HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 Emergency Drought Regulatios Agenda Item # 15
Public Utility District
ACTION
To: Board of Directors
From: Steven Poncelet
Date: July 16, 2014
Subject: Possible Board Action in Response to Proposed State Water
Resources Control Board Emergency Drought Regulations
1. WHY THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE BOARD
This item includes discussion and possible Board action regarding the California State
Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB's) Notice of Proposed Emergency
Rulemaking - Urban Water Conservation Drought,
2. HISTORY
The District is required every five years to submit to the California Department of
Water Resources and Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The District's last
UWMP was written in 2010 and adopted by the Board in 2011. Each UWMP is
required to contain a Water Shortage Contingency Plan to address emergency water
shortages. The excerpts from the Districts UWMP, and the associated Board
Ordinance No. 2005-05, are included as Attachment 1.
It is important to note that the District's Water Shortage Contingency Plan and the
associated stages were written to respond to an unforeseen and sudden water supply
shortage. Specifically, the ordinance states "WHEREAS, The Board finds and
determines that a water shortage could exist in the event of a major failure of one or
more components of the water system;". The District's Water Shortage Contingency
Plan was not written to respond to a long-term drought nor was it intended to be
activated during a period when the District was not experiencing a water supply
shortage. The following are the stages taken directly from the District's current Water
Shortage Contingency Plan:
1. "The following stages shall take effect upon declaration as herein provided:
(a) Stage 1 - 10% Reduction in Water Usage - Voluntary Compliance: Stage 1 applies
during periods that the District determines that water usage should be reduced
approximately 10% in order to meet all of the water demands of its customers.
Specific mandated restrictions in water use for Stage 1 are as follows:
1. All new water connections shall be prohibited in the area affected by the water
conservation requirement.
(b) Stage 2 - 30% Reduction in Water Usage - Mandatory Compliance: Stage 2
applies during periods that the District determines that water usage should be
reduced approximately 30% in order to meet all of the water demands of its
customers. Specific additional mandated restrictions in water use for Stage 2 are
as follows:
1. All outdoor water uses are prohibited. The District may discontinue service to
irrigation services.
2. The withdrawal of water for construction purposes shall be prohibited in the
area affected by the water conservation requirement.
3. Customers may be subject to fines and penalties for failure to comply with this
requirement.
4. The District may install flow restricting devices on a customers service.
(c) Stage 3 - 50% Reduction in Water Usage - Mandatory Compliance: Stage 3
applies during periods that the District determines that water usage should be
reduced approximately 50% in order to meet all of the water demands of its
customers. Specific additional mandated restrictions in water use for Stage 3 are
as follows:
1. Customers shall be required to repair any known leaks on piping owned by the
customer. In the event that such leaks are not repaired in a timely manner, the
District may perform the repair or hire a contractor to perform the repair, and
then invoice the customer for those costs.
2. The District may implement mandatory water rationing through the use of
forced rolling outages.
It has been well documented that California is in the third year of a drought and that
certain regions of the State - mostly the Central Valley - are experiencing water supply
shortages. Governor Jerry Brown declared a State of Emergency earlier this year and
there have been calls for voluntary reductions in water use. Many water agencies that
are experiencing water supply shortages have also declared emergencies and
implemented mandatory reductions in water usage. The District has worked to raise
awareness of the State drought and to encourage our customers to conserve water.
This includes a press release and the Districts Watch Your Water campaign and bill
stuffer. It should also be noted that, through the District's efforts over the last 5-years,
water production is down over 20%.
The District, which relies on the Martis Valley aquifer for our water supply, is in a
drought but we are not experiencing a water supply shortage at this time. This is
consistent with our understanding of the aquifer and based on our most recent well
data. As indicated above, however, it is important that everyone conserve water
whenever possible.
3. NEW INFORMATION
District staff have been closely following recent developments at the SWRCB
regarding their intention to implement state-wide emergency drought regulations;
adoption of which could have significant impacts to the District, our customers, and the
community. Staff have been working with the California Municipal Utilities Association
(CMUA) Legislative and Regulatory Committee to understand the proposed
emergency regulations and to make sure that the SWRCB understands Truckee's
unique situation. CMUA's water utility members, in multiple meetings and phone calls
with SWRCB staff, have stressed the need to focus the emergency regulations where
there are water supply shortages and not unduly punish regions that are not in an
actual emergency.
On July 7, 2014, the SWRCB issued a Notice of Proposed Emergency Rulemaking -
Urban Water Conservation Drought (See Attachments 2, 3, 4, & 5). The SWRCB will
consider adoption of these emergency regulations at their July 15th, 2014 board
meeting. If adopted, the emergency regulations would need to be implemented in
early August. As proposed, the District would be required to comply with the
emergency regulations even though we are not in a water supply shortage. According
to CMUA staff, it appears likely that that SWRCB will adopt the emergency regulations.
Staff, legal counsel, and CMUA are still investigating the requirements of the proposed
emergency regulations and possible impacts to the District, our customers, and the
community. Key provisions of the proposed emergency regulations include:
• Requires urban water agencies to implement all requirements and actions of
the stage of our Urban Water Management Plan's (UWMP's) Water Shortage
Contingency Plan that imposed mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation;
• Prohibitions on outdoor water use such as run off to hardscape and the use of
potable water in fountains. These general prohibitions reflect the Governors
April 25, 2014 drought executive order; and
• Requires each urban water supplier to prepare and submit to the SWRCB by
the 15th of each month a monitoring report on forms provided by the SWRCB.
The monitoring report shall include the amount of potable water the urban water
supplier produced in the preceding calendar month along with an estimate of
water per person per day.
The District will comply with the new regulations and the District's Urban Water
Management plan and implementing Ordinance No. 2005-05. It should be noted that,
as written, the proposed emergency drought regulations are open ended and do not
include an end date or definition of how they would be rescinded. Staff and legal
counsel have been reviewing the proposed emergency regulations and these
documents to determine the actions that will be required. Because the proposed
emergency regulations require that the District implement the level of our Water
Shortage Contingency Plan that imposes mandatory restrictions on out door irrigation,
this would require the District to implement Stage 2 of Ordinance No. 2005-05. This
would prohibit:
• All new water connections;
• All outdoor water use; and
• The withdrawal of water for construction purposes.
However, the Ordinance authorizes the General Manager to make exceptions to
prevent undue hardship or unreasonable restrictions, provided that the water shall not
be wasted or used unreasonably and the purpose of the Ordinance can be
accomplished. Because the District has not experienced a major failure of its water
system and the District is not experiencing a water supply shortage, Staff is proposing
to to implement the Ordinance as follows:
• Prohibit new water connections, excluding connections for which applications
have been completed before the restriction is in effect, except where such
action would be unreasonable or result in undue hardship;
• Limit irrigation to 2-days per week; and
• Prohibit the withdrawal of water for construction purposes, excluding uses for
public safety or permitted by a State or Federal agency, except where such
action would be unreasonable or result in undue hardship.
The next steps for the District are:
• If necessary, implement our Water Supply Contingency Plan and Ordinance No.
2005-05 to comply with State law;
• Communicate with our customers and community;
• Consider revisions to our Water Supply Contingency Plan and Ordinance No.
2005-05 including setting a Public Hearing.
The time line as understood today is:
• Determine actions, if any, taken by the California State Water Resources
Control Board at their July 15, 2014 meeting;
• At the July 16, 2014 regularly scheduled District Board meeting, if necessary,
implement our Water Supply Contingency Plan and Ordinance NO. 2005-05.
• At the July 16, 2014 regularly scheduled District Board meeting, set a Public
Hearing for Wednesday, September 17, 2014 to consider changes to the
District's Urban Water Management Plan;
• At the August 20, 2014 regularly scheduled District Board meeting, conduct a
workshop to update the Board and Public on the proposed emergency drought
regulations and to discuss proposed changes to the District's Urban Water
Management Plan; and
• At the September 17, 2014 District Board meeting, conduct the Public Hearing
and consider changes to the District's Urban Water Management Plan.
4. FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impacts of the proposed emergency drought regulations are unknown at this
point.
If the proposed emergency drought regulations are adopted by the SWRCB as written,
they will require - at a minimum - the commitment of District resources to:
• Implement the new regulations;
• Notify customers and the community about the mandatory regulations;
• Comply with the new mandatory reporting requirements; and
• Monitor and enforce the new regulations.
Potential impacts to the District's revenue are also unknown.
5. RECOMMENDATION
a) Direct the General Manager to implement the District's Urban Water Management
Plan's Water Shortage Contingency Plan should the SWRCB adopt emergency
drought regulations at their July 15, 2014 board meeting.
b) Set a Public Hearing for September 15, 2014 to consider changes to the Districts
Urban Water Management Plan.
Steven Poncelet Michael D. Holley
Public Information & Conservation Manager General Manager
` Attachment 1
SECTION 7
f WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN
L�< CjI•
,..I: LaNt�yil
10632. The plan shall provide an urban water shortage contingency analysis which includes each of the
following elements which are within the authority of the urban water supplier;
(a) 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 which are applicable to each stage.
(b) 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.
(c) 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.
(d) 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. .
i
(e) Consumption reduction methods in the most restrictive stages. Each urban water supplier may use
any type of consumption reduction methods in its water shortage contingency analysis that would
reduce water use, are appropriate for its area, and have the ability to achieve a water use reduction
consistent with up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply.
(fl Penalties or charges for excessive use, where applicable.
(g) An analysis of the impacts of each of the actions and conditions described in subdivisions (a) to
(f), 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.
(h) A draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance.
(i) A mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the urban water shortage
contingency analysis.
The effective management of water supply shortages is an important responsibility of water
agencies. Shortages may be caused by failures of major water supply facilities, natural disasters,
or other adverse conditions. Therefore, it is necessary to have an effective management program
to mitigate water supply shortages.
As described in Section 5, the District is using groundwater as its sole source of supply. The
Martis Valley Groundwater Basin has a storage volume of about 484,000 acre-feet (AF) and is
able support annual withdrawals of at least 24,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) Based upon current
withdrawals of about 7,175 AFY, there is over 65 years worth of water supply available even if
there was zero recharge of the groundwater basin. A three year minimum supply of 24,000 AFY
has been assumed.
