PAGE 12 Show Image
Investment Company by deed dated February 13, 1926. Other additional water and
ditch rights from the Goldfield Consolidated Mines Company were deeded to the
District in 1930.
The power potentials of its water led the District to enter into an agreement
with Pacific Gas and Electric Company ~G&E) in 1924 for use of a portion of the
District's water through PG&E facilities. Over the years, this agreement has been
modified to meet the changing conditions and requirements of both organizations.
In 1963, the District and PG&E agreed to develop additional storage capacity on
both Deer Creek and the Bear River. Also, additional water was made available by
improved and new facilities in the upper Yuba Basin.
The District first started treating water in the late 1950's by injecting
gaseous chlorine into open canals at the head of irrigation pipes serving isolated
pockets of the area's population. The first conventional water treatment plant was
built in 1963 at the Forest Knolls subdivision. Today, the District holds permits
from the California Department of Health Services, Office of Drinking Water, for
eight plants; serving over 15,000 connections. Each plant complies flilly with the
State Surface Water Treatment Rules and the Safe Drinking Water Act.
CLIMATE
Elevations within the District's boundaries range from 3,900' on Banner
Mountain above Nevada City, down to 200' near the town of Lincoln. Summers are dry
with mild to hot temperatures. Winters are wet, especially in the upper elevations
around Nevada City and Grass Valley, with snow levels usually around 3,500' and
occasionally as low as 1,000'. The District's watershed reaches a maximum elevation
of 8,373' on English Mountain, east of Bowman Reservoir. The normal seasonal
precipitation for various areas in and around the District and its watershed are
shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1
NORMAL PRECIPITATION
(INCHES OF WATER/YEAR)
LOCATION ELEVATION PRECIPITATION*
Auburn 1,292' 35.13
Grass Valley 2,400' 52.00
Nevada City 2,781' 55.95
Bowman Lake 5,385' 68.84
* Precipitation records source: National Climatic Data Center and NID
records.
URBANU9S
PAGE 13 Show Image
WATER FACILITIES
The District operates and maintains over 425 miles of canals and conduits
within District boundaries, and ten reservoirs with a total capacity of 250,280
acre-feet. These facilities store and deliver water to flilfill four main uses:
environmental requirements (minimum pools and fish releases), hydroelectric power
generation, raw water for irrigation, and surface water to meet urban water demands.
The District currently operates seven hydroelectric power plants, with a total
combined output of 86 MW; enough power to serve over 60,000 homes. Selected water
storage and transmission facilities, and power plants are operated and maintained
under agreement with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Other power plants are
owned and operated by the District.
Irrigation water customers are located throughout the delivery system. The
number of accounts has increased or decreased slightly from year to year; however,
at the end of 1995 there were approximately 5,500 customers.
The District's treated water system is made up of eight service areas, each
with its own treatment plant, storage facilities, and distribution system. Table 2
lists the service areas, treatment capacity, and number of connections at the end of
1995.
TABLE 2
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
TREATED WATER SERVICE AREAS
AREA PLANT CAPACITY CONNECTIONS*
(MGD)
Loma Rica 6.4 4,134
E. George 10.0 3,872
Lake Wudwood 4.0 2,570
North Auburn 6.0 2,017
Lake of the Pines 3.0 1,913
Snow Mountain 1.2 392
Cascade Shores 0.3 363
Smartville 0.1 42
Totals 31.0 Total 15,303
* as of December 31. 1995
Selected treated water systems have been intertied with other District systems
or other agencies for increased service reliability. The District's combined water
treatment capacity is 31 million gallons per day. There are 26 storage tanks and
URBANU95 1-5
PAGE 14 Show Image
three lined and covered reservoirs, all with a combined capacity of 31 million
gallons. Bids have been accepted to construct four additional tanks totaling 2.7
million gallons. The District maintains over 300 miles of treated water
transmission and distribution pipelines. The total number of connections exceeded
15,300 in 1995.
GROWTH
The District covers portions of three counties. Island exclusions include two
incorporated cities (Grass Valley and Nevada City). An estimate rate of growth
within the District's boundaries, using population, would not be practical due to a
lack of demographic information which corresponds with the District boundary. A
comparison of the number of connections to the treated water systems over the past
20 years will give an indication of the growth experienced within our treated water
service areas. New urban water connections have grown at a rate of 1.7% over the
past five years. This growth rate is not expected to change in the near filture.
The population within the District's urban water service areas is expected to grow
at the same rate. The total population served urban water at the end of 1995 is
estimated at 35,000 people. Figure 2 graphs the total number of connections for the
past 20 years, and compares that with the combined treated water production for each
year.
Figure 2 illustrates that the steady increase in service connections has not
necessarily resulted in a corresponding increase in water demand. This trend in the
reduction of water use per connection is shown in Figure 3 which compares total
treated water production to total connections, from 1975 to 1995.
Table 3 estimates the number of treated water connections and water production
through the year 2015.
TABLE 3
.........;:;;;:;;..;:j:::j::::: NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
TREATED WATER PRO3 ECTIONS 1995 - 2015
YEAR C0NNECTI0~S a PR0DUCTI0~ (AF)
1995 15,303 9,216
2000 17,200 10,200
2005 19,000 11,200
2010 21,000 12,400
2015 23,200 13,700
a Includes all customer sectors
b Actual end-of-year records.
URBANU95
PAGE 15 Show Image
FIGURE 2
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
TREATED WATER PRODUCTION AND CONNECTIONS 1975-1995
ACRE FEET THOUSANDS) CONNECTIONS THOUSANDS) 16
16 _______________________________
I ~A IUTREATED WATER PRODUCTION a
11~ 1~SERvICE CONNECTIONSb
12 ---- ------- - - _ _ _
11 _ _ - _ - _ _
4
3
1
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95
YEAR
a Treated water production equals total production of all water treatment plants.
b Connections equals total of all metered accounts.
PAGE 16 Show Image
I I IC)
I I a)
I',
I I I a)
I I I
I I I I
C\I
I I I I a)
z
o I I 00)
I I I a)
I I I Co
0 w I _________
I I I _______ CoCo
I I
u)O I ii
5 () I I I I I CD
cv, z ~ I I I I Co
Lc)~
w ~ I I I Co W
I I I I
I I I
~ ~o I Co
I I I I Co
I I I c\l
<5 z I I Co
I I' I
z I I I Co
w
c)WZ I' I I
Co
OW I I
uJ _________
W
0
0
HO
C\J ` Co CD ~ ~ a
d
6
d
6
1-8
PAGE 17 Show Image
0
a)
I I G)CU
a)
I I
a) LLCU~
cci)
c\' CU~0
a) x~CU~
V
a)
a
o
Co
a)
H a)
Co ~E2
- 1£) a)LL
Co
Co
C
C-
5II')~Oz
za)~ CCU ~
w I I Co~
~
w
~ H
Co~
~m~c')
c~) oCOO
Co C~V
w ~CU
Co CC
OH ~ a)> Co
Co 5
0
c')D
a ~
Co
z 0 I a) ~
CU
I
Co
H I I CU
WW
LL I I a) ~
w
0
a a a a a a
a a a a a
L')
2-3
PAGE 18 Show Image
10
a)
a)
C~)
a)
a) a)
Ca
0
(0
V
a)
V
V
a
Ca
w a)
a)
H Co
I'
~I'?E.L Co
0
0
E
c')~u)
5Ln~~ Co
(0~
Inz ~ CoW
w
- Co~'~ LL
W
Co<
Co
V
V
C
Ca
- Co
-.`c,) Ca
0 H
Co
0
a (0
.5
Ull
w
Z c')D~ Co
a)
VO
C
Co
H
V (0
W 0 Ca
0
W G)a)
LL
Ca (0
W (0 0 Ca
-(0
0 10 0 a)
~
Ca >
___________________________ 0 ~
a a a a a
a 10 a 10
c\'
2-4
PAGE 19 Show Image
SECTION II
WATER SUPPLY: PAST, CURRENT AND PROJECTED
The Nevada Irrigation District depends nearly totally on surface water
(exception: recycled water) for its SUpply of both irrigation and urban water
demands. The SUpply falls into four main categories: runoff from the watershed,
carryover storage in surface reservoirs, contract purchases, and recycled water.
Table 4 identifies the sources of supply available in past years and what is
expected to be available through the year 2015.
WATERSHED RUNOFF
This category of supply includes all runoff produced by the Districts
watershed during the water year. Actual amounts are listed in Table 4. The
amount of runoff and the manner in which it is used, depends a great deal on the
snow pack, often referred to as our "Frozen Reservoir". Ideally, melting snow
provides runoff lasting into June or July. The system of storage reservoirs and
conduits used to transport water to the District's service area boundary are
referred to as the Upper Division. The Upper Division is operated in conjunction
with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company under the terms of a joint agreement.
In periods of normal precipitation, ample runoff is available for power
production. Conversely, power production is sacrificed to avoid supply
deficiencies during dry years. Maximum capacity of key conduits in the Upper
Division limits the amount of runoff that can be used effectively for consumptive
purposes. Figure 4 shows the recorded watershed runoff since 1975 and compares it
to the 67-year average.
CARRYOVER STORAGE
The District has ten main storage reservoirs totaling a maximum of 250,280
AF. Carryover storage is the amount of water left in these reservoirs at the end
of the normal irrigation season, usually at the end of September. Actual amounts
are listed in Table 4. Experience has shown that carryover storage should be held
at a level not less than 70,000 AF. This figure includes a total of 39,675 AF of
minimum pool requirements for environmental needs and dead storage (includes
siltation estimates) which cannot be counted upon as a supply. Figure 5 shows the
usable carryover storage since 1975 and compares it to the 28-year average.
CONTRACT PURCHASES
These purchases are available each year through our 1963 agreement with
Pacific Gas and Electric. In years of at least normal precipitation, the maximum
amount available is 59,361 AF. This amount reduces in dry years to a maximum of
23,591 AF. Actual purchases are listed in Table 4. It should be noted that the
contract expires in 2013. A renegotiated contract has the potential of affecting
URBANU95 2-1
PAGE 20 Show Image
TABLE 4
IRRIGATION DISTRICT
* Water Supply Projections 1915 - 2015
* Acre-meet Per Water Year
C~ overStora e 147729 129229 136658 136746 58027 127400 127,400 i~00~~00
Icontr~ctPurch~~C\\13,000 12000 10298 9345 7356 8000 8,000~Q~~
IRecv9led*11,797 1 892 2 102 2 335 2 856 3 200 3,400 3,800 4,200
r\)r\)
Totals 376503 458606 310605 272464 474114 339800 340000 340400 340800
a. Includes Middle Yuba River above Milton Diversion, Canyon Creek above Bowman Reservoir, and Deer Creek. Does not include Texas
or Fall Creek, Bear River, or South Yuba due to PG&E contract provisions, and hydrological and water rights considerations.
From October 1 of previous year to September 30.
b. Storage recorded at end of September of previous year and reduced by 39, 675 AF unusable minimum pool requirements and
dead storage.
C. Purchased under PG&E contract. Full entitlement of 59,361 AF usually not purchased during normal and above normal runoff
years due to conduit conveyance restrictions. District purchases restricted to 23, 591 AF during dry year conditions.
d. Estimated for 1975 and 1980. Purchase records not readily available.
