snake is thought to have extended from the vicinity of Chico, Butte County, southward to Buena Vista Lake, near Bakersfield, in Kern County (Fitch 1940; Fox 1948; Hansen and Brode 1980; Rossman and Stewart 1987). Early collecting localities of the giant garter snake coincide with the distribution of large flood basins, particularly nparian marsh or slough habitats and associated tributary streams (Hansen and Brode 1980).

Loss of habitat due to agricultural activities and flood control have extirpated the snake from the southern one third of its range in former wetlands associated with the historic Buena Vista, Tulare, and Kern lake beds (Hansen 1980; Hansen and Brode 1980). By 1971, so much wetland habitat had been reclaimed, that the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) classified the giant garter snake as a rare animal and conducted a series of field surveys. The results of these surveys indicate that snake populations were distributed in marsh wetlands, tributary streams, and portions of the rice productions zones of the Sacramento Valley in Butte, Glenn, Colusa, Sutter, Yolo and Sacramento Counties, in the Delta region along the eastern fringes of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta in Solano, Contra Costa, Sacramento, and San Joaquin Counties, and in the San Joaquin Valley in San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Mendota, and Fresno Counties (Hansen 1988; Hansen and Brode 1980).

Upon federal listing in 1993, the Service identified 13 separate populations of giant garter snakes, with.each population representing a cluster of discrete locality records (Service 1993).

The 13 populations largely coincide with historical flood basins and tributary streams throughout the Central Valley: (1) Butte Basin, (2) Colusa Basin, (3) Sutter Basin, (4) American Basin, (5) Yolo Basin/Willow Slough, (6) Yolo Basin/Liberty Farms, (7) Sacramento Basin, (8) Badger Creek/Willow Creek, (9) Caldoni Marsh/White Slough, (10) East Stockton--Diverting Canal & Duck Creek, (11) North and South Grasslands, (12) Mendota, and (13) Burrel/Lanare.

A population is a group of organisms that interbreed and share a gene pool. The boundaries ofa _ population, both in space and time, are generally not discrete and, in practice, as usually defined by the researcher (Krebbs 1994). The gene pool and breeding patterns of the 13 giant garter snake populations identified in the final rule remain unstudied and unknown. What was described as “13 populations” should therefore be described more accurately as sub-populations and occurrences that note observations of individuals about which much remains unknown (Service 2003).

Surveys over the last 25 years suggest that sub-populations of giant garter snake in the northern parts of its range (1.e., Butte, Colusa, and Sutter Counties) are relatively large and stable (Wylie et al. 1997; Wylie et al. 2003a, 2004a). Habitat corridors connecting sub-populations, however, are either not present or not protected, and urban encroachment increases as a serious threat (Service 2003). Sub-populations in Yolo, Sacramento, Solano, and San Joaquin Counties areas are small, fragmented, and threatened by urbanization (Hansen 2004; Service 2003). Those sub- populations in the San Joaquin Valley, however, are most vulnerable having suffered near- devastating declines and possible extirpations over the last two decades (including populations in Stanislaus, Merced, Madera and Fresno Counties) (Dickert 2002, 2003; Hansen 1988; Williams and Wunderlich 2003). The southern sub-populations are extremely small, distributed discontinuously in isolated patches, and therefore are highly vulnerable to extinction by random environmental, demographic, and ‘genetic processes (Goodman 1987).

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 23
Habitat Requirements
Endemic to wetlands in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys, the giant garter snake inhabits marshes, sloughs, ponds, small lakes, low gradient streams, and other waterways and agricultural wetlands, such as irrigation and drainage canals, rice fields and the adjacent uplands (Service 2003). The snake feeds on small fishes, tadpoles, and frogs (Fitch 1941; Hansen 1988; Hansen and Brode 1980, 1993). Essential habitat components consist of: (1) wetlands with adequate water during the snake's active season (early-spring through mid-fall) to provide food and cover; (2) emergent, herbaceous wetland vegetation, such as cattails and bulrushes, for escape cover and foraging habitat during the active season; (3) upland habitat with grassy banks and openings in waterside vegetation for basking; and (4) higher elevation uplands for over-wintering habitat with escape cover (vegetation, burrows) and underground refugia (crevices and small mammal burrows) (Hansen 1988). Snakes are typically absent from larger rivers and other bodies of water that support introduced populations of large, predatory fish, and from wetlands with sand, gravel, or rock substrates (Hansen 1988; Hansen and Brode 1980; Rossman and Stewart 1987). Riparian woodlands do not provide suitable habitat because of excessive shade, lack of basking sites, and absence of prey populations (Hansen 1988).

Foraging Ecology
Giant garter snakes are the most aquatic garter snake species and are active foragers, feeding primarily on aquatic prey such as fish and amphibians (Fitch 1941). Historically, giant garter snake prey likely consisted of Sacramento blackfish (Orthodon microlepidots), thick-tailed chub (Gila crassicauda), and red-legged frog (Rana aurora) (Rossman et al. 1996; Service 2003).

Because these prey species are no longer available (chub extinct, red-legged frog extirpated from the Central Valley, blackfish declining) the predominant food items are now introduced species such as carp (Cyprinus carpio), mosquito-fish (Gambusia affinis), larval and sub-adult bullfrogs (Rana catesbiana), and Pacific chorus frogs (Pseudacris regilla) (Fitch 1941; Hansen and Brode 1993; Rossman et al. 1996).

Reproductive Ecology
The giant garter snake breeding season extends through March and April, and females give birth to live young from late July through early September (Hansen and Hansen 1990). Brood size is variable, ranging from 10 to 46 individual young, with a mean of 23 individuals (Hansen and Hansen 1990). At birth, young average about 8.1 inches (20.6 centimeters) snout-to-vent length and 3 to 5 grams. Although growth rates are variable, young typically more than double in size by one year of age, and sexual maturity averages three years in males and five years for females (Service 1993).

Movements and Habitat Use
The giant garter snake is highly aquatic but also occupies a terrestrial niche (Service 2003; Wylie et al. 2004a). Aquatic habitat includes remnant native marshes and sloughs, restored wetlands, low gradient streams, and agricultural wetlands including rice fields and irrigation and drainage canals. Terrestrial habitat includes adjacent uplands which provide areas for basking, retreats, and over-wintering. Basking takes place in tules, cattails, saltbush, and shrubs over-hanging the STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 24.
water, patches of floating vegetation including waterweed, on rice checks, and on grassy banks (Service 2003). The snake typically inhabits small mammal burrows and other soil and/or rock crevices during the colder months of winter (1.e., October to April) (Hansen and Brode 1993; Wylie et al. 1996; Wylie et al. 2003a). It also uses burrows as refuge from extreme heat during its active period (Wylie et al. 1997; Wylie et al. 2004a). While individuals usually remain in close proximity to wetland habitats, the Biological Resource Division of the U.S. Geological Survey (BRD) has documented snakes using burrows as much as 165 feet (50 meters) away from the marsh edge to escape extreme heat, and as far as 820 feet (250 meters) from the edge of marsh habitat for over-wintering habitat (Wylie er al. 1997). Snakes typically select burrows with sunny exposures along south and west facing slopes (Service 1993).

In studies of marked snakes in the Natomas Basin, snakes moved about 0.25 to 0.5 miles (0.4 to

0.8 kilometers) per day (Hansen and Brode 1993). Home range (area of daily activity) averages about 0.1 mile” (25 hectares) in both the Natomas Basin and the Colusa National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) (Wylie 1998a; Wylie et al. 2002). Total activity, however, varies widely between individuals; individual snakes have been documented to move up to 5 miles (8 kilometers) over a few days in response to dewatering of habitat (Wylie et al. 1997) and to use up to more than 8 miles (12.9 kilometers) of linear aquatic habitat over the course of a few months, and to have a home range as large as 14.5 miles” (3744 hectares) (Wylie and Martin 2004).

In agricultural areas, snakes were documented using rice fields in 19-20 percent of the observations, marsh habitat in 20-23 percent of observations, and canal and agricultural waterway habitats in 50-56 percent of the observations (Wylie 1998b). In the Natomas Basin, habitat used consisted almost entirely of irrigation ditches and established rice fields (Wylie 1998a; Wylie et al. 2004b). In the Colusa NWR, snakes were regularly found on or near edges of wetlands and ditches with vegetative cover (Wylie et al. 2003a). Telemetry studies also indicate that active snakes use uplands extensively; more than 31 percent of observations were in uplands (Wylie 1998b). Snakes observed in uplands during the active season were consistently near vegetative cover, particularly where cover exceeded 50 percent in the area within 1.6 feet (0.5 meter) of the snake (Wylie 1998b).

Snakes will move into restored habitat after two years. At the Colusa NWR, after two years, restoration area population estimates increased from 30 snakes per kilometer to 59-95 snakes per kilometer (Wylie et al. 2004a). At the Colusa Basin Drainage Canal, snakes were given three upland restoration treatments, 1) soil planted with native grasses over rock riprap, 2) soil planted with native grasses without rock, and 3) rock riprap only; snakes were most commonly found at the soil over rock mprap treatment (Wylie and Martin 2004).

Predators
Giant garter snakes are eaten by a variety of predators, including raccoons (Procyon lotor), striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis), opossums (Didelphis virginiansa), bull frogs (Rana catesbiana), hawks (Buteo sp.), egrets (Casmerodius albus, Egretta thula), and great blue herons (Ardea herodias) (Dickert 2003; Service 2003; Wylie et al. 2003c). Many areas supporting snakes have been documented to have abundant predators; however, predation does not seem to be a limiting factor in areas that provide abundant cover, high concentrations of prey items, and connectivity to a permanent water source (Hansen and Brode 1993; Wyhe et al. 1996). KN 16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael] Finan 25
Reasons for Decline and Threats to Survival
The current distribution and abundance of the giant garter snake is much reduced from former times (Service 2003). Less than 10 percent, or approximately 319,000 acres (129,000 hectares), of the historic 4.5 million acres (1.8 million hectares) of Central Valley wetlands remain (U.S. | Department of Interior 1994), of which very little provides habitat suitable for the giant garter snake. Loss of habitat due to agricultural activities and flood control have extirpated the snake from the southern one-third of its range in former wetlands associated with the historic Buena — Vista, Tulare, and Kern lakebeds (Hansen 1980; Hansen and Brode 1980). These lakebeds once supported vast expanses of ideal snake habitat, consisting of cattail and bulrush dominated marshes (Service 2003). Cattail and bulrush floodplain habitat also historically typified much of the Sacramento Valley (Hinds 1952). Prior to reclamation activities beginning in the mid- to late-1800s, about 60 percent of the Sacramento Valley was subject to seasonal overflow flooding providing expansive areas of snake habitat (Hinds 1952). Valley flood wetlands are now subject to cumulative effects of upstream watershed modifications, water storage and diversion projects, as well as urban and agricultural development.

The Central Valley Project (CVP), planned by the State of California, and built and operated by the Federal Bureau of Reclamation, is the largest water management system in California. CVP and the historic water development activities that preceded it have not only resulted in the loss of all but approximately 10 percent of wetlands, they have created an ecosystem altered to such an extent that remaining wetlands, like agriculture, depend on managed water (U.S. Department of Interior 1994). The historic disturbance events associated with seasonal inundation that occur naturally in dynamic riverine, riparian, and wetland ecosystems have been largely eliminated. In’ addition to the highly managed water regimes, implementation of CVP has resulted in conversion of native habitats to agriculture, and has facilitated urban development through the Central Valley (Service 2003). In 1992, Congress enacted the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA), the concerns of which include pricing and management of Central Valley water and attempting to mitigate for project impacts on fish, wildlife, and associated habitat. CVPIA, however, has been largely ineffective thus far, addressing primarily only the water needs of publicly-owned wetlands, which account for less than one-fourth of the wetlands in the Central Valley (Service 2003).

Residential and commercial growth with the Central Valley is consuming an estimated 15,000 acres of Central Valley farmland each year (American Farmland Trust 1999). In the future, this transformation is expected to accelerate. Rice fields have become important habitat for giant garter snakes, particularly associated canals and their banks for both spring and summer active behavior and winter hibernation (Hansen 2004). While within the rice fields, snakes forage in the shallow water for prey, utilizing rice plants and vegetated berms dividing rice checks for shelter and basking sites (Hansen and Brode 1993). The loss of rice land resulting from residential and commercial growth compounds the impact of direct habitat loss resulting from development itself.

Ongoing maintenance of aquatic habitats for flood control and agricultural purposes eliminates or prevents the establishment of habitat characteristics required by snakes (Hansen 1988). Such practices can fragment and isolate available habitat, prevent dispersal of snakes among habitat units, and adversely affect the availability of the snake’s food items (Hansen 1988; Brode and STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 26
Hansen 1992). For example, tilling, grading, harvesting and mowing may kill or injure giant garter snakes (Service 2003; Wylie et al. 1997). Biocides applied to control aquatic vegetation reduce cover for the snake and may harm prey species (Wylie et al. 1996). Rodent control threatens the snake’s upland estivation habitat (Wylie et al. 1996; Wylie et al. 2004a). .

Restriction of suitable habitat to water canals bordered by roadways and levee tops renders snakes vulnerable to vehicular mortality (Wylie ez al. 1997). Materials used in construction projects (e.g., erosion control netting) can entangle and kill snakes (Stuart et al. 2001). Livestock grazing along the edges of water sources degrades water quality and can contribute to the elimination and reduction of available quality snake habitat (Hansen 1988). Fluctuation in rice and agricultural production affects stability and availability of habitat (Wylie and Casazza 2001; Wylie et al. 2003b, 2004b).
_Other land use practices also currently threaten the survival of the snake. Nonnative predators, including introduced predatory game fish, bullfrogs, and domestic cats, can threaten snake populations (Dickert 2003; Wylie et al. 1996; Wylie et al. 2003c). Nonnative competitors, such as the introduced water snake (Nerodia fasciata) in the American River and associated tributaries near Folsom, may also threaten the giant garter snake (Stitt ef al. 2005). Recreational activities, such as fishing, may disturb snakes and disrupt basking and foraging activities. While large areas of seemingly suitable snake habitat exist in the form of duck clubs and waterfowl management areas, water management of these areas typically does not provide the summer water needed by the species. Degraded water quality continues to be a threat to the species both on and off refuges.

The disappearance of giant garter snakes from much of the west side of the San Joaquin Valley was approximately contemporaneous with the expansion of subsurface drainage systems in this area, providing circumstantial evidence that the resulting contamination of ditches and sloughs with drainwater constituents (principally selenium) may have contributed to the demise of giant garter snake populations. Dietary uptake is the principle route of toxic exposure to selenium in wildlife, including giant garter snakes (Beckon et al. 2003). Many open ditches in the northern San Joaquin Valley carry subsurface drainwater with elevated concentrations of selenium. Green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus) in this drainwater have been found to have concentrations of selenium ranging from 12 to 23 up/g (Saiki 1998), within the range of concentrations associated with adverse affects on predator aquatic reptiles (Hopkins et al. 2002). Since 1996, subsurface drainwater has been discharged, via the Grassland Bypass Project into Mud Slough North, where - selenium concentrations in small fish, including mosquito fish, frequently reach 10-15 pp/g (Beckon et al. 2003).

The Central Valley contains a number of endangered ecosystems due to its fertile soils, amiable climates, easy terrains, and other factors that historically have encouraged human settlement .and exploitation (Noss et al. 2003). Environmental impacts associated with urbanization include loss of biodiversity and habitat, alternation of natural fire regimes, fragmentation of habitat from road construction, and degradation due to pollutants (Service 2003). Rapidly expanding cities within the snake’s range include Chico, Yuba City, the Sacramento area, Galt, Stockton, Gustine, and Los Banos. :

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 27
Status with Respect to Recovery
The revised draft recovery plan for the giant garter snake subdivides its range into three proposed recovery units (Service 2003): (1) Northern Sacramento Valley Recovery Unit; (2) Southern Sacramento Valley Recovery Unit; and (3) San Joaquin Valley Recovery Unit.

The Northern Sacramento Valley Unit at the northern end of the species’ range contains sub- populations in the Butte Basin, Colusa Basin, and Sutter Basin (Service 2003). Protected snake habitat is located on State refuges and refuges of the Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) Complex in the Colusa and Sutter Basins. Suitable snake habitat is also found in low gradient streams and along waterways associated with rice farming. This northern most recovery unit is known to support relatively large, stable sub-populations of giant garter snakes (Wylie et al. 1996; Wylie et al. 2002; Wylie et al. 2004a). Habitat corridors connecting subpopulations, however, are either not present or not protected.

The Southern Sacramento Valley Unit includes sub-populations in the American Basin, Yolo Basin, and Delta Basin (Service 2003). The status of Southern Sacramento Valley sub- populations is very uncertain; each is small, highly fragmented, isolated, and threatened by urbanization (Hansen 2004; Service 2003; Wylie et al. 2004b). The American Basin sub- population, although threatened by urban development, receives protection from the Metro Air Park and Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plans, which share a regional strategy to maintain a viable snake sub-population in the basin. .

