In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation

Filing 3651

DECLARATION of Jeremiah J. Anderson in Support re: (3607 in 1:00-cv-01898-SAS-DCF, 146 in 1:04-cv-04973-SAS) MOTION for Summary Judgment.. Document filed by Chevron USA Inc., Union Oil Co of California, Union Oil Company of California. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:00-cv-01898-SAS-DCF, 1:04-cv-04973-SAS(Anderson, Jeremiah)

EXHIBIT A
•

Fresno/Clovis Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan, Phase I Report, Existing
Water Supply System Assessment (January 1992) (FRESNO-MTBE-13508, 13518,
13524-1 3516)

•

2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Chapler 4.1.2.2 (Prepared for City of Fresno
November 20 12),
hi tp :llwww.fresno.nov/GovcmmcmJDepartmemlJirectorv/PublicU til i 1ies/Watcnnanagcm
cntlimportantdoclUncnts,htm (last visited March 20, 2013)

•

Deposition of Brock Buche. pgs . 367-368 (Apr. 1,201 1)

•

California Historical Statutes. Water Code *§ I Db lOA. 10631,

Phase I Report
Existing Water Supply
System Assessment
,-

Volume I of II
L..o.a.~

co'-d-"

~U~~ To

CHMHlll
January 1992

FRESNO-MTBE-O13508

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The major findings and conclusions of Phase I of the Fresno/Clovis Metropolitan Water
Resources Management Plan follow. "Findings" are defined as statements of fact. and
"conc1usions" are analyses of the findings.

Findings
•

-

8 five-agency effan to address
the long-range water needs for the Fresno/Qavis. Metropolitan Area

The water resou:rces management plan is

(FCMA).
•

The objectives of the plan are to:
Provide s.afe, adequate, and dependable water supplies to meet
the futuT,C needs of the metropolitan area in an economical
manner
Protect groundwater quality from funher degradation
Provide an implementable plan

•

Three planning lhorizons are used: 1997, 2010, and 2050.

t

To promote this planning dIan, a technical advisory committee was
fonned from the sponsoring agencies and a public information program
has been implemented.

•

Over a I-year lperiod, three study phases will be completed, each of
whicb will be summarized in a separate report. A summary repan on the
entire study and an EIR will also be prepared -within this timeframe.

•

The FCMA relies solely on untreated, un-disinfected groundwater as a
source of potable water.

,.

Contamination was discovered in some wells in the late 1970s. At least
42 of the 352 public water agency wells in the FCMA have already been
deactivated due to groundwater quality degradation.

•

Recent and anticipated water quality regulations will likely require some
form of wellhead treatment at every public water agency well in the
FCMA

FRES. O-MTIlE-O1351 ~

•

Municipal allocations from FlO's }(jngs River supply arc ''run·of·tbe·
river" (no associated storage rights). This could require the cities to take
their allocations during snowmelt runoff from the Sierra Nevada.

Conclusions
•

If tbe planned levels of savings due to Fresno residential meter retrofit
and urban conservation are realized, water demand would 8crua11y
decrease in the near term. Demand would not reawcr to its present
level until the year 2005.

•

Reducing the estimated water savings due to conservation and phasing-in
the impacts of residential water meter retrofit over a longer period of
time resnro in demand incTea.sing by approximately 157,000 acre·feel
between ) 992 and: 2050.

•

Current General Plans do not provide sufficient Brea for development
beyond 20)0. OI)l of Qavis would need to amend its Sphere of Influence
before the year 2005.

•

A total of approximately 68.000 acres would be urbanized in the FCMA
between 1992 and 2050.

•

Of the 68,000 aClres, 63,000 would likely be within FID. This reduces
FlO's tota) irrigated acreage by about 40 percent.

•

The conversion of agr1culturalland to urban use results in a net decrease

in total demand of about 7,000 acre·feet per year by 2050.
•

The conversion ()f land use reduces water consumption from 51(},000
aere-feet per yea!' to 420,000 (Table 7-2).

•

The alternative land use scenario (development allowed north of Copper
Avenue) results im a net increase of 17,800 acre.feet in combined urban
and agricultural v.-ater demand by 2050. This is due: to smaller acreage
(7,000 acres) of iI:rigated agriculture convened to urban use.

