Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAmended Otay Water District 2015 UWMP_with App. L 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Update Prepared for Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, California 91978 MAY 2016 Amended June 2021 CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc 402 W. Broadway Suite 1450 San Diego, CA 92101        CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC III  Contents  Section Page  Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. vii   Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1‐1  1.1 Changes to the California Urban Water Management Planning Act ............................... 1‐1  1.2 Senate Bills 610 and 221 .................................................................................................. 1‐2  1.3 Senate Bill 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session of 2009 ............................................ 1‐2  1.4 Resource Maximization ................................................................................................... 1‐3   Plan Preparation .............................................................................................................................. 2‐1  2.1 Basis and Approach for Preparing the UWMP ................................................................. 2‐1  2.2 Level of Planning and Compliance ................................................................................... 2‐1  2.3 Agency Coordination and Outreach ................................................................................ 2‐3  2.3.1 Wholesale and Retail Coordination .................................................................... 2‐3  2.3.2 Coordination with Other Agencies and the Community .................................... 2‐3   Service Area ..................................................................................................................................... 3‐1  3.1 Service Area Description .................................................................................................. 3‐1  3.2 Service Area Population ................................................................................................... 3‐3  3.2.1 Other Demographic Factors ................................................................................ 3‐3  3.3 Climate Data .................................................................................................................... 3‐3   Water Use ........................................................................................................................................ 4‐1  4.1 Existing Water Use by Customer Class ............................................................................ 4‐1  4.2 Projected Future Water Use ............................................................................................ 4‐2  4.2.1 Approach / Methodology ................................................................................... 4‐2  4.2.2 Projected Potable Demands ............................................................................... 4‐3  4.2.3 Projected Recycled Demands ............................................................................. 4‐5  4.2.4 Projected Total Demands ................................................................................... 4‐5  4.3 Service Area Sales and System Losses ............................................................................. 4‐6  4.4 Estimating Future Water Savings ..................................................................................... 4‐6  4.5 Lower Income Water Demand Projections ...................................................................... 4‐7  4.6 Climate Change ................................................................................................................ 4‐7  4.6.1 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................ 4‐8  4.6.2 Water Authority Adaption and Mitigation ......................................................... 4‐8   SB X7‐7 Baselines and Targets .......................................................................................................... 5‐1  5.1 Baselines and Targets ...................................................................................................... 5‐1   Service Area Supplies ....................................................................................................................... 6‐1  6.1 Water Resources .............................................................................................................. 6‐1  6.1.1 Potable Water ..................................................................................................... 6‐1  6.1.2 San Diego County Water Authority .................................................................... 6‐1  6.1.3 City of San Diego ................................................................................................. 6‐1  6.1.4 Emergency Supplies ............................................................................................ 6‐2  6.2 Groundwater .................................................................................................................... 6‐2  6.3 Surface Water .................................................................................................................. 6‐2  6.4 Stormwater ...................................................................................................................... 6‐2  6.5 Wastewater and Recycled Water .................................................................................... 6‐3  CONTENTS    Section Page  IV CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   6.5.1 Recycled Water Coordination ............................................................................. 6‐3  6.5.2 Wastewater Collection & Treatment .................................................................. 6‐3  6.5.3 Recycled Water System ...................................................................................... 6‐4  6.5.4 Recycled Water Beneficial Uses .......................................................................... 6‐4  6.5.5 Proposed Actions to Encourage Use of Recycled Water .................................... 6‐5  6.6 Desalinated Water Opportunities .................................................................................... 6‐6  6.6.1 Water Purchase Agreement ‐‐ Rosarito Desalination Plant ............................... 6‐6  6.7 Exchanges or Transfers .................................................................................................... 6‐6  6.7.1 Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project ..................... 6‐6  6.8 Future Water Supplies ..................................................................................................... 6‐7  6.8.1 Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well ..................................................................... 6‐8  6.8.2 Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Project ............................... 6‐9  6.8.3 Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well ................................................................. 6‐10  6.8.4 North District Recycled Water Concept Project ............................................... 6‐11  6.9 Summary of Existing and Planned Sources of Water ..................................................... 6‐11   Water Service Reliability .................................................................................................................. 7‐1  7.1 Reliability of Supply .......................................................................................................... 7‐1  7.2 Projected Normal Year Supply and Demand ................................................................... 7‐3  7.3 Projected Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison ........................................... 7‐4  7.4 Projected Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison ....................................... 7‐5   Water Shortage Contingency Planning ............................................................................................. 8‐1  8.1 Stages of Action ............................................................................................................... 8‐1  8.2 Prohibitions on End Uses ................................................................................................. 8‐2  8.3 Penalties, Charges, Other Enforcement of Prohibitions .................................................. 8‐5  8.4 Consumption Reduction Methods ................................................................................... 8‐5  8.5 Determining Water Shortage Reductions ........................................................................ 8‐6  8.6 Revenue and Expenditure Impacts .................................................................................. 8‐6  8.7 Resolution or Ordinance .................................................................................................. 8‐6  8.8 Catastrophic Supply Interruption .................................................................................... 8‐7  8.9 Estimate of Minimum Supply for the Next Three Years .................................................. 8‐8   Demand Management Measures ..................................................................................................... 9‐1  9.1 Water Conservation Programs and Water Efficiency Practices ....................................... 9‐1  9.2 Determination of DMM Implementation ........................................................................ 9‐2   Plan Adoption, Submittal and Implementation .............................................................................. 10‐1  10.1 Notice of Public Hearing ................................................................................................ 10‐1  10.2 Plan Submittal ................................................................................................................ 10‐2    Appendices  Appendix A Urban Water Management Plan Act Text  Appendix B Adoption Resolution and Related Documentation  Appendix C AWWA Water Loss Worksheet  Appendix D SBX7‐7 Detailed Calculations  CONTENTS Section Page CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC v Appendix E City of San Diego Agreement for Otay WTP Appendix F City of San Diego Agreement for SBWRP Appendix G District Code of Ordinance Section 26 Water Recycling Plan and Implementation Procedures Appendix H Water Authority Documentation of Supply Reliability Appendix I District Code of Ordinance Section 39 Water Shortage Response Plan Appendix J District Code of Ordinance Section 72 Penalties and Damages Appendix K BMP Reports 2011-2014 Appendix L Report on Reduced Delta Reliance Table(s) Table 2-1 Public Water Systems ................................................................................................................. 2-1 Table 2-2: Plan Identification ...................................................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-3: Agency Identification ................................................................................................................. 2-2 Table 2-4: Water Supplier Information Exchange....................................................................................... 2-3 Table 2-5. Coordination with Appropriate Agencies .................................................................................. 2-4 Table 3-1. Population - Current and Projected ........................................................................................... 3-3 Table 3-2. Climate Data .............................................................................................................................. 3-4 Table 4-1. Demands for Potable Water - Actual ......................................................................................... 4-1 Table 4-S1: Summary of Unit Use Adjustment Factors .............................................................................. 4-3 Table 4-S2. District Anticipated Near-Term Annexations .......................................................................... 4-4 Table 4-2. Demands for Potable Water - Projected.................................................................................... 4-5 Table 4-3: Total Water Demands ................................................................................................................ 4-5 Table 4-4: Water Loss Summary Most Recent 12 Month Period Available ............................................... 4-6 Table 4-5: Inclusion in Water Use Projections ........................................................................................... 4-6 Table 4-6: Projected Future Conservation Savings - District ...................................................................... 4-7 Table 5-1 Baselines and Targets Summary ................................................................................................. 5-2 Table 5-2: 2015 Compliance ....................................................................................................................... 5-2 Table 5-3: 2010 Census Population and Water Use for Baseline Demand Calculations ............................. 5-3 Table 6-1: Groundwater Volume Pumped .................................................................................................. 6-2 Table 6-2: Wastewater Collected Within Service Area in 2015 ................................................................. 6-3 Table 6-3 Wastewater Treatment and Discharge within Service Area in 2015 .......................................... 6-4 Table 6-4. Current and Projected Recycled Water Use within Service Area ............................................... 6-5 CONTENTS    Section Page  VI CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   Table 6‐5. 2010 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projection Compared to 2015 Actual .................................. 6‐5  Table 6‐6 Retail: Methods to Expand Future Recycled Water Use ............................................................. 6‐5  Table 6‐7: Expected Future Water Supply Projects or Programs................................................................ 6‐8  Table 6‐8: Water Supplies — Actual 2015 ................................................................................................ 6‐11  Table 6‐9: Water Supplies — Projected .................................................................................................... 6‐12  Table 7‐1: Basis of Water Year Data ........................................................................................................... 7‐3  Table 7‐2: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison .......................................................................... 7‐3  Table 7‐3: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison ...................................................................... 7‐4  Table 7‐4: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison ................................................................ 7‐6  Table 8‐1: Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan ............................................................................. 8‐2  Table 8‐2 Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Uses ................................................................................. 8‐3  Table 8‐3: Stages of WSCP ‐ Consumption Reduction Methods ................................................................. 8‐5  Table 8‐4 Retail: Minimum Supply Next Three Years ................................................................................. 8‐8  Table 10‐1: Notification to Cities and Counties ........................................................................................ 10‐1    Figure(s)   Figure 3‐1. Water Service Area .................................................................................................................. 3‐2  Figure 3‐2. Temperature and Precipitation Distribution ........................................................................... 3‐5         CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC VII  Acronyms and Abbreviations  20x2020 20 percent reduction goal  Act Urban Water Management Act  ADWF average dry weather flow  AF acre‐feet  AFG accelerated forecasted growth  AFY acre‐feet per year  AWE Alliance for Water Efficiency  AWWA American Water Works Association  BMPs Best Management Practices  CII Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional  CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System  CNAP California Nevada Applications Program  CUWCC California Urban Water Conservation Council  District Otay Water District  DMP Drought Management Plan  DWR Department of Water Resources  EIR Environmental Impact Report  EIS Environmental Impact Statement  ERP Emergency Response Plan  ESP Emergency Storage Project  ETo  Evapotranspiration  FY Fiscal Year  GDP General Development Plan  GHG greenhouse gas  GIS geographical information system  gpcd gallons per capita per day  gpd gallons per day  gpf gallons per flush  gpm gallons per minute  Guidebook Guidebook to Assist Urban Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2015 Urban Water Management  Plan  IID Imperial Irrigation District  IRP Integrated Water Resources Plan  LMSE La Mesa‐Sweetwater Extension  LOPS Lower Otay Pump Station  Master Plan District 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan  Metropolitan Metropolitan Water District of Southern California  MFR Multi‐Family Residential  mgd million gallons per day  MOU Memorandum of Understanding  MWWD City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department  NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration  OMCDSP Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project  Pipeline No. 4 Water Authority Pipeline Number 4  ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS  VIII CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   PS Pump Station  RISA Regional Integrated Science and Assessments  RWCWRF Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility  SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments  SBWRP South Bay Water Reclamation Plant  SBX7‐7 Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session  SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition  Second Aqueduct Second San Diego Aqueduct  Series 13 SANDAG Series 13: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast  SFR Single Family Residential  SVSD County of San Diego Spring Valley Sanitation District  UWMP or Plan Urban Water Management Plan  Water Authority San Diego County Water Authority  Water Code California Water Code  WD Water District  WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Planning  WSRP Water Shortage Response Plan  WTP Water Treatment Plant  WUCA Water Utility Climate Alliance  WWTP wastewater treatment plant          SECTION 1   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 1‐1  Introduction  Since 1984, California’s Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act) has required each urban water  supplier in the state to prepare an urban water management plan (UWMP).  The requirement applies to  each urban water supplier that provides water for municipal purposes either directly or indirectly to  more than 3,000 customers or supplies more than 3,000 acre‐feet (AF) of water annually.  These  agencies must update their UWMP at least once every five years on or before December 31, in years  ending in five and zero.  The deadline for submittal of the 2015 UWMP for retail water purveyors is July  1, 2016 as a result of recent legislation. Sections 10610 through 10657 of the California Water Code  (Water Code) detail the information that must be included in these plans.  In accordance with the Act,  the Otay Water District (District) is required to update and adopt its plan for submittal to the California  Department of Water Resources (DWR) by July 1, 2016.  Appendix A contains the text of the Act.  1.1 Changes to the California Urban Water Management  Planning Act  Major amendments made to the Act since preparation of the District’s 2010 UWMP Plan include the  following:    Water Code Section 10631 (f) (1) and (2), Assembly Bill 2067 (2014) ‐ Requires water suppliers to  provide narratives describing their water demand management measures, as provided. Retail water  suppliers are required to address the nature and extent of each water demand management  measure implemented over the past 5 years and describe the water demand management  measures that the supplier plans to implement to achieve its water use targets.   Water Code Section 10621 (d), Assembly Bill 2067 (2014) – Extended the submittal deadline and  requires each urban water supplier to submit its 2015 UWMP to DWR by July 1, 2016.   Water Code Section 10644 (a) (2), Senate Bill 1420 (2014) ‐ Requires the plan, or amendments to the  plan, to be submitted electronically to DWR.   Water Code Section 10644 (a) (2), Senate Bill 1420 (2014) ‐ Requires the plan, or amendments to the  plan, to include any standardized forms, tables, or displays specified by DWR.   Water Code Section 10631 (e) (1) (J) and (e) (3) (A) and (B), Senate Bill 1420 (2014) ‐ Requires the  UWMP to quantify and report on distribution system water loss.   Water Code Section 10631 (e) (4), Senate Bill 1420 (2014) ‐  Provides for water use projections to  display and account for the water savings estimated to result from adopted codes, standards,  ordinances, or transportation and land use plans, when that information is available and applicable  to an urban water supplier.   Water Code Section 10631.2 (a) and (b), Senate Bill 1036 (2014) ‐ Provides for an urban water  supplier to include certain energy‐related information, including, but not limited to, an estimate of  the amount of energy used to extract or divert water supplies.   Water Code Section 10632 (b), Assembly Bill 2409 (2010) ‐ Requires urban water suppliers to  analyze and define water features that are artificially supplied with water, including ponds, lakes,  waterfalls, and fountains, separately from swimming pools and spas.  SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION   1‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   1.2 Senate Bills 610 and 221  Senate Bills (SB) 610 and 221 are the common names for Water Code Sections 10910 through 10914 and  Government Code Sections 65867.5, 66455.3, and 66473.7.  These bills amended state law to improve  the link between water supply planning and land use decisions made by cities and counties.  SB 610  requires that the water purveyor of the public water system prepare a water supply assessment to be  included in the environmental documentation of certain large proposed projects.  SB 221 requires a  written verification from the water purveyor that sufficient water supplies are available for certain large  residential subdivisions prior to approval of a tentative map.  The District’s UWMP provides information  that will be used in future assessments and verifications prepared to meet the requirements of these  bills.  1.3 Senate Bill 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session of 2009   In addition to changes in the Act listed above, the state Legislature passed Senate Bill 7 as part of the  Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX7‐7) on November 10, 2009, which became effective February 3,  2010. This new law was the water conservation component to the Delta legislation package, and seeks  to achieve a 20 percent statewide reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31,  2020. Specifically, SBX 7‐7 from this Extraordinary Session requires each urban retail water supplier to  develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20 percent reduction goal by 2020 (20x2020), and an  interim water reduction target by 2015.   The SBX 7‐7 target setting process includes the following: (1) baseline daily per capita water use; (2)  urban water use target; (3) interim water use target; (4) compliance daily per capita water use, including  technical bases and supporting data for those determinations. In order for an agency to meet its 2020  water use target, each agency can increase its use of recycled water to offset potable water use and also  step up its water conservation measures. The required water use targets for 2020 and an interim target  for 2015 are determined using one of four “Target” methods – each method has numerous  methodologies. The 2020 urban water use target may be updated in a supplier’s 2015 UWMP. Appendix  A also contains the text of SBX 7‐7.  Four methods are stipulated for calculating the water use target. Three of the methods are listed in  Water Code Section 10608.20(a)(1).  The fourth method was developed by DWR at the end of 2010. The  four methods are:   Method 1 – Eighty percent of the water supplier’s baseline per capita potable 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 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan.   Method 4 – An approach developed by DWR and reported to the Legislature in February 2011   The District’s 2010 UWMP presented the 2015 and 2020 water use targets using Method 1. In the 2015  UWMP, the District is required to report interim compliance followed by actual compliance in 2020.  Baseline, target, and compliance‐year water use estimates are required to be reported in gallons per  capita per day (gpcd). For consistent application of the Act, DWR produced Methodologies for  Calculating Baseline and Compliance Urban Water Per Capita Use in October 2010. Discussion on the  District’s baseline and target 2020 demands are discussed in more detail in Section 5.  SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 1‐3  Failure to meet adopted targets will result in the ineligibility of a water supplier to receive grants or  loans administered by the State unless one (1) of two (2) exceptions is met. Exception one (1) states a  water supplier may be eligible if they have submitted a schedule, financing plan, and budget to DWR for  approval to achieve the per capita water use reductions. Exception two (2) states a water supplier may  be eligible if an entire water service area qualifies as a disadvantaged community.  1.4 Resource Maximization   The District’s commitment to maximizing resources is reflected in its mission statement, which is, “…to provide safe, reliable water and wastewater services to our community with  innovation, in a cost‐efficient, water‐wise and environmentally responsible manner.”  For many years, the District has worked to reduce its reliance on imported water, and in particular  treated imported water.  On August 3, 1994, the District’s Board of Directors established a goal of being  able to meet 40 percent of annual demands from local water sources when water is unavailable from  the San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority).  The District and the Water Authority entered  into an agreement in 2006 to provide the District with treated water from the Helix Water District (Helix  WD) in addition to the District’s normal treated water supply from the Water Authority.  A similar  arrangement made with the City of San Diego in 1999 provides the District access to treated water from  the City of San Diego’s Otay Water Treatment Plant (WTP).  The District has also aggressively developed  its recycled water distribution system and has entered into an agreement to purchase recycled water  from the City of San Diego.  These water sources are further discussed in Section 6.0.  Water conservation is an important component of the District’s commitment to reducing reliance on  imported water.  In partnership with the Water Authority, the City of Chula Vista, and residential and  commercial developers, the District’s water use efficiencies and conservation efforts are expected to  grow and expand.  The District is also committed to continuing investigations of local groundwater,  additional recycled water, desalination, and other potential water resources that could further reduce  the District’s reliance on imported water.  SECTION 2   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 2‐1  Plan Preparation  This section provides the basis and approach that the District used to update its UWMP. It also includes  the data reporting period (calendar vs. fiscal year) and units of measure used by the District to report  water volumes. This section also includes the details of the coordination and outreach activities  conducted by the District during the preparation of this UWMP.  2.1 Basis and Approach for Preparing the UWMP  The District submitted its first UWMP in 2000 in compliance with the Act. The District has submitted the  last update to the UWMP in 2010. The normal cycle requires that the UWMP be submitted in December  of years ending in five and zero. Recent changes in the Plan requirements have necessitated the need  for State law to extend the 2015 deadline to July 1, 2016. However, this UWMP is referred to as the  2015 Plan to retain consistency with the five‐year submittal cycle.   In accordance with CWC, urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections or supplying  3,000 or more AF of water per year are required to prepare an UWMP every five years. As an urban  water supplier, the District is required to update and submit its 2015 plan to the department by July 1,  2016. The District has served 48,651 municipal connections and supplied volume of 30,298 AF in 2015  (Table 2‐1).  The District utilized DWR’s “Guidebook to Assist Urban Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2015 Urban Water  Management Plan” (Guidebook) and SBX 7‐7 to prepare this plan.  SBX 7‐7 was passed in November  2009 with the goal of reducing California’s urban per capita water use by 20 percent by December 31,  2020 with an incremental goal of reducing per capita water use by 10 percent by December 31, 2015.  Each urban water supplier is also required to meet SBX 7‐7 goals, which are discussed later in this  report.  This report includes projections of the District’s future demands and supplies, based on  estimates of future growth in the District’s service area.  It also discusses the steps the District has taken  to promote water conservation and ensure water is being used wisely.  The strategies outlined in this  report are intended to allow the District to continue to provide a safe and reliable water supply to its  customers.  The District prepared this UWMP with the assistance of its consultant, CH2M, as permitted by Section  10620 (e) of the Act.  Table 2‐1 Public Water Systems                                                                                               Public Water  System  Number  Public Water System Name  Number of  Municipal  Connections  2015  Volume of  Water Supplied     2015   CA 3710034 Otay Water District 48,651 30,299  Source: District CWA Data Report for FY15    2.2 Level of Planning and Compliance  The District joined the Water Authority as a member agency in 1956.  The Water Authority is responsible  for the supply of imported water into the San Diego County through its membership in Metropolitan  SECTION 2 – PLAN PREPARATION   2‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan).  The District receives imported potable water from  the aqueduct systems owned and operated by the Water Authority and Metropolitan.  Together these  agencies work to ensure a diverse and reliable supply for the San Diego region. Effective water planning for the Water Authority and its member agencies requires consistent  projections of supply and demand.  The Water Authority facilitated an Urban Water Management Plan  Working Group made up of staff from the Water Authority and its member agencies.  This group  provided a forum for exchanging demand and supply information.  In addition, DWR and the Water  Authority hosted a special workshop to review the requirements of the Act.  The District participated in  several workshops and meetings, providing water supply and demand information as well as recycled  water opportunities.  The District’s potable demands are currently met with imported water provided through the Water  Authority and Metropolitan.  Much of the supply discussion in this report is based on the supply  planning performed by these regional agencies. The District is engaged in regional water supply planning  and coordinates with regional partners.  However, this is an individual UWMP that reports on water  demands and supplies in the District's service area (as noted in Table 2‐2).  The District maintains its records of water use on a fiscal year (FY) that runs from July 1 through June 30  (Table 2‐3).  For example, FY 2015 runs from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015.  In this document,  projections of water demand over the course of a year are reported on a fiscal year basis.  For estimates  that are based on an instantaneous value and not a year‐long accumulation (for example, the service  area population), values are assumed to be valid on January 1 of the corresponding year.  Table 2‐2: Plan Identification  X Individual UWMP   Regional UWMP  (RUWMP)           NOTES:       Table 2‐3: Agency Identification                                                   Type of Agency   Agency is a wholesaler  X Agency is a retailer  Fiscal or Calendar Year   UWMP Tables Are in Calendar Years  X UWMP Tables Are in Fiscal Years  If Using Fiscal Years  Provide Month and Day that the Fiscal Year Begins  1 July  Units of Measure Used in UWMP  X Acre Feet (AF)   Million Gallons (MG)   Hundred Cubic Feet (CCF)  NOTES:       SECTION 2 – PLAN PREPARATION    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 2‐3  2.3 Agency Coordination and Outreach  2.3.1 Wholesale and Retail Coordination  The District has coordinated the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area,  including its wholesaler, i.e., the Water Authority (Table 2‐4). Since the District relies upon the water  supply from the Water Authority, the District has worked with the Water Authority and shared  information for water supply and demand projections.    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.                     Wholesale Water Supplier Name  San Diego County Water Authority  NOTES:  2.3.2 Coordination with Other Agencies and the Community  The District has coordinated 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 public  agencies (Table 2‐5). In accordance with the Act, the District provided a 60‐day notice to the Water  Authority (its wholesale water supplier) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), the  City of San Diego, City of Chula Vista, and County of San Diego that they were reviewing and considering  amendments or changes to the UWMP and that they would be holding a public hearing prior to the  adoption of the UWMP.  A copy of the 60‐day notice is included in Appendix B.  Also, in accordance with the Act, the District notified the land use jurisdictions (City of Chula Vista, City  of San Diego and County of San Diego) within its service area that it was preparing the 2015 UWMP.   Prior to adoption, the District will make its Draft 2015 UWMP available to stakeholders including the  Water Authority, the City of Chula Vista, the County of San Diego, and the City of San Diego.    The notice and instructions for downloading the Draft 2015 UWMP from the District’s website was also  made available to interested parties as listed in Table 2‐5.  The Draft 2015 UWMP was first presented at  a Water Resources Committee Meeting of the District’s Board of Directors.  A Public Hearing regarding  the 2015 UWMP will held on June 1, 2016.  Notices of the Public Hearing will be published in the San  Diego Union‐Tribune (May 5, 2016), The Star News (May 6, 2016), The East County Californian (May 12,  2016), and The Alpine Sun (May 5, 2016).  These coordination efforts are summarized in Table 2‐5 and  copies of the public notices are included in Appendix B.    SECTION 2 – PLAN PREPARATION   2‐4 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC    Table 2‐5. Coordination with Appropriate Agencies   Agency Sent  Notification  Letter  Participated  in UWMP  Development  Commented  on Draft  UWMP  Attended  Public  Meetings  Received  copy of Draft  of Notice of  Availability  Sent Notice  of Intention  to Adopt  UWMP  Wholesale Water Supplier  San Diego County  Water Authority         Other Coordination  City of San Diego        City of Chula Vista        Helix Water District        County of San Diego        Chula Vista Planning  Commission         San Diego Association  of Governments  (SANDAG)         San Diego LAFCO        Sweetwater Authority        Crest/Dehesa Planning  Group         Jamul/Dulzura  Planning Group         Otay Mesa Planning  Group         Spring Valley  Community Planning  Group         Sweetwater Planning  Group         Valley de Oro Planning  Group         Constituents of the  District         Local Libraries        Notes:       SECTION 3   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 3‐1  Service Area  This section of the report provides an overview of the District’s service area, its current water supply, an  analysis of available demographics, population growth projections, and climate data to provide a basis  for estimating future water requirements.  The District’s service area has experienced some growth in the past five years, and the service area  population is expected to be approximately 285,340 people by 2040.   3.1 Service Area Description  The District is located in the southern half of San Diego County and was created in 1956 by a small group  of private citizens, ranchers and landowners who were concerned about the declining quality and  quantity of water from their rural wells.  The District joined the Water Authority as a member agency in  the same year.  The Water Authority is the agency responsible for the supply of imported water into the  San Diego County through its membership in Metropolitan. The District is a California special district authorized under the provisions of the Municipal Water District  Law of 1911 and is revenue neutral, i.e., each end user pays their fair share of costs for capital  improvements, water acquisition, and the operation and maintenance of facilities. Its elected Board of  Directors sets the District ordinances, policies, taxes, and rates for providing wastewater, potable water,  and recycled water services.   The District’s water service area is generally located within the south central portion of San Diego  County and includes approximately 126 square miles.  The topography of the service area is diverse,  consisting of a variety of valleys, hills, mountains, mesas, lakes and rivers. The service area includes both  urban and rural development.  The major transportation arteries serving the area include State Highway  94 in the north, Interstate 805 in the southwest and the newly constructed State Route 125 to the east.  Interstate 905 and State Highway 11 are in the process of being constructed in the Otay Mesa area.   The District serves a wide spectrum of communities including southern El Cajon, La Mesa, Rancho San  Diego, Jamul, Spring Valley, Bonita, eastern City of Chula Vista, East Lake, Otay Ranch and Otay Mesa  areas.  The water purveyors that border the District include Padre Dam Municipal Water District (Padre  Dam MWD) on the north, Helix WD on the northwest, and the Sweetwater Authority, and the City of San  Diego on the west.  The southern boundary of the District is the international border with Mexico.    A map showing the regional jurisdictional boundaries within the District is shown on Figure 3‐1.  There is currently no adjacent water purveyor located to the east of the District, which provides an  opportunity for service for future land uses, such as the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP)  Area of Influence.     SECTION 3 – SERVICE AREA   3‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC    Source: District Draft 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan, Figure 6‐1 Water Service Area  Figure 3‐1. Water Service Area     SECTION 3 – SERVICE AREA    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 3‐3  3.2 Service Area Population  The District’s service area population has grown from approximately 48,300 in 1980 to a 2015  population of 217,339.  Data on the future rate of growth within the District were obtained from the  SANDAG Series 13: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast (Series 13) adopted by SANDAG’s Board of Directors  in October 2013.  The Series 13 forecast integrates 2010 Census counts and an economic outlook on  regional growth and lower water demands over the long‐term planning horizon. SANDAG serves as the  regional, intergovernmental planning agency and provides estimates of population and housing up to  the year 2050.    SANDAG has prepared forecasts of population, housing and employment in each census tract in 5‐year  increments between 2010 and 2040.  For this analysis, the District assumed that the population within  each census tract was uniformly distributed around the tract.  The census tract data were intersected  with the District’s service area boundary using geographical information system (GIS) software.  The  estimated service area population is shown in Table 3‐1.  Table 3‐1. Population ‐ Current and Projected  Population  Served  2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040  217,339 243,845 255,040 257,278 277,429 285,340  Source: District 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan Update, Appendix C and SANDAG Series 13 forecast  3.2.1 Other Demographic Factors  The District’s long‐term historic growth rate has averaged around 4 percent.  In recent years, growth has  occurred at a reduced rate due to a slowdown in economic conditions.  The SANDAG forecast shows an  average annual growth rate of 6 percent through 2040.  The growth rate is expected to slow as the  inventory of developable land is diminished.  The water service planning area comprises three distinct land use planning agencies: the City of San  Diego, the City of Chula Vista, and the County of San Diego.  Documents that govern land use planning in  these jurisdictions consist of the City of San Diego General Plan, the City of Chula Vista General Plan, and  the County of San Diego’s General Plan.  All three include various sub‐regional and community level  plans within the District.  Approximately 90 percent of the District’s customers are single‐family residences.  Much of the  anticipated development in the District’s service area is also single‐family residential.  The relative  composition of the District’s customers is expected to remain consistent.  The other customer sectors,  such as commercial, industrial, and institutional are expected to grow at the same rate to support the  residential development.  3.3 Climate Data  Climatic conditions within the service area are characteristically Mediterranean near the coast, with mild  temperatures year round.  Inland areas are both hotter in summer and cooler in winter, with summer  temperatures often exceeding 90 degrees and winter temperatures occasionally dipping to below  freezing.  Most of the region’s rainfall occurs December through March.  Total average annual rainfall is  approximately 10.08 inches per year. Historic climate data were obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center for Station 042706 (El  Cajon) for fiscal years 2011 through 2015.  This station was selected because its annual temperature  SECTION 3 – SERVICE AREA   3‐4 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   variation is representative of most of the District’s service area.  While there is a station in Chula Vista,  the temperature variation at the Chula Vista station is more typical of a coastal environment than the  conditions in most of the District’s service area.  Evapotranspiration data were obtained from the California Irrigation Management Information System  (CIMIS) for fiscal years 2011 through 2015.  Because conditions in the service area vary from coastal  areas to inland areas, evapotranspiration (ETo) data are reported for two stations:  147 (Otay Lakes),  and 153 (Escondido SPV).  The evapotranspiration data are based on historical data since 1999 and the  long‐term averages provided by CIMIS.  Climate and evapotranspiration data are summarized in Table 3‐ 2. The typical annual distribution for temperature and precipitation are shown in Figure 3‐2.    Table 3‐2. Climate Data  Month  Monthly Average Evapotranspiration (inches) El Cajon (042706)  Otay Lakes No. 147  Escondido   SPV No. 153  Average Monthly Total  Rainfall (inches)  Average Temperature  (Fahrenheit)  January 2.46 2.59 0.75 57.00  February 2.79 2.73 1.59 57.29  March 4.16 4.20 1.48 61.10  April 4.91 5.18 0.57 63.30  May 5.69 6.00 0.46 66.47  June 6.17 6.80 0.05 70.05  July 6.05 6.79 0.00 74.14  August 6.09 6.72 0.06 76.19  September 5.04 5.29 0.08 75.57  October 3.70 3.71 0.84 68.02  November 2.74 2.69 1.21 60.90  December 2.02 1.87 2.99 55.70  Annual Total 51.82 54.58 10.08 65.48  Source: CIMIS for Stations 147 (Otay Lakes), and 153 (Escondido SPV) and Western Regional Climate Center for Station 042706  (El Cajon).    SECTION 3 – SERVICE AREA    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 3‐5    Figure 3‐2. Temperature and Precipitation Distribution      SECTION 4   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 4‐1  Water Use  As part of the UWMP, California regulation requires water suppliers to quantify past and current water  use and to project the total water demand for the water system, including calculations of its baseline  (base daily per capita) water use and interim and urban water use targets. Projections of future water  demand allow a water supplier to analyze if future water supplies are adequate, as well as help the  agency when sizing and staging future water facilities to meet water use targets. Projected water use,  combined with population projections, provide the basis for estimating future water requirements.   This chapter provides the District’s current water use and water use projections through the year 2040.  In this chapter, the term “water use” and “water demand” has been used interchangeably. Recycled  water is addressed comprehensively in Chapter 6, but a summary of recycled water demand is included  in this section (in Table 4‐3) as well.  4.1 Existing Water Use by Customer Class   The District maintains records of its water consumption and its number of customers by customer type.   The breakdown of consumption between customer types in FY 2010 compared to FY 2015 is  summarized in Table 4‐1. The water demand data include losses in the District’s system and  unaccounted for water use. The District used the American Water Works Association’s method to  calculate the water losses.   Table 4‐1. Demands for Potable Water ‐ Actual  Use Type Level of Treatment When  Delivered  2015 Actual Volume 2010 Actual Volume  Single Family Drinking Water 16,641 17,165  Multi‐Family Drinking Water 3,403 3,605  Commercial Drinking Water  2,675 2,243  Industrial Drinking Water  Institutional Drinking Water 2,026 1,867  Landscape/Irrigation Drinking Water 4,121 3,732  Losses Drinking Water 920 1,854  Other Drinking Water 513 709  Total  30,299 31,175    In 2014, drought conditions required the District to impose mandatory conservation. This resulted in  FY 2015 water use decreasing by 3 percent from FY 2010 levels due to ongoing drought conditions and  conservation measures.  SECTION 4 – WATER USE   4‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   4.2 Projected Future Water Use  4.2.1 Approach / Methodology  The District projected future water demands as part of its 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan (Master  Plan) update. The Master Plan forecasts future water demands using existing demands as a base, and  scales these based on the net effects of growth, conservation, and other factors. The forecast  methodology is outlined below.     a) Existing baseline unit demands. The Master Plan uses actual unit use factors for calendar year  2013 as the baseline normal condition demands for the forecast period. 2013 demands are  sufficiently distant from the Water Use Alert conditions in effect in most of the County during  2009‐10. 2013 was moderately dryer than normal, which would tend to increase use, but this  increase is offset by below‐normal economic activity as the economy continued to recover from  the Great Recession.   b) New development. New development demands are  generated using the baseline unit use factors, and  the SANDAG Draft Series 13 projections for the  District at the pressure zone level of spatial  resolution.    Residential:  Single Family Residential (SFR) and  Multi‐Family Residential) MFR usage is scaled  upwards proportionate to housing unit counts  for each category, and adjusted for projected  changes in Persons Per Household rates.   Public / Commercial:  Commercial, industrial,  and governmental usage is scaled upwards from  existing use proportionate to employment  projections.   Irrigation:  Usage is scaled upward as a weighted  average of the change in SFR, MFR, and  commercial usage.   Temporary Meters:  TEMP account usage is  custom entered to reflect levels consistent with the building activity reflected in the Series 13  forecasts, based on past TEMP account usage from 2000 to 2007.  c) Reduced demands due to additional conservation efficiencies and other factors. The Master  Plan projects unit use rates will continue to decline over time in response to increased water rates,  conservation education, and shifting landscape preferences. These factors are summarized in  Table 4‐S1.       Forecast Methodology Summary  a) Existing Baseline Demands  +  b) New Development Demands  ‐  c) Reductions Due to Additional  Conservation Efficiencies  =  FUTURE DEMANDS  Demand forecast components.  The forecast  methodology starts with existing baseline  demands, and adjusts for growth from new  development, and for changes in per account  usage due to conservation efficiencies and  other effects.  SECTION 4 – WATER USE    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 4‐3  Table 4‐S1:  Summary of Unit Use Adjustment Factors  FACTORS DRIVING UNIT USE REDUCTIONS  1) Landscape Ordinances As required by State law from 2010 and as amended by the State Water Resources Control  Board in 2015, all land use jurisdictions have adopted landscape ordinances limiting new  landscape construction water use to 55 percent ETo for residential construction, and 45  percent for non‐residential construction. The state requirements also limit turf utilization in  all types of construction and in and streetscape uses. As a result, new construction in the  District will feature less grass, and be lower water using in comparison to pre‐2010  construction.  2) Weather‐Based  Irrigation Controllers  Newer landscape irrigation controllers can automatically adjust irrigation schedules  consistent with actual climate conditions and plant water needs, reducing unnecessary use  due to over‐irrigation. The use of these controllers will become increasingly common during  the planning horizon.  3) Turf Retirement Metropolitan and the Water Authority are providing financial incentives to customers who  replace grass with low water use landscapes, and customer landscape preferences are  shifting away from turf. Existing residential landscapes in the District service area are  dominated by grass; over the course of the planning horizon this will begin to shift as  customers opt to remove turf.  4) High‐efficiency clothes  washers  Newer clothes washing machines, in particular front‐loading versions, are more water  efficient than older traditional‐style washers.  5) High‐efficiency toilets California regulations enacted in 2011 require new toilets to operate with a maximum of 1.28  gallons per flush (gpf), compared to 1.6 gpf per the previous 1992 requirements. This will  reduce water use at new SFR and MFR construction.   6) MFR Submetering Future MFR construction will be subject to requirements that individual units be submetered  and billed by usage. The direct price signal to the consumer results in reduced water use.  7) Increasing Real Prices /  Behavioral Changes  Retail water rates may continue to increase at a rate faster than inflation, driven by increases  in wholesale rates. Customers respond by reducing use.    FACTORS DRIVING UNIT USE INCREASES  8) Growth located in  warmer inland areas  New development in the District is moving further and further inland. The warmer climate of  inland areas results in increased unit irrigation demands.  The average ETo rate for the geographic center of the District is approximately 47 inches (per  CIMIS station data, see San Diego County Landscape Design Manual, App. A). The average  ETo at the eastern edge of the District at Lower Otay Reservoir is 50 inches, 6 percent higher  than the geographic center.  9) Climate Change Per the Water Authority’s most recent climate change analysis (2013 Water Facilities Master  Plan, Appendix E), the median predicted climate change will increase average ETo in the  District service area 1.9 percent by 2035, and approximately 3 percent by 2050.    4.2.2 Projected Potable Demands  Water demands in the District service area will increase over time relative to existing demands, but at a  slower rate than the underlying growth in population and employment. The Master Plan projects future  demands will be approximately one‐third lower than those forecast in the District’s 2010 UWMP, and  that potable demands will not again reach their 2006 peak levels until sometime beyond 2035.  Near‐Term Annexation Demands  The District anticipates that additional lands will annex to its service area and anticipates these Near‐ Term Annexations may include those listed below:     Otay Ranch Village 13 ‐ The portion of the Proctor Valley Parcel (part of the Otay Ranch GDP)  outside the District’s boundary is known as the Resort Parcel, or Village 13. The land use mix will  SECTION 4 – WATER USE   4‐4 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   include approximately 1,738 SFR dwelling units, 200 MFR dwelling units, 29.3 acres of commercial,  26.0 acres of parks, and a 10.1‐acre school site. Village 13 is anticipated to be annexed into the  District to receive water service.   Sycuan Reservation ‐ Demand of 400 AF consisting of existing uses for homes, office buildings,  medical center and casino, and future demands to include expansion of a casino, medical center,  and hotel.   Peaceful Valley Ranch ‐ 152.4 acres for a proposed estate residential development proposed to  develop 52 estate residential units, and equestrian uses and amenities.    Stoddard Parcel ‐ 8‐acre lot with existing home, adjacent to the District boundary and the proposed  Peaceful Valley Ranch annexation.   San Ysidro Mountains Parcel, Planning Area 17 ‐ The land areas included within the 5,555‐acre San  Ysidro Mountains Parcel, also part of the Otay Ranch GDP, includes Village 15 and Planning Area 17.  Since the 2002 Water Resources Master Plan, Village 15 has been recorded as open space preserve.  According to the District, a conservatory now owns the land with the intent to remain open space.   Planning Area 17 is planned to include 296 single‐family units over 800 acres. Over 85 percent of the  parcel is designated as open space. The entire parcel lies outside of the District boundary, but within  the Area of Influence.   Annexations East of Village 13 ‐ The current land use will change slightly with the new San Diego  County 2020 Update. It will be Semi Rural based on the average slope of the property (1 dwelling  unit for every 2, 4, or 8 Acres). The density on the 1,776 acres available will generate 468 units at  320 gallons per unit or 150,000 gallons per day (gpd). Since this is rural land, some irrigation is  included. This brings the total to 151,800 gpd. Most of the remaining area is assumed to be non‐ irrigated open space.  The District projects water demands for these project will be as summarized in Table 4‐S2:  Table 4‐S2.  District Anticipated Near‐Term Annexations  Potential Annexation  Estimated Annual Demands (AFY)  2020 2020 ‐ 2040  Otay Ranch Village 13 1,961 1,961  Sycuan Reservation 392 392  Peaceful Valley Ranch 70 70  Stoddard Parcel 2 2  San Ysidro Mt. Parcel Village 17 (296 SFR units)  148 148  Annexations East Of Village 13 400 400  Total 2,973 2,973    The District’s projected potable water demands, including near term annexations, are summarized in  Table 4‐2.  SECTION 4 – WATER USE    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 4‐5  Table 4‐2. Demands for Potable Water ‐ Projected  Use Type 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040  Single Family 17,072 19,806 20,752 20,649 23,224  Multi‐Family 5,557 6,732 7,342 7,585 8,837  Commercial  6,577 7,949 8,653 8,923 10,378 Industrial  Institutional  Landscape/Irrigation 4,400 4,600 4,700 4,900 5,200  Near Term Annexations 2,973 2,973 2,973 2,973 2,973  Other 470 470 470 470 470  Total 37,050 42,530 44,891 45,501 51,082  Source: District 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan Update, Appendix B and Water Authority Member Agency Level Projections    4.2.3 Projected Recycled Demands  The Master Plan projected recycled water demands using methodologies similar to those described  previously for the potable demand forecasts. The recycled demand forecast is based on the assumption  that recycled water service will be available only in the Central system area, as reviewed in the Master  Plan.   Within the Central system area, the forecast assumes that almost all new development will utilize  recycled water for irrigation uses, with the only exceptions being those areas that are within the  drainage basin of Lower Otay Reservoir and therefore not allowed to use recycle water. The forecast  assumes those existing irrigation meters currently on the potable system will remain as potable  demands and not convert to recycled service, consistent with the District’s experience with the high  costs of retrofitting customer systems for recycled use.  Projected recycled water demands are presented in Table 4‐3.  4.2.4 Projected Total Demands  The District’s total projected demands, inclusive of baseline potable and recycled demands are  summarized in Table 4‐3 and include water savings from passive and active conservation efforts.  Table 4‐3: Total Water Demands  2020 2025 2030 2035 2040   Potable Water  Demand 37,050 42,530 44,891 45,501 51,082  Recycled Water  Demand  5,670 5,900 6,000 6,200 6,500  Total Water  Demand 42,720 48,430 50,891 51,701 57,582  NOTES:  SECTION 4 – WATER USE   4‐6 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   Accelerated Forecasted Growth Demand  The Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP long‐range water demand forecast incorporates a small demand  increment associated with potential accelerated forecasted growth (AFG). This demand increment is  intended to account for land‐use development included in SANDAG’s growth forecast and projected to  occur beyond year 2040, but not yet accounted for in local jurisdictions’ general land use plans.  The AFG demand increment was included in the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP to assist member  agencies with general plan amendments that rely on the Water Authority’s demand forecast to comply  with laws linking water availability and land‐use approvals, and intended to ensure the Water Authority  is adequately planning supplies for potential growth within the service area during the 2015 UWMP  planning horizon. As a member agency of the Water Authority, the District has access to the Water  Authority’s regional supply associated with AFG ,in conjunction with supplies identified in the District’s  2015 UWMP, to document the availability of water supplies to serve proposed projects when preparing  a Water Supply Assessment (Water Code Section 10912 (a)). Additionally, the Water Authority will track  demands associated with member agency projects requesting a portion of the AFG demand increment,  to demonstrate that adequate supplies exist for each new development.       4.3 Service Area Sales and System Losses  The District does not sell any water to other agencies.  Distribution system water losses (also known as “real losses”) are the physical water losses from the  water distribution system and storage facilities, up to the point of customer delivery. The District used  the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Method and Guidebook (Appendix L) worksheet to  report and calculate system losses. For FY 2015, the District’s reported losses were 265 acre‐feet per  year (AFY). The worksheet is provided as Appendix C and will be submitted electronically to DWR.  Table 4‐4:  Water Loss Summary Most Recent 12 Month Period Available                            Reporting Period Start Date  (Month/Year)  Loss  July/2014 265   NOTES:  4.4 Estimating Future Water Savings  The potable water demand projections presented in this UWMP include active and passive water  conservation savings. Future water conservation was estimated by the Water Authority for its member  agencies, using the Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) conservation tracking tool listed in DWR’s 2015  UWMP Guidebook as an application to assist water purveyors in developing savings estimates. The  projected active conservation savings are based on the continuation of conservation incentives and  rebate programs.  Table 4‐5:  Inclusion in Water Use Projections  Future Water Savings Included Yes   If "Yes"  to above, state the section or page number where  citations of the codes, ordinances, etc utilized in demand  projections are found.   Location in UWMP: Section 4.4, Water  Authority UWMP Section 2.4.2  Lower Income Residential Demands Included Yes  NOTES:     SECTION 4 – WATER USE    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 4‐7  Table 4‐6: Projected Future Conservation Savings ‐ District   2020 2025 2030 2035 2040  Active Conservation 2,111 1,844 1,585 1,538 1,587  Passive Conservation 2,497 4,497 5,489 6,040 6,744  Total 4,608 6,341 7,074 7,578 8,331    4.5 Lower Income Water Demand Projections  The requirements for the 2015 UWMP call for projections of water demands for low‐income customers.  The District reviewed the Housing elements from the City of Chula Vista, City of San Diego, and County  of San Diego’s General Plans, which forecast projections to 2030.  Demands for the projected low‐ income housing projects were estimated using the District’s planning demand criteria in its 2015 Master  Plan for high density multi‐family residential units.  Projected water demands were then distributed  equally throughout 2015 and 2040.  These demands have been assumed as part of the general growth  within the District and have been included in the District’s potable water demand projections.  4.6 Climate Change  Climate change adds its own new uncertainties to the challenges of planning. Changes in weather  significantly affect water supply planning, irrespective of the debate associated with the sources and  cause of increasing concentrations of greenhouse gasses. Typically, water supplies that are dependent  on natural hydrology are vulnerable to climate change, especially if the water source originates from  mountain snow pack. The most vulnerable water sources subject to climate change impacts are the  District’s imported water supplies from the Water Authority. In addition to water supply impacts,  changes in local temperature and precipitation are expected to alter water demand patterns. The  District is committed to performing its due diligence with respect to climate change.  The vulnerability of the water resources in California to climate change stems from a modified hydrology  that affects the frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme events, which, in turn, affect water  quantity, quality, and infrastructure. The California Climate Science and Data for Water Resources  Management (DWR, June 2015) report summarizes the latest climate change indicators, implications  and strategies for water managers in California under key climate‐induced factors.  As the climate change continues to impact the State’s water resources, the District is continuously  reviewing and updating new strategies and reevaluating existing policies, regulations, facilities, and  funding priorities to mitigate effects of climate on water resources. Some of the considerations of  mitigation and adaptation strategies include:  ■ Exploring the use of local groundwater supplies.  ■ Promoting recycled water use.  ■ Developing long‐term plans that utilize climate change adaptation components.  ■ Promoting water use efficiency for urban, agricultural, commercial, and industrial water users.  ■ Increasing investments in infrastructure that promote adaptation strategies and mitigate the loss  of existing supplies that are susceptible to climate change impacts.  The summer of 2015 was recently highlighted as having a record‐breaking heat wave in nearly 40 years,  but this influence on water demand is not currently known. Currently, the California Urban Water  Conservation Council (CUWCC) is working on a weather normalization model (weather model) to use  SECTION 4 – WATER USE   4‐8 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   and share with DWR.  Once complete, the District will run its water usage figures through the weather  model and at that point, the District can determine the full impacts of weather patterns on District‐wide  water use.  4.6.1 Potential Impacts  While uncertainties remain regarding the exact timing, magnitude, and regional impacts of these  temperature and precipitation changes, researchers have identified several areas of concern for  California water planners. These include:  ■ Reduction in Sierra Nevada snowpack;  ■ Increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather events; and  ■ Rising sea levels resulting in increased risk of damage from storms, high‐tide events, and the  erosion of levees.  Other important issues of concern due to global climate change include:  ■ Effects on local supplies such as groundwater;  ■ Changes in urban and agricultural demand levels and patterns;  ■ Impacts to human health from waterborne pathogens and water quality degradation;  ■ Declines in ecosystem health and function; and  ■ Alterations to power generation and pumping regimes.  Typically, water supplies that are dependent on natural hydrology are vulnerable to climate change,  especially if the water source originates from mountain snow pack. The most vulnerable water sources  subject to climate change impacts are the District’s imported water supplies from the Water Authority.   4.6.2 Water Authority Adaption and Mitigation  The Water Authority is an active and founding member of the Water Utility Climate Alliance (WUCA).  WUCA consists of ten of the nation’s largest water providers collaborating on climate change adaptation  and greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation issues. As part of this effort, WUCA pursues a variety of activities  on multiple fronts. WUCA monitors development of climate change‐related research, technology,  programs, and federal legislation. Activities to date include such things as:  ■ Letter of support for the California Nevada Applications Program (CNAP) branch of the Regional  Integrated Science and Assessments (RISA) team under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric  Administration (NOAA)  ■ Provided comments on U.S. Global Change Research Program, National Global Change Research  Plan  ■ Regular communication and consultations with federal agencies on the U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency’s Climate Ready Water Utility Working Group  ■ Participation in the International Water and Climate Forum, December 2015  The Water Authority has made great strides in implementing GHG mitigation programs and policies for  its facilities and operations. To date, these programs and policies have focused on the following:  ■ Pursuing water supply/energy relationships and opportunities to increase efficiencies to lower  GHG emissions; including the 40‐megawatt Lake Hodges Pumped Storage project in operation and  a potential 500‐megawatt San Vicente Pumped Storage project  SECTION 4 – WATER USE    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 4‐9  ■ Participating in the Climate Registry; the Water Authority developed its initial baseline GHG  inventory from calendar year 2009 and refined its inventory calculation in an update conducted  in 2014.  ■ Reducing the number of vehicles in the fleet and replacing vehicles with hybrids when possible   ■ Generating solar power at three Water Authority sites, including the Twin Oaks Valley WTP, the  Escondido Operations Center, and the San Diego Headquarters; cumulatively generating an  estimated 2.9 million kilowatt‐hours each year    SECTION 5   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 5‐1  SB X7‐7 Baselines and Targets  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 Delta legislation package, and seeks to achieve a 20 percent statewide  reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020. 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 water reduction target by 2015.  For the 2015 UWMP, the District is required to adjust the baseline and target per capita water use, and  compare 2015 per capita water use with set targets. Detailed calculations in compliance with DWR  requirements are provided in Appendix D. Water use is typically discussed based on per capita use and is  presented in gallons per capita daily (gpcd)  The 2010 UWMP described how the District calculated its baseline and targets, following the technical  methods and methodologies described in DWR’s Methodologies for Calculating Baseline and  Compliance Urban Per Capita Water Use For the Consistent Implementation of the Water Conservation  Bill of 2009.  Background information and the approach used to develop baselines and targets were also  to be included.  A description of each of these elements follows:  ■ Baseline daily per capita water use — how much water is used within an urban water supplier’s  distribution system area on a per capita basis. It is determined using water use and population  estimates from a defined range of years.  ■ Urban water use target — how much water is planned to be delivered in 2020 to each resident  within an urban water supplier’s distribution system area, taking into account water conservation  practices that currently are and plan to be implemented.  ■ Interim urban water use target — the planned daily per capita water use in 2015, a value halfway  between the baseline daily per capita water use and the urban water use target.  5.1 Baselines and Targets  In the 2010 UWMP, the District was required to develop a baseline per capita water use. Per DWR  requirements, the District estimated a 10‐year (1999 to 2008) and a 5‐year (2004 to 2008) baseline per  capita water use.   Table 5‐1 presents the adjusted baseline per capita water using the adjusted 2010 Census population  data. The District targets are based on Method 1. Since the District’s recycled water use is greater than  10 percent of 2008 retail water delivery, a 10 to 15‐year baseline period that ends no earlier than  December 31, 2004 was used. A 10‐year period from 1999 to 2008 provided a baseline of 191 gallons  per capita per day (gpcd) and a 2020 target of 153 gpcd as shown in Table 5‐1. No adjustment was  required since the 10‐year baseline target is less than 95 percent of the 5‐year baseline.   For reference purposes, the 2010 UWMP presented the 10‐year and 5‐year baseline per capita water  use as 190 gpcd and 191 gpcd, respectively.      SECTION 5 – SB X7‐7 BASELINES AND TARGETS   5‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   Table 5‐1 Baselines and Targets Summary   Baseline  Period Start Year      End Year      Average  GPCD  2015 Interim  Target   Confirmed  2020 Target  10 year 1999 2008 191 172 153  5 Year 2004 2008 192 ‐‐ ‐‐  Notes:  The District’s recent per capita water use has been declining to the point where current water use  already meets the 2020 target for Method 1. In 2015, water use within the District was 124 gpcd. This  recent decline in per capita water use is largely due to water use restrictions, increased water costs, and  poor economic conditions. However, the District’s effective water use awareness campaign and  enhanced conservation mentality of its customers will likely result in some long‐term carryover of these  reduced consumption rates beyond the current drought period. Table 5‐2 shows the District’s  compliance with the 2015 interim target.  Table 5‐2: 2015 Compliance      2015 Actual  GPCD  2015 Interim  Target GPCD  Did Supplier Achieve  Targeted Reduction  for 2015  124 172 Yes  Notes:  The baseline per capita water use estimates in the 2010 UWMP were based on preliminary 2010 Census  population data. For the 2015 UWMP, DWR requires that the baseline estimates be recalculated with  the formal 2010 Census population data. SANDAG Series 13 forecast data incorporates the final 2010  Census data into its analysis. DWR approved the use of Series 13 population data for the 2015 UWMP  calculations, finding that their population estimates and projections were thorough and addressed the  requirements of the Water Code. Population and water use data used to recalculate the baseline are  shown in Table 5‐3. Additional SBX7‐7 calculation tables are included as Appendix D, including the  SANDAG population estimates and the persons per connection calculations from DWR’s Population tool  as a reference.     SECTION 5 – SB X7‐7 BASELINES AND TARGETS    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 5‐3    Table 5‐3: 2010 Census Population and Water Use for Baseline Demand Calculations  Year Population Water Demand (AFY) Gallons per Capita Day  1998 120,091 22,874 170  1999 127,429 25,442 178  2000 134,686 29,901 198  2001 144,219 30,002 186  2002 154,936 35,182 203  2003 163,925 34,536 188  2004 173,279 39,579 204  2005 180,704 37,678 186  2006 186,119 41,258 198  2007 191,032 41,909 196  2008 194,791 38,045 174  2009 197,705 34,971 158  2010 200,704 31,175 139  Source: SANDAG Series 13 population forecast based on 2010 Census     SECTION 6   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐1  Service Area Supplies  6.1 Water Resources  This section discusses the water sources available to the District.  6.1.1 Potable Water  The District currently meets all its potable demands with imported treated water from the Water  Authority.  The Water Authority, as a wholesale agency, imports both raw water and treated water for  delivery to its member agencies in San Diego County.  The Water Authority’s current and future supply  portfolio is discussed in more detail in its draft 2015 UWMP.  Existing potable water supply sources available to the District include purchases from the Water  Authority, and back‐up purchases from the City of San Diego’s Otay WTP on an as‐needed and as‐ available basis.  The supplies are further described below.  6.1.2 San Diego County Water Authority  The District receives potable water from the Water Authority via Pipeline Number 4 (Pipeline No. 4) of  the Second San Diego Aqueduct (Second Aqueduct), and from the 36‐inch Jamacha Pipeline. The latter  pipeline was placed in to operation in 2010, replacing the former La Mesa‐Sweetwater Extension (LMSE)  supply pipeline. Both of these conveyance facilities are owned and operated by the Water Authority.    Pipeline No. 4 delivers potable water treated at one of three facilities: the Metropolitan Skinner WTP  located in Riverside County, the Water Authority’s Twin Oaks Valley WTP in San Marcos, and the Water  Authority’s Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Facility.  The Jamacha Pipeline delivers water treated at the  Helix WD’s Levy Filtration Plant.  The Water Authority does not have contractual agreements with its member agencies to guarantee flow  rates or hydraulic gradients at its various flow control facility connections.  Generally, if the Water  Authority cannot obtain sufficient treated and/or raw water, or has delivery limitations for the water  requests of its 24 member agencies, the Water Authority will attempt to allocate the water delivery  shortfall to its member agencies on a proportional basis.    6.1.3 City of San Diego  Through a 1999 agreement with the City of San Diego, the District may obtain up to 10 million gallons  per day (mgd) of supply from the City’s Otay WTP.  