PAGE 21 Show Image
the District's over all water supply; however, at this time, staff does not
foresee any major changes over present operations once negotiations have been
concluded.
Staff anticipates starting negotiations far in advance of the contract
expiration; perhaps as early as the year 2000. The District's Board of Directors
has established a reserve flind to meet the anticipated expense of relicensing the
multi-unit hydroelectric facility through the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission. The first installment of $5 million has been committed in the 1996
budget. For the purpose of this plan, supply projections for contract purchases
have been based on historic records. See Table 4 for actual purchase amounts.
RECYCLED
This supply is made up of effluent from municipal waste water treatment
plants that is captured and mixed with surface waters. The amounts captured are
listed in Table 4. This occurs below four municipal plants: Grass Valley, Nevada
City, Auburn, and Placer County at Joeger Road. This recycled waste water is not
used as a raw water supply for the District's treated water plants with the
exception of the small town of Smartville where it is mixed with a large volume of
surface water and transported through miles of natural drainage courses and
earthen canals. The capture of this water augments the District's overall surface
water supply and, therefore, should be included as a source of supply.
FREQUENCY AND XAGNITUDE OF SUPPLY DEFICIENCIES
The District has experienced wide variations in precipitation patterns in its
watershed area. During the 1976-77 drought, all irrigation needs, except
permanent agricultural crops, were rationed to 50% and all urban water customers
were requested to stop watering lawns and washing vehicles. Other restrictions
were imposed. This supply shortage prompted a thorough analysis of our operations
affecting the Upper Division as well as exercising options contained in our
contract with PG&E. Staff is confident that if we had applied similar techniques
leading up to and including 1976-1977, the District would not have experienced a
reduction in supply.
In order to maximize the District's water resources, a Water Management
Committee, consisting of District and PG&E operational personnel, reviews the
status of the District's Yuba-Bear River System and PG&E's Drum-Spaulding System
on a weekly basis. Real time data collected by a computer link with snow pillows
in the upper watershed and snow surveys conducted in the field are some of the
tools used by the Committee in analyzing water supply conditions. Operational
forecasts are developed to provide target water storage elevations and to maximize
the availability of water for consumptive purposes, hydroelectric generation, and
recreation activities. During dry years, priorities shift heavily towards
maintaining a water supply to meet consumptive needs.
The District's current method of operating the Upper Division watershed was
tested in 1990 to 1992 with another series of extremely dry years; the driest on
record. No deficiencies in the water supply were experienced.
URBANU9S 2-5
PAGE 22 Show Image
Future three-year sequences of dry years similar to 1975-77 and 1990-92 Will
have very little affect on the supply needed to meet routine irrigation and urban
deliveries.
The vulnerability of ~e District's urban water supply under drought
conditions is discussed in Section VI. A planned response to an urban water
shortage emergency caused by a catastrophic event is discussed in Section VII.
HISTORIC THREE-YEAR WORST CASE SUPPLY
Experience gained during the 1976 and 1977 drought has lead to more efficient
operation of the Upper Division watershed. These techniques were applied during
the three driest years on record: 1990-1992. The result was no supply
deficiencies. Table S presents this historic three-year worst case.
HYPOTHETICAL THREE-YEAR WORST CASE SCENARIO
The District, in an attempt to prepare for the worst imaginable sequence of
three dry years, has developed a hypothetical three-year worst case scenario. The
severity of this imaginary drought would yield 68% less runoff than normal and 40%
less than the runoff recorded in the 1990-1992 series of dry years. The estimated
water supply and resulting supply deficiencies caused by this most extreme case
are shown in Table 6. It can be seen from this example that deficiencies in
overall supplies could reach as high as 30%, based on a 167,000 AF normal demand.
A series of dry years cutting this deep into supplies would trigger a Stage III
Drought Warning, which would have only minimum affect on urban water users.
Drought contingency plans and drought stages are discussed in Section VI.
URBANU95
PAGE 23 Show Image
TABLE 5
NEVADA IRRIGATION 61sTR!cT
~Istorlc~Three-Year Wors? `Case' Water'Su'p'p"Iy 1990 1992
Aore ~ P~r Wat~r Year
C~rr ov'~St~'a ~ 58,027 136,746 118,617 136,356
Gqntract~Pu~ha~e:$,, C 7,356 9,345 6,573 4,042
Rec' "~e"d:':'...; 2,856 2,335 2,382 2,430
Totals 474,114 272,464 242,337 229,959
d
Percent Shorta e 0 0 0 0
a. Includes Middle Yuba River, Canyon Creek, and Deer Creek. Does not include Texas or Fall Creek,
Bear River or South Yuba due to PG&E contract provisions, and hydrological and water rights
considerations. From October 1 of previous year to September 30.
b. Storage recorded at end of September of previous year and reduced by 39, 675 AF unusable
minimum pool requirements and dead storage.
C. Purchased under PG&E contract.
d. Based on 167,000 AF demand.
e. Water normally used exclusively for power generation was held in storage during 1991, resulting
in increased carryover storage for 1992.
URBAN96.WK4
PAGE 24 Show Image
TABLE 6
NEVADA IRRiGATION DI~TRIOT
Hypothetical Three Year Worst Case Water Supply a
A~r~ ~ Per Water Year
over$tor~ ~ 58027 173,968 69,000 28,000
O~6::nt~ct Purchases 7,356 7,400 23,500 23,550
2 856 2,800 2,600 2,400
Totals 474114 278,626 130,173 118,750
f f
Percent Shorta e ___________ ___________ 30%
a. Case study based on 68% less runoff than normal and 40% less than the worst three
years on record: from 1990 - 1992.
b. Based generally on worst two years on record: 1976 and 1977.
C. Purchased under PG&E contract.
d. Lowest carryover storage on record: 1977.
e. Maximum allowable purchases under dry conditions.
f. Based on 167,000 AF demand.
PAGE 25 Show Image
SECTION III
WATER USE: PAST, CURRENT AND PROJECTED
WATER USE BY SECTOR
The District has three main water use sectors: agricultural, urban, and
environmental requirements such as minimum p0015 and fish releases.
The past, current, and projected uses by all sectors from 1975 to 2015 are
shown in Table 7. Significant increases in demand over the next 20 years are not
expected. As the area within the District's boundaries urbanizes, the water once
used on the land for agriculture will be converted to urban uses. Treated water
customers tend to use less water per acre than their agricultural counterparts.
The result will be very little change in the overall water demands caused by the
change in land uses. Some irrigable lands remain unused. As these lands are
brought under irrigation, a corresponding increase in agricultural demands is
expected.
AGRICULTURAL SECTOR
Agricultural water use accounts for nearly 90% of the total demand on the
water supply. During normal and good water years, a portion of the supply is
wholesaled to neighboring irrigation districts. The larger accounts are for
commercial crops such as orchards, nurseries, and rice, and irrigation of golf
courses. The bulk of the water is used on irrigated pasture. Smaller
agriculturalists supplement their income with truck crops; others grow family
gardens, irrigate small pastures, or maintain residential landscaping. A few
customers use the raw water for household uses; however, most use bottled water
for drinking or cooking. A few customers maintain their own water treatment
plants. A small portion of the supply is delivered to municipalities as surface
water supplies to treatment plants, which they then deliver to their own urban
water customers. See Table 7.
TREATED WATER SECTOR
Urban water uses, for the purpose of this plan, are considered to be all
treated water production. Figure 2 shows the historic production as compared to
the number of connections. Table 3 provides estimates of projected production and
number of connections. Current accounting practices identify three types of
treated water customers: commercial, noncommercial, and municipal. Noncommercial
users include single family residence, public agencies, schools, and nonprofit
organizations. All other customers, except for municipal deliveries are
considered commercial and may include multi-family, true commercial, and
industrial. A small portion of treated water production is delivered through
master meters to select areas under jurisdiction of other municipalities. The
water is then resold for both commercial and noncommercial use.
URBANU95 3-1
PAGE 26 Show Image
TABLE 7
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
Water Use Projection~s~i 975 201 ~
Acre-Feej~~P er Y6ar a
Customer Sector 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
bh
No~commerc~~ 5961 4,111 5,955 6,478 6,722 7,580 8,470 9,560 10,750
Commer~ai cb 936 1,567 2,032 2,330 2,377 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800
MUnicia:I:.{#reate.d)..........184 135 149 69 117 120 130 140 150
Municipal {Raw) e 3460 2,759 2,721 2,174 1,995 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400
A r~uItural 124784 131,493 143,803 148,687 145,723 147,000 149,000 151,000 153,000
En~rQnmentat 7 664 7,664 7,664 7,664 7,664 7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700
Totals 142989 147729 162324 167402 164598 167000 170,100 ~00~00
a. Noncommercial, commercial and municipal are based on calendar year. Agricultural and environmental are based
on water year, however, all are shown as calendar year for comparison purposes.
b. Noncommercial includes single family, residential, public agencies, schools, and non-profit.
C. Commercial includes all noncommercial uses such as multi-family, commercial, industrial.
d. Treated water delivered to municipalities for resale.
e. Raw water delivered to municipalities for treatment and resale; plus a 15% system loss factor.
f. Total agricultural sales plus a 15% system loss factor.
g. Uncaptured fish releases. Note: Minimum pools maintained for fisheries were subtracted from the supply side.
h. Total sales adjusted as the pro rata share of total treated water production.
U RBAN96.WK4
PAGE 27 Show Image
The District's residential customers have a higher percentage of retirees
than most urban areas. This was especially true through the 60's and 70's. As
the population growth began to accelerate in the mid 70's to mid 80's, the ratio
of retired households to those with families began to decrease. It is estimated
that there are 3.3 people per household. (Statistic provided by Department of
Health Services.)
The District's commercial customers vary as widely as most urban areas.
There are no major users of treated water for industrial or manufacturing
processes.
URBANU95 3-3
PAGE 28 Show Image
PAGE 29 Show Image
SECTION W
SUPPLY AND DEMAND C6MPARISON
NORMAL WATER YEARS
Figure 6 compares the past, current, and projected water supply and demand
from 1975-2015. The District's average water supply of nearly 330,000 AF is 185%
of the estimated demand of 176,800 AF for the year 2015. Use of refined watershed
operating techniques is expected to increase the average supply available and, in
turn, increase the supply/demand ratio. This increasingly more favorable ratio,
combined with the conservation measures identified in the District's Agricultural
Water Management Plan and this Urban Water Management Plan, will continue to
provide adequate water supplies to meet the District's projected demands through
the year 2015 with no expected deficiencies under normal water years.
DROUGHT CONDITIONS
A series of drought years similar to 1990-1992 will not produce supply
deficiencies. This historic three-year worst case is illustrated in Table 5,
Section II. The hypothetical three-year worst case scenario, presented in Table
6, Section II, assumes runoff amounts 68% less than normal and 40% less than that
experienced during the historic three-year worst case (1990-1992). In the event
of such an extreme hypothetical worst case, the District would experience a
deficiency in overall supplies of only 22% in the second year and 30% in the final
year. All deliveries would be made in the first year. Section VI of this plan
discusses water shortage contingency plans and its effect on urban users.