The San Joaquin Valley Unit includes sub-populations in the San Joaquin Basin and Tulare Basin. The San Joaquin Valley Unit formerly supported large snake populations, but numbers have severely declined, and recent survey efforts indicate numbers are extremely low compared to Sacramento Valley sub-populations (Dickert 2002, 2003; Wylie 1998a). Giant garter snakes:
currently occur in the northern and central San Joaquin Basin within the Grassland Wetlands, Mendota Area, and Burrel/Lanare Area. Agricultural and flood control activities are presumed to have extirpated the snake from the Tulare Basin (Hansen 1995); however, comprehensive surveys for this area are lacking and where habitat remains, the giant garter snake may be present _ (Service 2003).

Since 1995, BRD has been studying life history and habitat requirements of the giant garter snake within a few of the “13 populations” identified in the 1993 listing. BRD has studied snake sub- populations at the Sacramento, Delevan, and Colusa NWRs and in the Colusa Basin Drain within the Colusa Basin, at Gilsizer Slough within the Sutter Basin, at the Badger Creek area of the Cosumnes River Preserve within the Badger Creek/Willow Creek area of the Delta Basin, and in the Natomas Basin within the American Basin (Hansen 2003, 2004; Wylie 1998a, 1998b, 2003; Wylie et al. 1996; Wylie et al. 2002; Wylie et al. 2003a, 2004a; Wylie et al. 2003b, 2004b).

These areas contain the largest extant giant garter snake sub-populations. Outside of protected areas, however, snakes are still subject to all threats identified in the final rule. The other sub- populations are distributed discontinuously in small, isolated patches, and are vulnerable to extirpation by stochastic environmental, demographic, and genetic processes (Goodman 1987).

Until recently, there were no post-1980 sightings of giant garter snakes from Stockton southward, and surveys of historic localities conducted in 1986 did not detect any snakes (Hansen 1988).

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 28
Since 1995, however, surveys conducted by CDFG in cooperation with BRD around Los Banos and the Volta Wildlife Area in the Grasslands, and Mendota Wildlife Area in the Mendota Area have detected snakes, but in small numbers much lower than those found in Sacramento Valley sub-populations (Dickert 2002, 2003; Williams and Wunderlich 2003; Wylie 1998a). The estimated total population size for the Volta Wildlife Area is 45 individuals, approximately only

5.6 snakes per mile (3.5 snakes per kilometer). Such low numbers are illustrative of a tenuously small snake population. Also, one-third of the giant garter snakes found had lumps on their bodies suggestive of a parasitic nematode infection (Dickert 2003); further study is underway.

Ten of the 31 snakes found in 2003, however, weighed less than 40 grams indicating that giant garter snakes have been breeding at the Volta Wildlife Area. These results demonstrate that giant garter snakes are still extant in the northern San Joaquin Valley, but probably in extremely low numbers/densities. All sub-populations are isolated from each other with no protected dispersal corridors. Few opportunities for re-colonization of small sub-populations that may become extirpated exist given the isolation from larger populations and lack of dispersal corridors between them. .

The revised draft recovery criteria require multiple, stable sub-populations within each of the three recovery units, with sub-populations well-connected by corridors of suitable habitat. This entails that corridors of suitable habitat between existing snake sub-populations be maintained or created to enhance sub-population interchange to offset threats to the species (Service 2003).

Currently, only the Northern Sacramento Valley Recovery Unit is known to support relatively large, stable giant garter snake populations. Habitat corridors connecting sub-populations, even in the Northern Sacramento Valley Recovery Unit, are either not present or not protected.

Overall, the future availability of habitat in the form of canals, ditches, and flooded fields are subject to market-driven crop choices, agricultural practices, and urban development, and are, thus, uncertain and unpredictable.

Environmental Baseline
Delta Smelt
Two annual monitoring efforts, the Spring Kodiak Trawl (SKT) and the 20-mm surveys, document the distribution of delta smelt adults and larvae, respectively, in the Central and South Delta (CDFG 2007). In addition, salvage at the SWP and CVP are used as an indicator of delta smelt presence in the South Delta. Based on the available data, the Service is reasonably certain that the delta smelt occur within the action area.
* Distribution
_ Adult delta smelt movements upstream into the Delta from Suisun Bay starts in November/December and adults may be present through May. Salvage of adult delta smelt at the pumping facilities commonly occurs in January and occasionally in early December, showing known timing of movement of delta smelt into the South Delta. However, delta smelt likely to move into the Delta earlier than this. Salvage of adult delta smelt usually tapers off in April and rarely occurs after May. The annual SKT samples pelagic fish at several fixed stations in the Delta and usually starts in mid-January and ends in May. Stations within the Central and South Delta include stations located from the mouth of San Joaquin River through the Stockton Deep i STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 29
Chip Channel south to the City of Stockton, in Middle and Old Rivers, and in Franks Tract. Of these, station 906 is located Just downstream from the construction site while station 910 is located upstream (Figure 1).

The SKT surveys shows that the delta smelt can be distributed throughout the Central and South Delta, but the range and distribution of delta smelt vary widely between years. For instance, the 2007 SKT did not sample delta smelt at stations in the Central and South Delta while the 2004 SKT sampled delta smelt throughout the South Delta, including stations 906 and 910 (CDFG 2007). The factors affecting distribution may include flows in Old and Middle Rivers and flow changes in the San Joaquin River (USGS unpublished data). Further, there is a large inherent variation in the survey and the SKT may not be representative of distribution during low abundance. For instance, delta smelt were salvaged at the state and Federal pumping facilities in 2007 despite the failure to sample delta smelt in the SKT (CDFG 2007, Gartz in lit. 2007). This shows that some delta smelt had entered the South Delta in 2007. In addition, larvae may be sampled at upstream stations in the San Joaquin River even though no adult have been sampled at these stations. - .

Adult delta smelt is believed to spawn in the central Delta sloughs from February through August based on presence and growth rate of larvae. However, little is known of the microhabitat where spawning occurs but it has been assumed that the delta smelt spawn in shallow water areas having submersed aquatic plants and other suitable substrates and refugia. These shallow water areas have been identified in the Delta Native Fishes Recovery Plan (Recovery Plan) (Service 1996) as essential to the long-term survival and recovery of delta smelt and other resident fish. A no net loss strategy of delta smelt population and habitat is proposed in this Recovery Plan.

Once hatched, river flows and tides disperse and transport larvae throughout the Delta and eventually to the low salinity zone (2 parts per million) in the lower Delta and Suisun Bay. The CDFG annually conducts larvae and juvenile surveys, the 20-mm survey, at fixed stations throughout the Delta from March and into July (Figure 2). The survey, while collecting fish larvae less than 20 mm in size, is only fully efficient in collecting fish larvae that are of 20-mm length or longer. In early spring and summer, the delta smelt larvae and juveniles are found in . the San Joaquin, Old, and Middle Rivers; by Clifton Court forebay; Franks Tract; and by the mouth of the San Joaquin River. Larvae and juveniles are commonly collected in San Joaquin River just down stream of Empire Tract (station 906) and may be collected as far upstream as the Stockton Deep Water Channel by the City of Stockton (station 912). With the exception of 2006 and 2007, when no larvae where sampled in the south Delta, the 20-mm trawl has captured larvae in the South Delta starting mid-March. Delta smelt larvae/juveniles may continue to be sampled through July. However, by mid-June, the 20-mm trawl rarely samples juveniles at stations located by or upstream of Empire Tract (CDFG 2007). Results from the 20-mm trawl shows that the juveniles continue to grow in the Central and South Delta and the majority of juvenile delta smelt sampled are 20 mm or longer by mid-June.

The summer townet abundance index is conducted during June through August throughout the Delta and measures the abundance and distribution of juvenile delta smelt. Distribution data from this survey shows that the delta smelt in summer is concentrated around Susisun Bay with no delta smelt being sampled in the south Delta (CDFG 2007).

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 30
The delta smelt is adapted to living in the highly productive Estuary where salinity varies spatially and temporally according to tidal cycles and the amount of freshwater inflow. Despite this tremendously variable environment, the historical Estuary probably offered relatively consistent spring transport flows that moved delta smelt juveniles and larvae downstream to the mixing zone (Peter Moyle, U.C. Davis pers. comm.). Since the 1850’s, however, the amount and extent of suitable habitat for the delta smelt has declined dramatically. The advent in 1853 of hydraulic mining in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers led to increased siltation and alteration of the circulation patterns of the Estuary (Nichols et a/. 1986, Monroe and Kelly 1992).

The reclamation of Merritt Island for agricultural purposes, in the same year, marked the beginning of the present-day cumulative loss of 94 percent of the Estuary's tidal marshes (Nichols e¢ al. 1986, Monroe and Kelly 1992).

Abundance
The number of adult delta smelt entering the Central and South Delta vary between years, and is likely dependent on both the overall delta smelt abundance and the proportion of the overall population that enters the San Joaquin River portion of the delta relative to the Sacramento River portion. However, it seems reasonable to assume that overall abundance also will influence central and south Delta abundance. The summer townet (STN) survey abundance index has, except for three years since 1983 (1986, 1993, and 1994), remained at consistently lower levels than experienced previously (Figure 1). Besides measuring abundance and distribution, the summer townet abundance index also provides data on the recruitment potential of the species.

The fall midwater trawl (FMWT) provides an indication of the abundance of the adult population just prior to upstream spawning migration. Indicia for the delta smelt FMWT index can vary dramatically between years, e.g. the 1993 index was 1073 while the 1994 index dropped to 102 (Figure 2). Some of this variation is likely related to inherent variation in the sampling method.

However, as noted in the status of the species section, peak delta smelt indicia have been consistently lower after 1983 than pre 1983. Further, delta smelt indicia from 2001 to current have consistently been among the lowest ever recorded (Figure 1 and 2). The FMWT index does not provide information on specific areas of the Delta, and how the index relates to adult delta smelt abundance in the Central and South Delta is not clear.

The distribution of delta smelt in the Delta will also affect the abundance of the fish in the Central and South Delta. For instance, in 2004 adult delta smelt seemed distributed throughout the Delta, including station 906 and 910, while in 2007 most adult delta smelt were mainly found in Montezuma Slough, Sacramento River, and Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel of the north Delta (SKT survey: CDFG 2007). Thus, the combination of a very low overall population abundance and patchy distribution likely resulted in very low numbers of adult delta smelt in the South Delta during 2005/2006 and 2006/2007.

In addition to the degradation and loss of estuarine habitat, the delta smelt has been increasingly subject to entrainment, upstream or reverse flows of waters in the Delta and San Joaquin River, and constriction of low salinity habitat to deep-water river channels of the interior Delta (Moyle et al. 1992). These adverse conditions are primarily a result of drought and the steadily increasing proportion of river flow being diverted from the Delta by the CVP and SWP (Monroe and Kelly 1992). There is a relationship between the portion of the delta smelt population west of the Delta as sampled in the STN survey and the natural logarithm of Delta outflow from 1959 — STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 31
to 1988 (Department of Water Resources and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1994). This relationship indicates that the STN index increased dramatically when outflow was between 34,000 and 48,000 cfs which placed X2 between Chipps and Roe islands. Placement of X2 downstream of the Confluence, and Chipps and Roe islands provides delta smelt with low salinity and protection from entrainment, allowing for productive rearing habitat that increases both’smelt abundance and distribution. .

Giant Garter Snake

a
The proposed project is located within the Delta Basin snake population, in the Southern Sacramento Valley Recovery Unit (Service 2003). Twenty-five California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (2007) records are known from the Delta Basin. These records include Laguna Creek, Morrison Creek, Snodgrass Slough, Beach Lake, creeks in the City of Elk Grove, Badger and Willow Creeks, Consumnes River Preserve, Caldoni Marsh, White Slough, Duck Creek and other locations within the Basin.

During a field reconnaissance in April 2002, a giant garter snake was observed on the southwestern levee of Webb Tract. Since then, habitat evaluations and snake surveys have been conducted on Webb Tract and Bacon Island (Patterson 2004; Patterson and Hansen 2003).

Potential snake habitat in the area exists in the form of contiguous linear irngation canals and ditches. However, although both islands possess the essential snake habitat components, two years of surveys resulted in no further sightings or capture of giant garter snakes.

Recent genetic work on giant garter snake population structure indicates three genetic entities within the species which follow the pattern of subdivision revealed by the snake’s mitochondrial DNA and color pattern variants: north, central, and south (Paquin 2001). Interestingly, evidence of historical gene flow between northern and southern populations exists; however, mitochondrial DNA data reveal that the central population, analogous to the Delta Basin, is genetically isolated from both northern and southern populations. High frequencies of unique haplotypes in the central population increase the conservation value for the Delta Basin, particularly as a source for giant garter snake genetic diversity.

Laguna and Morrison Creek, Duck Creek, the Elk Grove creeks, as well as Beach Lake, Snodgrass Slough, Caldoni Marsh, White Slough and associated tributaries, are important snake habitat and movement corridors for the animal. Such waterways and associated wetlands provide vital permanent aquatic and upland habitat for snakes in areas with otherwise limited habitat.

The recovery strategy for the snake includes maintenance and/or creation of habitat corridors between existing sub-populations to enhance population interchange and offset threats to the species (Service 2003).

None of the potential habitat in the Action Area has been surveyed for the presence of giant garter snakes. According to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB 2007), a giant garter snake skin was found on Medford Island, approximately 1.5 miles away from the proposed intake structure. CNDDB contains records of giant garter snakes at the White Slough Wildlife Management Area and Caldoni Marsh, approximately 2.5 miles north of Eight Mile Road. These occurrences are presumed to be extant. A giant garter snake was observed in. 1976 at the intersection of Eight Mile Road and the Western Pacific Railroad tracks in the immediate vicinity STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 32
of the pipeline construction area. The current status of this occurrence is unknown.

Snakes have been documented to move up to 5 miles (8 kilometers) over a few days in response to dewatering of habitat (Wylie et al. 1997) and to use up to more than 8 miles (12.9 kilometers) of linear aquatic habitat over the course of a few months, and to have a home range as large as

14.5 miles” (3744 hectares) (Wylie and Martin 2004). Although giant garter snakes are typically absent from larger rivers (R. W. Hansen 1980, Rossman and Stewart 1987, Brode 1988, G.

Hansen 1988), individuals may occur in the San Joaquin River that have been washed down during heavy rainfall events from ditches and sloughs at higher elevations. The action area contains habitat components that can be used by the snake for feeding, resting, mating, and other - essential behaviors, as well as for a movement corridor. Because of the biology and ecology of the snake, the presence of suitable habitat within the proposed project, and observations of the species, the Service has determined that the snake is reasonably certain to occur within the action area.

Factors Affecting the Snake within the Action Area:

The overall status of the giant garter snake has not improved since its listing. Based on scarcity of suitable habitat and limited population size, at listing, threats to the Delta Basin population were considered imminent (Service 1993). The status of the Delta Basin sub-population has been, and continues to be, impacted by past and present Federal, state, private, and other human activities.

A number of State, local, private, and unrelated Federal actions have occurred within the action area and adjacent regions affecting the environmental baseline of the species. Some of these projects have been subject to prior section 7 consultation. These actions have resulted in both direct and indirect effects to snake habitat within the region. Projects affecting the environment in and around the action area include the improvement of the Northgate Boulevard/Arden-Garden Connector Intersection, the widening of Bond Road, construction of the Interstate 5/Consumnes River Boulevard Interchange, the Freeport Regional Water Diversion project, the Rivermont Drive Bridge project, the Rio Vista Northwest Wastewater Treatment project, the widening of Calvine Road, and the Kramer Ranch North project. In the past ten years, the Service has authorized take resulting in the permanent loss of more than 21 acres (9 hectares) of aquatic and 53 acres (22 hectare) of upland snake habitat, as well as temporary alteration of over 1,700 acres (688 hectares) of aquatic and 650 acres (263 hectares) of upland snake habitat in the Delta Basin.

Numerous recent development projects have been constructed in or near snake habitat in the rapidly developing areas in and around the cities of Sacramento, Elk Grove, Galt, and Stockton.

Urban and commercial development results in direct habitat loss and also may expose snakes to secondary effects including water pollution from urban run-off and increased vehicular mortality, both of which act in concert with rapid habitat loss and degradation to further threaten the snake in the Delta Basin. Also, development promotes road widening and bridge replacements, such as those authorized under section 7, which result in direct alteration of snake habitat. Most documented snake localities and/or movement corridors have been adversely impacted by development, including freeway construction, flood control projects, and commercial development. Further, several former localities are known to have been lost and/or depleted to that extent that continued viability is in question (Brode and Hansen 1992). The scarcity’ ot 16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 33
remaining suitable habitat, flooding, stochastic processes, and continued threats of habitat loss pose a severe imminent threat to giant garter snakes in the Delta Basin.

Ongoing agricultural and flood control activities in the Delta Basin may decrease and degrade the remaining snake habitat affecting the environmental baseline for the snake. Such activities are largely not subject to section 7 consultation. Although rice fields and agricultural waterways can provide valuable seasonal foraging and upland habitat for the snake, agricultural activities such as waterway maintenance, weed abatement, rodent control, and discharge of contaminants into wetlands and waterways can degrade snake habitat and increase the risk of snake mortality (Service 2003). On-going maintenance of agricultural waterways can also eliminate or prevent establishment of snake habitat, eliminate food resources for the snake, and fragment existing habitat and prevent dispersal of snakes (Service 2003).

