Summer 2005 California Water Conservation News

7/31/2019 Summer 2005 California Water Conservation News

1/12


2/12

Water Conservation News Spring/Summer 2005

2

Ofce of Water Use EfciencyMission Statement

Ofce of Water Use EfciencyMission Statement

In cooperation with others, we promote the efcient and benecialuse of Californias water resources to sustain our human and natural environment.

Water Conservation News provides informa-tion on water use efciency developments.This free newsletter is published quarterlyby the California Department of Water Re-sources, Ofce of Water Use Efciency.

Subscriptions: If you want to receive thisnewsletter, send your name and address to:Department of Water ResourcesBulletins and Reports

Attention: Mailing List CoordinatorP.O. Box 942836

Sacramento, CA 94236-0001(916) 653-1097

Water Conservation News is available on-line: www.owue.water.ca.gov/news/news.cfm

For more information about DWRswater use efciency programs call:Water Use Efciency Ofce(916) 651-9236

William J. BennettChief(916) 651-7051Manucher AlemiData Services and Program Development(916) 651-9662Fawzi Karajeh

Water Recycling and Desalination(916) 651-9669

David ToddTechnical Assistance and Outreach(916) 651-7027Simon EchingProgram Development(916) 651-9667Baryohay Davidoff

Agricultural Council Support(916) 651-9666Debra GonzalezFinancial Assistance(916) 651-7026Kent FrameCIMIS(916) 651-7030

Water use efciency information is alsoavailable from DWR district staff:

X. Tito CervantesNorthern District

2440 Main StreetRed Bluff, CA 96080-2398(530) 529-7389Ed MorrisCentral District3251 S StreetSacramento, CA 95816-7017(916) 227-7578David ScruggsSan Joaquin District3374 E. Shields AvenueFresno, CA 93726-6990(559) 230-3322David InouyeSouthern District770 Fairmont AvenueGlendale, CA 91203-1035(818) 543-4600

We welcome any comments, suggestions,and story ideas; please send them to:Water Conservation NewsEditorial StaffDepartment of Water ResourcesOfce of Water Use EfciencyP. O. Box 942836Sacramento, CA 94236-0001

E-mail: [email protected]: (916) 651-9605Fax: (916) 651-9849

DWR does not endorse any of the businesses orconsulting rms mentioned in this newsletter,

since there may be others that offer the same orsimilar services


3/12


3

Water Balance Studyof the Banta-Carbona

Irrigation DistrictBy Phil Anderson

The Banta-Carbona Irrigation Dis-trict is located one mile south of

the City of Tracy and 16 mileswest of the City of Modesto.It has approximately 14,200irrigated acres and pumpssurface water from the SanJoaquin River, and a small

amount of Federal water from the Delta-Mendota Canal. All district water distribu-tion is through canals, with a high-energyusage in pumping from the San Joaquin

River. About 3,200 acres are sprinkler ordrip irrigated; the remaining acreage isfurrow irrigated. All surface runoff is re-circulated within the district. The NewJerusalem Drainage District that underliesa portion of the district directly discharges4,000 acre-feet of tile water annually intothe San Joaquin River. Other subsurfacewater ows into the river as accretions.

The water balance results, which pertainto the inows to and outows from the

Banta-Carbona Irrigation District in 2002are listed below.

The total inows for the study yearwere 62,500 acre-feet at plus or minus2,500 acre-feet and the breakdown ofinows from various sources was: theSan Joaquin River Diversions 70 percent,Supplemental Pumped Groundwater 2percent, Precipitation 24 percent, andDelta-Mendota Canal Diversions were 4percent. The total outow was 62,500 acre-feetat plus or minus 5,300 acre-feet and the

break-down of outows to various out-lets such as: deliveries to turnouts out-side of the district 2 percent, surface andsubsurface discharge to the San JoaquinRiver 22 percent, evapotranspiration 67percent. The main cause of inefciencywithin the district was identied as ex-cess deep percolation on-farm. The studyalso pointed out that it appears that tiledrainage discharges (point source) areconsiderably less than previously report-

ed and that non-point accretions can bemuch more signicant than point sourcetile drainage.

The Banta-Carbona Irrigation District Mod-ernization Feasibility study was funded bya Proposition 13 Agricultural Water Con-

servation Grant from the Department ofWater Resources.

The information gathered during the studyenlightened district staff and directors asto where real potential lies in modernizingdistrict facilities as well as on-farm irriga-tion facilities. This feasibility study pointsout irrigation water can be conserved byminimizing deep percolation and by dis-tributing irrigation water more evenly overa eld. Providing water service that will

accommodate on-farm irrigation improve-ments will ultimately result in more cropper drop, which is the true measure ofthe efciency of resource utilization.

The rst task of this contract was theProject Organization and District WaterAssessment; which required the follow 9activities:

Determining the district boundariesand eld.

