mission springs water district mswd 2015 uwmp report.pdfmission springs water district 2015 urban...

Mission Springs Water District

2015 Urban Water Management Plan

June 20, 2016

2015 URBAN WATER

MANAGEMENT PLAN


June 20, 2016

3 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 200 Santa Ana, CA 92707

Mission Springs Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Table of Contents

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .......................................................... 1-1

1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE ............................................................. 1-1

1.2 UWMP UPDATE AND THE CALIFORNIA WATER CODE ................. 1-1

2 PLAN PREPARATION .............................................................................. 2-1

2.1 BASIS FOR PREPARING A PLAN .......................................................... 2-1

2.2 INDIVIDUAL OR REGIONAL PLANNING AND COMPLIANCE.......... 2-1

2.3 FISCAL OR CALENDAR YEAR AND UNITS OF MEASURE ............. 2-1

2.4 COORDINATION AND OUTREACH ....................................................... 2-1

3 System DESCRIPTION ............................................................................. 3-1

3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION ........................................................................ 3-1

3.2 SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY MAPS ...................................................... 3-7

3.3 SERVICE AREA CLIMATE........................................................................ 3-7

3.4 SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS ....................... 3-7

4 SYSTEM WATER USE .............................................................................. 4-1

4.1 RECYCLED VERSUS POTABLE AND RAW WATER DEMAND ....... 4-1

4.2 WATER USES BY SECTOR ..................................................................... 4-1

4.3 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER LOSSES ......................................... 4-3

4.4 ESTIMATING FUTURE WATER SAVINGS ........................................... 4-4

4.5 WATER USE FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ........................ 4-7

4.6 CLIMATE CHANGE .................................................................................... 4-9

5 BASELINES AND TARGETS ................................................................... 5-1

5.1 UPDATING CALCULATIONS FROM 2010 UWMP .............................. 5-2

5.2 BASELINE PERIODS ................................................................................. 5-2

5.3 SERVICE AREA POPULATION ............................................................... 5-2

5.4 GROSS WATER USE ................................................................................ 5-4

5.5 BASELINE DAILY PER CAPITA WATER USE ..................................... 5-4

5.6 2015 AND 2020 TARGETS ....................................................................... 5-4

5.7 2015 COMPLIANCE DAILY PER CAPITA WATER USE (GPCD) ..... 5-5

Mission Springs Water District Table of Contents 2015 Urban Water Management Plan

ii

5.8 REGIONAL ALLIANCE .............................................................................. 5-6

6 SYSTEM SUPPLIES ................................................................................. 6-1

6.1 PURCHASED IMPORTED WATER ......................................................... 6-1

6.2 GROUNDWATER ....................................................................................... 6-5

6.3 SURFACE WATER ................................................................................... 6-23

6.4 STORMWATER ......................................................................................... 6-23

6.5 WASTEWATER AND RECYCLED WATER ......................................... 6-23

6.6 DESALINATED WATER OPPORTUNITIES ........................................ 6-26

6.7 EXCHANGES OR TRANSFERS ............................................................... 6-28

6.8 FUTURE WATER PROJECTS ............................................................... 6-28

6.9 SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PLANNED SOURCES OF WATER .. 6-29

6.10 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS TO SUPPLY.......................................... 6-29

7 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT ...................................... 7-1

7.1 CONSTRAINTS ON WATER SOURCES ............................................... 7-1

7.2 RELIABILITY BY TYPE OF YEAR ......................................................... 7-17

7.3 SUPPLY AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT ............................................. 7-20

7.4 REGIONAL SUPPLY RELIABILITY ....................................................... 7-21

8 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING ................................. 8-1

8.1 STAGES OF ACTION ................................................................................ 8-1

8.2 PROHIBITIONS ON END USES .............................................................. 8-4

8.3 PENALTIES, CHARGES, OTHER ENFORCEMENT OF PROHIBITIONS ........................................................................................... 8-6

8.4 CONSUMPTION REDUCTION METHODS............................................ 8-7

8.5 DETERMINING WATER SHORTAGE REDUCTIONS ....................... 8-10

8.6 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE IMPACTS ........................................ 8-10

8.7 RESOLUTIONS OR ORDINANCE ......................................................... 8-11

8.8 CATASTROPHIC SUPPLY INTERRUPTION ...................................... 8-11

8.9 MINIMUM SUPPLY NEXT THREE YEARS.......................................... 8-12

9 DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES ................................................... 9-1

9.1 DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR RETAIL AGENCIES .. 9-1


iii

9.2 IMPLEMENTATION OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS .......................... 9-5

9.3 PLANNED IMPLEMENTATION TO ACHIEVE WATER USE TARGETS...................................................................................................................... 9-10

9.4 MEMBERS OF THE CALIFORNIA URBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNCIL.................................................................................................... 9-11

10 PLAN ADOPTION, SUBMITTAL, AND IMPLEMENTATION .................. 10-1

10.1 INCLUSION OF ALL 2015 DATA ........................................................... 10-1

10.2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ............................................................. 10-1

10.3 PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION .................................................... 10-2

10.4 PLAN SUBMITTAL.................................................................................... 10-2

10.5 PUBLIC AVAILABILITY ............................................................................ 10-3

10.6 AMENDING AN ADOPTED UWMP ....................................................... 10-3

APPENDICES

Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act as amended with SBX7-7

Appendix B DWR UWMP Checklist Organized by Subject (Appendix F from Final 2015 DWR UWMP Guidebook)

Appendix C Notice of Public Hearing and Resolution for Plan Adoption

Appendix D Population Tool Worksheets for SBX7-7 Calculations

Appendix E Supply Capability and Projected Demands for Single-Dry Year, Multiple- Dry Year, and Average Conditions (Tables 2-4, 2-5 and 2-6, respectively) from 2015 Metropolitan Urban Water Management Plan

Appendix F AWWA Water Loss Reporting Worksheets

Appendix G MSWD Water Regulations & Services Ordinance No. 93-3

Appendix H Summary of MSWD Conservation BMPs (2011 – 2015)

FIGURES

Figure No. Page

Figure 3-1 MSWD Service Area Location Map ....................................................................3-4

Figure 6-1 Mission Springs Water District Groundwater Subbasins.....................................6-7

Figure 6-2 Mission Springs Water District Wells .................................................................6-8

Mission Springs Water District Table of Contents 2015 Urban Water Management Plan

iv

TABLES

Table No. Page

Table 2-1: Public Water Systems ...........................................................................................2-1

Table 2-2: Plan Identification ................................................................................................2-1

Table 2-3: Agency Identification ...........................................................................................2-2

Table 2-4: Water Supplier Information Exchange .................................................................2-2

Table 2-4A: MSWD UWMP Development Coordination and Public Involvement .............2-3

Table 3-1A: Characteristics of MSWD Wells .......................................................................3-6

Table 3-1B: MSWD Water Storage .......................................................................................3-7

Table 3-1C: Historical District Climate Characteristics ........................................................3-8

Table 3-1: Population – Current and Projected......................................................................3-9

Table 4-1A: Historical District Water Service Connections..................................................4-1

Table 4-1B: Historical Water Use and Water Loss ...............................................................4-2

Table 4-1: Demands for Potable and Raw Water – Actual ....................................................4-2

Table 4-2: Demands for Potable and Raw Water – Projected ...............................................4-3

Table 4-3: Total Water Demands ...........................................................................................4-3

Table 4-4 Retail: 12 Month Water Loss Audit Reporting .....................................................4-3

Table 4-5A: Historical & Projected District Per-Capita Water Use ......................................4-6

Table 4-5B: Projected District Water Demands ....................................................................4-7

Table 4-5C: 2014-2021 RHNA Units for Desert Hot Springs ...............................................4-8

Table 4-5: Inclusion in Water Use Projections ......................................................................4-8

Table 4-6: Climate Change Management Strategies .............................................................4-10

Table 4-7: Sample Climate Change Strategy Performance Measures/Metrics ......................4-11

Table 5-1A: Baseline Daily Per-Capita Water Use ...............................................................5-3

Table 5-1B: Minimum Baseline Daily Per Capita Water Use ...............................................5-3

Table 5-1C: 2020 Targets by Method ....................................................................................5-5

Table 5-1: Baselines And Targets Summary .........................................................................5-5

Table 5-2: 2015 Compliance ..................................................................................................5-6

Table 6-1A: 2014 Water Balance in Mission Creek Subbasin ..............................................6-3

Table 6-1B: 2014 Water Balance in Mission Creek Subbasin ..............................................6-11

Table 6-1C: Historical Groundwater Production for District Wells (AFY) ..........................6-15


v

Table 6-1: Groundwater Volume Pumped .............................................................................6-15

Table 6-2A: Summary of District Groundwater Quality .......................................................6-20

Table 6-2: Wastewater Collected within Service Area in 2015 .............................................6-24

Table 6-3: Wastewater Treatment and Discharge within Service Area in 2015....................6-25

Table 6-3A: Projected Recycled Water Use in MSWD Service Area (AFY) .......................6-26

Table 6-4: Current and Projected Recycled Water Direct Beneficial Uses within Service Area ........................................................................................................................................6-27

Table 6-5: 2010 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projection Compared to 2015 Actual ...........Not Used

Table 6-6: Methods to Expand Future Recycled Water Use .................................................6-29

Table 6-7: Expected Future Water Supply Projects or Programs ..........................................Not Used

Table 6-8: Water Supplies – Actual .......................................................................................6-29

Table 6-9: Water Supplies – Projected ..................................................................................6-30

Table 7-1A: Metropolitan Supply Capability and Projected Demands (AFY)......................7-18

Table 7-1: Bases of Water Year Data ....................................................................................7-20

Table 7-2: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison ...................................................7-20

Table 7-3: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison ..............................................7-21

Table 7-4: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison ........................................7-21

Table 8-1: Stages of WSCP ...................................................................................................8-2

Table 8-2: Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Uses ..........................................................8-5

Table 8-3 Only: Stages Of WSCP – Consumption Reduction Methods ...............................8-8

Table 8-4: Minimum Supply Next Three Years ....................................................................8-12

Table 10-1: Notification to Cities and Counties ....................................................................10-1

Mission Springs Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Acronyms and Abbreviations

A-1

ACRONYMS and ABBREVIATIONS AB Assembly Bill ACWA Association of California Water Agencies AF Acre Feet AFY Acre Feet per Year AMI Area Median Income ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 AVEK Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency AWAC Alliance for Water Awareness and Conservation AWWA American Water Works Association Bay-Delta San Francisco-San Joaquin Bay-Delta BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan BMP Best Management Practices CASGEM California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring CAWCD Central Arizona Water Conservation District CCR Consumer Confidence Reports CDWR California Department of Water Resources CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CII Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System CRA Colorado River Aqueduct CUWCC California Urban Water Conservation Council CVP Central Valley Project CVWD Coachella Valley Water District CWC California Water Code DAC Desert Hot Springs Community DHS Department of Homeland Security DMM Demand Management Measure DOE Department of Energy DOF Department of Finance DVL Diamond Valley Lake DWA Desert Water Agency DWR Department of Water Resources DWCV Desert Water Agency/Coachella Valley Water District EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EOC Emergency Operations Center EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ET Evapotranspiration ETo Evapotranspiration From a Standardized Grass Surface GAMA Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic Information System

Mission Springs Water District Acronyms and Abbreviations 2015 Urban Water Management Plan

A-2

GPCD Gallons Per Capita Per Day GPF Gallons Per Flush GPM Gallons Per Minute GSA Groundwater Sustainability Act GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan HCD Housing and Community Development ICS Intentionally Created Surplus IID Imperial Irrigation District IRWMP Integrated Regional Water Management Plan KML Keyhole Markup Language MAF Million Acre Feet MCL Maximum Contaminant Level Metropolitan Metropolitan Water District of Southern California MG Million Gallons MGD Million Gallons per Day mg/L Milligrams Per Liter MPR Master Plan Report MSWD Mission Springs Water District MTBE Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California MWELO Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance ND Not Detected NDMA N-nitrosodimethylamine NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NT Not Tested OCWD Orange County Water District OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment pCi/L Picocuries Per Liter PHG Public Health Goal PSUSD Palm Springs Unified School District PVID Palo Verde Irrigation District QMCP Quagga Mussel Control Program QSA Quantification Settlement Agreement RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation RTP Regional Transportation Plan RUWMP Regional Urban Water Management Plan RV Recreational Vehicle RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCE Southern California Edison SCGC Southern California Gas Company SDCWA San Diego County Water Authority SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act

Mission Springs Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Acronyms and Abbreviations

A-3

SNWA Southern Nevada Water Authority SOI Sphere of Influence SWP State Water Project SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TAF Thousand Acre Feet TDS Total Dissolved Solids ug/L Micrograms Per Liter USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation USGS United States Geological Survey UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VOC Volatile Organic Compounds WASP Water Supply Allocation Plan WBIC Weather Based Irrigation Controllers WEWAC Water Education Water Awareness Committee WQCP Water Quality Control Plan WRCC Western Regional Climate Center WSA Water Service Area WSAP Water Supply Allocation Plan WSDM Water Surplus and Drought Management WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

Mission Springs Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Chapter 1

1-1

1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Mission Springs Water District (MSWD or District) has prepared the 2015 update of its Urban Water Management Plan to fulfill the requirements outlined in the California Urban Water Management Planning Act and Senate Bill 7 as part of the seventh Extraordinary Session (SBx7-7) (Water Conservation Bill of 2009).

1.2 UWMP UPDATE AND THE CALIFORNIA WATER CODE

This report has been prepared in compliance with Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656 of the Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act), which were added by Statute 1983, Chapter 1009, and became effective on January 1, 1984. This Act requires that “every urban water supplier shall prepare and adopt an urban water management plan” (Water Code § 10620(a)). An “urban water supplier” is defined as a supplier providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually (Water Code § 10617). These plans must be filed with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) every five years. However, the 2015 plans must be submitted to DWR by July 1, 2016. The Act’s requirements include:

• Detailed evaluation of the supplies necessary to meet demands over at least a 20-year period, in five-year increments, for a single dry water year, in multi-year droughts, and during average year conditions;

• Documentation of the stages of actions an urban water supplier would undertake to address up to a 50 percent reduction in its water supplies;

• Description of the actions to be undertaken in the event of a catastrophic interruption in water supplies, and;

• Evaluation of reasonable and practical efficient water uses, recycling, and conservation activities.

1.2.1 Changes in the Act Since 2010 Since 2010, several amendments have been made to the Act. The following is a summary of the significant changes in the Act that have occurred from 2010 to the present:

• Changes the deadline for water suppliers to submit their 2015 UWMPs to DWR by July 1, 2016 (Water Code § 10621(d)).

• Adds “distribution system water loss” to the list of past, present, and projected future water uses that the UWMP is to quantify to the extent that records are available and over the same 5-year increments described in Water Code § 10631(a). (Water Code § 10631(e)(1)(J)). For the 2015 UWMP, the distribution

Mission Springs Water District Chapter 1 2015 Urban Water Management Plan

1-2

system water loss must be quantified for the most recent 12-month period available. For all subsequent updates, the distribution system water loss must be quantified for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. (Water Code § 10631(e)(3)(A)). The distribution system water loss quantification must be reported in accordance with a worksheet approved or developed by DWR through a public process. The water loss quantification worksheet shall be based on the water system balance methodology developed by the American Water Works Association (AWWA) (Water Code § 10631(e)(3)(B)).

• If available and applicable to an urban water supplier, water use projections may display and account for the water savings estimated to result from adopted codes, standards, ordinances, or transportation and land use plans identified by the urban water supplier, as applicable to the service area (Water Code § 10631(e)(4)(A)). To the extent that an urban water supplier reports the information described in § 10631(e)(4)(A), an urban water supplier shall do both of the following: (1) provide citations of the various codes, standards, ordinances, or transportation and land use plans used in making the projections; and (2) indicate the extent that the water use projections consider savings from codes, standards, ordinances, or transportation and land use plans. Water use projections that do not account for these water savings shall note that fact (Water Code § 10631(e)(4)(B)).

• Requires plans by retail water suppliers to include a narrative description that addresses the nature and extent of each water demand management measure (DMM) implemented over the past 5 years. The narrative must describe the water DMMs that the supplier plans to implement to achieve its water use targets pursuant to Water Code § 10608.20 (Water Code § 10631(f)(1)(A)). The narrative must also include descriptions of the following water DMMs: water waste prevention ordinances, metering, conservation pricing, public education and outreach, programs to assess and manage distribution system real loss, water conservation program coordination and staffing support; and other DMMs that have a significant impact on water use as measured in GPCD, including innovative measures, if implemented (Water Code § 10631(f)(1)(B).

• Requires plans by wholesale water suppliers to include a narrative description of metering, public education and outreach, water conservation program coordination and staffing support, and other DMMs that have a significant impact on water use as measured in GPCD, including innovative measures, if implemented, as well as a narrative description of their distribution system asset management and wholesale supplier assistance programs (Water Code § 10631(f)(2)).

• Adds the voluntary reporting in the UWMP of any of the following information: an estimate of the amount of energy used: (1) to extract or divert water supplies; (2) to convey water supplies to water treatment plants or distribution systems; (3) to treat water supplies; (4) to distribute water supplies through the distribution system; (5) for treated water supplies in comparison to the amount used for non-treated water supplies; and (6) to place water into or to withdraw water from storage; and (7) any other energy-related information the urban water supplier


1-3

deems appropriate (Water Code § 10631.2(a)). DWR included in its UWMP guidance a methodology for the voluntary calculation or estimation of the energy intensity of urban water systems (Water Code § 10631.2(b))

• Requires urban water suppliers to submit plans or amendments to plans electronically and to include any standardized forms, tables, or displays specified by DWR (Water Code § 10644(a)(2))..

1.2.2 Senate Bill 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session of 2009, Water Conservation in the Delta Legislative Package

In addition to changes to the Act, the state Legislature passed Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session, referred to as SBx7-7, on November 10, 2009, which became effective February 3, 2010. This law was the water conservation component to the historic Delta legislative package, and seeks to achieve a 20 percent statewide reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020. This implements the Governor’s similar 2008 water use reduction goals. The law requires each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20 percent goal by 2020, and an interim urban water reduction target by 2015. The bill states that the legislative intent is to require all water suppliers to increase the efficiency of use of water resources and to establish a framework to meet the state targets for urban water conservation called for by the Governor. The bill establishes methods for urban retail water suppliers to determine targets to help achieve increased water use efficiency by the year 2020. The law is intended to promote urban water conservation standards consistent with the California Urban Water Conservation Council’s adopted best management practices. An urban retail water supplier may update its 2020 urban water use target in its 2015 UWMP (Water Code § 10608.20(g)).


2-1

2 PLAN PREPARATION 2.1 BASIS FOR PREPARING A PLAN

Per CWC 10617, “urban water supplier” means a supplier, either publicly or privately owned, providing water for municipal purposes either directly or indirectly to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually. An urban water supplier includes a supplier or contractor for water, regardless of the basis of right, which distributes or sells for ultimate resale to customers. This part applies only to water supplied from public water systems. MSWD is a public water supplier that meets the definition of an urban water supplier with 12,967 municipal water service connections and a total 7,252 acre-feet (AF) of water supplied to customers in their water service area in 2015. See Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: Public Water Systems

Public Water

System Number Public Water System Name

Number of

Municipal

Connections

2015

Water

Supplied

2015

(AF)

1 Mission Springs Water District 12,967 7,252

2.2 INDIVIDUAL OR REGIONAL PLANNING AND COMPLIANCE

MSWD has developed an individual UWMP (as opposed to a Regional UWMP) that reports solely on its service area, addresses all requirements of the CWC, and notifies and coordinates with appropriate regional agencies and constituents. See Table 2-2.

Table 2-2: Plan Identification

Individual UWMP

Regional UWMP (RUWMP)

2.3 FISCAL OR CALENDAR YEAR AND UNITS OF MEASURE

MSWD is a water retailer (as opposed to a water wholesaler). The District’s 2015 UWMP has been prepared using calendar years (as opposed to fiscal years) and has been prepared using acre-feet (AF) as the units of water volume measure. See Table 2-3.

2.4 COORDINATION AND OUTREACH

Per CWC 10631(j), an urban water supplier that relies upon a wholesale agency for a source of water shall provide the wholesale agency with water use projections from that


2-2

agency for that source of water in five-year increments to 20 years or as far as data is available. The wholesale agency shall provide information to the urban water supplier for inclusion in the urban water supplier’s plan that identifies and quantifies, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water as required by subdivision (b), available from the wholesale agency to the urban water supplier over the same five-year increments, and during various water-year types in accordance with subdivision (c). An urban water supplier may rely upon water supply information provided by the wholesale agency in fulfilling the plan.

MSWD has provided Desert Water Agency (DWA), the District’s water wholesaler, with projected water use in accordance with CWC 10631 and has relied upon water supply information provided by DWA in fulfilling its 2015 UWMP.

Table 2-4: Water Supplier Information Exchange

The retail supplier has informed the following wholesale supplier(s) of projected

water use in accordance with CWC 10631.

Desert Water Agency

The District also coordinated the development of this Plan with the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), the City of Desert Hot Springs, the City of Palm Springs, and the County of Riverside. The cities and agencies the District coordinated with in the development of the District’s 2015 UWMP are shown in Table 2-4A. The City of Desert Hot Springs, City of Palm Springs, and County of Riverside were notified of the District’s public hearing for consideration of adoption of the Plan at least 60 days prior to the hearing.

Table 2-3: Agency Identification

Type of Agency

Agency is a wholesaler

Agency is a retailer

Fiscal or Calendar Year

UWMP Tables Are in Calendar Years

UWMP Tables Are in Fiscal Years

Units of Measure Used in UWMP

Unit AF


2-3

This UWMP details the specifics as they relate to MSWD and its service area and will refer to Metropolitan, DWA, CVWD and other agencies, along with reference documents throughout.

Table 2-4A: MSWD UWMP Development Coordination and Public Involvement

Coordination and Public Involvement Actions

Agency or

City

Participated

in UWMP

preparation

Used Agency

Data as

Information

Source

Sent a

copy of

Draft

UWMP

Commented

on Draft

UWMP

Sent

Notice of

Public

Hearing

Attended

Public

Hearing

MSWD X X X X X X

City of Desert

Hot Springs X X X X

DWA X X X

CVWD X X X

Metropolitan X

Riverside

County X X

City of Palm

Springs X X

General

Public X X


3-1

3 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION

3.1.1 Regional General Description MSWD along with Coachella Water Authority (CWA), Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Desert Water Agency (DWA), and Indio Water Authority (IWA) are partners in the Coachella Valley Regional Water Management Group (CVRWMG) that leads the Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) program. The Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) program is a local water resources management approach directed by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). It is aimed at securing long-term water supply reliability within California by first recognizing the inter-connectivity of water supplies, and then encouraging the development and implementation of projects that yield combined benefits for water supplies, water quality, and natural resources. The Coachella Valley IRWM region is chiefly the same as the Whitewater River watershed, also known as the Coachella Valley. The Region is about 65 miles long on a northwest-southeast trending axis and covers approximately 1,420 square miles. The Coachella Valley IRWM region currently faces multiple potential water supply and quality issues, including increasing water demands, groundwater overdraft, stormwater capture and management, groundwater quality, surface water quality, flooding, and regulatory constraints that may be associated with any of these issues. Thus, the IRWM Plan promotes collaborative water management efforts and outlines strategies for addressing the current water management issues within the Coachella Valley. Following formation of CVRMWG and formal recognition of the Region by DWR through the Region Acceptance Process (RAP), the Coachella Valley IRWM Program developed the Region’s first IRWM Plan in 2010. CVRMWG prepared an update to the 2010 IRWM Plan in 2014. The Coachella Valley IRWM Plan presents an integrated regional approach for addressing water management issues through a process that identifies and involves water management stakeholders from the Coachella Valley. The IRWMP provides regional water supply planning in support of MSWD’s 2015 UWMP. The IRWM Plan:

• Defines the Coachella Valley IRWM Region and water systems,

• Identifies regional water management goals and objectives,

• Establishes objectives and measurable targets for the Region,

• Identifies water management issues and needs,

• Identifies stakeholder involvement and agency coordination processes,

• Identifies and evaluates resource management strategies,

• Assesses the integration of projects based on objectives,


3-2

• Establishes a project evaluation and prioritization process based on regional priorities, and

• Establishes a framework for implementation of projects.

3.1.1 District General Description

MSWD was established in 1953 and was formerly known as Desert Hot Springs County Water District. The District’s water service area consists of 135 square miles including the City of Desert Hot Springs, 10 smaller communities in Riverside County, and communities in the City of Palm Springs. The District’s water supply source is 100 percent groundwater produced from District-owned and operated wells. The District provides water service to approximately 37,600 people in their water service area. The District also provides sewer service to approximately 26,000 people in Desert Hot Springs, Desert Crest Country Club and Dillon Mobile Home Park. MSWD offices are located in Desert Hot Springs, California. MSWD water supply and distribution system includes three separate and distinct water supply and distribution systems with the largest of the three systems serving the community of Desert Hot Springs; the surrounding communities of West Garnet (located south of Interstate 10 and West of Indian Avenue); and North Palm Springs. The two smaller systems, Palm Springs Crest System and West Palm Springs Village System, are located approximately five miles west of Desert Hot Springs. These two communities are located on the north side of Interstate 10 (I-10) abutting the Morongo Indian Reservation. The District’s water service area and sphere of influence boundaries are shown on Figure 3-1.

3.1.1 District Water System Description

MSWD’s currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from groundwater produced from subbasins within the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, which underlies the District’s water service area. MSWD primarily produces groundwater from the Mission Creek Subbasin via 10 active wells. To a lesser extent, the District also produces groundwater from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin via four active wells; and from the Garnet Hill Subbasin via one active well.

The existing MSWD distribution system consists of three independent water distribution systems: 1) Desert Hot Springs and surrounding area system – encompasses the City of Desert Hot Springs, a portion of the City of Palm Springs and surrounding unincorporated areas of Riverside County including Desert Edge community, 2) Palm Springs Crest System, and 3) West Palm Springs Village System.

The existing Desert Hot Springs and surrounding area water distribution system serves up to 24 different pressure service zones through either a primary pressure zone or a reduced pressure service zone. In general, the MSWD standard pressure zones are reflective of existing storage tank overflow (or high water) elevations, i.e. the 913 Zone has a water storage tank high water elevation of 913 feet above mean sea level. As development of the MSWD occurred, numerous storage tanks were constructed at varying elevations to provide adequate pressure to its service area.


Palm Springs

DesertHot

Springs

Cabazon

INDI

AN AV

E

20TH

AVE

DILLION RD

PIERSON BLVD

PALM

DR

HACIENDA AVE

§̈¦10

§̈¦10

§̈¦10

62

2010 Urban Water Management PlanMission Springs Water District

MSWD Service AreaFigure 1-1PSOMAS

M:\2MIS041000\GIS\mxd\Fig1-1_MSWDServiceArea.mxd

I0 1 2 3 4Miles

LegendMSWD Service Area BoundarySphere of Influence

2015

3-1


3-4

The MSWD system, inclusive of all three distribution systems, has approximately 1.26 million linear feet of pipeline. District facilities within each pressure zone include supply, storage, booster station, and distribution system components. The Desert Hot Springs System has nine active wells (Well Nos. 22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 34 & 37) and one inactive well (Well No. 30 is offline indefinitely due to high uranium content) that produce groundwater from the Mission Creek Subbasin; and one well (Well No. 33) that produces groundwater from the Garnet Subbasin. Well Nos. 28 and 34 each have wellhead uranium treatment facilities. The Palm Springs Crest System has two active wells (Well Nos. 25 & 25A) that produce groundwater from the San Gorgonio Pass-Cabazon Subbasin. The West Palm Springs Village System has two active wells (Well Nos. 26 & 26A) that also produce groundwater from the San Gorgonio Pass-Cabazon Subbasin. Well No. 26A has wellhead uranium treatment.

3.1.1.1 Desert Hot Springs Water System Description

913 Zone

The 913 Zone, which is the lowest primary service zone in the District, has two groundwater production wells. Well No. 32 pumps groundwater from the Mission Creek Subbasin to a 2-million gallon (MG) water storage reservoir with a high water elevation of 913 feet. Well No. 33 pumps groundwater from the Garnet Hill Subbasin into a 55,000- gallon storage tank that provides suction head for water pumped to the 913 reservoir. These wells have a combined discharge capacity of 2,800 gallons per minute (gpm). The 913 Zone has topographic elevations that range between 635 and 800 feet. Water from the 913 reservoir can be pumped to the 1070 Zone.

1070 Zone

The 1070 Zone serves the primary pressure zone within the Two Bunch and Valley View service zones. This zone serves portions of the system from topographic elevation of 800 to 970 feet. The 1070 Zone includes groundwater wells, storage tanks, booster pump stations, and distribution system components, such as pipelines and valves. Well 27 and Well 31 provide a combined maximum groundwater supply of 3,000 gallons per minute (gpm) and serve the Valley View service zone through the Valley View tank, which has a capacity of 0.31 MG. Well 31 provides water to the Two Bunch service zone, which includes two storage tanks with a combined capacity of 1.45 MG. As mentioned above, Wells 32 and 33 from the 913 Zone can also deliver water to the Two Bunch storage facility via the 1070 boosters at the 913 tank. In turn, boosters at the Two Bunch facility can supply water to the 1240 Zone at Terrace. Total well capacity for the 1070 Zone is 5,800 gpm.


3-5

1400 Zone

The 1400 Zone serves the primary pressure service zones within the Overhill, Annandale, and Desert View service zones, as well as the reduced pressure service areas of Northridge, Annandale, and Overhill. The 1400 Zone includes groundwater wells, storage tanks, booster pump stations, and distribution systems components. The 1400 Zone is supplied groundwater from six wells with a combined capacity of 9,050 gpm, however the 1400 zone is separated by system constraints of normally closed valves into three separate areas. Well 28 and 24 provide source water for the Annandale service zone and tank (1400 Zone Central). Well 27 supplies the source for the Overhill tank and service zone (1400 Zone West) via the boosters at the Valley View tank. Wells 22, 29 and 37 provide source water for the Desert View tank via the boosters at the Terrace tank. Well 37, was added in 2009 providing 1,400 gpm of additional capacity to the zone (1400 Zone East). Four tanks serve the 1400 Zone with a total storage capacity of 4.4 MG.

1530 Zone

The 1530 Zone includes four tanks: Gateway, Worsley, Mission Lakes, Northridge, and Red Bud. The Northridge tank is interconnected via a normally closed valve to the Gateway, Worsley and Mission Lakes Tanks and is normally fed from boosters at the Terrace Tank, fed by wells 22, 29 and 37. The Redbud Tank is an isolated 1535 Zone on the east end of the system and is fed via boosters at Terrace to the Desert View Tank, and then fed to the Gateway Tank via another set of boosters at the Low Desert View site. The 1530 Zone includes storage tanks, booster pump stations, and distribution piping.

The 1530 Zone has historically received groundwater from Well 30, which delivered water to the Mission Lakes service zone and storage tank. Well 30 has been out of service since 2008 due to water quality issues. Well 34, which is rated for 600 gpm, is treated for uranium. Well 27 also supplies the 1530 zone (Central and West). The four 1530 Zone tanks have a total storage capacity of 3.6 MG.

1630 Zone

The 1630 Zone serves the primary pressures zones within the communities of Vista and Highland. The 1630 Zone also supplies water to the reduced pressure zone within Vista. The 1630 Zone includes storage tanks, booster pumps stations, and distribution system components. The 1630 Zone does not have any groundwater wells. All source water for the 1630 Zone is from the lower zones and is pumped multiple times to reach the higher zones. The 1630 Zone has two water storage tanks with a total storage capacity of 360,000 gallons. The Vista and Highland 1630 zones are completely separate.

3.1.1.2 Palm Springs Crest Water System Description

Woodridge 1840 Zone

The Woodridge 1840 Zone exclusively serves the Woodridge service zone. This system includes two groundwater wells (Well 25 and Well 25A) with production capacity of 575 gpm, and the Woodridge storage tank with a storage capacity of 0.12 MG. The entire Woodridge system is independent of the MSWD system and the Cottonwood system.


3-6

3.1.1.3 West Palm Springs Water System Description

Cottonwood 1630 Zone

The Cottonwood 1630 zone is part of the West Palm Springs Village water system, an independent water system, which is separate from the other systems. This system includes two groundwater wells (Well 26 and Well 26A) with a total capacity of 520 gpm. The Cottonwood 1630 Zone includes one storage facility with a capacity of approximately 0.28 MG. Well 26A is on fulltime Uranium treatment.

3.1.1.4 District Well Characteristics

All MSWD water supply comes from groundwater produced from wells. District well characteristics are shown in Table 3-1A.

Table 3-1A: Characteristics of MSWD Wells

Well No.

Age Depth Capacity

(years) (feet) (gpm)

Mission Creek Subbasin

MW-22 40 800 1,200

MW-24 37 800 1,700

MW-27 30 400 1,000

MW-28 21 900 1,500

MW-29 18 1,070 1,500

MW-30 (a) 18 1,100 850

MW-31 17 1,000 1,700

MW-32 6 1,000 1,900

MW-34 4 1,050 700

MW-35 (b) 0 1,000 0

MW-37 1 1,100 1,400

Garnet Hill Subbasin

MW-33 6 670 800

San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin, Cabazon Unit

MW-25 53 465 325

MW-25A 8 600 175

MW-26 79 575 280

MW-26A 9 285 185

(a) Well 30 is offline indefinitely because of water quality issues.

(b) It is indeterminate when Well 35 will be completed.

3.1.1.4 District Water Storage Characteristics

Water storage reservoirs (or tanks) are located throughout the MSWD water system to provide operational, fire-protection and emergency water storage. The number of water storage reservoirs and the combined storage capacity for each water service zone that has


3-7

a reservoir are shown in Table 3-1B. The total storage capacity for the water system is 19.65 million gallons (MG).

Table 3-1B: MSWD Water Storage

Area

No. of

Reservoirs

Storage Capacity

(million gallons)


913 Zone 1 2.00

1070 Zone 3 1.76

1240 Zone 4 7.14

1400 Zone 4 4.42

1530 Zone 4 3.57

1630 Zone 2 0.36

Subtotal 19.25

Cabazon Storage Unit

1630 Cottonwood 1 0.28

1840 Woodridge 1 0.12

Subtotal 0.40

TOTAL 19.65

3.2 SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY MAPS

The District’s service area encompasses 135 square miles including the City of Desert Hot Springs, 10 smaller communities in Riverside County, and communities in the City of Palm Springs. The District’s water service area and sphere of influence boundaries are shown on Figure 3-1.

3.3 SERVICE AREA CLIMATE

The District has a desert climate with low rainfall and humidity and a large range between high and low temperatures. The District only receives an average of approximately 5.5 inches of rain each year with the majority (70 percent) occurring between December and February. The average high monthly temperature of 108.2 degrees Fahrenheit (oF) occurs in July and the average low monthly temperature of 42.2 oF occurs in December and January. Evapotranspiration (ETo) for the District service area averages 83.5 inches. The average monthly evapotranspiration, rainfall, and temperatures for the District service area are shown in Table 3-1C.

3.4 SERVICE AREA POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS

3.4.1 Service Area Population

The District’s water service area encompasses 135 square miles including the City of Desert Hot Springs, 10 smaller communities in Riverside County, and communities in the City of Palm Springs. The City of Hot Springs makes up approximately 17 percent of the


3-8

District’s water service area (23 square miles).

Table 3-1C: Historical District Climate Characteristics

Month

Standard

Average ETo(a)

(inches)

Average

Rainfall(b)

(inches)

Daily Max

Temperature(b)

(degrees F)

Daily Min

Temperature(c)

(degrees F)

January 2.98 1.13 69.6 42.3

February 3.53 1.00 73.7 45.6

March 6.28 0.58 79.3 48.8

April 8.39 0.18 86.7 54.1

May 10.55 0.05 94.5 60.4

June 10.95 0.05 103.0 67.0

July 10.78 0.20 108.2 75.2

August 9.66 0.27 106.8 74.3

September 8.25 0.29 101.7 68.1

October 5.85 0.29 91.4 59.4

November 3.63 0.42 78.7 49.2

December 2.62 1.01 69.8 42.3

Annual 83.47 5.49 88.6 57.2

a) Standard Average ETo from California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) Station 200,

Indio, CA. Station 200 is CIMIS station closest to MSWD. Average for 5/16/2006 through 12/31/2015.

b) Data obtained from Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC), Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada

(http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca5378); WRCC program administered by the National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); data extracted from monitoring Station 046635 at Palm

Springs, CA, Average 3/01/1906 through 1/20/2015.

For the preparation of the 2015 UWMP, the DWR Population Tool was utilized to estimate the District’s water service area population from 1990 through 2015 based on inputting residential single-family and multi-family residential water service connections for the years 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015 along with the water service are boundary in electronic (KML) format. The Population Tool worksheets are included in Appendix D. A 2015 District WSA population of 37,614 was estimated.

A majority of the District’s WSA population resides inside the City of Hot Springs. DOF estimated a City population of 28,134, which is 74.8 percent of the WSA population. The Southern California Association of Government (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 2016 projects the City’s population will increase to 58,900 by 2040, which is an increase of 109.4 percent relative to 2015 as shown in Table 3-1.

The MSWD 2009 Comprehensive Water System Master Plan projected two water-use growth scenarios for the District: 1) a baseline growth scenario, and a high growth scenario. The high growth scenario equates to a population growth rate of approximately 6,500 people every five years. Applying this growth rate to the 2015 WSA population results in a year 2040 WSA population of 70,114, which is an increase of 86.4 percent. This population growth is consistent with the projected population growth for the City of


3-9

Desert Hot Springs, and provides a more modest population growth for the area outside the City (18.3 percent) consistent with historical growth.

Table 3-1: Population - Current and Projected

Service Area 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Increase(a)

City of Desert

Hot Springs 28,134 34,287 40,440 46,593 52746 58,900 109.4%

Outside City of

Desert Hot

Springs 9,480 9,827 10,174 10,521 10,868 11,214 18.3%

Total 37,614 44,114 50,614 57,114 63,614 70,114 86.4%

(a) Increase relative to 2015

3.4.2 Water-Use-Related Demographics

Of the 12,967 District water service connections in 2015, 12,334 are residential connections (95.1%). Of the 12,334 residential connections, 11,625 are single family (94.3%) and 709 are multi-family (5.7%).

The area of the City of Desert Hot Spring’s Sphere of Influence (City’s SOI) including the City and County-managed lands over which the City has an advisory role constitutes approximately 40 percent (56 square miles) of MSWD’s water service area. The City itself makes up approximately 17 percent of the District’s water service area (23 square miles). However, approximately 80 percent of the Districts’ water service area population resides inside the City of Hot Springs.

Approximately 60 percent of the area within the City’s SOI (including the City) is (or is planned to be) residential land use, with approximately 50 percent of the residential land use categorized as low-density residential and residential estates. Approximately 23 percent of the land is categorized as open space. Approximately 17 percent of the land is categorized as commercial, industrial, or institutional (CII).

In 2015, the average number of people per dwelling unit inside the City limits was 3.07. Of the 11,485 housing units inside the City limits, 7,220 (62.8%) are single-detached houses; 188 (14.3%) are single-attached; and 1,671 (8.7%) are 2- to 4-unit residences; 1,535 are five plus residences; and 9,871 are mobile homes. The vacancy rate was 20.6 percent.

The City has several Specific Plans that are currently being developed or planned for development:

Skyborne Specific Plan

Skyborne is a residential community of traditional single family neighborhoods and allows for potential development of a complimentary Active Adult Community in a gated village context. The project is currently in development and will continue with phased


3-10

development in response to economic and market conditions. The Specific Plan proposes up to 2,140 lots on 604+/- acres maintaining an average density of 3.5 dwelling units per acre with one and two story structures on lots ranging in size from 4,500 square feet (3,400 for Cluster Product) to 19,000 square feet in size.

Internal recreation amenities include approximately 10 acres of private neighborhood parks and up to two clubhouses with recreational amenities. The first clubhouse has been substantially constructed and serves the traditional neighborhoods within the community while a second clubhouse would provide Active Adult residents with various amenities tailored towards their interests if the Active Adult alternative is selected for Villages IV-VII. Currently, both Villages I and II have a park and swimming pool for use by residents.