The most likely cause of a water supply shortage would be the failure of a major water supply
facility such as a well, pump station or transmission pipeline. Such an occurrence could be
caused by a number of factors including earthquake, fire or major equipment failure. As a result,
water supply shortages are expected to be somewhat short in duration (days or possibly weeks),
Page 7-1
I
Attachment 1
Section 7—Water Shortage Contingency Plan
but may occur without any warning. The District's water system consists of five major
components: control valve stations, groundwater wells, pipelines, pump stations and storage
tanks. In May 2004, the District completed a Vulnerability Assessment that identified the
number of customers that would be impacted by major failure of a given facility. In conjunction
with the Vulnerability Assessinent, the District periodically updates its Emergency Response
Plan which identifies actions to be taken in the event of a major failure of a given facility.
Historically, the water supply system has been most impacted by power outages. In response,
the District has installed external generator connections and manual transfer switches at all of its
pump stations and well sites. The District currently owns two large trailer-mounted portable
generators that can be mobilized to any of the District's pump facilities in the event of a power
outage. In addition, the District has installed permanently-mounted diesel-powered backup
generators at 17 pump station sites. These generators are equipped with automatic transfer
switches and will activate in the event of a power outage.
WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM
Depending upon the type of failure, the location and the number of customers affected, it would
be necessary for the District to implement some form of water conservation—either voluntary or
mandatory. Table 7-1 identifies the various stages of water conservation measures that would be
implemented. '
Table 7-1. Water Conservation Stages
Stage Water Conservation Requirement Com fiance Level
I. 10%Reduction in Usage Voluntary
2 30%Reduction in Usage Mandatory
3 50%Reduction in Usage Mandatory
Stage I Water Conservation
Stage 1 would apply during periods where up to 10 percent of the water supply is unavailable. A
corresponding reduction in water usage of 10 percent would be required_ This would be
achieved through voluntary measures. All new water connections would be prohibited within the
area affected. The withdrawal of water for construction purposes would also be prohibited.
Stage.2 Water Conservation
Stage 2 would apply during periods where up to 30 percent of the water supply is unavailable. A
corresponding reduction in water usage of 30 percent would be required. All outdoor water
usage would be prohibited. Penalties and fines would be imposed for violations of the water
conservation program.
Stage 3 Water Conservation
Stage 3 would apply during periods where up to 50 percent of the water supply is unavailable. A
corresponding reduction in water usage of 50 percent would be required. If necessary,
mandatory rationing and temporary outages would be implemented by the District. Penalties and
fines would be imposed for violations of the water conservation program.
Page 7-2
i
=r'` Attachment 1
*L.
Section 7--Water Shortage Contingency Plan
Effectiveness of the Water Conservation Program
The District currently monitors total production for all sources on a daily basis. This monitoring
would be the primary tool to gauge the effectiveness of the water conservation program. Total
water production would be compared with production for the same time in prior years and with
days prior to implementation of the water conservation program. Other measures would likely
include drive-by inspections of customers to verify irrigation practices and monitoring of
customer usage through the District's AMR system.
WATER CONSERVATION ORDINANCE
In November 2005, the District adopted Ordinance 2005-05 which describes the water
conservation program to be implemented in the event of a water supply emergency. A copy of
the ordinance is given in Appendix D.
The ordinance outlines three stages of water alerts that describe different required conservation
efforts. These conservation savings range from voluntary compliance with reasonable
conservation efforts in Stage I to a mandatory 50 percent reduction in Stage 3. The ordinance
authorizes the General Manager of the District to implement these measures immediately upon
occurrence of an event requiring such conservation measures. A public meeting of the Board of
Directors would then be scheduled as soon a possible to inform the Board and the public of the
emergency, the actions taken by the District and the expected duration until the problem could be
corrected.
POTENTIAL FINANCIAL IMPACTS
In 2009, the District retained HDR to perform a water rate study and assist in the development of
the District's new metered rate structure. This new rate structure became effective in January of
2010. One of the major objectives in developing this new rate structure was to closely match the
District's variable revenue stream with its variable expenses and to match its fixed revenue
stream with its fixed expenses. Currently, about 85 percent of the Water Department's expenses
are fixed and do not vary with the amount of water sold to customers. The remaining 15 percent
of expenses is for the costs of pumping and treatment and will vary with customer usage. !
f
In the event that a Stage 3 conservation requirement (50 percent reduction in water usage) was
imposed for a significant length of time (number of months), the District would expect to see a
revenue reduction of about 7.5 percent. However, there should be a corresponding reduction in
t expenses associated with less water being treated and pumped to customers. Any remaining
?_ differences between revenue and expenses would likely be covered through the use of reserves.
The District would then have to evaluate its overall financial situation during the next annual
budget cycle. At that time,the District would review whether rate adjustments were necessary to
ensure the financial stability of the Water Department.
The District does not expect any significant impact on expenditures associated with a drought-
related water shortage. In the event of a major water supply facility failure,unforeseen expenses
can be expected. District staff and/or outside contractors may be required to work overtime and I
weekends to repair the damaged facility, install a temporary facility or adjust system operations j
in order to maintain water service to District customers. Similar to a drought-related water
shortage, it is expected that the immediate cost impacts would be covered through the use of
Page 7-3 l
1#
Attachment 1
Section 7—Water Shortage Contingency Plan
'+ reserve funds, The District would then review its uncial situation once the facility has been
r.:
repaired.
iW
i
1
3
I
Page 7-4
Attachment 1
■
Ordinance No. 2005 - 05
FINDING THE NECESSITY FOR AND ADOPTING
A WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM IN THE EVENT OF
A WATER SUPPLY EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, California Water Code Sections 375 et,seq, permit public entities which supply water at
retail to adopt and enforce a water conservation program to reduce the quantity of water used by the
people therein for the purpose of conserving the water supplies of such public entity;
WHEREAS, California Water Code Section 10632 requires an urban watersupplierto describe stages
of action to be undertaken in the event of a water supply shortage.;
WHEREAS,the Board of Directors of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District has determined that it
,is necessary to establish a water conservation program in the event of any future water supply
shortage;
WHEREAS, the Board finds and determines
s that a water shortage could exist in the event of major
failure of one or more components of the water system;
WHEREAS,the Board also finds and determines thatthe watersources available be putto maximum
beneficial use to the extent to which they are capable, and that the waste or unreasonable use, or
unreasonable method of use, of water be prevented and that the conservation of such water be
encouraged with a view to the maximum reasonable and beneficial use thereof in the interest of the
people of the District and for the public welfare.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the District as follows:
1. The General Manager is hereby authorized and directed to implement the provisions of this
ordinance.Additionally,the General Manager is hereby authorized to make minor and limited
exceptions to prevent undue hardship or unreasonable restrictions,provided that water shall not
be wasted or used unreasonably and the purpose of this ordinance can be accomplished.
2. The provisions of.!his Ordinance shall apply to all water served to persons, customers, and
property by the District. The District shall declare which portions of the service area are subject
to a water supply emergency and the requirements of this ordinance.
3, Water Conservation Stages'. No person shall knowingly use water or permit the use of water
supplied by the District for commercial, industrial, agricultural, governmental, or any other
purpose in a manner contrary to any provision of this ordinance, in an amount in excess of the
amounts authorized by this ordinance or during any period of time'otherthan the periods of time
specified in this ordinance.At no time shall water be wasted or used unreasonably.
Ij
Ordinance 2005-05
Attachment 1
4. The following stages shall take effect upon declaration as herein provided:
(a) Stage 1 — 10% Reduction in Water Usage-Voluntary Compliance: Stage 1 applies during
` periods thatthe District determines thatwater usage should be reduced approximatelyl0%in
order to meet all of the water demands of its customers. Specific mandated restrictions in
water use for Stage 1 are as follows:
1. All new water connections shall be prohibited in the area affected by the water
conservation requirement.
(b) Stage 2—30% Reduction in Water Usage- Mandatory Compliance: Stage 2 applies during
periods that the District determines that wafter usage should be reduced approximately 30%in
order to meet all of the water demands of its customers. Specific additional mandated
restrictions in water use for Stage 2 are as follows:
1. All outdoor water uses are prohibited. The District may discontinue service to irrigation
services.
2. The withdrawal of water for construction purposes shall be prohibited in the area affected
by the water conservation requirement. 1
3. Customers may be subject to fines and penalties forfallure to comply with this requirement.
4. The District may install flow restricting devices on a customers service. {
(c) Stage 3 50% Reduction in Water Usage- Mandatory Compliance: Stage 3 applies during
periods that the District determines that water usage should be reduced ap proximately 50%in
order to meet all of the water demands of its customers. Specific additional mandated
restrictions in water use for Stage 3 are as follows: {
l. Customers shall be required to repair any known leaks on piping owned by'the customer. i
In the event that such leaks are not repaired in a timely manner,the District may perform
the repair or hire a contractorto perform the repair, and then invoice the customer for those
costs.
2. The District may impibment mandatory water rationing through the use of forc
ed ced rolling
outages.
5. Implementation of Conservation Stages.The District shall monitor the projected supply and
demand for water by its customers on a daily basis. In the event of an emergency,the General
Manager shall determine the extent of the conservation required through the implementation
and/or termination of particular conservation stages in orderfor the District to prudently plan for
and supply water to its customers. Thereafter, the General Manager' may order that the
appropriate stage of water conservation be implemented orterminated in accordance with the
applicable provision of this Ordinance. Water system customers shall be notified of water
conservation stages by one or more of the following methods:
(a) Doorhanger notices delivered to the property served
(b) Mass mailing to customers and property owners
I
2 Ordinance 2005-05 �
I
i
Attachment 1
(e) Announcements in local media such as newspapers, radio and television
(d) Any other methods deemed appropriate by the General Manager
The stage designated shall become effective immediately upon announcement. The
declaration of any stage shall be reported to the Board as soon as practicable and convene a
special meeting as soon as possible, The Board,shall thereupon ratify the declaration,
rescind the declaration, or direct the declaration of a different stage,
6. Penalties and Fines. It shall be unlawful for any customer of the District to fall to comply with
any of the provisions of this ordinance. Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this
Ordinance shall.be as follows:
(a) For the first violation by any customer of any of the provisions of this Ordinance,the District
shall verbally notice the fact of such violation.