Flood control and maintenance activities which can result in snake mortality and degradation of habitat include levee construction, stream channelization, and rip-rapping of streams and canals (Service 2003). Flood control programs are administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and the Corps has typically consulted on previous projects and is expected to continue to do so for future projects. The ongoing nature of these activities and the administration under various programs, however, makes it difficult to determine the continuing and accumulative effects of these activities.

In addition to projects already discussed, projects affecting the environment in and around the action area include transportation projects with Federal, county, or local involvement. The Federal Highway Administration and/or the Corps have consulted with the Service on the issuance of wetland fill permits for several transportation-related projects within the Delta Basin that affected snake habitat. The direct effect of these projects is often small and localized, but the effects of transportation projects, which improve access and therefore indirectly affect snakes by facilitating further development of habitat in the area and by increasing snake mortality via vehicles, are not quantifiable.

Effects of the Proposed Project on Delta Smelt and its Critical Habitat The effects of the proposed project will fall into two main categories: the short-term construction related effects and the persistent long-term effects of the DWSP operations. The short-term effects are related to construction of facilities and pipelines, long-term effects relates to diversion of Delta water and loss of habitat at the DWSP intake.

Construction of DWSP Facilities

Construction of the DWSP intake includes dredging of the river channel bottom and bank, installation of wing walls and a cofferdam, application of rock rip-rap to the wing walls, and dewatering of the construction zone. These construction activities could adversely affect delta smelt by entrainment, injury or death by high energy sound waves, and by mobilizing sediment.

As noted above, about 6,700 cubic yards of material will be dredged and this activity could result in dredging equipment entraining delta smelt, resulting in injury or death. However, the project’s in-water work is of short duration (i.e. expected to last approximately 11 weeks) and 1s scheduled to occur from July 1 through November 30. This will minimize effects from construction since STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
7 Mr. Michael Finan 34
delta smelt is not expected to be present or be present in small numbers in the San Joaquin River during the period from August through November. However, delta smelt are commonly present in June and July and some delta smelt may be present year round. Further, if the timeline of the construction activities slip so that construction is initiated later in the work window, the risk of exposing delta smelt to adverse conditions of the construction activities increase due to the higher probability of delta smelt entering the action area a during upstream spawning movements starting in early winter.

Disturbance and Loss of Habitat
Construction of the intake structure would involve the limited dredging of material in the San Joaquin River and adjacent levee and placing fill including concrete and mprap. Approximately 6,900 cubic yards of material will be dredged and about 2133 cubic yards of fill will be placed in the San Joaquin River. The maximum permanent impact to riverine and shallow water habitat is anticipated to be 0.44 acre. Approximately 761 linear feet of San Joaquin River shoreline would be affected.

The removal of shallow water edge habitat and riparian vegetation, sources of zooplankton and maroinvertebrate production, respectively, may result in the loss of foraging opportunities. It may also cause a reduction in shade that would contribute to increased water temperatures within the San Joaquin River, providing increased susceptibility to disease and introduced species competition. Increased erosion after removal of riparian vegetation would lead to sedimentation in the aquatic environment. These factors may result in reduced viability for the delta smelt.

SJCOG will use the fees that the City of Stockton paid to participate in the SJMSCP to purchase similar habitat and manage this habitat for the benefit of the covered species to compensate for the effects from the construction of the intake structure.

Effects of Sediment Mobilization and Contaminants
Dredging and pile driving will mobilize sediment and this can be harmful to delta smelt, their prey species, and the habitat they depend on. In-water construction would be isolated by a cofferdam and consequently minimize effects from mobilized sediment on delta smelt.

However, preconstruction dredging and cofferdam construction are expected to temporarily increase suspended sediment concentrations within a localized area of the lower San Joaquin River. The area temporarily affected would be about 5.7 acres in size (approximately 250 feet wide and 1,000 feet long, based on experience at the recently constructed fish screen in the Sacramento River). These effects would occur for about 60 days for about eight to 10 hotrs per day, when cofferdam construction activity may disturb sediments and increase turbidity. The proposed instream work window for the DWSP intake, July 1 to November 30, will minimize the duration that delta smelt exposure to mobilized sediments.

Increased turbidity can harm fish directly by damaging gills or indirectly by reducing a fish’s ability to detect and avoid a predator. However, the activity is expected to increase turbidity level with less than ten percent of background level. Smelt species distribution is commonly associated with higher turbidity water and it is unlikely that a ten percent increase above existing background levels will adversely affect the delta smelt.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 35
Bottom sediment may also contain toxins (Hunt et a/. 2001) that could be mobilized during dredging. For instance, substances found in sediment from the San Joaquin River and its tributaries include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and DDT and its degradates (Pereira et al. 1996). Suspended sediments contained elevated amounts of chlordane, a chemical group widely applied for control of termites and other pests until the late 1980s, while trace levels of triazine herbicides atrazine, and simazine were present in the water at most sites. Hunt et al. (2001) found chlordane and a variety of other compounds in sediment throughout the Delta at levels toxic to aquatic organisms, and Werner et al. (2000) identified significant mortality and reproductive toxicity in zooplankton that were consistent with level of pesticides in the water samples. An immense variety of substances could also be introduced during accidental spills of materials. Such spills can result from small containers falling over, or from accidents resulting in whole loads being spilled. Large spills may be partially or completely mitigated by clean-up efforts, depending on the substance.

Exposure pathways to contaminants include uptake through gills, dermal contact, direct ingestion, ingestion of contaminated soil or plants, or consumption of contaminated prey.

Exposure to contaminants could cause short- or long-term morbidity, possibly resulting in reduced productivity or mortality. Carcinogenic substances could cause genetic damage resulting in sterility, reduced productivity, or reduced fitness among progeny. Contaminants also may have the same effect on prey species. This could result in reduced prey abundance and diminished local carrying capacity. The effects of contaminants may be difficult to detect.

Morbidity or mortality likely would occur after the animals had left the contaminated site, and more subtle effects such as genetic damage could only be detected through intensive study and monitoring.

Based on delta smelt surveys by the CDFG, delta smelt are expected to either not be present at the construction site or be present in very low numbers during the period from August through October (CDFG 2007). Thus, delta smelt exposure to mobilized sediment from instream activities will be limited to larvae and juveniles in July and adult delta smelt in November. Even during those times only a low number of delta smelt, a fraction of the population, would be expected to be exposed to sediment mobilization related to construction activities. Ifthe construction schedule is changed, then a considerably lager number of delta smelt could be exposed. Dredging and pile driving could result in a reduction in prey since the level of contaminants in the Delta could be toxic to zooplankton (Werner et al. 2000, Hunt et al. 2001).

However, prey species such as zooplankton is expected to be replaced by upstream sources, surrounding sloughs and shallow water habitat, or be brought in from downstream areas by tidal movement by the time of delta smelt up-estuary movements in late fall/early winter. The area expected to be affected by the sediment plume is small relative to the total area of the south Delta and any effect on aquatic organisms is not expected to result in a measurable overall reduction in food available for delta smelt. .

Effects of Acoustic Noise from Pile Driving
The installation of the sheet pile cofferdam and wing walls along the perimeter of the intake structure work zone will require the use of a percussion pile driver or vibratory pile driver to drive the steel sheet into the substrate of the river bottom. The wing walls will extend out 60 feet from the existing levee bank into the channel of the San Joaquin River at an angle. The , STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 36
cofferdam will close off the mouth of the intake structure, allowing the workspace behind it to be dewatered. Following the installation and dewatering of the work area, concrete pilings will be driven into the excavated work area to support the intake structure and fish screen racks.

High levels of acoustic noise have been shown to have adverse effects upon fish within close proximity of the noise source. The City has indicated that the pile driving activity for the sheet pile installation will take place over a period of three weeks. Sheet and concrete piles are driven into the substrate until predetermined level of resistance is encountered by the hammer. Energy transferred to the pile by the hammer ts partially redirected as acoustic energy and heat as the pile loses energy to the surrounding medium (1.e., soil or rock). The energy can be transmitted directly from the piles to the surrounding water, via air surrounding the pile to the water, or being transmitted through the soil to the water column.

As sound propagates away from the source, several factors change its amplitude (Burgess and Blackwell 2003). These factors include spreading of the sound wave over a wider area (spreading loss), sound energy waves transition from one medium to another (e.g. from air to _ water), loss to friction between the water or sediment particles that vibrate with the passing sound wave (absorption), scattering and reflection from boundaries and objects in the sound’s path, and constructive and destructive interference with reflections of the sound off surfaces such as the seafloor or water surface. The sound level measured at any give point along the path or the propagated sound wave includes all of these effects and is termed the received level. Thus, variables that affect the received level include the distance from the source, the density of the media such as saltwater versus freshwater (1.e., salinity), the amount of air in the water, bottom substrate composition and texture, salinity stratification and size and number of waves on the water surface, objects in the sound waves path, and ambient noise. Because of the many variables affecting propagation and loss of sound energy, it is difficult to estimate the sound level that will be measured at any given point.

The project location has several factors which may alter the transmission of the propagated sound waves into the channel of the San Joaquin River during the pile driving activities. The channel depth varies over a wide range in the reach adjacent to the project site. Along the levee bank, the depth drops of rapidly to approximately 20 feet in depth. The dredged ship channel, which is approximately 35 feet deep at low tide, passes to the south of the project site. These changes in bottom contours will create conditions that will attenuate the propagation of sound through the channel (null spots). In addition, ambient noise from the river flow, boat traffic, and irregular surfaces such as the rip rapped surface of the levees may create additional acoustic signals that muffle or cancel out the acoustic signal from the pile driving actions (masking). Installation of _the concrete support pilings for the intake structure is anticipated to take place in dewatered work area behind the cofferdam. The dewatered cofferdam is expected to provide for sound attenuation and the acoustic noise derived from the pile driving of the concrete support piles is expected to primarily be propagated through the soil to the aquatic environment, rather than through the air.

Based on previous results from pile driving, the Service believes that the source acoustic signal will be in excess of 180 decibel (dB)(re: 1 Pa) for percussion hammers. Data derived from concrete piles driven at the Pier 95 Amport facility and the Concord Naval Weapons Depot in Susisun Bay both indicated pile driving noise levels exceeded 170 to 180 dB re: 1 uPa 10 meters STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 7 37
from the pile at three meters depth. A report by Burgess and Blackwell (2003) indicated that vibratory installation of a sheet pile wall in upland position generated sound levels of approximately 140 dB re: 1 re: 1 wPa in the adjacent waterway at a distance of 200 feet, indicating that noise was transmitted through the soil to the water column. All underwater sound measurements discussed in this document are in reference to 1 re: 1 Pa and thus the reference to 1 re: 1 Pa will be omitted hereafter.

High underwater sound pressure levels have been known to cause swim bladder rupture, hemorrhaged eyes and internal organs, loss of hearing, temporary stunning, and alterations in behavior of fish (e.g., Yelverton et al. 1975; Turnpenny et al. 1994; Hastings ef al. 1996a and b).

However, Hastings and Popper (2005, 2006) concluded, based on an extensive literature review, that the available scientific and commercial data are inadequate for providing more than very preliminary conclusions on the effects of pile driving noise on fish.

Sound is the major form of communication underwater, so a functioning auditory system is believed to be essential for fish to survive. Damage to the auditory system may adversely affect a delta smelt’s ability to orient itself, detect predators, locate prey, or sense their acoustic environment. Little is known about the effect of pile driving on the auditory system of fish and hearing damage depends on the auditory threshold, which varies from species to species. - However, studies show that elevated sound can affect the hearing capabilities of fish much the same way as for other vertebrae. Experiments exposing oscar (Astronotus ocellatus) to continuous sound for one hour at 180 dBoeak at 300 Hz found destruction of sensory cells in the fish’s inner ear (Hastings et al. 1996b). McCauley ef a/. (2003) found indication that high- energy noise sources (at approximately 180 dBmax) can ablate the sensory hairs on the inner ear epithelial tissue of pink snapper (Chrysophrys auratus).

Sound pressure waves from pile driving can result in damage and injury to organs and tissue of fish. Fishes with swimbladders (which include the delta smelt) are sensitive to underwater impulsive sounds (1.e., sounds with a sharp sound pressure peak occurring in a short interval of time) because of swimbladder resonance, which is believed to occur in the frequency band of most sensitive hearing (usually 200 to 800 Hz). Pathologies associated with very high sound levels are collectively known as barotraumas.

Barotraumas include hemorrhage and rupture of internal organs, including the swimbladder and kidneys of the fish. The injury is caused as sound waves passes through the fish, thereby resulting in the resonance of the fish swimbladder. The swimbladder is a gas-filled organ in the center of the body cavity bordered by the kidney above and the liver and other internal organs below. Because of the acoustic impedance of aquatic animal tissue nearly matches that of water, sound energy from an underwater source readily enters their body. As the sound wave passes through the fish, the swimbladder starts to resonance resulting in rhythmic expansion and retraction of the swimbladder. At relatively low sound levels the swimbladder expands and retract without causing damage. At high sound pressure levels associated with pile driving; the abrupt and repeated expansion and retraction of the swimbladder hammer internal organs, tear at adjacent connected tissue, and rupture capillaries. oe
Another mechanism of injury and death is “rectified diffusion,” which is the formation and growth of bubbles in tissue caused by oscillation in the sound pressure as the sound wave passes STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 38
the fish. The acoustic oscillation causes bubble growth in tissue because of the rapid change in pressure much like diver’s disease or bends. As the pressure wave passes though the fish, the high pressure component of the wave shifts to the low pressure component causing gases dissolved in the blood or tissue to come out of physical solution and form gas bubbles. These bubbles increase in size as pressure waves continues to pas through the fish and will eventually cause inflammation, cellular damage, and blockage or rupture of capillaries, veins, and arteries.

Hastings (2002) expects little to no physical damage to aquatic animals for peak sound pressures below 190 dB, the threshold for rectified diffusion. However, much uncertainty exists as to the level of adverse effects to fish exposed to sound between 180 and 190 dBpea due to species- specific variables.

Recent pile driving experiments using juvenile steelhead (O. mykiss) and surfperch (family Embiotocidae) found no barotraumas with exposure to peak sound pressure levels as high as 211 dB (Caltrans 2004) and no statistically significant mortality at sound exposure levels (SEL) as high as 182 dB re: 1yPa’s (Caltrans 2004). Interim recommendations by Popper et al. (2006) suggest using a combined single strike criteria for pile driving noise; a peak sound pressure of 208 dBpeak and an SEL of 187 dB 1uPa’s. However, the effects to fishes of the high sound pressure levels produced by impact driving of piles depend on several factors, including the size and species of fish. Smaller fish are commonly more vulnerable to injury from sound pressure waves than larger fish. Most studies on the effect on fish and threshold sound pressure levels in California have been centered on regulations based on protection of salmonids. Depending on the time of pile driving, delta smelt in the channel adjacent to the pile driving will range in size from about 30 mm in July to 40 to 70 mm adults in November. Thus, it is expected that the effect on the delta smelt will be higher than that on the larger juvenile salmonids. Based on this information and that more information is needed to understand the effect of pile driving on delta smelt and fish in general, the Service has established the threshold for physical harm at 180 dBpeax for this project. Thus, driving of sheet piles and concrete piles is expected to injure or kill any delta smelt that are present within the channel at the project location during pile driving.

In addition to direct trauma, introduction of sound into aquatic environments may mask important signals as well as elevate stress levels, thereby affecting fitness and increasing likelihood of predation (Hastings and Popper 2005). Sound pressure levels expressed as “‘root- miean-squared” (rms) values are commonly used in behavioral studies. Sound pressure levels in excess Of 150 dBrms are expected to cause temporary behavioral changes such as elicitation of a startle response or behavior associated with stress. These sound pressure levels are not expected to cause direct permanent injury, but may decrease a fish’s ability to avoid predators.

Observations by Feist, et al. (1992) suggest that sound levels in this range may disrupt normal migratory behavior of juvenile salmon. They also noted that when exposed to the sounds from pile driving, juvenile pink and chum salmon were less likely to startle and flee when approached by an observer than were those that were shielded from the sounds. Sound may similarly affect the delta smelt. Based on this information, the Service has established the threshold for behavioral disruption at 150 dBms for the proposed DWSP project.

Effects of dewatering _
Once the sheet piles are established, the City proposes to dewater the work area enclosed by the cofferdam. Delta smelt may enter the work area behind the cofferdam before the cofferdam is STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 39
completed. Thus, as the cofferdam is dewatered, delta smelt enclosed by the cofferdam will succumb. To minimize loss of listed species during dewatering, the City proposes to capture and relocate fish within the cofferdam as it is dewatered. However, capture, handle, transport, and release of the delicate delta smelt may also result in some injury or mortality and expose the fish to predators as they are released back into the river. The delta smelt is also likely to be disoriented when released, thereby increasing their vulnerability to predators. Thus, even though capturing and relocating the fish will reduce loss, the proposed dewatering is still expected to result in some mortality of delta smelt if present within the cofferdam. However, delta smelt is not expected to be present at the intake site if construction activities are conducted during the proposed work window.