The Otay WTP was originally constructed in 1940,  and has a current rated capacity of 34.4 mgd.  The City of San Diego’s typical demand for treated water  from the Otay WTP is less than 20 mgd.  Under the terms of the agreement, the City’s obligation to  supply treated water to the District is contingent upon it having surplus capacity available, beyond what  the City needs for its own area system.    The agreement also provides the District with the option of funding an expansion of the Otay WTP in  return for additional capacity rights.  Although in the past the City has planned for expansion of the  plant to a capacity of 60 mgd, the City currently has no committed plans or budget for expansion of the  plant.  The District does not currently have permanent facilities in place to take delivery of water from the Otay  WTP; instead a temporary “Lower Otay Pump Station (PS)” conveys flows to an Otay WD Interconnect.   The District has completed the design of a permanent Lower Otay PS (LOPS), but has deferred  construction of the facility.  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES   6‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   The District considers the supply of water from the Otay WTP to be an alternative source for use in the  South District area system when the Water Authority Pipeline No. 4 is out of service.    The agreement with the City of San Diego for potable water from the Otay WTP is included in  Appendix E.  6.1.4 Emergency Supplies  The District has established a goal to sustain a 10‐day outage of supply from the Water Authority  Pipeline No. 4 at any time of the year without a reduction in service level.  The District seeks to obtain  this level of supply reliability through the development of alternative water supplies, through  agreements with neighboring water districts, and through treated water storage.    For emergency events longer than the 10‐day aqueduct shutdowns noted previously, the District will  utilize emergency supplies developed by the Water Authority’s Emergency Storage Project (ESP).  The  ESP is designed to provide treated water service to all Water Authority member agencies during a two‐ month interruption in service of imported water deliveries into San Diego County.  The ESP is sized to  deliver up to 75 percent of each agency’s peak two‐month summer demand.  The key facilities of the  ESP include the Olivenhain Dam and Conveyance System, the Lake Hodges Interconnect, the San  Vicente‐Miramar Pipeline, and the expansion of San Vicente Reservoir.  6.2 Groundwater  The District currently does not obtain any of it supply from groundwater.  The District has studied  possible local groundwater development projects, but none to date have advanced to development.   Both the geology and the semi‐arid hydrologic conditions of the region limit groundwater supplies  within the service area.  Narrow river valleys with shallow alluvial deposits are characteristic of some of  the more productive groundwater basins.  Additionally, irrigation with imported water and over‐ pumping has led to excessive salinity in many of the most promising basins.  Outside of these alluvial  basins, much of the geology consists of fractured crystalline bedrock and fine‐grained sedimentary  deposits that are generally capable of yielding only small amounts of groundwater to domestic wells.  The District is continuing to investigate local groundwater opportunities as a means of reducing its  dependence on imported water. Possible concept‐level future groundwater projects are discussed in  more detail in Section 6.8 (Future Water Supplies).    Table 6‐1: Groundwater Volume Pumped  X None    6.3 Surface Water  The District does not have any local surface supplies of its own.  6.4 Stormwater  The District does not currently utilize stormwater to augment its water supply.  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐3  6.5 Wastewater and Recycled Water  6.5.1 Recycled Water Coordination  The District has two sources of recycled water supply: Recycled water produced locally at the District’s  Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF) and a recycled water supply produced at the City  of San Diego’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP). The RWCWRF is located near the  intersection of Campo Road/Highway 94 and Singer Lane within the Middle Sweetwater River basin.  The agencies that participate in recycled water planning for the District’s service area are as follows:  ■ Otay Water District ‐ Owns and operates RWCWRF and the recycled water distribution network  ■ City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department (MWWD) ‐ Owns and operates regional  interceptors, SBWRP, and Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)  6.5.2 Wastewater Collection & Treatment  Wastewater flows treated by the District originate in the Middle Sweetwater River basin, also known as  the Jamacha Basin. A majority of these flows are collected by the District, with the remainder being  collected by the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD), which is operated by the County of San Diego.   Current wastewater collection system flows for both agencies total approximately 1.54 mgd average dry  weather flow (ADWF), of which approximately 1.3 mgd is diverted to the RWCWRF.  Approximately  0.92 mgd is collected from District customers and 0.62 mgd is collected from SVSD customers.    Wastewater collection and treatment within the District service area is summarized in Table 6‐2:   Table 6‐2:  Wastewater Collected Within Service Area in 2015  Name of Wastewater  Collection Agency  Wastewater Volume  Metered or  Estimated?               Volume of  Wastewater Collected  in 2015                   Name of  Wastewater  Treatment Agency  Receiving Collected  Wastewater   Treatment Plant  Name  Is WWTP Located  Within UWMP  Area?    Otay Water District Metered 1,029 Otay Water District RWCWRF  Yes   San Diego County  Sanitation District Metered 691 Otay Water District RWCWRF  Yes  City of Chula Vista Estimated 11,500 City of San  Diego/Metro JPA  Point Loma  WWTP No  City of San Diego Estimated 900 City of San  Diego/Metro JPA  Point Loma  WWTP No  Total Wastewater Collected from Service Area  in 2015: 14,120            The RWCWRF has the ability to produce approximately 1.3 mgd of recycled water meeting Title 22  requirements. The RWCWRF is a scalping treatment facility: wastewater that is not treated by the facility  for beneficial reuse continues to flow in the Rancho San Diego Outfall Facilities to the City of San Diego  Metropolitan Wastewater System.  Some of this wastewater is treated by MWWD at its SBWRP at the  secondary level, and the remainder is sent to the Point Loma WWTP for treatment at the advanced  primary level and disposed through an ocean outfall. At RWCWRF, tertiary treatment of the 1.3 mgd has  the ability to reliably produce approximately 1,100 AFY of recycled water.    SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES   6‐4 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   The RWCWRF provides tertiary treatment that meets the State of California’s Title 22 requirements for  reuse.  Effluent from the plant is pumped to lined and covered reservoirs in the District’s property  located north of Proctor Valley Road adjacent to the Rolling Hills Ranch Development project.    The estimated annual treated flow is shown in Table 6‐3.    Table 6‐3 Wastewater Treatment and Discharge within Service Area in 2015  Wastewater  Treatment Plant  Treatment Level Volume Treated Volume Discharged Volume Recycled Water  Served  RWCWRF Tertiary 1,167 138 1,029  Table Notes    6.5.3 Recycled Water System  The District operates and maintains over 93 miles of recycled water transmission and distribution  pipelines, pump stations and reservoirs, making it one of the largest recycled water systems in San Diego  County. The District’s mandatory reuse ordinance, land development conditions, and public outreach  has resulted in a stakeholder acceptance of recycled water as a viable local water supply for irrigation,  especially during these recent drought conditions. The District continues to successfully serve recycled  water to customers within its central service area, south of the Sweetwater Reservoir and west of the  Otay Lakes Reservoirs. The majority of the area represents the Otay Ranch GPD area within the City of  Chula Vista.   In order to serve the District’s existing demand for recycled water, the District entered into an  agreement to purchase recycled water from the City of San Diego’s SBWRP.  The SBWRP has a rated  capacity of 15 mgd and is located at Monument and Dairy Mart Roads near the international border,  adjacent to the Tijuana River.  The SBWRP receives wastewater flow from the Grove Avenue Pump  Station that scalps flow from the existing interceptor system that conveys flow northward to the Point  Loma Treatment Plant for treatment and ocean outfall disposal.  The existing interceptor system flows  are thereby reduced, freeing up additional capacity for future growth in the South Bay region.  The  SBWRP in essence is a scalping plant and is designed for a relatively constant flow rate depending upon  recycled water demands and interceptor capacity limitations.    The agreement between the District and the City of San Diego for purchase of recycled water from the  SBWRP was finalized on October 20, 2003.  In accordance with the agreement, the City of San Diego will  provide an annual amount of at least 6 mgd of recycled water to District.  The term of the agreement is  20 years from January 1, 2007.  The agreement with the City of San Diego for water from the SBWRP is  included in Appendix F.  The City of San Diego has agreed to meet all applicable federal, state and local  health and water quality requirements for recycled water produced at the SBWRP to the point of  delivery.  The point of delivery is located at the intersection of Dairy Mart Road and Camino de la Plaza.   As part of the agreement, the District has constructed a 30‐inch transmission main to deliver the  recycled water from the point of delivery to the District.  The City of San Diego has retained 1 mgd of  capacity in this transmission pipeline that runs through the City of San Diego’s system.    6.5.4 Recycled Water Beneficial Uses  The District’s service area is still experiencing growth and development in the geographic area where  recycled water is approved for use.  Expansion of the District’s recycled water system is critical to  reducing demands on imported water. The area with the greatest potential for expansion is the existing  Central service area. The District anticipates maximizing the use of recycled water by continuing to  require new developments within the District to use recycled water, wherever feasible.    SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐5  The District’s 2015 Master Plan Update included an assessment of current and future demand for  recycled water based on approved Subarea Master Plans or water studies.  For areas without  development plans, the projected water demand for the District at ultimate development was  determined by applying irrigated area percentages and recycled water irrigation duty factors. Most of  the currently identified uses are for outdoor irrigation.     The District currently serves recycled water to approximately 700 customers. In 2015, approximately  4,225 AF of recycled water was supplied to recycled water users.  Current uses consist primarily of  commercial landscape irrigation, golf course irrigation, and irrigation of public places like parks,  streetscapes, schools, highway medians, and open space areas.  The Olympic Training Center facility in  Chula Vista also uses recycled water to irrigate practice fields and landscape common areas.    The District’s 2015 recycled water use and future projections are presented in Table 6‐4.   Table 6‐4. Current and Projected Recycled Water Use within Service Area  Beneficial Use Type 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040  Landscape irrigation (excluding golf courses) 4,070 5,385 5,600 5,685 5,870 6,155  Golf course irrigation 270 285 300 315 330 345  Total 4,340 5,670  5,900  6,000  6,200  6,500   Notes  Recycled water use in FY2015 compared to the projections presented in the 2010 UWMP is shown in  Table 6‐5.  Table 6‐5. 2010 UWMP Recycled Water Use Projection Compared to 2015 Actual  Use Type 2010 Projection for  2015  2015 Actual Use  Landscape irrigation (excluding golf courses)  4,400  4,070  Golf course irrigation 270  Total 4,400 4,340    6.5.5 Proposed Actions to Encourage Use of Recycled Water  The District made the commitment and commenced its wastewater recycling efforts over 15 years ago.   A major component of the commitment to recycle was to enact an ordinance that requires recycled  water be used for any and all appropriate and approved non‐potable uses.  The requirement continues  today, with all new applications for water service being reviewed for opportunities to use recycled  water.  The District’s Code of Ordinance Section 26 (Appendix G) details the requirements for the use of  recycled water whenever feasible.   Table 6‐6 Retail: Methods to Expand Future Recycled Water Use  Name of Action Planned Implementation  Year  Expected Increase in  Recycled Water Use             Park and greenbelt irrigation 2020‐2040 400   Multi‐family common area landscape and streetscape irrigation 2020‐2040 400  Total 800  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES   6‐6 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC     6.6 Desalinated Water Opportunities  A portion of the District’s existing potable supply from the Water Authority originates at the Water  Authority’s Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Facility. During winter periods, supply from the facility may  constitute more than 50 percent of the District’s supply.  In addition, the District is also evaluating an option to enter into a water purchase agreement for supply  from a proposed seawater desalination facility in Rosarito, Mexico, as described further below.   6.6.1 Water Purchase Agreement ‐‐ Rosarito Desalination Plant  The District is currently investigating the feasibility of purchasing water from a seawater desalination  plant that is planned to be located in Rosarito Beach, Baja California, Mexico. The District’s CIP (P2451) is  known as the Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project (OMCDSP).  The treatment facility will be designed, constructed, and operated in Mexico through a public‐private  partnership agreement between the state of Baja, California and a private company. The District would  purchase the desalinated water under the terms of a water purchase agreement. The plant and  conveyance system are primarily intended to supply the Tijuana regional area and if an agreement can  be negotiated, the conveyance would be extended to the International Border to serve the District. The  current plan is to build a 100 mgd plant. Based upon the most recent demand forecasts in this master  plan, the District would purchase up to an average of approximately 20 mgd ultimately.  The District has completed a draft of the preliminary design report for the pipeline from the Border to  Roll Reservoir. The need for a pump station has not yet been determined and the disinfection  requirements have not been finalized and therefore the preliminary design for these facilities has not  been started. The District is preparing a combined Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/ Environmental  Impact Statement (EIS) with the Department of State serving as the lead federal agency. A first draft of  the EIR/EIS is expected in May 2016. The cost of the OMCDSP facilities in the United States is estimated  at $30 million.  The project remains subject to various uncertainties, and is not sufficiently advanced in its planning for  the District to characterize the project as a verifiable future supply. Nevertheless the District intends to  continue project planning efforts with the goal of making this supply a reality at a future date.  6.7 Exchanges or Transfers  At the wholesale level, the Water Authority has engaged in a transfer with the Imperial Irrigation District  (IID), and a portion of the District’s supply from the Water Authority derives from this transfer  arrangement.  Under this agreement, water conserved by IID will be transported by Metropolitan  through the Colorado River Aqueduct and delivered to the Water Authority.  Further information about  this agreement can be found in the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP.   At the retail level, the District does not have any transfer or exchange supplies of its own; however, the  District is evaluating an option to transfer stored water from the Cadiz Valley aquifer project, as  described further below.   6.7.1 Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project  The Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery and Storage Project is a two part project wherein Cadiz  Inc. would construct a wellfield on the Cadiz Valley property in the Mojave Desert. Recovered  groundwater would be conveyed to participating water providers from the wellfield via a 43 mile  pipeline to the Colorado River Aqueduct. Participating water providers will also have the ability to  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐7  decrease or forego their water delivery in certain years, such as wet years, and carry it over to future  years when it may be needed. This carry‐over water would be stored in the aquifer system at Cadiz  Valley. Ultimately, Cadiz Inc. projects 50,000 AFY to be made available for purchase. At this time, the  District conceptually anticipates purchasing 5,000 AFY.  6.8 Future Water Supplies  In 2015, the District started the update of their Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) which examines  potential, future supply options and its performance with regard to long‐term, comprehensive water  resource objectives.  The 2015 IRP provides a comprehensive and defensible implementation strategy to  meet the District’s water supply objectives, while allowing flexibility in adapting to anticipated changes  in the water industry, market and regulatory conditions.  The IRP proposes a phased implementation of  projects from now to 2030 to meet growing future water demands, while making adjustments as  necessary to respond to changing technology, supply levels, regulations, market conditions, costs, and  partnership opportunities.    The overall implementation strategy developed in the IRP is intended to assist the District in addressing  uncertainties surrounding future water supply by reducing dependence on imported sources.  The IRP  concludes that implementation of the plan will support the District in attaining its multiple objectives of  achieving reliability, maintaining affordability, increasing flexibility, increasing diversity, and addressing  environmental and institutional constraints.    The IRP identified six (6) supply options, including water conservation, groundwater development,  additional imported water alternatives, ocean desalination, recycled water, and the expansion of  treatment agreements with local agencies.  Within these six (6) source categories, the IRP assessed  13 individual water supply project options in terms of costs and non‐monetary factors. The District  selected these options for an implementation path or roadmap to keep the District on track in  accomplishing long‐term goals, while strategically making investments only if and when necessary.    In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, new development project proponents who  anticipate a water demand that exceeds what was planned for that area are required to acquire a water  supply source and/or participate in the development of alternative water supply projects to offset the  anticipated additional demand. These new water supply projects are in response to the regional water  supply issues related to the Sacramento‐San Joaquin Delta and the current ongoing western states  drought conditions.  They are in various states of the planning process and are intended to increase  water supplies to serve new development project water supply needs.  It is anticipated that future  Water Management Plans prepared by the District, the Water Authority, and Metropolitan will include  any increases in water demand associated with adopted changes in land use, as well as any new local  water supply resources, and will provide the planning tools necessary to ensure a water supply plan to  meet the needs of future planned development.  However, until those plans are adopted, it is necessary  to address the current regional water supply shortage by offsetting projected increases in water  demands with local water supply offset projects.  The following future water supply projects  summarized in Table 6‐7 have been proposed and the current status of each is described in the  paragraphs below.  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES   6‐8 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   Table 6‐7: Expected Future Water Supply Projects or Programs  Name of Future Projects  or Programs Description    Status  Planned  Implementation  Year               Expected Increase in   Water Supply to  Agency   Rosarito Desalination Plant Seawater Desalination Planned 2025 15,100  Rancho del Rey GW Well Brackish Groundwater Planned 2030 500  Middle Sweetwater River  Basin GW Well Groundwater Recovery Conceptual 2030 1,000  Otay Mesa Lot 7 GW Well Groundwater Recovery Conceptual 2030 400  North District Recycled  System Tertiary Conceptual 2030 800  NOTES:  6.8.1 Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well  In 1991, the McMillin Development Company drilled the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well to augment  grading water supplies for its Rancho del Rey development projects.  Although the well was considered a  “good producer,” little was known regarding its water quality and sustainable yield because the water  was used solely for earthwork (i.e. dust control and soil compaction).  The well was drilled to 865 feet,  with a finished depth of 830 feet and produced approximately 400 AFY of low quality water for four  years until its use was discontinued in April 1995 when the well was no longer needed.  McMillin  notified the District of its intent to sell off the groundwater well asset.  In 1997, the District purchased an existing 7‐inch well and the surrounding property on Rancho del Rey  Parkway from the McMillin Company with the intent to develop it as a source of potable water.  Treatment was required to remove salts and boron, among other constituents, using reverse osmosis  membranes and ion exchange.  In 2000, having received proposals for the design and construction of a reverse osmosis treatment  facility that far exceeded the allocated budget, the Board of Directors instructed staff to suspend the  project until such time as it became economically viable.  In January 2010, citing the rising cost of imported water and the District's interest in securing its own  water source for long‐term supply reliability, the Board authorized Phase 1 for drilling and development  of the Rancho del Rey Well.  In September 2010, a new 12‐inch production well was drilled to 900 feet through the groundwater  formation and into fractured bedrock. Testing showed the long‐term yield of the new well to be 450  gallons per minute (gpm), higher than previous studies had estimated. Separation Processes, Inc., a  highly qualified membrane treatment firm, was hired to conduct a detailed economic feasibility study to  confirm that the annualized unit cost of the new water source was economically competitive with other  sources. The economic study estimated the unit cost of water to be $1,510 per AF for an alternative that  utilizes a seawater membrane for treating both salts and boron. When compared with the current  imported treated water rate from the Water Authority, and with the knowledge that this rate will  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐9  continually increase as Metropolitan and the Water Authority raise its rates, the Rancho del Rey Well  project appears to be economically viable.  The District is continuing to pursue the Rancho del Rey groundwater well opportunity with due  consideration of the recommendations of the existing reports and plans to develop a groundwater well  production facility to extract approximately 500 AFY. For water planning purposes, production of  groundwater from the Rancho del Rey well is considered “additional planned” for local supplies. The  District contracted for the design of the wellhead treatment facilities and has prepared the project  environmental analysis. At the present time, the project is on hold until the economics are more  favorable.   6.8.1.1 San Diego Groundwater Basin Description  The Rancho Del Rey well is located within the Lower Sweetwater Hydrologic Area (HA 909.10), and  develops supply from what is believed to be the eastern edge of the San Diego Formation.  The San  Diego Formation is comprised of thick semi‐consolidated and unconsolidated older sediments that  underlie a large portion of San Diego, National City, and Chula Vista. The Formation extends to depths of  1000 feet or more, and is characterized by complex geology with extreme vertical and horizontal non‐ uniformity. The San Diego Formation extends eastward to the Rose Canyon and La Naçion faults, but the  western, northern, and southern boundaries of the aquifer are less well documented.   Little is known about the recharge sources of the San Diego Formation, and overdraft and seawater  intrusion implications are yet to be assessed.  In 2001, the U.S. Geological Survey, City of San Diego, the  District, Sweetwater Authority, and San Diego County Water Authority engaged in a long‐term, multi‐ phase study of the San Diego Formation aimed at: (1) achieving better understanding of the San Diego  Formation hydrogeology; and, (2) assessing the potential for additional groundwater extraction and  recharge.  Both the Sweetwater Hydrologic Area and the San Diego Formation are unadjudicated and neither has  an adopted groundwater management plan.  Sweetwater Authority in 2001, however, adopted an  interim groundwater management plan for the San Diego Formation that limits groundwater production  to prevent seawater intrusion and land subsidence.  6.8.2 Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Project  The Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well is an additional water supply project that was  thoroughly studied and documented in the 1990s.  The Middle Sweetwater River Basin is located within  the Sweetwater River watershed and that reach of the river extends from Sweetwater Reservoir to the  upstream Loveland Reservoir.  The next step in development of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin  Groundwater Well is the implementation of a pilot well project. The ultimate objective of the District is  to develop a groundwater well production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of  producing a sustainable yield of potable water as a local supply.  The purpose of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot project is to identify the  feasibility of developing a groundwater resource production system and then determine and assess any  limitations or constraints that may arise. The Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot  Project will accomplish six primary goals:  ■ Update project setting   ■ Update applicable project alternatives analysis  ■ Prepare groundwater well pilot project implementation plan  ■ Construct and test pilot monitoring and extraction wells  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES   6‐10 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   ■ Provide recommendations regarding costs and feasibility to develop a groundwater well  production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of producing a sustainable  yield of potable water  ■ Prepare groundwater well production project implementation plan and scope of work  The groundwater conjunctive use concept is described as the extraction of the quantity of water from  the groundwater basin that was placed there by customers of the District, Helix WD, and Padre Dam  Municipal Water District by means of its use of imported treated water that contributed to the overall  volume of groundwater within the basin.  An estimated quantity was developed to be approximately  12.5 percent of the total consumption of the District customers within that basin, as measured by water  meters.  In the 1994‐1995 period, the quantity of water that was returned to the groundwater basin by  District customers was estimated to be 810 AFY.  Currently, that 12.5 percent quantity could be on the  order of 1,000 AFY.  A scope of work addresses this concept while further development of the  groundwater basin as an additional supply resource is appropriately considered. If it is deemed that a  Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Production Project is viable then the consultant will  develop and provide a groundwater well production project implementation plan, cost estimate, and  related scope of work.    Further development of the groundwater basin to enhance the total groundwater production could be  accomplished by the District by means of additional extraction of water from the basin that is placed  there by means of either injection and/or spreading basins using imported untreated water as the  resource supply.  The existing LMSE Pipeline, owned by the Water Authority, once converted to an  untreated water delivery system, could be the conveyance system to transport untreated water for  groundwater recharge in support of this conjunctive use concept. These two distinct water resource  supply conjunctive use concepts will be addressed so they may coexist and to allow development in  separate phases.  6.8.3 Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well  In early 2001 the District was approached by a landowner representative about possible interest in  purchasing an existing well or alternatively, acquiring groundwater supplied from the well located on  Otay Mesa.  The then‐landowner, National Enterprises, Inc., reportedly stated that the well could  produce 3,200 AFY with little or no treatment required prior to introducing the water into the District  potable water system or alternatively, the recycled water system.  In March 2001 authorization to  proceed with testing of the Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well was obtained and the District proceeded  with the investigation of this potential groundwater supply opportunity.  In May 2001 an investigation was conducted to assess the Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well.  The scope of work  included a geohydrologic evaluation of the well, analyses of the water quality samples, management  and review of the well video log, and documentation of well pump testing. The primary findings, as  documented in the “Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation” report, formed the basis of the following  recommendations:  ■ For the existing well to be used as a potable water supply resource, a sanitary seal must be  installed in accordance with the California Department of Health guidelines.  ■ Drawdown in the well must be limited to avoid the possibility of collapsing the casing.  ■ Recovery from pumping drawdown is slow and extraction would need to be terminated for up to  2 days to allow for groundwater level recovery.  ■ The well water would need to be treated and/or blended with potable water prior to introduction  into the potable water distribution system.  SECTION 6 – SERVICE AREA SUPPLIES    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐11  The existing Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well, based upon the above findings was determined not to be a reliable  municipal supply of potable water and that better water quality and quantity could be discovered  deeper or at an alternative location within the San Diego Formation.  The District may still continue to pursue the Otay Mesa groundwater well opportunity with due  consideration of the recommendations of the existing report.  Based on the recommendations of the  investigation report, a groundwater well production facility at Otay Mesa Lot 7 could realistically extract  approximately 400 AFY.    6.8.4 North District Recycled Water Concept Project  Under this project, the District would serve up to 1.3 mgd of recycled water demands in the North  System via the RWCWRF. Effluent from the RWCWRF is currently pumped by the District to irrigate golf  courses, parks, and open space in Eastern Chula Vista, which is in the Central Area System and at a  higher elevation than the North System. This project would reduce the conveyance costs that are  currently incurred in pumping recycled water from the RWCWRF to Eastern Chula Vista. Existing  recycled water users in Chula Vista would have to be provided with an alternate supply.  Infrastructure required for this project includes conveyance to the North System as well as retrofits to  the RWCWRF chlorine contact basin, effluent pump station, and data collection and logging systems, per  the North District Recycled Water System Phase I Concept Study.  Inter‐agency coordination will be required for this project with the Regional Water Quality Control  Board and Sweetwater Authority. Additionally, coordination with the City of Chula Vista would be  required.  6.9 Summary of Existing and Planned Sources of Water  The District’s total current and planned supplies are shown in Table 6‐8 and Table 6‐9.  Actual 2015  supplies are based on Water Authority sales and recycled water sales. Projected supplies are based on  growth projections (with near‐term annexations) in the District’s service area as forecasted by SANDAG  Series 13.   Table 6‐8: Water Supplies — Actual 2015  Water Supply         2015  Actual  Volume Water Quality               Purchased or Imported  Water  30,299 Drinking   Recycled Water 4,340 Recycled  Total 34,629   NOTES:  SECTION 6   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 6‐12  Table 6‐9: Water Supplies — Projected  Water Supply         Additional Detail on  Water Supply  Projected Water Supply                                                                                                         2020 2025 2030 2035 2040   Reasonably Available  Volume  Reasonably Available  Volume  Reasonably Available  Volume  Reasonably Available  Volume  Reasonably Available  Volume  Purchased or  Imported Water 1     37,050 42,530 44,891 45,501 51,082  Recycled Water 1    5,670 5,900 6,000 6,200 6,500  Total Verifiable Water Supplies 2 42,720 48,430 50,891 51,701 57,582  City of San Diego  Otay WTP 3 Backup potable supply 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000  Total Verifiable and Available Water Supplies  52,720 58,430 60,891 61,701 67,582  Rosarito  Desalination Plant Planned  15,100 15,600 16,100 16,800  Rancho Del Rey GW  Well Planned   500 500 500  Middle Sweetwater  River Basin GW  Well  Conceptual   1,000 1,000 1,000  Otay Mesa Lot 7  GW Well Conceptual   400 400 400  North District  Recycled System Conceptual   800 800 800  Total Planned and Conceptual Water Supplies  15,100 18,300 18,800 19,500  Total Water Supplies 52,720 73,530 79,191 80,501 87,082  NOTES:  1. Amounts for Purchased/Imported and Recycled are those the District anticipates using to meet projected demands. Additional supply capacity may exist.  2. Total supplies includes water savings from active and passive conservation efforts.  3. Otay WTP availability is a District estimate, subject to the terms of the District’s agreement with the City of San Diego.    SECTION 7   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 7‐1    Water Service Reliability  7.1 Reliability of Supply  The Act states that every urban water supplier shall include, as part of its plan, an assessment of the  reliability of its water supplies.  The water supply and demand assessment must compare the total  projected water use with the expected water supply over the next 25 years in 5‐year increments.  This  reliability assessment is required for normal, single dry‐year and multiple dry water years.  The District currently obtains 100 percent of its potable water supply as imported water from the Water  Authority.  Historically, the Water Authority has relied on imported water supplies purchased from  Metropolitan to meet the needs of its member agencies. Metropolitan’s supplies come from two  primary sources, the State Water Project (SWP) and the Colorado River. However, after experiencing  severe shortages from Metropolitan during the 1987–1992 drought, the Water Authority began  aggressively pursuing actions to diversify the region’s supply sources and has been able to do so through  comprehensive supply and facility planning. The reliability of the District’s potable supply is dependent  on these wholesale agencies.  The District is committed to investing in alternative water sources, such as  groundwater or desalination that would reduce its dependence on imported water.    Metropolitan’s 2015 UWMP includes a discussion of supply reliability.  Metropolitan used a computer  model to evaluate 70 years of historic hydrology and develop estimates of water surplus or shortage.   The driest year on record was 1977, and the driest three‐year period was 1990‐92.  The analysis  determined that Metropolitan could maintain reliable supplies during normal or dry‐year conditions  during the period 2015 through 2040, even through multiple dry year periods.    The Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP also includes a discussion of supply reliability.  While, the Water  Authority will continue to rely on Metropolitan to help meet water demands, additional planned  resources by the Water Authority and its member agencies have also been identified. Additional  planned projects can further reduce the region’s reliance on sources of supply from Metropolitan, such  as the Bay‐Delta.  The Water Authority prepared an assessment of its supply reliability during a normal  year hydrology, a single dry year hydrology (2015 based on the present drought beginning in 2012), and  multiple dry years scenarios (2013‐2015).  Results from the Water Authority’s reliability assessment  demonstrate that the region’s existing and projected water resource mix is drought‐resilient, with only  minor shortages during multiple dry periods occurring 15 to 20 years in the future.   The District continues to work closely with the Water Authority and Metropolitan for future water  supply planning.  These wholesale agencies [Water Authority and Metropolitan] have determined that  they will be able to meet its projected demands through 2040, which include potable water demands for  the District.  The District has concluded that these wholesale agencies will be able to provide water to  meet the District’s projected demands.  Based on the information provided by Metropolitan and the  Water Authority, the water supply available to the District is considered to be reliable and drought‐ resilient.  Individual components of the supply, such as the Colorado River and State Water Project, may  experience dry years or extended droughts; however, this is a natural hydrological occurrence in  California.  The diversified improvements put in place by Metropolitan and the Water Authority have led  these agencies to state that they will be able to meet demands of their respective member agencies for  the next 25 years.  The Water Authority has provided the District documentation of this supply.  The  documentation is included in Appendix H.  SECTION 7 – WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY   7‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   The District currently relies on the Water Authority for its potable supply and has worked with the  Water Authority to prepare consistent demand projections for the District’s service area.  To maintain  consistency in planning efforts, the District has shown future supplies meeting future demands. If the  District’s future demands are slightly more or less than currently projected, it is anticipated that the  supply portfolio maintained by the Water Authority and Metropolitan will be flexible enough to  continue to meet the District’s demands.  Recycled water demands are to be met with recycled water from the District’s RWCWRF and the City of  San Diego’s SBWRP.  During dry periods, many conservation measures are focused on reducing outdoor  water use, which does not contribute to wastewater flow.  In addition, because both of these recycled  water facilities are scalping plants, the recycled water output is limited by the treatment capacity and  not by the supply of raw wastewater.  Therefore, the District’s recycled supply is not expected to be  subject to reduction during dry periods.  Throughout this section, projected supplies are shown to match projected demands.  This level of  reliability is based on the documentation in the UWMPs prepared by Metropolitan and the Water  Authority, as listed in Appendix H.  These agencies have determined that they will be able to meet the  District’s potable demands, during normal, single dry and multiple dry year conditions through 2040  with the exception of rare protracted dry year conditions, as noted in the Water Authority’s 2015  UWMP.  As shown in Tables 9‐3 through 9‐6 of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP under multiple dry  year conditions, these tables present potential water supply shortages of varying degrees over the 25‐ year planning horizon. These shortages can be mitigated through extraordinary water conservation  actions and if necessary, dry‐year transfers. Section 9.5 of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP describes  its additional planned supply projects that could be utilized to meet potential water shortages during dry  year scenarios. Because the Water Authority has determined that they will be able to meet the District’s  potable demands, during normal, single dry and multiple dry year conditions through 2040, this 2015  UWMP assumes potable supplies will remain unchanged under all hydrologic conditions (except where  noted in the following tables)   Water supply reliability based on an average water year is summarized in Table 7‐1.  The Water  Authority uses a computer model known as CWA‐MAIN to estimate water demands.  CWA‐MAIN uses  demographic and economic data, as well as weather data, to estimate water demands.  Using CWA‐ MAIN, the Water Authority estimated dry‐year demands for five‐year increments from 2020 through  2040.  According to models used during preparation of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, water  demand is expected to increase in the dry years. In fact, dry year demand was, on average, 7.5 percent  higher than the normal demands over the period of record used in the CWA‐MAIN model. Recycled  water supply is also expected to increase in 5‐year increments as demand for recycled increases relative  to increasing irrigation demand.  SECTION 7 – WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 7‐3  Table 7‐1: Basis of Water Year Data  Year Type Base Year   Available supplies if   year type repeats  (% of avg supply)  Average Year 1960‐2013 100%  Single‐Dry Year 2015 107%  Multiple‐Dry Years 1st Year 2013 108%  Multiple‐Dry Years 2nd Year 2014 114%  Multiple‐Dry Years 3rd Year 2015 121%  NOTES:  7.2 Projected Normal Year Supply and Demand  The District’s potable water supply is expected to continue to be supplied by the Water Authority during  normal year scenarios.  As stated previously, the Water Authority has determined that it will be able to  meet the District’s potable demands, during normal year conditions through 2040.   The projected supply and demand comparison under normal conditions is shown in Table 7‐2. The  District has implemented water conservation measures and currently maintains a per capita demand of  118 gpcd.  In order to meet its projected conservation targets, the District will continue to encourage  water conservation and implement the measures outlined in its Water Shortage Response Program  (District Code of Ordinance Section 39), which is included as Appendix I of this UWMP.   Table 7‐2: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison     2020 2025 2030 2035 2040  Supply totals 1                42,720 48,430 50,891 51,701 57,582  Demand totals 2             42,720 48,430 50,891 51,701 57,582  Difference 0  0  0  0  0   NOTES: Supply numbers from Table 6‐9; Demand numbers from Table 4‐3  1 Water Authority UWMP analysis shows 100 percent supply reliability for these conditions so total supplies are set equal to  District projected demands  2 District demand totals with additional conservation    SECTION 7 – WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY   7‐4 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   7.3 Projected Single Dry Year Supply and Demand  Comparison  Changes in weather can lead to changes in water use.  During dry years, water demands can be expected  to increase.  The Water Authority uses a computer model known as CWA‐MAIN to estimate water  demands.  CWA‐MAIN uses demographic and economic data, as well as weather data, to estimate water  demands.  Using CWA‐MAIN, the Water Authority estimated dry‐year demands for five‐year increments  from 2015 through 2040.  Notably, the District’s recycled water was assumed to be “drought‐resistant”  and not subject to reduction during dry periods. The dry‐year demand analysis from the Water Authority  reflects long‐term water use efficiency, but does not incorporate potential savings due to extraordinary  conservation occurring during droughts. This approach allows for a more comprehensive shortage  analysis and drought response planning.  The District’s potable water supply is expected to continue to be supplied by the Water Authority during  single dry year scenarios.  The Water Authority has determined that it will be able to meet the District’s  potable demands, during single dry year conditions through 2040 with the exception of rare protracted  dry year conditions, as noted in the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP. The supplies available from Water  Authority member agency projected recycling, potable reuse, and groundwater recovery projects are  assumed to experience little, if any, reduction in a dry year. The Water Authority’s existing and planned  conserved supplies from the IID transfer, canal lining projects, and Carlsbad Desalination Plant are also  considered “drought‐resilient” supplies as discussed in the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP. For this  single dry‐year assessment, it was assumed that Metropolitan would have adequate supplies in storage  and would not be allocating supplies to the Water Authority. With the previous years leading up to the  single dry‐year being wet or average hydrologic conditions, Metropolitan should have adequate supplies  in storage to cover potential shortfalls in core supplies and would not need to allocate supplies. Because  the Water Authority has determined that it will be able to meet the District’s potable demands, during  normal, single dry and multiple dry year conditions through 2040, this UWMP assumes potable supplies  will be sufficient under this single year hydrologic condition and extend over the planning horizon.  Recycled water supply is also expected to increase in 5‐year increments as demand for recycled water  increases relative to increasing irrigation demand.  The projected single dry‐year supplies and demands are compared in Table 7‐3.  Table 7‐3: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison    2020 2025 2030 2035 2040  Supply totals 1 45,748 56,213 61,125 63,932 75,087  Demand totals 2 45,748 56,213 61,125 63,932 75,087  Difference 0  0  0  0  0   NOTES:  1 Water Authority UWMP analysis shows 100 percent supply reliability for these conditions so total supplies are set equal to  District projected demands  2 District demand totals with additional conservation and proportional adjustment for dry year demands per Water Authority  CWA‐MAIN model during period of record    SECTION 7 – WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 7‐5  7.4 Projected Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand  Comparison  The Act requires water agencies to project demands and supplies during multiple dry years.  Projections  were prepared for five time frames: five‐year periods ending in 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035 and 2040.   Changes in weather can lead to changes in water use.  During dry years, water demands can be expected  to increase.  Using CWA‐MAIN, the Water Authority estimated dry‐year demands for five‐year  increments from 2020 through 2040.  According to models used during preparation of the Water  Authority’s 2015 UWMP, water demand is expected to increase in the dry years.  Notably, the District’s  recycled water supply was assumed to be “drought‐resistant” and not subject to reduction during dry  periods.   For the multi dry‐year reliability analysis, the conservative planning assumption is that Metropolitan will  be allocating supplies to its member agencies, including the Water Authority. By assuming allocations in  this reliability assessment, it allows the Water Authority to analyze how storage supplies could  potentially be utilized and the likelihood of shortages. Currently, Metropolitan allocates supplies  through its Water Supply Allocation Plan. Because it is uncertain in the future how Metropolitan will  allocate supplies to its member agencies, the analysis in the tables assumes they are allocated based on  preferential right to Metropolitan supplies. (Refer to the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP Appendix G for  a complete discussion). The Water Authority has invested in carryover storage supply capacity, which it  can utilize in dry years to improve reliability of supply. In years where shortages may still occur, after  utilization of carryover storage, additional regional shortage management measures, consistent with the  Water Authority’s Water Shortage and Drought Response Plan, will be taken to fill the supply shortfall.  These measures could include extraordinary conservation, achieved through voluntary or mandatory  water‐use restrictions. The District will also implement additional water conservation measures, as  determined in their Water Shortage Response Plan.  Because the Water Authority has determined that it will be able to meet the District’s potable demands,  during multiple dry year conditions through 2040, this UWMP assumes potable supplies will increase  under this multiple dry year hydrologic conditions and extend over the planning horizon. Recycled water  supply is also expected to increase in as demand for recycled water increases relative to increasing  irrigation demand.  Recycled water will provide additional supply for irrigation purposes.   The estimated supply and demand for multiple dry years beginning after 2020 and extending over the  planning horizon to 2035 are summarized in Table 7‐4.  SECTION 7 – WATER SERVICE RELIABILITY   7‐6 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   Table 7‐4: Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison       2017‐2019 2021‐2023 2026‐2028 2031‐2033 2036‐2038  First year   Supply totals 1 38,844  46,346  52,239  54,832  56,138   Demand totals 2 38,844  46,346  52,239  54,832  56,138   Surplus/(Shortage) 3 0 0  0  0  0   Second  year   Supply totals 1 40,378  48,769  54,469  57,290  58,714   Demand totals 2 40,378  48,769  54,469  57,290  58,714   Surplus/(Shortage) 3 0 0  0  0  0   Third year   Supply totals 1 42,430  51,823  57,467  58,024  57,153   Demand totals 2 42,430  51,823  57,467  60,142  62,086   Surplus/(Shortage) 3 0 0  0  (2,118) (4,933)  NOTES:  1 Water Authority UWMP analysis shows 100 percent supply reliability for these conditions so total  supplies are set equal to District projected demands   2 District demand totals with additional conservation and proportional adjustment for dry year demands  per Water Authority CWA‐MAIN model during period of record  3 Third dry year supply shortages will be addressed through drought management actions.      SECTION 8   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 8‐1  Water Shortage Contingency Planning  This section documents the District’s Water Shortage Contingency Planning (WSCP) efforts per  requirements of Section 10632 of the Act. The purpose of the Water Shortage Response Plan (WSRP) is  to provide a plan of action to be followed during the various stages of a water shortage. This section  includes the following elements: action stages, prohibitions, penalties and consumption reduction  methods, revenue impacts of reduced sales, draft water shortage contingency resolution/ordinance,  actions to be implemented during a catastrophic interruption of water supplies, and estimate of  minimum supply available.   Specific guidance provided in the following DWR documents were used as a resource in preparing this  UWMP:    DWR Urban Drought Guidebook (2008 Edition) – This publication provides extensive guidance on  water shortage contingency planning for urban water suppliers.  http://www.water.ca.gov/pubs/planning/urban_drought_guidebook/urban_drought_guidebook_20 08.pdf   DWR California Drought Contingency Plan (2010)  http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/Final_CA_Drought_Contingency_Plan‐11‐18‐ 2010a.pdf   California’s Most Significant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent Conditions, DWR 2015   http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/California_Signficant_Droughts_2015_small.pdf  The District’s WSRP was last amended and approved by the Board of Directors via Ordinance 546 in  August 2014. The approved WSRP was used to develop this section. The WSRP is included in Appendix I.  8.1 Stages of Action  The Act requires documentation of actions to be undertaken during a water shortage. A water shortage  occurs when water supplies available to the District are insufficient to meet water demands. Water  supply shortages can occur for a variety of reasons including droughts, loss in ability to divert or store, or  supply water, and/or facility outages. This section describes the five‐stage approach and level of actions  for dealing with water shortages, with increasing restrictions on water use in response to worsening  water shortage conditions and decreasing available supplies. The District has developed actions to be  undertaken in response to water supply shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water  supply.   As a member agency of the Water Authority, the District is a participant in the Water Authority’s  shortage contingency analysis, which addresses a catastrophic shortage situation and the District’s  water shortage management measures and its responses to the Water Authority’s Drought  Management Plan (DMP) are shown in Table 8‐1.  Essentially, the District’s Code of Ordinance Section 39  establishes water management requirements necessary to conserve water, enable effective water  supply planning, assure reasonable and beneficial use of water, prevent waste of water, prevent  unreasonable use of water, prevent unreasonable methods of water use within the District in order to  assure adequate supplies of water to meet the needs of the public, and further the public health, safety,  and welfare, recognizing that water is a scarce natural resource that requires careful management not  only in times of a water shortage, but at all times.1                                                                1  Otay Water District, Code of Ordinance Section 39.  Water Shortage Response Program  SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING   8‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   This Section discusses the actions that might be taken depending on the severity of the shortage. Table  8‐1 describes the water supply shortage stages and conditions. The stages will be implemented during  water supply shortages according to shortage level, ranging from 10 percent shortage in Stage 1 to  greater than 50 percent shortage in Stage 4. The stage determination and declaration during a water  supply shortage will be made by the District.    Table 8‐1: Stages of Water Shortage Contingency Plan  Stage No. Percent Supply Reduction Water Supply Condition  1 10 A temporary general water supply shortage due to increased  demand or limited supplies   2 20 Up to 20 percent water supply shortage due to increased  demand or limited supplies Shortage could be declared by  wholesale water agency due to problems with disruption,  treatment, or storage facilities.  3 40 40 percent shortage declared by wholesale water agency or a  long‐term scheduled or unscheduled shutdown, major system  disruption. Signs of multi‐year drought.  4 50 Greater than 50 percent shortage declared by wholesale water  agency. Typically meant for immediate crisis such as major  infrastructure failure, unscheduled shutdown or disruption to  water supply and distribution systems. Water supply reserved  for health and safety needs.  Notes: In addition to the water shortage conditions specified by various stages of water supply scenarios, the  District has implemented a list of conservation actions in the District’s WSRP that are in force at all times  to prohibit water waste. Those conservation actions are summarized below:  ■ Prevent water waste resulting from inefficient irrigation, such as runoff or overspray. Similarly,  stop water flows onto non‐targeted areas, such as adjacent property, non‐irrigated areas,  hardscapes, roadways, or structures.  ■ Serve and refill water in restaurants and other food service establishments only upon request.  ■ Offer guests in hotels, motels, and other commercial lodging establishments the option of not  laundering towels and linens daily.  ■ Repair all water leaks within forty‐eight hours (48) of notification by the District unless other  arrangements are made with the General Manager or designee.  8.2 Prohibitions on End Uses  The District has established prohibitions that become effective during different stages of water  shortage.  The prohibitions on water use are shown in Table 8‐2. For the complete Otay Code of  Ordinance, Section 39, see Appendix I and the Code of Ordinance or at  http://www.otaywater.gov/code‐of‐ordinances/  The District will enforce mandatory reduction programs as necessary to decrease consumption during  a water shortage. The District currently has limits on consumption to discourage and/or prevent  excessive use during times of supply shortage, as specified in Stage 1 actions. However, during a time  SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 8‐3  of water shortage, the District will evaluate the need for any consumption limits, and the District may  adopt additional consumption limits as deemed appropriate.  Table 8‐2 Restrictions and Prohibitions on End Uses   Stage   Restrictions and Prohibitions on  End Users                         Additional Explanation or Reference        Penalty, Charge, or  Other  Enforcement?   1 Landscape ‐ Restrict or prohibit  runoff from landscape irrigation  Prevent water waste resulting from inefficient irrigation,  such as runoff or overspray. Similarly, stop water flows  onto non‐targeted areas, such as adjacent property, non‐ irrigated areas, hardscapes, roadways, or structures. No  1 CII ‐ Restaurants may only serve  water upon request  Serve and refill water in restaurants and other food service  establishments only upon request. No  1 CII ‐ Lodging establishment must  offer opt out of linen service  Offer guests in hotels, motels, and other commercial  lodging establishments the option of not laundering towels  and linens daily. No  1  Other ‐ Customers must repair  leaks, breaks, and malfunctions in  a timely manner  Repair all water leaks within forty‐eight hours (48) of  notification by the District unless other arrangements are  made with the General Manager or designee. No  1, 2  Landscape ‐ Limit landscape  irrigation to specific times  Irrigate residential and commercial landscape before 10  a.m. and after 6 p.m. only. Suggest that customers water  no more than three days per week, using the watering  schedule found on the District’s web page. New plantings  and newly seeded areas are exempt for 30 days. No  1, 2  Landscape ‐ Restrict or prohibit  runoff from landscape irrigation  Use a hand‐held hose equipped with a positive shut‐off  nozzle or bucket to water landscaped areas, including trees  and shrubs located on residential and commercial  properties that are not irrigated by a landscape irrigation  system. No  1, 2 Other  Irrigate nursery and commercial grower’s products before  10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only. Watering is permitted at any  time with a hand‐held hose equipped with a positive shut‐ off nozzle, a bucket, or when a drip/micro‐irrigation  system/equipment is used. Irrigation of nursery  propagation beds is permitted at any time. Watering of  livestock is permitted at any time. No  1   Water Features ‐ Restrict water  use for decorative water  features, such as fountains Use re‐circulated water to operate ornamental fountains. No  1   Other ‐ Prohibit vehicle washing  except at facilities using recycled  or recirculating water  Wash vehicles, including but not limited to motorcycles,  farm equipment, trailers, boats and boat engines and  motorhomes using a bucket and a hand‐held hose with  positive shut‐off nozzle, mobile high pressure/low volume  wash system, or at a commercial site that re‐circulates  (reclaims) water on‐site. Vehicle washing is limited to once  per week. No  1   Other ‐ Prohibit use of potable  water for construction and dust  control  Use recycled or non‐potable water for construction  purposes when available. No  2 Landscape ‐ Limit landscape  irrigation to specific times  Limit residential and commercial landscape irrigation to no  more than three days per week This section shall not apply  to homeowner’s vegetable gardens, fruit trees, commercial  growers, or nurseries. No  2 Landscape ‐ Other landscape  restriction or prohibition  Limit lawn watering and landscape irrigation using  sprinklers to no more than fifteen (15) minutes per No  SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING   8‐4 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   watering station per day. During the months of November  through April, landscape irrigation shall not exceed seven  (7) minutes per water watering station per assigned day.  Watering times may need to be shortened to avoid run‐off.  This provision does not apply to landscape irrigation  systems using water efficient devices, including but not  limited to: weather based controllers, drip/micro‐irrigation  systems, rotating sprinkler nozzles and stream rotor  sprinklers.  2, 3 Landscape ‐ Other landscape  restriction or prohibition  Water landscaped areas, including trees and shrubs  located on residential and commercial properties, and not  irrigated by a landscape irrigation system on the same  schedule set forth above by using a bucket, hand‐held hose  with positive shut‐off nozzle, or low‐volume non‐spray  irrigation. No  2 Other  Irrigation is not allowed during a rainstorm and for forty‐ eight hours after one‐quarter inch or more of rainfall is  measured at Lindbergh Field. No washing down of paved  surfaces, including but not limited to sidewalks, driveways,  parking lots, tennis courts, or patios, except when it is  necessary to alleviate safety or sanitation hazards. No  3  Landscape ‐ Limit landscape  irrigation to specific times  Limit residential and commercial landscape irrigation to no  more than two (2) assigned days per week on a schedule  established by the General Manager and posted by the  District. During the months of November through April,  landscape irrigation is limited to no more than once per  week on a schedule established by the General Manager or  designee and posted by the District. This section shall not  apply to commercial growers or nurseries. Yes  3  Other water feature or swimming  pool restriction  Stop filling or re‐filling ornamental lakes or ponds, except  to the extent needed to sustain aquatic life, provided that  such animals are of significant value and have been  actively managed within the water feature prior to  declaration of a water shortage response level under this  Section. Yes  3  Other water feature or swimming  pool restriction  Stop operating non‐residential ornamental fountains or  similar decorative water features unless recycled water is  used. Yes  3 Other water feature or swimming  pool restriction  Stop washing vehicles except at commercial carwashes  that re‐circulate water, or by high pressure/low volume  wash systems. If a commercial car wash cannot  accommodate the vehicle because of the vehicle size or  type, such as RVs, horse trailers, boats and commercial  vehicles, customers will be allowed to wash vehicles using  a bucket and a hand‐held hose with positive shut‐off  nozzle, mobile high pressure/low volume wash system. Yes  4  Landscape ‐ Other landscape  restriction or prohibition  Stop all landscape irrigation, except crops and landscape  products of commercial growers and nurseries. This  restriction shall not apply to the following categories of use  unless the District has determined that recycled water is  available and may be lawfully applied to the use. Yes  4  Other  Repair all water leaks within twenty‐four (24) hours of  notification by the District unless other arrangements are  made with the District. Yes  NOTES:    SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 8‐5  8.3 Penalties, Charges, Other Enforcement of Prohibitions   The District has established prohibitions that become effective during different stages of water  shortage.  For the complete Otay Code of Ordinance, Section 72, see Appendix J for Section 39 of the  Code of Ordinance or at http://www.otaywater.gov/code‐of‐ordinances/  The District will enforce mandatory reduction programs as necessary to decrease consumption during a  water shortage. The District currently has no set charge for penalties or fees for exceeding consumption  limits to be set during times of supply shortage (as described above). However, during a time of water  shortage of Stages 3 and 4, the District may establish water allocations and any person that uses water  in excess of the allocation shall be subject to a penalty.  Below is a summary of penalties and charges and the stage during which they take effect. The penalties  may consist of a surcharge for the violation.    All stages ‐ Termination of Supplies through code enforcement process   Stage 3 ‐ Flow restriction orifices for customers not meeting Stage 3 allocations   Stage 4 ‐ Flow restriction orifices for customers not meeting Stage 4 allocations  8.4 Consumption Reduction Methods  Consumption reduction methods are actions that are taken by the District to reduce water demand with  its service area, whereas prohibitions addressed in section 8.3 limit specific uses of water. Based on the  requirements of the Act, Table 8‐3 summarizes the methods that can be used by the District to enforce a  reduction in consumption, where necessary. As mentioned earlier, various water conservation programs  have been initiated by the District to reduce water demand. Additional measures can be phased in to  provide additional demand reductions and increase public awareness of the need to conserve water.  Conservation is a permanent and long‐term application used within the District at all times.   Table 8‐3: Stages of WSCP ‐ Consumption Reduction Methods    Stage Consumption Reduction Methods by Water  Supplier                                       Additional Explanation or Reference  1   Expand Public Information Campaign  The District will increase its public education and outreach  efforts to emphasize increased public awareness of the  need to implement the water conservation practices.   1 Offer Water Use Surveys Residential survey program   1  Provide Rebates on Plumbing Fixtures and  Devices  Showerhead distribution; Residential voucher program;  Residential high‐efficiency clothes washers program   1  Provide Rebates for Landscape Irrigation  Efficiency Various programs related to landscape irrigation    1 Provide Rebates for Turf Replacement    3  Moratorium or Net Zero Demand Increase on  New Connections      NOTE:    SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING   8‐6 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   8.5 Determining Water Shortage Reductions  Mechanisms to determine reductions in water use include Water Authority water purchase invoices and  records, which show prior use for comparison with District customer billing showing 36‐month prior  consumption history for each customer, and its Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)  system, as described below.  The District has implemented and operated for many years a SCADA system to control, monitor, and  collect data regarding the operation of the water system.  The major facilities that have SCADA  capabilities are the water supply source, transmission network, pumping stations, and water storage  reservoirs.  The SCADA system allows for many and varied useful functions.  Some of these functions  provide for operating personnel to monitor the water supply source flow rates and reservoir levels, as  well as turn pumps on or off.  The SCADA system aids in the prevention of water reservoir overflow  events and increases energy efficiency.  The SCADA system can be used to monitor demands and  evaluate the effectiveness of conservation measures.  The District’s mechanisms for monitoring water use are summarized below:   Daily production and distribution records will provide data on system‐wide changes in demand   Customer billing data will provide data on month‐to‐month changes in water use, and year‐to‐year  changes for key customers   SCADA system will provide data on short‐term changes in pumping, flow rates, or reservoir levels  showing increased water use  8.6 Revenue and Expenditure Impacts  An extended water shortage would reduce the amount of water sold by the District to its customers.   Since water bills are based on water consumption, the revenue received by the District would also be  reduced.  The most severe restrictions are intended to reduce consumption by 50 percent.  The impacts  of such a reduction on the District’s revenue are anticipated to be at least 29 percent of District  revenues, or $25.5 million.  A 50 percent reduction in consumption would also reduce the District’s expenditures.  The District’s  costs for acquiring and delivering the water to its customers would be reduced by approximately 20  percent of expenditures, or $17.0 million.   Some of the District’s costs might be increased, such as additional staff time for monitoring water use,  or enforcing conservation policies However, these efforts will be achieved by temporarily re‐directing  staff from other tasks.  These changes in operation are not expected to cause a significant increase in  the District’s total expenditures.  The figures above show a potential shortfall of $8.5 million annually if consumption were reduced 50  percent.  If the reduction was due to a short‐term situation, the District could absorb a portion of the  shortfall by drawing on its general fund reserves, which are maintained at a minimum of $15.1 million.   After conditions returned to normal, the District would replenish its reserves.  The reserve fund could be  restored to its target level by increasing rates one‐half percent in each of the next three years.    The District’s response would be more complex if the 50 percent reduction in consumption was  expected to be permanent.  The District would need to raise the average water bill by 4.5 percent per  year over six (6) years.  Two factors would mitigate the need for more immediate increases.  First, the  District’s general fund reserves could be used to temporarily fill the gap between expenditures and  revenues.  Second, the $8.5 million shortfall mentioned above includes a significant reduction that  would go to the Water Authority as it raises its rates, assuming the reduction was occurring across the  SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING    CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 8‐7  region.  To the extent the Water Authority’s rate stabilization fund was adequate they would likely  spread their rate increases over several years, allowing the District to do the same.  In order to overcome revenue impacts, the District has the option for the following measures:   Adjust rates at a 4.5 percent annual increase for four years up to a 20 percent increase in average  water bill   Develop additional reserves – reserves are currently maintained at a minimum of 15.1 million.  With  the rate adjustment, the District would replenish any draw‐down of reserves that occurred  A permanent 50 percent reduction in water consumption might allow the District to achieve cost savings  in some areas.  The need for additional pumping, storage, and pipeline capacity might be reduced.  The  District might not require as much equipment or staff to maintain its infrastructure.  However, the  District might see higher expenditures in other areas, such as water use monitoring or answering  questions from customers.  Overall, these changes are not expected to have a significant impact on  District expenditures.  8.7 Resolution or Ordinance  The District’s Code of Ordinance Section 39 contains specific information on handling water shortages  and is included as Appendix I.  8.8 Catastrophic Supply Interruption  Catastrophic events such as earthquakes or regional power outages can impact water supply.  As a  member agency of the Water Authority, the District is a participant in the Water Authority’s Emergency  Response Plan (ERP) and ESP.  The ERP provides information to allow staff to respond to an emergency  that impedes the Water Authority’s ability to provide reliable water service to the District.  The ERP  includes:  ■ Authorities, policies, and procedures associated with emergency response activities;  ■ Emergency Operations Center activities, including activation and deactivation guidelines;  ■ Multi‐agency and multi‐jurisdictional coordination, particularly between the Water Authority, its  member agencies (including the District), and Metropolitan;  ■ Emergency staff, management, and organization required to assist in mitigating any significant  emergency or disaster;  ■ Mutual Aid agreements and covenants that outline the terms and conditions under which mutual  aid assistance will be provided; and  ■ Pre‐emergency planning and emergency operations procedures.  The ESP is a system of reservoirs, pipelines, and other facilities that will work together to store and  move water around the county in the event of a natural disaster.  The entire project is expected to be  completed by 2017.  When completed, the ESP will provide 90,100 AF of storage water for emergency  purposes in the Water Authority’s service area.  This amount is anticipated to meet the Water  Authority’s emergency water needs through at least 2030.  The District has constructed storage reservoirs to provide water during an interruption in the Water  Authority’s supply to the District.  These reservoirs provide approximately 190 million gallons of storage,  equal to approximately five days of average demand.  The District has also established emergency  SECTION 8 – WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLANNING   8‐8 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   interconnections with neighboring agencies to provide water during an emergency.  The District has  planned for potable water availability from the City of San Diego Otay WTP (10 mgd) and the Water  Authority through the Levy WTP (currently 8 mgd and proposed 16 mgd).    The District has also established minor emergency interconnections with neighboring water agencies for  use during short‐term outages.  The District has eight (8) minor interconnections with Helix WD, eight  (8) with Sweetwater Authority, and five (5) with the City of San Diego that are capable of supplying the  District with water.  These minor interconnections are intended primarily for short‐term repairs or  emergencies.  During an extended outage or water shortage, these neighboring agencies may not have  sufficient supply at these minor interconnections to share significant amounts with the District.  