Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - Legislative & Public Outreach Committee - 04/11/2024LEGISLATIVE & PUBLIC OUTREACH COMMITTEE APRIL 11, 2024 East Valley Water District was formed in 1954 and provides water and wastewater services to 107,000 residents within the cities of San Bernardino and Highland, and portions of San Bernardino County. EVWD operates under the direction of a 5­member elected Board. COMMITTEE MEMBERS James Morales Jr. Governing Board Member Ronald L. Coats Governing Board Member Legislative & Public Outreach Committee April 11, 2024 ­ 1:00 PM 31111 Greenspot Road, Highland, CA 92346 www.eastvalley.org PLEASE NOTE: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the District’s office located at 31111 Greenspot Rd., Highland, during normal business hours. Also, such documents are available on the District’s website at eastvalley.org and are subject to staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(a), any request for a disability­related 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 Clerk at (909) 885­4900 at least 72 hours prior to said meeting. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF BOARD MEMBERS PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person wishing to speak to the Board of Directors is asked to complete a Speaker Card and submit it to the District Clerk prior to the start of the meeting. Each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes, unless waived by the Chairman of the Board. Under the State of California Brown Act, the Board of Directors is prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not listed on the posted agenda. The matter will automatically be referred to staff for an appropriate response or action and may appear on the agenda at a future meeting. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the Board of Directors to be routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no discussion of these items prior to the time the board considers the motion unless members of the board, the administrative staff, or the public request specific items to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar. 1.February 8, 2024 Legislative & Public Outreach Committee Meeting Minutes INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 2.Outreach Update 3.Legislative Update REPORTS 4.Public Affairs/Conservation Activities ADJOURN LEGISLATIVE & PUBLIC OUTREACH COMMITTEEAPRIL 11, 2024East Valley Water District was formed in 1954 and provides water and wastewater services to107,000 residents within the cities of San Bernardino and Highland, and portions of SanBernardino County.EVWD operates under the direction of a 5­member elected Board.COMMITTEE MEMBERS James Morales Jr. Governing Board Member Ronald L. Coats Governing Board Member Legislative & Public Outreach Committee April 11, 2024 ­ 1:00 PM 31111 Greenspot Road, Highland, CA 92346 www.eastvalley.org PLEASE NOTE: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the District’s office located at 31111 Greenspot Rd., Highland, during normal business hours. Also, such documents are available on the District’s website at eastvalley.org and are subject to staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(a), any request for a disability­related 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 Clerk at (909) 885­4900 at least 72 hours prior to said meeting. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF BOARD MEMBERS PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person wishing to speak to the Board of Directors is asked to complete a Speaker Card and submit it to the District Clerk prior to the start of the meeting. Each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes, unless waived by the Chairman of the Board. Under the State of California Brown Act, the Board of Directors is prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not listed on the posted agenda. The matter will automatically be referred to staff for an appropriate response or action and may appear on the agenda at a future meeting. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the Board of Directors to be routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no discussion of these items prior to the time the board considers the motion unless members of the board, the administrative staff, or the public request specific items to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar. 1.February 8, 2024 Legislative & Public Outreach Committee Meeting Minutes INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 2.Outreach Update 3.Legislative Update REPORTS 4.Public Affairs/Conservation Activities ADJOURN LEGISLATIVE & PUBLIC OUTREACH COMMITTEEAPRIL 11, 2024East Valley Water District was formed in 1954 and provides water and wastewater services to107,000 residents within the cities of San Bernardino and Highland, and portions of SanBernardino County.EVWD operates under the direction of a 5­member elected Board.COMMITTEE MEMBERSJames Morales Jr.Governing Board Member Ronald L. CoatsGoverning Board MemberLegislative & Public Outreach CommitteeApril 11, 2024 ­ 1:00 PM31111 Greenspot Road, Highland, CA 92346www.eastvalley.orgPLEASE NOTE:Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of theagenda packet are available for public inspection in the District’s office located at 31111Greenspot Rd., Highland, during normal business hours. Also, such documents are availableon the District’s website at eastvalley.org and are subject to staff’s ability to post thedocuments before the meeting. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(a), any request for a disability­related 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 Clerk at (909) 885­4900 at least 72 hours prior to said meeting. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF BOARD MEMBERS PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person wishing to speak to the Board of Directors is asked to complete a Speaker Card and submit it to the District Clerk prior to the start of the meeting. Each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes, unless waived by the Chairman of the Board. Under the State of California Brown Act, the Board of Directors is prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not listed on the posted agenda. The matter will automatically be referred to staff for an appropriate response or action and may appear on the agenda at a future meeting. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the Board of Directors to be routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no discussion of these items prior to the time the board considers the motion unless members of the board, the administrative staff, or the public request specific items to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar. 1.February 8, 2024 Legislative & Public Outreach Committee Meeting Minutes INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 2.Outreach Update 3.Legislative Update REPORTS 4.Public Affairs/Conservation Activities ADJOURN Agenda Item #1 April 11, 20241 Meeting Date: April 11, 2024 Agenda Item #1 Consent Item Regular Meeting TO: Committee Members FROM: William Ringland, Public Affairs/Conservation Manager SUBJECT: February 8, 2024 Legislative & Public Outreach Committee Meeting Minutes RECOMMENDATION That the Legislative & Public Outreach Committee approve the February 8, 2024 meeting minutes. AGENCY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES III - Deliver Public Service With Purpose While Embracing Continuous Growth B. Strive to Provide World Class Customer Relations FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item. Respectfully submitted: ________________ William Ringland Public Affairs/Conservation Manager ATTACHMENTS February 8, 2024 Committee Meeting Minutes 02-08-2024 cmc 1 4 7 9 Subject to Approval EAST VALLEY WATER DISTRICT FEBRUARY 8, 2024 LEGISLATIVE & PUBLIC OUTREACH COMMITTEE MINUTES William Ringland, Public Affairs/Conservation Manager, called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and Director Coats led the flag salute. PRESENT: Directors: Coats, Morales Jr. ABSENT: None STAFF: William Ringland, Public Affairs/Conservation Manager; Cecilia Contreras, Public Affairs Coordinator; Roxana Morales, Public Affairs Specialist GUEST(s): None PUBLIC COMMENTS The Public Affairs Coordinator declared the public participation section of the meeting open at 1:00 p.m. There being no written or verbal comments, the public participation section was closed. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 12, 2023 COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES M/S/C (Morales-Coats) that the October 23, 2023 Committee meeting minutes be approved as submitted. OUTREACH UPDATE The Public Affairs Specialist provided an update on the District’s outreach activities. Updates included the startup of the Sterling Natural Resource Center, Greenspot Road construction, upcoming SNRC Operations ribbon cutting event, and participating in the Annual Highland YMCA 5k run. Staff continues to work on the animated wastewater video for educational purposes, website redesign, and creating the Fats, Oil, and Grease (FOG) printed material. The Public Affairs team continues reaching out to the community through ongoing social media campaigns, community pop-up events, and the District’s digital engagement, such as conservation workshops, school career days, Fix a Leak Week, and participating in the Citrus Harvest Festival. Upcoming projects include a Prop 218 Notice, the Annual Fiscal Year budget, and the annual Consumer Confidence Report (CCR). Information only. 02-08-2024 cmc 1 4 7 9 CONSERVATION UPDATE The Public Affairs/Conservation Manager provided conservation updates. Updates included the State’s current drought conditions, reporting staff submitted to stay in compliance with SB 606 and AB 1668, rebate program numbers, change in the WBIC controller for the Direct Install program, an upcoming Conservation workshop, and the continued efforts towards classroom presentations by the Conservation Coordinator. Information only. REVIEW DRAFT CONTRACT WITH RESOLUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY SERVICES The Public Affairs/Conservation Manager stated that staff initiated a Request for Proposals (RFP) for legislative advocacy services. Staff received a single proposal, which was found to be reasonable and responsive to the RFP. The proposed contract would be a one-year term with four optional one-year extensions, including a yearly increase consistent with inflation as determined by the consumer price index. Director Morales and Coats recommended that the contract with Resolute for Legislative Advocacy Services be presented to the Board of Directors for approval. SET THE DAY AND TIME FOR HOLDING REOCURRING MEETINGS The Committee discussed and established to continue the Legislative and Public Affairs Committee meetings to be held bimonthly, on the second Thursday at 1pm. PUBLIC AFFAIRS/CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES The Public Affairs/Conservation Manager provided an update on current activities. Updates included but were not limited to continued monitoring of legislation that could affect the District, the upcoming Community Advisory Commission meeting on February 27 where Rate Study information will be shared, and that the Facilities Rental program is continuing to be a success with 57 events scheduled currently throughout 2024 and into 2025. Information only. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 2:37 p.m. ______________________________ ______________________________ James Morales, Jr. Ron Coats Director Director Legislative and Public Outreach Committee April 11, 2024 OUTREACH UPDATE 2 •April bill insert •English and Spanish •System enhancement update •Information was incorporated as key messaging on social media COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT DRAFT 3 WHATEVER IT TAKES VIDEO •Published in mid-February •Over 18,000 views on YouTube •Over 5,000 views on Instagram •Video highlights water and wastewater system maintenance efforts 4 •District kept attendees hydrated •Staff engaged with several hundred community members •Provided District information and promoted the upcoming conservation workshop CITRUS HARVEST FESTIVAL EVENT 5 WEBSITE REDESIGN 6 WEBSITE REDESIGN PROGRESS Issue/ Award Redesign RFP Assess Content Management System Collect Feedback Develop Digital Infrastructure Design Website Wireframes Alpha and Beta Testing Launch Website We are in this step •.Gov domain transition taking place January 2025 7 •Enhanced navigation •Mega menu •Account log in •Translations •Mobile responsive WEBSITE WIREFRAME 8 SNRC FACILITY RENTALS 9 •Facility rentals through 2024: 45 •Rentals currently scheduled for 2025: 16 •Agencies renting our facilities for trainings, professional development, or events •San Bernardino County Probation •San Bernardino City USD •San Bernardino County Sheriffs – Coroner and Central Detention Center divisions •City of Highland (State of the City Address) •City of San Bernardino, Center for Individual Development •Nonprofits •Highland Area Chamber of Commerce •Making Hope Happen •Tomorrow’s Talent •San Bernardino Riverside Delta Sigma Theta Alumnae •San Bernardino Fatherhood •League of Women Voters FACILITY RENTALS 10 LOOKING FORWARD •Conservation Workshop •Saturday, April 20, 2024 •Partnership with Burrtec for compost giveaway •Promoted on social media, in-person events, in-office signage, and site banner •School Career Days •SNRC Ribbon Cutting Event •Friday, May 3 from 10:00am - 1:00pm 11 UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS 12 CURRENT PROJECTS •Public Hearing Notice for Rate Adjustment (218 Notice) •Notice was mailed to all District customers and resident at the end of March •Public meeting scheduled for May 15, 2024 at 5:30pm •Annual Fiscal Year Budget •Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) QUESTIONS Agenda Item #3 April 11, 