URBAN WATER DEMANDS
Only a small percent of the District's overall water supply, ranging from 6%
to 7% is used to meet urban water demands. This includes treatment plant
production and raw water delivered to municipalities for treatment and
distribution. Figure 7 shows the actual percent for the past 20 years and
projected percentages for the next 20 years. As the area within the District's
boundaries urbanizes, the water once used on the land for agriculture will be
converted to urban uses. The result will be very little change in the overall
water demands caused by the change in land uses.
URBANU95 4-1
PAGE 30 Show Image
1',
a
c\'
H
Co
a
CU
Ln a a)
____________________________ c\'
0
Lo a) E
I') a) a)
a Co V
a
c\'
VCO
a
a
a
(0
wo~ _ a) (0
z HtmO
(0(0
CU
0
VCU~~
a) *0
ErnLLL~ V
V CU
(0
C,) CUa) 8
CU~ E -a)
V ~
Ca) *E ~
CU~ .E~C
C (0
0 (0 CU
V a)
a)
(0 a)
cc ~
V(00C~
C (0 E
CU
w a E C
Co a) 0 0
C,
H
WW I I I CU
C') LL I a)
Wcc I
I I I II
0 I 0 0
I p ~ E E
I I
I I I Co Co Co
a a a a a a
a a a a a
I')
4-2
PAGE 31 Show Image
In I I I I I 10
_________________ a
U I
IIn~ I I I I
a) a
_______ a I:
I I I c\I
z I III
E
a
I'ILwL~ a
(`0 I a 8
I I~ a CoJ
a
50
H I
~ ZLL
w 0~0
I 8
`ft #1'
a
~ zmc,)
I _
I a)
-G)
Co
00
I I V
Co Co
0
I Co
z _______
w I 10
ZW
_______________________ __ *0
V
w a) _
0
E
Co
0 I a
Co G)
a)
G)
Co
V
C,)
o
C
H I I IC) E
Co V
C Co
~ E
______________________________ a)
0 I
___________________ o 0
E E
~=Co
Co _____________________
C,) C,)
I I
a a) Co (0 10
4-3
PAGE 32 Show Image
PAGE 33 Show Image
SECTION V
WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
The Nevada Irrigation District is committed to implementing water
conservation measures for all customer sectors.
Water conservation can be achieved through managing the supply, or the
demand. Supply management is used to improve overall system efficiency and reduce
waste within water production and delivery facilities. Demand management is used
to encourage water conservation by the consumer. Supply management is generally
preferable to demand management, because it can reduce water loss and waste
without depending on water users. The District chooses to focus on supply
management; however, it has implemented demand management measures as well.
AGRICULTURAL USES
In 1991, the District prepared an Agricultural Water Management Plan in
compliance with Part 2.8, Division 6 of the State Water Code. The primary
objective of the plan is to conserve water. Ongoing water conservation measures
include: use of reclaimed water, use of flow gauging stations throughout the
system, updated raw water system capital improvement list, weekly system
management meetings, use of snow courses to monitor snow pack and predict runoff,
staff training in water conservation, use of a public relations consultant,
cooperation with Soil Conservation Service, offering irrigation system
evaluations, annual workshops in water measurement and management, offering
customer assistance in scheduling irrigation needs and improving farm
efficiencies, an accelerated water loss prevention program, investigation of new
delivery systems, and offering landscape water management training.
It should be noted that the District's raw water delivery system demonstrates
a very low loss factor. In general, the system experiences the usual, and
generally unavoidable losses through evaporation, transportation, and deep
penetration seepage. However, losses due to canal leakage, overflows, and return
irrigation water (water which escapes the customer's property), in most cases,
finds its way back into the District's system by entering a lower canal,
reservoir, or stream. This return water augments the supply needed to make
downstream deliveries. Repairing a leak in a canal or conduit does not always
result in a corresponding conservation of water. Leaks can cause other problems
which usually dictate their repair, such as creation of unwanted wet areas or
boggs, potential property degredation, and a reduction in the effective capacity
of upstream facilities. The District is continuously patrolling and maintaining
its facilities in an effort to reduce water loss due to leaks.
URBAN WATER USES
The District's 1990 update of its Urban Water Management Plan identified
several measures which had already been adopted and several additional measures
URBANU95 5-1
PAGE 34 Show Image
for consideration. Subsequenfly, many of California's larger urban water supply
agencies have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding urban water
conservation in California. The MOU contains 16 best management practices (`3MP)
for urban water conservation. Although not a signatory to the MOU, the District
has adopted the BMP numbers and titles for the purposes of this update.
BMP 3 - DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER AUDITS, LEAK DETECTION,
AND REPAIRS
A system water audit involves accounting and veri~ing the quantities of
water being delivered by a system starting from the source of supply, flowing
through the distribution system, up to the point of being delivered as a product
to the customer. From a water conservation standpoint, a water audit will
determine the amount of unaccounted water by subtracting all consumptive meter
readings from the treatment plant production records. Some authorized uses and
all unauthorized uses are not metered. These unmetered uses total up to the
unaccounted for water. Examples of unmetered authorized uses include fire
fighting, routine water main flushing, and testing and flushing during
construction. Unauthorized uses include meter measuring errors, system leakage,
and theft.
The District has completed a program of installing meters to measure the
production at each of its eight water treatment plants. In addition, the District
has installed several meters at key location within the water distribution system.
On the demand side, all connections to the treated water system for consumptive
purposes are metered. Also, nonconsumptive connections, such as private fire
services, are equipped with meters on a bypass system to detect and measure
unauthorized usage or leaks in the private system. All tank water permits require
the use of meters and recording of all usage. Periodically, a water audit is
performed on each water system by comparing treatment plant production records
against total demands.
All significant pipeline leaks can be detected and pinpointed with leak
detection equipment. Sonic type equipment is the most commonly used. This type
of equipment consists of an acoustical pickup, electrom.c amplifier with intensity
meter and headphones. Models, like the popular Heath Son-i-Kit, are portable and
battery powered. The unit enables an experienced operator to determine the
difference between normal background noise and the sound of a leak. After a leak
has been located, this equipment is then used to pinpoint the leak by finding the
point of highest sound intensity on the headphQnes. A two-man crew can normally
cover about two miles of pipeline in a day.
The tangible benefit of locating and repairing a leak is in the value of the
water saved. There are also intangible benefits associated with public relations
and mitigation of property damage due to undiscovered leaks. Leak detection
surveys will be scheduled in the filture on high water loss systems as determined
by the periodic water audits discussed above.
The District maintains records on all leaks repaired on its treated water
system. Each year the information is reviewed to determine which pipelines should
be considered for replacement as part of the annual budgeted project list. Table
URBANU9S 5-2
PAGE 35 Show Image
8 shows the length of treated water pipeline replaced each year beginning with the
District's first adopted Urban Water Management Plan in 1985. From 1991 to 1995,
plus the replacements budgeted for in 1996, an average of approximately 8,100 feet
of pipeline is replaced annually.
TABLE 8
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
TREATED WATER PIPELINE REPLACEMENT a 1985-1995
YEAR LENGTH(FEET) YEAR LENGTH (FEET)
1985 4,300 1991 5,800
1986 3,200 1992 6,400
1987 2,300 1993 10,500
1988 9,100 1994 6,300
1989 5,500 1995 15,400
1990 5,500 1996 4,200 b
a Does not include service laterals 2 diameter and less.
b Budgeted for replacement in 1996.
In 1980, the District subscribed to "Underground Service Alert" (USA) and has
actively participated each year thereafter. Anyone planning to excavate, marks the
affected areas on the ground and calls USA. The District then marks its facilities.
This service prevents unnecessary ruptures in water mains and service laterals.
Water conservation is a tangible benefit of this program.
Budget: Distribution system water audits, with the aid of a computer program, is
estimated to cost $1,500 per year. Leak detection is estimated to cost
$4,800 per year. Water main rehabilitation and replacement is expected to
cost approximately $300,000 per year (`)ased on 8,000 LF of 8-inch main per
year).
Implementation: The District will continue to audit water distribution systems by
comparing water produced and water delivered. Each system will be audited
at least yearly. The District will continue its leak detection program and
will schedule surveys on high water loss systems as determined by the
annual water audits and leak history records. The District will continue
rehabilitating its water distribution system by replacing water mains with
extensive leak histories.
URBANU95 5-3
PAGE 36 Show Image
BMP 4 - METERING WITH COMMODITY RATES
The District has found that metering is the best, most cost effective water
conservation tool. Beginning in 1969, the District has required all new services be
metered and budgeted for retrofitting a certain number of existing services each
year. In 1977, funding was provided as part of the Economic Development Agency
Drought Relief Program, for installation of the remaining 800 meters.
The District is now flilly metered in all urban water customer sectors.
Separate meters are set for single-family residential, commercial, industrial,
institutional, governmental, and large landscaped areas. Multi-family complexes,
such as apartments and mobile home parks, are served through one or more master
meters. There are over 15,300 metered connections.
Proper structuring of water rates is also essential to water conservation. In
1981, CH2M Hill conducted a water rate study recommending the District eliminate its
declining block rate structure and reduce the minimum charge with a corresponding
increase in water rates. This recommendation was implemented on a gradual basis,
until in 1988, the declining block rate was eliminated. The effort to reduce the
minimum charge may be illustrated by comparing water rate increases since 1988 at a
total of 72% to the more moderate increase in the minimum charge for this same time
period at 38%.
Billing cycles are bimonthly. The minimum charge for each account includes the
first 2 HCF. A billing unit is one hundred cubic feet (748 gallons) and is
abbreviated as HCF. The 1995 rate for commercial accounts was $0.958 per HCF, and
noncommercial was $0.765 per HCF. Both these rates include a 4.10% surcharge for
Federal, State, and County mandated fees.
Recent studies in California suggest that suburban family water costs reflect a
price elasticity of demand of about 0.30. This means that if the price of water
increases ten percent, use will decrease by about three percent. The District has
generally set water rates comparable with rises in the consumer price index (CPI).
These types of increase have little affect on water usage for most households as
family incomes usually keep pace with the CPI. The District has not, as a rule,
increased water rates for the sole purpose of water conservation. This may be an
option during an isolated incident such as a drought.
Metering provides an accounting of all water uses within a treated water
system. The accuracy of the meters is an important part of a leak detection
program. In 1987, the District tested twenty-five commercial meters ranging in size
from three to six inch. Many of these meters were installed in the mid-1970s. All
but four meters tested within an accuracy range of 100.4 to 99.3%. The field
testing and repair work cost the District about $10,000. Increased revenue after
repairing the four defective meters was estimated at $5,000 per year.
URBANU95 5-4
PAGE 37 Show Image
Again in 1994, the District tested 63 meters ranging in size from 2 to 6
inches. All but 28 meters tested within an accuracy range of 100.4 to 99.3%. Field
testing and repair costs were estimated at $25,000. Increased accuracy of the
repaired meters will increase revenues. This is expected to help offset some of the
costs. A one-year comparison, between 1994 and 1995, is not enough data to make an
accurate projection of offsetting revenues. A comparison will be made sometime in
1997.
Budget: Meter installation costs are part of new service connection fees. Example:
5/8-inch meter (maximum capacity of 20 gpm), installation fee for 1995 was
$580. Testing and repair of large meters over the next five years is
estimated at $30,000.