8.9 Estimate of Minimum Supply for the Next Three Years  The Act requires an estimate of the minimum supply available during the next three years (2017 – 2019).   It is suggested that the estimate be based on the driest three‐year historic sequence for the water supply.   The District’s supply of potable water comes from the Colorado River basin and the SWP, through the  Water Authority and Metropolitan, and other sources.  Since the 1987‐1992 droughts, Metropolitan has  sought to diversify its supply and reduce its vulnerability to drought.  Metropolitan’s IRP outlines projects  such as increased storage, groundwater storage, financial incentives for local projects and conservation,  and long‐term water transfers that provide Metropolitan with supply during dry years on the Colorado  River and the SWP.  Implementation of Metropolitan’s IRP is expected to provide sufficient water to its  member agencies even during dry years.  The District’s recycled supply is currently provided by the RWCWRF.  This plant has an effective capacity  of approximately 1.3 mgd; raw wastewater flows that exceed the plant’s capacity are sent downstream  to the MWWD for treatment.  As stated earlier, the District also receives recycled water from the  SBWRP up to a contracted rate of 6 mgd. During a water shortage event, reduced water consumption  could lead to reduced raw wastewater flows.  Under these conditions, the District may observe a  reduction in indoor water usage; however, much of the reduction in water use is expected to come  through a reduction in outdoor use, which should not significantly impact wastewater flows or recycled  water supplies.  The supply of recycled water is considered to remain constant during multiple dry years.   Table 8‐4 shows the supply the District could expect to receive under this minimum supply scenario  based on current supply resources with the District’s supply portfolio.  Table 8‐4: Minimum Supply Next Three Years    Normal Year Single Dry Year 1 Multiple Dry Years 2  2017 2017 2017 2018 2019  District Demands 37,176 38,749 38,844 40,378 42,430  Water Authority Supplies 32,304 33,877 33,972 35,240 37,026  Recycled Water Supplies 4,872 4,872 4,872 5,138 5,404  Total Available Supplies 37,176 38,749 38,844 40,378 42,430  Difference 0 0 0 0 0  NOTES:   1 Total available supply analysis assumes the Water Authority utilizes carryover storage as needed during dry year scenarios to  meet member agency demands.  2 Multiple Dry Year Demands and Supplies from Table 7‐4        SECTION 9   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 9‐1  Demand Management Measures  Water conservation is a critical part of the District’s 2015 UWMP and its long‐term strategy for meeting  the water needs of the District.  The goals of the District’s water conservation program are to:   ■ reduce the demand for more expensive, imported water  ■ demonstrate continued commitment to the Best Management Practices (BMPs)  ■ ensure a reliable water supply  The District is a signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Urban Water  Conservation in California, which created the CUWCC in 1991.  As a signatory, the District is required to  submit biannual reports that detail the implementation of current water conservation practices.  The  District voluntarily agreed to implement the fourteen water conservation BMPs beginning in 1992.  The  District submits its annual report to the CUWCC every two years.  The District’s BMP Reports for 2011 to  2015, as well as the BMP Coverage Reports for 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 are included in Appendix K.  Water utilities throughout California are implementing water conservation programs and providing  services to their customers to promote water use efficiencies and water savings. As a water retailer and  signatory of the MOU, the District submits biennial reports on its compliance with the BMPs as  applicable through the GPCD Option.  In addition to the BMPs, the District also reports on the number of  accounts by customer class and details its supply sources.   According to the BMP Reports (for years 2010 ‐ 2014) submitted by the District, the District conservation  programs meet the requirements as a signatory to the MOU.  By choosing the GPCD Option and its  reporting mechanism and achieving per capita reductions, the District can demonstrate its successes in  water use reductions, efficiencies and conservation savings.    9.1 Water Conservation Programs and Water Efficiency  Practices  The District has long been a leader in the field of water conservation. Since the early 1990’s, water  conservation programs have been developed and conducted on the premise that water conservation  increases the water supply by reducing the demand on available supply, which is vital to the optimal  operation of the District.  Education is an important component to all of these programs.  As a member  agency of the Water Authority, the District also participates in many water conservation programs  designed and conducted as a shared‐cost participation program among the member agencies, the Water  Authority and Metropolitan.  The District continues to promote water conservation at a variety of events, including those involving  developers in its service area. In addition, the District developed and manages a number of its own  programs such as the Cash for WaterSmart Plants retrofit program, the Water Smart Irrigation Upgrade  Program, and the Commercial Process Improvement Program.   The District is currently engaged in a number of conservation and water use efficiency activities.  The District participates in a Joint Powers Authority with the Helix WD, Grossmont‐Cuyamaca  Community College District, the Water Authority, the City of San Diego, and the Padre Dam Municipal  Water District to operate the nearly five‐acre Water Conservation Demonstration Garden.  The Garden’s  mission is to, “promote water conservation in the southern California landscape through excellent  exhibits and programs that educate and inspire the public.”  The Garden educates customers about  reducing landscape water use through the use of water‐efficient landscapes.  SECTION 9 – DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEASURES   9‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   9.2 Determination of DMM Implementation  The District is a member of the CUWCC and a signatory to the MOU.  The District’s 2010 to 2014 Annual  Reports and the District’s Annual BMP Coverage Reports are included in Appendix K.  The 2014 BMP  Report indicates that the District is on track for foundational BMPs for urban water efficiency. The  District’s filing of the 2014 BMP Report meets the requirements set forth by the DWR and is in full  compliance with the CUWCC’s MOU regarding Urban Water Conservation in California.   SECTION 10   CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC 10‐1  Plan Adoption, Submittal and  Implementation  10.1 Notice of Public Hearing  As mentioned in Section 2 of this Plan, the District has coordinated the preparation of its plan with other  appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers, water management agencies, and  public agencies (Table 2‐4). In accordance with the Act, the District provided a 60‐day notice to the  Water Authority (its wholesale water supplier) and the San Diego Association of Governments, the City  of San Diego, City of Chula Vista, and County of San Diego that they were reviewing and considering  amendments or changes to the UWMP and that they would be holding a public hearing prior to the  adoption of the UWMP.  A copy of the 60‐day notice is included in Appendix B.  Also, in accordance with the Act, the District notified the land use jurisdictions (City of Chula Vista, City  of San Diego and County of San Diego) within its service area that it was preparing the 2015 UWMP.   Prior to adoption, the District has made available its Draft 2015 UWMP to stakeholders including the  Water Authority, the City of Chula Vista, the County of San Diego, and the City of San Diego.      The notice and instructions for downloading the Draft 2015 UWMP from the District’s website was also  made available to interested parties as listed in Table 2‐5.  The Draft 2015 UWMP was first presented at  a Water Resources Committee Meeting of the District’s Board of Directors.  A Public Hearing regarding  the 2010 UWMP will held on June 1, 2016.  Notices of the Public Hearing will be published in the San  Diego Union‐Tribune (May 5, 2016), The Star News (May 6, 2016), The East County Californian (May 12,  2016), and The Alpine Sun (May 5, 2016).  These coordination efforts are summarized in Table 2‐5 and  copies of the public notices are included in Appendix B.    Table 10‐1: Notification to Cities and Counties             City Name             60 Day  Notice  Notice of  Public  Hearing  City of San Diego    City of Chula Vista    County Name          60 Day  Notice  Notice of  Public  Hearing  San Diego County    NOTES:          SECTION 10 – PLAN ADOPTION, SUBMITTAL AND IMPLEMENTATION   10‐2 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC   10.2 Plan Submittal  The District’s 2015 UWMP will be submitted to DWR within 30 days of adoption and by July 1, 2016. The  UWMP submittal will also be completed electronically through DWR’s online submittal tool, WUEdata.            Appendix A  Urban Water Management Plan Act  Text  Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 2        California Water Code Division 6, Part 2.6.  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      Chapter 1. General Declaration and Policy 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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 3    (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. Chapter 2. Definitions 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, Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 4    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. Chapter 3. Urban Water Management Plans Article 1. General Provisions     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 Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 5    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, except as provided in subdivision (d). (b) Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan pursuant to this part shall, at least 60 days before 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). (d) Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2015 plan to the department by July 1, 2016. Article 2. Contents of Plan    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 Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 6    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 basins that 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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 7    (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. (J) Distribution system water loss. (2) The water use projections shall be in the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a). (3) (A) For the 2015 urban water management plan update, the distribution system water loss shall be quantified for the most recent 12-month period available. For all subsequent updates, the distribution system water loss shall be quantified for each of the five years preceding the plan update. (B) The distribution system water loss quantification shall be reported in accordance with a worksheet approved or developed by the department 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. (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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 8    (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. (f) Provide a description of the supplier's water demand management measures. This description shall include all of the following: (1) (A) For an urban retail water supplier, as defined in Section 10608.12, a narrative description that addresses the nature and extent of each water demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The narrative shall describe the water demand management measures that the supplier plans to implement to achieve its water use targets pursuant to Section 10608.20. (B) The narrative pursuant to this paragraph shall include descriptions of the following water demand management measures: (i) Water waste prevention ordinances. (ii) Metering. (iii) Conservation pricing. (iv) Public education and outreach. (v) Programs to assess and manage distribution system real loss. (vi) Water conservation program coordination and staffing support. (vii) Other demand management measures that have a significant impact on water use as measured in gallons per capita per day, including innovative measures, if implemented. (2) For an urban wholesale water supplier, as defined in Section 10608.12, a narrative description of the items in clauses (ii), (iv), (vi), and (vii) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), and a narrative description of its distribution system asset management and wholesale supplier assistance programs. (g) 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 Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 9    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 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. (h) Describe the opportunities for development of desalinated water, including, but not limited to, ocean water, brackish water, and groundwater, as a long-term supply. (i) 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 subdivision (f) 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. (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 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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 10    10631.2. (a) In addition to the requirements of Section 10631, an urban water management plan may, but is not required to, include any of the following information: (1) An estimate of the amount of energy used to extract or divert water supplies. (2) An estimate of the amount of energy used to convey water supplies to the water treatment plants or distribution systems. (3) An estimate of the amount of energy used to treat water supplies. (4) An estimate of the amount of energy used to distribute water supplies through its distribution systems. (5) An estimate of the amount of energy used for treated water supplies in comparison to the amount used for nontreated water supplies. (6) An estimate of the amount of energy used to place water into or withdraw from storage. (7) Any other energy-related information the urban water supplier deems appropriate. (b) The department shall include in its guidance for the preparation of urban water management plans a methodology for the voluntary calculation or estimation of the energy intensity of urban water systems. The department may consider studies and calculations conducted by the Public Utilities Commission in developing the methodology. 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 Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 11    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: Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 12    (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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 13    (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 Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 14    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 July 1, 2016, 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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 15    (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. Article 2.5. Water Service Reliability    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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 16    (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. Article 3. Adoption and Implementation of Plans    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) (1) 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. (2) The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted electronically and shall include any standardized forms, tables, or displays specified by the department. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 17    (b) (1) Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, 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. (2) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code. (c) (1) For the purpose of identifying the exemplary elements of the individual plans, the department shall identify in the report 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. Chapter 4. Miscellaneous Provisions 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. Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 18    (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 Appendix A Urban Water Management Planning Act Final   A ‐ 19    (commencing with Section 79000), or receive drought assistance from the state until the urban water management plan is submitted pursuant to this article.     Appendix B  Adoption Resolution and Related  Documentation  Notice of Otay Water District's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Preparation Date: March 30, 2016 This notice is to inform you that the Otay Water District (District) is updating its Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). California State law requires the Otay Water District to update their UWMP's every five years and notify the County of San Diego and the cities within their service area that a plan is being prepared. The District must adopt an updated UWMP by June, 2016 in order to submit the adopted plan to the California Department of Water Resources by July 1, 2016. The UWMP is required to contain a detailed evaluation of the supplies necessary to reliably meet demands over at least a 20-year period in both normal and dry years. In accordance with State law, the District will make a draft of the UWMP available on the District web site, www.otaywater.gov, for public review at least two weeks prior to holding a tentatively scheduled public hearing on June 1, 2016, at 3:30 PM in the District Board Room. Please feel free to contact Lisa Coburn-Boyd in the Engineering Dept. at 619-670-2219, or lisa.coburn-boyd(a~otavwater.gov, if you would like an electronic or hard copy of this plan or if you have any questions or would like additional information. Sincerely, OTAY WATER DISTRICT °~•"~a_-. ~~-ems,,, _ `g ~~- Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist P:\WORKING\CIP 00210 WMP & PEIR\2015 UWMP Update\Public Notices\2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.doc Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:12 PM To: Lardy, Eric Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Mr. Lardy, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisd Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-boyd@otaywater.gov Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:10 PM To: 'Fogg, Mindy' Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Ms. Fogg, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisa Coburn-Boys{ Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-boyd@otaywater.gov Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:05 PM To: 'ebatchelder@chulavistaca.gov' Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Dear Mr. Batchelder, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-boyd@otaywater.gov Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:06 PM To: 'kbroughton@chulavistaca.gov' Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Ms. Broughton, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-boyd @otaywater.gov Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:05 PM To: 'muggs.stoll@sandag.org' Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Mr. Stoll, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisa Coburn-Boyc} Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-boyd @otaywater.gov Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:05 PM To: 'murphyj@sandiego.gov' Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Dear Mr. Murphy, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisa Coburn-Boys{ Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-boyd@otaywater.gov Lisa Coburn-Boyd From: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:05 PM To: Dana Friehauf Subject: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP Update Notice Attachments: 2015 UWMP Public Notice_SD Cty & Cities.pdf Ms. Friehauf, Please see the attached notification that the Otay Water District is reviewing its UWMP and will be releasing its draft 2015 UWMP Update for public review in mid-May, 2016. A copy of this notice has also been sent to you via U.S. Mail. Thank you, Lisa Coburn-Boys} Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 619.670.2219 lisa.coburn-Boyd@otaywater.gov     Appendix C  AWWA Water Loss Worksheet  THE FOLLOWING KEY APPLIES THROUGHOUT:Value can be entered by user Value calculated based on input data These cells contain recommended default values Please begin by providing the following information, then proceed through each sheet in the workbook: NAME OF CITY OR UTILITY:COUNTRY: REPORTING YEAR:2015 START DATE(MM/YYYY):07/2014 END DATE(MM/YYYY):06/2015 NAME OF CONTACT PERSON:E-MAIL: Ext. PLEASE SELECT PREFERRED REPORTING UNITS FOR WATER VOLUME: Click to advance to sheet…Click here: for help about units and conversions Comments: If you have questions or comments regarding the software please contact us at:wlc@awwa.org Otay Water District AWWA Water Loss Control Committee (WLCC) Free Water Audit Software v4.1 USE:The spreadsheet contains several separate worksheets. Sheets can be accessed using the tabs towards the bottom of the screen, or by clicking the buttons on the left below. Descriptions of each sheet are also given below. PURPOSE: This spreadsheet-based water audit tool is designed to help quantify and track water losses associated with water distribution systems and identify areas for improved efficiency and cost recovery. It provides a "top-down" summary water audit format, and is not meant to take the place of a full-scale, comprehensive water audit format. United States of America The values entered in the Reporting Worksheet are used to populate the water balance 619-670-2219TELEPHONE: Acre-feet Enter the required data on this worksheet to calculate the water balance Lisa Coburn-Boyd Lisa.Coburn-Boyd@otaywater.gov The current sheet Depending on the confidence of audit inputs, a grading is assigned to the audit score Use this sheet to understand terms used in the audit process Use this sheet to interpret the results of the audit validity score and performance indicators Diagrams depicting possible customer service connection configurations Instructions Reporting Worksheet Loss Control Planning Water Balance Definitions Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WAS v4.1 ? Grading Matrix Add comments here to track additional supporting information, sources or names of participants Service Connections AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Instructions 1 Water Audit Report for:Otay Water District Reporting Year: All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR WATER SUPPLIED Volume from own sources:acre-ft/yr Master meter error adjustment (enter positive value): Water imported:8 30,298.900 acre-ft/yr Water exported:acre-ft/yr WATER SUPPLIED:30,298.900 acre-ft/yr . AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION Billed metered:8 29,529.400 acre-ft/yr Billed unmetered:acre-ft/yr Unbilled metered:7 126.300 acre-ft/yr Pcnt:Value: Unbilled unmetered:7 378.736 acre-ft/yr 1.25% AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:30,034.436 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)264.464 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt:Value: Unauthorized consumption:75.747 acre-ft/yr 0.25% Customer metering inaccuracies:7 0.000 acre-ft/yr 2.50% Systematic data handling errors:8 1.000 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:76.747 Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL) Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:187.717 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:264.464 acre-ft/yr NON-REVENUE WATER NON-REVENUE WATER:769.500 acre-ft/yr = Total Water Loss + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered SYSTEM DATA Length of mains:10 727.0 miles Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 50,013 Connection density: 69 conn./mile main Average length of customer service line:8 25.0 ft Average operating pressure:9 150.0 psi COST DATA Total annual cost of operating water system:8 $49,527,220 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):8 $5.44 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $1,143.00 $/acre-ft/yr PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Financial Indicators Non-revenue water as percent by volume of Water Supplied:2.5% Non-revenue water as percent by cost of operating system:2.0% Annual cost of Apparent Losses:$181,865 Annual cost of Real Losses:$214,560 Operational Efficiency Indicators Apparent Losses per service connection per day:1.37 gallons/connection/day Real Losses per service connection per day*:3.35 gallons/connection/day Real Losses per length of main per day*:N/A Real Losses per service connection per day per psi pressure:0.02 gallons/connection/day/psi Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL):723.30 million gallons/year From Above, Real Losses = Current Annual Real Losses (CARL):187.72 million gallons/year 0.08 * only the most applicable of these two indicators will be calculated WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE: PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION: 1: Water imported 2: Unauthorized consumption 3: Unbilled metered $/100 cubic feet (ccf) 378.736 AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Reporting Worksheet 2015 7/2014 - 6/2015 << Enter grading in column 'E' acre-ft/yr Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components: *** YOUR SCORE IS: 77 out of 100 *** Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) [CARL/UARL]: Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Choose this option to enter a percentage of billed metered consumption. This is NOT a default value ? ? ? ? ? ?Click to access definition ? ? ? ? ? ? Back to Instructions Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (pipe length between curbstop and customer meter or property boundary) Use buttons to select percentage of water suppliedORvalue ?Click here: for help using option buttons below For more information, click here to see the Grading Matrix worksheet ? Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved. ? ? ? ? WAS v4.1 AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Reporting Worksheet 2 Water Audit Report For:Report Yr: Otay Water District 2015 Water Exported 0.000 Billed Metered Consumption (inc. water exported)Revenue Water 29,529.400 Own Sources Authorized Consumption 29,529.400 Billed Unmetered Consumption 29,529.400 0.000 30,034.436 Unbilled Metered Consumption 126.300 0.000 505.036 Unbilled Unmetered Consumption 378.736 Water Supplied Unauthorized Consumption 769.500 Apparent Losses 75.747 30,298.900 76.747 Customer Metering Inaccuracies 0.000 Systematic Data Handling Errors Water Losses 1.000 Water Imported 264.464 Leakage on Transmission and/or Distribution Mains Real Losses Not broken down 30,298.900 187.717 Leakage and Overflows at Utility's Storage Tanks Not broken down Leakage on Service Connections Not broken down Non-Revenue Water (NRW) AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Water Balance Billed Authorized Consumption Unbilled Authorized Consumption (Adjusted for known errors) Billed Water Exported Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WAS v4.1 AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Water Balance 3 n/a 1 2345678910 Volume from own sources: Select this grading only if the water utility purchases/imports all of its water resources (i.e. has no sources of its own) Less than 25% of water production sources are metered, remaining sources are estimated. No regular meter accuracy testing. 25% - 50% of treated water production sources are metered; other sources estimated. No regular meter accuracy testing. Conditions between 2 and 4 50% - 75% of treated water production sources are metered, other sources estimated. Occasional meter accuracy testing Conditions between 4 and 6 At least 75% of treated water production sources are metered, or at least 90% of the source flow is derived from metered sources. Meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted annually. Less than 25% of tested meters are found outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Conditions between 6 and 8 100% of treated water production sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and electronic calibration conducted annually, less than 10% of meters are found outside of +/- 6% accuracy Conditions between 8 and 10 100% of treated water production sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and electronic calibration conducted semi- annually, with less than 10% found outside of +/- 3% accuracy. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Volume from own Sources" component: to qualify for 2: Organize efforts to begin to collect data for determining volume from own sources to maintain 10: Standardize meter accuracy test frequency to semi-annual, or more frequent, for all meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 3% accuracy. Continually investigate/pilot improving metering technology. Master meter error adjustment: Select n/a only if the water utility fails to have meters on its sources of supply, either its own source, and/or imported (purchased) water sources Inventory information on meters and paper records of measured volumes in crude condition; data error cannot be determined No automatic datalogging of production volumes; daily readings are scribed on paper records. Tank/storage elevation changes are not employed in calculating "Volume from own sources" component. Data is adjusted only when grossly evident data error occurs. Conditions between 2 and 4 Production meter data is logged automatically in electronic format and reviewed at least on a monthly basis. "Volume from own sources" tabulations include estimate of daily changes in tanks/storage facilities. Meter data is adjusted when gross data errors occur, or occasional meter testing deems this necessary. Conditions between 4 and 6 Hourly production meter data logged automatically & reviewed on at least a weekly basis. Data adjusted to correct gross error from equipment malfunction and error confirmed by meter accuracy testing. Tank/storage facility elevation changes are automatically used in calculating a balanced "Volume from own sources" component. Conditions between 6 and 8 Continuous production meter data logged automatically & reviewed daily. Data adjusted to correct gross error from equipment malfunction & results of meter accuracy testing. Tank/storage facility elevation changes are automatically used in "Volume from own sources" tabulations. Conditions between 8 and 10 Computerized system (SCADA or similar) automatically balances flows from all sources and storages; results reviewed daily. Mass balance technique compares production meter data to raw (untreated) water and treatment volumes to detect anomalies. Regular calibrations between SCADA and sources meters ensures minimal data transfer error. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Master meter error adjustment" component: to qualify for 2: Develop plan to restructure recordkeeping system to capture all flow data; set procedure to review data daily to detect input errors to maintain 10: Monitor meter innovations for development of more accurate and less expensive flowmeters. Continue to replace or repair meters as they perform outside of desired accuracy limits. Water Imported: Select n/a if the water utility's supply is exclusively from its own water resources (no bulk purchased/ imported water) Less than 25% of imported water sources are metered, remaining sources are estimated. No regular meter accuracy testing. 25% - 50% of imported water sources are metered; other sources estimated. No regular meter accuracy testing. Conditions between 2 and 4 50% - 75% of imported water sources are metered, other sources estimated. Occasional meter accuracy testing Conditions between 4 and 6 At least 75% of imported water sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted annually. Less than 25% of tested meters are found outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Conditions between 6 and 8 100% of imported water sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted annually, less than 10% of meters are found outside of +/- 6% accuracy Conditions between 8 and 10 100% of imported water sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted semi- annually, with less than 10% found outside of +/- 3% accuracy. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Water Imported Volume" component: to qualify for 2: Review bulk water purchase agreements with partner suppliers; confirm requirements for use and maintenance of accurate metering. Identify needs for new or replacement meters with goal to meter all imported water sources. to maintain 10: Standardize meter accuracy test frequency to semi-annual, or more frequent, for all meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 3% accuracy. Continually investigate/pilot improving metering technology. to qualify for 10: Maintain annual meter accuracy testing for all meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Investigate new meter technology; pilot one or more replacements with innovative meters in attempt to improve meter accuracy. to qualify for 4:Locate all water production sources on maps and in field, launch meter accuracy testing for existing meters, begin to install meters on unmetered water production sources and replace any obsolete/defective meters to qualify for 6:Formalize annual meter accuracy testing for all source meters. Complete installation of meters on unmetered water production sources and complete replacement of all obsolete/defective meters. to qualify for 8:Conduct annual meter accuracy testing on all meters. Complete project to install new, or replace defective existing, meters so that entire production meter population is metered. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 6% accuracy. to qualify for 10: Link all production and tank/storage facility elevation change data to a Supervisory Control & Data Acquisition (SCADA) System, or similar computerized monitoring/control system, and establish automatic flow balancing algorithm and regularly calibrate between SCADA and source meters. to qualify for 4: Install automatic datalogging equipment on production meters. Identify tanks/storage facilities and include estimated daily volume of water added to, or subtracted from, "Water Supplied" volume based upon changes in storage AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Grading Matrix In the Reporting Worksheet, grades were assigned to each component of the audit to describe the confidence and accuracy of the input data. The grading assigned to each audit component and the corresponding recommended improvements and actions are highlighted in yellow. Audit accuracy is likely to be improved by prioritizing those items shown in red Grading to qualify for 6: Review hourly production meter data for gross error on, at least, a weekly basis. Begin to install instrumentation on tanks/storage facilities to record elevation changes. Use daily net storage change to balance flows in calculating "Water Supplied" volume. to qualify for 8: Complete installation of elevation instrumentation on all tanks/storage facilities. Continue to use daily net storage change in calculating balanced "Volume from own sources" component. Adjust production meter data for gross error and inaccuracy confirmed by testing. to qualify for 10:Maintain annual meter accuracy testing for all meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Investigate new meter technology; pilot one or more replacements with innovative meters in attempt to improve meter accuracy. To qualify for 4: Locate all imported water sources on maps and in field, launch meter accuracy testing for existing meters, begin to install meters on unmetered imported water interconnections and replace obsolete/defective meters to qualify for 6: Formalize annual meter accuracy testing for all imported water meters. Continue installation of meters on unmetered exported water interconnections and replacement of obsolete/defective meters. to qualify for 8: Complete project to install new, or replace defective, meters on all imported water interconnections. Maintain annual meter accuracy testing for all imported water meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Back to Instructions Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WASv 4.1 Back to Instructions AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 4 n/a 1 2345678910 Grading Water Exported: Select n/a if the water utility sells no bulk water to neighboring water utilities (no exported water sales) Less than 25% of exported water sources are metered, remaining sources are estimated. No regular meter accuracy testing. 25% - 50% of exported water sources are metered; other sources estimated. No regular meter accuracy testing. Conditions between 2 and 4 50% - 75% of exported water sources are metered, other sources estimated. Occasional meter accuracy testing Conditions between 4 and 6 At least 75% of exported water sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted annually. Less than 25% of tested meters are found outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Conditions between 6 and 8 100% of exported water sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted annually, less than 10% of meters are found outside of +/- 6% accuracy Conditions between 8 and 10 100% of exported water sources are metered, meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration conducted semi-annually, with less than 10% found outside of +/- 3% accuracy. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Water Exported Volume" component: to qualify for 2: Review bulk water sales agreements with partner suppliers; confirm requirements for use & upkeep of accurate metering. Identify needs to install new, or replace defective meters as needed. to maintain 10: Standardize meter accuracy test frequency to semi-annual, or more frequent, for all meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 3% accuracy. Continually investigate/pilot improving metering technology. Billed metered: n/a (not applicable). Select n/a only if the entire customer population is not metered and is billed for water service on a flat or fixed rate basis. In such a case the volume entered must be zero. Less than 50% of customers with volume-based billings from meter readings; flat or fixed rate billed for the majority of the customer population At least 50% of customers with volume-based billing from meter reads; flat rate billed for others. Manual meter reading, under 50% read success rate, remainder estimated. Limited meter records, no regular meter testing or replacement. Billing data maintained on paper records, with no auditing. Conditions between 2 and 4 At least 75% of customers with volume-based billing from meter reads; flat or fixed rate billed for remainder. Manual meter reading used, at least 50% meter read success rate, failed reads are estimated. Purchase records verify age of customer meters; only very limited meter accuracy testing is conducted. Customer meters replaced only upon complete failure. Computerized billing records, but only periodic internal auditing conducted. Conditions between 4 and 6 At least 90% of customers with volume-based billing from meter reads; remaining accounts are estimated. Manual customer meter reading gives at least 80% customer meter reading success rate, failed reads are estimated. Good customer meter records, limited meter accuracy testing, regular replacement of oldest meters. Computerized billing records with routine auditing of global statistics. Conditions between 6 and 8 At least 97% of customers with volume-based billing from meter reads. At least 90% customer meter read success rate; or minimum 80% read success rate with planning and budgeting for trials of Automatic Metering Reading (AMR) in one or more pilot areas. Good customer meter records. Regular meter accuracy testing guides replacement of statistically significant number of meters each year. Routine auditing of computerized billing records for global and detailed statistics; verified periodically by third party. Conditions between 8 and 10 At least 99% of customers with volume-based billing from meter reads. At least 95% customer meter reading success rate; or minimum 80% meter reading success rate, with Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) trials underway. Statistically significant customer meter testing and replacement program in place. Computerized billing with routine, detailed auditing, including field investigation of representative sample of accounts. Annual audit verification by third party. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Billed Metered Consumption" component: If n/a is selected because the customer meter population is unmetered, consider establishing a new policy to meter the customer population and employ water rates based upon metered volumes. to qualify for 2:Conduct investigations or trials of customer meters to select appropriate meter models. Budget funding for meter installations. Investigate volume based water rate structures. to maintain 10: Regular internal and third party auditing, and meter accuracy testing ensures that accurate customer meter readings are obtained and entered as the basis for volume based billing. Stay abreast of improvements in Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) and information management. Plan and budget for justified upgrades in metering, meter reading and billing data management. Billed unmetered: Select n/a if it is the policy of the water utility to meter all customer connections and it has been confirmed by detailed auditing that all customers do indeed have a water meter; i.e. no unmetered accounts exist Water utility policy does not require customer metering; flat or fixed fee billed. No data collected on customer consumption. Only estimates available are derived from data estimation methods using average fixture count multiplied by number of connections, or similar approach. Water utility policy does not require customer metering; flat or fixed fee billed. Some metered accounts exist in parts of the system (pilot areas or District Metered Areas) with consumption recorded on portable dataloggers. Data from these sample meters are used to infer consumption for the total customer population. Site specific estimation methods are used for unusual buildings/water uses. Conditions between 2 and 4 Water utility policy does require metering and volume based billing but lacks written procedures and employs casual oversight, resulting in up to 20% of billed accounts believed to be unmetered. A rough estimate of the annual consumption for all unmetered accounts is included in the annual water audit, with no inspection of individual unmetered accounts. Conditions between 4 and 6 Water utility policy does require metering and volume based billing but exemption exist for a portion of accounts such as municipal buildings. As many as 15% of billed accounts are unmetered due to this exemption or meter installation difficulties. Only a group estimate of annual consumption for all unmetered accounts is included in the annual water audit, with no inspection of individual unmetered accounts. Conditions between 6 and 8 Water utility policy requires metering and volume based billing for all customer accounts. However, less than 5% of billed accounts remain unmetered because because installation is hindered by unusual circumstances. The goal is to minimize the number of unmetered accounts. Reliable estimates of consumption are obtained for unmetered accounts via site specific estimation methods. Conditions between 8 and 10 Water utility policy requires metering and volume based billing for all customer accounts. Less than 2% of billed accounts are unmetered and exist because meter installation is hindered by unusual circumstances. The goal exists to minimize the number of unmetered accounts to the extent that is economical. Reliable estimates of consumption are obtained at these accounts via site specific estimation methods. to qualify for 4: Purchase and install meters on unmetered accounts. Implement policies to improve meter reading success. Catalog meter information during meter read visits to identify age/model of existing meters. Test a minimal number of meters for accuracy. Install computerized billing system. to qualify for 6: Purchase and install meters on unmetered accounts. Eliminate flat fee billing and establish appropriate water rate structure based upon measured consumption. Continue to achieve verifiable success in removing manual meter reading barriers. Expand meter accuracy testing. Launch regular meter replacement program. Conduct routine audit of global statistics. to qualify for 8: Purchase and install meters on unmetered accounts. Assess cost-effectiveness of Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) system for portion or entire system; or achieve ongoing improvements in manual meter reading success rate. Refine meter accuracy testing program. Set meter replacement goals based upon accuracy test results. Refine routine auditing procedures based upon third party guidance. to qualify for 10:Purchase and install meters on unmetered accounts. Launch Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) system trials if manual meter reading success rate of at least 95% is not achieved within a five-year program. Continue meter accuracy testing program. Conduct planning and budgeting for large scale meter replacement based upon meter life cycle analysis using cumulative flow target. Continue routine auditing and require annual third party review. To qualify for 4:Locate all exported water sources on maps and in field, launch meter accuracy testing for existing meters, begin to install meters on unmetered exported water interconnections and replace obsolete/defective meters to qualify for 6:Formalize annual meter accuracy testing for all exported water meters. Continue installation of meters on unmetered exported water interconnections and replacement of obsolete/defective meters. to qualify for 8:Complete project to install new, or replace defective, meters on all exported water interconnections. Maintain annual meter accuracy testing for all imported water meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 6% accuracy. to qualify for 10:Maintain annual meter accuracy testing for all meters. Repair or replace meters outside of +/- 6% accuracy. Investigate new meter technology; pilot one or more replacements with innovative meters in attempt to improve meter accuracy. AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 5 n/a 1 2345678910 Grading Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Billed Unmetered Consumption" component: to qualify for 2: Investigate a new water utility policy to require metering of the customer population, and a reduction of unmetered accounts. Conduct pilot metering project by installing water meters in small sample of customer accounts and datalogging the water consumption. to maintain 10: Continue to refine estimation methods for unmetered consumption and explore means to establish metering, for as many billed unmetered accounts as is economically feasible. Unbilled metered: select n/a if all billing-exempt consumption is unmetered. Billing practices exempt certain accounts, such as municipal buildings, but written policies do not exist; and a reliable count of unbilled metered accounts is unavailable. Meter upkeep and meter reading on these accounts is rare and not considered a priority. Due to poor recordkeeping and lack of auditing, water consumption for all such accounts is purely guesstimated. Billing practices exempt certain accounts, such as municipal buildings, but only scattered, dated written directives exist to justify this practice. A reliable count of unbilled metered accounts is unavailable. Sporadic meter replacement and meter reading occurs on an as-needed basis. The total annual water consumption for all unbilled, metered accounts is estimated based upon approximating the number of accounts and assigning consumption from actively billed accounts of same meter size. Conditions between 2 and 4 Dated written procedures permit billing exemption for specific accounts, such as municipal properties, but are unclear regarding certain other types of accounts. Meter reading is given low priority and is sporadic. Consumption is quantified from meter readings where available. The total number of unbilled, unmetered accounts must be estimated along with consumption volumes. Conditions between 4 and 6 Written policies regarding billing exemptions exist but adherence in practice is questionable. Metering and meter reading for municipal buildings is reliable but sporadic for other unbilled metered accounts. Periodic auditing of such accounts is conducted. Water consumption is quantified directly from meter readings where available, but the majority of the consumption is estimated. Conditions between 6 and 8 Written policy identifies the types of accounts granted a billing exemption. Customer meter management and meter reading are considered secondary priorities, but meter reading is conducted at least annually to obtain consumption volumes for the annual water audit. High level auditing of billing records ensures that a reliable census of such accounts exists. Conditions between 8 and 10 Clearly written policy identifies the types of accounts given a billing exemption, with emphasis on keeping such accounts to a minimum. Customer meter management and meter reading for these accounts is given proper priority and is reliably conducted. Regular auditing confirms this. Total water consumption for these accounts is taken from reliable readings from accurate meters. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Unbilled metered Consumption" component: to qualify for 2:Reassess the water utility's policy allowing certain accounts to be granted a billing exemption. Draft an outline of a new written policy for billing exemptions, with clear justification as to why any accounts should be exempt from billing, and with the intention to keep the number of such accounts to a minimum. to maintain 10:Reassess philosophy in allowing any water uses to go "unbilled". It is possible to meter and bill all accounts, even if the fee charged for water consumption is discounted or waived. Metering and billing all accounts ensures that water consumption is tracked and water waste from plumbing leaks is detected and minimized. Unbilled unmetered: Extent of unbilled, unmetered consumption is unknown due to unclear policies and poor recordkeeping. Total consumption is quantified based upon a purely subjective estimate. Clear extent of unbilled, unmetered consumption is unknown, but a number of events are randomly documented each year, confirming existence of such consumption, but without sufficient documentation to quantify an accurate estimate of the annual volume consumed. Conditions between 2 and 4 Extent of unbilled, unmetered consumption is partially known, and procedures exist to document certain events such as miscellaneous fire hydrant uses. Formulae is used to quantify the consumption from such events (time running x typical flowrate x number of events). Default value of 1.25% of system input volume is employed Coherent policies exist for some forms of unbilled, unmetered consumption but others await closer evaluation. Reasonable recordkeeping for the managed uses exists and allows for annual volumes to be quantified by inference, but unsupervised uses are guesstimated. Conditions between 6 and 8 Clear policies and good recordkeeping exist for some uses (ex: unmetered fire connections registering consumption), but other uses (ex: miscellaneous uses of fire hydrants) have limited oversight. Total consumption is a mix of well quantified use such as from formulae (time x typical flow) or temporary meters, and relatively subjective estimates of less regulated use. Conditions between 8 and 10 Clear policies exist to identify permitted use of water in unbilled, unmetered fashion, with the intention of minimizing this type of consumption. Good records document each occurrence and consumption is quantified via formulae (time x typical flow) or use of temporary meters. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Unbilled Unmetered Consumption" component: to qualify for 5: Utilize accepted default value of 1.25% of system input volume as an expedient means to gain a reasonable quantification of this use. to qualify for 2: Establish a policy regarding what water uses should be allowed as unbilled and unmetered. Consider tracking a small sample of one such use (ex: fire hydrant flushings). to qualify for 5:Utilize accepted default value of 1.25% of system input volume as expedient means to gain a reasonable quantification of all such use. This is particularly appropriate for water utilities who are in the early stages of the water auditing process. to qualify for 6 or greater: Finalize policy and do field checks. Proceed if top-down audit exists and/or a great volume of such use is suspected. to maintain 10:Continue to refine policy and procedures with intention of reducing the number of allowable uses of water in unbilled and unmetered fashion. Any uses that can feasibly become billed and metered should be converted eventually. to qualify for 4: Implement a new water utility policy requiring customer metering. Expand pilot metering study to include several different meter types, which will provide data for economic assessment of full scale metering options. Assess sites with access difficulties to devise means to obtain water consumption volumes. to qualify for 6: Budget for staff resources to review billing records to identify unmetered properties. Specify metering needs and funding requirements to install sufficient meters to significant reduce the number of unmetered accounts to qualify for 8: Install customer meters on a full scale basis. Refine metering policy and procedures to ensure that all accounts, including municipal properties, are designated for meters. Implement procedures to obtain reliable consumption estimate for unmetered accounts awaiting meter installation. to qualify for 10: Continue customer meter installation throughout the service area, with a goal to minimize unmetered accounts. Sustain the effort to investigate accounts with access difficulties to devise means to install water meters or otherwise measure water consumption. to qualify for 4: Review historic written directives and policy documents allowing certain accounts to be billing-exempt. Draft an outline of a written policy for billing exemptions, identify criteria that grants an exemption, with a goal of keeping this number of accounts to a minimum. to qualify for 6: Draft a new written policy regarding billing exemptions based upon consensus criteria allowing this occurrence. Assign resources to audit meter records and billing records to obtain census of unbilled metered accounts. to qualify for 8: Communicate billing exemption policy throughout the organization and implement procedures that ensure proper account management. Conduct inspections of accounts confirmed in unbilled metered status and verify that accurate meters exist and are scheduled for routine meter readings. to qualify for 10: Ensure that meter management (meter accuracy testing, meter replacement) and meter reading activities are accorded the same priority as billed accounts. Establish ongoing annual auditing process to ensure that water consumption is reliably collected and provided to the annual water audit process. APPARENT LOSSES to qualify for 5: Utilize accepted default value of 1.25% of system input volume as an expedient means to gain a reasonable quantification of this use. to qualify for 4: Evaluate the documentation of events that have been observed. Meet with user groups (ex: for fire hydrants - fire departments, contractors to ascertain their need for water from fire hydrants). to qualify for 8: Assess water utility policy and procedures to ensure that fire hydrant permits are issued for use by persons outside of the utility. Create written procedures for use and documentation of fire hydrants by water utility personnel. to qualify for 10: Refine written procedures to ensure that all uses of unbilled, unmetered water are overseen by a structured permitting process managed by water utility personnel. Reassess policy to determine if some of these uses have value in being converted to billed and/or metered status. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 6 n/a 1 2345678910 Grading Unauthorized consumption: Extent of unauthorized consumption is unknown due to unclear policies and poor recordkeeping. Total unauthorized consumption is guesstimated. Unauthorized consumption is a known occurrence, but its extent is a mystery. There are no requirements to document observed events, but periodic field reports capture some of these occurrences. Total unauthorized consumption is approximated from this limited data. conditions between 2 and 4 Procedures exist to document some unauthorized consumption such as observed unauthorized fire hydrant openings. Use formulae to quantify this consumption (time running x typical flowrate x number of events). Default value of 0.25% of system input volume is employed Coherent policies exist for some forms of unauthorized consumption but others await closer evaluation. Reasonable surveillance and recordkeeping exist for occurrences that fall under the policy. Volumes quantified by inference from these records. Unsupervised uses are guesstimated. Conditions between 6 and 8 Clear policies and good recordkeeping exist for certain events (ex: tampering with water meters); other occurrences have limited oversight. Total consumption is a combination of volumes from formulae (time x typical flow) and subjective estimates of unconfirmed consumption. Conditions between 8 and 10 Clear policies exist to identify all known unauthorized uses of water. Staff and procedures exist to provide enforcement of policies and detect violations. Each occurrence is quantified via formulae (time x typical flow) or similar methods. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Unauthorized Consumption" component: to qualify for 5:Use accepted default of 0.25% of system input volume. to qualify for 2: Review utility policy regarding what water uses are considered unauthorized, and consider tracking a small sample of one such occurrence (ex: unauthorized fire hydrant openings) to qualify for 5:Utilize accepted default value of 0.25% of system input volume as expedient means to gain a reasonable quantification of all such use. This is particularly appropriate for water utilities who are in the early stages of the water auditing process. to qualify for 6 or greater:Finalize policy and do field checks. Proceed if top-down audit exists and/or a great volume of such use is suspected. to maintain 10: Continue to refine policy and procedures to eliminate any loopholes that allow or tacitly encourage unauthorized consumption. Continue to be vigilant in documentation and enforcement efforts. Customer metering inaccuracies: select n/a only if the entire customer population is unmetered. In such a case the volume entered must be zero. Customer meters exist, but with unorganized paper records on meters; no meter accuracy testing or meter replacement program. Workflow is driven chaotically by customer complaints with no proactive management. Loss volume due to aggregate meter inaccuracy is guesstimated. Poor recordkeeping and meter oversight is recognized by water utility management who has allotted staff and funding resources to organize improved recordkeeping and start meter accuracy testing. Existing paper records gathered and organized to provide cursory disposition of meter population. Conditions between 2 and 4 Reliable recordkeeping exists; meter information is improving as meters are replaced. Meter accuracy testing is conducted annually for a small number of meters. Limited number of oldest meters replaced each year. Inaccuracy volume is largely an estimate, but refined based upon limited testing data. Conditions between 4 and 6 A reliable electronic recordkeeping system for meters exists. Population includes a mix of new high performing meters and dated meters with suspect accuracy. Routine, but limited, meter accuracy testing and meter replacement occur. Inaccuracy volume is quantified using a mix of reliable and less certain data. Conditions between 6 and 8 Ongoing meter replacement and accuracy testing result in highly accurate customer meter population. Testing is conducted on samples of meters at varying lifespans to determine optimum replacement time for various types of meters. Conditions between 8 and 10 Good records of number, type and size of customer meters; ongoing meter replacement occurs. Regular meter accuracy testing gives reliable measure of composite inaccuracy volume for the system. New metering technology is embraced to keep overall accuracy improving. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Customer meter inaccuracy volume" component: If n/a is selected because the customer meter population is unmetered, consider establishing a new policy to meter the customer population and employ water rates based upon metered volumes. to qualify for 2: Gather available meter purchase records. Conduct testing on a small number of meters believed to be the most inaccurate. Review staffing needs of metering group and budget for necessary resources to better organize meter management. to maintain 10: Increase the number of meters tested and replaced as justified by meter accuracy test data. Continually monitor development of new technology in Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) to grasp opportunities for greater accuracy in metering and customer consumption data. Systematic Data Handling Error: Note: all water utilities incur some amount of this error. Even in water utilities with unmetered customer populations and fixed rate billing, errors occur in annual billing tabulations. Enter a positive value for the volume and select a grading. Vague policy for permitting (creating new customer accounts) and billing. Billing data maintained on paper records which are in disarray. No audits conducted to confirm billing data handling efficiency. Unknown number of customers escape routine billing due to lack of billing process oversight. Policy for permitting and billing exists but needs refinement. Billing data maintained on paper records or insufficiently capable electronic database. Only periodic unstructured auditing work conducted to confirm billing data handling efficiency. Volume of unbilled water due to billing lapses is a guess. Conditions between 2 and 4 Policy and procedures for permitting and billing exist but needs refinement. Computerized billing system exists, but is dated or lacks needed functionality. Periodic, limited internal audits conducted and confirm with approximate accuracy the consumption volumes lost to billing lapses. Conditions between 4 and 6 Policy for permitting and billing is adequate and reviewed periodically. Computerized billing system in use with basic reporting available. Any effect of billing adjustments on measured consumption volumes is well understood. Internal checks of billing data error conducted annually. Reasonably accurate quantification of consumption volume lost to billing lapses is obtained. Conditions between 6 and 8 Permitting and billing policy reviewed at least biannually. Computerized billing system includes an array of reports to confirm billing data and system functionality. Annual internal checks conducted with periodic third party audit. Accountability checks flag billing lapses. Consumption lost to billing lapses is well quantified and reducing year-by-year. Conditions between 8 and 10 Sound policy exists for permitting of all customer billing accounts. Robust computerized billing system gives high functionality and reporting capabilities. Assessment of policy and data handling errors conducted internally and audited by third party annually, ensuring consumption lost to billing lapses is minimized and detected as it occurs. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Systematic Data Handling Error volume" component: to qualify for 2:Draft written policy for permitting and billing. Investigate and budget for computerized customer billing system. Conduct initial audit of billing records by flow-charting the basic business processes of the customer account/billing function. to maintain 10:Stay abreast of customer information management developments and innovations. Monitor developments of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) and integrate technology to ensure that customer endpoint information is well-monitored and errors/lapses are at an economic minimum. to qualify for 8: Formalize regular review of permitting and billing practices. Enhance reporting capability of computerized billing system. Formalize regular auditing process to reveal scope of data handling error. to qualify for 10: Close policy/procedure loopholes that allow some customer accounts to go unbilled, or data handling errors to exist. Ensure that internal and third party audits are conducted annually. to qualify for 4: Implement a reliable record keeping system for customer meter histories, preferably using electronic methods typically linked to, or part of, the Customer Billing System or Customer Information System. Expand meter accuracy testing to a larger group of meters. to qualify for 6:Standardize procedures for meter recordkeeping with the electronic information system. Accelerate meter accuracy testing and meter replacements guided by testing results. to qualify for 8: Expand annual meter accuracy testing to evaluate a statistically significant number of meter makes/models. Expand meter replacement program to replace statistically significant number of poor performing meters each year. to qualify for 10: Continue efforts to manage meter population with reliable recordkeeping, meter testing and replacement. Evaluate new meter types and install one or more types in 5-10 customer accounts each year in order to pilot improving metering technology. to qualify for 4: Finalize written policy for permitting and billing. Implement a computerized customer billing system. Conduct initial audit of billing records as part of this process. to qualify for 6: Refine permitting and billing procedures and ensure consistency with the utility policy regarding billing, and minimize opportunity for missed billings. Upgrade or replace customer billing system for needed functionality - ensure that billing adjustments don't corrupt the value of consumption volumes. Procedurize internal annual audit process. to qualify for 5: Use accepted default of 0.25% of system input volume to qualify for 4: Review utility policy regarding what water uses are considered unauthorized, and consider tracking a small sample of one such occurrence (ex: unauthorized fire hydrant openings) to quality for 8: Assess water utility policies to ensure that all known occurrences of unauthorized consumption are outlawed, and that appropriate penalties are prescribed. Create written procedures for use and documentation of various occurrences of unauthorized consumption as they are uncovered. to qualify for 10: Refine written procedures and assign staff to seek out likely occurrences of unauthorized consumption. Explore new locking devices, monitors and other technologies designed to detect and thwart unauthorized consumption. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 7 n/a 1 2345678910 Grading Length of mains: Poorly assembled and maintained paper as-built records of existing water main installations makes accurate determination of system pipe length impossible. Length of mains is guesstimated. Paper records in poor condition (no annual tracking of installations & abandonments). Poor procedures to ensure that new water mains installed by developers are accurately documented. Conditions between 2 and 4 Sound policy and procedures for permitting and documenting new water main installations, but gaps in management result in a uncertain degree of error in tabulation of mains length. Conditions between 4 and 6 Sound policy and procedures exist for permitting and commissioning new water mains. Highly accurate paper records with regular field validation; or electronic records and asset management system in good condition. Includes system backup. Conditions between 6 and 8 Sound policy and procedures exist for permitting and commissioning new water mains. Electronic recordkeeping and asset management system are used to store and manage data. Conditions between 8 and 10 Sound policy exists for managing water mains extensions and replacements. Geographic Information System (GIS) data and asset management database agree and random field validation proves truth of databases. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Length of Water Mains" component: to qualify for 2:Assign personnel to inventory current as-built records and compare with customer billing system records and highway plans. Assemble policy documents regarding permitting and documentation of water main installations by the utility and building developers; identify gaps in procedure that result in poor documentation. to maintain 10: Continue with standardization and random field validation to improve knowledge of system. Number of active AND inactive service connections: Vague permitting (of new service connections) policy and poor paper recordkeeping of customer connections/billings result in suspect determination of the number of service connections, which may be 10- 15% in error from actual count. General permitting policy exists but paper records, procedural gaps, and weak oversight result in questionable total for number of connections, which may vary 5- 10% of actual count. Conditions between 2 and 4 Permitting policy and procedures exist, but with some gaps in performance and oversight. Computerized information management system is being brought online to replace dated paper recordkeeping system. Reasonably accurate tracking of service connection installations & abandonments; but count can be up to 5% in error from actual total. Conditions between 4 and 6 Permitting policy and procedures are adequate and reviewed periodically. Computerized information management system is in use with annual installations & abandonments totaled. Very limited field verifications and audits. Error in count of number of service connections is believed to be no more that 3%. Conditions between 6 and 8 Permitting policy and procedures reviewed at least biannually. Well- managed computerized information management system and routine, periodic field checks and internal system audits allows counts of connections that is no more than 2% in error. Conditions between 8 and 10 Sound permitting policy and well managed and audited procedures ensure reliable management of service connection population. Computerized information management system and Geographic Information System (GIS) information agree; field validation proves truth of databases. Count of connections believed to be in error by less than 1%. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Number of Active and Inactive customer service connections" component: to qualify for 2:Draft new policy and procedures for permitting and billing. Research and collect paper records of installations & abandonments for several years prior to audit year. to maintain 10: Continue with standardization and random field validation to improve knowledge of system. Vague policy exists to define the delineation of water utility ownership and customer ownership of the service connection piping. Curbstops are perceived as the breakpoint but these have not been well-maintained or documented. Most are buried or obscured. Their location varies widely from site-to-site, and estimating this distance is arbitrary due to the unknown location of many curbstops. Policy requires that the curbstop serves as the delineation point between water utility ownership and customer ownership of the service connection piping. The piping from the water main to the curbstop is the property of the water utility; and the piping from the curbstop to the customer building is owned by the customer. Curbstop locations are not well documented and the average distance is based upon a limited number of locations measured in the field. Conditions between 2 and 4 Good policy requires that the curbstop serves as the delineation point between water utility ownership and customer ownership of the service connection piping. Curbstops are generally installed as needed and are reasonably documented. Their location varies widely from site-to-site, and an estimate of this distance is hindered by the availability of paper records. Conditions between 4 and 6 Clear policy exists to define utility/customer responsibility for service connection piping. Accurate, well-maintained paper or basic electronic recordkeeping system exists. Periodic field checks confirm piping lengths for a sample of customer properties. Conditions between 6 and 8 Clearly worded policy standardizes the location of curbstops and meters, which are inspected upon installation. Accurate and well maintained electronic records exist with periodic field checks to confirm locations of service lines, curbstops and customer meter pits. An accurate number of customer properties from the customer billing system allows for reliable averaging of this length. Conditions between 8 and 10 Average length of customer service line: Note: if customer water meters are located outside of the customer building next to the curbstop or boundary separating utility/customer responsibility, follow the grading description for 10(a). Also see the Service Connection Diagram worksheet. Either of two conditions can be met to obtain a grading of 10:a) The customer water meter is located outside of the customer building adjacent to the curbstop or boundary separating utility/customer responsibility for the service connection piping. In this case enter a value of zero in the Reporting Worksheet with a grading of 10.b). Customer water meters are located inside customer buildings, or the properties are unmetered. In either case the distance is highly reliable since data is drawn from a Geographic Information System (GIS) and confirmed by routine field checks. Gradings 1-9 apply if customer properties are unmetered, if customer meters exist and are located inside the customer building premises, or if the water utility owns and is responsible for the entire service connection piping from the water main to the customer building. In any of these cases the average distance between the curbstop or boundary separating utility/customer responsibility for service connection piping, and the typical first point of use (ex: faucet) or the customer meter must be quantified. Gradings of 1-9 are used to grade the validity of the means to quantify this value.(See the "Service Connection Diagram" worksheet) to qualify for 4: Refine policy and procedures for permitting and billing. Research computerized recordkeeping system (Customer Information System or Customer Billing System) to improve documentation format for service connections. to qualify for 6: Refine procedures to ensure consistency with permitting policy to establish new service connections or decommission existing connections. Improve process to include all totals for at least five years prior to audit year. to qualify for 8: Formalize regular review of permitting policy and procedures. Launch random field checks of limited number of locations. Develop reports and auditing mechanisms for computerized information management system. to qualify for 10: Close any procedural loopholes that allow installations to go undocumented. Link computerized information management system with Geographic Information System (GIS) and formalize field inspection and information system auditing processes. Documentation of new or decommissioned service connections encounters several levels of checks and balances. SYSTEM DATA to qualify for 4: Complete inventory of paper records of water main installations & abandonments for a number of years prior to audit year. Review policy and procedures for commissioning and documenting new water main installation and abandonments. to qualify for 6: Finalize updates/improvements to policy and procedures for permitting/commissioning new main installations. Confirm inventory of records for five years prior to audit year; correct any errors or omissions. to qualify for 8:Launch random field checks of limited number of locations. Convert to electronic databases with backup as justified. to qualify for 10:Link Geographic Information System (GIS) and asset management databases, conduct field verification of data. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 8 n/a 1 2345678910 Grading Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Average Length of Customer Service Line" component: to qualify for 2: Research and collect paper records of service line installations. Inspect several sites in the field using pipe locators to locate curbstops. Obtain the length of this small sample of connections in this manner. to maintain 10: Continue with standardization and random field validation to improve knowledge of system. Average operating pressure: Available records are poorly assembled and maintained paper records of supply pump characteristics and water distribution system operating conditions. Average pressure is guesstimated based upon this information and ground elevations from crude topographical maps. Widely varying distribution system pressures due to undulating terrain, high system head loss and weak/erratic pressure controls further compromise the validity of the average pressure calculation. Limited telemetry monitoring of scattered sites provides some static pressure data, which is recorded in handwritten logbooks. Pressure data is gathered at individual sites only when low pressure complaints arise. Average pressure is determined by averaging relatively crude data, and is affected by significant variation in ground elevations, system head loss and gaps in pressure controls in the distribution system. Conditions between 2 and 4 Effective pressure controls separate different pressure zones; moderate pressure variation across the system, occasional open boundary valves are discovered that breech pressure zones. Basic telemetry monitoring of the distribution system logs pressure data electronically. Pressure data gathered by gauges or dataloggers at fire hydrants or buildings when low pressure complaints arise, and during fire flow tests and system flushing. Reliable topographical data exists. Average pressure is calculated using this mix of data. Conditions between 4 and 6 Reliable pressure controls separate distinct pressure zones; only very occasional open boundary valves are encountered that breech pressure zones. Well-covered telemetry monitoring of the distribution system logs extensive pressure data electronically. Pressure gathered by gauges/dataloggers at fire hydrants and buildings when low pressure complaints arise, and during fire flow tests and system flushing. Average pressure is determined by using this mix of reliable data. Conditions between 6 and 8 Well-managed, discrete pressure zones exist with generally predictable pressure fluctuations. A current full-scale SCADA System exists to monitor the water distribution system and collect data, including real time pressure readings at representative sites across the system. The average system pressure is determined from reliable SCADA System data. Conditions between 8 and 10 Well-managed pressure districts/zones, SCADA System and hydraulic model exist to give very precise pressure data across the water distribution system. Average system pressure is reliably calculated from extensive, reliable, and cross-checked data. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Average Operating Pressure" component: to qualify for 2:Employ pressure gauging and/or datalogging equipment to obtain pressure measurements from fire hydrants. Locate accurate topographical maps of service area in order to confirm ground elevations. Research pump data sheets to find pump pressure/flow characteristics to maintain 10: Continue to refine the hydraulic model of the distribution system and consider linking it with SCADA System for real-time pressure data calibration, and averaging. to qualify for 4: Formalize and communicate policy delineating utility/customer responsibilities for service connection piping. Assess accuracy of paper records by field inspection of a small sample of service connections using pipe locators as needed. Research the potential migration to a computerized information management system to store service connection data. to qualify for 6: Establish coherent procedures to ensure that policy for curbstop, meter installation and documentation is followed. Gain consensus within the water utility for the establishment of a computerized information management system. to qualify for 8: Implement an electronic means of recordkeeping, typically via a customer information system or customer billing system. Standardize the process to conduct field checks of limited number of locations. to qualify for 4: Formalize a procedure to use pressure gauging/datalogging equipment to gather pressure data during various system events such as low pressure complaints, or operational testing. Gather pump pressure and flow data at different flow regimes. Identify faulty pressure controls (pressure reducing valves, altitude valves, partially open boundary valves) and plan to properly configure pressure zones. Make all pressure data from these efforts available to generate system-wide average pressure. to qualify for 6: Expand the use of pressure gauging/datalogging equipment to gather scattered pressure data at a representative set of sites, based upon pressure zones or areas. Utilize pump pressure and flow data to determine supply head entering each pressure zone or district. Correct any faulty pressure controls (pressure reducing valves, altitude valves, partially open boundary valves) to ensure properly configured pressure zones. Use expanded pressure dataset from these activities to generate system-wide average pressure. to qualify for 8: Install a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System to monitor system parameters and control operations. Set regular calibration schedule for instrumentation to insure data accuracy. Obtain accurate topographical data and utilize pressure data gathered from field surveys to provide extensive, reliable data for pressure averaging. to qualify for 10: Obtain average pressure data from hydraulic model of the distribution system that has been calibrated via field measurements in the water distribution system and confirmed in comparisons with SCADA System data. to qualify for 10: Link customer information management system and Geographic Information System (GIS), standardize process for field verification of data. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 9 n/a 1 2345678910 Grading Total annual cost of operating water system: Incomplete paper records and lack of documentation on many operating functions making calculation of water system operating costs a pure guesstimate Reasonably maintained, but incomplete, paper or electronic accounting provides data to estimate the major portion of water system operating costs. Conditions between 2 and 4 Electronic, industry-standard cost accounting system in place. Gaps in data known to exist, periodic internal reviews conducted but not a structured audit. Conditions between 4 and 6 Reliable electronic, industry-standard cost accounting system in place, with all pertinent water system operating costs tracked. Data audited periodically by utility personnel, not a Certified Public Accountant (CPA). Conditions between 6 and 8 Reliable electronic, industry-standard cost accounting system in place, with all pertinent water system operating costs tracked. Data audited at least annually by utility personnel, and periodically by third-party CPA. Conditions between 8 and 10 Reliable electronic, industry-standard cost accounting system in place, with all pertinent water system operating costs tracked. Data audited annually by utility personnel and by third-party CPA. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Total Annual Cost of Operating the Water System" component: to qualify for 2: Gather available records, institute new procedures to regularly collect and audit basic cost data of most important operations functions. to maintain 10: Maintain program, stay abreast of expenses subject to erratic cost changes and budget/track costs proactively Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses): Antiquated, cumbersome water rate structure is use, with periodic historic amendments that were poorly documented and implemented; resulting in classes of customers being billed inconsistent charges. The actual composite billing rate likely differs significantly from the published water rate structure, but a lack of auditing leaves the degree of error indeterminate. Dated, cumbersome water rate structure, not always employed consistently in actual billing operations. The actual composite billing rate is known to differ from the published water rate structure, and a reasonably accurate estimate of the degree of error is determined, allowing a composite billing rate to be quantified. Conditions between 2 and 4 Straight-forward water rate structure in use, but not updated in several years. Billing operations reliably employ the rate structure. The composite billing rate is derived from a single customer class such as residential customer accounts, neglecting the effect of different rates from varying customer classes. Customer population unmetered. Fixed fee charged; single composite number derived from multiple customer classes. Clearly written, up-to-date water rate structure is in force and is applied reliably in billing operations. Composite customer rate is determined using a weighted average residential rate using volumes of water in each rate block. Conditions between 6 and 8 Effective water rate structure is in force and is applied reliably in billing operations. Composite customer rate is determined using a weighted average composite consumption rate, including residential, commercial, industrial and any other customer classes within the water rate structure. Conditions between 8 and 10 Third party reviewed weighted average composite consumption rate (includes residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Customer Retail Unit Cost" component: to qualify for 2: Formalize the process to implement water rates, including a secure documentation procedure. Create a current, formal water rate document and gain approval from all stakeholders. to qualify for 6: Evaluate volume of water used in each usage block by residential users. Multiply volumes by full rate structure. Meter customers and charge rates based upon water volumes to maintain 10: Keep water rate structure current in addressing the water utility's revenue needs. Update the calculation of the customer unit rate as new rate components, customer classes, or other components are modified. Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses): Note: if the water utility purchases/imports its entire water supply, then enter the unit purchase cost of the bulk water supply in the Reporting Worksheet with a grading of 10 Incomplete paper records and lack of documentation on primary operating functions (electric power and treatment costs most importantly) makes calculation of variable production costs a pure guesstimate Reasonably maintained, but incomplete, paper or electronic accounting provides data to roughly estimate the basic operations costs (pumping power costs and treatment costs) and calculate a unit variable production cost. Conditions between 2 and 4 Electronic, industry-standard cost accounting system in place. Electric power and treatment costs are reliably tracked and allow accurate calculation of unit variable production costs based on these two inputs only. All costs are audited internally on a periodic basis. Conditions between 4 and 6 Reliable electronic, industry- standard cost accounting system in place, with all pertinent water system operating costs tracked. Pertinent additional costs beyond power and treatment (ex: liability, residuals management, etc.) are included in the unit variable production cost. Data audited at least annually by utility personnel. Conditions between 6 and 8 Reliable electronic, industry-standard cost accounting system in place, with all pertinent variable production costs tracked. Data audited at least annually by utility personnel, and periodically by third-party. Conditions between 8 and 10 Either of two conditions can be met to obtain a grading of 10: 1) Third party CPA audit of all primary and secondary cost components on an annual basis.or:2) Water supply is entirely purchased as bulk imported water, and unit purchase cost serves as the variable production cost. Improvements to attain higher data grading for "Variable Production Cost" component: to qualify for 2: Gather available records, institute new procedures to regularly collect and audit basic cost data and most important operations functions. to maintain 10: Maintain program, stay abreast of expenses subject to erratic cost changes and budget/track costs proactively COST DATA to qualify for 4:Implement an electronic cost accounting system, structured according to accounting standards for water utilities to qualify for 6:Establish process for periodic internal audit of water system operating costs; identify cost data gaps and institute procedures for tracking these outstanding costs. to qualify for 8:Standardize the process to conduct routine financial audit on an annual basis. to qualify for 10:Standardize the process to conduct a third-party financial audit by a CPA on an annual basis. to qualify for 4:Implement an electronic cost accounting system, structured according to accounting standards for water utilities to qualify for 6: Formalize process for regular internal audits of production costs. Assess whether additional costs (liability, residuals management, etc.) should be included to calculate a more accurate variable production cost. to qualify for 8: Formalize the accounting process to include primary cost components (power, treatment) as well as secondary components (liability, residuals management, etc.) Conduct periodic third-party audits. to qualify for 10:Standardize the process to conduct a third-party financial audit by a CPA on an annual basis. to qualify for 4:Review the water rate structure and update/formalize as needed. Assess billing operations to ensure that actual billing operations incorporate the established water rate structure. to qualify for 8:Evaluate volume of water used in each usage block by all classifications of users. Multiply volumes by full rate structure. to qualify for 10:Conduct a periodic third-party audit of water used in each usage block by all classifications of users. Multiply volumes by full rate structure. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Grading Matrix 10 AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Customer Service Line Diagrams Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WAS v4.1 Back to Instructions Average Length of Customer Service Line The three figures shown on this worksheet display the assignment of the Average Length of Customer Service Line, Lp, for the three most common piping configurations. Figure 1 shows the configuration of the water meter outside of the customer building next to the curbstop valve. In this configuration Lp = 0 since the distance between the curbstop and the customer metering point is essentially zero. Figure 2 shows the configuration of the customer water meter located inside the customer building, where Lp is the distance from the curbstop to the water meter. Figure 3 shows the configuration of an unmetered customer building , where Lp is the distance from the curbstop to the first point of customer water consumption, or, more simply, the building line. In any water system the Lp will vary notably in a community of different structures, therefore the average Lp value is used and this should be approximated or calculated if a sample of service line measurements has been gathered. Return to Reporting Worksheet Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Click for more information AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Service Connection Diagram 11 Item Name Apparent Losses AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION Average length of customer service line Average operating pressure Billed Authorized Consumption Billed metered consumption Billed unmetered consumption Connection density AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Definitions Description = unauthorized consumption + meter under-registration + data handling errors Includes all types of inaccuracies associated with customer metering as well as data handling errors (meter reading and billing), plus unauthorized consumption (theft or illegal use). NOTE: Over-registration of customer meters, leads to under-estimation of Real Losses. Under-registration of customer meters, leads to over-estimation of Real Losses. All consumption that is billed and authorized by the utility. This may include both metered and unmetered consumption. See "Authorized Consumption" for more information. = billed metered + billed unmetered + unbilled metered + unbilled unmetered The volume of metered and/or unmetered water taken by registered customers, the water supplier and others who are implicitly or explicitly authorized to do so by the water supplier, for residential, commercial and industrial purposes. This does NOT include water sold to neighboring utilities (water exported). Authorized consumption may include items such as fire fighting and training, flushing of mains and sewers, street cleaning, watering of municipal gardens, public fountains, frost protection, building water, etc. These may be billed or unbilled, metered or unmetered. All billed consumption which is calculated based on estimates or norms but is not metered. This might be a very small component in fully metered systems (for example billing based on estimates for the period a customer meter is out of order) but can be the key consumption component in systems without universal metering. It does NOT include water sold to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is unmetered but billed. All metered consumption which is billed. This includes all groups of customers such as domestic, commercial, industrial or institutional. It does NOT include water sold to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is metered and billed. The metered consumption data can be taken directly from billing records for the water audit period. The accuracy of yearly metered consumption data can be refined by including an adjustment to account for customer meter reading lagtime, however additional analysis is necessary to determine the adjustment value, which may or may not be significant. =number of connections / length of mains The average pressure may be approximated when compiling the preliminary water audit. Once routine water auditing has been established, a more accurate assessment of average pressure should be pursued. If the water utility infrastructure is recorded in a Geographical Information System (GIS) the average pressure at many locations in the distribution system can be readily obtained. If a GIS does not exist, a weighted average of pressure data can be calculated from water pressure measured at various fire hydrants scattered across the water distribution system. Find Back to Instructions Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WAS v4.1 Find Find Find Find Find Click to see Service Connection Diagram This is entered for unmetered services and in cold or other areas where meters are installed inside homes and buildings. It is the length of customer service line either between the utility's service connection (often at the curbstop) and the meter, or to the building line (first point of customer consumption) if customers are unmetered. Note that the length of service connection between the main and customer service line is owned by the utility and its length and potential leakage is accounted for in the UARL formula by the number of service connections. What role does the "Average Length of Customer Service Line" parameter serve in the Water Audit? In many water distribution systems the water utility has maintenance responsibility for a portion of the customer service piping from its connection point at the water main to the curbstop valve located midway to the customer building. The customer is responsible to maintain the customer service piping from the curbstop to the building premises. When leaks arise on customer service piping, water utilities respond faster to repair leaks than customers when the leak is on piping under their responsibility. Leak durations are longer on the customer-maintained piping than the utility-maintained piping. The total length of pipe maintained by customers is one of the components of the Unavoidable Annual Real Loss (UARL) equation and is determined by multiplying the average length of customer maintained pipe, Lp by the number of customer service connections. Therefore this parameter is important to the calculation of the UARL and the Infrastructure leakage Index (ILI). AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Definitions 12 Item Name Description Customer metering inaccuracies Customer retail unit cost Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) Length of mains Master meter error adjustment NON-REVENUE WATER Number of active AND inactive service connections Real Losses Revenue Water Systematic data handling errors Total annual cost of operating the water system The ratio of the Current Annual Real Losses (Real Losses) to the Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL). The ILI is a highly effective performance indicator for comparing (benchmarking) the performance of utilities in operational management of real losses. Number of service connections, main to curb stop. Please note that this includes the actual number of distinct piping connections including fire connections whether active or inactive. This may differ substantially from the number of Customers (or number of accounts) = Apparent Losses + Real Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered Water which does not provide any revenue to the utility Physical water losses from the pressurized system and the utility’s storage tanks, up to the point of customer consumption. In metered systems this is the customer meter, in unmetered situations this is the first point of consumption (stop tap/tap) within the property. The annual volume lost through all types of leaks, breaks and overflows depends on frequencies, flow rates, and average duration of individual leaks, breaks and overflows. Water which is charged to customers to provide revenue to the utility. Apparent water losses caused by the collective under-registration of customer water meters. Many customer water meters will wear as large cumulative volumes of water are passed through them over time. This causes the meters to under-register. The auditor has two options for entering data for this component of the audit. The auditor can enter a percentage under-registration (typically an estimated value), this will apply the selected percentage to the two categories of metered consumption to determine the volume of water not recorded due to customer meter inaccuracy. Alternatively, if the auditor has substantial data from meter testing to arrive at their own volumes of such losses, this volume may be entered directly. Note that a value of zero will be accepted but an alert will appear asking if the customer population is unmetered. Since all metered systems have some degree of inaccuracy, then a positive value should be entered. A value of zero in this component is valid only if the water utility does not meter its customer population. The Customer Retail Unit Cost represents the charge that customers pay for water service. This unit cost is applied to the components of apparent loss, since these losses represent water reaching customers but not (fully) paid for. It is important to compile these costs per the same unit cost basis as the volume measure included in the water audit. For example, if all water volumes are measured in million gallons, then the unit cost should be dollars per million gallon ($/mil gal). The software allows the user to select the units that are charged to customers (either $/1,000 gallons, $/hundred cubic feet or $/1,000 litres) and automatically converts these units to the units that appear in the "WATER SUPPLIED" box. Since most water utilities have a rate structure that includes a variety of different costs based upon class of customer, a weighted average of individual costs and number of customer accounts in each class can be calculated to determine a single composite cost that should be entered into this cell. Finally, the weighted average cost should also include additional charges for sewer, stormwater or biosolids processing, if these charges are based upon the volume of potable water consumed. An estimate or measure of the degree of any inaccuracy that exists in the master meters measuring the Volume from own sources. Please also indicate if this adjustment is because the master meters under-registered (did not capture all the flow) or over-registered (overstated the actual flow). All systems encounter some degree of error in their Master Meter data. Please enter a positive value. These costs include those for operations, maintenance and any annually incurred costs for long-term upkeep of the system, such as repayment of capital bonds for infrastructure expansion or improvement. Typical costs include employee salaries and benefits, materials, equipment, insurance, fees, administrative costs and all other costs that exist to sustain the drinking water supply. These costs should not include any costs to operate wastewater, biosolids or other systems outside of drinking water. Apparent water losses caused by systematic data handling errors in the meter reading and billing system. Length of all pipelines (except service connections) in the system starting from the point of system input metering (for example at the outlet of the treatment plant). It is also recommended to include in this measure the total length of fire hydrant lead pipe. Hydrant lead pipe is the pipe branching from the water main to the fire hydrant. Fire hydrant leads are typically of a sufficiently large size that is more representative of a pipeline than a service connection. The average length of hydrant leads across the entire system can be assumed if not known, and multiplied by the number of fire hydrants in the system, which can also be assumed if not known. This value can then be added to the total pipeline length. Total length of mains can therefore be calculated as: Length of Mains, miles = (total pipeline length, miles) + [ {(average fire hydrant lead length, ft) x (number of fire hydrants)} / 5,280 ft/mile ] or Length of Mains, kilometres = (total pipeline length, kilometres) + [ {(average fire hydrant lead length, metres) x (number of fire hydrants)} / 1,000 metres/kilometre ] Find Find Find Find Find Find Find Find Find Find AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Definitions 13 Item Name Description Unauthorized consumption Unbilled Authorized Consumption Unbilled metered consumption Unbilled unmetered consumption Convert From… Million Gallons (US) = 1 Million Gallons (US) Any kind of Authorized Consumption which is neither billed nor metered. This component typically includes items such as fire fighting, flushing of mains and sewers, street cleaning, frost protection, etc. In most water utilities it is a small component which is very often substantially overestimated. It does NOT include water sold to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is unmetered and unbilled – an unlikely case. This component has many sub-components of water use which are often tedious to identify and quantify. Because of this, and the fact that it is usually a small portion of the water supplied, it is recommended that the auditor apply the default value of 1.25% of the volume from own sources. Select the default percentage to enter this value. If the water utility already has well validated data that gives a value substantially higher or lower than the default volume, then the auditor should enter their own volume. However the default approach is recommended for most water utilities. Note that a value of zero is not permitted, since all water utilities have some volume of water in this component occurring in their system. Enter Units: The user may develop an audit based on one of three unit selections: 1) Million Gallons (US) 2) Megalitres (Thousand Cubic Metres) 3) Acre-feet Once this selection has been made in the instructions sheet, all calculations are made on the basis of the chosen units. Should the user wish to make additional conversions, a unit converter is provided below (use drop down menus to select units from the yellow unit boxes): (conversion factor = 1) Metered Consumption which is for any reason unbilled. This might for example include metered consumption of the utility itself or water provided to institutions free of charge. It does NOT include water sold to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is metered but unbilled. Units and Conversions Converts to….. 1 All consumption that is unbilled, but still authorized by the utility. See "Authorized Consumption" for more information. Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL) The UARL is a theoretical reference value representing the technical low limit of leakage that could be achieved if all of today's best technology could be successfully applied. It is a key variable in the calculation of the Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI). It is not necessary that water utilities set this level as the target level of leakage, unless water is unusually expensive, scarce or both. NOTE: The UARL calculation has not yet been fully proven as effective for very small, or low pressure water distribution systems. If, in gallons per day: (Lm x 32) + Nc < 3000 or P <35psi in litres per day: (Lm x 20) + Nc < 3000 or P < 25m then the calculated UARL value may not be valid. The software does not display a value of UARL or ILI if either of these conditions is true. UARL (gallons/day)=(5.41Lm + 0.15Nc + 7.5Lc) xP, or UARL (litres/day)=(18.0Lm + 0.8Nc + 25.0Lc) xP where: Lm = length of mains (miles or kilometres) Nc = number of service connections Lc = total length of customer service lines (miles or km) = Nc multiplied by the average distance of customer service line, Lp (miles or km) P = Pressure (psi or metres) Includes water illegally withdrawn from hydrants, illegal connections, bypasses to consumption meter or meter reading equipment tampering. While this component has a direct impact on revenue, in most water utilities the volume is low and it is recommended that the auditor apply a default value of 0.25% of the volume from own sources. If the auditor has well validated data that indicates the volume from unauthorized consumption is substantially higher or lower than that generated by the default value then this value can be entered. However, for most water utilities it is recommended to apply the default value. Note that a value of zero will not be accepted since all water utilities have some volume of unauthorized consumption occurring in their system. Find Find Find Find Find Click to see Service Connection Diagram AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Definitions 14 Item Name Description Use of Option Buttons Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses) Volume from own sources Water exported Water imported WATER LOSSES = apparent losses + real losses The difference between System Input and Authorized Consumption. Water losses can be considered as a total volume for the whole system, or for partial systems such as transmission or distribution systems, or individual zones. Water Losses consist of Real Losses and Apparent Losses. Bulk water sold and conveyed out of the water distribution system. Typically this is water sold to a neighboring water utility. Be sure to account for any export meter inaccuracy in reporting this volume The volume of treated water input to system from own production facilities The cost to produce and supply the next unit of water. (E.g., $/million gallons) This cost is determined by calculating the summed unit costs for ground and surface water treatment and all power used for pumping from the source to the customer. It should also include the unit cost of bulk water purchased as an import if applicable. Bulk water purchased to become part of the water supplied. Typically this is water purchased from a neighboring water utility or regional water authority. Be sure to account for any import meter inaccuracy in reporting this volume Find Find Find Find Find To use the percent value choose this button To enter a value choose this button and enter the value in the cell to the right NOTE:For unbilled unmetered consumption and unauthorized consumption, a recommended default value can be applied by selecting the Percent option. The default values are based on fixed percentages of water supplied and are recommended for use in this audit unless the auditor has well validated data for their system. Default values are shown by purple cells, as shown in the example above. If a default value is selected, the user does not need to grade the item; a grading value of 3 is automatically applied (however, this grade will not be displayed). Find AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Definitions 15 Functional Focus Area Audit Data Collection Short-term loss control Long-term loss control Target-setting Benchmarking Preliminary Comparisons - can begin to rely upon the Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) for performance comparisons for real losses (see below table) Performance Benchmarking - ILI is meaningful in comparing real loss standing Identify Best Practices/ Best in class - the ILI is very reliable as a real loss performance indicator for best in class service For validity scores of 50 or below, the shaded blocks should not be focus areas until better data validity is achieved. AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Determining Water Loss Standing Conduct loss assessment investigations on a sample portion of the system: customer meter testing, leak survey, unauthorized consumption, etc. Establish ongoing mechanisms for customer meter accuracy testing, active leakage control and infrastructure monitoring Refine, enhance or expand ongoing programs based upon economic justification Water Loss Control Planning Guide Establish/revise policies and procedures for data collection Refine data collection practices and establish as routine business process Annual water audit is a reliable gauge of year-to-year water efficiency standing Level III (51-70)Level IV (71-90) Water Audit Data Validity Level / Score Level I (0-25) Analyze business process for customer metering and billing functions and water supply operations. Identify data gaps. Stay abreast of improvements in metering, meter reading, billing, leakage management and infrastructure rehabilitation Launch auditing and loss control team; address production metering deficiencies Research information on leak detection programs. Begin flowcharting analysis of customer billing system Level II (26-50)Level V (91-100) Establish long-term apparent and real loss reduction goals (+10 year horizon) Establish mid-range (5 year horizon) apparent and real loss reduction goals Evaluate and refine loss control goals on a yearly basis Begin to assess long-term needs requiring large expenditure: customer meter replacement, water main replacement program, new customer billing system or Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) system. Begin to assemble economic business case for long-term needs based upon improved data becoming available through the water audit process. Conduct detailed planning, budgeting and launch of comprehensive improvements for metering, billing or infrastructure management Continue incremental improvements in short-term and long-term loss control interventions Back to Instructions Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WAS v4.1 AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Loss Control Planning 16 Target ILI Range 1.0 - 3.0 0 >3.0 -5.0 0 >5.0 - 8.0 0 Greater than 8.0 0 Less than 1.0 1 Water resources are believed to be sufficient to meet long-term needs, but demand management interventions (leakage management, water conservation) are included in the long-term planning. Water resources are plentiful, reliable, and easily extracted. Although operational and financial considerations may allow a long-term ILI greater than 8.0, such a level of leakage is not an effective utilization of water as a resource. Setting a target level greater than 8.0 - other than as an incremental goal to a smaller long-term target - is discouraged. If the calculated Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) value for your system is 1.0 or less, two possibilities exist. a) you are maintaining your leakage at low levels in a class with the top worldwide performers in leakage control. b) A portion of your data may be flawed, causing your losses to be greatly understated. This is likely if you calculate a low ILI value but do not employ extensive leakage control practices in your operations. In such cases it is beneficial to validate the data by performing field measurements to confirm the accuracy of production and customer meters, or to identify any other potential sources of error in the data. Water resources can be developed or purchased at reasonable expense; periodic water rate increases can be feasibly imposed and are tolerated by the customer population. Cost to purchase or obtain/treat water is low, as are rates charged to customers. Existing water supply infrastructure capability is sufficient to meet long-term demand as long as reasonable leakage management controls are in place. Superior reliability, capacity and integrity of the water supply infrastructure make it relatively immune to supply shortages. Financial Considerations Water resources are costly to develop or purchase; ability to increase revenues via water rates is greatly limited because of regulation or low ratepayer affordability. Water Resources Considerations Available resources are greatly limited and are very difficult and/or environmentally unsound to develop. Operational Considerations Operating with system leakage above this level would require expansion of existing infrastructure and/or additional water resources to meet the demand. General Guidelines for Setting a Target ILI (without doing a full economic analysis of leakage control options) Once data has been entered into the Reporting Worksheet, the performance indicators are automatically calculated. How does a water utility operator know how well his or her system is performing? The AWWA Water Loss Control Committee provided the following table to assist water utilities is gauging an approximate Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) that is appropriate for their water system and local conditions. The lower the amount of leakage and real losses that exist in the system, then the lower the ILI value will be. Note: this table offers an approximate guideline for leakage reduction target-setting. The best means of setting such targets include performing an economic assessment of various loss control methods. However, this table is useful if such an assessment is not possible. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Loss Control Planning 17 DEVELOPED BY: ANDREW CHASTAIN-HOWLEY, Miya Water DAVID GOFF, P.E. Goff Water Audits & Engineering GEORGE KUNKEL, P.E. Philadelphia Water Department ALAIN LALONDE, Veritec Consulting DAVID SAYERS, Delaware River Basin Commission REFERENCES: - Alegre, H., Hirner, W., Baptista, J. and Parena, R. Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services. IWA Publishing ‘Manual of Best Practice’ Series, 2000. ISBN 1 900222 272 - Kunkel, G. et al, 2003. Water Loss Control Committee Report: Applying Worldwide Best Management Practices in Water Loss Control. Journal AWWA, 95:8:65 - AWWA Water Audits and Loss Control Programs, M36 Publication, 3 rd Edition, 2009 - Service Connection Diagrams courtesy of Ronnie McKenzie, WRP Pty Ltd. AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Acknowledgements AWWA Water Audit Software Version 4.1 Developed by the Water Loss Control Committee of the American Water Works Association January 2010 This software is intended to serve as a basic tool to compile a preliminary, or “top-down”, water audit. It is recommended that users also refer to the 3rd Edition AWWA M36 Publication, Water Audits and Loss Control Programs, for detailed guidance on compiling a comprehensive, or “bottom-up”, water audit using the same water audit methodology. Back to Instructions Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.WAS v4.1 AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Acknowledgements 20     Appendix D  SBX7‐7 Detailed Calculations  SB X7-7 Table 0: Units of Measure Used in UWMP* (select one from the drop down list) Acre Feet *The unit of measure must be consistent with Table 2-3 NOTES: Parameter Value Units 2008 total water deliveries 38,148 Acre Feet 2008 total volume of delivered recycled water 4,867 Acre Feet 2008 recycled water as a percent of total deliveries 12.76%Percent Number of years in baseline period1, 2 10 Years Year beginning baseline period range 1999 Year ending baseline period range3 2008 Number of years in baseline period 5 Years Year beginning baseline period range 2004 Year ending baseline period range4 2008 SB X7-7 Table-1: Baseline Period Ranges 1If the 2008 recycled water percent is less than 10 percent, then the first baseline period is a continuous 10-year period. If the amount of recycled water delivered in 2008 is 10 percent or greater, the first baseline period is a continuous 10- to 15-year period. 2 The Water Code requires that the baseline period is between 10 and 15 years. However, DWR recognizes that some water suppliers may not have the minimum 10 years of baseline data. 3 The ending year must be between December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2010. 4 The ending year must be between December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2010. 5-year baseline period Baseline 10- to 15-year baseline period NOTES: NOTES: SANDAG Series 13 population estimates used to calculate baseline SB X7-7 Table 2: Method for Population Estimates Method Used to Determine Population (may check more than one) 1. Department of Finance (DOF) DOF Table E-8 (1990 - 2000) and (2000-2010) and DOF Table E-5 (2011 - 2015) when available 3. DWR Population Tool 4. Other DWR recommends pre-review 2. Persons-per-Connection Method Population Year 1 1999 127,429 Year 2 2000 134,686 Year 3 2001 144,219 Year 4 2002 154,936 Year 5 2003 163,925 Year 6 2004 173,279 Year 7 2005 180,704 Year 8 2006 186,119 Year 9 2007 191,032 Year 10 2008 194,791 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 1 2004 173,279 Year 2 2005 180,704 Year 3 2006 186,119 Year 4 2007 191,032 Year 5 2008 194,791 217,339 Year 2015 SB X7-7 Table 3: Service Area Population 10 to 15 Year Baseline Population 5 Year Baseline Population 2015 Compliance Year Population NOTES: Exported Water Change in Dist. System Storage (+/-) Indirect Recycled Water This column will remain blank until SB X7-7 Table 4-B is completed. Water Delivered for Agricultural Use Process Water This column will remain blank until SB X7-7 Table 4-D is completed. Year 1 1999 25,442 - - 25,442 Year 2 2000 29,901 - - 29,901 Year 3 2001 30,002 - - 30,002 Year 4 2002 35,182 - - 35,182 Year 5 2003 34,536 - - 34,536 Year 6 2004 39,579 - - 39,579 Year 7 2005 37,678 - - 37,678 Year 8 2006 41,258 - - 41,258 Year 9 2007 41,909 - - 41,909 Year 10 2008 38,045 - - 38,045 Year 11 0 - - - - Year 12 0 - - - - Year 13 0 - - - - Year 14 0 - - - - Year 15 0 - - - - 35,353 Year 1 2004 39,579 - - 39,579 Year 2 2005 37,678 - - 37,678 Year 3 2006 41,258 - - 41,258 Year 4 2007 41,909 - - 41,909 Year 5 2008 38,045 - - 38,045 39,694 30,299 - - - 30,299 * NOTE that the units of measure must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in Table 2-3 NOTES: SB X7-7 Table 4: Annual Gross Water Use * 2015 10 to 15 Year Baseline - Gross Water Use 10 - 15 year baseline average gross water use 5 Year Baseline - Gross Water Use 5 year baseline average gross water use 2015 Compliance Year - Gross Water Use Baseline Year Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Volume Into Distribution System This column will remain blank until SB X7-7 Table 4-A is completed. Annual Gross Water Use Deductions Volume    Entering  Distribution  System  Meter Error  Adjustment*  Optional (+/‐) Corrected  Volume  Entering  Distribution  System Year 1 1999 25442                       ‐    Year 2 2000 29901                       ‐    Year 3 2001 30002                       ‐    Year 4 2002 35182                       ‐    Year 5 2003 34536                       ‐    Year 6 2004 39579                       ‐    Year 7 2005 37678                       ‐    Year 8 2006 41258                       ‐    Year 9 2007 41909                       ‐    Year 10 2008 38045                       ‐    Year 11 0                       ‐    Year 12 0                       ‐    Year 13 0                       ‐    Year 14 0                       ‐    Year 15 0                       ‐    Year 1 2004 39579                       ‐    Year 2 2005 37678                       ‐    Year 3 2006 41258                       ‐    Year 4 2007 41909                       ‐    Year 5 2008 38045                       ‐    30,299                                ‐    SB X7‐7 Table 4‐A:  Volume Entering the Distribution  System(s) Complete one table for each source.  10 to 15 Year Baseline ‐ Water into Distribution System 5 Year Baseline ‐ Water into Distribution System 2015 Compliance Year ‐ Water into Distribution System Name of Source Baseline Year Fm SB X7‐7 Table 3 * Meter Error Adjustment ‐ See guidance in Methodology 1, Step 3 of  Methodologies Document NOTES: This water source is: The supplier's own water source A purchased or imported source 2015 San Diego County Water Authority Service Area Population Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Annual Gross Water Use Fm SB X7-7 Table 4 Daily Per Capita Water Use (GPCD) Year 1 1999 127,429 25,442 178 Year 2 2000 134,686 29,901 198 Year 3 2001 144,219 30,002 186 Year 4 2002 154,936 35,182 203 Year 5 2003 163,925 34,536 188 Year 6 2004 173,279 39,579 204 Year 7 2005 180,704 37,678 186 Year 8 2006 186,119 41,258 198 Year 9 2007 191,032 41,909 196 Year 10 2008 194,791 38,045 174 Year 11 0 - - Year 12 0 - - Year 13 0 - - Year 14 0 - - Year 15 0 - - 191 Service Area Population Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 Gross Water Use Fm SB X7-7 Table 4 Daily Per Capita Water Use Year 1 2004 173,279 39,579 204 Year 2 2005 180,704 37,678 186 Year 3 2006 186,119 41,258 198 Year 4 2007 191,032 41,909 196 Year 5 2008 194,791 38,045 174 192 217,339 30,299 124 NOTES: 5 Year Average Baseline GPCD 2015 Compliance Year GPCD 2015 Baseline Year Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 SB X7-7 Table 5: Gallons Per Capita Per Day (GPCD) Baseline Year Fm SB X7-7 Table 3 10 to 15 Year Baseline GPCD 10-15 Year Average Baseline GPCD 5 Year Baseline GPCD 191 192 2015 Compliance Year GPCD 124 SB X7-7 Table 6: Gallons per Capita per Day Summary From Table SB X7-7 Table 5 10-15 Year Baseline GPCD 5 Year Baseline GPCD NOTES: Supporting Documentation Method 1 SB X7-7 Table 7A Method 2 SB X7-7 Tables 7B, 7C, and 7D Contact DWR for these tables Method 3 SB X7-7 Table 7-E Method 4 Method 4 Calculator SB X7-7 Table 7: 2020 Target Method Select Only One Target Method NOTES: 10-15 Year Baseline GPCD 2020 Target GPCD 191 153 SB X7-7 Table 7-A: Target Method 1 20% Reduction NOTES: 5 Year Baseline GPCD From SB X7‐7          Table 5 Maximum 2020  Target1 Calculated 2020 Target2 Confirmed  2020 Target 192 182 153                              153 SB X7‐7 Table 7‐F: Confirm Minimum Reduction for 2020 Target 1 Maximum 2020 Target is 95% of the 5 Year Baseline GPCD                                          22020  Target is calculated based on the selected Target Method, see SB X7‐7 Table 7 and  corresponding tables for agency's calculated target.      NOTES:  Confirmed 2020 Target Fm SB X7‐7 Table 7‐F 10‐15 year  Baseline GPCD Fm SB X7‐7 Table 5 2015 Interim  Target GPCD 153 191 172 SB X7‐7 Table 8: 2015 Interim Target GPCD NOTES:  Extraordinary  Events Weather  Normalization Economic  Adjustment 124 172  From  Methodology 8  (Optional)   From  Methodology 8  (Optional)   From  Methodology  8 (Optional)  ‐                    124                   124                   YES Optional Adjustments  (in GPCD) NOTES:  SB X7‐7 Table 9: 2015 Compliance Did Supplier  Achieve  Targeted  Reduction for  2015? Actual 2015  GPCD 2015 Interim  Target GPCD 2015 GPCD  (Adjusted if  applicable) TOTAL  Adjustments Adjusted 2015  GPCD  Enter "0" if Adjustment Not Used DISTRICT year series pop hhp gq hs hh OTAY WATER DISTRICT 1995 9 116,702 111,722 4,980 35,801 34,217 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 1998 9 120,091 121,191 121,191 121,191 121,191 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 1999 9 127,429 124,348 124,348 124,348 124,348 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2000 10 134,686 127,504 7,182 41,171 39,920 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2001 12 144,219 138,906 5,313 45,395 44,079 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2002 12 154,936 149,525 5,411 49,123 47,644 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2003 12 163,925 158,956 4,969 51,935 50,313 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2004 12 173,279 168,273 5,006 54,553 52,811 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2005 12 180,704 175,260 5,444 57,261 55,403 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2006 12 186,119 180,685 5,434 59,035 56,972 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2007 12 191,032 185,832 5,200 60,776 58,469 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2008 12 194,791 189,154 5,637 61,503 59,076 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2009 12 197,705 191,962 5,743 61,791 59,290 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2010 13 200,704 195,094 5,610 61,981 59,693 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2011 13 204,276 197,041 7,235 62,175 59,713 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2012 13 208,541 201,492 7,049 62,818 60,652 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2013 13 210,564 203,838 6,726 63,766 61,067 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2014 13 214,355 207,831 6,524 64,824 62,181 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2015 13 217,339 210,768 6,571 65,301 62,766 Sign Out0WUEdata - Otay Water District Please print this page to a PDF and include as part of your UWMP submittal. Confirmation Information Generated By Water Supplier Name Confirmation #Generated On Leanne Hammond Otay Water District 5293286979 4/29/2016 12:41:03 PM Boundary Information Census Year Boundary Filename Internal Boundary ID 2000 WaterServiceBoundary.kml 1046 2010 WaterServiceBoundary.kml 1046 Baseline Period Ranges 10 to 15-year baseline period Number of years in baseline period: 10  Year beginning baseline period range: 1999  Year ending baseline period range1: 2008 5-year baseline period Year beginning baseline period range: 2004  Year ending baseline period range2: 2008 1 The ending year must be between December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2010. 2 The ending year must be between December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2010. Persons per Connection Year Census Block Level Number of Connections * Persons per ConnectionTotal Population 1990 0 2.66 1991 - - 2.76 1992 - - 2.85 1993 - - 2.94 1994 - - 3.03 1995 - - 3.12 1996 - - 3.22 1997 - - 3.31 1998 - - 3.40 1999 - - 3.49 2000 128,157 35772 3.58 2001 - - 3.67 2002 - - 3.76 2003 - - 3.86 2004 - - 3.95 2005 - - 4.04 2006 - - 4.13 2007 - - 4.22 2008 - - 4.32 2009 - - 4.41 2010 200,164 44472 4.50 2015 - -      4.96 ** Page 1 of 2WUEdata Main Menu 4/29/2016https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/secure/wue_population_tool.asp?divID=selectWaterSystems... QUESTIONS / ISSUES? CONTACT THE WUEDATA HELP DESK Population Using Persons-Per-Connection Year Number ofConnections *Persons perConnection TotalPopulation 10 to 15 Year Baseline Population Calculations Year 1 1999 33446 3.49 116,753 Year 2 2000 35772 3.58 128,157 Year 3 2001 38194 3.67 140,248 Year 4 2002 40309 3.76 151,723 Year 5 2003 42437 3.86 163,637 Year 6 2004 44520 3.95 175,765 Year 7 2005 46042 4.04 186,010 Year 8 2006 46851 4.13 193,588 Year 9 2007 44070 4.22 186,152 Year 10 2008 44137 4.32 190,495 5 Year Baseline Population Calculations Year 1 2004 44520 3.95 175,765 Year 2 2005 46042 4.04 186,010 Year 3 2006 46851 4.13 193,588 Year 4 2007 44070 4.22 186,152 Year 5 2008 44137 4.32 190,495 2015 Compliance Year Population Calculations 2015 43803      4.96 ** 217,342 Hide Print Confirmation Page 2 of 2WUEdata Main Menu 4/29/2016https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/secure/wue_population_tool.asp?divID=selectWaterSystems... March 18, 2016 2020 (A)(B)(C)(D)(E) (F=A+B+C‐D‐E) (G)(H=F‐G) Agency Municipal and  Industrial Agricultural Near‐Term  Annexations Active 5 Passive Long‐Range  Demand Forecast Verifiable Local  Supplies 6 Demand on the  Water Authority Carlsbad M.W.D. 23,548                  317                         ‐                        1,592                            1,288                 20,985                   8,074                        12,911                   Del Mar, City of 1,365                     ‐                         ‐                        126                                131                    1,108                     100                            1,008                      Escondido, City of 23,686                  2,960                    366                        1,458                            1,954                 23,600                   12,640                      10,960                   Fallbrook P.U.D. 8,551                    4,427                     ‐                        469                                475                    12,034                   543                            11,491                   Helix W.D. 37,311                   ‐                         ‐                        2,513                            3,524                 31,274                   3,388                        27,886                   Lakeside W.D.4,988                    ‐                        5                            264                                619                    4,110                     700                            3,410                      Oceanside, City of 29,435                  1,359                    ‐                        2,156                            2,043                 26,595                   12,085                      14,510                   Olivenhain M.W.D.20,896                  1,428                    ‐                        1,317                            878                    20,129                   3,150                        16,979                   Otay W.D.44,314                  41                          2,973                    2,111                            2,497                 42,720                   5,670                        37,050                   Padre Dam M.W.D.14,603                  608                        2,000                    1,450                            1,590                 14,171                   2,016                        12,155                   Camp Pendleton M. R. 8,720                    ‐                        ‐                        ‐                                ‐                     8,720                     8,500                        220                         Poway, City of 15,424                  30                          ‐                        825                                628                    14,001                   645                            13,356                   Rainbow M.W.D.9,131                    11,305                  519                        561                                469                    19,925                   ‐                             19,925                   Ramona M.W.D.7,327                    1,814                    ‐                        429                                654                    8,058                     730                            7,328                      Rincon Del Diablo M.W.D.10,234                  270                        ‐                        418                                382                    9,704                     4,000                        5,704                      San Diego, City of 241,668                ‐                        ‐                        13,047                          15,943               212,678                 39,000                      173,678                 San Dieguito W.D.7,760                    121                        ‐                        580                                769                    6,532                     3,232                        3,300                      Santa Fe I.D.12,152                  63                          ‐                        873                                364                    10,978                   3,768                        7,210                      Sweetwater Auth.21,197                  18                          ‐                        1,089                            1,936                 18,190                   15,700                      2,490                      Vallecitos W.D.20,874                  955                        ‐                        1,227                            1,206                 19,396                   3,500                        15,896                   Valley Center M.W.D.10,143                  15,946                  ‐                        513                                482                    25,094                   137                            24,957                   Vista I.D.21,850                  994                        ‐                        1,536                            1,564                 19,744                   5,062                        14,682                   Yuima M.W.D.524                        10,305                  166                        99                                  92                       10,804                   7,000                        3,804                      Total 595,701                52,961                  6,029                    34,653                          39,488               580,550                 139,640                    440,910                 Grand Total 648,662                604362 74141 2025 (A)(B)(C)(D)(E) (F=A+B+C‐D‐E) (G)(H=F‐G) Agency Municipal and  Industrial Agricultural Near‐Term  Annexations Active 5 Passive Long‐Range  Demand Forecast Verifiable Local  Supplies 6 Demand on the  Water Authority Carlsbad M.W.D. 25,123                  300                         ‐                        1,278                            1,990                 22,155                   8,074                        14,081                   Del Mar, City of 1,425                     ‐                         ‐                        104                                182                    1,139                     125                            1,014                      Escondido, City of 25,369                  2,870                    694                        1,240                            2,674                 25,019                   12,640                      12,379                   Fallbrook P.U.D. 10,590                  4,289                     ‐                        442                                853                    13,584                   543                            13,041                   Helix W.D. 40,134                   ‐                         ‐                        2,127                            5,553                 32,454                   3,388                        29,066                   Lakeside W.D.5,737                    ‐                        5                            246                                911                    4,585                     700                            3,885                      Oceanside, City of 31,899                  1,318                    ‐                        1,737                            3,202                 28,278                   14,725                      13,553                   Olivenhain M.W.D.22,976                  1,378                    ‐                        1,051                            1,505                 21,798                   3,150                        18,648                   Otay W.D.51,771                  27                          2,973                    1,844                            4,497                 48,430                   5,900                        42,530                   Padre Dam M.W.D.16,524                  540                        2,000                    1,159                            2,608                 15,297                   2,016                        13,281                   Camp Pendleton M. R. 9,920                    ‐                        ‐                        ‐                                ‐                     9,920                     9,690                        230                         Poway, City of 16,649                  29                          ‐                        664                                1,063                 14,951                   645                            14,306                   Rainbow M.W.D.10,731                  10,985                  519                        522                                796                    20,917                   ‐                             20,917                   Ramona M.W.D.8,114                    1,760                    ‐                        379                                1,024                 8,471                     755                            7,716                      Rincon Del Diablo M.W.D.11,884                  242                        417                        368                                672                    11,503                   4,000                        7,503                      San Diego, City of 263,163                ‐                        ‐                        10,029                          23,577               229,557                 38,900                      190,657                 San Dieguito W.D.8,299                    107                        ‐                        479                                1,066                 6,861                     3,232                        3,629                      Santa Fe I.D.12,544                  62                          ‐                        665                                613                    11,328                   3,768                        7,560                      Sweetwater Auth.23,408                  16                          ‐                        968                                2,683                 19,773                   15,700                      4,073                      Vallecitos W.D.24,813                  915                        ‐                        1,075                            1,926                 22,727                   3,500                        19,227                   Valley Center M.W.D.12,045                  15,471                  ‐                        456                                851                    26,209                   222                            25,987                   Vista I.D.24,167                  934                        ‐                        1,272                            2,509                 21,320                   5,062                        16,258                   Yuima M.W.D.719                        10,136                  166                        79                                  171                    10,771                   7,000                        3,771                      Total 658,004                51,379                  6,774                    28,184                          60,927               627,046                 143,735                    483,311                 Grand Total 709,383                89110.60461 (60,927)                     Draft Normal‐Year Water Reliability Assessment Data  Baseline Demand Forecast 2,3,4 Conservation Savings Baseline Demand Forecast 2,3,4 Conservation Savings (Preliminary Water Authority Baseline Demand Forecast, Conservation Savings Projections and  Long‐Range Demand Forecast by Member Agency 1)   1 March 18, 2016 Draft Normal‐Year Water Reliability Assessment Data  (Preliminary Water Authority Baseline Demand Forecast, Conservation Savings Projections and  Long‐Range Demand Forecast by Member Agency 1)   2030 (A)(B)(C)(D)(E) (F=A+B+C‐D‐E) (G)(H=F‐G) Agency Municipal and  Industrial Agricultural Near‐Term  Annexations Active 5 Passive Long‐Range  Demand Forecast Verifiable Local  Supplies 6 Demand on the  Water Authority Carlsbad M.W.D. 25,806                  285                         ‐                        994                                2,654                 22,443                   8,074                        14,369                   Del Mar, City of 1,479                     ‐                         ‐                        73                                  236                    1,170                     150                            1,020                      Escondido, City of 26,474                  2,785                    694                        1,085                            3,308                 25,560                   12,640                      12,920                   Fallbrook P.U.D. 11,359                  4,160                     ‐                        423                                1,033                 14,063                   543                            13,520                   Helix W.D. 41,392                   ‐                         ‐                        1,787                            7,059                 32,546                   3,388                        29,158                   Lakeside W.D.6,020                    ‐                        5                            223                                1,079                 4,723                     700                            4,023                      Oceanside, City of 33,220                  1,281                    ‐                        1,389                            4,244                 28,868                   14,725                      14,143                   Olivenhain M.W.D.23,706                  1,332                    ‐                        885                                1,978                 22,175                   3,150                        19,025                   Otay W.D.54,979                  13                          2,973                    1,585                            5,489                 50,891                   6,000                        44,891                   Padre Dam M.W.D.17,234                  477                        2,000                    845                                3,388                 15,478                   2,016                        13,462                   Camp Pendleton M. R. 10,960                  ‐                        ‐                        ‐                                ‐                     10,960                   10,730                      230                         Poway, City of 17,051                  28                          ‐                        571                                1,381                 15,127                   645                            14,482                   Rainbow M.W.D.11,252                  10,685                  519                        503                                952                    21,001                   ‐                             21,001                   Ramona M.W.D.8,376                    1,711                    ‐                        339                                1,259                 8,489                     755                            7,734                      Rincon Del Diablo M.W.D.12,452                  214                        417                        319                                843                    11,921                   4,000                        7,921                      San Diego, City of 278,467                ‐                        ‐                        10,260                          30,195               238,012                 38,800                      199,212                 San Dieguito W.D.8,571                    94                          ‐                        380                                1,335                 6,950                     3,232                        3,718                      Santa Fe I.D.12,649                  60                          ‐                        515                                806                    11,388                   3,768                        7,620                      Sweetwater Auth.25,557                  14                          ‐                        903                                3,535                 21,133                   15,700                      5,433                      Vallecitos W.D.26,636                  879                        ‐                        905                                2,423                 24,187                   3,500                        20,687                   Valley Center M.W.D.12,651                  15,025                  ‐                        401                                1,057                 26,218                   231                            25,987                   Vista I.D.25,679                  878                        ‐                        1,039                            2,889                 22,629                   5,062                        17,567                   Yuima M.W.D.986                        9,976                    166                        50                                  217                    10,861                   7,000                        3,861                      Total 692,956                49,897                  6,774                    25,474                          77,359               646,794                 144,809                    501,985                 Grand Total 742,853                756433 102832.7672 679,074                    2035 (A)(B)(C)(D)(E) (F=A+B+C‐D‐E) (G)(H=F‐G) Agency Municipal and  Industrial Agricultural Near‐Term  Annexations Active 5 Passive Long‐Range  Demand Forecast Verifiable Local  Supplies 6 Demand on the  Water Authority Carlsbad M.W.D. 26,452                  270                         ‐                        951                                3,049                 22,722                   8,074                        14,648                   Del Mar, City of 1,518                     ‐                         ‐                        71                                  261                    1,186                     150                            1,036                      Escondido, City of 27,609                  2,702                    694                        1,027                            3,813                 26,165                   12,640                      13,525                   Fallbrook P.U.D. 11,785                  4,035                     ‐                        424                                1,149                 14,247                   543                            13,704                   Helix W.D. 42,835                   ‐                         ‐                        1,656                            8,241                 32,938                   3,388                        29,550                   Lakeside W.D.6,207                    ‐                        5                            225                                1,216                 4,771                     700                            4,071                      Oceanside, City of 34,426                  1,245                    ‐                        1,301                            4,954                 29,416                   14,725                      14,691                   Olivenhain M.W.D.24,343                  1,287                    ‐                        858                                2,290                 22,482                   3,150                        19,332                   Otay W.D.56,306                  ‐                        2,973                    1,538                            6,040                 51,701                   6,200                        45,501                   Padre Dam M.W.D.17,982                  416                        2,000                    803                                3,886                 15,709                   2,016                        13,693                   Camp Pendleton M. R. 10,960                  ‐                        ‐                        ‐                                ‐                     10,960                   10,730                      230                         Poway, City of 17,327                  27                          ‐                        536                                1,616                 15,202                   645                            14,557                   Rainbow M.W.D.11,811                  10,393                  519                        502                                1,075                 21,146                   ‐                             21,146                   Ramona M.W.D.8,527                    1,663                    ‐                        323                                1,416                 8,451                     755                            7,696                      Rincon Del Diablo M.W.D.12,996                  189                        417                        306                                966                    12,330                   4,000                        8,330                      San Diego, City of 292,305                ‐                        ‐                        10,490                          35,473               246,342                 38,700                      207,642                 San Dieguito W.D.8,816                    82                          ‐                        358                                1,502                 7,038                     3,232                        3,806                      Santa Fe I.D.12,841                  58                          ‐                        500                                905                    11,494                   3,768                        7,726                      Sweetwater Auth.28,038                  12                          ‐                        860                                4,334                 22,856                   15,700                      7,156                      Vallecitos W.D.28,202                  843                        ‐                        889                                2,742                 25,414                   3,500                        21,914                   Valley Center M.W.D.13,406                  14,592                  ‐                        396                                1,195                 26,407                   231                            26,176                   Vista I.D.26,679                  824                        ‐                        999                                3,187                 23,317                   5,062                        18,255                   Yuima M.W.D.1,283                    9,822                    166                        50                                  226                    10,995                   7,000                        3,995                      Total 722,654                48,460                  6,774                    25,063                          89,539               663,286                 144,909                    518,377                 Grand Total 771,114                777888 114601.584 Baseline Demand Forecast 2,3,4 Conservation Savings Baseline Demand Forecast 2,3,4 Conservation Savings 2 March 18, 2016 Draft Normal‐Year Water Reliability Assessment Data  (Preliminary Water Authority Baseline Demand Forecast, Conservation Savings Projections and  Long‐Range Demand Forecast by Member Agency 1)   2040 (A)(B)(C)(D)(E) (F=A+B+C‐D‐E) (G)(H=F‐G) Agency Municipal and  Industrial Agricultural Near‐Term  Annexations Active 5 Passive Long‐Range  Demand Forecast Verifiable Local  Supplies 6 Demand on the  Water Authority Carlsbad M.W.D. 26,880                  256                         ‐                        962                                3,428                 22,746                   8,074                        14,672                   Del Mar, City of 1,547                     ‐                         ‐                        72                                  285                    1,190                     150                            1,040                      Escondido, City of 28,892                  2,630                    694                        1,047                            4,299                 26,870                   12,640                      14,230                   Fallbrook P.U.D. 12,175                  3,907                     ‐                        437                                1,297                 14,348                   543                            13,805                   Helix W.D. 44,357                   ‐                         ‐                        1,675                            9,366                 33,316                   3,388                        29,928                   Lakeside W.D.6,438                    ‐                        5                            229                                1,345                 4,869                     700                            4,169                      Oceanside, City of 36,136                  1,213                    ‐                        1,327                            5,656                 30,366                   14,725                      15,641                   Olivenhain M.W.D.25,402                  1,250                    ‐                        873                                2,587                 23,192                   3,150                        20,042                   Otay W.D.62,936                  4                            2,973                    1,587                            6,744                 57,582                   6,500                        51,082                   Padre Dam M.W.D.18,796                  435                        2,000                    817                                4,350                 16,064                   2,016                        14,048                   Camp Pendleton M. R. 10,960                  ‐                        ‐                        ‐                                ‐                     10,960                   10,730                      230                         Poway, City of 18,042                  27                          ‐                        542                                1,849                 15,678                   645                            15,033                   Rainbow M.W.D.12,518                  10,124                  519                        510                                1,185                 21,466                   ‐                             21,466                   Ramona M.W.D.8,813                    1,620                    ‐                        327                                1,604                 8,502                     755                            7,747                      Rincon Del Diablo M.W.D.13,977                  183                        417                        314                                1,085                 13,178                   4,000                        9,178                      San Diego, City of 304,593                ‐                        ‐                        10,721                          41,726               252,145                 38,600                      213,545                 San Dieguito W.D.9,571                    68                          ‐                        363                                1,680                 7,596                     3,232                        4,363                      Santa Fe I.D.13,475                  57                          ‐                        503                                1,002                 12,027                   3,768                        8,259                      Sweetwater Auth.29,340                  11                          ‐                        896                                5,066                 23,389                   15,700                      7,689                      Vallecitos W.D.32,369                  821                        ‐                        926                                3,063                 29,201                   3,500                        25,701                   Valley Center M.W.D.14,224                  14,102                  ‐                        408                                1,333                 26,585                   231                            26,354                   Vista I.D.27,794                  796                        ‐                        1,033                            3,410                 24,147                   5,062                        19,085                   Yuima M.W.D.1,447                    9,710                    166                        51                                  242                    11,030                   7,000                        4,030                      Total 760,682                47,214                  6,774                    25,620                          102,601             686,449                 145,109                    541,340                 Grand Total 807,896                814669.7821 128221.2671 Footnotes 1) Excludes small increment of demand associated with Accelerated Forecasted Growth (demand not broken out by member agency) 2) Wholesale water rate ramp assumption: 2 percent real increase 2016‐2020, 1 percent real increase 2021‐2025, and rate of inflation thereafter (3% percent) 3) Includes impact of historic conservation savings  4) MCB Camp Pendleton demands based on projections provided by MCBCP staff and are net of conservation savings 5) Future Active savings assumed to be implemented at 2015 activity level (except for large scale turf replacement) 6) Provided by member agencies, Verifiable supplies include: surface water, groundwater, recycled water, seawater desalination (CDP contract supplies), and potable reuse Baseline Demand Forecast 2,3,4 Conservation Savings 3     Appendix E  City of San Diego Agreement for Otay  WTP      Appendix F  City of San Diego Agreement for  SBWRP      Appendix G  District Code of Ordinance Section 26  Water Recycling Plan and  Implementation Procedures  SECTION 26 WATER RECYCLING PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES 26.01 FINDINGS The state policies regarding use of recycled water are in the best interest of the Otay Water District. The majority of jurisdictions in San Diego County have adopted measures to promote water reclamation. This ordinance is necessary to protect the common water supply of the region which is vital to public health and safety, and to prevent endangerment of public and private property. San Diego County is highly dependent on limited imported water for domestic, agricultural and industrial uses. The reliability of the supply of imported water is uncertain. By developing and utilizing recycled water, the need for additional imported water can be reduced. In light of these circumstances, certain uses of potable water may be considered unreasonable or to constitute a nuisance where recycled water is available. 