20241 Meeting Date: April 11, 2024 Agenda Item #3 Informational Item Regular Meeting TO: Committee Members FROM: Public Affairs/Conservation Manager SUBJECT: Legislative Update RECOMMENDATION This agenda item is for informational purposes only, no action is required. BACKGROUND / ANALYSIS District staff together with legislative advocates are actively monitoring this year's legislative session and tracking over 70 bills significant to East Valley Water District’s operations. The legislation has been focused on a wide variety of water topics including, Prop 218, water use efficiency, PFAS and regulatory permitting transparency. Staff are monitoring unique pieces of legislation including the following: AB 2409: Permitting Accountability Transparency Dashboard SB 903: Environmental Health – PFAS Substances AB 805: Sewer Service AB 1820: Housing Development Projects SB 1330: Urban Retail Water Use In collaboration with CMUA and ACWA, District staff are actively engaged in working groups and advocating the District's position. Engagement with the organizations continues to provide a channel to voice positions on proposed legislation, learn about industry coalitions, and partner with neighboring districts on legislative positions. Finally, State leadership are actively discussing regulatory enhancements and details for California’s Making Conservation a California Way of Life legislation. Staff signed onto two coalition letters, one from ACWA and another from a coalition of actively involved districts, with the goal of highlighting the challenges the proposed regulation would bring to the District’s community. The District will continue to take an active role in the evolving legislative and regulatory requirements. Agenda Item #3 April 11, 20242 Meeting Date: April 11, 2024 Agenda Item #3 Informational Item AGENCY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES I - Implement Effective Solutions Through Visionary Leadership C. Strengthen Regional, State and National Partnerships II - Maintain a Commitment to Sustainability, Transparency, and Accountability B. Utilize Effective Communication Methods FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item. Respectfully submitted: ________________ William Ringland Public Affairs/Conservation Manager ATTACHMENTS Presentation Multi-Agency Comment Letter ACWA Comment Letter Legislative and Public Outreach Committee April 11, 2024 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 2 •Monitoring 70 pieces of legislation •Taking positions adopted by Board of Directors through: •2023-24 Legislative Platform LEGISLATIVE LANDSCAPE EVWD Water Use Efficiency Water Affordability Water Quality Water Rights 3 TRACKING AND MONITORING Bill District Position AB 460: State Water Resources Control Board – Interim Relief (Stalled)Oppose AB 805: Sewer Service: Disadvantaged Communities Oppose AB 1337: State Water Resources Control Board: Water Shortage Enforcement (Stalled)Oppose AB 1567: Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparation, Flood Protection, Extreme Heat Mitigation, Clean Energy, and Workforce Development Bond Act of 2024 Support AB 1820: Housing development projects: applications: fees and exactions Oppose Unless Amended 4 TRACKING AND MONITORING Bill District Position AB 1827: Local government: fees and charges: water: higher-consumptive water parcels Support AB 2257: Local government: property-related water and sewer fees and assessments Support AB 2409: Office of Planning and Research: permitting accountability transparency dashboard Support SB 903: Environmental health: product safety: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances Support SB 937: Development projects: permits and other entitlements: fees and charges Oppose Unless Amended 5 TRACKING AND MONITORING Bill District Position SB 1110: Urban retail water suppliers: informational order: conservation order Support SB 1330: Urban retail water supplier: water use Support 6 PRIORITIES •Bills must pass each house by May 24 •Budget Bill must be passed by June 15 •June 27 – Last day for legislative measure to qualify for Nov. 5 General Election •Summer recess July 3 to August 5 QUESTIONS 1 March 27, 2024 Submitted via: commentletters@waterboards.ca.gov Courtney Tyler Clerk to the State Water Board State Water Resources Control Board 1001 I Street, 24th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Comment Letter — Proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation Dear Ms. Tyler, The Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) and the undersigned organizations appreciate the opportunity to provide comments to the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) on the proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation (Regulation). ACWA and its coalition partners submitted comprehensive comments to the State Water Board on the August 2023 version of the proposed Regulation. Core to ACWA’s comments was the request that the State Water Board work with ACWA, water suppliers, and other interested parties to address the policy and technical concerns in the revised draft. We immensely appreciate the significant time that State Water Board staff and Board Members, environmental and environment justice groups, and water suppliers dedicated to this process in November and December of 2023, which resulted in 21 meetings of five working groups. We believe that collaborative processes focused around understanding diverse perspectives and discussing different solutions lead to improved and effective policy. Water suppliers offer a unique and important perspective on the development of the proposed Regulation because water suppliers have developed and successfully implemented water use efficiency programs, in partnership with their customers, over the past several decades. As noted in the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) January 2024 Report to the Legislature, Assessing Early Implementation of Urban Water Use Efficiency Requirements (Report), these local and state actions have led to water use reduction in which the state uses roughly the same total amount of urban water now as it did in 1990, despite a 30% increase in population. We support many of the changes made to the proposed Regulation to address the water communities’ feasibility, cost, and flexibility concerns in the previous version. We remain committed to continuing to work productively with the State Water Board and other interested parties to finalize this regulation so that water suppliers can continue to advance the goals of Making Conservation a California Way of Life. Section 1. Support for Changes to the Revised Proposed Regulation ACWA and the undersigned coalition partners are in strong support of the following changes made to the revised proposed Regulation. These changes are foundational to the success of this regulation, which we define as water suppliers’ ability to work with their customers to achieve meaningful water savings and multi-benefits, while considering cost, affordability, and suppliers’ 2 good faith efforts, while minimizing unintended impacts. We urge the State Water Board to retain these changes in the final Regulation that it adopts. 