ITEM:

ACTION ITEMS

 

20.

UPDATE ON RAINFALL AND STREAMFLOW AND POSSIBLE ACTIONS ON CONSERVATION AND RATIONING

 

Meeting Date:

January 29, 2014

Budgeted: 

N/A

 

 

 

From:

David J. Stoldt,

Program/

N/A

 

General Manager

Line Item:

 

 

 

 

 

Prepared By:

David J. Stoldt

Cost Estimate:

None

 

General Counsel  Review:  N/A

Committee Recommendation:  N/A

CEQA Compliance:  N/A

 

SUMMARY:  In early January the District began an assessment of precipitation and streamflow in the first three months of the 2014 water year in an effort to determine what type of water year might be indicated, what interim conservation steps might be taken between now and the timing of the District’s annual evaluation of usable storage and rationing on May 1, and whether rationing might be warranted at this time or become likely in the near term.  As detailed in the discussion section, WY 2014 is shaping up to be a dry or critically-dry year, hence the Monterey Peninsula would benefit from certain District actions related to conservation, riparian vegetation, and fisheries as described below.

 

On January 17, 2014 the Governor declared a drought emergency for the State of California (Exhibit 20-A) which calls on voluntary conservation of 20%.  What the Governor’s declaration means for the Monterey Peninsula is discussed below.

 

RECOMMENDATION:  The General Manager recommends that the Board instruct staff to undertake the recommended interim voluntary conservation measures, authorize additional riparian vegetation and fisheries activities should conditions warrant them, to include all such activities in the mid-year budget adjustments to be brought to the Board at its February meeting, and to authorize expenditure of Flood/Drought Reserve balances to the extent mid-year budget adjustments are insufficient to cover anticipated costs.  It is also recommended that staff prepare a follow-up appraisal of conditions and physical triggers for the March Board meeting.

 

DISCUSSION: 

Governors Declaration:  The Governor’s declaration calls on all Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent.  On the Monterey Peninsula, that equates to approximately 12 gallons per person per day.  The proposed conservation activities discussed below are designed to move our community in this direction, but we must also recognize that the Peninsula leads the State in average per capita consumption, at approximately 60 gallons per person per day.  This is approximately one-third that of Sacramento and one-half that of San Diego.  Hence, the Peninsula is already on the path to achieving the 20% reduction.

The declaration calls on local entities to implement local water shortage contingency plans immediately.  The District has already taken this action, and the Peninsula has been in Stage 1 conservation since 1999.

 

The State Water Board will notify water rights holders that they may be directed to cease or reduce water diversions.  That notification is attached as Exhibit 20-D.  This primarily affects entities connected to the State Water Project and CalFed, and its impacts on isolated systems such as the Carmel River have not been discussed.

 

Rainfall:  Cumulative rainfall at San Clemente Dam as of December 31 is the lowest since records have been kept starting 1922.  However, of the ten years with the worst first quarter rainfall, five of those years returned to “normal” or “below normal” designation.  Hence, it may be possible that rains could occur that would augment storage in the alluvial aquifer.  For example, March 1991 received 11 inches of rain, effectively ending a four-year drought.  However, to date January 2014 has produced less rain than any of the Januaries in those ten other years.

 

Streamflow:  Classification of unimpaired streamflow at San Clemente Dam as of December 31 is within the “critically dry” classification.  If this continues, WY 2014 would be only the 8th critically dry year since records were kept starting 1902 (see Exhibit 20-B.)  Note also from the Exhibit, 2013 and 2012 were dry years, making WY 2014 the third year of a drought.

 

Triggers Resulting in Additional Conservation or Rationing:  The District and Cal-Am share in a 7-stage “Community Water Conservation Plan”, also called the “Water Conservation and Standby Rationing Plan” which is summarized in Exhibit 20-C.  Each successive stage under the plan can be entered due to either a physical trigger, a regulatory trigger, or by emergency declaration of the District Board.

 

Stage 2 and Stage 3 conservation are triggered by Cal-Am production at the end of a month exceeding the year-to-date production limits established pursuant to District Rule 162.  Through January 19, 2014 Cal-Am is 181.18 acre-feet below its target, a margin of 5.67%.  Hence, the physical trigger for these stages has not been reached.