Assessing cropped acreage. Determining surface water inows. Determining precipitation. Determining Evapotranspiration from

elds Determining ET from canals, drains

and non-agricultural areas. Determining tile drainage outow

through the New Jerusalem Drain. Determining reverse ow in the Main

Lift Canal. Determining salt balance.

This feasibility study provided 10 specic

recommendations for infrastructure andoperations improvement. This task re-quired the following activities:

Modifying the Main Lift Canal systemso that it can accommodate time-of-use pumping by farmers, as well asprovide greater exibility to thelaterals.

Installing long-crested weirs in thelateral canals.

Removing the ow rate bottleneck for

the Peterman Lateral. Removing a bottleneck at the head of

the Clever Lateral. Examining and removing other

bottlenecks. Modifying Kasson District Structures.

Interconnecting the Westside lateralsand install a new regulating reservoir. Adjusting the ballasting of the two

Neyrtec structures. Examining how to supply the tail ends

of Lateral 2N with water from theClever Drain.

Installing permanent hydro-acousticow meters at the sh screen.

A key tool for evaluating the impact of vari-ous modernization/intervention actionsis a good ow measurement device at the

San Joaquin river entrance to the Main LiftCanal. During the feasibility study a MGDacoustic-doppler ow meter was installedin one of the bays. In the past two years,there have been major improvements inthe hardware and usage/calibration of hy-dro-acoustic ow measurement devices.

Since on-farm irrigation equipment canin most cases improve crop production,farmers are inclined to want to use thetechnology. When a farmer pays more for

water to be conveyed to him, it diminishesthe amount of capital he has to invest inon-farm irrigation equipment. Even withthose challenges the district continues tolook for ways to make it easier and moreattractive for farmers to purchase irrigationequipment that contributes to the farmersultimate success at increasing crop yieldswhich results in improved irrigation ef-ciency.

For additional information, please contact

Phil Anderson, DWR, at (916) 651-9663,or David Weisenberger, General Managerof the Banta-Carbona Irrigation District, at(209) 835-4670.

Final Report by: IrrigationTraining and ResearchCenter of California Poly-technic State University ofSan Luis Obispo and theBanta-Carbona IrrigationDistrict


4/12


4

Going Green inState Buildings

By Julie Saare-Edmonds

The Ofce of Water Use Efciency andTransfers has been active for more thanthree years in a program to advance sus-tainable building practices in state build-ings. Originally formed as a workgroup toincorporate sustainable or green build-ing features in the Capitol East End Com-plex, the Sustainable Building Task Forceand Technical Group developed guide-

lines for using sustain-

able building practicesin new constructionand during the retrotof existing state build-ings. Some of thesepractices include usinghigh-recycled contentbuilding materials,

low emission paint, carpet and furniture,energy and water efciency, natural day-lighting, improved ventilation and many

other methods to improve efciency andoccupant comfort. OWUET is advocatingefcient plumbing xtures such as dual

ush toilets, zero consumption urinals,low ow and auto shutofffaucets as well as waterefcient landscap-ing and recycledwater use. Theuse of efcientkitchen and laundryequipment is also em-phasized.

Currently, the Task Force and Execu-

tive Order Working Groups are workingtowards implementing Executive OrderS-20-04 signed by Governor Schwarzeneg-ger in December 2004. This ExecutiveOrder requires taking all steps necessaryto achieve the highest possible and costeffective increase in energy and resourceefciency. This to achieve a Leadership inEnergy and Environmental Design Silveror better rating on all new or renovatedstate buildings.

DWR and OWUET is working with theDepartment of General Services to ensurethat the Capitol West End Project will be

built with the most up to date water andenergy efcient technology available. Thisplanned complex has a completion date

of 2010.

Soft Path a Concrete IdeaBy Mark Roberson

Should water use efciency money beinvested in soft path or hard path actions?

That depends on who you ask and yourobjective.

At the state level, a hard pathaction would mean investingin centralized surface stor-age or conveyance struc-tures. A soft path actionwould be improving local in-frastructure or managementchanges that affect the avail-ability and quantity of sup-ply. From a water suppliers perspective, ahard path action would be local construc-tion of a canal or other structure. A softpath action would be capital improvementor policy changes.

Ultimately, the objective of an agriculturalwater supplier is customer service

providing water in a cost-effective man-ner at the rate, duration, and frequencyneeded to make economic use of the sup-ply. Current trends for agricultural watersuppliers are to use hard path actionssuch as system control and data acquisi-

tion (SCADA), regulating reservoirs, lateralinterceptors and spill recovery to providebetter customer service. Where the limit-

ing factor is water sup-ply availability, it makes

sense to develop localand centralized suppliesor water transfers to meet

demands. For suppliers thathave an adequate water sup-

ply to meet crop needs, usingsoft path actions is a better way to match

supply with demands.

Greater water supply at the diversionpoint is only useful if a supplier can physi-cally make use of the water. Growers aremoving to a higher level of irrigation watermanagement and in many instances alsoupgrading their hardware. To optimize

water use efciency, the sup-plier and customer must becompatible. For example,micro-irrigation has demon-strated signicant potential forimproved water use efciency.

