HomeMy WebLinkAbout0550.091• ~. . .
-, , .. ' \!I
December 12, 1991
THE HONORABLE CJTY COUNCIL
Palo Al tQo, Cal ifol."ll ia
Meabers of tha city Council:
4
Authorize Signature of "Memqrandum of Understanding ~eq8rding
Urban Water Conservatiqn in California-
This statf report recommends that the City Council authorize the
Kayor to sign the attached Memorandum of Understanding Regarding
Urban Water conservation in California {MOUl and to sign the
Letter of Concern and forward it with Exhibit 4 to the State
Water Resources Control Board and Enviror~ental Protection
Agency. since there may be policy and political implications in
th2 Council activities, staff r€commenas the appointment of a
Council Member to serve as the City's representative, with a
senior Utilities staff member acting as an alternate. If the
work of the Council turns towar~ principally technical matters
more appropriately addressed by staff, then this assignment ~ay
be reevaluated at a later date4
Background
The MOO (Attachment 1) a~dresses Best Management practices
regarding ~rban ~ater conservation in California. It is the
product of a consortium. of c.oncral:ned parties and is in response
to the Draft Bay-Delta Plan issued by the State Water Resources
Control Boa.rd (SWRCB) in 1988. That draft. was withdraW'rl due to
heavy opposition by urban water ~uppliers and other groups.
Thereafter, a consortium of ~ajor suppliers and environmental
groups beqan to work toward developing an alternative to the
Draft Plan. This MOO is the result of their effort. The list of
those agencies which were major participants and signatories of
,the "MOO is included. here as Attachlrient. 34 The MOO is. a landmark
consensus between northern and southern california wat~r agencies
and environmental and public advocacy groups. The Bay Area water
Users Association (BAWUA) represented Palo Alto among 30 local
water agencies and was actively involved in the MOU development.
At their october 16th meeting, the utilities Commission reviewed
the MOO and recommended that the council approve the MOU. They
CD,55D:n
o
also rec~mmended that the -Letter of Concern ft {Attachment 2}, be
signed by the Mayor and sent along with the correspon~ence to the
SWRCB.
The MOO ir. brief
Urban water agencies ~hich sign the MOV agree to initiate ~ater
conser\l'ation proqre.ms as described: in the MOU. The ~IOU
specifically identifies 16 WBest Management Practices~ (BMPS),
which the signatories are to implement. ~I~plement" has special
meaning in the Meu and refers to an Implementation Schedule which
is described in Exhibit 1, section B of the MOU. In brief, the
schedule indicates that all BMPs ... ill be initiated 'Within three
years and that certain levels of achievement are expected at the
end of ten years. Exemptions for special circums-cancE'.s are
allowed.
All signatories of the MOU agrea that the BMPs represent a
sufficient water conservation program in the context of the
Bay-Delta Hearings. However, signatories also agree that they
may develop other savings estimates for forums outside the
say-Delta Hearings. Signatories agree to support the BMF process
during the Hearings and to endorse the MOU by sending a ~pecific
letter tc the SWRCB. This letter is Exhibit 4 of the MOO.
The MOO establishes the california Urban Water Conservation
council (CUWCC). The CUWCC will be comprised of representatives
of all signatories to the MOU and is described in Exhibit 2 of
the MOU. Th~ major duties ~nd aut~orities of the CUWCC include
adopting and modifying aMPs and Potential BMPs (PBMP), receiving
progress reports from the signatories and reporting such to the
SWRCB, authorizing exemptions, and modifying the MOU. Decisi~ns
to modify the MOU require tWo-thirds vote from the water
suppliers, and a sepa~ate two-thirds vote of the public advocacy
signatories.
The term of the MOU is ten years: thereafter, it is automatically
renewed on an annual basis. Withdrawal provisions are ir.clude~.
Analysis of th~QQ
staff has reviewed the BMPs and the implementation s~hedule.
These consist of water audits, water conservation staffino, and
other activities which Palo Alto has :been engaged in for several
years. Staff notes, however, that several of the BMPs require
the City to mandate certain conservation practices~ The MOU does
allow Signatories to offer alternative methods for achieving the
specified conservation. Palo Alto has existing and planned
proqrams that successfully address the conservation issues and,
the~efore. comply in spirit, with all of the BMPs.
CXIl;550;91
•
j
f>
I
I
I
The reporting required by the MOU includes the same information
which the City uses in its own evaluation process. The only
additional effort should be to put the information in th~
standard format specified in the MOU.
We expect actual implementation of the MOU to have minimum impact
on costa and staff time.
Attachment 4 is corresponde~ce from BAWUA ~hich supports the MOU
and requests that the City become a signatory. BAWUA proponents
and others bave put forth many reasons fo~ signing the MOu. The
zast substantial reasons are:
1. The MOO establishes a uniformly applied water
conservation effort to be ap~lied in northern
and southern California in an agreement betwe~n
urban wate~ agencies and major environmental
interests ..
2. The California Urban Water Conservation Council
established by the MOU provides a forum to
resolve water planning issues jointly among
various water resource interest.
3. The MOO will become the de facto standard fo~
urban water usa, in which case, the City will
be held to those standards whether or not the
City signs the MOU.
4, Wide adoption of the MOV is preferred to
legislation regarding urban ~ater management
practices.
5. Wide adoption of the MOU by urban water
agencies will focus attention on the
agricUltural sector, which also needs to
develop a plan.
6. City adoption of the MOU is consistert with the
Public Trust Doctrine. This Doctr~ne requires
the city to use its water for the best and
highest use.
7. The City has an established reputation as a
proponent of resource conservation and
environmental protection, and being a
signatory to the MOO ~ould be consistent with
that policy.
ClOt: 55D"1
•
I
I
I
I
~QmmendatiQn
staf~ recommends that the city Council approve the attached
resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the "Memorandum of
Understanding Regarding U4ban water conservation in California"
and the associated -Letter of concern."
Respectfully [mi tted,
; ;-/.. \ ~\J~~?:--.-~~A' ___
w. _LAKE HEITZMAN" ')
se~ior Power Engineer
7-~L ,_ .1-", £/-; . . / . ~1'-""~-?;<~
RJCHARD L. YOUNG
D"irector of Utilities
\du ?-
WtLL1AM ZANER
C1 ty Manager
CJIIt, 550, U
-"
•
.
).
.~ . .-... ,
RESCWTIO/i NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THECITY OF PALO ALTO
APPROVING AliD AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE
KElIORAliDUM OF UN::JERSTANDING REGARDI;'G URBAN WATER
CONSERVATION IN CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto has deemed environmental
protection and r~source conservation to pe important goals;
WHEREAS, the Council of the city of Palo Alto has dete~
mined that the propos~d Memora~dum of Understanding Regarding Urban
water consarvation in California represents a good faith effort to
reach consensus bet'Ween .'ater suppliers and environmental groups on
reasonable urban conservation measures; and
WHEREAS, the council of the City of Pal~ Alto is concerned
that conservea urban water be put to the best and highest use;
NOW, THEREF'ORE. the Council of the City of Palo ".lto d()es
RESOLVE as tollows:
SECTION 1. The Mayor is authorized and directed to sign
and countersign said Memorandum of Understanding on behalf of the
City of Palo Alto~
~CTION 2. The Mayor is directed to sign the wLetter of
concern".
SECTION 3. The Director of Utili ties is authorized to
assign staff to serve on the California Urban Water conservation
Council.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
city Manager
City Attorney -olrector of Utilities
-,
SIGNATURE PAGE
I hereby executes the Memorandum of lfnderstanding Regarding CrbJ.n Water Conservation
in Cahfornia (the "'MOU,), dated June 11, 1991 ('With an :nitiai term commencing September
1, 19(1). and becomes a party thereto in accordance with its terms.
Dated:
Authorized Signatory
Title:
A fTACK)1ENT 1
MEMOIUJ\'DUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING
URBAN WATER CONSERVATION IN CALIFORNIA
September 1991
.'
.'-"
"'-"'
6111/91
TABLE OE CONTENTS
RECITALS .......•..................•.......... '" .............. .
TERMS ......... ' ..................................... ,. . . . . . .... 2
SECTION I: DEFINTIlONS ......................................... 2
I.l Best Manage ment Pract ices ..........•••.............. 2
1.2 ImplernematioD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3
1.3 Signatory Grou!" ................................... 3
l.~ C<Uifornia Urban Water C'<lru,,,,,ation C'<luncil ............. 3
SECTION 2: PURPOSES............................................ 4
SECflON 3: UMITS TO AfPUCABlLITY OF MOU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4
3.1 Relationship Between Water Supplier> ......•.....••..... 4
3.2 Agriculture 4
3.3 Reclamation .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. ... 4
3.4 Land Use Planning s
3.5 Use of Conserved Water ..••.........................• 5
SECTION 4: L\.!PI.£MENTATION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 5
4.1 The Best Management Practices I.is~ Schedule of
fmplernentation and Assumptions ....................... S
42 Initia! BMPs, PBMPs, Schedules, and Estimates
of Reli able Sav'.ng> • . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . • • . . .. 6
4.3 Future Revision of BMPs. PBMPs, Scbedules, and
Estimates of Reliable Saving> .....••..........•........ 6
·i·
\
~
'J ~
4.4 GoOO Faith Effort ................................ 7
E;;;empllons ..................... + •••••••••••••••
.) 4S ~ .' 7
.. ~
4.6 ScbeduT~ of Implementation ..... ..................... 8
SECTION 5: BAY/DELTA PROCEEDrNGS .................•.......... 9
5.1 Use of MOU for Bay IDelta Proceedings . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . .. 9
5.2 Recomm~ndations for Bay/Delta Proceedings .•........... 9
5.3 Letter to State Soard ..........•.......•............ 10
5.4 Withdrawal from MOV ............................. 10
SECTION 6: CAllFORNlA VRBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNCIL .. 10
6.1 Organization • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 10
6.2 Annual Report" ................................... 11
SECTION 7: GENERAL PROYlSlONS . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . ... 11
7.1 Initial Term of MOV ............................... 11
7.2 Signatories. . . . .. . .. .. .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. 11
7.3 Renewal of MOV ................... " .... ,....... 11
7.4 Witbdrawal f:om MOV ..........•.............•.... 11
7.5 Additional Parties •............••.........•........ 12
7.6 Legal Authori,y ................................... 13
7.7 Non-Contractual Agreement ............••••.......... 13
7.8 Modifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • • • . . . . . . . . . .. 13
· -\
EXHIBlTI
L EXHIBIT 1: Best Management Practice<'ii, Implementation S<:hedules, Assumptions..
and Potential Bese Management Practices ('Or Urban Wa~e:r
Conservation in California
2. EXHIBIT 2: California Urban Water Conservation Council
3. EXHIBIT 3: Principles 10 Guide the Performance of BMP Eoonomic (Cos,·
Effectiveness) Analyses
4. EXHIBIT 4: Form of Letter to State Water Resource; Control Board
5. EXHIBIT 5: Urban Water Conservation Annual Rep<lrt O"tline
-iii-
-:~.,:..-.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDl"iG
URBA!I/ WATER CONSERVATION IN CAUFORNIA
This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING URBAN WATER
CONSERVATION IN CALIFORNIA ("MOu) is made .. ~d entered into on the dates set
forth below among the undersigned parties ("signatories"). The sLgnatories represent urban
water suppliers, pub!ic advocacy organizations and other interested groups as defined in
Section I of this MOU.