(b) For a second violation by any customer of any of the provisions of this Ordinance,the District
shall issue a personal notice of the fact of such violation to the customer.
(c) For a third violation by a customer of any provision of this ordinance,the District may install
an appropriate flow restricting device upon a prior determination that the customer has
repeatedly violated the provisions of this Ordinance and that such action is reasonably
necessary to assure compliance with this ordinance. Such action shall betaken only after a
hearing held by the General Manager,where the customer has an opportunity to respond to
the District`s information or evidence that the customer has repeatedly violated the provisions
V of this Ordinance. As determined bythe General Manager,anysuch restricted service may
'be restored upon application of the customer made not less than forty-eight(48)hours after
the implementation of the action restricting service and only upon a showing bythe customer
that the customer is ready,willing and able to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance.
_= Prior to any restoration of service, the customer shall pay all District charges for any
restriction of service and its restoration as.provided for in the District's rules governing water
service. Any willful tampering with or removal of any flow restriction device shall result in
termination of service,for a period to be determined by the General Manager.
{
(d) Notice. The District shall give notice of each violation to the customer committing such
L.. violation as follows:
1. For any violation of the provisions of this Ordinance, the District may give written
notice of the fact of such violation to the customer personally or by U. S, mail, first
class, registered postage paid,
2. If the penalty assessed is, or includes, the installation of a flow restrictor to the
customer, notice of the violation shall be given in the following manner:
a. By giving written notice thereof to the customer personally; or
b. if the customerbe absentfrom or unavailable at eitherhis place of residence or
his assumed place of business, by leaving a copy with some person of suitable
age and discretion at either place, and sending a copy through the U.S. mail,
first class, registered postage prepaid, addressed to the customer at his place
of business, residence,or such other address provided bythe customer for bills
for water or electric service if such can be ascertained; or
3 Ordinance 2005-05
f
t: •
Attachment 1
C. If such place or residence,business or other address cannot be ascertained,or
a person of suitable age or discretion at any such place cannot be found,then
by affixing a copy in a conspicuous place on the property where the failure to
comply is occurring and also be delivering a copy to a person of suitable age
and discretion there residing, or employed, if such person can be found, and
also sending a copy through the U.S. mail, first class, registered postage
prepaid,addressed to the customer at the place where the property is situated
as well as such other address provided by the customer for bills for water or
electric service if such can be ascertained.
3. Said notice shall contain, in addition to the facts of the violation, a statement of the
possible penalties for' each violation and statement informing the customer of his
right to a hearing on the violation.
(e) appeals,Any customer against whom a penalty is levied pursuant to this section shall have
a right to an appeal, in the first instance to the General Manager with the right of appeal to
the District's Board of Directors, on the merits of the alleged violation,upon written requestof
that customer to the District within fifteen days of the date of notification of the violation.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors at a meeting duly called and held within the
District on the second day of November 2005 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Directors Aguera, Hemig, Sutton, Taylor and Thomason
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
�y
TRUCKEE DON R PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
By
J. n lg, President of the Board
ATTEST'
Peter L. Holzmelster, Clerk of the Board
rf cp
ice#° T O#C14 DOCUMENT
€EO.
i
l
E
4 Ordinance 2005-05
Attachment 2
EOYEFlOMUNONOR G.BROWN JR.
' O
O A 4 1!O R H I A MIAR` 10"ORIOUEZ
CRE
Water Boards ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
State Water Resources Control Board
NOTICE OF PROPOSED EMERGENCY RULEMAKING
July 8, 2014
Prohibition of Activities and Mandatory Actions During Drought Emergency
Required Notice of Proposed Emergency Action
Government Code section 11346.1, subdivision (a)(2) requires that, at least five working days
prior to submission of a proposed emergency regulation to the Office of Administrative Law
(OAL), the adopting agency must provide a notice of the proposed emergency action to every
person who has filed a request for notice of regulatory action with the agency. After the
submission of the proposed emergency action to OAL, OAL shall allow interested persons five
calendar days to submit comments on the proposed emergency regulations as set forth in
Government Code section 11349.6. This document and the accompanying information provide
the required notice.
Proposed Emergency Action
On January 17, 2014, Governor Brown declared a drought state of emergency. On
April 25, 2014 the Governor signed an Executive Order calling on the State to redouble state
drought actions. Among other things, the Executive Order provides that: "The Water Board
shall direct urban water suppliers that are not already implementing drought response plans to
limit outdoor irrigation and other wasteful water practices such as those identified in this
Executive Order. The Water Board will request by June 15 an update from urban water
agencies on their actions to reduce water usage and the effectiveness of these efforts. The
Water Board is directed to adopt emergency regulations as it deems necessary, pursuant to
Water Code section 1058.5, to implement this directive."
On May 23, 2014 the State Water Board issued a survey to more than 400 urban water
suppliers inquiring on the implementation of their urban water conservation actions and the
effectiveness of those actions. The State Water Board's June 17, 2014 meeting included an
informational update on the survey results and a description of urban water conservation efforts
being carried out by certain urban water suppliers.
Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Board the authority to adopt emergency
regulations in certain drought years in order to: "prevent the waste, unreasonable use,
unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of water, to promote water
recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available
under the diverter's priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the foregoing, to require reporting
of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports."
On July 15, 2014, the State Water Board will consider a proposed resolution adopting
emergency regulations adding new sections to Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations.
The proposed emergency regulations include a prohibition on certain classes of water use, an
order for all urban water suppliers to implement mandatory conservation measures, and an
order for water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to provide monthly data on
water production.
N-1
Attachment 2
Proposed Text of Emergency Regulations
See the attached proposed text of the emergency regulations.
Finding of Emergency (Gov. Code, § 11346.1, subd. (b))
The State Water Board finds that an emergency exists due to severe drought conditions, as
identified in the Governor's drought emergency proclamations. Immediate action is needed to
effectively increase water conservation so that remaining supplies are maintained to address
the present drought emergency. The State Water Board's May 2014 Drought Survey results
demonstrated that urban water conservation efforts could be augmented to minimize the
potential risks of threatened severe supply shortages. In addition, the current extent of
voluntary conservation goals established by many urban water suppliers will not provide for
timely and effective attainment of the State's conservation needs, which include the
maintenance of remaining supplies. Without adequate reserves, water suppliers will be unable
to address the drought emergency. The emergency regulation improves the State Water
Board's and local agencies' abilities to quickly and effectively implement and enforce mandatory
water conservation measures during the current drought to help preserve the State's supplies
during the drought emergency.
The State Water Board is unable to address the situation through non-emergency regulations
because the standard rulemaking process cannot timely address the current severe drought
emergency that is the focus of these regulations. Furthermore, the Governor's April 25, 2014
Executive Order orders the State Water Board to adopt emergency regulations pursuant to
Water Code section 1058.5 to address the issues that are the focus of these regulations.
Authority and Reference (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(2))
Water Code sections 1058 and 1058.5 provide authority for the emergency regulations. The
revised emergency regulations implement, interpret, or make specific Water Code sections 102,
104, 105, 350, 10617, and 10632.
Informative Digest(Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(3))
At present, there is no statewide prohibition on individual activities to promote conservation.
There is also no law or regulation requiring urban water suppliers to affirmatively adopt drought
shortage contingency plans, implement specific stages of their drought shortage contingency
plans, or report the amount of water they produce to the state. There is also no law or
regulation requiring distributors of public water supplies who are not urban water suppliers to
adopt water shortage contingency plans, limit outdoor irrigation by their customers, or
implement other mandatory conservation measures. The proposed regulation constitutes the
first statewide directive to individuals and to urban water suppliers to undertake specific actions
to respond to the drought emergency; consequently, the proposed regulation is consistent and
compatible with existing regulations on this subject. The proposed regulation neither differs
from nor conflicts with an existing comparable federal statute or regulation.
The proposed regulation is intended to safeguard urban water supplies in the event of another
dry year. It is both reasonable and prudent to maintain urban water supplies to the maximum
extent feasible to provide local agencies with the necessary flexibility to meet the health and
safety needs of Californians during the drought emergency. California has been subject to
multi-year droughts in the past and there is no guarantee that precipitation this winter will lift the
State out of the current drought conditions. Moreover, climate change science indicates that the
Southwestern United States are becoming drier, increasing the likelihood of prolonged droughts.
In addition, drought conditions have already forced the State Water Board to curtail surface
water diversions, and many groundwater basins around the state are already in overdraft
conditions that will likely worsen due to groundwater pumping this summer. Many water supply
systems face a present or threatened risk of inadequate supply. Should drought conditions
N-2
Attachment 2
persist into 2015, more water supply systems will be at risk of depleting supplies, presenting a
great risk to the health and safety of the people supplied by those systems. Maintaining urban
water supplies through enhanced conservation will reduce the risks to health and safety and
reduce negative impacts to the State's economy.
Each of the specific prohibitions on water uses is necessary to promote water conservation to
maintain an adequate supply during the drought emergency, which cannot be done if water is
being used in an excessive or wasteful manner. These prohibitions affect practices that use
excessive amounts of water or where more efficient and less wasteful alternatives are available.
These practices are particularly unreasonable during a drought due to the need to conserve
limited water supplies to meet health and safety needs. Consequently, the proposed regulation
will further protection of the environment.
Additional benefits will be realized should the Board adopt the proposed regulations. These
benefits include the following:
• Reduced water bills for customers that reduce water use (some of these savings will
generate additional economic activity, such as investments in drought-tolerant
landscaping);
• Increased water quality in receiving waters due to lower runoff volumes;
• Increased drought awareness and shared sense of responsibility among urban water
users;
• More effective tracking of total urban water use; and
• Reduced potential for severe economic disruption if 2015 is another dry year.
The proposed emergency adoption of section X sets forth the State Water Resources Control
Board's findings of drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.1
directs individuals statewide to refrain from engaging in certain activities to promote
conservation to meet the drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.2
directs urban water suppliers to report information to the Board and to take actions to promote
conservation and directs all other water suppliers to take actions to promote conservation.
Proposed Section X sets forth the Board's findings of drought emergency, noting the Governor's
adoption of two emergency proclamations pertaining to drought conditions, the persistence of
drought conditions, the dry nature of the preceding two years, and the likelihood that drought
conditions will continue.