Implementation: The District will continue to install meters on all new connections
to the treated water system for all customer sectors, and will continue the
gradual shift of revenues from the minimum charge to the commodity rate.
The District will schedule the testing of large meters in the year 1999.
One inch and smaller meters will be tested at 15-year intervals.
BMP 7 - PUBLIC INFORMATION
The District publishes a newsletter four times a year which is sent to all
customer sectors. The periodical often contains articles on water conservation.
Since 1985, approximately 50 such articles have appeared.
The District has, for many years, maintained an information booth at the Nevada
County Fair. The booth is staffed flill time and provides public access to a variety
of information, including water conservation. On occasion, the booth theme has been
on water conservation.
The District automatically performs a computerized check on all customer sector
billings to compare current water usage to the corresponding period in the prior
year. If a large difference is noted, the customer is notified of a possible leak
on their side of the meter.
In 1986, the District published a 32-page booklet entitled "Water Conservation
Gardening" to assist its customers in conserving water.
Another conservation article entitled "Lawn. Watering Guide" was published by
the District in 1989, and is updated, or reprinted, as necessary.
A water conservation library has been established in the District's main
office, as well as the branch office located in the North Auburn area. District
customers have been advised of the availability of the library material which
includes information on drip irrigation, efficient lawn irrigation, low water use
landscape and household water conservation measures. Video tapes on water
conservation are loaned to interested customers. The District, on a routine basis,
has prepared news releases and made public announcements on local radio stations
relating to water conservation issues. The District contracts with a consultant to
prepare most newsletters, news releases, and publications.
URBANU95 5-5
PAGE 38 Show Image
The District routinely prints water conservation messages on water billings and
return payment envelopes.
In June 1990, the District agreed to a cooperative effort with University of
California Extension Service Master Gardener's Nevada County Program to develop a
demonstration garden on District property. The garden, located at the District's
main office complex in Grass Valley, showcases proper irrigation methods, weed
abatement, tree pruning, low water use plants, and other growing techniques.
Budget: Public information efforts are estimated at $38,000 per year.
Implementation: The District will continue to provide its customer sectors with
information on water conservation. This effort will be at, or near,
existing levels, but will intensify at the onset of a dry year cycle.
BXP 8 - SCHOOL EDUCATION
The District routinely visits elementary, intermediate, and high schools with
informative talks and handouts. Subject matter occasionally includes conservation.
Most recently, we have donated pamphlets published by American Water Works
Association and other sources to area schools.
The District participated financially in the development of the American Water
Works Association's "Project Water Works". The program is designed to teach junior
and senior high school students about water related subjects including water
conservation. Work materials include a computer program, manual, and handbook.
In 1994, the District donated analytical equipment and supplies to an area high
school for use in their Agricultural Department. Students routinely test raw water
quality at selected areas of the watershed, as well as study specific watershed
areas known to have below normal water quality in order to isolate the source(s) of
contamination. Although not directly related to water conservation, the program
does increase the students awareness of the importance of water.
Budget: Providing published information to students is estimated to cost $400 per
year. Continued support of the high school water quality monitoring
program is estimated to cost $600 per year.
Implementation: The District will continue its effort to educate school-aged
children of the importance of water conservation.
BMP 11 - CONSERVATION PRICING, WATER RATES
The District has, starting in 1996, implemented an inclining block rate
structure for all urban water customer sectors. The minimum bimonthly rate for all
customer sectors and all meter sizes will continue to include the first 2 HCF. The
new inclining rate has three blocks. The District's 1996 rate schedules for
noncommercial (4-El) and commercial (4-Fl) are included as Appendix E. The rate of
increase between blocks is slight at 1.3%, and 0.7%. The District acknowledges the
URBANU95 5-6
PAGE 39 Show Image
industry trend towards inclining rate blocks and took this opportunity to introduce
its customers to the concept. The District does not expect the new rates to result
in a noticeable decrease in water use.
Budget: The first year of inclining block rates is not expected to have any affect
on the budget.
Implementation: The District plans to increase the difference between blocks in
coming years; however, it is anticipated that the amount of increases will
have very little affect on water conservation over the next five years.
BMP 13 - WATER WASTE PROHIBITION
The District has adopted regulations which state in part: "A water user who
wastes water......may be reflised further water service........(Section
3.05--Water Conservation). Offenders are first written a letter calling their
attention to the wasteflil practice and asking for a schedule of correction.
Continued violation is discussed before the Board's Water and Hydro Operations
Committee and a recommendation is made to the full Board. Service may be refused,
if necessary. Metered commodity rates are usually enough incentive for a corrective
action by the customer. In addition, the computerized check discussed in BMP 7,
alerts customers to unusual increases in usage patterns. This warning is enough to
prompt immediate corrective action for most customers.
Budget: Impact is minor and implementation is included in Operations Department
overhead.
Implementation: The District will continue enforcement of this regulation.
BMP 14 - WATER CONSERVATION COORDINATOR
The District has not assigned the title of "Water Conservation Coordinator" to
any one person. In practice, the District's General Manager insures adequate rules
and regulations are in place for metering all new urban water customers, setting
water rates, and enforcing water waste prohibition. The General Manager directs
various Department Managers to carry out other conservation measures such as water
audits, leak detection and repairs, public information, school education, and
monitoring industry trends and research.
ADDITIONAL URBAN WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES
The largest use of water inside the home is for toilet flushing. From January
of 1978, to October 1992, the State Health and Safety Code required all new homes
and other dwellings to use water conserving toilets. The standard toilet sold during
this time for new residential installation was the shallow trap type which utilizes
about 3.5 gallons per flush. Since October 1992, the sale of toilets using more
than 1.6 gallons per flush has been prohibited by State and Federal regulations.
The older style of toilet pre-1978) required five to seven gallons per flush.
About fifty percent of the District's current treated water customers have been
URBANU95 5-7
PAGE 40 Show Image
added since 1978. About five percent of our customers have been added since October
1992. As older homes are remodeled, updated toilets are installed. It is estimated
that at least 70% of District customers are now using either low-flush or ultraAow
flush toilets. The District relies totally on the Cities and Counties to enforce
these regulations through the building permit process. The estimated average annual
water savings created by a new District toilet retrofit program would be minimal,
decreasing each year. The benefit/cost ratio of implementing and participating in
an ultra low flow toilet retrofit program has been discussed, but not investigated.
It is not anticipated at this time that such a program will be implemented.
The California Administrative Code was modified in December 1978 to set water
conservation standards for shower heads. No such devices can now be sold that flow
in excess of 2.75 gallons per minute. Again, the District relies on City and County
governments for enforcement. Prior to the advent of water-conserving devices,
standard shower heads delivered from five to ten gallons of water per minute. It is
estimated that ninety percent of all shower heads installed in households served by
the District meet the new water conservation standards. This estimate is based on
the number of customers added since 1978 and the average life expectancy of a shower
head. The District also offered low-flow devices during the 1977 drought. Annual
water savings would be minimal if a new retrofit program was initiated by the
District and, therefore, no such program will be implemented.
The District is a contributing member of the American Water Works Association
Research Foundation (AWWARF). The Foundation researches water supply, distribution,
and quality issues. Many of these issues deal with water conservation, some
directly, some indirectly. Sample research titles include: "Revenue Instability and
Conservation Rate Structures", "Water Revenue Losses: Unaccounted-For-Water",
"Evaluating Residential Water Meter Performance", "Implementation and Optimization
of Distribution System Flushing", and "Cost Allocation and Rate Design for Water
Utilities".
URBANU95 5-8
PAGE 41 Show Image
SECTION VI
WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS
DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN
In 1991, the District prepared an Agricultural Water Management Plan in
compliance with Part 2.8, Division 6 of the State Water Code. That plan, in
conjunction with the 1990 update of this Urban Water Management Plan, has the
primary objective of conserving water through efficient water management. In
October of 1992, staff prepared a "Drought Contingency Plan" which identifies stages
of water supply shortages, the corresponding water demand reduction goals, and the
actions necessary to achieve those goals. The 1992 plan will serve as the drought
contingency plan for this urban water management plan. The contingency plan is
presented again later in this section.
The District is committed, by State and Federal mandate, as well as by policy,
to maintain a water supply during adverse conditions that will meet health and
safety needs of all sectors of urban water customers. This must remain the first
priority. The amount of water required to meet minimum health and safety demands of
all urban water users served by the District, including water delivered to
municipalities (1)oth treated and raw), is estimated at 4,000 AF per year (50,000
population at 68 gpcd). This represents less than two percent of the District's
total water demands in a normal year. During the last year of the hypothetical
three-year worst case scenario shown in Table 6, Section II, the 4,000 AF is only
3.4% of the overall depleted supply. The likelihood of the District enduring a
water shortage due to drought of such severity that only health and safety
requirements could be met is extremely remote and will not be considered in this
water shortage contingency analysis.
Section VII discusses the possibility of, and plans for responding to an urban
water shortage emergency caused by a complete disruption of the surface water supply
to the treatment plants.
PRIORITY BY USE, DISTRICT WIDE
Priority by use must take into consideration all District customer sectors and
their varied water demands. The following list begins with the highest priority
demand:
* Health and safety.
* Commercial and industrial.
* Permanent agriculture (requires five years to return to production).
* Existing landscaping.
* Annual agriculture.
* New customers (`1onor 5/8" meter for treated water standby accounts only,
no other new services).
URBANU9S 6-1
PAGE 42 Show Image
DROUGHT RATIONING STAGES AND REDUCTION GOALS
In 1992, the District adopted a Drought Contingency Plan which developed
rationing techniques and demand reduction goals based on water shortages of up to
50% of the District's overall supply. This goes beyond even the hypothetical
three-year worst case scenario shown in Table 6, Section II. The plan includes
voluntary and mandatory actions necessary to meet all stages of water supply
shortage ranging from a drought alert at 15%, warning at 25%, emergency at 35%, and
critical emergency at 50%. The stages and reduction goals are shown in Table 9.
TABLE 9
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
WATER SHORTAGE STAGES AND
DEMAND REDUCTION GOALS a
APRIL 1
SUPPLY
FORECAST b SUPPLY REDUCTION PROGRAM
AF SHORTAGE STAGE GOAL TYPE
185,000 None I
160,000 10% - 15% II (Alert) 15% Voluntary
145,000 15% - 25% III (Warning) 25% Mandatory
130,000 25% - 35% IV (Emergency) 35% Mandatory
110,000 35% - 50% V (Critical) 50% Mandatory
aBased on District's 1992 ~ Contingency Plan"
b Supply reduced by approximately 40,000 AF unusable mm. pool requirements
and dead storage.
DROUGHT RATIONING VS URBAN WATER DEMANDS
Going beyond the hypothetical three-year worst case scenario, to a 50%
reduction in the overall District supply does not require mandatory rationing of
urban customers because the urban water demands are expected to remain a relatively
small portion of the District's overall demands. Deep cuts in urban water uses
would conserve only minor amounts of water when compared to the total supply
available during a 50% reduction and, therefore, are not recommended.