However, for water suppli-ers that traditionally deliveron a xed rotation or on aminimum ow rate or duration,this would not be a match. Toprovide the change in service,the water supplier must makeinfrastructure or policy changes that allowthe end user to obtain a higher water useefciency potential from their new hard-ware or management. For most growers,the key to water use efciency is delivery

exibility. The technical knowledge onhow to make use of a exible supply isgenerally well understood.


5/12


5

Just a reminder, the 2005 Urban WaterManagement Plan Updates are due De-cember 31, 2005. Urban water suppliersare required to update their plans atleast once every ve years on or beforeDecember 31, in years ending in veand zero. Approximately 413 urbanwater suppliers were required to le2000 Urban Water Management Plans,and of those, 349 (84 percent) led anUWMP. As of April 1, 2005, 194 (47 per-cent) UWMPs were identied by DWR

as complete.

Urban Water Management Plans arereviewed by DWR staff to determinewhether or not they are complete andconsistent with Water Code 10631.Agencies subject to the Urban WaterManagement Planning Act must haveadopted a complete plan that meets therequirements of the law and submittedit to DWR to be eligible for droughtassistance or funds received through

DWR. Results are provided to urban wa-ter suppliers through a review letter.

It is anticipated that a greater numberof UWMPs will be received duringthe 2005 UWMP cycle than the 2000UWMP cycle. It is also expected that aportion of all the plans will be identi-

ed by DWR reviewers as not completeand that one or more revision of thoseplans will be necessary before they canbe identied as complete. Each revisionwill lengthen the time required for thereview process, therefore it is to the ad-vantage of suppliers planning to submitgrant applications for future fundingcycles to le as early as possible to allowtime for review and any necessary revi-sion of their UWMP. Filing early will helpinsure that they have a complete UWMP

and are eligible to receive future grantsor loans.

DWR provides technical assistance tourban water suppliers to help them meetthe requirements of the Act. Programstaff provides information on how toprepare water management plans, imple-ment water conservation programs, andunderstand the requirements of the Act.The DWR Ofce of Water Use Efciencyand Transfers has updated the UWMP

Worksheets and Demand ManagementMeasure Worksheets for the 2005. Theyare posted atwww.owue.water.ca.gov.

Contact David Todd at (916) 651-7027 or [email protected] orChris Fakunding at (916) 651-9673 [email protected].

The Clock is Running:2005 Urban Water Management Plan Updates Due Soon

AB 2717Task Force Update

By Julie Saare-Edmonds

In February 2005 the AB 2717 Landscape

Task Force met for the rst time in Sac-ramento. The purpose of the Task Forceand Technical Work Groups is to re-ex-amine the existing Model Water EfcientLandscape Ordinance and other aspectsof landscape water use and make recom-mendations that will improve landscapewater use efciency. After the introductoryTask Force meeting, the Technical WorkGroups began meeting to discuss the spe-cic issues involved.

Work Group One focuses on watersupply, planning, implementation, en-forcement and coordination. Overcomingconicts and improved communicationare also important components of theWork Group One efforts.

Work Group Two focuses on soils andirrigation. This work group will examineadvances in irrigation technology, labelingand performance standards of irrigationequipment, irrigation efciency and sched-uling, system design and maintenance andnon-potable water use. The work groupwill also examine cultural practices involv-ing soil.

Work Group Three is looking at issuesrelated to landscape design, plants andturfgrass. Specically they will be discuss-ing plant selection, water use, designconsiderations and climatic factors. This

group will also be evaluating measurementmethods and case studies.

Work Group Four is studying the eco-nomics of water use and conservation,rate structures, environmental costs andbenets, environmental justice and socialimpacts.

The nal report from the Task Force isdue to the Governor and the Legislatureby December 31, 2005. For more informa-

tion about the AB2717 Stakeholder TaskForce and Technical Work Groups see

the California Urban Water ConservationCouncil Web site at:www.cuwcc.org. Clickon the AB2717 Landscape Task Force logoon the home page.


6/12


6

Prop 50 Grant ProgramFunds New Agriculturaland Urban Water Use

Efciency ProjectsBy Baryohay Davidoff

Implementing efciency measures is criti-cal for meeting the growing demand forwater as Californias population increases.These efciency measures areeven more critical and neces-sary to stretch existing limitedwater supplies.

To help implement efciencymeasures and further advancemanagement of water by agri-cultural and urban water users,California voters have passedProposition 50 to providegrants for implementation ofnew water use efciency projects--$34 mil-lion were available as grants for scal year2004-05. To meet the Water Use EfciencyObjectives, as detailed in the CALFEDs2000 Record of Decision, DWR solic- itedagricultural and urban water useefciency project for two types ofprojects.

Implementation projectsproviding direct benet tothe Bay Delta.Projects that includedresearch and development,feasibility studies, pi-lot, or demonstrationprojects, training, educa-tion or public outreachprograms, or technicalassistance program relat-ed to water use efciency.

