HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - Community Advisory Commission - 02/24/2011tooEastValley
Water District
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEETING
Date: February 24, 2011
Time: 1:45 p.m.
Place: 3654 E. Highland Ave, Suite 12
Highland, CA 92346
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. Public Comments
2. Community Affairs Budget Issues
3. Congratulatory Letters for Elected Officials
4. Customer Satisfaction
5. District Webside Update
6. 2011 District Calendar
7. Santa Ana Sucker Fish Task Force expenses
8. Citrus Festival — March 2011
9. District motto
10. District Water Award
11. 2011 Water Leaders Class update
12. 2011 Spring tour
13. Document imaging software
14. Customer Bill of Rights
15. Water Conservation program
16. Alternate payment locations
17. Strategic Communications Plan/Survey
18. Press Releases/Media Outreach
ADJOURN
Pursuant to Government Code Section 549542(.), any request for a disability- related modification or
accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, that is sought in order to participate in the above- agendized
public meeting should be directed to the District's Administrative Manager at (909) 885 -4900 at least 72 hours pnor
to said meeting.
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
7 February 2011
Memorandum
To: East Valley Water District
From: Meredith Clement and Ric Corona, Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Subject: East Valley Water District, Calculations Performed for UWMP
1089014'00
The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 (SBX7 -7) is one of four policy bills enacted as part of the
November 2009 Comprehensive Water Package (Special Session Policy Bills and Bond
Summary). The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 provides the regulatory framework to support
the statewide reduction In urban per capita water use described in the 20x2020 Water
Conservation Plan. Consistent with SBX7 -7, each water supplier must determine and report Its
existing baseline water consumption and establish future water use targets in gallons per capita
per day (GPCD); reporting is to begin with the 2010 UWMP.
The two primary calculations required by SBX7 -7 are:
o Base Daily Water Use Calculation (GPCD used in past years)
o Compliance Water Use Target (target gallons per capita per day in 2015 and 2020)
The Base Daily Water Use calculation is based on gross water use each year and can be
based on a 10 -year average ending no earlier than 2004 and no later than 2010 or a 15 -year
average if 10% of 2008 demand was met by recycled water. Base Daily Water Use must
account for all water sent to retail customers, excluding:
o Recycled water
o Water sent to another water agency
o Water that went into storage
It Is at an agency's discretion whether or not to exclude agricultural water use from the Base
Daily Water Use calculation. If agricultural water use is excluded from the Base Daily Water
Use calculation it must also be excluded from the calculation of actual water use in later urban
water management plans.
There are four methods for calculating the Compliance Water Use Target
o Method 1: 20% reduction from Base Daily Water Use
o Method 2: Meet separate targets for indoor water use (55 GPCD), outdoor water use
consistent with water use allowed under Model Landscape Ordinance), and
commercial, institutional, and industrial (CII) customers
o Method 3: Meet DWR South Coast region target of 149 GPCD
1Wan3leherelproiects12010110890 7 4 00_51 wmwd_u wmp109+apodsl9 0940ponslevwd agency cthatxe6m method 7 vs metood 4
water use target seat valley water district 2-3.11 doe
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014'00
Page 2
o Method 4: Meet specific savings for different water use sectors (more information on
Method 4 appears betov.)
Finally, the selected Compliance Water Use Target must be com;)a-ed against what the
Department of Water Resources calls the 'Maximum Allowable GPr,D'. The Maximum
Allowable GPCD is based on E-5% of a 5 -year average base gr:lss .eater use from 2003 to
2010. The Maximum Allowable GPCD use is used to determmn. ,vhether a supplier's 2015
and 2020 per capita water use targets meet the minimum water use reduction of the SBX7 -7
legislation. If an agency's Compliance Water Use Target is higher than the Maximum
Allowable GPCD, the agency must instead use the Maximum P It wable GPCD as their target.
As described in the following paragraphs, Kennedy /Jenks Consultants has calculated Base
Daily Water Use, Compliance Water Use (both under Method 1 and Method 4), and has
compared the water use targets against the Maximum Allowable 3OCD.