URBANU95 6-2
PAGE 43 Show Image
DROUGHT WATER SHORTAGE STAGES AND REQUIRED ACTION
The District will forecast each year, by April 1 or earlier, the water supply
available for use during the coming year. Based on the severity of the predicted
shortage, as shown in Table 9, the District will take the following actions: (13ased
on District's 1992 Drought Contingency Plan.)
STAGE I: NORXAII WATER CONDITIONS
A. District will make flill supply and contract deliveries.
B. Continue to operate and maintain the water system in an efficient and
economical manner.
C. Continue to update District customers of water conditions and District
conservation measures.
D. Review, and if needed, update current water conservation plans and
system storage.
STAGE II: DROUGHT ALERT--1O% TO 15% SHORTAGE
A. District leak repair receives high priority.
B. Strongly encourage customers to conserve water.
C. Restaurant owners requested not to serve water unless requested by the
customer.
D. Declare that no District surplus water is available.
E. Maintain 70,000 minimum acre feet in storage by the end of October.
STAGE III: DROUGHT WARNING--25% SHORTAGE
A. All of Stage II requirements above, and the following:
B. Untreated water deliveries will. be reduced by 25% and irrigation
season delivery alternatives will be imposed.
C. Additional agricultural efficiency practices would be instituted to
assist the agriculturist in proper water management as outlined in the
Agricultural Water Management Plan.
D. Limit residential, garden, and landscape irrigation during the hottest
portion of the day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.).
URBANU95 6-3
PAGE 44 Show Image
E. Liniit fire department practice drills and flow testing of fire
hydrants.
F. Encourage that all treated water metered school grounds, and all other
public grounds reduce their water usage by 15 percent from what they
received under Stage I conditions and as outlined in the District's
Urban Water Management Plan.
G. Implement strong conservation pricing on treated water.
STAGE IV: DROUGHT EMERGENCY--35% SHORTAGE
A. Implement all items under Stages II and III, and the following:
B. Untreated water deliveries will be reduced by 35% and irrigation
season delivery alternatives will be imposed.
C. Implement stronger conservation pricing on treated water.
D. Suspend all NEW untreated water sales.
E. All new treated water services will not be allowed to plant new lawns,
landscaping, or gardens. The District will encourage customers to
utilize water efficient irrigation systems.
STAGE IV: CRITICAL DROUGHT EMERGENCY--50% SHORTAGE
A. Implement all items under Stage II, III, and IV, and the following:
B. Untreated water deliveries will be reduced by 50% and irrigation season
delivery alternatives will be imposed.
C. Conservation oriented rate structures and pricing methods will be
established to encourage water conservation.
RATE STRUCTURE UNDER DROUGHT RATIONING
The likelihood of the District experiencing a 50% shortage in overall water
supply, including urban and agricultural, is extremely remote as studied in Section
II. Table 6, Section II, shows a most conservative hypothetical three-year worst
case scenario. This extreme case assumed total runoff was 68% less than normal, yet
resulted in a supply deficiency of only 20% in the second year and 30% in the last
year. This would require action under a Stage III Drought Warning, which is one
step above a Drought Emergency and two steps above a Critical Drought Emergency.
During a prolonged drought, the District is prepared to implement strong
conservation pricing on treated water as a tool for encouraging water conservation
URBANU9S 64
PAGE 45 Show Image
and to supplement lost revenue caused by mandatory rationing applied to agricultural
demands. Treated water conservation pricing would be achieved by increasing the
base rate, and steepening the inclined block rates. Inclined block rates are
steepened by either reducing the block volumes, increasing the cost differential
between blocks, or both. This type of action can be studied and implemented, after
public hearings, in a relatively short time period. A complete analysis of rate
structures under rationing is not warranted at this time.
Some water supply agencies establish a "rate stabilization" flind in
anticipation of revenue shortfalls during a prolonged drought. Typically, flinds
equal to 75% to 100% of the agency's yearly urban water consumption revenues are
placed into a reserve account (does not usually include minimum bimonthly charges).
In practice, should a drought persist, customers are asked to conserve water which,
in turn, reduces revenues. The rate stabilization flind is then used to supplement
below normal revenues. These types of flinds are usually in addition to provisions
in the agencies drought contingency plans which call for progressively stronger
conservation pricing as the water shortage stages increase. The District's drought
contingency plan calls for conservation pricing; however, a flind has not been
established specifically for stabilizing rates during a prolonged drought. The
District does have sufficient revenue reserves, if required, to help stabilize
revenues from water sales and continue near-normal operations during a drought.
URBANU95 6-5
PAGE 46 Show Image
PAGE 47 Show Image
SECTION VII
URBAN WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY
VULNERABILITY OF URBAN WATER SUPPLIES
The District's eight urban water treatment plants each receive their surface
water supply from the District's overall water supply system which also provides
water for agricultural use. The facilities from which these water treatment plants
receive raw water are vulnerable to natural catastrophies. Most plants have some
type of backup supply, either raw water, or treated water from another system.
Should the main supply to a plant be disrupted, staff would immediately begin
analyzing the effort and time required to restore flow, as well as water supply
alternatives and the need for temporary rationing. A discussion of the
vulnerability of each plant supply and available supplemental supplies is discussed
in Appendix F.
HEALTH AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS DURING AN EMERGENCY
An urban water supply shortage emergency might occur due to a catastrophic
failure of a facility feeding one of the District's eight water treatment plants as
discussed above. Depending on the severity and time duration of the outage, it may
be necessary to implement mandatory rationing. The most severe mode of rationing
would restrict all urban water customer sectors to interior uses only and prohibit
use of water for manufacturing purposes. Demand sufficient for health and safety is
estimated at 68 gpcd.
RESPONSE TO URBAN WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY
In the event of a supply emergency, which requires the rationing of water for health
and safety purposes only, the District must be prepared to implement an emergency
urban water rationing program until normal supplies are restored. In the event of
such a supply shortage, the District will implement the following guidelines to be
followed until the supply is restored:
1. Direct all available flows to water treatment plant.
2. Notify house to house of emergency and curtailment of all:
* Outside water use.
* Water for manufacturing processes.
* Watering of recreational play areas.
* Flushing or flow testing of fire hydrants.
* 3. Intensify system water loss prevention measures.
URBANU95 7-1
PAGE 48 Show Image
* Conduct a water leak review to determine the amount of water,
if any, leaking in the affected system.
* Place District maintenance crews on call for priority water
leak repair.
* Schedule District operation crews to patrol for unauthorized
water use.
* Notify local news media to provide the most current information
to our customers.
4. Mutual aid will be called upon in order to provide an alternative supply of
water to those customers effected by the supply shortage. This may include
the following actions:
* Notify Cities/County/State
* Maintain an up4oAate list of contractors with water on tank trucks.
* Notify the Office of Emergency Services that a water supply emergency
exists.
5. The District will set up an Incident Command Center (`CC) in order to keep
local authorities, radio, newspaper and television up to date on the then
current status of the water rationing process that is in place, or if
customers need special attention during this shortage of water they can
contact the ICC unit directly.
URBANU95 7-2
PAGE 49 Show Image
SECTION VIII
RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
The District is currently receiving recycled water from four municipal waste
water treatment plants which discharges effluent into natural randoms. The City of
Grass Valley discharges to Wolf Creek, Nevada City to Deer Creek, Placer County to
Dry Creek, and the City of Auburn to Auburn Ravine. In each case, the discharge
mixes with District water being transported in the creeks. The combined waters are
then diverted from the creek into a canal, or delivered downstream where it is used
by agricultural customers or fish release requirements. It would be impractical for
the District to avoid taking this supply of water. This supply of water augments
the District's overall water supply. The amount of waste water treatment plant
effluent taken on an average year makes up only one percent of the total supply.
Table 4 shows the past, current, and projected amounts.
URBANU95 8-1
PAGE 50 Show Image
PAGE 51 Show Image
APPENDIX A
CALIFORNIA
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING ACT
Established: AB 797, Klehs, 1983
Amended: AB 2661, Klehs, 1990
AB lix, Filante, 1991
AB 1869, Speier, 1991
AB 892, Frazee, 1993
SB 1017, McCorquodale, 1994
AB 2853, Cortese, 1994
CALIFORNIA WATER CODE DIVISION 6
PART 2.6. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL DECLARATION AND POLICY
10610. This part shall be known and may be cited as the "Urban Water Management
Planning Act.
10610.2. The Legislature finds and declares as follows:
(a) The waters of the state are a limited and renewable resource subject to ever increasing
demands.
(b) The conservation and efficient use of urban water supplies are of statewide concern;
however, the planning for that use and the implementation of those plans can best be
accomplished at the local level.
10610.4. The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state as follows:
(a) The conservation and efficient use of water shall be actively pursued to protect both the
people of the state and their water resources.
(b) The conservation and efficient use of urban water supplies shall be a guiding criterion in
public decisions.
(c) Urban water suppliers shall be required to develop water management plans to achieve
conservation and efficient use.
URBANU95 A-i
PAGE 52 Show Image
CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS
10611. Unless the context otherwise requires, the definitions of this chapter govern the
construction of this part.
10611.5. "Conservation1t means those measures that limit the amount of water used only to
that which is reasonably necessary for the beneficial use to be served.
10612. "Customer" means a purchaser of water from a water supplier who uses the water
for municipal purposes, including residential, commercial, governmental, and industrial uses.
10613. "Efficient use" means those management measures that result in the most effective
use of water so as to prevent its waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use.
10614. "Person" means any individual, firm, association, organization, partnership,
business, trust, corporation, company, public agency, or any agency of such an entity.
10615. "Plan" means an urban water management plan prepared pursuant to this part. A
plan shall describe and evaluate reasonable and practical efficient uses and reclamation and
conservation activities. The components of the plan may vary according to an individual
community or area's characteristics and its capabilities to efficiently use and conserve water.
The plan shall address measures for residential, commercial, governmental, and industrial
water management as set forth in Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630) of Chapter 3.
In addition, a strategy and time schedule for implementation shall be included in the plan.
10616. "Public agency" means any board, commission, county, city and county, city,
regional agency, district, or other public entity.
10617. "Urban water supplier" means a supplier, either publicly or privately owned,
providing water for municipal purposes either directly or indirectly to more than 3,000
customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually. An urban water supplier
includes a supplier or contractor for water, regardless of the basis of right, which distributes
or sells for ultimate resale to customers. This part applies only to water supplied from public
water systems subject to Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 4010) of Part 1 of Division 5
of the Health and Safety Code.
A-2
PAGE 53 Show Image
CHAPTER 3. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS
Article 1. General Provisions
10620. (a) Every urban water supplier shall prepare and adopt an urban water management
plan in the manner set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section 10640).
(b) Every person that becomes an urban water supplier after December 31, 1984, shall adopt
an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water
supplier.
(c) An urban water supplier indirectly providing water shall not include planning elements in
its water management plan as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630) that
would be applicable to urban water suppliers or public agencies directly providing water, or
to their customers, without the consent of those suppliers or public agencies.
(d) (1) An urban water supplier may satisfy the requirements of this part by participation in
areawide, regional, watershed, or basinwide urban water management planning where those
plans will reduce preparation costs and contribute to the achievement of conservation and
efficient water use.
(2) Each urban water supplier shall coordinate the preparation of its urban water shortage
contingency plan with other urban water suppliers and public agencies in the area, to the
extent practicable.