RECITALS
A The signatories to this MOU recognize that C-O.lifomia's econmny. quality of
life rDd environment depend in ws,e part upon the wat~r resources of the State. The signa·
tories also reoognize the need to provide reliable urban water supplies and to protect the
em:ironmenl Increasing demands ror urban., agricultural and environmental water uses call
for conservation and the elimination of waste as imponant elements in the overall manage
ment of water resources, MilIly organizations and groups in California have an interest in
urban water co~rvatjon., and this MOU is intended to gain much Dt-eded oon.<;ensus on a
complex Lo;sue.
B. The urban water conservation practices included in this MOU {referred to as
'"Besl Management Practius" or -'BMPs") arc intended to reduce long-teno urba.n demands
from what they would have been without Implementation of these practices and are in ad(U·
lion to programs which may be instituted during occa5ional water supply sbonages.
C. The combination of B MPs and urban growth, unless properly accounted for
in water management planning, could make reductions in urban dema...,ds during short-tenn
emergende.s. such as droughts or earthquakes more difficult to achieve. Howe'o,o'er, notvwitb
standing such difficulties., L.ie signatory water supplier; \o\<ill cany out L.;e urban water conser
vation BMP process as described in this MOU.
D. The signatories recognize that means other than urban water conservation may
be needed to provide long-term reliability for urban water supplier.; and long-term protec
tiOD of the environment. However, the signatories may have differing views on what addi
tional measures might be appropriate to provide for these needs. Accordingly. this MOU
is not intended to a.ddress tbesc: issues.
E. A major benefit of this MOU L. to conserve water which could be used for the
protection (If streams., wetlands and estuaries and/or urban water supply reliabLiity. This
MOU lea'"s to other forums the ;,sue of bow conserved water will be used.
>'='1-~--~
.T'
«} .
~~:~i~:-'~;\ f
'-
C,~{
.;~~
•
F. It is the intent of this MOU that individual signatory water suppliers (1)
develop romprehensiYe cans.er .... ation BMP programs U::.iilg sound economic criteria and (2)
consider water conservation on an equal t.a..sis with other waler management options.
o. It Is iecognized that present urban water us,:!' throughout the Stare ,"'anes
according to many factors including. but not Hmlted to, climate, types of housing and land
scaping. amounts and kinds of commercial, lndustrial a1"l.d recreational development. and th~
extent to which conservation measures ha\iC already been implemented. 1t i.s rllrther recog
nized that many of the BMPs identified in E'<hJbit 1 to this MOU havo already been imple
mented in some areas and that even with broader employment of BMPs.. future urban water
usc will continue to vary from area to area. Therefore., this MOU is not intended to
~tablisb uniform per capita water use allotments throughout the urban areas of the State.
This MOU is a1sCI not intended to lin-tit the amoum or types of conservation a water supplier
can pursue or to limit a water supplier's more rapid implementation of BMPs.
H. It is recQ&-tUzed that projections of future water demand shQuld include
estimateS of anticipated demand reducticns due to changes Lll the real price of water.
I.L!LMJ!
SECflON 1
DEFlNTllONS
For purposes of this MOU, the following definitions apply:
1.1 Best Management Practices A Btst Management Practice CBMP") means.
a policy. program.. practice, rule, regulation or ordinance or the use of devices., equipment
or facilities which meets either of the following criteria:
(a) An e.",blisbed and generally accepted practice among water suppliers
that results in more efficient use or co~rvati()n of water;
(b) A pradce for wlticb sufficient data are available from existing water
conservation projectS to r.l.,·1jca.te that significant conservation or con
servation related benefits cart be achieved; that the practice is techni
cally and eronomically rtasonable and not environmentally or »Ocial\y
unacteptable; and that L.ie practice is not otherwise unreasonah!e for
most water suppliers to carry out.
-2-
t,
\
, ,.-,\
'-
Ahhougb the term '"Best Management Practices" has been used in various statutes
and regulations, the definitions and i!lterpretations of that term in those starutes and regula
!ions do not apply to this MOLT. The term "Be" Management Practices· or "aMPs· bas an
independent and special meaning in this MOLT and is to to< applied for purpose; of this
MOLT only as defined above.
1.2 Implementation ~Imp\ementation· means achieving and main~ning the
staffing. funding. and in general. the priority levels necessaI)' to achieve the level of activity
talled for in the descriptions of the various BMPs and to satisfy the <",n-'Oilment by the
signatories to use goo<! faith efforts to optimize saviogs from implementing BMPs as
des<:nbed in Section 4.4 of this MOLT. S .. ction B of Exhibit 1 to this MOLT establishes the
schedule for initial implementation Qf BMPs.
1.3 SliDatory Gmyp:; for pU'P""" of this MOLT, signatories will to< divided into
three group< as follows;
(.) Group t will consist of water suppliers. A 'water supplier" is defined
as any entity, including a city, which delivers or supplies water for
urban usc at the wholesale or retail level.
(b) Group 2 will consist of public advocacy organizations. A ·pubUc advo
cacy organization" is defined as a non profit organization:
(i) whose primary function is not the representation of trade,
industrial, or utility entities, and
(il) whose prime mission is the pTo~ection of the environment or
who has a clear interest in advancing the BMP process.
(c) Group 3 ",ill consist of other interested groups. 'Other inter.sted
group<' is defined as any other group which does not fall into one of
the two group< above.
1.4 Ca1jfornia Urban Water Co!1seryatign Council. The California Urban Water
C<>n.servation Council or 'C<>uncil· will have responsibility for monitoring the implemen
tation of this MOU and will be comprised of ,ignatories to this MOU grouped according
to the definitions in Section 1.3 above. The duties of the CounCIl are set forth in Se",'tion
6 and in Exhibit 2 to this MOLT.
.,3-
I
..
SEC'110N 2
PCIlPOSES
2.1 This MOU has two prima,y purposes: (1) to expedite implementation of
rea..~nable water conservation measures in urban areas; and (2) pursuant to SectionS oft1115
MOV. to establish assumptions for use in calculating estimates or reliable future water (on
servation saYings resulting from proven and reasonable conservatlon measures. Estimates
of reliable savings are the water ronsen-ation savings which can be ad\jeved with a high:
degree of confidence. in a given service area. The signatories have agr.eed upon the initial
assumptions to be used in calculating estimates of reliabte savings. These assumptions are
included in Exhibit 1 to this MOU. It is probable tha' average sa,ings achieved by water
suppliers will exceed the estimates of reliable savings.
SECTION 3
LIMITS TO APPllCABll.ITY OF MQ\!
3.1 Relationship Between Water Suppliers No rights, obligations or authorities
between wholesale suppliers,. retail agencies. cities or other water suppliers are created or
e"Panded by this MOU. Moreover, wholeS21e .water suppliers are not obligated to imple
ment BMPs at the retaiJ ruslomer leve[ except within their own retail service area, if any.
3.2 Agrigdwrc This MOU is intended to apply cnly to the delivery of water for
domestic. municipal and indlJ5trial uses. This MOU is not intended to apply directly or indi
rectly to the use of water for irrigated agriculnJ.re.
3.3 Reclamation. The signatory water suppliers sappon the reclamation and reL5e
of wastewater wherever technically and economically rea.\O~.able and not environment<!lIy
or socially unacceptable, and agree to prepare feasibility studies on water reclamation for
their respective service areas. However, this MOU does not apply to that aspect of water
management, except where the use of reclaimed water may otherw;.'e qualitY as a B MP as
defined above.
\
6/iU91
3.4 Lmd Use Plannjo¥. This MOU does nc>t deal ";th the Que.<lion of growth
maaa.gemeot. Howevt!r. each signatory water supplier will inform all r~levant land planning
agencies at 1<: .. 1 annually of the impacts that planning decisions involving projected growth
would have upon the relLab~lity of its water supplies for the water supplier's 5er";ce area and
other areas being considered for annexation.
3.5 Usc of CQps¢ryed Waler. A major be.ncfjr of this MOV is to conserve ",,·aler
whicb could be used for the protection of stream., wetlands and estuaries and/or urban
~r supply reliability. This MOU leaves to other forums the is.;ue of how conserved water
will be used
SECTION 4
IMPLEMElliTADON OF BEST MANAGEME1-rf PRACTICES
4.1 The Beg l\.:-m8Kcmem Practices .1st Schedule gf Implementation and
Assllwp;iQIl§. Exhibit 1 to this i--~01J contains:
(a> In Section A; A list 1<lentifying those practices which the signatories
believe presently meet the definition of a BMP as set forth in Section
1.1 of this MOU.
(b) In Section B: A schedule for implementing the BMPs to be followed
by signatory water suppliers unless exempted un<k:r Section 4.5 of th~s
MOU or an alternative schedule is prepared pursuant to Section 4.6
of • .his MOU.
(c) In Section C: Assumptions for use in developing estimates or reliable
savings from the implementation of BMP .. Estimates of reliable
savings are the water conservation savings which can be achieved with
3-high degree of confidence in a given service azea. The estimate of
reliahle saviogs for each BMP depends upon the nature of the BMP
and upon the amount or data avaI1able to evaluate potential savings.
For some BMPs (e.g, public information) estimates of reliable savings
may never be generated. For others, additional data may lead to
significant changes in the estimate of reliable savings. It is probable
that average savings achie>ed by water suppliers will exceed the
estimal~ of reliable savings.
-5-
\
(d) In Section 0: A !ist of "Pote:ntiaf Best Managerr..enr Practices·
("PBMPs"). PSMPs are p<lssible conservation practices which have Dot
beeD promoted to the BMP list.
4.2 hritiieI BMp}" PBMPs., Schedules, and Estjmates of Reliable SaviniS-. The ini-
tial pr "tion of conservation practices on the BMP and PBMp lists, the mitial schedule of
impleILontatioD and study for the BMP list. the initial schedule of study for the PBMP list.
and the initial estimates of reliable savings represen~ compromises by the signatones to
move the process forward botb for purposes of the present Bay/Delta pro..--.edings as
defined in Section 5 and 10 promot~ water conseT\'ation generally. Tne signatOries agree that
as Iriore and better data are collected in the futl,;re~ the list, the schedules, and the esti
mates of reliable s-avings will be refined and revised based upon the most objective criteria
available. However, the signatories agree that the mea~ures lncluded as initial 8MPs in
Section A of Exhibit 1 are tconamkally justified OD a state""ide basis.