1. Support for Changes to Timelines a. Outdoor Water Use Standard: We are in strong support of the proposed revisions of Section 968 to the outdoor residential water use standards timelines. The provision of five additional years to achieve meaningful water use reductions is reasonable, allows for more cost-effective implementation, and does not undermine the overall savings that will be achieved. In our October 2023 Comment Letter, we expressed significant concern that the initial proposed timelines were not reasonable, did not support cost-effective compliance, and would not achieve the multi-benefits desired. These concerns were also recognized in the LAO Report that “although the requirements are phased in over multiple years, the timeline for full implementation may be too aggressive given the number of changes that will have to occur to achieve the level of conservation envisioned. In addition, although the SWRCB is two years behind adopting final rules, suppliers’ deadlines (which are set in statute) have not been correspondingly adjusted.” To achieve the ambitious water use efficiency standards that this regulation would establish, water suppliers will need to develop and implement new programs that require long-term customer behavior change and significant investments. With a final Regulation expected to go into effect in 2025, starting compliance in 2025 would not be reasonable as 42% of suppliers be out of compliance. Additionally, suppliers would not have the appropriate time to collect and submit the required data for variances, which help ensure that individual water use objectives include all significant and appropriate uses of water. We strongly believe that the adjustments to the outdoor standards timeline will help provide the necessary time for all urban retail water suppliers to analyze existing water use efficiency programs; plan for cost- effective compliance with the standards, objectives and performance measures; budget for and staff programs; educate customers and build partnerships, including targeted programs for disadvantaged communities (DACs); allow for technology advancements; and avoid unintended impacts to urban trees, DACs, and water affordability. The proposed outdoor standards of a 0.55 Landscape Efficiency Factor (LEF) are far more stringent than the Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) 2022 Recommendations to the State Water Board, developed in coordination with the State Water Board and a diverse group of stakeholders and technical analyses and studies, of 0.63 LEF by 2030. The LAO Report, Public Policy Institute of California and many water suppliers have called for the State Water Board to revert to DWR’s recommendations for an outdoor standard. We believe that the achievement of 0.55 3 LEF for 2040 will be a tremendous lift for many suppliers and could still impose significant feasibility and cost-challenges, particularly absent dedicated funding or technical assistance. b. CII Performance Measures. We strongly support the proposed revisions to the implementation timelines for the Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) Performance Measures (PMs). Like the water use efficiency standards, compliance with the CII PMs in the previous version of the Regulation were proposed to begin in 2025. Additionally, implementation schedules for the CII PMs were overly prescriptive, requiring a specified percentage of completion bi-annually, and all stacked on top of each other within a five-year period, despite some CII PMs requiring completion before moving on to the next. We believe that the revised schedule will provide water suppliers with appropriate flexibility to successfully complete the CII PMs, resulting in reduced cost-impacts and reduced implementation challenges. 2. Support for Changes to Compliance a. Compliance in 2027. We strongly support the proposed modification to the compliance start date of 2027. Enacting legislation SB 606 and AB 1668 (2018) directed the regulation to be adopted by 2022 and defined the implementation and enforcement path, that authorized the State Water Board to: • Issue information orders starting January 1, 2024 • Written notices starting January 1, 2025 • Conservation orders starting January 1, 2026 • Civil liabilities starting January 1, 2027 We believe that adjusting compliance to begin in 2027 is consistent with the intent of the enacting legislation, which created a pathway within the first two to five years from the intended 2022 adoption date of the regulation for suppliers to develop programs that will be essential to achieving compliance. The change in compliance dates provides an important signal and more certainty to suppliers that the State Water Board’s focus is on the successful compliance with the regulation, rather than enforcement. b. Alternative Compliance Pathway. We strongly support the proposed changes to Section 966(i) and (j) that provide for a more feasible alternative compliance pathway. In our October 2023 letter, we expressed concern that many suppliers’ proposed water use objectives were unreasonable or infeasible. Based on preliminary data, the initial version of the proposed Regulation indicated that 41% of suppliers could be required to achieve water use reductions greater than 20% within the next 10 years. Many of these communities serve DACs. We raised concerns that the previously proposed alternative compliance pathway did not provide a pathway 4 to compliance. It only provided five additional years and had many requirements that were infeasible or unreasonable for suppliers. We believe that the two alternative compliance pathways currently proposed, one for communities below the Median Household Income (MHI) and with a water use reduction greater than 20% and one that applies to all suppliers with a reduction greater than 30%, are both necessary and strike an appropriate balance of achieving meaningful water savings. There was significant discussion on alternative compliance in the State Water Board’s working group meetings, and we appreciate that the State Water Board has now removed requirements that were infeasible for many water suppliers (e.g., eligibility requirements of 40% dedicated funding to DACs, which conflicts with Proposition 215, SITES rating system, and Tree City USA recognition). We believe that the revised alternative compliance requirements, which direct suppliers to develop a plan and show how they will meet a threshold of savings, provide more flexibility and align more accurately with the overall goals of advancing water use efficiency. We appreciate some interested parties’ concerns regarding 966(j) and the perception that communities with a higher MHI will be provided greater flexibility than the previous version of the regulation. However, this proposed pathway would still result in suppliers achieving a minimum of 30% reduction in water use in the next 15 years. This is significant and would require suppliers and customers to make substantial investments and changes in water use. Additionally, we note that a cap was not proposed on the total reduction, and for suppliers eligible for 966(j) and with a reduction greater than 30%, they will continue to meet the full extent of their water use objective but are being provided reasonable time with 2% per year annual reductions. 