California Water Commission WATER STORAGE INVESTMENT PROGRAM Item

California Water Commission WATER STORAGE INVESTMENT PROGRAM Item 9 Final Application Scores & Determinations

South County Ag Program • Individual scores Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 12 REV 27 27 Resiliency 25 20 Implementation Risk 15 15 Total Water Storage Investment Program 74

South County Ag Program • Public Benefit Ratio & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 1. 05 • Normalized to 12 • NMB • Application included emergency response, was not part of the proposed project • Recreation benefits brought up in June meeting • Total PBR 12 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

South County Ag Program • Relative Environmental Value • Application identified 6 ecosystem priorities and 1 water quality priority • Ecosystem REV 73. 2% • Water Quality REV 88. 9% • Added together and normalized to 27 points out of a maximum of 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

South County Ag Program • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 10 points • Uncertain future 10 points • Not clear if the two extreme climate scenarios were used in the analysis • Did not describe how each public benefit would change or could be adapted • Total 20 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

South County Ag Program • Implementation Risk • • Technical feasibility 5 points Financial feasibility 4 points Economic feasibility 4 points Environmental feasibility 4 points • Total 17 points • Normalized to 15 points out of a maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

South County Ag: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Temperance Flat • Scoring and Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 33 REV 27 10 Resiliency 25 19 Implementation Risk 15 9 Total Water Storage Investment Program 71

Temperance Flat • Public Benefit Ratio & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 2. 92 • No non-monetized benefits claimed • Total PBR 33 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Temperance Flat • Relative Environmental Value • Application identified 11 ecosystem priorities • Ecosystem REV 29. 6% • Normalized to 10 points out of maximum 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

Temperance Flat • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 8 points • Did not describe project’s inclusion in other integrated planning documents • Uncertain future 11 points • Some benefits were maintained or increased under extreme climate scenarios, flood benefit was reduced • Total 19 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Temperance Flat • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 5 points • Financial feasibility 1 point • High risk of being unable to fund project • Economic feasibility 3 points • B/C ratio less than 1 • Environmental feasibility 1 point • Timeframes in application not likely to be met • Total 10 points • Normalized to 9 points out of possible 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Temperance Flat: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Willow Springs • Scores & Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 12 REV 27 17 Resiliency 25 14 Implementation Risk 15 10 Total Water Storage Investment Program 53

Willow Springs • Public Benefit Ratio & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 1. 00 • Normalized to 11 • NMB 1 additional point for flood benefit • Total PBR score 12 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Willow Springs • Relative Environmental Value • Application identified 2 ecosystem priorities • Ecosystem REV 49. 6% • Normalized to 17 points out of maximum 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

Willow Springs • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 10 points • Uncertain future 4 points • • No analysis of the two extreme climate scenarios No analysis of future projects and water management actions No analysis of other sources of uncertainty Storage during 5 -year drought – application used average storage • Total 14 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Willow Springs • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 5 points • Financial feasibility 1 point • Sufficient funds may not be available for construction and O&M • Economic feasibility 2 points • B/C ratio substantially less than 1 • Environmental feasibility 3 points • Permit schedule not included in application • Total 11 points • Normalized to 10 points out of maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Willow Springs: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Kern Fan • Scores & Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 12 REV 27 13 Resiliency 25 12 Implementation Risk 15 11 Total Water Storage Investment Program 48

Kern Fan • Public Benefit Ratio & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 1. 05 • Non-monetized benefits not claimed • Total PBR score 12 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Kern Fan • Relative Environmental Value • Application included 3 ecosystem priorities • Ecosystem REV 37. 9% • Normalized to 13 points out of maximum 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

Kern Fan • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 7 points • Did not describe project’s inclusion in other integrated planning documents • Uncertain future 5 points • No analysis of the two extreme climate scenarios • No analysis of other sources of uncertainty • Storage at end of 5 -year drought was low • Total 12 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Kern Fan • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 4 points • Financial feasibility 3 points • Sufficient funds may not be available for construction & operations and maintenance • Economic feasibility 2 points • B/C ratio substantially lower than 1 • June applicant meeting: were adjustments made to water unit values at May meeting? • Environmental feasibility 4 points • Total 13 points • Normalized to 11 points out of maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Kern Fan: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Sites • Scores & Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 13 REV 27 15 Resiliency 25 21 Implementation Risk 15 12 Total Water Storage Investment Program 61

Sites • PBR & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 1. 10 • Normalized to 12 • Non-monetized benefits (recreation, flood, emergency response): additional 1 point for recreation • Sites also claimed other non-monetized benefits (flexibility of water delivery) which did not fall into the three categories of non-monetized benefits but was considered in the resiliency score • Total PBR Score 13 out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Sites • Relative Environmental Value • • Application identified 10 ecosystem priorities and 4 water quality priorities Ecosystem REV 40. 5% Water Quality REV 52. 5% Normalized to 15 points out of maximum 27 points • June applicant meeting question about priorities Water Storage Investment Program