4.3 Fut!l[e Revision or aMPs. rBMPs. Schedules.. and Estimates of Reliable
Sayings. After the beginning of the initial term of the MOU as provided in Sectia!) 7.1, the
California Urban Water Conservation Council ('Council") wil~ I'ursuant to Section 6 of this
MOU and Exhibit 1, aiter the composition of the BMP and PBMP lists, redefine individual
BMPs, alter the schedules of implementation., and update L.'1e assumptions of reliable savings
as more data becomes available. This dynamic BMP asse",ment proce;s includes the fol·
lowing specific commitments:
(a) The assumptions of re~iable "".figs will be up<lated at least e"ery 3
yun;.
(b) The economic reasonablene", of a BMP or PBMP wiU be assessed by
the Council using the economic principles in Sections 3 and 4 of
ExhIbit 3.
(c) A BMP will be removed from the BMP list if, after review of data
developed during implementation, the Council determines that the
BMP cannot be Clade et.'"Onomica.lly reasonable or determines chat the
8MP otherwise falls to conform to the definition of BMPs in Section
1.1.
(d) A PBMP will be moved to the BMP list and assigned a schedule of
implementation if, after review of da.t.a developed during research.,
aDd/or demonstration projects, the Council determines that the PBMP
is economically reasonable and othe rwise conforms to the definition of
BtvfPs in Section 1.1.
~
I
I
-
· ,
4.4 Good faith Effort. 'While specific 8MPs and results may differ because of
va.')'ins k>eaJ conditions among th~ areas served by the signatory water suppliers. a good
faith effort to implement BMI'> will be ,equired of all signatory water suppliers. The follow
ing are included within the meaning of 'good faith effort to implement BMPs':
(a) The proactive use by a signatory water supplier of legal authorities and
administrative pre!'ogativcs available to the waler supplier as necesS31)'
and reasonable for the implementation of BMPs.
(b) 'Where implementation of a panicular BMP is not v.ithin the legal
authority of a signatory water supplier. encouraging timeiy implementa
ti<>n of the BMP by other entities that have the legal authority to carry
out the BMP \\o;thin that water supplier's service area p'J.r.iuant to cn"it
ing legal autt"1ority. This encouragement may indude. but is Dot limited
to. financiai ince ruives as appropriate.
(c:) Cooperating with and encouraging cooperation between other water
suppliers and other relevant entities whenever possible a.rtd within
existing legal authority to promote the implementation of BMPS.
(dJ Optimizing savings from implementing BMPs.
(eJ for each signatory water suppHer and all signatory public advocacy
organizations,. encouraging the removal of institutional barriers to the
implementation of BMPs ";thin that water supplier's service area.
fuamples of good' faith efforts [0 remO\'c institutional barriers include
fonnal presentations and/or written requests tu entities requ~sting
approval of,. or amendment to, local ordinances., administrative policies
or legislation which will promote BMP iffiplemtntation.
4.5 ExemptioO" A signatory water supplier y.,'i1l be exempt from the implemeiJta-
tion of specific BMPs for as long as the supplier annually substantiates that based upon then
prevailing local conditions, one or more of the following findings applies:
(a) A fuD cost·benefit analysis, performed in .ccordance with the princi
ples set forth in Exh,bit 3, demonstrates that either the program (i) is
DOt oost-.effective overall when total program benefits and costs are
considered; OR (ii) is not cost-effective tc the indh,idual water 5uppli(!r
even after the water supplier has made a good fajth effort to share
costs with other program beneficiaries.
-7-
o
6/11/91
(b) Adequate funds are not and cannot reasonably be made available from
sources accessible to the water supplier including fun.js from other
entities. However, this -exemption ca."lOot be used if a new, less cost
effective water management option would be implemented instead of
the BMF for which the water supplier is seeking this exemption.
(0) Implementation uf the BMP is (i) not within the legal auworit)' of We
water suppli .. ; and (ii) the wator supplier has made a good faith effort
to work with other entiti~s that have the legal authority to carry out
the BMP; and (iii) the water supplier has made a good faith effort to
work with other relevant entities to enc"Ourage the removal of [nstitu·
lional barriers to the implementation of BMPs within its service area.
4.6 Schedyle or Implementation The schedule of implementation for B~{Ps is
set forth in Section B of Exhibit 1 to this MOU. However, it is recognized by the signa
tories that deviations from this schedule by water suppliers may be nece..~. Therefcre,
a water supplier may modify, to the minimum extent necessary. the schedule for i!nplemen
lation of BMPs if the water supplier substantiz.tes one or more of the following findings:
<a> That after a gooJ faith effort to implement the BMP within the time
prescnbed. irnpiement.;.tion is not feasible pursuant to the schedule.
However, implementation of this BMP is still required as soon as fea·
.ible within the initial term of this MOU as denned in Section 7.1.
(b) That implementation of ooe or more BMPs prior to other BMPs will
have a more po<!iitive effect on conservation or water supplies than ~ill
adherence to the schedule.
(c) That implementation of one or more Potential BMPs or other conser
vation measures prior to one or more BMPs will ha-:,oe a more positive
effect on conservation or water supplies than wi adherence to the
schedule.
-8-
•
. ~-------"", ........ "q . aiM' . '.=i
, ,
4
6,'11/91
SECTION 5
BAY/DElTA PROCEEDINGS
,5,1 lIS( of MQV for Bav/Delta P[ocecdin~s The BMP~. the estimates of reliable
>avings ar;d the ptoce"". c.tabli.~d by this MOU are agreed to by the signatories for pur·
poses of the present proceedings on the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Estuary ("Say/Delta") and in order to move the .. ater conservation prace" forward.
"Present Bay IDelta p,oceedings" is intended to mean those Bay/Delt. proCeedings presently
underway and those conducted ur:til a ftnal water rights decision is reached by tbe State
Water ReS<'UTccs Control Board ("State Board"). The willingness of the signatories to en .. r
into this MOU for purposes of the present Bay/Delta proceedings :n no way limits .be
signatorie5' ability to propose different conservation practices. different estimates of savings,
or different processes in a forum other than the present Bay/Delta proceedings. or for nOD~
urban water suppliers or for other water management issues. By stgning this MOU , public
.advocacy organization s.ignatCh-icS are not agreeing to use the initial assumptions of reliable
conservation savings in proceedings other than the presenf Bay/Delta proceedings. The
signatories maypreseo.t other assumptions of reliable conservation savings for non-signatory
water supptie" in the present Bay IDelta proceeding;, provided lbat such assumptions could
not have adverse impacts upon the waler supplies of any signalory water supplier.
Furthermore, the signatories retain the right to advocate any particular l=vel of protection
for the Bay IDelta ESluary. ,ncluding levels of freshwater flo-.s, and do nol necessarily agree
on population projections {or Cali!omia. Thls MOU is not intended to address any
authority or obtigation of the State Board to establish fresbwaler flow protections or set
waler qualiry objectives for lb. Estuary, or to addre" any "utboriry of lb. Environmental
Protection Agency.
5.2 Recommendations for Bay/Delta Procelli~ The signatories will make th~
foUowing recommendations to the Sta!e Board in conjunction with the present Bay/Delta
proceedings and \0 the EPA to the .xlent the EPA concerns i(;elf with the procoeoings:
<a) Tha. for purposes of the present Bay/Delta proceedings, implementa·
tion of L~e BMP process sel forth in Utis MOU represents a sufficient
long-term water conservation program by the signalory water suppliers.
recognizing that additional programs may be required during: occa
sional water supply shortages;
(b) That for purpose, of the present Ba)IDelta proceedings only, the State
Board and EPA sbould base their estimates of future urban water con·
5ervation savings on the implementation of all of the BMPs included
in Sect,on A of Exhlbit 1 10 this MOU for the entire service area of
·9·
,
6(11/91
the signatory water suppti.en and only on those BMPs. except for (i}
the conservation potential for water supplied by iJrban agencies for
agricultural purposes, or (ii) in cases where higher levels of con
servation have beer.. mandated;
(c) That for the purposes of the present Bay/Delta proceedings, the State
Board and EPA should make Iheir estimates of future urban water
conservation savings by employing the Ie liaNe savings assumptions
associated with those BMPs set forth in Section C of &!ubi! I to thi,
MOU;
(d) That the State Board should include a policy statement in the water
rights phase of ti,e Bay/Delta proceedings supporting the BMP process
des.:nbed in this MOU and that the BMP process should be
considered in any documents prepared by the Stale Board pursuant 10
the California E",iro~.mental Quality Act as part of the present
Bay/Delta proceedings.
53 Lwer 10 Stale Board. Within 30 days of signing this MOU, each ,;gnatory
will jointly or individually ""nvey the principles set forJ! in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 above by
sending a ietter to the State Board, copied 10 the EPA, in the foem attached to this MOU
as Exlubit 4.
5.4 Wjthdrawal from MOU Ii during the present Bay/Delta proceedings, tbe
State Board or EPA uses future urban water conservation savings that are inconsistent with
the use of BMPs as provided in this MOU, any signatory shall have the right to withdraw
from the MOU by providing written notice to tbe Council as descnbed in Section 7.4(a)(i)
below.
SECTION 6
CALIFORNIA URBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNOL
6.1 Orpniza'jon. The California Urban Water ConselV'dtion Council ("Council")
will be comprised of all signatories to thib MOU grouped according to the definition in
Section 1. The signatories agree to the necessary organization and duties of the Council as
specified in Exlubit 2 to this MOU. Within 3IJ days of the effective date of this MOU, the
Council will bold its first meeting.
-10-
•
\
_.
62 AIImiaI. RWrts The .ignatOJ}' water suppliers .. ill submit standardized
re.ports annually to the Council providing sufficient in!onnation to inform the Council on
the progress being made toward. implementing t."e BMP process. The Counc~ will al<.o
make annual reports to the State Boore!. An outline for the Council's annual report to L'te
State &2fd is attached as Exhibit 5 to this MOV.
SECTION 7
GENERAl PROYlSIOt§
7.1 In;t;a! Term of MOll. The initial term of this MOV shall be for a period of
10 yean;. This initial term shall commenc, on September 1, 1991.
72 Signatories Signatories shall cons'st of three groups: water suppliers, public
advocacy organizatioGS and other interested groups, arranged according to the definition in
Section 1.3. Such arrangement will be made by a Cou nCtl membership committee comprised
of three representatives from til: waler SUppliCT5' group and three representatives from the
public advocacy organizations' group.