Proposed Section X.1 prohibits several activities, except where necessary to address an
immediate health and safety need or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a
state or federal agency, to promote conservation. The section prohibits the application of water
to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes visible runoff, the use of a hose to wash an
automobile except where the hose is equipped with a shut-off nozzle, the application of water to
hardscapes, and the use of potable water in non-recirculating ornamental fountains.
Proposed Section X.2 directs urban water suppliers to implement the stage of their water
shortage contingency plans that impose mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation, requires
those urban water suppliers without adequate drought shortage contingency plans to adopt
them or other measures to promote conservation within thirty days, and report monthly water
production information to the Board. The section also directs distributors of public water
supplies that are not urban water suppliers to either limit outdoor irrigation or implement another
mandatory conservation measure or measures to achieve conservation.
N-3
Attachment 2
Other Matters Prescribed by Statute (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(4))
The proposed emergency regulation would be adopted in response to conditions which exist, or
are threatened, in a critically dry year immediately preceded by two or more consecutive below
normal, dry, or critically dry years or during a period for which the Governor has issued a
proclamation of a state of emergency under the California Emergency Services Act (Chapter 7
(commencing with Section 8550) of Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code) based on
drought conditions.
Local Mandate (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(5))
The State Water Resources Control Board has determined that adoption of proposed sections X
and X.1 does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts. The sections are
generally applicable law.
The State Water Resources Control Board has further determined that adoption of proposed
section X.2 does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts, because the
local agencies affected by the section have the authority to levy service charges, fees, or
assessments sufficient to pay for the mandate program or increased level of service. (See Gov.
Code, § 17556.)
Estimate of Cost or Savings (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(6))
Increased urban water conservation will result in reduced water use, which in turn will result in
reduced water sales and lost revenue for urban water suppliers. This loss in revenue will be a
function of the amount of water conserved (and therefore not sold) and the unit price that water
would have sold for. In addition to lost revenue from reduced water sales, urban water suppliers
will also incur costs associated with water production reporting as required by the proposed
emergency regulations. The State Water Board estimates that local agencies that are urban
water suppliers could collectively realize as much as $438,185,664 in lost revenue as a result of
implementing the proposed regulations. Additionally, the reporting costs to local government
are estimated to be $1,029,600. The total costs to local government are therefore estimated to
be $439,215,264, which is the sum of estimated lost revenues and the estimated reporting
costs.
Implementation of the proposed emergency regulations will result in additional workload for the
State Water Board and possibly for the Department of Water Resources, however, this work will
be accomplished through redirection of resources within existing agency budgets. Significant
costs or saving for State agencies are therefore not anticipated.
The above summary information is explained in greater detail in the State Water Board's
Emergency Regulations Digest, which is attached.
N-4
Attachment 3
PROPOSED TEXT OF EMERGENCY REGULATIONS
Article X. Prohibition of Activities and Mandatory Actions During Drought
Emergency
Sec. X Findings of Drought Emergency
(a) The State Water Resources Control Board finds as follows:
(1) On January 17, 2014,the Governor issued a proclamation of a state of
emergency under the California Emergency Services Act based on drought conditions;
(2) On April 25, 2014,the Governor issued a proclamation of a continued state of
emergency under the California Emergency Services Act based on continued drought
conditions;
(3) The drought conditions that formed the basis of the Governor's emergency
proclamations continue to exist;
(4)The present year is critically dry and has been immediately preceded by two or
more consecutive below normal, dry, or critically dry years; and
(5) The drought conditions will likely continue for the foreseeable future and
additional action by both the State Water Resources Control Board and local water
suppliers will likely be necessary to further promote conservation.
Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.
References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105.
Sec. X.1 Prohibited Activities in Promotion of Water Conservation
(a) To promote water conservation, each of the following actions is prohibited,
except where necessary to address an immediate health and safety need or to comply with
a term or condition in a permit issued by a state or federal agency:
(1) The application of water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes runoff
such that water flows onto adjacent property,non-irrigated areas,private and public
walkways, roadways,parking lots, or structures;
(2)The use of a hose to wash an automobile, except where the hose is fitted with
a shut-off nozzle or device attached to it that causes it to cease dispensing water
immediately when not in use;
(3) The application of water to any hard surface, including but not limited to
driveways, sidewalks, and asphalt; and
(4) The use of potable water in a fountain or other decorative water feature,
except where the water is part of a recirculating system.
(b) The taking of any action prohibited in subdivision (a) of this section is an
infraction,punishable by a fine of up to five hundred dollars ($500) for each day in which
the violation occurs.
Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.
References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105.
1
Attachment 3
PROPOSED TEXT OF EMERGENCY REGULATIONS
Sec. X.2 Mandatory Actions by Water Suppliers
(a) The term"urban water supplier,"when used in this section, refers to a supplier
that meets the definition set forth in Water Code section 10617.
(b)To promote water conservation, each urban water supplier shall implement all
requirements and actions of the stage of its water shortage contingency plan that imposes
mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation.
(c) To promote water conservation, each urban water supplier that does not have a
water shortage contingency plan or has been notified by the Department of Water
Resources that its water shortage contingency plan does not meet the requirements of
Water Code section 10632 shall,within thirty(30) days, limit outdoor irrigation by the
persons it serves to no more than two days per week or shall implement another
mandatory conservation measure or measures intended to achieve a comparable reduction
in water consumption by the persons it seines relative to the amount consumed in 2013.
(d)In furtherance of the promotion of water conservation each urban water
supplier shall prepare and submit to the State Water Resources Control Board by the 15th
of each month a monitoring report on forms provided by the Board. The monitoring
report shall include the amount of potable water the urban water supplier produced,
including treated water provided by a wholesaler, in the preceding calendar month. The
monitoring report shall also estimate the gallons of water per person per day used by the
persons it serves. In its initial monitoring report, each urban water supplier shall state the
number of persons it serves.
(e) To promote water conservation, each distributor of a public water supply, as
defined in Water Code section 350, that is not an urban water supplier shall, within thirty
(30) days,take one or more of the following actions:
(1) Limit outdoor irrigation by the persons it serves to no more than two days per
week; or
(2) Implement another mandatory conservation measure or measures intended to
achieve a comparable reduction in water consumption by the persons it serves relative to
the amount consumed in 2013.
Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.
References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105; 350; 10617; 10632.
2
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Prohibition of Activities and Mandatory Actions During Drought Emergency
FINDING OF EMERGENCY
The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board or Board) finds that an
emergency exists due to severe drought conditions and that adoption of the proposed
emergency regulation is necessary to address the emergency. California is currently in the third
year of a significant drought resulting in severe impacts to California's water supplies and its
ability to meet all of the demands for water in the State. On January 17, 2014,
Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. declared a drought state of emergency. On April 25, 2014 the
Governor signed an Executive Order stating, among things, "...that severe drought conditions
continue to present urgent challenges: water shortages in communities across the state, greatly
increased wildfire activity, diminished water for agricultural production, degraded habitat for
many fish and wildlife species, threat of saltwater contamination of large fresh water supplies
conveyed through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta, and additional water scarcity if
drought conditions continue into 2095." Immediate action is needed to ensure water suppliers
and all Californians are taking sufficient actions to conserve water and preserve the State's
water supply. Due to these concerns, the April 25, 2014 Executive Order, directs the State
Water Board to adopt emergency regulations as it deems necessary, pursuant to Water Code
section 1058.5, to ensure that urban water suppliers implement drought response plans to limit
outdoor irrigation and other wasteful water practices.
Authority for Emergency Regulations
Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Board the authority to adopt emergency
regulations in years when the Governor has issued a proclamation of emergency based upon
drought conditions or when in response to drought conditions that exist, or are threatened, in a
critically dry year immediately preceded by two or more consecutive below normal, dry, or
critically dry years. The Board may adopt regulations under such circumstances to: "prevent the
waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of
water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions
when water is not available under the diverter's priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the
foregoing, to require reporting of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports."
Emergency regulations adopted under Water Code section 1058.5 may remain in effect for up
to 270 days. Per Water Code section 1058.5, subdivision (b), any findings of emergency the
Board makes in connection with the adoption of an emergency regulation under the section are
not subject to review by the Office of Administrative Law.
Government Code section 11346.1, subdivision (a)(2) requires that, at least five working days
prior to submission of the proposed emergency action to the Office of Administrative Law, the
adopting agency provide a notice of the proposed emergency action to every person who has
filed a request for notice of regulatory action with the agency. After submission of the proposed
emergency regulations to the Office of Administrative Law, the Office of Administrative Law shall
allow interested persons five calendar days to submit comments on the proposed emergency
regulations as set forth in Government Code Section 11349.6.
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
The information contained within this finding of emergency provides the information necessary
to support the State Water Board's emergency rulemaking under Water Code section 1058.5
and also meets the emergency regulation criteria of Government Code section 11346.1 and the
applicable requirements of section 11346.5.
Evidence of Emergency
The U.S. Drought Monitor currently classifies the entire state of California as experiencing
severe to exceptional drought conditions. In most years, California receives about half of its
precipitation in the months of December, January and February, with much of that precipitation
falling as snow in the Sierra. A handful of large winter storms can make the difference between
a wet year and a dry one. In normal years, the snowpack stores water during the winter months
and releases it through melting in the spring and summer to replenish rivers and reservoirs and
recharge aquifers. However, relatively dry weather conditions this year have reduced the
amount of snowpack in California's mountains. Each of this season's first four snow surveys —
conducted in early January, late January, late February and early April—found a statewide
snowpack water equivalent far below average for the dates of the surveys. The 2014 statewide
snowpack began melting and running into the state's watercourses in early April. After reaching
a peak of 10.1 inches, the snowpack had almost completely melted away by late May,.
Rainfall also has been far below normal during this water year as recorded by weather stations
throughout the state. Despite a few storms that brought rain in February and March, electronic
readings indicate that precipitation at eight Northern California stations was only about
60 percent of normal for late April. The electronic readings for San Joaquin stations show even
drier conditions there—less than 50 percent of normal precipitation from October 1 to late May.
As of May 31, statewide precipitation was 55 percent of average to date; runoff was 35 percent
of average to date; and snow water equivalent was three percent of average for the date (one
percent of the April 1 average).
