Delta Species Protection Plan Rejected : Environment: Federal officials say the state’s proposal falls short of protecting endangered wildlife at junction of Sacramento-San Joaquin rivers.

In a move that could mean more restrictions on water exports to Southern California, federal environmental officials on Wednesday rejected key portions of a state plan for protecting endangered fish and wildlife in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

Officials with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said the state plan fell short of assuring that sufficient water is retained in the delta so that “habitat conditions . . . will be protected.”

The state standards would set new fees on water exports and place strict controls on the amount and time of year that water can be pumped out of the delta for delivery to Central and Southern California.

“The standards now proposed by the state . . . would still not be sufficient to protect the ecological health of the estuary,” said Daniel W. McGovern, EPA regional administrator.

McGovern said he hoped the state would modify its plan to satisfy EPA objections. He warned that if it does not the federal agency was prepared to issue rules that would impose stronger protections for the delta.

The federal comments were a disappointment to state officials, who in announcing the proposed standards for the delta in December had characterized them as a bold attempt by the State Water Resources Control Board to protect the environmentally sensitive estuary.

The delta, a maze of islands and channels where the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers meet and flow into San Francisco Bay, is the key transfer point for water that is collected in Northern California and shipped south. It is the habitat for numerous fish and wildlife species, many of which have become endangered as drought and water exports have damaged the health of the estuary.

In a politely worded letter, EPA officials said the state standards would probably slow the decline of endangered species but would not provide the protections needed to restore their habitats so populations could rebuild.

Specifically, they criticized the board for failing to propose standards governing the amount of saltwater intrusion that would be permitted in Suisun Bay adjoining the delta, a “productive nursery for Delta smelt, striped bass and other fish and wildlife.” Environmentalists said such standards would probably require further curtailments in exports so the outflow from the delta could be increased to hold back the saltwater intrusion.

State officials said they were still analyzing the implications of the federal critique.

Gary Bobker, program director for the Bay Institute of San Francisco, an environmental organization, praised the EPA comments, saying the federal agency had pinpointed what he believed to be the shortcomings of the state plan.

The EPA letter, however, was a blow to the 29 water agencies that receive water deliveries from the State Water Project. Many of those agencies had criticized the state proposal as being too restrictive, although the largest, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, had generally supported the state proposal.

While the EPA was issuing comments that could affect long-term water supplies, the California Department of Water Resources was making its own announcement on short-term water deliveries.

Encouraged by a succession of fierce winter storms that dumped heavy rain and snow on Northern California, the state agency announced a substantial increase in water deliveries to Central and Southern California.

Officials said the State Water Project would be able to deliver at least 25% of the water requested by its contractors. Only a month ago, state officials said the project would have to cut deliveries to 10% of the amounts requested.