7.3 Renewa! ofMOU The MOV shall be automati<ally renewed after the initial
tcnn of 10 years on an annual basis as 10 all signatories unless a signalory withdra"-'S as
descnbed below in Section 7.4.
7.4 Wjthdrawal from MOV, Signatories to the MOV may withdraw from the
MOV in three separate W3ys as descnbed in sections (a), (b) and (c) below.
(a) Withdrawal pdor [0 expiration of initial term Before the expiration
of the initial term of 10 yezrs. a signatory may withdraw by providing
written notice to the Council dectaring its intent to withdraw. T.a.is
Mitten notice must include a substantiated finding that one of the two
provisions (i) or (ii) below applie.,
(i) During the present Bay/Delta proceedings, the Stale Board or
EPA used future urban wa.:el conservation savings that are
incon;istent with the use of BMPs as provided in this MOV;
OR
<ti) After a period of 5 years from Ibe commencement of the initio!
term of the MOV:
-11-
"* if
. -
•
•
\
~ ..
_. ____ .-:....._ ...... "". idMliil!itII!l!!II!i1!!11t aiJi !iii;'''::.
(A) Specific signatory water suppliers representing more than
10 per~nt of the population included within the
combined service areas of the signatory water suppUers
have failed to act in good faith pursuant to Section 4,4
of the MOU; ond
(8) The signatory w'.5hing to withdT3w h ... attached fmdings
10 its past two annual reports to the Coundl beginning
no earlier than the fourth annual report identifying these
same signatory water suppliers and giving evidence based
upon the information r~qui.:f!d to be submitted in the
annual reports to the CDuneil to support the allegations
of hilure to act in good faith; and
(C) The State Board has failed 10 lequiTe conservatioo
efforts by the specific water suppliers adequate to satisf)l
the requirements of this MOU; and
(0) Discussions between Ibe signataI)' wishing to withdraw
and the specific signatories named have failed to satisfy
the obj. otions oi the sigr.atory wish ing to withdraw_
After a .ignatol)' declares an intent 10 wilbdraw under Section 7.4(0), the MOU shall
remain in effect as to that signatory for I SO daY'.
(b) Witbdrawal after expiation of initial term. After the initia! term of 10
years, any .ignatory may declare its intent 10 withdraw from the MOU
unconilitionally by providing wrilten notice to the Council. After a
'ignatory bas declarod its intent to wilbdraw as provided in this section,
the MOU will remain in effect as to that signataI)' for 180 daY'.
(c) 1mmcdjate withdrawal. Any ~ignatOl)' who does not sign a modifica·
tion to the MOU requiTing a 2/3 vote as described in ExJubit 2 of this
MOU may withdraw from the MOU by providing written notice 10 the
CounciL 1l!e wilbdrawing signalory's deties under this MOU will be
terminated effective iJnr!uo....diately upon providi1lg sllch 'WTitten notice.
H a signataI)' v.ithdraws from the MOU under any of the abo.e methods, the MOU
shall remain in effect as to all other signatories.
7.5 Addjtjpnal Parties, Additional partie, may sign the MOU after September I,
1991 by providing written notice to and upon approval by the Council. Additional partie.
-12-
.--~ .... ;" .. "" ... ,"' -..-
.,
/~ , ..
6/,,,91
wiU be assigned by tbe Council to one of Ihe three signalo,} grou!'" defined in Section L3
before entry into the CounCIl. All addilional signaiory waler supptiers shall be subject 10 the.
sch~dult: of impieml!ntation provided in Exhibit 1.
7.6 Up) AUlhori!)!. Nothing in this MOV is inlended to give any signalory,
agency. entity or o..-ga.nizatiOD expansion of any existing authority. No organization formed
pllrnIant 10 this MOV has authority beyond that specified in this MOV.
7.7 NQn-Cogtractual Agreement This MOV is tntended to embody genera! prin~
ciples agreed up<ln between and among the signatories and is not intended 10 create con
tractual reiatioIl5h.ips, rights, obligations.., dude! or remedies in a court of law between or
among the signalories.
7.8 ModifiguioO$ The signatories agree that th~ writins constitutes the entire
und~rstanding between and among the signalories. The general manager, chief executive
officer or executive director of each signatory or their designee shall have Lbe authority to
vole on any modi6cativns to this MOV and its exhibIts. AIry mudi6cations 10 the MOV
itself and 10 its exhibits shall be made by the CounCIl as descnbed in Exlubil 2.
-13-
1 , 6111/91
EXHIBIT 1
BEST MANAGEMENT PRAcnCES, IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULES, ASSUMPTIONS AND POTENTIAL BEST
MANAGEMENT PRAcnCES FOR URBAN WATER CONSERVATION
IN CALIFORNIA
SECflON A BEST MANAGEMENT PRAcnCES
This section contaln5 th\)Se Best Management PTactices, rBMPs") that s.ignatory water
suppliers ~mmit to implementing, Suppliers' water needs estimates will be adjusted to
reflect estimates or reliable 5a>ings from this category of BP,m. For some BMPs, no esti
mate of savings is made.
11 is recognized by all panies that a single impleme:ntation method for a BMP wollld
not be appropriate for all water sUJ=plic:rs. In fact, it is likely [hat as the process moves for
w-4I'd, water suppliers will find new implementation methods even more effective than those
d~smbed. Any implementation method used should be at least as effective as the methods
descnbed below.
1. INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WATER AUDITS AND INCENTIVE PRO
GRAMS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, MULTI-FAMILY RESI
DENTIAL, AND GOVER11IME1'ITAL/INSmunoNAL CUSTOMERS.
2
Implementation methods shall be at le.,t as effective as identifying the top
20% of water users in each "Clor, directiy contacting the m (e.g, by mail
and/or telephone) and offering the .. "icc on a repeating cycle; providing
incentives sllfficient to achieve customer implementation (e.g ... free shower·
beads, bose end sprinkle r timers, adjustment to high waler "'" bills if cus
tomers implement water conservation measureS;, etc.). This could be a
coop.::rati'Vc program among organizations that would benefit from its imple
meotation.
PLUMBING, NEW AND RETROm.
a. ENFORCEMENT OF WATER CONSERVING PLUMBING HX
TURE STANDARDS INCLUDING REQUIREMENT FOR ULTRA
LOW FLUSH ("ULF') TOILETS IN AlL NEW CONSTRUCTION
BEGlNNING JANUARY t, 1992.
t-t
,
Implementation methods shall be at least as effective as contacting the local
building departments and providing information to [he inspectors; and con
tacting major developers and plumbing supply outlets to inform them of tl::e
requireme nt.
b. SUPPORT OF STATE AND FEDERAL LEOISLA nON PROHIBI
TING SALE OF TOILETS USING MORE THA" 1.6 GALLONS
PER FLUSH.
c. PLUMBING RETRom.
Implementation methods shall be at least as effective as delivering reuofit kits
including high quality low-flow showerheads to pre-1980 bomes that do not
have them and toilet displacement devices or other devices to reduce flush
volum~ for each home that does not already have ULF toilets; offering to
w.staif the devices; and following up at leasE thre e times.
3. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER AUDITS, LEAK DETEcnON AND
REPJ'JR
Implementation methods shall be at I< ast as effective as at least o,ce every
three years completing a water audit 0( the water supplier's distnbution sys
tem using methodology such as that descnbed i. the American Water Works
Association's "Manual of Water Supply Practices, Water Audits and Leak
Detection;'" advising customers whenever it appears possible that leaks exist
on the customers' side of the meter; and performing dislncution system :eak
detection and repair whenever the audit reveals that it would be cost effective.
4. METERING WITH COMMODITY RATES FOR ALL NEW
CONNECI10N~ AND RETROm OF EXlSTING CONNECI10NS.
Implementacon methods shall be requiring meters for all new connections
and billing by volume of use; and establishing a program for retrofitting any
existins unmetcred connections and bLlling by volume of use; for example,
through a requirement thai aD connections be retrofitted at or within six
months of resale of the property or retrofitted by neighborhood.
5. LARGE LANDSCAPE WATER AUDITS AND INCENTIVES.
Implementation methO<!s shall be at least as effective as identifying all irriga
ton of large (at least 3 acres) landscapes (e.g., golf courses, green bells,
common areas, multi-family housing landscapes, scbools, business parks,
1-2
•
~ W1'/91
i
I
I
\
6.
oemeteries, parks a..,d pubUcly owned lands<:apes or. or adjacent to road
rights-(Jf·way); cootacting them directly (by mail and/or telephone); offering
land..oeaf'C audits usi"g methodology such as that desaibed in the Lar.dsape
Water Management Hardbook prepared for the California Department of
Wi'ter Resources; and cost-effective incenth"es sufficienl to achieve CllStomer
imp!emrntation; pro\'iding follow-up audits at least once every five years~ and
providing multi·linguaI training and infonnation necessary for implementation.
LANDSCAPE WATER CONSERVATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW
AND EXlSTI."IG COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, lNSTI1VfJONAI.,
GOVERNMENT AI., AND MUL TI·F AMIL Y DEVELOPMENTS.
Implementation methods 'hall be enacting and implementing landscape water
conservation ord:naD<:cs., or if the supplier does not have the authority to
enact ordinances, cooperattng with citie:;, counties and the green industry in
the service area to develop and implement landscape water con.~rvation
ordicanoes pursuant to the "Water Conservation in Lar.dscaping Act" ('"Act")
(California Goveromen: Code ~§ 65590 '-\li!:Q.). The ordinance sball be at
least as effective as the Model Water Efficient l.andscape Ordicanoe being
developed by the Department of Water Resources. A study of the
effectiveness of this BMI' will be initiated within two ye .... of the date local
agencies must adopt ordinances under the Act.
7. PUBUC INFORMATION.
Implementation methods shall be at least as effeC'Jve as ongoing programs
promoting water conservation and conservation related be nefits including pro
viding speake" to community group< and the media; using paid and public
sen.1ce advertising; usi!1g bLll inserts; providing irJormarion on customers' bills
showing use in gallons per day for the last billing period compared to the
same period the year before; pro .... iding public information to promote other
water conservation practices; and coordinating with other government2.l agen
cies, industry groups and public interest groups.
8. SCHOOL EDUCATION.
Implementation methods shan be at least as effecti,'e as ongoing programs
promoting water conservation and conservation related benefits including
working with the school districts in the water supplier's service area to provide
educational materials and lostructionai assistance.
1·3
.'
S/11/91
9. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WATER COl'SERVAllON.
Implementatior. methods shail be at least as effeetive as identifying ""d con
w:ting the lap 10% of the industrial and commercial customers directly (by
mail and/or telephone); offering audits and ince,tiyes sufficient to achieve
customer implementa~ion; and providmg follow-up audits at 1east once: every
five years if necessary.