Due to these drought conditions and dry conditions for the past several years, storage in
California's reservoirs is also at below average levels, at 65 percent of average for the state at
the end of May. Current storage levels in key reservoirs reflect this trend. Shasta Lake,
California's and the Central Valley Project's (CVP) largest reservoir, is at 45 percent of its
4.5 million acre-feet (MAF) capacity (54 percent of its historical average for this date). Lake
Oroville, the State Water Project's (SWP) principal reservoir, is at 47 percent of its 3.5 MAF
capacity (57 percent of its historical average for the date). Trinity Reservoir is at 47 percent of
its 2.4 MAF capacity (54 percent of historical average). San Luis Reservoir, a critical south-of-
Delta reservoir for both the SWP and CVP, is at 38 percent of its 2 MAF capacity (52 percent of
average for this date). Folsom Reservoir is at 53 percent of its 1 MAF capacity (64 percent of
average for this date). New Melones Reservoir is at 32 percent of its 2.4 MAF capacity
(50 percent of average for this date). New Don Pedro Reservoir is at 52 percent of its 2 MAF
capacity (67 percent of average for this date) and Lake McClure is at 29 percent of its 1 MAF
(42 percent of average for this date).
2
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Local, state and federal water agencies across California have limited supplies due to the
drought. In response, those agencies have taken various actions, including reducing or
eliminating contract water deliveries and implementing mandatory and voluntary conservation
efforts. A total of 46 Emergency Proclamations addressing the drought are known to have been
issued by city, county, special districts, and tribal governments. The State's two major water
supply projects, the CVP and SWP, have also announced severe reductions in contract
deliveries. The United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has announced that its
regular CVP agricultural contractors will receive no deliveries in 2014 and its municipal and
industrial contractors will receive 50 percent of their historic use. The Department of Water
Resources (DWR) has announced that its deliveries to its regular SWP contractors will be
reduced to five percent for both municipal and agricultural contractors. Senior SWP contractors
have also received less than their full contract amounts. In addition to water supply reductions
and conservation efforts, many water users have requested and received approvals for changes
to regulatory requirements, including water right requirements, to extend limited supplies. Many
water users have also pursued water transfers and purchases from willing sellers to make up for
reduced supplies.
Need for the Regulation
Immediate action is needed to effectively increase water conservation so that remaining
supplies are maintained to address the ongoing drought emergency. The State Water Board's
May 2014 Drought Survey results demonstrated that urban water conservation efforts could be
augmented to minimize the potential risks of threatened severe supply shortages. In addition,
current voluntary conservation goals established by many urban water suppliers will not provide
for timely and effective attainment of the State's conservation needs, which include the
maintenance of remaining supplies. Without adequate reserves, water suppliers will be unable
to address the drought emergency. The emergency regulation improves the State Water
Board's and local agencies' abilities to quickly and effectively implement and enforce mandatory
water conservation measures during the current drought emergency to help preserve the State's
supplies throughout a continuing drought that could last through 2015 or beyond.
Description and Effect of Proposed Regulation
The proposed regulation consists of three requirements: a prohibition on certain types of water
use, an order for all urban water suppliers to implement mandatory conservation measures, and
an order for water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to provide monthly data on
water production. These requirements are intended to preserve urban water supplies. It is both
reasonable and prudent to preserve urban water supplies to the maximum extent feasible to
provide local agencies with the necessary flexibility to meet the health and safety needs of
Californians during the drought emergency. California has been subject to multi-year droughts
in the past and there is no guarantee that precipitation this winter will lift the State out of the
current drought conditions. Moreover, climate change science indicates that the Southwestern
United States are becoming drier, increasing the likelihood of prolonged droughts. In addition,
drought conditions have already forced the State Water Board to curtail surface water
diversions, and many groundwater basins around the state are already in overdraft conditions
3
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
that will likely worsen due to groundwater pumping this summer. Many water supply systems
face a present or threatened risk of inadequate supply. Should drought conditions persist into
2015, more water supply systems will be at risk of depleting supplies, presenting a great risk to
the health and safety of the people supplied by those systems. Maintaining urban water
supplies through enhanced conservation will reduce the risks to health and safety and reduce
negative impacts to the State's economy.
Each of the specific prohibitions on water uses is necessary to promote water conservation to
maintain an adequate supply during the drought emergency, which cannot be done if water is
being used in an excessive or wasteful manner. These prohibitions affect practices that use
excessive amounts of water or where more efficient and less wasteful alternatives are available.
These practices are particularly unreasonable during a drought due to the need to conserve
limited water supplies to meet health and safety needs. Exceptions to meet immediate health
and safety concerns or to comply with state or federal permit requirements are available,
however.
A prohibition on runoff of outdoor irrigation water is necessary to promote water conservation to
address the drought emergency. Irrigating residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational
landscapes to the point of visible runoff is an excessive use of water and more efficient
alternatives are available. This practice depletes water supplies, whose maintenance is critical
during a drought for health, safety, and, in some cases, operational flexibility. Runoff enters the
storm drain system or evaporates, and does not provide for domestic use, sanitation, or fire
protection, which are the primary needs that public water supply distributors must meet during
drought periods. (Wat. Code, § 354.)
A prohibition on vehicle washing with a running hose (a hose that is not equipped with a shut-off
nozzle) promotes water conservation to address the drought emergency through the use of
more efficient and effective washing techniques and options. Washing cars at commercial car
wash establishments—which are widely distributed throughout the state--or manual washing
with a small amount of water in a bucket or with a hose equipped with a shut-off nozzle are
efficient and reasonable techniques for those with a need to wash a vehicles.
A prohibition on watering of hardscapes, such as driveways, sidewalks, and asphalt, promotes
water conservation to address the drought emergency through the use of more efficient and
effective cleaning methods for hardscapes. For example, many hardscapes can be cleaned
with a broom, thus conserving water for other uses during a time of extreme scarcity.
A prohibition on the use of potable water without recirculation pumps for fountains and other
decorative water fixtures promotes water conservation to address the drought emergency
through saving water that would evaporate, leak, or not be reused. In addition, ornamental
water fixtures do not provide for domestic use, sanitation, or fire protection, and therefore do not
promote a use of paramount importance during the drought emergency.
The proposed regulation to require urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more service
connections to implement their Water Shortage Contingency Plans (WSCPs) at a level that
includes mandatory use restrictions, and water suppliers without WSCPs and water suppliers
4
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
which have fewer than 3,000 service connections to implement mandatory restrictions, is
necessary to promote conservation to address the drought emergency because mandatory
restrictions have proven to be effective at reducing water use. Data collected from the State
Water Board's May 2014 Urban Water Conservation Survey indicates that 53 of the 268 urban
water suppliers who responded to the survey (representing approximately 10 million retail
customers) have already formally invoked their drought shortage contingency plans and have
implemented both mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use and prohibitions on runoff into
streets and gutters. Requiring mandatory use restrictions for the rest of the water suppliers
(representing approximately 28 million retail customers) will ensure that water use restrictions
are applied equitably and to the greatest effect statewide.
One of the options for mandatory use restrictions is limiting outdoor irrigation to no more than
two days per week. This limit is necessary to promote conservation to address the drought
emergency because outdoor irrigation accounts for 44 percent of urban water use (see Table 1
below), outdoor irrigation is generally more discretionary than other types of use, and because
studies have shown that urban landscapes are often over-watered. Two days per week of
outdoor irrigation increases conservation and reduces the likelihood of over-irrigation and visible
runoff.
The proposed regulation to require urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more service
connections to provide the Board with monthly potable water production figures along with a
calculation of gallons per capita per day (GPCD) is necessary so that the Board can track the
effectiveness of the proposed regulations and urban water conservation actions. Such
monitoring reports will promote the conservation necessary to address the drought emergency.
Estimate of Water Savings from Proposed Regulation
According to the Department of Water Resource's Public Review Draft Water Plan Update
2013, total urban water use between 1998 and 2005 was 8.8million acre-feet. The breakdown
of the urban use by customer class is provided in the Table 1.
Table 1: Urban Water Use by Sector in Million Acre-Feet(MAF)
Sector Volume(MAF)
Residential landscape 3,
Large landscape 0.9
Indoor residential 2.7
Commercial, institutional,and industrial 1.7
Other 0.5
Total 8.8
Source:DWR Public Review Draft Water Plan Update 2013
Outdoor irrigation represents 44 percent of the total urban water use (3 MAF for residential
landscape and 0.9 MAF for large landscapes). The proposed regulation prohibiting visible
runoff affects the 44 percent of statewide urban use dedicated to outdoor irrigation. The
5
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest(Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
proposed regulation to require implementation of WSCPs at a mandatory level by urban water
suppliers would, in some cases, entail restrictions on use by other customer classes, including
residential indoor use in instances where mandatory restrictions include rationing of residential
use. However, a review of the State Water Board's May 2014 Urban Water Conservation
Survey results and a select group of WSCPs indicates that water suppliers with significant
supply shortages have already implemented mandatory restrictions and are therefore already in
compliance with the proposed regulation, while those that will need to invoke their WSCPs at a
mandatory level to comply do not include restrictions on water use by the non-residential
classes at the first level of mandatory restrictions. Thus, the Board estimates that the proposed
regulations will have a minimal impact on the 56 percent of water used for purposes other than
outdoor irrigation.
Many California Urban water suppliers are already implementing water conservation measures
commensurate with those required by the proposed regulations and therefore conservation
savings attained by their customers are not attributable to the proposed regulations. As
described above, 53 of the 268 urban water suppliers who responded to the survey indicated
that they had already formally invoked their drought shortage contingency plans and have
implemented both mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use and prohibitions on runoff into
streets and gutters. Therefore, these 53 urban water suppliers are already implementing
conservation measures that are commensurate with the requirements of the proposed
emergency regulation. These 53 urban water suppliers represent approximately 10 million retail
customers, which accounts for about 38 percent of the survey response by retail population.
The Board estimates that all 268 of the survey respondents collectively are representative of the
urban water conservation actions being taken statewide. Based upon these assumptions,
62 percent of urban water use would be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations while
38 percent of urban water use would not be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations
(i.e, they are already implementing the required conservation measures).