(e) The urban water supplier may prepare the plan with its own staff, by contract, or in
cooperation with other governmental agencies.
10621. (a) Each urban water supplier shall periodically update its plan at least once every
five years. After the review, it shall make any amendments or changes to its plan which are
indicated by the review.
(b) The amendments to, or changes in, the plan shall be adopted and filed in the manner set
forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section 10640).
Article 2. Contents of Plans
10630. It is the intention of the Legislature, in enacting this part, to permit levels of water
management planning commensurate with the numbers of customers served and the volume
of water supplied.
A-3
PAGE 54 Show Image
10631. A plan shall be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall do all of the
following:
(a) Include an estimate of past, current, and projected potai)le and recycled water use and, to
the extentrecords are available, segregate those uses between residential, industrial,
commercial, and governmental uses.
(b) (1) Identif~r conservation and reclamation measures currently adopted and being
practiced.
(2) Urban water suppliers that are members of the California Urban Water Conservation
Council and submit annual reports to that council in accordance with the "Memorandum of
Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California," dated September 1991,
may submit the annual reports for the purposes of identif~ring conservation measures as
required by paragraph (1).
(c) Describe alternative conservation measures, including, but not limited to, consumer
education, metering, water saving fixtures and appliances, pool covers, lawn and garden
irrigation techniques, and low water use landscaping, that would improve the efficiency of
water use with an evaluation of their costs and their environmental and other significant
impacts.
(d) Provide a schedule of implementation for proposed actions as indicated by the plan.
(e) Provide an urban water shortage contingency plan that includes all of the following
elements that are within the authority of the urban water supplier:
(1) Past, current, and projected water use and, to the extent records are available, a
breakdown of those uses on the basis of single-family residential, multifamily residential,
commercial, industrial, governmental, and agricultural use.
(2) An estimate of the minimum water supply available at the end of 12, 24, and 36 months,
assuming the worst case water supply shortages.
(3) Stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to water
supply shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply, and an outline of
specific water supply conditions that are applicable to each stage.
(4) Mandatory provisions to reduce water use that include prohibitions against specific
wasteflil practices, such as gutter flooding.
A-4
PAGE 55 Show Image
(5) Consumption limits in the most restrictive stages. Each urban water supplier may use
any type of consumption limit in its water shortage contingency plan that would reduce water
use and is appropriate for its area. Examples of consumption limits that may be used include,
but are not limited to, percentage reductions in water allotments, per capita allocations, an
increasing block rate schedule for high usage of water with incentives for conservation, or
restrictions on specific uses.
(6) Penalties or charges for excessive use.
(7) An analysis of the impacts of the plan on the revenues and expenditures of the urban
water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those impacts, such as the development
of reserves and rate adjustments.
(8) A draft water shortage contingency resolution or ordinance to carry out the urban water
shortage contingency plan.
(9) A mechanism for determining actual reductions in water use pursuant to the urban water
shortage contingency plan.
(f) Describe the frequency and magnitude of supply deficiencies, based on available historic
data and fliture projected conditions comparing water supply and demand, including a
description of deficiencies in time of drought and emergency and the ability to meet
deficiencies.
(g) To the extent feasible, describe the method which will be used to evaluate the
* effectiveness of each conservation measure implemented under the plan.
(h) Describe the steps which would be necessary to implement any proposed actions in the
plan.
(i) Describe findings, actions, and planning relating to all of the following:
(1) The use of internal and external water audits for single-family residential, multifamily
residential, institutional, commercial, industrial, and governmental customers, and the use of
* incentive programs to encourage customer audits and program participation.
(2) The use of distribution system water audits.
(3) Leak detection and repair.
(4) The use of large landscape water audits.
A-5
PAGE 56 Show Image
~) Describe actions and planning to eliminate the use of once-through cooling Systems,
nonrecirculating water Systems, and nonrecycling decorative water fountains, and to
encourage the recirculation of water if proper public health and safety standards are
maintained.
(k) Describe actions and plans to enforce conservation measures.
(1) To the extent feasible, describe the amount of water saved through water conservation
measures employed by user groups.
*(m) Describe actions and planning to ensure the involvement of community members within
the service area with regard to water management planning.
10632. (a) In addition to the elements required pursuant to Section 10631, a plan
projecting a future use which indicates a need for expanded or additional water supplies shall
be adopted in accordance with this chapter and shall include an evaluation of the following
alternatives:
(1) Recycled water. The plan's evaluation of this alternative shall provide information on
recycled water and its potential for use as a water source in the service area of the urban
water supplier and shall includc all of the following information:
(A) A description of the waste water collection and treatment systems in the supplier's
service area, including a quantification of the amount of waste water collected and treated
and the methods of waste water disposal.
(B) A description of the recyc1~ed water currently being used in the supplier's service area,
including, but not limited to, the type, place, and quantity of use.
(C) A description and quantification of the potential uses of recycled water, including, but
not limited to, agricultural irrigation, landscape irrigation, wildlife habitat enhancement,
wetlands, industrial reuse, groundwater recharge, and other appropriate uses, and a
determination with regard to the technical and economic feasibility of serving those uses.
(D) The projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5,
10, 15, and 20 years.
(E) A description of actions, including financial incentives, which may be taken to
encourage the use of recycled water where fresh water is not necessary, and the projected
results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.
A-6
PAGE 57 Show Image
(F) A plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area, including
actions to facilitate the installation of dual distribution systems and to promote recirculating
uses.
(2) Exchanges or transfer of water on a short-term or long-term basis.
(3) Management of water system pressures and peak demands.
(4) Issues relevant to meter retrofitting for all uses.
(5) Incentives to alter water use practices, including fixture and appliance retrofit programs.
(6) Public information and educational programs to promote wise use and eliminate waste.
(7) Changes in pricing, rate structures, and regulations.
(b) The preparation of the plan shall be coordinated with local water, waste water, and
planning agencies.
10633. The plan shall contain an evaluation of the alternative water management practices
identified in Sections 10631 and 10632, taking into account economic and noneconomic
factors, including environmental, social, health, customer impact, and technological factors.
Evaluation of the elements in Section 10632 shall include a comparison of the estimated cost
of alternative water management practices with the incremental costs of expanded or
additional water supplies, and in the course of the evaluation first consideration shall be
given to water management practices, or combination of practices, which offer lower
incremental costs than expanded or additional water supplies, considering all the preceding
evaluation factors.
Article 3. Adoption and Implementation of Plans
10640. Every urban water supplier required to prepare a plan pursuant to this part shall
prepare its plan pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 10630).
The supplier shall likewise periodically review the plan as required by Section 10621, and
any amendments or changes required as a result of that review shall be adopted pursuant to
this article.
A-7
PAGE 58 Show Image
10641. (a) An urban water supplier required to prepare a plan may consult with, and obtain
comments from, any public agency or state agency or any person who has special expertise
with respect to water conservation and management methods and techniques.
(b) In order to assist urban water suppliers in obtaining needed expertise as provided for in
subdivision (a), the department, upon request of an urban water supplier, shall provide the
supplier with a list of persons or agencies having expertise or experience in the development
of water management plans.
10642. Prior to adopting a plan, the urban water supplier shall make the plan available for
public inspection and shall hold a public hearing thereon. Prior to the hearing, notice of the
time and place of hearing shall be published within the jurisdiction of the publicly owned
water supplier pursuant to Section 6066 of the Government Code. A privately owned water
supplier shall provide an equivalent notice within its service area. After the hearing, the plan
shall be adopted as prepared or as modified after the hearing.
10643. An urban water supplier shall implement its plan adopted pursuant to this chapter in
accordance with the schedule set forth in its plan.
10644. An urban water supplier shall file with the department a copy of its plan no later
than 30 days after adoption. Copies of amendments or changes to the plans shall be filed
with the department within 30 days after adoption.
Plans filed under this section shall describe the basis for the decision of the urban water
supplier to add, change, or retain conservation measures.
The department shall annually prepare and submit to the Legislature a report summarizing
the status of the plans adopted pursuant to this part. The report prepared by the department
shall highlight the outstanding elements of individual plans. The department shall provide a
copy of the report to each urban water. supplier which has filed its plan with the department.
The department shall also prepare reports and provide data for any legislative hearings
designed to consider the effectiveness of plans submitted pursuant to this part.
10645. Not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the urban
water supplier and the department shall make the plan available for public review during
normal business hours.
A-8
PAGE 59 Show Image
CHAPTER 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
10650. Any actions or proceedings to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the acts or
decisions of an urban water supplier on the grounds of noncompliance with this part shall be
commenced as follows:
(a) An action or proceeding alleging failure to adopt a plan shall be commenced within 18
months after that adoption is required by this part, or within 18 months after commencement
of urban water service by a supplier commencing that service after January 1, 1984.
(b) Any action or proceeding alleging that a plan, or action taken pursuant to the plan, does
not comply with this part shall be commenced within 90 days after filing of the plan or
amendment thereto pursuant to Section 10644 or the taking of that action.
10651. In any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul a plan, or an
action taken pursuant to the plan by an urban water supplier on the grounds of
noncompliance with this part, the inquiry shall extend only to whether there was a prejudicial
abuse of discretion. Abuse of discretion is established if the supplier has not proceeded in a
manner required by law or if the action by the water supplier is not supported by substantial
evidence.
10652. The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section
21000) of the Public Resources Code) does not apply to the preparation and adoption of plans
pursuant to this part or to the implementation of subdivision (e) of Section 10631. Nothing in
this part shall be interpreted as exempting from the California Environmental Quality Act any
project that would significantly affect water supplies for fish and wildlife, or any project for
implementation of the plan, other than projects implementing subdivision (e) of Section
10631, or any project for expanded or additional water supplies.
10653. The adoption of a plan shall satisfy any requirements of state law, regulation, or
order, including those of the State Water Resources Control Board, for the preparation of
water management plans or conservation plans; provided, that if the State Water Resources
Control Board requires additional information concerning water conservation to implement its
existing authority, nothing in this part shall be deemed to limit the board in obtaining that
information. The requirements of this part shall be satisfied by any water conservation plan
prepared to meet federal laws or regulations after the effective date of this part, and which
substantially meets the requirements of this part, or by any existing water management or
conservation plan which includes the contents of a plan required under this part.
A-9
PAGE 60 Show Image
10654. An urban water supplier may recover in its rates the costs incurred in preparing its
plan and implementing the reasonable water conservation measures included in the plan.
Any best water management practice that is included in the plan that is identified in the
"Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California" is
deemed to be reasonable for the purposes of this section.
10655. If any provisio?i of this part or the application thereof to any person or circumstances
is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this part
which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application thereof, and to this end
the provisions of this part are severable.
10656. An urban water supplier that does not submit an amendment to its urban water
management plan pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 10621 to the department by January
31, 1992, is ineligible to receive drought assistance from the state until the urban water
management plan is submitted pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 10640) of
Chapter 3.