Operation of the DWSP Intake

Operation of the DWSP Intake facility will affect the delta smelt directly through entrainment of fish and indirectly by changes in hydrology. The former will be localized and concentrated to delta smelt in the near vicinity of the intake while the latter could affect delta smelt throughout the South and Central Delta.

Effects of Entrainment
The fish screen for the DWSP were designed utilizing the criteria recommended for protection of juvenile salmonids and delta smelt (Service 1995, CDFG 2000b). The flat plate style fish screens will be installed at a slight angle from vertical, facilitating cleaning and debris removal. It will be oriented parallel to the ambient flow in the river for both upstream and downstream directions of tidal flow (i.e., essentially parallel to the bank). Transitions from the upstream and downstream wing walls will be constructed so as to minimize the creation of eddies or turbulent flow that could concentrate delta smelt or provide a predator holding zone for ambush attacks of delta smelt passing by the screen. The screen is designed to have an approach velocity equal to or less than 0.2 fps (~ 6 cm/s). Tuning vanes behind the screen will 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 will be designed to have openings no more than 1.75 mm wide.

The fish screen’s 1.75 mm screen mesh is expected to exclude from the intake delta smelt that. are 25-mm long or longer. Thus, operating the DSWP intake will directly affect the delta smelt .by entraining delta smelt less than 25-mm long (larvae) and impinging larger delta smelt to the fish screen (juveniles and adults). To minimize impingement fish screen is designed to meet criterion for protection of delta smelt with approach velocities not exceeding 0.2 fps and sweeping velocities exceeding 0.4 fps (~ 12 cm/s) (Service 1995, CDFG 2000b).

Effects to Juvenile and Adult Delta Smelt. The degree at which 25-mm long or longer delta smelt will contact and impinging with the fish screen and consequently be injured depends on the exposure time to the screen, screen approach and sweeping velocity, and the behavior of the fish (Swanson et al. 2005, White et al. 2007). Studies of fish behavior to the flow plume in experimental chambers showed that delta smelt at 40 to 60 mm length swam against the water current in near-screen flows and that the fish increased their swimming efforts as a response to higher sweeping velocities (Swanson et al. 1998, 2005). The fish also swam faster (more effort) STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 40
during day than during the night. In the experiments, delta smelt were transported with the cutrent when sweeping velocities exceeded their swimming capacity. Consequently, the time it takes for a delta smelt to pass by a screen of a finite length is related to sweeping velocity, and screen passage velocity should be higher during night than during day. However, delta smelt also swam Closer to the channel bottom and farther away from the screen at higher sweeping velocities, probably seeking a velocity refuge (Swanson et al. 1998). Thus it seems like the fish at times are trying to hold position against the current by increasing swimming velocity and seeking areas with less water velocity.

The exposure time to the proposed DWSP intake fish screen can be estimated based on the sweeping velocity and length of the fish screen. For the 30 mgd build out, the fish screen needs to be a minimum 235 square feet large to achieve an approach velocity of 0.2 fps at the pumping rate of 47 cfs (CDFG 2000). Thus, the Service estimates the screen will be from: 15- to 30-foot long. The designed sweeping velocity for the Stockton DWSP is 0.4 fps. However, due to tidal flow in the San Joaquin River at the site of the DWSP, the sweeping velocity can only be met approximately 80 to 85 percent of the time at the intake site. These departures from the necessary sweeping velocity occur during slack tide periods when the tidal flow changes from flood tide to ebb tide. The amount of time during the day when the sweeping flow does not meet the design criteria of the fish screen is equal to approximately four hours, with approximately two hours of not demonstrable sweeping velocity at all (15 minutes of slack water before and after the peak tidal oscillation, four times a day). The designed sweeping velocities are at or lower than the expected swimming velocity for delta smelt. Thus, an adult delta smelt is expectedto maintain position during targeted sweeping flows or move against the flow. Estimated maximum screen passage velocity for an adult delta smelt (1.e., the distance the fish move along the screen per time unit) during the day at zero sweeping velocity is about 20 cm/s (Swanson et al. 2005).

This relates to a minimum exposure time of two and a half minutes for an adult delta smelt swimming along a 30-meter long screen during tidal change. At night, under experimental conditions with sweeping flows of 0 cm/s, delta smelt maintained their position or moved pass the screen at an “upstream” direction at a velocity of about 10 cm/s (Swanson ef al. 2005). At sweeping velocities of 31 and 62 cm/s, delta smelt was carried with the currents at higher screen passage velocities during night than during the day. Thus, the delta smelt is expected to be exposed to the screen for a substantially longer duration during the night than during the day.

The delta smelt is also expected to show some behavioral response to tidal fluctuations (Bennett et al. 2002). Adult delta smelt moving upstream to spawn are believed to use the tidal fluctuation to support upstream movement. Delta smelt are believed to move into the water column and swim with the current during flood tide and hold position by swimming against the current during ebb tide. The delta smelt may also move closer to the bottom or banks to seek velocity refuge during ebb tide. Thus, the delta smelt is expected to be briefly exposed to the DSWP intake during flood tide while they may be exposed to the intake for considerable time during ebb tide.

Fish close to the fish screen are exposed to periodic contact with the screen and may be impinged against it. Experiments in the Fish Treadmill at the University of California, Davis, exposed delta smelt to a simulated fish screen in a large annular flume (Swanson et al. 1998, 2005; White et al. 2007). Delta smelt experienced brief contact with the screen at all flow treatments and screen contact rates increased with both approach and resultant velocity (the vector sum of the , STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 4]
sweeping and approach velocities). However, contact duration was shorter in the absence of sweeping flow than under high-velocity flow conditions (White et al. 2007). Contact rates increased during night, consistent with the observed reduction in swimming velocity, but not with temperature (Swanson et al. 2005). Mean contact rate with a 6 cm/s approach velocity and 31 cm/s (~ 1.0 fps) sweeping velocity ranged from 0.023 to 0.047 contacts per fish per minute (White et al. 2007). At zero sweeping velocity the contact-rate was 0.028. Most delta smelt — contacted the screen broadside with the tail first. In 34 percent of recorded incidents, the fish impacted the screen head first (White et al. 2007).

The behavioral response to the simulated fish screen and experimental velocities was somewhat similar to what has been observed with juvenile Chinook salmon. However, the two species differed markedly in their response to flow velocities and effects of screen contact and injuries. - Contact with the screen decreased with increasing flow and swimming velocity for Chinook salmon while it increased for delta smelt; delta smelt also experienced more high velocity screen contact. The difference may be a result of swimming behavior and strength between the two species. Further, while the rate of contact for Chinook salmon during might was similar to contact rate for delta smelt during day, delta smelt sustained more injuries and had a higher mortality rate. Injuries included scale loss, fin damage, abrasions, hemorrhage, and stress. The magnitude of injury to delta smelt depended on the frequency of contact and severity of contact, the former being a function of exposure time and flow and the latter mainly of approach velocity (Swanson et al. 1998, 2005). However, low injury rate was sustained at velocity treatments similar to design flows proposed for the DWSP and no fish were impinged. Based on results from the Fish Treadmill studies, Swanson et al. (2005) estimated five percent mortality at night and zero mortality during day for a 100 meter long screen with approach and sweeping velocities similar to the designed flow for the DWSP intake fish screen. The mortality rate may, however, be higher for fish smaller than those used in these experiments.

The mainstem San Joaquin River channel at the intake location is about 600 feet wide at its narrowest point and only delta smelt a few feet from the screen will be in danger of being impinged on the fish screen. The face of the intake with the screen will provide a vertical clean surface to a depth of 15 feet and therefore not provide habitat features that would attract delta smelt. Since delta smelt is expected to use the open water of the river channel, only a fraction of juvenile and adult delta smelt using the channel will be directly affected by the proposed DWSP intake.

Larvae Delta Smelt. The length of time a larvae is exposed to the fish screen is based on the sweeping velocity and the length of the fish screen. With an estimated fish screen length of 30 feet the estimated exposure time will be 75 seconds based on the 0.4 sweeping velocity. The distance a passive particle is affected by the water intake is a function of pumping capacity and the effective surface. area that the particle is passing through, which determine the approach velocity of particles at different distances from the screen face under different pumping rates.

The City estimates that the area of influence for a passively drifting delta smelt larvae is two feet or closer from the screen (ESA 2006b).

The number of larvae entrained at the DWSP intake location will depend on the volume of water being diverted and the average number of larvae or juveniles in a given volume of water (i.e., delta smelt density) at any given time. Larvae density near the proposed DWSP diversion will,

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 4?
vary from year to year according to overall numbers of-delta smelt in the Delta and the proportion of females spawning in the central and south Delta. However, the proportion of the total population presented at the intake location is expected to be low. For instance, a total of 102 delta smelt were sampled,in the 20-mm trawl at the station near the proposed diversion site (station 906: Figure 4) in 1999 but this represented only 10 percent of the 1,020 delta smelt sampled in the whole of the Delta the same year. Similarly in a year with low abundance, such as 2005, only 5 delta smelt were collected at station 906 by the 20-mm trawl compared to a total of 598 delta smelt larvae sampled for the whole Delta.

Number of delta smelt larvae and juveniles collected in the 20-mm trawl usually peaks late April and early May (Stern in lit. September 5, 2006). The proposed reduction in pumping between March 15 to April 15 and between May 21 and June 20 and closedown of pumps between April 16 and May 20 will significantly reduce delta smelt exposure to water diversions. For instance, in 2005 larvae were collected at stations 906 and 910 between March 14 and May 23, the period when pumping restrictions would have been in place. During the years of survey, larvae have never been collected at station 906 after June 21 (DFG 2007).

The size of larva fish vulnerable to entrainment at a fish screen is a function of the slot opening of the screen mesh and size (length and depth) of the fish. Entrainment of delta smelt larvae at fish screens has not been studied, and the relationship between fish length and the effectiveness of various mesh openings in physically excluding fish from entrainment differs for fish species with different body shapes. Hanson Environmental and ESA (Stern in lit. February 24, 2006 — Attachment B) therefore used the data developed for larval bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli) to analyze entrainment of delta smelt larvae at the DWSP intake since larvae of this species resembles the body shape of delta smelt.

Stern (in lit. February 24, 2006 — Attachment B) assumed that screens with a 2 mm screen mesh will exclude zero percent of delta smelt larvae 4 mm long or less, 56 percent of larvae 5 to 7 mm long, 78 percent of larvae 8 to 10 and 11 to 14 mm long, and 80 percent of larvae 15 mm and greater in length. Using results from the CDFG 20-mm surveys and the Delta Smelt Larvae Survey (DSLS) conducted in 2005, Hanson Environmental and ESA (2006) estimated that the highest larvae densities in the vicinity of the proposed DWSP intake occurred between mid- March to mid-June. Applying these results to delta smelt and using larvae densities recorded | from CDFG's 20-mm surveys, Hanson Environmental, Inc. calculated entrainment of different size classes assuming a curtailment of pumping from April 15 to May 15 and a diversion of 100.6 AF/day for the remaining year (Stern in lit. February 24, 2006 — Attachment B)(Table 1).

However, the number entrained is expected to be substantially lower because Hanson Environmental, Inc. did not include a lowered pumping rate from March 15 to April 15 and from May 16 to June 15 or the proposed 100 percent curtailment that extended to May 20. Given calculations based on the 20-mm survey data and two 50 percent curtailment periods, an average of 1,247 delta smelt would have been entrained each year from 1995 through 2006 with a range of 0 delta smelt in 1995, 1998, and 2006 to 3,690 delta smelt in 1999. The number of larvae being entrained is expected to be somewhat proportional to overall abundance of the seasons overall spawning abundance indicated by the FMWT index (Table 2). During the years 2002 to 2006, the period of reduced delta smelt abundance based on the FMWT index, the estimated number of larvae that would have been entrained range between 0 in 2006 and 2007 to a maximum of 924 in 2003 (Table 2). A delta smelt female spawn from 1,200 to 2,600 gees and

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 43
even the larger estimate of entrained larvae would represent only a small fraction of the total population of delta smelt larvae produced during a season. The number of larvae exposed to the DWSP intake is expected to be low in the future because of the recent observed reduction in abundance of larvae at the intake location. Thus, with the proposed pumping operations, the number of larvae entrained as a consequence of the proposed action is expected to range between 0 and 200 with zero or only a few larvae being entrained during years with very low abundance.

The above calculations are based on the proposed initial 30 mgd diversion. Increases in the. pumping rate will increase the estimated number of delta smelt entrained in the DWSP intake facility. However, future expansion of the DWSP in not covered in this biological opinion and the effects of diversion rates above the 30 mgd on delta smelt have not been estimated.

Consequently, future expansions will require separate biological opinions to assess the effects on delta smelt.

Effects of Changes in Delta Hydrology
The applicant used CALSIM II for their hydrological modeling. Geographically, the model covers the drainage basin of the Delta and SWP exports to the water users. CALSIM II typically simulates system operations for a 73-year period using a monthly time step. The historical flow record of October 1921 to September 1994 is used to represent the possible future range of water supply conditions. Assumptions about facilities, land use, water supply contracts, etc. is kept constant over the 73-year simulation period and represent a fixed level of development (LOD).

To estimate effects from the project on Delta hydrology, the model was run with and without the proposed project included. All of the assumptions except the action itself are kept the same during the two model runs. Once the model runs are completed, the results for simulations with the proposed project included can be compared with simulations without the proposed project.

Model runs are best interpreted using long-term or year type average statistics: Thus, the model is limited in its use to measure effects to the delta smelt on a time scale that 1s relevant to the species. However, monthly results are still useful for general comparison of alternatives.

Hydrological modeling by the applicant shows that the diversion of 30 mgd at a rate of up to 47 cfs will result in small but measurable changes in Delta hydrology (MVH 2005). These changes could potentially adversely affect delta smelt through changes in water quality and increased chance of entrainment at the State and Federal intake facilities at Banks and Tracy, respectively.

QWEST is an index of the net San Joaquin River flow at Jersey Point. The flow rate and diversion are indicative of the water balance in the central and southern Delta. Net reverse flow past Jersey Point indicates that higher salinity water is being drawn into the interior Delta as a result of high depletions and exports compared to Delta inflows and cross-Delta flows. QWEST can be used as an indicator of changes in habitat conditions and delta smelt survival.

Modeled changes in QWEST are a direct consequence of DWSP diversion. Changes in annual flows are slight but measurable over all water year types and can be significant in certain months.

For instance, QWEST decreases relative to baseline for the 2003 LOD by 112 cfs of the average net negative 378 cfs December flow. For the 2015 LOD cumulative condition analysis, QWEST decreased under the DWSP by 17 cfs or 4 percent of the average annual net flow. The largest change in net San Joaquin River average monthly outflow for the 2015 LOD occurs in August STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 44
with a decrease in outflow by 46 cfs from a baseline outflow of negative 2,610 cfs. The computer simulation modeling by the applicant has indicated that the DWSP diversion effect on reduction in net Delta outflow on the San Joaquin River is subtle, yet has pervasive effect on average annual flows at San Joaquin River at Anticoh, Old River at San Joaquin confluence, and Ran Joaquin River at San Andreas Landing. Effects follow consistent trends base on the projected growth trends of the future level of development forecasts.

Delta smelt distribution, especially larvae distribution, is affected by the hydrology in the delta.

During the larval and juvenile phases, river flows of sufficient magnitude and duration facilitate down-estuary movement from spawning habitats in the Delta. Larvae originating in Sacramento | - ‘River can be brought into the central Delta via Three Mile Slough or back up through the San Joaquin River by flood tides. Larvae in the lower San Joaquin River can be transported through the mouth of Old and Middle Rivers towards the water export facilities in the south Delta.

The tidal flow in the delta varies greatly over the tidal cycle and a passive particle will slush back and forth with the tide but water exports can result in a net movement into the south Delta. At the 30 mgd buildout, the change in QWEST of the DWSP is small compared to total annual outflow and the DWSP diversion minimal compared to total tidal flows but the change in QWEST flows will affect net particle movement in the central Delta. This will result in a slightly increased residence time during positive QWEST and an increased net movement into the central Delta during negative QWEST flows. Therefore the proposed DWSP could result in a slight increase in larvae entrainment at the CVP and SWP export facilities during some water years since delta smelt larvae are mostly transported passively with flow and tide. However, the proposed restrictions on pumping from April 15 through June 15 will avoid or minimize any effects of the DWSP on QWEST.

Adult delta smelt migrating up the Delta likely also respond to subtle changes in Delta flows and salinity. Reduction in San Joaquin River flows together with increased flow from the Sacramento River through Three Mile Slough may attract adult delta smelt into the central Delta where they are more susceptible to enter Old River and eventually being entrained in the state and Federal Delta water diversions. The small changes seen in the modeled delta flows for the 30 mgd SDWP diversion are not likely to affect delta smelt movements into the Delta. However, the full buildout to 160 mgd could have substantial effect on delta smelt distribution during spawning movements into the Delta.

Effects on Critical Habitat

Cnitical habitat is not likely to be adversely modified or destroyed as a result of the proposed project. The primary constituent elements essential to the conservation of the species will not be affected by the proposed project. The initial 30 mgd diversion at the SDWP pumping facility will result in an insignificant loss of physical habitat in the delta. River flows and water in the delta will continue to be adequate to provide spawning, rearing and foraging habitat for the smelt.

