Department of Public Works February 28, 1994
City of Thousand Oaks
2400 Willow Lane
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Re: Water Rights Application 29408; Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR); City of Thousand Oaks, Applicant; Comments by California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Protestant.
The following are the comments by the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA) to the NOP for the DEIR for Water Right Application 29408.
The City of Thousand Oaks will be the lead agency and will prepare an EIR for the subject project associated with WR Application 29408. The responsible agency is the State Water Resources Control Board.
The proposed project is located in Ventura County in Southern California near the Pacific Ocean. The City of Thousand Oaks has filed WR Application 29408 to appropriate and a petition to reclaim and use:
o Treated wastewater discharged from the City of Thousand Oaks' Hill Canyon Wastewater Treatment Plant (HCTP);
o Accretions from aquifer spillage within the City; and
o Storm drainage system return flow originating from within the City.
This water will be used for irrigation, fish and wildlife enhancement, and maintenance of dedicated instream beneficial uses. The water would be used on property owned by the City, located within the City, or by downstream Water Districts in accordance with agreements which are currently being negotiated. The use of the reclaimed water for irrigation would help to alleviate Ventura County's reliance on imported water and local groundwater supplies and would aid in drought-proofing the Calleguas Municipal Water District (CMWD) Service Area. Groundwater pumping and Conejo Creek diversions by adjacent landowners would be reduced by an amount equal to the amount of water diverted under the project. Instream beneficial uses include assuring a sustained recharge of the Santa Rosa Basin (about 1,370 acre-feet per year (AFY) on average and assuring a minimum release of 2 cfs at the downstream point of diversion for habitat maintenance. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 3; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
The City of Thousand Oaks is located near the interchange of State Highway 23 and U.S. Highway 101. The HCTP is located on the North Fork Arroyo Conejo Creek, a tributary of Conejo Creek. Water in Arroyo Conejo Creek includes all the above listed sources, in addition to natural stream flows. The City is not attempting to appropriate the natural or stormwater flows of Arroyo Conejo Creek. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 3; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
The project study area includes all of the above mentioned water district service areas and the riparian lands of the Conejo Creek system. The water system includes the North and South Forks of Arroyo Conejo Creek, Conejo Creek, Calleguas Creek, and Mugu Lagoon. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 4; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
The HCTP, constructed in 1960, discharged about 9,720 AF of water in 1992 into the North Fork of Arroyo Conejo Creek. The project proposes diverting and reclaiming up to 24.0 cfs from Arroyo Conejo and Conejo Creeks for beneficial use within the Conejo Creek system, the City, and the Camrosa, Calleguas Municipal and Pleasant Valley County Water Districts. We reference the proposed points of discharge and diversion as stated on page 5 of the NOP. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 5; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
A minimum of 2 cfs (1,460 AFY) would be bypassed at Point #3 to flow beyond the CMWD point of diversion and would be dedicated for instream beneficial uses in the Conejo and Calleguas Creeks to Mugu Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 5; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
The project is consistent with the Ventura County Water Management "208" Plan and is supported by local agencies and environmental groups. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 5; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
Subsequent to EIR certification [January 1992] by the Thousand Oaks City Council, the Water Rights EIR was challenged in early 1992 by eight property owners along Conejo Creek who divert creek water for agricultural irrigation use. The Ventura County Superior Court ruled in favor of the property owners in that the EIR was inadequate in its evaluation of land use and agricultural impacts and its description of the reduced-scale project alternatives. [We reference the following: See Project Description and Purpose; page 2; Notice of Preparation, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Thousand Oaks Water Right Application No. 29408]
The Draft EIR should include the following information, data, evaluations and studies:
Conejo Creek System - Hydrology
o The HCTP, constructed in 1960, discharged about 9,720 AF of water in 1992 into the North Fork of Arroyo Conejo Creek.
Name the downstream diverters who diverted and used the 9,720 acre feet of water discharged by the HCTP into the North Fork of Arroyo Conejo Creek in 1992. What was the basis of their water right to divert said 9,720 acre feet of wastewater?
What was the amount of the 9,720 acre feet of wastewater discharged by the HCTP into the North Fork of Arroyo Conejo Creek which was not diverted and flowed to Mugu Lagoon in 1992?
Provide information and data on the annual amount of water discharged by the HCTP into the North Fork of Arroyo Conejo Creek since 1960. What amount of the water discharged by the HCTP flowed into Mugu Lagoon on an annual basis since 1960?
o Provide historic information and data on the annual amount of natural flows in the Conejo Creek System (unimpaired).
o Provide information and data on the present amount of natural flows available for diversion under existing water rights in the Conejo Creek System.
o Provide information and data on the annual amount of imported water conveyed into the Conejo Creek System. Name the sources of the imported water.
o Provide information and data on the historic and present annual amount of water reserved in water right permits to protect public trust fish and wildlife resources in the Conejo Creek System. i.e. Mandatory minimum streamflow requirements.
o What is the annual amount of accretion water from aquifer spillage within the City?
o What is the annual amount of storm drainage system return flow originating from within the City?
* Note: Conejo Creek System includes the North Fork and South Fork of Arroyo Conejo Creek, Conejo Creek, Calleguas Creek, and Mugu Lagoon.
Water Rights
o Considering only water rights, does the City's proposed project comply with Section 13550 (a) (b) (c) & (d) and Section 13551 of the California Water Code?
o Describe the claimed water rights held by the eight property owners. i.e. season and amount of daily and annual diversions. Describe whether they are diverting surface flows, groundwater or the underflow of the Conejo River system. Evaluate the cumulative impacts to the availability of ground water and surface flows from the City's Project, the eight property owners diversions and other diversions in the Conejo Creek System.