SEC. 2. No appropriation is made and no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution or Sectioh 2231 or 2234 of the
Revenue and Taxation Code because the local agency or school district has the authority to
levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of
service mandated by this act.
uwmplan.cur -- revised 1/95
A-1O
PAGE 61 Show Image
PAGE 62 Show Image
PAGE 63 Show Image
APPENDIX B
RESOLUTION No. 96-10
OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
(ADOPTING, DIRECTING FILING, AND IMPLEMENTING THE NEVADA
IRRIGATION DISTRICT URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN)
The Board of Directors of Nevada Irrigation District does
hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the California Legislature enacted Assembly
Bill 797 (Water Code Section 10610 et seq., known as the
Urban Water Management Planning Act) during the 1983-1984
Regular Session, and as amended subsequently, which mandates
that every supplier providing water for municipal purposes to
more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre
feet of water annually, prepare an Urban Water Management
Plan, the primary objective of which is to plan for the
conservation and efficient use of water; and
WHEREAS, the District is supplier of water providing
urban water to over 15,300 connections, and
WHEREAS, the Plan shall be periodically reviewed at
least once every five years, and that the District shall make
any amendments or changes to its plan which are indicated by
the review; and
WHEREAS, the Plan must be adopted by March 31, 1996
(extension granted by California Department of Water
URBANU95 B-i
PAGE 64 Show Image
Resources), after public review and hearing, and filed with
the California Department of Water Resources within thirty
days of adoption; and
WHEREAS, the District has therefore, prepared and
circulated for public review a draft Urban Water Management
Plan, and a properly noticed public hearing regarding said
Plan was held by the District's Board of Directors on March
27, 1996, and
WHEREAS, the District did prepare and shall file said
Plan with the California Department of Water Resources in
April 1996;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors
of the Nevada Irrigation District as follows:
1. The Urban Water Management Plan, 1995 Update, is
hereby adopted and ordered filed with the District;
2. The Secretary of the Board of Directors is hereby
authorized and directed to file the Urban Water
Management Plan, 1995 Update1 with the California
Department of Water Resources within 30 days after
this date;
3. The General Manager is hereby authorized and
directed to implement the Water Conservation
Programs as set forth in the Urban Water Management
Plan, 1995 Update, which includes water shortage
contingency analysis and recommendations to the
Board of Directors regarding necessary procedures,
rules, and regulations to carry out effective and
equitable water conservation and water recycling
B-2
PAGE 65 Show Image
programs;
4. In a water shortage, the General Manager is hereby
authorized to declare a Water Shortage Emergency
according to the Water Shortage Stages and Required
Actions indicated in the Plan, and implement
necessary elements of the Plan;
5. The General Manager shall recommend to the Board of
Directors additional procedures, rules, and
regulations to carry out effective and equitable
allocation of water resources.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the
Nevada Irrigation District at a regular meeting of said Board
held on the 27th day of March, 1996, by the following roll
call vote:
Ayes: Directors: Southern, Bierwagen, Birdsall, Williams
Leipzig
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstaining: None
Secretary
B-3
PAGE 66 Show Image
PAGE 67 Show Image
PAGE 68 Show Image
PAGE 69 Show Image
APPENDIX C
NOTICE
ADOPTION OF THE
URBAN WATER NANAGENENT PLAN
1995 UPDATE
NEVADA IRRIGATION
DISTRICT
NOTICE is given that a public hearing will be held on March 27,
1996, at 10:30 aem. by the Board of Directors of the Nevada
Irrigation District to consider adoption of the Urban Water
Management Plan 1995 Update. A copy of the proposed plan is
available for public inspection at the District office located
at 10836 Rough and Ready Highway, Grass Valley, between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday.
S. Carol Gates
Deputy Board Secretary
Nevada Irrigation District
URBANU95 c-i
PAGE 70 Show Image
NID
Grass Valley, Calif.
No.
Notice for Publication, etc. (Title): Urban Water Management Plan
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
In the Superior Court
State of California } ss.
County of Nevada
EXHIBIT "A"
The undersigned, Betsy Hunter, being the principal clerk
_______________ of the Nevada County Publishing Co., declares that the
NOTICE Nevada County Publishing Co. now is, and during all times
ADOPTIONOFTHE herein named, was a corporation duly organized and
URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN existing under the laws of the State of California, and now
1995 UPDATE uurlng.aii times herein named was the and
NEVADA IRRIGATION i." printer
DISTRICT is, and
NOTICEisgiventhatapubfl~ publisher of THE UNION, a newspaper of general
hearing wifl be held on March
27, 1996, at 10:30 ~m. bathe circulation, as defined by Section 6000 of the Government
Board of Directors of the va- Code of the State of California, printed and published daily
da Im9a~on IJistrict to conslaer
adoption of the Urban Water (Sundays excepted) in City Valley, of
Management Plan 1995 Up. the of Grass County
date. A copy of the prnposed Nevada, State of California, and that affiant is the
plan is availabte for public in-
spection at the District offioe lo-.. principal clerk of said Nevada County Publishing Co.
cated at 10836 Rough and
Ready Highway, Grass Valley,
between the hours of 8 am. That the printed advertisement hereto annexed, marked
and S p.m., Monday through
Friday. . ..~.
SCarol Gates Exhibit A, was published in the said UNION, in the issues
Depu Board Secretary of the following named dates:
Neva a rrigat'on District
Publication Dates: March 6 and
13,1996
96-0275 ~ March 6 & 13, 1996
I certify, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed at Grass Valley, California, this 13th day of
Marc;½½¾½~~996.~*~
C-2
PAGE 71 Show Image
PROOF OF PUBUCATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, This space is for the County clerk's
Filing Stamp
County of Placer,
I am a citizen of the United States, and a
resident of the above named County and
State. I am over the age of eighteenyears,
and not a party to or interested in the above
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of
the Auburn Journal, a newspaper of
general circulation printed and published
m the City of Auburn, County of Placer and PROOF OF PUBUCATION OF
which newspaper has been adjudged a
newspaper of general circulation by the X15740 Public Hearing Urban Water 1995 Update
Superior Court of the County of Placer,
State of California, under date of May 26, __________________________________
1952, Case No.17407. The notice, of which
the attached is printed copy (setintype not _________________________________
smaller than nonpareil) has been published
in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement X15740
thereof on the following dates, to-wit: NOTICE
March 7, 13 ADOPTION OF ThE
_______________________________________ URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN
1995 UPDATE
______________________________________ NEVADA
IRRIGATION DISTRI6T
~
at 10:30 &m. by the
Board of Directors of the
allinthe year 1996 Nevada Irrigation District
to consider adoption of
the Urban Water Man
agement Plan 1995 U~
date. A copy of the pr~
I certify (or Declare) under penalty of per- plan is available
jury that the foregoing is true and correct. ~
at 10836 hand
Ready H~way, Grass
Valley, between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 5
Monday through
S. ~roI Gates ~ A:
I
___________________________________________ Depu Board
~ jed ~
Secre
Nevada rrigation
I Signature District
Publish: March 7, 13,
1996
Dated at Auburn, California
March 13, 1996
PROOF OF PUBUCATION
THE AUBURN JOURNAL,
1030 High St. P.O. Box 5910
Auburn, CA 95604-5910 C-3
PAGE 72 Show Image
PAGE 73 Show Image
PAGE 74 Show Image
PAGE 75 Show Image
APPENDIX D
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
URBAN WATER MANAGBMBNT PLAN
1995 UPDATE
RECORD OF CONTACTS AND COMMENTS
Copies of the Draft plan were made available for public review and comment at
the District's main office in Grass Valley and the office in the North Auburn area.
Comments on the Draft plan solicited from the following public agencies:
(copies of letters are not included in this Appendix.)
State Department of Water Resources
County of Nevada
County of Placer
City of Grass Valley
City of Nevada City
Comments were received from Holly Sheradin of Department of Water Resources,
via telephone. Comments were minor in nature. Action was taken on all comments to
either clarify or add information to the report.
No comments were received from the two counties or the two cities.
No written comments were received.
A public hearing was held on March 27, 1996. No comments were received from
the public during the hearing.
URBANU95 D-1
PAGE 76 Show Image
PAGE 77 Show Image
PAGE 78 Show Image
PAGE 79 Show Image
APPENDIX E
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1996 URBAN WATER RATES
SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICE SCHEDULE 4-El
BY NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1996
NONCOMMERCIAL, INSIDE DISTRICT
Charges for treated water meeting state health standards, delivered
through a metered connection.
SERVICE SIZE: 5/8" 3/4" 1" 1 1/2" 2" 3" 4" 6"
MINIMUM
BIMONTHLY
RATE: 23.55 29.90 43.05 68.15 102.90 180.75 250.70 501.55
USAGE RATES: ($ per hundred cubic feet (hcf) per billing period)
First 200 cubic feet per billing period Included in minimum rate
Next 5,800 cubic feet per billing period $0.755 per hcf
Next 34,000 cubic feet per billing period 0.765 per hcf
Over 40,000 cubic feet per billing period 0.770 per hcf
Federal/State/County Mandated Fees 3.47%
SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICE SCHEDULE 4-Fl
BY NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1996
COMMERCIAL, INSIDE DISTRICT
Charges for treated water meeting state health standards, delivered
through a metered connection.
SERVICE SIZE: 5/8" 3/4" 1" 1 1/2" 2" 3" 4" 6"
MINIMUM
BIMONTHLY
RATE: 29.40 37.40 53.80 85.20 128.60 226.00 313.35 626.90
USAGE RATES: ($ per hundred cubic feet (hcf) per billing period)
First 200 cubic feet per billing period Included in minimum rate
Next 5,800 cubic feet per billing period $0.945 per hcf
Next 34,000 cubic feet per billing period 0.955 per hcf
Over 40,000 cubic feet per billing period 0.965 per hcf
Federal/State/County Mandated Fees 3.47%
E-1
PAGE 80 Show Image
PAGE 81 Show Image
PAGE 82 Show Image
PAGE 83 Show Image
APPENDIX F
NEVADA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
1995 UPDATE
URBAN WAThR SUPPLY
VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS
This Appendix discusses the vulnerability of the raw water supplies and
available supplemental supplies to the District's urban water treatment plants.
Supplemental supplies may include raw water, other sources of treated water, or
both. This information supplements Section VII "Urban Water Shortage Emergency ".
The raw water supply and delivery facilities for each of the eight water
treatment plants is listed below, starting with the most upstream facility first.
The upstream starting point is limited to the first major storage reservoir (except
for Smartville Water Treatment Plant). In all cases, there are major facilities
above these reservoirs; however, continuous delivery of water into the first listed
major storage reservoir is not of importance for a firm supply of water to the
treatment plants. Natural water courses used as part of the delivery system have
also been listed, however, their vulnerability has not been assessed.
A list of delivery facilities, except natural water courses, along with the
vulnerable features of each is included in Table F-i located at the back of this
Appendix.
Cascade Shores Water Treatment Plant 0.3 MGD 363 Connections(12195)
Supply and Delivery:
* Lake Spaulding
* South Yuba Canal
* Cascade Canal
Note: No on-site raw water reservoir. The Cascade Siphon would, in an
emergency, provide a small amount of raw water storage (`)etween elevations of
lower zone storage tanks and siphon outlet - both inlet and outlet ends.)
Alternate Supplies:
* Natural flows, when available, from Deer Creek and tributaries above Cascade
Canal Diversion dam. Quantity varies,. depending on rainfall and snow melt in
the limited water shed.