•

Although a large Ivoundwater reservoir is present, intentional recharge of
surface water is necessary to maintain groundwater levels. A significant
increase in the intentional recharge volume will be necessary in the future
to balance increases in grounclwater pumpage.

•

The best Jocatio:ns for additional basin recharge facilities are in the
northwestern POTicon of the study area where permeable alluvial deposits

FRES:-<O-MTBE-O13524

are found. In the eastern and northern pans of the study area,
considerable deposits of low permeability materials will significantly limit
the quantity of water that can be recharged.
•

Under current operations, contaminants wiD continue to move toward
pumping wens. 1be rate of contaminant movement is slow, on the order
of 100's to 1.000·s of feet per year, but eventually contaminants will reach
pumping wells.

•

Positive action will be required to control groundwater contamination to
prevent degradation of presently uncontaminated areas of the aquifer. A
major objective of the next phase of study will be to develop a
groundwater man,agement alternative that meets the supply needs of the
community whi1l: at the same time controls the movement of
contaminants in the aquifer.

•

Nonhwest Hydrogeologic Conditions:
Predomirumtly permeable deposits above and below the water
table; high well yields and good recharge capacity
Excellent 'I'>'8ter quality for development of urban supply

•

Nonheast Hydrogeologic Conditions:

WidespreEld occurrence of fine grained materials above and below
the water table, generally decreasing wen yields and recharge
capacity n~ative to the northwest area
Large areas of DBCP contamination

Localized areas of higb inorganic constituents in groundwater
Thick clay strata and shallow bedrock occur in several portions of
the area

Groundwclter elevations have been declining more rapidly than in
the remaillder of the urban area
•

Southeast Hydrolgeologi< Conditions:
DBCP and EDS contamination is widespread
The urbalD pumping depression is drawing contaminated water
into the urban area

FRSfiOOS.oIJ.51

xiv

FRESNO-MTBE-O 13525

•

Southwest Hydrogeologic Conditions.:
DBCP and nitrate contamination occur in large portions of this
area
To the southwest of the urban area groundwater levels are
substantially elevated due to wastewater disposal

•

Seasonal and carryover storage would allow more effective utilization of
presently availabll~ surface water supplies.

•

It would be desirable. from a water quality point afview,

to

use mare of

the high quality amponed surface water for municipal purposes, using
more groundwater and reclaimed wastewater for agriculture.
•

FID has adequat'e capacities in the major canals to serve future urban
and agricultural demands in most months; however, peak demands will
have to be man~lged through system enlargement, conjunctive use, or
altered recharge schedules.

•

Intentional recbarge in flood control basins could be increased
substantially through revised design criteria and operations.

•

If the current pattern of well closures continues, urban water suppliers
can expect pressures to fall below the statutory limit of 20 psi in some
areas unless poor quality wells are kept operating and the customers
notified.

•

The lack of red1.o1ndancy or reliability in the: distribution systems of the
FCMA is a critical deficiency of the existing system. In order for the
existing system to adequately serve the future needs in areas of well
closures, the wells must be replaced or fitted with wellhead treatment.

•

The five agenci~: need to focus on renewaJ of USBR contracts for FID.
Garfield Water I)istrict, and International Water District in the near term
(1994-1995) andlhe Cil)' of Fresno contract in the fu'ure (2006).

•

.

Municipal distnbution systems are typified by 12-inch pipes 8t 112 mile
spacing. This grid is n01 large enough to provide adequate pressures in
the vicinity of a 'Yo'Cll closure.

•

,

The cities should firm up their amtracts with FlO to provide equitable,
long·term commitments of surface water and wastewater.

FRES NO-MTBE-O13526

2010 un.BAN WATER
MANA(~EMENT PLAN

Prepared for

City of Fresno
November 2012

439-02-11-10

Elizabeth Drayer

Cha pter 4
Water Supply

r -4.1.2.2 Groundwater Management
10631 (b)(/) A cop)' of any groU/Jtilt'(liL'r manag"1II1!1II P"III adllpIL\/ by /111' urOOI! II'(//(!r .wppJi~r, illc:Judillg pl()1l.~
(It/aplI'li purXlIIl/J/lu PCIr/ Z 75 (commencillg with Section 10750). ur all)' mllm' speci/it- alfli1nri:mioll/or
gmumhl'tlll!r /IW/UlJt<'/1//."nl