The salinity of the delta will not be modified beyond the normal fluctuations as a result of this project, as the location of X2 during February through June will not change significantly as a result of this project. No breeding habitat will be affected by the proposed project, and the sustainability of the food base for delta smelt will not be changed by the proposed project. In addition, adequate flows and reduced exports during the delta smelt spawning and rearng 9 16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan . : 45
seasons will protect delta smelt.

Effects of the Proposed Action on Giant Garter Snake
Effects of the Construction

Direct effects:
“No direct effects to giant garter snakes are anticipated as a result of the initial 30 mgd operation of the intake. The fish screen size and approach velocity is designed to avoid entrainment of delta smelt, which are much smaller in size, so no entrainment of giant garter snakes is expected to occur.

Direct effects to giant garter snakes as a result.of the construction of the intake, pipelines, and water treatment plant will be avoided by implementation of the “Incidental Take Minimization Measures” as outlined in the SJMSCP. Restricting construction to during the species.active period (May 1 — October 1) will allow for giant garter snakes to disperse out of the construction area to avoid direct mortality. SJCOG will use the fees that the City of Stockton paid to participate in the SJMSCP to purchase similar habitat and manage this habitat for the benefit of the covered species to compensate for the effects from the construction of the intake structure, the pipelines, and the water treatment plant. |
Indirect effects:

One of the objectives outlined in the Final Environmental Impacts Report for the Stockton Delta Water Supply project (ESA 2005) is “to provide adequate water supply to accommodate planned growth.” The initial 30 mgd intake operation is expected to meet the water supply needs of build-out anticipated in the 1990 Stockton General Plan. The pumping of water out of the Delta will result in an increased availability of drinking water, with subsequent growth-inducing effects on federally-listed species, including the giant garter snake. Incidental take that occurs as a result of the necessitated residential development may be covered under the SJMSCP, but it is possible that some of the proponents of this development will opt out of participating in the SJMSCP. In this case, giant garter snakes may be affected by habitat loss, modification, or fragmentation, or direct mortality, and any resulting take would not be covered under the SJMSCP.

Indirect effects from the construction of the intake, pipelines, and water treatment plant are analyzed in the /ntra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion (Service 2001). Those effects applicable to the proposed action include habitat fragmentation, edge effects, changes in hydrology, displacement of individuals, and temporary harassment from the presence of people and equipment.

Effects of Interrelated and Interdependent Activities

Upgrades to the electrical infrastructure are necessary for the operation of the water treatment plant and intake pumps. Construction of these upgrades has the potential to affect the giant garter snake if poles, substations, or any other related structures are constructed in giant garter snake habitat. SJMSCP coverage can be sought when design specifications are finalized, and ; STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | AG
will be subject to conditions of coverage, including adherence to “Incidental Take Minimization Measures” and fee payment to SJCOG. It is possible these upgrades could require permits from other federal agencies, which would necessitate section 7 consultation with that agency if these upgrades may affect the giant garter snake.

Cumulative Effects
Cumulative effects include the effects of State, Tribal, local, or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action area considered for this biological opinion. Future actions that are unrelated to the proposed action are not considered in this section because they require separate consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Act.

Non-Federal actions that may affect the action area include ongoing agricultural activities and increased urbanization. Agricultural activities in the Delta affect riparian and wetland habitats through upland modifications of the watershed that lead to increased siltation or reduction in water flow in stream channels flowing into the Delta. The approximately 1,800 agricultural diversions in the Delta (DWR 1993) will continue to entrain an unquantified number of delta smelt each year and agricultural drainage returns reduces water quality and contain herbicide and pesticide compounds that could affect delta smelt survival and reproductive success. Stormwater from urban areas containing toxic compound is and will continue to be discharged into the Delta.

The Delta and East Bay regions, which include portions of Contra Costa, Alameda, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, Stanislaus, and Yolo counties, are expected to increase in population by nearly three million people by the year 2020. Increase in urbanization and housing developments can impact habitat by altering watershed characteristics, and changing both water uses and stormwater runoff patterns. Industrial and residential developments and expansions will also result in development of upland and riparian habitat supporting the giant garter snake. Many these activities are expected to not go through any consultation process with the Service.

Conclusion
After reviewing the current status of the delta smelt and the giant garter snake, the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects of the proposed project, and the cumulative effects, it is the Service’s biological opinion that the City of Stockton’s water supply project as proposed, is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the delta smelt or the giant garter snake. The proposed action is located in delta smelt critical habitat, but will not be adversely modified by the proposed action. —
This conclusions are based on the following considerations: (1) In-water construction and its potential effects will occur at a time of year when delta smelt is unlikely to be present within the ‘project area; (2) conservation and performance measures are in place to ensure impacts are minimized on all aspects of the project; (3) work area isolation and fish removal will occur; (4) the fish screen will prevent adult delta smelt and juveniles larger than 20 mm from being entrained at the DWSP intake; (5) entrainment of larvae and juveniles will be minimized by reduced pumping and pumping curtailment during the period of peak abundance of larvae and juveniles; (6) the proportion of the delta smelt larvae and juvenile population exposed to the pumps is expected to be low; (7) the expected survival of delta smelt larvae and juveniles jn the

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan . . : 47
south Delta at baseline conditions is low and estimated loss of larvae at the DWSP intake is therefore not believed to affect larvae expected survival to maturity; (8) expected contribution to population growth by a larvae is low and the low number expected to be entrained is therefore not expected to significantly affect the delta smelt population; and (9) the effects of this action are not likely to impair currently properly functioning habitats for the delta smelt and the giant garter snake, appreciably reduce the functioning of already impaired habitats, or retard the long- term progress of impaired habitats toward proper functioning condition essential to the long-term survival and recovery of the populations of the delta smelt and the giant garter snake.

INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT
Section 9 of the Act and Federal regulation pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act prohibit the take of endangered and threatened species, respectively, without special exemption. Take is defined as harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Harass is defined by the Service as an intentional or negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury to a listed species by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering. Harm is defined by the Service to include significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by impairing - behavioral patterns including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Incidental take is defined as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity.

Under the terms of section 7(b)(4) and section 7(0)(2), taking incidental to and not intended as part of the agency action is not considered to be prohibited taking under the Act, provided that such taking is in compliance with this Incidental Take Statement.

The measures described below are nondiscretionary and must be implemented by the Corps so they become binding conditions of any grant or permit issued to the applicant, as appropriate, in order for the exemption in section 7(0)(2) to apply. The Corps has a continuing duty to regulate the activity that is covered by this incidental take statement. If the Corps (1) fails to require the applicant to adhere to the terms and conditions of the incidental take statement through enforceable terms that are added to the permit or grant document, and/or (2) fails to retain oversight to ensure compliance with these terms and conditions, the protective coverage of section 7(0)(2) may lapse.

Amount or Extent of Take
Delta Smelt
The Service expects that incidental take of adult delta smelt and juveniles larger than 20 mm long will be difficult to detect or quantify for the following reasons: the small size of eggs, larvae, and fish; their occurrence in aquatic habitat makes them difficult to detect; and the low likelihood of finding dead or impaired specimens. Direct take of delta smelt from the construction of the proposed water intake and fish screen activities (e.g. entrainment of the.dredge, exposure to resuspended sediment, acoustic noise for the pile driving actions) is not expected to occur if construction actions are implemented in the middle of the construction window (i.e., August 1 through October30) and construction actions are completed by November 30. The expppyne tesk

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan . 48
to delta smelt increases should construction activities-be initiated earlier than August 1 since_ juveniles and adults may still be in the vicinity of the water intake site or if construction activities continue after October 1 since up-estuary migration by adult delta smelt could start in November.

Incidental take from operation of the water intake is calculated for the initial proposed water diversion level of 30 mgd. The Service understands that increases in the diversion rate beyond 30 med will trigger new consultations with the Corps and the City of Stockton. Direct take of larvae and juveniles in the form of mortality will occur from entrainment at the water intake and of adult delta smelt in the form of injury and harassment from impingement on the fish screen.

Entrainments of delta smelt do not necessarily index how facility operations affect the delta smelt population. In years when delta smelt are numerous and widely distributed, high entrainment rates may not be of great concern. Conversely, during years when there are few delta smelt and they are distributed in areas vulnerable to entrainment at the DWSP intake, even low salvage may be of great concern. Entrainment of larvae is of lesser concern than entrainment of prespawning adults as prespawning adults are individually more important to the perptuaiton of the species.

No adults or juveniles larger than 20 mm are expected to be entrained at the DWSP intake. The larvae entrainment were calculated from the density of larvae captured in the biweekly DFG 20- mm trawls at stations adjacent to the proposed intake facility location during the years 1995 to 2006. These densities were then applied to calculate entrainment at the DWSP at a pumping rate of 30 mgd and pumping curtailment during April 16 through May 15. However, about half of this number is expected to be entrained at any give density during any given year since the calculation did not take into account the proposed longer curtailment period (April 16 through May 20) and the reduced pumping rate before and after this period. An upper incidental take limit is then provided based on the relationship between estimated take and the previous years FMWT index. However, with the expected efficiency of the screen similar to the similar fish screen at the Contra Costa Water District diversion in Old River, the number of larvae entrained is expected to be close to zero unless the overall delta smelt population increases substantially and the majority of spawning occurs in the South Fork Mokelumne River, by Empire Tract, and/or in the San Joaquin River upstream of Empire Tract..

The Service is quantifying take incidental to the project in terms of acres of habitat that will become unsuitable for the species as a result of the action. About 0.44 acre of shallow water habitat will become unsuitable as a result of the proposed project. The Service further estimates take of delta smelt larvae incidental to operation of the intake facility will not exceed 25 following a year with a low pre-spawn delta smelt population abundance as indicated by a FMWT index of 50 or lower. Incidental take of delta smelt larvae may increase as population abundance increase and is estimated to range from 0 to an upper limit of 200 1f the previous FMWT index falls between 51 and 100, from 0 to an upper limit of 700 if the FMWT index falls between 101 and 500, and from 0 to an upper limit of 3,500 following a year with high abundance of pre-spawning delta smelt indicated by an FMWT index higher than 500. In addition, an unquantifiable but anticipated small number of delta smelt juveniles and adults within two feet of the screen may be injured or harassed as a result of impingement on the fish screen. The Service has developed the following incidental take statement based on the premise that the reasonable and prudent measures will be implemented. Upon implementation of the following reasonable and prudent measures, incidental take associated with the construction of the intake facility in the form harm of delta smelt catised by the loss of 0.44 acre of shallow water habitat will become exempt from the prohibitions described under section 9 of the Act, Upon.

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 49
implementation of the following reasonable and prudent measures; the Corps-and the City of Stockton will become exempt from the prohibitions described under section 9 of the Act for the above described incidental take associated with construction activities and operation of the DWSP intake facility for the 33 mgd diversion in the form of kill, injury, and harassment of delta smelt.

Giant Garter Snake

Incidental take associated with the construction of the intake structure, raw and treated water pipelines, and water treatment plant will be covered under the section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the SIMSCP. The total amount of incidental take authorized for the SIMSCP is outlined in Table 36 of the Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion. No new circumstances as identified at 50 C.F.R. 402.16 have occurred that would alter the non-jeopardy determination for the covered species we made in the Jntra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion and associated incidental take permit. Therefore, the biological opinion remains valid. The habitat acreage converted as a result of the proposed action will be deducted from the amount of habitat specified in Table 36.

The Service does not anticipate that the operation of the intake will incidentally take any giant garter snakes by direct mortality or injury from the operation of the intake. The Service expects that incidental take in the form of harm or harassment is unlikely to occur if all “Conservation Measures” as outlined in the Project Description and “Incidental Take Minimization Measures” required by the SJMSCP are correctly implemented. Therefore, no incidental take is authorized from the operation of the intake. If take of giant garter snakes or any other federally-listed species is expected to occur as a result of upgrades to the electrical infrastructure, reinitiation of this consultation will be necessary (see “Reinitiation — Closing Statement” at the end of this biological opinion).

Effect of the Take
In the accompanying biological opinion, the Service determined that this level of anticipated take is not likely to result in jeopardy to the delta smelt. The proposed project is within critical habitat designated for the delta smelt. However, the Service determined in the accompanying biological opinion that the proposed project will not result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat designated for the delta smelt.

In the Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion, the Service determined that this level of take is not likely to result in jeopardy to the giant garter snake. Critical habitat has not been proposed or designated for the giant garter snake; therefore none will be affected.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 50
Reasonable and Prudent Measures
The Service believes the following reasonable and prudent measures are necessary and appropriate to minimize incidental take of listed species:

1. The City of Stockton shall implement measures to avoid or minimize adverse effects to the delta smelt and the giant garter snake.

2. The City of Stockton shall ensure their compliance with the Project Description of this. biological opinion. ,
Terms and Conditions
To be exempt from the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act, the Corps must ensure compliance with the following terms and conditions, which implement the reasonable and prudent measures described above. These terms and conditions are nondiscretionary:

1. The following Terms and Conditions will implement Reasonable and Prudent Measure number one (1):
a. The City of Stockton shall minimize the potential for take of the delta smelt and modification/loss of this species’ habitat by implementing the Stockton Delta Water Supply Project, including the conservation measures as described in the biological assessment, as described in the Project Description section of this biological opinion with the inclusion of or modifications by Terms and Conditions of this biological opinion.
b. The City of Stockton shall minimize the potential for take of the giant garter snake resulting from project related activities by implementation of the Stockton Delta Water Supply Project, including the conservation measures as described in the biological assessment, as describe in the Project Description section of this biological opinion with the inclusion of or modifications by Terms and Conditions of this biological opinion. c. The City of Stockton shall include Special Provisions that include the avoidance and minimization measures, and Terms and Conditions of this biological opinion in the solicitation for bid information. In addition, the City of Stockton will educate and. inform contractors involved in the project as to the requirements of the biological opinion.
d. Prior to initiation of ground breaking, the City of Stockton biologist or a Service- approved biologist will conduct an education and training session for all construction personnel. All individuals who will be involved in the site preparation or construction shall be present, including the project representative(s) responsible for reporting take to the Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Training sessions shall be repeated for all new employees before they access the project site. Sign up sheets identifying attendees and the contractor/company they represent shall be provided to the Service with the post-construction compliance report. The training will consis of a brief

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | : 51
presentation by the on-site biologist who-will explain endangered species concems to all contractors, their employees, and agency personnel involved in the project. The program will include a description of the giant garter snake and delta smelt, species habitat needs, an explanation of their protection under the Act, a description of the measures being taken to reduce effects to the species during project construction and implementation, the penalties for non-compliance, and the boundaries (work area) of the project.. The . applicant shall submit written proof of the training to the San Joaquin Valley Branch of Endangered Species Program at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office within ten (10) working days of the completion of training. Any deviation from these and other non- discretionary measures must be approved by SJCOG and the Service prior to implementation.
e. To ensure that the incidental take limit is not exceeded and to evaluate the effectiveness of minimization measures, the City of Stockton shall develop and implement a plan to monitor and quantify entrainment of delta smelt at the DWSP intake. The monitoring shall occur over a ten year period from the start of operation of the DWSP intake. In addition to quantifying take of delta smelt larvae and juveniles, the monitoring shall assess the effectiveness of the proposed period of curtailment and reduced pumping, and _ evaluate if other periods would provide better protection of delta smelt. An annual report shall be sent to Ryan Olah, Branch Chief of the Coast Bay Delta Branch at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office.
f. The fish screen shall be operated in accordance with criteria described in this biological opinion and in consultation with the Service as long as the diversion is in use. When and if the City of Stockton chooses to increase the design intake of the diversion over the initial nominal capacity of 30 mgd, the Corps and the City of Stockton shall enter into formal reinitiation of this consultation with the Service. g. Pile driving shall not start before August 1 and be completed by October 30. h. A Service-approved biologist must be on site to monitor project activities; and shall have the authority to stop project activities — when listed species are encountered, unintended direct or indirect effects to listed species habitat occurs, or if activities are not in conformance with the minimization measures as delineated in this project description — until appropriate corrective measures are taken. Ifa listed animal is observed within a designated work area and cannot be avoided, all work shall stop until the animal leaves the work area or until it is captured and relocated by a biologist with a valid section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the Service to outside of the work area to avoid injury or mortality.

1. The City will follow all the “Incidental Take Minimization Measures” developed by SJCOG for giant garter snakes. These measures shall include, but not be limited to:
i. conduct pre-construction surveys within 24 hours of initial ground disturbance ii. restrict construction, spoils, and equipment staging areas to outside of aquatic and upland habitat (within 200 feet of aquatic habitat) for giant garter snakes STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | 52
j.
i. conduct an environmental awareness training for all construction workers which includes education on the federally-listed species in the area and the importance of - their conservation
iv. restrict all work to during the active period for the giant garter snake (May 1 — October 1).

The City will install a barrier designed to exclude giant garter snakes around all construction or equipment staging areas designated as aquatic or upland (within 200 feet of aquatic) habitat. Temporary fencing is allowed, but the fence must have an anchored base to prevent giant garter snakes from traveling underneath it and entering the construction area.
k. All disturbed habitat must be restored or replaced consistent with the Service’s od.