Non-Riparian Use
o Describe whether the eight property owners and other riparian land owners are diverting, selling or transferring water diverted under the claim of riparian rights for use to non-riparian lands from the Conejo Creek system.
Riparian Land Uses
o Describe the location and total acres used by the eight property owners and other riparian land owners, including their land use activities. Evaluate the amount of water used by the individual riparian land owner on a daily and seasonal basis. Are the riparian diverters in compliance with Sections 100.5 and 100 of the California Water Code?
Conservation Measures
o Describe whether the eight property owners and other riparian property owners, including the City and other water users have implemented a conservation program and conservation measures to reduce impacts to groundwater from seawater intrusion in the Conejo River system. Evaluate whether the conservation program and conservation measures are working effectively to improve groundwater and prevent seawater intrusion.
Explain whether a Groundwater Management Program has been implemented for the Conejo Creek System.
Cumulative Impacts to Groundwater Quality and Quantity
o Evaluate the cumulative impacts to groundwater quality and quantity in the Conejo River system from the City's proposed project, riparian diversions such as the eight property owners, other riparian land owners and other water projects.
Cumulative Impacts to Underflow of the Conejo Creek System
o Evaluate the cumulative impacts to the underflow of the Conejo River system from the City's proposed project, riparian diversions such as the eight property owners, other riparian land owners and other water projects.
Cumulative Impacts to Public Trust Fish and Wildlife Resources
o Describe the fish and aquatic species and their habitat in the Conejo Creek System. Evaluate the cumulative impacts to the public trust fish and wildlife species of the Conejo Creek System with the City's proposed project.
o Describe the fish and aquatic species and their habitat in Mugu Lagoon. Evaluate the cumulative impacts to the public trust fish and wildlife species of the Mugu Lagoon with the City's proposed project.
o Describe the fish and aquatic species and their habitat in the Conejo Creek System. Evaluate the cumulative impacts to the public trust fish and wildlife resources of the Conejo Creek System from existing water projects and riparian diversions without the City's project.
o Describe the fish and aquatic species and their habitat in Mugu Lagoon. Evaluate the cumulative impacts to the public trust fish and wildlife resources of the Mugu Lagoon from existing water projects and riparian diversions without the City's project.
Federal and State Threatened and Endangered Species
o Describe the federal and state threatened and endangered fish, aquatic, wildlife, and plant species in the Conejo Creek system, including Mugu Lagoon. Evaluate the direct and cumulative impacts to these species from the City's proposed project, riparian diversions, and other water projects in the Conejo Creek system. Include the recovery plans in the DEIR prepared by either the federal or state fish and wildlife agencies.
Surface Water Quality
o Describe the present condition of surface water quality in the Conejo Creek System. Is the present condition of surface water quality having any impacts to fish and aquatic species in the Conejo Creek System and also in Mugu Lagoon. What are the effects to water quality and plantlife in the Conejo Creek System from discharges from the HCPT? Considering water quality and plantlife, are said discharges from the HCPT in compliance with Section 13550 (d) of the California Water Code?
o Are stormwater discharges originating from the City's stormwater drainage system having any effects to water quality in the Conejo Creek System?
o Describe whether return flows from agricultural land use practices are having any adverse impact to water quality in the Conejo Creek System.
o Evaluate the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to surface water quality and fish and aquatic resources from the City's proposed project, riparian diversions and other water projects.
Riparian Habitat
o Describe the present condition of riparian habitat in the Conejo Creek system. Evaluate the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to riparian habitat in the Conejo Creek System with and without the City's Project.
Project Minimum Flows For Protection and Enhancement of Public Trust Resources
As stated in the NOP, a minimum flow of 2 cfs (1,460 AFY) would be bypassed at Point #3 to flow beyond the CMWD point of diversion and would be dedicated for instream beneficial uses in the Conejo and Calleguas Creeks to Mugu Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean.
o Explain how the flow of 2 cfs was reached to protect and enhance public trust resources from Point #3 to Mugu Lagoon. Was this minimum flow reached based on scientific studies? Include the results of the studies in the DEIR.
o To ensure that the minimum flow of 2 cfs is maintained at all times, we will request the State Water Board to require the City to install and maintain a fulltime measuring measure as near Mugu Lagoon as possible. Describe the proposed location of the fulltime measuring device.
Growth Inducing Impacts
o Evaluate the cumulative growth inducing impacts from the City's project.
Other Project Alternatives
o Evaluate the physical feasibility of a De-Sal Project Alternative to recharge the groundwater aquifer of the Conejo Creek System.
o Evaluate a Conjunctive Use Alternative which allows the treated water from the HCTP to flow down the Conejo Creek System to improve groundwater quality and surface flows, and protect the public trust resources affected by water diversions in the Conejo Creek System.
California Environmental Quality Act
We are requesting the draft and final EIR comply fully with the California Environmental Quality Act and its Guidelines.
Please provide the CSPA with a timely copy of the draft EIR at the address listed below.
Respectfully Submitted
__________________________________
Robert J. Baiocchi
For: California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
P.O. Box 357
Quincy, CA 95971
Bus Tel: 916-283-3767 (Quincy Office), 916-836-0338 (Home Office) and 916-283-1007 (Law Office)
cc: Kathy Mrowka
Division of Water Rights
John Turner, Chief
Environmental Services
Department of Fish and Game
Jim Crenshaw, President
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Bill Jennings
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Tom Gregory
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Mike Jackson, Counsel
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Interested Parties