In 2006. the Fresno Af\.!U Regional Gruundw<J lcr ManagcInC'nt Plan (FARGMP) was pn:pan.:d to
comply with A83030 and S13 1938. Participating agencies, including the City, adopted the
FARGMP in 2006. Participating <Igcllci cs and adoption dates arc listed in Tabl'.! -l~S.
Table 4-5. Groundwater Management Plan Participants

•

Agency

Fresno Irrigation District
Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District

0210812006

City of Clovis

•

0112512006
0211312006
02/14/2006
03/0112006

Malaga County Water DIstrict

City of Kerman
Bakman Water Company
City of Fresno
County of Fresno
Pinedale County Water District
Garfield Water District

03/13/2006
04/18(2006

07/18/2006
09/20/2006
11/0112006

The FARGMP boundaries generally coincide wi th F lO. hut also include a smull area northea"t of
FID. The objectives of the FARGM P have been developed to monitor, protect, and slIstain
groundwater within the region. Spcc~fic objectives include the following:
,.

Preserve .md enhance the ex isti ng quality or lhe area' s groundwater;

•

Correci the overdratl and stabilize grou ndwater levels at the highest practical
heneficial levels;

•

Preserve untreated groundwater as the primary source of domestic water:

•

Maximize the available water supply. including conjunctive usc ofsurfacL' water and
groundwater:

•

Conserve the watcr resource for long· tenn bcneficial usc and assure an adequate
supply lor thc future;

•

Manngc !;,'Totmdwatcr resources 10 the ex ten t n~essary
beneficial, and continued usc of the resource;

•

MonilOr groundwater quality and qu:mtity to provide the requisite information for
cstnblishing groundwater policics, gO<l ls. and recommended action!;: and

•

Improve coordination and consistency among agenc ies n::sponsible for the monitonng
and management of groundwater in the Plan A rea.

WEST 'l'OST AS50CIArfS
November 2012
0 \ <· .)'1 ' 01·\ 1.IO\"I>\""'"~ ' 1l(l~1 \ .0..

4· 5

\0

ensu re reasonable.

CiT)'

01

F~~o

1010 Urbon WO lor Monogl!ml!n! 1'10.,

Chapter 4
Water Supply
Although FID led the development of the FARCrMP, the October 2(}05 Memorandum of
Understanding between the participating agencies makes il clear th<J\ each participating agency
rL'tains authority and rcsponsibiliry for groundwater man<lgcmcnl within its own jurisdictiun.
A copy of the Fresno Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan is provided in Appendix E
of this UWMP.
4 1.2.3 Description of Groundwater Basin
J rJ631 (b)(2) A de.~crip'if'" of UI1Y gmllnd.... ~l/e,. hosill (II' hm"illsji'rllf1 which the! rwb<lll W(/I,'I' supl'lier pumps
};I'Olilldwlllt!r. F,\r,hf>$1: h".rin~.r(Jr lJo'hich II c.'Jllr! or lite hl.Uwd has adjlldicllled Ih(' righ,:r (() I)llnl}) grmmJu~II,>r. "
copy of fhe ardt'r or dl'f'rl..'C (ldoPTed hy 'hl' emwl or IIII' hoard "lid II d('.~cripllrm oflhe ulllmtnf of grmmdll'mt'r III,.
urh(1Il wa/(:r slIppf/cr ha.~ Ihl! "'go/ righllo pump under fila orJel' or Jl'crc(,'. For hGsilJ.~ Ihaf JI/II'C nOl b('f!1J
UI!illliicmed. illJormlilifln m lfj " ' ' ' ....Ihcr fhe dftplIrtllwlllhas;dell/ilil'dlhebMin OT hu.~ill.~ a~ flwrdraJu!d (IT haf
I'l"Ojt"C!fed 111m thc ba~ill will }w"mlle (J1't'rtfrt!lied ifpr('.~1'1II mWI<I~.'lIIel/f condiliall.f cUlllilll/l'. mIlle ImJS/ rllrr~'1!1
t!(fki(ll depanmcntul bulletill thai chmTlctt!ri='l!.v the ("(1II(/itil'lI oJth€' grmmdnWl!r bILl;n. 011.1 (l (/.·tlllled dl!~·c/iplion
ofthe effilYf.v hehlt: undertaken by tlte IIrban water slIl'pltrr'" t'ftminul(' Ihe long·reml overdraft r;mulitiulJ.