As a result of a Proposal Solicitation Pack-age, released on November 15, 2004, witha deadline of January 11, 2005, DWR re-ceived 168 eligible proposals requesting atotal of about $140 million to implementagricultural and urban efciency projects,research and demonstration, training,education, outreach projects, technical

assistance, feasibility and pilot projects,investigation of new technologies, meth-odologies, and new and innovative watermanagement practices. These proposalsare posted on:www.owue.water.ca.gov/finance/index.cfm

Eligible proposals were then reviewed andevaluated to determine which projectswould be funded with the limited $33million available. The task of review and

evaluation fell on the shoul-ders of about 52 individualsfrom local, State, and Fed-eral agencies, environmentalinterests, and others. Fiveagricultural and eight urbanpanels along with an eco-

nomic panel, and a sciencepanel evaluated and scoredall proposals according crite-ria detailed in the PSP. Fol-lowing this, an interagency

team consisting of representatives fromDWR, USBR, SWRCB, and CALFED recom-mended which project may be funded withlimited funds. Special consideration wasgiven to projects that represent different

geographical areas, and dif-ferent categories for imple-

mentation, studies, technicalassistance, demonstration,pilot projects, education and

training as detailed in the PSP.

The review and selectionprocess resulted in recom-

mendation to fund a total of 72projects, 27 agricultural and 45

urban project totaling $11,237,791and $16,895,191 respectively. Local

matching funds added to about $5.2and $16.9 million for agricultural and

urban projects respectively. A list of therecommended for funding projects can befound atwww.owue.water.ca.gov/finance/index.cfm.

Thank you to the technical reviewers,economics and science team, as well asAgency Team members for their hard work

General Information onFunding Distribution

The Prop 50 recommendationswill fund 10 Section A and 17 Sec-tion B agricultral projects, as wellas 22 Section A and 23 Section Bprojects. The contracting processwill begin in late June, but it maybe 4 to 6 months before a signedcontract is in place.

Project DistributionAREA AG URBANBay Area 1 9Sacramento Valley 13 3San Joaquin Valley 9 4

Southern California 19Statewide 4 10

to make this Prop 50 funding cycle pos-sible. For additional information, contactBaryohay Davidoff at (916) 651-9666, [email protected].


7/12


7

Uses for CIMISBy CIMIS Staff

When the CIMIS weather station networkbegan in 1982, the primary purpose of CI-MIS was to provide free information usefulin estimating crop water use for irrigationscheduling to the public. Although irriga-tion scheduling and evapotranspiration

data continues to be themain use of CIMIS, theuses of its other weatherdata have been con-stantly expanding overthe years. At present,there are approximately7,000 registered CIMISusers from diverse back-

grounds accessing theCIMIS computer directly.Based upon web trends

tracking it is estimated that on average,requests for CIMIS information on theinternet total about 2,000,000 per year.There are also many secondary suppliersof CIMIS weather data, such as other websites, radio, newspapers, consultants, andlocal water agencies.

The availability of hourly, daily and month-

ly weather data from CIMIS has greatly im-proved the exibility of data applicationsfor a myriad of business functions. Someof the broader applications we are seeingare a greater CIMIS presence in the plan-ning and managing of resources. Theseresources include not only water use, but

also water quality, planning water balanc-es, water shed maintenance, air resourcesmonitoring and prediction, and forestrymanagement. Modeling is becoming evermore important with CIMIS data being au-tomatically downloaded into degree-day,

pest management, and plant and weathermodels. These uses are being applied atthe local, regional, State, Federal agencyslevel.

Some examples of CIMIS uses include: Farm commodity purchasers for

predicting product quality Pesticide applicators for weather

prediction and documentation Waste water facilities planning and

management Local and state water planners and

managers Legal and insurance rms for

documentation and litigation High schools for educational purposes Homeowner associations for water

conservation Air quality monitoring assistance Federal agencies for resource

management and studies Users from other countries for

planning and development of similarnetworks

California state departmentsproviding public assistance and wateruse planning

Automated severe weather warningsystems

Solar and wind power design Hydrological modeling for water

availability and groundwater recharge

To order the CIMIS brochures, visitwww.cimis.water.ca.govor contact Kent Frameat [email protected].

University of California Integrated PestManagement Project for degree-daycalculations and pest and plantmodeling

Urban landscape planning andmanaging

Because of the many diverse applicationsof CIMIS data, increased usership, and theevolving way data is handled, the develop-ment of new programs, data collectionmethods and useful dissemination plat-

forms become increasingly important.

CIMIS Main User Catagories

This chart represents 26 sub-groupsof users compiled into seven mainuser categories and their percentto the total number of CIMIS users.When users register they indicatewhich of the 26 sub-groups bestrepresents them.