The 11.7 acre elementary school site on Karen Avenue has been acquired by the Palm Springs Unified School District (PSUSD). Development of this site will be at the discretion of the PSUSD. Adjacent to the school site, also on Karen Avenue, is a 6-acre parcel containing a planned public park (5 acres) and well site (1 acre). A 1.8 acre site located west of Worsley Road and adjacent to the northernmost east-west spine road contains an existing reservoir site & planned recreational vehicle (RV) parking & storage area. This totals almost 30 acres of land devoted to recreation and public purposes.

Vortex Downtown Specific Plan

The City approved the Vortex Downtown Specific Plan in 2010. The Vortex Land Use Plan provides for a potential mix of approximately 847,300 square feet of commercial, retail, office, restaurant, destination health-and-wellness resort, civic center, and entertainment uses, as well as up to 504 residential and live-work units and 100 timeshare/hotel rooms. The Development Plan is designed to accommodate these uses through the creation of 22 planning areas and 5 land use categories that cover approximately 151.6 acres, inclusive of rights-of-way. The planning areas and land use categories allow for a greater variety of land uses and customized development standards than those currently found in the Desert Hot Springs General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.


4-1

4 SYSTEM WATER USE 4.1 RECYCLED VERSUS POTABLE AND RAW WATER DEMAND

MSWD currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from groundwater production and does not purchase imported water from a water wholesaler. However, CVWD and DWA are remediating the overdraft condition of the groundwater in the Upper Coachella Valley by artificial replenishment with Colorado River and State Water Project (SWP) Exchange water purchased from Metropolitan. District groundwater meets all Federal and State primary and secondary water quality standards without treatment (other than chlorination for disinfection) with the exceptions that groundwater from Well Nos. 26A, 28, and 34 is treated at each well to meet the primary water quality standard for uranium.

The District currently does not have recycled water use within their service area; however there are plans to use recycled water for the irrigation of golf courses, parks, medians and greenbelts in the future. To produce recycled water meeting Title 22 standards, the District are constructing the Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (RWWTP) with tertiary treatment facilities, and plan to have the plant in operation by early 2018 to accommodate a recycled water demand of 1.0 mgd (1,120 AFY). It is projected that the recycled water system (and the RWWTP) will be expanded to 6,400 AFY by 2040, matching projected demands with projected available wastewater.

4.2 WATER USES BY SECTOR

Historical water service connections by customer sector are shown in Table 4-1A. Total water service connections has increased from 11,294 in 2000 to 12,747 in 2010 for an increase of 12.9 percent, but only increased by 1.7% between 2010 and 2015. Single-family residential accounts for 89.7 percent of total water service connections.

Table 4-1A: Historical District Water Service Connections

Customer Sector 2005 2010 2015

Single Family 10,053 11,463 11,625

Multi Family 670 705 709

Commercial 403 325 356

Other(a) 168 254 277

Total 11,294 12,747 12,967

(a) Billed institutional, industrial, irrigation

Historical metered and billed water use by customer billing sector is shown in Table 4-1B. Total water use including unaccounted-for (lost) water decreased from 10,801 AFY in 2005 to 8,665 AFY in 2010 (19.8 percent); to 7,252 AFY in 2015 (32.9 percent decrease relative to 2005). Per-capita water use also decreased and is discussed in Section 4.4. System water losses are discussed in Section 4.3. Single family residential water use has accounted for approximately 47 to 58 percent of total system water use.


4-2

District water system demands for potable (drinking water) for 2015 by customer billing sector are shown in Table 4-1. District water use by customer sector plus system water losses represent 100 percent of the water demands for the District’s water system. Projected District water demands for the planning period (2020-2040) by water use sector and water losses are shown in Table 4-2. The methodology for developing these projected demands is presented in Section 4-4.

Table 4-1B: Historical Water Use and Water Loss

2005

Water

Use/

Supply

2010

Water

Use/

Supply

%

Change

(2005-

2010)

2015

Water

Use/

Supply

%

Change

(2010-

2015)

%

Change

(2005-

2015)

Single-Family

Residential 5,102 5,058 -0.9% 3,881 -23.3% -23.9%

Multi-Family

Residential 1,553 1,375 -11.5% 1,224 -11.0% -21.2%

Total Residential 6,655 6,433 -3.3% 5,105 -20.6% -23.3%

Population 31,291 35,800 14.4% 37,614 5.1% 20.2%

Residential

Per-Capita (gpcd) 189.8 160.4 -15.5% 121.1 -24.5% -36.2%

Commercial 880 689 -21.7% 417 -39.5% -52.6%

Other 1,427 990 -30.6% 984 -0.6% -31.0%

Unaccounted 1,839 553 191.1% 746 34.9% 292.6%

Total 10,801 8,665 -19.8% 7,252 -16.3% -32.9%

Total Per-Capita

(gpcd) 308.1 216.0 -29.9% 172.1 -20.3% -44.1%

Water Supply 10,801 8,665 -19.8% 7,252 -16.3% -32.9%

Water Loss(a) 1,839 553

746

Water Loss % 17.0% 6.4%

10.3%

(a) Includes authorized but unbilled water use for fighting fires, flushing water mains, fire flow tests

Table 4-1: Demands for Potable Water – Actual

Use Type 2015 Actual

Additional

Description

Level of Treatment

When Delivered

Volume

(AFY)

Single Family - Drinking Water 3,881

Multi-Family - Drinking Water 1,224

Commercial - Drinking Water 417

Other(a) - Drinking Water 984

Other(b) - Drinking Water 90

Losses - Drinking Water 656

Total 7,252


(b) Authorized but unbilled water use for fighting fires, flushing water mains, and fire flow tests


4-3

Table 4-2: Demands for Potable Water Projected

Use Type Projected Water Use

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Single Family 4,688 5,266 5,844 6,422 7,000

Multi-Family 1,479 1,661 1,843 2,025 2,208

Commercial 504 566 628 690 752

Other(a) 1,189 1,335 1,482 1,628 1,775

Losses 570 641 711 781 851

Total 8,430 9,469 10,508 11,547 12,586


Table 4-3: Total Water Demands

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Potable Water Demand 7,252 8,430 9,469 10,508 11,547 12,586

Recycled Water Demand 0 1,120 2,200 3,600 5,000 6,400

Total Water Demand 7,252 9,550 11,669 14,108 16,547 18,986

4.3 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER LOSSES

In accordance with CWC 10631, distribution system water loss is to be quantified for the most recent 12-month period available for the 2015 urban water management plan update and is to be reported in accordance with a worksheet approved or developed by DWR through a public process. The water loss quantification worksheet is to be based on the water system balance methodology developed by the AWWA. The AWWA Water Audit Software Version 5.0 was used to quantify distribution water loss for the District for calendar year 2015. As shown in Table 4-4, a water loss volume of 655.5 AFY was calculated, which is 9.0 percent of the water supplied assuming 1.25 percent of authorized consumption (90.0 AFY) was unbilled and unmetered water use, i.e. water typically used for fighting fires, flushing water mains, conducting fire flow tests, etc. A copy of the AWWA water audit worksheets used to calculate MSWD’s 2015 water losses are included in Appendix F.

Table 4-4 Retail: 12 Month Water Loss Audit Reporting

Reporting Period Start Date

(mm/yyyy)

Volume of Water Loss

(AFY)

(01/2015) 656.0


4-4

4.4 ESTIMATING FUTURE WATER SAVINGS

In September 2014, two legislative bills amending sections of the Act were approved and chaptered: AB 2067 and SB1420. Key among the changes to existing statutes was the addition of CWC Section 10631(e)(4). This specific addition provides the option for urban water suppliers to reflect its and its customer’s efficiency efforts as part of its future demand projection. The new statutes added the following to CWC Section 10631(e):

(4) (A): If available and applicable to an urban water supplier, water use

projections may display and account for the water savings estimated to

result from adopted codes, standards, ordinances, or transportation and

land use plans identified by the urban water supplier, as applicable to the

service area.

(B) To the extent that an urban water supplier reports the information

described in subparagraph (A), an urban water supplier shall do both of

the following:

(i) Provide citations of the various codes, standards, ordinances, or

transportation and land use plans utilized in making the projections.

(ii) Indicate the extent that the water use projections consider savings

from codes, standards, ordinances, or transportation and land use plans.

Water use projections that do not account for these water savings shall be

noted of that fact.

It is important to note that water conservation in the District is largely driven by socio-economic issues. District pricing combined with local economic factors are the primary contributors to water-use efficiency.

4.4.1 Reduced District Water Use Since 2005

Through the implementation of District ordinances such as District Ordinance No. 93-3, which establishes procedures and policies necessary for the orderly administration of a water conservation program to prohibit waste and restrict water during a water shortage emergency, and guidelines such as the District’s 2009 Water Efficient Landscaping Guidelines, total District per-capita water use has decreased 16.3% since 2010 and 44.1% since 2005; and residential per-capita water has decreased 20.6% since 2010 and 23.3% since 2005. In April 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order requiring the State Water Resources Control Board to implement measures to cut the State’s overall water usage by 25% due to the continuing drought. The executive order mandates a 25% reduction in supply to California’s approximately 400 water control agencies and requires water agencies and cities to reduce water use 25% (on average) below 2013 levels by the end of February 2016, with usage reported to the State by water suppliers. Cities and water agencies were assigned various reduction goals, and MSWD reduction goal was initially


4-5

set at 32%; later reduced to 28%, and was reduced to 24% in February 2016 after the District received a climate consideration. District water use has decreased a cumulative 18.0% for the first eight recording months (June 2015 through February 2016) relative to year 2013 water usage in response to the District’s conservation goal set by the State, which has been extended to October 2016 or as long as the drought continues. On May 9, 2016 Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-37-16 that builds on temporary statewide emergency water restrictions to establish longer-term water conservation measures, including permanent monthly water use reporting, new permanent water use standards in California communities and bans on clearly wasteful practices. Through a public process and working with partners such as urban water suppliers, local governments and environmental groups, DWR and the SWRCB will develop new water use efficiency targets as part of a long-term conservation framework for urban water agencies. These targets go beyond the 20% reduction in per capita urban water use by 2020 that was embodied in SBx7-7, and will be customized to fit the unique conditions of each water supplier.

4.4.2 Reduced Future District Water Use due to Existing and Future Conservation Measures

As shown in Table 4-1B, total per-capita District water use has significantly dropped from 308.1 gpcd in 2005 to 216.0 gpcd in 2010 to 172.1 gpcd in 2015 (a reduction of 44.1% since 2005). Residential per-capita District water use has also significantly dropped from 189.8 gpcd in 2005 to 160.4 gpcd in 2010 to 121.1 gpcd in 2015 (a reduction of 36.2% since 2005).

Many of the water conservation measures already implemented and being implemented by District customers such as turf removal, conversion to drought resistance landscapes, conversion to more efficient irrigation systems and ET-based irrigation controllers, retrofits to higher efficiency toilets, implementation of weather-based irrigation controllers, etc. will have permanent effects on water use (reduction) in the future.

Higher water rates enacted by the District will remain in place and will help keep water conservation at current levels. Due to demographic factors in the region, the District does not anticipate a significant increase in water use compared to pre-drought levels once the drought ends. It is anticipated that a great deal of water conservation will remain due to a history of limited rebound in water use among the District’s customer base after economic events, including pricing changes. Also, Executive Order B-37-16 will help ensure water conservation in the District’s water service area going forward.

As shown in Table 4-5A, it is estimated in this UWMP that total District water system per-capita water use will increase slightly from 172.1 gpcd in 2015 to 173.5 in 2020 for existing residences and development after the end of the drought with a water loss of 7.0 percent (similar to the 6.4% loss in 2010). However, it is estimated that water conservation retrofits will continue for existing houses and development as aged


4-6

plumbing and irrigation appurtenances are replaced over time, and that per-capita water use will decrease to 164.5 gpcd in 2040 (a reduction of approximately 5%). Water loss is estimated to remain at 7.0% through 2040.

However, more significant future per-capita water use will occur within the District for new residential developments due to California’s newly adopted Green Building Code, which aims to cut indoor water consumption by at least 20 percent, primarily through more efficient indoor water fixtures. For a three-bedroom house, the savings is estimated to be about 10,000 gallons of water per year, on average. The California Green Building Code also includes outdoor water conservation by reducing the area devoted to high-irrigation lawns and plants, emphasizing natural drought-tolerant plantings, and installing irrigation controls that respond to local weather conditions. This is consistent with the new Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), which was adopted by the State on July 15, 2015, and became effective for the City of Desert Hot Springs by default on December 1, 2015.

Table 4-5A: Historical & Projected District Per-Capita Water Use

2005 2010 2015 2020 2040

Existing Households

Residential Per-

Capita (gpcd) 189.8 160.4 121.1 125.0 120.0

CII Per-Capita(a)

(gpcd) 65.8 41.9 33.2 36.0 32.0

Water Loss Per-

Capita (b)(gpcd) 52.5 13.7 17.8 12.5 12.5

Total Per-Capita

(gpcd) 308.1 216.0 172.1 173.5 164.5

New Households

Residential Per-

Capita (gpcd) - - - 115.0 115.0

CII Per-Capita

(gpcd) - - - 30.0 30.0

Water Loss Per-

Capita (gpcd) - - - 11.0 11.0

Total Per-Capita

(gpcd) - - - 156.0 156.0

(a) Commercial, industrial and institutional per-capita water use

(b) Water loss is estimated to be 7.0% for existing & 6.0% for new development.

As shown in Table 4-5A, total per-capita water use for new housing and development is estimated at 156.0 gpcd in the future (through 2040). A residential per-capita water use of 115.0 gpcd is estimated. Water loss for new developments is estimated to be 6.0 percent.


4-7

Based on per-capita water use developed for existing and new housing and other development in Table 4-5A, projected District water demands were developed and are shown in Table 4-5B. As shown, total water use is estimated to increase from 7,252 AFY in 2015 to 12,586 AFY in 2040 (an increase of approximately 73.9 percent), which is all attributable to new development.

Total per-capita water use is estimated to decrease from 172.1 gpcd in 2015 to 160.6 gpcd in 2040. It should be noted that the 2020 through 2040 projections are based on normal, non-drought years. These per-capita water use projections are less than the 2015 and 2020 SBx7-7 targets of 262.3 and 234.9 gpcd, respectively, developed for the District in this UWMP as detailed in Chapter 5.

Table 4-5B: Projected District Water Demands

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Existing Households

Population 37,614 37,614 37,614 37,614 37,614 37,614

Total Per-Capita

Water Use (gpcd) 172.1 173.5 171.3 169.0 166.8 164.5

Water Use (AFY) 7,252 7,312 7,217 7,122 7,028 6,933

New Households

Population 0 6,500 13,000 19,500 26,000 32,500

Total Per-Capita

Water Use (gpcd) 0 156.0 156.0 156.0 156.0 156.0

Water Use (AFY) 0 1,136 2,272 3,408 4,545 5,681

Water Use (AFY) 7,252 8,430 9,469 10,508 11,547 12,586

Total Per-Capita

Water Use (gpcd) 172.1 170.9 167.3 164.6 162.4 160.6

4.5 WATER USE FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS

For planning and funding purposes, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) categorize households into five income groups based on the County Area Median Income (AMI):

• Extremely Low Income — up to 30 percent of AMI

• Very Low Income - 31 to 50 percent of AMI

• Low Income - 51 to 80 percent of AMI

• Moderate Income - 81 to 120 percent of AMI

• Above Moderate Income — greater than 120 percent of AMI Combined, extremely low, very low, and low income households are often referred to as lower income household.


4-8

State Housing Element law requires that a local jurisdiction accommodate a share of the region’s projected housing needs for the planning period. This share, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), is important because State law mandates that a jurisdiction provide sufficient land to accommodate a variety of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. Compliance with this requirement is measured by the jurisdiction's ability in providing adequate land with adequate density and appropriate development standards to accommodate the RHNA. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), as the regional planning agency, is responsible for allocating the RHNA to individual jurisdictions within the region.

SCAG assigned a RHNA of 4,196 units to the City of Desert Hot Springs for the 2014-2021 RHNA period, in the income distribution shown in Table 4-5C:

Table 4-5C: 2014-2021 RHNA Units for Desert Hot Springs

Housing Income Level Units

Extremely Low/Very Low Income: 946

Low Income: 661

Moderate Income: 772

Above Moderate Income: 1,817

Total 4,196

The lower income households total 1,646 units for the City of Desert Hot Springs. Assuming all 1,646 lower income housing units are built by 2021, and based on the current people per dwelling unit factor for the City (3.07) and a per-capita residential water usage of 186.3 gpcd (average gpcd for period 2015-2025 per Table 4-5A), the water demand increase for these 1,646 lower income housing units is estimated at 1,055 AFY, which is included in the estimated demand increase between 2015 and 2025 of 3,413 AFY. Confirmation that future water savings and demands for lower income households are included in demand projections is provided in Table 4-5.

Table 4-5: Inclusion in Water Use Projections

Are Future Water Savings Included in Projections? Yes

If "Yes" to above, state the section where citations of the codes, ordinances,

etc., utilized in demand projections are found.

Chapters 8 & 9

2015 UWMP

Are Lower Income Residential Demands Included In

Projections? Yes


4-9

4.6 CLIMATE CHANGE

As presented in the 2014 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IWRMP): The variability of location, timing, amount, and form of precipitation in California, suggested as a result of climate change, could present some uncertainly as to the availability of future delivery and delivery capabilities of the Region’s SWP allotments. DWR has determined that the Sierra snowmelt is shrinking and that melting is occurring earlier, shifting runoff from the spring further into the winter and causing winter flooding. Changes in precipitation patterns and quantity throughout the Southwest may also impact potential water supply availability from the Colorado River. Such changes in local conditions may impact local water quality, flooding, local supplies, and resources such as habitat and recreation. Concerns about climate uncertainty have resulted in the need to adapt existing flood management, water quality management, resources stewardship practices, and water supply systems in response to changing conditions.

The Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning (DWR 2011) is intended to help local agencies, cities, and counties include climate change as part of their water resources planning. As part of the suggested process, the Climate Change Handbook

recommends regions identify strategies that can be used to help them to adapt to climate change as well as mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The 2009

California Climate Adaptation Strategy Handbook defines climate change adaptation as adjustments to the natural or human systems due to actual or expected climate changes in an effort to minimize harm or take advantage of beneficial opportunities (CNRA 2009), while climate change mitigation aims at directly reducing the GHG emissions that cause climate change through energy efficiency, emissions reduction, and/or carbon sequestration

In addition to the RMS discussed above, strategies were identified through the review of relevant climate change related documents. These documents include:

• Managing an Uncertain Future (DWR 2008)

• Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2006)

• Climate Action Team Biennial Report (CalEPA 2010)

• Resolution on Sea Level Rise (OPC 2010)

• California Climate Extremes Workshop Report (Scripps 201 l)

The identified strategies were screened relative to each strategy’s potential for addressing the climate change vulnerability issues and mitigating GHG emissions. Table 4-1 presents these strategies, and identifies the following information:

• Is the strategy a “no regret” strategy?

• Does the strategy help to adapt to vulnerability issues

• Does the strategy help the Region to mitigate GHGs?

By definition, “no regret” strategies are those strategies that, if implemented, would provide benefits today regardless of potential climate change impacts, but would also reduce the Region’s vulnerability to potential future climate change impacts.


4-10

“No regret” strategies are desirable for immediate implementation as they will provide benefits even under the uncertainty of climate change projections.

The set of climate change strategies listed in Table 4-6 are those that will best help the Region in responding to and reducing potential climate change vulnerabilities given current knowledge. Further, the climate change vulnerability analysis upon which these strategies were based was vetted through the Region’s stakeholders during a meeting of the Planning Partners held on December 13, 2012. When implementing these strategies, performance measures or metrics to assess the effectiveness of a project in meeting the Region’s goals will be developed.

Table 4-6: Climate Change Management Strategies

Implemented

in Region?

No Regret

Strategy?

Help to adapt to

climate change

vulnerabilities?

Help to

mitigate

GHGs?

Reduce Water Demand

Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Yes Yes Yes Yes

Urban Water Use Efficiency Yes Yes Yes Yes

Water Meter Insta1lation* Yes Yes Yes Yes

Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers

Conveyance- Delta Yes Yes Yes Yes

Conveyance- Regional/Local Yes Yes Yes Yes

System Reoperation Yes Yes Yes Yes

Water Transfers Yes Yes Yes

Conduct emissions inventories * Yes Yes Yes

Increase use of renewable energy sources* Yes Yes

Localized (or decentralized) water/

wastewater treatment* No Yes

Shift water use to off-peak hours* No Yes Yes

Optimize sewer systems* Yes Yes

Increase Water Supply

Conjunctive Management and

Groundwater Storage Yes Yes Yes

Desalination Yes Yes

Precipitation Enhancement Yes Yes Yes

Recycled Municipal Water Yes Yes Yes Yes

Surface Storage- CALFED Yes Yes Yes

Surface Storage- Regional/Local Yes Yes Yes

Improve Water Quality

Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Yes Yes Yes

Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer

Remediation Yes Yes Yes

Matching Quality to Use Yes Yes Yes Yes

Pollution Prevention Yes Yes Yes Yes

Salt and Salinity Management Yes Yes Yes Yes

Urban Runoff Management Yes Yes Yes Yes


4-11

Table 4-6 (Cont.): Climate Change Management Strategies

Implemented

in Region?

No Regret

Strategy?

Help to adapt to

climate change

vulnerabilities?

Help to

mitigate

GHGs? Improve Flood Management

Flood Risk Management Yes Yes Yes

Integrated Flood Management* No Yes Yes

Protective Infrastructure* Yes Yes

Sediment Management* No Yes

Practice Resources Stewardship

Agricultural Lands Stewardship Yes Yes Yes Yes

Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants and

Water Pricing) Yes

Yes Yes Yes

Ecosystem Restoration Yes Yes Yes Yes

Forest Management Yes Yes Yes Yes

Recharge Area Protection Yes Yes Yes Yes

Water-Dependent Recreation Yes Yes Yes Yes

Watershed Management Yes Yes Yes Yes

Other Strategies

Education and Outreach Yes Yes Yes Yes

* Indicates an additional strategy (not an RMS identified in the 2009 California Water Plan Update) that was considered as a potential additional strategy that could be implemented to address climate change

Table 4-7: Sample Climate Change Strategy Performance Measures/Metrics

Strategy Category Sample Performance Measures/Metrics

Reduce Water Demand

Average (annual) water demand r eduction; peak (seasonal, monthly) water

demand reduction

Improve Operational Efficiency Additional supply; supply reliability;

Increase Water Supply Additional supply; potable demand offset; supply reliability

Improve Water Quality

Salt line migration; stream temperature; dissolved oxygen; turbidity; pollutant

concentrations

Improve Flood

Management

Acres of a certain habitat or floodplain function restored/protected; volume

of natural flood storage provided; storm return period used for planning;

expected damage resulting for a certain return period storm

Practice Resource

Stewardship

Presence/absence of key indicator species; acres of a certain habitat or

floodplain function restored/protected; volume of natural flood storage

provided; acres of recharge area protected


5-1

5 BASELINES AND TARGETS Senate Bill x7-7 (SBx7-7) was enacted in November 2009 (Water Conservation Act of 2009), requiring all water suppliers to increase water use efficiency. The legislation set an overall goal of reducing per-capita urban water use by 20% by December 31, 2020, and to make incremental progress towards this goal by reducing per capita water use by at least 10% by December 31, 2015. In preparing the 2010 UWMP, each urban retail water supplier was required to develop baseline daily per-capita water use, minimum baseline daily per-capita water use, and target daily per-capita water use for 2015 and 2020 that were to be 10% and 20% less, respectively, than the baseline daily per-capita water use based on utilizing one of four methods provided; with the target reduction for 2020 greater than the legislation’s minimum water use reduction requirement. The four methods are:

• Method 1: Eighty percent of the water supplier’s baseline per capita water use

• Method 2: Per capita daily water use estimated using the sum of performance standards applied to indoor residential use; landscape area water use; and commercial, industrial, and institutional uses

• Method 3: Ninety-five percent of the applicable state hydrologic region target as stated in the State’s April 30, 2009, draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan

• Method 4: A BMP Option based on standards that are consistent with the California Urban Water Conservation Council’s (CUWCC) best management practices (BMPs).

Baseline daily per-capita water use is defined as a continuous 10 or 15 year base period (baseline) for water use ending no earlier than December 31, 2004 and no later than December 31, 2010. If the average baseline daily per-capita water use is greater than 100 GPCD for a defined 5-year baseline period, the legislation’s minimum water use reduction requirement must also be met as set in Section 10608.22 of Senate Bill No. 7 SBx7-7. Per SBx7-7, the minimum water use reduction baseline period must end no earlier than December 31, 2007 and no later than December 31, 2010 and the minimum reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of this 5-year base daily per capita water use. For the 2015 UWMP, water agencies must demonstrate compliance with their established water use target for 2015, which will also demonstrate whether the agency is on currently on track to achieve its 2020 target.


5-2

5.1 UPDATING CALCULATIONS FROM 2010 UWMP

In the 2010 UWMP, water agencies calculated a 2020 Urban Water Use Target through the use of a selected target method. In 2015 UWMPs, water agencies may update their 2020 Target and may make this calculation using a different target method than was used in 2010 DWR determined that significant discrepancies exist between Department of Finance (DOF) projected populations for 2010 (based on 2000 U.S. Census data) and actual populations for 2010 based on 2010 U.S. Census data. The average difference between projected and actual was approximately 3 percent, but the difference for some cities was as high as 9 percent. Therefore, if an agency did not use 2010 Census data for their baseline population calculations in the 2010 UWMP (the full census data set was not available until 2012) DWR has determined that these agencies must recalculate their baseline population for the 2015 UWMPs using 2000 and 2010 Census data. This may affect the baseline and target GPCD values calculated in the 2010 UWMP, which must be modified accordingly in the 2015 UWMP. The District’s 2010 UWMP did not use 2010 census data for its baseline population calculations and it is therefore recalculated in the 2015 UWMP in developing new SBx7-7 targets

5.2 BASELINE PERIODS

The District currently does not produce or receive recycled water supply, and therefore, a 10-year baseline period is used as opposed to a 15-year baseline period. The baseline period must end no earlier than December 31, 2004 and no later than December 31, 2010. The most advantageous sequence of years for calculating per-capita water use is the sequence that generates the highest per-capita water use, making subsequent water conservation easier to achieve. Accordingly, the 10-year period 1997 through 2006 was selected as the average per-capita water use baseline for the 2015 UWMP, which is the same baseline period used in the 2010 UWMP, as shown in Table 5-1A.

Per SBX7-7, the minimum 5-year water use reduction baseline period must end no earlier than December 31, 2007 and no later than December 31, 2010. A 5-year minimum water use reduction baseline period between 2004 through 2008 was selected to calculate the most advantageous 5-year minimum water use reduction target as shown in Table 5-1B. The minimum 5-year water use reduction baseline period is used to calculate the legislation’s minimum water use reduction requirement.

5.3 SERVICE AREA POPULATION

DWR developed a “Population Tool” that uses GIS and Census data to calculate population within the water supplier’s service area, which can be used for the preparation of the 2015 UWMP. The Population Tool is particularly useful for agencies whose water service area boundaries do not match up to a city’s boundary and cannot use Census or DOF population data alone. The Population Tool utilizes US Census data and electronic


5-3

maps of the agency’s service area. Using the number of agency residential service connections, the tool will calculate the population for the non-census years.

Table 5-1A: Baseline Daily Per-Capita Water Use

Sequence

Year

Calendar

Year

Water

Service

Area

Population

Daily System

Gross Water

Use (AFY)

Annual Daily

Per Capita

Water Use

(GPCD)

1 1997 22,161 7,297 293.9

2 1998 22,996 7,382 286.5

3 1999 23,864 7,763 290.3

4 2000 24,713 8,010 289.3

5 2001 26,068 7,979 273.2

6 2002 27,393 8,283 269.9

7 2003 28,705 8,736 271.6

8 2004 30,005 10,197 303.3

9 2005 31,291 10,801 308.1

10 2006 32,563 11,349 311.1

Baseline Daily Per Capita Water Use: 289.7

Table 5-1B: Minimum Baseline Daily Per-Capita Water Use

Sequence

Year

Calendar

Year

Water

Service

Area

Population

Daily System

Gross Water

Use (AFY)

Annual Daily

Per Capita

Water Use

(GPCD)

1 2004 30,005 10,197 303.3

2 2005 31,291 10,801 308.1

3 2006 32,563 11,349 311.1

4 2007 33,824 10,608 279.9

5 2008 35,073 9,964 253.6

Minimum Baseline Daily Per Capita Water Use: 291.2

The DWR Population Tool utilizes residential (single-family and multi-family) water service connections for the years 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015 along with the water service area boundary in electronic (KML) format to estimate a water agency’s water service area population from 1990 through 2015 based on inputting residential (single-family and multi-family) connection data for each of those four periods.


5-4

The DWR Population Tool was utilized to estimate the District’s water service area population from 1990 through 2015. A 2015 District WSA population of 37,614 was estimated. The Population Tool worksheets are included in Appendix D.

5.4 GROSS WATER USE

For the baseline and minimum baseline periods, 100 percent of District gross water came from local groundwater production. The District had no recycled water supply; no indirect recycled water use; no water placed in long-term storage; no water delivered to another urban supplier; no water delivered for agricultural use; and no significant process water use. Gross water use for the baseline and minimum baseline periods are shown in Table 5-1A and 5-1B, respectively.

5.5 BASELINE DAILY PER CAPITA WATER USE

As shown in Table 5-1A, the baseline per-capita water use is calculated to be 289.7 gpcd. In the 2010 UWMP, the baseline per-capita water use was calculated to be 327.1 gpcd. As shown in Table 5-1B, the minimum baseline per-capita water use is calculated to be 291.2 gpcd. In the 2010 UWMP, the baseline per-capita water use was calculated to be 317.2 gpcd.

5.6 2015 AND 2020 TARGETS

As shown in Table 5-1B, the minimum baseline water use averages 291.2 gpcd. The minimum per capita water use target for 2020 must therefore be 276.6 gpcd (95% of 291.2). The calculation of the 2020 water use reduction target for the four methods are as follows:

• Method 1: Using a baseline per-capita average of 289.7 gpcd (shown in Table 5-1A) the District’s 2020 target would be 231.8 gpcd (80% of 289.7). Since the target water use for Method 1 is less than the one found using the legislation’s minimum requirement criteria (276.6), no further adjustments to this water use target would be required, if this method is selected.

• Method 2: The City does not currently maintain records of lot size, irrigated landscaped area for each parcel, reference evapotranspiration for each parcel, etc. to split its residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional uses into inside and outside (landscape irrigation) uses. The use of Method 2 to calculate conservation targets is therefore not feasible.

• Method 3: The District falls within the Colorado River Hydrologic Region (Hydrologic Region 10). According to the State’s April 30, 2009 draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan, the 2020 Target for Hydrologic Region 10 is 211 gpcd. Using Method 3, the District’s 2020 water use target would be 200.5 gpcd (95% of 211). Since the target water use generated by Method 3 is less than the one found using the minimum requirement, no further adjustments to this water use target would be required, if this method is selected.


5-5

• Method 4: DWR’s Target Method 4 Calculator was utilized to calculate 2020 target water use for the District under this method based on standards consistent with CUWCC BMPs. The District currently meters all water services, so there is no projected metering savings. A default indoor residential water savings of 15 gpcd was assumed. CII savings was calculated to be 6.6 gpcd and landscape irrigation and water loss savings was calculated to be 33.2 gpcd. Using Method 4, the District’s 2020 water use target would be 234.9 gpcd. Since the target water use generated by Method 4 is less than the one found using the minimum requirement, no further adjustments to this water use target would be required, if this method is selected.

The discussion and calculations above are summarized in Table 5-1C.

Table 5-1C: 2020 Targets by Method

Method 2020

1 231.8

2 Not Applicable

3 200.5

4 234.9

As shown in Table 5-1, Method 4 results in the most favorable 2020 water use target level for the District: 234.9 gpcd. The 2015 interim target is calculated to be 262.3 gpcd (mid-point between baseline of 289.7 and 2020 target of 234.9). In the District’s 2010 UWMP, the District’s 2020 target water use was calculated to be 264.9 gpcd using Method 4 and the 2015 interim target was calculated to be 296.0 gpcd. These baselines and targets are summarized in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Baselines and Targets Summary

Baseline

Period Start Year End Year

Average

Baseline

GPCD(a)

2015

Interim

Target(a)

Confirmed

2020

Target(a)

10-15

year 1997 2006 289.7 262.3 234.9

5 Year 2004 2008 291.2

(a) All values are in gallons per capita per day (gpcd)

5.7 2015 COMPLIANCE DAILY PER CAPITA WATER USE (GPCD)

The District has had lower per-capita water use than its 2015 target for the past seven years since 2009. In 2015, the District’s per-capita water use was 172.1 gpcd, which was significantly lower than its 2015 target of 262.3 gpcd as demonstrated in Table 5-2. There were no adjustments to the 2015 target for extraordinary events, economic adjustment, or


5-6

weather normalization. The District’s 2015 per-capita water use of 172.1 gpcd is also lower than its 2020 target of 234.9 gpcd.

5.8 REGIONAL ALLIANCE

The District is not participating in a regional alliance and is submitting their 2015 UWMP individually.

Table 5-2: 2015 Compliance

Actual

2015

gpcd

2015

Interim

Target

gpcd

Optional Adjustments to 2015 GPCD

Enter "0" for adjustments not used

From Methodology 8 2015

gpcd

Did

Supplier

Achieve

Targeted

Reduction

for 2015?

Y/N

Extraordinary

Events

Economic

Adjustment

Weather

Normal-

ization

TOTAL

Adjustments

Adjusted

2015

gpcd

172.1 262.3 0 0 0 0 172.1 172.1 Yes

(a) All values are in gallons per capita per day (gpcd)


6-1

6 SYSTEM SUPPLIES

MSWD currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from the Upper Coachella Valley groundwater basin via District owned and operated wells. CVWD and DWA are remediating the overdraft condition of the groundwater basin by artificial replenishment with imported Colorado River and State Water Project (SWP) Exchange water. Colorado River water is used to recharge the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin, while SWP Exchange water is used to recharge the Upper Whitewater and Mission Creek subbasins.

6.1 PURCHASED IMPORTED WATER

As a State Water Contractor, DWA is entitled to SWP water, as explained below. A conveyance system to provide SWP water directly to the Coachella Valley currently does not exist. However, the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) does go through the valley and DWA, as well as CVWD, have entered into separate agreements with Metropolitan to exchange SWP water for Colorado River water on an acre-foot-for-acre-foot basis.

In 1997, Metropolitan tapped into the CRA for DWA and installed a 48-inch turnout just south of Indian Avenue and west of Worsley Road. DWA acquired approximately 190 acres of land in the vicinity of the turnout in order to construct spreading basins to hold the Colorado River water as it percolates downward into the Mission Creek Subbasin. DWA completed construction of 60 acres of recharge basins as the Mission Creek Recharge Facilities in June 2002. The replenishment program began in the 2003 and has replenished the Mission Creek Subbasin with a cumulative total of approximately 141,800 AF of supplemental water (CVWD, 2015 Engineer’s Report).

Starting in 1973, the Upper Whitewater River Subbasin has been replenished using SWP Exchange water. CVWD operates two separate Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment facilities. Since 1973, the Whitewater River Subbasin has been replenished with a cumulative total of approximately 2,883,623 AF of supplemental water (CVWD, 2015 Engineer’s Report).

MSWD receives the benefit of DWA’s State water contracts and the spreading of Metropolitan’s SWP in the Mission Creek Subbasin. MSWD pays DWA’s replenish assessment for every AF of supplemental water extracted from the Mission Creek Subbasin.

6.1.1 Imported SWP Water

To recharge groundwater supplies in the Upper Whitewater River and Mission Creek subbasins, CVWD and DWA exchange CRA water for SWP water from Metropolitan. The SWP is managed by DWR and includes 660 miles of aqueduct and conveyance facilities extending from Lake Oroville in northern California to Lake Perris in the south. The SWP has contracts to deliver 4.172 million AFY to 29 contracting agencies. Each year, DWR determines the amount of water available for delivery to SWP contractors based on hydrology, reservoir storage, the requirements of water rights licenses and permits, water quality and environmental requirements for protected species in the


6-2

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The available supply is then allocated according to each SWP contractor’s Table A Amount. CVWD and DWA jointly manage their combined SWP Table A Amounts, allocating costs in proportion to total groundwater production within the Upper Whitewater and Mission Creek portions of their respective service areas. There are no physical facilities to deliver SWP water to the Valley. CVWD’s and DWA’s Table A water is exchanged with Metropolitan for a like amount of Colorado River water from Metropolitan’s Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) that extends from Lake Havasu, through the Coachella Valley to Metropolitan’s Lake Mathews. Metropolitan, DWA and CVWD executed an advanced delivery agreement in 1985 that allowed Metropolitan to pre-deliver up to 600,000 AF of SWP water into the Coachella Valley. Metropolitan then has the option to deliver the SWP allocation either from the CRA or from water previously stored in the basin. This agreement was subsequently amended to increase the pre-delivery amount to a maximum of 800,000 AF. The amount of water that has been pre-delivered is accounted for annually and reported in the Engineer’s Reports on Water Supply and Replenishment prepared by CVWD and DWA. Metropolitan historically has not made full use of its SWP Table A Amounts in normal and wet years. By virtue of the 2003 Exchange Agreement, Metropolitan assigned 11,900 AF of its annual Table A allocation to DWA and 88,100 AF of its annual Table A allocation to CVWD; however, Metropolitan retained the option to call-back or recall the assigned annual Table A water allocations, in accordance with specific conditions, in any year. In implementing the 2003 Exchange Agreement, Metropolitan advised CVWD and DWA that it would probably recall the 100,000 AF assigned to the two Coachella Valley agencies from 2005 through 2009. In fact, it did recall 100,000 AF in 2005, but it has not recalled any water since then. According to communications with Metropolitan staff, it is unlikely that Metropolitan will recall any water in 2015. In 2004, CVWD purchased an additional SWP Table A water from the Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District (Tulare Lake Basin) in Kings County (DWR, 2004). In 2007, DWA and CVWD purchased Table A SWP water from Tulare Lake Basin and from the Berrenda Mesa Water District in Kern County (DWR, 2007a). DWA’s total SWP Table A allocation is 55,750 AFY and CVWD’s total allocation is 138,350 AFY for a combined allocation of 195,100 AFY. CVWD’s and DWA’s total allocations of Table A SWP water is shown in Table 6-1A. Because groundwater production continues to exceed groundwater replenishment, and groundwater overdraft persists within the Mission Creek and Whitewater River subbasins, continued artificial recharge is necessary to either eliminate or reduce the effects of annual and cumulative overdraft, and reduce the resultant threat to the groundwater supply.


6-3

DWA has requested its maximum 2015 Table A State Water Project water allocation of 55,750 acre feet (AF) pursuant to its State Water Project Contract, which was increased from 38,100 AF in 2004 to 50,000 AF in 2005 and to 55,750 in 2010, for the purpose of groundwater replenishment. CVWD plans to do the same with its maximum 2015 Table A water allocation, which was increased in quantity from 23,100 AF in 2003 to 33,000 AF in 2004, to 121,100 AF in 2005, and to 138,350 AF in 2010.

Table 6-1A: 2014 Water Balance in Mission Creek Subbasin

Agency

Original

Table A

Tulare Lake

Basin

Transfer #1

Tulare Lake

Basin

Transfer #2

Metropolitan

Transfer

Berrenda

Mesa

Transfer Total

CVWD 23,100 9,900 5,250 88,100 12,000 138,350

DWA 38,100 0 1,750 11,900 4,000 55,750

Total 61,200 9,900 7,000 100,000 16,000 194,100

Although CVWD and DWA have contracts for the amount shown in Table 6-1A, the amount of water they are actually allocated in any given year is based on the amount of SWP water available. State Water Project Table A water allocations are based primarily on hydrologic conditions and legal constraints and vary considerably from year to year. In 2014, Table A water deliveries were approximately 5% of maximum Table A allocations.