10. NEW COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WATER USE REVIEW.
ImplementatioD methods shall be at least as effective as assuring the ,e,,;ew
of proposed water uses for new commercial and tndusrnal water sen-ice and
making reconunendations for improved water use efficiency before completion
of the building permit prIX.os.
11. OONSERVAllON PRICING.
Implementation methods shall be at least as ,ffeetive as e~minating nonron·
serving pricing and adopting conserving pricing. For signatories supplying
both water and sewer service, this BMP applies to pricing of both waler and
sewer service. Signatories that supply water but not sewer service shall ma1ce
good faith effortS to work with ~wer agencies 5C that those sewer agencies
adopt conservation pricing for sewer service.
Nourons.emne pricini provides no incentives to customers to reduce use.
Such pricing is charaaerized by O~e or more of the foUewing components:
a. Rates in whicb the unit price decreases as th~ quantfty used increases
(declining block rates);
b. Rates that involve charging CUSlOmers a fixed amount per billing cycle
regardless of the quantity used;
Co Pricing in wbich the typical bill is determined by high fixed charges and
low commodity charges.
CooKwtioo pOdoi provides incentives to customers tc reduce a\'erage or
peak use, or both. Such pricing includes:
a. Rates designed to rcoove r the cost of provid;il;; service; and
b. Billing for water and sewer service based on melered water use.
1-4
.~
6/11;91
Conservation pricing is also characterized by one or more of !..be foilowing
components:
.c. Rates tD whic:h the unit rate is constant regardless of the quantity used
(uniform rates) or lncrease5 as the quantity used increase'S (incr~asing
block rates);
d. Seasonal rates or excess~use .surcharges to reduce peak demands during
summer months:
e. Rates based upon the long-run marginal cost or the cosl of adding Ihe
next unit of capacity to the system;
f. Lifeline rates.
12. lANDSCAPE WATER CONSERVATION FOR NEW AND EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
lmplerr.entation methods shall be at least as effective as providing guidelines.
information and incentives for installation of more efficient landscapes and
water saving practices (e.g., encouraging local nurseries to promole sales and
use of low water using plants, providing landscape water conservation male~
rials in new borne owner packets and water bi1J..s, sporuoring demonstration
gardens); and enacting and implementing landscape water conservation
orclinan«s or. if the "'pplier does nOl bave the authority to enact ordinances.
cooperating with cities, counties, and Ll'Je green industry in the servi<:e area to
develop and implement landsolpe waler conservation ordinances pursuant to
the "Water Conservation in Landscaping Act ("Act") (California Government
Code n 65590 ~ ~.). The ordinance ,ball be at least as effective as the
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance being developed by the
Department of Water Resources.
13. WATER WASTE PROHIBmON.
Implementation methods shall be enacting and enforcing measures prohibiting
gutter flooding, sales of automatic (self-regenerating) water softene~ single
pass rooling systems in new connections, noruecirculating systems in all new
conveyer car wasb and comme<cial laundry sy.terns, and noruecycling
decorative water fountains.
1·5
I
! ~T f
:..
•
,-
L. li ttL· -c..
6;!l/91
14. WATER CONSERVATION COORDINATOR.
Implementation methods '5ha.li be at least as effective as designating a water
conservation coordinator responslble for preparing the conservation plan,
Dla.'1aging its implementation,. and evaluating the results. For very small water
suppliers.. this might be a pan-time responsibility. For larger suppllers this
would be a full-time responslbility ...... ;th additional s~aff a.~ appropriate. Tht5
work should be coordin2ted v.rith ~e supplier's operations and planning staff.
15. FINANClA.L INCENTIVES.
Implementation methods shall be at least as dfectiv< as:
a. Offering financial incentives to facilitate implementation of CUil.<;er-'3-
tion programs. Initial recommendations for such inc.entives will be
developed by the Council "ithin two years of the initial signing of the
MOU. including incentives to improve the effidency of landscape
water use; and
b. Financiai incentives offered by wholesale water suppliers to their cust~
mers to achieve cons.eI'V'J.tion.
16. ULTRA LOW FLUSH'TOILET REPLACEMENT.
Water suppliers agree to implement programs for replacement of existing
bigb-wa.ter-using toilets with ultra-low-flush toilets (1.-6 gallons or less) in resi
dential, commercial, and !ndustrial buLldings. Sucb program.~ \Ifill be at least
as effective as offering rebates of up.o SlOO for each replacement that would
not have occurred without ihe rebate. or rtCiuiring replacement at the time of
resale, or r equ [ring repT acement at the ti me of change o( service. This leve l
of implementation will be reviewed by the Council an.,r development of the
assumptions included in the foUowing two paragraphs using the economic
principles included in paragraphs 3 and' of Exhibit 3.
a. Assumptions for delennining est;mates of reliable savings from
installation of u1tra-IO' .. -flush t0ilelS in both existing and new resi
dential, commercial, and indu,trial structures will be recommended by
the Council to the Slale Waler Resour""" Control Board ("Slale
Boater) by December 31, 1991 for use in the present BayiDeIta pro
ceedings.
~!1 ,,91
b. Shoul.! the Council not agree on the above as.umptio"" a panel will
be formed by December 31, 1991 10 develop such assumptions. The
panel shail coru;ist of one member appointed from the signatory public
advocacy group; one member appointed from the signatory water
supplier group; and one member mu tually agreed to by the two
appointed members. The assumptions to be used for this BMP will be
determined by a majority vote of the panel by february 15, 1992 using
the aite ria for determining estimates of reliable savings included in
this MOV. The decision of the panel will be adopted by the Council
and forwarded 10 the State Board by March 1, 1992
J·7
..
) ~ .-
:
/
6/12191
SECDON B, JMPl.EMENTATION SCHEDUl.ES
&st Management Practices ~ill be implemented by signatory water slJi'plie;s
according to the scb~dule sec for.h below. "Implementation" means aChievlTlg and main·
taining the staffing, funding. and in general, the priority levels necessary 10 achieve the level
of arovity <ailed for in the descriptions of the various BMPs and 10 salisfy we commitment
by the signatories to uoe good faith efforts 10 optimize ,a-ings from implementLos BMP, as
descrtbed in section 4.4 of the MOll, BMP, will be im;>lemented al a level of effort
projected to achieve at least the coverages specified in Section C of this ExhIbit wi.thin the
initial ten year term of the MOU.
This schedule selS forth the Ialesl dales by which implementalion of BMP, will be
underway_ It is reoognized that some signatories are already implementing ~ffiie BMPs, and
that this scbec;hlIe does not proh.ibit signatories from (mplementing BMPs sooner than
required.
The following EMPs will be implemented by the end of the first year of the initial
term (number,; correspond to those in the list sel forth in Section A above):
term:
Za. ENFORCEMENT OF WATIOR CONSERVING PLUMBL'iG F1A,lJRE
STANDARDS INCLUDING REQUIREMENT FOR Ul. TRA LOW FLUSH
TOIlETS IN AIL NEW CONSTRUCDON BEGINNING JA.'lUARY I,
1992.
2b. SUPPORT OF STATIO AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION PROHIBITING
SALE OF TOILE1S USING MORE THAN 1,6 GALLONS PER FLUSH.
3. DISTRIStJnON SYS'ffiM WA'ffiR AUDITS. (LEAK DE'ffiCDON A."ID
REPAIR to be implemented by end of second year,)
7. PUBUC INFORMATION.
8. SCHOOL EDUCATION.
U. WA'ffiR WASTE PROHIBITION.
14. WATIOR CONSERVATION COORDINATOR
The following BMPs will be implemented by the eDd of the secoDd year of the initial
k PWMBING RETROm.
1-8
term:
.' _.
6/1 1/91
J. LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR. (DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER
AUDITS to be implemented by e~d of first year.)
4, MElERING WITH COMMODITY RATES FOR ALL l'eW
CONNECTIONS AND RETROFIT OF EXlSTING CONNECI10NS.
6. LA.'IDS""...APE WATER CONSERVATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW
AND EXlS'I1NG COMMERCL.o.L, INDUSTRJAL, INSTfn.JTIONAL,
GOVERNMENTAL, AND MULTI·fAMILY DEVELOPMENTS.
11. CONSERVATION PRICING. (All components except hilling for sewer
service b~d on metered water use,)
12. lANDSCAPE WATER CONSERVATION FOR NEW AND EXlSTING
SL'IGLE FAMILY HOMES.
16, ULTRA WW FLUSH TOILET REPLACEMENT,
The following BMPs will be implemen!ed by the end of the third year of the initial
L INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WATER AUDITS AND INCENTIVE PRO
GRAMS FOR SINGLE F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL, MUL TI·F AMIL Y RESI·
DENTIAL, AND GOYERNMEl'<,AL/INSTJT\JTIONAL CUSTOMERS,
S. lARGE LANDS('APE WATER AUDITS AND INCENTIVES.
9, COMMERCfAL AND lNDUSTRfAL WATER CONSERVATION.
10. NEW COMMERCL4J. AND INDUSTRIAl, WATER USE REVIEW.
11. CONSERVATION PRICING. (Billing for sewer service based on metered
water usc.)
is. FINA>~CIAL INCENTIVES.
\·9
"
-
SEcnON C: ASSUMPTIONS fOR ESTIMATING REUABLE
SAVINGS fROM BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
6/llj9!
Estimated Water Savings
Pre-19SO Post-19SO
Best Management Practice Constn.J.ction Construction -
1. Interior ud E.zterior Waler A1Idits and lnceat'i",
Proerams for Slagle Family Reside.Ii • .!, Multi-
f.mily Rest"",,lial and GoverumcnlaljInstituUonal
CuSComt:u
Sini:le Family and Mu!ti~(amily
Reduction factors
Low-flow showerhead 7_2 ged 2.9 ged
T ouet retrofit' L3 ged 0
Leak repair 05 ged 05 ged
Landscape audit, percent outdoor use 10% 10%
Coverage factO<'
Target, top percent of user.; 20% 20%
Accep[ audit 20% 20%
GoyernmenlilllImtjrutiooal
Reduction Factors
Interior retrofit, percent indoor use 5% 0
Landscape audit, pera:nt outdoor u>e 1.W"" 10%
Coverage F:u:tor
Target, top percent of user.; 20% 20%
Accept audit 70% 70%
1-10
,
:
z. P1umbIBg, N ... and Retronl
.. Eafon:emeDt or Water Cor.sernng Plumbing
FiItIU"E Staadards Including Requiremen!
ror lIlt .... Low F1u.b ToUet' in All New
CODstru<tiOD !Iejp.Dlng January I, 1m
Reduetio!l factor
Coverage factor
All new homes and buildings built after
January 1992
b. Support .... k and rederal 1ec;s1aUon
prohibiting sale or loilets asiDa more Ihan
1.6 gallon. per Oush
Reduction factor
C<Jverage factor
c. Plumbing Retront
Single fazruly canvass
Reduction factors
Toilet retrofit"
Low-flow showerhead
C<Jverage factor
Insta.lIation Rate
Multi-family oW>ler contact
Reduction (acton
Toilet retrofit
Low-f1<>w showerhead
Coverage factor
InstaD.a tion rate
I-II
N/A
b
NO
I.3ged
7.2 ged
is%
13 ged
7.2 god
80%
o{11/91
b
N/A
b
NO
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
._---'-
!