Consultants

14%

Growers22%

Others22%

University16%

WaterAgencies5%Landscape

10%

Public Agencies

14%


8/12


8

CALIFORNIA URBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNCIL

Want to be Part of a

National Organization?By Mary Ann Dickinson

Are you envious of thelarge number of nationalorganizations that exist tohelp in promoting energyefciency? Have you everwondered why no such na-tional organization exists topromote water efciency? Well, wonderno more.

The California Urban Water Conserva-tion Council is developing the frame-work for a national partnership on wateruse efciency--similar to the Consortiumfor Energy Efciency. We all need anationwide water efciency organiza-tion that can develop cross-state initia-tives, conduct needed water efciencyresearch, coordinate water efciencyproject partners, and in general serveas a clearinghouse for water efciencyprogress and cutting-edge change. The

US Environmental Protection Agencyagrees, and has given the Council a grantto coordinate this project.

To design a program that best meets theneeds of the water and related indus-tries, the Council will seek informationin a variety of ways:

conducting stakeholder workshopsthroughout the country to listen topotential partners to learn what is im-portant to them; conducting a nationwide survey ofstakeholders through the internet; inventorying existing water ef-ciency organizations on a local andregional basis and learning from theirexperiences; conducting three specialized focusgroups to get feedback on proposeddesigns for the national organization; writing a report summarizing all theoptions and making recommendations.

Please consider having a voice in the fram-ing of a newly created national water useefciency organization. A national organi-

zation could greatly benet Califor-nia by providing the support for

needed product research andsavings evaluation studies. Visitthe Councils Web page on thisproject to ll out a survey formand to register your views in thediscussion forum. The Web site

is accessible through the Councils mainhome page atwww.cuwcc.org. Wed liketo hear from you!

Mission Accomplished!By Katie Shulte Joung

May 1, 2005, marked the three-year an-niversary of the landmark cooperativeagreement among the Departmentof Water Resources, the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation, and theCALFED Bay-Delta Authority andthe California Urban Water ConservationCouncil. This agreement represents asignicant commitment to assisturban water agencies acrossCalifornia to achieve water useefciency goals. Programs con-ducted with funding from DWR includedproviding technical assistance to wateragencies on understanding the Councilsmemorandum of understanding (MOU),implementing the 14 Best ManagementPractices (BMPs), and using the BMPreporting Web site. The funding alsosupported maintenance and upgrades to

the Councils Web site, the BMP report-ing database, regular publication of theWaterLogue, and updating the Web sitewith new product information and othertechnical resources.

All of the Councils projects funded byDWR are now complete!

Development of a Water Savings Cal-culation Model A software program toestimate statewide water savings fromBMP activities has been developed. Thisdatabase relies on the data provided bywater agencies on the implementationof quantiable BMPs. The model alsoenables water suppliers to calculate theiragencys water savings potential for usein program planning. Water savings es-timates from 1991 through 2005, for allquantiable BMPs are now readily avail-able on the Councils Web site.

UWMP WorkshopsIn early 2005, the

Council hosted a series of 10 UrbanWater Management Plan workshopsthroughout the State to assist urban wa-ter suppliers, consultants, planners and

other interested parties in preparingan UWMP, which is due by Decem-ber 31, 2005. The plan must de-

scribe and evaluate sources ofwater supply, efcient uses of

water, demand management mea-sures, implementation strategies

and schedules, and other rel-evant information and pro-

grams. The workshopswere designed to

provide step-by-step guidance

and information on using DWRs UrbanWater Management Plan Guidebook,new legislative requirements affect-ing the UWMP; using the DWR ReviewSheets as a template; understanding thetwo mechanisms for reporting waterconservation activities (Demand Manage-ment Measures and/or Best ManagementPractices); and streamlining the prepara-

tion of a Water Supply Assessment orVerication in accordance with SenateBill 221 and Senate Bill 610 (Water Sup-ply Planning).

Revenue Impacts In Fall 2004, theCouncil hosted workshops for wateragency general managers, nance direc-tors, rate managers, and other interestedparties to provide information on manag-


9/12


9

ing revenue stability through rate design,the effect of pricing on water consump-tion and conservation, incorporating fu-ture capital investment in rate structuredesign, adaptive pricing benets fordrought management, equity versus ef-ciency, and the benets to wastewaterutilities in adopting a conservation ori-ented rate structure.

Integrating Water Supply and LandUse Planning In the Spring of 2004,the Council conducted workshops forwater suppliers, land-use planners, engi-neers, consultants and other interested

parties on the implementation of Sen-ate Bill 221 and Senate Bill 221 (Statesof 2001). Using DWRs Guidebook forImplementation of SB 221 and SB 610 asa resource, the workshops provided in-formation on: integrating the legislativerequirements of with the California En-vironmental Quality Act and the Subdivi-sion Map Act process; and preparing aWater Supply Assessment or Verication;and using the Urban Water ManagementPlan as a source document.