According to projections for 2015, DWR will deliver 20% of Table A water allocation requests, resulting in deliveries of 38,820 AF of Table A water to the Coachella Valley agencies. The state's historic drought condition and lower than normal reservoir levels have been the cause of lower allocations delivered from CDWR in the last two calendar years. Ordinarily, DWA requests State Water Project surplus water under the Turn-Back Water Pool Program (Pool A and Pool B) in March of each year, but it is currently unknown if any surplus water will be made available. In addition, the availability of water under the Yuba River Accord is uncertain for 2015. Long-term average Table A allocations are currently predicted to be approximately 58% of maximum Table A allocations (DWA 2015/2016 Engineer’s Report for Groundwater Replenishment and Assessment Program for Mission Creek Subbasin).

6.1.2 Imported Colorado River Water

As discussed above, DWA and CVWD use Colorado River Water to replenish both the Whitewater River and Mission Creek subbasins in exchange for SWP water. Colorado River water has been a major source of supply for the Coachella Valley since 1949 with the completion of the Coachella Canal. In addition to groundwater recharge, this water is used for agricultural and non-urban purposes. The Colorado River is managed and operated in accordance with the Law of the River, the collection of interstate compacts, federal and state legislation, various agreements and contracts, an international treaty, a


6-4

U.S. Supreme Court decree, and federal administrative actions that govern the rights to use of Colorado River water within the seven Colorado River Basin states. California’s apportionment of Colorado River water is allocated by the 1931 Seven Party

Agreement among Palo Verde Irrigation District (PVID), Imperial Irrigation District (IID), CVWD and Metropolitan. The three remaining parties, the City and the County of San Diego and the City of Los Angeles, are now served by Metropolitan. California’s Colorado River supply is protected by the 1968 Colorado River Basin Project Act (PL 90-537, 1968). This act provides that, in years of insufficient supply on the main stream of the Colorado River, supplies to the Central Arizona Project shall be reduced to zero before California will be reduced below 4.4 million AF in any year. This provision assures full supplies to the Coachella Valley except in periods of extreme drought.

6.1.3 Imported Water Quality

Water quality for public drinking water systems is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the DHS. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) has established national primary and secondary drinking water standards for public water systems. Through primacy, the State of California has established more stringent standards than those enacted by EPA. Primary drinking water standards include regulations over the following type of constituents: turbidity, microorganisms, disinfection byproducts, disinfectants, inorganic chemicals, organic chemicals, and radionuclides. Secondary drinking water standards include the following components: aluminum, chloride, color, corrosivity, fluoride, foaming agents, and odor. As required by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), which was reauthorized in 1996, the District provides annual Water Quality Reports to its customers; also known as Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR). This mandate is governed by the EPA and the DHS to ensure the safety of potable water. DWA and CVWD recharge the Mission Creek Subbasin with imported Colorado River water, which meets all water quality standards for drinking water, but also has some water quality concerns related to salinity and perchlorate.

6.1.3.1 Salinity

SWP Exchange water is Colorado River water delivered via the CRA. Colorado River water has a higher level of salinity than SWP water. Based on historical and projected variations in Colorado River water quality, the TDS range for the SWP Exchange water recharged at the Whitewater River Recharge Facility is approximately 530 to 750 mg/L, averaging 636 mg/L since 1973. Several actions have been taken on the state and federal level to control the salinity of the river such as the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act in 1974 and formation of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum. In 1975, water quality standards and a plan for controlling salinity were approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.


6-5

CVWD and DWA, along with other partner agencies, are evaluating the feasibility of importing SWP water to the Coachella Valley via a direct connection to the SWP. If constructed, a SWP extension would terminate at the Whitewater and Mission Creek spreading facilities.

6.1.3.2 Perchlorate

Perchlorate is a contaminant of concern and is known to have adverse effects on the thyroid. Currently, there is no federal MCL for perchlorate; however, the state MCL for perchlorate is 6 µg/L. In January 2011, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) released for public comment a new draft Public Health Goal (PHG) of 1 µg/L for perchlorate in drinking water. Perchlorate is difficult to remove from water supplies with conventional water treatment. Successful treatment technologies include nanofiltration, reverse osmosis, biological treatment, and fluidized bed bioreactor treatment.

Perchlorate has been detected at low levels in the Colorado River water supply. Perchlorate was found in Colorado River water imported to the Coachella Valley in the late 1990s. Treatment was initiated in 1999 in Nevada at three different locations. This has resulted in significant reduction in perchlorate concentration in the Colorado River. Concentrations have steadily declined since the initiation of treatment and have reached levels below the state reporting level of 2 µg/L. Metropolitan continues to monitor perchlorate contamination of the Colorado River as well as research various treatment options. Based on the current state MCL, perchlorate would not affect water supply reliability.

6.2 GROUNDWATER

MSWD’s currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from groundwater produced from subbasins within the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, which underlies the District’s water service area. The Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, is bounded on the north and east by non-waterbearing crystalline rocks of the San Bernardino and Little San Bernardino Mountains and on the south and west by the crystalline rocks of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains. At the west end of the San Gorgonio Pass, between Beaumont and Banning, the basin boundary is defined by a surface drainage divide separating the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin from the Beaumont Groundwater Basin of the Upper Santa Ana drainage area. The southern boundary is formed primarily by the watershed of the Mecca Hills and by the northwest shoreline of the Salton Sea running between the Santa Rosa Mountains and Mortmar. Between the Salton Sea and Travertine Rock, at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, the lower boundary coincides with the Riverside/Imperial County Line. Southerly of the southern boundary, at Mortmar and at Travertine Rock, the subsurface materials are predominantly fine grained and low in permeability; although groundwater is present, it is not readily extractable. A zone of transition exists at these boundaries; to the north the subsurface materials are coarser and more readily yield groundwater.


6-6

Although there is interflow of groundwater throughout the groundwater basin, fault barriers, constrictions in the basin profile, and areas of low permeability limit and control movement of groundwater. Based on these factors, the groundwater basin has been divided into subbasins and subareas as described by CDWR in 1964 and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) in 1971. The subbasins present in the Coachella Valley are the Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, Garnet Hill, San Gorgonio Pass, and Whitewater River (also known as the Indio) subbasins. The subbasins, with their groundwater storage reservoirs, are defined without regard to water quantity or quality. They delineate areas underlain by formations which readily yield the stored water through water wells and offer natural reservoirs for the regulation of water supplies. The boundaries between subbasins within the groundwater basin are generally defined by faults that serve as effective barriers to the lateral movement of groundwater. Minor subareas have also been delineated, based on one or more of the following geologic or hydrologic characteristics: type of water bearing formations, water quality, areas of confined groundwater, forebay areas, groundwater divides and surface drainage divides. The following is a list of the subbasins and associated subareas, based on the CDWR and USGS designations:

• Mission Creek Subbasin

• Desert Hot Springs Subbasin

o Miracle Hill Subarea

o Sky Valley Subarea

o Fargo Canyon Subarea

• Garnet Hill Subbasin1

• San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin

• Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin

o Palm Springs Subarea

o Thermal Subarea

o Thousand Palms Subarea

o Oasis Subarea The subbasins underlying the MSWD water service area are shown on Figure 6-1. MSWD primarily produces groundwater from the Mission Creek Subbasin via 9 active wells. To a lesser extent, the District also produces groundwater from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin via four active wells; and from the Garnet Hill Subbasin via one active well. The locations or these wells relative to the subbasins they extract groundwater from are shown on Figure 6-2.

1 The California DWR does not recognize the Garnet Hill Subbasin. However, the USGS did recognize the northern part of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin as a separate subbasin and referred to it as the Garnet Hill Subbasin.

Mission SpringsWater District

Palm Springs

DesertHot

Springs

Cabazon

San Gorgonio Sub-Basin

Garnet Hill Sub-Basin

PIERSON BLVD

DILLION RD

INDI

AN AV

E

20TH

AVE

PALM

DR

§̈¦10

§̈¦10

§̈¦10

62

Mission CreekSub-Basin

Desert Hot Springs Sub-Basin

Whitewater Sub-Basin


MSWD GroundwaterSub-Basins

Figure 2-1PSOMASM:\2MIS041000\GIS\mxd\Fig2-1_UWMP_subbasins.mxd

LegendMSWD Service Area BoundarySphere of InfluenceKnown Fault Lines

UWMP Sub-BasinsDesert Hot Springs Sub-BasinMission Creek Sub-BasinGarnet Hill Sub-BasinWhitewater Sub-BasinSan Gorgonio Sub-Basin

0 1 2 3 4MilesI

2015

6-1

Mission SpringsWater District

Palm Springs

DesertHot

Springs

Cabazon

2525a 26a

26

San GorgonioSub-Basin

Garnet Hill Sub-Basin

W33

PIERSON BLVD

INDI

AN AV

E

PALM

DR

20TH

AVE

DILLION RD

W32

W37

§̈¦10

§̈¦10

§̈¦10

62

Mission Creek Sub-Basin

Desert Hot Springs Sub-Basin

WhitewaterSub-Basin

P5

P4

DWA

W31

W28

W279CO1

34053409

3410

17J01

W23/30

P6

P3P2

P1

W24W22

3408

W29


MSWD Well LocationsFigure 2-2PSOMAS

LegendMSWD Service Area BoundarySphereofInfluenceKnown Fault LinesPrivate WellsPublic Wells - MSWDPublic Wells - CVWD

UWMP Sub-BasinsDesert Hot Springs Sub-BasinMission Creek Sub-BasinGarnet Hill Sub-BasinWhitewater Sub-BasinSan Gorgonio Sub-Basin

M:\2MIS040200\GIS\Tasks\General\mxd\Fig3-2_UMWP_WellLocations.mxd

I0 1 2 3 4Miles

2015

6-2


6-9

All of the subbasins, except for Desert Hot Springs can provide potable water. The Desert Hot Springs Subbasin is a “hot-water” basin that is highly mineralized with water temperatures exceeding 100 degrees Fahrenheit and is not used to supply potable water. However, this hot, highly mineralized water is important to the local economy as it supports numerous spa resorts and hotels in and around the city of Desert Hot Springs. None of the groundwater basins in the Coachella Valley are adjudicated, therefore, there are no legal agreements limiting MSWD’s pumping from any of the subbasins. Bulletin 118 (2003) is the most recent DWR bulletin that characterizes the condition of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin as a whole. CVWD and DWA are averting overdraft conditions in the Upper Whitewater River Subbasin and the Mission Creek Subbasin through groundwater replenishment with Metropolitan imported water (artificial recharge). Starting in 1973, the Upper Whitewater River Subbasin has been replenished using Metropolitan State Water Project (SWP) exchange water for groundwater recharge. CVWD and DWA have an agreement with Metropolitan to exchange (on an acre-foot-for-acre-foot basis) a percentage of their SWP Table A water rights for an equal amount of Metropolitan’s Colorado River water for the purpose of recharging the basin. A replenishment program using SWP exchange water was also established for the Mission Creek Subbasin with recharge commencing in 2003.

6.2.1 Mission Creek Subbasin MSWD primarily produces groundwater from the Mission Creek Subbasin via 9 active wells. To a lesser extent, the District also produces groundwater from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin via four active wells; and from the Garnet Hill Subbasin via one active well. The Mission Creek Subbasin is located in the Upper Coachella Valley in the north central portion of Riverside County, California. The Mission Creek Fault and the Banning Fault bound the northeastern and southern edges of the subbasin, respectively, and are the major groundwater controls. Both act to limit groundwater movement as these faults have folded sedimentary deposits, displaced water-bearing deposits, and caused once permeable sediments to become impermeable (DWR, 1964). To the west, the subbasin is bounded by the San Bernardino Mountains and to the east by the Indio Hills and the Mission Creek Fault. Artesian conditions have historically been present near a narrow strip along the northwest portion of the Seven Palms Ridge (DWR, 1964), allowing for the development of a unique Willow-Mesquite biological community that includes phreatophytes. Depth to groundwater in other parts of the Subbasin averages 300 feet below ground surface. Major surface water features in the area are the Whitewater River, Mission Creek, San Gorgonio River, Little and Big Morongo Washes, and Long Canyon. The Mission Creek Subbasin is filled with Holocene and late Pleistocene unconsolidated sediments eroded from the San Bernardino and Little San Bernardino Mountains. There are three significant water-bearing sedimentary deposits recognized in the subbasin:


6-10

Pleistocene Cabazon Fanglomerate and Pleistocene to Holocene Older alluvium and alluvial deposits. These deposits are generally coarse sand and gravel, poorly sorted alluvial fan and pediment deposits that coalesce with one another. The Mission Creek Subbasin is considered an unconfined aquifer with a saturated thickness of 1,200 feet or more and an estimated total storage capacity on the order of 2.6 million acre-feet (MAF). The subbasin is naturally recharged by surface and subsurface flow from the Mission Creek, Dry, and Big Morongo Washes, the Painted Hills, and surrounding mountain drainages. Irrigation return flow and discharges from municipal and individual subsurface wastewater disposal systems also contribute to recharge. Natural inflow has been supplemented with artificial recharge of imported water since 2003. Total 2014 inflow to the Mission Creek Subbasin is estimated at 18,497 (afy) (MWH/Psomas, 2013) as shown in Table 6-21 and includes 7,500 AFY from mountain front recharge and stream underflow and 1,840 AFY from flows across the Mission Creek Fault from the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin. Additionally, non-consumptive return flow is estimated at 4,832 AFY assuming 35 percent of 2014 production. The primary outflow from the Mission Creek Subbasin is through groundwater production for domestic, agricultural and commercial use. Total groundwater production by MSWD, CVWD, and other privately-owned wells together averaged approximately 2,000 AFY in the 1970s; increased to over 17,000 AFY in 2006; and has since decreased to 13,834 in 2014. Additionally, natural outflow including underflow to the Garnet Hill Subbasin and to semi-water-bearing rocks in southeastern portion of basin and evapotranspiration is estimated at 5,700 AFY. Water replenished at the Mission Creek Groundwater Replenishment Facility is estimated at 4,325 AF. The water balance in Mission Creek Subbasin for the year 2014 is shown in Table 6-1B (CVWD’s 2015-2016 Engineer’s Report for the Mission Creek Subbasin). The annual water balance is the total inflow less the total outflow, which is estimated at a loss of 1,027 AF of water storage (approximately 0.03 percent of storage capacity) in the subbasin in 2014. Without water replenishment, the loss would have been -5,340 AF. Groundwater overdraft within the Mission Creek Subbasin (excluding artificial recharge) is now estimated to have averaged up to 9,000 acre feet per year (AF/Yr) (14,000 acre feet (AF) water produced - 5,000 AF non-consumptive return = 9,000 AF of groundwater overdraft) during the last five years. Cumulative overdraft offset by artificial recharge is estimated to be roughly 98,000 AF (DWA, 2015). Regional water levels have been declining since the early 1950’s due to scarce annual precipitation and groundwater extractions (DWR 2003). Water levels have declined in portions of the Mission Creek Subbasin approximately 100 feet between the years 1936 and 2003. Based on DWA’s 2015-2016 Engineer’s Report for the Mission Creek Subbasin, cumulative overdraft offset by artificial recharge is estimated at 100,000 AF.


6-11

Table 6-1B: 2014 Water Balance in Mission Creek Subbasin

Basin Inflow and Outflow Component Flow

(AFY)

Inflow

Desert Hot Springs Subbasin 1,840

Non-Consumptive Return(a) 4,832

Mountain Front Recharge and Stream

Underflow 7,500

Artificial Replenishment(b) 4,325

Total Inflow 18,497

Outflow

Natural Outflow(c) 5,700

2014 Groundwater Production 13,834

Total Outflow 19,534

Annual Balance(d) -1,037

(a) Based on 35% of 2014 production (13,834 AF x 0.35 = 4,842 AF)

(b) Water delivered to Mission Creek Replenishment Facility

(c) Underflow to Garnet Hill Subbasin and to semi-water-bearing rocks in southeastern

portion of basin and evapotranspiration

(d) This is a decrease in stored groundwater equal to 0.03% of the subbasin’s storage

capacity

Due to continuing overdraft conditions in the Mission Creek Subbasin, CVWD and DWA began constructing facilities to replenish the Mission Creek Subbasin in October 2001. Facilities were completed in June 2002 and in December 2002, DWA and CVWD began recharge activities in the Mission Creek Subbasin. The current replenishment program is effectively increasing water levels and is expected to stabilize or reverse the water level decline. Currently, MSWD has groundwater elevation monitoring wells and has been the exclusive monitoring and reporting agency to California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) for groundwater conditions in the Mission Creek Subbasin and Garnet Hill Subbasin (portion of Indio Subbasin). MSWD, DWA, and CVWD now jointly manage the Mission Creek Subbasin under the terms of the Mission Creek Settlement Agreement (December, 2004). This agreement and the 2003 Mission Creek Groundwater Replenishment Agreement between CVWD and DWA specify that the available SWP water will be allocated between the Mission Creek and Whitewater River Subbasins in proportion to the amount of water produced or diverted from each Subbasin during the preceding year. In 2014, production from the Mission Creek Subbasin was about 7.4 percent of the combined production from these two Subbasins.


6-12

6.2.2 Garnet Hill Subbasin MSWD produces groundwater from the Garnet Hill Subbasin via one active well. The Garnet Hill Subbasin which lies immediately south of the Mission Creek Subbasin, underlies approximately 20 square miles and is subordinate to the Indio Subbasin (DWR, 2003). The basin is bounded on the north by the Banning fault, on the south by the Garnet Hill fault, and on the east and west by non-water to semi-water bearing rocks. The area between the Garnet Hill fault and the Banning fault, named the Garnet Hill subarea by DWR (2003), was considered a distinct Subbasin by the USGS because of the effectiveness of the Banning and Garnet Hill faults as barriers to groundwater movement. This is illustrated by a difference of 170 feet in groundwater level elevation in a horizontal distance of 3,200 feet across the Garnet Hill fault, as measured in Spring 1961. The Garnet Hill Subbasin is considered an unconfined aquifer with a saturated thickness of 1,000 feet or more and an estimated total storage capacity on the order of 1.0 MAF (DWR 2003). The Subbasin is naturally recharged by subsurface flow from the Mission Creek Subbasin and runoff from the Whitewater River watershed on the west. Irrigation return flow and discharges from municipal and individual subsurface wastewater disposal systems also contribute to recharge but is considered very small. Total 2009 inflow to the Garnet Hill Subbasin is estimated at 25,150 acre-feet (Psomas, 2010). The primary outflows from the Garnet Hill Subbasin are across the Garnet Hill Fault to the Upper Whitewater River Subbasin. In addition, limited groundwater production for domestic, agricultural and commercial use also occurs but has only recently been of any significance. Groundwater production has varied over the years, ranging from a high of over 4,000 AFY in the early 1950s to less than 50 AFY in the mid-1980s. Currently, groundwater production is estimated at between 300-500 AFY (PSOMAS, 2010). MSWD constructed Well 33 in the Garnet Hill Subbasin with production since 2007. MSWD, CVWD and DWA have jointly developed the Mission Creek/Garnet Hill Water Management Plan for this Subbasin along with the Mission Creek Subbasin (MWH, 2013).

6.2.3 Desert Hot Springs Subbasin The Desert Hot Springs Subbasin is bounded to the north by the Little San Bernardino Mountains and to the southwest by the Mission Creek Fault and to the southeast by the San Andreas Fault. The San Andreas Fault separates the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin from the Whitewater River Subbasin and serves as an effective barrier to groundwater flow. The Desert Hot Springs Subbasin is not extensively developed except in the area of Desert Hot Springs. Relatively poor groundwater quality has limited the use of this Subbasin for potable supply. Total groundwater storage capacity for the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin is estimated to be 4.1 MAF (DWR 2003). No municipal groundwater production is reported to occur in the Subbasin (CVWD, 2010).


6-13

6.2.4 Whitewater River Subbasin The Whitewater River Subbasin, part of what was once referred to as the Indio Subbasin, comprises the major portion of the floor of the Coachella Valley and encompasses approximately 400 square miles. Beginning approximately one mile west of the junction of State Highway 111 and Interstate 10, the Whitewater River Subbasin extends southeast approximately 70 miles to the Salton Sea. The Subbasin is bordered on the southwest by the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains, and is separated from the Garnet Hill, Mission Creek and Desert Hot Springs Subbasins to the north and east by the Garnet Hill and San Andreas Faults. The limit of the Whitewater River Subbasin along the base of the San Jacinto Mountains and the northeast portion of the Santa Rosa Mountains coincides with the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin boundary. The Garnet Hill Fault, which extends southeastward from the north side of San Gorgonio Pass to the Indio Hills, is a relatively effective barrier to groundwater movement in the Garnet Hill Subbasin. The San Andreas Fault, extending southeastward from the junction of the Mission Creek and Banning faults in the Indio Hills and continuing out of the basin on the east flank of the Salton Sea, is also an effective barrier to groundwater movement. The historic fluctuations of water levels within the Whitewater River Subbasin indicate a steady decline in the levels throughout the Subbasin prior to 1949.

6.2.5 Cabazon Storage Unit of the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin MSWD produces groundwater from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin via four active wells. .A portion of the MSWD western service area is underlain by the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin. The portion of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin that lies entirely within the San Gorgonio Pass is described as the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin (DWR 1964). This Subbasin is bounded on the north by the San Bernardino Mountains and by semi-permeable rocks, and on the south by the San Jacinto Mountains. A surface drainage divide between the Colorado River and South Coastal Hydrologic Study Areas bounds the Subbasin on the west. The eastern boundary is formed by a bedrock constriction that creates a groundwater cascade into the Indio Subbasin (DWR 1964). The main water bearing deposits in the Subbasin are Holocene and Pleistocene age alluvium and Pliocene to Pleistocene age San Timoteo Formation. Holocene alluvium is mostly gravel and sand and, where saturated, would yield water readily to wells. Within the Subbasin, these deposits lie largely above the water table and contribute little water to wells. Holocene alluvium is found in the tributaries of the Subbasin and allows runoff to infiltrate and recharge the Subbasin (DWR, 1987). Older, Pleistocene-age alluvium contains sand and gravel, but also large amounts of clay and silt. These deposits yield moderate amounts of water to wells (DWR 1987).

Groundwater levels throughout the Subbasin declined significantly from 1933 through 1939 during the construction of the San Jacinto Tunnel as large quantities of groundwater


6-14

were pumped and diverted into the Indio Subbasin (SGPWA 2001). Groundwater levels in the eastern part of the Subbasin rose or stayed the same between 1967 and 1987 (DWR, 1987). Total storage capacity of the Subbasin was estimated to be about 2.7 MAF by DWR (1964). A re-evaluation by DWR (1987) estimates total storage capacity to be about 2.2 MAF. The San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin is subdivided into a series of storage units that include: the Banning Bench, Banning, Beaumont, and Cabazon storage units (Boyd, 1969). The Cabazon storage unit within the San Gorgonio Basin is recharged naturally with runoff from the adjacent San Jacinto and San Bernardino Mountains. The Cabazon storage unit encompasses approximately 11 square miles. The Cabazon storage unit is located near the western boundary of the MSWD boundary. MSWD operates four wells in the Cabazon storage unit. Other groundwater users in the Cabazon storage unit include Desert Hills Premium Outlets and Cabazon Water District.

6.2.6 District Groundwater Production The District has historically produced groundwater from the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin; primarily from the Mission Creek Subbasin via 9 active wells; and to a lesser extent, from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin via four active wells and from the Garnet Hill Subbasin via one active well. Historical groundwater production for each District well and for each subbasin from 2010 through 2015 is shown in Table 6-1C. A summary of groundwater pumped by the District by subbasin from 2011 through 2015 is shown in Table 6-1.

6.2.7 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014

Historically, California has never managed its groundwater supplies on a state-wide basis. That has now changed. As of January 1, 2015, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), signed by Governor Edmund G. Brown in September 2014, now regulates the use of groundwater on a more universal scale.

SGMA adopts a strategy for managing the state's groundwater resources by way of development and implementation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for each of the State’s groundwater basins (currently basins with a priority of medium rating are required to develop and implement a GSP by 2022 with the objective that the basin be sustainably managed within 20 years of the GSP implementation [CCR, Title 23, Div. 2, Chapter 1.5, Subchapter 2]). These plans can vary from simple basin-wide plans developed and implemented by individual local agencies, to multiple plans by different local agencies operating in the same basin, to state-imposed plans where no sufficient local plan exists. Consistent with the State’s interest in groundwater sustainability through local management, the following general principles shall guide the implementation of SGMA and the development and implementation of the GSP for each basin:


6-15

Table 6-1C: Historical Groundwater Production for District Wells (AFY)

Well No. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015


MW-22 980.0 456.1 956.8 951.4 854.0 1,186.3

MW-24 788.8 974.6 1,037.2 1,130.5 1,073.3 1,059.5

MW-27 466.2 255.1 285.8 287.0 357.4 105.8

MW-28 378.4 126.8 128.6 57.1 54.5 70.2

MW-29 1,513.3 1,789.3 1,305.3 1,345.8 1,224.0 133.4

MW-30 (a) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

MW-31 1,612.9 980.8 784.7 603.6 496.4 518.0

MW-32 643.6 950.7 1,159.0 1,293.0 1,387.2 1,486.8

MW-34 505.2 692.4 722.8 754.5 620.3 389.5

MW-35 (b) 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

MW-37 1,344.5 1,636.6 1,732.5 1,706.4 1,687.9 1,841.0

Subotal 8,232.9 7,864.4 8,112.7 8,129.3 7,755.0 6,790.5


MW-33 287.9 497.4 176.7 202.1 216.0 316.2

San Gorgonio River Subbasin - Cabazon Unit

MW-25 20.3 32.2 41.7 41.2 31.5 21.1

MW-25A 43.6 29.9 23.9 21.9 37.5 36.7

MW-26 72.2 80.1 72.6 70.9 82.3 82.5

MW-26A 7.8 7.6 7.3 13.7 3.7 5.0

Subtotal 143.9 149.8 145.5 147.7 155.0 145.3

Total 8,664.7 8,511.6 8,434.9 8,479.1 8,126.0 7,252.0

(a) Well 30 is currently inactive due to water quality issues. Offline indefinitely.

(b) Well 35 is constructed but not yet outfitted. It is indeterminate when it will be outfitted and

ready for production.

Table 6-1: Groundwater Volume Pumped (AFY)

Groundwater Type Basin Name 2011 2012 2023 2014 2015

Alluvial Basin Mission Creek 7,864.4 8,112.7 8,129.3 7,755.0

6,790.5

Alluvial Basin Garnet Hill 497.4 176.7 202.1 216.0 316.2

Alluvial Basin

San Gorgonio River

-Cabazon Unit 149.8 145.5 147.7 155.0 145.3

Total 8,511.6 8,434.9 8,479.1 8,126.0

7,252.0


6-16

• Groundwater conditions must be adequately defined and monitored to demonstrate that a GSP is achieving the sustainability goal for the basin

• GSP content information must be sufficiently detailed and readily comparable

• Sustainable management criteria and projects and management actions shall be commensurate with the level of understanding of the basin setting, based on the level of uncertainty and data gaps, as reflected in the GSP

• An Agency shall have the responsibility for adopting a GSP that defines the basin setting and establishes criteria that will maintain or achieve sustainable groundwater management

A GSP will be evaluated, and its implementation assessed, consistent with the objective that a basin be sustainably managed within 20 years of the GSP implementation without adversely affecting the ability of an adjacent basin to implement its GSP or achieve and maintain its sustainability goal over the planning and implementation horizon.

While sustainability plans must contain a number of specific requirements, they must be designed to develop and implement best management practices. Under SGMA, best management practices are:

“a practice, or combination of practices, that are designed to achieve sustainable

groundwater management and have been determined to be technologically and

economically effective, practicable, and based on best available science.” (CCR,

Title 23, Div. 2, Chapter 1.5, Subchapter 2)

The SGMA also contains procedural requirements for plan development and implementation, and exempts many activities involved in that process from the environmental review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Mission Creek, Whitewater River (which includes the Garnet Hill Subbasin) and San Gorgonio Pass subbasins have been designated as medium priority under SGMA. The subbasins are unadjudicated and will require the formation of a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA[s]) and the development of a GSP[s]). Pursuant to California Water Code sections 10723(c)(3) and 10723.8 of the SGMA, DWA submitted a Notice of Election to become a Groundwater Sustainability Agency for the portions of the Indio Subbasin (DWR No. 7-21.01), Mission Creek Subbasin (DWR No. 7-21.02), and the San Gorgonio Subbasin (DWR No. 7-21.04) on November 20, 2015. DWA is currently preparing a draft GSP for its subject basins, which is estimated to be completed by June 2016. CVWD submitted on November 6, 2015 Notice of Election to become a Groundwater Sustainability Agency for the portions of the Indio Subbasin (DWR No. 7-21.01) and the Mission Creek Subbasin (DWR No. 7-21.02) underlying the CVWD boundary.


6-17

6.2.7.1 State Oversight and Intervention

While the SGMA generally emphasizes local management of groundwater resources, it does provide for state involvement on a number of levels. For example, DWR must develop and publish best management practices for sustainable groundwater management, and it is responsible for reviewing sustainability plans every five years to ensure compliance with the SGMA. In addition, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB or State Board) can "designate a basin as a probationary basin" for failure to develop a groundwater sustainability plan where one is needed, or for implementation of an insufficient plan. If a local agency fails to remedy the problem that led to a designation, the State Board may adopt its own interim sustainability plan for the basin.

6.2.7.2 Timeline

Some of the more important past and future deadlines for actions for SGMA implementation are as follows:

• September 16, 2014: Groundwater management legislation becomes law

Governor Brown signs Senate Bill 1168, Assembly Bill 1739, and Senate Bill 1319, which made up the groundwater management legislation package.

• January 1, 2015: Legislation goes into effect

The SGMA becomes effective.

• January 31, 2015: DWR must establish initial groundwater basin priority

DWR establishes the initial priority – high, medium, low or very low – or each groundwater basin in the state by the end of January 2015 (Water Code § 10722.4).

• January 1, 2016: DWR must set emergency regulations for basin boundary revision

DWR adopts emergency regulations for groundwater basin boundary revisions by January 1, 2016. The regulations must include the methodology and criteria used to evaluate proposed boundary revisions, including the establishment of new sub basins (Water Code § 10722.2).

• June 1, 2016: DWR must establish emergency regulations for evaluating plans

DWR adopts emergency regulations for evaluating GSPs and their implementation and coordination agreements among local agencies for ground water sustainability planning. The regulations must identify GSP components and information to assist plan and coordination agreement development and implementation (Water Code § 10733.2).

• December 31, 2016: DWR estimate of water available for groundwater replenishment due


6-18

DWR publishes its estimate of the water available for groundwater replenishment on its website (Water Code § 10729(c)).

• January 1, 2017: Basin deadline to submit alternative to a GSP

Medium- and high-priority basins choosing to meet sustainability objectives by ways other than groundwater sustainability planning (which includes not forming a GSA) must submit their alternatives to DWR (and then again every five years) (Water Code § 10733.6).

• January 1, 2017: DWR will establish best management practices for sustainable management

DWR publishes best management practices for the sustainable management of groundwater on its website (Water Code § 10729(d)).

• June 30, 2017: Deadline to form a GSA

A local agency or agencies in each high- or medium-priority groundwater basin must have officially formed one or more (GSAs) for the entire basin (Water Code §5 10724, 10735.2(a)(1))

• June 30, 2017: State Water Board can begin to put basins on probation

The State Water Board can initiate probationary status to a medium- or high-priority basin if the basin lacks one or more GSA(s) that covers the entire basin or no alternative has been approved (Water Code § 10735.2(a)(1)).

• July 1, 2017: Those pumping in a probationary basin must report extractions

Pumping groundwater in a basin that either has been designated as a probationary basin or lies outside a GSA's management area must be reported to the State Water Board. These reporting requirements do not apply to those extracting for domestic purposes 2 AFY or less, and some others (Water Code §§ 5202, 10724).

• January 31, 2020: GSPs required for critically over drafted basins

Basins designated as high- or medium-priority and subject to critical conditions of overdraft must be managed under a GSP or GSPs. The State Water Board can initiate probationary status for all or part of a basin if there is no GSP, if the GSP is inadequate, or the GSP implementation will not likely achieve sustainability (Water Code § 10720.7(a)(1), 10735.2(a)(2), 10735.2(a)(3)).

• January 31, 2022: GSPs required for all remaining high- and medium- priority groundwater basins

All remaining basins designated as high- or medium-priority must be managed under a GSP or GSPs. The State Water Board can initiate probationary status in 2022 for all or part of a basin if there is no GSP, if the GSP is inadequate, or the


6-19

GSP implementation will not likely achieve sustainability except for basins where groundwater extractions result in significant depletion of interconnected surface waters (Water Code § 10720.7(a)(2), 10735.2(a)(4), and 10735.2(a)(5)(A)).

• January 31, 2025: State Water Board actions where extractions impact surface waters

The State Water Board can initiate probationary status for those medium- or high-priority basin where the GSP is inadequate or implementation is not likely to achieve sustainability and the basin is in a condition where groundwater extractions result in significant depletion of interconnected surface waters (Water Code § 10735(a)(5)(B).

6.2.8 Groundwater Quality

In general, the existing groundwater quality from District wells was reviewed and found to be excellent. All urban water served by MSWD meets state and federal drinking water quality standards (MSWD, Water Quality Report, 2014). Historic groundwater quality data for the Mission Creek subbasin was evaluated by Slade (2000) from samples taken from MSWD and CVWD wells between 1961 and 1998 and is summarized as follows:

• Groundwater in the subbasin ranges in character from a calcium-magnesium bicarbonate type in the northwest to sodium chloride-sulfate type in the southeast.

• Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in groundwater samples taken from MSWD/CVWD municipal wells ranged from 271 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to 490 mg/L. All samples analyzed were below the State of California recommended Secondary Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) of 500 mg/L for TDS.

• Total hardness has historically ranged from 56 mg/L to 252 mg/L as measured in municipal wells. These concentrations indicate moderately hard to hard water.

• The pH concentration of groundwater in the MCGS has ranged from 7.2 to 8.3.

• Nitrate as NO3 concentrations have ranged from not detected (ND) to 7.6 mg/L.

• Iron (Fe) concentrations have ranged from ND to 0.242 mg/L, below its State of California Secondary MCL of 0.300 mg/L.

• Magnesium (Mg) ranged in concentration from ND to 0.010 mg/L, below its State of California Secondary MCL of 0.050 mg/L.


6-20

Additional samples have since been taken and the overall characteristics of the basin have not significantly changed. General water quality characteristics of groundwater produced from selected wells in each subbasin and data provided in the District’s 2014 CCR is shown in Table 6-2A.

Table 6-2A: Summary of District Groundwater Quality(a)

Constituent Year Range


Nitrates as NO3 (mg/L) 2014 ND(a)-5.7

Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 2014 280-650

VOCs 2014 ND-1.1(b)

MTBE (µg/L) 2014 ND<3

NDMA 2014 NT

San Gorgonio River Subbasin - Cabazon Unit

Nitrates as NO3 (mg/L) 2014 3.9-14

Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 2014 250-400

VOCs 2014 ND


NDMA 2014 NT


Nitrates as NO3 (mg/L) 2014 ND<2

Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 2014 200

VOCs 2014 ND


NDMA 2014 NT

(a) ND=Not Detected, NT = Not Tested

(b) Only compounds detected were chloroform and methylene chloride and

were below reporting limits

Nitrates

Nitrates as NO3 was detected but all samples were below the MCL of 45 mg/L.

Total Dissolved Solids

Total dissolved solids ranged from 200 mg/L to 650 mg/L. Well 34 reported that the highest TDS levels in excess of 500 mg/L but within the secondary MCL of 1,000 mg/L.

Volatile organic compounds (VOC)

VOCs were detected (chloroform and methylene chloride) in some wells but were below the MCL of 5 µg/L.


6-21

Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) MTBE was reported as not detected in all samples collected and reported by MSWD.

N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) NDMA was not tested for in any samples reported by MSWD.

Emerging Contaminants No emerging contaminants have been identified in any samples reported by MSWD.

Uranium There are two possible sources of uranium in the Coachella Valley. The first is naturally occurring uranium in the geologic formations of the basin. The second is contamination along the Colorado River. A review of data from the SWRCB Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) program over the past ten years indicates no wells having uranium levels exceeding the 20 pCi/L MCL. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has completed about 48 percent of a project to move a 16- million-ton pile of uranium mill tailings near Moab, Utah which lies approximately 750 feet from the Colorado River (2015 Metropolitan UWMP). Due to the proximity of the pile to the Colorado River, there is a potential for the tailings to enter the river as a result of a catastrophic flood event or other natural disaster. In addition, contaminated groundwater from the site is slowly seeping into the river. The DOE is responsible for remediating the site, which includes removal and offsite disposal of the tailings and onsite groundwater remediation. Previous investigations have shown uranium concentrations contained within the pile at levels significantly above the California MCL of 20 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). Metropolitan has been monitoring for uranium in the CRA and at its treatment plants since 1986. Monitoring at Lake Powell began in 1998. Uranium levels measured at Metropolitan’s intake have ranged from 1 to 6 pCi/L, well below the California MCL. Conventional drinking water treatment, as employed at Metropolitan’s water treatment plants, can remove low levels of uranium; however, these processes would not be protective if a catastrophic event washed large volumes of tailings into the Colorado River. Public perception of drinking water safety is also of particular concern as to uranium. Remedial actions at the site since 1999 have focused on removing contaminated water from the pile and groundwater. To date, over 4,400 pounds of uranium in contaminated groundwater have been removed. In July 2005, DOE issued its Final Environmental Impact Statement with the preferred alternative of permanent offsite disposal by rail to a


6-22

disposal cell at Crescent Junction, Utah, located approximately 30 miles northwest of the Moab site. Rail shipment and disposal of the uranium mill tailings pile from the Moab site began in April 2009 using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) 2009 funding which helped to accelerate initial cleanup efforts. Through August 2015, DOE has shipped over 7.7 million tons of mill tailings to the Crescent Junction disposal cell. DOE estimates completing movement of the tailings pile by 2025, depending on annual appropriations. Metropolitan continues to track progress of the remediation efforts and work with Congressional representatives to support increased annual appropriations and expedite cleanup. Based on sampling in the Canal, uranium concentrations over the last four years have varied from 3.5 pCi/L to 6.1 pCi/L, with the most recent reading of 3.5 pCi/L (May 2010), which is well below the California MCL of 20 pCi/L. MSWD and other Valley agencies (CVWD, DWA, City of Indio, City of Coachella) continue to monitor for radioactive materials in well water and Colorado River water. Currently, MSWD wells 28, 34, and 26A have fulltime uranium treatment to preclude exceeding the MCL. Other Water Quality Testing/Issues In addition, URS (2005) reviewed the water quality testing data received from the respective agencies and has identified water quality parameters that equaled or exceeded the published regulatory standards. The wells and the specific standards in question are presented below and are based on laboratory data received between the years 1989 and 2003 and the District’s 2014 CCR.

• Well 24 reported to have a gross alpha value of 18 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) that is the maximum limit for primary drinking water and Title 22 standards. Average gross alpha for the Desert Hot Springs system in 2008 equaled 4 pCi/L and ranged between ND to 20 pCi/L. Although individual samples may exceed the MCL, compliance with standard is based on a 4-quarter average, which was below the MCL.

• Well 24 had a violation of the concentration of Lindane (a pesticide) at 0.4

µg/L in 1989. The recommended primary drinking water and Title 22 limit is 0.2 mg/L. In the year 2014, Lindane was not detected.

• Well 26 had a reading of 6 µg/L for antimony that is also the maximum recommended value under the primary drinking water and Title 22 standards.

• Well 26A had high uranium values from 19 to 21.3 pCi/L for 6 consecutive samples in the years 2001 to 2004. The maximum Title 22 drinking water concentration is 20 pCi/L. This site is currently on fulltime treatment for uranium and has never received a citation from the Health


6-23

Department for exceeding the MCL. These values were reported before the well went into service for domestic use.

• Well 26A had gross alpha counts of 23 to 27 pCi/L for three samples taken in 2001 through 2002. The Title 22 standard is 15 pCi/L. Based on 2008 measurements of the West Palm Springs Village system, gross alpha counts were not detected. This site is currently on fulltime treatment.

• Well 28 and Well 34 are both on fulltime treatment for uranium to preclude exceeding the MCL. Neither of these sites have ever received a citation from the Health Department for exceeding the MCL.