3. Support for Inclusion of Irrigable, Not Irrigated. We support changes to Section 968(b)(2)(B) that allows for the inclusion of 20% of the suppliers’ unique square footage of Irrigable Not Irrigated (INI) area. These changes align the draft Regulation more consistently with existing law and the Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) analysis and recommendations to the State Water Board. In Section 2, Comment 1 of this letter, we note continued concern with provisions of this section, and request additional changes to make the provisions of INI consistent with existing law. As noted in our previous comment letter, the Conservation Legislation requires outdoor efficiency standards to apply to “irrigable lands” (Wat. Code, § 10609.6 (2)(B)). The August 2023 draft Regulation did not apply to “irrigable lands” as the statute requires. Instead, the draft Regulation only included irrigable land that is currently being irrigated in its proposed outdoor standards. Section 968(b)(2)(B) inappropriately limits 20% of the irrigable, but not currently 5 irrigated (INI), landscape area as eligible for inclusion in the objective until 2027, and even then, it is only allowed to be included if the supplier will surpass its objective target without it. Because the draft Regulation did not apply to all irrigable lands, it was inconsistent with the Conservation Legislation. Additionally, we noted that DWR conducted a statistical analysis of outdoor water use, Landscape Area Measurement (LAM) and INI data. The data concluded that the INI area is being irrigated at one fifth or 20% of the irrigable area. This 20% should not be viewed as additional, but as area that is being irrigated. As a result, DWR correctly recommended that the calculation of annual outdoor water use must include 20% INI. DWR's findings were also based on the recognition that its analysis was only a snapshot in time and undercounting of irrigated area would continue unless multiple images are conducted over the analysis year. 4. Support for Other Technical Changes. a. Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Standards. We support the following changes made to Section 968: • Inclusion of residential parkway landscape. • Inclusion of alternative sources of data for LAM, evapotranspiration, and effective precipitation. • Designation of special landscapes areas with a LEF of 1.0. • Designation of residential special landscape standard as 1.0 and the addition of recycled water irrigated landscape. • Clarification for variances and temporary provision approval, including process, required information, and timeline for inclusion. • Removal of temporary provisions for existing residential pools, spas and similar water features. b. CII PMs. We support the following changes made to Section 972, 973 and 974: • Removal of interim implementation schedules of CII performance measures • Changes to the definition of large landscape. • Inclusion of additional flexibility in the options of in-lieu technologies. • Modifications to identification of disclosable buildings through existing California Energy Commission resources, and associated reporting requirements. • Inclusion of alternative methodologies for identifying CII connections to develop conservation programs. • Consideration for suppliers with limited CII water use. • Compliance through regional programs. c. Bonus Incentive. We support the following changes to Section 971: 6 • Development of methodology for calculating the bonus incentive through direct potable reuse. Section 2. Requests for Changes 1. Request for Changes to Recognize Data Errors and Limitations. We urge the State Water Board to recognize that there are and will continue to be inherent data quality limitations and variability that impact suppliers’ compliance with their water use objective. As water suppliers and the state work together to implement the final Regulation, the goal for high-quality data is important. However, we continue to request changes that recognize inherent data limitations and gaps. a. Compliance and Enforcement. We request that a final Regulation make clear that it will consider data limitations and errors and provide technical assistance prior to taking enforcement actions. The State Water Board should make clear that “if a supplier does not meet its water use objective because of potential data errors and limitations (e.g., it is unable to obtain the information required for variances, there are potential errors in landscape area measurement (LAM) data), prior to any enforcement action, technical assistance must be offered to the supplier to correct data errors and limitations. b. Evaluate Future LAM for Error. We appreciate that the State Water Board’s revised proposed Regulation allows for updated aerial imagery and landscape classification. We want to work with the State Water Board and DWR to better understand landscape classification, as it relates to retailer’s actual water use of existing landscapes, particularly INI. Any new LAM data should be analyzed to determine the accuracy and associated errors (e.g., areas classified as INI that are likely irrigated), and those errors should be reflected in suppliers’ updated LAM. As currently proposed, the proposed Regulation does not provide any flexibility to account for errors in updated LAM. c. Data Error Adjustment. Regarding the request for a Data Error Adjustment (DEA), we note that the State Water Board has accounted for data quality and variability issues in other regulations, such as the Water Loss Regulation, which provided that “a supplier shall maintain, for each compliance assessment, real loss that is no greater than 5 gallons per connection per day above the supplier’s real water loss standard.” The DEA would be a percentage, either five or ten percent as determined below, added to a supplier’s budget for efficient indoor residential water use, efficient outdoor residential water use, and efficient water use on a CII landscape with a dedicated irrigation meter (DIM) or equivalent technology. 