 

Stages 4 through 7 involve a triggered by physical “usable storage” triggers and result in rationing.  Each May 1, the usable storage in the Carmel River System and the Seaside Basin is determined and compared to water production needs for the subsequent 17 months.  In 2013, the usable storage triggers were as follows:

 

PRODUCER

MAY-SEPTEMBER

CARRYOVER STORAGE

TOTAL STORAGE

DEMAND

NEEDS FOR NEXT YEAR DEMAND

REQUIRED ON MAY 1

Percent of Annual Demand

Water Rationing Stage

100%

67%

33%

0%

4

5

6

7

15%

20%

35%

50%

System-wide demand reduction

imposed if storage is less than

"Total" shown in boxed area below

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cal-Am

6,604

12,882

8,631

4,251

0

19,486

15,235

10,855

6,604

Non Cal-Am

1,946

3,046

2,041

1,005

0

4,992

3,987

2,952

1,946

Total

8,550

15,928

10,672

5,256

0

24,478

19,222

13,807

8,550

 

 

District staff has determined that as of December 31st, usable storage was 25,620 acre-feet or 88% of average.  That level of usable storage would not have triggered Stage 4 rationing for the current year.  However, based on expected Cal-Am production for January to April 2014, if there is no precipitation by May 1 to augment supplies, usable storage would decline to 23,127.  Presently, the triggers for the May 1, 2014 evaluation are estimated as follows:

 

 

TOTAL STORAGE

REQUIRED ON MAY 1

Water Rationing Stage

4

5

6

7

15%

20%

35%

50%

Total

23,690

19,072

13,657

8,400

 

 

Hence, if there is no additional precipitation, the District would determine that the Stage 4 rationing trigger has been met and seek a 15% voluntary reduction in use.

 

Suggested Interim Voluntary Conservation Measures:  At this time, the District may wish to consider activities that may be part of Stages 1 – 4, without actually invoking a designated change in Stage.  Such activities would be voluntary in nature, but would likely also include increased enforcement.  Suggested activities, and budget impacts, are identified below:

 

  1. Outreach efforts – Note that MPWMD and Cal-Am staff are scheduled to meet on January 30 to discuss voluntary conservation outreach campaign and will be meeting regularly to coordinate the conservation program.
    1. Cal-Am mailer and ads reminding all users of standard Stage 1 outdoor watering days and water waste restrictions (Cal-Am outreach budget)

                                                              i.      In process – refrigerator magnet

    1. Press release to Chambers/Hospitality prior to AT&T week reminding restaurants/hotels of signage and drinking water requirements (no fiscal impact); 

                                                              i.      MPWMD to draft

                                                            ii.      Cal-Am to help distribute

    1. Develop database of restaurant and hospitality addresses and send periodic reminders of Stage 1 requirements and non-residential water efficiency requirements.  (MPWMD fiscal impact $3,000-$4,500)
    2. MPWMD postcard or letter to all non-Cal-Am users requesting reductions in use. (MPWMD fiscal impact NTE $2,500)

                                                              i.      This is particularly important for alluvial pumpers.

    1. Meet with large pumpers outside boundaries/inside watershed and MCWRA
    2. Meet with large MPWMD pumpers and large Cal-Am customers (laundry, irrigation accounts, jurisdictions, military, schools)

                                                              i.      Underway for February and March

                                                            ii.      Cal-Am and MPWMD

    1. Periodic email blasts regarding  need to conserve from local chambers, community/business organizations
    2. Postcard with rebate information to common-area laundry room accounts (MPWMD fiscal impact NTE $2,000)
    3. Consider ordinance to require common-area laundry room retrofits (this has CEQA filing $2,200 for Negative Declaration)
    4. Multi-lingual outreach regarding rebates, activities, print materials (Cal-Am outreach budget TBD)
    5. Should joint Cal-Am budget or activities prove insufficient, a separate print, TV, & radio conservation campaign establishing District focused outreach campaign would require $15,000 to $20,000. Recommendation is to approve funding contingent upon outcome of Joint Conservation Meetings
    6. Workshops

                                                              i.      Laundry-to-Landscape (i.e., graywater) (Reimburseable – Approx. $2,500)