The Mission Creek Subbasin is located beneath both developed and undeveloped areas. Given the high permeability of the surface sediments and the presence of residential/commercial/industrial activities within the subbasin boundaries, there is a possibility that the underlying groundwater could be impacted by various activities currently occurring or proposed in the subbasin. While not all-inclusive, the following activities may pose the greatest threat to the existing groundwater quality in the subbasin:

• Septic systems

• Recharge of imported water

• Abandoned/inactive wells

• Accidental commercial/industrial discharges

MSWD is actively pursuing a program to properly place residences/businesses in the district on the MSWD water supply system and promoting the proper abandonment of unused/inactive wells. In addition, MSWD is converting residences/businesses currently on septic systems to the MSWD sewer collection and treatment system as discussed further in Section 6.5

6.3 SURFACE WATER

The District does not use, or plan to use, self-supplied surface water as part of its water supply.

6.4 STORMWATER

The District is currently not using stormwater to meet local water supply demands. At this time, there are no plans to utilize stormwater, but that could change in the future.

6.5 WASTEWATER AND RECYCLED WATER

6.5.1 Wastewater Collection and Treatment

The existing wastewater collection system for the water service area, which is operated and maintained by MSWD, consists of a network of approximately 45 miles of sewers, which are concentrated in the central portion of the study area where the majority of the populace and businesses reside. The Desert Crest Country Club community first received


6-24

sewer service in the early 1960s with the outlying tracts established later in the early 1970s. Most of the MSWD sewer pipelines were constructed in the early 1970s and include lines along Ocotillo Road, Palm Drive, and Mission Lakes Boulevard. In the early 1980s, improvements to the pipeline system were added to tracts west of West Drive.

MSWD has an ongoing program to connect existing residences currently on septic systems to sewer collectors that have been constructed or are in the process of being constructed. Since 2005, 3,520 parcels have been converted from septic to sewer service for a total of 7,700 parcels. An additional 695 parcels will be converted by 2016. MSWD operates two wastewater treatment plants serving 7,300 parcels and a population of approximately 20,400. The Horton Wastewater Treatment Plant (Horton WWTP), located on Verbena Drive about a half mile south of Two Bunch Palms Trail, has a capacity of 2.3 million gallons per day (mgd) (2,800 AFY). The plant uses an extended aeration process for treatment and disposes of the secondary wastewater, which is not disinfected, in adjacent percolation/evaporation ponds. The sludge generated from the treatment process is run through a dewatering sludge filter press and then trucked offsite to proper disposal areas. The average daily flow metered to the plant in 2015 was 1.69 mgd (1,893 AFY) as shown in Table 6-2.

The Desert Crest Wastewater Treatment Plant, located about a half mile southeast of the intersection of Dillion Road and Long Canyon Road, has a capacity of 0.18 mgd (202 AFY) and serves a country club development and mobile home park. The facility operates similar to the Horton WWTP using an aeration basin for treatment and disposes of the secondary wastewater, which is not disinfected, by way of percolation/evaporation ponds. The sludge generated from the treatment process is dried in on-site beds and then trucked offsite to proper disposal areas. The average daily flow to the plant in 2015 was metered at 0.04 mgd (45 AFY) as shown in Table 6-2. Wastewater treatment and discharge characteristics associated with the District are shown in Table 6-3.

Table 6-2: Wastewater Collected Within Service Area in 2015

Wastewater Collection Recipient of Collected Wastewater

Wastewater

Collection

Agency

Wastewater

Volume

Metered or

Estimated?

Volume of

Wastewater

Collected in

2015 (AFY)

Wastewater

Treatment

Agency

Treatment

Plant Name

Is WWTP

Located

Within

UWMP Area?

MSWD Metered 1,893 MSWD Alan L Horton Yes

MSWD Metered 45 MSWD Desert Crest Yes

Total 1,938


6-25

Table 6-3: Wastewater Treatment and Discharge Within Service Area in 2015

WW

Treatment

Plant

Method of

Disposal

Does This

Plant Treat

Wastewater

Generated

Outside the

Service Area?

Treatment

Level

2015 Volumes

WW

Treated

Discharged

Treated

WW

Recycled

Within

Service

Area

Recycled

Outside

of Service

Area

Alan L

Horton

Percolation

Ponds No

Undisinfected

Secondary 1,893 1,893 0 0

Desert

Crest

Percolation

Ponds No

Undisinfected

Secondary 45 45 0 0

Total 1,938 1,938 0 0

Both District wastewater treatment plants uses an extended aeration process for treatment and dispose of the secondary wastewater, which is not disinfected, in adjacent percolation/evaporation ponds located within the plant on the southwest (potable water) side of the Mission Creek Fault. In addition, effluent is used for irrigation and maintenance at the treatment plants.

6.5.2 Potential Recycled Water Use

The District currently does not have recycled water use within their service area; however there are plans to use recycled water for the irrigation of golf courses, parks, medians and greenbelts in the future. To produce recycled water meeting Title 22 standards, the District are constructing the Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (RWWTP) with tertiary treatment facilities, and plan to have the plant in operation by early 2018 to accommodate a recycled water demand of 1.0 mgd (1,120 AFY). It is projected that the recycled water system (and the RWWTP) will be expanded to 6,400 AFY by 2040, matching projected demands with available wastewater as further discussed in this section.

MSWD’s 2004 Water Conservation Master Plan outlines various planned and implemented activities to ensure water use efficiency throughout the District’s service area. Under System Reliability Initiatives, Initiative No. 2 calls for total management of water resources to ultimately include developing recycled water for appropriate beneficial uses.

The District’s Water Efficient Landscaping Guidelines identifies the installation of recycled water irrigation systems (dual distribution systems) as required to allow for the future use of recycled water, unless a written exemption has been granted.

The District prepared a Water Recycling Feasibility Study in 2007 in which treatment and distribution alternatives and recycled water demands were identified. It was determined that recycled water infrastructure could feasibly be implemented to supply existing and future irrigation demands and, subsequently, offset a portion of potable


6-26

water demands. Recycled water can be used for groundwater basin replenishment and favorably impacts water balance calculations.

The construction of recycled water infrastructure including the RWWTP with tertiary treatment facilities is projected to occur by 2020 to accommodate a recycled water demand of 1.0 mgd (1,120 AFY) as shown in Table 6-3A.

Table 6-3A: Projected Recycled Water Use in MSWD Service Area (AFY)

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Potable Water

Demand(a) 6,506 7,860 8,828 9,797 10,766 11,735

Wastewater

Generation(b) 1,938 2,750 3,531 4,409 5,383 6,454

% Wastewater

Generation(b) 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55%

Recycled Water 0 1,120 2,200 3,600 5,000 6,400

% Recycled

Water(c) 0 41% 62% 82% 93% 99%

(a) After water losses

(b) Ongoing program to convert customer septic systems to the wastewater collection system

(c) With the construction of recycled water system infrastructure

In 2015, only approximately 30 percent of the potable water demand (after water losses) was conveyed to the District’s wastewater collection system and ultimately to the Horton WWTP and Desert Crest WWTP for treatment, as there are still many customers on septic systems. As the District continues its program to convert existing septic systems to the wastewater collection system and connects to new customers, the percentage is envisioned to increase to approximately 55 percent by 2040. The 55 percent projection for wastewater generation (interior water use) from potable water demand is based on recent studies in Southern California (approximately 45 percent) and the projection of increased exterior landscape irrigation conservation in the future. The primary recycled water demands are foreseen to be public green areas, golf courses and playing fields that will be identified as part of the water reuse study currently underway. Consistent with recycled water demands that have been identified and estimated system wastewater flows, it is envisioned that the recycled water system including the RWWTP will be expanded to accommodate a system recycled water system demand of 6,400 AFY by 2040 as shown in Table 6-3A and 6-4. Note DWR Table 6-5 is not used because the District did not project recycled water use for 2015 in the 2010 UWMP. Methods to expand recycled water use are shown in Table 6-6.

6.6 DESALINATED WATER OPPORTUNITIES

Desalination has been identified as a potential solution for increasing water supplies and reducing groundwater overdraft for the Coachella Valley region. However, desalination


6-27

requires complicated technologies and is a high energy consuming technology. Desalination offers many potential benefits including: increases water supply and reliability during drought periods, reduced dependency on imported supplies by developing a local supply source, protection of public health, and facilitates more recycling and reuse, given the lower salinity of the source. Desalination strategies being considered by the Coachella Valley IRWMP region include:

Table 6-4: Current and Projected Recycled Water Direct Beneficial Uses Within Service Area

Name of Agency Producing (Treating) the Recycled Water: MSWD in Future

Name of Agency Operating the Recycled Water Distribution System: MSWD in Future

Supplemental Water Added in 2015: 0

Source of 2015 Supplemental Water: NA

Beneficial Use Type

Level of

Treatment 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Parks & Landscape Tertiary 0 300 600 1,000 1,400 1,800

Golf Course Irrigation Tertiary 0 820 1,600 2,600 3,600 4,600

Total: 0 1,120 2,200 3,600 5,000 6,400

Table 6-6: Methods to Expand Future Recycled Water Use

Name of Action Description

Planned

Implementation

Year

Expected

Increase in RW

Use

Construct Plant & Build

RW Distribution

Construct RWWTP w/ tertiary treatment

& construct distribution infrastructure 2025 1,120

Expand Plant & Build

RW Distribution

Expand RWWTP & construct distribution

infrastructure 2030 1,080


RW Distribution




RW Distribution




RW Distribution



Total 6,400

• CVWD Agricultural Drain Water Desalination Project. The Coachella Valley has a large network of drains and open channels that transport irrigation drainage flows and stormwater. CVWD operates and maintains this drainage system and is evaluating the development of up to 85,000 AFY of desalinated drain water by 2045.


6-28

• CVWD Desalination Pilot Project. CVWD received a grant from DWR’s Proposition 50 Water Desalination Proposal for a pilot desalination project. The pilot study, which was completed in 2008, compared reverse osmosis with solar’ still “dewvaporation” of agricultural drainage runoff and brackish groundwater, which was withdrawn from the upper part of the aquifer, which consists mostly of agricultural runoff. Reverse osmosis was the chosen treatment technology to meet the current water quality goals.

• Desalination of Colorado River Water. As reported in the Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan, June 2015, Colorado River recharge is an important strategy of the Coachella Valley WMP for sustaining groundwater levels. Under current average conditions, imported Colorado River water conveys about 350,000 tons of salt into the basin each year. Desalination of Colorado River water is one approach for reducing the salt load in the recharged water. Technical challenges include the necessity and level of treatment, benefits of treatment, cost of treatment, methods and costs of brine disposal and how the costs of treatment would be recovered from basin water users. Methods for improving recharge water quality will be considered as part of the IRWMP or a similar approach involving broad stakeholder involvement (CVWD, 2012a).

Desalination of Colorado River water could provide a groundwater quality benefit by reducing the TDS concentration of imported water. The basic concept would involve desalination of some or all of the Colorado River water imported to the Coachella Valley for recharge, to be consistent with the average groundwater quality or to meet secondary (non-enforceable aesthetic) recommended drinking water standards of 500 mg/L. CVWD completed a pilot treatment study in conjunction with potable use. To date, no feasibility study has been performed for brine disposal methods. The TDS impacts of recharge were evaluated in the Water Management Plan Update EIR and it was determined that the benefits of recharge with Colorado River water to the basin are greater than the cumulative negative impacts.

6.7 EXCHANGES OR TRANSFERS

The District has not entered into any agreements for the transfer or exchange of water. However, the District cooperates with DWA and Metropolitan for the Desert Water Agency/Coachella Valley Water District (DWCV) SWP Table A Transfer and the DWCV Advance Delivery Program.

6.8 FUTURE WATER PROJECTS

6.8.1 MSWD Septic System Conversions

MSWD has installed approximately 65,700 linear feet of sewer since 2010 and has abated approximately 1,275 septic tanks. The District recently started projects in subareas J-1 and D-2, which when complete will result in 31,300 linear feet of new sewer and will


6-29

bring sewer service to 695 parcels. When complete, it is anticipated that 518 active septic tanks will be abated.

As there are no future water supply projects projected at this time that will provide a quantifiable increase to MSWD’s supply, DWR Table 6-7 was not completed.

6.8.2 MSWD Recycled Water System Implementation

To produce recycled water meeting Title 22 standards, the District are constructing the Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (RWWTP) with tertiary treatment facilities, and plan to have the plant in operation by early 2018. Recycled water system transmission and distribution system piping and other infrastructure will be constructed to accommodate a recycled water demand of 1.0 mgd (1,120 AFY) by 2020.

6.9 SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PLANNED SOURCES OF WATER

MSWD currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from groundwater production and does not purchase imported water from a water wholesaler. However, CVWD and DWA are remediating the overdraft condition of the groundwater in the Upper Coachella Valley by replenishment with Colorado River and State Water Project (SWP) Exchange water from Metropolitan. District groundwater meets all Federal and State primary and secondary water quality standards without treatment (other than chlorination for disinfection) with the exceptions that groundwater from Well Nos. 26A, 28, and 34 is treated at each well site to meet the primary water quality standard for uranium. The construction of recycled water infrastructure including tertiary treatment facilities at the planned RWWTP is projected to occur by 2020 to accommodate a recycled water demand of 1,120 AFY District water supplies for 2015 and projected District water supplies through 2040 are shown in Tables 6-8 and 6-9, respectively.

6.10 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS TO SUPPLY

Climate change impacts to the region as presented in the 2014 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IWRMP) are summarized in Section 4.6.

Table 6-8: Water Supplies — Actual

Water Supply

Additional Detail on

Water Supply

2015

Actual

Volume Water Quality

Groundwater

Coachella Valley

Basin/District Wells 7,252 Drinking Water

Total 7,252


6-30

Table 6-9: Water Supplies — Projected

Water Supply

Additional Detail

Projected Water Supply(a) (AFY)

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Groundwater

Coachella Valley

Basin/District Wells 8,430 9,469 10,508 11,547 12,586

Recycled

Water RWWTP 1,120 2,200 3,600 5,000 6,400

Total 9,550 11,669 14,108 16,547 18,986

(a) Supply expected to be reasonably available


7-1

7 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT

7.1 CONSTRAINTS ON WATER SOURCES Reliability is a measure of a water service system’s expected success in managing water shortages. The combination of demand management and supply augmentation options help to reduce the frequency and severity of shortages. The only current direct water source to MSWD is local groundwater. The reliability of the District’s water supply is dependent on the reliability of groundwater supplies, supplemented by imported surface water used for groundwater replenishment and the planned implementation of recycled water supply. Imported supplies are managed and delivered by Metropolitan through DWA. The following sections will discuss these agencies as well as the Regional Water Quality Control Board, their roles in water supply reliability, and the near and long-term efforts they are involved with to ensure future reliability of water supplies to the District and the region as a whole. Two of the most significant constraints on water supply for the District and for Southern California have been the drought that started in 2012 and has persisted into 2016, and Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta ecosystem issues that affect imported water supply from the State Water Project (SWP). The water conditions that the region faced in 2015 were shaped by supply conditions and resource actions that occurred in the preceding years, including several extraordinary events, such as:

• Historic drought in California leading to record low contract supplies available from the State Water Project in 2014 (five percent of contract supplies) and in 2015 (20 percent of contract supplies);

• An extended 16 year drought in the Colorado River watershed that decreased storage levels in Lake Mead and Lake Powell

• Groundwater basins and local reservoirs dropping to very low operating levels due to record dry hydrology in Southern California;

• Restrictions of SWP deliveries by federal court orders due to endangered Delta smelt and salmon which resulted in the combined loss of approximately 3 MAF of SWP supplies between 2008 and 2014. These losses has impacted Metropolitan’s ability to meet demands and refill regional storage;

• Supply availability in the Los Angeles Aqueduct system continues to be affected by both the drought and environmental mitigation efforts related to Owens Lake and the Lower Owens River.

7.1.1 Desert Water Agency

Desert Water Agency (DWA) has implemented groundwater replenishment and assessment programs for both the Mission Creek and Whitewater Subbasins. These


7-2

programs were established to augment groundwater supplies and arrest or retard declining water table conditions within the Upper Coachella Valley, specifically the Whitewater River Subbasin within DWA’s retail service area, and the Mission Creek Subbasin within DWA’s boundary and MSWD’s service area. The intention of the program is to optimize and protect the use of groundwater in addition to providing sound management of the groundwater supplies. DWA is a retail water agency that operates a groundwater replenishment program for the MSWD service area. As such, both agencies are responsible for ensuring that adequate water supplies are available to MSWD customers, now and into the future. Because MSWD and CVWD have retail customers served from the Mission Creek Subbasin, and because CVWD is also a retailer operating groundwater replenishment programs, DWA, CVWD, and MSWD are working together to ensure an adequate quantity and quality of water produced from the Mission Creek Subbasin. DWA and CVWD are also SWP contractors and through their exchange agreement with Metropolitan, began recharging CRA water into the Mission Creek Subbasin in 2002. This recharge program is jointly administered by DWA and CVWD with facilities constructed and operated by DWA and is expected to increase as groundwater extraction increases to meet projected growth. If groundwater replenishment with imported water (artificial recharge) is excluded, annual groundwater overdraft (groundwater extractions or water production in excess of natural groundwater replenishment or recharge) within the Mission Creek Subbasin is currently estimated to range between 2,000 and 4,000 AFY, depending upon actual non-consumptive return flows. Supplementing natural groundwater replenishment resulting from rainfall runoff with artificial recharge is therefore necessary to reduce annual and cumulative overdraft. Increases in cumulative overdraft, without artificial recharge, will result in declining groundwater levels and increasing pump lifts, thereby increasing energy consumption for groundwater extraction. Extreme cumulative overdraft has the potential of causing ground surface settlement, and could also have an adverse impact upon groundwater quality and storage volume. Artificial recharge offsets annual groundwater overdraft and the concerns associated therewith and arrests or reduces the effects of cumulative groundwater overdraft. On May 14, 2013, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (tribe) filed a lawsuit against CVWD and DWA over groundwater rights. The case addresses two primary concerns: groundwater rights and groundwater quality. It asks the court to 1) declare the existence of the tribe’s senior rights in the Coachella Valley under federal law; and 2) quantify these rights. The case, which is now on appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, also seeks to prevent CVWD and DWA from further injuring the tribe and residents in surrounding communities by impairing the quantity and quality of water in the aquifer. While the outcome of this case seems to primarily impact the Whitewater River Subbasin where the tribe is located, the material effect of this case on the Mission Creek and Garnet Hill Subbasins is unknown at this time.


7-3

In summary, the Mission Creek Subbasin is in a condition of overdraft even though the decline of groundwater levels has been attenuated (cumulative overdraft offset by artificial recharge is estimated to be roughly 100,000 AF); thus, there is a continuing need for groundwater replenishment (DWA, 2015-2016 Engineer’s Report for the Mission Creek Subbasin).

7.1.2 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California

Metropolitan acquires water from Northern California via the SWP and from the Colorado River via the CRA to supply water to most of Southern California. As a wholesaler, Metropolitan has no retail customers, and distributes treated and untreated water directly to its 26 member agencies.

As reported in their 2015 UWMP, Metropolitan faces a number of challenges in providing adequate, reliable and high quality supplemental water supplies for southern California. One of those challenges is dry hydrologic conditions that can have a significant impact on Metropolitan’s imported water supply sources.

The peak of the snowpack season traditionally occurs on April 1; however in 2015, the snowpack peaked in January at only 17 percent of the April 1 average measurement, resulting in the earliest and lowest snowpack peak in recorded history. The statewide snowpack was all but gone by April 1, 2015 and registered a record low of five percent of average for that day. This dry hydrology produced only 51 percent of average runoff for the water year and consequently kept state reservoirs below average storage levels. As a result, Metropolitan only received 20 percent of its contract water supplies from the State Water Project in 2015. With storage in northern California reservoirs at or around 90 percent of full and a strong snowpack, DWR increased the Table A allocation to SWP Contractors to 60 percent in April of 2016.

In 2015, the Upper Colorado River Basin snowpack peaked in March at 76 percent of normal. Runoff for that basin measured 94 percent of normal due to above normal rainfall in May, June and July, which averted a Colorado River shortage conditions for 2016. This allowed Metropolitan to implement new water management programs and bolster supplies in 2015. The Colorado River, however, is experiencing a historic16-year drought causing total storage levels in that system to steadily decline increasing the likelihood of shortage in future years beyond 2016. The restrictions on water use generated a record demand for water-saving rebates and refocused efforts to increase development of local water resources.

These dry hydrologic conditions and reduced imported water supplies, have led to significant withdrawals from Metropolitan's storage reserves, including Diamond Valley Lake (DVL) and its groundwater banking and conjunctive use programs to meet scheduled water deliveries. During the 2007-2009 drought, Metropolitan withdrew a combined 1.2 MAF from storage reserves to balance supplies and demands. In 2014 alone, Metropolitan withdrew 1.1 MAF from dry-year storage to balance supplies and demands because of the historic low final SWP allocation in that year.


7-4

In addition, challenges such as the detection of the quagga mussel in the Metropolitan’s CRA supplies and increasingly stringent water quality regulations to control disinfection byproducts exacerbate the water supply condition and underscore the importance of flexible and adaptive regional planning strategies.

A very significant constraint on water supply for Southern California has been Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta ecosystem issues that affect imported water supply from the State Water Project (SWP).

7.1.2.1 State Water Project Supply Reliability Actions, Projects and Programs

Much of the SWP water supply passes through the San Francisco-San Joaquin Bay-Delta (Bay-Delta). The SWP consists of a series of pump stations, reservoirs, aqueducts, tunnels, and power plants operated by DWR. This statewide water supply infrastructure provides water to 29 urban and agricultural agencies throughout California. More than two-thirds of California’s residents obtain some of their drinking water from the Bay-Delta system.

The Bay-Delta’s declining ecosystem, caused by a number of factors that include agricultural runoff, predation of native fish species, urban and agricultural discharge, changing ecosystem food supplies, and overall system operation, has led to reduction in water supply deliveries. SWP delivery restrictions due to regulatory requirements resulted in the loss of about 1.5 MAF of supplies to Metropolitan from 2008 through 2014, reducing the likelihood that regional storage can be refilled in the near-term. Operational constraints will likely continue until a long-term solution to the problems in the Bay-Delta is identified and implemented.

In April 2015, the Brown Administration announced California WaterFix, as well as a separate ecosystem restoration effort called California EcoRestore. Together, the California WaterFix and California EcoRestore will make significant contributions toward achieving the coequal goals of providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem established in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Reform Act of 2009. In addition to enhancing the Delta Ecosystem there are a number major actions, projects, and programs Metropolitan has undertaken to improve SWP reliability.

The Bay Delta Conservation Plan

The Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) was prepared through a collaboration of state, federal, and local water agencies, state and federal fish agencies, environmental organizations, and other interested parties. At the outset of the BDCP process, a planning agreement was developed and executed among the participating parties and a Steering Committee was formed. The BDCP identified a set of conservation measures including water conveyance improvements and restoration actions to contribute to the recovery of endangered and sensitive species and their habitats in California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The BDCP was formulated to contribute to the state’s co-equal goals of water supply reliability and ecosystem restoration.


7-5

Lead agencies for the EIR/EIS were the California Department of Water Resources, the USBR, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service, in cooperation with the California Department of Fish and Game, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Metropolitan served on the steering committee. DWR and USBR are the lead agencies for the California WaterFix.

In order to select the most appropriate elements of the final conservation plan, the BDCP considered a range of options for accomplishing these goals using information developed as part of an environmental review process. Potential habitat restoration and water supply conveyance options included in the BDCP were assessed through an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The BDCP planning process and the supporting EIR/EIS process is being funded by state and federal water contractors. The First Administrative Draft BDCP was released in March 2012, a Second Administrative Draft BDCP and EIR/S was released in March 2012 and the Public Draft BDCP and EIR/S was released December 2013. Each of the above draft documents were released to the public. The official public comment draft was released in December 2013.

A new permitting approach and associated new alternatives to the BDCP were announced in April 2015. The California WaterFix and California EcoRestore would be implemented under a different Endangered Species Act permitting process. This would fulfill the requirement of the 2009 Delta Reform Act to contribute toward meeting the coequal goals of providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem. DWR and USBR serve as lead agencies for the California WaterFix. The new water conveyance facilities included in Alternative 4 (the BDCP) would be constructed and operated under the California WaterFix. Proposes changes to the design of the water conveyance facilities reduce the overall environmental/construction impacts to the environment, minimize disruptions to local communities, and increase long term operational and cost benefits.

Some of the engineering improvements configuration improvements would include moving the tunnel alignment away from local communities and environmentally sensitive areas. The elimination of pumping plants, reduction of permanent power lines and power use, and the reconfiguration of intake and pumping facilities sediment basins and reconfiguration/relocation of the construction staging sites in the North Delta will lessen construction and longer term operational impacts. If implemented, these would result in reduced environmental and construction impacts and increase improved long-term operational and cost benefits.

The main objective under the EcoRestore Program is to pursue at least 30,000 acres of Delta habitats over the next five years. These restoration programs would include projects and actions that are in compliance with pre-existing regulatory requirements designed to improve the overall health of the Delta. Other priority restoration projects would also be identified by the Delta Conservancy and other local governments. Funding would be provided through multiple sources including state bonds and other state-mandated funds, State Water Project/Central Valley Project contractors’ funds as part of existing regulatory obligations, and from various local and federal partners.


7-6

As part of the new alternatives and the state’s proposed project, the regulatory approach to obtaining state and federal endangered species compliance is shifting from the BDCP Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan strategy to an approach that contemplates a Biological Opinion pursuant to Federal ESA Section 7 and a State 2081 Permit. This approach as well as the proposed revision to the new water facilities and ecosystem restoration actions is evaluated in the partially Recirculated Draft EIR/EIS released in July 2015.

The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is continuing its phased review and update of the 2006 Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP) for the Bay-Delta. The first phase focuses on the southern Delta salinity objectives for the protection of agriculture, San Joaquin River flow objectives for the protection of fish and wildlife, and a program of implementation for achieving those objectives. The second phase considers the comprehensive review of the other elements of the Bay-Delta WQCP, including but not limited to Sacramento River and Delta outflow objectives.

Metropolitan has been collaborating with water users and other stakeholders to develop sound science and technical analyses in support of the WQCP review process, including sharing results in technical forums and publishing findings in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Metropolitan has been meeting with Board members and staff to share findings as new science and analyses are developed and to encourage close coordination between BDCP and WQCP updates.

Monterey Amendment

The Monterey Amendment originated from disputes between the urban and agricultural SWP contractors over how contract supplies are to be allocated in times of shortage. In 1994, in settlement discussions in Monterey, the contractors and DWR reached an agreement to settle their disputes by amending certain provisions the long-term water supply contracts. These changes, known as the Monterey Amendment, altered the water allocation procedures such that both shortages and surpluses would be shared in the same manner for all contractors, eliminating the prior “agriculture first" shortage provision. In turn, the agricultural contractors agreed to permanently transfer 130 TAF to urban contractors and permanently retire 45 TAF of their contracted supply.

The amendment facilitated several important water supply management practices including ground water banking, voluntary water marketing, and more flexible and efficient use of SWP facilities such as borrowing from Castaic Lake and Lake Perris and using carryover storage in San Luis Reservoir to enhance dry-year supplies. It also provided for the transfer of DWR land to the Kern County Water Agency for development of the Kern Water Bank. The Monterey Amendment was challenged in court, and the original Environmental Impact Report (EIR) invalidated. Following a settlement, DWR completed a new EIR and concluded the CEQA review in May 2010.

However, the project has been challenged again in a new round of lawsuits. Central Delta Water Agency, South Delta Water Agency, California Water Impact Network, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, and the Center For Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit against DWR in Sacramento County Superior Court challenging the validity of the EIR


7-7

under CEOA and the validity of underlying agreements under a reverse validation action (the “Central Delta I" case). These same plaintiffs filed a reverse validation lawsuit against the Kern County Water Agency in Kern County Superior Court ("Central Delta II"). This lawsuit targets a transfer of land from Kern County Water Agency to the Kern Water Bank, which was completed as part of the original Monterey Agreement. The third lawsuit is an EIR challenge brought by Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District and Buena Vista Water Storage District against DWR in Kern County Superior Court (“Rosedale"). The Central Delta II and Rosedale cases were transferred to Sacramento Superior Court, and the three cases were consolidated for trial.

In January 2013, the Court ruled that the validation cause of action in Central Delta I was time-barred by the statute of limitations. On October 2, 2014, the court issued its final rulings in Central Delta I and Rosedale, holding that DWR must complete a limited scope remedial CEQA review addressing the potential impacts of the Kern Water Bank. However, the court’s ruling also allows operation of the State Water Project to continue under the terms of the Monterey Agreement while the remedial CEQA review is prepared and leaves in place the underlying project approvals while DWR prepares the remedial CEQA review. The Central Delta II case was stayed pending resolution of the Central Delta I case. The plaintiffs have appealed the decision.

SWP Terminal Storage

Metropolitan has contractual rights to 65 TAF of flexible storage at Lake Perris (East Branch terminal reservoir) and 154 TAF of flexible storage at Castaic Lake (West Branch terminal reservoir). This storage provides Metropolitan with additional options for managing SWP deliveries to maximize yield from the project. Over multiple dry years, it can provide Metropolitan with 73 TAF of additional supply. In a single dry year like 1977, it can provide up to 219 TAF of additional supply to Southern California.

Yuba Dry Year Water Purchase Program

In December 2007, Metropolitan entered into an agreement with DWR providing for Metropolitan’s participation in the Yuba Dry Year Water Purchase Program between Yuba County Water Agency and DWR. This program provides for transfers of water from the Yuba County Water Agency during dry years through 2025.

Desert Water Agency/Coachella Valley WD SWP Table A Transfer

Under the transfer agreement, Metropolitan transferred 100 TAF of its SWP Table A contractual amount to Desert Water Agency/CVWD (DWCV). Under the terms of the agreement, DWCV pays all SWP charges for this water, including capital costs associated with capacity in the California Aqueduct to transport this water to Perris Reservoir, as well as the associated variable costs. The amount of water actually delivered in any given year depends on that year’s SWP allocation. Water is delivered through the existing exchange agreements between Metropolitan and DWCV, under which Metropolitan delivers Colorado River supplies to DWVC equal to the SWP supplies delivered to Metropolitan. While Metropolitan transferred 100 TAF of its Table A amount, it retained other rights, including interruptible water service; its full carryover


7-8

amounts in San Luis Reservoir; its full use of flexible storage in Castaic and Perris Reservoirs; and any rate management credits associated with the 100 TAF.

In addition, Metropolitan is able to recall the SWP transfer water in years in which Metropolitan determines it needs the water to meet its water management goals. The main benefit of the agreement is to reduce Metropolitan’s SWP fixed costs in wetter years when there are more than sufficient supplies to meet Metropolitan’s water management goals, while at the same time preserving its dry-year SWP supply. In a single critically dry-year like 1977, the call-back provision of the entitlement transfer can provide Metropolitan about 5 TAF of SWP supply. In multiple dry years like 1990-1992, it can provide Metropolitan about 26 TAF of SWP supply.

Desert Water Agency/Coachella Valley WD Advance Delivery Program

Under this program, Metropolitan delivers Colorado River water to the Desert Water Agency and CVWD in advance of the exchange for their SWP Contract Table A allocations. In addition to their Table A supplies, Desert Water Agency and CVWD, subject to Metropolitan’s written consent, may take delivery of SWP supplies available under Article 21 and the Turn-back Pool Program. By delivering enough water in advance to cover Metropolitan’s exchange obligations, Metropolitan is able to receive Desert Water Agency and CVWD’s available SWP supplies in years in which Metropolitan’s supplies are insufficient without having to deliver an equivalent amount of Colorado River water. This program allows Metropolitan to maximize delivery of SWP and Colorado River water in such years.

Desert Water Agency/Coachella Valley WD Other SWP Deliveries

Since 2008, Metropolitan has provided Desert Water Agency and CVWD written consent to take delivery of non-SWP supplies separately acquired by each agency from the SWP facilities. These deliveries include water acquired from the Yuba Dry Year Water Purchase Program and the 2009 Drought Water Bank. Metropolitan has also consented to:

• 10 TAF of exchange deliveries to CVWD for non-SWP water acquired from the San Joaquin Valley from 2008 through 2010,

• 36 TAF of exchange deliveries to Desert Water Agency for non-SWP water acquired from the San Joaquin Valley from 2008 through 2015, and

• 16.5 TAF of exchange deliveries to CVWD from groundwater storage of Kern River flood flows or SWP water delivered from Kern County Water Agency provided by Rosedale Rio Bravo Water Storage District from 2012 through 2035.

7.1.2.2 Central Valley/State Water Project Storage and Transfer Programs

Metropolitan increases the reliability of supplies received from the California Aqueduct by developing flexible SWP storage and transfer programs. Over the years, Metropolitan


7-9

has developed numerous voluntary SWP storage and transfer programs, to secure additional dry-year water supplies.

Metropolitan has a long history of managing the wide fluctuations of SWP supplies from year to year by forming partnerships with Central Valley agricultural districts along the California Aqueduct, as well as with other Southern California SWP Contractors. These partnerships allow Metropolitan to store its State Water Project (SWP) supplies during wetter years for return in future drier years. Some programs also allow Metropolitan to purchase water in drier years for delivery via the California Aqueduct to Metropolitan’s service area.

In addition, the SWP storage and transfer programs have served to demonstrate the value of partnering, and increasingly, Central Valley agricultural interests see partnering with Metropolitan as a sensible business practice beneficial to their local district and regional economy. Metropolitan is currently operating several SWP storage programs that serve to increase the reliability of supplies received from the California Aqueduct. Metropolitan is also pursuing a new storage program with Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency, which is currently under development. In addition, Metropolitan pursues SWP water transfers on an as needed basis.

Semitropic Storage Program

Metropolitan has a groundwater storage program with Semitropic Water Storage District located in the southern part of the San Joaquin Valley. The maximum storage capacity of the program is 350 TAF. The specific amount of water Metropolitan can store in and subsequently expect to receive from the programs depends upon hydrologic conditions, any regulatory requirements restricting Metropolitan's ability to export water for storage, and the demands placed on the Semitropic Program by other program participants. In 2014, Metropolitan amended the program to increase the return yield by an additional 13.2 TAF per year. The minimum annual yield available to Metropolitan from the program is currently 34.7 TAF, and the maximum annual yield is 236.2 TAF, depending on the available unused capacity and the State Water Project allocation. During wet years, Metropolitan has the discretion to use the program to store portions of its SWP water that are in excess of the amounts needed to meet Metropolitan’s service area demand. In Semitropic, the water is delivered to district farmers who use the water in-lieu of pumping groundwater. During dry years, the district returns Metropolitan’s previously stored water to Metropolitan by direct groundwater pump-in return and the exchange of SWP supplies.

Arvin-Edison Storage Program

Metropolitan amended the groundwater storage program with Arvin-Edison Water Storage District in 2008 to include the South Canal Improvement Project. The project increases the reliability of Arvin-Edison returning higher water quality to the California Aqueduct. In addition, Metropolitan and Arvin-Edison often enter into annual operational agreements to optimize program operations in any given year. The program storage capacity is 350 TAF. The specific amount of water Metropolitan can expect to store in and subsequently receive from the programs depends upon hydrologic conditions and any


7-10

regulatory requirements restricting Metropolitan’s ability to export water for storage. The storage program is estimated to deliver 75 TAF. During wet years, Metropolitan has the discretion to use the program to store portions of its SWP supplies which are in excess of the amounts needed to meet Metropolitan’s service area demand. The water can be either directly recharged into the groundwater basin or delivered to district farmers who use the water in-lieu of pumping groundwater. During dry years, the district returns Metropolitan’s previously stored water to Metropolitan by direct groundwater pump-in return or by exchange of surface water supplies. In 2015, Metropolitan funded the installation of three new wells at a cost of $3 million that will restore the return reliability by 2.5 TAF per year. The funding will ultimately be recovered through credits against future program costs.

San Bernardino Valley Metropolitan Storage Program

The San Bernardino Valley Metropolitan Storage program allows for the purchase of a portion of San Bernardino Valley Metropolitan’s SWP supply. The program includes a minimum purchase provision of 20 TAF and the option of purchasing additional supplies when available. This program can deliver between 20 TAF and 70 TAF in dry years, depending on hydrologic conditions. The expected delivery for a single dry year similar to 1977 is 20 TAF should supplies be available. The agreement with San Bernardino Valley Metropolitan also allows Metropolitan to store up to 50 TAF of transfer water for use in dry years. The agreement can be renewed until December 31, 2035.

San Gabriel Valley Metropolitan Exchange Program

The San Gabriel Valley Metropolitan program allows for the exchange of up to 5 TAF each year. For each acre-foot Metropolitan delivers to the City of Sierra Madre, a San Gabriel Valley Metropolitan member agency, San Gabriel Valley Metropolitan provides two acre-feet to Metropolitan in the Main San Gabriel Basin, up to 5 TAF. The program provides increased reliability to Metropolitan by allowing additional water to be delivered to Metropolitan's member agencies Three Valleys and Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water Districts.

Antelope Valley—East Kern Water Agency Exchange and Storage Program

The Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency (AVEK) exchange and storage program provides Metropolitan with additional supplies and increased reliability. Under the exchange program, for every two acre-feet Metropolitan receives, Metropolitan returns one acre-foot to AVEK to improve its reliability. The exchange program is expected to deliver 30 TAF over ten years, with 10 TAF available in dry years. Under the program, Metropolitan will also be able to store up to 30 TAF in the AVEK’s groundwater basin, with a dry year return capability of 10 TAF.

Kern-Delta Water District Storage Program

This groundwater storage program has 250 TAF of storage capacity. The program is capable of providing up to 50 TAF of dry-year supply. In 2015, Metropolitan funded the cross river pipeline that, when completed, will help improve Metropolitan’s return


7-11

reliability by reducing losses during exchanges. Water for storage can be either directly recharged into the groundwater basin or delivered to district farmers who use the water in-lieu of pumping groundwater. During dry years, the district returns Metropolitan’s previously stored water to Metropolitan by direct groundwater pump-in return or by exchange of surface water supplies.

Mojave Storage Program

Metropolitan entered into a groundwater banking and exchange transfer agreement with Mojave Water Agency on October 29, 2003. This agreement was amended in 2011 to allow for the cumulative storage of up to 390 TAF. The agreement allows for Metropolitan to store water in on exchange account for later return. Through 2021, and when the State Water Project allocation is 60 percent or less, Metropolitan can annually withdraw the Mojave Water Agency’s State Water Project contractual amounts in excess of a 10 percent reserve. When the State Water Project allocation is over 60 percent, the reserved amount for Mojave’s local needs increases to 20 percent. Under a 100 percent allocation, the State Water Contract provides Mojave Water Agency 82.8 TAF of water.

Central Valley Transfer Programs

Metropolitan secures Central Valley water transfer supplies via spot markets and option contracts to meet its service area demands when necessary. Hydrologic and market conditions, and regulatory measures governing Delta pumping plant operations, will determine the amount of water transfer activity occurring in any year. Recent transfer market activity, described below, provides examples of how Metropolitan has secured water transfer supplies as a resource to fill anticipated supply shortfalls needed to meet Metropolitan's service area demands.

In 2003, Metropolitan secured options to purchase approximately 145 TAF of water from willing sellers in the Sacramento Valley during the irrigation season. These options protected against potential shortages of up to 650 TAF within Metropolitan’s service area that might have arisen from a decrease in Colorado River supply or as a result of drier-than-expected hydrologic conditions. Using these options, Metropolitan purchased approximately 125 TAF of water for delivery to the California Aqueduct.

In 2005, Metropolitan, in partnership with seven other State Water Contractors, secured options to purchase approximately 130 TAF of water from willing sellers in the Sacramento Valley, of which Metropolitan’s share was 113 TAF. Metropolitan also had the right to assume the options of the other State Water Contractors if they chose not to purchase the transfer water. Due to improved hydrologic conditions, Metropolitan and the other State Water Contractors did not exercise these

In 2008, Metropolitan, in partnership with seven other State Water Contractors, secured approximately 40 TAF of water from willing sellers in the Sacramento Valley, of which Metropolitan’s share was approximately 27 TAF.


7-12

In 2009, Metropolitan, in partnership with eight other buyers and 21 sellers, participated in a statewide Drought Water Bank, which secured approximately 74 TAF, of which Metropolitan’s share was approximately 37 TAF.