Data Provided by East Valley Water District
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants asked East Valley Water District tc prc.ide data related to the sales
of water to all sectors served by East Valley Water District for the last fifteen years. Also
requested was the number of accounts for single - family and multi- family sectors, water sales to
other agencies, along with a percentage for water loss through th-3 distribution system. Table 1
shows a summary of the data p•ovided by the East Valley Wale • r)istnct
Gross Water Use
Table 1 shows the basic inputs to the Gross Water Use calculat•e-1 As is shown in Table 1,
during the period 1995 to 2009 East Valley Water District did mt make deliveries of recycled
water. East Valley Water District has chosen not to exclude water sent to agricultural customers
from the calculation of Gross Water Use Gross Water Use was r etermined based on the
following formula:
Gross Water Use = Total Sales - ReLycled Water Delivered to Retail - ti ill•% 10 Other Agencies + System
Loses
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014.00
Page 3
Table 1
Total Sales and Number of Accounts per Single/Multi- family
Year
Water Sant to
Retail
Customers
e )'
Water Sent
to All
Customers
JAFYr b
Recycled
Water
Delivered to
Retail
System
c
0 single-
Family
Connections
d
0 Multi-
Family
Connections
e
Assumed
Loss Rate
Sales Date Metered • Lou Metered * Loss
1985 15.727 15.799 692 2
1998 1 17,581 15 692 978 2
1997 17,612 15,907 965 4
1996 181118 18,070 954 2
1999 1 18,850 16,258 945 3
2000 19,603 15,949 950 3
2001 I 19,603 15.176 950 3
2002 19,8155 17,636 1,051 7
2003 20.379 18,946 1,072 7
2004 21,814 19.615 1,051 5
2005 22,162 20,015 1013 2
2006 21,211 20,170 980 13
2007 22,761 21,036 938 7
2008 22.052 19,949 830 a
2009 21,093 20,098 828 7
References
Limited to water deNYered to customers in are East Valley Water District service area through that agencys
distnbuban system
Limned to deliveries to commercial producers of agricultural crops or livestock
Lem7ed to recycied water that enters East Vaeey Water District's dlsMbulion system and Is delivered to customers
in that agency's service arse.
a) Public Water System Statistics for East Valley Water District
b) Public Water System Statistics for Fast Valley Water District
c) Public Water System Statistics for Fast Valley Water District
d) Public Water System Statistics for East Valley Water District
e) Public Water System Statistics for East Valley Water District. Years 2003 to 2008. Public Water System
Statistics characterized mutti- fariuly commercial accounts as'Commercial' The number of mufti-Family
accounts for years 2003 to 2008 has been estimated based on data for year 2002 and 2009
f) Based on comparison of water produced versus water delivered
Base Dally GPCD
In order to determine the gross water use per capita per day, Kennedy /Jenks determined the
population being served by East Valley Water District by taking the number of accounts for
single- and multi- family and multiplying by a factor for the number of people living at each type
of account. The number of persons associated with a single - family account and the number of
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014.00
Page 4
persons associated with a multi- family account were estimated ;Sing the "Aftemative
Methodology for Service Area population" as described in Appen ii • A of the Methodologies for
Calculating Baseline and Comphance per Capda Urban Water J Le DWR 2010). Table 2
shows the factors used to determine the populations of the area I •emg served by the District for
both a single- and a multi- family account along with Gross Water U-e
After calculating a population for the service area and the gross 'n star usage. the gross water
use per day per capita was then calculated by the following formula for each year for which data
was provided:
GPDC =
Gross Water Usage
Total Population x 365 davti
Table 2 provides a summary of the population and GPCD for each of the years for which date
was provided by the District The selected 10 -year period is 199( tr. 2008 resulting in a Base
Daily GPCD of 342.
Compliance Water Use Target. Method 1
Method 1 for establishing the Compliance Water Use Target takes trie selected 10 -year
average, and reduces that GPCD by 20 %. The selected I 0 -year average GPCD, 342 reduced
by 20% means the Compliance Water Use Target under Method I 273 GPCD in 2020 and
the interim target GPCD for the year 2015 is 308.