26.02 USE OF RECYCLED WATER A. District Policy: It is the policy of the Dis- trict that recycled water shall be used within the jurisdiction wherever its use is financially and technically feasible, and consistent with legal requirements, preservation of public health, safety and welfare, and the environment. A customer’s recycled water service must at all time be in compliance with any requirements of service, including but not limited to the requirements established under this Section 26, the District’s Rules and Regulations for Recycled Water Use, the California Water Code, commencing with Section 13520, the California Health and Safety Code, Section 116555, the California Code of Regulations, Titles 17 and 22, and Water Agency Standards. B. Required Use for Greenbelt Purposes: Pursuant to Section 13550 of the California Water Code, no customer of the District shall make, cause, use or permit the use of potable water supplied by the District for greenbelt uses, including, but not limited to, cemeteries, golf courses, parks and highway landscaped areas, when, following notice and a hearing, the District finds that recycled water is available for such greenbelt uses and that the following conditions are met: 26-2 1. the recycled water is of adequate quality; 2. the recycled water may be furnished to such areas at a reasonable cost, comparable to or less than the cost of supplying potable domestic water; 3. the State Department of Health Services has determined that such use would not be detri- mental to public health; and 4. the use of recycled water will not adversely affect downstream water rights, will not degrade water quality. The findings may include terms and conditions under which recycled water shall be used. In addition, the District may assist the customer in obtaining any permits or approvals required for the use of recycled water. 26.03 DEFINITIONS The following terms are defined for purposes of this ordinance: A. Agricultural Purposes: Agricultural purposes include the growing of field and nursery crops, row crops, trees, and vines and the feeding of fowl and livestock. B. Artificial Lake: A human-made lake, pond, lagoon, or other body of water that is used wholly or partly for landscape, scenic or noncontact recre- ational purposes. C. Commercial Office Building: Any building for office or commercial uses with water requirements which include, but are not limited to, landscape irrigation, toilets, urinals and decorative foun- tains. D. Recycled Water Distribution System: A piping system intended for the delivery of recycled water separate from and in addition to the potable water distribution system. E. Greenbelt Areas: A greenbelt area includes, but is not limited to golf courses, cemeteries, parks and landscaping. F. Industrial Process Water: Water used by any industrial facility with process water require- ments which include, but are not limited to, rins- 26-3 ing, washing, cooling and circulation, or con- struction, including any facility regulated for industrial waste or other objectionable discharge under District Code of Ordinances Sections 52.04, 52.05 and 52.06. G. Off-Site Facilities: Water facilities from the source of supply to the point of connection with the on-site facilities, normally up to and includ- ing the water meter. H. On-Site Facilities: Water facilities under the control of the owner normally downstream from the water meter. I. Potable Water: Water which conforms to the fed- eral, state and local standards for human consump- tion. J. Recycled Water: Recycled water means water which, as a result of treatment, is suitable for a direct beneficial use or controlled use that would not otherwise occur. (See Water Code Section 13050(n).) K. Recycled Water Use Permit: A recycled water permit means a permit issued by the District approving and conditioning recycled water service for a particular site. L. Recycled Water Site Supervisor: A person responsible for the safe and efficient installation, operation and maintenance of a recycled water use site, including but not limited to compliance with all applicable permits, enforcement of the recycled water producer’s rules and regulations and the prevention of potential hazards, such as cross-connections. The Recycled Water Site Supervisor must be certified by an approved Recycled Water Site Supervisor Certification Training Class offered within the County of San Diego and must have evidence of valid certification at all times while acting as Recycled Water Site Supervisor. M. Temporary Recycled Water Use Permit: Temporary recycled water use permit means a permit issued by the District, at its discretion, to allow temporary use of recycled water pending issuance of a recycled water use permit or pending renewal of such permit following suspension or termination due to a violation of the provisions of this Section. 26-4 N. Waste Discharge: Waste Discharge means water deposited, released or discharged into a sewer system from any commercial, industrial or residen- tial source which contains levels of any substance or substances which may cause substantial harm to any water treatment or reclamation facility or which may prevent any use of reclaimed water authorized by law. 26.04 WATER RECLAMATION MASTER PLAN A. General: The General Manager shall prepare and adopt a Water Recycling Master Plan to define, encourage, and develop the use of recycled water within the District's boundaries. The Master Plan shall be updated not less often than every five years. B. Contents of the Water Recycling Master Plan: The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Plants and Facilities. Evaluation of the location and size of present and future recycling treatment plants, distribution pipelines, pump stations, reservoirs, and other related facilities, including cost estimates and potential financing methods. 2. Recycled Water Service Areas. A designation, based on the criteria set forth in Section 26.02 and the information derived from Section 26.04B.1. and this Section 26.04B.2. of the areas within the District that can or may in the future use recycled water in lieu of potable water. Recycled water uses may include, but are not limited to, the irriga- tion of greenbelt and agricultural areas, filling of artificial lakes, and appropriate industrial and commercial uses. 3. Designate Tributary Areas. For each water reclamation facility identified in the Master Plan, designate proposed tributary areas. Within such areas, discharges to the sewage system shall be subject to permitting, moni- toring and control measures to protect public health, safety and public and private prop- erty. Designation of tributary areas shall be adopted by ordinances, and may be included in the Master Plan. Prior to designation of tributary areas, appropriate notice shall be given to property owners and residents of the area. 26-5 4. Quality of Water to be Recycled. For each water reclamation treatment facility, evalu- ate water quality with respect to the effect on anticipated uses of recycled water to be served by each treatment facility. Evaluate sources of waste discharge and sewer inflow that may, directly or cumulatively, substan- tially contribute to adverse water quality conditions in recycled water. 5. Tributary Protection Measures. Develop rec- ommended control measures and management practices for each designated tributary area to maintain or improve the quality of recycled water. Such control measures may include capital improvements to the sewer collection system and waste discharge restrictions for industrial, commercial and residential discharges. 6. Mandatory Recycled Water Use. For each recycled water service area, evaluate whether greenbelt irrigation, agricultural irrigation, commercial office buildings, filling of artificial lakes, or industrial processes shall be limited to the use of recycled water. As appropriate, mandate construction of recycled water distribution systems or other facilities in new and exist- ing developments for current or future recycled water use as a condition of any development approval or continued water ser- vice if future reclamation facilities are proposed in the Master Plan that could ade- quately serve the development, in accordance with the procedures described in Section 26.05. Identify resources and adopt measures to assist water users in the financing of necessary conversions. 7. Rules and Regulations for Recycled Water Use. Establish general rules and regulations governing the use and distribution of recycled water. 8. Public Awareness Program. Establish a com- prehensive water reclamation public awareness program. 9. Coordination Among Agencies. An examination of the potential for initiating a coordinated effort between the District and other 26-6 regional agencies to share in the production and utilization of recycled water. 26.05 PROCEDURES A. Existing Potable Water Service. 1. Preliminary Determination. Based upon the Master Plan, upon the designation of each recycled water service area or the commence- ment of the design of new recycled water facilities, the General Manager shall make preliminary determinations as to which exist- ing potable water customers shall be con- verted to the use of recycled water. Each water customer shall be notified of the basis for a determination that conversion to recycled water service will be required, as well as the proposed conditions and schedule for conversion. 2. Notice. The notice of the preliminary deter- mination, including the proposed conditions and time schedule for compliance, and a recycled water permit application shall be sent to the water customer by certified mail. 3. Objections; Appeals. The water customer may file a notice of objection with the District within thirty (30) days after any notice of determination to comply is delivered or mailed to the customer, and may request reconsideration of the determination or modi- fication of the proposed conditions or sched- ule for conversion. The objection must be in writing and specify the reasons for the objection. The preliminary determination shall be final if the customer does not file a timely objection. Staff (Engineering Department) shall review the objection and shall confirm, modify or abandon the prelimi- nary determination. Upon issuance of a final determination in writing by Staff, customer may appeal the determination upon written application to the Board of Directors after the final determination made by the Staff (Engineering Department). The customer’s written application to the Board of Directors to appeal the final determination must be received within thirty (30) days of the customer receiving the final determination. B. Development and Water Service Approvals. 26-7 1. Conditions. Upon application by a developer, owner or water customer (herein referred to as "applicant") for a tentative map, subdivi- sion map, land use permit or other develop- ment project as defined by Government Code Section 65928 or for new or altered water service, the District Staff shall review the Master Plan and make a preliminary determina- tion whether the current or proposed use of the subject property is required to be served with recycled water or to include facilities designed to accommodate the use of recycled water in the future. Based upon such deter- mination, use of recycled water and provision of recycled water distribution systems or other facilities for the use of recycled water, and application for a permit for such use may be required a condition of approval of any such application, in addition to any other conditions of approval for service. 2. Alterations and Remodeling. On a case-by- case basis, upon application for a permit for the alteration or remodeling of multifamily, commercial or industrial structures (including, for example, hotels), the Dis- trict Staff shall review the Master Plan and make a preliminary determination whether the subject property shall be required to be served with recycled water or to include facilities designed to accommodate the use of recycled water in the future. Based upon such determination, use of recycled water and provision of recycled water distribution systems or other facilities for the use of recycled water, and application for a permit for such use, may be required as a condition of approval of the application. 3. Notice of Determination. A notice of the basis for the preliminary determination, proposed conditions of approval and schedule for compliance shall be provided to the applicant prior to approval of the develop- ment application or application for water service. 4. Requested Service. On a case-by-case basis, upon application for a permit to use recycled water on a property not covered by Sections 26.05.A.1, 26.05.B.1, or 26.05.B.2 above, the General Manager shall review the Master Plan and make a determination whether the subject property shall be served with recycled water. 26-8 Based upon such determination, the application for the permit shall be accepted and processed subject to Section 26.05.C. C. Recycled Water Permit Process. Upon a final determination by the General Manager that a prop- erty shall be served with recycled water, or adoption of a condition of development approval or water service requiring use or accommodation of the use of recycled water, the water customer owner or applicant shall obtain a recycled water permit. 1. Permit Conditions. The permit shall specify the design and operational requirements for the applicant's water distribution facilities and schedule for compliance, based on the rules and regulations adopted pursuant to Section 26.04.B and shall require compliance with both the California Department of Health Services Wastewater Recycling Criteria (see California Code of Administrative Regula- tions, Title 22), and requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2. Plan Approval. Plans for the recycled and non-recycled water distribution systems for the parcel shall be reviewed by the District Engineer and a field inspection conducted before the plans are approved. 3. Meter Permit Issuance. Upon completion of construction and approval by the District and the County Department of Environmental Health the meter permit shall be issued. Recycled water shall not be supplied to a property until inspection by the District determines that the applicant is in compliance with the permit conditions. 4. Recycled Water Use Permit Issuance. If the site has a certified Recycled Water Site Supervisor, a Recycled Water Use Permit will be issued by the District. If the site does not have a certified Recycled Water Site Supervisor identified, a Temporary Recycled Water Use Permit may be issued, for a maximum of 120 days, to allow the site to receive recycled water while a proposed Recycled Water Site Supervisor is being certified. Failure to secure a certified Recycled Water Site Supervisor for the site under a Temporary Recycled Water Use Permit may 26-9 result in discontinuation of recycled water service to the site. D. Temporary Use of Potable Water. At the discretion of the General Manager, potable water may be made available on a temporary basis, until recycled water is available. Before the applicant receives temporary potable water, a water reclamation per- mit, as described in Section 26.05.C, must be obtained for new on-site distribution facilities. Prior to commencement of recycled water service, an inspection of the on-site facilities will be conducted to verify that the facilities have been maintained and are in compliance with the recycled water permit and current requirements for service. Upon verification of compliance, the applicant shall be notified of the corrective actions necessary and shall have at least thirty (30) days to take such actions prior to initiation of enforcement proceedings. E. Recycled Water Rate. The rate charged for recycled water shall be established by Ordinance of the Board of Directors. F. Certified Recycled Water Site Supervisor Requirements. 1. Each Approved Recycled Water Use Site is required to have a Certified Recycled Water Site Supervisor. It is the responsibility of the recycled water use site owner or property designee to assure a Certified Recycled Water Site Supervisor is assigned to the recycled water use site. 2. Each approved recycled water use site shall maintain and report annually proof of Recycled Water Site Supervisor certification, a current address, and a 24-hour emergency contact phone number for the assigned Recycled Water Site Supervisor on a form approved by the Otay Water District. Failure to report the prescribed Recycled Water Site Supervisor information annually may result in discontinuation of recycled water service to the site. 3. Recycled Water Site Supervisors shall hold a valid and current certification from a Recycled Water Site Supervisor Certification Training Course recognized by the San Diego 26-10 County Health Department and approved by Otay Water District. Evidence of said certification shall be available on site and upon request by the District. Certification alone does not constitute District approval. Recertification of the Recycled Water Site Supervisor is required every five years. 4. The Recycled Water Site Supervisor shall be solely responsible for communications with the property owner or property designee for all on site recycled water issues. 5. Periodic inspection of the Approved Recycled Water Use Site may be made by the District to verify conformance with the approved Recycled Water Use Permit. If at any time the Otay Water District conducts an inspection of a recycled water use site and the Recycled Water Site Supervisor’s certification is expired or it has been determined that the recycled water use site has failed to meet the requirements of the permit, recycled water service to the site shall be discontinued until the recycled water site is brought back into compliance with the approved Recycled Water Use Permit. 6. The District reserves the right to recommend removal of a Recycled Water Site Supervisor if it has been determined upon inspection that the Recycled Water Site Supervisor’s actions have placed the public at risk through improper conduct, testing, repairs, unapproved modifications, and/or reporting with respect to an Approved Recycled Water Use Site. 26.06 REGULATION OF WASTE DISCHARGE TO SEWERAGE SYSTEMS A. Intent. The District recognizes that to maintain adequate wastewater quality for water reclamation treatment processes, and to protect public and private property, restrictions may be required on certain industrial, commercial and residential waste discharges to a sewerage system that is located within a designated tributary area of an existing or planned reclamation facility. B. Adopted Tributary Protection Measures. Waste dis- charges to the sewerage system from any indus- 26-11 trial, commercial or residential source may be restricted or prohibited upon a finding, following a noticed public hearing, that the type or class of discharge involved is capable of causing or may cause substantial damage or harm to any sewage treatment or reclamation facility or to any sig- nificant user or users or potential user or users of recycled water within an area which has been planned for recycled water service. Prohibitions for certain discharges and guidelines for accept- ability of wastes are set forth in District Code of Ordinances Sections 52.04, PROHIBITIONS AGAINST DISCHARGE OF OBJECTIONABLE WASTES, which prohibits discharge of certain items into the District sewer system, including, but not limited to, brine dis- charge from on-site self-regenerating water sof- tener units; 52.05, GUIDELINES TO DETERMINE ACCEPTABILITY OF WASTES; and 52.06, DISCHARGE OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE. 26.07 SANCTIONS. In addition to the remedies established under Division IV of this Code, the following sanctions and remedies apply to violations of the provisions of this Section. A. Public Nuisance. Discharge of wastes or the use of recycled water in any manner in violation of this ordinance or of any permit issued hereunder is hereby declared a public nuisance and shall be corrected or abated as directed by the General Manager. Any person creating such a public nui- sance is guilty of a misdemeanor. B. Injunction. Whenever a discharge of wastes or use of recycled water is in violation of this ordi- nance or otherwise causes or threatens to cause a public nuisance, the District may seek injunctive relief as may be appropriate to enjoin such discharge or use. C. Permit Suspension or Revocation. In addition to any other provision of this Code or state statute or rule authorizing termination of water service, the General Manager may suspend or revoke a permit issued hereunder if a violation of any provision of this ordinance or the Rules and Regulations for Recycled Water Use is found to exist or if a discharge of wastes or use of recycled water causes or threatens to cause a nuisance. If a permit is revoked, the General Manager may, at its discretion, issue the recycled water user a temporary recycled water permit for up to 120 days to allow service to continue while corrective measures are completed. 26-12 D. Penalty. Any owner and/or operator who violates this ordinance shall, for each day of violation, or portion thereof, be subject to an administrative fine as described in Section 72.05. 26.08 VALIDITY If any provision of this Section 26 or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of Section 26 and the application of such provi- sions to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.     Appendix H  Water Authority Documentation of  Supply Reliability  Section 5 Member Agency Supplies 5.1 Introduction Local resources developed and managed by the Water Authority’s member agencies are critical to securing a diverse and reliable supply for the region. Local projects reduce demands for imported water and provide agencies with a drought-resilient supply. This section provides general information on the local resources being developed and managed by the member agencies. These supplies include surface water, groundwater, recycled water, potable reuse and desalinated seawater. The Water Authority, working closely with its member agencies, took the following steps to update the yields anticipated from the member agencies’ local supplies: 1. Provided the member agencies with the projected supply numbers included in the Water Authority’s Updated 2010 Plan and requested they update the figures for their specific project(s) and separate the projects into three project categories: “verifiable,” “additional planned,” and “conceptual.” These categories are based on the stages of development, as defined in the introduction of Section 4, “San Diego County Water Authority Supplies.” 2. Prepared revised projections based on input from agencies. 3. Presented revised supply numbers to member agencies at several meetings and continued working with them to ensure the figures accurately reflected their project implementation efforts. 4. Distributed the administrative draft of the 2015 Plan to member agencies for their review, providing the agencies another opportunity to review and revise the updated local supply figures prior to Water Authority Board approval. Before 1947, the San Diego region relied on local surface water runoff in normal and wet weather years and on groundwater pumped from local aquifers during dry years when stream flows were reduced. As the economy and population grew, local resources became insufficient to meet the region’s water supply needs. From the 1950s onward, the region became increasingly reliant on imported water supplies. Since 1980, a range of 5 to 36 percent of the water used within the Water Authority’s service area has come from local sources, primarily from surface water reservoirs with yields that vary directly with annual rainfall. A small but growing share of local supply comes from recycled water and groundwater recovery projects, with additional local supply planned from potable reuse and seawater desalination. Yield from these projects is considered drought-resilient since the projects are primarily independent of precipitation. In fiscal year 2015, total local water sources provided 10 percent of the water used in the Water Authority’s service area. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-1 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies 5.2 Surface Water 5.2.1 Description The regional surface water yield is supported by 24 surface reservoirs with a combined capacity of 746,385 AF. These reservoirs are located in seven of San Diego County’s nine coastal watersheds. Runoff in these watersheds occurs at the crest of the county’s Peninsular Range and drains into the Pacific Ocean. The oldest of these reservoirs, Cuyamaca, was constructed in 1887. Table 5-1 lists the 24 reservoirs, together with their operating agency and storage capacity. Olivenhain Reservoir, completed in 2003, is the region’s newest reservoir. It is part of the Water Authority’s Emergency Storage Project (ESP) and has a storage capacity of 24,789 AF. The ESP adds 90,100 AF of additional storage capacity and is designed to protect the region from disruptions in the water delivery system. In addition, the 2002 Regional Water Facilities Master Plan (Master Plan) identified an opportunity to augment the ESP with a carryover storage component at San Vicente. The Water Authority completed the ESP and Carryover Storage Project (CSP) portion of the San Vicente Dam Raise in mid-2014, which provides an additional 152,000 AF of water storage capacity. Refer to Section 11.1.2 and 11.2.3 for additional information on the Water Authority’s emergency and carryover storage. Table 5-1 Major San Diego County Reservoirs Agency (Owner) Reservoir Capacity (AF) Carlsbad MWD Maerkle 600 Escondido, City of Dixon 2,606 Escondido, City of Wohlford 6,506 Fallbrook PUD Red Mountain 1,335 Helix WD Cuyamaca 8,195 Helix WD Jennings 9,790 Poway, City of Poway 3,330 Rainbow MWD Morro Hill 465 Ramona MWD Ramona 12,000 San Diego, City of Barrett 34,806 San Diego, City of El Capitan 112,807 San Diego, City of Hodges 30,633 San Diego, City of Lower Otay 49,849 San Diego, City of Miramar 6,682 San Diego, City of Morena 50,694 San Diego, City of Murray 4,684 San Diego, City of San Vicente 1 249,358 San Diego, City of Sutherland 29,508 DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-2 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Agency (Owner) Reservoir Capacity (AF) San Dieguito WD/Santa Fe ID San Dieguito 883 San Diego County Water Authority Olivenhain 24,789 Sweetwater Authority Loveland 25,400 Sweetwater Authority Sweetwater 28,079 Valley Center MWD Turner 1,612 Vista ID Henshaw 51,774 Total Capacity 746,385 = Connected to Water Authority aqueduct system. 1 The Water Authority has storage rights to 152,100 AF of capacity in San Vicente Reservoir (100,000 AF is designated as CSP storage; 52,100 AF is designated as emergency storage). DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-3 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Figure 5-1 Major San Diego County Reservoirs DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-4 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies 5.2.2 Issues Management The Water Authority’s member agencies manage most of the region’s reservoirs. The San Vicente Dam Raise was completed in mid-2014 and CSP water began to be stored a year later. Together with the city of San Diego, the Water Authority coordinates San Vicente operations to optimize the use of their respective storage pools. The Water Authority also coordinates storage in Lake Hodges with the city, in order to manage its pumped storage project. The Lake Hodges Pumped Storage Project delivers water uphill to Olivenhain Reservoir in off-peak hours, generating electricity during peak demand periods through a coordinated release schedule. Also, in coordination with its member agencies, the Water Authority manages the imported conveyance system to achieve the optimal use of local and imported water resources, which include the local reservoirs. To reduce the need for imported water purchases, the reservoirs are operated to maximize the use of this local supply. Local surface water supplies can also offset dry-year shortfalls in imported water. Maximizing local yield reduces losses due to evaporation and spills, but it also results in increased demands for imported water during dry years when imported water is more likely in short supply. Most member agencies maintain some portion of their storage capacity for emergency storage. To optimize the use of local storage, the Water Authority works with its member agencies through periodic storage agreements and through its annual Aqueduct Operating Plan. Storage agreements allow for carryover storage to be placed in member agency reservoirs and to provide increased local storage capacity, which can be used during peaks on the aqueduct system. The aqueduct operating plans coordinate imported water deliveries and optimize reservoir fill opportunities. Local yield is maximized by the member agencies that operate the reservoirs. Water Quality See Section 7, “Water Quality,” for a relevant discussion of water quality issues related to the region’s water supply. 5.2.3 Projected Surface Water Supplies Surface water supplies can represent the largest single local resource in the Water Authority’s service area. However, annual surface water yields can vary substantially due to fluctuating hydrologic cycles. Since 1990, annual surface water yields have ranged from a low of 4,100 AF in fiscal year 2015 to a high of 140,300 AF in fiscal year 1984. Water Authority member agencies project average annual surface water use to decrease slightly, from 51,580 AF in 2020 to 51,180 AF in 2040. A list of the individual reservoirs, expected yield, and basis for the supply figure can be found in Appendix F, Table F-1. Table 5-2 shows the projected average surface water supply within the Water Authority’s service area, and the yields are utilized in the reliability analysis included in Section 9, “Water Supply Reliability.” Member agencies expect to include specific information on the projected yields from local reservoirs in 2015 plans. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-5 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Table 5-2. Projected Surface Water Supply (Normal Year – AF/YR) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 51,680 51,5801 51,480 51,380 51,280 51,180 1 Post-2015 supply adjusted downward to account for increase in California American Water Company (Cal Am) demands from City of San Diego. 5.3 Groundwater One of the elements identified in the Water Authority’s resource mix is the use and optimization of groundwater supplies by member agencies. The Water Authority does not currently hold groundwater basin rights, nor does it own or operate groundwater facilities within San Diego County. Although opportunities are limited, groundwater is currently used to meet a portion of the municipal water demands throughout the Water Authority’s service area from MCB Camp Pendleton in the north to National City in the south. This section provides a general description of municipal groundwater development within the Water Authority’s service area, the issues associated with development of this supply, and projected agency yields. Inclusion of specific information required under the Act on groundwater basins and projects is expected in member agency 2015 plans. 5.3.1 Description Within the past five years, water supply agencies within the Water Authority’s service area have produced an annual average of approximately 18,944 AF of potable water supplies from groundwater. This total represents production from both brackish groundwater desalination facilities and municipal wells producing groundwater not requiring desalination. It does not include production from privately owned water wells used for irrigation and domestic purposes, or several thousand acre-feet of groundwater produced annually from the Warner Basin by the Vista ID. This groundwater is discharged into Lake Henshaw and reported as local surface water supply by the City of Escondido and Vista ID. In addition to providing a local supply to water agencies, groundwater is also a source of supply for numerous private well owners, who draw on groundwater to help meet their domestic and agriculture water needs. In the Ramona area alone, over 1,000 privately owned wells provide a supplementary source of water for Ramona MWD customers. Similar domestic uses occur throughout the Water Authority’s service area. These domestic supplies help to offset demand for imported water provided by the Water Authority and its member agencies. Although significant, the amount of groundwater pumped by private wells cannot be accurately quantified nor estimated within the Water Authority’s entire service area. One agency, the Yuima MWD, did begin to report yield from its mutual water companies located within their service area in 2015, which totaled approximately 6 AF in normal year deliveries. Groundwater production in the Water Authority’s service area is limited by a number of factors, including the limited geographic extent of the more productive sand and gravel (alluvial) aquifers; the relatively shallow nature of most of the alluvial aquifers; lack of rainfall and groundwater recharge; and degraded water quality resulting from human activities, such as septic tank use. Shallow and narrow river valleys filled with alluvial sand and gravel deposits are characteristic of the more productive groundwater basins in the San Diego region. Outside of these more productive DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-6 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies aquifers, groundwater is developed from fractured crystalline bedrock and semi-consolidated sedimentary deposits that occur throughout the region. However, these aquifers have limited yield and storage and are best suited for meeting domestic water needs that do not require higher flow rates. Figure 5-2 shows the locations of the principal alluvial groundwater basins within the Water Authority’s service area. Figure 5-2 Alluvial Groundwater Basins DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-7 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Although groundwater supplies are less plentiful in the San Diego region than in some other areas of California, such as the Los Angeles Basin in Southern California and the Central Valley in Northern California, the Water Authority believes that sufficient undeveloped brackish groundwater supplies exist that could help meet a greater portion of the region’s future water demand. Several agencies within the Water Authority’s service area have identified potential projects that may provide several thousands of acre-feet of additional groundwater production in the coming years. A general summary and description of these projects is presented below. Groundwater Extraction and Disinfection Projects Groundwater that can be extracted and used as a potable water supply, with little more than disinfection, generally occurs outside the influence of human activities and within the upper reaches of the east–west trending watersheds. Wells producing higher quality water are operated by MCB Camp Pendleton (Santa Margarita River watershed) and the Sweetwater Water Authority (San Diego Formation aquifer). The Vista ID also operates numerous high-quality extraction wells in the Warner Basin, located in the upper San Luis Rey River watershed. The water from these wells is discharged to Lake Henshaw and eventually to the San Luis Rey River where it is then diverted farther downstream for use in Escondido and elsewhere. The unit cost of water produced from simple groundwater extraction and disinfection projects is low and generally well below the cost of imported water. Although a substantial amount of the higher quality groundwater within the Water Authority’s service area is already utilized, the primary focus for future local groundwater development is brackish groundwater recovery and recharge projects. Brackish Groundwater Recovery Projects Groundwater high in salts and total dissolved solids (TDS) and other contaminants, that requires advanced treatment prior to potable use, is typically found in shallow basins in the downstream portions of watersheds. Brackish groundwater recovery projects use membrane technology, principally reverse osmosis, to treat extracted groundwater to potable water standards. The City of Oceanside’s 6.37-MGD capacity Mission Basin Desalter and the Sweetwater Authority's existing 4.0-MGD Richard A. Reynolds Groundwater Desalination Facility are the only currently operating brackish groundwater recovery and treatment facilities within the Water Authority’s service area. The City of San Diego is currently gauging the feasibility of developing two brackish groundwater projects, including the Mission Valley Brackish Groundwater Recovery Project. Unit costs for brackish groundwater recovery projects are considerably higher than those for simple groundwater extraction and disinfection projects due to the additional treatment requirements and the cost of concentrate (brine) disposal. However, where economical options exist for disposal of brine, this type of groundwater project has proven to be an economically sound water-supply option. Groundwater Recharge and Recovery Projects Artificial recharge and recovery projects, also referred to as conjunctive-use projects, can increase groundwater basin yields by supplementing the natural recharge process. Conjunctive-use projects divert water supplies to percolation basins or injection wells to supplement natural rainfall runoff recharge. Captured rainfall runoff, recycled water, imported water, or a combination thereof, can be used to recharge groundwater basins when water levels have been lowered sufficiently by pumping. Groundwater basins can be operated similar to surface water reservoirs to supply stored water to the region if imported deliveries are limited due to high demand, supply and facility constraints, or a DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-8 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies combination thereof. The Fallbrook PUD and MCB Camp Pendleton are currently exploring the feasibility of such projects. 5.3.2 Issues Local water agencies often need to consider a multitude of issues during the planning, permitting, design, construction and operation of a groundwater project. The issues can include dealing with hydrogeological uncertainties, high upfront study and subsurface investigation costs, higher unit costs association with brackish groundwater recovery and treatment, project funding considerations, water rights, regulatory and environmental concerns, and possible contamination of groundwater that might occur after the project is constructed and facilities are brought online. Although these issues in the past have discouraged decision makers and have limited groundwater development in San Diego County, state-wide drought conditions and water supply reliability concerns are prompting renewed consideration of the viability of local groundwater development and cleanup projects for this region. Hydrogeological and Environmental Impact Uncertainty In groundwater basins not recently used as a source of a municipal water supply by an agency, and where a general lack of information exists regarding issues such as the physical nature of the aquifer materials, existing wells and groundwater production, water quality, and potential impact of pumping to riparian habitat, significant resources must be expended prior to determining the feasibility of a project. Subsurface exploration and field investigations are costly and time consuming. In addition, data management and utilization generally requires the development of costly large-scale numerical models. These issues, in conjunction with financial considerations, often dictate that groundwater projects be developed, and production increased incrementally, in a planned and managed fashion. Economic and Financial Considerations Because of the saline nature of the water and the presence of other contaminants in many of the groundwater basins in San Diego County, the cost of groundwater development often requires demineralization and brine disposal facilities, which can be costly to construct and operate. Institutional, Legal, and Regulatory Issues Institutional and legal issues can also impact project development. Because groundwater basins often involve multiple water agencies and/or numerous private wells and water-right holders, water rights and management authority should be addressed before a project progresses beyond the planning stage. Agencies are often reluctant to initiate groundwater development projects that go beyond the feasibility study stage unless jurisdiction and water rights issues are resolved beforehand. As challenging as those issues may be, recent drought conditions have prompted local agencies to attempt to resolve or overcome those barriers to groundwater development and proceed to groundwater project implementation. In September 2014, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a package of three bills known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), which sought to provide local agencies with a framework for managing groundwater basins in a manner that ensured basin resiliency, recognized that groundwater is most effectively managed at the local level, and empowered local agencies to achieve basin sustainability within 20 years. The SGMA DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-9 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies further respected regional differences and provided for a tailored approach to planning. Other goals of the SGMA included: • Established minimum standards for sustainable groundwater management • Improved coordination between land use and groundwater planning • Provided state technical assistance • Created a mechanism for state intervention if, and only if, a local agency was not managing its groundwater sustainably • Protected water rights DWR Bulletin 118 identified 515 alluvial groundwater basins in California. DWR conducted an initial prioritization of the identified 515 basins, and those basins deemed high-and medium-priority basins are required by SGMA to develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) via a designated Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). A GSA can be a local agency, a combination of local agencies, or a county. It is the GSA’s responsibility to develop and implement a GSP that considers all beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin. GSAs must be formed by June 30, 2017. In the San Diego region, four local basins were deemed medium priority: • San Luis Rey Valley • San Pasqual Valley • Santa Margarita Valley • San Diego River Valley Regional and local agencies impacted by this requirement are taking steps to ensure SGMA compliance within the allotted timeframe. Uncertainty over future regulatory requirements for drinking water supplies can also pose additional barriers to project development. When developing facilities and compliance plans for groundwater development and/or groundwater recharge projects, agencies must take into account proposed or potential regulatory changes related to water quality issues. Some of the regulations for which changes are expected over the next decade include state and federal drinking water standards and California Division of Drinking Water (DDW) groundwater recharge regulations. Environmental Regulatory Constraints Issues related to the environmental impacts that could potentially result from the fluctuation of groundwater levels when large quantities of groundwater are extracted are common to many of the groundwater projects proposed within the principal alluvial aquifers in the Water Authority’s service area. These issues include potential impacts on endangered species habitat and groundwater-dependent vegetation. Impacts may occur if a project results in seasonal or long-term decreases in the depth of the groundwater. Although potential environmental impacts can generally be mitigated, mitigation costs can reduce the cost-effectiveness of a project. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-10 April 2016 Water Quality Remediation of groundwater contamination presents a significant, ongoing operations and maintenance cost that presents barriers to project implementation. See Section 7.5, “Groundwater,” for additional information on water quality for groundwater supplies. Funding Grant funding for groundwater development has been steadily increasing. Beginning with Title XVI of Public Law (PL) 102-575, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act, which initially authorized the federal government to fund up to 25 percent of the capital cost of authorized recycling projects. PL 104-266, the Reclamation Recycling and Water Conservation Act of 1996, authorized two additional projects. One of those projects included funding for the City of Oceanside’s Mission Basin Brackish Groundwater Desalting Demonstration Project (additional detailed Title XVI funding information can be found under Section 5.4.3). Since 1994, this project, along with the Sweetwater Authority’s groundwater desalination facility, also benefitted from receiving Groundwater Recovery Program Funding from Metropolitan. To date, over $13.9 million has been received from this funding source for both the City of Oceanside and Sweetwater Authority’s groundwater brackish projects. Along with local and federal funding sources, in 2007, the San Diego Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program submitted a grant proposal to DWR for Proposition 50 funds. As a result of this grant award, the Santa Margarita Conjunctive Use Project was awarded grant funding to enhance groundwater basin recharge and recovery to provide water supplies for both MCB Camp Pendleton and Fallbrook PUD, which also resolved a long-standing water rights dispute. The project will provide approximately 3,100 acre-feet per year (AF/YR) of new local supply from the Santa Margarita River by conjunctively managing the groundwater basin. Additionally, 1,380 acres of sensitive habitat will also be preserved along the river as a result of this project. In Southern California, wastewater, brackish water and urban runoff are high in total dissolved solids (TDS) and other impurities that require advanced treatment to allow beneficial reuse. The North San Diego County Cooperative Demineralization Project funded under Proposition 84 - Round 1 Implementation Grant, focuses on developing new local water supplies and managing water quality issues by constructing an advanced water treatment facility (San Elijo Water Reclamation Facility) to mitigate high TDS sources, increase beneficial reuse, and study the feasibility of brackish to potable water desalination in North San Diego County. In 2014, also with Proposition 84 grant funding awarded through the San Diego IRWM, the Sweetwater Authority will be able to expand their production of potable water from desalinated brackish groundwater through expansion of the Richard A. Reynolds Groundwater Desalination Facility for an additional 5,200 AF/YR. The project involved drilling five new wells in the San Diego Formation, construction of an additional 20,000 linear feet of conveyance and potable pipelines, and facility modifications. The desalinated groundwater produced by the project will be added directly into the potable water supply, which will offset imported water purchases. Brine discharge from this project will also help to maintain the brackish quality in the Sweetwater River estuary, protecting against incursion by non-native freshwater species. The project was implemented by the Sweetwater Authority, in partnership with the City of San Diego. This multi-year project is expected to be completed in fiscal years 2016 and 2017. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-11 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies 5.3.3 Projected Groundwater Supply Yield The Water Authority has worked closely with its member agencies to develop groundwater yield projections. The most reliable projections have been developed by considering only existing (verifiable) groundwater projects, which include planned expansions to existing projects. Table 5-3 shows the projected annual yield from verifiable groundwater projects in five-year increments, based on projections and implementation schedules or existing projects and planned expansions provided by the member agencies. These are included in the reliability analysis found in Section 9, “Water Supply Reliability.” Table F-2, Appendix F contains a list of the projects and the projected supplies. Table 5-3. Projected Groundwater Supply (Normal Year – AF/YR) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 23,773 31,240 32,430 33,470 33,470 33,470 An overall projected increase in groundwater production from 2020 and beyond is due primarily from the expansion of the brackish groundwater recovery and treatment project currently operated by the City of Oceanside. The City of Oceanside completed an expansion of the capacity of its Mission Basin Desalter (6.37-MGD / 4.0-MGD expansion). The new conveyance and pumping facilities, completed in November 2013, can now convey all of the production produced. Monitoring will continue of ultimate production capacity or “safe yield” of the Mission Basin. As previously described in Section 5.3.2, the Sweetwater Authority and the City of San Diego have joined together to expand the capacity of the Richard A. Reynolds Desalination Facility (owned by the Sweetwater Authority), and share in the cost of the project and the total 8,800 AF of water produced. The Reynolds Desalination Facility treats a local groundwater supply that has previously been non-potable or unusable. The facility was initially designed and constructed to accommodate an expansion in the production capacity. Additional Planned Projects – Groundwater Maximizing groundwater development is critical to diversifying the region’s water supply portfolio. Beyond the projections of the more reliable and verifiable projects included in Table 5-3, member agencies have also identified two additional planned projects, with an estimated total of 3,600 AF/YR of additional yield in 2040. The Otay WD Rancho Del Rey Groundwater Well Development Project is expected to yield 500 AF/YR by 2030. Fallbrook PUD/MCB Camp Pendleton’s Santa Margarita Conjunctive-Use Project is projected to yield an additional 3,100 AF/YR by 2020. These additional yields are considered additional planned supplies and are reflected in Section 10, “Scenario Planning – Managing an Uncertain Future,” as potential strategies to manage future uncertainty planning scenarios. These additional planned projects, as well as the conceptual projects provided by the member agencies, are also included in Table F-2, Appendix F. 5.4 Water Recycling Another local supply identified in the Water Authority’s resource mix is the optimization of recycled water use. Every gallon of recycled water used within the region reduces the need to import or DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-12 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies develop other water supplies. This section provides a general description of recycled water development within the Water Authority’s service area, the issues associated with developing this supply, and projected regional yield. Documentation on specific existing and future recycling projects is expected to be part of the 2015 plans for those agencies that include water recycling as a supply. The Water Authority coordinated the preparation of this section with its member agencies and those wastewater agencies that operate water recycling facilities within the Water Authority’s service area. 5.4.1 Description Water may be recycled for non-potable or potable purposes. This section considers non-potable recycling. Non-potable recycling is the treatment and disinfection of municipal wastewater to provide a water supply suitable for non-drinking uses. Non-potable recycling in the San Diego Region started back in the 1960s when Padre Dam MWD began recycling water for use in Santee Lakes. Water recycling started to increase significantly in the 1990s. Today agencies in San Diego County use recycled water to fill lakes, ponds, and ornamental fountains; to irrigate parks, campgrounds, golf courses, freeway medians, community greenbelts, school athletic fields, food crops, and nursery stock; and to control dust at construction sites. Recycled water can also be used in certain industrial processes, in cooling towers, and for flushing toilets and urinals in non-residential buildings. Recycled water is also used for street sweeping and firefighting purposes. Local agencies must consider a number of issues when developing recycled water projects, including economic and financial considerations; regulatory, institutional, and public acceptance issues; and water quality concerns related to unknown or perceived health and environmental risks. These issues, if unresolved, can limit the amount of recycled water use in San Diego County. The following sections discuss some of the specific challenges associated with recycled water development. With additional water treatment, recycled water can also be treated to drinking (potable) water standards. Additional information on this highly treated water source (termed “potable reuse”) can be found in Section 5.5. Economic and Financial Considerations The capital-intensive cost of constructing recycled water projects and managing a dual distribution system has traditionally been a barrier to project implementation. The up-front capital costs for construction of treatment facilities and recycled water distribution systems can be high, while full market implementation is usually phased in over a number of years, resulting in very high initial unit costs that affect cash flow in the early project years. Some local agencies have been successful in expanding recycled water by requiring developers to install dual plumbed systems as new development infrastructure is built. Otay WD, Carlsbad MWD, and the City of San Diego have all been successful utilizing this approach. The high costs associated with converting existing water customers to non-potable recycled water use have also been challenging. This situation is compounded by the seasonal nature of recycled water demands, a lack of seasonal storage and the lack of large industrial water users in San Diego County that can use recycled water. Projects that serve a large portion of irrigation demands, like the majority of the projects in the Water Authority’s service area, often use only half of their annual production capacity due to these seasonal demand patterns. The unit costs associated with these projects are generally higher than those of projects that serve year-round demands, since the project DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-13 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies facilities must be sized to accommodate seasonal peaking. Projects that serve mostly irrigation demands also tend to have less stable revenue bases because irrigation demands are heavily influenced by hydrologic conditions. Recycled water is typically stored in storage tanks and ponds. Availability of seasonal and operational storage can help ensure a continuous demand and production of recycled water throughout the year, thus making projects more cost-effective. To be economically feasible, a project’s benefits must offset or exceed its associated costs. Project benefits can take the form of (1) revenues from the sale of recycled water; (2) increased supply reliability; (3) increased control over the cost of future water supplies; and (4) avoided water and wastewater treatment, storage, and conveyance costs. Agencies developing recycled water projects must be able to quantify these benefits to determine the economic feasibility of a project. In addition, financial incentives and grant funding from federal and state agencies are critical to offsetting project costs and project implementation. Regulatory Two state agencies have primary responsibility for regulating the application and use of recycled water: the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (DDW) and the California Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Water Boards). As of July 1, 2014, the administration of the Drinking Water Program (DWP) transferred from the Department of Public Health (DPH) to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). That reorganization specifically created the new DDW. This transfer of responsibility aligned the state’s drinking water and water quality programs in an integrated organizational structure that positioned the state to both protect water quality and the public health as related to water quality, while meeting current needs and future demands on water supplies. Planning and implementing water recycling projects entails numerous interactions with these regulatory agencies prior to project approval. The DDW is responsible for establishing statewide criteria for recycled water uses in Title 22 of the California Administrative Code. Under Title 22, the standards are established for each general type of use based on the potential for human contact with recycled water. The highest degree of standards for recycled water is for unrestricted body contact. The San Diego Water Board is charged with issuing permits and enforcing requirements for the application and use of recycled water for each recycled operation, which ensures compliance with basin plan objectives and incorporates recommendations from the DDW. As part of the permit application process, applicants must demonstrate that the proposed recycled water operation will meet the ground and surface water quality objectives in the basin management plan, and will comply with Title 22 requirements. With the consent of the recycled water supplier, the San Diego Water Board and DDW may delegate review of individual non-potable use sites to the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH). Coordination between the regulatory agencies responsible for monitoring development of recycled water is important, along with the development of a reasonable and consistent application of regulations. Project proponents need to work closely and cooperatively with regulatory agencies in their efforts to satisfy the regulations and still be able to develop much needed, cost-effective water recycling projects. To address regulatory gaps, the Water Authority and its member agencies met with local regulators in 2012 to tackle some of these regulatory concerns. This resulted in the drafting and execution of Consent Agreements between the DEH (with consent from DDW) and the DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-14 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies member agencies that helped to target and focus limited regulatory staff resources to new sites and higher risk, complicated recycled water sites. Ongoing oversight of recycled water sites deemed low risk is now handled intenally by experienced, water agency staff. Cost savings and expedited recycled water hook-ups have resulted. More recently, Water Authority staff provided direct technical assistance to local agencies by coordinating ad-hoc committee meetings and drafting technical documents to assist agencies to expedite the approval and installation of hauled recycled water fill stations and use of hauled recycled water for the following recycled water uses: 1. Street sweeping and cleaning of sidewalks and outdoor work areas, 2. Dust control, soil compaction, and construction, 3. Sewer flushing, 4. Pressure testing of newly constructed tertiary recycled water or sewer force main pipelines and gas pipelines, 5. Use of recycled water for irrigation of commercial and residential landscapes, crops, and nursery stock, and 6. Fire protection. Acting regionally has simplified and expedited local agencies’ efforts to offer their customers the option to use recycled water for these approved uses. This, in turn, has helped reduce demand on potable water systems. Institutional The primary institutional issue related to the development of water recycling in San Diego County is interagency coordination, such as when the wastewater agency that produces the recycled water is not the water purveyor within the reuse area. At those times, effective communication and cooperation between both agencies regarding the distribution of recycled water and providing service to the water customer is vital and should begin early in the planning process. These institutional arrangements require contracts and/or agreements between the parties and/or agencies involved, the terms of which must be established on a case-by-case basis. The agreements usually define the reporting and compliance responsibilities, the amount of recycled water deliveries, water pricing, and a financing plan that identifies which agency will receive the financial incentives. Many local entities in the San Diego region have responsibilities to provide both water and wastewater services. Where the water and wastewater agencies are not the same, close collaboration takes place for planning, permitting and operating recycled water facilities. These close relationships have helped to advance recycled water in the San Diego region. Public Acceptance Without public acceptance, siting, financing, constructing, and operating a water-recycling project becomes increasingly difficult. For many in the public, a general sense of water quality and safety concerns exists due to a lack of understanding regarding the water recycling treatment process. The most successful means to obtaining public acceptance is through education and involvement. Recent DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-15 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies focus group findings indicate that the public is now more accepting of the safety and beneficial use of recycled water for non-potable uses, particularly during drought events. 5.4.2 Wastewater Generation, Collection, Treatment, and Disposal Approximately 200 MGD of wastewater is currently generated, collected, treated, and disposed of within the Water Authority’s service area and provides significant potential for recycled water use. Most of the large wastewater treatment plants are located along the coast for easy and convenient access to an ocean outfall. These plants serve most of the San Diego region’s highly urbanized areas. Figure 5-3 identifies the location of the wastewater treatment plants and the associated outfall systems. The coastal location of the plants is not always conducive to development of recycled water. Most of the market for recycled water is located at higher elevations, making distribution systems costly. However, recycled water costs could be offset by possible savings on wastewater treatment costs where those savings are available. Table F-3, Appendix F shows a detailed list of the wastewater treatment plants within the county, their capacities at various levels of treatment, and the type of disposal. In addition, according to the County of San Diego, approximately 10 to 15 MGD of wastewater within the Water Authority’s service area is generated and disposed of through private systems, such as septic tanks. 5.4.3 Encouraging Recycled Water Development The Act requires agencies to describe in their plan the actions, including financial incentives, that agencies may take to encourage the use of recycled water. Table 5-4 summarizes the existing funding programs used by the Water Authority’s member agencies. Water and wastewater agencies develop some of the programs, while others are developed or funded by other water providers and agencies, such as the Water Authority, Metropolitan, and state and federal agencies. In addition to helping with funding, regional coordination on planning and regulatory issues can also reduce costs associated with development of recycled water. Funding Programs Another important component of a successful recycling project is securing diversified funding and establishing funding partnerships. The Water Authority has focused on providing and facilitating the acquisition of outside funding for water recycling projects. Financial assistance programs that have been utilized by San Diego County agencies include the Water Authority's Local Water Supply Development Program, Metropolitan’s Local Resources Program (LRP), the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) Title XVI Grant Program, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) low-interest loan programs and the IRWM Plan Grant Program. Together, these programs offer funding assistance for all project phases, from initial planning and design, to construction and operation. Financial assistance programs administered by the Water Authority and Metropolitan have provided $7.7 million to San Diego County agencies during fiscal year 2015. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-16 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Figure 5-3 Wastewater Treatment and Water Recycling Facilities DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-17 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Table 5-4. Programs to Encourage Recycled Water Use Incentive Programs Local Water Supply Development (Water Authority – existing executed agreements) Local Resources Program (Metropolitan – existing executed agreements) On-site Retrofit Pilot Program provides financial incentives directly to public or private property owners to convert potable water irrigation or industrial water systems to recycled water service. (Metropolitan) Grants Title XVI Funding Program (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation) Public Facility Retrofit Program provides grant funding assistance for site retrofits and construction costs to increase recycled water use. (administered by Water Authority, funded through Proposition 50 grant funding, State of California) Proposition 84 Planning Grants and Implementation (State of California) Low Interest Loans Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program (State of California) Long-Term Contracts to Ensure Price and Reliability Funding Assistance to State Water Resources Control Board to fund staff position(s) to expedite water recycling projects (Water Authority) Regional Planning and Regulatory Assistance Regional coordination with member agencies and regulatory agencies such as the San Diego Regional Board, Division of Drinking Water, and the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health on recycled water issues Initiate, review, and comment on statewide regulatory developments and legislation to support local projects. Preparation of guidelines and Engineering reports in conjunction with member agencies, such as Recycled Water Fill Stations. Local Water Supply Development Program The Water Authority administers the Local Water Supply Development (LWSD) Program (formerly referred to as the Recycled Water Development Fund (RWDF) Program initially adopted by the Board in April 1991), which is designed to ensure the financial feasibility of local water recycling projects during their initial years of operation. To date, the Water Authority has entered into LWSD agreements with 11 water and wastewater agencies for a combined project yield of over 30,000 AF/YR. Over $40 million in Water Authority incentive funding has been awarded to program participants. In fiscal year 2015, the Water Authority provided local agencies with $3.7 million in LWSD incentives for agencies with existing executed agreements. The Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act – Title XVI Since 1995, the Title XVI Grant Program has been a significant source of funding for San Diego area water recycling projects. Title XVI of Public Law (PL) 102-575, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act, authorized the federal government to fund up to 25 percent of the capital cost of authorized recycling projects, including the San Diego Area Water Reclamation Program, an inter-connected system of recycling projects serving the Metropolitan Sewage System service area. PL 104-266, the Reclamation Recycling and Water Conservation Act of 1996, authorized two additional projects in northern San Diego County: the North San Diego County Area DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-18 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Water Recycling Project and the Mission Basin Brackish Groundwater Desalting Demonstration Project. The North San Diego County project received its final federal funding in 2008 when it reached its maximum federal funding limit of $20 million. The City of Oceanside’s Mission Basin project was also completed and received final funding totaling $3,484,000. To date, San Diego agencies have been authorized to receive more than $110.8 million under the Title XVI grant program. The funding mechanism for the San Diego Area projects (and all other authorized Title XVI projects) was changed from direct appropriations to a competitive process that requires applications to be submitted in response to an annual Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA). The Sweetwater Authority has successfully applied for funds from the last two FOA solicitations. It is expected that the Sweetwater Authority will apply again for federal funding and, if successful, will utilize this grant funding to fully fund its Richard A. Reynolds Groundwater Desalination Facility expansion project. Solicitation of additional funding by the City of San Diego, Padre Dam MWD, and the City of Escondido is anticipated for their respective potable reuse projects. Clean Water State Revolving Fund/Water Recycling Grants The SWRCB, through the Division of Financial Assistance, offers low interest financing agreements for water quality projects and water reclamation facilities. For fiscal years 2014 and 2015, the SWRCB made 33 binding commitments totaling over $789 million in low cost financing to eligible projects. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) offers agencies a below-market interest rate that can result in substantial savings on debt service. Approximately $69 million was appropriated to the SWRCB in fiscal year 2016 for funding water recycling projects. An example of funding awarded to one of the Water Authority’s member agencies is a $29.5 million funding commitment to the Carlsbad MWD for advanced treatment, storage, and recycled water distribution costs. Additional construction funding can be obtained through Water Recycling Grants that provide up to 35 percent of actual eligible construction costs incurred up to a maximum of $15 million, including construction allowances. Planning grants of up to $75,000 maximum are also provided for eligible facilities planning/feasibility study costs. Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Grant Funding: Propositions 50 and 84 In 2007, the San Diego IRWM program submitted a grant proposal to DWR for Proposition 50 grant funds and was awarded $25 million in grant funding. Section 8 describes the IRWM program in more detail. Operation of the Recycled Water Retrofit Assistance Program, managed and administered by Water Authority staff on behalf of its member agencies, continues to provide Proposition 50 grant funding to the Water Authority’s member agencies and their customers. Project grant funding facilitated the retrofitting of user sites to receive recycled water and provided direct funding to water and wastewater agencies to make the required alterations and distribution system expansions to bring recycled water to their respective customer base. In 2011, the San Diego IRWM program was awarded $7.9 million in Proposition 84 Round 1 grant funds. One of the projects funded through this source was the Phase I North San Diego County Regional Recycled Water Project (NSDCRRWP). This project is an effort by North San Diego County water and wastewater agencies to regionalize recycled water systems by identifying new agency interconnections, seasonal storage opportunities, and indirect potable water use that would maximize supplies, reduce wastewater discharges to the ocean, reduce energy consumption due to diminished delivery of imported water, and allow recycled water to play an even more significant role in meeting the region’s future water needs. This project involved the support of many partners, including the Olivenhain MWD, Carlsbad MWD, Vallecitos WD, Santa Fe ID, City of Oceanside, DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-19 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Leucadia WD, City of Vista/Buena Sanitation District, San Elijo Joint Powers Authority, City of Escondido, and Rincon del Diablo MWD. In 2013, the San Diego IRWM program was awarded approximately $10 million in grant funds made available through Proposition 84 Round 2. One of the selected projects helped to implement the 10 priority sub-projects identified in Phase I of the NSDCRRWP. The Phase II NSDCRRWP helped to increase connectivity between recycled water facilities in North San Diego County. This effort increased the use of recycled water by allowing it to be distributed across the North County region, and produced an estimated 6,790 AF/YR of recycled water. Project benefits included: reducing imported water dependency, reducing discharge of recycled water to the ocean, reducing energy consumption from pumping imported water, and providing more recycled water for future water needs. The agencies involved with this effort were the Leucadia Wastewater District, Vallecitos WD, Vista ID, Rincon del Diablo MWD, Olivenhain MWD, Santa Fe ID, Carlsbad MWD, the City of Escondido, the City of Oceanside, and the San Elijo Joint Powers Authority. Grant funding totals are listed under Table 5.4.1 below: Table 5.4.1 Recycled Water Grant Sources Lead Agency Grant Award Proposition 50 Ray Stoyer Water Recycling Facility Demo. Plant for AWT Recycled Water Retrofit Assistance Program Recycled Water Distribution System Expansion Padre Dam MWD SDCWA City of San Diego $3,000,000 $800,000 $476,5146 Proposition 84 Round 1 North San Diego County Regional Recycled Water Project North San Diego County Demineralization Project Olivenhain MWD San Elijo JPA $1,455,000 $1,018,500 Proposition 84 Round 2 No. S. D. County Regional Recycled Water Project Phase II Failsafe Potable Reuse at the Advanced Water Purification Facility Olivenhain MWD WateReuse Research Foundation $3,452,000 $2,113,000 Proposition 84 Drought Round Fallbrook Plant Nurseries Recycled Water System Expansion Carlsbad Recycled Water Plant and Distribution System Fallbrook PUD Carlsbad MWD $772,000 $4,000,000 DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-20 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Lead Agency Grant Award Proposition 84 Final Round Padre Dam AWT Phase I Expansion Safari Park Drought Response and Outreach Integrated Water Resource Solutions for the Carlsbad Watershed Escondido AWT for Agriculture UC San Diego Water Conservation and Watershed Protection Project Padre Dam MWD Zoological Society of San Diego San Elijo JPA City of Escondido UC San Diego $6,000,000 $2,900,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,435,000 TOTAL $36,210,646 Optimizing the Use of Recycled Water – Regional Coordination In support of the SWRCB call for salinity and nutrient planning, the Water Authority, in cooperation with the Southern California Salinity Coalition (SCSC), worked in partnership with San Diego Regional Board staff to develop guidelines for the development of Salinity/Nutrient Management Plans. The State Water Resources Control Board Recycled Water Policy (Recycled Water Policy) encouraged a stakeholder-driven process for the development of plans for the management of salt and nutrients on a basin-wide basis, as opposed to an individual discharge permit level. The San Diego region was unique in that the planning process encompassed 17 fairly small groundwater basins with varying levels of use and variable water quality. Consistent with the Recycled Water Policy, the Southern California Salinity Coalition and the San Diego County Water Authority worked with local stakeholders and San Diego Regional Board staff to develop agreed-upon guidelines for development of salt and nutrient management plans within the region. The guidelines established priorities and recommended levels of effort for the plans depending on the size and importance of each basin within the region. Other key components of the guidelines were the recommended technical approaches for completing the salt and nutrient management plans and suggested strategies for managing salts. These guidelines were supported by both the stakeholders and the Regional Board staff. The final guidelines were endorsed by the San Diego Regional Board through a resolution adopted at their November 2010 board meeting. The agreement between the Regional Board and local stakeholders provided regulatory certainty for stakeholders and helped expedite the development of these plans within the region. Also with support from the San Diego Regional Board, IRWM grant funding was secured to help fund the development of five local Salinity Nutrient Management Plans. The following water agencies were awarded Proposition 84 grant funding and developed Salinity/Nutrient Management Plans for the following basins: • City of San Diego for the Hodges/San Pasqual Basin • Padre Dam MWD for the Santee Basin • Rincon del Diablo MWD for the Escondido Basin • Fallbrook PUD for the Middle Santa Margarita Basin DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-21 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies • Ramona MWD for the San Vicente/Gower Basin Of the basins listed above, three fell under the higher priority Tier A basin category as defined in the Salt/Nutrient Management Guidelines. One fell under Tier B, and another was listed as a Tier C basin. The salt and nutrient management plans were completed and submitted to the State of California in October 2013. The implementation of these plans will improve overall water quality and use of groundwater resources within the San Diego region. 5.4.4 Projected Recycled Water Use The Water Authority worked closely with its member agencies to determine the projected yield from existing and planned recycled water projects. Table 5-5 shows the estimated annual yield from the projects in five-year increments based on the implementation schedules provided by the member agencies and the likelihood of development. These projected supply yields will be included in the reliability analysis found in Section 9, “Water Supply Reliability.” Table F-4, Appendix F contains a detailed list of the projects and projected supplies. Table 5-5. Projected Recycled Water Use (Normal Year – AF/YR) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 32,595 47,460 48,825 48,959 49,159 49,459 The Water Authority’s 2010 Plan projected a verifiable water yield of 38,660 AF/YR in the year 2015. As shown in Table 5-5 above, the actual yield for 2015 was 32,595 AF/YR. The increase in projected recycled water use shown in Table 5-5 in 2020 and beyond is primarily from the expansion of existing facilities. For example, the City of Oceanside is in the process of expanding their current recycled water system with a tertiary treatment capacity expansion of 0.8 MGD at the San Luis Rey Water Reclamation Facility (SLRWRF) in addition to the construction of a 1.5-MGD tertiary treatment train, existing pump station upgrades, construction of a 1-million-gallon recycled water reservoir, and construction of over 4,500 linear feet of recycled water pipeline to serve approximately 5,225 AF/YR of recycled water demand. Another San Diego North County agency, the Carlsbad MWD, will be expanding its Water Recycling Facility’s capacity to 7 MGD from its current 4 MGD, a 75 percent capacity increase. The expansion project includes adding 18 miles of new pipe to the existing recycled water distribution system for irrigation and other non-drinking purposes, and building a new 1.5 million-gallon reservoir for recycled water storage. It is projected that, by 2020, one-third of the City of Carlsbad’s total water supplies will be recycled water. Recycled water development helps relieve pressure on the region’s potable water supplies by providing a drought-proof, locally controlled water supply source. Further, the City of Escondido’s Advanced Water Treatment for Agriculture project, funded under Proposition 84, will construct a new microfiltration/reverse osmosis (MFRO) advanced treatment facility with a total production capacity of 2.0 MGD. Water treated at the MFRO facility will be blended with tertiary treated water from an existing recycled water plant and distributed to agricultural customers in the northern and eastern areas of Escondido. The City of Escondido has partnered with Escondido Growers for Agricultural Preservation, Vista ID, City of San Diego, and Rincon del Diablo MWD to implement this project. This project supports the San Diego region’s goals DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-22 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies of supply reliability and sustainability, and protects water quality while supporting local agriculture and the economy. Additional Planned Projects – Recycled Water Maximizing recycled water development is critical to diversifying the region’s water supply portfolio. Beyond the verifiable project yields included in Table 5-5 above, member agencies have also identified additional planned projects. Aside from Carlsbad MWD and City of Escondido projects described above, the Padre Dam MWD, MCB Camp Pendleton, and Santa Fe ID have identified additional planned projects that are projected to yield an additional 2,468 AF/YR by 2035. These yields are considered additional planned supplies and are utilized in Section 10, “Scenario Planning – Managing an Uncertain Future.” These additional planned projects, as well as the conceptual projects provided by the member agencies, are also included in Table F-4, Appendix F. 5.5 Potable Reuse 5.5.1 Background and Description Recycled water can be further treated for potable reuse through the use of multi-barrier advanced purification treatment processes, which may include technologies such as reverse osmosis and advanced oxidation. The advanced treated water may be passed through a natural barrier, such as a groundwater basin or surface water reservoir, and provided with additional treatment to render wastewater suitable for potable purposes. Projects that include a natural barrier are considered indirect potable reuse. Projects that deliver advanced treated water directly to a raw or treated water pipeline are considered direct potable reuse. Several Water Authority member agencies are completing studies pertaining to potable reuse in San Diego County through groundwater recharge or reservoir augmentation. Two agencies, the City of San Diego and the Padre Dam MWD, have implemented pilot projects to determine potable reuse project viability. Detailed member agency project information can be found in Section 5.5.3. Currently, numerous drivers make potable reuse an attractive option not only for the San Diego region, but for the state of California as well. Climate change is creating unpredictable weather patterns, which may result in recurring droughts and cause scarcity of water supply. Potable reuse is a renewable resource, which can provide a cost-effective and sustainable, high-quality water supply. Being able to maximize the use of all recycled water can reduce the impacts and costs associated with discharging waste to the ocean. De facto or incidental reuse has taken place for many years as wastes are discharged to rivers and collected and treated for potable water supplies downstream. Clean Water Act standards placed on waste discharges and treatment requirements for water suppliers through the Safe Drinking Water Act have been designed to avoid waterborne disease outbreaks and to ensure a safe and reliable potable water supply for customers. These requirements protect the public from waterborne disease outbreaks and health impacts from chemical constituents and emerging compounds. The longest standing groundwater recharge project in California has been in existence since 1962. Recycled water may be percolated through into the groundwater, or highly treated water can be directly injected into the groundwater basin. Locally, potable reuse was first considered in the early and mid-1990s. The Water Authority and the City of San Diego proposed a potable reuse project that would deliver advanced treated water from DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-23 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies the North City Water Reclamation Plant and convey it to San Vicente Reservoir where it would blend with imported and local surface water prior to being treated at a surface water treatment plant. The Water Authority created a citizens advisory group to advise the Water Authority on the suitability of potable reuse as a water supply for San Diego County. In 1994, the Repurified Water Review Committee recommended that potable reuse be pursued as part of diversified mix of water supplies. The Water Authority sponsored the work of an Independent Advisory Panel of experts for indirect potable reuse and, along with the City of San Diego, conducted detailed studies that were submitted to state health authorities to determine regulatory guidelines for an indirect potable reuse project blending advanced treated recycled water in San Vicente Reservoir. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) approved this concept of reservoir augmentation in 1996, but no reservoir augmentation project has been built in San Diego or other parts of California. In 1998, the Water Authority co-funded a report by the National Research Council on “Issues in Potable Reuse: The Viability of Augmenting Drinking Water Supplies with Reclaimed Water,” which concluded that planned indirect potable reuse was a viable option. In 2006, the City of San Diego again began planning for a potable reuse project and, in 2012, CDPH and the San Diego Regional Board conceptually approved the City of San Diego’s proposed indirect potable reuse project for surface water augmentation through San Vicente Reservoir. The SWRCB DDW, formerly CDPH, has the authority to permit direct potable reuse projects, but no projects have been proposed or approved in California. Two direct potable reuse projects have been approved in Texas in response to extreme drought conditions and were placed into operation. The many years of advanced research concerning potable reuse in California and elsewhere have proven that reliable technology is now available to allow agencies to consider direct potable reuse as a potentially viable and acceptable treatment option. A direct potable reuse treatment scheme, if approved by DDW, will permit water suppliers in San Diego to maximize the use of existing infrastructure and produce a new, safe, and viable potable water supply for the San Diego region. As water supplies become scarcer, particularly in the arid west, more such projects will likely be proposed. Economic and Financial Considerations Potable reuse projects are being considered when they are deemed more cost effective and feasible than non-potable recycled water projects. Potable reuse projects have an advantage as they do not require construction of a dual distribution system, and once treatment and conveyance facilities have been constructed, the full amount of water produced can be immediately available to augment local water supplies. Costs for potable reuse are in range with other locally developed supplies. An added cost advantage may result as a potable reuse project may also contribute to meeting waste discharge requirements. Cost of conveyance to move advanced treated water to a local reservoir can be a significant component of a project cost. If the advanced treated water can be delivered to a reservoir closer to the point of production, it can significantly reduce project costs. Regulatory requirements on which reservoirs can be used, and whether direct potable reuse can be permitted by the regulatory agencies, will have a significant impact on overall project costs. Institutional The institutional arrangements between wastewater agencies and water suppliers will be similar for potable reuse projects in the region as they are for recycled water, as described in Section 5.4.1. An additional factor to consider will be the ongoing coordination between operators of advanced treatment facilities and the operators of local surface water treatment facilities for projects with a DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-24 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies downstream surface water treatment plant. Increased coordination will be required to ensure a safe reliable drinking water supply. Public Acceptance Like recycled water, public acceptance for potable reuse projects is critical for the success of the project. Potable reuse projects are under a high level of public scrutiny to ensure the safety of the drinking water supply. While the technology for potable reuse projects has been proven, these projects may fail due to lack of public acceptance. In the San Diego region, project proponents have done a significant level of public outreach for potable reuse projects. Tours of demonstration facilities, such as those constructed by the City of San Diego and Padre Dam MWD, have proven highly successful in convincing the public of the safety of the product water. Polls in the San Diego region have demonstrated increasing public acceptance of potable reuse as a safe water supply. The Water Authority has worked with the member agencies through the Potable Reuse Coordination Committee (PRCC) to coordinate and develop common language and messaging to be used throughout the region. This ad-hoc Committee, consisting of regional agencies interested in developing and promoting potable reuse projects meets on an as needed basis, to engage and keep the member agencies informed on the latest potable reuse regulatory, legislative, and stakeholder outreach efforts at the local and state levels. Legislative and Regulatory Legislative Requirements to Develop Potable Reuse Regulations Potable reuse projects require a high level of regulatory scrutiny and are currently approved on a case-by-case basis. Historically, an expert panel has been convened to look at project specifics and provide recommendations to the project proponent and DDW. While all projects will build on the knowledge and efforts obtained through past indirect potable reuse projects, local reservoir augmentation projects are anticipated as the first to be approved in California. The California Legislature passed SB 918 in 2010 and SB 322 in 2013, legislation sponsored and actively supported by the Water Authority, which expedited specific regulations for indirect potable reuse use surface water augmentation. This legislation also sought acknowledgement by the State of California that direct potable reuse was a viable water supply option. Specifically, the bills directed the Department of Public Health to: 1. Adopt regulations for indirect potable reuse through groundwater recharge by Dec. 31, 2013 (later moved to July 1, 2014). 2. Form an expert panel to provide recommendations to DDW on the surface water augmentation regulations and feasibility of direct potable reuse. 3. Form a public advisory group representing diverse water supply, environmental, and business interests to provide input to the expert panel on issues related to direct potable reuse, with all of the public advisory group meetings to be open and transparent public meetings. 4. Adopt regulations for surface water (reservoir) augmentation by Dec. 31, 2016. 5. Report to the legislature by Dec. 31, 2016, on the ability to adopt regulations for direct potable reuse. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-25 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Development of Potable Reuse Regulations In June 2014, CDPH adopted regulatory criteria for approval of groundwater recharge projects. SB 322 was critical in helping move the evaluation of direct potable reuse forward in a timely manner in California. In February 2014, CDPH formed the Public Advisory Group, which has met regularly. The City of San Diego and Padre Dam MWD are represented on the Public Advisory Group as well as other San Diego interests. In its first meeting, the Public Advisory Group provided recommendations to DDW on the formation of an Expert Panel to provide recommendations on technical issues related to surface water augmentation criteria and the feasibility of adopting regulations for potable reuse. The Expert Panel consists of 12 experts in the fields of toxicology, wastewater treatment, drinking water supplies treatment, drinking water standards, epidemiology, limnology, microbiology, and chemistry. The Public Advisory Group has weighed in on developing common terminology to describe potable reuse and the need and approach for having certified and qualified operators for advanced treatment facilities. The Advisory Group has also expressed interest in economic impacts and viability of implementing potable reuse as well as public health concerns including emerging contaminants, and will raise issues of public interest that may need to be addressed by the Expert Panel. The Advisory Group has also discussed concerns on how DDW may delineate between surface water augmentation and direct potable reuse. As the State of California develops criteria for surface water augmentation, projects using multi-purpose and smaller reservoirs could be considered direct potable reuse. The Expert Panel has also been meeting regularly since 2014. The Expert Panel has considered the proposed research agenda of the WateReuse Research Foundation and provided recommendations to the DDW regarding possible research gaps. The DDW presented for consideration a proposed framework for surface water augmentation, the focus of which will be on multiple treatment barriers for removal of pathogens and chemical constituents and approaches for ensuring the reliable monitoring and operation of the treatment processes. To minimize the need for a case-by-case review of projects, the surface water augmentation criteria should provide for flexibility in the range of reservoir size and configuration that may be acceptable for surface water augmentation projects. The Expert Panel will also develop a white paper with a list of issues as it relates to direct potable reuse. Concepts regarding direct potable reuse are similar to the framework for surface water augmentation with an increased emphasis on reliability, including monitoring, operator qualifications, and response to treatment failures. Permitting of Potable Reuse Projects Potable reuse projects require close collaboration between the San Diego Water Board and DDW. Local groundwater recharge projects are permitted by the San Diego Water Board under reclamation criteria or waste discharge requirements. The Water Board will incorporate recommendations from the DDW to ensure the protection of public health. Groundwater projects will conform to the groundwater recharge criteria. Local surface water augmentation projects will be permitted by the San Diego Water Board for the discharge into local reservoirs. For any discharge to waters of the United States, a discharge permit meeting federal Clean Water Act requirements is required. The new advanced treated supply will also be permitted by DDW as a drinking water supply under the Safe Drinking Water Act. While no direct potable reuse projects have been permitted in California, it is expected that these projects, if DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-26 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies delivered directly to a piped system, would be permitted by DDW as a drinking water supply. Projects not falling within an existing set of regulations may be reviewed by DDW and the San Diego Water Board on a case-by-case basis. Projects determined protective of public health and the environment would be issued the appropriate permits. Importance of Science Based Regulations The primary obligation of all drinking water suppliers is to protect public health. Regulations and transparency of information ensure that drinking water is safe and that information is available to the public to instill confidence that the public’s health is protected. Any potable reuse project will be required to achieve the same high standard of public health protection as any other drinking water supply. Because of the high standard involved in protecting public health and the extensive use of treatment technology to meet drinking water standards for potable reuse, science-based research is essential to both the regulatory development process and instilling public confidence. The Water Authority has been active in promoting the importance of research in regulation development. In 2012, the WateReuse Association and the WateReuse Research Foundation launched a potable reuse initiative and raised over $6 million to fund the research necessary to overcome any regulatory, scientific, technical and public perception barriers to potable reuse. The San Diego region has been a strong supporter of the direct potable reuse initiative. The Water Authority and several member agencies have directly contributed to this effort. An additional $2.113 million through the San Diego IRWM Program and DWR will fund the WateReuse Research Foundation’s “Failsafe Potable Reuse at the Advanced Water Purification Facility” project. The Water Authority supports this effort through its management of the San Diego IRWM grant program. WateReuse Research Foundation project research will be an important part of the State of California’s development of indirect and potentially direct potable reuse regulations, and will provide objective, science-based information for the public to understand the levels of protection and safety that contribute to developing this important new water supply. Funding of Potable Reuse Projects The primary sources of outside funding available for potable reuse projects include Title XVI, Clean Water State Revolving Funds, and IRWM. These funding sources are described in more detail in Section 5.4.3.1. Propositions 50 and 84 have already provided support for potable reuse through the San Diego IRWM by funding for the City of San Diego’s water purification demonstration project, Padre Dam MWD’s potable reuse demonstration project, and the WateReuse Failsafe Potable Reuse Project. These projects provided the research necessary to move potable reuse forward in the San Diego region and in California. Proposition 84 will also provide funding for the Padre Dam Phase IA recycled water treatment plant expansion, which will increase supply available for potable reuse projects. 5.5.2 Water Authority Activities in Support of Potable Reuse The Water Authority has been a staunch supporter and an active participant in advancing the goal of implementing potable reuse in San Diego County for over 20 years. The more recent focus of the Water Authority’s efforts to advance potable reuse has been through advocacy for legislation and regulations that move projects forward in the near term. Water Authority staff has been prominently involved through participation in the WateReuse Association Potable Reuse Task Force; WateReuse Legislative and Regulatory Committee; and though other regulatory advocacy DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-27 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies venues, including attending and providing comments at Expert Panel meetings by advocating and supporting member agency interests. The Water Authority has also been able to track trends in public acceptance of recycled water through its public opinion survey. This effort provides a foundation for member agency outreach and measures the effectiveness of those outreach efforts. In 2012, 71 percent of respondents believed that it was possible to further treat recycled water used for irrigation to make the water pure and safe for drinking. This was an increase over the 2011 survey findings where 66 percent felt that it is possible to further treat recycled water for drinking purposes. However, both the 2011 and 2012 survey results represent a substantial increase over the 2009 survey response where just 53 percent thought it was possible. Water Authority staff has been supporting member agencies in three key areas: public outreach and messaging, engaging with regulatory agencies and the Expert Panel, and helping secure funding for local projects. While member agencies will lead the development of their own specific projects, the need continues for regional coordination and collaboration on potable reuse issues. Water Authority staff will continue to engage with member agencies and the DDW to ensure that the regulatory framework developed by the DDW and reviewed by the Expert Panel considers the wide range of approaches expected as part of member agency projects. In addition, Water Authority staff has supported member agencies by actively engaging in public outreach in support of member agency projects. This support has included: 1. Coordinate with member agencies through Joint Public Information Committee to develop common outreach messaging that will support potable reuse projects. 2. Coordinate with the member agencies through the Potable Reuse Coordination Committee. 3. Outreach to the general public to increase public acceptance of potable reuse through presentations, development of handout materials for public outreach events and use by the member agencies, and sharing of information through the Water Authority’s website. 4. Communicate with regional, local, state, and federal elected officials on the importance of potable reuse for the San Diego region to gain support for potable reuse. 5. Communicate with SWRCB members and staff on the safety and importance of potable reuse. 6. Collaborate with other organizations that support potable reuse including WateReuse, the Water Reliability Coalition, and state and local environmental groups on common outreach to support potable reuse. 7. Advocate at the state and local level for reasonable regulations that will support the safe use of recycled water for local potable reuse projects. 5.5.3 Projected Supply through Potable Reuse The Water Authority worked closely with its member agencies to determine the projected yield from existing and planned potable water reuse projects. Table 5-6 shows the estimated verifiable annual yield from the projects in five-year increments based on the implementation schedules provided by the member agencies and the likelihood of development. These projected supply yields will be included in the reliability analysis found in Section 9, “Water Supply Reliability”. Table F-5, Appendix F contains a detailed list of the projects and projected supplies. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-28 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Table 5-6. Projected Potable Reuse Water Use (Normal Year – AF/YR) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 0 3,360 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 The increase in projected potable reuse shown in Table 5-6 in 2025 and beyond is primarily from the expansion of planned facilities. The City of Oceanside completed the investigative phase of their Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) project to enhance water supply reliability. This will involve the recharging of the Mission Groundwater Basin using water treated at the San Luis Rey Water Reclamation Facility (SLRWRF). This project will utilize advanced treated recycled water for subsurface and surface replenishment supplied through the AWT facility. The Phase I Project includes the construction of a 3-MGD capacity AWT facility, three injection wells, and a separate conveyance pipeline to the injection wells, which will result in the production of 3,360 AF/YR to be used for groundwater injection. Phase II consists of adding 1,700 AF/YR of advanced treated water for surface spreading at two water basins. This will necessitate increasing the capacity of the AWT facility to accommodate this additional supply for a final capacity of 4.5 MGD, which will provide an ultimate yield of 5,000 AF/YR of groundwater recharge. Both Project Phases 1 and 2 will require the construction of monitoring wells. It is expected that the City of Oceanside’s Indirect Potable Reuse Project will be operational in 2021. Additional Planned Potable Reuse Projects As part of the City of San Diego’s effort to provide a local and sustainable water supply, the City of San Diego’s Water Purification Demonstration Project (WPDP) examined the use of advanced water purification technology to provide a safe and reliable water supply, and determined if reservoir augmentation using this purified water was a feasible option for San Diego. The WPDP concluded in 2013. The information collected via various studies and the results of the WPDP determined that it was feasible for San Diego to use water purification technology. Pure Water San Diego, the City's phased, multi-year program to produce purified water to supplement San Diego's drinking water supply, is scheduled to be operational by 2021. The long-term goal, producing 83 million gallons of purified water per day (one-third of San Diego's future drinking water supply), is scheduled for 2035. The East County Regional Water Reuse Program Planning Study (Study) was partially grant funded and addressed the elements of the Recycled Water Facilities Planning Report outline provided by the SWRCB. The study evaluated the potential for expanding Title 22 tertiary recycled water for irrigation and developing potable reuse within the study area that included the following four agencies: Padre Dam Municipal Water District (Padre Dam MWD), Helix Water District (Helix WD), the County of San Diego (County), and the City of El Cajon (El Cajon). The objectives of the East County Regional Potable Reuse Program were as follows: 1. Produce potable water at a cost less than $2,000/AF. 2. Incur wastewater treatment cost at less than that projected for Metropolitan and associated Pure Water costs. 3. Yield at least 2 MGD for Phase 1 Groundwater Replenishment and Reuse Program (GRRP). DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-29 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies Potable reuse will require full advanced treatment in addition to conventional wastewater treatment by microfiltration (MF), reverse osmosis (RO), ultraviolet (UV) disinfection, and advanced oxidation process (AOP), which is similar to treatment provided in Orange County. Further treatment using free chlorine to produce Advanced Water Treatment (AWT) water is also planned. The addition of free chlorine provides supplemental log removal to meet DDW requirements that allow a reduction in the environmental buffer, meaning reduced travel time requirements. The Study also evaluated the feasibility to treat all wastewater generated by Padre Dam MWD, the County, and El Cajon using full advanced treatment at Padre Dam MWD’s Ray Stoyer Water Recycling Facility (WRF) before being injected into the Santee Groundwater Basin or used to augment surface water at Lake Jennings. For surface water augmentation at Lake Jennings, AWT water will be blended with a mixture of imported surface water and local runoff in Lake Jennings before it is treated at Helix WD’s R. M. Levy Water Treatment Plant. In March 2015, Padre Dam opened the Advanced Water Purification Demonstration Facility, which uses a four-step water purification process to treat recycled water using state-of-the-art technologies. Since its opening, this pilot facility has produced approximately 100,000 gallons of purified water each day for testing purposes to ensure it meets the public health objectives to earn approval from the State Water Resources Control Board’s DDW. The water purified at the facility is not currently being distributed as drinking water. Conceptual Potable Reuse Projects Conceptual projects include the City of Escondido, which is planning to expand its non-potable water recycling program to include additional landscaping and agricultural irrigation, and incorporation of a future indirect potable reuse element. Escondido is pursuing this dual path for water supply reliability and to avoid the cost of a future ocean outfall expansion associated with its discharge of secondary treated wastewater. The Escondido City council has approved exploring this project alternative and has incorporated this approach into their long-range financial planning. 5.6 Member Agency Seawater Desalination 5.6.1 Carlsbad Desalination Plant In June 2011, the Water Authority board of directors adopted guiding principles for the Water Authority to make available to its member agencies up to 49 percent of the Minimum Annual Demand Commitment (48,000 AF) and provide the opportunity for member agencies to enter into uniform contracts to make firm commitments to individually purchase from the Water Authority treated water in designated amounts that represent a portion of the Minimum Annual Demand Commitment. Vallecitos Water District (Vallecitos) and Carlsbad Municipal Water District (Carlsbad) both passed resolutions expressing their intention to enter into uniform contracts with the Water Authority to purchase desalinated water. Beginning in July 2016, Vallecitos and Carlsbad will purchase 3,500 and 2,500 AF/YR, respectively, for a full contract year, representing a total of 6,000 AF of member agency seawater desalination water supply annually. 5.6.2 Rosarito Beach Desalination Project, Otay Water District The Otay Rosarito Beach Desalination Project is not considered a verifiable supply and is therefore not included in the reliability assessment in Section 9. The Otay project is considered an additional DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-30 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 5. Member Agency Supplies planned project and is presented in Section 10 as a potential strategy to manage future uncertainty planning scenarios. Plans are underway to develop a seawater desalination facility in Rosarito Beach by a private company, Consolidated Water Co. Ltd. This bi-national project would produce up to 100 MGD for potential distribution to the federal and /or state agencies serving the Rosarito and Tijuana areas, and to Otay Water District. The district has sought a presidential permit to build a cross-border pipeline to carry up to 50 million gallons per day from Mexico into its service area, which is currently awaiting approval. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 5-31 April 2016 Section 9 Water Supply Reliability Under the Act, every UWMP must include an assessment of water supply reliability. The assessment must compare the total projected water supply and demands over the next 20 years in 5-year increments under normal, single dry-year, and multiple dry water years. The assessment contained in the 2015 Plan evaluates reliability through the next 25 years. In addition to the verifiable mix of resources utilized in the reliability assessment, additional planned resources by the Water Authority and its member agencies have also been identified. Additional planned projects can further reduce the region’s reliance on sources of supply from Metropolitan, such as the Bay-Delta. This section presents a summary of the water demands and supplies within the Water Authority’s service area along with the reliability assessment and discussion on additional planned projects. Results from the reliability assessment demonstrate that the region’s existing and projected water resource mix is drought-resilient, with only minor shortages during multiple dry periods occurring 15 to 20 years in the future. These shortages can be mitigated through extraordinary water conservation actions and if necessary, dry-year transfers. 9.1 Development of Projected Water Resources Mix In summary, development of the projected mix of resources to meet future demands is based on the following factors: I. Member agency information on projected water recycling, potable reuse, groundwater, desalination, and surface water (discussed in Section 5); II. Attaining the additional regional water use efficiency targets (Section 2) III. Board approvals taken in regard to Water Authority supplies (Section 4 and 11): a. Agreement between IID and the Water Authority for Transfer of Conserved Water, and other related agreements (Section 4.2); b. Agreements related to the ACC and CC Lining Projects, and other related agreements (Section 4.3); c. Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant Water Purchase Agreement between the Water Authority and Poseidon Water (Section 4.5); d. Acceptance of San Vicente Dam Raise Project (emergency and carryover storage) as complete (Section 11.2.4); e. Approval of 2013 Regional Water Facilities Optimization and Master Plan Update (Section 1.6.4) f. Agreements and actions related to out-of-region groundwater banking program (Section 11.2.4). DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-1 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability 9.2 Normal Water Year Assessment Table 9-1 shows the normal year assessment, summarizing the total water demands within the Water Authority’s service area through the year 2040 along with the supplies necessary to meet demands under normal conditions. Section 2 contains a discussion of the normal year water demands in the Water Authority's service area. If Metropolitan, the Water Authority and member agency supplies are maintained and developed as planned, along with achievement of the additional water conservation, no shortages are anticipated within the Water Authority’s service area in a normal year through 2040. In the reliability assessment, the projected supplies from Metropolitan are considered supplemental and are calculated as the increment of supply necessary to meet demands after taking into account member agency and Water Authority supplies. Metropolitan staff provided the Water Authority with estimated demands on Metropolitan that will be used in their 2015 Plan. The estimated demands are shown to be adequate to cover the supplemental need identified in Table 9-1. The data provided by Metropolitan is included in Appendix I. Table 9-1. Normal Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment (AF/YR)1 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Water Authority Supplies IID Water Transfer 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 ACC and CC Lining Projects 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 Carlsbad Desalination Plant 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Sub-Total 320,200 330,200 330,200 330,200 330,200 Member Agency Supplies Surface Water 51,580 51,480 51,380 51,280 51,180 Water Recycling 47,460 48,825 48,959 49,159 49,459 Seawater Desalination 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Potable Reuse 3,360 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 GW Recovery 13,300 13,300 13,300 13,300 13,300 Groundwater 17,940 19,130 20,170 20,170 20,170 Sub-Total 139,640 143,735 144,809 144,909 145,109 Metropolitan Water District Supplies 123,343 157,918 178,591 197,215 222,326 Total Projected Supplies 583,183 631,853 653,600 672,324 697,635 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 583,183 631,853 653,600 672,324 697,635 1 Normal water year demands based on 1960 – 2013 hydrology. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-2 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability 9.3 Dry Water Year Assessment In addition to a normal water year assessment, the Act requires an assessment to compare supply and demands under single dry and multiple dry water years over the next 20 years, in five-year increments. Section 2 describes the derivation of the dry water year demands. Table 9-2 shows the single dry-year assessment. The dry-year demands reflect long-term water use efficiency, but do not incorporate potential savings due to extraordinary conservation occurring during droughts. This approach allows for a more comprehensive shortage analysis and drought response planning. The projected groundwater and surface water yields shown in the table are based on 2015 dry-year supplies during the present drought beginning 2012. The supplies available from member agency projected recycling, potable reuse, and groundwater recovery projects are assumed to experience little, if any, reduction in a dry-year. The Water Authority’s existing and planned conserved supplies from the IID transfer, canal lining projects, and Carlsbad Desalination Plant are also considered “drought-resilient” supplies as discussed in Section 4. For this single dry-year assessment, it was assumed that Metropolitan would have adequate supplies in storage and would not be allocating supplies. With the previous years leading up to the single dry-year being wet or average hydrologic conditions, Metropolitan should have adequate supplies in storage to cover potential shortfalls in core supplies and would not need to allocate. Table 9-2. Single Dry Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment Five Year Increments (AF/YR) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Water Authority Supplies IID Water Transfer 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 ACC and CC Lining Projects 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 Carlsbad Desalination Plant 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Sub-Total 320,200 330,200 330,200 330,200 330,200 Member Agency Supplies Surface Water 6,004 6,004 6,004 6,004 6,004 Water Recycling 47,460 48,825 48,959 49,159 49,459 Seawater Desalination 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Potable Reuse 3,360 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 GW Recovery 13,300 13,300 13,300 13,300 13,300 Groundwater 15,281 15,281 15,281 15,281 15,281 Sub-Total 91,405 94,410 94,544 94,744 95,044 Metropolitan Water District Supplies 212,918 252,296 275,715 296,199 335,223 Total Projected Supplies 624,523 676,906 700,459 721,143 760,467 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 624,523 676,906 700,459 721,143 760,467 If Metropolitan, the Water Authority and member agency supplies are maintained and developed as planned, along with achievement of the additional conservation target, no shortages are anticipated within the Water Authority’s service area in a single dry-year through 2040. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-3 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability In accordance with the Act, Tables 9-3, 9-4, 9-5, 9-6, and 9-7 show the multiple dry water year assessments in five-year increments. Similar to the single dry-year assessment, the member agencies’ surface and groundwater yields shown in these tables are reflective of supplies available during the present drought beginning 2012, in years 2013, 2014 and 2015. While surface and groundwater yields are based on historic estimates and remain the same, recycled and brackish groundwater yields are based on projected growth in these member agency supplies. For the multi dry-year reliability analysis, the conservative planning assumption is that Metropolitan will be allocating supplies to its member agencies. By assuming allocations in this reliability assessment, it allows the Water Authority to analyze how storage supplies could potentially be utilized and the likelihood of shortages. Currently, Metropolitan allocates supplies through its Water Supply Allocation Plan. Because it is uncertain in the future how Metropolitan will allocate supplies to its member agencies, the analysis in the tables assumes they are allocated based on preferential right to Metropolitan supplies. As discussed in Section 6.1.1, Section 135, Preferential Right to Purchase Water, is included in Metropolitan’s Act and allows a Metropolitan member agency to acquire for use within the agency supplies based on preferential rights at any time. The Water Authority’s annual preferential right percentage of Metropolitan supplies, used in Tables 9-3 through 9-7, is estimated through 2040 and is based on Metropolitan’s current method of calculating preferential rights. In 2015, a Superior Court ruled Metropolitan under-calculated the Water Authority’s preferential right to Metropolitan water. That ruling is being appealed. The analysis assumes total Metropolitan dry-year supplies available for allocation to be 1,500,000 AF throughout the planning period. This was maintained due to the numerous uncertainties associated with identifying Metropolitan’s future available supplies. In Section 10, there are scenarios presented that modify the dry-year supplies available for allocation. This total supply assumes reduced deliveries from the State Water Project and Colorado River Aqueduct along with limited storage supplies. Table 9-3. Multiple Dry Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment Five-Year Increments (AF/YR) – 2017-2019 2017 2018 2019 Member Agency Supplies 114,600 96,027 83,308 Water Authority Supplies 230,200 260,200 290,200 Metropolitan Allocation (Preferential Right) 279,450 280,500 281,400 Total Estimated Core Supplies w/o Storage Takes 624,250 636,727 654,908 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 604,829 628,721 660,670 Potential Supply (Shortage) or Surplus 19,421 8,006 -5,762 (Difference between Supplies and Demands) Utilization Carryover Supplies 0 0 5,762 Total Projected Core Supplies w/ Utilization of Carryover Storage Supplies 624,250 636,727 660,670 Remaining Potential Surplus Supply, or (Shortage) that will be handled through Management Actions 19,421 8,006 0 DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-4 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability Table 9-4. Multiple Dry Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment Five-Year Increments (AF/YR) – 2021-2023 2021 2022 2023 Member Agency Supplies 132,771 110,062 93,208 Water Authority Supplies 330,200 330,200 330,200 Metropolitan Allocation (Preferential Right) 282,750 283,050 283,350 Total Estimated Core Supplies w/o Storage Takes 745,721 723,312 706,758 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 632,681 665,756 707,457 Potential Supply (Shortage) or Surplus 113,040 57,556 (699) (Difference between Supplies and Demands) Utilization Carryover Supplies 0 0 699 Total Projected Core Supplies w/ Utilization of Carryover Storage Supplies 745,721 723,312 707,457 Remaining Potential Surplus Supply, or (Shortage) that will be handled through Management Actions 113,040 57,556 0 Table 9-5. Multiple Dry Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment Five-Year Increments (AF/YR) – 2026-2028 2026 2027 2028 Member Agency Supplies 135,202 111,919 94,490 Water Authority Supplies 330,200 330,200 330,200 Metropolitan Allocation (Preferential Right) 283,500 283,350 283,050 Total Estimated Core Supplies w/o Storage Takes 748,902 725,469 707,740 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 681,549 710,641 749,758 Potential Supply (Shortage) or Surplus 67,353 14,828 (42,018) (Difference between Supplies and Demands) Utilization Carryover Supplies 0 0 42,018 Total Projected Core Supplies w/ Utilization of Carryover Storage Supplies 748,902 725,469 749,758 Remaining Potential Surplus Supply, or (Shortage) that will be handled through Management Actions 67,353 14,828 0 DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-5 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability Table 9-6. Multiple Dry Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment Five-Year Increments (AF/YR) – 2031-2033 2031 2032 2033 Member Agency Supplies 135,349 112,079 94,664 Water Authority Supplies 330,200 330,200 330,200 Metropolitan Allocation (Preferential Right) 281,550 280,950 280,350 Total Estimated Core Supplies w/o Storage Takes 747,099 723,229 705,214 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 704,215 735,777 772,413 Potential Supply (Shortage) or Surplus 42,884 (12,548) (67,199) (Difference between Supplies and Demands) Utilization Carryover Supplies 0 12,548 40,000 Total Projected Core Supplies w/ Utilization of Carryover Storage Supplies 747,099 735,777 745,214 Remaining Potential Surplus Supply, or (Shortage) that will be handled through Management Actions 42,884 0 (27,199) Table 9-7. Multiple Dry Water Year Supply and Demand Assessment Five-Year Increments (AF/YR) – 2036-2038 2036 2037 2038 Member Agency Supplies 135,569 112,319 94,924 Water Authority Supplies 330,200 330,200 330,200 Metropolitan Allocation (Preferential Right) 278,850 278,550 278,100 Total Estimated Core Supplies w/o Storage Takes 744,619 721,069 703,224 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 730,024 763,528 807,375 Potential Supply (Shortage) or Surplus 14,595 (42,459) (104,151) (Difference between Supplies and Demands) Utilization Carryover Supplies 0 42,459 40,000 Total Projected Core Supplies w/ Utilization of Carryover Storage Supplies 744,619 763,528 743,224 Remaining Potential Surplus Supply, or (Shortage) that will be handled through Management Actions 14,595 0 (64,151) Under specific parameters assumed in the multi dry-year analysis, some level of shortage could potentially be experienced, as shown in Tables 9-6, and 9-7. The shortages are minor and due primarily to increasing water demands due to economic growth within the region. As discussed in Section 11.2.4, the Water Authority has invested in carryover storage supply capacity, which can be utilized in dry-years to improve reliability. The carryover storage investment includes both surface water storage in San Vicente Reservoir and out-of-region groundwater storage in California’s Central Valley, for a total of approximately 99,000 AF of storage supplies available. As described in Section 11.2.4, there are a number of factors to consider when determining the utilization of carryover supplies to reduce or eliminate shortages. The storage take amount should DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-6 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability be handled on a case-by-case basis, considering such items as, current demand trends, core supply availability, hydrologic conditions, and storage supply available for withdrawal. These factors will vary depending upon the situation. For the analysis in the 2015 Plan, it was assumed the carryover storage supplies would be full going into the dry-year period. In determining the amount to utilize, the analysis uses general guidelines that approximately one third of the San Vicente Reservoir carryover supplies available in storage will be utilized in one year. Utilizing a portion of available storage supplies avoids depletion of storage reserves, thereby making water available for potential ongoing or future shortages. The supplies taken from carryover storage will be considered a Water Authority regional supply to be combined with Water Authority’s core supplies and any potential dry-year transfers. Under the Water Authority’s current Transitional Special Agricultural Water Rate (TSAWR) program requirements, customers in the TSAWR class of service receive no water from the Carryover Storage Program during Stage 2 or 3 of the Water Shortage Drought Response Plan. During shortages, TSAWR deliveries are also cutback at the same level of Metropolitan’s cutback to the Water Authority. Extension of the TSWR program had been approved by the Water Authority Board in March 2014 and will be revisited by the Board again in 2020. For planning purposes only, the assessments in Tables 9-3 through 9-7 do not factor in this program requirement, due to the uncertainties associated with the future of the program beyond 2020. This also provides a more conservative planning analysis. In years where shortages may still occur, after utilization of carryover storage, additional regional shortage management measures, consistent with the Water Authority’s Water Shortage and Drought Response Plan (described in Section 11.2.1), will be taken to fill the supply shortfall. These measures could include extraordinary conservation, achieved through voluntary or mandatory water-use restrictions. A description of the savings achieved during the 2012-2016 shortage period is described in Section 11.2.3. As discussed in the following section, the amount of savings achieved through extraordinary conservation measures could be limited due to demand hardening. In addition, the Water Authority could evaluate the option of securing dry-year transfers, which the Water Authority successfully acquired and utilized during the 2007-2011 shortage management period. (Description of the Water Authority’s dry-year transfer program is included in Section 11.2.4.). It should be emphasized that the amount of extraordinary conservation savings expected to be achieved through mandatory measures, such as water-use restrictions, could be less than that experienced in the previous shortage periods. This is due to the concept known as demand hardening. Demand hardening diminishes the ability or willingness of a customer to reduce demands during shortages as a result of having implemented long-term conservation measures. Responsiveness to drought pricing and general price increases will diminish because remaining essential uses are less responsive to price. This will reduce customer discretionary demands and create less flexibility in the managing of demand during shortages. This will increase the importance of acquiring supplemental dry-year supplies to eliminate or reduce potential supply shortages. Section 11.2.4 discusses the Water Authority’s potential dry-year supplies. Long-term permanent conservation savings is critical to ensuring water is used most efficiently and will help avoid or minimize drought situations. Due to potential demand hardening, shortage management measures such as water-use restrictions and drought pricing, may not be as effective in the future in achieving necessary savings to help reduce the supply gap. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-7 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability 9.4 Reliability of Supply The above sections identify the diverse mix of resources planned to meet future demands in both a normal and dry-year. Implementation of this regional resource mix will require maintaining and developing projects and programs by the Water Authority, its member agencies, and Metropolitan. The Water Authority coordinated with its member agencies and Metropolitan during preparation of the 2015 Plan on the future demands and supplies projected for the region. The steps being taken by the member agencies and Metropolitan to develop supplies are addressed in their respective urban water management plans. Section 4 contains the steps taken and remaining actions necessary to develop and maintain the Water Authority supplies. The Act requires agencies to describe reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal and climatic shortage. Sections 9.2 and 9.3 describes the results of the water supply reliability assessment for the region, during normal water years, single dry years, and multiple dry years. The Act also requires the 2015 Plan to contain historic data on supplies available for the three water year types. The following is the historic total supplies, both local and imported, that were utilized during the periods identified: Normal/average (607,200AF) based on 30-year average between 1986 and 2015, single dry year (477,458AF) based on 2015, and multiple dry water years (581,828AF, 590,119AF, and 477,458AF) based on years 2013-2015. Supplies utilized in a non-allocation dry period could exceed the supplies utilized in a normal year, due to the ability to purchase additional imported supplies from Metropolitan. It should also be noted that in the reliability assessment, contained in Section 9.2, the average local supply yields are not based on historic yields, but projected numbers provided by member agencies. These figures more accurately reflect the expected yield based on current local agency policies and procedures on operations and management of the supply. Key to long-term reliability will be the monitoring of supplies and demands in order to make necessary modifications to the core and dry-year resources identified in the normal and dry-year resource mixes. The Water Authority Board will monitor reliability of existing supplies and development of identified future supplies through the Annual Supply Report and five year updates to the UWMP. The Act requires that, for any water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, given specific legal, environmental, water quality, or climatic factors, that the agency describe, to the extent practicable, plans to replace that source with alternative sources or water demand management measures. As stated throughout the 2015 Plan, the Water Authority and its member agencies are planning to develop a diverse supply of resources. The unavailability of any one supply source will be buffered because of the diversity of the supplies: the region is not reliant on a single source. To replace or supplement an existing supply, the Water Authority could take steps to further long-term water use efficiency and work with member agencies to further maximize development of recycled water, potable reuse, groundwater, and seawater desalination. In order to adequately plan for potential supply uncertainties and identify alternative sources, the 2015 Plan contains a scenario planning process described in Section 10. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-8 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability 9.5 Additional Planned Supply Projects The mix of current and future supplies is developed jointly between the Water Authority and its member agencies. The mix of supplies is being represented in two ways. Verifiable supplies are those supplies identified by the Water Authority or member agencies as having achieved a level of certainty in their planning and implementation, such as where California Environmental Quality Act has been satisfied, permits are in hand or contracts have been executed. As part of this general definition, these projects also have the political support of the governing body to more forward and be implemented at this time. Verifiable supplies are included in water supply assessments and verifications prepared by retail water agencies and used by the cities and county in their land use decisions regarding available water supplies for growth under SB 221 and SB 610. Those projects with adequate documentation regarding implementation and supply utilization, or existing projects already planned for expansion, were included in the assessments discussed in Sections 9.2 and 9.3. Additional planned supplies are those that have not yet achieved the same level of certainty as the verifiable supplies, but have progressed to a point where the Water Authority or a member agency has taken significant financial actions to pursue the project. Additional planned supplies are not included in supply verifications for SB 221 and SB 610. These additional planned supplies are important to the region for a number of reasons. The Water Authority and member agencies must continue to strive to develop cost-effective local resources that can further diversify the region’s supplies and reduce demands for imported water from Metropolitan. They provide objectives for the region to work towards by resolving any funding, regulatory, and other constraints associated with implementation. As part of conducting comprehensive supply planning, both the verifiable and additional planned projects are evaluated in regards to meeting future demands and the need for supplemental supplies from Metropolitan. Table 9-8 includes the evaluation of verifiable and additional planned projects compared with projected water demands in a normal year. It is important to emphasize that this evaluation is presented as a potential supply scenario and not the region’s reliability analysis for purposes of compliance with state laws governing approval of land-use projects (SB 610 and 221). DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-9 April 2016 San Diego County Water Authority Section 9. Water Supply Reliability Table 9-8. Supply Scenario with Additional Planned Projects (Normal Year AF/YR) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Water Authority Supplies IID Water Transfer 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 ACC and CC Lining Projects 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 Regional Seawater Desalination 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Sub-Total 320,200 330,200 330,200 330,200 330,200 Water Authority Additional Planned (Desal) 0 0 0 56,000 56,000 Water Authority Total 320,200 330,200 330,200 386,200 386,200 Member Agency Supplies Verifiable Total 139,640 143,735 144,809 144,909 145,109 (Additional Planned) Surface Water 0 0 0 0 0 Water Recycling 2,840 8,546 3,796 2,796 2,796 Desal 0 15,100 15,600 16,100 16,800 Reuse 4,470 29,086 46,686 106,099 106,099 GW Recovery 0 0 500 500 500 Groundwater 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100 Member Agency Total 150,050 199,567 214,491 273,504 274,404 Total Projected Local Supplies 470,250 529,767 544,691 659,704 660,604 Metropolitan Water District Supplies 112,932 102,086 108,909 12,620 37,031 Total Supplies 583,182 631,853 653,600 672,324 697,635 Total Demands w/ Water Efficiency Savings 583,182 631,853 653,600 672,324 697,635 1 Normal water year demands based on 1960 – 2008 hydrology. The specific member agency local recycled water, potable reuse and brackish groundwater projects included in the figures are listed in Tables F-2 and F-4, respectively, in Appendix F. Also included in the Appendix are conceptual projects identified by the member agencies. DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 9-10 April 2016     Appendix I  District Code of Ordinance Section 39  Water Shortage Response Plan  39-1 SECTION 39. WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM 39.01 DECLARATION OF NECESSITY AND INTENT (a) This Section establishes water management requirements necessary to conserve water, enable effective water supply planning, assure reasonable and beneficial use of water, prevent waste of water, prevent unreasonable use of water, prevent unreasonable method of use of water within the District in order to assure adequate supplies of water to meet the needs of the public, and further the public health, safety, and welfare, recognizing that water is a scarce natural resource that requires careful management not only in times of a water shortage, but at all times. (b) This Section establishes regulations to be implemented during times of declared water shortages, or declared water shortage emergencies. It establishes four levels of actions to be implemented in times of shortage, with increasing restrictions on water use in response to worsening water shortage conditions and decreasing available supplies. (c) The Level 1 water shortage response condition practices are voluntary and will be reinforced through local and regional public education and awareness measures that may be funded in part by the District. Beginning at the level 2 Water Shortage Response Condition, the District may implement water shortage pricing. When a water shortage response Level 2 condition is declared, all conservation practices and water-use restrictions may become mandatory and increasingly restrictive in order to attain escalating conservation goals. (d) During a Water Shortage Response Level 3 condition or higher, the water conservation practices and water use restrictions established by this ordinance are mandatory and violations are subject to criminal, civil, and administrative penalties and remedies specified in Section 72 of this ordinance. Exhibit A-2 39-2 39.02 DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROGRAM (a) The following words and phrases whenever used in this Section shall have the meaning defined in this sub- section: 1. “Grower” refers to those engaged in the growing or raising, in conformity with recognized practices of husbandry, for the purpose of commerce, trade, or industry, or for use by public educational or correctional institutions, of agricultural, horticultural or floricultural products, and produced: (1) for human consumption or for the market, or (2) for the feeding of fowl or livestock produced for human consumption or for the market, or (3) for the feeding of fowl or livestock for the purpose of obtaining their products for human consumption or for the market. “Grower” does not refer to customers who purchase water subject to the Metropolitan Interim Agricultural Water Program or the Water Authority Special Agricultural Rate programs. 2. “Water Authority” means the San Diego County Water Authority. 3. “DMP” means the Water Authority’s Drought Management Plan in existence on the effective date of this Section and as readopted or amended from time to time, or an equivalent plan of the Water Authority to manage or allocate supplies during shortages. 4. “Metropolitan” means the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 5. “Person” means any natural person, corporation, public or private entity, public or private association, public or private agency, government agency or institution, school district, college, university, or any other user of water provided by the District. 39-3 39.03 APPLICATION (a) The provisions of this Section apply to any person in the use of any water provided by the District. (b) This Section is intended solely to further the conservation of water. It is not intended to implement any provision of federal, State, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations relating to protection of water quality or control of drainage or runoff. Refer to the local jurisdiction or Regional Water Quality Control Board for information on any storm water ordinances and storm water management plans. (c) Nothing in this Section is intended to affect or limit the ability of the District to declare and respond to an emergency, including an emergency that affects the ability of the District to supply water. (d) The provisions of this Section do not apply to use of water from private wells or to recycled water. (e) Nothing in this Section shall apply to use of water that is subject to a special supply program, such as the Metropolitan Interim Agricultural Water Program or the Water Authority Special Agricultural Rate programs. Violations of the conditions of special supply programs are subject to the penalties established under the applicable program. A person using water subject to a special supply program and other water provided by the District is subject to this Section in the use of the other water. (f) In addition, customers are encouraged not to wash down paved surfaces, including but not limited to sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, tennis courts, or patios, except when it is necessary to alleviate safety or sanitation hazards. At all times, the following practices shall be in effect: 1. Prevent water waste resulting from inefficient irrigation, such as runoff or overspray. Similarly, stop water flows 39-4 onto non-targeted areas, such as adjacent property, non-irrigated areas, hardscapes, roadways, or structures. 2. Serve and refill water in restaurants and other food service establishments only upon request. 3. Offer guests in hotels, motels, and other commercial lodging establishments the option of not laundering towels and linens daily. 4. Repair all water leaks within forty-eight hours (48) of notification by the District unless other arrangements are made with the General Manager or designee. 39.04 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 1 – SUPPLY WATCH CONDITION (a) A Water Shortage Response Level 1 condition is also referred to as a “Supply Watch” condition. A Level 1 condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its member agencies that due to water shortage or other supply reductions, there is a reasonable probability there will be supply shortages and that a consumer demand reduction of up to 10 percent is required in order to ensure that sufficient supplies will be available to meet anticipated demands. The General Manager shall declare the existence of a Level 1 and take action to implement the Level 1 conservation practices identified in this Section. (b) During a Level 1 condition, the District will increase its public education and outreach efforts to emphasize increased public awareness of the need to implement the following water conservation practices. The same water conservation practices may become mandatory if the District declares a Level 2 condition: 1. Irrigate residential and commercial landscape before 10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only. Customers are to water no more than three days a week using the suggested watering schedule as found on the District’s web page. New plantings and newly seeded areas are exempt for 30 days. 39-5 2. Use a hand-held hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle or bucket to water landscaped areas, including trees and shrubs located on residential and commercial properties that are not irrigated by a landscape irrigation system. 