The Council was grateful for the fundingfrom DWR to conduct these projects,which we believe will result in evengreater urban water conservation effortsby Californias water suppliers and shouldhelp water agencies meet the needs of ourgrowing population while preserving im-portant natural resources. Mary Ann Dick-inson, Executive Director for the Council,expressed her enthusiasm for this uniquepartnership when she stated, While theCouncils projects for DWR are complete,

we look forward to future partnerships toassist California in meeting its water useefciency goals. We are committed to pro-viding continued assistance to DWR andthe water efciency community.

For additional information on theseprojects visit the Councils Web site at

www.cuwcc.org.

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

AWMC Web Site Offers

Wealth of InformationThere are no ashing lights or stick-gures running across the computerscreen to greet the visitor to the Agri-cultural Water Management CouncilsWeb site. Instead, the Web site hosts awealth of information designed to assistagricultural water district to evaluateand improve their water management.Especially helpful is the link from theWeb sites home page that leads to as-sistance in formulating water manage-

ment plans. Visit the Council Web site atwww.agwatercouncil.org to nd out howto access the following tools.

Planning worksheetsA series of worksheetswalks the water

district represen-tative through the

information needed todevelop an agriculturalwater management plan.

Many of the work-sheets include tablesthat individuals can

simply add the infor-mation requeste

according to the plan guidelines.

Net Benet AnalysisWater suppliers can also nd net ben-et analysis software to evaluate theiroperations for improving efciency. TheCouncil provides an analytical frame-

work for districts to evaluate the benetsand costs of implementing an efcientwater management practice in their ser-vices area in order to best determine the

appropriate manner of implementation.The net benet analysis takes into con-

sideration the technical, environmental,socioeconomic, nancial, and third partyfactors affected by water use efciencyactivities.

Monitoring and VericationProcedures

Low-cost monitoring and vericationprotocols are available to assist watersuppliers in estimating the volumeof water conserved by a water use ef-ciency project. The protocols include

guidelines for how to identify bothpre- and post-project conditions for thefollowing water use efciency projecttypes: monitor canal lining and piping,drainage reuse, spillage reduction, andon-farm improvements.

BMP ReportingNew to the Council Web site is a BMPreporting application for federal con-tractors to submit their reports online.Contractors can access the applicationfrom a secured location on the CouncilWeb site with a username and password.The site is easy to navigate with a user-friendly interface. Users will be able tocomplete any numberof the steps, save theirwork and retrieve it bya simple login method.Contact the Councilofce to receive a user-name and passwordto sample theWeb site.


10/12


10

New Water RecyclingProjects Increase the

States Recycled Water UseBy Nancy King

New phases of two recycled water projectsare scheduled to come online this yearand will ultimately augment our state wa-ter supplies. Both the San Gabriel ValleyWater Recycling Project, Phase 2, and theEncina Basin Water Reclamation Program,Phase II together will supply 2,320 mil-lion gallons of recycled water annually forirrigation and other uses, freeing up thepotable water for household needs.

San Gabriel Valley

Water Recycling ProjectPhase 2 of Californias San Gabriel ValleyWater Recycling Project, scheduled to bein operation by September 2005, will sup-ply approximately 2,646 acre-feet per year(approximately 860 million gallons annu-ally) of recycled water to customers. Theproject consists of constructing:

a pump station adjacent to the

treatment plant and

a distribution pipeline system.

The Upper San Gabriel Valley MunicipalWater District is building the distributionfacilities and will wholesale the recycledwater to the local water purveyor, who willin turn retail the recycled water to variouscustomers. Recycled water will be used inplace of using groundwater at the WhittierNarrows Recreation area - a large countypark - as well as other customer locations.

The recycled water will be piped fromthe Los Angeles County Sanitation Dis-

tricts Whittier Narrows Water ReclamationPlant. This plant can produce up to 15million gallons per day (mgd) of tertiarytreated water. Phase 1 of the project con-sisted of extending distribution facilitiesfrom the Central Basin Municipal WaterDistricts recycled water system to serve1,800 acre-feet per year, or 590 milliongallons, from the Sanitation Districts 100MGD San Jose Creek WRP, to Rio HondoCollege, Mill Elementary School and Rose

Hills Memorial Park. This initial phase be-gan delivering recycled water in June 2003.

The $9 million project is being fundedby the USGVMWD, the U.S. Bureau ofReclamation, and the Metropolitan Water

District of Southern California, as well as apotential State Board Proposition 50 grant.USGVMWD has contracted with a private

company to design and manage construc-tion of the facilities, and with San GabrielValley Water Company to operate andmaintain the distribution system. TheSan Gabriel Valley Water Recycling Proj-ect is part of the ongoing efforts of theSanitation Districts and its water purveyorpartners to recycle as much of the re-cycled water from its water reclamationplants as possible. For more informationabout the Project, contact Earle C. Har-tling, Water Recycling Coordinator for

Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts,at (562) 699-7411, ext. 2806 or [email protected].

Encina BasinWater Reclamation Program,

Phase II ProjectThe City of Carlsbads Encina Basin WaterReclamation Program, Phase II Project willsupply 4.0 mgd of recycled water for ir-rigation freeing up drinking water suppliespreviously used for irrigation.

