Letter to Department of the Interior

Letter

Last week, the Department of the Interior announced a brief window for public comment on a controversial Memorandum of Agreement relating to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). This period for public comment followed the ongoing efforts of five Northern California Members of Congress who have repeatedly called on the Interior Department to rescind the document, noting that it was developed behind closed doors and that it gives water export agencies south of the Delta and in Southern California unprecedented influence over an important public process concerning California's precious fresh water supplies.

U.S. Reps. George Miller (CA-7), Mike Thompson (CA-1), Doris Matsui (CA-5), Jerry McNerney (CA-11) and John Garamendi (CA-10) submitted comment to the Department of the Interior today, noting their disappointment in the limited nature of the comment period.

The Members reiterated that Interior must retract its support for the document and allow a minimum of 45 days for public comment, and that the process be opened up to include other key stakeholders left out of the discussions, including Bay Area, Delta and coastal communities, farmers, businesses, and fishermen.

Excerpt: "…we remain deeply disappointed by the brevity of the comment period. The Department of the Interior should retract its support for the MOA and allow at least 45 days for public comment."

The lawmakers recently held a series of meetings with Interior Department and California officials to express their concerns about the Memorandum of Agreement that the Department signed with water export agencies, an agreement that was developed and signed without input from Bay-Delta stakeholders. They followed those meetings with a letter to Secretary Ken Salazar to express their objections to the current BDCP.

The period of public comment came as a result of the Members' advocacy. However, the white paper issued by Interior and limited period for public comment did not satisfy the Members' concerns.

Excerpt: "Our concerns remain largely unaddressed. Despite the contention that Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) are typically applicant-driven processes and that significant involvement of the export contractors is "appropriate and fully consistent" with existing practices, it is clear that state and federal agencies are failing to consider the specific circumstances surrounding the BDCP."

The statement submitted today details clear steps the Department of the Interior must take to ensure that the BDCP is not crafted behind closed doors with select stakeholders.

Excerpt: "We would like to reemphasize the need for sustained, serious, and meaningful consultation with in-Delta groups. For that reason, we continue to urge the Department of Interior to retract its support for the MOA, extend the public comment period, and develop a BDCP process that is truly fair and transparent. It is more important to get this HCP done correctly rather than just done. A 50-year plan deserves no less."

The full text of the Nov. 4 letter is below. A pdf version is attached.

_____

November 4, 2011

Bureau of Reclamation
Bay-Delta Office
801 I Street, Ste. 140
Sacramento, CA 95814

To whom it may concern:

We appreciate the opportunity for public comment on the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed by state and federal agencies and south-of-Delta water export contractors. However, we remain deeply disappointed by the brevity of the comment period. The Department of the Interior should retract its support for the MOA and allow at least 45 days for public comment.

We have also reviewed the Department's response to our earlier correspondence and its accompanying "white paper" on the MOA. Our concerns remain largely unaddressed. Despite the contention that Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) are typically applicant-driven processes and that significant involvement of the export contractors is "appropriate and fully consistent" with existing practices, it is clear that state and federal agencies are failing to consider the specific circumstances surrounding the BDCP.

Unlike most HCPs, the BDCP is being developed and funded by agencies that do not represent the geographic area that will be most affected. The BDCP proposes dramatic changes to the Delta region, and many of the proposed changes will be harmful to our constituents. Since the water export contractors do not represent this area, it is unacceptable that they wield disproportionate influence in this process and that local representatives from the Delta region are largely excluded.

The BDCP is at a critical juncture. As the Department reviews the public comments received and develops a path forward, we wish to reemphasize several vital points. To be successful and enjoy legitimacy, the BDCP must:

* Vigorously engage Delta communities and respond to their concerns in a thoughtful, substantive, and responsible manner incorporating assurances as to their concerns in the BDCP document (or wherever appropriate);

* Restore the health of the Delta estuary and California's fisheries;

* Protect the quality and availability of local water resources for farmers, families, and businesses in the Delta and north-of-Delta regions;

* Preserve flood protection for local communities;

* Be consistent with all relevant federal and state environmental statutes;

* Achieve the co-equal goals as established by state law and supported by the Interior Department, which means addressing not just water supply reliability but also restoring the Delta ecosystem and enhancing the Delta as a place.

We appreciate recent outreach by state and federal agencies to in-Delta stakeholders and environmental NGOs. However, previous pledges of collaboration and transparency have fallen far short. We would like to reemphasize the need for sustained, serious, and meaningful consultation with in-Delta groups. For that reason, we continue to urge the Department of the Interior to retract its support for the MOA, extend the public comment period, and develop a BDCP process that is truly fair and transparent. It is more important to get this HCP done correctly rather than just done. A 50-year plan deserves no less.

Several of us plan to file individual comments in the coming days to reflect the specific needs of our constituents. In addition, we are attaching a copy of our letter dated October 24, which we ask that you consider as part of our comment. While every community has unique concerns, we are united in our belief that dramatic changes are required if the BDCP is to succeed. We appreciate your attention to this letter.

Sincerely,

_________________ _________________
Jerry McNerney George Miller
Member of Congress Member of Congress

_________________ _________________
Doris Matsui Mike Thompson
Member of Congress Member of Congress

_________________
John Garamendi
Member of Congress

Source