                                                            ii.      Commercial, Institutional, Industrial (“CII”) retrofits (Reimburseable -- Approximately $5,000 3-day workshops. NOTE: Probably high estimate)

                                                          iii.      Rebate/conservation seminar – (Reimburseable –NTE $3,000)

                                                          iv.      Expo Fall 2014 – (Fiscal impact TBD)

 

  1. Complete required water audits (32) and require correction of leaks/waste (Reimburseable -- $75,000)

 

  1. Increase water waste enforcement effort (no fiscal impact).
    1. Need understanding of enforcement process (Reg XI)
    2. Refocus priorities from change of title inspections to water waste and CII enforcement.
    3. Notify Realtors regarding MPWMD inspections only when necessary (with examples) (MPWMD fiscal impact – Mailing costs NTE $500 unless MCAR is willing to do outreach)
    4. Investigate Cal-Am population survey responses for residences indicating more than 6 residents (MPWMD fiscal impact approximately $1,000)

 

  1. FUTURE POSSIBLE ACTIONS
    1. Rationing Plan revision and budget must be completed

                                                              i.      Funding source

                                                            ii.      Who (community members) will be involved in developing a program that works with the CDO restrictions?

                                                          iii.      Coordination with Cal-Am, CPUC, etc.

    1. In-line meter program and/or expand rebate program to sub-meter installation
    2. Smart metering, such as “Barnacles” program undertaken in Palo Alto
    3. Pressure reducing valve program (GRC 2015)

 

Total Non-Reimbursable: $11,200 to $12,700

Contingent Non-Reimbursable: $15,000 to $20,000

 

Possible Riparian Vegetation Activities: If the critically dry conditions persist through March, the District would need to expand its irrigation systems around Cal-Am’s four wells (Rancho Cañada, San Carlos, Cypress, and Pearce). This would be the first phase of a potential larger expansion if monitoring results showed that other areas required irrigation. The goal would be to at least cover a few gaps in the up and downstream reaches of Cal-Am’s four wells.

 

Rancho Cañada Well:  The District would need to extend the irrigation line going upstream on the right bank (facing downstream) from Rancho Canada Well 1,500 feet to link up with existing irrigation at the Dow property.  Cost estimate between $3,000 and $5,000.

 

Rancho San Carlos Well:  The District currently has all the irrigation pipe (aluminum latch pipe) and miscellaneous parts to install the San Carlos Irrigation System. This system was installed last summer and removed in December. It takes about two days to install it with 3 to 4 staff members. Installation is easier at this site because it has a vehicle access ramp.

 

Cypress Well (Valley Hills):  The District would need to install approximately 1000 feet of irrigation pipe going upstream on both the right and left bank of the Cypress Well. This would be a total of 2000 feet of new irrigation that would be designed to remain in place.  Cost estimate between $7,000 and $8,000 depending on how much help we get with installation.

 

Pearce Well:  The District would most likely use a temporary system in this location (aluminum latch pipe) similar to the Rancho San Carlos system. The existing connection would need to be repaired (Cal-Am may provide this service). Rain-for-Rent or another similar company would rent out the pipe and possibly help with the installation. The system would be comprised of a total of 4,000’ lineal feet. This system would require more physical labor such as carrying in the pipe by hand because there is no vehicle access ramp.  Cost estimate between $10,000 and $16,000 depending on assistance with installation

Approximate Cost for Irrigation Around Cal-Am’s Four Wells

Rancho Canada Well   $5,000

Cypress Well                 $8,000

Pearce Well                 $16,000

Total                           $29,000

Additional Cost        $21,000 if monitoring results show irrigation is necessary in additional areas

Grand Total               $50,000

 

Further, depending on how many systems are installed, two temporary employees may be required to run the systems. This will depend on time dedicated by existing staff to fisheries work.

 

Possible Fisheries Activities:  The District should consider two possible scenarios: Scenario 1 – No Significant Additional Rain and Flows Do Not Increase This Year, and Scenario 2 –  Flows Increase Enough to Cause the River Front to Reach the Lagoon or Open the Lagoon to the Ocean:

 

Scenario 1 would likely require the following activities:

 

1)                  Expand Smolt & Downstream Migrant Trapping: 

a.       If Flows Don’t Increase: Initiate smolt trapping at a new site TBD above Robles Del Rio Bridge in March to capture any smolts emigrating from the upper watershed and get them to the ocean, and prevent other juveniles from migrating in to dewatered zone.