Guidelines for Restoration and/or Replacement of Giant Garter Snake Habitat and Standard Avoidance and Minimization Measures During Construction Activities in Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas) Habitat (attached).

Sensitive habitat areas shall be delineated with high visibility temporary orange-colored fence at least four (4) feet in height, flagging, or other barriers. Such fencing shall be inspected by the Service-approved biologist and maintained daily until completion of the project. The fencing will be removed only when all construction equipment is removed from the site. No project activities shall occur outside the delineated project construction area.
m. A storm water management/erosion control plan shall be developed and implemented during the rainy season (or onset of rain) that include temporary onsite silt traps and/or basins with multiple discharge points to natural drainages and energy dissipaters.

Stockpiles of loose material shall be covered and runoff diverted away from exposed soil material. If work stops because of to rain, a positive grading away from slopes shall be provided to carry the surface runoff to areas where the flow would be controlled, such as the temporary silt basins. Sediment basins/traps shall be located and operated to minimize the amount of sediment transported offsite. Any trapped sediment shall be removed from the basin or trap and placed at a suitable location onsite, away from concentrated flows, or removed to an approved disposal site. n. Temporary erosion control measures shall be implemented until perennial revegetation or oO Ve
landscaping is established and can minimize sediment discharges into nearby waterways.

For construction within 500 feet of a water body, appropriate erosion control measures shall be implemented upstream adjacent to the water body.

Erosion protection shall be provided on all cut-and-fill slopes. Revegetation shall be facilitated by mulching, hydroseeding, or other methods and shall begin assoonas | possible after the completion of grading and before the onset of the rainy season (i.¢., by October 15).

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 53
Dp. A co
The BMPs selected and implemented for the project-shall-be operational before major | earthwork begins. The construction phase facilities shall be maintained regularly and cleared of accumulated sediment as necessary. Effective mechanical and structural BMPs that will be implemented for the Proposed Action include the following:
i. Mechanical storm water filtration measures, including oil and sediment separators or absorbent filter systems such as the Stormceptor® system, can be installed within the storm drainage system to filter storm water prior to its discharge. ii. Vegetative strips, high-infiltration substrates, and grassy swales shall be used where feasible throughout the development to reduce runoff and provide initial storm water treatment.
iil. Roof drains shall discharge to natural surfaces or swales where possible to avoid excessive concentration and channelization of storm water. iv. Permanent energy dissipaters shall be included for drainage outlets. y. The water quality detention basins shall be designed to provide effective water quality control measures including the following:
(a.) Maximize detention time to allow settling of fine particles (b.) Establish maintenance schedules to periodically remove sediments, excessive vegetation, and debris that may clog basin inlets and outlets (c.) Maximize the detention basin elevation to allow the greatest amount of infiltration and settling prior to discharge
Fueling and maintenance of mechanical equipment shall occur in areas where oil or other chemical cannot drain into wetlands, streams, or other aquatic landscape features.

Fueling and maintenance areas shall be encircled with structures or material to contain a potential spill. The applicant will prepare a spill prevention and clean-up plan.

Hazardous materials such as fuels and solvents used on construction sites shall be stored in covered containers and protected from rainfall, runoff, vandalism, and accidental release to the environment: All fuels and solvents shall be stored in an area with an impervious surface and a containment capacity equal to the volume of the stored materials. A stockpile of spill cleanup materials shall be readily available at all construction sites. Employees shall be trained in spill prevention and cleanup, and individuals shall be designated as responsible for prevention and cleanup activities.

Equipment shall be properly maintained in designated areas with runoff and erosion control measures to minimize accidental release of pollutants.

The SWPPP will specify measures for removing sediment from water pumped during trench dewatering before the water is released to waterways. STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 54

2. The following Terms and Conditions will implement Reasonable and Prudent Measure number one (2):
a. Ifrequested, before, during, or upon completion of ground breaking and construction activities, the City of Stockton shall allow access by Service and/or California Department of Fish and Game personnel to the project site to inspect project effects to the delta smelt, giant garter snake, and their habitats. b. The City of Stockton shall comply with the Reporting Requirements in this biological opinion.

Reporting Requirements
The Service and the California Department of Fish and Game must be notified within one (1) . working day of the discovery of death or injury to a delta smelt or giant garter snake that occurs due to project related activities or is observed at the project site. Injured giant garter snake must be cared for by a licensed veterinarian or other qualified person(s), such as the Service-approved biologist. Notification must include the date, time, and location of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal clearly indicated on a USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle and other maps at a finer scale, as requested by the Service, and any other pertinent information. Dead individuals of any of these two listed species must be sealed in a zip-lock® plastic bag containing information on date and time when the animal was found, the location where it was found, and the name of the person who found it written on 100% rag content paper with permanent ink, and the bag containing the specimen frozen in a freezer located in a secure site. The Service contacts are Chris Nagano, Deputy Field Supervisor at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office at telephone 916/414-6600, and Scott Heard, Resident Agent-in-Charge of the Service’s Law Enforcement Division at at telephone 916/414-6660.

The City of Stockton shall submit a post-construction compliance report prepared by the on-site biologist to the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office within sixty (60) calendar days of the date of the completion of construction activity. This report shall detail (1) dates that construction occurred; (11) pertinent information concerning the success of the project in implementing avoidance and minimization measures with an explanation of failure to meet such measures, if any; (111) known project effects on the delta smelt and/or the giant garter snake, if any; (v) occurrences of incidental take of these listed species, if any; and (vi) other pertinent information.

The City shall submit a report to the Service documenting the restoration of all impacted giant garter snake habitat in accordance with the Guidelines for Restoration and/or Replacement of Giant Garter Snake Habitat. This and all subsequent reports should reference the Service File No. 1-1-05-F-0029 and be submitted to the Service, Attention: San Joaquin Valley Branch immediately upon completion of restoration and/or monitoring.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan , 55

CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 7(a)(1) of Act directs Federal agencies to utilize their authorities to further the purposes of the Act by carrying out conservation programs for the benefit of endangered and threatened species. Conservation recommendations are discretionary agency activities that can be implemented to further the purposes of the Act, such as preservation of endangered species habitat, implementation of recovery actions, or. development of information and data bases.

1. The Corps and the City of Stockton should develop and implement restoration measures in areas designated in the Delta Fishes Recovery Plan (Service 1996).

2. The City of Stockton should assist the Service in implementing recovery actions identified in the Draft Recovery Plan for the Giant Garter Snake (Thamnopsis gigas) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999).

2. The Corps should develop procedures that minimize the effects of all other in-water activities on the delta smelt.

3. The Corps should support and promote aquatic and riparian restoration within the Delta region, and encourage its contractors to modify operation and maintenance procedures through the Corps’ authorities so that those actions avoid or minimize negative impacts to delta smelt and giant garter snake.

4. Sightings of any listed or sensitive animal species should be reported to the California Natural Diversity Database of the California Department of Fish and Game. A copy of the reporting form and a topographic map clearly marked with the location the animals were observed also should be provided to the Service.

To be kept informed of actions minimizing or avoiding adverse effects or benefiting listed and proposed species or their habitats, the Service requests notification of the implementation of any conservation recommendations.

REINITIATION - CLOSING STATEMENT
This concludes formal consultation with the Corps on the Stockton Delta Water Project in San Joaquin, California. As provided in 50 CFR 402.16, re-initiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary Federal agency involvement or control over the action has been maintained (or is authorized by law) and if: (1) the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded; (2) new information reveals effects of the proposed action may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in this opinion; (3) the agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this opinion; or (4) a new species or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by the proposed action. In instances where the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded, any operations causing such take must cease pending re-initiation.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 56
If you have any questions regarding this-biological-opinion.on the proposed Stockton Delta Water Supply Project, please contact Peter Johnsen or Ryan Olah of the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office at (916) 414-6625. .

Sincerely,
Oh f == Cay C. Goude
Acting Field Supervisor

cc:

Jeffery Stuart, National Marine Fisheries Service, Sacramento, California Scott Wilson, California Department of Fish and Game, Yountville, California Steve Mayo, San Joaquin Council of Governments, Stockton, California Robert Granberg, City of Stockton, Stockton, California Calvin Fong, Walter Yep, Inc., Sacramento, California
STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | 57
Literature Cited
American Farmland Trust. 1999. California’s Central Valley Urban Sprawl 2040 Zone of Conflict. Farmland Information Library. http://farm.fic.niu.edu/fic/ft/cv.html Arthur, J.F. and M.D. Ball. 1978. Entrapment of suspended materials in the San Francisco Bay- Delta Estuary. U.S. Dept. Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Sacramento, California. 1979. Factors influencing the entrapment of suspended material in the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary: Pages 143-174 in T.J. Conomos, editor. Pacific Division, American Association of Advances in Science., San Francisco, California 1980. The significance of the entrapment zone location to the phytoplankton standing crop in the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary. U.S. Department of Interior, Water and Power Resources Service.

Beckon, W. N., M. C. S. Eacock, A. Gordus, and J. D. Henderson. 2003. Biological effects of the Grassland Bypass Project. Ch. 7 in Grassland Bypass Project Annual Report 2001- 2002. San Francisco Estuary Institute.

Bennett, W.A., W.J. Kimmerer, J.R. Burau. 2002. Plasticity in vertical migration by native and exotic estuarine fishes in a dynamic low-salinity zone. Limnology and Oceanography 47:
1496-1507.

Brett, JR. 1976. Scope for metabolism and growth of sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka, and some related energetics. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 33:307- - 313.

Brode, J. 1988. Natural history of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis couchi gigas). Pages 25- 28, In Proceedings of the conference on California herpetology, H. F. DeListe, P. R.

Brown, B. Kaufman, and B. M. McGurty (eds.) Southwestern Herpetologists Society, Special Publication No. 4.

Brode, J. M. and G. E. Hansen. 1992. Status and future management of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) within the southern American Basin, Sacramento and Sutter Counties, California. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division. January 1992.

Burgess, W.C. and S.B. Blackwell. 2003. Acoustic monitoring of barrier wall installation at the former Rhéne-Poulene site, Tukwila, Washington. Prepared for RCI International, Inc., . Summer Washington.

Caltrans. 2004. San Francisco — Oakland Bay Bridge east span seismic safety project. Fhiseries and hydroacoustic monitoring program compliance report. June 2004. EA 012023, 04- SF-80 KP 12.2/KP 14.3, 04-ALA-80 KP 0.0/KP 2.1.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 58
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1999. Fall Midwater Trawl {database on the internet]. Available from http://www.delta.ca.gov/data/mwt99/index.html.

2000a. 20mm Survey [database on the internet]. Available from http://www.delta.ca. gov/data/20mm/2000/.
2000b. Fish screen criteria. June 19, 2000. Available from http://www.iep.ca.gov/cvffrt/DFGCriteria2.htm
2001. 2001 Summer Townet Survey [database on the internet]. Available from http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov/data/skt/skt2002/index.html.

2004. Comment Letter on the Five Year Status Review of the Delta Smelt. 2 pp. 2005. Fall Midwater Trawl [database on the internet]. Available from http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov.
2006. Summer Townet Survey [database on the internet]. Available from http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov. .
2007. Bay — Delta Monitoring [database on the internet]. Available from http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 1993. Sacramento — San Joaquin Delta Atlas. DWR, Sacramento, California.

California Department of Water Resources and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region 1993. Effects of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project on delta smelt.

Sacramento County, California. 134 pp.
and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region 1994. Effects of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project on delta smelt and Sacramento splittail.

Sacramento, California. 230 pp.

California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 2007. RareFind 3. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.

Dickert, C. 2002. San Joaquin Valley giant garter snake proj ect 2001. California Department of Fish and Game. 14 pp.
. 2003. Progress report for the San Joaquin Valley giant garter snake conservation project- 2003. California Department of Fish and Game. 37 pp.

Erkkila, L.F., J.F. Moffett, O.B. Cope, B.R. Smith, and R.S. Nelson. 1950. Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta fishery resources: effects of Tracy pumping plant and delta cross channel.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Special Report. Fisheries 56. 109 pp. - STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 59
Environmental Science Associates (ESA). -2003. Stockton Delta Water Supply Project.

Sacramento, California. 25 pp.
. 2006a. Stockton Delta Water Supply Project, Final Program Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No: 2003112060. Sacramento, California. . 2006b. Stockton Delta water supply project. Biological assessment prepared for the City of Stockton. ESA, Sacramento, California. February 2006.

Fitch, H.S. 1940. A biogeo graphic study of the ordinoides Artenkreis of garter snakes (genus Thamnophis). University of California Publications in Zoology 44: 1-150. . 1941. The feeding habits of California garter snakes. California Fish and Game 27(2):
1-32.

Fox, W. 1948. The relationships of the garter snakes of the garter snake Thamnophis ordinoides.

Copeia 1948: 113-120.

Ganssle, D. 1966. Fishes and decapods of San Pablo and Suisun bays. Pp.64-94 in D.W.

Kelley, ed.: Ecological studies of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, Part 1. Calif.

Dept. Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 133.

Goodman, D. 1987. The demography of chance extinction. Pages 11-19 in: M. E. Soulé (ed.).

Conservation Biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.
‘Hansen, E.C. 2003. Year 2002 investigations of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) in the Middle American Basin: Sutter County, California. Prepared for Sacramento Area _ Flood Control Agency.
. 2004. Year 2003 investigations of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) in the Middle American Basin: Sutter County, California. Prepared for Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency.

Hansen, G. E. 1988. Review of the status of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis couchi gigas) and its supporting habitat during 1986-1987. Final report for California Department Fish and Game, Contract C-2060. Rancho Cordova, California. 31 pp. . 1995. Status of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) in the San Joaquin Valley- 1995. Final Report for California Department of Fish and Game Standard Agreement No.

FG4052IF. Section 6 Project EF94-XX, Objectives 3 and 5, November 1996.

Hansen, R. W. 1980. Western aquatic garter snakes in central California: an ecological and evolutionary perspective. Master of Arts thesis, California State University, Fresno, California, 78 pp.

Hansen, G. E. and J. M. Brode. 1980. Status of the giant garter snake Thamnophis couch! gigas

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 60
(Fitch). California Department of Fish and Game;Inland Fisheries Endangered Species Program Special Publication 80-5. Rancho Cordova, Califormia. 14 pp. . 1993. Results of relocating canal habitat of the giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) during widening of SR 99/70 in Sacramento and Sutter Counties, California. Final report for Caltrans Interagency Agreement 03E325 (FG7550) (FY 87/88-91-92). Rancho Cordova, California. 36 pp.

Hansen, R. W. and G. E. Hansen. 1990. Thamnophis gigas (giant garter snake) reproduction.

Herpetological Review 21(4):93-94.

Hanson Environmental, Inc. and ESA. 2006. Stockton Delta Water Supply Project: Seasonal distribution of larval delta smelt in the lower San Joaquin River in the vicinity of the Stockton Delta Water Supply intake structure. Technical Memorandum prepared for the City of Stockton. Project No. 200090. ESA, Sacramento, California. August 2006.

Hastings, M.C. 2002. Clarification of the meaning of sound pressure levels and the known effects of sound on fish. Document in support of Biological Assessment for the new Benicia-Martinez Bridge. August 26, 2002; revised August 27, 2002. 8 pp.

Hastings, M.C., and A.N. Popper. 2005. Effects of sound on fish. Prepared for Jones & Stokes under California Department of Transportation contract no. 43A0139. Sacramento, CA.

Hastings, M.C., A.N. Popper, J.J. Finneran, and P. Lanford. 1996. Effects of low frequency underwater sound on hair cells of the inner ear and lateral line of the teleost fish Astronotus ocellatus. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99: 1759-1766.

Hastings, M.C., A.N. Popper, J.J. Finneran, and P. Lanford. 1996. Effects of underwater sound on hair cells of the inner ear and lateral line of the oscar (Astronotus ocellatus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99: 2576-2603.

Herbold, B. 1994, Habitat requirements of delta smelt. Interagency Ecological Studies Program Newsletter, Winter 1994. California Department of Water Resources, Sacramento, California.

Hinds, N. E. A. 1952. Evolution of the Califoria landscape. California Division of Mines Bulletin No. 158. 240 pp.

Hopkins, W. A., J. H. Roe, J. W. Snodgrass, B. P. Staub, B. P. Jackson, and J. D. Congdon. 2002. Effects of chronic dietary exposure to trace elements on banded water snakes (Nerodia fasciata). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:906-913.

Hunt, J.W., B.S. Anderson, B.M. Phillips, R.S. Tjeerdema, K.M. Taberski, C.J. Wilson, H.M.

Puckett, M. Stephenson, R. Fairey, and J. Oakden. 2001. A large-scale categorization of sites in San Francisco Bay, USA, based on the sediment quality triad, toxicity identification evaluations, and gradient studies. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20: 1252-1265. STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan | 61
Knutson, A.C., Jr. and J.J. Orsi. 1983. Factors regulating abundance and distribution of the shrimp Neomysis mercedis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 112:476-485.

Krebbs, C.J. 1994. Ecology: the Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance. Fourth Edition. Harper-Collins College Publishers. 801 pp.

McCauley, R.D., J Fewtrell, and AN. Popper. 2003. High intensity anthropogenic sound damages fish ears. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 113: 638-642.

