Water Supply PlanningA Legal Overview

Edward J. CaseyWeston Benshoof Rochefort Rubalcava & MacCuish

333 South Hope Street, 16th FloorLos Angeles, California 90071

(213) 576-1005, ecasey@wbcounsel.comMay 18, 2004

Overview of Presentation

►Review of Case Law Leading Up To SB 610/221

►Review SB 610/221 (Enacted in 2002)

►Review Legal Requirements for UWMPs

►Identify Open Questions

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►Not Many CEQA Cases Concerning Water Supply Pre - 1990s

►Stanislaus (1995)►One of First CEQA Cases Dealing with Water Supply

►25-Year, Phased Project

►Firm Water Supply Only Identified For First Phase (5 years)

►EIR Invalidated Because No Analysis of Long-Term Water Supplies

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►County of Amador (1999)►CEQA Challenge To Water Agency’s Adoption of

Long-Term Water Supply Program

►Program Planned For Additional Water Supplies To Meet Anticipated Growth In Draft General Plan

►EIR Invalidated For Lack of Analysis of Growth Impacts From Additional Water Supplies

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►Newhall Ranch – Trial Court Decision (2000)►Three Sources of Waters – Reclaimed, Flood Flows,

SWP

►SWP► Cannot Assume Full Contractual Entitlements► Only Evidence Before Court Was Historical Deliveries

►Flood Flows► Inadequate Evidence Re Ability of Aquifer To Store

Water

►Death Knell of “Will Serve” Letter

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►“Newhall II” (2003)►Pre – 610/221 EIR

►Water Supply Analysis Assumes 100% SWP Entitlements During Wet Years, 50% During Dry Years

►EIR Struck Down► Insufficient Evidence Supporting Assumptions

► Key Factor → SWP System Not Fully Built Out

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221►PCL/Monterey Amendments

►“Paper Water”► Full SWP Entitlement Is A “Hope,”► “Actual, Reliable” Water Supply Less Than Entitlement

►Connection Between Land Use Planning and Water Supply

► Condemns Land Use Planning Based On “Paper Water”

►Worst Case Scenario► Need To Analyze Long-Term Shortage Scenario

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►Save Our Peninsula (Monterey County ) (2001)

►Groundwater Overdraft

►Multiple Issues Need To Be Analyzed

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►Napa Citizens (2001)►Airport Development Project

►Source of Water Identified

►EIR Still Struck Down► Water Source Still Not Firm; Agreements Still Needed

► Not Need Guaranteed Source, But Need To Analyze Back-up Source (Worst Case Scenario)

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►Friends of Eel River (2003)►Sonoma County Water Agency

► Proposed Project to Increase Water Diversion from Russian River

►EIR Struck Down Because No Analysis of PG&E Projects That Would Decrease Amount of Water Discharged into Russian River

CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221

►San Joaquin Raptor (2003)►New UC Campus at Merced

►Proposed Source of Water Was Groundwater► Basin Near Overdraft

►EIR Upheld Based on City’s Water Supply Plan► City’s Proposed Supply Projects Provide Sufficient

Basis to Conclude No Significant Water Impacts

Lessons Learned►Build It, and Water Will Follow

►Days Are Over►Demonstrate Long-Term Supplies Based on Evidence

►Need To Address Worst Case Scenarios►Drought/Loss of Supplies/Third Party Actions

►Groundwater Carries Special Problems

►Connection Between Water Supply Planning and Land Use Planning

►Not Need Guaranteed Water Supply►Reasonable Probability/Certainty

SB 610/221►Essential Elements

►Demonstrate Sufficient Water Supply to Meet Project and Cumulative Demand in Normal, Single and Multi-Dry Years Over 20 Year Horizon

►List of Qualifying Projects► 500 residential units or equivalent water demand

►Substantial Evidence Test Applies

►Projections; Not Guarantee

►Can Rely on Future Water Supplies Depending on:► Contracts, Capital Budget, Permits, Water Rights

►Special Rules For Groundwater

Guideline Documents

►DWR’s Guidelines for SB 610/221

►DWR’s Guidelines for Assessing State Project Water

►MWD’s Reliability Report of 2003

UWMPs

►Urban Water Management Plans►610/221 Both Provide That Information and Projections

in UWMP May Be Used in 610/221 Reports

►UWMPs Prepared Every Five Years

►New Requirements Re Groundwater

►CLWA’s UWMP Challenged in Court ►Challenge Rejected by Trial Court

► Heavy Reliance on Substantial Evidence Test and Expert Opinion

Open Legal Questions

►Attack on Plan Documents►UWMPs, MWD’s Reliability Report, Etc.

►When Can Rely, Or Not Rely, On Plan Documents?

Open Legal Questions

►Groundwater As Source► Issue Is Legal Entitlement to Produce Groundwater

and Third Party Impacts

►Types of Basins► Adjudicated

► Managed But Not Adjudicated

► Neither Adjudicated Nor Managed► Red Flag

Open Legal Questions

►Proving Likelihood of Additional Water Supply in Future►Required to Show Permits, Plans, Contracts, Capital

Budgets

►When Are Proposed Plans Sufficiently Ripe?

Open Legal Questions

►Worst Case Planning – How Much Needed?►Existing Supplies

►Back-up Plans

Open Legal Questions

►Connection Between Land Use Planning and Water Supply Planning►Who Does What and When?