People have been asking, “Where do we stand on the Delta Tunnel Project?” “Are they building in?” “Is the project still moving forward?” SHORT ANSWER: No, they aren’t building it. It’s in the review process now. And…the tunnel project was specifically NOT part of Newsom’s expedited projects for the state, so it will be going through the full review process.
First, a quick reminder of the history: The Delta Tunnel(s) Project was begun in 2006 as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (“BDCP”) and went through several guises until it was renamed California WaterFix, which was approved by DWR in 2017. The WaterFix Project consisted of two tunnels diverting up to 9,000 cubic feet per second from the Sacramento River at Hood and carrying it under the Delta to the existing pumps near Tracy.
Save the California Delta Alliance, and others, filed lawsuits challenging the WaterFix Project in 2017. By 2019, DWR saw the handwriting on the wall and figured out they were going to lose the lawsuits. In May of 2019, the WaterFix Project was canceled by DWR. SUCCESS! Thanks in large part to all of our members getting on the bus, going to meetings, sending in comments.
The One Tunnel Project: DWR came back and proposed the Delta Conveyance Project in 2020. The Delta Conveyance Project is really the same project as WaterFix with a few adjustments. Now there is one tunnel instead of two and the capacity is 6,000 cfs, down from 9,000. Also of note, the tunnel has now been routed around the edge of the Delta near Highway 5, instead of running through the center of the Delta as WaterFix did.
NOTE: DWR’s decision to re-route the tunnel was in response to allegations in Delta Alliance’s lawsuit that a tunnel route through the center of the Delta would destroy recreation and boating in the Delta for the decades long construction period. Due to our efforts, boating will be able to continue in the waterways.
So where are we now?
The one-tunnel Delta Conveyance Project is currently undergoing environmental review and there are several regulatory processes yet to come, including applications for permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, the California State Water Resources Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Services, the federal Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Delta Stewardship Council. Whew!
There are many legal flaws with the Delta Conveyance Project and it would still be terrible for the Delta, even though the tunnel route is better. Delta resident’s participation in submitting comments and attending meetings was essential in helping us win the 2017 lawsuit.
Your ongoing participation will be essential to helping us win future legal challenges as well!!!
Save the California Delta Alliance (STCDA) 
So you ever feel that our fearless zero Gavin really doesn’t want to deal with this, and is only pushing for it because of family connection and past favors done for him by Moonbeam (and of course Stu Resnick’s campaign money)?
The lack of rational thought given to this project amazes me. The peripheral canal was by far a better idea, its route was along Highway 5, which made sense because the State already owned the land The construction of that highway included borrow pits that were to be integrated with the canal, again making sense.
Somewhere along the line we lost our ability to think. Why does this need to be a tunnel? Why not a pipeline? Possibly half buried. The construction costs would be so much lower, time to build would be much faster, environmental damage would be minimal. And with money saved maybe even make it a double walled pipeline.
Speaking of rational thought, using earthquakes to justify a tunnel makes no sense. Tunnels do well during earthquakes ONLY IF they are drilled through rock. Otherwise, tunnels fail like buried pipes. There are records online if you want to research my assertions here, China has been building tunnels and chronicling successes and failures.
And what happens if this single lined tunnel leaks for whatever reason? If a levee breaks, theres a small army of folks with tractors and earth moving equipment that could be put to work rapidly on a temporary levee repair. But if its an underground leak, the special equipment and people required for repair are alot harder to find, wouldnt you think?
What isnt mentioned is the REST of the SWP. Any one else think an earthquake strong enough to break a levee is going to crack that concrete canal? And wont other infrastructure be affected by this earthquake? And the pumps a tunnel requires, theyll need electricity. Haven’t earthquakes caused power outages?
Off topic, the DWR has been working to “restore” tidal marshland areas on Sherman Island to mitigate saltwater intrusion. Does it occur to anyone else we drained the Delta to begin with because the swamp, er, marshlands were filled with mosquitos? Fun fact, mosquitos are the most deadly animal on the planet to us humans, according to Google.
Lastly, how can the DWR be allowed to promise SWP water to any Water District? Haven’t they already overpromised the SWP water? I read awhile back there was a deal cut with Antioch where they wouldnt oppose the Tunnel in return for the DWR’s guarantee of water from the SWP. If water was money, it seems like the DWR would be bankrupt. Maybe I think too much.
Thank you for allowing me to ramble on. Keep up the good fight!
You are 100 percent correct. Stu Resnick has been funding everyone starting with Schwarzenegger who revitalized the old peripheral canal, then Brown, now Newsom and also Feinstein, Obama, I guess Trump too, since he was pushing for it, also.
YES – we’ve pushed and pushed for a route by Highway 5. I agree an above-ground or nearly above-ground makes way more sense. I think somewhere along the line Jerry Brown got the bright idea if it’s a tunnel it will go “under” the Delta and no one will even know it’s there. Well, that was silliness.
As for the rest of your comments – I agree totally and you are right-on target. Thanks for being a supporter!
Originally the tunnels project was to be at a depth of 1000’. Then it was dormant and returned at a depth of 350’, this is the depth where all the aquifer wells are at. Does MWD plan to steal the fresh water from the Bay Area? The farms and communities will be devastated and farmland will sell cheap, that is the plan.
MWD did this in Moreno Valley in the 1950’s and put the farmers out of business. Residents had to buy their aquifer water at a high price from MWD. The San Bernardino aquifer water was sold to MWD and the communities were delivered recycled wastewater.
Who has the right to either sell aquifer water or to steal it? I think this is big business stealing resources from unsuspecting farmers and small communities. These resources are currently being used by the local farmers, communities and cities.
This aquifer depth and that the local population uses this aquifer water was not disclosed in any EIR, engineering report or any other discussion.
The federal government is supporting this activity using federal tax dollars.
This is an environmental justice issue. I and my community have water rights. The state wants to take that away and sell it to private companies who then sell it to other communities and corporations.
The Bay Area will need to spend billions to filter and treat tidal water polluted by Feedlots sewage, poorly treated Regional Wastewater and poorly treated industrial wastewater, cargo ships bilge dumps and toxic seepage from thousands of derelict boat’s flotsam and jetsam.
We must stop the tunnel because the original reason for it was to bypass the delta pollution. Why spend billions on a tunnel when the funds can clean the delta water and build habitats? Across California every region needs updated water infrastructure and clean recycled wastewater treatment facilities.
The great Delta Waterways Cleanup will make the way clear for habitat restoration. The wildlife and fishing will be supported and the beautiful waterways forests will flourish.
The delta water will be clean and the aqueduct water will be clean.