Monroe, M.W. and J. Kelly 1992. State of the Estuary: A report on conditions and problems in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary. San Francisco Estuary.

Project, Oakland, California.

Moyle, P.B. 1976. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 405 pp.
2002. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, California. 576 pp.
2003. Comment Letter on the Five Year Status Review of the Delta Smelt. 4pp.

Moyle, P. B. and J. Cech, Jr. 1988. Fishes: An Introduction to Ichthyology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 559 pages.

Moyle, P. B., B. Herbold, D. E. Stevens, and L. W. Miller 1992. Life history and status of delta smelt in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, California. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 121:67-77.

MWH. 2005: Modeling technical appendix to the draft environmental impact report. City of Stockton Delta Water Supply Project. MVH, Sacramento, California. October 2005.

Nichols, F.H., J.E. Cloern, S.N. Luoma, and D.H. Peterson 1986. The modification of an Estuary. Science 231:567-573.

Noss, R. F., E. T. LaRoe III, and J. M. Scott. 2003. Endangered ecosystems of the United States: a preliminary assessment of loss and degradation—April 2003. http://biology.usgs.gov/pubs/ecosys.htm
Orsi, J.J. and W.L. Mecum. 1986. Zooplankton distribution and abundance in the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta in relation to certain environmental factors. Estuaries 9(4B):326-339.

Paquin, M.M. 2001. Population structure of the giant garter snake Thamnophis gigas. Master of Arts thesis in Biology: Ecology and Systematics; San Francisco State University. 27 pp.

Patterson, L. 2004. Giant garter snake surveys for the In-Delta Storage Program year-end and -

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 62
summary report.

Patterson, L. and E. Hansen. 2003. Giant garter snake surveys on Bacon Island and Webb Tract in 2003. Report to Department of Water Resources. 24 pp.

Pereira, W.E., J.L. Domagalski, F.D. Hostettler, L:.R. Brown, and J.B. Rapp. 1996. Occurrence and accumulation of pesticides and organic contaminants in river sediment, water, and clam tissues from the San Joaquin River and tributaries, California. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15: 172-180.

Radtke, L. D. 1966. Distribution of smelt, juvenile sturgeon, and starry flounder in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Pp. 115-119 im J. L. Turner and D. W. Kelley, eds.:

Ecological studies of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, Part 2. California Department of Fish and Game Fish Bulletin No. 136. .

Rossman, D. A. and G. R. Stewart. 1987. Taxonomic reevaluation of Thamnophis couchii (Serpentes: Colubridae). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, Louisiana State University 63:1-25. ,
Rossman, D. A., N. B. Ford, and R. A. Seigel. 1996. The garter snakes: evolution and ecology.

University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. 331 pp.

Saiki, M. K. 1998. An ecological assessment of the Grassland Bypass Project on fishes inhabiting the Grassland Water District, California. Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California.
7 Stitt, E. W., P.S. Balfour, T. Luckau, and T. E. Edwards. 2005. The southern watersnake -(Nerodia fasciata) in Folsom, California: history, population attributes, and relation to other introduced watersnakes in North America. Final Report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, CA.

Souza, K. and M. Bryant. 2002. Townet Survey and Fall Midwater Trawl. Interagency Ecological Program for the San Francisco Estuary. Newsletter 15(2):21-24.

Stevens, D. E. 1966. Distribution and food habits of American Shad (Alosa sapidissima) in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Pp. 97-107 in J.L. Tumer and D.W. Kelley (eds.).

Ecological studies of the San Francisco Bay Estuary. California Fish and Game Bulletin No. 136.

Stevens, D. E. and S. W. Miller. 1983. Effects of river flow on abundance of young Chinook salmon, American shad, longfin smelt, and Delta smelt in the Sacramento-San Joaquin river system. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 3:425-437.

Stevens, D. E., S. W. Miller, and B. C. Bolster 1990. Report to the Fish and Game Commission:

A status review of the delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) in California. California Department of Fish and Game Candidate Species Status Rept. 90-2. 149 pages.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan . 63
"hazard to snakes and other wildlife. “Herpetological Review 32(3): 162- 164.

Swanson, C.. and J. J. Cech, Jr. 1995. Environmental tolerances and requirements of the delta smelt, Hypomesus transpacificus. Final Report. Davis, California. 77 pp.

Swanson, C., T. Reid, P.S. Young, and J.J. Cech. 2000. Comparative environmental tolerances of threatened delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) and introduced Wakasagi (H. nipponensis) in an altered California estuary. Oecologia 123:384-390.

Swanson, C., P.S. Young, and J.J. Chech, Jr. 1998. Swimming performance, behaviour, and physiology of delta fishes in complex flows near a fish screen: Biological studies using the Fish Treadmill. Interagency Ecological Program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary Newsletter 11: 38-42.

Swanson, C., P.S. Young, and J.J. Cech, Jr. 2005. Close encounters with a fish screen:

Integrating physiological and behavioral results to protect endangered species in exploited ecosystems. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 134: 1111-1123.

Sweetnam, D.A. 1999. Status of delta smelt in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary. California Fish and Game 85(1):22-27.

Sweetnam, D.A. and D.E. Stevens. 1993. Report to the Fish and Game Commission: A status - review of the delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) in California. Candidate Species Status Report 93-DS. Sacramento, California. 98 pp. plus appendices.

Tumer, J.L. and D.W. Kelly. 1966. Ecological studies of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

California Department of Fish and Game Bulletin No. 136.

Turnpenny, A.W.H., K.P. Thatcher, and J.R. Nedwell. 1994. The effects on fish and other marine animals of high-level underwater sound. Fawley Aquatic Research Laboratory, Ltd., Report FRR 127/94, United Kingdom.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 1994. The Impact of Federal Programs on Wetlands, Vol. I, A Report to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, Washington, D.C., March, 1994. http://www.do1.gov/oepc/wetlands2/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 1991. Proposed Rule to List the Giant Garter Snake, Thamnophis gigas as an Endangered Species. Federal Register 56:67046. 1993a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Determination of threatened status for the delta smelt. March 5, 1993. Federal Register 58:12854-12864. 1993b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Determination of threatened status for the giant garter snake. Federal Register 58:54053-54066. 1994a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Critical habitat determination for

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 64
the delta smelt: December19, 1994. Federal Register 59: 65256-65279. 1994b. Formal consultation on the 1994 operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project: Effects on delta smelt. Sacramento, California. 34 pp., plus figures. 1995. Formal consultation and conference on the effects of long-term operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project on the threatened delta smelt, delta smelt critical habitat, and proposed threatened Sacramento splittail. Sacramento, California. 52pp., plus figures and attachment.
1996. Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Native Fishes Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. 2000. Biological Opinion on Implementation of the CVPIA and Continued Operations and Maintenance of the CVP. Sacramento, California.
2001. Intra-service biological and conference opinion on issuance of an incidental take permit to multiple applicants for a multiple species habitat conservation plan for San Joaquin County, California. Biological opinion. Service File 1-1-00-F-0231.

Sacramento, California. 214 pages.
. 2003. Revised Draft Recovery Plan for the Giant Garter Snake (7 hamnophis gigas).

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. ix + 194 pp. 2004. Five Year Status Review for the Delta Smelt. Sacramento, California. 50 pp.

Wang, J.C.S. 1986. Fishes of the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary and adjacent waters, California: A guide to the early life histories. Interagency Ecological Study Program for he Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary. Sacramento, California. Technical Report 9. 1991. Early life stages and early life history of the delta smelt, Hypomesus transpacificus, in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, with comparison of early life stages of the longfin smelt, Spirinchus thaleichthys. Interagency Ecological Studies Program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary. Sacramento, California. Technical Report 28.

Weihs, D. 1974. Energetic advantages of burst swimming of fish. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 48:215-229.

Werner, I., L.A. Deanovic, V. Connor, V. De Vlaming, H.C. Baily, and D.E. Hinton. 2000.

Insecticide-caused toxicity to Ceriodaphnia dubia (Cladocera) in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19:
. 215-227. .

White, D.K., C. Swanson, P.S. Young, J.J. Cech, Jr., ZQ Chen, and M.L. Kavvas. 2007. Close encounters with a fish screen II: Delta smelt behavior before and during screen contact.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 136: 528-538.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 65
Williams, T. and V. Wunderlich: 2003. Progress-report: 2003 San Joaquin Valley giant garter snake conservation project. San Luis National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Los Banos, California.

Wylie, G.D. 1998a. Results of the 1998 survey for giant garter snakes in and around the Grasslands Area of the San Joaquin Valley. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California.
. 1998b. Giant garter snake project: 1998 progress report. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. . 2003. Results of the 2003 monitoring for giant garter snakes (Thamnophis gigas): bank protection project on the left bank of the Colusa Basin Drainage Canal in Reclamation District 108, Sacramento River Bank Protection Project, Phase W. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 13 pp.

Wylie, G.D. and M. L. Casazza. 2001. Investigations of giant garter snakes in the Natomas Basin: 2001 field season. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Division, U.S.

Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 9 pp.

Wylie, G.D. and L. L. Martin. 2004. Results of 2004 monitoring for giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) for the bank protection project on the left bank of the Colusa Basin Drainage Canal in Reclamation District 108, Sacramento River Bank Protection Project, Phase II. Prepared for: Environmental Planning Section, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, November 2004.

Wylie, G.D., T. Graham, M. L. Casazza, M. M. Paquin, and J. Daugherty. 1996. National Biological Service giant garter snake study progress report for the 1995 field season.

Preliminary report. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Cassaza, and J. K. Daugherty. 1997. 1996 Progress report for the giant garter snake study. Preliminary report. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Casazza, L. Martin, and E. Hanson. 2000. Investigations of giant garter snakes in the Natomas Basin: 2000 field season. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Survey, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 13 pp.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Casazza, and N. M. Carpenter. 2002. Monitoring giant garter snakes at Cohisa National Wildlife Refuge: 2001 progress report. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Survey, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 10 pp.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Casazza, L. L. Martin, and M. Carpenter. 2003a. Monitoring giant garter snakes at Colusa National Wildlife Refuge: 2002 progress report. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Survey, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 16 pp.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 66
Wylie, G.D., MLL. Casazza, and L. L. Martin: 2003b. Giant garter-snake surveys.in the Natomas _ Basin: 2000-2002. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Survey, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 20 pp.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Casazza, and M. Carpenter. 2003c. Diet of bullfrogs in relation to predation on giant garter snakes at Colusa National Wildlife Refuge. California Fish and Game 89(2): 139-145.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Casazza, L.L. Martin, and M. Carpenter. 2004a. Monitoring giant garter snakes at Colusa National Wildlife Refuge: 2003 progress report. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Survey, U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 17 pp.

Wylie, G.D., M.L. Casazza, and L. L. Martin. 2004b. Monitoring Giant Garter Snakes in the Natomas Basin: 2003 Results. Dixon Field Station, Biological Resources Survey, U.S.

Geological Survey, Dixon, California. 55 pp.

Yelverton, J.T., D.R. Richmond, W. Hicks, K. Saunders, and R. Fletcher. 1975. The relationship between fish size and their response to underwater blast. Topical Report DNA 3677T. Defense Nuclear Agency, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C.

In Litt. References
Gartz, R. May 7, 2007. Electronic mail to the Delta Assessment Team providing weekly information on salvage at the SWP and CVP export facilities.

Stern, M.S. September 5, 2006. Draft letter to Peter Johnsen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California, outlining the proposed operation scenario for the Stockton Delta Water Supply Project.

Stern, M.S. February 24, 2006. Letter to Chris Nagano, Deputy Assistant Field Supervisor, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California, responding to the Service’s November 2, 2005, request for additional information for the City of Stockton’s Delta Water Supply Project.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 67
Appendix A: Tables and Figures

a W
3L

ar rT a ae
Figure 1. Summer townet (STN) indices from 1959 to 2005 (CDFG 2007). "oF 7a

BAge t+
BAgeQ
Ai Ages
Abundance
Index
ise) oO oO L

aE
STSSCEIS Git Ma Lake Paina Bo anae oesebie
0 ot OT
67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 O1 O38 O5

Year
Figure 2. Fall midwater trawl (FMWT) indices from 1967 to 2006 (CDFG 2007).

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan
Spring Kodiak Trawl Sampling Stations

Figure 4. Map of sampling stations for the 20-mm survey in the Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta STKN-16
68 STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
nelt larvae and juveniles that would have been entrained by the SDWP intake as estimated by Hanson Environmental (Stern in lit. nent B). The estimate is based on presence and densities of delta smelt in the San Joaquin River near the intake site as recorded by the 20- yy the California Department of Fish and Game during the years 1995 to 2006. The estimates are calculated with 1) a 30 day pumping rough May 15 with a diversion of 100.6 AF per day the reminder of the year and 2) no curtailment and 92.05 AF per day.

Larvae Delta Smelt Size Classes by Length (mm)

5 to 7 8 to 10 ll to 14 >15 Sum all size classes
Curtailment Curtailment Curtailment Curtailment Curtailment Yes No | Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No
0 0 0 0 0 0 iO
0 0 214 663 175 287 1009 972 1398 1922
0 246 158 636 0 0 0 235 158 1117
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i0
0 233 340 = 1462 2063 4481 4977 6235 7380 12411}
299 274 902 1190 659 799 788 1964 2648 4227
255 1399 258 943 129 974 0 257 642 3573
229 227 448 778 419 773 190 203 1286 1981
256 234 313 661 654 1028 624 893 1847 2816
0 0 0 343 145 678 131 201 276 1222
- 270 247 70 113 95 219 0 90 435 669
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1309 2860 2703 6789 4339 9239 T719 11050 16070 29938

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 70
- Fable.2.- Estimated entrainment of larvae at the DWSP intake if the facility had been in operation during the years from 1995 through 2007 compared to the previous year’s-pre-spawning delta. smelt abundance indicated by the ascending FMWT index. The estimated take is based on 50 % curtailment during the periods March 15 through April 14 and May 16 through June 15, and 100% curtailment during the period April 15 through May 15. Note that the proposed 100% curtailment lasting from April 15 through May 20 would reduce entrainment even further.

FMWT Year Estimated Year
index entrainment
27 2005 0 2006
41 2006 0 2007
74 2004 218 2005
102 1994 0 1995
127 1996 79 1997
139 2002 924 2003
210 2003 138, 2004
303 1997 0 1998
420 1998 3690 1999
603 2001 643 2002
756- 2000 324 2001
864 1999 4324 2000
899 1995 699 1996

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan : 71
Appendix B: Guidelines for Restoration and/or Replacement of Giant Garter Snake - Habitat. Oe a BE
Guidelines for Restoration and/or
Replacement of Giant Garter Snake Habitat
Replacement and Restoration Guidelines are provided together, as the two conservation measures may not be mutually exclusive. Replacement of habitat may also require restoration of some areas. Preserved habitat may additionally be improved for giant garter snakes by using some restoration guidelines.

Reference sites
A nearby reference site should be chosen both for restoration of giant garter snake habitat and for creation of replacement habitat. The reference site will be used to determine the success of conservation efforts. For habitat restoration, the pre-project condition may be used as a reference site 1f adequate documentation exists. For creation of replacement habitat or for restoration where pre-project conditions are not documented, the reference site should be nearby or adjacent to the project site and should represent high quality giant garter snake habitat.

Restoration of giant garter snake habitat
Restoration may include incorporating some of the Replacement Guidelines to enhance habitat value for giant garter snakes. Restoration should follow the guidelines outlined below:

1. Restoring giant garter snake habitat includes minimizing impacts of project activities to the existing habitat. In general, these minimization measures may include using silt fencing, designating environmentally sensitive areas, using protective mats, preventing runoff, and providing worker awareness training.

Specific measures to minimize impacts include:
a. Avoid construction activities within 200 feet from the banks of giant garter snake aquatic habitat. Confine movement of heavy equipment to existing roadways to minimize habitat disturbance.
b. Construction activity within habitat should be conducted between May 1 and October 1. This is the active period for giant garter snakes and direct mortality is lessened, because snakes are expected to actively move and avoid danger. Between October 2 and April 30 contact the Service’s Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office to determine if additional measures are necessary to minimize and avoid take.

C. Confine clearing to the minimal area necessary to facilitate construction activities. Flag and designate avoided giant garter snake habitat within or STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 72
_adjacent to the project area as Environmentally Sensitive Areas. These areas should be avoided by all construction personnel. - d. Construction personnel should receive Service-approved worker environmental awareness training. This training instructs workers to recognize giant garter snakes and their habitat(s).
e. 24-hours prior to construction activities, the project area should be surveyed for giant garter snakes. The survey of the project area should be © repeated if a lapse in construction activity of two weeks or greater has occurred. If a snake is encountered during construction, activities shall cease until appropriate corrective measures have been completed or it has been determined that the snake will not be harmed. Report any sightings and any incidental take to the Service immediately by telephone at (916) 414-6620.
f. Any dewatered habitat should remain dry for at least 15 consecutive days after April 15 and prior to excavating or filling of the dewatered habitat.

Remove all construction debris and stockpiled materials.

Re-grade area to preexisting contour, or a contour that would improve restoration potential of the site.

