ITEM:		CONSENT CALENDAR
3.	CONSIDER EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR A CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE PERMIT APPLICATION FEE FOR THE PHASE 2 AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY PROJECT.
Meeting Date:			June 19, 2017	Budgeted:	Yes, partially reimbursable
From:			Dave Stoldt,	Program/	Water Supply Projects/
			General Manager	Line Item No.:	1-4-1 Water Rights Permits Fees
Prepared By:			Kevan Urquhart, Larry Hampson & Jonathan Lear	Cost Estimate:	$7,311
General Counsel Approval: N/A
Committee Recommendation: The Administrative Committee reviewed this item on June 12, 2017 and recommended approval.
CEQA Compliance: This action does not constitute a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines section 15378.

SUMMARY: Water Rights Permit #20808C, issued to the District by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for the diversions by Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Phase 2, has a ministerial formality placed in all appropriative water rights statewide, for the applicant (i.e. District) to consult with the California State Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and acquire a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) for new on-/in-stream facilities, if necessary. Proof of that CDFW permit or a consultation resulting in a determination that one isn’t needed, is required by the SWRCB for their records. This fee is required to initiate that administrative review process with CDFW.

BACKGROUND: The District followed this same process in 2008 for the Phase 1 ASR Water Right Permit #20808A. As a result, the CDFW issued what is known as a “No LSAA Needed Letter”, and our permit application fees were returned. Unfortunately, CDFW put an expiration date of 2013 on that prior letter, and we have to reapply for another one for Phase 2. We asked CDFW to simply reissue or renew the original “No LSAA Needed Letter”, but they want a full reapplication for their administrative record, instead. Nothing has changed in the nature of the ASR project from Phase 1 to Phase 2, and the exact same conditions exist in 2017 to justify a “No LSAA Needed Letter”, as occurred in 2008. District staff believe a “No LSAA Needed Letter” remains the appropriate approach, since no construction has ever occurred within the flood plain due to either phase of ASR, so that CDFW has no jurisdiction, as all diversion points are existing California American Water (CAW) wells. The project is also an offset of unpermitted summer diversions out of a fully appropriated season, into the winter period approved for ongoing legal diversions by the SWRCB, and mandated by Water Rights Order 95-10. Thus both the ASR Projects are a net environmental benefit.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Administrative Committee support our recommendation to the District Board to consider spending $7,311 for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2016-2017 to cover this permit application fee, if it is required by CDFW. The District is very likely to have this fee waived, if no LSAA is issued.

IMPACT TO STAFF/RESOURCES: If CDFW decides to issue a “No LSAA Needed Letter” as it did for ASR Phase 1 in 2008, then the check will be returned and the expense will not be incurred. If they decide to enter into the LSAA development process, then 50% of the fee will be reimbursed by our co-water right holder and project partner, CAW, as part of ongoing project expenses.

CEQA COMPLIANCE: This permit application mandated by the SWRCB is not itself a “project” as defined by CEQA Regulation #15378. The existing ASR project itself was subject to CEQA, and the District complied with CEQA and NEPA, respectively, through producing and filing a combined Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Environmental Assessment (EA) with the State Clearing House: MPWMD Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project EIR/EA - SCH#2004121065

EXHIBITS

None

file:///U:\staff\Boardpacket\2017\20170619\ConsentClndr\03\Item-3.docx