6/11/91
3-Distributioa System "'~4:ter Audits, URK Detection FACTOR
and il2pair
Reduction factor
Lower unaccounted for water to no more 10%
than pe reent eota! use
(AIl other utilities remain a.t (;urrent levels)
Coverage factor
Total number of utilities participating in 100%
audits
Utilities participating in leale det<Clior. and varies based on cost-
repair effectiveness ana1ysis
... Metering with Commodity Rates ror All N.,.
ColllleClio •• IlDd Ketron. or ExiSIiDI Connedioo.
Reduction factor
Urunetered portion of utility. percen' of 20%
applied water
Coverage factor
Unmetered customers 100%
S. Lo'1" Landscape Water Audits and Ineen,lve.
Reduction factor
Landscape audit for multi-family. 15%
commercial, industrial, institutional. and
public users, with 3 aCtes of land..<caping or
more, percent of irrigation water use
Coverage factor
Applies to all sites three acres or more
1-12
". --....".. 'l'fJ - , tn.,,' .
-,,--
-
,.------------_.-,----------,
6. Landscape Water Con~rvaliolJi Requirements ror
New smd Existing Commercial, Industrial,
lnstitu1rona!, Govemmeetar, and Muhi.ramjJy
Development.
Reduction factor
Reduced landscape water 1J..~. percent oC
new irrigation !J5e
Coverage factor
All new landscape areas
7. Public InformatioD
Reduction factor
Coverage factor
8. Scboo! EducatioD
Reduction factor
Cove rage factor
,. Commercial and Induslrial Water Conservation
Commercial water reduction results from Best
Management Practices such as Interior and
LandS<:ape Water Audits, Plumbing Codes, and
Other Facto" but e.dude Ultra Low Hush Toilet
Replacement. E.o;.timated reduction in gaU("IIlS per
employee per day in year 2000 use (K:curring over
the p< nod 198().2000.
Industria1 water reduction results from Best
Management Practices, \\o'aste D£s.charge Fees,
New Technology, Water Audits, Plumbing Codes
and Other Factors., but exclude Ultra Low Flush
Toilet Replacement Estimated reduction in
gallons per employee per day in year 2000 use over
Ibe period 198(}'2000.
10. New Commerdal and Industria! Water Use-Review
Reduction factor
Coverage factor
l·B
20%
NO
NO
NO
NO
12%'
NO
NO
" ---
........
r r
11. ~D.servatioD. Pricing
RedUl,,'tion factor NO
Coverago factor NO
12. Landsape Water Conservation ror New and
Exist,nl SiDgie Family Homes
Reduction factor NO
(".overage factor NO
13. Water Waste Prohibition
Reduction factor NO
Coverage (actor NO
14-Water Conservation Coordinator
Reduction factor NO
Qwerage factor NO
IS. YlDJIncial IDCeDti_
Reduction factor NO
Coverage (actor NO
16. Ultra Low Flush T~IIe1 Repllcem."t Pro ........ I
Reduction factor b
eo-'.rage factor b
1,14
.'---"'"fir t
1"-
NOTES AND DEFINmON OF TERMS
a five year life (toilet retrofIt)
b refer to paragraphs (a) and (b) of BeS! Management Practice No. 16
c includes savings accounted for in other Best Manag-ement Practices
ged = gallons per capita per day
Reduroon factor :; unit water savings
Coverage" factor = installation and/or compliance rate
Low flow sbowerbead = 2.5 gallons per minute maximum flo..-"
Ultra low flush toilet =-1.6 ganoM per flush maximum
Unaccounted for water = autborized (unmetered uses), leakage and meter error
Outdoor use = s:Jrnmer ~ winter use, on an average annual basis
Irrigation use = waler used solely for irrigating, excluding cooling water use
Target = customers offered an fncentive or audit
N I A = not applicable
NO = DOt quantified at tbis time
1-15 ,
I
I . ---._----=-><---....
/
o
SEcnON D. POTE]'.'TIAL BEST ~t".NAGEME:>OT PR'<CTICES
This Section contaius Pott:ntial 8es.t Management Practices ("PBMPs~) that will be
studied. Mere appropriate, demonstration projects. ..... ill be car.ied out to deterrrine if the
pr2ctices meet the criteria to be designated as BMPs. Within one year of the initial signing
of this MOU, the Council will deYelop and adopt a schedule for s:tidies of these PBMPs.
I. AA TE STRUCR'RES AND 011 {ER ECONOMIC l!'\CEN1IVF.s MD DISC--;·
CENTIVESTO ENCOUR'<GE WATER CONSERVATION. This is the top
priority PBMP to be studied. Such ~tudia should lndude seasor..al rates; rncrea.sing
bloc~ rates; connection fee di.')C()unts; grant or loan programs '!o help finance
conservation projeas; financial in",ntr..es to change landscapes; variable hoolrup
fees tied to landscaping; and interrupi.:ible water service to l&.rge industrial.
commercia! or pLObtk customers. Studies on this PBMP will be initiated within
12 months from the initial signing of the MOU. At least one of these srudies
will include a pilot project Dn incentives to encouarage landscape water
conservation.
2. EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR WATER IJSING APPIJANCES AND
IRRIGATION DEVICES.
3. REPLACEMENTOF EXISTING WATER USING APPLIANCES (EXCEPT
TOILETS AND SHOWERHEADS WHOSE REPLACEMENTS ARE
INCORPOAATED AS BEST MANAGEMENT PAACTICES) AND
IRRIGATION DEVICES.
4. RETROFIT OF EXISTING CAR WASHES.
5. GRAYWATER USE.
6. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PRESSURE REGUlATION.
7. WA'lliR SUPPUER Blll.1NG RECORDS BROKEN OOWN BY CUSTOMER
CLASS (E.G, RESIDENTIAL. COMMERCIAl., INDUSTRIAL).
8. SWIMMING POOL AND SPA CONSER V A TlON INCLUDING COVERS
TO REDUCE EVAPOAATION.
9. RESTRlCTIONS OR PROHIBmONS ON DEVICES nt<\T USE
EVAPOAATION TO COOL EXTERIOR SPACES.
10. POINT-OF·USE WATER HEATERS, RECIRCUlATING HOT WATER
SYSTEMS M'D HOT WATER PIPE INSUlATION.
11. Efl1ClENCY STANDARDS FOR NEW INDUSTIUAL AND COMMffiClAL
PROCESSES.
1-16
o
EXHIBIT 2
CAlIFORNIA I lRBAN WATER CONSERV AnON COUNCIL
1. The California Urban Water Conserlalion CounciI (the "Councl") will be comprised
of a representative of eacb of the signatories to the MOU.
2. The ('.Quocil wiIi be housed by California Urban Water Agencies ('"CUWA').
The Council will act independently of CUW A on all technical and policy is,ues. CUWA will
be respon5lble for the initial funding and ensuring that the Council's administrative and geoeral
office needs are mel CUWA wilt rewn the right to withdraw fram this relationship at any
time upon 180 days written nctice to the Council. The Council recognizes that its funding
requirements may exceed what CUWA is prepared to contnbute and that alternative funding
may be needed.
3. The Council's responsibilities and authorities include:
(a) Recommending srudy methodologies for Best Management Practices
("BMPs"). including procedures for assessing the effectivcoess and reliahility
of urban water cor.servation measures.
(b) Developing guide1ines including discount rate to be used by all signatories
in computing BMP benefits and C05ts pursuant to Exhibit 3.
(c) Reviewing and modifying the economic principles set forth in Exhibit
3.
(d) Cotiecting and sum.'narizing information on implementation of BMPs
and Potential Best Management Practice. CPBMPs').
(e) Adopting or mV<lifying BMPs and PBMPs lists.
(I) Adopting or modifying reliable water conservation savings data for BMPs.
(g) Adopting or modifying the sche dules of implementation for existi og and
new BMP,.
(b) Adopting or modifying the schedules for resear<b and demonstration
projects for BMPs and PBMPs.
(i) Coordinating and/or making recommendations regarding BMP. study
and demon'stration proje-cts.
2-1
. "." ,
'*~ ..
(j) Accepting or denying requests for additional parties. to Join the ~rOl;
and assigning additional parties to one of !.he three signatory groups as
descnbed in Section :.3 of the MOU.
{k) Reviewing and modifying report format ...
(I) Making annual reporl' to the State Water Resources Control Beard and
the Council Members on the above items ba..,~d on the format de5CTibed
in Exhibit 5.
(m) Willlin two years of the initiai signing of llIis MOU, developing and
implementing procedures and a funding mechanism for independent
evaluation of the MOU process at the Council and signatory !evels.
(n) Undenaking such additional resporu.lbilities as the Members may agrt':e
upon.
4. The Council will make formal reports to 1he State Water Resources Contrc,.!
Board and to llIe governing bodies of ail Council Membe r.;. Such reports sball include a formal
annual written report. Other reporu such as status repons and periodic updates may be prepared
as deemed appropriate by the Council. Any Memher of the Council will be entitled to review
draft reports and comment on all reports. Such comments shall be included in any fina] repert
at the Member's requesL
5. It is anticipated wat the Council will develop a committee 5tru ... "ture, w}-Jch will
include a Membe"hip Commiuee as descnbed in Section 7.2 of the MOU. A Steering
Committee and one or more technical committees may also be needed
6. For purposes nf the Co"nol, signatories will be divi ded into three group': wate r
suppliers ("Group 1"), public advocacy organizations ("Group 2") and allier interested groups
("Group 3") as those terms are defined in Section) of the MOU. Member.; of Groups ) and
2 shall be member.; of the Council and shall po<Sess all voting right5. Memben of Group 3
shall nol have voting rights, but shall act in an advisory capacity to the Coone'J.
7. Decisions by the Council to undertake additional res!"'nsibiliries; to modify the
MOU itself; or to modify Exhibits 2 or 3 require the following:
(.j The Council will provide notice to all signatories giving the text of the
proposed action or modification at least 60 days in advance of the vote
by the Council.
(b) To pass the action or modification, there must be a vole in favor of the
action or modification by allo05t2/3 ofllle member.; of Group I voting,
2-2
.