7 2. Request for Inclusion of Irrigable, Not Irrigated. a. New LAM Data. The proposed Regulation would remove the inclusion of 20% of the suppliers’ unique square footage of INI area once updated landscape area is provided. Like DWR’s statistical findings that 20% of INI landscape is being irrigated, new LAM data would likely include similar errors. We request that whenever new LAM data is developed, updated INI “buffers” are again provided, and that suppliers may use the updated INI “buffer ” data to meet compliance. b. Consideration of INI. We have concerns with the language in the revised draft Regulation related to Section 968(b)(2)(B) that provides for the inclusion of 20% of suppliers unique square footage of Irrigable Not Irrigated area “if the supplier’s actual urban water use for the reporting year, calculated in accordance with section 10609.22, is greater than the urban water use objective calculated pursuance to section 966 without inclusion of Irrigable Not Irrigated area.” While we appreciate the improvements from the previous version of the proposed Regulation, we still believe that this is inconsistent with the requirements of existing law and DWR’s analysis, which recognized that INI lands are in fact being irrigated and should be included in suppliers water use objective. This language should be struck from the final Regulation. 3. Request for Changes to Effective Precipitation. We continue to request that Effective Precipitation be removed from the final Regulation and outdoor standard. Effective Precipitation is not required by MWELO (Title 23, Division 2.7, Section 494): “A local agency may consider Effective Precipitation (25% of annual precipitation) in tracking water use.” The inclusion of Effective Precipitation in the outdoor standard is inconsistent with real- world irrigation practices. Landscapes are generally not designed to consider effective precipitation since it can be highly variable. Precipitation often falls during winter months when irrigation is not utilized (May through September) and can percolate below the root zone of the plant negating its beneficial effect to that plant’s watering needs. Additionally, precipitation is often not distributed evenly throughout a supplier's service area. Some areas may receive precipitation and other areas none, making it difficult to apply one effective precipitation rate at the water supplier level. 4. Request for Clarification of Compliance 2027 and Progressive Enforcement. We appreciate that the State Water Board has a positive track record of utilizing its enforcement discretion. Additionally, as mentioned in Section 1 Comment 2a of this letter, we support that the revised proposed Regulations modifies the compliance date to 2027. We assume that the intent of 2027 compliance means a progressive enforcement consistent with statute, in which the State Water Board may issue information orders starting 2027, written notices in 2028, conservation orders in 2029, and civil liabilities in 2030. However, the language is 8 vague, and the steps and timelines of the State Water Board’s progressive enforcement should be defined to provide certainty to all interested parties. 5. Request for Improvements to Reporting. a. Reporting Year. The Conservation Legislation allows for water suppliers’ calculations to be based on “conditions for the previous calendar or fiscal year.” (Wat. Code § 10609.20, subd. (b).) Section 975 of the draft Regulation would require urban water supply reports to be based on conditions of the previous state fiscal year. A regulation cannot limit flexibility that a statute specifically allows. We additionally note that this is inconsistent with the State Water Board’s adopted Water Loss Regulation, which allows water loss audit reporting on either a fiscal or calendar year. Because the proposed Regulation would require water suppliers to report based on the state fiscal year, it is inconsistent with the Conservation Legislation. Additionally, we note that the requirement for suppliers to report on a fiscal year basis creates conflict with other existing reporting requirements, including the electronic annual report. We request that a final Regulation allow suppliers to report either calendar year or fiscal year. b. Streamline Reporting. Given the 15-day comment period deadline, we did not have adequate time to provide detailed comments to all the new reporting requirements. However, we note significant concern with the newly proposed reporting requirements that are either duplicative with existing reporting to the State Water Board or request reporting that is outside the scope of the enacting legislation and regulation. Following the submittal of our comment letter, we would like to work with State Water Board staff and other interested parties to make technical changes to the final Regulation to address the following problematic reporting requirements: i. Top 10% single family residential and multi-family residential customers ii. Excluded demands (e.g., process water estimate and MUM volumes) iii. Volume reporting iv. Applied water to large landscapes v. Estimated water savings vi. Reporting units We request that State Water Board staff meet with water suppliers to discuss technical revisions to the reporting requirements to minimize duplicative and burdensome reporting that does not align with the intent of enacting legislation. Additionally, we request that any final reporting document that water suppliers must complete be developed through a collaborative process. 6. Request for Technical Cleanup on CII PMs. 9 a. CII Classification. We continue to request that the four additional proposed classifications that deviate from the Energy Star Portfolio Manager broad categories be removed from the proposed Regulation. We do not understand the value that including these additional classifications would provide for the burden they create for suppliers. b. CII BMPs. i. Key Business Activity Indicator (KBAI). We appreciate the flexibility that the addition of the KBAI option provides in targeting CII programs and PM s in Section 974. This would allow suppliers to target inefficient water use more effectively. It is important to note that there is significant variability in water use, even within a single classification category, within a single supplier service area, and between suppliers. These variations can be due to the location, operating hours, extent of outdoor landscaping, seasonal variation, etc. As a result, it would be challenging to establish a single efficiency standard or easily identify inefficient customers based on a single benchmark in each classification. In some cases, inefficiency could be determined based on the age of plumbing fixtures or devices, evidence of leaks, or other on-site conditions that are not necessarily readily identifiable across a classification or obvious in the analysis of water use data. We request that the language be clarified to acknowledge that the determination of efficiency could have a wide range and could be challenging to quantify, and that the supplier would target these CII customers based on the range in addition to other factors, determined by the supplier, based on their local service area. ii. “Offer” vs. “Implement”. The draft Regulation requires suppliers to “implement” actions and technologies for large landscapes. The term “implement” implies