Various studies have analyzed the response of urban populations to mandatory use restrictions
imposed during drought conditions. Multiple studies conclude that mandatory use restrictions
are more effective than voluntary conservation measures because areas that have imposed
mandatory use restrictions have achieved greater use reductions than areas that imposed only
voluntary measures, controlling for other variables. The amount of conservation achievable
through mandatory restrictions varies. Conservation savings of up to 29 percent have been
observed. For example, a study conducted on the effects of water demand management
policies of eight California water agencies during the period from 1989-1996, which included
3 years of drought (1989-1991), found that rationing and use restrictions were correlated with
use reductions of 19 percent and 29 percent, respectively. The study's authors concluded:
In general, relatively moderate (5-15%) reductions in aggregate demand can be achieved through
modest price increases and "voluntary" alternative [Demand-Side Management] policy
instruments, such as public information campaigns. However, to achieve larger reductions in
demand (greater than 15%), policymakers will likely need to consider either relatively large price
increases, more stringent mandatory policy instruments (such as use restrictions), or a package
of policy instruments. (Dixon & Moore, 1996).
6
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
A recent study from UCLA on use reductions in Los Angeles during the 2007-2009 drought
reached similar conclusions:
Our results indicate that mandatory restrictions are most effective at reducing water consumption
for [Single-Family Residential] households. The greatest impact of measures resulted from the
combination of mandatory watering restrictions and the price increase, which led to a water
reduction of 23% in July/August 2009, while voluntary restrictions led to only a 6% reduction in
water use. (Mini, 2013).
In addition, a study of Virginia's severe 2002 drought found that mandatory use restrictions
coupled with an aggressive information and enforcement campaign led to a 22 percent
reduction in use. (Halich & Stephenson, 2006). Thus, given the severity of the current drought
and the level of resources already devoted to attaining the state's conservation goals, the Board
anticipates the proposed regulations can result in up to a 20 percent reduction in outdoor water
use, totaling 0.48 million acre-feet, as calculated below.
Total urban water use for outdoor irrigation: 3.9 MAF
Urban water use for outdoor irrigation affected by the proposed regulations: 3.9*0.62 = 2.4 MAF
Estimated conservation savings from adoption of the proposed regulations: 2.4*0.2 = 0.48 MAF
Additional Benefits to Proposed Regulations
Staff has determined that additional benefits will be realized should the Board adopt the
proposed regulations. These benefits include the following:
• Reduced water bills for customers that reduce water use (some of these savings will
generate additional economic activity, such as investments in drought-tolerant
landscaping)
• Increased water quality in receiving waters due to lower runoff volumes
• Increased drought awareness and shared sense of responsibility among urban water
users
• More effective tracking of total urban water use
• Reduced potential for severe economic disruption if 2015 is another dry year
These benefits will offset some of the fiscal impacts to water suppliers when benefits and costs
are viewed from a statewide perspective. Therefore, these benefits provide additional
justification for adopting the proposed regulations.
References:
2014 National Climate Assessment, US Global Change Research Program, Washington, D.C.,
accessed from: http://nca20l4.globalchan.ge.gov/report, on June 29, 2014.
Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk, California Natural Resources Agency,
Sacramento CA, accessed from:
http://resources.ca.gov/climate adaptation/docs/Safeguarding California Public Draft Dec-
10.pdf, on June 29, 2014.
7
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Diagnostic Discussion, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center, Washington,
D.C.,accessed from:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis monitoring/enso advisory/index.shtml, on
June 29, 2014.
State Water Resources Control Board Water Conservation Survey results as of June 19, 2014,
Sacramento, CA, accessed from:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water issues/programs/drought/workshops results.s
html
Consideration of a Proposed Resolution Regarding Drought-Related Emergency Regulations for
Curtailment of Diversions to Protect Senior Water Rights, State Water Resources Control
Board, Division of Water Rights, Sacramento, CA, accessed from:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board info/agendas/2014/iul/070114agnd revised.pdf, on June
29, 2014.
Report to the Governor's Drought Task Force— Groundwater Basins with Potential Water
Shortages and Gaps in Groundwater Monitoring, Department of Water Resources, Sacramento,
CA, April 30, 2014, accessed from:
http://www.water.ca.qov/waterconditions/docs/Drought Response-
Groundwater Basins Apri130 Final BC.pdf, on June 29, 2014.
Urban Non-point Source Fact Sheet, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.,
accessed from: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/urban facts.cfm, on June 29, 2014.
California Water Code, Sections 354, 10608, 10630-10634,
California Governor Brown State of Emergency Declaration dated January 17, 2014:
http:/�/gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18368
California Governor Brown Executive Order for State Drought Actions dated April 25, 2014:
http://(`gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18496
Dixon, Lloyd S., Moore, Nancy Y., and Pint, Ellen M., Drought Management Policies and
Economic Effects in Urban Areas of California, 1987-1992, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica
CA, 1996.
Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Estimation of Residential Outdoor Water Use in Los
Angeles, California, Landscape and Urban Planning 127 (2014) 124-135.
Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Patterns and Controlling Factors of Residential Use in Los
Angeles, California, Water Policy Uncorrected Proof(2014) 1-16.
Mini, Caroline, 2013: Residential water use and landscape vegetation dynamics in Los
Angeles, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
8
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Renwick, Mary E., and Green, Richard D., Do Residential Water Demand Side Management
Policies Measure Up? An Analysis of Eight California Water Agencies, Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management 40,37-55 (2000).
Olmstead, Sheila M., and Stavins, Robert N., Managing Water Demand: Price vs. Non-Price
Conservation Measures, A Pioneer Institute White Paper, No. 39 (2007).
Halich, Greg, and Stephenson, Kurt, The Effectiveness of Drought Management Programs in
Reducing Residential Water-Use in Virginia, Virginia Water Resources Research Center,
Blacksburg, VA, April 21, 2006.
California Department of Water resources, Public Review Draft (PRD) of California Water Plan
Update 2013 (Update 2013) accessed from:
htti)://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/cwpu20l3/prd/index.cfm, on June 29, 2014.
Informative Digest
Summary of Existinq Laws and Regulations
At present, there is no statewide prohibition on individual activities to promote conservation.
There is also no law or regulation requiring urban water suppliers to affirmatively adopt drought
shortage contingency plans, implement specific stages of their drought shortage contingency
plans, or report the amount of water they produce to the state. There is also no law or
regulation requiring distributors of public water supplies who are not urban water suppliers to
adopt water shortage contingency plans, limit outdoor irrigation by their customers, or
implement other mandatory conservation measures. The proposed regulation constitutes the
first statewide directive to individuals and to urban water suppliers to undertake specific actions
to respond to the drought emergency; consequently, the proposed regulation is consistent and
compatible with existing regulations on this subject. The proposed regulation neither differs
from nor conflicts with an existing comparable federal statute or regulation.
Description and Effect of Proposed Regulations
The proposed emergency adoption of section X sets forth the State Water Resources Control
Board's findings of drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.1
directs individuals statewide to refrain from engaging in certain activities to promote
conservation to meet the drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.2
directs urban water suppliers to report information to the Board and to take actions to promote
conservation and directs all other water suppliers to take actions to promote conservation.
9
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Proposed Emergency Regulation Section X
Proposed Section X sets forth the Board's findings of drought emergency, noting the Governor's
adoption of two emergency proclamations pertaining to drought conditions, the persistence of
drought conditions, the dry nature of the preceding two years, and the likelihood that drought
conditions will continue.
Proposed Emergency Regulation Section X.1
Proposed Section X.1 prohibits several activities, except where necessary to address an
immediate health and safety need or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a
state or federal agency, to promote conservation. The section prohibits the application of water
to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes visible runoff, the use of a hose to wash an
automobile except where the hose is equipped with a shut-off nozzle, the application of water to
hardscapes, and the use of potable water in non-recirculating ornamental fountains.
Proposed Emergency Regulation Section X.2
Proposed Section X.2 directs urban water suppliers to implement the stage of their water
shortage contingency plans that impose mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation, requires
those urban water suppliers without adequate drought shortage contingency plans to adopt
them or other measures to promote conservation within thirty days, and report monthly water
production information to the Board. The section also directs distributors of public water
supplies that are not urban water suppliers to either limit outdoor irrigation, or implement
another mandatory conservation measure or measures to achieve conservation.
Authority and Reference Citations
For Section X
Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.
References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105.
For Section X.1
Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.
References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105.
For Section X.2
Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.
References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105; 350; 10617; 10632.
10
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Mandate on Local Agencies or School Districts
The State Water Resources Control Board has determined that adoption of sections X and X.1
does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts. The sections are
generally applicable law.
The State Water Resources Control Board has further determined that adoption of section X.2
does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts, because the local
agencies affected by the section have the authority to levy service charges, fees, or
assessments sufficient to pay for the mandate program or increased level of service. (See Gov.
Code, § 17556.)
Suspension of California Environmental Quality Act
On April 24, 2014, the Governor issued an executive order addressing the drought emergency,
which, among other things, suspended the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) as
applied to the State Water Resources Control Board's adoption of emergency regulations to
"prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of
diversion of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, and to require curtailment
of diversions when water is not available under the diverter's priority of right." The proposed
emergency regulation falls under this suspension.
Public Agency and Government Fiscal Impact Analysis
Summary
Increased urban water conservation will result in reduced water use by the customer, which in
turn will result in reduced water sales and lost revenue for urban water suppliers. This loss in
revenue will be a function of the amount of water conserved (and therefore not sold) and the
unit price that water would have sold for. California Urban Water Supplier water rates are
primarily comprised of a fixed and a variable component. The variable portion of the rate is
based on the volume of water used by the customer and generally the fixed portion does not
change with use. The variable portion of the rate therefore represents the unit cost of lost
revenue.
In addition to lost revenue from reduced water sales, urban water suppliers will also incur costs
associated with water production reporting as required by the proposed emergency regulations.
Implementation of the proposed emergency regulations will result in additional workload for the
State Water Board and possibly for the Department of Water Resources, however, this work will
be accomplished through redirection of resources within existing agency budgets. Significant
costs or saving for State agencies are therefore not anticipated.
11
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Fiscal Impacts to Public Water Supply Agencies
Fiscal impacts to urban water agencies are assumed to result primarily from changes in water
sale revenues. These are calculated below by developing a statewide average variable rate for
water and multiplying it by the estimate of water sales reduction resulting from the proposed
regulation.