A~ described below, the City of Fresno overlies the Kings S~tbbasin of the San Joaquin Vallcy
Groundwater Basin. Thl.: Kings SlIbb,a~in (DWR Basin No. 5-22.08) underlies Fresno. Kings. and
Tulare Counties and has a surface area of 976,000 acres (1,530 squ~re miles), The Kings
Subbasin has not been adjudicated. However. as described furt her in Sl.:clion 4.1.2.3.6. the Kings
Subbasin was identilicd in DWR's Bulletin liS-SO to be in a critical condition ofovcrdrafl.

4.1.2.3. 1 Basin Location

The SJV Basin I.:ompriscs the southern portion of th..: Greal Central Valley of California. and is
bounded io the north by th\.' SUCramC!110-San Joaquin Dl.:lta and Sacramento Valley. 10 Ihe ~ast by
the Sierra Nevadas, to the south by the Sun Emigdio and Tehachapi Mountains. and 10 the west
by th(: Coast Ranges.
The Kings SUbbasin. located within the southem half of the SJV Basin. is bounded to thc north
by the San Joaquin River, to the cast by the alluvium·gr:m;le rock interface of [he Sierra Nevada
foothills. and to the west by the Delta-Mendota and Westside Subbasins. The Kings Subbasin is
bounded 10 the south by the northern boundary of the Empire West Side Irrigation District the
southern fork of the Kings River. the soulhern boundary of the Laguna Irrigation District, the
nonhern houndary of the Kings County Water District. and the western boundary of Slolle Corral
Irrigation District. Figure 4·1 illustra.tes the lot:at ion oflhe City rdalivl! 10 til\.' boundari\.~s of the
Kings Subbasin.
4.1 .2.3.2 Area Geology

The upper several hundred feet within the KlIlgs Subhasin generally conSists ot h!ghly
pernlcable. coars~·grailled deposits, whieh are termed older alluvium. Coarse· grained strcam
channel deposito;, associated with deposits by the ancestral San JOJquin and Kings Rivers,
underlie much of northwest fresno. Additionally, a recent study completed in 2004 indicated the
rresentc of It laterally extensive clay layer, :.It an average depth of approximately 250 fcct below
the ground surf~ec. beneath mosl of the south and solltheastcm portions of the City.

""'f~f

Ves!

ASSOCIAt[S

Noven.be. 2012
..... 4J'\Q:l·1 l.l0., wp ,v""'w\ 12o,' I <0.4

4-6

01r of Fr .. ..,o
1010 Urbem Wotor Monageme1'll Plan

City of Fr esno 3 0(b) (6) - Brock Buche & Robert Little
Page 260
UNITED STi,>T?:S DT STRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
IN RE :
!"lethyl ':'ertiary But.yl
E1..her ("M'I'BE" l

Mllster Fi le No . 1 : 00-1898
MDL 1358

(SAS)

ProdUCLS Liabilit.y
Litigation

This Document Relates to:
City of Fresno v . Chevron U , S , A .
Inc., et a1., et a1 .,

Case no . 04 Civ .

O~973

(SAS)
I

APRIL 1,

?-011

Videotaped Deposi t ion a f BROCK mJcHE and
ROBERT C . Ll'l"I'LB, Volu!:\c II, City ot Fresno's 30(b) (6)
Designee re Damages and Remedies, held in the Law Offices
of McCormick Barstow LLP, 5 River Park Place East.
Fresno, beginning at 9 : 04 a. m " before Sandra Bunch
VanderPol, FAPR , RPR, RMR, eRR, CSR #3032

G01,KOW TECHNOLOGIES, TNC .
877.370 . 3377 phI917.591.5677. fax

deps@golkow . com

Golkow Technologi es. Inc.

l.877.370.DEPS
b 72bB21 f·5837 4b92-b5f7 -o017270e4b46

City of Fresno 30 (b) (6) - Brock Buche & Robert Little
Page 261
1

APPEJl..RANCES :

2
3
4.