that suppliers will take up an action on a customer's behalf. Suppliers may offer programs, rebates, incentives, and in-lieu technologies, but suppliers cannot require the customer to act or implement in-lieu water use technologies. The draft Regulation should replace “implement” with “offer” to recognize suppliers’ appropriate authorities. iii. Statewide Entities. We appreciate changes that allow a supplier to rely on implementation by a regional entity in lieu of implementing its own conservation program. We recommend that statewide entities also be included. We appreciate the opportunity to provide these written comments to the State Water Board on the draft Regulation. We ask for the opportunity to work collaboratively with the State Water Board on provisions to clarify and streamline reporting and compliance, and we look forward to the finalization of this regulation so the true work of Making Conservation a California Way of Life can begin. Please do not hesitate to contact me at ChelseaH@acwa.com or (916) 206-4078 if you have any questions regarding our input. 10 Sincerely, Chelsea Haines Regulatory Rela�ons Manager Associa�on of California Water Agencies Alameda County Water District Amador Water Agency Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency Bella Vista Water District Calaveras County Water District California Municipal Utilities Association California Special Districts Association California Water Association California-Nevada Section AWWA Camrosa Water District Carlsbad Municipal Water District Carmichael Water District Casitas Municipal Water District Citrus Height Water District City of Bakersfield City of Chino City of Colton City of Folsom City of Garden Grove City of Glendora Water Division City of Oceanside City of Ontario City of Ontario City of Redding City of Roseville City of San Diego Public Utilities Department City of Santa Rosa City of Sunnyvale City of Upland City of Yuba City Coachella Valley Water District Contra Costa Water District Cucamonga Valley Water District Desert Water Agency East Valley Water District Eastern Municipal Water District 11 El Dorado Water Agency El Toro Water District Elk Grove Water District Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Foothill Municipal Water District Georgetown Divide Public Utility District Golden State Water Company Great Oaks Water Company Helix Water District Indio Water Authority Inland Empire Utilities Agency Las Virgenes Municipal Water District Liberty Utilities Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Mesa Water District Monte Vista Water District Municipal Water District of Orange County North Marin Water District Otay Water District Padre Dam Municipal Water District Palmdale Water District Ramona Municipal Water District Rancho California Water District Regional Water Authority Rosamond Community Services District Rowland Water District Sacramento Suburban Water District San Diego County Water Authority San Gabriel Valley Water Association San Gabriel Valley Water Company Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency Santa Fe Irrigation District Santa Margarita Water District South Coast Water District South Tahoe Public Utility District Suburban Water Systems Sweetwater Authority Tahoe City Public Utility District Three Valleys Municipal Water District Truckee Donner Public Utility District Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District Vallecitos Water District Valley Center Municipal Water District 12 Vista Irrigation District Walnut Valley Water District West Basin Municipal Water District West Kern Water District West Valley Water District Western Municipal Water District Yorba Linda Water District CC: The Honorable E. Joaquin Esquivel, Chair, State Water Resources Control Board The Honorable Dorene D’Adamo, Vice Chair, State Water Resources Control Board The Honorable Laurel Firestone, State Water Resources Control Board The Honorable Sean Maguire, State Water Resources Control Board The Honorable Nichole Morgan, State Water Resources Control Board Mr. Eric Oppenheimer, Executive Director, State Water Resources Control Board Mr. James Nachbaur, Director, Office of Research, Planning and Performance, State Water Resources Control Board Ms. Charlotte Ely, Supervisor, Conservation and Efficiency, State Water Resources Control Board Mr. Dave Eggerton, Executive Director, Association of California Water Agencies Ms. Cindy Tuck, Deputy Director, Association of California Water Agencies March 27, 2024 Submitted via: commentletters@waterboards.ca.gov Mr. E. Joaquin Esquivel, Chair State Water Resources Control Board 1001 I Street, 24th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Comment Letter – Proposed Regulations on Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life Dear Chairman Esquivel, The undersigned organizations appreciate the opportunity to provide comments to the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board or Board) on the Changes to Proposed Regulations for Making Conservation a California Way of Life (Regulations). These comments supplement the comments we provided on October 17, 2023, on the initial proposed Regulations. We are a group of water suppliers who are subject to, and who have been actively involved in the development of, the Regulations that the State Water Board is charged with adopting pursuant to SB 606 and AB 1668 (together, the 2018 conservation legislation). All of us have a long-standing commitment to water use efficiency, as demonstrated by the substantial decreases in total and per capita water use that our Comment Letter – Proposed Regulations on Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life March 27, 2024 Page 2 customers have achieved, most at levels well beyond 20 x 2020 targets. We support the intent of the legislation to make conservation a way of life with cost effective water conservation programs that would achieve even greater efficiencies than we have already achieved. Thank you also for the opportunity to provide comments at the Board workshop on March 20, 2024. The Board heard again from water suppliers about the adverse impacts the proposed regulations will have on suppliers and their customers, and we appreciate the concerns expressed by Board members about water affordability, equity and the potential infeasibility of achieving the 2040 outdoor standard. As we described in our October 2023 letter, retail and wholesale water suppliers will still need to generate revenues to cover their operating and capital costs, including the increased costs driven by these regulations, and rates will rise accordingly. Indeed, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is the largest water wholesaler in California, is now proposing to increase their water rates by 41% over the next four years, due to their need to address the consequence of reduced water deliveries. The “benefits” described in the Board’s Standardized Regulatory Impact Assessment, which are primarily