The Carlsbad Water Recycling Facility isthe rst of the four major componentsthat make up the Phase II Project. Thisfacility will process 4.0 mgd of recycledwater to an advanced tertiary treatmentlevel that meets State Health Departmentsrequirements for recycled water suit-able for body contact. The facility can beexpanded, through future phases, to pro-duce 16.0 mgd.

The second component of Phase II is toconstruct the distribution system--over24 miles of pipelines. David Ahles, SeniorCivil Engineer of the City of Carlsbad, sayspipelines will serve two hundred potential

customers in the Carlsbad Research Park,as well as homeowners associations. Thethird component is the construction ofthree new Recycled Water Pump Stationsthat will pump a combined ow of over17,000 gallons per minute through thedistribution system to provide irrigationwater to the City. The fourth and nalcomponent of Phase II consists of waterquality improvements to a recycled waterstorage reservoir. The Phase II Project - re-cycled water plant, pipelines, pumping sta-

tions and the reservoir work - is expectedto cost $45 million and is scheduled to becompleted spring 2006, with water deliver-ies beginning summer 2005.

Phase II expands the recycled water dis-tribution system constructed as part ofthe Phase I Project completed in 1997.Ahles says the City of Carlsbads Phase Ihas been a great success. Currently, theapproximately 26 miles of existing pipelinesupplies recycled water to 58 outdoor

landscape irrigation use sites including LaCosta Resort and Spa, Four Seasons Re-sort Aviara, LEGOLAND California, GrandPacic Palisades Hotel, and the world-re-nowned Flower Fields, as wellas parks, median strips,shopping areas, freewaylandscaping and numer-ous homeowners associa-tions. At the completionof Phase II, the CarlsbadMunicipal Water Districtwill be able to supply25 percent of the entirecitys water needs withrecycled water.

For more information contact David Ahles,City of Carlsbad, at (702) 602-2748 oremail [email protected].

Visitors learn about the Los Angeles CountySanitation Districts Whittier Narrows WaterReclamation Plant


11/12


11

California RecognizesDesalination as Potential

Water Supply OptionDWR awards $25 Million in

Water Desalination GrantsBy Fawzi Karajeh and Fethi BenJemaa

Desalination is gaining considerable at-tention from scientists, resource planners,policy-makers, and other stakeholders.The main driving force for this renewedinterest in water desalination is the re-markable technological advancementin processes which has recently led to amuch lower cost of desalinated water.

Worldwide, 2.4

billion people (39percent of worldpopulation) live incoastal areas. In theUnited States, 54 percent of thepopulation lives in coastal regionsand the percentage is increasing. Cur-rently, there are over 13,600 desalinationunits across 120 countries producingover 32 million cubic meters (8.4 billiongallons) of fresh water each day (BGD),of which 4 billion gallons a day is in the

United States. This 4 BGD is less than 1percent of the fresh water used in theUnited States. Worldwide, the 8.4 billiongallons supplied through desalination ac-counts for only 3 percent of global drink-ing water.

The California Department of Water Re-sources within the framework of its mis-sion of managing the water resources ofthe State provides desalination technicaland nancial assistance as an important

and developing water supply strategy.

2003: DWR convened the California WaterDesalination Task Force under AssemblyBill 2717. The Task Force was formed tolook into opportunities and impedimentsfor using brackish water and oceanwaterdesalination in California, and to examinewhat role the state should play in further-ing the use of desalination technology.One of the primary ndings is that eco-

nomically and environmentally acceptabledesalination should be part of a balancedwater portfolio to meet Californias exist-ing and future water supply and envi-ronmental needs. The California WaterDesalination Task Force identied poten-

tial water supply benets associated withthe increased use of desalinated water,as well as the challenges facing Californiawith large-scale desalination use.

November 2002: California voterspassed Proposition 50, the Water Security,Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and BeachProtection Act of 2002. Chapter 6(a) ofProposition 50 allocates the sum of $50million for oceanwater and brackish water

desalination projects grants. This grant

program, administered by DWR,provides funding for constructionprojects, research and develop-

ment, feasibility studies, andpilots and demonstration

projects. The program assistslocal public agencies with the devel-

opment of local water supplies throughbrackish water and seawater desalination.

July 8, 2004: DWRs Ofce of Water UseEfciency and Transfers released a draft

Proposal Solicitation Package (PSP) forpublic comments. DWR held two publicworkshops on August 12, 2004, in North-ern California and August 17, 2004, inSouthern California. The public commentperiod ended August 23, 2004.

October 2004: The California Bay-DeltaPublic Advisory Committee endorsed thePSP on October 14, 2004. On October 25,2004, the nal PSP was released and madeavailable in hard copies and posted on theWeb to accept proposals.

November 15, 2004: DWR conducted aPublic Workshop for the Final PSP, and byJanuary 13, 2005, the due date to submitapplications, DWR received 42 eligible ap-plications requesting $71.3 million.