,

MILLER, AXLINE & SAWfER
MICHAEL AXLINE , Esq .
Maxline@toxictorts.o:r-g
1050 Fulton .l\venuE, Suite 100
Sacramento, California 95825-4272

[phone]
Counsel for the Plaintiff

G
-7

SHEPPARD,

MULLIN,

RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

WHITNEY JONES ROY, Esq.
8

[e-mail]

333 South Hope Street, 43rd Floor
9

10

Los Jl.Jlgeles,

California 90071-1448

[phone]
Counsel for Defendan1: Exx0!1Mobil Corporation

' 1

12
13

"

ARNOLD & PORTER LLP
JAMES FINSTEN, Esq .
James. finsten@aportel[. com
777 South Figueroa Street, 44th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90017-5844
[phone]
Counsel for Defendant BP

15

lE

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
LEO GOLDBARD, Esq . (Via telephone)

17

leo .goldbard@rnto . com
355 South Grand Avenue,

18
19

35th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071 -1 560
[phone]
Counsel for Defendants Shell Oil Company,
Enterprises and Equiva Services, LLC

Equilon

20
21

22
23

24

KING & SPALDING
DAVID GRENARDO, Esq .
dgrenardo@kslaw . com
1100 Louisiana Street, Suite 4000
Houston, Texas 77002-5213
(713) 276 -7378
Counsel for Defendant: Chevron u . s. A.

Golkow Technologies. Inc. - 1.877 .370 .DEPS
b72b821 f·5837 4b92-b5f7 -O01727004b46

City of Fresno 30(b)(6)

Brock Buche & Robert Little
Page 36 7

Page 365

1
2
3
4
5

BY MR. FINSTEN,
Q.
Has thc City ever incurred treatment
costs for any constituent that it decided. on its
own. it needed to incur those costs where the
constituent was below the stale Action Level or the

6
7

Mel?
MR. MILLER: Same ohjection and same

8
9
;. 0
11
1~
] 3

objcctiuns . It was covered repeatedly in dcp>{)sitions
with Mr. Linle. Will) is the morc appropriate person

14
! 5

MR. MILLER: Same objection .
MR. FINSTEN : That's directly under tiw

t<l

ask.

BY MR. FINSTEN:
Q. Wilt the City institute treatment for
MTBE al levels below the sl.:condary Mel.?

J 6 notice. ThaI's -- ifyou'rc going to instruct on
17 that --

18
MR. MILLER: I didn't instruct.
j 9 "Same Objection."
20

J

said,

MR. FINSTEN: Okay . Okay .
You can answer the 4ucstion .
' don't have a definitive answer Ii:)f

21
Q.
22
A.
23 thai.
24
Q.
? 5 definitive

Who at the City would have a
answer as to whether or not it would

1
MR. MILLER: Argumentative.
2
T HE W ITNESS : WelL they -3
MR. MILLER: Go ahead.
4
THE WI TNESS: I mean, I don't know-S Counci l has been made aware, the Mayor has been made
6 aware in. you know. authorized pursuit of the
"I lawsuit.
S
I'm not aware they've been given information
9 in the int(.'rim or continuing basis. Pcrhups -- wl'll.
10 I uon't know. Can' talk about city al1orney?
11
MR. FlNSTEN: No.
l~
MR. MILLER: No.
13 I3Y MR. FINSTEX
14
Q. Arc you aware of any cost-benefit
15 analysis involving det(.'ctions to treat Fresno water
16 for MTBE contamination?
17
A. Where co~t?
18
Q. Cost·henefit analysis.
19
A.
I'mllolawarc.
20
Q.
Do you know what cost-benefit
21 analysis is'!
2? r-- A . Yes.
23
Q. Typicnlly your construclion projeCls
24 [or w~llhead Ireulmen! arc subject !O cost-bene lit
25 analYsis, right?
Page 368

Page 366

t
2
.3
4
5
6
7

8
9

10
11
12
1 .3

institute treatment tor MTBE at levels helow the
secondary MCL?
A. ' don't think that policy decision
has been made yet.
Q . Okay. But the City. nevertheless.
expects thm il will need to spend at leasl
$40 million to construct f"l1ture treatment costs for
MTBE?
A. At a minimum.
Q . At a minimum. Okay. Anybody at the
City Council know that?
A. I'm not aware.
Q. Anybody at the Mayor's office kllOW

14 that?
15
A.
'don't know .
16
Q . You've nl' vcr talked to unybody at the
17 Mayor's office about the need to spend $40 million
18 for treating MTBE?
19
A. ' have not.
20
Q . You haven't talked to anybody <II the
21 City Council about thai?
22
A.
I have no\.
Q. Why not? Not important?
2'A. No. Absolutely it"s important.
25
Q. Then why haven't you told them?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