Sites • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 10 points • Acknowledged the value of flexibility to CVP/SWP • Uncertain future 11 points • Frequency of water delivery to Yolo Bypass decreased under 1 extreme climate scenario • Did not describe how recreation & flood control benefits would change under extreme climate and other uncertainties • Total: 21 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Sites • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 5 points • Financial feasibility 3 points • No explicit funding source for some capital & operations and maintenance costs • Economic feasibility 4 points • Environmental feasibility 2 points • Permit schedule; project impacts not evaluated • Total 14 points • Normalized to 12 points out of maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Sites : Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Chino Basin • Scores & Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 23 REV 27 24 Resiliency 25 12 Implementation Risk 15 10 Total Water Storage Investment Program 69

Chino Basin • PBR & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 1. 78 • Normalized to 20 • NMB plus 3 points for emergency response benefits • Total PBR 23 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Chino Basin • Relative Environmental Value • Application included 2 ecosystem priorities and 1 water quality priority • Ecosystem REV 60. 4% • Water Quality REV 92. 5% • Normalized to 24 points out of maximum 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

Chino Basin • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 8 points • Did not describe project’s inclusion in other integrated planning documents • Uncertain future 4 points • No analysis of the two extreme climate scenarios • No analysis of future projects and water management actions • No analysis of project performance during a 5 -year drought • Total 12 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Chino Basin • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 3 points • Preliminary operations plan is generally described and supported • Financial feasibility 3 points • Economic feasibility 2 points • B/C ratio in technical review updated after applicant meeting in June • B/C ratio still substantially less than 1 • Environmental feasibility 3 points • Instream flow dedication • Environmental document and permit timelines • Total 11 points • Normalized to 10 points out of maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Chino Basin: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Pacheco Reservoir • Scores & Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 27 REV 27 21 Resiliency 25 23 Implementation Risk 15 11 Total Water Storage Investment Program 82

Pacheco Reservoir • Public Benefit Ratio & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 2. 02 • Normalized to 23 • NMB plus 4 points for well supported flood benefits • Total PBR 27 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Pacheco Reservoir • Relative Environmental Value • Application identified 11 ecosystem priorities • Ecosystem REV 59. 5% • Normalized to 21 points out of maximum 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

Pacheco Reservoir • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 8 points • Did not describe project’s inclusion in other integrated planning documents • Uncertain future 15 points • Total 23 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Pacheco Reservoir • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 5 points • Financial feasibility 3 points • Sufficient funds not likely available to cover construction & operation of project • Economic feasibility 4 points • Environmental feasibility 1 point • Very early in environmental documentation process • Completion dates very close to statutory deadline • Total 13 points • Normalized to 11 points out of maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Pacheco: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Los Vaqueros • Scores & Determinations Component Max Value Score PBR & NMB 33 23 REV 27 17 Resiliency 25 22 Implementation Risk 15 14 Total Water Storage Investment Program 76

Los Vaqueros • PBR & Non-monetized benefits • PBR 1. 81 • Normalized to 20 points • NMB plus 3 points for emergency response benefits • Total PBR 23 points out of maximum 33 points Water Storage Investment Program

Los Vaqueros • Relative Environmental Value • Application identified 2 ecosystem priorities • Ecosystem REV 48. 8% • Normalized to 17 points out of maximum 27 points Water Storage Investment Program

Los Vaqueros • Resiliency • Integration & Flexibility 10 points • Uncertain future 12 points • No analysis of other sources of uncertainty • Did not describe how recreation benefits would change under extreme climate scenarios and other uncertainties • Total 22 points out of maximum 25 points Water Storage Investment Program

Los Vaqueros • Implementation Risk • Technical feasibility 5 points • Financial feasibility 3 points • Capacity of other required participants e. g. agricultural, not fully demonstrated • Economic feasibility 3 points • B/C ratio just under 1 • Applicant asked about updates to economic worksheets • Environmental feasibility 5 points • Total 16 points • Normalized to 14 points out of maximum 15 points Water Storage Investment Program

Los Vaqueros: Two-step Commission decision 1. Decide final scores 2. Make 9 Determinations 1. Cost effective 2. Improves operations of State water system 3. Net improvement ecosystem & water quality conditions 4. Measurable improvement to Delta or tributaries Water Storage Investment Program 5. 50% Program cost share 6. 50% Ecosystem improvements 7. Appears feasible 8. Advances long term objectives 9. Consistent with laws & regulations

Proposition 1 Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 Water Storage Investment Program