In 2010, Metropolitan, in partnership with three other State Water Contractors, secured approximately 100 TAF of water from willing sellers in the Sacramento Valley, of which Metropolitan’s share was approximately 88 TAF. Metropolitan also purchased approximately 18 TAF of water from Central Valley Project Contractors located in the San Joaquin Valley. In addition, Metropolitan entered into an unbalanced exchange agreement that resulted in Metropolitan receiving approximately 37 TAF.

In 2015, Metropolitan, in partnership with eight other State Water Contractors, secured approximately 20 TAF of water from willing sellers in 4he Sacramento Valley, of which Metropolitan’s share was approximately 14 TAF.

In addition, Metropolitan has secured water transfer supplies under the Yuba Accord, which is a long-term transfer agreement. To date, Metropolitan has purchased approximately 165 TAF.

Finally, Metropolitan has secured water transfer supplies under the Multi-Year Water Pool Demonstration Program. In 2013 and 2015, Metropolitan secured 30 TAF and 1.3 TAF, respectively.

Metropolitan’s recent water transfer activities demonstrated Metropolitan’s ability to develop and negotiate water transfer agreements either working directly with the agricultural districts who are selling the water or through a statewide Drought Water Bank. Because of the complexity of cross-Delta transfers and the need to optimize the use of both CVP and SWP facilities, DWR and USBR are critical players in the water transfer process, especially when shortage conditions increase the general level of demand for transfers and amplify ecosystem and water quality issues associated with through-Delta conveyance of water. Therefore, Metropolitan views state and federal cooperation to facilitate voluntary, market-based exchanges and sales of water as a critical component of its overall water transfer strategy.

Achievements to Date

Metropolitan has made rapid progress to date developing SWP storage and transfer programs. Most notably, Metropolitan has utilized approximately 457 TAF to supplement its SWP supplies during the recent 2012-2015 unprecedented drought. Of this total, approximately 325 TAF are from SWP storage program extractions in Semitropic, Arvin, Kern Delta, and Mojave; 57 TAF are from the San Bernardino and SGV Metropolitan programs; and 78 TAF of SWP transfer supplies were purchased from the SWP Buyers Group, Multi-Year Water Pool, and Yuba water purchase programs.

7.1.2.3 Colorado River Water Supply Reliability Actions, Projects and Programs

The Colorado River Basin has been experiencing a prolonged drought, where runoff above Lake Powell has been below average for twelve of the last sixteen years. Within those sixteen years, runoff in the Colorado River Basin above Lake Powell from 2000


7-13

through 2007 was the lowest eight- year runoff on record. While runoff returned to near normal conditions during 2008-2010, drought returned in 2012 with runoff in 2012 being among the four driest in history. During these drought conditions, Colorado River system storage has decreased to 50 percent of capacity.

Quagga mussels were discovered in January of 2007 in Lake Mead and rapidly spread downstream to the Lower Colorado River. The presence and spawning of quagga mussels in the Lower Colorado River and in reservoirs located in southern California poses an immediate threat to water and power systems serving more than 25 million people in the southwestern United States. Quagga mussels (Dreissena bugensis) is a related species to the better-known zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) and indigenous to the Ukraine. They were introduced to the Great Lakes in the 1980s from fresh-water ballast of a transoceanic ship traveling from Eastern Europe.

Although the introduction of these two species into drinking water supplies does not typically result in violation of drinking water standards, invasive mussel infestations can adversely impact aquatic environments and infrastructure. If unmanaged, invasive mussel infestations have been known to severely impact the aquatic ecology of lakes and rivers; clog intakes and raw water conveyance systems; reduce the recreational and aesthetic value of lakes and beaches; alter or destroy fish habitats; and render lakes more susceptible to deleterious algae blooms.

Metropolitan’s planning strategy recognized explicitly that program development would play an important part in reaching the target level of deliveries from the CRA. The implementation approach explored a number of water conservation programs with water agencies that receive water from the Colorado River or are located in close proximity to the CRA. Negotiating the QSA was a necessary first step for all of these programs. On October 10, 2003, after lengthy negotiations, representatives from Metropolitan, Imperial Irrigation District (IID), and CVWD executed the QSA and other related agreements.

Parties involved also included San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), the DWR, the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Department of the Interior, and the San Luis Rey Settlement Parties. One of those related agreements was the Colorado River Water Delivery Agreement: Federal Quantification Settlement Agreement which specifies to which agencies water will be delivered under priorities 3a and 6a of the Seven Party Agreement during its term. Metropolitan has identified a number of programs that could be used to achieve the regional long-term development targets for the CRA. Metropolitan has entered into or is exploring agreements with a number of agencies.

Imperial Irrigation District / Metropolitan Water District Conservation Program

Under agreements executed in 1988 and 1989, Metropolitan has funded water efficiency improvements within IID’s service area in return for the right to divert the water conserved by those investments. Under this program, IID implemented a number of structural and non-structural measures, including the lining of existing earthen canals with concrete, constructing local reservoirs and spill-interceptor canals, installing non-leak gates, and automating the distribution system. Other implemented programs include


7-14

the delivery of water to farmers on a 12-hour rather than a 24-hour basis and improvements in on-farm water management through the installation of drip irrigation systems. Through this program, IID has conserved an additional 105 TAF per year on average upon completion of program implementation. Execution of the QSA and amendments to the 1988 and 1989 agreements resulted in changes in the availability of water under the program, extending the term to 2078 if the term of the QSA extends through 2077 and guaranteeing Metropolitan at least 85 TAF per year. The remainder of the conserved water is available to CVWD when needed.

Palo Verde Land Management, Crop Rotation, and Water Supply Program

In May 2004, Metropolitan’s Board authorized a 35-year land management, crop rotation, and water supply program with PVID. Under the program, participating farmers in PVID are paid to reduce their water use by not irrigating a portion of their land. A maximum of 29 percent of the lands within the Palo Verde Valley can be fallowed in any given year. Under the terms of the QSA, water savings within the PVID service area are made available to Metropolitan. This program provides up to 133 TAF of water to be available to Metropolitan in certain years. In 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 approximately 108.7, 105.0, 72.4, 94.3, 120.2, 116.3, 122.2, 73.7, 32.8, and 43.0 TAF of water, respectively, were saved and made available to Metropolitan. In March 2009, Metropolitan and PVID entered into a one-year supplemental fallowing program within PVID that provided for the fallowing of additional acreage, with savings of 24.1 TAF in 2009 and 32.3 TAF in 2010.

Southern Nevada Water Authority and Metropolitan Storage and Interstate Release Agreement

SNWA has undertaken extraordinary water conservation measures to maintain its consumptive use within Nevada’s basic apportionment of 300 TAF. The success of the conservation program has resulted in unused basic apportionment for Nevada. As SNWA expressed interest in storing a portion of the water with Metropolitan, the agencies, along with the United States and the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, entered into a storage and interstate release agreement in October 2004. Under the agreement, additional Colorado River water supplies are made available to Metropolitan when there is space available in the CRA to receive the water. SNWA will have stored approximately 330,000 acre-feet with Metropolitan through 2015. SNWA is not expected to call upon Metropolitan to return water until after 2019.

Lower Colorado Water Supply Project

In March 2007, Metropolitan, the City of Needles, and the USBR executed a Lower Colorado Water Supply Project contract. Under the contract, Metropolitan receives, on an annual basis, Lower Colorado Water Supply Project water unused by Needles and other entities adjacent to the river that do not have rights or have insufficient rights to use Colorado River water. The water supply for the project comes from groundwater wells located along the All-American Canal. A portion of the payments made by Metropolitan to Needles are placed in a trust fund for potentially acquiring a new water supply for the Project should the groundwater pumped from the project’s wells become too saline for


7-15

use. In 2014, Metropolitan received 6.1 TAF from this project and is projected to receive 5.8 TAF in 2015.

Lake Mead Storage Program

In May 2006, Metropolitan and the USBR executed an agreement for a demonstration program that allowed Metropolitan to leave conserved water in Lake Mead that Metropolitan would otherwise have used in 2006 and 2007. USBR would normally make unused water available to other Colorado River water users, so the program included a provision that water left in Lake Mead must be conserved through extraordinary conservation measures and not simply be water that was not needed by Metropolitan in the year it was stored. This extraordinary conservation was accomplished through savings realized under the Palo Verde Land Management, Crop Rotation and Water Supply Program. Through the two-year demonstration program, Metropolitan created 44.8 TAF of “Intentionally Created Surplus" (ICS) water.

In December 2007, Metropolitan entered into agreements to set both the rules under which ICS water is developed, stored in, and delivered from Lake Mead. The amount of water stored in Lake Mead, created through extraordinary conservation, that is available for delivery in a subsequent year is reduced by a one-time deduction of five percent resulting in additional system water in storage in the lake, and an annual evaporation loss of three percent, beginning in the year following the year the water is stored. Metropolitan created ICS water in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 and withdrew ICS water in 2008, 20a 3, and 2014. As of January 1, 2015, Metropolitan had a total of 61.8 TAF of Extraordinary Conservation ICS water in Lake Mead.

The December 2007 federal guidelines concerning the operation of the Colorado River system reservoirs provided the ability for agencies to create “System Efficiency ICS" through the development and funding of system efficiency projects that save water that would otherwise be lost from the Colorado River. To that end, in 2008 the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD), SNWA, and Metropolitan contributed funds for the construction of the Drop 2 (Brock) Reservoir by the USBR. The purpose of the Drop 2 (Brock) Reservoir is to increase the capacity to regulate deliveries of Colorado River water at Imperial Dam reducing the amount of excess flow downstream of the dam by approximately 70 TAF annually. In return for its $25 million net contribution toward construction, operation, and maintenance, 100 TAF of water that was stored in Lake Mead was assigned to Metropolitan as System Efficiency ICS. Through 2014, Metropolitan has diverted 35 TAF of this amount, with 65 TAF remaining in storage.

In 2009, Metropolitan entered into an agreement with the United States, SNWA, the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, and CAWCD to have USBR conduct a one-year pilot operation of the Yuma Desalting Plant at one-third capacity. The pilot project operated between May 2010 and March 2011 and provided data for future decision making regarding long-term operation of the Plant and developing a near-term water supply. Metropolitan’s contribution toward plant operating costs secured 24.4 TAF of System Efficiency ICS which was stored in Lake Mead as of January 1, 2015.


7-16

Quagga Mussel Control Program

The presence and spawning of quagga mussels in the lower Colorado River from Lake Mead through Lake Havasu poses a threat to Metropolitan and other Colorado River water users due to the potential to continuously seed water conveyance systems with mussel larvae. Chlorination is the most frequently used means to control mussel larvae entering water systems.

Metropolitan developed the Quagga Mussel Control Program (QMCP) in 2007 to address the long term introduction of mussel larvae into the CRA from the lower Colorado River which is now heavily colonized from Lake Mead through Lake Havasu. The QMCP consists of surveillance activities and control measures. Surveillance activities are conducted annually alongside regularly scheduled 2-3 week long CRA shutdowns. Control activities consist of continuous chlorination at the outlet of Copper Basin Reservoir (5 miles into the aqueduct), a mobile chlorinator for control of mussels on a quarterly basis at outlet towers and physical removal of mussels from the trash racks at Whitsett Intake Pumping Plant in Lake Havasu. Since 2007, the CRA has had scheduled 2 to 3 week-long shutdowns each year for maintenance and repairs which provide the opportunity for direct inspections for mussels and the additions benefit of desiccating quagga mussels. Recent shutdown inspections have demonstrated that the combined use of chlorine and regularly scheduled shutdowns effectively control mussel infestation in the CRA since only few and small mussels have been found during these inspections.

In addition, Metropolitan has appropriated $9.55 million to upgrade chlorination facilities in the aqueduct and at two additional locations in its system, the outlets of Lakes Mathews and Skinner. It is likely that additional upgrade costs will be incurred for these facilities. Chemical control (chlorination) at Copper Basin Reservoir, Lake Mathews, and the Lake Skinner Outlet costs approximately $3.0-3.2 million per year depending on the amount of Colorado River water conveyed through the aqueduct.

Achievements to Date

Metropolitan has developed a number of supply and conservation programs to increase the amount of supply available from the CRA. However, other users along the River have rights that will allow their water use to increase as their water demands increases. The Colorado River faces long-term challenges of water demands exceeding available supply with additional uncertainties due to climate change. Because Metropolitan holds the lowest priority rights in California during a normal Lake Mead storage condition, future supply available could decrease.

7.1.3 Regional Water Quality Control Board – Region 7

The SWRCB and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) are responsible for the protection and, where possible, the enhancement of the quality of California's waters. The SWRCB sets statewide policy, and together with Regional Boards, implements state and federal laws and regulations. Each of the nine Regional Boards adopts a Water Quality Control Plan or Basin Plan, which recognizes and reflects


7-17

regional differences in existing water quality, the beneficial uses of the region's ground and surface waters, and local water quality conditions and problems. The Basin Plan is more than just a collection of water quality goals and policies, descriptions of conditions, and discussions of solutions. It is also the basis for the RWQCB's regulatory programs. The Basin Plan establishes water quality standards for all the ground and surface waters of the region. The RWQCB also regulates water discharges to minimize and control their effects on the quality of the region's ground and surface water. Permits are issued under a number of programs and authorities. Potential and actual water quality problems in the region are listed in the Basin Plan, along with the causes, where they are known. For water bodies with quality below the levels necessary to allow all the beneficial uses of the water to be met, plans for improving water quality are included. Legal basis and authority for the RWQCB reflects, incorporates, and implements applicable portions of a number of national and statewide water quality plans and policies, including the California Water Code (Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act) and the Clean Water Act.

7.2 RELIABILITY BY TYPE OF YEAR

In their 2015 UWMP, Metropolitan estimated supply capability and projected demands for an average (normal) year based on an average of hydrologies for the years 1922-2012; for a single dry-year based on a repeat of the hydrology in the year 1977; and for multiple dry years based on a repeat of the hydrology of 1990-1992. These estimates were summarized in Tables 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6 of their 2015 UWMP, which are included in the Appendix E of this report for reference.

Table 2-4 summarizes the sources of supply for the single dry year (1977 hydrology), while Table 2-5 shows the region’s ability to respond in future years under a repeat of the 1990-92 hydrology. Table 2-5 provides results for the average of the three dry-year series rather than a year-by-year detail because most of Metropolitan’s dry-year supplies are designed to provide equal amounts of water over each year of a three-year period. These tables show that the region can provide reliable water supplies under both the single driest year and the multiple dry-year hydrologies. Table 2-6 reports the expected situation on the average over-all historic hydrologies from 1922 to 2012.

A summary of the information provided in Metropolitan Tables 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6 is shown in Table 7-1A.

For each of these scenarios there is a projected surplus of supply in every forecast year. Projected supply surpluses, based on the capability of current supplies, range from 0.1 percent to 87 percent of projected demands. With the inclusion of supplies under development, potential surpluses range from 5 percent to 110 percent of projected demands. Metropolitan’s supply capabilities were developed using the assumptions for CRA and SWP supplies presented in Sections 7.2.1 and 7.2.2, respectively.


7-18

7.2.1 Assumptions for Colorado River Aqueduct Supplies

CRA supplies include supplies that would result from existing and committed programs and from implementation of the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) and related agreements. The QSA establishes the baseline water use for each of the agreement parties and facilitates the transfer of water from agricultural agencies to urban uses. Colorado River Water Management Programs are potentially available to supply additional water up to the CRA capacity of 1.2 MAF on an as needed basis.

Table 7-1A: Metropolitan Supply Capability and Projected Demands (AFY)

Single Dry Year MWD Supply Capability & Projected Demands (1977 Hydrology)

Fiscal Year 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Capability of Current Supplies 2,584,000 2,686,000 2,775,000 2,905,000 2,941,000

Projected Demands 2,005,000 2,066,000 2,108,000 2,160,000 2,201,000

Projected Surplus 579,000 620,000 667,000 745,000 740,000

Projected Surplus %(a) 29% 30% 32% 34% 34%

Supplies under Development 63,000 100,000 316,000 358,000 398,000

Potential Surplus 642,000 720,000 983,000 1,103,000 1,138,000

Potential Surplus %(a) 32% 35% 47% 51% 52%

Multiple Dry Year MWD Supply Capability & Projected Demands (1990-1992 Hydrology)

Fiscal Year 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040



Projected Surplus 102,000 36,000 19,000 26,000 2,000

Projected Surplus %(a) 5% 2% 1% 1% 0.1%


Potential Surplus 145,000 116,000 223,000 271,000 288,000


Average Year MWD Supply Capability & Projected Demands (1922 - 2012 Hydrology)

Fiscal Year 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040



Projected Surplus 1,588,000 1,632,000 1,699,000 1,780,000 1,777,000

Projected Surplus %(a) 85% 85% 87% 89% 87%


Potential Surplus 1,651,000 1,732,000 2,085,000 2,208,000 2,245,000


(a) As a percentage of projected demand

Source – 2015 Metropolitan Urban Water Management Plan, June 2016


7-19

7.2.2 Assumptions for State Water Project Supplies

State Water Project (SWP) supplies are estimated using the 2015 SWP Delivery Capability Report distributed by DWR in July 2015. The 2015 Delivery Capability Report presents the current DWR estimate of the amount of water deliveries for current (2015) conditions and conditions 20 years in the future. These estimates incorporate restrictions on SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) operations in accordance with the biological opinions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service issued on December 15, 2008, and June 4, 2009, respectively.

Under the 2015 Delivery Capability Report with existing conveyance and low outflow requirements scenario, the delivery estimates for the SWP for 2020 conditions as percentage of Table A amounts, are 12 percent, equivalent to 230 TAF, under a single dry-year (1977) condition and 51 percent, equivalent to 975 TAF, under the long-term average condition.

In dry, below-normal conditions, Metropolitan has increased the supplies received from the California Aqueduct by developing flexible Central Valley/SWP storage and transfer programs.

Over the last two years under the pumping restrictions of the SWP, Metropolitan has worked collaboratively with the other contractors to develop numerous voluntary Central Valley/SWP storage and transfer programs. The goal of these storage/transfer programs is to develop additional dry-year supplies that can be conveyed through the California Aqueduct during dry hydrologic conditions and regulatory restrictions.

A key component of Metropolitan’s water supply capability is the amount of water in Metropolitan’s storage facilities. Storage is a major component of Metropolitan’s dry-year resource management strategy. Metropolitan’s likelihood of having adequate supply capability to meet projected demands, without implementing the Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP), is dependent on its storage resources.

In developing the supply capabilities for the 2015 UWMP, Metropolitan assumed the current (2015) storage levels at the start of simulation and used the median storage levels going into each of the five-year increments based on the balances of supplies and demands. Under the median storage condition, there is an estimated 50 percent probability that storage levels would be higher than the assumption used, and a 50 percent probability that storage levels would be lower than the assumption used.

All storage capability figures shown in the 2015 UWMP reflect actual storage program conveyance constraints. It is important to note that under some conditions, Metropolitan may choose to implement the WSAP in order to preserve storage reserves for a future year, instead of using the full supply capability. This can result in impacts at the retail level even under conditions where there may be adequate supply capabilities to meet demands.

The basis of water year and the available supply as a percentage of average projected demand for average year, single-dry year and multiple-dry years are shown in Table 7-1.


7-20

The available supply as a percentage of average demand shown in Table 7-1 conservatively does not include Metropolitan-estimated surplus supplies as shown in Table 7-1A.

Table 7-1: Basis of Water Year Data

Year Type Base Year

Available Supplies if

Year Type Repeats

% of Average Supply(a)

Average Year 1922 to 2012 100%

Single-Dry Year 1977 100%

Multiple-Dry Years 1st Year 1990 to 1992 100%

Multiple-Dry Years 2nd Year 1990 to 1992 100%

Multiple-Dry Years 3rd Year 1990 to 1992 100%

(a) Not including Metropolitan-estimated surplus supplies as shown in Table 7-1A.

7.3 SUPPLY AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT

As stated in CWC 10635(a):

Every urban water supplier shall include, as part of its urban water management plan, an

assessment of the reliability of its water service to its customers during normal, dry, and

multiple dry water years. This water supply and demand assessment shall compare the

total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water

use over the next 20 years, in five-year increments, for a normal water year, a single dry

water year, and multiple dry water years. The water service reliability assessment shall

be based upon the information compiled pursuant to Section 10631, including available

data from state, regional or local agency population projections within the service area

of the urban water supplier.

Projected normal-year average annual District supplies and demands as developed in Table 6-9 and Table 4-3, respectively, are shown in Table 7-2. District demands for groundwater are estimated to increase by 5 percent during single dry-year and multiple dry-year supply scenarios. Recycled water demands are not projected to increase because recycled water supply is fixed. Projected single-dry-year average-annual District supplies and demands are shown in Table 7-3. Projected multiple dry-year average-annual District supplies and demands are shown in Table 7-4.

Table 7-2: Normal-Year Supply and Demand Comparison

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Supply totals

(from Table 6-9) 9,550 11,669 14,108 16,547 18,986

Demand totals

(from Table 4-3) 9,550 11,669 14,108 16,547 18,986

Difference 0 0 0 0 0


7-21

Table 7-3: Single-Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Supply totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615

Demand totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615


Table 7-4: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

First year

Supply totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615

Demand totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615


Second year

Supply totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615

Demand totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615


Third year

Supply totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615

Demand totals 9,972 12,142 14,633 17,124 19,615


Metropolitan has projected supply surpluses for normal, dry-year and multiple-dry year demand scenarios through the year 2040: from 3% to 102% of projected demands not including supplies under development; and from 8% to 121% of projected demands including supplies under development. As such, sufficient imported water is deemed to be available to recharge the Upper Whitewater and Mission Creek Subbasins as necessary to reduce annual and cumulative overdraft, and allow for groundwater to meet District demands projected for normal, dry-year, and multiple-dry-year demand scenarios through 2040 as shown in Tables 7-2, 7-3, and 7-4, respectively.

7.4 REGIONAL SUPPLY RELIABILITY

MSWD currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from groundwater production and does not purchase imported water from a water wholesaler. However, CVWD and DWA are remediating the overdraft condition of the groundwater basin in the Upper Coachella Valley by artificial replenishment with Colorado River and SWP Exchange water purchased from Metropolitan. Colorado River water is used to recharge the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin, while SWP Exchange water is used to recharge the Upper Whitewater and Mission Creek subbasins.


7-22

If groundwater replenishment with imported water (artificial recharge) is excluded, annual groundwater overdraft (groundwater extractions or water production in excess of natural groundwater replenishment or recharge) within the Mission Creek Subbasin is currently estimated to range between 2,000 and 4,000 AFY, depending upon actual non-consumptive return flows. Supplementing natural groundwater replenishment resulting from rainfall runoff with artificial recharge is therefore necessary to reduce annual and cumulative overdraft. The implementation of other local water resources such as recycled water will decrease the region’s reliance on groundwater to meet future demands. MSWD currently does not have recycled water use within their WSA, however there are plans to use recycled water primarily for the irrigation of existing and new golf courses and new developments. To produce recycled water meeting Title 22 standards, the District plans to upgrade their Horton WWTP with tertiary treatment facilities by 2025 to accommodate a recycled water demand of 2,000 AFY. The recycled water system is projected to expand to 4,500 AFY by 2040.


8-1

8 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING Water supplies may be interrupted or reduced by droughts, earthquakes, and power outages which hinder a water agency’s ability to effectively deliver water. Drought impacts increase with the length of a drought, as supplies in reservoirs are depleted and water levels in groundwater basins decline. The ability to manage water supplies in times of drought or other emergencies is an important part of water resources management for a community. California’s extensive system of water supply infrastructure, its reservoirs, groundwater basins, and inter-regional conveyance facilities, mitigate the effect of short-term dry periods. Defining when a drought begins is a function of drought impacts to water users. Drought is a gradual phenomenon. Although droughts are sometimes characterized as emergencies, they differ from typical emergency events. Droughts occur slowly, over a multi-year period. Drought impacts increase with the length of a drought, as carry-over supplies in reservoirs are depleted and water levels in groundwater basins decline. During water shortage emergencies, the District will implement water conservation stages, adopted as Section 15 of District Ordinance No. 93-3, which is included in Appendix G. The purpose of the Conservation Stages is to reduce the effect of a water shortage on District customers during water shortages and emergencies. In compliance with the Water Code requirements, this plan imposes up to a 50 percent reduction in the total water supply. The District will further implement both its Water Conservation Master Plan adopted in September 2004 and its Water Efficient Landscaping Guidelines, which were incorporated by reference into the City of Desert Hot Springs’ Water Conservation Ordinance.

8.1 STAGES OF ACTION

The District’s Water Regulations and Service Ordinance (Ordinance No. 93-3) establishes procedures and policies necessary for the orderly administration of a water conservation program to prohibit waste and restrict water during a water shortage emergency. The Ordinance also contains three stages of action for water supply shortages. Table 8-1 summarizes the various stages and water supply conditions that would impose the various reductions in water use. Under the existing Ordinance No. 93-3, the General Manager of the District shall monitor the supply and demand for water on a daily basis to determine the level of conservation required by the implementation or termination of the Water Conservation Stages, and shall notify the Board of Directors of the necessity for the implementation or termination of each stage. Each declaration of the Board of Directors implementing or terminating a water conservation stage will be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation, and will then be posted at the District offices. Each declaration will remain in effect until the Board of Directors otherwise declares.


8-2

Table 8-1 Retail

Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan

Stage

Percent

Supply

Reductiona

Water Supply Condition

1 10% Voluntary conservation

1A 10% Mandatory conservation

2 15%

A threatened water supply shortage which

could affect the District’s ability to provide

water for ordinary domestic and commercial

uses. Mandatory conservation.

3 50%

A water shortage emergency in which the

District may be prevented from meeting the

water demands of its customers. Mandatory

conservation.

(a) One stage in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan must address a water shortage of 50%.

During water shortages, the District has the ability to meet its demands by applying the Water Conservation Stages. These stages impose phases of mandatory reduction of water use up to 50 percent and consist of three stages that help reduce water use within the District’s system in order to meet use-reduction targets. As detailed in District Ordinance No. 93-3, Section 15 (Adopted October 18, 1993), the following series of water conservation stages will take place in the event of a severe water shortage:

8.1.1 Stage 1 – Voluntary Conservation (Normal Water Use)

During this stage, customers are encouraged to continue to use water wisely, to prevent the waste or unreasonable use of water, and to reduce water consumption to that necessary for ordinary domestic and commercial purposes.

8.1.2 Stage 2 – Mandatory Compliance (Threatened Water Supply Shortage) In the event of a threatened water supply shortage which could affect the District’s ability to provide water for ordinary domestic and commercial uses, the Board of Directors shall hold a public hearing at which customers shall have the opportunity to protest and to present their respective needs to the District. The Board may then, by resolution, declare a water shortage condition to prevail, and the following conservation measures shall be in effect:

• Exterior Landscape Plans – Exterior landscape plans for all new commercial and industrial development shall provide for timed irrigation and shall consider the use of drought resistant varieties of flora. Such plans shall be presented to and approved by the District prior to issuance of a water service letter.


8-3

• Excessive Irrigation and Related Waste – No customer shall cause or permit the use of water for irrigation of landscaping or other outdoor vegetation, plantings, lawns or other growth, to exceed the amount required to provide reasonable irrigation and shall not cause or permit any unreasonable or excessive waste of water.

• Agricultural Irrigation – Persons receiving water from the District who are engaged in commercial agricultural practices, whether for the purpose of a crop production or growing of ornamental plants shall provide, maintain and use irrigation equipment and practices which are the most efficient possible, Upon the request of the General Manager, these persons may be required to prepare a plan describing their irrigation practices and equipment, including but not limited to the estimate of the efficiency of the use of water on their properties.

• Commercial Facilities – Commercial and industrial facilities shall, upon request of the General Manager, provide the District with a plan to conserve water at their facilities. The District will provide these facilities with information regarding the average monthly water use by the facility for the last two-year period. The facility will be expected to provide the District with a plan to conserve or reduce water used by the percentage deemed by the Board of Directors to be necessary under the circumstances. After review and approval by the General Manager, the water conservation plan shall be considered subject to inspection and enforcement by the District.

• Parks, Golf Courses, Swimming Pools, and School Grounds – Public and private parks, golf courses, swimming pools, and school grounds shall use water for irrigation or pool filling only between the hours of 6 P.M. and 6 A.M..

• Domestic Irrigation – Upon notice and public hearing, the District may determine that the irrigation of exterior vegetation shall be conducted only during specified hours and/or days, and may impose other restrictions on the use of water for such irrigation. The irrigation of exterior vegetation at other than these times shall be considered to be a waste of water.

• Swimming Pools – All residential, public and recreational swimming pools shall use evaporation resistant covers and shall recirculate water. Any swimming pool which does not have a cover installed during periods of nonuse shall be considered a waste of water.

• Run-off and Wash-down – No water shall be used for the purposes of wash-down of impervious areas, without specific written authorization of the General Manager. Any water used on premises that is allowed to escape off the premises and runoff into gutters or storm drains shall be considered a waste of water.


8-4

• Vehicle Washing – The washing of cars, truck or other vehicles is not permitted, except with a hose equipped with an automatic shut-off device, or at a commercial facility designed and so designated on the District’s billing records.

• Drinking Water Provided by Restaurants – Restaurants are requested not to provide drinking water to patrons except by request.

Stage 3 – Mandatory Conservation Measures (Water Shortage Emergency)

In the event of a water shortage emergency in which the District may be prevented from meeting the water demands of its customers, the Board of Directors shall, if possible given the time and circumstances, immediately hold a public hearing at which customers of the District shall have the opportunity to protest and to present their respective needs to the Board. No public hearing shall be required in the event of a breakage or failure of a pump, pipeline, and conduit causing an immediate emergency. The General Manager is empowered to declare a water shortage emergency, subject to the ratification of the Board of Directors within 72 hours of such a declaration, and the following rules and regulations shall be in effect immediately following such declaration:

• Prohibition – Watering of parks, school grounds, golf courses, lawn watering, landscape irrigation, washing down of driveways, parking lots or other impervious surfaces, washing of vehicles, except when done by commercial car wash establishments, using only recycled or reclaimed water, filling or adding water to swimming pools, wading pools, spas, ornamental ponds, fountains and artificial lakes are prohibited.

• Restaurants – Restaurants shall not serve drinking water to patrons except by request.

• Construction meters – No new construction meter permits shall be issued by the District. All existing construction meters shall be removed and/or locked.

• Commercial Nurseries and Livestock – Commercial nurseries shall discontinue all watering and irrigation. Watering of livestock is permitted as necessary.

The District shall determine the extent of the conservation required through implementation and/or termination of particular water conservation plans in order to plan for and supply water to its customers, including consumption reduction up to 50 percent.

8.2 PROHIBITIONS ON END USES

As detailed in District Ordinance No. 93-3, Section 15, the District is committed to implementation of the Water Conservation Stages and the resulting penalties for non-compliance. Restrictions and prohibitions on end uses for the three stages of the WSCP are shown in Table 8-2.


8-5

Table 8-2 Retail Only: Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Uses

Stage Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Users

Additional Explanation or

Reference

Penalty or

Other

Enforceme

nt?

1 Landscape - Restrict or prohibit runoff from landscape

irrigation No

1, 1A, 2 Other

Prohibit the use of potable water

during & within 48 hours after

measurable rainfall (EO B-37-16)

Yes

1, 1A, 2 Other

Prohibit irrigation of ornamental

turf on public medians (EO B-37-

16)

Yes

1A, 2 Landscape - Restrict runoff from landscape irrigation Yes

1A, 2 Landscape - Limit landscape irrigation to specific days Yes

1A, 2 CII - Lodging must offer opt out of linen service Yes

1A, 2 Other - Require automatic shut of hoses Yes

1A, 2, 3 Other - Prohibit potable water for washing hard surface Yes

1A, 2, 3 CII - Restaurants may only serve water upon request Yes

1A, 2, 3 Water Features - Restrict water use for decorative

water features, such as fountains Yes

2 Landscape - Limit landscape irrigation to specific times Yes

2 Pools and Spas - Require covers for pools and spas Yes

2, 3 Other - Prohibit vehicle washing except at facilities

using recycled or recirculating water Yes

3 Landscape - Prohibit all landscape irrigation Yes

3 Other water feature or swimming pool restriction

No filling or adding of water to

swimming pools, wading pools,

spas, ornamental ponds,

fountains and artificial lakes

Yes

3 CII - Other CII restriction or prohibition

Commercial nurseries shall

discontinue all watering and

irrigation. Watering of livestock is

permitted as necessary

Yes

3 CII - Other CII restriction or prohibition

No new construction meter

permits shall be issued by the

District. All existing construction

meters shall be removed and/or

locked.

Yes


8-6

8.3 PENALTIES, CHARGES, OTHER ENFORCEMENT OF PROHIBITIONS As detailed in District Ordinance No. 93-3, Section 15, the District is committed to implementation of the Water Conservation Stages and the resulting penalties for non-compliance. Under Water Conservation Stage 3, several activities are prohibited. The following activities are specifically prohibited, as included in further detail in the copy of Ordinance No. 93-3 in Appendix G:

• Watering of parks, school grounds, golf courses, lawn watering, landscape irrigation, washing down of driveways, parking lots or other impervious surfaces;

• Washing of vehicles, except when done by commercial car wash establishments, using only recycled or reclaimed water; and

• Filling or adding water to swimming pools, wading pools, spas, ornamental ponds, fountains and artificial lakes.

Any violation of the District’s Water Conservation Stages including waste of water and excessive use is a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, the violator shall be punished by imprisonment, fine or by both such fine and imprisonment as allowed by law. In addition to criminal penalties, violators of the mandatory provision of the Ordinance shall be subject to civil action, as follows:

(1) First Violation. A written notice containing the description of the violation will be given to the person who is suspected of the violation.

(2) Second Violation. $100.00 surcharge applied to the customer’s bill if the customer commits a second violation of the Ordinance within a 12-month period, or for failure to comply with the notice of violation within the period stated.

(3) Third Violation. $200.00 surcharge applied to the customer’s bill and/or a flow restricting device to be installed in the customer’s water service line for continued failure to comply within 30 days after notice and imposition of second violation sanction. The charge to the customer for installing a flow-restricting device shall be based upon the size of the meter and the actual cost of installation.

(4) Subsequent Violations. For any subsequent violation of the Ordinance within the 24 calendar months after a first violation, a discontinuance of service and the penalty surcharge applied for the third violation shall be imposed and the District may discontinue water service to that customer at the premises or to the meter where the violation occurred. The charge for reconnection and restoration of normal service shall be as provided in the Rules and Regulations of the District. Such restoration of service shall not be made until the General Manager of the District has determined that the water user has provided reasonable assurances that future violations of the Ordinance by the user will not occur.

In addition, the District can impose a fine of up to $500 per day for each day the violation occurs.


8-7

8.4 CONSUMPTION REDUCTION METHODS The District has developed consumption reduction program methods that include:

• Public Information Campaign

• Customer Billing

• Frequency of Meter Reading

• Water Use Surveys

• Rebates or Giveaways of Plumbing Fixtures and Devices

• Rebates for Landscape Irrigation Efficiency

• Decrease Line Flushing

• Reduction of Water System Loss

• Water Waste Patrols

• Moratorium or Net Zero Demand Increase on New Connections

• Implementation of Drought Rate Structure or Surcharge

• Other Program Methods Table 8-3 summarizes the various consumption reduction methods to be employed and the following discussion presents the various categories and methods employed by the District to reduce overall demand within its service area.

8.4.1 Categories of Consumption Reduction Methods

The following are consumption reduction methods that have been undertaken by the District to reduce water demand within their service area.

Public Information Campaign The District maintains a website titled MSWD.org which provides information regarding:

• A focused conservation page;

• Planting database;

• Methods to reduce water use;

• Watering restrictions;

• Fines and surcharges associated with violation of watering restrictions;

• Water rebates for installing certain water saving devices and turf replacement;

• Swamp cooler Audit Program and maintenance practices;

• Link to CVWaterCounts Regional Conservation Program site;

• Individual water metering monitoring; and

• Other frequently asked questions regarding water use and conservation In addition, the District in concert with Southern California Edison (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) has developed the LivingWise Program. A classroom program that includes discussions using a Student Guide that provides the foundations of using energy and water efficiently. It is followed by hands-on, creative, problem-solving


8-8

activities and a residential plumbing retrofit kit that will result in nearly 3 million gallons per year water savings (MSWD Living Wise Program Summary Report 2014-2015).

Table 8-3: Water Shortage Contingency Plan - Consumption Reduction Methods

Stage Consumption Reduction Methods

by Water Supplier Additional Explanation or Reference

All

Stages

Expand Public Information

Campaign

The District will expand public information

campaigns on consumption reduction methods

through billing inserts, the District's website, and

LivingWise Program.

All

Stages Offer Water Use Surveys

Continue to offer water use surveys to educate and

reduce water use

All

Stages

Provide Rebates on Plumbing

Fixtures and Devices

District maintains a residential plumbing retrofit

programs that involve providing customers with

rebates for water efficient plumbing devices such as

low-flow showerheads, faucet aerators and ultra-low

flush toilets

All

Stages

Provide Rebates for Turf

Replacement

The District has a Turf rebate program that its intent

is to replace turf or other high water demand ground

cover with aesthetically pleasing desert landscaping

and reduce water consumption and water runoff as

well as increase education about water conservation

and desert friendly landscaping.

All

Stages Reduce System Water Loss

The District regularly conducts water system audits,

leak detection and repairs as part of its overall

operations. These activities are conducted by water

operations/maintenance.

All

Stages

Moratorium or Net Zero Demand

Increase on New Connections

District is in the process of developing a plan to

implement fees for sub-dividing parcels and

requiring new development to pay for any

supplemental water needed to serve the project.

All

Stages Offer Water Use Surveys

District offers an evaporative cooler assessment and

maintenance program that assesses the users

current water usage and provides suggestions for

use and maintenance

All

Stages Other

The District has hired a Water Conservation

coordinator that will assist the district in:

implementing various programs; monitoring the

effectiveness of the programs, and providing public

outreach towards water conservation.

Customer Billing The District has a tiered rate structure for water service within its service area. The tiered rate structure is intended to discourage high water use. Most of the District’s water


8-9

customers also receive sewer service from the District. The District imposes rates for sewer service based on maximum potential water usage, billed at a uniform rate for residential customers. Commercial sewer service fees are based on water usage and also promote water conservation.

Water Use Surveys The District has developed water survey programs for both single and multi-family residential customers. The District's water surveys are aimed at developing residential customer water use efficiency for both landscape and indoor water use.

Rebates or Giveaways of Plumbing Fixtures and Devices The District, in concert with SCE and SCGC, have developed the LivingWise Program. A classroom program that includes discussions using a Student Guide that provides the foundations of using energy and water efficiently. It is followed by hands-on, creative, problem-solving activities. Students receive a kit containing high-efficiency showerheads and faucet aerators. In addition, the District maintains a residential plumbing retrofit program that involves providing customers with rebates for toilets that use 3 gallons per flush (gpf) or more. For multi-family properties, MSWD has developed a full-bathroom retrofit program that includes water efficient plumbing devices such as low-flow showerheads, faucet aerators and ultra-low flush (1.2 gpf) toilets.

Rebates for Landscape Irrigation Efficiency

The District has a Turf Rebate Program that replaces turf or other high water demand ground cover with aesthetically pleasing desert landscaping and reduce water consumption and water runoff as well as increase education about water conservation and desert friendly landscaping. The rebate consists of $2 per square foot as funds are available.

Reduction of Water System Loss

The District regularly conducts water system audits, leak detection and repairs as part of its overall operations. These activities are conducted by water operations/maintenance staff, and are aimed at reducing water losses through a water agency's mains.

An aggressive service line replacement program was implemented between 2013 and 2015 to address an inordinate number of leaks caused by defective poly service lines. The replacement of these lines has resulted in savings of thousands of gallons of water. See section 9.1.5 for more information on District programs to assess and manage distribution system real losses.


8-10

Moratorium or Net Zero Demand Increase on New Connections The District is developing a plan to implement water supply fees that will be levied on parcels prior to subdivision. The establishment of fees is in response to the District’s growth projected at approximately 3.5 percent annually. The goal of the District is to allow growth with water consumption equal to or less than current consumption, while requiring new development to pay for any supplemental water needed to serve its project.

Implementation of Drought Rate Structure or Surcharge The District has a tiered rate structure for water service within its service area. The tiered rate structure discourages high water use. Most of the water customers of the District’s water system also receive sewer service from the District. A portion of the District’s water customers are served by septic systems. The District imposes rates for sewer service based on maximum potential water usage, billed at a uniform rate for residential customers. Commercial sewer service fees are based on water usage and also promote water conservation.