associated with cost savings associated with reduced water purchases, are likely to be significantly lower than projected in the SRIA, or even non-existent. The Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) has prepared and submitted a more comprehensive and detailed set of comments on the Regulations. We support most of the recommendations made in that letter, and some of the signatories to this letter are also signatories to the ACWA letter. This letter includes the few elements of the Regulations that are in addition to, or differ from, ACWA’s comments. Support for Certain Changes Made to the Initial Regulations As described in more detail in the ACWA letter, we support the extended timeline for meeting the outdoor standards, the alternative compliance pathways, and the changes to the CII performance measures. We particularly appreciate the implementation of the deletions we had requested in our October 17, 2023, letter of Sections 975(d)(3)(C) and (D) of the initial proposed Regulations. These sections required water agencies to report information about activities conducted by CII customers, which would be difficult, at best, for water agencies to collect. We also support the language added to Section 966(a) of the Regulations, concerning demonstrating compliance with water use objectives in 2027, although this addition needs to be reconciled with the reporting requirements defined in Section 10609.24 of the Water Code. COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE REGULATIONS Outdoor standards apply to “irrigable” lands The proposed Regulations limit the applicability of the outdoor standard to irrigated acreage, unless the supplier will exceed its water use objective, in which case the supplier may include an additional 20% maximum of non-irrigated area that has become irrigated. This approach is not authorized by and is inconsistent with the statute, which states: Comment Letter – Proposed Regulations on Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life March 27, 2024 Page 3 “The department, in coordination with the board, shall conduct necessary studies and investigations and recommend, no later than October 1, 2021, standards for outdoor residential use for adoption by the board in accordance with this chapter… The standards shall apply to irrigable lands.” (Water Code §10609.6(a)(2)(B)) (emphasis added) Notably, too, the primer prepared in 2018 by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and Board staff also clearly note this statutory construct. On page eight of the primer, the following description is provided: “Standards for outdoor residential water use that apply to residential irrigable lands, including provisions for swimming pools, spas, and ornamental water features that are artificially supplied with water, and incorporating principles of the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (CWC §10609.6)”. (emphasis added) Recommendation 1 – revise the references in the outdoor standard (including in the definition of residential landscape area) to “irrigable lands” and adjust the acreages used for determining outdoor usage budgets for all agencies accordingly. Specify an ETF of 0.63 in the Outdoor Standard from 2035 Onwards The Regulations propose to establish a series of outdoor landscape standards, starting with a landscape efficiency factor of 80% through June 30, 2035, then changing to 63% from that point in time through June 30, 2040, and then changing again thereafter to 55% for residential landscapes and 45% for CII landscapes. The 2018 legislation states that the landscape efficiency factor values should reflect a factor that allows for “the amount of water necessary to efficiently irrigate both new and existing landscapes.” (Water Code Section 10609.9 – emphasis added). As described in the recommendations submitted to the Board by the Department of Water Resources (DWR), the proposed 2040 standard of 55% would not provide adequate water supplies to existing landscapes. DWR, the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Public Policy Institute of California all recommend that the outdoor standard should include a landscape efficiency factor no lower than 63%. Such a limit would also help to ensure that there are adequate water supplies allowed for residential and landscape uses to maintain a healthy urban tree canopy, itself an essential tool to reduce the likelihood of extreme heat events. Recommendation 2 – revise the outdoor standards to specify that there will be an evapotranspiration adjustment factor of 0.63, to be applied to irrigable lands, starting in 2035. CLOSING REMARKS Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments to the State Water Board as it continues its formal rulemaking. We also very much appreciate the State Water Board staff’s engagement with the water community. We look forward to collaborating further with the Board and staff to develop a regulatory framework that will reasonably, cost-effectively, and feasibly advance our shared goal of Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life in a manner that recognizes and accounts for every agency’s unique circumstances, as well as the related costs and benefits of seeking each additional increment of water use efficiency. Comment Letter – Proposed Regulations on Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life March 27, 2024 Page 4 Sincerely, Larry B. McKenney, General Manager Amador Water Agency Kristina Budak, P.E., Water Resources Director City of Bakersfield David Coxey, General Manager Bella Vista Water District Ian Prichard, Deputy General Manager Callegusas Municipal Water District J. M. Barrett, General Manager Coachella Valley Water District Michael Moore, General Manager/CEO East Valley Water District Greg Thomas, General Manager Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Jack Bebee, General Manager Fallbrook Public Utility District Lucy Silva, Water Management Coordinator City of Folsom Dave Pedersen, General Manager Las Virgenes Municipal Water District Paul E. Shoenberger, P.E., General Manager Mesa Water District Brian Macy, P.E., General Manager Mission Springs Water District Kimberly A. Thorner, Esq., General Manager Olivenhain Municipal Water District Chris Shepard, General Manager Orange Vale Water Company Jose Martinez, General Manager Otay Water District Dennis D. LaMoreaux, General Manager Palmdale Water District Brent Byrne, General Manager Quartz Hill Water District Kim Domingo, PE, General Manager Rosamond Community Services District Tom Coleman, General Manager Rowland Water District Miguel J. Guerrero, P.E., General Manager San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Paul Helliker, General Manager San Juan Water District Matthew H. Litchfield, P.E., General Manager Three Valleys Municipal Water District Gary Arant, General Manager Valley Center Municipal Water District Van Grayer, General Manager Vaughn Water Company Greg A. Hammett, General Manager West Kern Water District