Determination of Average Water Rates
Data was compiled from a 2013 Water Rate Survey prepared by published by Raftelis Financial
Consultants, Inc. and the California-Nevada Section of the American Water Works Association
to develop a statewide average estimate for the variable portion of urban water rates. The 2013
Rate Survey included information on the average fixed and variable water rates for 46 California
Counties based on survey responses from 216 urban water suppliers statewide. The average
rate (variable portion only) for each represented county was weighted by county population to
determine a statewide average rate of$ 1,086.77 per acre foot of water sold.
Estimate of Water Savings from the Proposed Emergency Regulation
According to the Department of Water Resources' Public Review Draft Water Plan Update
2013, total urban water use between 1998 and 2005 was 8.8 million acre-feet (MAF). Outdoor
irrigation represents 44 percent of the total urban water use (3 MAF for residential landscape
and 0.9 MAF for large landscapes). The proposed regulation prohibiting visible runoff therefore
affects the 44 percent of statewide urban use dedicated to outdoor irrigation. The proposed
regulation to require implementation of WSCPs at a mandatory level by urban water suppliers
would, in some cases, entail restrictions on use by other customer classes, including residential
indoor use in instances where mandatory restrictions include rationing of residential use.
However, a review of the State Water Board's May 2014 survey results and a select group of
WSCPs indicates that water suppliers with significant supply shortages have already
implemented mandatory restrictions and are therefore already in compliance with the proposed
regulation, while those that will need to invoke their WSCPs at a mandatory level to comply do
not include restrictions on water use by the non-residential classes at the first level of mandatory
restrictions. Thus, the Board estimates that the proposed regulations will have a minimal impact
on the 56 percent of water used for purposes other than outdoor irrigation.
Many California Urban water suppliers are already implementing water conservation measures
commensurate with those required by the proposed regulations and therefore conservation
savings attained by their customers are not attributable to the proposed regulations, Fifty-three
of the 268 urban water suppliers who responded to the State Water Board's survey indicated
that they had already formally invoked their drought shortage contingency plans and have
implemented both mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use and prohibitions on runoff into
streets and gutters. These 53 urban water suppliers represent approximately 10 million retail
customers, which accounts for about 38 percent of the survey response by retail population.
The Board assumes that these 53 urban water suppliers are already implementing conservation
measures that are commensurate with the requirements of the proposed emergency regulation.
The Board also assumes that all 268 of the survey respondents collectively are representative
12
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
of the urban water conservation actions being taken statewide. Based upon these assumptions,
62 percent of urban water use would be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations while
38 percent of urban water use would not be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations.
Various studies have analyzed the response of urban populations to mandatory use restrictions
imposed during drought conditions. Multiple studies conclude that mandatory use restrictions
are more effective than voluntary conservation measures because areas that have imposed
mandatory use restrictions have achieved greater use reductions than areas that imposed only
voluntary measures, controlling for other variables. The amount of conservation achievable
through mandatory restrictions varies. Conservation savings of up to 29 percent have been
observed. For example, a study conducted on the effects of water demand management
policies of eight California water agencies during the period from 1989-1996, which included
3 years of drought (1989-1991), found that rationing and use restrictions were correlated with
use reductions of 19 percent and 29 percent, respectively. The study's authors concluded:
In general, relatively moderate (5-15%) reductions in aggregate demand can be achieved through
modest price increases and "voluntary" alternative [Demand-Side Management] policy
instruments, such as public information campaigns. However, to achieve larger reductions in
demand (greater than 15%), policymakers will likely need to consider either relatively large price
increases, more stringent mandatory policy instruments (such as use restrictions), or a package
of policy instruments. (Dixon & Moore, 1996).
A recent study from UCLA on use reductions in Los Angeles during the 2007-2009 drought
reached similar conclusions:
Our results indicate that mandatory restrictions are most effective at reducing water consumption
for [Single-Family Residential] households. The greatest impact of measures resulted from the
combination of mandatory watering restrictions and the price increase, which led to a water
reduction of 23% in July/August 2009, while voluntary restrictions led to only a 6% reduction in
water use. (Mini, 2013).
In addition, a study of Virginia's severe 2002 drought found that mandatory use restrictions
coupled with an aggressive information and enforcement campaign led to a 22 percent
reduction in use. (Halich & Stephenson, 2006).
In many cases, mandatory use restrictions are instituted jointly with price increases. Although
the proposed regulations do not mandate price increases, we anticipate that many water
suppliers will implement rate design changes as part of implementing their WSCP and in order
to ameliorate the impacts of reduced revenues as sales decrease due to conservation.
Thus, given the severity of the current drought and the level of resources already devoted to
attaining the state's conservation goals, the Board anticipates the proposed regulations can
result in up to a 20 percent reduction in outdoor water use, totaling 0.48 million acre-feet, as
calculated below.
Total urban water use for outdoor irrigation: 3.9 MAF
Urban water use for outdoor irrigation affected by the proposed regulations: 3.9*0.62 = 2.4 MAF
Estimated conservation savings from adoption of the proposed regulations: 2.4*0.2 = 0.48 MAF
13
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Reduction in Public Water Supplier Water Sales Volume
As described above, urban water use for outdoor irrigation affected by the proposed regulations
is estimated to be up to 2.4 MAF per year. Urban Water suppliers in California, however, are
comprised of both governmental agencies and investor owned utilities that are regulated by the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Costs to investor owned utilities need not be
considered for the purposes of estimating the costs of the proposed regulations on local
agencies. The CPUC indicates that"there are 116 investor-owned water utilities under the
CPUC's jurisdiction providing water service to about 16 percent of California's residents". The
estimated 2.4 MAF per year of water used for outdoor irrigation can therefore be reduced by
16 percent for the purpose of determining the amount of conservation and corresponding
revenue impact to local government resulting from adoption of the proposed regulation. This
brings the total volume of outdoor irrigation water use down to approximately 2.016 MAF per
year. Since the proposed regulations are estimated to achieve in as much as a 20 percent
reduction in water use it follows that the proposed regulations could result in a reduction in
water sales by local government agencies of 403,200 acre-feet per year (i.e, 20% of 2.016
MAF).
Calculation of Decreased Public Water Supplier Sales Revenues
The estimated decreased sales revenues are a function of the average variable water rate and
the amount of decreased sales volume. The estimate of decreased sales revenues due to the
proposed regulations is $438,185,664, as calculated below.
Average statewide variable water rate: $1,086.77 per acre-foot
Estimated conservation savings (local government portion) from proposed regulations: 403,200
acre-feet
Total revenue impact: $1086.77*403,200 = $438,185,664
Note on calculation methodology
This methodology likely overstates the fiscal impact of decreased revenues for several reasons.
First, it does not account for the savings in energy and chemical costs water suppliers will
realize due to decreased water production. Second, it does not account for the avoided cost of
supply augmentation that could be necessary if not for the conservation savings generated by
the proposed regulations.
Reporting Costs
The estimated cost of reporting as would be required by the proposed emergency regulations
were determined by multiplying the total number of urban water supplies that would be required
to submit monthly water production reports by the estimated average time to compile and
submit water production information and by an average staff cost per hour. Based on
information provided by the Department of Water Resources there are 440 urban water
suppliers that are subject to Urban Water Management Planning Act requirement to prepare an
Urban Water Management Plan and therefore subject to the proposed reporting requirements.
14
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
The maximum amount of time to prepare and submit the water production data is estimated to
be 4 hours per urban water supplier per month. The estimated average total hourly staff costs
of urban water supplier staff required to complete the certification form is $65 per hour or
$260 per monthly report. If adopted, the term of the proposed emergency regulations would be
270 days or almost 9 months. Therefore, the total maximum reporting costs to urban water
suppliers as a result of the proposed regulations is estimated at$1,029,600 (440 urban water
suppliers multiplied by the $260 cost per monthly report multiplied by 9 months).
Total Implementation Cost
The total estimated cost of implementing the proposed regulations is $439,215,264, which is the
sum of estimated lost revenues to urban water suppliers and the estimated reporting costs as
described above.
References:
California Department of Water resources, Public Review Draft (PRD) of California Water Plan
Update 2013 (Update 2013) accessed from:
http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/cwpu20l3/prd/index.cfm, on June 29, 2014.
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)Website, accessed from:
http://www.cpue.ca.gov/PUC/water/, on July 1, 2014
Dixon, Lloyd S., Moore, Nancy Y., and Pint, Ellen M., Drought Management Policies and
Economic Effects in Urban Areas of California, 1987-1992, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica
CA, 1996.
IMPLAN (http://www.implan.com)
Halich, Greg, and Stephenson, Kurt, The Effectiveness of Drought Management Programs in
Reducing Residential Water-Use in Virginia, Virginia Water Resources Research Center,
Blacksburg, VA, April 21, 2006.
Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Estimation of Residential Outdoor Water Use in Los
Angeles, California, Landscape and Urban Planning 127 (2014) 124-135.
Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Patterns and Controlling Factors of Residential Use in Los
Angeles, California, Water Policy Uncorrected Proof(2014) 1-16.
Mini, Caroline, 2013:Residential water use and landscape vegetation dynamics in Los
Angeles, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
Olmstead, Sheila M., and Stavins, Robert N., Managing Water Demand: Price vs. Non-Price
Conservation Measures, A Pioneer Institute White Paper, No. 39 (2007).
15
Attachment 4
Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))
Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. and California-Nevada Section of the American Water Works
Association. 2013 Water Rate Survey.
Renwick, Mary E., and Green, Richard D., Do Residential Water Demand Side Management
Policies Measure Up?An Analysis of Eight California Water Agencies, Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management 40,37-55 (2000).
State of California, Department of Finance, E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and
the State with Annual Percent Change—January 1, 2013 and 2014. Sacramento, California,
May 2014
State Water Resources Control Board Water Conservation Survey results as of June 19, 2014,
accessed from:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water issues/programs/drought/workshops results.s
html, on June 30, 2014
State Water Resources Control Board, June 20, 2014 - Statewide Drought Related Curtailment
of Water Diversions Emergency Regulations Digest-with Appendix 10, accessed from:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water issues/programs/drought/docs/emergency re
gulations/sw eregs digest 062014.pdf, on June 30, 2014
State Water Resources Control Board Water Conservation Survey results as of June 19, 2014,
Sacramento, CA, accessed from:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water issues/programs/drought/workshops results.s
html
16
Attachment 5
F6 hi i
The State Water Board to Consider Proposed
Emergency Water Conservation Regulations
On January 17 Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. issued a drought emergency proclamation
following three dry or critically dry years in California. Extreme drought now covers nearly 80
percent of the state and these conditions will likely continue into the foreseeable future.