 

Requires 1.4 full-time equivalents (FTE) of Water Resources Assistant (WRA) + 1.4 FTEs of Fisheries Aide (FA) for 7 days per week, for up to 3 months + potentially overnight uniformed security or random security patrol; additional trap building supplies.  Cost = Labor $23,510, weir parts/supplies $3,000; Random Security Patrol $9,000?

 

b.      Or, if Flows Increase to >6+ CFS Rewetting DeDampierre/Boronda Reach:  Initiate Smolt Trapping at traditional Scarlette Road site in March for two reasons above. 

 

Requires 1.4 FTEs of WRA + 1.4 FTEs of FA for 7 days per week for 3 months.  Cost = Labor $23,510

 

c.       Get Cal-Am to pay Cardno-Entrix to start their San Clemente Dam Re-Route trapping in March [cost only to Cal-Am]

 

d.      If Los Padres Reservoir (LPR) doesn’t fill and spill, consider initiating Smolt Trapping at the head of LPR to i) capture any smolts emigrating from the upper watershed and get them to the ocean, and ii) prevent other juveniles from migrating into and being trapped in LPR.

 

Requires 2.3 PYS of WRA + 2.3 PYS of FA for 2 x 12-hour shifts, 7 days per week, for up to 3 months.  Purchase or lease additional fyke trap.  Cost = Labor $70,531, weir parts/supplies $3,000

 

2)                  Conduct spring SH population surveys to define existing fish densities in receiving waters prior to any potential fish rescues/relocations.  Either i) snorkel survey the river from LPR – Robles Del Rio, or ii) add additional sampling stations to the ones we already do in fall, and block net e-fish them for population estimates.  Each of these efforts could require two weeks of redirected efforts by existing staff.  Cost = no new $.

 

3)                  Need to hire an extra WRA & FA for the primary/1st Rescue Crew to replace Matt & Mark who may be working nearly full time with Thomas on Riparian Irrigation expansion and maintenance.  Cost = $16,306

 

4)                  Do Not Run SHSRF – Due to risks from low base flow and minimal LPR releases, and poor water quality from SCD Reroute deconstruction.  Instead distribute rescued fish upstream, preferably above SCD.

 

REDIRECTED SAVINGS: from power, feed, pump repairs, etc. = ~ $ 

 

ADDITIONAL COSTS: increased travel & re-release time reduces available rescue time by ~ 2 hours/day, or requires crews shift to 10 hour days, increasing budgeted labor costs ~25% [~$9,050].  Increases Fisheries Program fuel costs by ~25%.

5)                  Lagoon Rescues: using staff and crew of community volunteers.  One or two days of effort on call/as needed for adults, plus three or more additional days efforts as lagoon volume and water quality degrades for trapped juveniles/smolts.  Costs: no additional funds needed; redirect existing staff from other duties; call for interagency/community volunteers.

 

- Total Additional Costs ~$157,907 – Potential Savings of Up To $53,800 = Possibly Net +$104,107

 

Scenario 2 Activities Include:

 

1)                  Add 2nd weekday rescue crew led by existing staff to keep up with fast river dry-back, since no LPR releases will be possible.  Need 4 extra WRAs/FAs for 2nd crew.  COST = $32,611

 

2)                  Add adult pre-spawner & kelt transport crew of 1 WRA & 1 FA for 7 days/week for 3 months.  COST = $23,510

 

Additional General Costs

 

1)      Buy one or two hand held PIT tag readers to use at Fyke Traps to identify repeat captured and research fish released by NMFS this year.  $2,000

 

EXHIBITS

20-A    Governor’s Emergency Declaration

20-B    Classification of Unimpaired Carmel River Flows, 1902 to Date

20-C    Water Conservation and Standby Rationing Plan

20-D    SWRCB Notice of Potential Curtailment of Water Right Diversions

 

 

 

 

U:\staff\Boardpacket\2014\20140129\ActionItems\20\item20.docx