Replant and hydroseed the restoration area. Recommended plantings consist of a) wetland emergents, b) low-growing cover on or adjacent to banks, and c) upland plantings/hydroseeding mix to encourage use by other wildlife. Extensive riparian (e.g., shaded riverine aquatic - SRA) plantings are not appropriate because shading may result in Jack of basking sites. Native plantings are encouraged except where non-natives will provide additional values to wildlife habitat and will not become invasive in native communities. The applicant should obtain cuttings, plantings, plugs, or seeds, from local sources wherever possible.

The applicant should attempt to restore conditions similar to that of adjacent or nearby habitats.
a. Emergent wetland plants recommended for giant garter snake habitat are California bulrush (Scirpus californicus), cattail (Typha spp.), and water primrose (Ludwigia peploides). Additional wetland plantings may include common tule (Scirpus acutus), Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), or duckweed (Lemna spp.).
b. Cover species on or adjacent to the bank may include California blackberry (Rubus vitifolius) or wild grape (Vitis californica), along with the hydroseeding mix recommended below. ,
STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 73
C. Upland plantings/hydroseeding mix: Disturbed soil surfaces such as levee ~ ‘slopes should be hydroseeded-to-prevent-erosion..The Service. recommends a mix of at least 20-40 percent native grass seeds [such as as annual fescue (Vulpia spp.), California brome (Bromus carinatus), blue wild rye (Elymus glaucus), and needle grass (Nassella spp.)] 2-10 percent native forb seeds, 5 percent rose clover (Trifolium hirtum), and 5 percent alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Approximately 40-68 percent of the mixture may be non-aggressive European annual grasses [such as wild oats (Avena sativa), wheat (Triticum ssp.), and barley (Hordeum vulgare)|]. The Corps will not include aggressive nonnative grasses, such as perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), fescue (Festuca spp.), giant reed (Arundo donax), medusa-head (Taeniatherum caput-medusae), or Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana) in the hydroseed mix. The Corps will not include endophyte-infected grasses in the mix. Mixes of one- hundred percent native grasses and forbs may also be used, and are encouraged.

Replacement of giant garter snake habitat
Location
Replacement location should be within the same population cluster boundaries (population clusters are defined in 58 FR 54053) as the habitat lost. For example: The — boundaries of the Sacramento Basin population cluster are approximately, Highway 16 to the north, Sacramento River to the west, Twin Cities Road to the south, and the Folsom Aqueduct to the east. Habitat lost within this area must also be replaced within this area.

Habitat components

Giant Garter Snake Habitat. The giant garter snake inhabits marshes, sloughs, ponds, small lakes, low gradient streams, other waterways and agricultural wetlands such as urigation and drainage canals and rice fields, and the adjacent uplands. Essential habitat components consist of (1) adequate water during the snake's active period, (early spring through mid-fall) to provide a prey base and cover; (2) emergent, herbaceous wetland vegetation, such as cattails and bulrushes, for escape cover and foraging habitat; (3) upland habitat for basking, cover, and retreat sites; and (4) higher elevation uplands for cover and refuge from flood waters. For the purposes of this programmatic opinion, a basic giant garter snake habitat unit will incorporate 2.00 acres (0.81 hectares) of surrounding upland for every 1.00 acre (0.40 hectare) of aquatic habitat. The 2.00 acres (0.81 hectares) of upland also may be defined as 218 linear feet (66 meters) of bank side habitat which incorporates adjacent uplands to a width of 200 feet (61 meters) from the edge of the bank.

Replacement habitat must provide the above mentioned essential habitat components and include the following:

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 74
_ 1. All replacement habitat must include both upland and aquatic habitat components.

Upland and aquatic habitat components must be included-in-the-replacement. habitat at a ratio of 2:1 upland acres to aquatic acres. bo A semi-permanent or permanent aquatic habitat which provides water during the active period for giant garter snakes (April through October) with suitable vegetative cover present. Linear or meandering channels with slow flowing water over a mud or silt substrate are preferred:
to Upland basking and retreat sites with low-growing vegetation cover adjacent to aquatic habitat, and upland retreats and flood refugia with partially buried broken concrete or animal burrows.

4. Small fish and amphibian larvae for foraging, but predatory "game fish” (bass, Micropterus spp.; sunfish, Lepomis spp.; catfish, Ictalurus spp. and Ameiurus spp.) absent or controlled. ;

5. An adequate buffer (at least 200 feet) from roadways to reduce vehicular mortality.

6. Follow planting recommendation provided above under restoration guidelines.

Monitoring
Habitat restoration

Restoration of habitat should be monitored for one year following implementation.

Monitoring reports documenting the restoration effort should be submitted to the Service:
(1) upon completion of the restoration implementation; and (2) one year from restoration implementation. Monitoring reports should include photo documentation, when restoration was completed, what materials were used, plantings (if specified) and justification of any substitutions to the Service recommended guidelines. Monitoring reports should also include recommendations for remedial actions and approval from the Service, if necessary, and justification from release of any further monitoring, if requested.

Creation of replacement habitat

Replacement habitat should be monitored for five years following implementation.

Hydrology should be monitored for the first two years after creation of wetlands. The monitoring effort should continue for three additional years to ensure success criterla are met. Monitoring reports documenting implementation of conservation measures should be submitted to the Service: (1) upon completion of wetland creation; (2) yearly for the first two years of monitoring; and (3) five years from implementation. Monitoring reports should include photo documentation, when restoration was completed, what materials were used, plantings (if specified) and justification of any substitutions to the Service STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 75
- recommended guidelines. Monitoring reports should also include recommendations for remedial actions and approval from the Service, ifnécéssary, and justification from. — 2. | release of any further monitoring, if requested.

Success criteria for replacement habitat:

1. At completion of monitoring, the cover measured on the habitat area should be 90 percent of cover measured on the reference site.

2. At completion of monitoring, the species composition measured on the habitat area should:be 90 percent of that measured on the reference site.

3. At completion of monitoring, wetlands created on the site should meet Corps jurisdictional criteria.

Maintenance and management of replacement giant garter snake habitat

1. A final management plan of replacement habitat must be approved by the Service.

2. . All maintenance activities should follow the Service’s Standard Avoidance and Minimization Measures During Construction Activities in Giant Garter Snake Habitat.

3. Additional guidance includes:
a. Canal Maintenance - Hand clearing of canals is preferred for removal of excessive vegetation or debris. Any equipment should be operated from the bank top. Excavate from only one side of the canal during a given year.

Avoid excavating the banks above the high water level. Preferably, one side of the canal should be left undisturbed indefinitely (the preferred side would be the west or north side) so that emergent vegetation and bank side cover is left in place.
b. Place the spoils from canal clearing in a designated location, rather than along bank tops. This will prevent burying or crushing snakes basking on the banks, or trapping snakes taking cover in burrows or bank-top soil crevices.

C. Vegetation control - Uplands should not be disced. Leave vegetation on levees and canal sides wherever possible. Mowing to contro! vegetation should take place July through September and mower blades should be raised to leave at least six inches of grassy cover to avoid injuring snakes. d. Traffic - Control vehicle access to avoid vehicular mortality of giant garter snakes.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 76

4. Use a water maintenance regime that will keep some open water channels _—- adjacént to vegetated edges for giant garter snakeforaging.. 2

5. Eradicate/control non-natives and invasive exotics.

Compatible uses of giant garter snake replacement habitat:

Rice farming is a compatible land use for adjacent properties.

Uses of giant garter snake replacement habitat that are incompatible with the habitat of giant garter snakes, or represent threats to giant garter snakes include row cropping on uplands, orchards on uplands, OHV (off-highway vehicle) use, and combining with riparian habitat creation which requires dense cover or SRA habitat.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
___ Appendix C: Standard Avoidance and Minimization Measures During Mr. Michael Finan — 77

Construction Activities in Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas) Habitat = =—— Standard Avoidance and Minimization Measures During Construction Activities in Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas) Habitat HABITAT TYPE:

The giant garter snake inhabits marshes, sloughs, ponds, small lakes, low gradient streams, irrigation and drainage canals, and rice fields. Giant garter snakes require permanent aquatic habitat, or habitat seasonally flooded during its active period (early- spring through mid-fall), with herbaceous wetland vegetation, such as cattails and bulrushes, grassy banks (often salt grass), and uplands for cover and retreat sites during its active season and for refuge from flood waters during the dormant season (winter).

Giant garter snakes are typically absent from larger rivers and from wetlands with sand, gravel, or rock substrates because of lack of suitable habitat. Some riparian woodlands may not provide suitable habitat because of excessive shade, lack of basking sites, and absence of giant garter snake prey.

AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES:

1. Avoid construction activities within 200 feet from the banks of giant garter snake aquatic habitat. Confine movement of heavy equipment to existing roadways to minimize habitat disturbance.

2. Construction activity within habitat should be conducted between May 1 and October 1. This is the active period for giant garter snakes and direct mortality is lessened because snakes are expected to actively move and avoid danger.

Between October 2 and April 30 contact the Service’s Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office to determine if additional measures are necessary to minimize and avoid take.

Confine clearing to the minimal area necessary to facilitate construction activities.

Flag and designate avoided giant garter snake habitat within or adjacent to the project area as Environmentally Sensitive Areas. These areas should be avoided by all construction personnel.

Go

4. Construction personnel should receive Service-approved worker environmental awareness training. This training instructs workers to recognize giant garter snakes and their habitat(s).

5. 24-hours prior to construction activities, the project area should be surveyed for giant garter snakes. The survey of the project area should be repeated if a lapse in construction activity of two weeks or greater has occurred. Ifa snake is encountered during construction, activities shall cease until appropriate corrective STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 78
“measures have been completed orit has been determined that the snake will not be ~ harmed. Report any sightings and any incidental take to the Service immediately by telephone at (916) 414-6620.

6. Any dewatered habitat should remain dry for at least 15 consecutive days after April 15 and prior to excavating or filling of the dewatered habitat.

7. After completion of construction activities, remove any temporary filland construction debris and, wherever feasible, restore disturbed areas to pre-project conditions. Restoration work may include such activities as replanting species removed from banks or replanting emergent vegetation in the active channel.

8. Follow the conservation measures in Table 1 to minimize the effects of loss and disturbance of habitat on giant garter snakes. Replacement ratios are based on the acreage and on the duration of disturbance.

TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF GIANT GARTER SNAKE CONSERVATION

MEASURES

IMPACTS: IMPACTS: CONSERVATION
DURATION ACRES MEASURE:

COMPENSATION
LEVEL 1 . 1 season Less than 20 and Restoration
temporary
LEVEL 2 "2 seasons Less than 20 and Restoration plus 1:1 temporary replacement
LEVEL 3 © More than 2 seasons | Less than 20 and 3:1 Replacement (or and temporary temporary restoration plus 2:1
replacement)
Permanent loss Less than 3 acres 3:1 Replacement
total giant garter
snake habitat
AND
Less than 1 acre
aquatic habitat;
OR
Less than 218 linear
feet bank habitat

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Mr. Michael Finan 79
Giant garter snake habitat includes 2.0 acres of surrounding upland habitat for every. 1.0 acre of aquatic habitat. The 2.0 acres of upland habitat also may be defined as 218 linear feet of bank side habitat which incorporates adjacent uplands to a width of 200 feet from the edge of each bank. Each acre of created aquatic habitat should be supported by two acres of surrounding upland habitat. Compensation may include creating upland refuges and over-wintering sites for the giant garter snake that are above the 100-year flood plain.

A season is defined as the calendar year period between May 1 and October 1: the active - period for giant garter snakes, when mortality is less likely to occur.

STKN-16

STKN-16
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 3
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
California Department of Fish and Game
Bay Delta Region
California Endangered Species Act
Incidental Take Permit No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

STOCKTON DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
Authority: This California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Incidental Take Permit (ITP) is issued by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) pursuant to Fish and Game Code sections 2081(b) and 2081(c), and California Code of Regulations, title 14, subdivision 3, chapter 6, article 1, commencing with section 783. CESA prohibits the take 1 of any species of wildlife designated as an endangered, threatened, or candidate species2 by the Fish and Game Commission. DFG, however, may authorize the take of such species by permit if the conditions set forth in Fish and Game Code sections 2081 (b) and 2081(c) are met. (See also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 783.4.)
Permittee:

Name and title of principal officer:

Contact person:

Mailing address:

City of Stockton
Mark J. Madison, P.E., Director of
Municipal Utilities
Robert L. Granberg, (209) 937-8779
2500 Navy Drive
Stockton, California 95206
Effective Date and Expiration Date of the ITP:

This ITP shall be executed in duplicate original form and shall become effective once a duplicate original is acknowledged by signature of the Permittee on the last page of the ITP and returned to DFG's Habitat Conservation Planning Branch at the address listed in the Notices section of this ITP. Unless renewed by DFG, this ITP's authorization to take the Covered Species shall expire on December 31, 2014.
1Pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 86, "'Take' means hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill." 2"Candidate species" are species of wildlife that have not yet been placed on the list of . endangered species or the list of threatened species, but which are under formal consideration for listing pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 2074.2.

EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
Project Location:

The City of Stockton's Delta Water Supply Project will be located west and north of Stockton.

The Project will be on the San Joaquin River and will extend from the southwestern tip of Empire Tract, west of Stockton, adjacent to the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel, to a location north of Stockton, approximately three miles east of Interstate 5 (1-5) (Figure 1 ).

Project Description:

The Permittee proposes to construct: 1) a new water intake and pump facility on Empire Tract; 2) an approximately 67,000-foot (12.7-mile) raw water pipeline; 3) a new water treatment plant (WTP) and associated infrastructure on 56 acres of a 126-acre parcel just north of Stockton, and 4) an approximately 23,760-foot (4.5-mile) treated water pipeline.

Construction of the new WTP and associated infrastructure, the 12. 7 mile raw water pipeline and the 4.5 mile treated water pipeline are activities covered under the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), and therefore, incidental take of Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsom) and giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) associated with those activities are authorized pursuant to DFG's ITP for the SJMSCP (ITP No. 2081-2000-006-02). In order to avoid the potential for additional incidental take of the species covered by this ITP that could result from pipeline construction, the Permittee has proposed trenchless construction techniques such as, bore and jack and microtunneling where the pipeline construction activities cross waterways. As a result, this ITP covers only the portion of the proposed activities not covered under the SJMSCP, which is limited to construction and operation of the new water intake and pump facility on Empire Tract, as described below (hereafter, the Project).

The initial capacity of the Project will divert up to 30 million gallons per day (mgd) (47 cubic feet per second [cfs]), with possible, future staged incremental expansions to an ultimate capacity of 160 mgd (250 cfs). The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) bifurcated the water rights application into two separate applications; Application 30531A (WA30531A) and Application 30531 B. WA 30531A covers only the initial phase of the Project up to 30 mgd (33,600 AF/year) under Water Rights Permit 21176 (WRP 21176) issued on March 8, 2006. WRP 21176 only covers water allowable under WA 30531A and additional diversion amounts require additional analysis and authorization. The current place of use for WRP 21176 is confined to the City's current 1990 General Plan boundary. The new water intake facility will be designed to accommodate expansion to avoid extensive future construction in the river and sloughs. This ITP covers Project operation of up to 30 mgd and 47 cfs. When phases of the Project beyond 30 mgd are needed·, the Permittee will be required to prepare additional project-level California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation, request additional water rights from the SWRCB under Application 30531 B and request additional take authorization from DFG.

Though diversion of water beyond 30 mgd is not covered under this ITP, the proposed in­ bank intake and pump station facility will include flat plate screens sized to accommodate the Page2
Incidental Take Permit
No. 2081-2009-005-03

CITY OF STOCKTON

DELTA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
EXHIBIT 2

STKN-18
80 mgd intake capacity predicted for the year 2050. In the future and not addressed in this ITP, the City may propose to construct an additional 80 mgd intake and pump station to reach a total capacity of160 mgd.

The fish screen and intake channel for the pump station facility will be built into the levee bank of the existing levee. Water flows at the south bank location average 15,010 cfs (tidally driven}, which will assist in maintaining the desired sweeping velocity of 0.4 feet per second (fps) across the intake fish screen. The vertical screen height of the fish screen will be 15 feet with a nominal structure length of 120 feet. The fish screen may be slightly angled away from vertical to better conform to the established slope of the levee. The fish screen will be designed to meet the current fish screen criteria established by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and DFG. The void between the existing levee and the newly placed wing walls will be filled with imported material (1,300 cubic yards) and compacted to provide support for the intake structure. The dredging, cofferdam installation, removal of water from behind the cofferdam and backfilling of soil is expected to take approximately 60 days to complete. Within the area identified as the footprint for the intake structure, a network of 14-inch diameter pre-stressed concrete piles will be driven into the soil to a depth of 75 feet. These concrete piles will provide support to the poured concrete slab foundation of the intake facility and the related concrete structural elements of the fish screen and pumping platform.

Covered Species:

This ITP covers the following species:

Name
Fish

1. Delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus)

2. longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys)
Status Under CESA3
Threatened 4
Candidate5
3Under CESA, a species may be on the list of endangered species, the list of threatened species, or the list of candidate species. All other species are "unlisted." 4 The Fish and Game Commission has approved a petition to uplist the Delta smelt from threatened to endangered. The Delta 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 threatened and endangered species, and therefore this ITP will remain in effect after the status change.