Note: No alternate supplies of treated water available.
E. George Water Treatment Plant 10 MGD 3,685 Connections(12195)
Supply and Delivery:
* Lake Spaulding
* South Yuba Canal
* Cascade Canal
* Upper Grass Valley Canal
Note: No on-site raw water storage available.
F-i
PAGE 84 Show Image
Alternate Supplies:
* Natural flows, when available, from Deer Creek and tributaries above Cascade
Canal Diversion dam. Quantity varies, depending on rainfall and snow melt in
the limited water shed.
* Install portable pumps at D.S. Canal; lift water to Cascade Canal (at
dissipator) via reverse flow in Snow Mountain Siphon.
* Intertie with Loma Rica treated water distribution system. Intertie will
gravity feed a limited supply of treated water through the system to the
Banner Reservoirs (lined and covered treated water storage.)
* Emergency intertie lumped by fire truck) with City of Grass Valley treated
water system to supply a limited area.
Note: A study is now underway to identi~ permanent points of intertie with
the City of Grass Valley's treated water system. If not feasible, or if the
approved interties do not supplement urban supplies for a large enough area, it
is likely the District will install permanent pumps on the D.S. Canal to
deliver raw water directly to the E. George Plant for treatment.
Loma Rica Water Treatment Plant 6.4 MGD 4,134 Connections(12195)
Supply and Delivery:
* Lake Spaulding
* South Yuba Canal
* Cascade Canal
* Loma Rica Reservoir
Note: Loma Rica Reservoir provides raw water storage for the water treatment
plant, as well as being used as a regulatory reservoir for the raw water
distribution system.
Alternate Supplies:
* Natural flows, when available, from Deer Creek and tributaries above Cascade
Canal Diversion dam. Quantity varies, depending on rainfall and snow melt in
the limited water shed.
* Install portable pumps at D.S. Canal; lift water to Cascade Canal (at
dissipator) via reverse flow in Snow Mountain Siphon.
* Intertie with E. George treated water distribution system. Intertie will
gravity feed most of the Loma Rica System. A permanent pumping station will
deliver water to the tanks at the water treatment plant to be backfed to the
Loma Rica industrial area, airport, and air attack base.
Snow Mountain Water Treatment Plant 1.2 MGD 392 Connections(12195)
Supply and Delivery:
* Lake Spaulding
* South Yuba Canal
* Cascade Canal (above dissipator on Pasquale Road)
* Snow Mountain Canal
F-2
PAGE 85 Show Image
Note: A small on-site reservoir provides raw water for the water treatment
plant.
Alternate Supplies:
* Natural flows, when available, from Deer Creek and tributaries above Cascade
Canal Diversion dam.
Quantity varies, depending on rainfall and snow melt in the limited water
shed.
* Install portable pumps at D.S. Canal; lift water to Snow Mountain canal using
the Snow Mountain siphon. This can be done in conjunction with pumping to
the Cascade Canal as a supply for E. George and Loma Rica water treatment
plant, or to supply only the Snow Mountain Canal.
* Emergency intertie (pumped by fire truck) with City of Nevada City's treated
water system.
Note: A study is now underway to intertie the Snow Mountain system with the E.
George system and eliminate the Snow Mountain water treatment plant. If this
proves infeasible, a study to identify permanent points of intertie with the
City of Nevada City will be completed.
Lake Wudwood Water Treatment Plant 4.0 MGD 2,752 Connections(12/95)
Supply and Delivery:
* Scotts Flat Reservoir
* Lower Scotts Flat Reservoir
* Deer Creek (natural water course)
* Newtown Canal
Note: On-site reservoirs provide raw water storage for the water treatment
plant.
Alternate Supplies:
* Woods Ravine Diversion (fed by the Red Hill Canal) will provide a limited
supply of water to the Newtown Canal.
Smartville Water Treatment Plant 0.1 MGD 42 Connections(12195)
Supply and Delivery:
* Squirrel Creek (natural water course)
* China Union Canal
* Meade Canal
Note: No on-site storage reservoir for raw water.
Alternate Supplies:
* Union Reservoir via the Town Canal can be used as an alternate raw water
source. A pump is required to push water through the plant and into the
storage tank.
Note: No alternate supplies of treated water available.
F-3
PAGE 86 Show Image
Lake of the Pines Water Treatment Plant 3.0 MOD 1,913 Connections(12195)
Supply and Delivery:
* Rollins Reservoir
* Bear River (natural water course)
* Combie Reservoir
* Magnolia III (includes pumps @ Combie Aqueduct and
small regulatory reservoir at the head of the canal).
Note: An on-site reservoir provides raw water storage for the water treatment
plant.
Alternate Supplies:
None.
Note: It would be possible to set portable pumps at Combie Reservoir and
temporary pipeline to supply the Magnolia III Canal should the first few
hundred feet of the Combie Aqueduct fail. Has not been done to date.
North Auburn Water Treatment Plant 6.0 MOD 2,017 Connections(12/95)
Supply and Delivery:
* Rock Creek Reservoir
Note: The water treatment plant is fed directly from this reservoir under
normal circumstances.
Alternate Supplies:
* Combie Ophir II, Rock Creek siphon can provide raw water directly to the
plant, if needed.
* Three interties with PCWA's treated water system deWitt Center, Live Oak
Lane at Highway 49, and near Bell Road and Highway 49) can provide limited
supplies to all pressure zones.
SUMMARY OF VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS
Of the eight water treatment plants, Lake of the Pines is the most vulnerable
to a water shortage emergency. There are no alternate supplies available should the
Magnolia III pumps or canal fail, or the Bear River, Combie Reservoir or the canal
water become contaminated by way of a spill or other accident. On-site raw water
storage will last a few days if the weather is cool. There is no other treated
water source available in the area for an emergency intertie.
The next most vulnerable to outage is Cascade Shores, which has only limited
storage available in the siphon. Should the Cascade Bench Flume fail, there are no
alternate supplies of raw water. There are no other treated water sources available
for an emergency intertie.
The third most vulnerable is the Lake Wildwood system. Should the Newtown
Canal fail, especially below Wood's Ravine, there are no other supplies of raw
F-4
PAGE 87 Show Image
water. Again, on-site raw water storage will last a few cool- weather days. There
are no other treated water sources available for an emergency intertie.
The Snow Mountain system is somewhat vulnerable to raw water outages, although
the small on-site raw water storage reservoir helps to reduce the concern. Also,
emergency interties with the City of Nevada City have been used in the past to
supplement treated water supplies.
Smartville has two raw water supplies and arnple treated water storage to help
lessen its vulnerability.
E. George and Loma Rica are most vulnerable to outages on the Cascade Canal due
to snow and ice. E. George now has enough treated water storage (15 MG) to last
several days, especially if the weather is cool. Loma Rica can rely on the Loma
Rica Reservoir for a few days of raw water supply and its intertie with E. George
for treated water to help lessen its vulnerability. Interties with the City of
Grass Valley will help sustain storage reserves during an emergency.
The North Auburn system is the least vulnerable to outages with two separate
supplies of raw water; however, a hazardous spill into Rollins Reservoir could
eventually affect both supplies. The distribution system provides three permanent
interties with PCWA's treated water system.
F-5
PAGE 88 Show Image
APPENDIX F
TABLE F-i
URBAN WATER SUPPLY
FACILITIES VULNERABILITY
Name and Owner Outage Vulnerability
Lake Spaulding Hazardous spill from Highway 80
PG&E and SP R/R corridors.
South Yuba Canal Hazardous spill from Highway 80,
PG&E Highway 20, and SP R/R corridors.
Wooden flume structures:
wildfires
All flume structures (wooden and
galvanized steel): falling trees,
and rolling rocks.
All flume structures and tunnel:
earthquake
Entire length: snow and ice
Scheduled outage: 3 weeks every
spring.
Cascade Canal Hazardous spill from several
NID minor county collector roads.
Concrete bench flume (5+ miles):
side-wall failure, bench failure
(slipout), snow and ice
Failure of the South Yuba Canal
during a snow storm will com-
pound snow and ice problem in
the Cascade Canal.
Inverted siphons (Cascade shores,
Clipper Creek and Phase III)
"Techite" pipe prone to failure.
All flume structures (concrete
bench and steel): falling trees
rolling rocks, and earthquake.
Entire length: snow and ice.
(continued on next page)
F-6
PAGE 89 Show Image
APPENDIX F
TABLE F-i (CONTXNUED)
URBAN WATER SUPPLY
FACILITIES VULNERABILITY
Name and Owner Outage Vulnerability
Upper Grass Valley Canal All earthen canal sections:
NID landslide
Hazardous spill from county
collector road.
Entire length: snow and ice
Failure of the Cascade Canal
during a snow storm will corn-
pound snow and ice problems in
the Upper Grass Valley Canal.
Loma Rica Reservoir Hazardous spill from minor
NID collector road or airport
activity (plane downed short
of runway)
Snow Mountain Canal Hazardous spill from Highway 20
NID corridor
Wooden flume structures: wildfire
All flumes (wood and steel):
falling trees, rolling rocks, and
earthquake
Inverted siphon (Snow Mtn.): Deer
Creek crossing washout at flood
stage.
Entire length: landslide, and
snow and ice.
Scotts Flat Reservoir Hazardous spill from Highway 20
NID corridor and several County
collector roads.
Sewage spill from Cascade Shores
Community sewer system.
(continued on next page)
F-7
PAGE 90 Show Image
APPENDIX F
TABLE F-i (CONTXNUED)
URBAN WATER SUPPLY
FACILITIES VULNERABILITY
Name and Owner Outage Vulnerability
Newtown Canal Diversion dam on Deer Creek:
NID washout at flood stage.
Hazardous spill from County
collector roads, and agricultural
and industrial activities.
Micro biological contamination
from agricultural activities.
Entire length: landslide
China Union Canal Diversion dam on Squirrel Creek
NID washout at flood stage.
Hazardous spill from Highway 20
corridor, County collector roads,
and minor agricultural
activities.
Entire length: landslide
Meade Canal Hazardous spill from
NID agricultural activities.
Entire length: landslide
Town Canal Hazardous spill from Highway 20
NID corridor, County collector roads,
and minor agricultural activities.
Entire length: landslide
Rollins Reservoir Hazardous spill from Highway 80,
NID Highway 174, and SP RIR corridors
Combie Reservoir Hazardous spill from Highway 80
NID and SP RIR corridors via Bear
River, many County major and
minor collector roads, and
agricultural and industrial
activities within the water shed.
(continued on next page)
F-8
PAGE 91 Show Image
APPENDIX F
TABLE F-i (CONTINUED)
URBAN WATER SUPPLY
FACILITIES VULNERABILITY
Name and Owner Outage Vulnerability
Magnolia III Canal Hazardous spill from County
NID collector roads, and agricultural
activities.
Micro biological contamination
from agricultural activities.
Power outage at Mag III pumps
Entire length: landslide
Rock Creek Reservoir PG&E source water: hazardous
PG&E spill from Highway 80 and SP RIR
corridors.
Watershed above reservoir:
hazardous spill from County major
and minor collector roads, air-
port activities (plane downed on
takeoff or landing, agricultural
and industrial activities.
activities.
(end of Table F-l)
F-9