•
611'191
LlX:luding \'otes made Ln person or in writing. and a vote in favor of the
action or modification by at !east 2/3 oftbe members of Group 2 voting.
induotng votes made in person or in writing.
8. All o~r modifications and Council actions shall be undertaken as follows: The,. must be a YOlO in favor of the modification or action by a strnple majority of the members
of Group 1 voting. including votes made in pe!"50rl or in writing. and a \lote L", favor of the
modificatW. or action ITt a simple majori:y of the members of Group 2voting, including vo t ..
made in person or in writing.
2·3
.,,' ,
1.
EXHIBIT 3
I'lUNCIPI..ES TO GUIDE THE PERFORMANCE OF
BMP ECONOMIC (COST· EFFECTIVENESS) ANAt\'SES
~ total cost-effectiv:ness of a ronservatior. measure 'IoVill be measured by compa.ring
the pre..,nt valu~ of the benefits of the measure listed in paragraph 3 below to the
present value of tbe costs listed in paragr.ph 4. The measure will be cost-effeotive
if the present value of tbe benefits exce~ds tll. present value of the costs.
2. The cost-effectiveness oC a conse rvatlOLl me asure to the water supplier will be measured
by comparing the present value of the benefits clescnbed in paragraph S to the present
value of the costs described in paragraph 6. The measure ~ill be cost--effective if the
present value of the benefits exceeds the presem value of lile costs.
3. Total benefits ex:chJde fInancial incentives received by water suppliers or by retail
customers. These benefits include:
(a) avoided capital costs of production,. transport, storage, treatment,. wastewater
treatment and distnbution capacity
(b) avoided operating costs, including but not limited to, energy and labor
(c) environmental benefits and avoided environmental costs
(d) avoided costs to other water suppliers, including those associated wi.b making
surplus water avaHable <0 other supplie"
(e) benefits to retail custome", lnduding benefits to customers of other supplie"
assodated \lfitb making surplus water available to these suppliers
4. Total program costs are 1..'10;0 costs associated with the planning. design, and
implementation of the particular BMP, excluding fina."1Cial incentives paid either to
other walc:r suppliers or to retail customers. These costs include:
(a) capital expenditures for equipment or conservation devices
(b) operating expenses ror staff or contractors to plan, design, or implement the
program
(c) costs to adler water suppliers
3·1
•
l? [ 'Ii
6/11/91
(d) cost5 to the enl,.1conment
(e) oosts to retail customers
s. Program benefits to the water supplier il1du..ie:
(a) costs avoided by tPe water suppUer o( oonstructing production, transport, storage,
treatment, distnouuon capacity, and wastewater treatment facillties, if any.
(b) operating costs avoided by the water supplier, including but not limited to, energy
and labor associated with the water deliveries that no longer must be made
(e) avoided costs of water purcha.es by the water supplier
(d) endronmentaI benefits and avoided environmental costs
(e) revenues from other entities.. including but not limited to revenue from the sale
o(\1,-ater made available "y the conservatioD measure md financial incentives
received from other entities
6. Program costs to the water supplier include:
(a) capital expenditures incurred by the water suppUer for equipment or CO!lS<IYation
devkes
(b) financial inanti-lles to other water suppliers or retail customers
(e) operating expenses for st.ff or contraC'tOrs to plan, design, or implement the
program
(d) costs to the environment
7, The California Urban Water Conservation Council ("Collnci;") will be responsible (or
developing guidelines thai will be used by all water suppliers in ooruputing BMP benefits
and costs. These guidelines will include, but Wl11 not be lintited to, the following issues:
(a) analytical frameworks
(b) avoided environmeotal <osts
(c) other impacts 00 the supply system that may be oommon to many water suppliers
(d) time horiwns a.,d dis.:ount rates
,r ~"
(e) a'loioed costs to non-water supply agc.n~es
(f) benef..ts and costs to retaLl customers
(g) benefits of water made aVallable to otller entities as a result of conservation
efforts
These guidelines will rc::cognlze (he unique ness o[ indlv1dua1 water supplie.rs and vrill therefore
not impose excess[v~ uniformity.
!l. Withln the .. guidelines, each water supplier "ill be responsible for analyses of the
=t~ffec:tiveness of particular BMPs on its system. The .. analyse. will be reviewed
by the Council.
9. The Council wH\ also be responsible for periodically reviewing the overall framew<>rk
set fOrth in this Exhil:>iL
3-3
1»-
"-
EXHIBIT 4
{Date]
w. Don Maughan, Chainnan, and Membe rs
State Water Resources Control Board
90 I "PO Street
Saoramento. California 9580 I
$>,bject: Bay jDelta Proceedings:
Urban Watei Conservation
Dear Chairman Maughan end Members:
~/1U91
We are please<l to f"""..,.d to you a copy of a "Memorandum of Understanding Regarding
Urban Water Conservation in California" recently entered into by many urban water suppliers.
public advocacy organizations, and other interested groups.
This Memorandum of Understanding was developed over a period of many months
of fut-gathering and intensive negotiations. It commits the signatory water suppliers to good
faith implementatioo of a program of water coru;ervation which embodies a series of "'Best
Management Practices· for California·, urban arcas. It also commits all of the signatories
to an ongoing. structured process of data collection through which other conservation mea:iures,
not yet in general use. can be evaluated as to whe ther they should be a~ded to the list of Best
Management Practices. Finally, it commlL5 all signatories to rectJmmending to this Board
thal the Best Management Practices identified in this Memorandum of Understanding be
taken as the benchmark for estimating reliable savings for urban areas which utilize waters
affected by the Bay/Delta proceedi ng>. An important part of this program is the signatories'
recognition of the need to provide long-term reliabili ty for urban water suppliers and longaterm
protection of the environment.
To carry out these commitments. please be advised that each of 1he signatories has
endorsed making the follo"'ing recommendations to this Board;
4·1
-
6/l1~1
1. That for purposes of the present Bay/Delta proceedings. implementation of
!he Best Management ~ process set forth in !he Mcmornndum or Unde"tanding repr_DIS
a 5ufficien! long-term .... '3terconscrvatlon program by the slgnatorywate r sLlppliers, recognizing
that a.dditlonal programs may be required during occasiona: waler supply shortages.
2. That for purposes of the present Bay/Delta proceedings only. the Board should
base its estimate~ of future urban water conservation ~vings OD implementation of all of the
Best Managem~nt Practices included in Section A of Exhibit 1 to the Memorandum of
Understanding for the entire service area ofthe signatorj' water suppliers and orJy on those
Best Management Practices, except for (a) the <onservation potential for water supplied by
urban agencies for agricultural purposes, or (b) in ca..~s "'here higher levels of conservation
hl.ve be¢n mandated.
3. That for purposes of the present Hay lDeI:a proceedings, the Board should make
its estimates of furllre urban water conservation savings by employing the reliable savings
assumptions associated with UlO5e Best Management Practjces set forth in Section C of Exhibit
1 to the Memorandum of Understanding. Measures for which reliable savings assumptions
are not yet available should nol be employed in estimating future urban Vw'ater use.
4. That the Board should inelude a policy statement in the water rights phase of
the present Bay(Delta ~ suJ'l'O'ting the &.t Management Practices process described
in tile Memor411dum of Under.;tanding and should also consider that process in any documents
it prepares pursuant to the California Enviroruner.ta1 Quality Act as part of the present Bay IDe Ita
proceedings.
It should be emphasized that the Memorandum of Under.;tanding does not contain
projections of population for California and, accordingly, Done of the signatories to the
Memorandum of Understanding are agreeing to recommend that any speciJk population levels
be used by the Board in es.timating futu!'e water demands. Furthermore. it should be noted
that the signatories have retained the right to advocate any particular level of protection for
tile Bay(Delta Estua.ry, including levels of freshwater flows, and tbat the Memorandum of
Understanding is not intended to address any authority or obligation of the Board to establish
freobwater flow prcte<."tiom or to set water quality oojectives for the Estu<lry. The Mef!}()randum
of UnderstaDding is also not intended to addr"", any authority of the Environmental Protection
Agency.
Finally, as described in Section 5.1 of the MOU, the signatories have not limited their
ability to propose different conservation practices. different estimate:s of savings or different
processes in a forum other than the present Bay/Delta proceedings or for DOD-urban water
suppliers or for other water management issues. Public advocacy organiz.ation signatories
bave not agreed to use the initial assumptions of reliable conservation savings in proceedings
other tban tbe present Bay (Delta proceedings. ·Ilte signatories may present other assumptions
of reliable conservation savings for oon-signalOl)l water suppliers in the Bay (Delta proceedings,
4·2
prO\;ded that such as.. .. umptiaru could not advc:r;ely lmpact tbe water supplies of signatory
water suppliers.
The Meroor.mdum of Undemanding es!ahlisJ>e. :lJ1 ongoinj: proc::= for study an<! research
in the field of urban water conservation and an organizational structure to S:.lpport this effort,
whkh is described in Exhlbit 2 to the Memorandum of Understanding. The process is dynamic
and contemplates periodic-re\oisions to the Jist of Best Management Pracric..:os., as weU as
refinements'm!:he savings assumptions based on continuing field stuilles.. 'The Colifomia Urban
Water Conservation Council .... ill forward updated llsi.S of Best Management Practices arid
updated savings assumptions to the Board as they bec0me available. Howl!ver, for the pr-esent
BayfDelta proceedings, the measur~s and savings a.. ...... urnption.s listed on Exhlbtt 1 should be
used as desmbed above.