During the 2005 funding cycle, a sum of$25 million was appropriated for fundingbrackish water and oceanwater desalina-

tion projects. Entities involved with watermanagement activities were eligible to ap-ply including cities, counties, joint powerauthorities, public water districts, universi-ties and colleges, tribes, non-prot organi-zations, watershed management groups,

state agencies and federal agencies.

After receiving the 42 eligible applications,a Desalination Review Panel was formedto help the State review the applicationsbased on the criteria set forth in the PSP.The Desal Review Panel, comprised ofmembers representing local, state, andfederal agencies as well as other stakehold-ers, evaluated the proposals in relation tothe seven criteria established in the PSP.Detailed scoring sheets were provided to

each reviewer. Panel members submittedtheir individual draft scores and commentsfor the proposals they reviewed. Then onMarch 24, 2005, the Desal Review Panelmet and ranked eligible projects for thedifferent project categories: research anddevelopment, feasibility studies, pilots anddemonstrations, and constructions.

March 25, 2005: A Desalination Fund-ing Agency Team was appointed by theDepartment and included representatives

from DWR, Department of Health Servic-es, Energy Commission, and U.S. Bureauof Reclamation. The Desalination FundingAgency Team reviewed the scores and theranking recommend by the DesalinationReview Panel and made its recommenda-tion to the DWR. DWR issued a Draft StaffFunding Recommendation on March 30,2005.

April 12, 2005: DWR conducted a publicworkshop to provide information aboutthe Draft Funding Recommendation, an-nounce the projects recommended forfunding, and review the award contractingprocess. DWR also opened a commentperiod on the Staff Funding Recommenda-tion until April 19, 2005.

April 14, 2005: DWR submitted theStaff Draft Funding Recommendation tothe joint meeting of the California BayDelta Authority and the Bay-Delta Public

Continued on Page 12


12/12


12

Funded ProjectsCATEGORY FUNDED / TOTAL COST REQUESTED GRANT STATE SHARE

Construction 3 / 8 $104,359,043 $15,000,000 $8,930,744 9%

Pilot and Demonstration 6 / 14 $26,438,272 $10,474,232 $7,974,516 30%

Research and Development 7 / 11 $13,804,295 $6,004,746 $6,004,746 43%

Feasibility Studies 9 / 9 $4,437,061 $2,089,994 $2,089,994 47%

Total 25 / 42 $149,038,671 $33,568,972 $25,000,000 17%

Advisory Committee. The Authority, viaits resolution 05-04-07, recommended theDepartment of Water Resources proceedwith the Proposition 50 Water Desalina-tion Grants, 2005 Cycle Staff Recommend-ed Projects.

Based on the review process, DWR has de-cided that the available $25 million underthis Desalination grant cycle be used tofund 25 different projects including: 3 con-structions, 6 pilots and demonstrations, 7research and development projects, and9 feasibility studies. These funding awardsprovide 54 percent of the fund to brackishwater desalination projects and 46 percentto ocean desalination projects with a state-

wide geographically balanced distribution.

With these funding awards, the State ofCalifornia is funding well-documenteddesalination construction projects withhigh potential of success. The State ispartially funding the construction projects

as ranked in the top three by the DesalReview Panel and recommended by theProposition 50 Desal Agency Team. Thisfunding will create a new water sourcefrom unusable ocean and brackish ground-water to meet current or future water

shortages through which will create re-gional and statewide benets.

All applicable laws, Proposition 50 provi-sions, and concerns will be addressedbefore the implementation of the awardedprojects. This process allows the State tohave access to data, knowledge, and ex-perience gained as a result of the awardedprojects and makes knowledge availablefor other potential projects. The Statecan support feasible desalination projects

while working toward meeting water sup-ply benets projected by the CaliforniaDesalination Task Force and the 2005 Cali-fornia Water Plan Update.

The number of funded projects was in-creased by lowering the level of funding

for construction projects. As a result, twoadditional pilot projects (brackish waterand oceanwater desalination) were added,which are expected to provide local agen-cies and the State with valuable informa-tion for informed decisions. These funding

awards are consistent with principles out-lined in the PSP process of encouragingthe development of all practical desalina-tion technologies and both brackish andocean desalination feedwater sources.

Summaries, charts, and details on the25 awarded projects are available on theWater Recycling and Desalination web site:http://www.owue.water.ca.gov/recycle/DesalPSP/DesalPSP.cfm. A map of the geo-graphical locations of the funding awards

is available at:www.owue.water.ca.gov/recycle/DesalPSP/

MapDesalFundingDistribution.JPG.

Desalination from Page11

WATER CONSERVATION NEWSP. O. Box 942836Sacramento, CA 94236-0001

This newsletter is printed on recycled paper.

STATE

OF CALIFORN

IA

DE

PAR

TMENT

OFWATER

RESOURC

ES

Address Correction Requested

Summer 2005 California Water Conservation News

Documents

Transcript of Summer 2005 California Water Conservation News