8.5 DETERMINING WATER SHORTAGE REDUCTIONS Under normal conditions, potable water production figures are recorded daily. Weekly and monthly reports are prepared and monitored. This data will be used to measure the effectiveness of any water shortage contingency stage that may be implemented. The General Manager of the District monitors the supply and demand for water on a daily basis to determine the level of conservation required by the implementation or termination of the Water Conservation Stages, and notifies the Board of Directors of the necessity for the implementation or termination of each stage. As stages of water shortage are declared by the General Manager, the District will follow implementation of those stages and continue to monitor water demand levels. Subsequently, the General Manager may implement or terminate the appropriate stages of water conservation in accordance with the Ordinance. If there is further concern after Stage I of the Water Conservation, a public announcement and notification in a local newspaper will be circulated.

8.6 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE IMPACTS

The District has prepared stringent measures, as outlined in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, to effectively mitigate water supply impacts in the event of a catastrophic water shortage or drought. Such a reduction in water consumption could bring with it a loss of revenues needed to maintain and operate the water system. The District’s expenditures will be greatly impacted due to the implementation of a water shortage program. The District, under requirements of CA Proposition 218, reviews and adjusts its water rates periodically. Therefore, if needed, the District will implement rate adjustments to increase revenue when demand is significantly reduced due to implementation of water conservation measures.


8-11

The District is developing a plan to implement water supply fees that will be levied on parcels prior to subdivision. The establishment of fees is in response to the District’s growth projected at approximately 3.5 percent annually. The goal of the District is to allow growth with water consumption equal to or less than current consumption, while requiring new development to pay for any supplemental water needed to serve its project.

8.7 RESOLUTIONS OR ORDINANCE The District’s Water Regulations and Service Ordinance No. 93-3 implements several measures in order to curtail water use and is provided in Appendix G.

In addition, in 2004 the District adopted two major conservation policy statements: a Water Conservation Master Plan and Water Efficient Landscaping Guidelines. The Water Conservation Master Plan identifies several key areas in which the District will pursue more efficient water use practices, namely: efficient landscaping guidelines; efficient landscaping requirements for new development; landscape education center and xeriscape demonstration garden; efficient landscaping incentives; conservation education programs in schools, community and bimonthly billing information; tiered water pricing that encourages conservation; updated water shortage ordinance; water audits for the largest users; and rebates for water efficient plumbing fixtures.

8.8 CATASTROPHIC SUPPLY INTERRUPTION

A water shortage emergency could be the result of a catastrophic event such as a failure of transmission facilities, a regional power outage, earthquake, flooding, supply contamination from chemical spills, or other adverse conditions.

The District currently has a Disaster Preparedness Plan in place that will be implemented during a catastrophic interruption of water supplies. The District’s Emergency Handbook sets forth specific actions to implement the appropriate plan, depending on the type of disaster and describes the organizational and operational policies and procedures required to provide sufficient water supply and safe drinking water. It also provides a system for organizing and prioritizing water repairs. The Plan cites authorities and specifies the public and private organizations responsible for providing water service. In general, the General Manager of the District will be known as the Plan Director and will authorize implementation of the Plan, as necessary. In the Plan Director’s absence, the Director of Operations will assume these responsibilities. The Plan Director will assign personnel to notification teams. Each special team will have specific positions and duties to carry out. Each employee has a copy of the Disaster Preparedness Emergency Handbook and is aware of his/her responsibilities depending on the type of disaster.

For all disasters, the District has established an emergency operations command, consisting of the General Manager, assisted by the Director of Operations and Maintenance, who will be responsible for determining the best overall priorities and strategies to control the situation. The Public Information Officer is the individual who provides a communication link via radio between the Emergency Operations Centers (EOC), such as the City, County, or State OES. The Disaster Advisory Council includes


8-12

the District’s Board of Directors who will assist the District’s EOC, if the situation warrants.

In the case of a water shortage emergency, there are two inter-connections with CVWD that allow water to be conveyed between the District and CVWD systems. The two connections both feed the Two Bunch Pressure Zone and are situated at the following locations:

• A 6-inch connection located at Little Morongo Road and Dillon Road

• An 8-inch connection located at Bubbling Wells Road and Camino Aventura.

The capacity of the emergency interties was estimated assuming a design flow of 5 feet per second. Estimated capacity of the 6-inch and 8-inch connections is 450 gpm and 775 gpm, respectively. In the case of an emergency water shortage, these emergency interties will be utilized to maintain water supply.

8.9 MINIMUM SUPPLY NEXT THREE YEARS

In April 2015, citing continued drought conditions and reduced allocations from the State Water Project and Colorado River, the Metropolitan Board of Directors approved implementing their Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP) at a Regional Shortage Level 3 starting July 1, 2015 to cut imported water deliveries to its member agencies by 15%. Under a Level 3 WSAP, MWD could impose a surcharge for any member agency that failed to meet the 15% reduction. On May 10, 2016, the Metropolitan Board of Directors reduced the WSAP to a Level 2, which is a 10% reduction in imported water deliveries, effective immediately, due to lower demands achieved through the region’s water saving efforts and improved supply conditions, particularly in Northern California; and declared there would be no WSAP set forth for FY 2017.

MSWD currently receives 100 percent of its water supply from the Upper Coachella Valley groundwater basin via District owned and operated wells. Although MSWD is not directly reliant on imported water for its water supply, CVWD and DWA are remediating the overdraft condition of the groundwater basin in the Upper Coachella Valley by artificial replenishment with imported Colorado River and State Water Project (SWP) Exchange water from Metropolitan. Colorado River water is used to recharge the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin, while SWP Exchange water is used to recharge the Upper Whitewater and Mission Creek subbasins.

The UWMP Act requires water agencies to provide an estimate of the minimum water supply available for each of the next three water years. As it appears there will no imported water reductions to reduce groundwater replenishment, normal water supplies are estimated for MSWD for 2016, 2017, and 2018 as shown in Table 8-4.

Table 8-4: Minimum Supply Next Three Years (AFY)

2016 2017 2018

Available Water Supply 7,488 7,724 7,959


9-1

9 DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES The goal of the Demand Management Measures (DMM) section in an UWMP is to provide a comprehensive description of the water conservation programs that the District has implemented, is currently implementing, and plans to implement in order to meet its urban water use reduction targets.

9.1 DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR RETAIL AGENCIES The District has made the State-mandated DMMs a key element in the overall water resource management strategy. The District is dedicated to implementing water conservation measures, as demonstrated in the District’s adopted (September 2004) Water Conservation Master Plan. The Water Conservation Master Plan defines a series of sensible water conservation activities that complement the unique water resource characteristics of the District’s service area. The Plan represents a qualitative effort at identifying and screening potential conservation initiatives appropriate for implementation in the District’s service area. The data will assist the District in determining which initiatives should be continued to meet long-term conservation objectives. As part of the Water Conservation Master Plan, the District identified factors affecting water conservation within the District. Significant factors are impacting water use within the District and include the following: Limited availability of water as a resource in Coachella Valley; the District’s 100 percent dependency on groundwater as a water source; lack of other potable water sources and limited emergency interconnections; assessments to DWA for future imported water supply; lack of sufficient reservoir storage for water shortages and emergencies; continued new residential development in the City of Desert Hot Springs; risk of future degradation of groundwater supplies from septic systems, and commercial and industrial development; and the need to implement costly new sources of water (reclamation/conjunctive use, etc.). The water conservation principles identified in the District’s Water Conservation Master Plan were outlined and include detailed tasks. Overall, the District aims to employ the following principles:

• Clarify and summarize the District’s conservation programs, reflecting conservation commitments made through the UWMP and other programs.

• Ensure that the conservation measures adopted by the District treat all customers fairly and equitably.

• Do not create undue pressure on revenue stability resulting in water costs exceeding local socio-economic conditions.

• Identify and establish measurable conservation targets to be accomplished by the District within a reasonable period of time.


9-2

• Develop sensible approaches for practical, cost-effective and efficient conservation programs which anticipate and serve the long-term needs of District customers.

• Facilitate the District’s ability to provide a dependable, reliable supply of water.

The District also developed a conceptual framework for the proposed conservation planning process throughout the service area. Four phases are envisioned as part of the process, including the formulation of conservation principles, program refinement, program implementation and program evaluation. The Plan’s Conservation Action Plan seeks to implement the conceptual framework in a “dual approach,” whereby regulatory and management practices are jointly utilized. In the Conservation Action Plan, the process for establishing measurable conservation targets is discussed. Three distinct components for the process are identified as the following:

• establishment of measurable targets,

• identifying worthwhile conservation measures, and

• evaluating the effects of conservation activities and attainment of goals The District’s implementation of the demand management and water conservation measures are discussed as follows:

9.1.1 Water Waste Prevention Ordinances

In 2004, the District adopted two major conservation policy statements: a water conservation master plan and water efficient landscaping guidelines. The water conservation master plan identifies several key areas in which the District will pursue more efficient water use practices, namely: efficient landscaping guidelines; efficient landscaping requirements for new development; and xeriscape demonstration garden; efficient landscaping incentives; conservation education programs in schools, community and bimonthly billing information; tiered water pricing that encourages conservation; updated water shortage ordinance; water audits for the largest users; and rebates for water efficient plumbing fixtures.

9.1.2 Metering

The District maintains water meters on all residential, commercial, industrial and municipal connections to the District’s water distribution system. The District has an aggressive meter replacement program. Meters are re-built or replaced on a multi-year cycle to ensure accuracy and proper functioning. The District’s water system is fully metered. Therefore, the District completes annual checks on the accuracy and operation of production meters by either recalibrating and reinstalling meters, or by replacing meters that do not fall within the required operating range of AWWA standards. Monthly non-revenue water is accounted for.


9-3

9.1.3 Conservation Pricing

The District has a tiered rate structure for water service within its service area. The tiered rate structure is intended to discourage high water use. Most of the District’s water customers also receive sewer service from District. The District imposes rates for sewer service based on maximum potential water usage, billed at a uniform rate for residential customers. Commercial sewer service fees are based on water usage and also promote water conservation.

9.1.4 Public Education and Outreach

The District maintains a website titled MSWD.org which provides information regarding:



• A dedicated conservation page;

• A water efficient planting database;

• An evaporative cooler maintenance program and primer;


• Water rebates for installing certain water saving devices and turf removal; and

• Other frequently asked questions regarding water use and conservation Moreover, the District has partnered with SCE, and SCGC in school education outreach programs that provide information to children to learn the importance of water conservation.

The Groundwater Guardian Program is a community educational program developed by The Groundwater Foundation, a private, non-profit educational organization recognized internationally, in Lincoln, Nebraska. "Designation as a Groundwater Guardian Community is presented by The Groundwater Foundation to communities which demonstrate an ongoing participatory approach to protecting groundwater resources." "For continuing designation as a Groundwater Guardian, a community must submit an Annual Entry Form and proposed ROA (Result Oriented Activities) Plan(s) by February each year; continue ongoing activities; and submit an Annual Report in August each year." For more information about The Groundwater Foundation and/or the Groundwater Guardian Program see www.groundwater.org. The Desert Hot Springs community has three Groundwater Guardian Teams and a Groundwater Guardian Affiliate:

• Desert Hot Springs Groundwater Guardian Team (Community - 1st Designated in 1995)

• Mission Springs Water District (Affiliate - 1st Designated in 1997)


9-4

• Desert Hot Springs High School (nation's 1st Groundwater Guardian Campus Team - 1st Designated in 2000)

• Desert Springs Middle School (Groundwater Guardian Campus Team - 1st Designated in 2004)

9.1.5 Programs to Assess and Manage Distribution System Real Loss

The District is currently using a wide range of operational policies and practices to ensure the efficient use of its water supply. The District conducts monthly monitoring of all water services. In addition, daily inspection of all facilities such as pump stations, wells, reservoirs, valve vaults, etc., is completed. On an annual basis, visual inspection of all easements and pipeline alignments is accomplished. The District accomplishes water audits and leak detection through various District activities focused on finding and correcting water losses. Field crews visually survey the system as they travel the throughout the District’s service area on a daily basis. The District’s telemetry system also enhances the ability to locate and correct large leaks expeditiously. Leak monitoring is accomplished by all operations field personnel. In the event of a leak, prompt response and investigation is communicated to the District by customers and other entities. Leak and other system losses (fire flows) are calculated monthly and held in a database. The District offers dye tablets to all customers. At public outreach events, the District provides the tablets at no charge and offers a pamphlet on how to use them. The District service crew carries the tablets when making service calls, especially when responding to complaints of high water bills. The District encourages landlords to make them available to tenants. Finally, the availability of the free tablets is advertised on the District website, stating that customers may come into the District lobby and pick up tablets at no charge. The District works diligently to confirm that the appropriate parties are billed for water loss resulting from damaged fire hydrants, air-vacuums, blow offs, dig-ins, etc. In addition, monthly monitoring of “unaccounted-for” water losses assists in identifying leaks. Average unaccounted-for water losses are currently at approximately 4.8 percent for the District. To evaluate the effectiveness of these conservation measures, the District finance staff will continue to review the data records to confirm that unaccounted-for water remain low and consistent. Because of the District’s proactive measures, the unaccounted-for water losses are projected to be approximately 4.8 percent. The CUWCC has established a standard rate of water savings based on the repair of a distribution line: a 1-inch crack in a distribution main at 100 pounds per square inch (psi) can leak 57 gallons per minute. Cost and savings depend on the age of infrastructure for the water system. The District implements programs on leak detection and repair, metering, meter replacement, system flushing, reservoir cleaning and maintenance, valve maintenance


9-5

and mapping. The District proposes to review distribution system operational procedures and maintenance practices with appropriate field and administrative staff, as detailed in the 2004 Water Conservation Master Plan. These measures will ensure system reliability. The hydrant flushing program will be reviewed for its scope and timing, as well as to determine how much water is lost during flushing. The Dos Palmas waterline replacement project in 2008 included 32,250 linear feet of 8-inch and 3,900 linear feet of 12-inch ductile iron mainline replacement, and 840 service line replacements. MSWD spent an average of $120,000 annually since 2010 replacing poly service lines. MSWD had 600 service line leaks in 2010, but reduced to an average 400 leaks per year from 2011 thru 2013. The number of service line leaks then reduced to below 200 in both 2014 and 2015.

9.1.6 Water Conservation Program Coordination and Staffing Support

The District has designated the Conservation Officer responsible for implementing both the conservation master plan as well as monitoring progress in fulfilling DMMs and a state conservation order. The District continues to be involved in water conservation programs and coordinates with the four other water agencies of the Coachella Valley through the Coachella Valley Regional Water Management Group and CVWaterCounts (www.cvwatercounts.com) regional conservation group. Additionally, the District has hired a (temporary) project administrator to implement the turf and plumbing rebate programs under funding provided through CA Proposition 84. These programs will continue as funding is available and local demand exists.

9.2 IMPLEMENTATION OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS The majority of the water conservation programs implemented within the District’s service area have been conducted in coordination with the SCE and SCGC. The following represents the District’s best understanding of the nature and extent of these programs over the past five years.

9.2.1 Public Education and Outreach

The District maintains a website titled MSWD.org which provides information regarding:



• A dedicated conservation page;

• A water efficient planting database;

• An evaporative cooler maintenance program and primer;


• Water rebates for installing certain water saving devices and turf removal; and

• Other frequently asked questions regarding water use and conservation


9-6

Moreover, the District has partnered with SCE, and SCGC in school education outreach programs that provide information to children to learn the importance of water conservation. The extent of the District’s involvement in programs for public education and outreach has not been quantified. As the program matures and the program is further developed, the District will have a better understanding of the extent of the overall program. The District runs a continual advertising campaign focusing on the “Mission: Conservation” theme. These advertisements appear in both regular as well as periodic publications. Public education and outreach also extend to social media outlets such as Facebook and the CVWaterCounts website and social media outlets. The Desert Hot Springs community has three Groundwater Guardian Teams and a Groundwater Guardian Affiliate. Designation as a Groundwater Guardian Community is presented by The Groundwater Foundation to communities which demonstrate an ongoing participatory approach to protecting groundwater resources.

9.2.2 Programs to Assess and Manage Distribution System Real Loss

As previously stated, the District conducts monthly monitoring of all water services. In addition, daily inspection of all facilities such as pump stations, wells, reservoirs, valve vaults, etc., is completed. On an annual basis, visual inspection of all easements and pipeline alignments is accomplished. A budgeted service line replacement program has been ongoing since 2010. The extent of the District’s involvement in programs to assess and manage distribution losses has not been quantified. As the program matures and the program is developed, the District will have a better understanding of the extent of the overall program.

9.2.3 Other

The District in concert with the SCE, and SCGC has developed a number of consumption reduction/ conservation program methods for residential, landscape, and commercial/ industrial/institutional customers that include:

• Water Use Surveys/Audits

• Rebates or Giveaways of Plumbing Fixtures and Devices

• Rebate Programs including: o Turf conversion o SMART Timer rebates o High Efficiency Toilet rebates

• Rebates for Landscape Irrigation Efficiency

• Leak detection and monitoring program

• Hiring of a Water Conservation coordinator


9-7

• Evaporative cooler maintenance and assessment program Large landscape irrigation surveys are offered to cost effectively achieve quantifiable water savings. The audits are performed in conjunction with the District’s Efficient Landscaping Guidelines, adopted by the District board on December 20, 2004. The guidelines establish effective water efficient landscape requirements for newly installed and rehabilitated landscapes, as well as promote water conservation through climate appropriate plant material and efficient irrigation practices. Section 0.00.040 of the District’s Landscaping Guidelines outlines provisions for landscape water audits. Under the Guidelines, all landscaped areas which exceed 1.0 acre (43,560 square feet), including golf courses, green belts, common areas, multifamily housing, schools, businesses, public works, parks, and cemeteries, may be subject to a landscape irrigation audit at the discretion of the District if the District determines that the annual maximum applied water allowance has been exceeded for a minimum of 2 consecutive years. At a minimum, the audit will be conducted by a certified landscape irrigation auditor and shall be in accordance with the California Landscape Irrigation Auditor Handbook, the entire document which is hereby incorporated by reference. The Guidelines also require an irrigation design plan, which includes the installation of separate landscape water meters for all projects except for single-family homes or any project with a landscaped area of less than 2,500 square feet. Automatic control systems shall be required for all irrigation systems and must be able to accommodate all aspects of the design. Mechanical irrigation controllers are prohibited. Plants that require different amounts of water shall be irrigated by separate valves. If one valve is used for a given area, only plants with similar water use shall be used in that area. Anti-drain valves shall be installed in strategic points to prevent low-head drainage. Sprinkler heads shall have application rates appropriate to the plant water use requirements within each control valve circuit. Scheduling aids, including soil moisture sensing devices and ET controllers, are required and recommended, respectively. Emitters shall have applications rates appropriate to the plant water use requirements within each control valve circuit. The District has a water efficient demonstration garden adjacent to its administration building. The garden is approximately 8,000 square feet in size and features a variety of drought-resistant trees, shrubs and groundcover native to the local area and the Coachella Valley. Brochures are distributed to provide explanation of each plant, specific environmental requirements, and to enable interested members of the public to take a self-guided tour of the garden. Since early 2002, the District has been an active participant along with various Coachella Valley area public agencies and private sector organizations to develop a standardized landscape ordinance appropriate to the arid desert climate. The resulting Coachella Valley-Wide Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Ordinance No.1302 adopted by CVWD on March 25, 2003) is designed to ensure consistency of landscape water efficiency standards, and applies to new and rehabilitated landscapes within the Valley. A key feature of the Ordinance is a 25 percent reduction in landscape water use. This


9-8

savings is achieved by changing the plant water-use coefficient factor in the formula originally established by AB 325 from 0.8 to 0.6. With this ordinance, new landscaping for any parcel in the Valley can use no more than 60 percent of the water required for an equivalent sized parcel completely planted in grass.

The City of Desert Hot Springs adopted the District’s Efficient Landscaping Guidelines, and incorporated them into its Ordinance No. 2005-02, which establishes a Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance within the City’s boundaries. The Ordinance was updated and revised in 2009 and subsequently readopted again by the City. The City’s Ordinance directly follows the District’s Ordinance as applicable to the City’s jurisdiction. In other jurisdictions served by the District, the Riverside County Planning Department and the City of Palm Springs require compliance with the District’s Landscaping Guidelines as a condition of new building permits and/or certificates for occupancy. The adoption of the District’s Guidelines by the City of Desert Hot Springs, and its consistency with CVWD and Citys’ water conservation measures, demonstrates the District’s commitment to regional collaboration and support for the implementation of large landscape conservation programs. The District’s Water Conservation Master Plan sets forth an initiative to require water efficient practices in landscape plans and irrigation systems of all new or substantially rehabilitated residential and commercial development projects. In late 2003, the District assumed a leadership role in landscape water conservation by partnering with a local builder to develop a series of cost-effective and aesthetically pleasing landscape design options for the builder’s new residential tract. The landscape solutions emphasized the use of native desert and other water-conserving plants, in concert with water efficient irrigation systems. A key goal of this joint venture was to satisfy the maximum applied water allowance budget established by the Coachella Valley-Wide Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The landscape designs jointly developed between the District and the builder also reflect several factors important to homeowners, including the style of landscaping, the maintenance demands and water use of a particular design option, and cost. This collaborative effort has resulted in over 30 percent of the homes in Phase 1 of the project featuring water wise landscaping. The District’s leadership and innovation was recognized by the water community when the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) presented the District with the Theodore Roosevelt Environmental Award in 2004 for the Lifestyle Landscaping Program. The District was part of the Riverside County Conservation Task Force to create the Riverside County Water Use Efficiency Ordinance. The District was an active member of the Task Force to encourage approval and adoption of the ordinance among stakeholders, including County Supervisors, planning agencies, cities, and water districts. To date, a water budget approach has been recommended to allow customers flexibility and does not dictate design implementation. In addition, the Task Force


9-9

evaluated the use and inclusion of Weather Based Irrigation Controllers (WBIC), enforcement of the Ordinance, support from stakeholders, and emphasis on education as key components of the implementation. The Task Force developed the Model (draft) Ordinance in 2008/09 with compliance by local cities by January 1, 2010. The District provides resources to assist residents in planning and implementing a desert-friendly landscape. Residents within the District service area are provided with the steps for water conservation measures in their homes and businesses under the following three categories of land uses: Residential Landscape Makeover, Landscape Planning (in-fill projects which require a building permit), and Landscape Planning (tract projects). The steps for each category are summarized below. The District continues to recommend water-wise and desert-friendly plant materials in homes and businesses. Desert-friendly landscape styles include the following: Arid, Semi-Arid, and Lush & Efficient. Arid landscapes include slower growing, low water use plant materials and often incorporate decorative rock or mulch into the landscape design. A 2000-square foot, Arid landscape design will use about 29,000 gallons of water per year. Semi-Arid landscapes use plant materials similar to Arid, but may also include a limited turf area for pets and children, if needed. The Semi-Arid style may include a mix of low and medium water-use plants. A 2000-square foot, Semi-Arid landscape will use about 38,000 gallons of water per year. Lush & Efficient landscapes may incorporate high water use plants or a larger amount of grass. Careful, ongoing maintenance of the irrigation system is a must, as well as shaping the turf areas to conform to sprinkler patterns and avoid runoff. A 2000-square foot, Lush & Efficient landscape will use about 56,000 gallons of water per year. A Turf lawn requires heavy maintenance and uses about three times more water than the Arid landscape. Turf lawns also look out of place, and do not blend in with the desert’s natural beauty. A 2,000-square foot Turf landscape will use about 96,000 gallons of water per year. The District also refers its service area residents to the following links for further information:

• The New Mexico Office of the State Engineer 5-step guide to creating a water-wise landscape, called “Xeriscape 101: A Step-by-Step Guide to Creating a Water-Wise Yard.”

http://www.ose.state.nm.us/water-info/conservation/xeriscape-101.html.

• Gallery of California Heritage Gardens:

http://www.bewaterwise.com/Gardensoft/garden_gallery.aspx

• CVWD’s guide, “Lush & Efficient: Gardening in the Coachella Valley,” contains information on topics such as “The Ingredients of a Desert Garden,” “Grouping Plants by Sun and Water Needs,” and “How Much and When to Water.” It also includes a month-to-month gardening calendar for the Coachella Valley and a vast plant database. “Lush &


9-10

Efficient” can be ordered from CVWD or you can browse the online version at: http://cvwd.org/lush&eff.htm.

• The Southern Nevada Water Authority has useful information on general landscape tips at: http://www.snwa.com/html/ws_landscape_tips.html

• The Alliance for Water Awareness and Conservation (AWAC) provides featured plant updates at: http://www.hdawac.org/

• The Water Education Water Awareness Committee (WEWAC) provides monthly plant features at: http://www.usewaterwisely.com/potm.cfm

• MSWD Mission: conservation - Plant Guide provides a custom search tool for water efficient plants and provides calculation on water use and other helpful information for turf replacement and new landscaping, at: http://topratedms.azurewebsites.net/

On its website, the District also provides a water budget calculator to assist residents in figuring out what their water allowance is and how the landscape alternatives fit into the allowance. The District provides detailed instruction on how to use the calculator, including determining square footage of landscape and annual maximum water allowance for landscape. Based on the calculations, a type of irrigation will be suggested, for example, drip irrigation (non-turf), and the recommended area in which to use spray irrigation. The District then provides a step by step process for selecting the types of plants that will meet the recommended irrigation methods and landscape size. The water use calculator estimates the amount of water that the selected landscape and plant materials will use on an annual basis. Next, the District provides recommendations on design and installation of an efficient irrigation system. The District encourages public consultation of the District staff as a source of information. A summary of MSWD conservation best management practices (BMPs) by element and year for the years 2011 through 2015 are included in Appendix H. A total of $87,600 was expended between 2011 and 2015. An additional $310,700 is pending approval and confirmation of proper implementation.

9.3 PLANNED IMPLEMENTATION TO ACHIEVE WATER USE TARGETS

Through the implementation of District water conservation ordinances and measures, total per-capita District water use water use has significantly dropped from 308.1 gpcd in 2005 to 216.0 gpcd in 2010 to 172.1 gpcd in 2015 (a reduction of 44.1% since 2005). Residential per-capita District water use has also significantly dropped from 189.8 gpcd in 2005 to 160.4 gpcd in 2010 to 121.1 gpcd in 2015 (a reduction of 36.2% since 2005). MSWD has surpassed the required 20% reduction for 2020.

Many of the water conservation measures already implemented and being implemented by District customers such as turf removal, conversion to drought resistance landscapes,


9-11

turf replacement, conversion to more efficient irrigation systems and ET-based irrigation controllers, retrofits to toilets and plumbing fixtures, implementation of weather-based irrigation controllers, etc. will have permanent effects on water use (reduction) in the future.

Lower per-capita water use is projected for new housing development (relative to existing housing and development) due to new building codes and landscape ordinances. California’s newly adopted green building code will have a direct impact on home building and water conservation in the State. The new code aims to cut indoor water consumption by at least 20%, primarily through more efficient indoor water fixtures. For a three-bedroom house, the saving is estimated to be about 10,000 gallons of water per year, on average.

The California Green Building program also includes outdoor water conservation by reducing the area devoted to high-irrigation lawns and plants, emphasizing natural drought-tolerant plantings, and installing irrigation controls that respond to local weather conditions. This is consistent with the District’s 2009 Water Efficient Landscaping Guidelines and the new Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), which was adopted by the State on July 15, 2015 and was adopted by the City of Desert Hot Springs.

9.4 MEMBERS OF THE CALIFORNIA URBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNCIL

The District is not a member of the CUWCC.


10-1

10 PLAN ADOPTION, SUBMITTAL, AND IMPLEMENTATION

10.1 INCLUSION OF ALL 2015 DATA

MSWD’s 2015 UWMP consists of water use and planning data for the entire year of 2015. The District is reporting on a 2015 calendar year basis.

10.2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

The District will hold a public hearing prior to adopting the 2015 UWMP. The public hearing will provide an opportunity for the public to provide input to the Plan before it is adopted. The District will consider all public input. There are two audiences to be noticed for the public hearing; cities and counties, and the public.

10.2.1 Notice to Cities and Counties CWC 10621

(b) Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan shall… at least 60 days prior

to the public hearing on the plan … notify any city or county within which the supplier

provides waters supplies that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and

considering amendments or changes to the plan.

CWC 10642

…The urban water supplier shall provide notice of the time and place of hearing to any

city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies. A privately owned water

supplier shall provide an equivalent notice within its service area…

MSWD supplies water to the City of Desert Hot Springs and to the unincorporated area of Riverside County as shown in Table 10-1.

Table 10-1: Notification to Cities and Counties

City Name 60 Day Notice

Notice of Public

Hearing

Desert Hot Springs

County Name 60 Day Notice

Notice of Public

Hearing

Riverside County

The City of Desert Hot Springs and Riverside County were notified that MSWD will be reviewing the UWMP and considering amendments to the Plan. This notice was sent at least 60 days prior to the public hearing. The District provided notice of the time and


10-2

place of the public hearing by publishing such notice in a local newspaper at least two weeks and one week prior to the date of the public hearing, respectively. A copy of the 60-day notice letters are included in Appendix C.

10.2.1 Notice to the Public CWC 10642

…Prior to adopting a plan, the urban water supplier shall make the plan available for

public inspection…Prior to the hearing, notice of the time and place of hearing shall be

published within the jurisdiction of the publicly owned water supplier pursuant to Section

6066 of the Government Code…

Government Code 6066

Publication of notice pursuant to this section shall be once a week for two successive

weeks. Two publications in a newspaper published once a week or oftener, with at least

five days intervening between the respective publication dates not counting such

publication dates, are sufficient. The period of notice commences upon the first day of

publication and terminates at the end of the fourteenth day, including therein the first

day. The District’s public notice of the public hearing was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 29, 2016, and June 5, 2016 and in the Desert Star Weekly newspaper on June 8, 2016. A copy of the proof of publications are included in Appendix C.

10.3 PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION

As part of the public hearing, the District will provide information on their baseline values, water use targets, and implementation plan required in the Water Conservation Act of 2009. A Board workshop was held on June 7, 2016, prior to the Public Hearing of June 20, 2016. The public hearing on the UWMP will take place before the adoption of the UWMP, which will allow the District the opportunity to modify the UWMP in response to public input before adoption. The District will formally adopt the UWMP before submitting the UWMP to DWR. A copy of the District’s adoption resolution is included in Appendix C.

10.4 PLAN SUBMITTAL

The District’s 2015 UWMP will be submitted to DWR within 30 days of adoption and by July 1, 2016. UWMP submittal will be done electronically through WUEdata, an online submittal tool. After the UWMP has been submitted, DWR will review the plan and make a determination as to whether or not the UWMP addresses the requirements of the CWC. The DWR reviewer will contact the water supplier as needed during the review process. Upon completion of the Plan review, DWR will issue a letter to the agency with the results of the review.


10-3

Not later than 30 days after adoption, the District will submit a CD or hardcopy of the adopted 2015 UWMP to the California State Library.

10.5 PUBLIC AVAILABILITY

Not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its Plan with DWR, the District will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours by placing a copy of the UWMP at the front desk of the District’s office, and by posting the UWMP on the District’s website for public viewing.

R

10.6 AMENDING AN ADOPTED UWMP

If the District amends the adopted UWMP, each of the steps for notification, public hearing, adoption, and submittal will also be followed for the amended plan.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

UWMP Act as amended with

SBX7-7

California Urban Water Management Planning Act Page 1 2010

CALIFORNIA WATER CODE DIVISION 6 PART 2.6. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING All California Codes have been updated to include the 2010 Statutes. CHAPTER 1. GENERAL DECLARATION AND POLICY 10610-10610.4 CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS 10611-10617 CHAPTER 3. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS Article 1. General Provisions 10620-10621 Article 2. Contents of Plans 10630-10634 Article 2.5. Water Service Reliability 10635 Article 3. Adoption and Implementation of Plans 10640-10645 CHAPTER 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 10650-10656

WATER CODE SECTION 10610-10610.4 10610. This part shall be known and may be cited as the "Urban Water Management Planning Act." 10610.2. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (1) The waters of the state are a limited and renewable resource subject to ever-increasing demands. (2) The conservation and efficient use of urban water supplies are of statewide concern; however, the planning for that use and the implementation of those plans can best be accomplished at the local level. (3) A long-term, reliable supply of water is essential to protect the productivity of California's businesses and economic climate. (4) As part of its long-range planning activities, every urban water supplier should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. (5) Public health issues have been raised over a number of contaminants that have been identified in certain local and imported water supplies. (6) Implementing effective water management strategies, including groundwater storage projects and recycled water projects, may require specific water quality and salinity targets for meeting groundwater basins water quality objectives and promoting beneficial use of recycled water. (7) Water quality regulations are becoming an increasingly important factor in water agencies' selection of raw water sources, treatment alternatives, and modifications to existing treatment facilities. (8) Changes in drinking water quality standards may also impact the usefulness of water supplies and may ultimately impact supply reliability. (9) The quality of source supplies can have a significant impact


on water management strategies and supply reliability. (b) This part is intended to provide assistance to water agencies in carrying out their long-term resource planning responsibilities to ensure adequate water supplies to meet existing and future demands for water. 10610.4. The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state as follows: (a) The management of urban water demands and efficient use of water shall be actively pursued to protect both the people of the state and their water resources. (b) The management of urban water demands and efficient use of urban water supplies shall be a guiding criterion in public decisions. (c) Urban water suppliers shall be required to develop water management plans to actively pursue the efficient use of available supplies.

WATER CODE SECTION 10611-10617 10611. Unless the context otherwise requires, the definitions of this chapter govern the construction of this part. 10611.5. "Demand management" means those water conservation measures, programs, and incentives that prevent the waste of water and promote the reasonable and efficient use and reuse of available supplies. 10612. "Customer" means a purchaser of water from a water supplier who uses the water for municipal purposes, including residential, commercial, governmental, and industrial uses. 10613. "Efficient use" means those management measures that result in the most effective use of water so as to prevent its waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use. 10614. "Person" means any individual, firm, association, organization, partnership, business, trust, corporation, company, public agency, or any agency of such an entity. 10615. "Plan" means an urban water management plan prepared pursuant to this part. A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities. The components of the plan may vary according to an individual community or area's characteristics and its capabilities to efficiently use and conserve water. The plan shall address measures for residential, commercial, governmental, and industrial water demand management as set forth in Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630) of Chapter 3. In addition, a strategy and time schedule for implementation shall be included in the plan. 10616. "Public agency" means any board, commission, county, city


and county, city, regional agency, district, or other public entity. 10616.5. "Recycled water" means the reclamation and reuse of wastewater for beneficial use. 10617. "Urban water supplier" means a supplier, either publicly or privately owned, providing water for municipal purposes either directly or indirectly to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually. An urban water supplier includes a supplier or contractor for water, regardless of the basis of right, which distributes or sells for ultimate resale to customers. This part applies only to water supplied from public water systems subject to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 116275) of Part 12 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code.

WATER CODE SECTION 10620-10621 10620. (a) Every urban water supplier shall prepare and adopt an urban water management plan in the manner set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section 10640). (b) Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier. (c) An urban water supplier indirectly providing water shall not include planning elements in its water management plan as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630) that would be applicable to urban water suppliers or public agencies directly providing water, or to their customers, without the consent of those suppliers or public agencies. (d) (1) An urban water supplier may satisfy the requirements of this part by participation in areawide, regional, watershed, or basinwide urban water management planning where those plans will reduce preparation costs and contribute to the achievement of conservation and efficient water use. (2) Each urban water supplier shall coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable. (e) The urban water supplier may prepare the plan with its own staff, by contract, or in cooperation with other governmental agencies. (f) An urban water supplier shall describe in the plan water management tools and options used by that entity that will maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions. 10621. (a) Each urban water supplier shall update its plan at least once every five years on or before December 31, in years ending in five and zero. (b) Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan pursuant to this part shall, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing on the plan required by Section 10642, notify any city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies that the urban water


supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. The urban water supplier may consult with, and obtain comments from, any city or county that receives notice pursuant to this subdivision. (c) The amendments to, or changes in, the plan shall be adopted and filed in the manner set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section 10640).

WATER CODE SECTION 10630-10634 10630. It is the intention of the Legislature, in enacting this part, to permit levels of water management planning commensurate with the numbers of customers served and the volume of water supplied. 10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter that shall do all of the following: (a) Describe the service area of the supplier, including current and projected population, climate, and other demographic factors affecting the supplier's water management planning. The projected population estimates shall be based upon data from the state, regional, or local service agency population projections within the service area of the urban water supplier and shall be in five-year increments to 20 years or as far as data is available. (b) Identify and quantify, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a). If groundwater is identified as an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier, all of the following information shall be included in the plan: (1) A copy of any groundwater management plan adopted by the urban water supplier, including plans adopted pursuant to Part 2.75 (commencing with Section 10750), or any other specific authorization for groundwater management. (2) A description of any groundwater basin or basins from which the urban water supplier pumps groundwater. For those basins for which a court or the board has adjudicated the rights to pump groundwater, a copy of the order or decree adopted by the court or the board and a description of the amount of groundwater the urban water supplier has the legal right to pump under the order or decree. For basins that have not been adjudicated, information as to whether the department has identified the basin or basins as overdrafted or has projected that the basin will become overdrafted if present management conditions continue, in the most current official departmental bulletin that characterizes the condition of the groundwater basin, and a detailed description of the efforts being undertaken by the urban water supplier to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition. (3) A detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years. The description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historic use records.


(4) A detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped by the urban water supplier. The description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historic use records. (c) (1) Describe the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or climatic shortage, to the extent practicable, and provide data for each of the following: (A) An average water year. (B) A single dry water year. (C) Multiple dry water years. (2) For any water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, given specific legal, environmental, water quality, or climatic factors, describe plans to supplement or replace that source with alternative sources or water demand management measures, to the extent practicable. (d) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long-term basis. (e) (1) Quantify, to the extent records are available, past and current water use, over the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a), and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors, including, but not necessarily limited to, all of the following uses: (A) Single-family residential. (B) Multifamily. (C) Commercial. (D) Industrial. (E) Institutional and governmental. (F) Landscape. (G) Sales to other agencies. (H) Saline water intrusion barriers, groundwater recharge, or conjunctive use, or any combination thereof. (I) Agricultural. (2) The water use projections shall be in the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a). (f) Provide a description of the supplier's water demand management measures. This description shall include all of the following: (1) A description of each water demand management measure that is currently being implemented, or scheduled for implementation, including the steps necessary to implement any proposed measures, including, but not limited to, all of the following: (A) Water survey programs for single-family residential and multifamily residential customers. (B) Residential plumbing retrofit. (C) System water audits, leak detection, and repair. (D) Metering with commodity rates for all new connections and retrofit of existing connections. (E) Large landscape conservation programs and incentives. (F) High-efficiency washing machine rebate programs. (G) Public information programs. (H) School education programs. (I) Conservation programs for commercial, industrial, and institutional accounts.