The Memorandum of Understanding is a significant accomplishment and one oCwhich
all tIJe parties are proud. We bope it will be of ,wue 10 the Board in the complex and important
Bay/Delta proceeding. ... By copy of this let[er, we are for-,wanJing these recommendations
to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Very Truly Yours,
Name of Signatory
cc: Administrator
U.S. Environmenlal Protection Agency
4!l1 "M" Stree~ SW
Washington. D.C. 20460
Regional Administrator. Region IX
U.S. Environmental Protection .A.gency
215 Fremont Street
San Francis<o. California 94105
•
','
EXHIBIT 5
{JRBAN WATER CONSERVATION ANNUAL REPORT
OUn.INE
t Executive Summary
U. Implementation Assessment
Water Suppliers' Report
Fi,~dings
Comments
Progress
Public Advocacy Organizations' Report
Findings
Comments
Progre~
m, Survey Resolts for 199X
Summary of Survey Respo nses
Table _ Por Capita Usage [by region]
Table __ ' Status of liMP Implementation [by supplier]
Table _' Proposed Implementation Schedules
Interpretation of Survey Responses
Lack of nata
Oimatic Influences
Implementation DiCfi:ulties
Evaluation of Results
N, Trend An&Iy5is
Comparison with Prior Years
Table _' Per Capita l1sage [by region]
Projected Conservation
Table _" Schedule of Implementation
5-1
•
'.--
611 1/91
Updated Estimateo;; of Future Savings [by region1
Evaluation of Progress
V. Studies of Best Management Practices
A>.sessment of Current BMPs
Table _' Evaluation or Effectiveness [by measure ~nd region1
As"ss=nt of Potential BMPs
Status of Current Studies
PrOJlCl"'d Future Studies
Revision of Us ... of Current and Potential BMPs
Additions and Deletions
Other Modificatio!lS to MOU or FAllbits
VL Recent Developments
Legislative Update
Program Funding
Case Studies
Residential COI\SeI'\lation
Industrial CODS< .. ation
Irrigation Efficiency
Legal Actions
National Practkes
Technical Advances
Publications
V\L CounciI Commlttee Activities
VIll. Funding Levels
IX. Staffing Levels
x. SUbstantiated F"lIldings by Signatory Water Supplier in Support of Use of Exemptions
5-2
i I
'-
1",
6(1 ,/9t
XL Sub'tantiated Findings in Support of U~ of AlI • .""tive Schedule of Implement.tio"
Appendi~s
List of Signatori.s [subeommittee members Doted]
Key Correspondena: and Comments
5-3
----,--_. -'--
I
I
I
,j
~
i
I
I
December 10, 1991
w. Don Maughan, Chairman
State Water Resources Control Board
901 ·P" Street
Sacramento, CA 95801
RE: Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban
Water Cons~~ation in California
Dear Hr. Hauqhan:
On December 9, 1991, the City Council of the City of Palo
Alto authori~ed me to execute the above-referenced Memorandum of
UndE'lr-standinq ,"MOO"). The Council's action followed the recommen
dation of our newly-created Utilities Advisory Commission. I am
~iting to express our concern and request your coop-a.ration in
addressing one area in which the MDU is silent.
As you know, the KOU makes no effort to identify the
manner in which water conserved through Best Management practices
will be used. Palo Alto believes it W'ould be appropriate to
identify the in stream and consumptive uses for whicb conserved
water might be used~ We beli~ve identifying such uses will
facilitate greater public understanding of the reasons for
conse.cvationa In addition, we believe identifying the uses of
conserved water will alleviate any ~equityW concerns raised by the
re-allocation water resources envisicned in the MOU~
Let me close by
be a party to the MOU~
rHrection towards a more
system in California.
9IlI27qOOS04'N
indicating that Palo Alto is pleased to
We believe it is a step i:1 the right
unified and efficient water allocation
Very trulf yours,
JACK SUTORIUS
Mayor
-
A Ti AOIMENT ~
October 25, 1991
California Urban Water Conservation Council
The Following organizations bave agreed to sign the Memorandum or Understanding
Reprding Urban ""ster Conservation in California:
Alameda County Water District
Anaheim, City of
Ilelmont County Water District
Calaveras County Water District
California Trout, Inc.
California Water Commission
California Water Service Corr.pany
Cuiw Municipal W.ter District
Channel Islands Beach Community Services District
Chino Basi.1 Municipal Water District
Coastal Municipal Water District
Committee for Water Policy Con.r.cnsus
Construction Indusl:r)' Federation
Contra Costa Water District
Del Oro Water Company
Dominguez Water CO!?Oration
Dublin San Ramon Services District
Environmental Defense Fund
Fftends of the River
Helix Water District
Hi-Desert Water District
Hollister, City of
IrvinC'-Ranch Water District
League of Women Voters of California
Lmcoln A .... ·erme Water Company
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
Malaga County Water District
Marin Municipal Water District
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Mono Lake Committee
Mothers of ELA s.n to Isabel
Municipal ",Tater District of Or.dJlge County
North T'hoe Public Utility District
Olivenhain Municipal Water District
continued
........
'.
CaUfornia Urban Water Consenation Council
Page 2
Orange County Board of Supervisors
Orange County Water District
Otay Water District
Padre Dam Municipal Water District
PWLoing and Conservation League
QEl, Inc.
lWnona Municipal Water District
Rincor. Del Diablo Municipal Water District
Sacram.ento, City of
San Buenaventura, City of
San Diego, City of
San Diego County Waler AuU.ority
San Dieguito Water District
San Francisco Water Department
San Luis Obi.spc, City of
Sanla Clara Valley Wata District
Santa Fe Irrigation District
Santa Monica, City of
Save San Fra.J1cisco Bay Associ:nlon
Sierra Club
5<>1ano County Water Agency
Scuthem California Water Committee
South Yuba River Citizens League
Sweetwater Authority
Trabuco Canyoo Water District
Tuolumne Regional Water District
Upland, City of
Vallecitos Water District
Ventura County Board of Supervisors
Venr.J!'2. County Wat:er"Norlcs District No. 1
Water Association of the County of Orange
West Basin Municipal Water District
"
"------~--------
,. 0 IJO~ ~no OMS SOUTH G.RIMMER: aOUU .... ,.,;:D. fRE,'-1u+H. C"LlFO;;!:NiA 904SH
PHONf ~.'Sl 'S'}..19~ fA); l.-r51 ,"7~179J
ATTAC~M[NT 4
IIEeE I Vu) OCT 0 1",1
TO:
I'ROX:
SlTBJECT:
DATE:
San Fr-ancisco
Jame~ D. Beard.
Memorandum of
Conservation in
MEMORANDUM:
September 27, 1~91
Reg&rdinq Urban Water
The Hemorandui'TI of Unde;'standing Regar-ding Urban Water
Conservation in California ("'MOU ") is an important development in
Yater policy. Recognizing its significance, the Association
sponsored t~o workshops during August at which John Farnkopf
'presented a detailed, section-by-section explanation of the MOU.
Tr~e 'Workshops were attended by representatives of approximately
20 BAWUA member agencies. Several of the participants suggested
that the Association Board of Directors consider taKing formal
action on the MOU and. then present a specific recommendation to
the l11embers.
At its September meeting, the Board of Directors voted t::l endoI""se
the MOU in principle ~nd urge all member agencies to t~oughtfully
consider becoming signatories to it. The purpose of this
memorandum is to communicate that endorsement and give you some
personal observat.ions why I supported the Board's action and why
I have recommended that the Board of Dire=tors cf my agency. the
Alameda County Wa~er District. become a Signatory to the MDU.
1. Pressures for greater efficiency i~ water distribution
are increasing. They have already produced the Urban Water
Managt!men't Act (AB 797); r.l0re demanding and rigid 1a'lo:s are
predictable, unless the water industry is able to demonstrate
that it has moved aqqressively, on its own initiative, to
institutionalize conservation practices.
2.
operating
about how
SZlS.1
It is easy for uninformed persons, not responsible for
~ater ~gencies~ to make very unrealistic assumptions
much water can be ~saved· through water conservation.
wr ... SEDS ~ COIJ...,. ""'.,.. 011"C1 • S-' c--"~ \11'1'" 1)ot.1''I:' • ""001'" .... ,' ... Oeo."m",,.. , .. "."'''' •• ~'I" SIlo ..... :, ::o""o.~" • C:"v 0' II ...... ~."'" • c~. 0" D"".
Cqo.c.o-, 01 1-0..,.. .. 0. c .... 01 ~ I> •••• ;;..t-, 0' ""_". c....;,1 ... _n. CAy'" ... ~ ... ~.~ \/ ......• c·r., or "1<0 '"".0 .C"y 0' I:II'C'ooI)(>(l c ...... • C"",, 01 S.n 8<U"<l. c~, 0< Sin J,""
CI? ot s.-. .. CI.Io' •• c.r. ,r s.,......,~ ..... c .... rtJ.>c)I' c-.1 ..... 'r O<i"c.. c",_ ..... "",1' "' .... AlIOC,II"'" • Ell' p..,~ ... ~c "'t' .. , t>""'er" f:1lt .. CI ... .....,.C'N"_·~'·"'~·
c...."C'l.~ \f~"'" O,j..,n<_,,",,,,,_,,, o.l"oC" ,0001"......:M eo., ..... ""'"f" o.~,,><;:t ... ""'" Cou, ::OIJ"" w ..... 0'1",:" I'M"'''' C_ ....... '1" 0.,">0 _3' ..... <51' ......
_~ .......... 00II"1::1' $0_ COuo'Ito I'll .... 0. ... <1 • ~P"I)'~ iJo"o'_'~' • ,~ ~ _.t>I>'~~ . ""1'1T~0I0'" -:Ot./~ho ""Ple-Oo$i"C'
, .
\
,
,
-
SFBAWUA Members
September 27~ 1991
Page 2
The overly ambitious and theoretical estimates developed by the
staff of the SWRCB in the Bay-Delta hearings a few· years ago is
an example of this tendency.
J. The MOU represents an opportunity for the ~ater
industry to ~et challenging, but ~~alistic, goals for itself and
thereby reduce pressure for new laws or regulations that would
force rigid and unrealistic de~ands on us.
4. The MOU has been developed ~ith input from yater agency
engineers and managers. Its list of Best Management Practices
(MBKPs") isn't going to be easy for all agencies to achieve, but
they are, in general, technically sound 6~d attainable measureS.
5. The MOU recognizes that agencies differ; it allows
~gencies considerable flexibility in the details of how the
standar6iled BMPs are to te implemented. It also allo~s agencies
to exempt themselves from specific BMPs (or the schedule of
implem~ntaticn) if local factors--including budgetary
constraints--require it~
6. The MOU specifically does not expand the powers of
wholesale agencies. such as San Francisco Water Department, over
their customer agencies.
7. The MOV also explicitly states that it is ~~ a legally
enforceable contract. Thus, agencies c~n associate themselves
with the BMP effort without exposing themselves to lawsuits.
Finally, there is also a 50~ewhat parochial, but practical.
consideration. The MOU esta~li$hes a California Urcan Water
Conservation Council to ever see the implementation of the MOll,
ineludinq compiling data on a statewide basis and periodically
updating the list of BMPs. To add a new conservation measure to
the lis~ of BMPs requires a majo~ity vote in both of the groups
Which can join the Council as voting members--... ·ater agencies and
environmental advocacy groups. unless SAWVA members jOin, it is
probable that most water agency memhers will b~ from so~thern
California and the Central Valley. Thus, if the eay Area is to
have an equal voice in future decisir.ns about the BM? process, it
is important for inQividual water agencies here to sign the MOU
and thereby qualify as voting members of the Council.
&2111.T
~fI
. :
I
!
I
, '
"!
"1
j
i
J
i
i
!
I
!
! ,
SFBAWUA Hubers
September 27, 1991
Page 3
,\,' :
"-'-.
In conclusion, the BAWUA Board of Directors and I urge that you
present the MOU to your agency's governing board ~ith the
recommendation that they seriously consider becoming signatories
to it.
JAMES 04 BEARD
President
IlHI.1
.I
r-