MR. MILLER : Objection. Agsumc~ facts not
in evidence ..A,rgumentativc. Vague.
TilE WITNESS: Ifthcre'g a contaminant in
our water. like the DBCP, we have litigation that we
can go instull that wellhead treatment. There's not
a cost-benefit analysis for that.
Our - our priority is to maintain the
quality ()f our aquifer. Onee a contaminant has
impacted our wells. it's -- the preservation orlhat
resource, thm w(' install the treatment so we can
pump and trcat and extract the contaminant. y()u know,
fmm Ihut resource.
I don't know thai a cost-henent analysis is
nece-~sarily approprime for every installation when
the higher calling is to protect and pre-serve Ihe
t..£!:oundwatcr supply .
BY MR. FIN$TEN:
Q.
Do you think ii's appropriate in the
case ofMTBE. where we·rc talking about detections
that arc 250 times below the secondary MCL?
A.
Appropriate? It's always appropriate
to be monitoring and watching what's happening.
When - you know. we go through these tiles here. and
we see free product setting on the water. and. you
know. it's migrating for how many years because it

28 (Pages 365 to 368)

Golkow Technolo9ies, Inc .

1 . 877.370.DEPS
b 72b821 f·5837 4b92·b5f7..o017270e4b4Ci

Westlaw.
Page 1

West's Ann.Cal. Water Code § 10610.4
WEsrs ANNOTATED CALIFORNIA CODES
WATER CODE

DIVISION 6. CONSERVATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND UTI LIZATION OF ST AIE WATER RESOURCES
PART2,6. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNrNG
CHAPTER I. GENERAL DECLARATION AND POLICY
Copr. (C) West Group 1998. All rights reserved.
§ 10610.4. Policy regarding water resources
The Legislature iinds and declares that it is the policy oflhe Slale.as follows :

(a) The management of urban waler demands and efficient use. of water shall be actively pursued 10 protect both the
people of the slate and their water resources.
(b) The management of urban water demands and efficient usc of urban water supplies shall be a guiding criterion In
public decisions.
(c) Urban WOlter suppliers shall be required to develop waler management plans to actively pursue th~ efficient usc
of available supplies.

CREDIT(S)
1992 Main Volume
(Added by Slats.198}, c. 1009. § I.)
1998 Electronic Pocket Part Update
(Amended by Srnts.1995, c. 854 (S.B.IOII), § 2.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

9C\P
1995 LegiSlation
Section 19 0(S18ts, 1995, c. 854 (S.B.IOII), prcovidcs:
"This act d~s not apply 10 any urban water management plan du(' before January I. 1996,"
West's Ann. Cal. Waler Code § 10610.4
CA WATER § 10610.4
END OF DOCUME."NT

102013 Thomson Reuters. No Claim 10 Orig. US Gov, Works.

Westlaw
Page 1

West's Ann.Cal-Water Codl! § 10631

WEsrs ANNOTATED CALIFORNIA CODES
WATERCOm~

DIVISION 6. CONSERVATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND UTILIZATION OF SlATE WATER RESOURCES
PART 2.6. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANKING
CHAPTER 3. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS
ARTICLE 2. CONTENTS OF PLANS
COpT. (C) West Group 1998, All rights reserved.

§ 10631. Descriptions and provisions in plans
A plan shall be adopted in accordance with thi.<; chapter and shall do all ofrhe following:

(a) Describe the s,"'f'Vicc area of the supplier. including curn:n! and prujected population, climate, and other demographic faclor.; affecting the suppliers water management planning. The projected population estimates shall be
based upon data from the stale, regional, or ioc,al service agency population projections within the service area of the
urban wliter supplier nod shall be in five -yea:r increments to 20 years or as far as data is available.
(b) Identify and quantify, to the eXlent practk:able, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments as des.cribed in subdivision (a).
(c) Describe the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or climatic shortage. to the extent practicable, and provide data for each of
following:
( I) An average wdter year.
(2) A single dry water year.
(3) MUltiple dry water years.
For any water source that may nol be available al a consistent leV\":1 of use, given specific legal, environmental, water
quality, or climatic factors, describe plans to replace that soun:e with alternative sources or water demand management measures, to the extent practicable.
d) Describe the opportunities tor exchanges o:r transfers of water on a short-term or long-term basis.
(e)(I) Quantif)', to the extent records are available. past and current water use, over the same five-year increments
described in subdivision (a), and projected waler usc, identifying the uses among w:tter use sectors including, but not
necessarily limited to, all of the following uses·:
(A) Single-jiunily residential.
(B) Multifamily.
(C) Commercial.
(0) Industrial.
(E) Institutional and governmental.
(F) Landscape.
(0) Sales to other agencies.
(H) Saline water intrusion barriers, groundwat'~r recharge, or conjunctive use, or any combination thereof.
(I) Agricultural.
(2) The water use projections shall be in ihe same five-year increments as described in subdivision (a).
(f) Provide a description orthe supplier's wat,:r demand managemcnI measures. This description shall include all of
the (ollowing:
( I) A description of each waler demand management measure that is curremly being implemented. or scheduled for
implementation, including the steps necessary to implement nny proposed measures, including, bUI no! limited to, all

me

0 2013 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

Page 2

ofthe following:
(A) Interior and exterior water audits and incenti ... e programs for single-family residential, multifamily residential,
governmental, and institutional customers.
(8) Enforccment of plumbing fixture efficicncy standards and programs to re trofit less efficicnt fixtures.
(C) Distribution systcm watcr audits, leak dctection, and repair.
(D) Metering with commodity rates for all new connections und retrofit of ex is ling connections .
(E) Large landscape water audits and i1lCenti ...es.
(F) Landscape water conservation requirements for new and existing commercial, industrial, institutional, go ...ernmcntlll, and multifamily developmcnts.
(G) Public information.
(H) School education.
(I) Commercial and industrial wlltcr conser... ation.
(J) New commcrcial and industrial watcr use re ... iew.
(K) Conservation pricing for watcr service and conservation pricing for sewcr service, where the urban water supplier also provides sewer service.
(L) Landscape water conscrvation for new and existing single-family homes.
(M) Water waste prohibitions.
(N) Water conservation coordinator.
(0) Financial incenti ...es 10 encourage water conservation.
(P) Ultra-low-flush toilet re placemcnt.
(2) A schedule of implementation for all waler demand management measurc! proposed or described in the plan.
(3) A description of the methods, if ruty, that the supplier will usc to evaluate the effecti ...enes.s of waler dcm:md
management measures implemented or describ.::d under the plan.
(4) An estimate, if available, of existing conservation savings on water use within the supplier's scrvice area, Md thc
effect of such savings on the supplier's ability to funhcr «.'duce demand.
(g) An cvaluation or each water demand management measure listed in paragraph (1) ofsubdi... ision (f) that is not
currently being implemented or scheduled for implementation. In the course of the evalUation, first consideration
shall be gi ...en to water demand management measures, or combination of measures, which offer lowcr incremental
costs than expanded or addition31 watcr supplies. This e...aluation shall do all of the following:
( I) Take imo account economic and noneconomic factors, including environmental. social, health, customer impact,
and technological factoTS.
(2) Include a cost-benefit analysis, identirying total benefits and total costs.
(3) Include II description of funding a"'3i1able to implcment any planned water supply projcct tllat would provide
water at a higher unit cost.
(4) Include a description of the water supplicr's legal authority to implemcnt the measure and eITons to work with
other rcle ...ant agencies [0 ensure the implementation of the measure and to sharc Ihe cost ofimplcmentation.
(h) Ur ban water suppliers thaI arc members of the California Urban Water Conservation Council and submit annual repans to that council in accordance with the "Memorandum of Undcrstanding Regarding Urban Water ConsCTV'J.tion in California," dated September 1991 , may submit the annual rcpons idcntifying wutcr dcmand managemtnt measures currently being implemented, or scheduled for implementation. to satisfy the requirements ofsubdi·
visions (f) and (g).
CREDIT(S)
1992 Main Volume
(Added by St<l\s. 19S3. c. 1009, § I. Amended by St8ts.\990. e. 355 (A.(l2661 ). § 1: Sta15.I99I-92 , 1st ExSess., c.
13 (A.B.I l), § 3; Slats.1991, c. 938 (A.B. I 869), § 3.)
1999 Electronic Pocket Pan Upd31e

0 2013 Thomson

Reule~.

No Claim

10

Orig. US Go .... Works.