(J) Wholesale agency programs. (K) Conservation pricing. (L) Water conservation coordinator. (M) Water waste prohibition. (N) Residential ultra-low-flush toilet replacement programs. (2) A schedule of implementation for all water demand management measures proposed or described in the plan. (3) A description of the methods, if any, that the supplier will use to evaluate the effectiveness of water demand management measures implemented or described under the plan. (4) An estimate, if available, of existing conservation savings on water use within the supplier's service area, and the effect of the savings on the supplier's ability to further reduce demand. (g) An evaluation of each water demand management measure listed in paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) that is not currently being implemented or scheduled for implementation. In the course of the evaluation, first consideration shall be given to water demand management measures, or combination of measures, that offer lower incremental costs than expanded or additional water supplies. This evaluation shall do all of the following: (1) Take into account economic and noneconomic factors, including environmental, social, health, customer impact, and technological factors. (2) Include a cost-benefit analysis, identifying total benefits and total costs. (3) Include a description of funding available to implement any planned water supply project that would provide water at a higher unit cost. (4) Include a description of the water supplier's legal authority to implement the measure and efforts to work with other relevant agencies to ensure the implementation of the measure and to share the cost of implementation. (h) Include a description of all water supply projects and water supply programs that may be undertaken by the urban water supplier to meet the total projected water use as established pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 10635. The urban water supplier shall include a detailed description of expected future projects and programs, other than the demand management programs identified pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (f), that the urban water supplier may implement to increase the amount of the water supply available to the urban water supplier in average, single-dry, and multiple-dry water years. The description shall identify specific projects and include a description of the increase in water supply that is expected to be available from each project. The description shall include an estimate with regard to the implementation timeline for each project or program. (i) Describe the opportunities for development of desalinated water, including, but not limited to, ocean water, brackish water, and groundwater, as a long-term supply. (j) For purposes of this part, urban water suppliers that are members of the California Urban Water Conservation Council shall be deemed in compliance with the requirements of subdivisions (f) and (g) by complying with all the provisions of the "Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California,"


dated December 10, 2008, as it may be amended, and by submitting the annual reports required by Section 6.2 of that memorandum. (k) Urban water suppliers that rely upon a wholesale agency for a source of water shall provide the wholesale agency with water use projections from that agency for that source of water in five-year increments to 20 years or as far as data is available. The wholesale agency shall provide information to the urban water supplier for inclusion in the urban water supplier's plan that identifies and quantifies, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water as required by subdivision (b), available from the wholesale agency to the urban water supplier over the same five-year increments, and during various water-year types in accordance with subdivision (c). An urban water supplier may rely upon water supply information provided by the wholesale agency in fulfilling the plan informational requirements of subdivisions (b) and (c). 10631.1. (a) The water use projections required by Section 10631 shall include projected water use for single-family and multifamily residential housing needed for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, as identified in the housing element of any city, county, or city and county in the service area of the supplier. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the identification of projected water use for single-family and multifamily residential housing for lower income households will assist a supplier in complying with the requirement under Section 65589.7 of the Government Code to grant a priority for the provision of service to housing units affordable to lower income households. 10631.5. (a) (1) Beginning January 1, 2009, the terms of, and eligibility for, a water management grant or loan made to an urban water supplier and awarded or administered by the department, state board, or California Bay-Delta Authority or its successor agency shall be conditioned on the implementation of the water demand management measures described in Section 10631, as determined by the department pursuant to subdivision (b). (2) For the purposes of this section, water management grants and loans include funding for programs and projects for surface water or groundwater storage, recycling, desalination, water conservation, water supply reliability, and water supply augmentation. This section does not apply to water management projects funded by the federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5). (3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the department shall determine that an urban water supplier is eligible for a water management grant or loan even though the supplier is not implementing all of the water demand management measures described in Section 10631, if the urban water supplier has submitted to the department for approval a schedule, financing plan, and budget, to be included in the grant or loan agreement, for implementation of the water demand management measures. The supplier may request grant or loan funds to implement the water demand management measures to the extent the request is consistent with the eligibility requirements applicable to the water management funds. (4) (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the department shall


determine that an urban water supplier is eligible for a water management grant or loan even though the supplier is not implementing all of the water demand management measures described in Section 10631, if an urban water supplier submits to the department for approval documentation demonstrating that a water demand management measure is not locally cost effective. If the department determines that the documentation submitted by the urban water supplier fails to demonstrate that a water demand management measure is not locally cost effective, the department shall notify the urban water supplier and the agency administering the grant or loan program within 120 days that the documentation does not satisfy the requirements for an exemption, and include in that notification a detailed statement to support the determination. (B) For purposes of this paragraph, "not locally cost effective" means that the present value of the local benefits of implementing a water demand management measure is less than the present value of the local costs of implementing that measure. (b) (1) The department, in consultation with the state board and the California Bay-Delta Authority or its successor agency, and after soliciting public comment regarding eligibility requirements, shall develop eligibility requirements to implement the requirement of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). In establishing these eligibility requirements, the department shall do both of the following: (A) Consider the conservation measures described in the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California, and alternative conservation approaches that provide equal or greater water savings. (B) Recognize the different legal, technical, fiscal, and practical roles and responsibilities of wholesale water suppliers and retail water suppliers. (2) (A) For the purposes of this section, the department shall determine whether an urban water supplier is implementing all of the water demand management measures described in Section 10631 based on either, or a combination, of the following: (i) Compliance on an individual basis. (ii) Compliance on a regional basis. Regional compliance shall require participation in a regional conservation program consisting of two or more urban water suppliers that achieves the level of conservation or water efficiency savings equivalent to the amount of conservation or savings achieved if each of the participating urban water suppliers implemented the water demand management measures. The urban water supplier administering the regional program shall provide participating urban water suppliers and the department with data to demonstrate that the regional program is consistent with this clause. The department shall review the data to determine whether the urban water suppliers in the regional program are meeting the eligibility requirements. (B) The department may require additional information for any determination pursuant to this section. (3) The department shall not deny eligibility to an urban water supplier in compliance with the requirements of this section that is participating in a multiagency water project, or an integrated regional water management plan, developed pursuant to Section 75026 of the Public Resources Code, solely on the basis that one or more of


the agencies participating in the project or plan is not implementing all of the water demand management measures described in Section 10631. (c) In establishing guidelines pursuant to the specific funding authorization for any water management grant or loan program subject to this section, the agency administering the grant or loan program shall include in the guidelines the eligibility requirements developed by the department pursuant to subdivision (b). (d) Upon receipt of a water management grant or loan application by an agency administering a grant and loan program subject to this section, the agency shall request an eligibility determination from the department with respect to the requirements of this section. The department shall respond to the request within 60 days of the request. (e) The urban water supplier may submit to the department copies of its annual reports and other relevant documents to assist the department in determining whether the urban water supplier is implementing or scheduling the implementation of water demand management activities. In addition, for urban water suppliers that are signatories to the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California and submit biennial reports to the California Urban Water Conservation Council in accordance with the memorandum, the department may use these reports to assist in tracking the implementation of water demand management measures. (f) This section shall remain in effect only until July 1, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before July 1, 2016, deletes or extends that date. 10631.7. The department, in consultation with the California Urban Water Conservation Council, shall convene an independent technical panel to provide information and recommendations to the department and the Legislature on new demand management measures, technologies, and approaches. The panel shall consist of no more than seven members, who shall be selected by the department to reflect a balanced representation of experts. The panel shall have at least one, but no more than two, representatives from each of the following: retail water suppliers, environmental organizations, the business community, wholesale water suppliers, and academia. The panel shall be convened by January 1, 2009, and shall report to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2010, and every five years thereafter. The department shall review the panel report and include in the final report to the Legislature the department's recommendations and comments regarding the panel process and the panel's recommendations. 10632. (a) The plan shall provide an urban water shortage contingency analysis that includes each of the following elements that are within the authority of the urban water supplier: (1) Stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to water supply shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply, and an outline of specific water supply conditions that are applicable to each stage. (2) An estimate of the minimum water supply available during each of the next three water years based on the driest three-year historic


sequence for the agency's water supply. (3) Actions to be undertaken by the urban water supplier to prepare for, and implement during, a catastrophic interruption of water supplies including, but not limited to, a regional power outage, an earthquake, or other disaster. (4) Additional, mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices during water shortages, including, but not limited to, prohibiting the use of potable water for street cleaning. (5) Consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages. Each urban water supplier may use any type of consumption reduction methods in its water shortage contingency analysis that would reduce water use, are appropriate for its area, and have the ability to achieve a water use reduction consistent with up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply. (6) Penalties or charges for excessive use, where applicable. (7) An analysis of the impacts of each of the actions and conditions described in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive, on the revenues and expenditures of the urban water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts, such as the development of reserves and rate adjustments. (8) A draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance. (9) A mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the urban water shortage contingency analysis. (b) Commencing with the urban water management plan update due December 31, 2015, for purposes of developing the water shortage contingency analysis pursuant to subdivision (a), the urban water supplier shall analyze and define water features that are artificially supplied with water, including ponds, lakes, waterfalls, and fountains, separately from swimming pools and spas, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 115921 of the Health and Safety Code. 10633. The plan shall provide, to the extent available, information on recycled water and its potential for use as a water source in the service area of the urban water supplier. The preparation of the plan shall be coordinated with local water, wastewater, groundwater, and planning agencies that operate within the supplier's service area, and shall include all of the following: (a) A description of the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier's service area, including a quantification of the amount of wastewater collected and treated and the methods of wastewater disposal. (b) A description of the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project. (c) A description of the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area, including, but not limited to, the type, place, and quantity of use. (d) A description and quantification of the potential uses of recycled water, including, but not limited to, agricultural irrigation, landscape irrigation, wildlife habitat enhancement, wetlands, industrial reuse, groundwater recharge, indirect potable reuse, and other appropriate uses, and a determination with regard to the technical and economic feasibility of serving those uses. (e) The projected use of recycled water within the supplier's


service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected pursuant to this subdivision. (f) A description of actions, including financial incentives, which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water, and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year. (g) A plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area, including actions to facilitate the installation of dual distribution systems, to promote recirculating uses, to facilitate the increased use of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, and to overcome any obstacles to achieving that increased use. 10634. The plan shall include information, to the extent practicable, relating to the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments as described in subdivision (a) of Section 10631, and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability.

WATER CODE SECTION 10635 10635. (a) Every urban water supplier shall include, as part of its urban water management plan, an assessment of the reliability of its water service to its customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. This water supply and demand assessment shall compare the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years, in five-year increments, for a normal water year, a single dry water year, and multiple dry water years. The water service reliability assessment shall be based upon the information compiled pursuant to Section 10631, including available data from state, regional, or local agency population projections within the service area of the urban water supplier. (b) The urban water supplier shall provide that portion of its urban water management plan prepared pursuant to this article to any city or county within which it provides water supplies no later than 60 days after the submission of its urban water management plan. (c) Nothing in this article is intended to create a right or entitlement to water service or any specific level of water service. (d) Nothing in this article is intended to change existing law concerning an urban water supplier's obligation to provide water service to its existing customers or to any potential future customers.


WATER CODE SECTION 10640-10645 10640. Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan pursuant to this part shall prepare its plan pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630). The supplier shall likewise periodically review the plan as required by Section 10621, and any amendments or changes required as a result of that review shall be adopted pursuant to this article. 10641. An urban water supplier required to prepare a plan may consult with, and obtain comments from, any public agency or state agency or any person who has special expertise with respect to water demand management methods and techniques. 10642. Each urban water supplier shall encourage the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan. Prior to adopting a plan, the urban water supplier shall make the plan available for public inspection and shall hold a public hearing thereon. Prior to the hearing, notice of the time and place of hearing shall be published within the jurisdiction of the publicly owned water supplier pursuant to Section 6066 of the Government Code. The urban water supplier shall provide notice of the time and place of hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies. A privately owned water supplier shall provide an equivalent notice within its service area. After the hearing, the plan shall be adopted as prepared or as modified after the hearing. 10643. An urban water supplier shall implement its plan adopted pursuant to this chapter in accordance with the schedule set forth in its plan. 10644. (a) An urban water supplier shall submit to the department, the California State Library, and any city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies a copy of its plan no later than 30 days after adoption. Copies of amendments or changes to the plans shall be submitted to the department, the California State Library, and any city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies within 30 days after adoption. (b) The department shall prepare and submit to the Legislature, on or before December 31, in the years ending in six and one, a report summarizing the status of the plans adopted pursuant to this part. The report prepared by the department shall identify the exemplary elements of the individual plans. The department shall provide a copy of the report to each urban water supplier that has submitted its plan to the department. The department shall also prepare reports and provide data for any legislative hearings designed to consider the effectiveness of plans submitted pursuant to this part. (c) (1) For the purpose of identifying the exemplary elements of the individual plans, the department shall identify in the report those water demand management measures adopted and implemented by specific urban water suppliers, and identified pursuant to Section


10631, that achieve water savings significantly above the levels established by the department to meet the requirements of Section 10631.5. (2) The department shall distribute to the panel convened pursuant to Section 10631.7 the results achieved by the implementation of those water demand management measures described in paragraph (1). (3) The department shall make available to the public the standard the department will use to identify exemplary water demand management measures. 10645. Not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the urban water supplier and the department shall make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.


WATER CODE SECTION 10650-10656 10650. Any actions or proceedings to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the acts or decisions of an urban water supplier on the grounds of noncompliance with this part shall be commenced as follows: (a) An action or proceeding alleging failure to adopt a plan shall be commenced within 18 months after that adoption is required by this part. (b) Any action or proceeding alleging that a plan, or action taken pursuant to the plan, does not comply with this part shall be commenced within 90 days after filing of the plan or amendment thereto pursuant to Section 10644 or the taking of that action. 10651. In any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul a plan, or an action taken pursuant to the plan by an urban water supplier on the grounds of noncompliance with this part, the inquiry shall extend only to whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse of discretion is established if the supplier has not proceeded in a manner required by law or if the action by the water supplier is not supported by substantial evidence. 10652. The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) does not apply to the preparation and adoption of plans pursuant to this part or to the implementation of actions taken pursuant to Section 10632. Nothing in this part shall be interpreted as exempting from the California Environmental Quality Act any project that would significantly affect water supplies for fish and wildlife, or any project for implementation of the plan, other than projects implementing Section 10632, or any project for expanded or additional water supplies. 10653. The adoption of a plan shall satisfy any requirements of state law, regulation, or order, including those of the State Water Resources Control Board and the Public Utilities Commission, for the preparation of water management plans or conservation plans; provided, that if the State Water Resources Control Board or the Public Utilities Commission requires additional information concerning water conservation to implement its existing authority, nothing in this part shall be deemed to limit the board or the commission in obtaining that information. The requirements of this part shall be satisfied by any urban water demand management plan prepared to meet federal laws or regulations after the effective date of this part, and which substantially meets the requirements of this part, or by any existing urban water management plan which includes the contents of a plan required under this part. 10654. An urban water supplier may recover in its rates the costs incurred in preparing its plan and implementing the reasonable water conservation measures included in the plan. Any best water management practice that is included in the plan that is identified in the


"Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California" is deemed to be reasonable for the purposes of this section. 10655. If any provision of this part or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this part which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application thereof, and to this end the provisions of this part are severable. 10656. An urban water supplier that does not prepare, adopt, and submit its urban water management plan to the department in accordance with this part, is ineligible to receive funding pursuant to Division 24 (commencing with Section 78500) or Division 26 (commencing with Section 79000), or receive drought assistance from the state until the urban water management plan is submitted pursuant to this article.

Senate Bill No. 7

CHAPTER 4

An act to amend and repeal Section 10631.5 of, to add Part 2.55(commencing with Section 10608) to Division 6 of, and to repeal and addPart 2.8 (commencing with Section 10800) of Division 6 of, the Water Code,relating to water.

[Approved by Governor November 10, 2009. Filed withSecretary of State November 10, 2009.]

legislative counsel’s digest

SB 7, Steinberg. Water conservation.(1) Existing law requires the Department of Water Resources to convene

an independent technical panel to provide information to the departmentand the Legislature on new demand management measures, technologies,and approaches. “Demand management measures” means those waterconservation measures, programs, and incentives that prevent the waste ofwater and promote the reasonable and efficient use and reuse of availablesupplies.

This bill would require the state to achieve a 20% reduction in urban percapita water use in California by December 31, 2020. The state would berequired to make incremental progress towards this goal by reducing percapita water use by at least 10% on or before December 31, 2015. The billwould require each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water usetargets and an interim urban water use target, in accordance with specifiedrequirements. The bill would require agricultural water suppliers toimplement efficient water management practices. The bill would requirethe department, in consultation with other state agencies, to develop a singlestandardized water use reporting form. The bill, with certain exceptions,would provide that urban retail water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2016,and agricultural water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2013, are not eligiblefor state water grants or loans unless they comply with the water conservationrequirements established by the bill. The bill would repeal, on July 1, 2016,an existing requirement that conditions eligibility for certain watermanagement grants or loans to an urban water supplier on the implementationof certain water demand management measures.

(2) Existing law, until January 1, 1993, and thereafter only as specified,requires certain agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt watermanagement plans.

This bill would revise existing law relating to agricultural watermanagement planning to require agricultural water suppliers to prepare andadopt agricultural water management plans with specified components onor before December 31, 2012, and update those plans on or before December

� 93

31, 2015, and on or before December 31 every 5 years thereafter. Anagricultural water supplier that becomes an agricultural water supplier afterDecember 31, 2012, would be required to prepare and adopt an agriculturalwater management plan within one year after becoming an agriculturalwater supplier. The agricultural water supplier would be required to notifyeach city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies withregard to the preparation or review of the plan. The bill would require theagricultural water supplier to submit copies of the plan to the departmentand other specified entities. The bill would provide that an agricultural watersupplier is not eligible for state water grants or loans unless the suppliercomplies with the water management planning requirements established bythe bill.

(3) The bill would take effect only if SB 1 and SB 6 of the 2009–10 7thExtraordinary Session of the Legislature are enacted and become effective.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Part 2.55 (commencing with Section 10608) is added toDivision 6 of the Water Code, to read:

PART 2.55. SUSTAINABLE WATER USE AND DEMAND REDUCTION

Chapter 1. General Declarations and Policy

10608. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) Water is a public resource that the California Constitution protects

against waste and unreasonable use.(b) Growing population, climate change, and the need to protect and

grow California’s economy while protecting and restoring our fish andwildlife habitats make it essential that the state manage its water resourcesas efficiently as possible.

(c) Diverse regional water supply portfolios will increase water supplyreliability and reduce dependence on the Delta.

(d) Reduced water use through conservation provides significant energyand environmental benefits, and can help protect water quality, improvestreamflows, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

(e) The success of state and local water conservation programs to increaseefficiency of water use is best determined on the basis of measurableoutcomes related to water use or efficiency.

(f) Improvements in technology and management practices offer thepotential for increasing water efficiency in California over time, providingan essential water management tool to meet the need for water for urban,agricultural, and environmental uses.

(g) The Governor has called for a 20 percent per capita reduction in urbanwater use statewide by 2020.

� 93

— 2 —Ch. 4

(h) The factors used to formulate water use efficiency targets can varysignificantly from location to location based on factors including weather,patterns of urban and suburban development, and past efforts to enhancewater use efficiency.

(i) Per capita water use is a valid measure of a water provider’s effortsto reduce urban water use within its service area. However, per capita wateruse is less useful for measuring relative water use efficiency betweendifferent water providers. Differences in weather, historical patterns of urbanand suburban development, and density of housing in a particular locationneed to be considered when assessing per capita water use as a measure ofefficiency.

10608.4. It is the intent of the Legislature, by the enactment of this part,to do all of the following:

(a) Require all water suppliers to increase the efficiency of use of thisessential resource.

(b) Establish a framework to meet the state targets for urban waterconservation identified in this part and called for by the Governor.

(c) Measure increased efficiency of urban water use on a per capita basis.(d) Establish a method or methods for urban retail water suppliers to

determine targets for achieving increased water use efficiency by the year2020, in accordance with the Governor’s goal of a 20-percent reduction.

(e) Establish consistent water use efficiency planning and implementationstandards for urban water suppliers and agricultural water suppliers.

(f) Promote urban water conservation standards that are consistent withthe California Urban Water Conservation Council’s adopted bestmanagement practices and the requirements for demand management inSection 10631.

(g) Establish standards that recognize and provide credit to water suppliersthat made substantial capital investments in urban water conservation sincethe drought of the early 1990s.

(h) Recognize and account for the investment of urban retail watersuppliers in providing recycled water for beneficial uses.

(i) Require implementation of specified efficient water managementpractices for agricultural water suppliers.

(j) Support the economic productivity of California’s agricultural,commercial, and industrial sectors.

(k) Advance regional water resources management.10608.8. (a) (1) Water use efficiency measures adopted and

implemented pursuant to this part or Part 2.8 (commencing with Section10800) are water conservation measures subject to the protections providedunder Section 1011.

(2) Because an urban agency is not required to meet its urban water usetarget until 2020 pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 10608.24, an urbanretail water supplier’s failure to meet those targets shall not establish aviolation of law for purposes of any state administrative or judicialproceeding prior to January 1, 2021. Nothing in this paragraph limits theuse of data reported to the department or the board in litigation or an

� 93

Ch. 4— 3 —

administrative proceeding. This paragraph shall become inoperative onJanuary 1, 2021.

(3) To the extent feasible, the department and the board shall provide forthe use of water conservation reports required under this part to meet therequirements of Section 1011 for water conservation reporting.

(b) This part does not limit or otherwise affect the application of Chapter3.5 (commencing with Section 11340), Chapter 4 (commencing with Section11370), Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 11400), and Chapter 5(commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of theGovernment Code.

(c) This part does not require a reduction in the total water used in theagricultural or urban sectors, because other factors, including, but not limitedto, changes in agricultural economics or population growth may have greatereffects on water use. This part does not limit the economic productivity ofCalifornia’s agricultural, commercial, or industrial sectors.

(d) The requirements of this part do not apply to an agricultural watersupplier that is a party to the Quantification Settlement Agreement, asdefined in subdivision (a) of Section 1 of Chapter 617 of the Statutes of2002, during the period within which the Quantification SettlementAgreement remains in effect. After the expiration of the QuantificationSettlement Agreement, to the extent conservation water projects implementedas part of the Quantification Settlement Agreement remain in effect, theconserved water created as part of those projects shall be credited againstthe obligations of the agricultural water supplier pursuant to this part.

Chapter 2. Definitions

10608.12. Unless the context otherwise requires, the following definitionsgovern the construction of this part:

(a) “Agricultural water supplier” means a water supplier, either publiclyor privately owned, providing water to 10,000 or more irrigated acres,excluding recycled water. “Agricultural water supplier” includes a supplieror contractor for water, regardless of the basis of right, that distributes orsells water for ultimate resale to customers. “Agricultural water supplier”does not include the department.

(b) “Base daily per capita water use” means any of the following:(1) The urban retail water supplier’s estimate of its average gross water

use, reported in gallons per capita per day and calculated over a continuous10-year period ending no earlier than December 31, 2004, and no later thanDecember 31, 2010.

(2) For an urban retail water supplier that meets at least 10 percent of its2008 measured retail water demand through recycled water that is deliveredwithin the service area of an urban retail water supplier or its urban wholesalewater supplier, the urban retail water supplier may extend the calculationdescribed in paragraph (1) up to an additional five years to a maximum of

� 93

— 4 —Ch. 4

a continuous 15-year period ending no earlier than December 31, 2004, andno later than December 31, 2010.

(3) For the purposes of Section 10608.22, the urban retail water supplier’sestimate of its average gross water use, reported in gallons per capita perday and calculated over a continuous five-year period ending no earlier thanDecember 31, 2007, and no later than December 31, 2010.

(c) “Baseline commercial, industrial, and institutional water use” meansan urban retail water supplier’s base daily per capita water use forcommercial, industrial, and institutional users.

(d) “Commercial water user” means a water user that provides ordistributes a product or service.

(e) “Compliance daily per capita water use” means the gross water useduring the final year of the reporting period, reported in gallons per capitaper day.

(f) “Disadvantaged community” means a community with an annualmedian household income that is less than 80 percent of the statewide annualmedian household income.

(g) “Gross water use” means the total volume of water, whether treatedor untreated, entering the distribution system of an urban retail watersupplier, excluding all of the following:

(1) Recycled water that is delivered within the service area of an urbanretail water supplier or its urban wholesale water supplier.

(2) The net volume of water that the urban retail water supplier placesinto long-term storage.

(3) The volume of water the urban retail water supplier conveys for useby another urban water supplier.

(4) The volume of water delivered for agricultural use, except as otherwiseprovided in subdivision (f) of Section 10608.24.

(h) “Industrial water user” means a water user that is primarily amanufacturer or processor of materials as defined by the North AmericanIndustry Classification System code sectors 31 to 33, inclusive, or an entitythat is a water user primarily engaged in research and development.

(i) “Institutional water user” means a water user dedicated to publicservice. This type of user includes, among other users, higher educationinstitutions, schools, courts, churches, hospitals, government facilities, andnonprofit research institutions.

(j) “Interim urban water use target” means the midpoint between theurban retail water supplier’s base daily per capita water use and the urbanretail water supplier’s urban water use target for 2020.

(k) “Locally cost effective” means that the present value of the localbenefits of implementing an agricultural efficiency water managementpractice is greater than or equal to the present value of the local cost ofimplementing that measure.

(l) “Process water” means water used for producing a product or productcontent or water used for research and development, including, but notlimited to, continuous manufacturing processes, water used for testing andmaintaining equipment used in producing a product or product content, and

� 93

Ch. 4— 5 —

water used in combined heat and power facilities used in producing a productor product content. Process water does not mean incidental water uses notrelated to the production of a product or product content, including, but notlimited to, water used for restrooms, landscaping, air conditioning, heating,kitchens, and laundry.

(m) “Recycled water” means recycled water, as defined in subdivision(n) of Section 13050, that is used to offset potable demand, includingrecycled water supplied for direct use and indirect potable reuse, that meetsthe following requirements, where applicable:

(1) For groundwater recharge, including recharge through spreadingbasins, water supplies that are all of the following:

(A) Metered.(B) Developed through planned investment by the urban water supplier

or a wastewater treatment agency.(C) Treated to a minimum tertiary level.(D) Delivered within the service area of an urban retail water supplier

or its urban wholesale water supplier that helps an urban retail water suppliermeet its urban water use target.

(2) For reservoir augmentation, water supplies that meet the criteria ofparagraph (1) and are conveyed through a distribution system constructedspecifically for recycled water.

(n) “Regional water resources management” means sources of supplyresulting from watershed-based planning for sustainable local waterreliability or any of the following alternative sources of water:

(1) The capture and reuse of stormwater or rainwater.(2) The use of recycled water.(3) The desalination of brackish groundwater.(4) The conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater in a manner

that is consistent with the safe yield of the groundwater basin.(o) “Reporting period” means the years for which an urban retail water

supplier reports compliance with the urban water use targets.(p) “Urban retail water supplier” means a water supplier, either publicly

or privately owned, that directly provides potable municipal water to morethan 3,000 end users or that supplies more than 3,000 acre-feet of potablewater annually at retail for municipal purposes.

(q) “Urban water use target” means the urban retail water supplier’stargeted future daily per capita water use.

(r) “Urban wholesale water supplier,” means a water supplier, eitherpublicly or privately owned, that provides more than 3,000 acre-feet ofwater annually at wholesale for potable municipal purposes.

Chapter 3. Urban Retail Water Suppliers

10608.16. (a) The state shall achieve a 20-percent reduction in urbanper capita water use in California on or before December 31, 2020.

� 93

— 6 —Ch. 4

(b) The state shall make incremental progress towards the state targetspecified in subdivision (a) by reducing urban per capita water use by atleast 10 percent on or before December 31, 2015.

10608.20. (a) (1) Each urban retail water supplier shall develop urbanwater use targets and an interim urban water use target by July 1, 2011.Urban retail water suppliers may elect to determine and report progresstoward achieving these targets on an individual or regional basis, as providedin subdivision (a) of Section 10608.28, and may determine the targets on afiscal year or calendar year basis.

(2) It is the intent of the Legislature that the urban water use targetsdescribed in subdivision (a) cumulatively result in a 20-percent reductionfrom the baseline daily per capita water use by December 31, 2020.

(b) An urban retail water supplier shall adopt one of the followingmethods for determining its urban water use target pursuant to subdivision(a):

(1) Eighty percent of the urban retail water supplier’s baseline per capitadaily water use.

(2) The per capita daily water use that is estimated using the sum of thefollowing performance standards:

(A) For indoor residential water use, 55 gallons per capita daily wateruse as a provisional standard. Upon completion of the department’s 2016report to the Legislature pursuant to Section 10608.42, this standard maybe adjusted by the Legislature by statute.

(B) For landscape irrigated through dedicated or residential meters orconnections, water efficiency equivalent to the standards of the Model WaterEfficient Landscape Ordinance set forth in Chapter 2.7 (commencing withSection 490) of Division 2 of Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations,as in effect the later of the year of the landscape’s installation or 1992. Anurban retail water supplier using the approach specified in this subparagraphshall use satellite imagery, site visits, or other best available technology todevelop an accurate estimate of landscaped areas.

(C) For commercial, industrial, and institutional uses, a 10-percentreduction in water use from the baseline commercial, industrial, andinstitutional water use by 2020.

(3) Ninety-five percent of the applicable state hydrologic region target,as set forth in the state’s draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan (datedApril 30, 2009). If the service area of an urban water supplier includes morethan one hydrologic region, the supplier shall apportion its service area toeach region based on population or area.

(4) A method that shall be identified and developed by the department,through a public process, and reported to the Legislature no later thanDecember 31, 2010. The method developed by the department shall identifyper capita targets that cumulatively result in a statewide 20-percent reductionin urban daily per capita water use by December 31, 2020. In developingurban daily per capita water use targets, the department shall do all of thefollowing:

(A) Consider climatic differences within the state.

� 93

Ch. 4— 7 —

(B) Consider population density differences within the state.(C) Provide flexibility to communities and regions in meeting the targets.(D) Consider different levels of per capita water use according to plant

water needs in different regions.(E) Consider different levels of commercial, industrial, and institutional

water use in different regions of the state.(F) Avoid placing an undue hardship on communities that have

implemented conservation measures or taken actions to keep per capitawater use low.

(c) If the department adopts a regulation pursuant to paragraph (4) ofsubdivision (b) that results in a requirement that an urban retail water supplierachieve a reduction in daily per capita water use that is greater than 20percent by December 31, 2020, an urban retail water supplier that adoptedthe method described in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) may limit its urbanwater use target to a reduction of not more than 20 percent by December31, 2020, by adopting the method described in paragraph (1) of subdivision(b).

(d) The department shall update the method described in paragraph (4)of subdivision (b) and report to the Legislature by December 31, 2014. Anurban retail water supplier that adopted the method described in paragraph(4) of subdivision (b) may adopt a new urban daily per capita water usetarget pursuant to this updated method.

(e) An urban retail water supplier shall include in its urban watermanagement plan required pursuant to Part 2.6 (commencing with Section10610) due in 2010 the baseline daily per capita water use, urban water usetarget, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita wateruse, along with the bases for determining those estimates, includingreferences to supporting data.

(f) When calculating per capita values for the purposes of this chapter,an urban retail water supplier shall determine population using federal, state,and local population reports and projections.

(g) An urban retail water supplier may update its 2020 urban water usetarget in its 2015 urban water management plan required pursuant to Part2.6 (commencing with Section 10610).

(h) (1) The department, through a public process and in consultationwith the California Urban Water Conservation Council, shall developtechnical methodologies and criteria for the consistent implementation ofthis part, including, but not limited to, both of the following:

(A) Methodologies for calculating base daily per capita water use,baseline commercial, industrial, and institutional water use, compliancedaily per capita water use, gross water use, service area population, indoorresidential water use, and landscaped area water use.

(B) Criteria for adjustments pursuant to subdivisions (d) and (e) of Section10608.24.

(2) The department shall post the methodologies and criteria developedpursuant to this subdivision on its Internet Web site, and make written copies

� 93

— 8 —Ch. 4

available, by October 1, 2010. An urban retail water supplier shall use themethods developed by the department in compliance with this part.

(i) (1) The department shall adopt regulations for implementation of theprovisions relating to process water in accordance with subdivision (l) ofSection 10608.12, subdivision (e) of Section 10608.24, and subdivision (d)of Section 10608.26.

(2) The initial adoption of a regulation authorized by this subdivision isdeemed to address an emergency, for purposes of Sections 11346.1 and11349.6 of the Government Code, and the department is hereby exemptedfor that purpose from the requirements of subdivision (b) of Section 11346.1of the Government Code. After the initial adoption of an emergencyregulation pursuant to this subdivision, the department shall not requestapproval from the Office of Administrative Law to readopt the regulationas an emergency regulation pursuant to Section 11346.1 of the GovernmentCode.

(j) An urban retail water supplier shall be granted an extension to July1, 2011, for adoption of an urban water management plan pursuant to Part2.6 (commencing with Section 10610) due in 2010 to allow use of technicalmethodologies developed by the department pursuant to paragraph (4) ofsubdivision (b) and subdivision (h). An urban retail water supplier thatadopts an urban water management plan due in 2010 that does not use themethodologies developed by the department pursuant to subdivision (h)shall amend the plan by July 1, 2011, to comply with this part.

10608.22. Notwithstanding the method adopted by an urban retail watersupplier pursuant to Section 10608.20, an urban retail water supplier’s percapita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base dailyper capita water use as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section10608.12. This section does not apply to an urban retail water supplier witha base daily per capita water use at or below 100 gallons per capita per day.

10608.24. (a) Each urban retail water supplier shall meet its interimurban water use target by December 31, 2015.

(b) Each urban retail water supplier shall meet its urban water use targetby December 31, 2020.

(c) An urban retail water supplier’s compliance daily per capita wateruse shall be the measure of progress toward achievement of its urban wateruse target.

(d) (1) When determining compliance daily per capita water use, anurban retail water supplier may consider the following factors:

(A) Differences in evapotranspiration and rainfall in the baseline periodcompared to the compliance reporting period.

(B) Substantial changes to commercial or industrial water use resultingfrom increased business output and economic development that haveoccurred during the reporting period.

(C) Substantial changes to institutional water use resulting from firesuppression services or other extraordinary events, or from new or expandedoperations, that have occurred during the reporting period.

� 93

Ch. 4— 9 —

(2) If the urban retail water supplier elects to adjust its estimate ofcompliance daily per capita water use due to one or more of the factorsdescribed in paragraph (1), it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting,the adjustment in the report required by Section 10608.40.

(e) When developing the urban water use target pursuant to Section10608.20, an urban retail water supplier that has a substantial percentageof industrial water use in its service area, may exclude process water fromthe calculation of gross water use to avoid a disproportionate burden onanother customer sector.

(f) (1) An urban retail water supplier that includes agricultural water usein an urban water management plan pursuant to Part 2.6 (commencing withSection 10610) may include the agricultural water use in determining grosswater use. An urban retail water supplier that includes agricultural wateruse in determining gross water use and develops its urban water use targetpursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 10608.20 shall usea water efficient standard for agricultural irrigation of 100 percent ofreference evapotranspiration multiplied by the crop coefficient for irrigatedacres.

(2) An urban retail water supplier, that is also an agricultural watersupplier, is not subject to the requirements of Chapter 4 (commencing withSection 10608.48), if the agricultural water use is incorporated into its urbanwater use target pursuant to paragraph (1).

10608.26. (a) In complying with this part, an urban retail water suppliershall conduct at least one public hearing to accomplish all of the following:

(1) Allow community input regarding the urban retail water supplier’simplementation plan for complying with this part.

(2) Consider the economic impacts of the urban retail water supplier’simplementation plan for complying with this part.

(3) Adopt a method, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 10608.20,for determining its urban water use target.

(b) In complying with this part, an urban retail water supplier may meetits urban water use target through efficiency improvements in anycombination among its customer sectors. An urban retail water suppliershall avoid placing a disproportionate burden on any customer sector.

(c) For an urban retail water supplier that supplies water to a UnitedStates Department of Defense military installation, the urban retail watersupplier’s implementation plan for complying with this part shall considerthe United States Department of Defense military installation’s requirementsunder federal Executive Order 13423.

(d) (1) Any ordinance or resolution adopted by an urban retail watersupplier after the effective date of this section shall not require existingcustomers as of the effective date of this section, to undertake changes inproduct formulation, operations, or equipment that would reduce processwater use, but may provide technical assistance and financial incentives tothose customers to implement efficiency measures for process water. Thissection shall not limit an ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to adeclaration of drought emergency by an urban retail water supplier.

� 93

— 10 —Ch. 4

(2) This part shall not be construed or enforced so as to interfere withthe requirements of Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 113980) to Chapter13 (commencing with Section 114380), inclusive, of Part 7 of Division 104of the Health and Safety Code, or any requirement or standard for theprotection of public health, public safety, or worker safety established byfederal, state, or local government or recommended by recognized standardsetting organizations or trade associations.

10608.28. (a) An urban retail water supplier may meet its urban wateruse target within its retail service area, or through mutual agreement, byany of the following:

(1) Through an urban wholesale water supplier.(2) Through a regional agency authorized to plan and implement water

conservation, including, but not limited to, an agency established under theBay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Act (Division 31(commencing with Section 81300)).

(3) Through a regional water management group as defined in Section10537.

(4) By an integrated regional water management funding area.(5) By hydrologic region.(6) Through other appropriate geographic scales for which computation

methods have been developed by the department.(b) A regional water management group, with the written consent of its

member agencies, may undertake any or all planning, reporting, andimplementation functions under this chapter for the member agencies thatconsent to those activities. Any data or reports shall provide informationboth for the regional water management group and separately for eachconsenting urban retail water supplier and urban wholesale water supplier.

10608.32. All costs incurred pursuant to this part by a water utilityregulated by the Public Utilities Commission may be recoverable in ratessubject to review and approval by the Public Utilities Commission, and maybe recorded in a memorandum account and reviewed for reasonableness bythe Public Utilities Commission.

10608.36. Urban wholesale water suppliers shall include in the urbanwater management plans required pursuant to Part 2.6 (commencing withSection 10610) an assessment of their present and proposed future measures,programs, and policies to help achieve the water use reductions required bythis part.

10608.40. Urban water retail suppliers shall report to the department ontheir progress in meeting their urban water use targets as part of their urbanwater management plans submitted pursuant to Section 10631. The datashall be reported using a standardized form developed pursuant to Section10608.52.

10608.42. The department shall review the 2015 urban watermanagement plans and report to the Legislature by December 31, 2016, onprogress towards achieving a 20-percent reduction in urban water use byDecember 31, 2020. The report shall include recommendations on changesto water efficiency standards or urban water use targets in order to achieve

� 93

Ch. 4— 11 —

the 20-percent reduction and to reflect updated efficiency information andtechnology changes.

10608.43. The department, in conjunction with the California UrbanWater Conservation Council, by April 1, 2010, shall convene a representativetask force consisting of academic experts, urban retail water suppliers,environmental organizations, commercial water users, industrial water users,and institutional water users to develop alternative best management practicesfor commercial, industrial, and institutional users and an assessment of thepotential statewide water use efficiency improvement in the commercial,industrial, and institutional sectors that would result from implementationof these best management practices. The taskforce, in conjunction with thedepartment, shall submit a report to the Legislature by April 1, 2012, thatshall include a review of multiple sectors within commercial, industrial,and institutional users and that shall recommend water use efficiencystandards for commercial, industrial, and institutional users among varioussectors of water use. The report shall include, but not be limited to, thefollowing:

(a) Appropriate metrics for evaluating commercial, industrial, andinstitutional water use.

(b) Evaluation of water demands for manufacturing processes, goods,and cooling.

(c) Evaluation of public infrastructure necessary for delivery of recycledwater to the commercial, industrial, and institutional sectors.

(d) Evaluation of institutional and economic barriers to increased recycledwater use within the commercial, industrial, and institutional sectors.

(e) Identification of technical feasibility and cost of the best managementpractices to achieve more efficient water use statewide in the commercial,industrial, and institutional sectors that is consistent with the public interestand reflects past investments in water use efficiency.

10608.44. Each state agency shall reduce water use on facilities itoperates to support urban retail water suppliers in meeting the targetidentified in Section 10608.16.

Chapter 4. Agricultural Water Suppliers

10608.48. (a) On or before July 31, 2012, an agricultural water suppliershall implement efficient water management practices pursuant tosubdivisions (b) and (c).

(b) Agricultural water suppliers shall implement all of the followingcritical efficient management practices:

(1) Measure the volume of water delivered to customers with sufficientaccuracy to comply with subdivision (a) of Section 531.10 and to implementparagraph (2).

(2) Adopt a pricing structure for water customers based at least in parton quantity delivered.

� 93

— 12 —Ch. 4

(c) Agricultural water suppliers shall implement additional efficientmanagement practices, including, but not limited to, practices to accomplishall of the following, if the measures are locally cost effective and technicallyfeasible:

(1) Facilitate alternative land use for lands with exceptionally high waterduties or whose irrigation contributes to significant problems, includingdrainage.

(2) Facilitate use of available recycled water that otherwise would notbe used beneficially, meets all health and safety criteria, and does not harmcrops or soils.

(3) Facilitate the financing of capital improvements for on-farm irrigationsystems.

(4) Implement an incentive pricing structure that promotes one or moreof the following goals:

(A) More efficient water use at the farm level.(B) Conjunctive use of groundwater.(C) Appropriate increase of groundwater recharge.(D) Reduction in problem drainage.(E) Improved management of environmental resources.(F) Effective management of all water sources throughout the year by

adjusting seasonal pricing structures based on current conditions.(5) Expand line or pipe distribution systems, and construct regulatory

reservoirs to increase distribution system flexibility and capacity, decreasemaintenance, and reduce seepage.