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014'00
Page 5
Table 2
Service Area Population and Base Dally GPCD
Year
People
Per Unit
Single-
Famil a
People
Per Unit
Multi
Family(b)
Population
c
Production
d Production GPY GPCD
10 -Year
Average
5-Year
Average
1995 3.0 24 49.072 16,042 5.228,836.304 292
ism 3.0 24 49.443 17,933 5,842,977,422 324
1997 30 24 5005 18.31 5,958,195. 327
199IN 301 24 50.5431 16.5121 5.380.091.2631 29
199 3. 24 51.051 19.5111 8,359641,453 341
2001A 3.d 2A 50,14d 20,191 6.578.712.1231 35
20011 3 01 24 4782 20,191 6.578.712.1231 377
20 3.0 2.4 55.45 21.245 6.922.294.5281 34
200A 3 d 24 59.431 21.M 7.104.970.25A 32
20041 3 d 2.4 51.381A 22,995 7.394.745.81d 330 331
2001A 3.d 24 62.49d 22,605 7.305.358.830 3231 3341 1
2 3 2A 62.83 23,960 7,atig.5al.em 341 33
20071 3 2.4 85,37 24,354 7,935155 229 33 336 331
200 3
241
61 85 23.816 7,759,941, 586 344 34 3
20W 34 2.41 62 22,57 7 353 Bab 087 32A 34A 33
a) Persons per Single - Family Unit estimated for EVWD's service area using the'Altemaliw Methodology for
Service Area Population" as described in Appendix A of the Methodologies for Calculating Sessions and Compaance
par We Urban Water Use (DWR 2010)
b) Persons per Multi- Family Unit estimated for EVWD's service area using the "Altemative Methodology fox Service
Area Population' as described In Appendix A of the Methodoogies for Cookuladng Sessilm and Comphance per
Capda Urban Water Use (DWR 2010)
c) Population estimated by mulupiying the number of smgledamily connections in a given year by the estimated
number of persons per unit for a single - family dwelling, multiplying number of rnutli- family connections in a given year
by the estimated number of persons per unit for a multi - family dwelling and summing the resultant numbers
d) Public Water System Stabstics for East Valley Water District.
Comparison of Compliance Wafer Use Target to Maximum Allowable GPCD
As shown in Table 2, it is possible to calculate six different 10 -year averages and it was also
possible to calculate three different 5-year averages. For the purpose of the SBX7 -7 calculation
it's advantageous to select the 10 -year average and 5 -year average with the highest GPCD, in
this case 342 and 334. Given that the 5 -year average GPCD is 334, the Maximum Allowable
GPCD Is 317. The Compliance Water Use Target, under Method 1 (273 GPCD) is less than the
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014'00
Page 6
Maximum Allowable GPCD, sc no adjustments to the Cornpltancr: 'dater Use Target are
necessary.
Table 3 summarizes the results of the Compliance Water Use Ta grt calculation using Method 1
Table 3
Summary of Water Use Target Calculation - Method 1
Compliance Water Use Target, Method 4
342 GPCD
334 GPCD
273 GPCD
317 GPCD
273 GPCD
308 'GPCD I
Compliance Water Use Target under Method 4 is Base Daily Gpr;D less:
o Indoor residential water savings (default is 15 GPCD)
0 20% savings on all unmetered uses
0 10% savings on Baseline CII (must be expressed in GPCD)
0 21.6% savings on current landscape and water loss uses -must be expressed as
GPCD)
DWR has provided the follcwing formula for calculating lards -ape and water loss uses:
Landscape and Water Loss Use = Base Daily Per Car Water Use - Default Indoor
Water Use (70 CPC DI - Baseline CII
The following calculations were performed to determine the Cornr itF nce Water Use Target
under Method 4:
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014`00
Page 7
Indoor Residential Savings = I S GPCD (default)
Unmetered Savings = 0 GPCD (no unmetered during selected penod)
CIISavings = 10 % +(74GPCDforC11) =7GPCD
LanscapeSavings = 21. 6% '(342GPCD- 74GPCD- 70GPCD)= 43GPCD
Total Savings = 15 GPCD + 7 GPCD + 43 GPCD = 65 GPCD
Target GPDC = 342 GPCD - 65 GPCD = 277 GPCD
Comparison of Compliance Water Use Target to Maximum Allowable GPCD
As described earlier, the Maximum Allowable GPCD is 317. The Compliance Water Use
Target, under Method 4 (277 GPCD) is less than the Maximum Allowable GPCD, so no
adjustments to the Compliance Water Use Target are necessary.