More than, 400,000 acres of farmland are expected to be fallowed, thousands of people may be
out of work, communities risk running out of drinking water and fish and wildlife species are in
jeopardy. Many communities are down to 50 gallons a day or less per person for basic sanitation
needs. With our inability to predict the effect of the next rainy season, water saved today can
improve a region's water security and add flexibility to systems that may need to withstand another
year or more with precipitation below average.
There are many ways to boost local water supplies such as recycling treated wastewater and
reusing some household or industrial water onsite. However, conservation is the easiest, most
efficient and most cost effective way to quickly reduce water demand and extend supplies into the
next year, providing flexibility for all California communities. In a survey conducted by the State
Water Board in June, while many communities have significantly reduced their water demand over
time, it is clear that more can be done.
Conservation Actions Needed
Because of these dire conditions and the need to conserve more, the State Water Resources
Control Board (State Water Board) is proposing that individuals and water agencies take
necessary steps to conserve water supplies both for this year and into 2015, and is recommending
that individuals and water agencies do even more voluntarily to manage our precious water
resources.
Most Californians use more water outdoors than indoors. In some areas, 50 percent or more of
our daily water use is for lawns and outdoor landscaping. Some urban communities have been
investing in conservation, particularly indoors, for years, but reducing the amount of water used
outdoors can make the biggest difference of all.
The proposed emergency conservation regulations are primarily directed at reducing outdoor
urban water use.
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
WOO
10011 Street,Sacramento,CA 95814.916.341-5254•Mailing Address:P.O.Box 100,Sacramento,CA 95912.0100•www.waterboards.ca.gov ��;'�. ,d
Attachment 5
�y
These emergency conservation measures target both individual water use, by identifying the
practices from which every Californian should abstain during this drought emergency, as well as
the steps that local water suppliers should be taking to reduce water demand in their service areas.
These restrictions set a minimum level of effort in this time of emergency and everyone should do
more voluntarily. As the drought wears on, the State Water Board may revisit these regulations
and consider other measures.
Temporary Water Restrictions
All Californians will be affected by the ongoing drought conditions in one form or another,
especially if these conditions persist or worsen in 2015. To promote water conservation statewide,
the emergency regulations would prohibit each of the following, except in case of health or safety
needs or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a state or federal agency:
• The direct application of water to any hard surface for washing.
• Watering of outdoor landscapes that cause runoff to adjacent property, non-irrigated areas,
private and public walkways, roadways, parking lots or structures.
• Using a hose to wash an automobile, unless the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle.
• Using potable water in a fountain or decorative water feature, unless the water is
recirculated.
Violations of prohibited activities are considered infractions and are punishable by fines of$500 for
each day in which the violation occurs. Any employee of a public agency charged with enforcing
laws may write and issue a ticket to the violator.
Action by Urban Water Suppliers Required
To reduce water demand, the regulations would require urban water suppliers to implement their
Water Shortage Contingency Plans at a level that triggers mandatory restrictions on outdoor water
use. Almost all urban water suppliers (those with more than 3,000 water connections) have these
plans; about 40 of these larger agencies do not.
If an urban water supplier does not have a Water Shortage Contingency Plan or its Plan does not
meet the requirements of the water code, the supplier must, within 30 days, require customers to
limit outdoor irrigation to no more than two days per week or implement another mandatory
conservation measure to achieve a comparable reduction in water consumption by the people it
serves relative to the amount consumed in 2013.
Water suppliers serving fewer than 3,000 connections must also, within 30 days, require customers
to limit outdoor irrigation to no more than two days per week or implement another mandatory
conservation measure to achieve a comparable reduction in water consumption by the people it
serves relative to the amount consumed in 2013.
Attachment 5
Urban water suppliers that violate mandatory actions could be subject to cease and desist orders
for violating emergency regulations with fines up to $10,000 per day per violation. Or, the matter
could be referred to the Attorney General's office for further action.
Keeping Track of Urban Water Use
Each urban water supplier will keep track of its water use and compare it to the same period last
year. Reports that include the amount of potable water the supplier produced in the preceding
month and an estimate of gallons of water per person per day used by its customers
will be submitted to the State Water Board by the 15th of each month.
Looking Forward
The State Water Board is providing the following tips to water suppliers to educate their customers
about the new requirements:
• Retail water suppliers should provide notice of the regulations in English and Spanish in one
or more of the following ways: newspaper advertisements, bill inserts, website homepage,
social media, notices in public libraries;
• Wholesale suppliers should include reference to the regulations in all of their customer
communications;
• All water suppliers should provide signage where recycled or reclaimed water is being used
for activities that the emergency regulations prohibit with the use of potable water, such as
operation of fountains and other water features;
• All water suppliers should train personnel on the regulations; and
• All water suppliers should set conservation targets, measure their service area's progress
and make this information available to their customers.
In addition to letting customers know about the new requirements, water suppliers should also:
• Have an easy way for customers to report leaks and water waste via phone or electronic
submittal (website form, or email); and
• Request that police and fire departments and other local government personnel report leaks
and water waste they encounter during their routine duties/patrols
If drought conditions continue, additional actions by the State Water Board and local water
suppliers will likely be necessary to further increase conservation. All water suppliers are
encouraged to be prepared and plan for a possible dry 2015 now.
Next Steps
The proposed emergency regulations will be considered by the State Water Board at its July 15th
meeting. Written comments are due by 12 noon on July 14, 2014. If adopted and subsequently
approved by the Office of Administrative Law, they would go into effect on or about August Vt.
w
pastors ksacation of Truckee Takoe
July 16, 2014
The Honorable Tony Laliotis
President
Truckee Donner Public Utility District Board of Directors
11570 Donner Pass Road
Truckee, CA 96161
RE: Agenda Item 15—Possible TDPUD Board Action in response to proposed State Water
Resources Control Board Emergency Drought Regulations
President Laliotis and Board Members:
My name is Michael Forshee. I am a CA licensed general contractor but here tonight on behalf of the
Contractors Association of Truckee Tahoe. I serve as the Vice Chair of CATT's Local Government Affairs
Committee. The Contractors Association of Truckee Tahoe is composed of 335 member companies representing
the broad cross section of the building industry and related trades and professions. Many of our members are
rate payers or customers of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the proposed action caused by the State Water Board's
declaration enacted July 15. Please be aware that your staff has been in continuing discussion with CATT since
Thursday evening,July 10. A briefing with your General Manager was held on Monday,July 14. This is a positive
and outstanding example where TDPUD took a proactive approach with a stakeholder group.
Although perhaps well intended,the CA State Water Board's broad brush action was not well thought out.
The TDPUD has plenty of water. The TDPUD anticipates no water shortage. Despite the fact there is no water
shortage, we are faced with the prospect of TDPUD's Ordinance 2005-05, Urban Water Master Plan (UWMP), and
Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) coming to life and prohibiting new connections and water purchases.
The negative consequences to the construction industry within your jurisdiction are alarming!
We urge you in the strongest possible terms to de-couple construction from the outdoor water
restrictions This should be done tonight as part of your action in addition to the other rulemaking actions
proposed to change Ordinance 2005-05,the UWMP with WSCP.
Please adopt an implementing Resolution pertaining to Ordinance 2005-05 that immediately directs the
General Maher to exempt all construction hookups/water purchase from all stages as currently described in
Ordinance 2005-05,the TDPUD UWMP, and the TDPUD WSCP. This request is not an amendment. This request is
based on the "undue hardship and unreasonable restriction" authorization for exceptions in Ordinance 2005-05
(page 1, section 1). There is no nexus between the State's emergency drought regulations (primarily focused on
limiting outdoor washing and irrigation) and TDPUD provisions in Stages 1-2 prohibiting new connections and
water for purchase. These are unreasonable restrictions and temporary takings. Our remedy is an implementing
resolution that addresses the unreasonable restriction and lack of a nexus, using a tool you have built into
Ordinance 2005-05. Our remedy recognizes the undue hardship resulting from implementation of Stages 1 and 2
of the Ordinance.
17313 Soaring Way,$:ujte 1G,Truckee,CA 95151 o 530=550-9999 o F:530-550-9998 o info@ca.-tt.com
Here are six points to consider:
• The State Water Board Order repeats the need to curt'aih certain uses of water (excessive
irrigation causing runoff, potable fountains, washing of hard surfaces, and car washing
without a shutoff nozzle). The SWB order never once mentions construction as a target
for reduction. Max Gomberg, SWB staff, told CATT Executive Director Pat Davison on
Monday afternoon that "There is no language specific to construction and the intent is
not to limit construction activity."
• Power washing with a nozzle seems comparable to car washing with a nozzle. Power
washing depends on a controlled stream of water—it should not be prohibited.
• Tahoe City Public Utility District, North Tahoe Public Utility District, and Northstar
Community Services District are not proposing any restrictions on new connections as a
result of the SWB declaration.
• New residential construction, by virtue of CA building codes, is far superior from a water
efficiency standpoint that the older housing stock.
• Economic activity from construction benefits the entire community. Limiting new
connections not only jeopardizes jobs but the community as a whole. The circulating
dollar is a powerful thing. When families have paychecks, food is purchased, non-profit
donations are made, sales tax is collected, and a variety of other benefits accrue. Our
local economic recovery could be severely hampered by the unjustified application of a
flawed rule.
• There is no water shortage in the TDPUD service area.
We agree with staff's recommendations that Ordinance 2005-05 and the 2011 Urban Water Master Plan
with embedded Water Shortage Contingency Plan warrant review and appreciate the timeline for an August
workshop and September rulemaking hearing. We expect to be fully engaged in that process and look forward to
producing a realistic and reasonable package for adoption this fall.
Thank you for considering our request. I am happy to answer your questions tonight. Our Executive
Director will be back next week for followup.
Sincerely,
CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF TRUCKEE TAHOE
Michael Forsh
Vice Chair, CATT Local Government Affairs Committee