(6) Increase flexibility in water ordering by, and delivery to, watercustomers within operational limits.

(7) Construct and operate supplier spill and tailwater recovery systems.(8) Increase planned conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater

within the supplier service area.(9) Automate canal control structures.(10) Facilitate or promote customer pump testing and evaluation.(11) Designate a water conservation coordinator who will develop and

implement the water management plan and prepare progress reports.(12) Provide for the availability of water management services to water

users. These services may include, but are not limited to, all of the following:(A) On-farm irrigation and drainage system evaluations.(B) Normal year and real-time irrigation scheduling and crop

evapotranspiration information.(C) Surface water, groundwater, and drainage water quantity and quality

data.(D) Agricultural water management educational programs and materials

for farmers, staff, and the public.(13) Evaluate the policies of agencies that provide the supplier with water

to identify the potential for institutional changes to allow more flexiblewater deliveries and storage.

(14) Evaluate and improve the efficiencies of the supplier’s pumps.

� 93

Ch. 4— 13 —

(d) Agricultural water suppliers shall include in the agricultural watermanagement plans required pursuant to Part 2.8 (commencing with Section10800) a report on which efficient water management practices have beenimplemented and are planned to be implemented, an estimate of the wateruse efficiency improvements that have occurred since the last report, andan estimate of the water use efficiency improvements estimated to occurfive and 10 years in the future. If an agricultural water supplier determinesthat an efficient water management practice is not locally cost effective ortechnically feasible, the supplier shall submit information documenting thatdetermination.

(e) The data shall be reported using a standardized form developedpursuant to Section 10608.52.

(f) An agricultural water supplier may meet the requirements ofsubdivisions (d) and (e) by submitting to the department a water conservationplan submitted to the United States Bureau of Reclamation that meets therequirements described in Section 10828.

(g) On or before December 31, 2013, December 31, 2016, and December31, 2021, the department, in consultation with the board, shall submit to theLegislature a report on the agricultural efficient water management practicesthat have been implemented and are planned to be implemented and anassessment of the manner in which the implementation of those efficientwater management practices has affected and will affect agriculturaloperations, including estimated water use efficiency improvements, if any.

(h) The department may update the efficient water management practicesrequired pursuant to subdivision (c), in consultation with the AgriculturalWater Management Council, the United States Bureau of Reclamation, andthe board. All efficient water management practices for agricultural wateruse pursuant to this chapter shall be adopted or revised by the departmentonly after the department conducts public hearings to allow participationof the diverse geographical areas and interests of the state.

(i) (1) The department shall adopt regulations that provide for a rangeof options that agricultural water suppliers may use or implement to complywith the measurement requirement in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).

(2) The initial adoption of a regulation authorized by this subdivision isdeemed to address an emergency, for purposes of Sections 11346.1 and11349.6 of the Government Code, and the department is hereby exemptedfor that purpose from the requirements of subdivision (b) of Section 11346.1of the Government Code. After the initial adoption of an emergencyregulation pursuant to this subdivision, the department shall not requestapproval from the Office of Administrative Law to readopt the regulationas an emergency regulation pursuant to Section 11346.1 of the GovernmentCode.

� 93

— 14 —Ch. 4

Chapter 5. Sustainable Water Management

10608.50. (a) The department, in consultation with the board, shallpromote implementation of regional water resources management practicesthrough increased incentives and removal of barriers consistent with stateand federal law. Potential changes may include, but are not limited to, allof the following:

(1) Revisions to the requirements for urban and agricultural watermanagement plans.

(2) Revisions to the requirements for integrated regional watermanagement plans.

(3) Revisions to the eligibility for state water management grants andloans.

(4) Revisions to state or local permitting requirements that increase watersupply opportunities, but do not weaken water quality protection under stateand federal law.

(5) Increased funding for research, feasibility studies, and projectconstruction.

(6) Expanding technical and educational support for local land use andwater management agencies.

(b) No later than January 1, 2011, and updated as part of the CaliforniaWater Plan, the department, in consultation with the board, and with publicinput, shall propose new statewide targets, or review and update existingstatewide targets, for regional water resources management practices,including, but not limited to, recycled water, brackish groundwaterdesalination, and infiltration and direct use of urban stormwater runoff.

Chapter 6. Standardized Data Collection

10608.52. (a) The department, in consultation with the board, theCalifornia Bay-Delta Authority or its successor agency, the State Departmentof Public Health, and the Public Utilities Commission, shall develop a singlestandardized water use reporting form to meet the water use informationneeds of each agency, including the needs of urban water suppliers that electto determine and report progress toward achieving targets on a regionalbasis as provided in subdivision (a) of Section 10608.28.

(b) At a minimum, the form shall be developed to accommodateinformation sufficient to assess an urban water supplier’s compliance withconservation targets pursuant to Section 10608.24 and an agricultural watersupplier’s compliance with implementation of efficient water managementpractices pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 10608.48. The form shallaccommodate reporting by urban water suppliers on an individual or regionalbasis as provided in subdivision (a) of Section 10608.28.

� 93

Ch. 4— 15 —

Chapter 7. Funding Provisions

10608.56. (a) On and after July 1, 2016, an urban retail water supplieris not eligible for a water grant or loan awarded or administered by the stateunless the supplier complies with this part.

(b) On and after July 1, 2013, an agricultural water supplier is not eligiblefor a water grant or loan awarded or administered by the state unless thesupplier complies with this part.

(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall determine thatan urban retail water supplier is eligible for a water grant or loan even thoughthe supplier has not met the per capita reductions required pursuant to Section10608.24, if the urban retail water supplier has submitted to the departmentfor approval a schedule, financing plan, and budget, to be included in thegrant or loan agreement, for achieving the per capita reductions. The suppliermay request grant or loan funds to achieve the per capita reductions to theextent the request is consistent with the eligibility requirements applicableto the water funds.

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the department shall determine thatan agricultural water supplier is eligible for a water grant or loan even thoughthe supplier is not implementing all of the efficient water managementpractices described in Section 10608.48, if the agricultural water supplierhas submitted to the department for approval a schedule, financing plan,and budget, to be included in the grant or loan agreement, for implementationof the efficient water management practices. The supplier may request grantor loan funds to implement the efficient water management practices to theextent the request is consistent with the eligibility requirements applicableto the water funds.

(e) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall determine thatan urban retail water supplier is eligible for a water grant or loan even thoughthe supplier has not met the per capita reductions required pursuant to Section10608.24, if the urban retail water supplier has submitted to the departmentfor approval documentation demonstrating that its entire service areaqualifies as a disadvantaged community.

(f) The department shall not deny eligibility to an urban retail watersupplier or agricultural water supplier in compliance with the requirementsof this part and Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 10800), that isparticipating in a multiagency water project, or an integrated regional watermanagement plan, developed pursuant to Section 75026 of the PublicResources Code, solely on the basis that one or more of the agenciesparticipating in the project or plan is not implementing all of the requirementsof this part or Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 10800).

10608.60. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature that funds made availableby Section 75026 of the Public Resources Code should be expended,consistent with Division 43 (commencing with Section 75001) of the PublicResources Code and upon appropriation by the Legislature, for grants toimplement this part. In the allocation of funding, it is the intent of the

� 93

— 16 —Ch. 4

Legislature that the department give consideration to disadvantagedcommunities to assist in implementing the requirements of this part.

(b) It is the intent of the Legislature that funds made available by Section75041 of the Public Resources Code, should be expended, consistent withDivision 43 (commencing with Section 75001) of the Public ResourcesCode and upon appropriation by the Legislature, for direct expenditures toimplement this part.

Chapter 8. Quantifying Agricultural Water Use Efficiency

10608.64. The department, in consultation with the Agricultural WaterManagement Council, academic experts, and other stakeholders, shalldevelop a methodology for quantifying the efficiency of agricultural wateruse. Alternatives to be assessed shall include, but not be limited to,determination of efficiency levels based on crop type or irrigation systemdistribution uniformity. On or before December 31, 2011, the departmentshall report to the Legislature on a proposed methodology and a plan forimplementation. The plan shall include the estimated implementation costsand the types of data needed to support the methodology. Nothing in thissection authorizes the department to implement a methodology establishedpursuant to this section.

SEC. 2. Section 10631.5 of the Water Code is amended to read:10631.5. (a) (1) Beginning January 1, 2009, the terms of, and eligibility

for, a water management grant or loan made to an urban water supplier andawarded or administered by the department, state board, or CaliforniaBay-Delta Authority or its successor agency shall be conditioned on theimplementation of the water demand management measures described inSection 10631, as determined by the department pursuant to subdivision(b).

(2) For the purposes of this section, water management grants and loansinclude funding for programs and projects for surface water or groundwaterstorage, recycling, desalination, water conservation, water supply reliability,and water supply augmentation. This section does not apply to watermanagement projects funded by the federal American Recovery andReinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the department shall determine thatan urban water supplier is eligible for a water management grant or loaneven though the supplier is not implementing all of the water demandmanagement measures described in Section 10631, if the urban watersupplier has submitted to the department for approval a schedule, financingplan, and budget, to be included in the grant or loan agreement, forimplementation of the water demand management measures. The suppliermay request grant or loan funds to implement the water demand managementmeasures to the extent the request is consistent with the eligibilityrequirements applicable to the water management funds.

� 93

Ch. 4— 17 —

(4) (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the department shall determinethat an urban water supplier is eligible for a water management grant orloan even though the supplier is not implementing all of the water demandmanagement measures described in Section 10631, if an urban water suppliersubmits to the department for approval documentation demonstrating thata water demand management measure is not locally cost effective. If thedepartment determines that the documentation submitted by the urban watersupplier fails to demonstrate that a water demand management measure isnot locally cost effective, the department shall notify the urban water supplierand the agency administering the grant or loan program within 120 daysthat the documentation does not satisfy the requirements for an exemption,and include in that notification a detailed statement to support thedetermination.

(B) For purposes of this paragraph, “not locally cost effective” meansthat the present value of the local benefits of implementing a water demandmanagement measure is less than the present value of the local costs ofimplementing that measure.

(b) (1) The department, in consultation with the state board and theCalifornia Bay-Delta Authority or its successor agency, and after solicitingpublic comment regarding eligibility requirements, shall develop eligibilityrequirements to implement the requirement of paragraph (1) of subdivision(a). In establishing these eligibility requirements, the department shall doboth of the following:

(A) Consider the conservation measures described in the Memorandumof Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California, andalternative conservation approaches that provide equal or greater watersavings.

(B) Recognize the different legal, technical, fiscal, and practical rolesand responsibilities of wholesale water suppliers and retail water suppliers.

(2) (A) For the purposes of this section, the department shall determinewhether an urban water supplier is implementing all of the water demandmanagement measures described in Section 10631 based on either, or acombination, of the following:

(i) Compliance on an individual basis.(ii) Compliance on a regional basis. Regional compliance shall require

participation in a regional conservation program consisting of two or moreurban water suppliers that achieves the level of conservation or waterefficiency savings equivalent to the amount of conservation or savingsachieved if each of the participating urban water suppliers implemented thewater demand management measures. The urban water supplieradministering the regional program shall provide participating urban watersuppliers and the department with data to demonstrate that the regionalprogram is consistent with this clause. The department shall review the datato determine whether the urban water suppliers in the regional program aremeeting the eligibility requirements.

(B) The department may require additional information for anydetermination pursuant to this section.

� 93

— 18 —Ch. 4

(3) The department shall not deny eligibility to an urban water supplierin compliance with the requirements of this section that is participating ina multiagency water project, or an integrated regional water managementplan, developed pursuant to Section 75026 of the Public Resources Code,solely on the basis that one or more of the agencies participating in theproject or plan is not implementing all of the water demand managementmeasures described in Section 10631.

(c) In establishing guidelines pursuant to the specific fundingauthorization for any water management grant or loan program subject tothis section, the agency administering the grant or loan program shall includein the guidelines the eligibility requirements developed by the departmentpursuant to subdivision (b).

(d) Upon receipt of a water management grant or loan application by anagency administering a grant and loan program subject to this section, theagency shall request an eligibility determination from the department withrespect to the requirements of this section. The department shall respond tothe request within 60 days of the request.

(e) The urban water supplier may submit to the department copies of itsannual reports and other relevant documents to assist the department indetermining whether the urban water supplier is implementing or schedulingthe implementation of water demand management activities. In addition,for urban water suppliers that are signatories to the Memorandum ofUnderstanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California andsubmit biennial reports to the California Urban Water Conservation Councilin accordance with the memorandum, the department may use these reportsto assist in tracking the implementation of water demand managementmeasures.

(f) This section shall remain in effect only until July 1, 2016, and as ofthat date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted beforeJuly 1, 2016, deletes or extends that date.

SEC. 3. Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 10800) of Division 6 of theWater Code is repealed.

SEC. 4. Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 10800) is added to Division6 of the Water Code, to read:

PART 2.8. AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING

Chapter 1. General Declarations and Policy

10800. This part shall be known and may be cited as the AgriculturalWater Management Planning Act.

10801. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) The waters of the state are a limited and renewable resource.(b) The California Constitution requires that water in the state be used

in a reasonable and beneficial manner.(c) Urban water districts are required to adopt water management plans.

� 93

Ch. 4— 19 —

(d) The conservation of agricultural water supplies is of great statewideconcern.

(e) There is a great amount of reuse of delivered water, both inside andoutside the water service areas.

(f) Significant noncrop beneficial uses are associated with agriculturalwater use, including streamflows and wildlife habitat.

(g) Significant opportunities exist in some areas, through improvedirrigation water management, to conserve water or to reduce the quantityof highly saline or toxic drainage water.

(h) Changes in water management practices should be carefully plannedand implemented to minimize adverse effects on other beneficial usescurrently being served.

(i) Agricultural water suppliers that receive water from the federal CentralValley Project are required by federal law to prepare and implement waterconservation plans.

(j) Agricultural water users applying for a permit to appropriate waterfrom the board are required to prepare and implement water conservationplans.

10802. The Legislature finds and declares that all of the following arethe policies of the state:

(a) The conservation of water shall be pursued actively to protect boththe people of the state and the state’s water resources.

(b) The conservation of agricultural water supplies shall be an importantcriterion in public decisions with regard to water.

(c) Agricultural water suppliers shall be required to prepare watermanagement plans to achieve conservation of water.

Chapter 2. Definitions

10810. Unless the context otherwise requires, the definitions set forthin this chapter govern the construction of this part.

10811. “Agricultural water management plan” or “plan” means anagricultural water management plan prepared pursuant to this part.

10812. “Agricultural water supplier” has the same meaning as definedin Section 10608.12.

10813. “Customer” means a purchaser of water from a water supplierwho uses water for agricultural purposes.

10814. “Person” means any individual, firm, association, organization,partnership, business, trust, corporation, company, public agency, or anyagency of that entity.

10815. “Public agency” means any city, county, city and county, specialdistrict, or other public entity.

10816. “Urban water supplier” has the same meaning as set forth inSection 10617.

� 93

— 20 —Ch. 4

10817. “Water conservation” means the efficient management of waterresources for beneficial uses, preventing waste, or accomplishing additionalbenefits with the same amount of water.

Chapter 3. Agricultural Water Management Plans

Article 1. General Provisions

10820. (a) An agricultural water supplier shall prepare and adopt anagricultural water management plan in the manner set forth in this chapteron or before December 31, 2012, and shall update that plan on December31, 2015, and on or before December 31 every five years thereafter.

(b) Every supplier that becomes an agricultural water supplier afterDecember 31, 2012, shall prepare and adopt an agricultural watermanagement plan within one year after the date it has become an agriculturalwater supplier.

(c) A water supplier that indirectly provides water to customers foragricultural purposes shall not prepare a plan pursuant to this part withoutthe consent of each agricultural water supplier that directly provides thatwater to its customers.

10821. (a) An agricultural water supplier required to prepare a planpursuant to this part shall notify each city or county within which the supplierprovides water supplies that the agricultural water supplier will be preparingthe plan or reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes tothe plan. The agricultural water supplier may consult with, and obtaincomments from, each city or county that receives notice pursuant to thissubdivision.

(b) The amendments to, or changes in, the plan shall be adopted andsubmitted in the manner set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section10840).

Article 2. Contents of Plans

10825. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this part to allowlevels of water management planning commensurate with the numbers ofcustomers served and the volume of water supplied.

(b) This part does not require the implementation of water conservationprograms or practices that are not locally cost effective.

10826. An agricultural water management plan shall be adopted inaccordance with this chapter. The plan shall do all of the following:

(a) Describe the agricultural water supplier and the service area, includingall of the following:

(1) Size of the service area.(2) Location of the service area and its water management facilities.(3) Terrain and soils.(4) Climate.

� 93

Ch. 4— 21 —

(5) Operating rules and regulations.(6) Water delivery measurements or calculations.(7) Water rate schedules and billing.(8) Water shortage allocation policies.(b) Describe the quantity and quality of water resources of the agricultural

water supplier, including all of the following:(1) Surface water supply.(2) Groundwater supply.(3) Other water supplies.(4) Source water quality monitoring practices.(5) Water uses within the agricultural water supplier’s service area,

including all of the following:(A) Agricultural.(B) Environmental.(C) Recreational.(D) Municipal and industrial.(E) Groundwater recharge.(F) Transfers and exchanges.(G) Other water uses.(6) Drainage from the water supplier’s service area.(7) Water accounting, including all of the following:(A) Quantifying the water supplier’s water supplies.(B) Tabulating water uses.(C) Overall water budget.(8) Water supply reliability.(c) Include an analysis, based on available information, of the effect of

climate change on future water supplies.(d) Describe previous water management activities.(e) Include in the plan the water use efficiency information required

pursuant to Section 10608.48.10827. Agricultural water suppliers that are members of the Agricultural

Water Management Council, and that submit water management plans tothat council in accordance with the “Memorandum of UnderstandingRegarding Efficient Water Management Practices By Agricultural WaterSuppliers In California,” dated January 1, 1999, may submit the watermanagement plans identifying water demand management measures currentlybeing implemented, or scheduled for implementation, to satisfy therequirements of Section 10826.

10828. (a) Agricultural water suppliers that are required to submit waterconservation plans to the United States Bureau of Reclamation pursuant toeither the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575)or the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982, or both, may submit those waterconservation plans to satisfy the requirements of Section 10826, if both ofthe following apply:

(1) The agricultural water supplier has adopted and submitted the waterconservation plan to the United States Bureau of Reclamation within theprevious four years.

� 93

— 22 —Ch. 4

(2) The United States Bureau of Reclamation has accepted the waterconservation plan as adequate.

(b) This part does not require agricultural water suppliers that are requiredto submit water conservation plans to the United States Bureau ofReclamation pursuant to either the Central Valley Project Improvement Act(Public Law 102-575) or the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982, or both, toprepare and adopt water conservation plans according to a schedule that isdifferent from that required by the United States Bureau of Reclamation.

10829. An agricultural water supplier may satisfy the requirements ofthis part by adopting an urban water management plan pursuant to Part 2.6(commencing with Section 10610) or by participation in areawide, regional,watershed, or basinwide water management planning if those plans meetor exceed the requirements of this part.

Article 3. Adoption and Implementation of Plans

10840. Every agricultural water supplier shall prepare its plan pursuantto Article 2 (commencing with Section 10825).

10841. Prior to adopting a plan, the agricultural water supplier shallmake the proposed plan available for public inspection, and shall hold apublic hearing on the plan. Prior to the hearing, notice of the time and placeof hearing shall be published within the jurisdiction of the publicly ownedagricultural water supplier pursuant to Section 6066 of the GovernmentCode. A privately owned agricultural water supplier shall provide anequivalent notice within its service area and shall provide a reasonablyequivalent opportunity that would otherwise be afforded through a publichearing process for interested parties to provide input on the plan. After thehearing, the plan shall be adopted as prepared or as modified during or afterthe hearing.

10842. An agricultural water supplier shall implement the plan adoptedpursuant to this chapter in accordance with the schedule set forth in its plan,as determined by the governing body of the agricultural water supplier.

10843. (a) An agricultural water supplier shall submit to the entitiesidentified in subdivision (b) a copy of its plan no later than 30 days afterthe adoption of the plan. Copies of amendments or changes to the plansshall be submitted to the entities identified in subdivision (b) within 30 daysafter the adoption of the amendments or changes.

(b) An agricultural water supplier shall submit a copy of its plan andamendments or changes to the plan to each of the following entities:

(1) The department.(2) Any city, county, or city and county within which the agricultural

water supplier provides water supplies.(3) Any groundwater management entity within which jurisdiction the

agricultural water supplier extracts or provides water supplies.(4) Any urban water supplier within which jurisdiction the agricultural

water supplier provides water supplies.

� 93

Ch. 4— 23 —

(5) Any city or county library within which jurisdiction the agriculturalwater supplier provides water supplies.

(6) The California State Library.(7) Any local agency formation commission serving a county within

which the agricultural water supplier provides water supplies.10844. (a) Not later than 30 days after the date of adopting its plan, the

agricultural water supplier shall make the plan available for public reviewon the agricultural water supplier’s Internet Web site.

(b) An agricultural water supplier that does not have an Internet Website shall submit to the department, not later than 30 days after the date ofadopting its plan, a copy of the adopted plan in an electronic format. Thedepartment shall make the plan available for public review on thedepartment’s Internet Web site.

10845. (a) The department shall prepare and submit to the Legislature,on or before December 31, 2013, and thereafter in the years ending in sixand years ending in one, a report summarizing the status of the plans adoptedpursuant to this part.

(b) The report prepared by the department shall identify the outstandingelements of any plan adopted pursuant to this part. The report shall includean evaluation of the effectiveness of this part in promoting efficientagricultural water management practices and recommendations relating toproposed changes to this part, as appropriate.

(c) The department shall provide a copy of the report to each agriculturalwater supplier that has submitted its plan to the department. The departmentshall also prepare reports and provide data for any legislative hearingdesigned to consider the effectiveness of plans submitted pursuant to thispart.

(d) This section does not authorize the department, in preparing the report,to approve, disapprove, or critique individual plans submitted pursuant tothis part.

Chapter 4. Miscellaneous Provisions

10850. (a) Any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void,or annul the acts or decisions of an agricultural water supplier on the groundsof noncompliance with this part shall be commenced as follows:

(1) An action or proceeding alleging failure to adopt a plan shall becommenced within 18 months after that adoption is required by this part.

(2) Any action or proceeding alleging that a plan, or action taken pursuantto the plan, does not comply with this part shall be commenced within 120days after submitting the plan or amendments to the plan to entities inaccordance with Section 10844 or the taking of that action.

(b) In an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annula plan, or an action taken pursuant to the plan by an agricultural watersupplier, on the grounds of noncompliance with this part, the inquiry shallextend only to whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse

� 93

— 24 —Ch. 4

of discretion is established if the agricultural water supplier has notproceeded in a manner required by law, or if the action by the agriculturalwater supplier is not supported by substantial evidence.

10851. The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13(commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) does notapply to the preparation and adoption of plans pursuant to this part. Thispart does not exempt projects for implementation of the plan or for expandedor additional water supplies from the California Environmental Quality Act.

10852. An agricultural water supplier is not eligible for a water grantor loan awarded or administered by the state unless the supplier complieswith this part.

10853. No agricultural water supplier that provides water to less than25,000 irrigated acres, excluding recycled water, shall be required toimplement the requirements of this part or Part 2.55 (commencing withSection 10608) unless sufficient funding has specifically been provided tothat water supplier for these purposes.

SEC. 5. This act shall take effect only if Senate Bill 1 and Senate Bill6 of the 2009–10 Seventh Extraordinary Session of the Legislature areenacted and become effective.

O

� 93

Ch. 4— 25 —

APPENDIX B

DWR UWMP Checklist Organized

by Subject

Appendix F Checklist Final

F - 1

(Appendix F from DWR UWMP Guidebook)

UWMP Checklist

This checklist is developed directly from the Urban Water Management Planning Act and SB X7-7. It is provided to support water suppliers during preparation of their UWMPs. Two versions of the UWMP Checklist are provided – the first one is organized according to the California Water Code and the second checklist according to subject matter. The two checklists contain duplicate information and the water supplier should use whichever checklist is more convenient. In the event that information or recommendations in these tables are inconsistent with, conflict with, or omit the requirements of the Act or applicable laws, the Act or other laws shall prevail.

Each water supplier submitting an UWMP can also provide DWR with the UWMP location of the required element by completing the last column of eitherchecklist. This will support DWR in its review of these UWMPs. The completed form can be included with the UWMP.

If an item does not pertain to a water supplier, then state the UWMP requirement and note that it does not apply to the agency. For example, if a water supplier does not use groundwater as a water supply source, then there should be a statement in the UWMP that groundwater is not a water supply source.


F - 2

Checklist Arranged by Water Code Section

CWC Section

UWMP Requirement

Subject

Guidebook Location

UWMP Location

(Optional Column for

Agency Use)

10608.20(b) Retail suppliers shall adopt a 2020 water use

target using one of four methods. Baselines and Targets

Section 5.7 and App E

10608.20(e) Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets

Chapter 5 and App E

10608.22 Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.


Section 5.7.2

10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their interim target by December 31, 2015.



10608.24(d)(2) If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.


Section 5.8.2

10608.26(a) Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and Implementation

Section 10.3

10608.36 Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.


Section 5.1

10608.40 Retail suppliers shall report on their progress in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form.



10620(b) Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.

Plan Preparation Section 2.1

10620(d)(2) Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 2.5.2


F - 3

10620(f) Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability Assessment

Section 7.4

10621(b) Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan.


Section 10.2.1

10621(d) Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2015 plan to the department by July 1, 2016.


Sections 10.3.1 and 10.4

10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description

Section 3.1

10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier.

System Description

Section 3.3

10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.

System Description and Baselines and Targets

Sections 3.4 and 5.4

10631(a) Provide population projections for 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2035.

System Description

Section 3.4

10631(a) Describe other demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.

System Description

Section 3.4

10631(b) Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2015, 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2035.

System Supplies Chapter 6

10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier.

System Supplies Section 6.2

10631(b)(1) Indicate whether a groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 6.2.2

10631(b)(2) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 6.2.1

10631(b)(2) Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.


10631(b)(2) For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as overdrafted, or projected to become overdrafted. Describe efforts by the supplier to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition.


10631(b)(3) Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of



F - 4

groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years

10631(b)(4) Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.

System Supplies Sections 6.2 and 6.9

10631(c)(1) Describe the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or climatic shortage.


Section 7.1

10631(c)(1) Provide data for an average water year, a single dry water year, and multiple dry water years


Section 7.2

10631(c)(2) For any water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, describe plans to supplement or replace that source.


Section 7.1

10631(d) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long-term basis.


10631(e)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors.

System Water Use

Section 4.2

10631(e)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for the most recent 12-month period available.

System Water Use

Section 4.3

10631(f)(1) Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures


10631(f)(2) Wholesale suppliers shall describe specific demand management measures listed in code, their distribution system asset management program, and supplier assistance program.



10631(g) Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and multiple-dry years.


10631(h) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply.


10631(i) CUWCC members may submit their 2013-2014 CUWCC BMP annual reports in lieu of, or in addition to, describing the DMM implementation in their UWMPs. This option is only allowable if the supplier has been found to be in full compliance with the CUWCC MOU.


Section 9.5

10631(j) Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale



F - 5

supplier(s) – if any - with water use projections from that source.

10631(j) Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.


10631.1(a) Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.

System Water Use

Section 4.5

10632(a) and 10632(a)(1)

Provide an urban water shortage contingency analysis that specifies stages of action and an outline of specific water supply conditions at each stage.

Water Shortage Contingency Planning

Section 8.1

10632(a)(2) Provide an estimate of the minimum water supply available during each of the next three water years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the agency.


Section 8.9

10632(a)(3) Identify actions to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in case of a catastrophic interruption of water supplies.


Section 8.8

10632(a)(4) Identify mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices during water shortages.


Section 8.2

10632(a)(5) Specify consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages.


Section 8.4

10632(a)(6) Indicated penalties or charges for excessive use, where applicable.


Section 8.3

10632(a)(7) Provide an analysis of the impacts of each of the actions and conditions in the water shortage contingency analysis on the revenues and expenditures of the urban water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts.


Section 8.6

10632(a)(8) Provide a draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance.


Section 8.7

10632(a)(9) Indicate a mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the water shortage contingency analysis.


Section 8.5

10633 For wastewater and recycled water, coordinate with local water, wastewater, groundwater, and planning agencies that operate within the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled Water)

Section 6.5.1


F - 6

10633(a) Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier's service area. Include quantification of the amount of wastewater collected and treated and the methods of wastewater disposal.


Section 6.5.2

10633(b) Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.


Section 6.5.2.2

10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.


Section 6.5.3 and 6.5.4

10633(d) Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.


Section 6.5.4

10633(e) Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.


Section 6.5.4

10633(f) Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.


Section 6.5.5

10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.


Section 6.5.5

10634 Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability


Section 7.1

10635(a) Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and multiple dry water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.


Section 7.3

10635(b) Provide supporting documentation that Water Shortage Contingency Plan has been, or will be, provided to any city or county within which it provides water, no later than 60 days after the submission of the plan to DWR.


Section 10.4.4

10642 Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan.



F - 7

10642 Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan.


Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5

10642 The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.


Sections 10.2.1

10642 Provide supporting documentation that the plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.


Section 10.3.1

10644(a) Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.


Section 10.4.3

10644(a)(1) Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.


Section 10.4.4

10644(a)(2) The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.


Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2

10645 Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.


Section 10.5

Checklist Arranged by Subject

CWC Section

UWMP Requirement

Subject

Guidebook Location

UWMP Location

(Optional Column for

Agency Use)

10620(b) Every person that becomes an urban water

supplier shall adopt an urban water

management plan within one year after it has

become an urban water supplier.

Plan Preparation Section 2.1

10620(d)(2) Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management



F - 8

agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

10642 Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan.


10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description

Section 3.1

10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier.

System Description

Section 3.3

10631(a) Provide population projections for 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2035.

System Description

Section 3.4

10631(a) Describe other demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.

System Description

Section 3.4

10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.

System Description and Baselines and Targets


10631(e)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors.

System Water Use

Section 4.2

10631(e)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for the most recent 12-month period available.

System Water Use

Section 4.3

10631.1(a) Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.

System Water Use

Section 4.5

10608.20(b) Retail suppliers shall adopt a 2020 water use target using one of four methods.



10608.20(e) Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily

per capita water use, urban water use target,

interim urban water use target, and

compliance daily per capita water use, along

with the bases for determining those

estimates, including references to supporting

data.


Chapter 5 and App E

10608.22 Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use

reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of

base daily per capita water use of the 5 year

baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers

base GPCD is at or below 100.


Section 5.7.2

10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their interim

target by December 31, 2015. Baselines and Targets


10608.24(d)(2) If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary


Section 5.8.2


F - 9

events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

10608.36 Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.


Section 5.1

10608.40 Retail suppliers shall report on their progress in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form.



10631(b) Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2015, 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2035.

System Supplies Chapter 6

10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier.


10631(b)(1) Indicate whether a groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.


10631(b)(2) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 6.2.1

10631(b)(2) Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.


10631(b)(2) For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as overdrafted, or projected to become overdrafted. Describe efforts by the supplier to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition.


10631(b)(3) Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years


10631(b)(4) Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.

System Supplies Sections 6.2 and 6.9

10631(d) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long-term basis.


10631(g) Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and multiple-dry years.


10631(h) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply.



F - 10

10631(j) Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) – if any - with water use projections from that source.


10631(j) Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.


10633 For wastewater and recycled water, coordinate with local water, wastewater, groundwater, and planning agencies that operate within the supplier's service area.


Section 6.5.1

10633(a) Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier's service area. Include quantification of the amount of wastewater collected and treated and the methods of wastewater disposal.


Section 6.5.2

10633(b) Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.


Section 6.5.2.2

10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.


Section 6.5.3 and 6.5.4

10633(d) Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.


Section 6.5.4

10633(e) Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.


Section 6.5.4

10633(f) Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.


Section 6.5.5

10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.


Section 6.5.5

10620(f) Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.


Section 7.4

10631(c)(1) Describe the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or climatic shortage.


Section 7.1


F - 11

10631(c)(1) Provide data for an average water year, a single dry water year, and multiple dry water years


Section 7.2

10631(c)(2) For any water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, describe plans to supplement or replace that source.


Section 7.1

10634 Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability


Section 7.1

10635(a) Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and multiple dry water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.


Section 7.3

10632(a) and 10632(a)(1)

Provide an urban water shortage contingency analysis that specifies stages of action and an outline of specific water supply conditions at each stage.


Section 8.1

10632(a)(2) Provide an estimate of the minimum water supply available during each of the next three water years based on the driest three-year historic sequence for the agency.


Section 8.9

10632(a)(3) Identify actions to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in case of a catastrophic interruption of water supplies.


Section 8.8

10632(a)(4) Identify mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices during water shortages.


Section 8.2

10632(a)(5) Specify consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages.


Section 8.4

10632(a)(6) Indicated penalties or charges for excessive use, where applicable.


Section 8.3

10632(a)(7) Provide an analysis of the impacts of each of the actions and conditions in the water shortage contingency analysis on the revenues and expenditures of the urban water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts.


Section 8.6

10632(a)(8) Provide a draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance.


Section 8.7

10632(a)(9) Indicate a mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the water shortage contingency analysis.


Section 8.5


F - 12

10631(f)(1) Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.



10631(f)(2) Wholesale suppliers shall describe specific demand management measures listed in code, their distribution system asset management program, and supplier assistance program.



10631(i) CUWCC members may submit their 2013-2014 CUWCC BMP annual reports in lieu of, or in addition to, describing the DMM implementation in their UWMPs. This option is only allowable if the supplier has been found to be in full compliance with the CUWCC MOU.


Section 9.5

10608.26(a) Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets.


Section 10.3

10621(b) Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan.


Section 10.2.1

10621(d) Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2015 plan to the department by July 1, 2016.


Sections 10.3.1 and 10.4

10635(b) Provide supporting documentation that Water Shortage Contingency Plan has been, or will be, provided to any city or county within which it provides water, no later than 60 days after the submission of the plan to DWR.


Section 10.4.4

10642 Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan.


Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5

10642 The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.


Sections 10.2.1

10642 Provide supporting documentation that the plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.


Section 10.3.1

10644(a) Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.


Section 10.4.3


F - 13

10644(a)(1) Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.


Section 10.4.4

10644(a)(2) The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.


Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2

10645 Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.


Section 10.5

APPENDIX C

Notice of Public Hearing and Resolution for Plan Adoption

APPENDIX D

Population Tool Worksheets for

SBX7-7 Calculations

APPENDIX E

Supply Capability and Projected

Demands for Single-Dry Year, Multiple-Dry Year, and Average

Conditions (Tables 2-4, 2-5 and 2-6, respectively) from 2015

Metropolitan UWMP

WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY 2-15

Table 2-4 Single Dry-Year

Supply Capability1 and Projected Demands Repeat of 1977 Hydrology

(Acre-feet per year)

Forecast Year 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Current Programs In-Region Supplies and Programs 693,000 774,000 852,000 956,000 992,000 California Aqueduct2 691,000 712,000 723,000 749,000 749,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Total Supply Available3 1,451,000 1,457,000 1,456,000 1,455,000 1,454,000 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000

Capability of Current Programs 2,584,000 2,686,000 2,775,000 2,905,000 2,941,000

Demands Total Demands on Metropolitan 1,731,000 1,784,000 1,826,000 1,878,000 1,919,000 IID-SDCWA Transfers and Canal Linings 274,000 282,000 282,000 282,000 282,000

Total Metropolitan Deliveries5 2,005,000 2,066,000 2,108,000 2,160,000 2,201,000

Surplus 579,000 620,000 667,000 745,000 740,000

Programs Under Development In-Region Supplies and Programs 43,000 80,000 118,000 160,000 200,000 California Aqueduct 20,000 20,000 198,000 198,000 198,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Total Supply Available3 155,000 125,000 75,000 25,000 25,000 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 0 0 0 0 0 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 0 0 0 0 0

Capability of Proposed Programs 63,000 100,000 316,000 358,000 398,000

Potential Surplus 642,000 720,000 983,000 1,103,000 1,138,000 1 Represents Supply Capability for resource programs under listed year type. 2 California Aqueduct includes Central Valley transfers and storage program supplies conveyed by the aqueduct.3 Colorado River Aqueduct includes programs, IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings conveyed by

the aqueduct. 4 Maximum CRA deliveries limited to 1.20 MAF including IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings. 5 Total demands are adjusted to include IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings. These supplies are

calculated as local supply, but need to be shown for the purposes of CRA capacity limit calculations without double counting.

2-16 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY

Table 2-5

Multiple Dry-Year Supply Capability1 and Projected Demands

Repeat of 1990-1992 Hydrology (Acre-feet per year)

Forecast Year 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Current Programs In-Region Supplies and Programs 239,000 272,000 303,000 346,000 364,000 California Aqueduct2 664,000 682,000 687,000 696,000 696,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Total Supply Available3 1,403,000 1,691,000 1,690,000 1,689,000 1,605,000 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 Capability of Current Programs 2,103,000 2,154,000 2,190,000 2,242,000 2,260,000 Demands Total Demands on Metropolitan 1,727,000 1,836,000 1,889,000 1,934,000 1,976,000 IID-SDCWA Transfers and Canal Linings 274,000 282,000 282,000 282,000 282,000


Surplus 102,000 36,000 19,000 26,000 2,000 Programs Under Development In-Region Supplies and Programs 36,000 73,000 110,000 151,000 192,000 California Aqueduct 7,000 7,000 94,000 94,000 94,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Total Supply Available3 80,000 75,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 0 0 0 0 0 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 0 0 0 0 0 Capability of Proposed Programs 43,000 80,000 204,000 245,000 286,000

Potential Surplus 145,000 116,000 223,000 271,000 288,000 1 Represents Supply Capability for resource programs under listed year type. 2 California Aqueduct includes Central Valley transfers and storage program supplies conveyed by the aqueduct. 3 Colorado River Aqueduct includes programs, IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings conveyed by

the aqueduct. 4 Maximum CRA deliveries limited to 1.20 MAF including IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings. 5 Total demands are adjusted to include IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings. These supplies are


WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY 2-17

Table 2-6 Average Year

Supply Capability1 and Projected Demands Average of 1922-2012 Hydrologies

(Acre-feet per year)

Forecast Year 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Current Programs In-Region Supplies and Programs 693,000 774,000 852,000 956,000 992,000 California Aqueduct2 1,555,000 1,576,000 1,606,000 1,632,000 1,632,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Total Supply Available3 1,468,000 1,488,000 1,484,000 1,471,000 1,460,000 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 Capability of Current Programs 3,448,000 3,550,000 3,658,000 3,788,000 3,824,000 Demands Total Demands on Metropolitan 1,586,000 1,636,000 1,677,000 1,726,000 1,765,000 IID-SDCWA Transfers and Canal Linings 274,000 282,000 282,000 282,000 282,000


Surplus 1,588,000 1,632,000 1,699,000 1,780,000 1,777,000 Programs Under Development In-Region Supplies and Programs 43,000 80,000 118,000 160,000 200,000 California Aqueduct 20,000 20,000 268,000 268,000 268,000 Colorado River Aqueduct Total Supply Available3 5,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 0 0 0 0 0 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 0 0 0 0 0 Capability of Proposed Programs 63,000 100,000 386,000 428,000 468,000

Potential Surplus 1,651,000 1,732,000 2,085,000 2,208,000 2,245,000 1Represents Supply Capability for resource programs under listed year type. 2California Aqueduct includes Central Valley transfers and storage program supplies conveyed by the aqueduct. 3Colorado River Aqueduct includes programs, IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings conveyed by

the aqueduct. 4Maximum CRA deliveries limited to 1.20 MAF including IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings. 5 Total demands are adjusted to include IID-SDCWA transfer and exchange and canal linings. These supplies are


APPENDIX F

AWWA Water Loss Reporting

Worksheets

APPENDIX G

MSWD Water Regulations & Services Ordinance No. 93-3

APPENDIX H

Summary of MSWD Conservation

BMPs (2011-2015)

mission springs water district mswd 2015 uwmp report.pdfmission springs water district 2015 urban...

Documents