3. Irrigate nursery and commercial grower’s products before 10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only. Watering is permitted at any time with a hand-held hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle, a bucket, or when a drip/micro-irrigation system/equipment is used. Irrigation of nursery propagation beds is permitted at any time. Watering of livestock is permitted at any time. 4. Use re-circulated water to operate ornamental fountains. 5. Wash vehicles, including but not limited to motorcycles, farm equipment, trailers, boats and boat engines and motorhomes using a bucket and a hand-held hose with positive shut-off nozzle, mobile high pressure/low volume wash system, or at a commercial site that re-circulates (reclaims) water on-site. Vehicle washing is limited to once per week. 6. Use recycled or non-potable water for construction purposes when available. 39.05 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2 – SUPPLY ALERT CONDITION (a) A Water Shortage Response Level 2 condition is also referred to as a “Supply Alert” condition. A Level 2 condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its member agencies that due to cutbacks caused by water shortage or other reduction in supplies, a consumer demand reduction of 11 to 20 percent is required in order to have sufficient supplies available to meet anticipated demands. The District Board of Directors may declare the existence of a Level 2 condition and implement the Level 2 conservation practices identified in this section of the ordinance. The District may decide to implement some or all of the Level 1 practices. 39-6 (b) All persons using District water shall make every effort to comply with Level 1 water conservation practices during a Level 2, and also to comply with the following additional conservation measures: 1. Limit residential and commercial landscape irrigation to no more than three (3) days per week. This section shall not apply to homeowner’s vegetable gardens, fruit trees, commercial growers, or nurseries. 2. Limit lawn watering and landscape irrigation using sprinklers to no more than fifteen (15) minutes per watering station per day. During the months of November through April, landscape irrigation shall not exceed seven (7) minutes per water watering station per assigned day. Watering times may need to be shortened to avoid run-off. This provision does not apply to landscape irrigation systems using water efficient devices, including but not limited to: weather based controllers, drip/micro-irrigation systems, rotating sprinkler nozzles and stream rotor sprinklers. 3. Water landscaped areas, including trees and shrubs located on residential and commercial properties, and not irrigated by a landscape irrigation system on the same schedule set forth above by using a bucket, hand-held hose with positive shut- off nozzle, or low-volume non-spray irrigation. 4. Irrigation is not allowed during a rainstorm and for forty-eight hours after one-quarter inch or more of rainfall is measured at Lindbergh Field. No washing down of paved surfaces, including but not limited to sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, tennis courts, or patios, except when it is necessary to alleviate safety or sanitation hazards. 39.06 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 3 – SUPPLY CRITICAL CONDITION (a) A Water Shortage Response Level 3 condition is also referred to as a “Supply Critical” condition. A Level 3 condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its member agencies that due to increasing cutbacks caused by 39-7 water shortage or other reduction of supplies, a consumer demand reduction of between 21 and 40 percent is required in order to have sufficient supplies available to meet anticipated demands. The District Board of Directors may declare the existence of a Level 3 condition and implement the Level 3 conservation practices identified in this Section. (b) All persons using District water shall comply with Level 1 and Level 2 water conservation practices during a Level 3 condition and shall also comply with the following additional mandatory conservation measures: 1. Limit residential and commercial landscape irrigation to no more than two (2) assigned days per week on a schedule established by the General Manager or designee and posted by the District. During the months of November through April, landscape irrigation is limited to no more than once per week on a schedule established by the General Manager or designee and posted by the District. This section shall not apply to commercial growers or nurseries. 2. Water landscaped areas, including trees and shrubs located on residential and commercial properties, and not irrigated by a landscape irrigation system on the same schedule set forth above by using a bucket, hand-held hose with a positive shut-off nozzle, or low-volume non-spray irrigation. 3. Stop filling or re-filling ornamental lakes or ponds, except to the extent needed to sustain aquatic life, provided that such animals are of significant value and have been actively managed within the water feature prior to declaration of a water shortage response level under this Section. 4. Stop operating non-residential ornamental fountains or similar decorative water features unless recycled water is used. 5. Stop washing vehicles except at commercial carwashes that re-circulate water, or by high pressure/low volume wash systems. If a commercial car wash cannot accommodate the vehicle because of the vehicle size or type, such as RVs, horse trailers, boats and commercial vehicles, customers will be 39-8 allowed to wash vehicles using a bucket and a hand- held hose with positive shut-off nozzle, mobile high pressure/low volume wash system. (c) Upon the declaration of a Level 3 condition, the District may suspend new potable water service and statements of immediate ability to serve or provide potable water service (such as, will serve letters, certificates, or letters of availability) except under the following circumstances: 1. A valid, unexpired building permit has been issued for the project; or 2. The project is necessary to protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare; or 3. The applicant provides substantial evidence of an enforceable commitment that water demands for the project will be offset prior to the provision of a new water meter(s) to the satisfaction of the District. This provision shall not be construed to preclude the resetting or turn-on of meters to provide continuation of water service or to restore service that has been interrupted. (d) Upon the declaration of a Level 3 condition, the District will suspend consideration of annexations to its service area. (e) The District may establish a water allocation for property served by the District using a method that takes into consideration the implementation of conservation methods or the installation of water saving devices. If the District establishes a water allocation, it shall provide notice of the allocation by including it in the regular billing statement for the fee or charge or by any other mailing to the address to which the District customarily mails the billing statement for fees or charges for on-going water service. Following the effective date of the water allocation as established by the District, any person that uses water in excess of the allocation shall be subject to a penalty for each billing unit of water in excess of the allocation. The penalty for excess water 39-9 usage shall be cumulative to any other remedy or penalty that may be imposed for violation of this Section. 39.07 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 4 – SUPPLY EMERGENCY CONDITION (a) A Water Shortage Response Level 4 condition is also referred to as a “Supply Emergency” condition. A Level 4 condition applies when the Water Authority Board of Directors declares a water shortage emergency pursuant to California Water Code section 350 and notifies its member agencies that Level 4 requires a demand reduction of more than 40 percent in order for the District to have maximum supplies available to meet anticipated demands. The District shall declare a Level 4 in the manner and on the grounds provided in California Water Code section 350. (b) All persons using District water shall comply with conservation measures required during Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 conditions and shall also comply with the following additional mandatory conservation measures: 1. Stop all landscape irrigation, except crops and landscape products of commercial growers and nurseries. This restriction shall not apply to the following categories of use unless the District has determined that recycled water is available and may be lawfully applied to the use. A. Maintenance of trees and shrubs that are watered on the same schedule as noted in the Level 3 Condition, by using a bucket, hand-held hose with a positive shut-off nozzle, or low- volume non-spray irrigation; B. Maintenance of existing landscaping necessary for fire protection as specified by the Fire Marshal of the local fire protection agency having jurisdiction over the property to be irrigated; C. Maintenance of existing landscaping for erosion control; D. Maintenance of plant materials identified to be rare or essential to the well being of rare animals; 39-10 E. Maintenance of landscaping within active public parks and playing fields, day care centers, school grounds, cemeteries, and golf course greens, provided that such irrigation does not exceed two (2) days per week according to the schedule established under the District’s Level 3 Condition; F. Watering of livestock; and G. Public works projects and actively irrigated environmental mitigation projects. 2. Repair all water leaks within twenty-four (24) hours of notification by the District unless other arrangements are made with the District. (c) The District may establish a water allocation for property served by the District. If the District establishes water allocation it shall provide notice of the allocation by including it in the regular billing statement for the fee or charge or by any other mailing to the address to which the District customarily mails the billing statement for fees or charges for on-going water service. Following the effective date of the water allocation as established by the District, any person that uses water in excess of the allocation shall be subject to a penalty for each billing unit of water in excess of the allocation. The penalty for excess water usage shall be cumulative to any other remedy or penalty that may be imposed for violation of any provision of this Section. 39.08 CORRELATION BETWEEN DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN (DMP) AND WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVELS (a) The correlation between the Water Authority’s DMP stages and the District’s water shortage response levels identified in this Section of the Code of Ordinance is described herein. Under DMP Stage 1, the District would implement Water Shortage Response Level 1 actions. Under DMP Stage 2, the District would implement Water Shortage Response Level 1 or Level 2 actions. Under DMP Stage 3, the District would implement Water Shortage Response Level 2, Level 3, or Level 4 actions. 39-11 (b) The water shortage response levels identified in this Section correspond with the Water Authority DMP as identified in the following table: Water Shortage Response Levels Use Restrictions Conservation Target DMP Stage 1 - Supply Watch Voluntary Up to 10% Stage 1 or 2 2 - Supply Alert Mandatory 11 to 20% Stage 2 or 3 3 - Supply Critical Mandatory 21 to 40% Stage 3 4 - Supply Emergency Mandatory Above 40% Stage 3 39.09 PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINATION AND NOTIFICATION OF WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL (a) The existence of a Water Shortage Response Level 1 condition may be declared by the General Manager upon a written determination of the existence of the facts and circumstances supporting the determination. A copy of the written determination shall be filed with the Clerk or Secretary of the District and provided to the District Board of Directors. The General Manager may publish a notice of the determination of existence of Water Shortage Response Level 1 condition in one or more newspapers, including a newspaper of general circulation within the District. The District will also post notice of the condition on their website. (b) The existence of Water Shortage Response Level 2 or Level 3 conditions may be declared by resolution of the District Board of Directors adopted at a regular or special public meeting held in accordance with State law. The mandatory conservation measures applicable to Water Shortage Response Level 2 or Level 3 conditions shall take effect on the tenth (10) day after the date the response level is declared. Within five (5) days following the declaration of the response level, the District shall publish a copy of the resolution in a newspaper used for publication of official notices. (c) The existence of a Water Shortage Response Level 4 condition may be declared in accordance with the procedures specified in California Water Code sections 350 to 352 as note below: 39-12 350. The governing body of a distributor of a public water supply, whether publicly or privately owned and including a mutual water company, may declare a water shortage emergency condition to prevail within the area served by such distributor whenever it finds and determines that the ordinary demands and requirements of water consumers cannot be satisfied without depleting the water supply of the distributor to the extent that there would be insufficient water for human consumption, sanitation, and fire protection. 351. Except in event of a breakage or failure of a dam, pump, Pipe line or conduit causing an immediate emergency, the declaration shall be made only after a public hearing at which consumers of such water supply shall have an opportunity to be heard to protest against the declaration and to present their respective needs to said governing board. 352. Notice of the time and place of hearing shall be published pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code at least seven days prior to the date of hearing in a newspaper printed, published, and circulated within the area in which the water supply is distributed, or if there is no such newspaper, in any newspaper printed, published, and circulated in the county in which the area is located. The mandatory conservation measures applicable to Water Shortage Response Level 4 conditions shall take effect on the tenth (10) day after the date the response level is declared. Within five (5) days following the declaration of the response level, the District shall publish a copy of the resolution in a newspaper used for publication of official notices. If the District establishes a water allocation, it shall provide notice of the allocation by including it in the regular billing statement for the fee or charge or by any other mailing to the address to which the District customarily mails the billing statement for fees or charges for on-going water service. Water allocation shall be effective on the fifth (5) day following the date of mailing or at such later date as specified in the notice. (d) The District Board of Directors may declare an end to a Water Shortage Response Level by the adoption of a resolution at any regular or special meeting held in accordance with State law.     Appendix J  District Code of Ordinance Section 72  Penalties and Damages  SECTION 72 PENALTIES AND DAMAGES 72.01 GENERAL A. User and Owner Responsibility. Each person receiving service, or that owns a property that receives service, agrees to pay the District any applicable fees and charges. Such persons are also responsible for all costs and damages in connection with any violation of this Code relating to their service. B. District Not Liable. The District shall bear no liability for any cost, damage, claim or expense incurred by District or any responsible party or third party on behalf of the District arising from or related to any violation, including, but not limited to, costs, damages, claims or expenses arising from any corrective action of the District. Such corrective actions include, but are not limited to, the removal, confiscation, disposition or use of any device, equipment, improvement or material encroaching on any District property or used in connection with any other violation. C. District Obligation to Collect Damages. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.6, the District shall take all practical and reasonable steps, including appropriate legal action, if necessary, to recover civil damages for the negligent, willful, or unlawful damaging or taking of property of the District. D. Assessment of Damages. Actual damages resulting from any violation, including late payment or failure or refusal to pay for service and any interest thereon, may be assessed and collected as part of a customer’s monthly bill to the extent allowed by law. The District will separately invoice any actual damages not assessed on a monthly bill, including any damages assessed against any responsible person who is not a customer. E. Unpaid or Partially Paid Bills. Bills issued by the District are due in full as provided in such bills. Failure to timely pay bills in full may lead to a reduction, suspension, or termination of service, as provided in Section 72.02(B), below, in Section 34 of this Code, or pursuant to other provisions of this Code or applicable law. In addition, if bills remain unpaid, in full or in part, the District may lien the delinquent real property and may assess damages and penalties established by District or otherwise authorized by law. 72.02 VIOLATIONS AND GENERAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS A. Notice of Violation. Notice and a reasonable period of time to correct a violation will be given prior to the termination, reduction or suspension of service or the imposition of any administrative fine. However, the District may, without notice, correct any condition or violation that endangers the health or safety or impairs any District service, facility or property or is otherwise determined by the District to require immediate action. 1. Investigative Procedures. If a possible violation is identified, observed or reported, the District will contact the allegedly responsible party to investigate. If the violation is in fact occurring, District staff will issue a notice of violation or otherwise inform the responsible party that corrective actions must be taken within a period of time deemed reasonable by the District, taking into consideration the nature of the violation and the potential damage that can arise if the violation continues. 2. Content of Notice of Violation. The notice will describe the violation, indicate the actions that must be taken, and indicate the date by which those actions must be taken. Unless immediate action is required, the notice will provide a reasonable time for the violation to be corrected. The notice will also specify the amount of any delinquency, actual damages or other amounts due the District, if any, and the telephone number of a representative of the District who can provide additional information. 3. No Notice Required; District Action. If the District determines that immediate or prompt correction of the violation is necessary to prevent waste or to maintain the integrity of the water supply, systems or facilities of the District, or for the immediate protection of the health, safety or welfare of persons or property, or for any other compelling reason, the District will take any action deemed necessary (including suspension, reduction or termination of service; locking or removal of meters; or repairs of any improvements) and a notice will be left at the affected parcel specifying any further corrective actions required. Any costs incurred by District and any applicable fines will be the responsibility of the responsible party. 4. Notice; Failure to Comply. The responsible party will be given an opportunity to correct the violation and to provide verbal, written and pictorial exculpatory evidence. If such evidence does not exonerate the responsible parties and if the violation(s) are not corrected to the satisfaction of the District within the time provided, the District may assess cost and penalties, administrative fines and may take any other action or pursue any other remedy available. Furthermore, if the violation concerns any service requirement or facility, or to prevent waste or protect the integrity of the system or the health and safety of the public, the District may suspend, reduce or terminate service to the extent permitted by law. B. Service Termination, Suspension or Reduction; Removing or Locking Meters. Service may be reduced, suspended or terminated for failure to pay for service or in connection with a violation of this Code or applicable law. Termination, suspension or reduction of service will proceed as follows: 1. Notice Prior to Termination, Suspension or Reduction of Service. Except as provided in Paragraph A, above, or in other provisions of this Code or applicable law, not less than ten (10) days notice will be given prior to the date service is reduced, suspended or terminated; provided that, where service is terminated due to failure to comply with the terms of an amortization agreement, under Section 34 of this Code, only forty-eight (48) hours prior notice is required. The notice will be delivered to the affected parcel and, if the owner of record does not reside in the affected parcel, a copy of the notice will be forwarded to the owner’s address on record with the assessor’s office via any available means, such as personal delivery, certified mail return receipt requested, email, fax or fed-ex. 2. Termination for failure to pay for service. The District may discontinue any or all service due to failure to pay the whole or any part of a bill issued by the District. In connection with termination of water service, the provisions of Section 60373 of the Government Code, or any other appropriate provision of law, or as set forth in Section 34 of this Code of Ordinance, will be followed. In connection with sewer, Section 71672 of the California Water Code or other applicable requirements will be followed. C. Reconnection or Reinstatement of Service, Unlocking or Reinstalling Meters. If service is reduced, suspended or terminated for any reason, each of the following conditions applicable to the situation must be satisfied or arrangements satisfactory to the General Manager or a designee must be made before service is reinstated: 1. Outstanding amounts for service bills, including any service charges for benefits derived from the violation, must be paid; 2. All required deposits (including any security deposits), actual damages, fines, costs, charges and penalties must be paid; 3. Any amounts due for the removal, locking, servicing, repair or replacement of meters or other facilities required for service must be paid at the rates in effect at the time of reinstatement, as set forth on Appendix A to this Code or other schedule of fees then in effect; 4. All violations and related damages or conditions must have been corrected and/or repaired and evidence satisfactory to the District to that effect and demonstrating that it is safe to reinstate service, must have been provided to and approved by the District; and 5. If the service was originally in the name of a tenant, the District may require the owner of the parcel to request the service account under his or her name and responsibility. D. Owner Responsibility for Account. In addition to owners’ obligations under subsection (A) of section 72.01 and subsection (C)(5) of Section 72.02, above, and any other remedies provided by this Code or by applicable law, Owners may be required to deliver to the District a form of acknowledgement or authorization for service to a tenant. In addition, if (i) a tenant engages in any violation, (ii) if the District has reduced, suspended or terminated any service to a tenant three (3) times within any twenty-four (24) month period or (iii) the tenant has failed or refuses to comply with the terms of payment arrangements with the District four (4) times, the District reserves the right to demand that the property owner take responsibility for services to the tenant- occupied parcel. The General Manager or a designee shall develop procedures to implement these requirements. E. Right of Access to Customer’s Premises; Interference. If any person refuses to consent to an investigation of a possible violation, or prevents or refuses to allow access to District staff or authorized representatives to any premises or facility during an investigation or in connection with any termination, reduction or suspension of service, the District may seek an injunction or a warrant, as provided in Section 71601 of the Water Code. F. Other Remedies. In addition to the actions contemplated in this Section, the District may seek other remedies authorized or required by any applicable law, including imposing an administrative fine, pursuant to Section 72.06, or pursuing other available civil or criminal remedies. 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS A. Unauthorized Connections. The District shall bear no cost or liability for any unauthorized connection. In addition to other remedies, any unauthorized connection is subject to a Type II fine, pursuant to Section 72.06 depending upon the severity, duration and reoccurrence of the violation and any other factors the District may reasonably take into consideration.., Further, the District may demand that the unauthorized connection be immediately disconnected. In the alternative, if the customer refuses to take immediate action, or if immediate actions is necessary as set forth in Section 72.02(A)(3), above, the District may immediately disconnect, remove, confiscate, destroy or dispose of any parts installed or used for the unauthorized connection, all at the expense of the customer and any other responsible party. To the extent allowed by law, the District may also, immediately or as otherwise deemed advisable by the District, terminate service to any parcel and any person that allows, uses or benefits from such unauthorized connection. B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property, engaging in non-permitted uses of water, or failing to take corrective action after notice of any leaks or water waste is given. If the District determines that water waste is occurring, the District will: 1. Notify the customer that they are in violation of the District’s Code of Ordinances. 2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the District may, without prior notice, repair or replace any District controlled facilities at the cost of the person identified as the responsible party, if any. 3. If the water waste is due to a condition within the customer’s property or facilities, the District may (i) require the customer to repair or replace the affected facilities, immediately or within a reasonable time, depending on the situation; or (ii) if necessary to prevent further waste, adjust, lock or remove the meter. If any repair or replacement required is not completed in a timely manner, the District may perform the repair or replacement at the cost of the customer or may terminate service without further notice. C. Meter Tampering. In addition to other remedies, tampering is subject to a Type II fine pursuant to Section 72.06 depending upon the severity, duration and reoccurrence of the violation and any other factors the District may reasonably take into consideration. Additionally, tampering may be prosecuted as a crime under Section 498 of the California Penal Code, as set forth in Section 73.01 of this Code. D. Fire Service Violation. Fire service is subject to compliance with all provisions of this Code and the law concerning water service, and failure to comply with such provisions may result in the reduction, suspension, termination or disconnection of water service for fire protection, without any liability to District. Furthermore, illegal connections or other violations relating to fire service are subject to either a Type I or Type II fine, at the option of the District, and may be prosecuted as crimes. E. Backflow prevention, screens and other safety devices. If service requirements include the installation, testing and maintenance of backflow prevention devices (Section 23.04 of this Code), screens or other safety operational items, in addition to, or in lieu of, other remedies provided herein, the District may apply any of the remedies under Section VI and VII of the District’s Ordinance No. 386, as amended or renumbered. Furthermore, violations relating to backflow testing may be prosecuted as set forth in Section 73.01 of this Code. Violations of backflow requirements or knowingly filing a false statement or report required by a local health officer are subject to either a Type I or Type II fine, at the option of the District, pursuant to Section 72.06, below. F. Violation Concerning Recycled Water Service. In addition to any fine, revocation, suspension or penalty imposed under Section 26 in connection with any violation of said Section, including permit suspension or revocation under Section 26.07.C, the District may (i) suspend or terminate water and or sewer service to the property, the owner and/or the operator; (ii) require payment by the owner for any damage to the District facilities, reimbursement to District of costs and expenses, or fines imposed on the District in connection with such violation; or (iii) prosecute the responsible party under any applicable provision of this Code, the Water Code or the Penal Code. Additionally, any violation concerning recycled water service is subject to either a Type I or Type II fine, at the option of the District, pursuant to Section 72.06, below. G. Violation Concerning Sewer Service. In addition to any other remedy, fine or penalty provided by this Code or applicable law, failure to comply with any requirements of sewer service, including requirements for the preservation of public health, safety and welfare and including, but not limited to, the requirements established under Article II, Chapter 2, Sections 50 to 56.04 of this Code, as hereafter amended or as supplemented by other District Rules and Regulations for Sewer Service, the California Health and Safety Code, the California Code of Regulations, Titles 17 and 22, and Water Agency Standards. Furthermore, may be prosecuted as set forth in Section 73.01 of this Code. Additionally, any violation concerning sewer service is subject to a Type I or Type II fine, at the option of the District, pursuant to Section 72.06, below. H. Theft, Fraud, or Misappropriation. In addition to any other remedy, fine or penalty provided by this Code or applicable law, any violation involving theft, fraud or misappropriation of District water, services, or property is subject to a Type I or Type II fine, at the option of the District, pursuant to Section 72.06, below. 72.04 VIOLATIONS OF CONSERVATION OR OTHER WATER USE RESTRICTION PROVISIONS The District has established and published conservation measures set forth in Section 39 of the Code. Commencing with declared Level 2 conditions, the District may assess water shortage rates and charges previously adopted. In addition, after notice of the declared water shortage level is given as required by law, any person who uses, causes to be used, or permits the use of water in violation of such requirements (other than a person who qualifies for an applicable exemption, if any) may be assessed damages, penalties and fines. A. Additional provisions concerning use restriction violations. In addition to payment of actual damages, the following may apply to a violation of any water conservation or water use restriction measure: 1. A change on the account holder shall not cause the account to revert to pre-violation status unless the new account holder provides evidence that it is not related to the violator and had no responsibility for the prior account. 2. The District may reduce, suspend or terminate service to any parcel immediately and without further notice if the violation involves or results in water waste, as set for in Section 72.03(B), above. 3. Willful violations of mandatory conservation measures described in Section 39 of this Code may be enforced by terminating service to the property at which the violation occurs, as provided by Section 356 of the California Water Code. B. Prosecution for violations of conservation measures. Pursuant to Section 377 and 71644 of the California Water Code, each violation of the District’s Conservation Ordinance, set fort in Section 39 of this Code, may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the County jail for no more than thirty (30) days or by a fine, as set forth in subsection (C), below. C. Assessment of fines for violations of conservation or water use restriction provisions. Any responsible party who fails to comply with any conservation or use restriction measure is subject to the assessment of an administrative Type I fine, added to account, pursuant to Section 72.06, below. 72.05 VIOLATIONS INVOLVING DISTRICT REAL PROPERTY A. Removal, Disposition and Costs. The District has absolute discretion to determine the corrective action required in connection with any violation involving District real property, including requiring the owner of any unauthorized encroachment or improvement to remove it or taking action to remove it immediately and without notice. Any improvements or uses placed within or on any District property or right of way are subject to the following: 1. Costs and Damages. All costs and damages shall be the responsibility of the customer and any other responsible party. Furthermore, the District shall not be liable for costs to repair or replace any unauthorized encroachment or improvement, or any property, improvement or thing used in connection with, supported by or attached thereto. 2. Burden of proof. The burden shall be on the user to prove to the District’s satisfaction, the authority, scope and extent of any right to access, improve or use the District’s property. Only written evidence in the form of an agreement, deed, statute, recorded or official map or plat, governmental regulation or other right may be used to establish such claim of right. B. Notice. In connection with any improvement or use that does not constitute a health hazard and does not interfere with the District’s use of its property, the District will give written notice of up to sixty (60) days, at the discretion of the General Manager, to cease, terminate, eliminate or remove the offending improvement, structure or use. Any written notice will be given to the responsible party or posted at the property where the trespass or encroachment occurs. If the responsible party is not the owner of any real property affected by the violation, the District will also give notice to the owner of record at the address on record with the assessor’s office via personal delivery, certified mail return receipt requested or via Fed-Ex. C. Immediate action. In connection with any improvement that constitutes a health hazard or interferes with the District’s use of any District property, the District will take any immediate action deemed necessary by the General Manager. D. Fines. In addition to all other remedies provided under this Article or under applicable law, the District may impose a fine as provided in Section 72.06. Additionally, the District may impose a fine up to either the amount specified on any sign, or a Type I or Type II fine, at the option of the District, in connection with any trespass on District property in violation of a sign prohibiting trespassing, pursuant to Section 72.06, below. E. Separate violation. A separate violation will accrue for each day after the deadline to cease, terminate, eliminate or remove the trespass or encroachment, as set forth in the notice. 72.06 ADMINISTRATIVE FINES Any administrative fines established herein shall be in the nature of civil penalties and shall be additional and cumulative to any other fines, damages or any other charges established by the District and are also separate from and cumulative to any other civil or criminal penalty, fine or remedy. In connection with each violation, the District may assess a fine up to the amount specified in the schedule of fines for the type of fine being imposed. Each day during which a violation is in effect constitutes a separate violation and violations are cumulative while the account is in the name of the original violator or any person that participated in or benefited from the violation. Except where the violation creates an immediate danger to health or safety, the person responsible for the continuing violation will be provided a reasonable period of time to correct or otherwise remedy the violation(s) prior to the imposition of administrative fines. A. Assessment of Fines for Technical Violations of Other Code Provisions. Any person who engages in a violation of any provision of this Code is subject to the assessment of a separate administrative Type I Fine, unless subject to a more severe fine as set forth in this Code. B. Assessment of Separate Fines. Nothing in this code or the limits specified per violation shall prevent the imposition of separate fines for each separate violation committed during a single act. For example, in connection with a violation concerning sewer service that involves a trespass on any portion of the District’s real property, separate fines may be assessed for the trespass, the damage to District personal property, the damage to District real property; the damage to the sewer system and the activity resulting on all the damages. C. Types of Fines. The amount for each type of fine specified below may increase automatically to reflect any higher amount authorized by law or regulation. The District has determined to establish two types of fines based on the nature of the violation, as follows: 1. Type I Fine. Any violation that does not have the potential to endanger the health or safety of the public. The fine will not exceed the amount specified in the Section 36900(b) of the California Government Code or Appendix A for a first, second, third or each additional violation of that same ordinance or requirement within a twelve-month period. 2. Type II Fine. Any violation that has the potential to endanger the health or safety, including, but not limited to, unauthorized or illegal connections, meter tampering, water theft, , or knowingly filing a false statement or report required by a local health officer . The fine will not exceed the amount specified on Appendix A per each day the violation is identified or continues. D. Collection of Fines. Any fines assessed by the District are payable directly to the District, are due upon issuance or as otherwise indicated on the notice or bill, and are delinquent 30 calendar days from the due date. E. Notice of Administrative Fine; Content. Notice of an administrative fine pursuant to this section will contain the following information: (i) a brief description of the violation(s); (ii) the date and location of the violation(s); (iii) a brief description of corrective action(s) required, as appropriate; (iv) a statement explaining that each day the violation continues constitutes a new violation; (v) in the case of violations creating an immediate danger to health or safety, the amount of civil penalty assessed or, in all other cases, the amount of civil penalty to be assessed if the violation(s) are not corrected within the time provided by the notice; (vi) a statement of the procedure for payment and the consequences of failure to pay; (vii) contact information for the District employee that should be contacted to discuss the notice and provide evidence of compliance; and (viii) a brief statement describing the responsible party’s right to request further review, pursuant to subsection (F), below. F. Option for Board Review . Persons receiving a Notice of Administrative Fine may request Board review. The request for Board consideration must be in writing, must be received by the District Secretary within ten (10) calendar days from the date of the notice and must include contact information, an explanation of the basis for the request, and any supporting documentation said person(s) wish to provide to the Board for review and consideration. District staff will review the petitioner’s request and will make a recommendation to the Board in light of its investigation. The District will provide notice of the date, time and place for Board consideration by electronic means, facsimile or first class mail sent to the return addressee indicated on the written request. G. Any fines assessed pursuant to the Notice of Administrative Fines must be timely paid notwithstanding the filing of a request for Board review. At the time of Board review, the petitioner may, address the Board and respond to the charges to show good cause why the fine should not be imposed; however, the customer is not entitled to a full judicial-type hearing with cross examination, sworn testimony, etc. In accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 53069.4, the Board’s determination shall be final and conclusive, and shall be deemed confirmed, if not appealed within 20 calendar days to the Superior Court of the County of San Diego.     Appendix K  BMP Reports 2011‐2014        GPCD in 2012: GPCD Target for 2018: 127.27 Biennial GPCD Compliance Table Year 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Report 1 2 3 4 5 % Base 96.4% 92.8% 89.2% 85.6% 82.0% GPCD 186.09 179.14 172.19 165.24 158.29 % Base 100% 96.4% 92.8% 89.2% 82.0% GPCD 193.04 186.09 179.14 172.19 158.29 Target Highest Acceptable Bound 179 Otay Water District 158.29 GPCD in 2006:199.6 ON TRACK CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2012 1. Conservation Coordinator provided with necessary resources to implement BMPs? Name: Title: Email: Water Conservation Program Manager William Granger richard.namba@otaywater.gov 2. Water Waste Prevention Documents Otay Water District179 WW Document Name WWP File Name WW Prevention URL WW Prevention Ordinance Terms Description Option A Describe the ordinances or terms of service adopted by your agency to meet the water waste prevention requirements of this BMP. 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property Option B Describe any water waste prevention ordinances or requirements adopted by your local jurisdiction or regulatory agencies within your service area. Option C Describe any documentation of support for legislation or regulations that prohibit water waste. Option D Describe your agency efforts to cooperate with other entities in the adoption or enforcement of local requirements consistent with this BMP. Option E Describe your agency support positions with respect to adoption of legislation or regulations that are consistent with this BMP. Option F Describe your agency efforts to support local ordinances that establish permits requirements for water efficient design in new development. At Least As effective As No BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational Best Managemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2011 ON TRACK Exemption Comments: No 0 BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational Best Managemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2011 ON TRACK 1. Conservation Coordinator provided with necessary resources to implement BMPs? Name: Title: Email: Water Conservation Specialist Richard Namba richard.namba@otaywater.gov 2. Water Waste Prevention Documents Otay Water District179 WW Document Name WWP File Name WW Prevention URL WW Prevention Ordinance Terms Description Option A Describe the ordinances or terms of service adopted by your agency to meet the water waste prevention requirements of this BMP. SECTION 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property ... Option B Describe any water waste prevention ordinances or requirements adopted by your local jurisdiction or regulatory agencies within your service area. Option C Describe any documentation of support for legislation or regulations that prohibit water waste. Option D Describe your agency efforts to cooperate with other entities in the adoption or enforcement of local requirements consistent with this BMP. Option E Describe your agency support positions with respect to adoption of legislation or regulations that are consistent with this BMP. Option F Describe your agency efforts to support local ordinances that establish permits requirements for water efficient design in new development. San Diego County's Planning Department's Water Efficient Landscape permitting process that considers MAWA and ETWU standards adopted by California's Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance At Least As effective As No BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational Best Managemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2012 ON TRACK Exemption Comments: No 0 BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational Best Managemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2012 ON TRACK 179 Otay Water District Completed Standard Water Audit Using AWWA Software?Yes AWWA File provided to CUWCC?Yes Otay 2011 AWWA Reporting Worksheet.xls AWWA Water Audit Validity Score? 83 Complete Training in AWWA Audit Method Yes Complete Training in Component Analysis Process? Yes Component Analysis? No Repaired all leaks and breaks to the extent cost effective? Yes Locate and Repar unreported leaks to the extent cost effective? Yes Maintain a record keeping system for the repair of reported leaks, including time of report, leak location, type of leaking pipe segment or fitting, and leak running time from report to repair.Yes CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2011 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control ON TRACK Provided 7 Types of Water Loss Control Info Leaks Repairs Value Real Losses Value Apparent Losses Miles Surveyed Press Reduction Cost Of Interventions Water Saved (AF) Comments: At Least As effective As No 0NoExemption 179 Otay Water District Completed Standard Water Audit Using AWWA Software?Yes AWWA File provided to CUWCC?Yes Otay 2012 AWWA Reporting Worksheet.xls AWWA Water Audit Validity Score? 78 Complete Training in AWWA Audit Method Yes Complete Training in Component Analysis Process? Yes Component Analysis? No Repaired all leaks and breaks to the extent cost effective? Yes Locate and Repar unreported leaks to the extent cost effective? Yes Maintain a record keeping system for the repair of reported leaks, including time of report, leak location, type of leaking pipe segment or fitting, and leak running time from report to repair.Yes CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2012 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control ON TRACK Provided 7 Types of Water Loss Control Info Leaks Repairs Value Real Losses Value Apparent Losses Miles Surveyed Press Reduction Cost Of Interventions Water Saved (AF) Comments: At Least As effective As No 0NoExemption 179 Otay Water District Numbered Unmetered Accounts No Metered Accounts billed by volume of use Yes Number of CII Accounts with Mixed Use Meters 2231 Conducted a feasibility study to assess merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? Yes Feasibility Study provided to CUWCC?Yes Completed a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters Yes Comments: Date: Uploaded file name: 2/28/2013 Copy_of_MUM_Final_Report_Nov_2012.docx At Least As effective As Yes Refer to GPCD On track report below 2NoExemption BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2011 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency ON TRACK 179 Otay Water District Numbered Unmetered Accounts No Metered Accounts billed by volume of use Yes Number of CII Accounts with Mixed Use Meters 993 Conducted a feasibility study to assess merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? Yes Feasibility Study provided to CUWCC?Yes Completed a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters Yes Comments: Date: Uploaded file name: 11/30/2012 MUM Final Report Nov 2012.docx At Least As effective As Yes Refer to 2010 GPCD on track report below 0NoExemption BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2012 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency ON TRACK Use Canadian Water Wastewater Association Rate Design ModelImplementation Option: Implementation (Water Rate Structure) 179 Otay Water District YesAgency Provide Sewer Service: Customer Class Water Rate Type Conserving Rate? (V) Total Revenue Comodity Charges (M) Total Revenue Fixed Carges 5 4 9 Other Increasing Block Yes 33877300 10163190 33877300 10163190 77Calculate: V / (V + M)% Customer Class Rate Type Conserving Rate? Other Increasing Block Yes Canadian Water and Wastewater Association Use 3 years average instead of most recent year Upload file: Comments: 0NoExemption District GPCD graph illustrates on target to meet target standard YesAt Least As effective As BMP 1.4 Retail Consrvation Pricing CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2011 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency On Track Use Canadian Water Wastewater Association Rate Design ModelImplementation Option: Implementation (Water Rate Structure) 179 Otay Water District YesAgency Provide Sewer Service: Customer Class Water Rate Type Conserving Rate? (V) Total Revenue Comodity Charges (M) Total Revenue Fixed Carges 9 2 4 Other Increasing Block Yes 39385200 18523600 39385200 18523600 68Calculate: V / (V + M)% Customer Class Rate Type Conserving Rate? Other Increasing Block Yes Canadian Water and Wastewater Association Use 3 years average instead of most recent year Upload file: Comments: 0NoExemption Review 2012 GPCD historical progress report YesAt Least As effective As BMP 1.4 Retail Consrvation Pricing CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2012 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency On Track 179 Otay Water District Retail The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Description of all other Public Outreach programs p Public Outreach Program List Number 3 1 0 4 6 0 Newsletter articles on conservation 200000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 250000 Website 12000 Landscape water conservation media campaigns 2400 Total 464400 Number Media Contacts Number Articles or stories resulting from outreach 4 Television contacts 2 Total 6 Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount Public Programs 13000 Total Amount:13000 Public Outreah Additional Programs Bill stuffers Newsletter Otay provided residential & commercial surveys Does your agency perform Public Outreach programs?Yes Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Did at least one contact take place during each quater of the reporting year?Yes Did at least one contact take place during each quater of the reporting year?Yes Did at least one website update take place during each quater of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Program Annual Budget Joint water agency workshops & outreach events Comments: The name of agency, contact name and email address if not CUWCC Group 1 members CUWCC BMP Coverage Report BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2011 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency On Track At Least As effective As No No 0Exemption CUWCC BMP Coverage Report BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2011 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency On Track 179 Otay Water District Retail The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Description of all other Public Outreach programs p Public Outreach Program List Number 3 1 2 0 1 2 Newsletter articles on conservation 200000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 250000 Website 20000 Landscape water conservation media campaigns 5000 Total 475000 Number Media Contacts Number News releases 12 Articles or stories resulting from outreach 2 Total 14 Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount Total Budget 40000 Total Amount:40000 Public Outreah Additional Programs Bill stuffers Newsletter Otay provided residential& commercial surveys Website Does your agency perform Public Outreach programs?Yes Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Did at least one contact take place during each quater of the reporting year?Yes Did at least one contact take place during each quater of the reporting year?Yes Did at least one website update take place during each quater of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Program Annual Budget Home Depot WaterSmart Plant Fairs The name of agency, contact name and email address if not CUWCC Group 1 members CUWCC BMP Coverage Report BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2012 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency ON TRACK Comments: At Least As effective As No No 0Exemption CUWCC BMP Coverage Report BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2012 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency ON TRACK 179 Otay Water District Retail Materials meet state education framework requirements? Splash and Wet outdoor education modules Materials distributed to K-6? 2 children's activity books provided. Water books available for lending to teachers. Water experiential teaching resource box available for check out by teachers. Materials distributed to 7-12 students? (Info Only) Annual budget for school education program:34300.00 Description of all other water supplier education programs Water conservation themed workshops & seminars provided for residential & commercial customers. Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority NoDoes your agency implement School Education programs? The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Yes Yes Yes National Geographic water conservation themed booklets provided Comments: At Least As effective As No Exemption 0No BMP 2.2 School Education Programs CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2011 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency ON TRACK 179 Otay Water District Retail Materials meet state education framework requirements? SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules Materials distributed to K-6? 2 -3 children's water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Materials distributed to 7-12 students? (Info Only) Annual budget for school education program:25600.00 Description of all other water supplier education programs Splash Lab or Green Machine funding. Water conservation classes for residential or commercial customers. Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority YesDoes your agency implement School Education programs? The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Yes Yes Yes National Geographic water conservation themed booklets provided. Comments: Refer to GPCD progress that illustrates the District is on track At Least As effective As Yes Exemption 0No BMP 2.2 School Education Programs CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2012 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency ON TRACK Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Reporting unit name : Base Year 2008 Reporting unit number: 179 BMP 1.3 Metering Number of unmetered accounts in Base Year BMP 3.1 & BMP 3.2 & BMP 3.3 Residential Programs Number of Single Family Customers and Multy Family Customers BMP 3.4 WaterSense Specification (WSS) Toilets Number of Single Family Units and Number of Multi Family Units Average number of toilets per Single Family household and Multi Family households Five year average resale rate of Single Family households and Multi Family households Average number of persons per Single Family households and Multi Family households BMP 4.0 & BMP 5.0 CII & Landscape Total water use (in Acre Feet) by CII accounts Number of accounts with dedicated irrigation meters Number of CII accounts without meters or with Mixed Use Meters Number of CII accounts Comments Resale average obtained from Richard D'Ascoli, Chief Executive Officer, The Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS. The whole basis for this calculation assumes that the homes for sale still have 3.5 gpf toilets In reality, the majority of the homes for sale in our service area were built after 1992, plus just over 22,000 toilets were retrofit through our rebate program that ran from 1991-2010. The resale rate in portions of our service area are high due to foreclosures, which drives up the average. Zip codes with a high resale rate already have ULFTs. Zip codes used: 91913, 91914, 91915, 91978. 0.00 40,698 6,23623,625 3,432 1.70 1.30 4.90 7.7000 3.50 2.70 4,268.19 1,813.00 422.00 1,416.00 in Base Year prior to 1992 Base Year Data Conservation Coordinator:Yes First Name:William Contact Information Last Name:Granger Title:Water Conservation Program Manager Phone:619/670-2730 Email:richard.namba@otaywater.gov Water Waste Prevention Otay Water District Reporting unit name (District name)Reporting unit number: 179 WW Document Name WWP File Name WW Prevention URL WW Prevention Ordinance Terms Description Option A Describe the ordinances or terms of service adopted by your agency to meet the water waste prevention requirements of this BMP. 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property Option B Describe any water waste prevention ordinances or requirements adopted by your local jurisdiction or regulatory agencies within your service area. Option C Describe any documentation of support for legislation or regulations that prohibit water waste. Option D Describe your agency efforts to cooperate with other entities in the adoption or enforcement of local requirements consistent with this BMP. Option E Describe your agency support positions with respect to adoption of legislation or regulations that are consistent with this BMP. Option F Describe your agency efforts to support local ordinances that establish permits requirements for water efficient design in new development. BMP1.1 Operation Practices - Retail Only 2011 Comments: At Least As effective As No 0NoExemption BMP1.1 Operation Practices - Retail Only 2011 Conservation Coordinator:Yes First Name:Richard Contact Information Last Name:Namba Title:Water Conservation Specialist Phone:619/670-2730 Email:richard.namba@otaywater.gov Water Waste Prevention Otay Water District Reporting unit name (District name)Reporting unit number: 179 WW Document Name WWP File Name WW Prevention URL WW Prevention Ordinance Terms Description Option A Describe the ordinances or terms of service adopted by your agency to meet the water waste prevention requirements of this BMP. SECTION 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property ... Option B Describe any water waste prevention ordinances or requirements adopted by your local jurisdiction or regulatory agencies within your service area. Option C Describe any documentation of support for legislation or regulations that prohibit water waste. Option D Describe your agency efforts to cooperate with other entities in the adoption or enforcement of local requirements consistent with this BMP. Option E Describe your agency support positions with respect to adoption of legislation or regulations that are consistent with this BMP. BMP1.1 Operation Practices - Retail Only 2012 Comments: Option F Describe your agency efforts to support local ordinances that establish permits requirements for water efficient design in new development. San Diego County's Planning Department's Water Efficient Landscape permitting process that considers MAWA and ETWU standards adopted by California's Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance At Least As effective As No 0NoExemption BMP1.1 Operation Practices - Retail Only 2012 AWWA Water Audit Otay Water District Agency to complete a Water Audit & Balance Using The AWWA Software Uploaded filename: Otay 2011 AWWA Reporting Worksheet.xls 83 Agency Completed Training In The AWWA Water Audit Method Agency Completed Training In The Component Analysis Process Completed/Updated the Component Analysis (at least every 4 years)? Component Analysis Completed/Updated Date Water Loss Performance Agency Repaired All Reported Leaks & Breaks To The Extent Cost Effective Agency Located and Repaired Unreported Leaks to the Extent Cost Effective Type of Program Activities Used to Detect Unreported Leaks Does your agency maintain in-house records of audit results or the completed AWWA worksheet for the completed audit which could be forwarded to CUWCC? Does your agency keeps records of each component analysis performed, and incorporates results into future annual standard water balances? Annual Summary Information Complete the following table with annual summary information (required for reporting years 2-5 only) Yes Water Audit Validity Score from AWWA spreadsheet: 179 Reporting unit name Reporting unit number: Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Please describe your infrastructure rehabilitation and renewal activity below Water operations staff will provide data AWWA Model Operational Efficiency Indicator Apparent Losses per service connection per day:1.41 Real Losses per service connection per day:16.5 N/A Real Losses per length of main per day: Real Losses per service connection per day per psi pressure:0.11 Recording Keeping Requirements Beginning in Year 2 Does your agency maintain a record keeping system for the following? Date/Time Leak Reported Yes Leak Location Yes Type of Leaking Pipe Segment or Fitting No Leak Running Time From Report to Repair Yes Leak Volume Estimate No Cost of Repair Yes Do you have an infrastructure rehabilitation and renewal program ? Yes BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control 2011 Unavoidable Annual Real Losses(UARL):687.48 Above, Real Losses=Current Annual Real Losses(CARL):882.55 Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) [CARL/UARL]:0.42 Comments: At Least As effective As No 0NoExemption BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control 2011 AWWA Water Audit Otay Water District Agency to complete a Water Audit & Balance Using The AWWA Software Uploaded filename: Otay 2012 AWWA Reporting Worksheet.xls 78 Agency Completed Training In The AWWA Water Audit Method Agency Completed Training In The Component Analysis Process Completed/Updated the Component Analysis (at least every 4 years)? Component Analysis Completed/Updated Date Water Loss Performance Agency Repaired All Reported Leaks & Breaks To The Extent Cost Effective Agency Located and Repaired Unreported Leaks to the Extent Cost Effective Type of Program Activities Used to Detect Unreported Leaks Does your agency maintain in-house records of audit results or the completed AWWA worksheet for the completed audit which could be forwarded to CUWCC? Does your agency keeps records of each component analysis performed, and incorporates results into future annual standard water balances? Annual Summary Information Complete the following table with annual summary information (required for reporting years 2-5 only) Yes Water Audit Validity Score from AWWA spreadsheet: 179 Reporting unit name Reporting unit number: Yes Yes No Yes Yes In pipe video camera equipment to examine pipe integrity Yes No Please describe your infrastructure rehabilitation and renewal activity below Awaiting District operation staff reports to complete missing data fields AWWA Model Operational Efficiency Indicator Apparent Losses per service connection per day:1.42 Real Losses per service connection per day:18.55 N/A Real Losses per length of main per day: Recording Keeping Requirements Beginning in Year 2 Does your agency maintain a record keeping system for the following? Date/Time Leak Reported Yes Leak Location Yes Type of Leaking Pipe Segment or Fitting No Leak Running Time From Report to Repair Yes Leak Volume Estimate No Cost of Repair Yes Do you have an infrastructure rehabilitation and renewal program ? Yes BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control 2012 Real Losses per service connection per day per psi pressure:0.12 Unavoidable Annual Real Losses(UARL):697.37 Above, Real Losses=Current Annual Real Losses(CARL):1011.36 Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) [CARL/UARL]:0.47 Comments: At Least As effective As No 0NoExemption BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control 2012 Implementation Does your agency have any unmetered service connections? If YES, has your agency completed a meter retrofit plan? Enter the number of previously unmetered accounts fitted with meters during reporting year: Are all new service connections being metered? Are all new service connections being billed volumetrically? Has your agency completed and submitted electronically to the Council a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters? Meters Matrix Account Type Num Of Metered Accounts Num Of Metered Accounts Read Num Of Metered Accounts Billed By Volume Billing Frequency Estimated Bills Per Year Meter Readings Per Year Single-Family 43903 43903 43903 Monthly 6 3 2 Commercial 797 797 797 Monthly 6 3 2 Institutional 1434 1434 1434 Monthly 6 3 2 Dedicated Irrigation 1223 1223 1223 Monthly 6 3 2 Recycled 701 701 701 Monthly 6 3 2 Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Retrofitted with Dedicated Irrigation Meters during Reporting Period 2231 0 Feasibility Study Has your agency conducted a feasibility study to assess the merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? No If YES, please fill in the following information: A. When was the Feasibility Study conducted Describe, upload or provide an electronic link to the Feasibility Study Upload File 2/28/2013 Report was completed in February 2013 Otay Water District 179 Reporting unit name Reporting unit number: No Yes Yes Yes Yes Copy_of_MUM_Final_Report_Nov_2012.docx 2NoExemption Refer to GPCD On track report below YesAt Least As effective As BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity 2011 Comments: BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity 2011 Implementation Does your agency have any unmetered service connections? If YES, has your agency completed a meter retrofit plan? Enter the number of previously unmetered accounts fitted with meters during reporting year: Are all new service connections being metered? Are all new service connections being billed volumetrically? Has your agency completed and submitted electronically to the Council a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters? Meters Matrix Account Type Num Of Metered Accounts Num Of Metered Accounts Read Num Of Metered Accounts Billed By Volume Billing Frequency Estimated Bills Per Year Meter Readings Per Year Single-Family 44509 44509 44509 Monthly 1 0 9 3 Commercial 800 800 800 Monthly 1 0 9 3 Institutional 2167 2167 2167 Monthly 1 0 9 3 Dedicated Irrigation 1229 1229 1229 Monthly 1 0 9 3 Recycled 699 699 699 Monthly 1 0 9 3 Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Retrofitted with Dedicated Irrigation Meters during Reporting Period 993 0 Feasibility Study Has your agency conducted a feasibility study to assess the merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? No If YES, please fill in the following information: A. When was the Feasibility Study conducted Describe, upload or provide an electronic link to the Feasibility Study Upload File 11/30/2012 Otay Water District 179 Reporting unit name Reporting unit number: No Yes Yes Yes Yes MUM Final Report Nov 2012.docx YesAt Least As effective As BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity 2012 Comments: 0NoExemption Refer to 2010 GPCD on track report below BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity 2012 BMP 1.4 Retail Conservation Pricing Implementation (Water Rate Structure) Enter the Water Rate Structures that are assigned to the majority of your customers, by customer class Customer Class Water Rate Type Total Revenue Comodity Charges Total Revenue Fixed Carges 5 4 9 Other Increasing Block 33877300 10163190 33877300 10163190 Implementation (Conservation Pricing Option) Use Annual Revenue As Reported Use Canadian Water Wastewater (CWWA) Association Rate Design Model Use 3 years average instead of most recent year Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure by Customer Class Agency Provide Sewer Service Select the Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure assigned to the majority of your customers within a specific customer class. Sewer Rate Name Customer Class Name Sewer Total Revenue Commodity Charges Sewer Total Revenue Customer Meter/Service (Fixed Charges) Increasing Block Other 1994000.00 598200.00 Comments: 179 Reporting unit number: Otay Water District Reporting unit name Enter the Water Rate Structures that are assigned to the majority of your customers, by customer class If CWWA is selected, please upload spreadsheet here. Canadian Water and Wastewater Association Yes At Least As effective As Yes District GPCD graph illustrates on target to meet target standard No 0Exemption 2011 BMP 1.4 Retail Conservation Pricing Implementation (Water Rate Structure) Enter the Water Rate Structures that are assigned to the majority of your customers, by customer class Customer Class Water Rate Type Total Revenue Comodity Charges Total Revenue Fixed Carges 9 2 4 Other Increasing Block 39385200 18523600 39385200 18523600 Implementation (Conservation Pricing Option) Use Annual Revenue As Reported Use Canadian Water Wastewater (CWWA) Association Rate Design Model Use 3 years average instead of most recent year Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure by Customer Class Agency Provide Sewer Service Select the Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure assigned to the majority of your customers within a specific customer class. Sewer Rate Name Customer Class Name Sewer Total Revenue Commodity Charges Sewer Total Revenue Customer Meter/Service (Fixed Charges) Increasing Block Other 2336000.00 628600.00 Comments: 179 Reporting unit number: Otay Water District Reporting unit name Enter the Water Rate Structures that are assigned to the majority of your customers, by customer class If CWWA is selected, please upload spreadsheet here. Canadian Water and Wastewater Association Yes At Least As effective As Yes Review 2012 GPCD historical progress report No 0Exemption 2012 Reporting unit #179 Otay Water District Reporting unit name /Retail Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Did at least one contact take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Programs List Number of Public Contacts Public Information Programs Name 200000 Newsletter articles on conservation 250000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets12000Website 2400 Landscape water conservation media campaigns Contact with the Media Did at least one contact take place during each quarter of the reporting year?Yes Number of Media Contacts Public Outreach Media Contact Name List 4 Articles or stories resulting from outreach 7 7 6 1 5 2 Television contacts 7 7 6 1 5 IAgency Website Updates Enter your agency's URL (website address):www:otaywater.gov Does your agency perform Public Outreach programs? The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Yes Yes Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Wholesale Agency Website Updates NoThe list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2011 Describe a minimum of four water conservationrelated updates to your agency's website thattook place during the year: Rebate list for OWD, MWD & CWA Free conservation services Conservation class schedules Education program updates Did at least one Website Update take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Programs Annual Budget Enter budget for public outreach programs. You may enter total budget in a single line or brake the budget into discretecategories by entering many rows. Please indicate if personnel costs are included in the entry. Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount Personal Cost Included? Comments Public Programs 13000 Public Information Expenses Enter expenses for public outreach programs. Please include the same kind of expenses you included in the question relatedto your budget (Section 2.1.7, above). For example, if you included personnel costs in the budget entered above, be sure to include them here as well. Public Outreach Expense Category Expense Amount Personal Cost Included? multi agency fund 1000 school giveaways 800 water con outreach items 11000 tour handouts 200 Additional Public Information Program Please report additional public information contacts. List these additional contacts in order of howyour agency views their importance / effectiveness with respect to conserving water, with the mostimportant/ effective listed first (where 1 = most important). Were there additional Public Outreach efforts?Yes Public Outreach Additional Information Public Information Additional Programs Importance Bill stuffers 1 7 7 6 1 5 Newsletter 2 7 7 6 1 5 Otay provided residential & commercial surveys 3 7 7 6 1 5 Social Marketing Programs Branding Does your agency have a water conservation”brand,” “theme” or mascot?No BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2011 Describe the brand, theme or mascot. Market Research Have you sponsored or participated inmarket research to refine your message?No Market Research Topic Brand Message Brand Mission Statement Community Committees Do you have a community conservation committee?No Enter the names of the community committees: Training Training Type Number of Trainings Number of Attendees Description of Other 3 3 83 Social Marketing Expenditures Public Outreach Social Marketing Expenses Partnering Programs Name Type of Program CLCA? Green Building Programs? Master Gardeners? Cooperative Extension? Local Colleges? Joint water agency workshops & outreach eventsOtherV Retail and wholesale outlet; name(s) and type(s) of programs: Partnering Programs - Newsletters Number of newsletters per year 4 Number of customers per year 40000 Describe other utilities your agency partners with, including electrical utilities San Diego Gas & Electric provides showeheads and aerators for distribution by Otay WD Partnering with Other Utilities Conservation Gardens Describe water conservation gardens at your agency or other high traffic areas or new homes Otay is founding and supporting water agency member of the Water Conservation Garden at Cuyamaca College located in El Cajon, CA. Landscape contests or awards Describe water wise landscape contest or awards program conducted by your agency Annual Best In District Landscape Contest for residential site removing grass to DT plants BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2011 Additional Programs supported by Agency but not mentioned above: Comments At Least As effective As No Exemption 0No BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2011 Reporting unit #179 Otay Water District Reporting unit name /Retail Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Did at least one contact take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Programs List Number of Public Contacts Public Information Programs Name 200000 Newsletter articles on conservation 250000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets20000Website 5000 Landscape water conservation media campaigns Contact with the Media Did at least one contact take place during each quarter of the reporting year?Yes Number of Media Contacts Public Outreach Media Contact Name List 12 News releases 7 8 0 0 3 2 Articles or stories resulting from outreach 7 8 0 0 3 IAgency Website Updates Enter your agency's URL (website address):otaywater.gov Does your agency perform Public Outreach programs? The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Yes Yes Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority The list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Wholesale Agency Website Updates NoThe list of wholesale agencies performing public outreach which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2012 Describe a minimum of four water conservationrelated updates to your agency's website thattook place during the year: Water conservation themed videos added as produced Rebate updates District sponsored seminars Promoted the Water Conservation Garden's educational programs Did at least one Website Update take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Programs Annual Budget Enter budget for public outreach programs. You may enter total budget in a single line or brake the budget into discretecategories by entering many rows. Please indicate if personnel costs are included in the entry. Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount Personal Cost Included? Comments Total Budget 40000 Public Information Expenses Enter expenses for public outreach programs. Please include the same kind of expenses you included in the question relatedto your budget (Section 2.1.7, above). For example, if you included personnel costs in the budget entered above, be sure to include them here as well. Public Outreach Expense Category Expense Amount Personal Cost Included? water con outreach items 11000 Additional Public Information Program Please report additional public information contacts. List these additional contacts in order of howyour agency views their importance / effectiveness with respect to conserving water, with the mostimportant/ effective listed first (where 1 = most important). Were there additional Public Outreach efforts?Yes Public Outreach Additional Information Public Information Additional Programs Importance Bill stuffers 1 7 8 0 0 3 Newsletter 2 7 8 0 0 3 Otay provided residential& commercial surveys 3 7 8 0 0 3 Website 4 7 8 0 0 3 Social Marketing Programs BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2012 Branding Does your agency have a water conservation”brand,” “theme” or mascot?No Describe the brand, theme or mascot. Market Research Have you sponsored or participated inmarket research to refine your message?No Market Research Topic Brand Message Brand Mission Statement Community Committees Do you have a community conservation committee?Yes Enter the names of the community committees:San Diego County Conservation Coordinators, Conservation Action Committee Training Training Type Number of Trainings Number of Attendees Description of Other 3 2 65 Social Marketing Expenditures Public Outreach Social Marketing Expenses Expense Categary Expense Amount Description 7 8 0 0 3 Partnering Programs Name Type of Program CLCA? Green Building Programs? Master Gardeners? Cooperative Extension? Local Colleges? Other V Retail and wholesale outlet; name(s) and type(s) of programs: Home Depot WaterSmart Plant Fairs Partnering Programs - Newsletters Number of newsletters per year 4 Number of customers per year 120000 San Diego Gas & Electric provides low flow showerheads and aerators Partnering with Other Utilities BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2012 Describe other utilities your agency partners with, including electrical utilities Conservation Gardens Describe water conservation gardens at your agency or other high traffic areas or new homes Otay is founding and supporting water agency member of the Water Conservation Garden at Cuyamaca College in El Cajon, CA. Landscape contests or awards Describe water wise landscape contest or awards program conducted by your agency Landscape Contest identifies Otay's best residential site conversion removing grass to DT plants. Additional Programs supported by Agency but not mentioned above: Comments At Least As effective As No Exemption 0No BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2012 V Materials meet state education framework requirements?Description Splash and Wet outdoor education modules 2 children's activity books provided. Water books available for lending to teachers. Water experiential teaching resource box available for check out by teachers. DescriptionMaterials distributed to K-6 Students?V Number of students reached 4500 V Materials distributed to 7-12 Students? (optional) Description National Geographic water conservation themed booklets provided Annual budget for school education program 34300.00 Description of all other water supplier educationprograms Water conservation themed workshops & seminars provided for residential & commercial customers. School Programs Activities Classroom Presentation: Number of presentation 32 Number of attendees 1376 Describe the topics covered in your classroom presentations:Class would get bus and Water Conservation Garden's Ms. Smarty Plant's guided tour of Water Conservation Garden's water conserving flora. Large group assemblies: Number of presentation Number of attendees Children’s water festivals or other events: Number of presentation 4 Number of attendees 725 Cooperative efforts with existing science/water education programs (various workshops, science fair awardsor judging) and follow-up: Number of presentation 3 Number of attendees 175 Other methods of disseminating information (i.e. themed age-appropriate classroom loaner kits): Description Number distributed 250Number of attendees1Number of booths Staffing children’s booths at events & festivals: 60Number of participantsPoster & photo contestDescription Water conservation contests such as poster and photo: Offer monetary awards/funding or scholarships to students: 179Reporting unit #Reporting unit name Otay Water District /Retail Does your agency perform Public Outreach programs?No The list of wholesale agencies performing school education programs which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2011 2800.00Total funding7Number offered Number of attendeesNumber of presentation Teacher training workshops: 1565Number of participants 33Number of tours or fieldtrips Fund and/or staff student field trips to treatment facilities, recycling facilities, water conservation gardens,etc.: 0.00Total funding 2Number of internship College internships in water conservation offered: Number of attendees0Number of presentation Career Fairs / Workshops: Number of eventsDescription Additional program(s) supported by agency but not mentioned above: Number of participants Comments 0NoExemption At Least As effective As No WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2011 V Materials meet state education framework requirements?Description SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules 2 -3 children's water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. DescriptionMaterials distributed to K-6 Students?V Number of students reached 6400 V Materials distributed to 7-12 Students? (optional) Description National Geographic water conservation themed booklets provided. Annual budget for school education program 25600.00 Description of all other water supplier educationprograms Splash Lab or Green Machine funding. Water conservation classes for residential or commercial customers. School Programs Activities Classroom Presentation: Number of presentation 33 Number of attendees 1268 Describe the topics covered in your classroom presentations: Large group assemblies: Number of presentation 0 Number of attendees Children’s water festivals or other events: Number of presentation 2 Number of attendees 400 Cooperative efforts with existing science/water education programs (various workshops, science fair awardsor judging) and follow-up: Number of presentation 2 Number of attendees 125 Other methods of disseminating information (i.e. themed age-appropriate classroom loaner kits): Description Splash Lab, Green Lab & Ms Smarty Plants are offered to schools and funded by the district Number distributed 300Number of attendees2Number of booths Staffing children’s booths at events & festivals: 90Number of participantsPoster, Photo and Video contestDescription Water conservation contests such as poster and photo: 2700.00Total funding7Number offered Offer monetary awards/funding or scholarships to students: 179Reporting unit #Reporting unit name Otay Water District /Retail Does your agency perform Public Outreach programs?Yes The list of wholesale agencies performing school education programs which can be counted to help the agency comply with the BMP Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2012 Number of attendees0Number of presentation Teacher training workshops: 1518Number of participants 33Number of tours or fieldtrips Fund and/or staff student field trips to treatment facilities, recycling facilities, water conservation gardens,etc.: 0.00Total funding 2Number of internship College internships in water conservation offered: Number of attendees0Number of presentation Career Fairs / Workshops: Number of eventsDescription Additional program(s) supported by agency but not mentioned above: Number of participants Comments 0NoExemption Refer to GPCD progress that illustrates the District is on track At Least As effective As Yes WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2012 Service Area Population:206000 Non Potable Water Sources2011 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 1 8 9 3 Local Watershed AF / Year Water Supply Type Water Supply Description 1 8 9 3 Chapman Recycled 1154.00 Recycled Non Potable District recycled plant 1154.00 1 8 9 3 Imported AF / Year Water Supply Type Water Supply Description 1 8 9 3 South Bay Reclamation 2692.00 Other Purchased from city of San Diego plant 2692.00 Service Area Population:212844 Non Potable Water Sources2012 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 1 8 6 3 Local Watershed AF / Year Water Supply Type Water Supply Description 1 8 6 3 Chapman Recycled 1124.20 Recycled Non Potable District Recycled 1124.20 1 8 6 3 Imported AF / Year Water Supply Type Water Supply Description 1 8 6 3 South Bay Reclamation 3360.40 Other Purchased from city of San Diego 3360.40 Service Area Population:206000 Potable Water Sources2011 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 1 0 0 2 Imported AF / Year Water Supply Type Water Supply Description 1 0 0 2 Wholesaler Supply 14039448.00 Raw Water CWA & MWD Supply 14039448.00 Service Area Population:212844 Potable Water Sources2012 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 1 3 7 6 Imported AF / Year Water Supply Type Water Supply Description 1 3 7 6 Wholesaler Supply 29651.80 Raw Water CWA & MWD 29651.80 Non Potable Water Uses2011 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 Billed: Un-Billed: 1 6 9 5 CustomerType Metered Accounts Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Un-Metered Accounts Un-Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Description 1 6 9 5 Dedicated Irrigation 685 5.14 685 5.14 Non Potable Water Uses2012 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 Billed: Un-Billed: 1 6 9 4 CustomerType Metered Accounts Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Un-Metered Accounts Un-Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Description 1 6 9 4 Dedicated Irrigation 696 5.10 0 0.00 Recycled water for irrigaiton 696 5.10 0 0.00 Potable Water Uses2011 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 4 4 0 0 CustomerType Metered Accounts Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Un-Metered Accounts Un-Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Description 8 8 0 Single-Family 43903 22.90 Commercial 2231 9.70 Dedicated Irrigation 3454 4.71 Recycled 685 5.14 Other 123 0.55 50396 43.00 Billed: Un-Billed: Potable Water Uses2012 Reporting Unit Name Otay Water District Retail Only Reporting Unit ID#: 179 8 3 3 5 CustomerType Metered Accounts Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Un-Metered Accounts Un-Metered Water Delivered AF/Year Description 1 6 6 7 Single-Family 44396 23.00 0 0.00 Commercial 2232 10.00 0 0.00 Dedicated Irrigation 1227 4.80 0 0.00 Recycled 696 5.10 0 0.00 Other 105 0.60 0 0.00 Fire/Temp 48656 43.50 0 0.00 Billed: Un-Billed: 1. Conservation Coordinator provided with necessary resources to implement BMPs? Name: Title: Email: Senior Water Conservation Specialist Richard Namba richard.namba@otaywater.gov On Track 2. Water Waste Prevention Documents Otay Water District179 WW Document Name WWP File Name WW Prevention URL WW Prevention Ordinance Terms Description Option A Describe the ordinances or terms of service adopted by your agency to meet the water waste prevention requirements of this BMP. http://www.otaywater.gov/c ode-of-ordinances/ SECTION 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property ... Option B Describe any water waste prevention ordinances or requirements adopted by your local jurisdiction or regulatory agencies within your service area. Option C Describe any documentation of support for legislation or regulations that prohibit water waste. Option D Describe your agency efforts to cooperate with other entities in the adoption or enforcement of local requirements consistent with this BMP. Option E Describe your agency support positions with respect to adoption of legislation or regulations that are consistent with this BMP. Option F Describe your agency efforts to support local ordinances that establish permits requirements for water efficient design in new development. BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2013 On Track BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2013 179 Otay Water District Completed Standard Water Audit Using AWWA Software?Yes AWWA File provided to CUWCC?No Otay Water District BMP1.2 FY13 AWWA Water Audit Validity Score? Complete Training in AWWA Audit Method Complete Training in Component Analysis Process? CompComponent Analysis? Repaired all leaks and breaks to the extent cost effective? Locate and Repar unreported leaks to the extent cost effective? Maintain a record keeping system for the repair of reported leaks, including time of report, leak location, type of leaking pipe segment or fitting, and leak running time from report to repair. CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2013 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency Foundational BMPs BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control Provided 7 Types of Water Loss Control Info Leaks Repars Value Real Losses Value Apparent Losses Miles Surveyed Press Reduction Cost Of Interventions Water Saved (AF) 123 119786 167 81 On Track At Least As Effective As In lieau of an active leak detection program, the City has opted to replace 1% of distribution system lines each year. Lines are replaced based on age and other asset management factors. Attached documentation shows the reduction in main breaks due to 179 Otay Water District BMP 1.2 Results from Main Replacement Program. We encourage them every year to join. On Track AWWA Water Audit Reporting unit number: 179Reporting unit name (District name)Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Agency to complete a Water Audit & Balance Using The AWWA Software Yes Email to office@cuwcc.org - Worksheets (AWWA Water Audit). Enter the name of the file below: Water Audit Validity Score from AWWA spreadsheet: 78 Agency Completed Training In The AWWA Water Audit Method Yes YesAgency Completed Training In The Component Analysis Process Completed/Updated the Component Analysis (at least every 4 years)?Yes Component Analysis Completed/Updated Date Water Loss Performance Agency Repaired All Reported Leaks & Breaks To The Extent Cost Effective No Recording Keeping Requirements: Date/Time Leak Reported Leak Location Type of Leaking Pipe Segment or Fitting Leak Running Time From Report to Repair Leak Volume Estimate Cost of Repair Agency Located and Repaired Unreported Leaks to the Extent Cost Effective Yes Type of Program Activities Used to Detect Unreported Leaks In pipe video camera equipment used to check pipe integrity NoDoes your agency maintain in-house records of audit results or the completed AWWA worksheet for the completed audit which could be forwarded to CUWCC? Does your agency keeps records of each component analysis performed, and incorporates results into future annual standard water balances? Yes Annual Summary Information Complete the following table with annual summary information (required for reporting years 2-5 only) Total Leak Repaired Economic Value Of Real Loss Economic Value Of Apparent Loss Miles Of System Surveyed For Leaks Pressure Reduction Undertaken For Loss Reduction Cost Of Interventions Water Saved (AF/Year) 123 119786 167 81 Comments: BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control 2013 179 Otay Water District Numbered Unmetered Accounts No On Track Metered Accounts billed by volume of use Yes On Track Number of CII Accounts with Mixed Use Meters 911 Conducted a feasibility study to assess merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? No Not On Track Feasibility Study provided to CUWCC?Yes On Track Completed a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters Yes On Track At Least As Effective As No BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2013 Implementation Reporting unit number: 179Reporting unit name (District name)Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Does your agency have any unmetered service connections?No If YES, has your agency completed a meter retrofit plan?No Enter the number of previously unmetered accounts fitted with meters during reporting year: YesAre all new service connections being metered? YesAre all new service connections being billed volumetrically? YesHas your agency completed and submitted electronically to the Council a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters? Meters Matrix Error: Subreport could not be shown. Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Retrofitted with Dedicated Irrigation Meters during Reporting Period 911 0 Feasibility Study Has your agency conducted a feasibility study to assess the merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? No If YES, please fill in the following information: A. When was the Feasibility Study conducted B. Describe, upload or provide an electronic link to the Feasibility Study Upload File11/30/2012 12:00:00 AM Mixed Use Meter (MUM) Site Conversion: Adding a Dedicated Meter Feasibility Analysis was completed by the District in 2013. Comments: BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity 2013 Use Annual Revenue As ReportedImplementation Option: Implementation (Water Rate Structure) 179 Otay Water District 1165 YesAgency Provide Sewer Service: Customer Class Water Rate Type Conserving Rate? Other Increasing Block Yes On Track Customer Class Water Rate Type (V) Total Revenue Comodity Charges (M) Total Revenue Fixed Carges 11 65 Other Increasing Block 40845629 20063176 40845629 20063176 67Calculate: V / (V + M)% Customer Class Rate Type Conserving Rate? Single-Family Increasing Block Seasonal Yes On Track At Least As Effective As No BMP 1.4 Retail Consrvation Pricing Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2013 BMP 1.4 Retail Conservation Pricing Implementation (Water Rate Structure) Reporting unit number: 179Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Reporting unit name (District name) Enter the Water Rate Structures that are assigned to the majority of your customers, by customer class Water Rate Name Customer Class Name Total Revenue Commodity Charges Total Revenue Customer Meter/Service (Fixed Charges) Increasing Block Other 40845629 20063176 11 65 Implementation (Conservation Pricing Option) Use Annual Revenue As Reported Use CWWA Rate Design Model Use 3 years average instead of most recent yearVV Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure by Customer Class Agency Provide Sewer Service Yes Select the Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure assigned to the majority of your customers within a specific customer class. Sewer Rate Name Customer Class Name Sewer Total Revenue Commodity Charges Sewer Total Revenue Customer Meter/Service (Fixed Charges) Increasing Block Seasonal Single-Family 2618291.00 1 1 6 5 Comments: 2013 179 Otay Water District Retail Only Does a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs?Yes List of wholesale Agencies An actively maintained website that is updated regularly (minimum = 4 times per year, i.e., at least quarterly) Yes Description of all other Public Outreach programs Surveys provided by District, Commercial Irrigation Upgrade Rebates provided, Residential rebates revised, Landscape design assistance provided On Track Agency Name ID number 78455 San Diego County Water Authority 196 78455 p Public Outreach Program List Number 3922 75 Newsletter articles on conservation 200000 Email Messages 50000 Website 40000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 731000 General water conservation information 70000 Total 1091000 On Track Number Media Contacts Number 784 55 News releases 30 Total 30 On Track Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount 78 45 5 Public Information 155000 Total Amount:155000 On Track Public Outreah Additional Programs Speaker's Bureau Community Environmental Fairs At Least As Effective As No Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report Foundational BMPs BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2013 Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report Foundational BMPs BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2013 Reporting unit #179 Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Reporting unit name (District name)/Retail Only YesDoes a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs? List of wholesale Agencies Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Home Depot Is your agency performing public outreach? Report a minimum of 4 water conservation related contacts your agency had with the public during the year. Did at least one contact take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Programs List Number of Public Contacts Public Information Programs Name 200000 Newsletter articles on conservation 784 55 50000 Email Messages 784 55 40000 Website 784 55 731000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 784 55 70000 General water conservation information 784 55 Contact with the Media Does a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs?Yes List of wholesale Agencies Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Home Depot OR Retail Agency (Contacts with the Media) Did at least one contact take place during each quarter of the reporting year?No Media Contacts List Number of Media Contacts Public Outreach Media Contact Name List 30 News releases 78 45 5 Does a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs?No Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Home Depot List of wholesale Agencies Is Your Agency Performing Website Updates? Enter your agency's URL (website address):http://www.otaywater.gov/ Describe a minimum of four water conservationrelated updates to your agency's website thattook place during the year: Surveys provided by District, Commercial Irrigation Upgrade Rebates provided, Residential rebates revised, Landscape design assistance provided BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2013 Did at least one Website Update take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Outreach Annual Budget Enter budget for public outreach programs. You may enter total budget in a single line or brake the budget into discretecategories by entering many rows. Please indicate if personnel costs are included in the entry. Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount Personal Cost Included? Comments Public Information 155000 78 45 5 Public Outreach Expenses Enter expenses for public outreach programs. Please include the same kind of expenses you included in the question relatedto your budget (Section 2.1.7, above). For example, if you included personnel costs in the budget entered above, be sure to include them here as well. Public Outreach Expense Category Expense Amount Personal Cost Included? Annual Newsletter 7 8 4 5 5 Outreach documents 40000 7 8 4 5 5 Water Conservation Garden 95000 7 8 4 5 5 Additional Public Information Program Please report additional public information contacts. List these additional contacts in order of howyour agency views their importance / effectiveness with respect to conserving water, with the mostimportant/ effective listed first (where 1 = most important). Were there additional Public Outreach efforts?Yes Public Outreach Additional Information Public Information Additional Programs Importance Speaker's Bureau 1 78 45 5 Community Environmental Fairs 2 78 45 5 Social Marketing Programs Branding Does your agency have a water conservation”brand,” “theme” or mascot?No Describe the brand, theme or mascot. Market Research BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2013 Have you sponsored or participated inmarket research to refine your message?Yes Market Research Topic Otay Water District Customer Satisfaction Survey Brand Message Brand Mission Statement Community Committees Do you have a community conservationcommittee?No Enter the names of the community committees: Training Training Type Number of Trainings Number of Attendees Description of Other 3 1 25 Water Smart Landscape Class 7 8 4 5 5 Social Marketing Expenditures Public Outreach Social Marketing Expenses Expense Categary Expense Amount Description Outreach 8000 Community event suppies 78 45 5 Partnering Programs - Partners Name Type of Program CLCA? Green Building Programs? Master Gardeners? Cooperative Extension? Class speaker, workshop leaderLocal Colleges?V OtherV V Retail and wholesale outlet; name(s) and type(s) of programs: Drought Tolerant Plant Fair Partnering Programs - Newsletters Number of newsletters per year 4 Number of customers per year 200000 Describe other utilities your agency partners with, including electrical utilities San Diego Gas and Electric Partnering with Other Utilities BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2013 Conservation Gardens Describe water conservation gardens at your agency or other high traffic areas or new homes Water Conservation Garden at Cuyamaca College, South Bay Botanical Garden at Southwestern College Landscape contests or awards Describe water wise landscape contest or awards program conducted by your agency OWD sponsors Best In District Landscape Contest & founding member of regional Landscape Contest Additional Programs supported by Agency but not mentioned above: Comments BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2013 179 Otay Water District Retail Only Does a wholesale Agency implement School Education Programs?Yes List of wholesale Agencies Materials meet state education framework requirements and are grade-level appropriate?Yes Curriculum materials developed and/or provided by Agency: SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules Materials Distributed to K-6?Yes Describe K-6 Materials 2 children's Project Wet water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Community events provided K-6 curricular outreach material. Materials distributed to 7-12 students? Yes (Info Only) Annual budget for school education program:28000.00 Description of all other water supplier education programs SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules 2 children's Project Wet water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Community events provided K-6 curricular outreach material. Splash Lab and Green Machine funding. Water conservation classes for residential or commercial customers. Funded Water Conservation Garden Ms Smarty Plants led tours. Splash Lab, Green Lab & Ms Smarty Plants garden tours are offered to schools and funded by the district Poster Splash and Project Green Mobile Labs provided by San Diego County Department of Education but funded by Otay Water District On Track Agencies Name ID number 61 40 1 Metropolitan Water District of SC 161 61 40 1 San Diego County Water Authority 196 61401 Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority At Least As Effective As No BMP 2.2 School Education Programs Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2013 179 Otay Water District YesDoes a wholesale Agency implement School Education Programs? List of wholesale Agencies Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Agencies Name ID number 61 40 1 Metropolitan Water District of SC 161 61 40 1 San Diego County Water Authority 196 V Materials meet state education framework requirements? Description SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules 2 children's Project Wet water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Community events provided K-6 curricular outreach material. DescriptionMaterials distributed to K-6 Students?V Number of students reached 2250 V Materials distributed to 7-12 Students? (optional) Description National Geographic water conservation themed booklets provided. Annual budget for school education program 28000.00 Description of all other water supplier educationprograms Splash Lab and Green Machine funding. Water conservation classes for residential or commercial customers. Funded Water Conservation Garden Ms Smarty Plants led tours. School Education Programs School Programs Activities Classroom Presentation: Number of presentation 33 Number of attendees 1268 Describe the topics covered in your classroom presentations: Large group assemblies: Number of presentation 0 Number of attendees Children’s water festivals or other events: Number of presentation 2 Number of attendees 300 Cooperative efforts with existing science/water education programs (various workshops, science fair awardsor judging) and follow-up: Number of presentation 2 Number of attendees 125 Other methods of disseminating information (i.e. themed age-appropriate classroom loaner kits): Description 2 Staffing children’s booths at events & festivals: WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2013 Retail Only Please provide the name of Agency if not FORTECH Group1 members Number distributed 125 WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2013 300Number of attendees2Number of booths 125Number of participants2Description Water conservation contests such as poster and photo: 400.00Total funding2Number offered Offer monetary awards/funding or scholarships to students: Number of attendees0Number of presentation Teacher training workshops: 1234Number of participants 30Number of tours or fieldtrips Fund and/or staff student field trips to treatment facilities, recycling facilities, water conservation gardens,etc.: 0.00Total funding 0Number of internship College internships in water conservation offered: Number of attendees0Number of presentation Career Fairs / Workshops: 4 Number of events Splash and Project Green Mobile Labs provided by San Diego County Department of Education but funded by Otay Water District Description Additional program(s) supported by agency but not mentioned above: 300 Number of participants Comments WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2013 1. Conservation Coordinator provided with necessary resources to implement BMPs? Name: Title: Email: Senior Water Conservation Specialist Richard Namba richard.namba@otaywater.gov On Track 2. Water Waste Prevention Documents Otay Water District179 WW Document Name WWP File Name WW Prevention URL WW Prevention Ordinance Terms Description Option A Describe the ordinances or terms of service adopted by your agency to meet the water waste prevention requirements of this BMP. Option B Describe any water waste prevention ordinances or requirements adopted by your local jurisdiction or regulatory agencies within your service area. http://www.otaywater.gov/c ode-of-ordinances/ SECTION 72.03 CERTAIN SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS B. Water waste. No customer shall knowingly permit leaks or other wastes of water, including, but not limited to, allowing runoff on any portion of his or her property .. Option C Describe any documentation of support for legislation or regulations that prohibit water waste. Option D Describe your agency efforts to cooperate with other entities in the adoption or enforcement of local requirements consistent with this BMP. Option E Describe your agency support positions with respect to adoption of legislation or regulations that are consistent with this BMP. Option F Describe your agency efforts to support local ordinances that establish permits requirements for water efficient design in new development. On Track BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2014 BMP 1.1 Operation Practices Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Retail Coverage Report 2014 179 Otay Water District Completed Standard Water Audit Using AWWA Software?Yes AWWA File provided to CUWCC?No Otay Water District BMP1.2 FY14 AWWA Water Audit Validity Score? Complete Training in AWWA Audit Method Complete Training in Component Analysis Process? CompComponent Analysis? Repaired all leaks and breaks to the extent cost effective? Locate and Repar unreported leaks to the extent cost effective? Maintain a record keeping system for the repair of reported leaks, including time of report, leak location, type of leaking pipe segment or fitting, and leak running time from report to repair. CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2014 Foundational Best Management Practices For Urban Water Efficiency Foundational BMPs BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control Provided 7 Types of Water Loss Control Info Leaks Repars Value Real Losses Value Apparent Losses Miles Surveyed Press Reduction Cost Of Interventions Water Saved (AF) 137 119786.5 167 81.1 On Track At Least As Effective As In lieau of an active leak detection program, the City has opted to replace 1% of distribution system lines each year. Lines are replaced based on age and other asset management factors. Attached documentation shows the reduction in main breaks due to 179 Otay Water District BMP 1.2 Results from Main Replacement Program. We encourage them every year to join. On Track AWWA Water Audit Reporting unit number: 179Reporting unit name (District name)Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Agency to complete a Water Audit & Balance Using The AWWA Software Yes Email to office@cuwcc.org - Worksheets (AWWA Water Audit). Enter the name of the file below: Water Audit Validity Score from AWWA spreadsheet: 76 Agency Completed Training In The AWWA Water Audit Method Yes YesAgency Completed Training In The Component Analysis Process Completed/Updated the Component Analysis (at least every 4 years)?Yes Component Analysis Completed/Updated Date Water Loss Performance Agency Repaired All Reported Leaks & Breaks To The Extent Cost Effective No Recording Keeping Requirements: Date/Time Leak Reported Leak Location Type of Leaking Pipe Segment or Fitting Leak Running Time From Report to Repair Leak Volume Estimate Cost of Repair Agency Located and Repaired Unreported Leaks to the Extent Cost Effective Yes Type of Program Activities Used to Detect Unreported Leaks Pipeline video camera capability NoDoes your agency maintain in-house records of audit results or the completed AWWA worksheet for the completed audit which could be forwarded to CUWCC? Does your agency keeps records of each component analysis performed, and incorporates results into future annual standard water balances? Yes Annual Summary Information Complete the following table with annual summary information (required for reporting years 2-5 only) Total Leak Repaired Economic Value Of Real Loss Economic Value Of Apparent Loss Miles Of System Surveyed For Leaks Pressure Reduction Undertaken For Loss Reduction Cost Of Interventions Water Saved (AF/Year) 137 119786. 5 167 V 81.1 Comments: BMP 1.2 Water Loss Control 2014 179 Otay Water District Numbered Unmetered Accounts No On Track Metered Accounts billed by volume of use Yes On Track Number of CII Accounts with Mixed Use Meters 993 Conducted a feasibility study to assess merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? No Not On Track Feasibility Study provided to CUWCC?Yes On Track Completed a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters Yes On Track At Least As Effective As No BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2014 Implementation Reporting unit number: 179Reporting unit name (District name)Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Does your agency have any unmetered service connections?No If YES, has your agency completed a meter retrofit plan?No Enter the number of previously unmetered accounts fitted with meters during reporting year: YesAre all new service connections being metered? YesAre all new service connections being billed volumetrically? YesHas your agency completed and submitted electronically to the Council a written plan, policy or program to test, repair and replace meters? Meters Matrix Error: Subreport could not be shown. Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Number of CII Accounts with Mixed-use Meters Retrofitted with Dedicated Irrigation Meters during Reporting Period 993 0 Feasibility Study Has your agency conducted a feasibility study to assess the merits of a program to provide incentives to switch mixed-use accounts to dedicated landscape meters? No If YES, please fill in the following information: A. When was the Feasibility Study conducted B. Describe, upload or provide an electronic link to the Feasibility Study Upload File11/30/2012 12:00:00 AM Mixed Use Meter (MUM) Site Conversion: Adding a Dedicated Meter Feasibility Analysis was completed by the District in 2013. Comments: BMP 1.3 Metering With Commodity 2014 Use Annual Revenue As ReportedImplementation Option: Implementation (Water Rate Structure) 179 Otay Water District 1369 YesAgency Provide Sewer Service: Customer Class Water Rate Type Conserving Rate? Other Increasing Block Yes On Track Customer Class Water Rate Type (V) Total Revenue Comodity Charges (M) Total Revenue Fixed Carges 13 69 Other Increasing Block 46856253 21462274 46856253 21462274 69Calculate: V / (V + M)% Customer Class Rate Type Conserving Rate? Single-Family Increasing Block Seasonal Yes On Track At Least As Effective As No BMP 1.4 Retail Consrvation Pricing Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2014 BMP 1.4 Retail Conservation Pricing Implementation (Water Rate Structure) Reporting unit number: 179Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Reporting unit name (District name) Enter the Water Rate Structures that are assigned to the majority of your customers, by customer class Water Rate Name Customer Class Name Total Revenue Commodity Charges Total Revenue Customer Meter/Service (Fixed Charges) Increasing Block Other 46856253 21462274 13 69 Implementation (Conservation Pricing Option) Use Annual Revenue As Reported Use CWWA Rate Design Model Use 3 years average instead of most recent yearV Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure by Customer Class Agency Provide Sewer Service Yes Select the Retail Waste Water (Sewer) Rate Structure assigned to the majority of your customers within a specific customer class. Sewer Rate Name Customer Class Name Sewer Total Revenue Commodity Charges Sewer Total Revenue Customer Meter/Service (Fixed Charges) Increasing Block Seasonal Single-Family 2757867.00 1 3 6 9 Comments: 2014 179 Otay Water District Retail Only Does a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs?Yes List of wholesale Agencies An actively maintained website that is updated regularly (minimum = 4 times per year, i.e., at least quarterly) Yes Description of all other Public Outreach programs Landscape contest; Water Smart Landscape Workshops; Rebate updates; Water conservation garden classes On Track Agency Name ID number 78453 San Diego County Water Authority 196 78453 p Public Outreach Program List Number 3922 65 Newsletter articles on conservation 192000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 675000 Website 38000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 650000 General water conservation information 55000 Total 1610000 On Track Number Media Contacts Number 784 53 Radio contacts 2 News releases 18 News releases 3 Total 23 On Track Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount 78 45 3 Public Information annual budget 168000 Total Amount:168000 On Track Public Outreah Additional Programs Community Events Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report Foundational BMPs BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2014 Public Outreah Additional Programs Conservation Speakers Bureau At Least As Effective As No Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report Foundational BMPs BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2014 Reporting unit #179 Otay Water District Otay Water DistrictAgency name: Reporting unit name (District name)/Retail Only YesDoes a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs? List of wholesale Agencies Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Home Depot Is your agency performing public outreach? Report a minimum of 4 water conservation related contacts your agency had with the public during the year. Did at least one contact take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Information Programs List Number of Public Contacts Public Information Programs Name 192000 Newsletter articles on conservation 784 53 675000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 784 53 38000 Website 784 53 650000 Flyers and/or brochures (total copies), bill stuffers, messages printed on bill, information packets 784 53 55000 General water conservation information 784 53 Contact with the Media Does a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs?Yes List of wholesale Agencies Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Home Depot OR Retail Agency (Contacts with the Media) Did at least one contact take place during each quarter of the reporting year?No Media Contacts List Number of Media Contacts Public Outreach Media Contact Name List 2 Radio contacts 78 45 3 18 News releases 78 45 3 3 News releases 78 45 3 Does a wholesale Agency implement Public Outreach Programs?No Please provide the name of Agency if not CUWCC Group1 members Home Depot List of wholesale Agencies Is Your Agency Performing Website Updates? BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2014 Enter your agency's URL (website address):http://www.otaywater.gov/ Describe a minimum of four water conservationrelated updates to your agency's website thattook place during the year: Landscape contest; Water Smart Landscape Workshops; Rebate updates; Water conservation garden classes Did at least one Website Update take place duringeach quarter of the reporting year?Yes Public Outreach Annual Budget Enter budget for public outreach programs. You may enter total budget in a single line or brake the budget into discretecategories by entering many rows. Please indicate if personnel costs are included in the entry. Annual Budget Category Annual Budget Amount Personal Cost Included? Comments Public Information annual budget 168000 78 45 3 Public Outreach Expenses Enter expenses for public outreach programs. Please include the same kind of expenses you included in the question relatedto your budget (Section 2.1.7, above). For example, if you included personnel costs in the budget entered above, be sure to include them here as well. Public Outreach Expense Category Expense Amount Personal Cost Included? Outreach items 40000 7 8 4 5 3 Water Conservation Garden 96000 7 8 4 5 3 Additional Public Information Program Please report additional public information contacts. List these additional contacts in order of howyour agency views their importance / effectiveness with respect to conserving water, with the mostimportant/ effective listed first (where 1 = most important). Were there additional Public Outreach efforts?Yes Public Outreach Additional Information Public Information Additional Programs Importance Community Events 2 78 45 3 Conservation Speakers Bureau 1 78 45 3 Social Marketing Programs Branding Does your agency have a water conservation”brand,” “theme” or mascot?No Describe the brand, theme or mascot. BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2014 Market Research Have you sponsored or participated inmarket research to refine your message?Yes Market Research Topic Otay Water District Customer Satisfaction Survey Brand Message Brand Mission Statement Community Committees Do you have a community conservationcommittee?Yes Enter the names of the community committees:Conservation Action Committee & CAC Planning Committee Member Training Training Type Number of Trainings Number of Attendees Description of Other 3 1 30 7 8 4 5 3 4 50 CLEAN Business Partners 7 8 4 5 3 Social Marketing Expenditures Public Outreach Social Marketing Expenses Expense Categary Expense Amount Description Outreach 8000 Provide community event outreach supplies 78 45 3 Partnering Programs - Partners Name Type of Program CLCA? Green Building Programs? V Master Gardeners?Chula Vista Harborfest V Cooperative Extension? Cuyamaca Community College, Southwestern Community CollegeLocal Colleges?V Chula Vista CLEAN Business PartnersOtherV V Retail and wholesale outlet; name(s) and type(s) of programs: Water Efficient Plant Fairs Partnering Programs - Newsletters Number of newsletters per year 4 BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2014 Number of customers per year 200000 Describe other utilities your agency partners with, including electrical utilities San Diego Gas & Electric; City of Chula Vista Conservation section Partnering with Other Utilities Conservation Gardens Describe water conservation gardens at your agency or other high traffic areas or new homes Water Conservation Garden at Cuyamaca College; South Bay Botanical Garden at Southwestern College Landscape contests or awards Describe water wise landscape contest or awards program conducted by your agency Annual Best In District Landscape Contest sponsor &l Regional Landscape Contest Awards Sponsor Additional Programs supported by Agency but not mentioned above: Comments BMP 2.1 Public Outreach 2014 179 Otay Water District Retail Only Does a wholesale Agency implement School Education Programs?Yes List of wholesale Agencies Materials meet state education framework requirements and are grade-level appropriate?Yes Curriculum materials developed and/or provided by Agency: SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules Materials Distributed to K-6?Yes Describe K-6 Materials 2 children's Project Wet water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Community events provided K-6 curricular outreach material. Materials distributed to 7-12 students? Yes (Info Only) Annual budget for school education program:28000.00 Description of all other water supplier education programs SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules 2 children's Project Wet water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Community events provided K-6 curricular outreach material. Splash Lab and Green Machine funding. Water conservation classes for residential or commercial customers. Funded Water Conservation Garden Ms Smarty Plants led tours. Splash Lab, Green Lab & Ms Smarty Plants garden tours are offered to schools and funded by the district Poster Splash and Project Green Mobile Labs provided by San Diego County Department of Education but funded by Otay Water District On Track 61402 Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority At Least As Effective As No BMP 2.2 School Education Programs Foundational BMPs Foundational Best Manegemant Practices for Urban Water Efficiency CUWCC BMP Coverage Report 2014 179 Otay Water District Retail Only YesDoes a wholesale Agency implement School Education Programs? List of wholesale Agencies Metropolitan Water District of SC,San Diego County Water Authority Please provide the name of Agency if not FORTECH Group1 members V Materials meet state education framework requirements? Description SPLASH and WET outdoor education modules 2 children's Project Wet water conservation activity books provided. Teacher water resource activity boxes provided. Community events provided K-6 curricular outreach material. DescriptionMaterials distributed to K-6 Students? V Number of students reached 2250 V Materials distributed to 7-12 Students? (optional) Description National Geographic water conservation themed booklets provided. Annual budget for school education program 28000.00 Description of all other water supplier educationprograms Splash Lab and Green Machine funding. Water conservation classes for residential or commercial customers. Funded Water Conservation Garden Ms Smarty Plants led tours. School Education Programs School Programs Activities Classroom Presentation: Number of presentation 33 Number of attendees 1268 Describe the topics covered in your classroom presentations: Large group assemblies: Number of presentation 0 Number of attendees Children’s water festivals or other events: Number of presentation 2 Number of attendees 300 Cooperative efforts with existing science/water education programs (various workshops, science fair awardsor judging) and follow-up: Number of presentation 2 Number of attendees 125 Other methods of disseminating information (i.e. themed age-appropriate classroom loaner kits): Description 2 Number distributed 125 300Number of attendees2Number of booths Staffing children’s booths at events & festivals: 125Number of participants2Description Water conservation contests such as poster and photo: Offer monetary awards/funding or scholarships to students: WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2014 400.00Total funding2Number offered Number of attendees0Number of presentation Teacher training workshops: 1234Number of participants 30Number of tours or fieldtrips Fund and/or staff student field trips to treatment facilities, recycling facilities, water conservation gardens,etc.: 0.00Total funding 0Number of internship College internships in water conservation offered: Number of attendees0Number of presentation Career Fairs / Workshops: 4 Number of events Splash and Project Green Mobile Labs provided by San Diego County Department of Education but funded by Otay Water District Description Additional program(s) supported by agency but not mentioned above: 300 Number of participants Comments WMP 2.2 School Education Programs 2014 Appendix L Report on Reduced Delta Reliance 1 Appendix L: Quantifying Regional Self-Reliance and Reduced Reliance on the Delta Watershed 1 - Introduction The 2020 UWMP Guidebook states that that an urban water supplier that anticipates participating in or receiving water from a proposed project, such as a multi-year water transfer, conveyance facility, or new diversion that involves transferring water through, exporting water from, or using water in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) should provide information in their 2015 and 2020 UWMP’s that can then be used in the covered action process to demonstrate consistency with Delta Plan Policy, WR P1, Reduce Reliance on the Delta Through Improved Regional Water Self Reliance (California Code Req., tit. 23, § 5003). The Delta Plan Policy WR P1 specifies the measures that must be taken by water suppliers under certain conditions to reduce their reliance on the Delta and improve regional self-reliance. In addition, the Delta Plan recommends that all water suppliers within the Delta watershed voluntarily implement the measures contained in WR P1 to reduce their reliance on the Delta and improve regional self-reliance. Delta Plan WR P1 identifies UWMP’s as the tool to be used to demonstrate consistency with the state policy that states that suppliers who carry out or take part in covered actions must reduce their reliance on the Delta. WR P1 subsection (c)(1) further defines what adequately contributing to reduced reliance on the Delta means. (c)(1) Water suppliers that have done all the following are contributing to reduced reliance on the Delta and improved regional self-reliance and are therefore consistent with this policy: (A) Completed a current Urban or Agricultural Water Management Plan (Plan) which has been reviewed by the California Department of Water Resources for compliance with the applicable requirements of Water Code Division 6, Parts 2.55, 2.6, and 2.8; (B) Identified, evaluated, and commenced implementation, consistent with the implementation schedule set forth in the Plan, of all programs and projects included in the Plan that are locally cost effective and technically feasible which reduce reliance on the Delta; and (C) Included in the Plan, commencing in 2015, the expected outcome for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improvement in regional self-reliance. The expected outcome for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improvement in regional self- reliance shall be reported in the Plan as the reduction in the amount of water used, or in the percentage of water used, from the Delta watershed. For the purposes of reporting, water efficiency is considered a new source of water supply, consistent with Water Code section 1011(a). The analysis and documentation provided below include all of the elements described in WR P1 (c)(1) that need to be included in a water suppliers UWMP to support a certification of consistency for any future covered actions. 2 2 - Demonstration of Regional Self-Reliance The methodology used to determine improved regional self-reliance for the Otay Water District (District) is consistent with the approach detailed in DWR’s UWMP Guidebook Appendix C, including the use of narrative justifications for the accounting of supplies and the documentation of specific data sources. Some of the key assumptions underlying the District’s demonstration of reduced reliance include: • All data were obtained from the current 2020 UWMP or previously adopted UWMPs and represent average or normal water year conditions. • All analyses were conducted at the service area level, and all data reflect the total contributions of the District and its customers. • No projects or programs that are described in the UWMPs as “Projects Under Development” were included in the accounting of supplies. Baseline and Expected Outcomes To demonstrate the expected outcomes for a reduced reliance on the Delta and improved regional self- reliance, a comparison to a baseline is needed. This analysis uses a normal water year representation of 2010 as the baseline, which is consistent with the approach described in the Guidebook Appendix C. Data for the 2010 baseline were taken from the District’s 2005 UWMP as the UWMPs generally do not provide normal water year data for the year that they are adopted (i.e., 2005 UWMP normal year forecasts begin in 2010, 2010 UWMP normal year forecasts begin in 2015, and so on). Consistent with the 2010 baseline data approach, the expected outcomes for reduced Delta reliance and improved regional self-reliance for 2015 and 2020 were taken from the District’s 2010 and 2015 UWMPs, respectively. Expected outcomes for 2025-2045 are from the current 2020 UWMP. Documentation of the specific data sources and assumptions are included in the discussions below. Service Area Demands without Water Use Efficiency In alignment with the Guidebook Appendix C, this analysis uses normal water year demands, rather than normal water year supplies to calculate expected outcomes in terms of the percentage of water used. Using normal water year demands serves as a proxy for the amount of supplies that would be used in a normal water year. This helps alleviate issues associated with how supply capability is presented to fulfill requirements of the UWMP Act versus how supplies might be accounted for to demonstrate consistency with WR P1. Because WR P1 considers water use efficiency savings a source of water supply, water suppliers can calculate their embedded water use efficiency savings based on changes in forecasted per capita water use since the baseline. As explained in the Guidebook Appendix C, water use efficiency savings must be added back to the normal year demands to represent demands without water use efficiency savings accounted for; otherwise, the effect of water use efficiency savings on regional self-reliance would be overestimated. Table K-1 shows the results of this adjustment for the District. Supporting narratives and documentation for all the data shown in Table K-1 are provided below. Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency The service area demands shown in Table K-1 represent the total water demands for the District’s retail service area which consist of municipal and industrial (M&I) demands. The M&I demand data shown in Table K-1 were collected from the following sources: • Baseline (2010): 2005 UWMP, Table 4 3 • 2015: 2010 UWMP, Table 6 • 2020: 2015 UWMP, Table 4-2 • 2025-2045: 2020 UWMP, Table 4-2 Non-Potable Water Demands The District serves recycled water to customers for non-potable uses, as discussed in Chapter 6 of the 2020 UWMP. The non-potable water demand data shown in Table K-1 represents recycled water demand estimates for use in the District’s service area collected from the following sources: • Baseline (2010): 2005 UWMP, Table 4 • 2015: 2010 UWMP, Table 19 • 2020: 2015 UWMP, Table 6-4 • 2025-2045: 2020 UWMP, Table 6-4 Potable Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency The “Potable Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency” was calculated by subtracting the “Non- Potable Water Demands” from “Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency.” Service Area Population The population data shown in Table K-1 were collected from the following sources: • Baseline (2010): 2010 UWMP, Table 3 • 2015: 2015 UWMP, Table 3-1 • 2020-2045: 2020 UWMP, Table 3-1 Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline The “Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline” was calculated using “Potable Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency” divided by “Service Area Population” and then comparing with 2010 Per Capita Water Use. Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency In Table K-2, the “Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency” was added to the “Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline” to obtain the “Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency Accounted For”. Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance For a covered action to demonstrate consistency with the Delta Plan, WR P1 subsection (c)(1)(C) states that water suppliers must report the expected outcomes for measurable improvement in regional self- reliance. Table K-3 shows expected outcomes for supplies contributing to regional self-reliance both as an amount and as a percentage. The numbers shown in Table C-3 represent efforts to improve regional self-reliance for the District’s entire service area and include the total contributions of the District and its customers. Supporting narratives and documentation for all the data shown in Table K-3 are provided below. Water Use Efficiency The water use efficiency information shown in Table K-3 is taken directly from Table K-1. 4 Water Recycling The water recycling values shown in Table K-3 are taken directly from the non-potable water demands in Table K-1. Local Water Supply Projects The local supply project values in Table K-3 are future District water supply projects (2035-2045) that are considered as additional planned or conceptual. These future projects are described in the 2020 UWMP section 6.8. 3 - Reliance on Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed Metropolitan’s service area reduces reliance on the Delta through investments in non-Delta water supplies, local water supplies, and regional and local demand management measures. Metropolitan’s member agencies coordinate reliance on the Delta through their membership in Metropolitan, a regional cooperative providing wholesale water service to its 26 member agencies, which includes the Water Authority, who the District receives supplies from. Accordingly, regional reliance on the Delta can only be measured regionally—not by individual Metropolitan member agencies and not by the customers of those member agencies. Metropolitan’s member agencies, and those agencies’ customers, indirectly reduce reliance on the Delta through their collective efforts as a cooperative. Metropolitan’s member agencies do not control the amount of Delta water they receive from Metropolitan. Metropolitan manages a statewide integrated conveyance system consisting of its participation in the State Water Project (SWP), its Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) including Colorado River water resources, programs and water exchanges, and its regional storage portfolio. Along with the SWP, CRA, storage programs, and Metropolitan’s conveyance and distribution facilities, demand management programs increase the future reliability of water resources for the region. In addition, demand management programs provide system-wide benefits by decreasing the demand for imported water, which helps to decrease the burden on the district’s infrastructure and reduce system costs, and free up conveyance capacity to the benefit of all member agencies. Metropolitan’s costs are funded almost entirely from its service area, except for grants and other assistance from government programs. Most of Metropolitan’s revenues are collected directly from its member agencies. Properties within Metropolitan’s service area pay a property tax that currently provides approximately 8 percent of the fiscal year 2021 annual budgeted revenues. The rest of Metropolitan’s costs are funded through rates and charges paid by Metropolitan’s member agencies for the wholesale services it provides to them. Thus, Metropolitan’s member agencies fund nearly all operations Metropolitan undertakes to reduce reliance on the Delta, including Colorado River Programs, storage facilities, Local Resources Programs and Conservation Programs within Metropolitan’s service area. Because of the integrated nature of Metropolitan’s systems and operations, and the collective nature of Metropolitan’s regional efforts, it is infeasible to quantify each of Metropolitan member agencies’ individual reliance on the Delta. It is infeasible to attempt to segregate an entity and a system that were designed to work as an integrated regional cooperative. In addition to the member agencies funding Metropolitan’s regional efforts, they also invest in their own local programs to reduce their reliance on any imported water. Moreover, the customers of those member agencies may also invest in their own local programs to reduce water demand. However, to the extent those efforts result in reduction of demands on Metropolitan, that reduction does not equate to 5 a like reduction of reliance on the Delta. Demands on Metropolitan are not commensurate with demands on the Delta because most of Metropolitan member agencies receive blended resources from Metropolitan as determined by Metropolitan—not the individual member agency—and for most member agencies, the blend varies from month-to-month and year-to-year due to hydrology, operational constraints, use of storage and other factors. Infeasibility of Accounting Regional Investments in Reduced Reliance Below the Regional Level The accounting of regional investments that contribute to reduced reliance on supplies from the Delta watershed is straightforward to calculate and report at the regional aggregate level. However, any similar accounting is infeasible for the individual member agencies or their customers. As described above, the region (through Metropolitan) makes significant investments in projects, programs and other resources that reduce reliance on the Delta. In fact, all of Metropolitan’s investments in Colorado River supplies, groundwater and surface storage, local resources development and demand management measures that reduce reliance on the Delta are collectively funded by revenues generated from the member agencies through rates and charges. Metropolitan’s revenues cannot be matched to the demands or supply production history of an individual agency, or consistently across the agencies within the service area. Each project or program funded by the region has a different online date, useful life, incentive rate and structure, and production schedule. It is infeasible to account for all these things over the life of each project or program and provide a nexus to each member agency’s contributions to Metropolitan’s revenue stream over time. Accounting at the regional level allows for the incorporation of the local supplies and water use efficiency programs done by member agencies and their customers through both the regional programs and through their own specific local programs. As shown above, despite the infeasibility of accounting reduced Delta reliance below the regional level, Metropolitan’s member agencies and their customers have together made substantial contributions to the region’s reduced reliance. Because of this infeasibility to separate out the individual member agency’s reduced reliance on the Delta, Metropolitan has completed the analysis to demonstrate a regional wide reduction which is shown in Table K-4. 4 - Summary of Expected Outcomes for Reduced Reliance on the Delta As stated in WR P1(c)(1)(C), the policy requires that, commencing in 2015, UWMPs include expected outcomes for measurable reduction in Delta reliance and improved regional self- reliance. WR P1 further states that those outcomes shall be reported in the UWMP as the reduction in the amount of water used, or in the percentage of water used, from the Delta. The expected outcomes for the District’s Delta reliance and regional self-reliance were developed using the approach and guidance described in Appendix C of DWR’s Urban Water Management Plan Guidebook 2020 (Guidebook Appendix C) issued in March 2021. Regional Self-Reliance The data used to demonstrate increased regional self-reliance in this analysis represent the total regional efforts of the District and its customers and were developed in conjunction with the Water Authority and Metropolitan as part of the UWMP coordination process. 6 The following provides a summary of the near-term (2025) and long-term (2045) expected outcomes for the District’s regional self-reliance. • Long-term (2045) – Normal water year regional self-reliance is expected to increase by about 14,260 AFY from the 2010 baseline; this represents an increase of about 23.1 percent of 2025 normal water year retail demands (Table K-3). The results show that the District and its customers are measurably reducing reliance on the Delta and improving regional self-reliance. Reduced Reliance on Supplies from the Delta Watershed For reduced reliance on supplies from the Delta Watershed, the data used in this analysis represent the total regional efforts of Metropolitan, the Water Authority, its member agencies and their customers (many of them retail agencies) and were developed in conjunction with the Water Authority and other Metropolitan member agencies as part of the UWMP coordination process (as described in Section 5 of Metropolitan’s 2020 UWMP). In accordance with UMWP requirements, Metropolitan’s member agencies and their customers (many of them retail agencies) also report demands and supplies for their service areas in their respective UWMPs. The data reported by those agencies are not additive to the regional totals shown in Metropolitan’s UWMP, rather their reporting represents subtotals of the regional total and should be considered as such for the purposes of determining reduced reliance on the Delta. While the demands that Metropolitan’s member agencies and their customers report in their UWMP’s are a good reflection of the demands in their respective service areas, they do not adequately represent each water suppliers’ individual contributions to reduced reliance on the Delta. To calculate and report their reliance on water supplies from the Delta watershed, water suppliers that receive water from the Delta through other regional or wholesale water suppliers would need to determine the amount of Delta water that they receive from the regional or wholesale supplier. Two specific pieces of information are needed to accomplish this, first is the quantity of demands on the regional or wholesale water supplier that accurately reflect a supplier’s contributions to reduced reliance on the Delta and second is the quantity of a supplier’s demands on the regional or wholesale water supplier that are met by supplies from the Delta watershed. For water suppliers that make investments in regional projects or programs it may be infeasible to quantify their demands on the regional or wholesale water supplier in a way that accurately reflects their individual contributions to reduced reliance on the Delta. Due to the extensive, long-standing, and successful implementation of regional demand management and local resource incentive programs in Metropolitan’s service area, this infeasibility holds true for Metropolitan’s members as well as their customers. For Metropolitan’s service area, reduced reliance on supplies from the Delta watershed can only be accurately accounted for at the regional level. The results show that as a region, Metropolitan and its members (including the District) as well as their customers are measurably reducing reliance on the Delta and improving regional self-reliance. 5 - UWMP Implementation In addition to the analysis and documentation described above, WR P1 subsection (c)(1)(B) requires that all programs and projects included in the UWMP that are locally cost-effective and technically feasible, which reduce reliance on the Delta, are identified, evaluated, and implemented consistent with the implementation schedule. WR P1 (c)(1)(B) states that: 7 (B) Identified, evaluated, and commenced implementation, consistent with the implementation schedule set forth in the Plan, of all programs and projects included in the Plan that are locally cost effective and technically feasible which reduce reliance on the Delta[.] In accordance with Water Code Section 10631(f), water suppliers must already include in their UWMP a detailed description of expected future projects and programs that they may implement to increase the amount of water supply available to them in normal and single-dry water years and for a period of drought lasting five consecutive years. The UWMP description must also identify specific projects, include a description of the increase in water supply that is expected to be available from each project, and include an estimate regarding the implementation timeline for each project or program. Chapter 6 of the District’s 2020 UWMP summarizes the implementation plan and continued progress in developing a diversified water portfolio to meet the region’s water needs. 6 - 2015 UWMP Appendix L The information contained in this appendix is also intended to be a new Appendix L to the District’s 2015 UWMP consistent with WR P1 subsection (c)(1)(C) (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23, § 5003). The District provided notice of the availability of the draft 2020 UWMP, 2021 WSCP, and the new Appendix L to the 2015 UWMP and held a public hearing to consider adoption of the documents in accordance with CWC Sections 10621(b) and 10642, and Government Code Section 6066, and Chapter 17.5 (starting with Section 7290) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code. The public review drafts of the 2020 UWMP, Appendix L to the 2015 UWMP, and the 2021 WSCP were posted on the District’s website in advance of the public hearing on June 2, 2021. The notice of availability of the documents was sent to cities and counties in the District’s service area. Copies of the notification sent to the cities and counties in the District’s service area are included in the 2020 UWMP Appendix B. Thus, this Appendix K to the District’s 2020 UWMP, which was adopted with the District’s 2020 UWMP, will also be recognized and treated as Appendix L to the District’s 2015 UWMP. The District held the public hearing for the draft 2020 UWMP, draft Appendix L to the 2015 UWMP, and draft 2021 WSCP on June 2, 2021, at a regular Board of Directors meeting, held online due to COVID-19 concerns. The District’s Board of Directors determined that the 2020 UWMP and the 2021 WSCP accurately represent the water resources plan for the District’s service area. In addition, the District’s Board of Directors determined that Appendix L to the 2015 UWMP and Appendix K to the 2020 UWMP includes all the elements described in Delta Plan Policy WR P1, Reduce Reliance on the Delta Through Improved Regional Water Self-Reliance (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23, § 5003), which need to be included in a water supplier’s UWMP to support a certification of consistency for a future covered action. As stated in Resolutions 4396, 4397, and 4395, the District’s Board of Directors adopted the 2020 UWMP, Appendix L to the 2015 UWMP, and the 2021 WSCP and authorized their submittal to the State of California. Copies of the resolutions are included in the 2020 UWMP Appendix B. 8 Table K-1: Calculation of Water Use Efficiency (Completed if Water Supplier does not specifically estimate Water Use Efficiency as a Supply) Table K-2: Calculation of Service Area Water Demands Without Water Use Efficiency Service Area Water Use Efficiency Demands (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Service Area Water Demands with Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 45,772 44,883 37,050 33,465 35,736 38,536 41,767 45,265 Non-Potable Water Demands 4,040 4,400 5,670 4,500 5,000 5,100 5,200 5,300 Potable Service Area Demands with Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 41,732 40,483 31,380 28,965 30,736 33,436 36,567 39,965 Total Service Area Population Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Service Area Population 200,704 217,339 225,870 233,256 239,627 242,883 248,905 272,353 Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Per Capita Water Use (GPCD)186 166 124 111 115 123 131 131 Change in Per Capita Water Use from Baseline (GPCD)(19) (62) (75) (71) (63) (54) (55) Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline 4,708 15,585 19,535 19,089 17,066 15,187 16,665 Total Service Area Water Demands (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Service Area Water Demands with Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 45,772 44,883 37,050 33,465 35,736 38,536 41,767 45,265 Reported Water Use Efficiency or Estimated Water Use Efficiency Since Baseline 301 14,378 14,806 14,231 12,142 10,141 11,143 Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 45,772 45,184 51,428 48,271 49,967 50,678 51,908 56,408 9 Table K-3: Calculation of Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Water Use Efficiency - 4,708 15,585 19,535 19,089 17,066 15,187 16,665 Water Recycling 4,040 4,400 5,670 4,500 5,000 5,100 5,200 5,300 Stormwater Capture and Use Advanced Water Technologies Conjunctive Use Projects Local and Regional Water Supply and Storage Projects 13,000 13,000 13,000 Other Programs and Projects the Contribute to Regional Self-Reliance Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 4,040 9,108 21,255 24,035 24,089 35,166 33,387 34,965 Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 45,772 45,184 51,428 48,271 49,967 50,678 51,908 56,408 Change in Regional Self Reliance (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 4,040 9,108 21,255 24,035 24,089 35,166 33,387 34,965 Change in Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 5,068 17,215 19,995 20,049 31,126 29,347 30,925 Percent Change in Regional Self Reliance (As Percent of Demand w/out WUE) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Percent of Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 8.8%20.2%41.3%49.8%48.2%69.4%64.3%62.0% Change in Percent of Water Supplies Contributing to Regional Self-Reliance 11.3%32.5%41.0%39.4%60.6%55.5%53.2% 10 Table K-4: Calculation of Reliance on Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) CVP/SWP Contract Supplies 1,472,000 1,029,000 984,000 1,133,000 1,130,000 1,128,000 1,126,000 1,126,000 Delta/Delta Tributary Diversions Transfers and Exchanges 20,000 44,000 91,000 58,000 52,000 52,000 52,000 52,000 Other Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed Total Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed 1,492,000 1,073,000 1,075,000 1,191,000 1,182,000 1,180,000 1,178,000 1,178,000 Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Service Area Water Demands without Water Use Efficiency Accounted For 5,493,000 5,499,000 5,219,000 4,925,000 5,032,000 5,045,000 5,133,000 5,374,000 Change in Supplies from the Delta Watershed (Acre-Feet) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed 1,492,000 1,073,000 1,075,000 1,191,000 1,182,000 1,180,000 1,178,000 1,178,000 Change in Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed (419,000) (417,000) (301,000) (310,000) (312,000) (314,000) (314,000) Percent Change in Supplies from the Delta Watershed (As a Percent of Demand w/out WUE) Baseline (2010)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 (Optional) Percent of Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed 27.2%19.5%20.6%24.2%23.5%23.4%22.9%21.9% Change in Percent of Water Supplies from the Delta Watershed -7.6%-6.6%-3.0%-3.7%-3.8%-4.2%-5.2%