Table 4 summarizes the results of the Compliance Water Use Target calculation using Method
4.
Table 4
Summary of Water Use Target Calculation - Method 4
Selected 10 -year Averesis One Daily Water Use 342 GPCD
Selected 5 ar Average Ban Daily Waller Use 334 GPCD
Compliance Water Use Target Method 4 277 GPCD
Maximum Allowable Water Use Target a% RaducOon 317 GPCD
2020 Target 277 GPCD
2015 Interim Target 300 GPCD
Recommendation
After analyzing the results of the calculations for both Method 1 and 4, it can be seen that the
Compliance Water Use Targets under both methods are relatively close to each other.
However, Method 4 does provide a higher target which will be easier to achieve by East
Valley Water District by the year 2020. Looking at Table 4, using Method 4 only requires a
reduction of 33 GPCD by year 2015, while using Method 1 would require a reduction of 34
GPCD. By the year 2020 Method 4 requires a reduction of 65 GPCD, while using Method 1
would require a 69 GPCD reduction. The difference between Method 1 and 4 becomes more
evident when comparing acre-feet per year (AFY). In year 2020. Method 1 would require a
reduction of 6,340 AFY while Method 4 would require only a 6,045 AFY reduction, a difference
of 295 AFY.
Kennedy /Jenks Consultants
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014.00
Page 8
Table 5 provides a comparisor of Methods 1 and 4 and also gives an indication of needed water
savings.
Table 5
Comparison of Method 1 and 4
Water Use Under Compliance Compliance I Reduction Reduction
Current Tergat Target Required Required
Practices
NA I NA
GPCD 342 308 1 3[•0_
AFY 25 472 22,789 1 22!1" Up to 34 Up t0 2,883
Year 2020
GPCD 342 1 273 27'
A FY 30.901 24 581 24 11— Up l0 88 Up 10 6.340
Revised Demand and Population Projections
On January 14, 2011 Kennedy /Jenks provided EVWD with a merrorandum whereby future
population for years 2015 to 2035 was projected based on growth rPles from the Southern
California Association of Gover^ments Integrated Growth Forecast However, since that time
EVWD has asked that Kennedy.Jenks also add the potential demani from the proposed
Sunrise Ranch development. E :'WD's Water Master Plan (200E t aesumes a worst cast
demand from Sunrise Ranch of 16,700 AFY. For the purposes of e=tlmation. Kennedy /Jenks
has assumed this development and Its associated demand occur from years 2020 to 2035 (this
is consistent with the Water Master Plan). Specifically it Is assurned that Sunrise Ranch will
result in 4,175 AF additional demand in year 2020, 8,350 AFY adrdrmal demand in year 2025,
12,525 AFY additional demand in year 2035, and 16,700 AFY acic it nnal demand in year 2035.
The revised demand projections are shown in Table 6 below
Kennody /Jenks Consultsnts
Memorandum
East Valley Water District
7 February 2011
K/J 1089014.00
Page 9
Table 8
Projected Demand In EVWD Service Area (AFY)
a) Total anticipated demand of Sunrise Ranch development assumed to be 16,700 once fully built-out The assumed hmelrame for
development Is 4,175 aly by 2020. 8.350 afy by 2025, 12.525 afy by 2030. and 16.700 ally as years thereafter
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Growth based on SCAG Forecast 24.278 2&472 26.726 28.194 29.742 31.376
Sunrise Rench 101mlo ment a 0 1 01 4.175 1 8,350 1 12.525 1 16.700
Total 24,2781 25.472 1 30.901 1 36.544 1 4Z2671 48.016
a) Total anticipated demand of Sunrise Ranch development assumed to be 16,700 once fully built-out The assumed hmelrame for
development Is 4,175 aly by 2020. 8.350 afy by 2025, 12.525 afy by 2030. and 16.700 ally as years thereafter