CAL WATER FIX HEARING: Deadlines for briefs and questions for petitioners and protestants

From the Cal Water Fix Hearing Team at the State Water Board:

Please read this email carefully because it contains important information concerning due dates established during the hearing on February 8, 2018.

During the hearing on February 8, 2018, the hearing officers directed the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) (collectively petitioners) to respond to the Natural Resources Defense Council, et al.’s February 7, 2018 Renewed Motion for Stay of Part 2 of the hearing as well as the other comments and issues raised during the hearing that day.  Petitioners have until 5:00 PM on Friday, February 9, 2018 to respond.

The hearing officers set a deadline of 12:00 noon on Tuesday, February 13, 2018 for all other parties to respond to petitioners’ forthcoming submittal.

As part of their response, petitioners should brief the following six questions.  All other parties are invited to brief all or some of questions three through six in their replies.

Questions Directed to Petitioners:

  1. Does the certified final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) address all potential impacts if the WaterFix Project is constructed and operated in stages?  In the supplement to the EIR, what additional analyses will be performed and what specific environmental issues will be evaluated ?
  1. If DWR constructs and operates the WaterFix Project in stages, to what extent would Reclamation participate during the first stage?  Would the WaterFix Project be operated differently if Reclamation does not participate?

Questions Directed to All Parties:

  1. If the WaterFix Project is intended to be constructed and operated in stages, is an amendment to the change petition or any additional supporting information under Water Code sections 1701.1, 1701.2, and 1701.3 necessary? Why or why not?
  1. If the WaterFix Project is constructed and operated in stages, are there potential impacts to legal users of water, fish and wildlife, the public interest, or consideration of appropriate Delta flow criteria that would warrant revisiting any Part 1 or Part 2 key hearing issues? Which issues?
  1. If a supplement to the EIR is entered into the administrative record, what is the most efficient way to address any new information included in the supplement?
  1. Would any conditions necessary to adequately protect the rights of legal users, fish and wildlife, or the public interest be different if the WaterFix Project were constructed in stages?  Would appropriate Delta flow criteria be different?  Why or why not?

RELATED: Cal Water Fix hearing update

Click here to view all posted announcements.

Daily emailsGet the Notebook blog by email and never miss a post!

Sign up for daily emails and get all the Notebook’s aggregated and original water news content delivered to your email box by 9AM. Breaking news alerts, too. Sign me up!

(Visited 67 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply