PAGE 1 Show Image
9
The 1 995 City oF San Diego
Urban Water Management Plan
and Conservation Program
PAGE 2 Show Image
The 1995 City of San Diego
Urban Water Management Plan
and Conservation Program
PAGE 3 Show Image
Susan Golding
Mayor
Harry Mathis
Councilmember District 1
THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO Byron Wear
Councilmember District 2
MAYOR AND
Christine Kehoc
COUNCILMEMBERS Councilmember District 3
George Stevens
Councilinember District 4
Barbara Warden
Councilmember District 5
Valerie Stallings
Councilmember District 6
Judy McCarty
Councilmember District 7
Juan Vargas
Councilmember District 8
Jack McGrory
CITY OFFICIALS CityManager
George Loveland
Deputy City Manager
John Witt
City Attorney
Ed Ryan
Auditor and Comptroller
Conny Jarnison
Treasurer
Charles Abdelnour
City Clerk
PAGE 4 Show Image
m-e City ofSan Diego Water Conseruation Program
is dedicated to conserving water. our most precious resource.
George Loveland
The City of San Diego The City of San Diego
Deputy City Manager Director of Water Utilities
Marsi Steirer
The City of San Diego
Water Conservation Program Manager
PAGE 5 Show Image
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AB AssemblyBill
AF Acre-Feet
AFY Acre-Feet per Year
AIiM Acutely Hazardous Materials
AWWA American Water Works Association
BMP Best Management Practice
CII Commercial, Industrial, Institutional
CADD Computer Aided Drafting and Design
CALTRANS California Department of Transportation
CBO Community Based Organization
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information Service
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CRA Colorado River Aqueduct
CUWCC California Urban Water Conservation Council
CWA San Diego County Water Authority
CWCD Consolidated Water Conservation Database
CWP Clean Water Program for Greater San Diego
DAFT Dissolved Air-Flotation Thickeners
DWR California Department of Water Resources
DSM Demand-Side Management
EDU Equivalent Dwelling Unit
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
FY Fiscal Year
GIS Geographical Information System
GMD Galions per Meter per Day
GPD Gallons per Day
GPF Galions per Flush
GPCD Galions per Capita per Day
HCF Hundred Cubic Feet
lID Imperial Irrigation District
IRW-MAIN U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Institute for Water
Resources Municipal and Industrial Needs
LAN Local Area Network
LPP Local Projects Program
LTWMP Large Thrf Water Management Project
MAF Million Acre-Feet
MAFY Million Acre-Feet per Year
MBSIS Mission Bay Sewer Interceptor System
MGIL Milligrams per Liter
vii
PAGE 6 Show Image
gil Micrograms per Liter
MGD Million Gailons a Day
MGY Million Gailons a Year
MIRP Major Incident Response Plan
MOU Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water
Conservation in California
MSS Metropolitan Sewerage System
MVWRP Mission Vailey Water Reclamation Plant
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
MWD-MAIN IRWMAIN modified for Metropolitan's service area
MWWD Metropolitan Wastewater Department
NAS Naval Air Station
NRCA National Resources, Culture and Arts Committee
NCWRP North City Water Reclamation Plant
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NSPF Northern Sludge Processing Facility
O,M&R Operations, Maintenance and Replacement
PFIAP Public Facilities Irrigation Assistance Program
PBMP Potential Best Management Practices
PLWTP Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant
PSI Pounds per Square Inch of Pressure
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride
RMPP Risk Management Prevention Plan
SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments
SBWRP South Bay Water Reclamation Plant
SCCWRR Southern California Comprehensive Water Reclamation
and Reuse Study
SDDPC San Diego Data Procressing Center
SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric Company
SDMC San Diego Municipal Code
SDWA Safe Dn~nking Water Act
SWAP San Diego Water Assurance Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
SWP State Water Project
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
ULFT Ultra-Low Flush Toilet
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
WUD Water Utilities Department
viii
PAGE 7 Show Image
THE 1995 CITY OF SAN DIEGO
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
AND CONSERVATION PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
LIST OF ACRONYMS vii
LIST OF FIGURES xv
LIST OF TABLES xvii
APPENDICES xviii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xix
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING ACT 1
CITY OF SAN DIEGO WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1
Water System History 1
Current Water Supply System 2
Water Production Division 4
Water Distribution Division 4
Wastewater Collection Division 5
Services Division 5
Engineering Division 6
THE METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 7
Administration Section 9
Program Management Division 9
Support Services Division 9
Engineering and Water Reclamation Division 10
Contracts Management Division 10
Operations and Maintenance Division 11
Environmental Monitoring and Technical Services Division 11
ix
PAGE 8 Show Image
PAGE
RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER AGENCIES 11
The San Diego County Water Authonty 12
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California I 4
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF THE 1995 URBAN WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN 14
Public Hearings 16
Adoption of the 1995 Urban Water Management Plan 16
FORMAT OF THE 1995 PLAN UPDATE 16
CHAPTERII. WATERUSE 19
POPULATION AND HOUSING TRENDS 19
WATER USE CHARACTERISTICS 19
Historic and Current Water Use 19
Customer Class Data 23
Projected Water Use 24
WATER USE PLANNING 35
The Water Facilities Master Plan 35
CHAPTER III. CURRENT WATER SUPPLIES AND MANAGEMENT
PROGRAMS 37
CURRENT SOURCES OF SUPPLY 37
Local Distribution System 37
Local Supply System 38
Water Treatment Plants 41
Distribution and Transfers 44
System Pressure Controls 44
Peak Demands 45
x
PAGE 9 Show Image
PAGE
QUALITY OF CURRENT SUPPLIES 46
Water Quality 46
COMPARISON OF DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLIES WITH DEMANDS 47
NEW SUPPLY OPPORTUNITIES 49
San Diego Water Assurance Plan 49
Surface Water Management 50
Water Repunfication 51
WASTEWATER TREATMENT 51
Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant 52
Current and Future South Bay Projects 55
WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE 55
Water Reclamation Master Plan and City Council Policy 55
Current Water Reclamation Facilities 56
Total Resource Recovery Project 56
PROPOSED RECLAMATION FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 57
North City Water Reclamation Plant 57
Mission Valley Water Reclamation Plant 58
South Bay Water Reclamation Plant 58
Otay Valley Water Reclamation Plant 59
Reclamation Treatment System 59
Reclaimed Water Distribution Facilities 60
Market Assessment 61
Customer Reclaimed Water System Retrofits 63
FINANCIAL INCENTIVE PROGRAMS 64
Local Projects Program 64
Reclaimed Water Development Fund 64
REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION 65
Southern California Water Reclamation and Reuse Study 65
xi
PAGE 10 Show Image
PAGE
BIOSOUDS MANAGEMENT AND BENEFICIAL USE PLAN 67
CURRENT WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS 68
Water Exchanges or Transfers 68
Reservoir Management Plan 70
Hodges Reservoir Pump Station and Pipeline 70
The Dnnking Water Quality Improvement Program 70
Corrosion Control 71
Water Main Break Study 71
CHAPTER IV. DROUGHT RESPONSE AND EMERGENCIES 73
DROUGHT RESPONSE 73
Response to 1976-77 Drought 73
Response to 1987-92 Drought 73
Supply Deficiencies That Occur Only During Periods of Drought 79
Supply Deficiencies That Occur On A Regular Basis 80
Ability to Meet Short-Term Deficiences 80
WATER EMERGENCY POLICIES 80
Emergency Storage of Water 80
Emergency Water Conservation Ordinance 86
External Supply Shortage Triggering Levels 86
Emergency Management and Disaster Planning 86
San Diego Water Assurance Plan 88
CHAPTERV. WATERCONSERVATIONPROGRAMS 89
OVERVIEW OF THE CITYVS WATER CONSERVATION POLICIES 89
Long-Term Conservation Program Goal 90
Conservation Best Management Practices 90
RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS 96
Residential Interior Plumbing Retrofit Program 96
xii
PAGE 11 Show Image
PAGE
Multi-Family Interior Plumbing Retrofit Program 98
Mobile Home Showerhead Retrofit 98
School Showerhead Program 98
Residential Water Survey Program 99
Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Rebate Program 100
Community Based Toilet Replacement Program 101
New Homeowner Outreach Program 101
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS 102
Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Water Conservation
Survey Program 102
City Facilities Retrofit Program 102
LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION PROGRAMS 103
Mira-Mesa Xeriscape Demonstration Garden 103
San Diego Wild Animal Park Water-Wise Garden 104
Pubhc Facilities Irrigation Assistance Program 104
Funding of Irngation Fixtures 104
Large Thrf Water Management Program 104
Protector del Agua 105
WATER CONSERVATION DATABASES 105
Water Consumption Database 105
Consolidated Water Consumption Database 106
RESEARCH PROGRAMS 106
AWARDS 107
Resource Conservation Award 107
Water Awareness Award 107
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH ACTIVITIES 107
Public Information and Education Program 108
Water Conservation Hotline 108
xiii
PAGE 12 Show Image
PAGE
City Manager's Water Conservation Advisory Committee 108
WATER CONSERVATION MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS 109
San Diego Municipal Code Section 93.0206 109
San Diego Municipal Code Section 93.0208 109
Other Legislative Activities 111
POTENTIAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 111
CITY-WIDE CONSERVATION POLICIES 111
Water Theft Prevention Program 111
City-Wide Metering 111
Leak Detection Program 113
Metropolitan Industrial Waste Program 113
CITY LANDSCAPE PRACTICES AND POLICIES 114
City Parks Landscape Conservation Practices 114
City Landscape Policies 115
CHAPTER VI. PRICING AND RATE STRUCTURES 117
Conservation Through Pricing and Rate Structures 117
Sources of Revenue 117
Water Rates and Pricing Policy 117
Current Water Rates 118
Single-Family Domestic Rates 118
Multi-Family, Commercial and Industrial Rates 118
Water Capacity Charges 118
Sewer Rates Pricing Policy 119
Current Sewer Service Rates 119
Sewer Capacity Charges 120
Future Sewer Rates and Charges 120
Cor~sumption Limits 120
Penalties or Charges for Excessive Use 121
Analysis of Revenue and Expenditure Impacts 122
xiv
PAGE 13 Show Image
LIST OF' FIGURES
FIGURE TITLE PAGE
1 1 Water Utilities Department Organizational Chart 3
1 .2 Metropolitan Wastewater Department Organizational Chart 8
1.3 San Diego County Water Authority Service Area Map 13
1 .4 Metropohtan Water District of Southern California 15
Service Area Map
2.1 Citywide Water Use 1991-1995 (MGD) 23
2.2 City Water Usage by Customer Class 1995 23
2.3 Citywide Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 26
2.4 Single-Family Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 27
2.5 Multi-Family Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 28
2.6 Commercial Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 29
2.7 Industrial Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 30
2.8 Irrigation Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 31
2.9 Cal-Amencan Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 32
2. 10 Miscellaneous Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 33
2. 1 1 Others - Water Demand Projections 1995-2050 (MGD) 34
3. 1 Reservoir System Net Local Yield: 1880-1990 39
3.2 City of San Diego Service Area Map 42
3.3 Metropolitan Sewerage System 53
3.4 Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant 54
xv
PAGE 14 Show Image
FIGURE TITLE PAGE
3.5 Reclaimed Water Demand Northern Service Area 62
3.6 Reclaimed Water Demand Southern Service Area 63
3.7 Southern California Comprehensive Water Reclamation 66
and Reuse Study
4 1 City of San Diego Consumption History 1 9 1 5- 1 995 (MG) 82
4.2 City of San Diego Per Capita Usage 1915-1995 83
(Gallons Per Person Per Year)
4.3 City of San Diego Consumption 1960- 1994 84
(Gallons Per Capita Per Day)
5. 1 City of San Diego Monthly Water Usage Information 91
5.2 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding 93
Urban Water Conservation in California
5.3 Summary of Best Management Practices and the 94
City1s Efforts
5.4 City of San Diego Water Conservation Programs 1991-1995 97
5.5 Potential Best Management Practices 112
xvi
PAGE 15 Show Image
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE TITLE PAGE
2. 1 City of San Diego Water Use Charactenstics 1970- 1995 20
2.2 City of San Diego Water Usage by Customer Class (MGD) 22
1990-1995
3.1 Sari Diego City Reservoirs 40
3.2 Sari Diego City Water Treatment Plants 43
3.3 Rainfall and Runoffin the City ofSan Diego 1961-1995 48
3.4 Projected Metro System Population and Wastewater Flow 52
1995-2015
3.5 Projected Reclaimed Water Demand 2000-2015 61
3.6 Local and Imported Water Production 1950-1995 69
4. 1 City of San Diego Water Supply Shortfall Projections 85
1996-2000
6. 1 Water Revenue and Expenditures Statement- Base Case 123
6.2 Water Revenue and expenditures Statement- Case Two 124
6.3 Water Revenue and Expenditures Statement- Case Three 125
6.3A Water Revenue and Expenditures Statement- Case Four 126
xvii
PAGE 16 Show Image
LIST OF APPENDICES
PAGE
APPENDIX A California Urban Water Management Planning Act A-i
APPENDIX B - Urban Water Management Plan Commmittee Members B-i
APPENDIX C - San Diego City Council Resolution c-i
APPENDIX D - Council Policy 400- 12, 11lmplementation of Water
Reclamation/ Reuse D-i
APPENDIX E - Water Reclamation, San Diego Municipal Code
Section 64.080i E-i
APPENDIX F - Council Policy 400-4, "Emergency Water Storage" F-i
APPENDIX G - Emergency Water Regulations, San Diego Municipal
Code Section 67.38 G-i
APPENDIX H - Council Policy 400- i i , "Action Plan for Implementation
of Water Conservation Techniques" H-i
APPENDIX I - i995 City of San Diego Best Management Practices
Report
I-i
APPENDIX J - City Manager's Water Conservation Advisory Committee
Members J-l
APPENDIX K - Water and Energy Conservation, San Diego Municipal
Code Section 93.0201 K-i
APPENDIX L - City-Wide Landscape Regulations, San Diego Municipal
Code Section 101.0700 L-1
APPENDIX M - Council Policy 900-12, "Business and Industry
Incentive Program" M-i
xviii
PAGE 17 Show Image
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of San Diego is a thriving community located on Southern California's
semi-arid coastal plain. San Diego's pleasant Mediterranean climate attracts large
numbers of potential residents, businesses, and tourists every year. Known as
America's Finest City, San Diego is the sixth largest City in the United States with
a population of 1 .2 million.
San Diego imports up to ninety percent of its water from sources as far away as
Northern California and the Colorado River. The City purchases imported water
from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and the San
Diego County Water Authority (CWA). Careful water resource planning has been
the cornerstone of the development of the City's current water supply system
which consists of nine reservoirs and three water treatment plants. Because of
the vulnerability of the imported water pipelines to natural disasters, including
earthquakes, much of the local water supply is stored specifically for meeting
emergency needs. The City of San Diego is acutely aware of its dependence upon
imported water and continues to develop and pursue programs dedicated to
effectively and efficiently managing, reclaiming and conserving its water resources.
The City of San Diego established its Water Conservation Program in 1985. It's
long-term goal is to reduce San Diego's dependence upon imported water. To
assist in accomplishing this goal, the City Council has supported the development
of a comprehensive water conservation effort that initiates programs designed to
assist residential, commercial, industrial and institutional customers in managing
their water use wisely. The City's innovative water conservation efforts have been
recognized, and emulated, by water agencies and districts in the United States
and Canada. The water conservation programs, implemented during drought and
non-drought years, provide city water customers with information, water efficient
plumbing fixtures, financial incentives, and measures and practices that reduce
water used for interior (plumbing, manufacturing) and exterior (landscape,
irrigation) purposes. These water conservation efforts have resulted in a total
city-wide water savings of eight million gallons of water a day (MGD).
Water conservation is only one component of the City's overall strategy to secure
a safe and reliable water supply. The City has other programs that are either
currently operating or are in the design or construction stage aimed at meeting
this objective. For almost twenty years the City has been studying alternative
treatment processes for wastewater and conducting detailed health studies
relating to repurified water. The City operates an Aquaculture Plant that uses
water hyacinths to filter wastewater before it is treated and sold for irrigation use.
A 30 MGD water reclamation plant will be in full operation by mid-1997, and a
xix
PAGE 18 Show Image
City Council adopted plan will expand the number of wastewater treatment plants
and infrastructure of the Metropolitan Sewerage System operated by the City.
Plans and studies are being finalized for the Repurified Water Project which, if
approved, will deliver treated wastewater to a local reservoir for future potable
consumption. This project is another example of the City's efforts to provide
residents with a cost-effective, safe and reliable alternative to imported water.
The City is also looking into expanding reservoir storage capacities, building
pipelines to connect Lake Hodges to the Miramar Lake and Water Treatment Plant,
and, in coi~junction with the CWA, provide ample regional storage during
emergencies arising from the curtailment of imported water deliveries. Also, in
the Fall of 1994, the City Council adopted the San Diego Water Assurance Plan
(SWAP) designed to lessen the impact of future water shortages through voluntary
water conservation efforts and water transfers. The CWA is presently pursuing
potential water storage agreements with water entities outside of the region, and
is in discussions with the Imperial Irrigation District on a possible water transfer
to augment the region's water supply.
On November 6, 1995, the San Diego City Council unanimously adopted the City's
1995 Urban Water Management Plan and Conservation Program (Plan). This
action represented the adoption of the third Urban Water Management Plan the
City has prepared and submitted to the State over a 10-year period. The content
of the Plans has changed over the years reflecting the City's continued efforts to
test new technologies and try innovative methods as a part of its overall water
resources strategy.
xx
PAGE 19 Show Image
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING ACT
The City of San Diego has prepared a 1995 Urban Water Management Plan (Plan)
and Conservation Program in response to the Urban Water Management Planning
Act (Act), Water Code sections 10610 through 10656, which were added by
Statute 1983, Chapter 1009, and became effective on January 1, 1984 (Appendix
A) The Act was known as Assembly Bill (AB) 797 while pending before the
Legislature. The Act requires that "every urban water supplier providing water for
municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000
acre-feet ofwater annually, to prepare and adopt an urban water management
plan."
Further, the Act specifies that Plans be filed with the California Department of
Water Resources (DWR) every five years. In compliance with the Act, the City of
San Diego filed prior Plans with the DWR in 1985 and 1990. The City's current
Plan, contained in this report, is an update of the 1990 Plan and will be submitted
to the DWR no later than December 31, 1995. This Plan update will be used by
the City as a water resources planning tool to ensure the citizens of San Diego a
safe and adequate water supply through the year 2010.
The Act has evolved since its passage in 1983. There have been several
substantive amendments to the Act, with the most recent occurring in 1994. The
amendments have focused on metering, drought and/or emergency contingency
planning, and water recycling. The process of revising the Act continues in 1995,
as efforts are being made to further develop and clarif~~ various aspects of this
section of the State Water Code.
CITY OF SAN DIEGO WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Water System History
The history of the City of San Diego's water supply indicates that water surpluses
are rare. Therefore, constant attention to water conservation and management
programs is required. San Diego was founded as a Spanish community by Father
Junipero Serra and the Franciscan Fnars in 1769. Established as the first
mission site in the state, Father Serra and the Friars built the region's first
drainage ditches, wells, and a dam situated on the San Diego River.
The City of San Diego was incorporated in 1850, and became a charter city in
1889, pursuant to the California Constitution and the California Government
1
PAGE 20 Show Image
Code. Municipal ownership of the City's water supply and distribution system
began in 1901, with the purchase, for $40 million, of the privately owned San
Diego Water Company. By 1947, the Cityts publicly owned water supply system
extended to dams, water rights, distribution lines, and associated facilities.
The expansion of the City's water supply system occurred in four phases over a
period of 30 years. The first phase involved the acquisition of existing reservoir
systems and dams, including Lower and Upper Otay in 1913, and Morena Dam
in 19 14. Phases two and three consisted of purchasing Lake Hodges and the
San Dieguito Dam in 1925, and the construction of El Capitan Dam in 1935.
The fourth and final expansion phase was the result of a wartime population
(WWII) of more than 400,000 people constituting a demand well above the
systemts safe yield. As a result of this supply deficiency, the Navy requested that
the City connect to the Colorado River Aqueduct, which was completed by the
Metropohtan Water District (MWD) of Southern California in 1 94 1 . The San Diego
County Water Authority (CWA) was formed in 1944, and joined the MWD in 1946,
in order to economically import Colorado River water to the San Diego region. The
San Diego Aqueduct, completed in 1947, became the region1s first link to the
MWD's Colorado River Aqueduct. Thus began the City's reliance upon imported
water, which now constitutes up to 80 to 90 percent of its supply.
Current Water Supply System
San Diego, the sixth largest city in the United States, has a population of
1 .2 million, and covers an area of more than 342 square miles. Each day the City
of San Diego Water Utilities Department delivers more than 182 million gallons of
treated water to City residents. With an average rainfall of less than ten inches,
San Diego imports up to 90 percent of its water from sources in Northern
California and the Colorado River. The Water Utilities Department purchases
some 46 billion gallons of water annually from the CWA at a present cost of
$62 million per year. This imported water is stored in nine city owned and
operated reservoirs, and the majority of it is treated at one of three City water
treatment plants before it is delivered to residents and businesses through
2,609 miles of pipeline.
In addition to treating and delivering water, the Water Utilities Department
collects and treats 1 80 million gallons of sewage generated daily by 1 . 8 million
residents and businesses in San Diego County. Sewage is collected from
1 5 municipalities, water agencies, and sanitation districts within the regional
Metropohtan Sewerage System (MSS), and is treated at the Point Loma Wastewater
Treatment Plant. The City of San Diego operates and maintains the wastewater
2
PAGE 21 Show Image
ficility and collects revenues from the MSS agencies proportionate to their
discharges into the sewerage system.
The Water Utilities Department also maintains 2,463 miles of municipal sewer
lines, and operates 82 sewer and storm water pumping stations. As one of the
largest departments within the municipal government of the City of San Diego, the
Water Utilities Department has 950 employees, and a $280 million budget in
Fiscal Year 1996.
The department receives no revenues from sales or property taxes, and operates
solely on funds derived from water and sewer rates and service charges. These
funds are administered in two enterpnse funds separate from the City of San
Diego's General Fund, in accordance with City Charter provisions.
The functions and responsibilities of the City of San Diego Water Utilities
Department are divided between five independent divisions. Figure 1 . 1 displays
an organization chart of the Water Utilities Department, and the major functions
of each division. The names of key departmental personnel are also displayed.
A description of the department1s divisions and programs is included in the
following section.
Figure 1.1
Water Utilities Department
FY 1996
Director
Milon Mills, Jr.
As&i~tant Director
Henry Peppor
Water Prock~ction Water Di&trlbuffon W~ater Colection services Engheertng
Pete Siva Larry Gardner Chados Yac~dy Stey. Hogan Ai~~ Oskoul
Deputy Director Depute Director ~ Director Depute Director Act~~g Deputy Director
wat.r Qu~ity Lab ChoUa& Di&tri~t Wa~tew~ter Collection Admi~i~tr~~. ServIces EnN~~DBe~tiDPS~fl
Water Trea~m~nt Plant& Rose Canyon D~trI~t Const and Muntenance Finand~ Servlce&
Water Redam~on Constructon Operations and lns~on Contra~~ and Grant Computer Management
1En~5ineer~WHydrography Specs Services Engineerhg waser Conservntion Project Management
Res~oirs Engineering Public Information Plannh~ClP
Emergency Phones sari and Trnin~ F~ilties PIann~g
Recr~on Management lr~fo ~y~ems Constructon Management
C~tomer Services Corrosion Control
3
PAGE 22 Show Image
Water Production Division
The Water Production Division provides San Diegans with safe water for dnnking
and for all household, commercial, and industrial needs. The division operates
three water treatment plants Alvarado, Miramar and Otay that provide the City
with an average of 180 million gallons of water daily. Operators staff these
facilities 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and laboratory personnel conduct
more than 600,000 chemical and biological tests of the water each year to ensure
that it meets all State and Federal dnnking water standards.
The division maintains the City1s nine dams and reservoirs at Lakes Barrett,
El Capitan, Hodges, Miramar, Morena, Murray, Otay, San Vicente, and
Sutherland. Outdoor recreation at the lakes includes hiking, water skiing,
boating, and sail boarding. The lakes have earned a worldwide reputation for
excellent fishing and water fowl hunting.
The Water Production Division also oversees the department1s Aquaculture II
project. This water reclamation project uses an aquatic ecosystem to naturally
treat wastewater so that it can be sold for irrigation purposes and, perhaps in the
future, to recharge our reservoirs.
The division has 227 employees, and operates with a $90 million budget in Fiscal
Year 1996.
Water Distribution Division
The Water' Distribution Division is responsible for delivering safe, potable water
to all of San Diego.
The Water Distribution Division I~ support services and construction sections
maintain 2,609 miles ofwater mains, from the 72-inch Shepherd Canyon Pipeline
to 6-inch residential distribution lines. The Division is also responsible for
maintaining and repairing 45 water pump stations, 2 1 , 1 50 hydrants,
140,000 valves and 248,240 water meters.
The Water Distribution Division staff work at locations throughout the City.
Emergency Services crews are on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In
addition to the field personnel, the Division has emergency phone personnel,
engineering support and administrative services.
The Water Distribution Division has 340 employees and operates with a $45
million budget in Fiscal Year 1996.
4
PAGE 23 Show Image
Wastewater Collection Division
The Wastewater Collection Division is' responsible for collecting and transporting
the Cily's sewage to the Point Loma Sewage Treatment Plant. Each day the plant
treats approximately 180 million gallons of sewage. Wastewater is collected from
1.8 million people living in San Diego and 15 surrounding municipalities, water
agencies, and sanitation districts.
Getting the sewage to the plant involves a complex and efficiently run system. The
Division is in charge of 2,827 miles of sewer mains.
Wastewater Collection personnel regularly clean all the sewer lines and maintain
45,000 sewer manholes as well as 79 sewer pump stations, 14 sewer interceptor
pump stations and 13 sewer interceptor diversion basins in Mission Bay, and 12
stormwater pump stations.
The Mission Bay Sewer Interceptor System (MBSIS) has drainage diversion
facilifies to divert stormwater system dry weather low flows into the sewer system.
This prevents polluted street runoff from draining into Mission Bay. The system
also diverts any sewer spills backing up out of manholes into the sewer system.
The Division operates out of three field stations located throughout the local
metropolitan area. Emergency service units are staffed 24 hours a day to respond
to sewer maintenance problems.
The Wastewater Collection Division has 205 employees, and operates with a
$79 million budget in Fiscal Year 1996.
Services Division
The Services Division provides centralized administrative services to the
department. These services include the preparation of the annual budget and
monitoring revenues and expenditures.
The division has an active Grants Section that successfully obtained more than
$6 million in repurification grant awards and an additional $ 100,000 pending in
awards for recharge in the last Fiscal Year. The Safety and Training Section
develops programs to ensure that employees perform their duties safely and
efficiently. The Public Information Section keeps customers abreast of information
which affects them.
The Water Conservation Section develops programs designed to reduce water
consumption, distributes materials on conservation methods, strives to increase
water awareness in the community, and responds to customer water waste
5
PAGE 24 Show Image
complaints.
The Customer Services Section serves 248,240 customers, and is charged with
reading meters, distributing billings, collecting revenues, and responding to
customer inquiries.
The division has 177 employees, and operates with a $66 million budget in Fiscal
Year 1996.
Engineering Division
The Engineering Division is currently comprised of six sections: Facilities
Planningi Capital Improvement Program, New Development, Design, Construction
Management, Computer and Project Management, and Corrosion Control.
The Facilities Planning Section is responsible for forecasting utility replacement
and expansion needs, and identifying the necessary capital facilities. The section
also provides initial cost estimates and assists in identifying revenue sources for
those needs. When requested, the section also assists in establishing
requirements for new developments.
The New Development Section is responsible for plan checks and new
developments. New Development engineers work with developers to determine
water and sewer needs for new projects. The Plan Check group provides plan
review services to the public and for City-generated construction projects.
The Engineering Design Section is responsible for implementing the capital facility
needs identified by the Facilities Planning Section, such as upgrades,
replacements, and/or expansions to water treatment plants, pipelines, pump
stations, storage facilities, and special buildings. Project implementation includes
engineering expertise and design, the preparation of construction drawings,
contract specifications, and final project cost estimates.
The Construction Management Section assures that designed capital facilities are
constructed in accordance with the construction drawings, contract specifications,
and all other applicable construction standards. This section acts as the liaison
between the City and the contractor in all matters of contractual legalities,
including the negotiation of contract change orders and the final acceptance of
overall construction work.
The Computer and Project Management Section coordinates and tracks the
scheduling and cash management of the Division's more than 300 capital
improvement projects. In addition, it provides training and support on the CADD
PAGE 25 Show Image
system and assists in equipment requisition.
The Corrosion Control Section monitors the existing corrosion protection systems,
implements necessaiy corrosion control on new projects, and provides corrosion
control technical support.
All six sections share in the coordination of the various phases of work with other
City departments, other utility companies and/or agencies, negotiating and
administering agreements with all other entities, and ensuring compliance with
Federal and State regulations.
The division has 1 12 employees, and operates with a budget of $36 million in
Fiscal Year 1996.
THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT
The City of San Diego embarked on a sewerage system upgrade and expansion
program with the formation of the Clean Water Program in 1987. Originally a
division of the Water Utihties Department, the Clean Water Program evolved into
a separate entity in January of 1994, becoming the Metropolitan Wastewater
Department (MWWD). Although the MWWD has taken on many new
responsibilities, the original Clean Water Program goals are still being met. These
include expanding the sewerage system to accommodate projected increases in
wastewater flows, supplementing our limited water supply and reducing our
dependence on imported water by implementing a water reclamation plan, and
safeguarding our ocean water quality.
To accomplish these objectives, the MWWD is currently planning, designing and
building numerous projects including the North City Water Reclamation Plant, the
Northern Sludge Processing Facility, rehabilitating major sewer lines, and
constructing miles of pipelines and related facilities in support of these projects.
These improvements will provide enough capacity to treat the wastewater
generated in the greater San Diego metropolitan area for a future estimated
population of 2.9 million through the year 2050, that is expected to create a
wastewater flow of 340 million gallons per day. The current system serves a
population of 1 .8 million from 1 5 municipalities, water agencies, and sanitation
districts generating approximately 1 80 million gallons of wastewater daily.
Currently, one wastewater treatment plant, located near the tip of Point Loma,
treats all the sewage generated in the greater San Diego area, a 450-square-mile
region from Del Mar to the north, Alpine and Lakeside to the east, and south to
the border with Mexico.
7
PAGE 26 Show Image
In order to help conserve water for potable uses, while lessening our dependence
upon imported water, the MWWD is planning to build three water reclamation
plants. Diverting wastewater to the water reclamation plants will also relieve
capacity at the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant. Reclaimed water
provides a non-interruptible supply of water that is available when other supplies
may be curtailed due to drought or disaster; contains nutrients which can benefit
landscapes and crops; and provides a water supply to irrigate landscapes
throughout the year. The first phase of the City's water reclamation program, the
North City Water Reclamation Plant, is currently under construction.
The MWWD is also participating in the Multiple Species Conservation Program,
a regional effort to preserve and protect rare, threatened and endangered species
and their habitats in San Diego. This program is the first of its kind in California
and one of the first in the nation. The implementation of the Multiple Species
Conservation Program will provide mitigation for impacts caused by the expansion
of the regional sewerage system.
Metropolitan Wastewater's six divisions, and an administrative section, are
charged with meeting the Department's mission "to provide the public with a safe
and efficient regional sewerage system that protects our ocean quality,
supplements our limited water supply, and meets federal standards, at the lowest
possible costs." F'igure 1 .2 displays an organizational chart of the Metropolitan
Wastewater Department, the major functions of each division and the names of
key departmental personnel. The MWWD has 632 employees and operates with
a budget of $ 1 38 million and a capital improvement budget of $3 1 9 million for
Fiscal Year 1996. A description of the department's divisions and programs is
included in the following section.
F
Metropolitan ~treewlafe2r Department
FY 1996
Director
DaveSchlesinger
..I....
Assistant Director Pubic lnfbrmation
Susan Hamilton
..........T...
7am.............................j......-... . -. A................. ...-.~...- .1................. . I
Management ~ Support SeMces Engineenng and Water Contracts Management Operations and Technical Services
, Redamaton Maintenance
Scott Tulloch ,~ Chuck Mu~Ier Al Beingessner ~ Bill Hanley Chns Toth ~an Langwortny
Deputy Director ~ Deputy Director
__________________ __________________ Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director .~ De
___________________ ___________________ ___________________ , puty Director
Pr~ect Management Fiscal Analysis Faai~~es Ranrung D~n Contracts V~~~stewater Treatment W~stewater Laboratory
SchedulelCost Contm~ Budgets Engineenng Studies Cons~ucbon Contracts Sludge ~Spoaal Industr~aI Waste Laboratory
Env~ronmentaI Grants Dean Est~mat~ Tre~ment Rant Mahtenan~ Ocean Montonng Program
Perm~tt~ng 1.$. Coo~nabon Value En~neenng Equal Opportunity Operat~ona and Maintenance lndustn~ VV~ste Permits
Constrnct~on Mgmt Records Management VY~ter Redamabon Contra~ng Program Training and Com~ianca
Constrnct~on Labor Leg~at~ve An~~a Markebng Malaria's Management Major Pump Stations Technical Stu~es
R~at~~try Agency Contracts
Accounts Payab~~ Purccaaing
Receivable
8
PAGE 27 Show Image
Administration Section
The Administration Section manages and directs the Metropohtan Wastewater
Department and provides liaison with local, state and federal agencies. This
section also implements a public information program that includes; community
relations, disseminating information, media relations, public review of
environmental documents and government liaison.
The Administration Section is also responsible for coordinating the Multiple
Species Conservation Program and for preparing a plan to protect sensitive plant
and wildlife habitats in a way that can accommodate development necessary for
the economic health of the region.
Program Management Division
The Program Management Division oversees the planning and design of all capital
improvemen t projects undertaken by the MWWD. Project managers ensure that
the treatment plants, pipelines, pump stations and other related facilities are
designed and built on schedule and within budget. Responsibilities include
engineering, environmental review, permitting, land acquisition and cost controls.
This division is also responsible for managing, monitoring and inspecting
construction projects beginning with project design, including the development of
standard work breakdown structures, construction cost estimating, cost
estimating and scheduling, contractor performance measurements, project safety,
site security, startup and testing of facilities and contract closeout.
Support Services Division
The Support Services Division provides centralized administrative support cntical
to the entire MWWD. These services include the preparation and administration
of the annual budget, morntoring revenues, expenditures and cash flows, contract
invoice payment, billing participating agencies and grants development.
The Grants Section develops numerous requests for federal grants and pursues
funding from the State Revolving Loan Fund. The MWWD was awarded over
$144 million dollars in grant funds over the last five years.
The Division's Information Systems Section coordinates the installation and
operation of computer systems, including CADD workstations. The group also
offers computer software support.
9
PAGE 28 Show Image
The Records Management Section maintains a libraiy of Metropolitan Wastewater
Department documents and correspondence pertaining to the department and its
projects. The library is open to the public during normal business hours.
Engineenng and Water Reclamation Division
The Engineering and Water Reclamation Division performs several key functions
including facilities and master planning, engineering review for planned facilities,
design guidelines, computer aided design and drafting, Value Engineenng,
management and beneficial use of biosolids, and reclaimed water marketing.
Millions of dollars have been saved as a result of the Department's nationally
recognized Value Engineering Program where engineered projects undergo
evaluation by an independent review team for cost saving recommendations.
The Biosolids Section manages plans for handling biosolids in the service area
with an emphasis on beneficial use. Their efforts are especially focused on future
sludge operations at NAS Miramar.
The Marketing Section identifies potential reclaimed water customers and
promotes the beneficial use of reclaimed water. The reclaimed water distribution
system developed from these marketing efforts will deliver reclaimed water from
the water reclamation plant to reuse sites.
Contracts Management Division
Once planned improvements to the sewerage system are approved by the City
Council, the Contracts Management Division handles the task of selecting the
appropriate design or construction contractor.
Under its contracts administration function, division staff handle all aspects of
contracting for consultant services, construction, prepurchased materials, and
equipment. Activities include contract development, solicitation, negotiation,
award administration, and contract closeout.
Contracts Management is also responsible for the development and
implementation of a comprehensive integrated materials management program.
This involves the special procurement of materials and equipment independent of
the contractor to avoid delays in equipment delivery and to realize cost savings by
purchasing in large quantities. Contracts Management staffwarehouse, maintain
inventory and issue a wide range of equipment and materials.
10
PAGE 29 Show Image
Under its estimating function, staff is responsible for developing fair cost
estimates for contract awards and handling change orders for contract services.
Operation and Maintenance Division
The Operation and Maintenance Division is responsible for all components of
wastewater treatment for 1 . 8 million customers in San Diego and 1 5 other
municipalities, water agencies, and sanitation districts located in the metropolitan
service area. Each day this division is responsible for collecting and treating 180
million gallons of wastewater that is then discharged through an outfall pipe
stretching 4.5 miles offshore at a maximum discharge depth of 320 feet, making
it one of the world's longest and deepest ocean outfalls.
Biosolids resulting from the wastewater treatment process are piped to the
Division's Fiesta Island Sludge Dewatering F'acihty where belt presses squeeze out
excess water and further prepare sludge for removal.
Environmental Monitoring and Technical Services Division
One of the ways the MWVVD maintains the quality of the marine environment and
protects our sewerage system is by regulating the quality of wastewater that
enters the sewers. This job of protecting ocean water quality begins by stopping
or pretreating contaminants at their source, before they enter the wastewater
stream. The Environmental Monitoring and Technical Services Divisions is tasked
with monitoring these activities through the following three programs:
The Industrial Wastewater Program regulates local industries to ensure they
do not discharge harmful pollutants into the sewage system.
A team of scientists in the Ocean Monitoring Section analyze nearly 250,000
samples each year from ocean water, animals and sediments to assess the
effects of the effluent discharge on the ocean ecology.
The Effluent and Plant Process Section provides wastewater sampling in
support of the operating facilities. Chemists and biologists perform these
analyses at both the Alvarado Laboratory and operating facility locations.
RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER WATER AGENCIES
The City of San Diego is one of twenty-three member agencies of the San Diego
County Water Authority (CWA). Member agency status entitles the City to directly
purchase water from the CWA on a wholesale basis. The City also looks to the
CWA to ensure, to the best of its ability, that adequate amounts of water will be
available to satisfy future water needs.
11
PAGE 30 Show Image
The San Diego County Water Authority
The San Diego County Water Authority was created on June 9, 1944, by an action
of the State Legislature under the County Water Authority Act of 1943. The CWA
was formed for the sole purpose of importing Colorado River water to the
San Diego region.
The imported water is now a combination of water from the Colorado River via the
Colorado River Aqueduct and from Northern Califbrnia via the State Water Project.
The CWA sells this water wholesale to its twenty-three member agencies. The
member agencies consist of six cities, three water districts, three irrigation
districts, eight municipal water districts, one public utility district, one federal
agency, and a county water district. The County of San Diego is an ex-officio
member. Member agencies are autonomous, and their city council or board of
directors set local water policies and water pricing structures. Each member
agency may appoint at least one representative (based on assessed property
valuation) to serve on the CWA Board of Directors. The City of San Diego is
represented by ten CWA Board members.
All water distributed by the CWA is purchased from the Metropolitan Water
District (MWD) of Southern California, and is delivered into CWA pipelines from
MWD facilities located near the San Diego/Riverside County lines (Figure 1.3).
The CWAjoined the MWD in 1946, and is represented by six directors who serve
on MWD's Board of Directors. The CWA is the largest of MWD's 27 member
agencies, and currenfly purchases approximately 23 percent of MWD's total water
supply.
12
PAGE 31 Show Image
Figure 1.3
~ CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT <½~
AQUEDUCT
RiVERSIDE COUNTY
½4½R00 I o SANDIEGOCOUNTY
\
S'~e~ian~ ~ee~c'
`\`~i Capta es~a'r
L~eIa~d ~ese~.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
13
PAGE 32 Show Image
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California was established by the
California State legislature in 1928. One of the world?s largest water agencies, the
MWD was created to provide supplemental water from the Colorado River to cities
and communities located on CaliforniaI 5 south coastal plain.
The MWD Board consists of 5 1 directors representing the district's 27 member
agencies. The 27 member agencies include 14 cities, 12 municipal water districts,
and one county water authonty. Acting as a wholesaler, the MWD annually
supplies two million acre-feet ofwater to more than 16 million Southern California
residents. Its service area covers 300 cities, six counties, and encompasses 5,200
square miles (Figure 1 .4).
Currently, the MWD's imported water comes from two sources: the Colorado River
via the Colorado River Aqueduct, and from Northern California via the State Water
Project (SWP) and its California Aqueduct. About 90 percent of this water is used
by residential, commercial, and industrial customers, while 10 percent is used for
agriculture. The Colorado River Aqueduct was built by the MWD, and began to
deliver water to Southern California in 194 1 . This aqueduct spans 242 miles of
desert and mountains, and brings 1 .2 million acre-feet (MAF') of water annually
to Southern California. In 1972, the MWD began distributing water from the
SWP's California Aqueduct to meet the growing demands of its service area. Water
from this aqueduct travels more than 400 miles before it reaches MWD1s
distribution system. As the largest of the 29 SWP contractors, MWD's 1995 water
delivery from this system was 2.0 MAF.
If the current rate of growth in the region continues, the MWD1s service area
population could increase by approximately 19.5 million people by the year 2010.
As a result of a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court decision, the MWD's dependable supply
of Colorado River water was reduced to less than 550,000 acre-feet a year (AFY).
In order to make up for this loss, the MWD has initiated many programs designed
to enhance available water supplies and reduce water demands. The City of San
Diego and the CWA participate in several of these programs. These programs are
described in more detail in the MWD1s 1995 Regional Urban Water Management
Plan.
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF' THE 1995 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Due to the scope and importance of updating the Plan, the Water Utilities
Department formed an Urban Water Management Plan Committee in March 1995.
This Committee was formed to oversee the development of the Plan update, and
14
PAGE 33 Show Image
;\
Lm½½ ;. k½
____ I
Thn:½EAN¼ ¼ ¼ ½-
THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT
OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
MAP SHOWING METROPOLITAN'S MEMBER AGENCIES
AND FACILITIES FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF
COLORADO RlVER WATER AND STATE PROJECT WATER
DEPARTMENT OF WATFR RSOURCES' CALIFORNIA AOUEDUCI
MEIROPOLTAN'S WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO METROPOLITAN~S SYSTEM
A POWER PLANTS
A PROPOSED POWER PLANTS
. PUMPING PLANTS
. WATER FILTRATION PLANTS
PAGE 34 Show Image
is composed of representatives from the Water Utihties Department's five
divisions, arid the City's Metropolitan Wastewater Department (Appendix B).
Because of the P1an~s required components and the size of the City~s service area,
the 1995 Plan update includes the following elements: water conservation
measures and programs; water-efficient landscape and irrigation practices; a
water shortage contingency plan; wastewater reclamation and reuse; supply
deficiencies; management of water system pressures; rate structures and water
pricing; water audits of distribution systems; leak detection; and service area and
customer account data.
Public Hearings
The City Manager's Water Conservafion Advisory Committee held a public hearing to
review and evaluate the 1995 Draft Plan on September 26, 1995. In accordance with the
Plan Act, the date, time and location of the Advisory Committee meeting was publicly
noticed in the San Diego Union-Tnbune and the San Diego Daily Transcript. Remarks and
suggesfions made by the Advisory Committee members were incorporated into the Plan.
The San Diego City Council's Natural Resources, Culture and Arts (NRC&A) Committee
held a public hearing of the 1995 Draft Plan on October 18, 1995. After reviewing the Draft
Plan, the NRC&A Committee approved it unanimously.
Adoption of the 1995 Urban Water Management Plan
The 1995 Plan was adopted by the San Diego City Council on November 6, 1995, by
Resolution R-286543 (Appendix C).
FORMAT OF THE 1995 PLAN UPDATE
The chapters in this updated Plan correspond to the outline presented in the Act,
specifically Sections 10631, 10632, and 10633 (Appendix A). The elements set
forth in Section 1 063 1 are required to be included in all plans prepared by
agencies that have a "need for expanded or additional water supplies." Section
1 0633 requires a discussion of the impacts of implementing the alternative
management practices discussed in Sections 1 063 1 and 10632.
The first two chapters, following this Introduction, describe the City's water service
area and water use characteristics, and identif~~ available water supplies including
the City's wastewater reclamation program. Drought management and emergency
programs are described in Chapter IV. Finally, Chapters V and VI describe the
City's current water conservation measures that were adopted to reduce the City's
16
PAGE 35 Show Image
dependence upon imported water, potenfial water conservation programs that may
be adopted in the future, and conservation through pricing and water/ sewer rates.
The individual chapters corresponding with the specific provisions of the Act are
noted below:
Chapter I. Introduction
Section 10632: (b) Plan preparation, coordination with other agencies.
Chapter II. Past, Projected and Future Water Use
Section 10631: (a) past, current and projected potable and recycled water use;
(1) water savings from conservation measures by user groups.
Chapter III. Current Water Supplies and Management Programs
Section 1063 1 : (b)(1) reclamation measures currently adopted and being
practiced; Section 10632: (a)(1) recycled water; (a)(2) exchanges or transfer of
water on short term or long term basis; (a)(3) management of water system
pressures and peak demand.
Chapter IV. Drought Response and Emergencies
Section 1 063 1 : (e) provide an Urban Water Shortage Contingency Plan (Plan);
and (f) frequency and magnitude of supply deficiencies.
Chapter V. Water Conservation Programs
Section 10631: (b)(1) conservation and reclamation measures currently adopted
and being practiced; (c) alternative conservation measures; (d) schedule of
implementation; (g) methods to evaluate effectiveness of measures; (h) describe
steps necessary to implement proposed actions; (i) findings, actions, and
planning relating to water conservation measures; 0) actions and planning to
eliminate nonrecirculation water systems and encourage recirculation systems;
(k) enforcement of conservation measures; and (m) community involvement. (2)
"Memorandum of Understanding" reports: Section 10632: (a)(4) issues relevant
to meter retrofitting for all uses; (a) (5) incentives to alter water use practices;
(a)(6) public information and education programs.
Chapter VI. Pricing and Rate Structures
Section 10632: (a)(7) changes in pricing, rate structures, and regulations.
17
PAGE 36 Show Image
H
PAGE 37 Show Image
CHAPTER II. WATER USE
Water use within the City of San Diego is associated with demographic, economic,
and climatic factors. As the sixth largest City in the United States, San Diego has
experienced a steady growth rate of about three percent a year, for the last ten years.
Having a Mediterranean climate, coastal location, and a fairly stable economy,
San Diego is considered to be one of the finest sunbelt cities in the nation. This
chapter will examine the City's population and housing trends, define water use
characteristics and sectors, and review water use projections.
POPULATION AND HOUSING TRENDS
The City covers an area of 342 square miles, with 53 percent of this area currently
receiving water service. In 1995, the City1s population was 1 .2 million people.
Between 1980 and 1995, the City's population grew by more than 300,000 people,
representing an increase of 35 percent. Population projections for the City are made
every year by the Sari Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) . The City uses
SANDAG projections for planning purposes, including estimating future water
demands and wastewater treatment capacity. SANDAG's projections indicate that
the City's population will increase to nearly 1.5 million by 2015. This is equivalent
to an annual average increase of 14,400 people per year over the 1995-2015 period.
SANDAG'S 1995 housing figures indicate that there are a total of 452,473 housing
units within the City. This figure consists of approximately 248,016 single-family
units, 198,752 multi-family units, and 5,725 mobile homes. SANDAG is forecasting
more than 591,000 housing units by 2015. Multi-family units represent the fastest
growing segment of the housing market, with an expected increase of 7 1 percent by
2015. The City's average household size in 2015 is forecast to be 2.7 people.
According to 1980 U.S. Federal Census data, there are 206,000 single-family and
136,000 multi-family residences built within the City before 1981 . The City has
targeted these older housing units in particular for several water conservation
programs because they do not comply with water-saving changes made to the State
Plumbing Code beginning in 1983.
WATER USE CHARACTERISTICS
Historical and Current Water Use
The City~s water supply data and the amount of water deliveries for Fiscal Years
1970 through 1995 are listed in Table 2. 1. Domestic water use is broken down into
three customer account categories: residential; commercial, agricultural and
governmental; and industrial. Also included in this Table is the per capita
consumption in both gallons and acre-feet. Per capita consumption is defined as
the daily residential, commercial, industrial, and governmental water use divided by
the service area population.
19
PAGE 38 Show Image
_______________________________ Table 21
____ FISCAL YEAR ____ _____
_________________________________ 1970 1975 1980 1935 1990 1995
Water Supply
Gross Water Into Distribution System:
MillionGallons/Day(MGD) 115 143 161 197 218 187
Million Gallons/Year (MGY) 41,962 52,145 58,701 71,941 79,740 67,916
Acre-FeetJNear(AFY) 128,777 160,028 180,147 220,780 244,714 208,427
Sources of Water (MOY):
Local-SurfaceWaterReservoirs 9,122 4,128 23,005 23,191 5,196 16,914
Imported - County Water Authonty 32,462 47,914 35,588 48,564 74,437 51,000
Groundwater Fletcher & Riverview Wells 70 1 03 108 97 99 96
Waste Water Reclamation
Other Seawater Desalination 308 0 0 0 0 _______
Service Area Information S.D.
Total SeryiceAreaLandSize(Acres) 202,880 204,160 204,800 211,648 211,776 218,880
TotalPopulationServed(1000's) 697 773 876 979 1,107 1,198
TotalNumberSeryiceConnections 155468 180565 199 113 213 172 247000 248240
Water Dellyeries
Wholesale Water Deliveries to:
Cal Amencan, Del Mar, & Misc. (MOY) 2,283 3,452 3,339 3,577 4,286 3,854
Cal Amencan Deliveries to S.D. (MGY) 699 1,107 1,347 1,573 1,841 1,497
Water Delivered to S.D. Retail Customers 1.
Residential:
% ofWater Dehvery 61.6 57.6 52.3 53.1 57.2
Deliveries (MGY) 30,007 31,910 35,769 40,055 36,862
NumberofConnections 168,288 184,459 196,255 215,268 226,758
Average Use (MOY/Connection) 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.16
Per Capita Use (GPCD) 106 100 100 99 85
Commercial, Agricultural & Governmental:
% ofWater Delivered 26.6 34.5 34.7 35.3 32.6
Deliveries (MGY) 12,950 19,107 23,749 26,629 20,993
Number ofConnections 13,849 16,63 1 15,646 16,476 18,963
Average Use (MGY/Connection)
Industrial:
%ofWaterDelivered 4.8 3.0 3.2 4.2 3.8
Deliveries (MGY) 2,333 1,679 2,162 3,149 2,469
NumberofConnections 434 440 537 616 631
Average Use (MGY/Connection) 5.4 3.8 4.0 5. 1 3.9
Other:
%ofWaterDelivered 7 4.8 9.8 7.4 6.44
Deliveries (MGY) 3 403 2 666 6 684 5 621 4 150
Total Delivered City ofS.D. (AFY) 123,916 152,831 174,034 214,629 237,210 197, 874
Acre-fi/Capit~ear 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.21 0.17
MG/Capit~ear 0.058 0.064 0.065 0.071 0.070 0.05
Gal/Capita/Day 159 177 177 196 191 147
1Water deliveries per customer class include water use for irrigation purposes.
20
PAGE 39 Show Image
The water supply section of Table 2. 1 shows the City's water sources, and
indicates that the majority ofwater sold or stored by the City has been purchased
from the CWA. The amount of local water or surface runoff is dependent upon
climatic conditions.
Water demand within the City increased from 123,9 16 acre-feet a year (AFY) in
1970, to 174,034 AFY in 1980, and to 197,874 AFY in 1995 (Table 2.1). During
this time period the number of meter connections grew from 155,468 in 1970, to
199,1 13 in 1980, and to 248,240 in 1995. The majority ofwater delivered in 1995
was to single and multi-family residential customers (55. 1 percent), followed by
commercial, agn~cultural, and governmental customers (34 percent), and 3.8
percent was used by industrial customers.
Residential per capita water use in Fiscal Year 1995 was 85 gallons of water per
person per day (gpcd) . Water demand from this customer segment has actually
decreased since 1975 when it was 106 gpcd. In 1990, midway through the recent
six year drought, residential water use dropped to 99 gpcd. This overall decrease
in residential water consumption can be attributed to public information efforts
establishment of a conservation ethic, installation of permanent water saving
plumbing fixtures, and several years of above average precipitation.
City-wide water demand showed an upward trend between 1970- 1990. This
growth in demand occurred primarily in the commercial and industrial sectors,
the former increasing their water consumption by almost 14 billion gallons per
year between 1975 and 1990, and the latter by 816 million gallons per year over
the fifteen year period. While the number of residential connections grew by
46,980 (28 percent) from 1975 to 1990, per capita usage decreased from 106 to
99 gpcd during this time frame.
City-wide per capita water use was on a steady rise from 1970, peaking at 196
gpcd in 1985. Between 1990 and 1995, per capita water use declined by 44 gpcd.
Likewise, the average use per metered connection for all customer classes
increased from 712 gallons per meter per day (gmd) in 1970, to 899 gmd in 1985.
This average began to drop in 1990, with the 1995 average plummeting to 1970
usage levels (7 1 2 gmd) . This drop was the result of water conservation efforts
despite a half-percent increase ( 1 ,240 connections) in the number of metered
connections in the last five years.
More recent historical city-wide water use data, for Fiscal Years 199 1 through
1995, are shown in Table 2.2 and Figure 2. 1 . This water use data is based on
Water Utilities billing records and are broken down into the following customer
classes: 1) single and multi-family residential; 2) commercial; 3) industrial; 4)
outside (i.e., City of Del Mar); 5) Cal-Amencan Water Company; 6) irrigation only;
and, 7) miscellaneous (fire flow, backflow, and construction).
21
PAGE 40 Show Image
Tc~b'e 22
Water U age b y Cusi ~ mer CI ~2
Fiscal Single Multi Ca
Commercial3 lndustrial Outside I- Irrigation Miscellaneous Total
Year Family Family _ Amencan __
1990 63.8 42.7 43.43 9.39 0.16 12.66 20.91 1.26 199.0
1991 59.1 39.1 39.54 8.33 0.25 11.35 19.48 0.89 178.0
1992 50.4 35.4 37.02 7.20 0.04 9.99 15.93 0.63 156.6
1993 58.6 38.0 40.87 6.74 0.06 11.05 18.66 0.62 174.5
1994 61.6 38.5 41.18 6.55 0.05 10.33 19.66 0.47 178.3
1995 59.6 37.8 41.79 6.70 0.05 10.56 19.34 0.75 176.7
Trends in recent water use levels reflect the impact that state-wide drought
conditions, as well as the declining local economy, have had on the consumption
patterns of City residents. The sharp decrease in overall water use from Fiscal
Year 1990 to Fiscal Year 1992 (around 2 1 percent) can be attributed to the
following:
. voluntary water conservation, on the order of 10 to 30 percent
. installation of low-flow plumbing fixtures
. cooler and wetter weather conditions in 1992-93
City-wide water use experienced a dramatic decline during the recent six year
drought (1987-92). Total demand in FY 1992 was 156.6 MGD representing a
reduction of 42.4 MGD from FY 1990. Water demand increased to 174.5 MGD in
FY 1993, ~d has continued to remain at less than 180 MGD for the subsequent
years. Utilities typically experience an upward climb in demand after the
conclusion of a drought or other "emergency" that ultimately leads to a return to
former consumption levels. Figure 2. 1 illustrates that this has not yet been the
case for the City as FY 1995 water usage remained fairly close to its FY 1994 level.
The installation of thousands of water-efficient plumbing fixtures in existing
buildings and in new construction since 199 1 is a contnbuting factor.
2
Figures are based on Water Utilities Billing Records, and thus represeut sales.
Actual deliveries would include system losses, most typically leaks and unmetered water
use.
3lncludes water used by educational institutions.
22
PAGE 41 Show Image
Figure 2.1
city-wide Water Use
(Million Gallons pcr~)
~.............-~. -...-
170.........................-...~.--............~
1~....................~..---.-...-...........-..
Customer Class Data
In Fiscal Year 1995, 55 percent of the water delivered within the City of San Diego
was used by the residential sector, approximately 4 percent was used by
industrial customers, and 34 percent was used by commercial, governmental,
irrigation, and agricultural customers. Water use charactenstics by customer
class are displayed in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2
Fiscal Year 1995 Water Use
(By customer c~~s)
~7% - Sin~eFarniiy
- Multi-Family
- Commercial
~% ~ Industriai
~ ~ Cal-American
~ Miscellaneous
23
PAGE 42 Show Image
One sector that is not clearly defined in customer classifications, yet uses a
significant amount of water, is tourists visiting San Diego. A portion of
commercial water usage is associated with hotels, golf courses, and other
establishments providing services to the City1s large tourist industiy. The
Convention and Visitors Bureau estimates that the annual number of tourist days
spent in San Diego is equivalent to a year round population of more than
220,060 people.
The U.S. Navy also maintains a strong presence in San Diego. As one of the City1s
largest customers, the Navy uses more than 12,000 acre-feet of water annually.
This water is delivered to numerous military installations, training centers, and
military housing complexes. The Navy, interested in reducing their water
consumption, formed a task force in 1989 to address water conservation and
water management concerns. In February 1990, the Navy adopted a Water
Shortage Contingency Plan which was distributed to all Naval installations in
San Diego, and also adopted a four-stage water shortage contingency plan similar
to the City1s Emergency Water Conservation Ordinance.
During the six year drought, the Navy adopted the City's 10 percent (1990) and
20 percent (199 1) water conservation goals for their installations. The Navy has
also conducted turf audits at several facilities, and has worked with the MWD, the
CWA, and the City to install low-flow showerheads in the barracks at two bases.
Projected Water Use
Potable water use for the years 2000, 2010, and 2050 (estimated buildout) were
projected using the MWD-MAIN demand forecasting model. The model uses
SANDAG Series 7 demographic and socioeconomic data, as well as historical
Water Utilities billing records as input data. MWD-MAIN forecasts unit water use
factors by customer class, which are then applied to corresponding land use areas
to arrive at projected water use by customer class. Figure 2.3 shows potable
water use projections broken down by: residential, industrial, commercial,
irrigation, and miscellaneous. Potable water use figures in forecast years 2005
and 2015 through 2040 were interpolated from the 2000, 2010, and 2050
prqjections. Figures 2.3 to 2. 1 1 show citywide and customer class water demand
projections. For comparison purposes, ten percent, twenty percent, and fifty
percent conservation efforts were considered in the projected water demand
figures. Note that projections correspond to water deliveries, and unlike the
historical demands presented in Table 2 . 1 , deliveries do account for unmetered
system losses. Deliveries are typically considered to be nine percent higher than
metered sales.
24
PAGE 43 Show Image
The quantity of irnported water available to the San Diego area may be limited in
the future; and, it is the intention of the City's Water Conservation Program to
heighten the public1s awareness of water supply issues and to encourage their
participation in conservation efforts.
Actual FY 1995 billed water use was inflated by the nine percent loss factor and
plotted on the same figures as projected water use. A sizable jump from actual
FY 1995 to projected FY 2000 demands can be seen in the figures. The City has
experienced somewhat lower (than what may have been predicted a few years ago)
water demands as a result of the 1987 1992 drought. Much of this can be
attributed to strong water conservation behavioral effects. For the sake of
long-term projections as these, such behavioral effects are treated as temporary
and specific to drought or emergency conditions. They were thus excluded from
the forecasting process. The prqjections do, however, account for conservation
resulting from the installation of low-flow hardware. Estimated water savings
from such hardware by the year 2010 is about 25 mgd.
Any demand offsets that might be introduced by the advent of the Citys future
reclaimed water systems were completely discounted from the projections. The
reasoning at the time was that there was a high degree of uncertainty associated
with the projected water reclamation levels themselves.
To summarize, forecast water use as presented in this report:
* Includes unmetered system losses;
. Includes water savings resulting from the installation of low-flow
conservation hardware;
. Excludes temporary conservation behavioral effects seen in times of
drought or other short-term emergency situations;
. Excludes any displaced potable water demands resulting from the future
water reclamation system.
25
PAGE 44 Show Image
FIGURE 2.3
Ci~Wide Water I)em~ndPr~ecti~s
(million ga11~~ per say)
350
300
250
200
U - U U U * U U
~00
50
~5 200$ 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055
City-wide water demand is expected to reach 257 MGD by the year 2000 and
332 MGD by the year 2050. Water conservation efforts will play an important
role in meeting future demands.
CITY-WIDE DEMAND PROJECTIONS
_______ (MGD) ______________
_________ conservaTion Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 192.54 173.28 154.03 96.27
2000 256.87 231.19 205.50 128.44
2005 265.93 239.34 212.75 132.97
2010 274.99 247.49 219.99 137.50
2015 282.11 253.90 225.69 141.06
2020 289.24 260.31 231.39 144.62
2030 303.48 273.13 242.78 151.74
2040 317.72 285.95 254.18 158.86
2050 331.97 298.77 265.58 165.98
26
PAGE 45 Show Image
FIGURE 2.4
SiugIe~awiIy W~er ~mand Projectio~~
(mi~on galons p~ day)
20
~99$ 200S 20~ 2025 2035 2045 2O5~
Ye~
*Fu~i)~~~d *
By the year 2050, single-family water usage is expected to represent over
one-third of the City's total demand. This customer class is projected to see a
steady increase through the year 2050, going from about 65 to 103 MGD demand.
Note that projections do not include irrigation-only meters at residential sites.
SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
_______ (MGD)
Conservation Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 64.93 58.44 51.94 32.47
2000 81.73 73.56 65.38 40.87
2005 83.52 75.17 66.82 41.76
2010 85.32 76.79 68.26 42.66
2015 88.73 79.86 70.98 44.37
2020 92.14 82.93 73.71 46.07
2030 98.96 89.06 79.17 49.48
2040 105.78 95.20 84.62 52.89
2050 112.60 101.34 90.08 56.30
27
PAGE 46 Show Image
FIGURE 2.5
MultiFamily Water Dem~~d P~jections
(I) i~qn ~al1ons pe~ ~)
0
1995 2005 2015 2025 203w 2045 205$
Combined single-family and multi-family water use represents about 50 percent
of the forecast city-wide demand. Note that these forecasts do not include
irrigation-only water use in multi-family residential areas.
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
_______ (MGD)
conservation Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 41.29 37.16 33.03 20.65
2000 49.45 44.51 39.56 24.73
2005 54.1 1 48.70 43.29 27.06
2010 58.77 52.89 47.02 29.39
2015 60.20 54.18 48.16 30.10
2020 61.62 55.46 49.30 30.81
2030 64.47 58.02 51.58 32.24
2040 67.32 60.59 53.86 33.66
2050 70.17 63.15 56.14 35.09
28
PAGE 47 Show Image
FIGURE 2.6
Commerci~I Water Demaud Projectious
(miIho~ gallons per d~~)
so
70
~
so ~ A__~A
40 * * * * .
30 * * * U U U U
20
1995 2005 20~ 2025 2035 2045 20~5
Commercial water use shows a relatively flat growth pattern from 2000 to 2050,
but by 2050 it is expected to have increased by more than 20 percent. Note that
these figures do not include educational and irrigation-only water use in
commercial areas.
COMMERCIAL
_______ (MOD)
Conservation Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 45.56 41.00 36.45 22.78
2000 53.97 48.57 43.18 26.99
2005 56.44 50.80 45.15 28.22
2010 57.80 52.02 46.24 28.90
2015 58.96 53.06 47.17 29.48
2020 59.96 53.96 47.97 29.98
2030 61.44 55.30 49.15 30.72
2040 63.44 57.10 50.75 31.72
2050 65.44 58.90 52.35 32.72
29
PAGE 48 Show Image
FIGURE 2.7
hidustrial Water I)enwndPr~ecti~s
(~ilb~n ~allo~ per day)
~s 200S 20~ 2025 203S 2045 2055
Ye~
, FuUI>emaxi4 ~
, 2~%Co~servatio~ p 50%C~~exv~~
Water use in the industrial sector is expected to have the highest growth rate,
approximately 65 percent from the year 2000 to the year 2050. This follows from
land use projections that indicate a higher percentage of land designated for
industries. Note that these forecasts do not include irrigation-only water use in
industrial areas.
INDUSTRIAL
_______ (MGD)
__________ Conservation Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 7.30 6.57 5.84 3.65
2000 9.25 8.33 7.40 4.63
2005 9.70 8.73 7.76 4.85
2010 10.15 9.14 8.12 5.08
2015 10.80 9.72 8.64 5.40
2020 11.44 10.30 9.15 5.72
2030 12.74 11.47 10.19 6.37
2040 14.03 12.63 11.22 7.02
2050 15.33 13.80 12.26 7.67
30
PAGE 49 Show Image
FIGURE 2.8
Irrigati~u Water Demand Projections
(m illion galIon~ per d~)
30 A
A__m£ A__~£ ~ A _
. ~ * * .
20
10
199$ 2005 20IS 202S 203$ 2045 2055
~ ~ )0%Co~servati~~
+ 2O%Co~ervati~~ 5 ~
The irrigation customer class includes: irrigation-only usage in the residential,
commercial, and industrial ssectors, as well as golf courses, parks, intensive
agriculture, and City parks and recreation areas. The leveling trend seen in
forecast years 2005 to the year 2050 can be attributed to more efficient water
management practices in the future, as well as to the trend toward smaller ratios
of landscaped areas to total living and commercial areas.
IRRIGATION
(MGD) _______________
conservaTion Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 21.08 18.97 16.86 10.54
2000 30.42 27.38 24.34 15.21
2005 31.20 28.08 24.96 15.60
2010 31.99 28.79 25.59 16.00
2015 32.28 29.05 25.82 16.14
2020 32.57 29.31 26.06 16.29
2030 33.15 29.84 26.52 16.58
2040 33.73 30.36 26.98 16.87
2050 34.31 30.88 27.45 17.16
31
PAGE 50 Show Image
FIGURE 2.9
5 Eum-.. U ~m
0
1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 205S
Year
, F~ ~ ~
4 ~ * S()%Co~erv#tion
Forecasts indicate minimal changes in Cal-Amencan S reliance on the City for
water supply.
CALAMERICAN
_______ (MOD) _______________
__________ ConservaTion Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 11.51 10.36 9.21 5.76
2000 13.08 11.77 10.46 6.54
2005 13.08 11.77 10.46 6.54
2010 13.08 11.77 10.46 6.54
2015 13.23 11.91 10.58 6.62
2020 13.38 12.04 10.70 6.69
2030 13.68 12.31 10.94 6.84
2040 13.98 12.58 11.18 6.99
2050 14.28 12.85 11.42 7.14
32
PAGE 51 Show Image
FIGURE 2.10
Misccllaneous Water Demand Projectio~~
(mi1Iiq~ gallons per d~)
0
1995 2OO~ 2015 202S 203w 2045 2()~S
, F~ Dema~ ~
, 2O%C~~ervat~~ 5 5()%C~~c~at~n
On average, water use in the miscellaneous customer class is quite small.
Included in this customer class are backflow meters, construction meters, and fire
flow.
MISCELLANEOUS
_______ (MGD)
Conservation Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 0.82 0.74 0.66 0.41
2000 0.92 0.83 0.74 0.46
2005 0.96 0.86 0.77 0.48
2010 0.99 0.89 0.79 0.50
2015 1.02 0.92 0.82 0.51
2020 1.04 0.94 0.83 0.52
2030 1.09 0.98 0.87 0.55
2040 1.14 1.03 0.91 0.57
2050 1.20 1.08 0.96 0.60
33
PAGE 52 Show Image
FIGURE 2.11
Other Water Deuiand P~~jections
(milho~ gal1~ns per d~)
15 A A a - &
. . . . * .
U *.~* U U
19% 2005 2q15 202$ 2035 2~5 205$
~ ~ ~
, 20%Co~erv~ion * ~%Conserv~ti~n
Included in this customer class are the City's largest commercial and industn~al
water users. Among them are San Diego State University, University of California
San Diego, the Navy, and Kelco. Large customers were disaggregated from their
respective customer classes for the purposes of avoiding unrealisfic, skewed model
projections. Average unit water-use factors were proven invalid for large
customers and were not used. They were therefore projected strictly on the basis
of their historical water usage. On average they represent a sizable portion of the
City's overall demand, ranging from about 6 to 9 percent.
OTHERS
_______ (MGD)
Conservation Level
Year 0% 10% 20% 50%
1995 16.92 15.23 13.54 8.46
2000 17.00 15.30 13.60 8.50
2005 17.00 15.30 13.60 8.50
2010 17.00 15.30 13.60 8.50
2015 17.20 15.48 13.76 8.60
2020 17.40 15.66 13.92 8.70
2030 17.79 16.01 14.23 8.90
2040 18.18 16.36 14.54 9.09
2050 18.57 16.71 14.86 9.29
34
PAGE 53 Show Image
WA'!ER USE PLANNING
To keep pace with the demands of new growth and to ensure an adequate supply
of safe drinking water, the City has undertaken the development of a Water
Facilities Master Plan. This Plan will survey the present distribution system,
identif~~ projects capable of addressing future system deficiencies, and develop a
computer model that projects future supply demands and takes water
conservation efforts into account. A more detailed explanation of the Plan follows.
Water Facilities Master Plan
The Water Facilities Master Plan is a comprehensive planning study that will
determine intermediate and ultimate demands on the City's water distribution
system in a two phase study. Phase I of the Master Plan was completed in 1992.
It involved the data collection, development of computer models and databases,
and the development of future demands. Computer models were developed for the
purposes of hydraulic modeling, and long-term water demand forecasting. The
hydraulic model will be used to strategically plan for new filtration, distribution
and storage facilities based on calculated pipe flows and service pressures. The
demand forecasting model will be able to analyze the impacts of demographic and
socioeconomic growth, as well as the effects of conservation programs. A Master
Plan of operational and facility improvements necessary to meet those demands
will also be developed in Phase II. The project will be completed by 1998.
35
PAGE 54 Show Image
LA)
PAGE 55 Show Image
CHAPTER III. CURRENT WATER SUPPLIES AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
CURRENT SOURCES OF SUPPLY
The City of San Diego is located in a semi-arid coastal desert environment
averaging 9.3 inches of rain annually Prolonged rain storms are rare, there are
no permanent streams or natural lakes, and ground water basins are limited.
San Diego imports most of its water from the San Diego County Water Authonty
(CWA) via the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California. A 242
mile-long aqueduct brings Colorado River water from Lake Havasu to the
Southland. The City also receives water originating in Northern California from
the State Water Project (SWP). This water is captured in reservoirs north of
Sacramento and released through natural rivers and streams into the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The 444 mile-long California Aqueduct carries
the water from south of the Delta to State Water Project contractors throughout
the state such as the MWD.
The MWD blends Colorado and SWP water at a facility in Riverside County,
transferring it to San Diego water *tment plants (Miramar, Alvarado and Otay)
via pipelines operated by the CWA. Ten to twenty percent of San Diego's water is
of local origin, collected as runoff in the City's nine reservoirs. The City is,
therefore, heavily dependent upon imported water, and depends upon the MWD
and the CWA for more than three-fourths of its water supply. A small portion of
San Diego's water is treated imported water, purchased from the MWD's Lake
Skinner Treatment~Plant in Rancho California.
The CWA's water deliveries to the City currently account for about 34 percent of
the CWA's total water sales. The City's imported water needs for Fiscal Year 1995
totalled 156,519 acre-feet, representing 75 percent of its total water needs. The
City of San Diego is acutely aware of its dependence upon imported water, and
continues to develop and pursue programs dedicated to managing, conserving,
and reclaiming its water resources. The City does, however, look to the CWA, and
MWD, its principle water supplier, to act as the lead agency in ensuring adequate
long-term supplies of water to meet all demands within the City's service area.
LOCAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
The City of San Diego operates one of the largest water systems in the nation. In
spite of the great distances of the City's water supply sources, and the vast area
covered by its distribution network, the supply and distribution system has an
excellent record of reliability. Most of the water system is gravity-fed from local
water treatment plants and imported water aqueducts. Only a few areas located
37
PAGE 56 Show Image
at higher elevations require pumping to receive water service. The distribution
system serves 175 square miles of developed area, and is designed to meet the
high peak demands associated with the very hot and dry weather conditions in the
late summer and early fall. Adequate treated water distribution storage exists for
meeting peak flow demands on the system and for providing uninterrupted supply
during rare pipeline outages. With large areas of open space throughout the City,
ofteri in the form of brush-lined canyons, the system also has an enviable record
of providing water for fire protection.
Water losses are held to a minimum through city-wide metering, and careful water
accounting. Shallow water mains and an impermeable soil substructure
throughout most of the City provide a means for automatic leak detection. An
active policy of replacing outdated water mains provides added insurance against
distribution system water losses.
The City maintains full treatment and ifitration capacity to meet most of its needs
at its three water treatment plants. The plants meet, or exceed, all existing water
quality standards for drinking water, and have adequate reserve capacity to
provide full treatment to meet the system's peak demands.
Local Supply System
The City of San Diego's water system consists of nine local surface water
reservoirs with more than 400,000 acre-feet of capacity. The City's reservoir
system operates in combination with the imported water system. While the
reservoirs capture local runoffs they also provide for emergency water storage that
takes into account the City's dependence upon water sources located hundreds
of miles away. The reservoir system has an average yield of approximately 40,000
acre-feet, that varies considerably from year to year as shown in Figure 3 . 1 . Table
3. 1 lists each of the reservoirs and identifies the year constructed, original cost,
capacity, average annual evaporation in acre-feet, emergency storage, and
contracted storage agency.
The City Council, recognizing the City's reliance upon aqueducts and canals that
could become inoperable due to an earthquake, flood, or sabotage, adopted a
resolution in 1963 to maintain at least six-tenths of a year's supply of water in
storage for emergency uses (Appendix F). Prior to 1963, the Water Utilities
Department operated under an unofficial policy of providing approximately one
year's storage as emergency supply. An evaluation of the hazards and possible
interruptions balanced against the costs of emergency storage caused the City
Council to re-evaluate this requirement.
38
PAGE 57 Show Image
Figure 3.1
NET LOCAL YIELD
1 30,000 AF Emergency Storage
With Seasonal Existing System
140,000
1 20,000
100,000------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~ 80,000------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~A)
~ ~~fflAverage=4o~422
-~ mMedian=27158
~ 60,000------------------------------------------------------
0
a)
z
40,000
0
1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
Water Year
NS
3/11/94
FN IMPRT636.XLS
PAGE 58 Show Image
TABLE 3.1
SAN DIEGO CITY RESERVOIRS
Average
Annual Net
Year Original Capacity Evaporation Emergency
Name Built Cost* Acre-Feet Acre-Feet Storage
Morena 1912 $ 1.50 50,206 6,161.4 (a)
Barrett 1922 1.65 37,947 2,664.3
UpperOtay 1901 0.08 810
Lowerotay 1919 0.73 49,510 4,778.2 x (b)
ElCapitan 1934 5.80 112,807 3,763.8 x (c)
SanVicente 1943 3.40 90,230 4,322.2 x (b)
Sutherland 1953 3.90 29,684 1,136.6 (d)
Hodges 1918 0.49 33,550 4,998.4 (e)
Murray 191w 0.25 4,818 498.7 x
Miramar 196C 2.20 7,184 522.2 x
Morena overflowed: `16, `17, `27, `28, `39, `40, `41, `42, `43, `44, `80, `81, `82, `83, `84, `95
Barrett overflowed: `27, `37, `38, `39, `41 , `42, `43, `79, `80, `81 , `82, `83, `84, `93, `94, `95
Upper Otay overflowed: `37, `39, `41 , `52, `78, `83, `93, `95
Lower Otay overflowed: `27, `32, `38, `41 , `80, `81 , `82, `83, `93
El Capitan overflowed: `38, `39, `41 , `80, `93
San Vicente overflowed: `78, `80, `83, `93, `95
Sutherland overflowed: `78, `79, `80, `83, `84, `93, `95
Hodges overflowed: `22, `23, `26, `27, `28, `32, `33, `37, `38, `39, `40, `41 , `42, `43, `44, `45,
`46, `52, `78, `79, `80, `81 , `82, `83, `84, `93, `95
Contracted Storage
(a) County of San Diego (Recreational Use)
(b) San Diego County Water Authonty
(c) Helix Water District
(d) Ramona Municipal Water District
(e) San Dieguito-Santa Fe Irrigation Districts
* in millions
40
PAGE 59 Show Image
The six-tenths of the annual water demand estimate uses a running average
which changes continuously in anticipation of the next six-tenths of a yearts
requirement. The amount required is computed based on an average of prior
actual usage during a comparable six-tenths of a year period. For example,
storage requirements can vary from a minimum of 1 14,000 acre-feet for
September, to a maximum of about 160,000 acre-feet for March.
Emergency storage is accounted for at Lake Skinner (an MWD reservoir) and
several City of San Diego reservoirs (San Vicente, El Capitan, Lower Otay, Murray,
and Miramar). Transfers from Lake Skinner are made through CWA aqueducts.
Unfiltered imported water is used to supply the Miramar and Alvarado Water
Treatment Plants. Filtered water from the Lake Skinner Water Treatment Plant
(Skinner Plant) is utilized to augment the supply in the City's service area. Raw
water from San Vicente and El Capitan Reservoirs is transported to the Alvarado
Water Treatment Plant via City of San Diego pipelines. The Lower Otay, Murray,
and Miramar Reservoirs are directly adjacent to the Otay, Alvarado, and Miramar
Water Treatment Plants, respectiyely. Water can be pumped directly from these
reservoirs to adjacent plants.
Water Treatment Plants
The water supply for the City of San Diego is treated at four water treatment
plants. Alvarado Water Treatment Plant (The Alvarado Plant) is located at the
Murray Reservoir and serves the central and eastern areas of the City. The
Miramar Plant is located at the Miramar Reservoir and serves the northern section
of the City. The Otay Plant, adjacent to Lower Otay Reservoir, serves the South
Bay area of the City. The Skinner Plant, in Riverside County, is owned and
operated by the MWD, and supplies supplemental treated water, as required,
throughout the City's service area via the CWA's treated water aqueduct. Table
3.2 provides a list of the water treatment plants serving the city area and their
design capacities. The City of San Diego water service areas (Miramar, Alvarado,
Otay), reservoirs, water treatment plant sites, and aqueducts are shown in
Figure 3.2.
The Alvarado Plant filters water originating in the San Diego River and San
Dieguito River systems (El Capitan, San Vicente, Murray, and Sutherland
reservoirs) . In addition, imported water may be drawn from two nearby aqueduct
connections. The Alvarado Plant has a 120 million gallon per day (MGD) capacity
and a 35 million gallon (MG) regulating reservoir. An expansion to 180 MGD is
now under construction, and is scheduled to be completed by October 200 1.
41
PAGE 60 Show Image
Figure 3.2
Cit o ~ Diego
42
PAGE 61 Show Image
The Miramar Water Treatment Plant (Mirarnar Plant) filters imported water which
has been transported through the facilities of the MWD and the CWA. The
primaiy water supply to the Miramar Plant is through a 48 inch pipeline
connection to the CWA's second San Diego Aqueduct. Miramar Reservoir serves
to supplement the delivery from the CWA aqueduct when necessary, or as a
TABLE 3.2
WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
ReservoiriPlant Design Capacity Ownership
Lake Skinner Treatment Plant 340 mgd Metropolitan
Water District
* Lake Murray (Alvarado Plant) 120 mgd City of San Diego
Lower Otay Reservoir 40 mgd City of San Diego
Miramar Reservoir 140 mgd City of San Diego
*Work is in progress to expand the Alvarado Water Treatment Plant
20-day source of supply in the event of an aqueduct failure. The Miramar Plant
has a 140 MGD, capacity with a 50 MG regulating capacity. There are no facilities
in place to transfer any Hodges water to City treatment plants at present. A
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project is being studied to ultimately
construct a pump station and pipeline to transfer water to and from the CWA
aqueduct system and ultimately to the Miramar Plant. Other options being
investigated by the CWA will provide emergency storage, but not additional local
yield.
The Otay Water Treatment Plant (Otay Plant) treats water from the
Cottonwood-Otay system and from the second San Diego Aqueduct. Water from
Morena and Barrett Reservoirs is transferred to the Otay Plant, when available,
and is treated after being pumped from Otay Reservoir. The capacity of the Otay
Plant is 40 MGD.
Studies have been completed for the Alvarado and Miramar Plants to determine
the necessary facilities for compliance with new Federal Safe Dnnking Water Act
regulations (Safe Dnnking Water Act).
43
PAGE 62 Show Image
Quality control is maintained in all phases of the water treatment process.
Routine analyses, pertinent to the plant's operation, are performed in each of the
four plants by operations personnel and water quality laboratory staff. More
complete chemical and bacteriological analyses are performed at the central
laboratories, the Alvarado Plant for the City, arid the LaVeme Water Treatment
Plant for the MWD. Tests are routinely conducted for minerals, metals, pesticides,
trace organic compounds, algae, bacteria, asbestos, radioactivity, and foaming
agents. Safe Drinking Water Act regulations will greafly expand the number and
type of tests, and the City is in the process of expanding its laboratoiy equipment
and personnel to comply with these new requirements.
Distribution and Transfers
Within the City's distribution system, water can be transferred among storage
tanks, standpipes, and reservoirs within the service areas of the City's Otay,
Alvarado and Miramar Plants. This is done by gravity distribution mains within
pressure zones, and from higher pressure zones to lower pressure zones. Water
is transferred by pumping from lower to higher pressure zones. There are
presently 45 pump stations and 3 1 water storage facilities with a capacity in
excess of 200 million gallons. There are more than 2,609 miles of water
distribution mains in the City's water service area.
Water can be transferred relatively easily between the Otay and the Alvarado
service areas, and water from the Miramar service area can be transferred by
minor adjustments into the Alvarado service area. However, the ability to move
water from the Alvarado service area into the Miramar area is limited. Most
transfers into the Miramar area must be made by pumping and affect only a small
portion of the service area.
System Pressure Controls
The City has installed and maintains 87 pressure reducing facilities to ensure
adequate but not excessive pressures throughout its water distribution system.
Each pressure zone is established to provide an average water service pressure of
40 to 85 pounds per square inch (psi). Pressures vary in any pressure zone with
customers located at higher elevations in a zone receiving somewhat lower
pressures than those located at lower elevations. In addition, pressures fluctuate
daily due to pressure losses caused by varying demands. Should excessively high
pressures occur at the lower elevation limits of a zone, individual house regulators
are required to reduce the water pressure to an appropriate level. Adequate
pressure must be maintained in all areas of the City to meet insurance standards
for fire flow.
44
PAGE 63 Show Image
The City's water distnbution system is divided into three service areas that
coincide with its three water treatment plants: Miramar, Alvarado, and Otay. In
addition, the system is supplied with treated water from the CWA's aqueducts at
Black Mountain, Rancho Bernardo, Shepherd Canyon, Paradise Mesa, and Lower
Otay. The service area boundaries can be adjusted with valve changes to provide
for operational flexibihty. Additionally, the City's Miramar Plant produces treated
water that is pumped into the CWA's aqueduct. Conversely, the City also
purchases treated water produced at the MWD's Skinner Plant that is delivered
via the CWA aqueduct.
The distribution system has approximately 2,609 miles of water mains varying in
size from 4 to 72 inches in diameter. The distribution system is divided into
87 separate pressure zones. Approximately 80 percent of the City's customers are
at elevations which can be served by gravity flow from the above referenced
sources of water. The remaining areas require pumping. The City has carefully
planned and designed its complex water distribution system to take full advantage
of existing water pressures and elevations. This approach conserves energy by
limiting the amount of pumping required.
Peak Demands
Water demands made by individual customers on the City's water distribution
system are subject to wide fluctuations day to day and throughout the year.
These fluctuations in demand are a common and expected occurrence in any
water distnbution system and are influenced or prompted by such factors as
customer habits and routines, time of day, day of week, and climatic conditions.
Actual water system peak demands on City facilities fall well within the limits
commonly experienced by retail urban water purveyors. The City's current Water
Conservation Program, discussed in Chapter V, has assisted in reducing peak
demands.
The low pressure limits in the City's water service pressure zones are established
as the minimum pressure that will still allow the acceptable operation of water use
appliances, fixtures, and irrigation devices. Any reduction in pressure would
adversely affect the proper operation of existing fixtures and would create
significant public objection. Other than the provision of individual pressure
regulators for higher pressure services, no significant pressure reduction program
appears viable.
45
PAGE 64 Show Image
QUALITY OF CURRENT SUPPLIES
The quality of imported water has been a serious problem for San Diego since the
aqueduct connection to the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) in 1947. Colorado
River water has twice the salt content (`1'otal Dissolved Solids or TDS) of local
water. The TDS problem improved when water from the State Water Project (SWP)
was first introduced, and blended with Colorado River water, in 1976. The SWP
contains about one half the salt content (TDS) as the Colorado River water. This
water supply has some unique quality problems of high levels of bromides and
organic humic substances associated with salt water intrusion and agricultural
tail water. These specific water quality problems pose serious concerns when
addressing future compliance with the new and proposed regulations associated
with the 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments. The City's primary source
of imported water remains the Colorado River.
Water Quality
The City of San Diego is committed to providing its customers with high quality
drinking water. The City's drinking water surpasses the quality standards set by
State and Federal regulations. Highly trained microbiologists, chemists, and
water treatment specialists at the water quality laboratories and treatment plants
conduct more than 135,000 separate water analyses a year.
In comparison to many other areas in Southern California, San Diego has minimal
ground water basins. While all major local streams contain ground water basins,
they are generally small in size and very shallow. Most of the area is underlain
with marine sediments of low permeability near the coast, and granite rock further
inland.
The mineral content of ground water basins along the coast is characteristically
high. The cost-effectiveness and overall feasibility of groundwater projects will
require further evaluation by the City. The San Pasqual Valley and Santee/El
Monte Groundwater Basin are the areas of greatest interest although they have
high TDS and poor water quality at present.
Originally, some of the municipal water supply was obtained from these basins
even though much of the use was for agricultural irrigation on the valley floors.
During the drought period after World War II, water levels in the basins were
drawn down until no further use was possible. Poor quality irrigation runoff
water, with a high TDS has since filled the basins. Also, the process of
degradation was aided by seawater intrusion along the coast, and by sewage
discharges to the streambeds from inland treatment plants.
46
PAGE 65 Show Image
COMPARISON OF DEPENDABLE WATER SUPPLIES WITH DEMANDS
The City of San Diego presently relies upon imported water to meet up to ninety
percent of its normal annual water supply. Typically, local water runoff meets
only ten to twenty percent of local supply needs. However, in a wet year local
runoff can be as high as twenty to forty-six percent of actual demand. Seasonal
rainfall is not a dependable factor as demonstrated by the wide-range of rainfall
received by the City during the last 34 years. Table 3.3 displays rainfall measured
at Lindbergh Field (San Diego's primary airport) by the U.S. Weather Bureau, and
the amount of rainfall recorded at Lake Murray Reservoir, a City owned facility
located fourteen miles inland. The rainfall measured at Lake Murray is more
representative of the amount of rainfall at City populated areas.
The City has embarked upon an aggressive water reclamation program to create
an additional, dependable water supply source, and to forestall potential future
water shortages. Additionally, the City relies upon the MWD and the CWA to
develop additional sources of water for future consumption. Please refer to the
CWA's and MWD's respective Urban Water Management Plans for an elaboration
of potential water supplies for their service areas. The following sections describe
new water supply opportunities available to the City, including its comprehensive
water reclamation effort.
47
PAGE 66 Show Image
Table 3.3
RAINFALL AND RUNOFF IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO
Rainfall Rainfall Total City
Fiscal Lindbergh Field Murray Reservoir Runoff
Year Inches Inches Acre-Feet
95 13.51 19.65 342,685
94 12.81 10.85 53,700
93 17.26 21.33 506,756
92 9.43 17.31 39,346
91 17.12 13.12 61,306
90 7.84 9.02 11,322
89 5.61 5.83 16,331
88 8.55 14.69 32,191
87 9.61 11.25 26,486
86 14.10 16.51 93,742
85 9.33 12.36 51,291
84 5.73 7.78 125,122
83 18.60 23.51 622,171
82 11.50 13.49 131,257
81 8.10 9.41 99,518
80 15.72 22.90 742,703
79 14.72 20.29 241,714
78 18.71 23.25 279,245
77 8.08 9.78 8,589
76 9.11 9.65 14,706
75 10.65 13.17 13,868
74 6.60 7.90 10,736
73 11.43 13.13 43,709
72 5.69 6.09 5,190
71 7.94 8.69 8,558
69 11.60 15.36 106,013
68 7.96 8.53 8,376
67 10.63 13.36 57,931
66 15.07 15.00 29,999
65 8.50 9.06 8,621
64 7.05 10.03 4,769
63 3.98 6.13 2,544
62 9.63 12.02 9,675
61 3.46 5.43 2,264
Note: Lindbergh Field (Lindbergh International Airport) data compiled by U.S. Weather
Bureau. Murray Reservoir data compiled by the City of San Diego, Water Utilities
Department.
48
PAGE 67 Show Image
NEW SUPPLY OPPORTUNITIES
The CWA has undertaken the Emergency Water Storage Project (Storage Project)
to ensure that the region has an adequate water supply during emergencies. The
preliminary engineering and environmental studies for the Storage Project began
in 1989. This project is driven by the fact that the region1s water supply is
vulnerable to natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods and droughts.
Imported water aqueducts that supply San Diego County cross several large
earthquake faults. One of the most compelling reasons to undertake the Storage
Project is that an earthquake could severely curtail imported water deliveries for
up to six months, and leave parts of the county completely without water for
several months. Also, the CWA estimates that the county is around 40,000 AF
short of the emergency water capacity it would need if imported water pipelines
were severed today.
The City remains supportive of, and interested in, CWA's Storage Project. The
Storage Project is important to the City as it will provide needed emergency
storage in CWA's service area in the event of a major disaster or extended drought.
A study of potential storage sites in the region identified potential new surface
storage sites, and existing reservoirs that might be expanded to provided
additional emergency storage. The City is presently working closely with CWA
staff as City facilities San Vincente and Hodges Reservoirs have been chosen
as two of four final storage systems to be evaluated and included in the proj ect1s
Environmental Impact Report! Environment Impact Statement (EIR/ EIS).
Additional information on the Storage Project can be found in CWA's Urban Water
Management Plan.
San Diego Water Assurance Plan
San Diego Mayor Susan Golding unveiled the San Diego Water Assurance Plan
(SWAP) at a press conference held at a city reservoir on November 24, 1994. The
four key elements of the SWAP program are:
Assurance from MWD that San Diego's water deliveries will not fall below 80%
of normal.
Voluntary conservation to save 10% of water use.
Transfers of water from the State Water Bank, agricultural water districts, or
farmers to make up any shortfall.
Average cost of no more than 30 cents per household per month, and less than
1% per month for business users.
49
PAGE 68 Show Image
The recent six year drought (1987-92) was the driving force behind the
development of SWAP. The Mayor was concerned that a reoccurrence of a water
shortage would lead, once again, to massive water cuts from the MWD and CWA,
rationing, and penalty pricing, all of which would be detrimental to the local
economy. SWAP, on the other hand, would save jobs, retain billions of dollars in
the local economy, and maintain the present quality of life for San Diegans by
providing a reliable and guaranteed supply of water during water shortages.
SWAP builds upon MWD's stated water supply reliability goal of 1'providing
100 percent of full service wholesale water demands 90 percent of the time, and
never providing less than 80 percent of full service wholesale demands." SWAP
proposes to make up for the 20 percent reduction in deliveries during water
shortages by combining a 1 0 percent volui~itary water conservation effort with
water transfers for the remairnng 10 percent. The Mayor presented SWAP to the
City Council on December 5, 1994, and was unanimously approved.
Following the City Council's adoption of SWAP, the Mayor made a presentation on
SWAP to the CWA Board. As the City's water wholesaler and an MWD member
agency, support from the CWA Hoard for SWAP was integral to its implementation.
The CWA Board has embraced the objectives of SWAP, and directed their staff to
pursue storage agreements with other water agencies in order to provide
additional water to the San Diego region during times of shortage. The City of
Pasadena is one agency that the CWA is in discussions with regarding using their
groundwater basins for storage.
Also in the spirit of SWAP, in September 1995, the CWA Board of Directors
approved opening discussions with the Imperial Irrigation District (lID) regarding
a long-term transfer of conserved water from the Imperial Valley to San Diego.
The goal of the negotiations with lID is to reach mutually beneficial water transfer
terms. An agreement between the two parties would make available water
conserved by the lID that the CWA would agree to purchase on mutually
acceptable terms. For the CWA, the key issues are the amount of water available
for transfer, price of the water, duration of the contract, and means to transport
the supply. The talks should be completed by Spring 1996.
Surface Water Management
The MWD adopted a Seasonal Storage Program to maximize the amount of water
maintained in local reservoirs. Under the Seasonal Storage Program, local runoff
and imported water are stored in the reservoirs during the winter months
(November - April) for use in the summer to reduce peaking of the imported water
system. The three principle goals of the program are to: 1) achieve greater
conjunctive use of imported and local water supplies, 2) encourage construction
of additional local production facilities, and 3) reduce dependency on MWD's
water deliveries during summer months.
50
PAGE 69 Show Image
Water Repurification
The City of San Diego and CWA are currently studying the feasibihty of processing
reclaimed water through an advanced water treatment process to produce
repurified water. The goal of the Water Repurification Project (Project) is to
develop a local potable water source that is reliable and renewable, thus
expanding the San Diego region's total available water resources. In the initial
Project, reclaimed water would be further treated to meet or exceed stringent state
and federal potable water quality standards. The repurified water produced by the
advanced treatment facility would then be pumped to a surface reservoir for
blending with raw water supplies.
The Repurified Water Review Committee (Review Committee), a 17 member panel
composed of area residents, was formed to evaluate the project and provide public
involvement to this process. The Review Committee represents San Diego's
diverse region and includes members of the Sierra Club, Biomedical Industries
Council, and the San Diego Taxpayers Association. The Review Committee has
endorsed the water repurification study, and concluded that "sufficient
information exists to establish the suitability of repurified water as a supplement
to San Diego County's water supply." The Review Committee encouraged the City
and CWA to continue with the study and eventual environmental review process.
The City's Total Resource Recovery Prqject's findings provided the documentation
of viable alternatives for wastewater management and potable water supply. The
completed studies have provided some of the baseline data that is being used to
support the Pr(~ject. In 1994, the California State Department of Health Services
gave conceptual approval to the Project and called for additional studies of the
proposed system's reliability and reservoir operations. If additional studies and
the subsequent demonstration project prove successful, this Project could be fully
operational by the early 2000's.
The City and CWA are currently evaluating alternafives for siting repurified water
treatment facilities and selecting the reservoir. One alternative being considered
is locating the state-of-the-art advance treatment and disinfection systems at the
North City Water Reclamation Plant site to further process the tertiary reclaimed
water. The repurified water would be pumped to the San Vicente Reservoir to be
blended with raw water. The blended water would be stored in the reservoir for a
predetermined length of time before being conveyed to the Alvarado Plant for
treatment and disinfection prior to distribution through the City's potable water
system.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
The Metropolitan Sewerage System (MSS) services the City of San Diego and
fourteen participating agencies. The system's infrastructure consists of sewer
51
PAGE 70 Show Image
interceptors, two large wastewater pump stations, three large force mains, sludge
drying beds on Fiesta Island, an advanced pnmaiy treatment plant located at
Point Loma, and an ocean outfall. These existing wastewater treatment facilities
and planned water reclamation plants are displayed in Figure 3.3.
Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant (PLWTP) was first placed in operation
as a primary treatment plant in 1963. Since that time, the PLWTP has been
expanded and upgraded several times to its present advanced primary treatment
capacity of 219 MGD. The plant is currently being expanded and upgraded in
order to increase the advanced primary treatment capacity to 240 MGD of annual
average daily flow and to 430 MGD of peak flow. The maximum limitations are
due to the current hydraulic capacities of the influent sewage conveyance system.
The plant is equipped to use chemical coagulants to achieve 80 percent suspended
solids removal on a monthly average. The existing PLWTP facilities layout is
shown in Figure 3.4. Solids are stabilized in anaerobic digesters, and treated
effluent is discharged to an ocean outfall and diffuser. Digested solids, known as
biosolids, are pumped to Fiesta Island for dewatering.
Table 3.4 summarizes the projected population and wastewater flows for the years
1995 to 2015. Wastewater flow projections were developed from both population
projections and projected increases in commercial, industrial, and public facility
land use density. Consequently, this Table does not indicate a direct relationship
between population and wastewater flow.
Table 3.4
PROJECTED METRO SYSTEM POPULATION and WASTEWATER FLOW
Ycar ?op~i1~tion Average Wastewater
(Millions) Flow
(MGi))
1995 ____________________
___________________ 1.80
2000 2.04
2005 2.21
2010 2.35
2015 2.48 248
52
PAGE 71 Show Image
Figure 3.3
Metropolitan Sewerage System
Existing and Planned Facilities
Metropolitan Wastewater Plan
~
~ /:I~~ 5588
t- ~ .5 *~`?~T~k Pe'w*quitos
Procenlag Fec*des ~ Mut~4 El Cajon Gardens
~i- U ~
%-.s½~ *~ ~ .*/.`Stut~n~'*'1
Point Loma Coronado ~ .
PROPOSED FA~L1TY
0 EXISTING FACILITY
PROPOSED PIFSUNES
I. by San Diego MEXiCO I U U U U EXI~NG RPEUNES
WRP WAIER RECLAMA~ON PLA~IT
PUMP FA~LmES RELATED TO
STATiON 2 NO~OSOUDS
53
PAGE 72 Show Image
FIGURE 3.4
½ ~
¾' (~ ½,
k~ ~` ~ L-
~` ~- ~\ ~ CONJROI BUI~~ ~ ~ ~tlO1DERS)
~
TE~ ~ ~ ~O 7 GAS
Co ~
0 ~ -,
~ -
c~o~~'
UPGRADE CHE~~ ~
~ ~ ~.` ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ . - `~ i/ DIGESTE~NO ~ : D~ESTER NO 1Gb: ~
I SYSTEM & ROAD
~Jl SSING FACILmES
AI~TERNA~ DIGESTER NO 9 ~ I
NORTh Acc~~OAD? (
OPERATIONS EXPANSION
TO NAVY BUILDING JCJ ~ SO~Jm EFFLUENT NEW FACILiTy
`~½4 MODIFY EXISTING FACILITY
N. EFFLUENT UTFALL CONNECTOR
I SCREENING I
~ PROTE~flON IMPROVEMENTS HYDROELECTRI; `~ ~ ~TUNNEL0OUTFALL CONNECTOR
I NORTH SHORELINE STRUCTURE
111.300 FT. MINIMUM)
~¼ ~`\~ FACILITY
I)~ `~ POINT LOMA TUNNEL OUTFALLI
EXISTING
\\ ` OUTFALL POINT LOMA TIE-IN STRUCTURE
PROPOSED POIMT LOMA
WASTEWATER TREATMEI\IT PLANT
EXTEND FACIUTY UPGRADES
(12,500 FTLE~)/ ~
OUTFAL
PAGE 73 Show Image
Current and Future South Bay Projects
The proposed Metropolitan Wastewater Plan includes an expansion of the
wastewater treatment infrastructure in the South Bay.
South Bay Treatment Plant
The South Bay Treatment Plant is planned to be a conventional secondary
treatment plant to treat non-reclaimable wastewater. Solids would be conveyed
to the proposed Southern Sludge Processing Facility. Initial capacity of the
treatment plant will be 21 MGD with an ultimate expansion capacity of 56 MGD.
Southern Sludge Processing Facihty
Sludge produced at the South Bay secondary treatment and reclamation plants
will be piped to the Southern Sludge Processing Facility for thickening, anaerobic
digestion, dewatering and storage. Digested sludge will be trucked for ultimate
offsite beneficial use or disposal.
WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE
Water Reclamation Master Plan and City Council Policy
On November 28, 1988, City Council Policy 400-12, "Implementation of Water
Reclamation/Reuse," was adopted (Appendices D and E). This policy established
the need for: 1) preparation of a Reclamation Facihties Master Plan, 2) drafting of
a Mandatory Use Ordinance, 3) preparation of a Mandatory Water Quality
Management Plan, 4) conducting a Public Information Program, and
5) development of Rules and Regulations to implement the policy. The policy also
established a target goal to reclaim and reuse a minimum of 70,000 acre-feet per
year (AFY) by the year 2010.
The Metropolitan Wastewater Department (MWWD) , formerly the Clean Water
Program for Greater San Diego (CWP), has satisfied the above requirements.
Extensive master planning efforts carried out by the CWP between 1988 and 1992
resulted in the preparafion of the Water Reclamation and Reuse Conceptual Master
Plan in 1 989 and the Reclaimed Water Distribution Master Plans in 1 992 . This was
immediately followed by the preparation of the Addendum Master Plan for the
Northern and Central Seruice Areas, in response to the City Council~s adoption of
the Consumers' Alternative.
55
PAGE 74 Show Image
Continued planning efforts, recent legislation and court actions have resulted in
a number of changes in program direction which have led to the implementation
of an optimized reclamation/reuse system for the Northern Service Area.
Consequently, the reuse goal established by Council Policy 400-12 and the
existing master plans are outdated.
Although the Water Reclamation Ordinance does not require updating the master
plans until 1997, the master plans are now being revised in order to reflect
current direction, establish the system being implemented and enable the
development of an appropriate financing plan. In addition, a new reuse goal that
is consistent with the current direction needs to be determined. The update is
scheduled to be completed by the end of calendar year 1995.
Current Water Reclamation Facilities
For the past 50 years imported water has met the vast majonty of San Diego's
needs. During the recent six year drought, City residents became aware of how
precarious our potable water supply is after they were asked to reduce water
consumption by twenty percent.
Up to ninety percent of San Diego's water is imported from the Colorado River or
the SWP. The imported water supply is considered limited and future reliability
is uncertain. Arizona and Nevada are increasing their allotments from the
Colorado River and legal, political, and environmental factors further limit the
supply of water from Northern California.
To meet `future demands, and avoid water shortages while lessening our
dependence on imported water, the City of San Diego is developing and
implementing innovative water management strategies. These include cost-
effective local water reclamation and repunfication projects, conservation and
groundwater recharge.
Total Resource Recovery Project
Water reclamation is not new to San Diego. Since the late 1970's the Water
Utilities Department has been working on a Total Resource Recovery Project
(Recovery Prqject) to reclaim water. Funded in part by State and Federal grants,
this aquatic treatment system uses ponds stocked with water hyacinths, small
fish, crayfish and naturally occurring organisms to create an ecosystem that
effectively removes solids from the water. Up to 90 percent of the pollutants can
be eliminated from the wastewater in hyacinth ponds. The secondary treated
water is then pumped through an advance water treatment system at the plant
56
PAGE 75 Show Image
that uses chemically enhanced coagulation, sand filtration, reverse osmosis, air
stripping and granular activated carbon filtering to remove virtually all the
remaining impurities.
The Recovery Project was divided into three phases. The first two phases, Aqua
I and Aqua II, were considered research pilot projects. Operating in six ponds in
Mission Valley, the project successfully proved that the technology and treatment
system functioned reliably. Up to 300,000 gallons of wastewater per day was
reclaimed at the Aqua II facihty. The reclaimed water was then sold to CALTRANS
to irrigate nearby freeway landscaping.
In 1993, the Project evolved into Aqua III, the demonstration phase of the
program. Relocated to the northern portion of the City, the Aqua III (San Pasqual
Aquatic Treatment Facility) grew to 24 holding ponds capable of producing one
MGD of reclaimed water from wastewater generated in the Rancho Bernardo area.
Although not part of the City's Metro Wastewater Treatment System, the San
Pasqual Aquatic Treatment Facility (San Pasqual) is functioning as both a
research project and a commercial treatment plant in order to demonstrate that
the treatment system can perform successfully and reliably in a full-scale
application.
In October 1994, the first customer was retrofitted and connected to the
San Pasqual plant's reclaimed water distribution system. The customer, a
homeowner 5 association, is using reclaimed water to irrigate green belts in a
residential community. Eventually, at least four more customers, including
CALTRANS, two wholesale nurseries and a community park will be served by the
San Pasqual demonstration project. The plant's 22 acre site will also be irrigated
with reclaimed water. Eventually the plant may be expanded to serve other
markets in San Pasqual and Rancho Bernardo.
PROPOSED RECLAMATION FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AND PROJECT
REPORT
North City Water Reclamation Plant (NCWRP)
The North City Water Reclamation Plant (NCWRP) site is situated in the southeast
quadrant of the junction of 1-805 and Eastgate Mall Road. Construction activities
at the 39 acre site began in 1993, and the 30 MGD plant will be in full operation
and producing Title 22 reclaimed water by mid-1997. The plant will serve the
northern part of the San Diego metropolitan area with approximately 100 square
miles of tributary area. Currently, an average dry-weather wastewater flow of
approximately 22 MGD is generated in this area.
57
PAGE 76 Show Image
According to the onginal plan projections, the Phase 1 NCWRP capacity of
30 MGD would be followed by a second phase expansion to 40 MGD and a
possible final expansion to a total capacity of 55 MGD (after 2030). Actual
phasing of expansion is still uncertain.
The plant will be operated to produce secondary effluent and reclaimed water. The
demand for reclaimed water will vaiy seasonally and will increase as new
customers are connected to the system. Reclaimed water produced by the plant
will be distributed to identified users in the Northern service area through what
is now known as the "optimized" reclaimed water distribution system. Treated
water in excess of the reclaimed water demand will be sent to the planned Water
Repurification Project. Sludge will be pumped to the Northern Sludge Processing
Facility (NSPF') for thickening, digestion, and dewatering. Excess NCWRP
secondary effluent will be conveyed through a separate effluent system to the
PLWTP and ocean outfall.
Mission Valiey Water Reclamation Plant (MVWRP)
The planned Mission Valley Water Reclamation Plant (MVWRP) will provide
reclaimed water to the lower San Diego River (Mission Bay/Mission Valley) service
area. The MVWRP is planned to be located on the 18 acre Camino Del Rio North
site previously occupied by the City's Aqua I and II Plants. The MVWRP treatment
process and support facilities would be similar to the NCWRP's with the exception
of flow equalization (the MVWRP would be a constant-flow facility, thus no flow
equalization would be required).
An initial capacity of7.5 MGD was previously projected to be on-line around 2010,
with an ultimate expansion ofthe MVWRP to 15 MGD. Reclaimed water produced
by the plant would be conveyed through a reclaimed water distribution system to
local reuse markets. Excess (secondaiy) effluent would be discharged to the ocean
through the PLWTP and ocean outfall. The actual timing and phasing of the
MVWRP is being reevaluated at this time.
South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP)
The South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP) will be an integral part of, and
located within, the South Bay Secondary Treatment Plant site. The site is at Dairy
Mart Road, just north of the Mexico border. The SBWRP is planned to be on line
in 2001, with an initial capacity of 7 MGD. The proposed initial capacity of the
secondary plant is 2 1 MGD and is expected to be needed by 2008. The secondary
plant is ultimately planned to be expanded to 56 MGD. Wastewater conveyed to
the secondary treatment and the water reclamation plants will be separated in
58
PAGE 77 Show Image
order to ensure suitable (lower salirnty concentrations) wastewater flows into the
water reclamation plant. Initially, sludge from these facilities will be conveyed
through existing sewer tributaries to the PLWTP. Sludge processing facilities will
be added on site, concurrent with the addition of secondary treatment.
Reclaimed water produced by the plant is planned to be delivered to users within
the City of San Diego, as well as to outside users such as Otay Water District, the
County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista. During periods of minimal
demand, effluent disposal will occur via the South Bay Ocean Outfall that is being
constructed by the federal government.
Otay Valley Water Reclamation Plant (OVWRP)
The future Otay Valley Water Reclamation Plant (OVWRP) will be located on the
Otay Valley Road East site. The 20 acre site is located inside the proposed Otay
Valley Regional Park, on the south side of the Otay River, two miles east of 1-805,
and three miles north of the International border. The OVWRP is estimated to
have a capacity of 18 MGD. The OVWRP treatment process and support facilities
would be similar to the NCWRP's. Due to its location, reclaimed water produced
by this plant probably will be delivered to markets outside the City. An effluent
pipeline is anticipated to be built from the plant to the South Bay Ocean Outfall
for effluent disposal during periods of low reclaimed water demands.
Sludge would be pumped through a dedicated pipeline to a trunk sewer for
conveyance by the South Metro Interceptor System to the PLWTP.
Reclamation' Treatment System
All reclamation plants will provide disinfection, grit removal, pnmary
sedimentation, conventional aeration, secondary clarification, filtration, and
disinfection. Flow equalization will be provided in the on-line plants. Filtration
and disinfection of effluent from the secondary clarification process would
comprise the tertiary treatment of wastewater mandated by Title 22 of the
California Admirnstrative Code to assure a reclaimed water quality that is safe for
unrestricted body contact.
A minimum of four units are planned in each plant for pnmary sedimentation,
conventional aeration, secondary clarification, and filtration, so that if one of the
units were taken out of service for maintenance, the remaining units would not
be loaded in excess of one third more than their design capacity.
To make the water reclamation plants good neighbors, the control of odors and
noise are an important element of the facility plan. To control odors, all the
59
PAGE 78 Show Image
odor-generating operations such as headworks, grit chamber, pnmary
sedimentation tanks, equalization and aeration tanks will be covered and
continuously ventilated. Exhaust from these units will be treated by chemical
scrubbers and activated carbon absorption units to reduce wastewater odors to
adjacent residential and commercial areas. Similarly, all the noise-generating
components of the plants such as pumps, blowers, and compressors will be
enclosed to reduce their noise levels.
Reclaimed Water Distribution Facilities
Separate distribution systems are planned for the City's Northern, Central and
Southern service areas. The distribution systems will be constructed on a
schedule which will allow the delivery of reclaimed water to the markets when the
water reclamation plants are on-line. Projected reclaimed water demands that the
proposed system will serve are shown in Table 3.5.
Northern
The proposed "optimized Reclaimed Water Distribution 5y5~~~lY for the Northern
service area consists of pipelines, pumping stations and a storage tank that will
provide reclaimed water from the NCWRP to users in the Northern service area.
The distribution system is currently under design and scheduled to begin
construction early next year. The "optimized" system was defined as the
maximum benefit derived from the delivery of reclaimed water and the
opportunities presented by the proposed water repurification project. It is
projected that over 9,000 AFY of reclaimed water demand will be met by the
system.
Central
Under the "optimized" system, the Central service area will not be served from the
NCWRP as previously planned. It is now envisioned that this area will be limited
to a distribution system from the future MVWRP and will deliver approximately
3,000 AF'Y to users in Mission Valley from Mission Gorge on the east to Mission
Bay Park on the west.
Southern
Recent planning efforts have identified several alternative distribution systems to
deliver reclaimed water from the SBWRP to users in the Southern service area.
It is anticipated that about 3,000 AFY ofreclaimed water demand within the south
bay area will be supplied by the SBWRP. Ultimately, the system will have the
capacity to deliver 6,000 AFY.
PAGE 79 Show Image
Table 3.5
PROJECTED RECLMMED WATER DEMAND
Central 0 0 3,421 3,421
Southern 0 3,000 6,000 6,000
Total I 8,697 ~ 11,697 ~ 15,137 ~ 15,337
Market Assessment
The MWVVD's Water Reclamation Marketing Analyst position was created in 1991
in order to identi~ and gather information from potential reclaimed water
customers as well as educate the general public about water reclamation. The
marketing analyst is responsible for production of water reclamation promotional
materials and brochures, as well as a quarterly newsletter targeting potential
customers.
Reclaimed water market assessments have been a continual process during the
planning stages of the City's reclaimed water system. In July 1989, the Water
Reclamation and Reuse Conceptional Master Plan identiiied major reclaimed water
market service areas in the San Diego region. In 1992, reclaimed water
distribution system master plans were completed for the Northern, Central and
Southern service areas to further define the potential reclaimed water market and
determine the distribution facilities necessary to meet those demands.
To initially define the three service areas, 4,500 questionnaires were sent out to
all large commercial water users, businesses and industries with an industrial
waste permit, and all Water Utilities' customers with an existing irrigation meter.
Based on the results of these surveys and further investigation into irrigation
meter records, a second technical questionnaire was mailed to larger users. Users
were categorized into groups based on their annual non-potable uses: Type 1
using 12 AFY or more; Type lA using between 4 and 12 AFY; and Type 2 using
less than 4 AFY. In addition, all Type 1 users were personally contacted and given
more detailed informahon about the City's water reclamation program. These
users included golf courses, cemeteries, homeowner associations, parks and other
large irrigation users. As a follow-up, Letters of Intent were mailed to all Type 1
Users. The letters are not legally binding, but they do serve to confirm and venf~~
the signer's interest in purchasing reclaimed water from the City. When this
original market assessment was completed, over 130 letters of intent were
returned representing an estimated demand of 13,000 AF'Y.
61
PAGE 80 Show Image
as well as identify new potential customers, the reclaimed water market
assessments for the City's Northern arid Southern service areas were updated.
These studies were completed in November 1994 (Figure 3.5) and March 1995
(Figure 3.6), respectively.
Figures 3.5 and 3.6 display the types of uses for reclaimed water demands in the
Northern and Southern service areas. It should be noted that not all potential
users identiiied in the two market assessments will be served reclaimed water due
to economic constraints, institutional limitations or regulatory restrictions.
Figure 3.5
Reclaimed Water Potential Demand
Northern S ervice Area
landscape
98.14%
agriculture 1.00%
0.86%
0 agriculture
~ landscape
E industrial
As seen in Figure 3.5, the Northern service area, 139 Type 1 and 189 Type lA
users were identified. This represents an existing annual reclaimed water demand
of 7,637 AFY for Type 1 users and 1 ,48 1 AF'Y for Type lA users, for a potential
total demand of9,118 AFY.
62
PAGE 81 Show Image
Figure 3.6
ReclaimedWater Potential Demand
Southern ServiceArea
landscape
39.86%
agriculture
27.50%
industrial groundwater
0.21% recharge
32A3%
5 agriculture
~ landscape
~ groundwater recharge
E industrial
The market assessment in the Southern service area identified 49 Type 1 and 74
Type lA users. Collectively they represent a total demand of 5,520 AF'Y
(5,025 AFY for Type 1 users and 495 AFY for `I~pe lA users).
Customer Reclaimed Water System Retrofits
The scope of retrofitting or modif~~ing existing irrigation or industnal water
systems to use reclaimed water will vary greatly depending on the user. Large
users, such as golf courses and urnversities, may need to install additional piping
to carry the reclaimed water throughout the area they desire coverage. For
smaller users, the retrofit may be easier. `I~ically, if a small user already has an
irrigation system that is separate from the on-site potable water system,
retrofitting can be relatively minor. Installation of a new reclaimed water meter
with connection, backflow prevention device, appropriate signage and tagging or
marking, may be all that is required. Rules and Regulations for Reclaimed Water
Use and Distribution Within the City of San Diego were developed in 1993 to
establish procedures for the distribution and use of reclaimed water.
63
PAGE 82 Show Image
The CWA and the City co-sponsor a Reclaimed Water Site Supervisor Training
Class. The one day class was created to provide irrigation supervisors with a
basic understanding of reclaimed water as well as how to operate a successful
reclaimed water irrigation system. The course was developed by the CWA, City,
County Health Services Department, City of Escondido, County of San Diego and
Carlsbad Municipal Water District.
The Water Utilities Department is currently developing an action plan, that
includes a financial assistance component, to assist North City reclaimed water
customers with retrofitting their existing systems.
FINANCIAL INCENTWE PROGRAMS
Local Prolects Program
The Local Projects Program (LPP), funded and administered by the MWD, is
intended to encourage the development and use of reclaimed water in order to
reduce the demand for imported water supplies. MWD determined that
implementation of reclamation projects would result in a regional benefit for their
entire service area, since reclaimed water could augment local water supplies.
Currently the LPP provides a financial contribution of $ 1 54 per acre-foot of
reclaimed water beneficially reused within MWD's service area.
On February 25, 1991, the City entered into 25 year agreements with the CWA
and MWD to provide LPP incentives for the North City Water Reclamation Project
and the San Pasqual Aquatic Treatment Project. The North City project will
receive financial incentives for up to 17,000 AFY of reclaimed water beneficially
reused while the much smaller San Pasqual project's rebate will be based on up
to 1 ,OOO AFY. A third LPP application will be submitted to MWD for consideration
once the City determines the best distribution system alternative for the South
Bay Water Reclamation Project.
Reclaimed Water Development Fund
In addition to MWD's LPP program, the CWA provides its own financial incentives
for water reclamation projects meeting LPP critena. The CWA established the
Reclaimed Water Development Fund (Development Fund) to provide their member
agencies with financial assistance for the development of cost-effective water
reclamation projects that replace the demand for imported water. The amount of
funding provided is based on the applicant's actual financial need after
consideration is given to all other sources of revenue. The maximum contribution
is currently set at $ 1 OO for each acre-foot of reclaimed water beneficially reused.
64
PAGE 83 Show Image
The City entered into the Development Fund agreement with the CWA on
December 5, 1994 for the North City Reclaimed Water Distribution System and
San Pasqual's Reclaimed Water Distribution System. The City will receive $ 100
for every acre-foot of reclaimed water beneficially reused; up to 17,000 AFY for the
North City project and up to 1 ,000 AFY for the San Pasqual Project.
REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION
Southern California Water Reclamation and Reuse Study
The City of San Diego is one of eight major California water agencies working
towards developing regional long-range water management strategies by
participating in the United States Bureau of Reclamation's Southern Calzfornia
Comprehensive Water Reclamation and Reuse Study. The six year reuse study
encompasses various municipalities and districts in Southern California, from the
Mexican Border to Ventura County (Figure 3.7).
The goal of the regional study is to promote more efficient use of water resources
by increasing the use of reclaimed water. Since nearly half of California's expected
population growth over the next 25 years will be in Southern California, innovative
water management strategies are a must if we are to meet our future water
demands.
The study began with data collection, compilation and generation of baseline
information for total water supply and demand, reclaimed water supply and
demand and groundwater recharge demands. The data will be used in an
economic distribution model to optimize the links between reclaimed water supply
and demand. Potential region-wide projects will be identified to maximize cost-
effective water reclamation. Potential and planned projects will be investigated in
more detail during subsequent study phases.
65
PAGE 84 Show Image
Figure 3.7
e Ca~ *C e~iv~ rR ti
_____________ ______ _______ K
SAN LUIS
OBISPO
SAN BERNARDINO ~ U
~ p
U
U
~ q
` ¼
~
~~S¾ ,
Angel ~ ~GE U
~ StudyArea
*
SIANEGO IMPERIAL ~
I
I
SCC~I'fRR Study Area Boundary ~CAL-I ` ` ~ ` `a
Hydrologic Regions ~ `<"4<
66
PAGE 85 Show Image
BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT AND BENEFICIAL USE PLAN
The Biosolids Benefidal Use Plan, originally adopted by the City Council in 1993
and updated in 1995, sets forth a strate~ for the beneficial use of the City's
biosolids generated in the Metro System. It calls for a diversified biosolids
management program to maximize the cost-effective reuse of the biosolids. The
plan is consistent with state and federal regulations.
The organic content of the biosolids can provide nutrients to soil damaged by
years of commercial fertilizer use. Research repeatedly illustrates how crop yields
increase and irrigation water demand decreases when biosolids are applied to the
soil. Biosolids are part of nature's nitrogen cycle, and recycling them as soil
nutrients is good for the environment.
Under the beneficial use program, the City plans to direct its biosolids to multiple
contractors operating concurrently to produce diverse products for distribution
and sale to different markets. This strategy is designed to provide reliable,
relatively low risk, competitively priced biosolid recycling. The City's goal is to
beneficially use 100 percent of the biosolids produced in the Metro System.
The Metro System wastewater treatment and water reclamation plants will
continuously remove solids from wastewater. Sludge collected in the PLWTP is
anaerobically digested onsite, then pumped to Fiesta Island for dewatering. The
Fiesta Island operations are scheduled to be relocated in 1997 to the Northern
Sludge Processing Facility (NSPF) at NAS Miramar, which is currently under
construction.
Wastewater biosolids from the North City and future Mission Valley water
reclamation plants will be conveyed to the NSPF for digestion and dewatering. This
facility will be capable of producing and storing stabilized dried cake.
The City's first large scale biosolids competition program will be a biosolids
dryer/pelletization system. Dewatered biosolids will be dried in an enclosed
facility and made into pellets suitable for use as fertilizer. The dryer facility will
be built at the NSPF site.
Another large scale biosolids competition program being pursued by the City, for
installation at NSPF, is cogeneration. Methane, a byproduct of biosolids
processing and decomposition of wastes at the adjacent landfills, will be used to
create an energy source for this entire facility.
In addition to these two facilities at NSPF, the City annually solicits bids from
private firms for offsite beneficial use and disposal. Contracts awarded in the past
have included composting, direct application to agncultural land, and landfill
disposal. A goal of the beneficial use program is to select contractors in the future
who will beneficially use the biosolids and not dispose of this valuable resource.
67
PAGE 86 Show Image
CURRENT WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
Historically, local water production has been as high as 96,775 acre-feet, or 46
percent of the total supply available in F'iscal Year 1983-84 (Table 3.6). The City's
current average yield of all impounding facilities is about 40,000 AFY. This yield
could be enhanced by the selection of surface and ground water improvement
concepts recommended by the recently completed Reservoir Management Plan.
Typically, the ratio of local water production to the City's total supply ranges from
10 to 20 percent. This section highlights the City's current policies and plans
which respond to water supply deficiencies, and maximize distribution system
efficiency.
The Water Utilities Department feels that the development of any significant,
additional water sources in the region is limited. The City is also investigating
methods to maximize the yield from existing facilities at Lake Hodges Reservoir
and through the Reservoir Management Plan study.
As an emergency water supply, the Water Utilities Department maintains six-
tenths of the City's annual requirement in storage at Lake Skinner, San Vicente,
El Capitan, Lower Otay, Murray, and Miramar reservoirs. However, delivery of
these emergency supplies to the City's North City area is compromised by limited
emergency storage capacity. Construction of a tie-in to Hodges Reservoir and/or
the construction of large conveyance pipelines from San Vicente Reservoir to the
Miramar Plant would help correct this deficiency by providing a water supply to
this facility.
Since any significant water supply interruptions to the City's facilities would only
occur as a result of a supply deficiency to the MWD, please refer to the MWD's
Regional Urban Water Management Plan.
Water Exchanges or Transfers
City Council Policy 400-4 (Appendix F) requires the City's Water Utilities
Department to maintain six-tenths of the annual water demand for emergency
supply of water for the City of San Diego and its contractees as active, available
storage at Skinner, San Vicente, El Capitan, Lower Otay, Murray, and Miramar
reservoirs. The City's extensive reservoir and distribution system combined with
the physical interconnection between the adjacent water districts' systems and the
City's results in increased regional system flexibihty during unanticipated
emergencies and short-term planned system interruptions. However, system
improvements to meet emergency demands in the North City area are needed.
Construction of a tie-in to Hodges Reservoir and or the construction of large
conveyance pipelines from San Vincente Reservoir to the Miramar Plant would
help correct the deficiencies in that system.
68
PAGE 87 Show Image
Table 3.6
City of San Diego
Water UtillUes Production
Local and Imported Water
FISCAL LOCAL C.W.A. TOTAL
YEAR AMOUNT PERCENT AMOUNT PERCENT PRODUCTION
1995 51,907.7 24.9% 156,518.9 75.1% 208,426.6
1994 56,118.4 26.6% 154,482.2 73.4% 210,600.6
1993 39,534.5 18.8% 170,709.4 81.2% 210,243.9
1992 18,961.6 9.8% 174,507.5 90.2% 193,469.1
1991 16,232.8 7.5% 200,945.4 92.5% 217,178.2
1990 16,657.4 6.9% 225,863.7 93.1% 242,521.1
1989 16,274.5 6.7% 228,438.7 93.3% 244,713.2
1988 21,474.1 9.2% 213,124.2 90.8% 234,598.3
1987 39,559.5 16.9% 194,483.8 83.1% 234,043.3
1986 49,963.5 22.0% 177,520.9 78.0% 227,484.4
1985 71,467.9 32.4% 149,312.9 67.6% 220,780.8
1984 96,775.6 46.1% 113,015.1 53.9% 209,790.7
1983 71,836.5 38.5% 114,759.4 61.5% 186,595.9
1982 62,696.9 31.6% 135,585.6 68.4% 198,282.5
1981 84,388.2 42.5% 114,288.5 57.5% 198,676.7
1980 70,930.3 39.4% 109,217.5 60.6% 180,147.8
1979 63,317.0 36.9% 108,482.7 63.1% 171,799.7
1978 22,584.9 14.0% 138,664.2 86.0% 161,249.1
1977 9,825.7 5.8% 159,544.0 94.2% 169,369.7
1976 11,945.5 6.8% 163,333.8 93.2% 175,279.3
1975 12,984.6 8.1% 147,043.4 91.9% 160,028.0
1974 15,193.7 9.5% 144,786.5 90.5% 159,980.2
1973 14,383.2 9.9% 130,304.3 90.1% 144,687.5
1972 18,098.5 12.2% 130,264.8 87.8% 148,363.3
1971 25,906.9 19.0% 110,439.9 81.0% 136,346.8
1970 29,153.3 22.6% 99,623.3 77.4% 128,776.6
1969 15,068.1 12.7% 103,748.6 87.3% 118,816.7
1968 22,552.2 19.0% 96,068.7 81.0% 118,620.9
1967 23,587.4 21.6% 85,738.2 78.4% 109,325.6
1966 10,204.9 9.5% 97,295.0 90.5% 107,499.9
1965 4,921.5 4.9% 95,032.4 95.1% 99,953.9
1964 4,497.7 4.6% 92,450.8 95.4% 96,948.5
1963 5,949.2 6.3% 88,153.9 93.7% 94,103.1
1962 8,102.1 9.4% 78,060.6 90.6% 86,162.7
1961 7,467.2 8.4% 81,718.1 91.6% 89,185.3
1960 21,250.1 25.0% 63,724.4 75.0% 84,974.5
1959 23,538.6 28.1% 60,120.1 71.9% 83,658.7
1958 6,853.8 9.4% 65,807.5 90.6% 72,661.3
1957 9,939.6 13.4% 64,166.3 86.6% 74,105.9
1956 10,429.7 14.5% 61,286.3 85.5% 71,716.0
1955 18,288.8 26.7% 50,322.3 73.3% 68,611.1
1954 31,921.0 48.6% 33,710.2 51.4% 65,631.2
1953 39,591.6 62.9% 23,355.6 37.1% 62,947.2
1952 15,013.4 27.2% 40,176.8 72.8% 55,190.2
1951 7,865.0 13.8% 49,121.0 86.2% 56,986.0
1950 17,503.0 33.4% 34,956.0 66.6% 52,459.0
TOTALS 1,312,717.6 19.8% 5,330,273.4 80.2% 6,642,991.0
Prepared By: L. Adams
Source: San Diego County Water Authority Annual Report
69
PAGE 88 Show Image
The City is one of the few water agencies in San Diego County with enough local
water supplies to meet a portion of its own demands while still maintaining a
short or long-term additional supply. The emergency reserve storage of water
within the City is for cushioning the impact of temporary interruptions of imported
water. Such storage will be in an amount sufficient to cover reasonable
anticipated needs until repairs can be made to supply lines in the event of
unforeseen emergencies or natural disasters, with the exception of Miramar.
The City has interconnections with a number of CWA member agencies including
Sweetwater Authority, Santa Fe Irrigation District, Otay Municipal Water District,
and the Helix and San Dieguito Water Districts.
Reservoir Management Plan
The City has undertaken a facilities planning and operational study of its
reservoirs called the Reservoir Management Plan. The project involved the
development of a mathematical model to simulate operations of the reservoir
system. The model will be used to increase operational efficiency by decreasing
water losses, pnmarily evaporation and overflows. The project investigated the
feasibility of new construction projects designed to increase local water yield,
including new dams and reservoirs, and additions to existing facilities such as
spillway gates and pipelines for water transmission where natural channels now
perform this function. In addition, the study projected future raw water storage
needs and presented projects to supply this storage for ultimate City build-out.
The project was completed in May 1995, at an estimated cost of $ 1 million.
Hodges Reservoir Pump Station and Pipeline
The City is currently studying a project to increase the utilization of Hodges
Reservoir. Currenfly, the City only uses Hodges to meet contractual demands of
the San Dieguito Water District and Santa Fe Irrigation District. Outlet facilities
at Lake Hodges are not presently connected to the City1s transmission system.
Once completed, the project will provide the pipelines and pump station necessary
to deliver water from Lake Hodges to the Miramar Plant.
The Dnnking Water Quality Improvement Program
This program is a multi-phased effort to upgrade the ~~~y?5 water treatment
facilities to meet more stringent and restrictive water quality standards. The first
project in this program is the Alvarado Plant Expansion, estimated to cost $90
million. The first phase of the project, the treated water reservoir upgrade, began
in December 1994, and is expected to be completed in January of 1997 at a cost
of approximately $26 million. The Alvarado Plant upgrade is expected to be
completed by 200 1 . Other projects in this program will result in the upgrade of
the City1s Miramar and Otay Plants and will study the need for a new facility.
Major renovations to the water treatment plants are needed to ensure that the
70
PAGE 89 Show Image
City's water quality and treatment goals, capacity requirements, and operational
needs will continue to be met in the 2 1 st centuiy.
Corrosion Control
When corrosion control related issues are not addressed in the planning and
design phases of projects, or if field inspections by personnel are ignored during
construction phases, destrucfion caused by corrosion will shorten the expected
design life of the structure. Corrosion is an important engineering component,
yet is typically overlooked in many projects. According to latest figures published
in 1995, the annual cost of combating corrosion in the United States is $300
billion dollars. Approximately $100 billion of this cost is avoidable and can be
saved by a broader use of corrosion resistant matenals.
Unfortunately, the City of San Diego is not exempt from the costly destruchon
caused by corrosion. In 1 99 1 , the Miramar 5 1 -inch water line failed due to
corrosion and it cost over $300,000 to place it back into service. Since then, the
pipeline has been internally re-lined with a steel cylinder.
The City of San Diego has been growing in population which, in turn, has initiated
an increase in building. With this, the City's infrastructure has become a very
complex network of underground utilities. To add to this complexity, the City
must comply with governmental regulations on most projects. Additionally, most
projects now include increased code compliance in the areas of public safety,
health, and the environment. Due to the complexity of these issues, corrosion
control personnel must have the training and expertise to effectively deal with
them. In addition to maintenance and repair costs, damage claims to personal
property and the lack of including corrosion considerations in new or existing
structures adds to the overall cost of combating corrosion.
The City has recognized that corrosion engineenng is vital to the preservation of
the City1s infrastructure. The City is also aware of the expenditures for
maintenance repairs associated with corrosion, and has designated a Corrosion
Control Section to establish a corrosion mitigation program.
Water Main Break Study
The Water Utilities Department has implemented a Water Main Break Study in
an effort to help analyze water main breaks. When a main break occurs, soil
samples, and if possible, pipeline material samples are laboratory tested and
analyzed for specific characteristics that will assist in determining the cause of the
break. All data is compiled and reviewed for possible trends which may pinpoint
specific areas within the City susceptible to main breaks, or where special
measures should be taken to mitigate other potential main breaks. The database
also serves as an information source for the Water Utilities on-going pipe
replacement program where older cast iron pipes are replaced with PVC piping.
71
PAGE 90 Show Image
PAGE 91 Show Image
CHAPTER W. DROUGHT RESPONSE AND EMERGENCIES
The City of San Diego has created a van~ety of water conservation programs
throughout its history. Due to population growth and increased incidents of
drought, the City has endeavored to develop and implement water conservation
programs that seek to assure its customers a safe and reliable water supply. This
chapter will focus on the water conservation actions adopted and implemented by
the City in response to two recent, and severe state-wide droughts. A description
of the water management programs adopted by the City to mitigate or reduce
water supply shortages during emergency or drought conditions is also contained
in this chapter.
DROUGHT RESPONSE
Response to the 1976-77 Drought
1976-77 DroughtAction Plan
During the 1976-77 state-wide drought, the MWD requested a 10 percent
reduction in water consumption from all citizens in its service area. San Diego
residents responded by reducing water usage by almost 17 percent. The City
developed special public information programs designed to educate citizens about
the importance of saving water, while informing them about drought conditions.
Over 100,000 water-saver kits were distributed to City residents, water
conservation tip sheets were circulated city-wide, and a special water and sewer
bill insert was prepared encouraging customers to conserve water.
The City also participated in regional water conservation actvities implemented
by the CWA and the MWD. These two water agencies launched aggressive public
information campaigns designed to heighten public awareness of the need to
conserve water during the drought.
Response to the 1987-1992 Drought
1987-92 DroughtAction Plan
The Drought Action Plan prepared by the MWD in 1988, called upon member
agencies to reduce their demands on the MWD by 10 percent during the summer
months. The San Diego City Council responded by adopting a resolution on
June 20, 1988, calhng for a 10 percent voluntary reduction in water use during
the summer months. An evaluation of both City and County water consumption
found a net reduction of three to four percent between June and September, 1988.
73
PAGE 92 Show Image
The City's water conservation public information program enlarged its scope of
activities in response to the drought. Highlights of the 1988 drought-response
activities included:
. Distribution of over 7,000 conservation informational materials to
the public at the Del Mar fair.
* Contacting managers of apartments and condominiums, resulting in
the distribution of more than 25,000 water conservation kits.
* Twenty-seven turf audits were conducted at large apartment and
condominium complexes with three acres or more of turf.
* A brochure of the City's xeriscape demonstration garden, located at
a public libraiy, was produced.
. All City employees received, with their payroll checks, water
conservation fips and a letter from the City Manager urging them to
conserve water at home and at work.
City residents in the San Carlos and State College areas participated in a pilot
water conservation audit project sponsored by the MWD. Twenty two single-family
residences, and five multi-family units having above average water consumption
participated in this pilot program.
The audit consisted of an audit crew conducting an indoor and outdoor survey of
water usage; providing participants with specific recommendations on ways to
minimize consumption in the residence and on the landscape; furnishing a turf
irrigation schedule; and, supplying participants with two water efficient
showerheads and a soil moisture probe. An analysis of the program participants'
water usage recorded before and after the audit indicated that they reduced their
water consumption by an average of 2 16 gallons per day.
1989 DroughtAction Plan
At the direction of the City Council, an innovative public education and
information program was implemented during the summer of 1989. The goal of
this program was to increase the public's understanding of, and commitment to,
water conservation. This was accomplished by educating and inft~rming
San Diegans of the City's dependence upon imported water, and providing
information on water-saving practices for residential indoor and outdoor water
use. Highlights of this program included:
74
PAGE 93 Show Image
. Sponsoring water awareness activities including a `kick-off' event
at the San Diego Community Concourse; tours of the City's three
water treatment plants; and a special event held at Balboa Park
featuring utility vehicles and crews, entertainment, and informational
materials.
* A media campaign consisting of newspaper and radio advertising.
Newspaper ads focused on the City1s dependence upon imported
water. Conservation messages were broadcast with traffic reports on
twelve radio stations, including three Spanish-language stations.
* Bumper stickers displaying a water conservation message, were
distributed to City departments and placed on City vehicles. Bumper
stickers were also distributed to the public.
* Water Conservation brochures, kits, and other informational
materials were distributed. City residents were informed of these
items through public information displays, presentations made by
Water Conservation Program staff, and through water bill inserts and
bill messages.
The City's Water Conservation Program hired two part-time water conservation
field interns to work in conjunction with the summer water conservation program.
The goal of this program was to inform and educate customers about water
conservation through personal contact, and to distribute water conservation
materials and kits. Patterned after similar programs adopted by other water
agencies in Fresno, Santa Cruz, and the Bay Area, the water conservation field
interns responded to more than 160 water-waste complaints each month.
1990 DroughtAction Plan
As California entered its fourth consecutive drought year, the MWD devised a
Drought Action Plan and called upon its member agencies to reduce their water
demands by at least 10 percent during the summer months (June-September).
In response to the MWD1s request, the CWA requested that all of its member
agencies adopt and implement water conservation programs designed to save a
minimum of 10 percent. On May 21, 1990, the San Diego City Council adopted
a voluntary water conservation program with the goal of saving 1 0 percent
between June and September, 1990.
Former Mayor Maureen O'Connor chaired a Water Conservation Committee
composed of individuals representing 25 diverse organizations which included
environmental, religious, professional, real estate and labor organizations, and
75
PAGE 94 Show Image
several of the City's largest water customers such as the U.S. Navy and the San
Diego Unified Port Authority. Highlights of City1s 1990 drought campaign include:
* Distnbuting more than 450,000 conservation kits to City residents.
This was accomplished through 1) an arrangement with the
San Diego Union and Tribune newspapers which distributed 440,000
kits, county-wide, in a weekday edition; 2) City-wide public
information displays; 3) City employees; and, 4) customer requests.
* A Drought Tip Sheet water bill insert promoted water conserving
habits, provided practical water-saving tips, and informed San
Diegans about state-wide drought conditions was sent to 238,000
Water Utilities customers.
* The City sponsored water conservation messages which immediately
followed live radio traffic broadcasts. The conservation messages
aired during the month of June on twenty radio stations, including
five Spanish language stations.
* Water conservation tip sheets were distributed on a mass scale to all
City school students and employees, visitors to the San Diego Zoo
and Wild Animal Park, sports fans attending San Diego Padres
baseball games, and to employees of large companies such as
General Dynamics and Kelco.
* Special water conservation public service ads were prepared by local
television stations featuring local media personalities demonstrating
water-saving tips.
* Water conservation was the theme of articles that appeared in the
membership newsletters of Sea World, the San Diego Zoological
Society, Apartment Association, Chamber of Commerce, and
the Economic Development Corporation.
. The U.S. Navy and the Marine Corps developed programs aimed at
educating personnel about ways to save water at base installations
and at home.
. Taxi companies placed water conservation bumper stickers on their
taxi cabs.
* Conservation tips were also printed on the sides of milk cartons
distributed by local dairy, and on grocery store shopping bags.
76
PAGE 95 Show Image
. During August and September 1990, the Sari Diego Zoo and Wild
Animal Park offered free admission tickets to San Diegans presenting
water bills showing a decrease in water use of 1 0 percent or more
over the same period for the previous year.
. In conjunction with the CWA, the City developed a multi-family
showerhead retrofit program. Low-flow showerheads were given to
property management firms which installed them in pre-1981
multi-family units.
As a result of this comprehensive water conservation public information
campaign, the City saved 10.7 percent during the summer (June-September) of
1990.
1991 DroughtAction Plan
On December 1 1, 1990, the City Council adopted the Urban Water Management
Plan (Plan) and Conservation Program. Included in this document was a five-year
water conservation strategy promoting long-term conservation through public
education, and programs that encouraged City residents to install water-efficient
plumbing fixtures. In 199 1 , California was in the midst of its fifrh consecutive
drought year. The year began with below normal state-wide precipitation and
runoff levels, and cntically low reservoir storage levels. The City Council
responded to the worsening water supply outlook by declaring a drought
emergency and adopting a motion to achieve a 30 percent city-wide water
conservation goal in March 199 1 . The rains of "Miracle March" dramatically
reduced the state-wide severity of the drought, and the Council reduced the city-
wide conservation goal to 20 percent in April 199 1 . City residents demonstrated
their commitment to water conservation by conserving an average of 26 percent
between April and December 1 99 1.
Many water conservation measures approved by the City Council in 1990 were
developed and implemented in 199 1 . The following sections summarize some of
the major components of the City's response to the drought emergency.
. Residential i*~tenor Plumbing Retrofit Program. This city-wide program
distributed water-saving retrofit kits to 100,000 single-family
households. Each kit contained low-flow showerheads, toilet tank
displacement devices, and toilet leak detection tablets.
. Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Rebate Program (Rebate Program). The Rebate
Program promoted the installation of ultra-low flush toilets (ulfr's) by
providing customers with a financial incentive to conserve.
Residential customers installed more than 7,000 ulft's in 199 1.
77
PAGE 96 Show Image
. P'ibhc li-fonmation and Education Efforts. A variety of written
matenals were made available for customers including pamphlets
promoting water-efficient landscape, drip irrigation, drought tips, and
conservation around the home. More than 366,000 pieces of these
materials were distributed to city residents in 199 1 . Highlights of the
199 1 public information campaign included: a water bill insert
describing the severity of the drought; an insert in the Pacific Bell
Yellow Pages promoting water conserving habits and practical water-
saving tips; water conservation radio messages broadcast live in
coijunction with traffic reports; water conservation Speakers' Bureau
presentations; distributing conservation literature and spealling with
the public at community events; and, a brochure detailing water
conservation reference materials was made available to the public
through the City1s public libraiy system.
. The Water Conservation Hotline was installed in June of 1990 to
respond to customer requests for information and materials, and to
report instances of water waste. The automated Hotline operates
twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, and is staffed by water
conservation specialists during business hours.
1 992 Drought Action Plan
In 1992, the state was in its sixth drought year. While the rains of "Fabulous
February"' eased the severity of the drought, 1992 was classified as a critically dry
year. Many water resource officials compared the current drought to CaliforniaI 5
historically dry period of 1928-34. The City maintained its 20 percent
conservation goal established in April 199 1 . Between January and December
1992, the City achieved a 21 percent reduction in water consumption. The City's
Water Conservation Program developed and implemented several new
conservation programs in 1992 which are detailed below.
. The third and final phase of the Residential Interior Plumbing Retrofit
Program was implemented in the Fall of 1992. This program
furnished 150,000 single-family homes with water conserving retrofit
devices.
* The Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Rebate Program (Rebate Program) was
expanded to allow the participation of commercial and industrial
customers. More than 20,000 ulft's were installed in 1992.
78
PAGE 97 Show Image
* The City Fadhties Retrofit Progiam was implemented in July of 1992,
demonstrating the City's support and commitment to water
conservation through retrofitting city-owned and operated buildings
with ulfrts. More than 370 ulft's were installed in 52 City facilities
during the first five months of this program.
* The Multi-Family Plumbing Retrofit Program ran from July through
November 1992, distributing water conserving plumbing retrofit kits
to more than 100,000 multi-family units city-wide.
* The Mobile Home Showerhead Retrofit Program was implemented in
the Spring of 1992. More than 1,300 mobile homes were contacted
by trained crews who installed low-flow showerheads and compact
fluorescent lightbulbs. This was the first City water conservation
program that involved SDG&E as a partner.
. The Residential Water Survey Program (Suwey Program)was developed
to assist City residents in determining how much water is used inside
and outside their homes. More than 2,500 single-family households
participated in this pilot program phase.
. Through the Public i*~formation and Community Outreach Program,
Water Conservation staff attended 23 community events reaching an
audience of more than 890,000 people. A variety of water
conservation informational materials were distributed throughout the
year to city residents.
In February 1993, Governor Wilson declared an official end to the six year
drought, ending the longest recorded drought in California's history. The City's
Water Conservation Program continues to develop and implement innovative
programs to help city water customers use this precious resource more efficiently.
A complete account of the City's water conservafion efforts can be found in
Chapter V.
Supply Deficiencies That Occur Only During Periods of Drought
During the 1976-77 state-wide drought, San Diego residents voluntarily reduced
their water usage by 17 percent. The 1976-77 cutback occurred not because of
inadequate supplies, but as an effort to help mitigate the severe effects of the
drought in other areas of the state. In 1990, California's fourth consecutive year
of drought, the City saved 10.7 percent due to its comprehensive water
conservation program and public information campaign.
79
PAGE 98 Show Image
In April of 1991, the CWA reduced delivety allocations to each member agency by
20 percent of the agency S adjusted 1989-90 base year delivery. The CWA also
established a method to pay incentive credits to agencies reducing cumulative
deliveries below their allocations and accomplishing a 20 percent reduction in
water usage. Working together, all member agencies achieved at least a 20
percent level of conservation, with a City average of 28.6 percent, for the period
April through September 1991.
Supply Deficiencies That Occur On a Regular Basis
The MWD has experienced no regular or frequent water supply deficiencies in its
history. During the 1976-77 drought, delivery service to its member agencies was
not interrupted. In addition, the MWD was able to deliver water to other parts of
the state.
Ability to Meet Short-Term Deficiencies
Council Policy 400-4 (Appendix F), adopted by the City Council in 1973, mandates
the storage of a six-tenths of the annual water demand for emergency water
supply. The Reservoir Management Plan (see Chapter III) re-evaluated this policy
and its practical implementation to determine the facihty requirements for
ultimate expansion and growth of the City.
WATER EMERGENCY POLICIES
Emergency Storage of Water
In 1973, the San Diego City Council adopted Council Policy Number 400-4
(Appendix F), entitled Emergency StoTage of Water, which requires that the City
retain, at all times, an emergency supply of water in available storage equal to
six-tenths of the City's annual requirement. This policy was established to protect
City residents from water service interrupfion in the event of a flood, earthquake,
or sabotage destroying the aqueducts, canals, or pumping plants of the MWD or
the CWA.
The Water Utilities Department accounts for storage at the following reservoirs:
Lake Skinner, San Vicente, El Capitan, Lower Otay, Murray, and Miramar. The
active, available storage includes any water in the San Vicente Reservoir stored
to the account of the CWA or the MWD, but does not include any water stored in
El Capitan Reservoir by the Helix Water District. The storage also includes 60
percent of the active, available storage in MWD's Lake Skinner Reservoir. Active,
available storage is that portion of water which is above the lowest usable outlet
of each reservoir. The minimum required emergency storage varies depending on
80
PAGE 99 Show Image
demands forecast for the following six-tenths of the year. This ranges from
approximately 1 14,000 to 160,000 acre-feet depending on the coming season. At
the end of F'Y 95, available storage in the above mentioned reservoirs totaled
257,092 acre-feet. Total storage in the City's nine reservoirs was 406,817
acre-feet, with 83 percent of local origin and 17 percent from imported sources.
Only a few local water agencies, in addition to the City, have local water supplies
that can satisfy more than a fraction of their own demands much less provide a
short or long-term additional supply to the City. However, the emergency reserve
storage of water within the City is for the purpose of cushioning the impact of
temporary interruptions of imported water. Such storage will be in an amount
sufficient to cover reasonable anticipated needs until repairs can be made to
supply lines in the event of unforeseen emergencies or natural disasters.
The City has interconnections with a number of water agencies including CWA,
Sweetwater Authority, Helix and San Dieguito Water Districts, Santa Fe Irrigation
District and Otay Municipal Water District. The region's water system flexibility
is increased during unanticipated emergencies due to the City's extensive reservoir
and distribution system, and the physical interconnections with the systems of
adjacent water districts. These interconnections proved to be the salvation of
three water districts when, in late September 1990, a CWA pipeline carrying
treated water from the MWD's Lake Skinner Plant broke. Repair crews discovered,
when replacing the cracked pipeline, that an adjoining length ofpipe was damaged
and also needed to be replaced. These two events triggered a massive water
emergency for 400,000 residents living in the eastern and southern portions of
San Diego County.
The three water districts, which have minimal storage, were able to survive this
crisis by sharing surplus reservoir water, and by enacting restrictive water
conservation measures prohibiting outdoor water use. The City of San Diego was
able to provide assistance to these water districts via two emergency pipeline
connections. This situation demonstrated the importance of emergency
preparedness and regional system flexibility. It also increased the public's
awareness of the importance of water conservation.
The City's historical water consumption data for Fiscal Years 19 15 through 1995
is displayed in Figure 4. 1. The historical city-wide per capita water usage for the
same period in shown in Figure 4.2. The success of recent conservation efforts
is reflected in the downward trend exhibited in both Figures. The overall gallons
per capita per day for City residents covering Fiscal Years 1960 through 1995 is
represented in Figure 4.3.
81
PAGE 100 Show Image
CONSUMPTIQN FOR CITY OF SAN DIEGO
80000
I I I I I I I P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I I I 1111111
0 0 I I 4 -I I- -I I- I I- A I I I -I I I- 4 I ~ -I ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~ -I- ~ ~ I ~ -I- I ~ J I I- ~ ~ I ~ ~ I I -I J -I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
L I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I 11111111 I I I I I I I I I 111111 I I I I I
L ~ V I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 111111 I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I 111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
0 50000 il I III I I I I I I I 11111 I 11111 I 1111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IlIlIllIll I
I I r 1 I I 1 I I F ~ I I I ~ I I r ~ I I I I I ~ I I T I I I T I I I T I I I I I I I I I T I T I I I r I I I T I I I I I I r I I I r
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1111111
N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11111 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IllIllIllIll I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I lillIll I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I IlIlIllIll I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
30000 Il -: I ~ ~ I I L I I I L I I I ~ I I I L ~ I L ~ I I L I I I L ~ I I ~ I J I ~ I ~ I ~ ~ J I I I ~ I J I ~ j J I I ~ J I I ~ ~ I I j J I I L J I I L J I I ~
~ 0 0 0 0 I -: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1111111 I I I
N ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ I l r ~ l I r ~ I 1 r ~ I I t ~ ~ I r ~ I I r T I ~ 7 I I~ r T I 1 ~ 7 ~ 1 ~ ? ~ I r t ~ I ~ T ~ I r T ~ I t T ~ I l T ~ I I T ~ I I T ~ I ~ ~ I I r , I I
Ix) ~ ~ ~ 0 CV) (0 0) c\' I') ~ ~ ~ 0 C~ (0 0) C\l K') CO ~ ~ ~ 0 CY)
c\' c\j C\J c~ cq ~ Cr) ~ ~ ~ `0 I£) 10 (0 ~ (0 ~ ~ ~ ~ Co CO ~ 0) a) a)
a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a)
~ ~
FISCAL YEAR
NOTE:BASED ON C~Y OF SAN DIEGO ANNUAL REPORTS
PAGE 101 Show Image
PER CAPITA USAGE FOR CITY OF SAN DIEGO
GALLONS PER PERSON FOR FISCAL YEAR
70000--------------------------------I
6 0000--------J-----------I----------L----J----------L----J----------~ --------~----J-------
G
~ 50000 - - ~--------------------~----~----------~----~----------4---------~----~-------
L
L 40000--------------------------I
0
N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
~ 30000--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I l l I I I I I I I I I l I
I I I I I I l l I I I I I I I
~. I I I ~ I I I I
1£) 0 LO 0 II) 0 10 0 L() 0 I~) 0 L() 0 LO 0 II)
c\J c\l Cf) cv, ~ ~ U) I') ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a) a)
a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a)
FISCAL YEAR
PAGE 102 Show Image
PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION FOR CITY OF SAN DIEGO
C) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
240 --: I I I---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
~ 2 3 0 - - r1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
A 220 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
2 1 0 - ~-----------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - ~ - - L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - I L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - A L ~-----------------------------------------------------------------
~ 1 ~ 0 - - I I I----------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I------------------------------------------------------I I-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I
~ F) 1 6 0 - - ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - I L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - I L ~ L--------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - ~ - L ~ I I-------------------------------------
Co ~ ~ 30
1 20 - - ~ I------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - I L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - I L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - i - L ~-----------------------------------------------------------------
8 0 - - I I I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------r
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I
F) 5 0 - - ~-----------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - I L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - A L L----------------------------------------------------------------------------------J - - J - - ~ - - L L-----------------------------------------------------------------
I----------------------------------------------------------------------l I l l 1----------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I-----------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I S
0 C\J CV) ~ It) ~ ~ ~ a) 0 C\I CY) ~ L() ~ ~ CO ~ 0 C\1 ~ ~ LI) W ~ CO 0) 0 C~J ~) ~ 1£)
~ ~ (0 (0 ~ ~ (0 (9 (0 CD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.co Co CO CO ~ CO ~ ~ CO CO 0) 0) 0) 0) ~ a)
a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a)
S I ` ~ ~ ~
FISCAL YEAR
PAGE 103 Show Image
The projected worst case water supply shortfall is provided in Table 4. 1 The
water supply shortfall is calculated by comparing a projection for water
consumption with a 50 percent reduction in projected water delivery in each year.
This estimate is for a worst case imported water shortfall. Water consumption
was estimated by adding a two percent growth factor to the FY 95 projection. This
prqjection assumes a ten percent conservation level and also that ten percent of
the supply would be from runoff. Evaporation of water from City surface
reservoirs can exceed runoff. This table shows the amount of water that would
either be needed to be conserved or be withdrawn from the reservoir storage in
order to meet projected demands.
Table 4.1
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
WORST CASE WATER SUPPLY SHORTAGES
1997 226,706 113,353 90,682
1998 231,240 115,620 92,496
1999 235,865 117,933 94,346
2000 240,582 120,291 96,233
*Based on 2 percent growth. Estimate does not include outside agencies.
85
PAGE 104 Show Image
Emergency Water Conservation Ordinance
The San Diego City Council adopted a comprehensive Emergency Water
Conservation Ordinance in 1987, which imposes water use restricfions in four
progressive stages (Appendix G) The Ordinance was revised in April 1 99 1 , to
allow for greater administrative ease when implementing the various stages of the
Ordinance. The amended Ordinance defines unreasonable uses ofwater, explains
the circumstances invoking the four stages of water conservation compliance
adds a provision regarding the issuance of new construction meters, and allows
greywater to be used for outdoor irrigation on a temporary basis. The City
Manager is authorized to immediately implement the Ordinance in the event of a
disaster, such as a break in the aqueduct, an earthquake, or other event which
interrupts or imperils the City1s water supply. The specific cnteria for triggenng
the four stages are listed in the Emergency Water Conservation Ordinance.
External Supply Shortage Triggering Levels
In the event of a water supply shortage resulting from an emergency or hazard
including natural disasters such as earthquakes and fires, water system failures,
and supply emergencies such as contamination or future droughts, the CWA
serves as the central coordinating agency for member agencies in the areas of
emergency preparedness and response coordination. The CWA's multi-hazard
Emergency Response Plan is integrated with the San Diego County Emergency
Plan and the State of California Emergency Plan.
The CWA communicates and coordinates with the DWR directly and through the
MWD. Whether during emergency or normal operations the City complies with
reductions in supply or stages of reduction upon implementation by the CWA.
Depending upon the level of the reduction required by the wholesaler, the City
may be required to substitute for loss of imported water supply by taking water
out of storage, alerting the public to the situation and calling for a certain level of
conservation, or enacting the appropriate stage of the Emergency Water
Conservation Ordinance.
Emergency Management and Disaster Planning
The Water Utilities Department participates regularly in regional and county-wide
disaster preparedness drills. One recent drill was held for the purpose of testing
the regional communications network during a simulated earthquake.
Specifically, communications capabilities between the CWA and its twenty-three
member agencies, and the communicafions link between the CWA and the County
86
PAGE 105 Show Image
Office of Disaster Preparedness were examined. The City is represented on several
CWA task forces which focus on the regional management of emergency
interruptions of water treatment or distribution.
The Water Utilities Department has a full-time Emergency Management
Coordinator whose responsibilities include: employee training; developing
emergency response plans; hazardous materials management; agency liaison
during emergency response coordination; and participating in and conducting
drills. The drills are a cooperative effort of Federal, State, County and local
agencies to prepare for every possible type of emergency.
The Water Utilities Department has formed a task force to develop a Risk
Management Prevention Plan (RMPP) for each departmental facility where Acutely
Hazardous Materials (AHM's) are used. The task force is also developing plans
intended to respond to emergencies arising from the use ofAHM1s within the City's
water distribution system, as well as, water service interruption resulting from a
major disaster. The Water Utilities Department's Emergency Management
Coordinator also coordinates the Chlorine Management Task Force, a multi-
agency effort, which has developed a detailed program meeting the mandate of the
State's Unif6rm Fire Code as it pertains to chlorine handling requirements.
The Water Utilities Department has a standing committee called the "Red Alert
Committee," which is comprised ofrepresentatives from the Engineering, Services,
Systems, and Water Production Divisions. The committee meets semi-annually
for seasonal planning and to assess the management of existing and anticipated
water supplies,. During the summer of 1995, the Red Alert Committee began to
convene weekly to assess and approve projects that could lead to an interruption
in water service for residents living in certain areas of the city. Pnmary
responsibilities of the committee include assessing emergency response
capabihties of the department, gathering water related information, and acting as
a clearing house and decision making body for Water Utilities management when
reacting to major interruptions to the water collection, treatment, and distribution
systems.
The City has adopted a Major Incident Response Plan (MIRP). This plan is
designed to mitigate area-wide disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, or dam
failures. The Water Utilities Department MIRP Development Project, coordinated
by the Emergency Management Coordinator, is completing a departmental MIRP
in compliance with the City's MIRP. This project will be completed by July of
1996.
87
PAGE 106 Show Image
San Diego Water Assurance Plan
The San Diego Water Assurance Plan (SWAP), initiated by Mayor Susan Golding,
is designed to ensure that there is adequate water available in the future in the
event of a water shortage or emergency. The pnncipal elements of SWAP are:
imported water deliveries of not less than 80% of normal; 1 0% voluntary water
conservation; and water transfers to offset any shortfall. The City Council
unanimously adopted SWAP in December of 1994.
88
PAGE 107 Show Image
Chapter V. WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Overview of the City's Water Conservation Policies
The City of Sari Diego's water conservation goal is to reduce the City's dependency
upon imported water. In order to accomplish this goal, the City has worked to
create a water conservation ethic, adopted policies and ordinances designed to
promote city-wide water conservation practices, implemented a comprehensive
public information and education program, and proposed an ambitious water
reclamation and reuse program.
In 1982, the City Council adopted and implemented a Water Conservation Plan
and Work Program. This Work Program allocated the financial resources
necessary to retrofit City buildings and facilities with water-conserving plumbing
mixtures, updated the existing City landscape and irngation systems, initiated a
public information program, proposed planting low-water use demonstration
gardens, and recommended developing an emergency plan for distributing water
during a shortage.
The City Council updated and incorporated the Water Conservation Plan and
Work Program into Council Policy 400- 1 1 , entitled an 11Action Plan for
Implementation of Water Conservation Techniques" (Appendix H) which was
adopted in 1987. The Action Plan requires the preparation of an annual report
which reviews the water conservation activities undertaken by the City during the
previous year. This report is prepared by the Water Utilities Department and is
presented to the City Council's Natural Resources, Culture and Arts (NRCA)
Committee dunng the annual meeting of the City and the CWA.
In compliance with state legislation, the City prepared and adopted its first Urban
Water Management Plan (Plan) and Conservation Program in 1985. The Plan
described the City's current and alternate water conservation measures;
documented past, current, and projected water use; and outlined estimated water
savings resulting from implementing the conservation measures set forth in the
Plan.
The City's 1990 Plan set forth a five year water conservation strategy consisting
of eight integrated and complementary conservation programs. The adoption of
the Plan included funding for equipment and personnel necessary to implement
the long-term water conservation measures. All of the innovative conservaton
measures contained in the Plan have been implemented along with several other
water conservation programs not included in this document. These new programs
have been developed in an attempt to provide support and assistance to all
89
PAGE 108 Show Image
customer classes. Recent efforts include a survey program for commercial,
industrial and institutional customers, and an outreach program for new
homeowners contemplating installing low-water use plant matenals. These and
other water conservation programs are described in greater detail in this chapter.
The City's successful water conservation efforts have been recognized, and
emulated, by other water agencies and districts in the United States and Canada.
Long-Term Conservation Program Goal
The City is strongly committed to water conservation for several reasons including
our dependence upon imported water, the frequency and magrntude of droughts
in our state, and lastly, as an important component of the City's long-term water
resource strategy. Water purveyors have recently begun to refer to conservation
as demand-side management (DSM), a concept familiar to the energy industiy.
Simply stated, demand management efforts are measures that result in the
reduction of water used or lost. Thus, DSM efforts can range from the installation
of water-efficient plumbing fixtures to programs that replace leaky water meters.
The City's DSM efforts detailed in this Chapter consist of a variety of practices that
reduce urban water demand.
City residents are committed to conserving water as a way of life. This allegiance
to water conservation is witnessed by a willingness on the part of City residents
to participate in all conservation programs, and the City's ability to meet or exceed
the 20 percent water conservation goal established by the City Council in April
199 1 (Figure 5. 1). While manyjurisdictions are experiencing an increase in water
consumption ret
urning to pre-drought levels, and a decline in participation in
conservation programs, this has not been the case for San Diego.
Conservation Best Management Practices
In September 1 99 1 , the City became one of the original signatories to the
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Urban Water Conservation in
California. The MOU has been signed by more than 160 California water agencies
public interest groups and other parties, and has an initial term of ten years. The
purpose of the MOU is to give strength and commitment to water conservation as
a way to stretch CaliforniaIs available water resources (Figure 5.2). The MOU
contains sixteen Best Management Practices (BMP's) that are proven, long-term,
and cost-effective water conservation measures. Urban water agencies adopting
BMPtS will improve the efficiency of water used in their service area. All of the
City1s water conservation programs are BMP's. Figure 5.3 lists the sixteen BMP's,
their implementation schedule, and provides a description of the City's BMP
efforts.
90
PAGE 109 Show Image
Figure 5.1
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
MONTHLY WATER USAGE INFORMATION
June, 1990 November, 1995
MONTH EXPECTED USAGE ACTUAL USAGE SAVINGS
June, 1990 7,440 MG 6,307.6 15.2w
July 8,215 MG 7,413.1 9.8w
August 8,246 MG 7,202.4 12.6w
September 7,290 MG 6,932.2 4.9w
October 6,541 MG 6,496.1
November 5,610 MG 5,536.5 1.3w
December 5,208 MG 5,056.0 2.9%
1990 Totals 48,550 MG 44,943.9 7.4%
January, 1991 5,239 MG 4,713.3 10.0%
February 4,760 MG 4,522.2 5.0%
March 5,735 MG 3,625.0 36.8%
April 6,180 MG 4,156.2 32.7%
May 7,254 MG 5,261.9 27.5%
June 7,260 MG 5,466.5 24.7%
July 8,091 MG 5,804.6 28.2%
August 8,401 MG 5,683.2 32.3%
September 7,440 MG 5,467.2 26.5%
October 6,603 MG 5,300.8 19.7%
November 5,670 MG 4,842.3 14.6%
December 5,301 MG 4,060.6 23.4%
1991 Totals 771934 HG 58,903.8 24.4%
January, 1992 5,270 MG 3,981.0 24.4%
February 4,988 MG 3,639.7 27.0%
March 5,797 MG 3,739.5 35.5%
April 6,270 MG 4,820.7 23.1%
May 7,533 MG 5,718.5 24.1%
June 7,710 MG 6,103.7 20.8%
July 8,494 MG 6,742.6 20.6%
August 8,494 MG 7,025.7 17.3%
September 7,500 MG 6,531.1 12.9%
October 6,696 MG 5,841.4 12.8%
November 5,730 MG 5,204.5 9.2%
December 5,332 MG 4,001.1 25.0%
1992 Totals 79,814 MG 63,349.5 20.6%
January, 1993 5,332 MG 3,518.1 34.0%
February 4,844 MG 3,234.2 33.2%
March 5,797 MG 4,295.7 25.9%
April 6,240 MG 5,249.9 15.9%
May 7,471 MG 6,178.9 17.3%
June 7,620 MG 6,287.9 17.5%
July 8,401 MG 6,993.3 16.7%
August 8,432 MG 6,990.1 17.1%
September 7,470 MG 6,430.3 13.9%
October 6,634 MG 6,027.7 9.1%
November 5,700 MG 4,784.5 16.1%
December 5,487 MG 4,351.8 20.7%
1993 Totals 79,428 MG 64,342.4 19.0%
91
PAGE 110 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
MONTHLY WATER USAGE INFORMATION
June, 1990 November, 1995
(Continued)
MONTH EXPECTED USAGE ACTUAL USAGE SAVINGS
January, 1994 5,301 MG 4,755.2 1O.3oa
February 4,844 MG 3,643.8 24.8~~
March 5,828 MG 4,150.7 28.8oo
April G,270 MG 4,623.0 26.3aa
May 7,502 MG 5,246.5 30.1%
June 7,680 MG 6,319.8 17.7%
July 8,494 MG 6,837.0 19.5%
August 8,525 MG 7,358.8 13.7%
September 7,530 MG 6,694.6 11.1%
October 6,727 MG 6,196.3 7.9%
November 5,760 MG 4,804.9 16.6%
December 5,363 MG 4,510.5 15.9%
1994 Totals 79,824 MG 65,141.1 18.4%
January, 1995 5,369 MG 3,665.5 31.7%
February 4,903 MG 3,672.2 25.1%
March 5,890 MG 3,902.1 33.7%
April 6,340 MG 4,932.9 22.2%
May 7,594 MG 5,462.4 28.1%
June 7,765 MG 5,892.7 24.1%
July 8,576 MG 6,992.6 18.5%
August 8,605 MG 7,353.4 14.5%
September 7,611 MG 6,808.6 10.5%
October 6,783 MG 6,221.4 8.3%
November 5,826 MG 5,067.8 13.0%
1995 T6tals 75,262 MG 59,971.6 20.3%
92
PAGE 111 Show Image
Figure 5.2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) REGARDING URBAN WATER
CONSERVATION IN CALIFORNIA
RECITALS
The signatories to this MOU recognize that California's economy, quality of life, and
environment depend in large part upon the water resources of the State. The signatories
also recognize the need to provide reliable urban water supplies and to protect the
environment. Increasing demands for urban, agricultural, and environmental water uses
call for conservaUon resources. Many organizaUons and groups in California have
an interest in urban water conservation, and this MOU is intended to gain much
needed consensus on a complex issue.
2. The urban water conservation practices included in this MOU (referred to as "Best
Management Practices" or "BMP'S") are intended to reduce long-term urban demands from
what they would have been without implementation of these practices and are in addition
to programs which may be instituted during occasional water supply shortages.
3. The combination of BMP'S and urban growth, unless properly accounted for in water
management planning, could make reductions in urban demands during short-term
emergencies such as droughts or earthquakes more difficult to achieve. However,
notwithstanding such difficulties, the signatory water suppliers will carry out the urban
water conservation BMP process as described in this MOU.
4. The signatories recognize that means other than urban water conservation may be
needed to provide long-term reliability for urban water suppliers and long-term protection
of the environment. However, the signatories may have differing views on what additional
measures might be appropriate to provide for these needs. Accordingly, this MOU
is not intended to address these issues.
5. A major benefit of the MOU is to conserve water which could be used for the protection of
streams, wetlands and estuaries, and/or urban water supply reliability. This MOU leaves
to other forums the issue of how conserved water will be used.
6. It is the intent of this MOU that individual signatory water suppliers (1) develop
comprehensive conservation BMP programs using sound economic criteria and
(2) consider water conservation on an equal basis with other water management options.
7. It is recognized that present urban water use throughout the State varies according to many
factors including, but not limited to, climate, types of housing and landscaping, amounts and
kinds of commercial, industrial and recreational development, and the extent to which
conservation measures have already been implemented. It is further recognized that many
of the BMP'S identified in Exhibit I to this MOU have already been implemented in some
areas and that even with broader employment of BMP'S, future urban water use will
continue to vary from area to area. Therefore, this MOU is not intended to establish
uniform per capita water use allotments throughout the urban areas ofthe State. This MOU
is also not intended to limit the amount or types of conservation a water supplier can pursue
or to limit a water supplier's more rapid implementaUon of BMP'S.
8. It is recognized that projections of future water demand should include estimates of
anticipated demand reductions due to changes in the real price of water.
93
PAGE 112 Show Image
Figure 5.3
Summary of Best Management Practices, Implementation Schedule, and
the City of San Diego's current Water Conservation Measures
BMP
BMP I Implementation f
Schedule
Citys Water Conservation Program
Interior and exterior water audits 1993-94 Ongoihg prograin. Residential Water Survey Program for single-family customers implemented in
and incentive programs for single- Summer of 1992. Expanded program to include multi4amily units implemented in Spring of 1993.
family residential, mulfi-family Thrf audits available for commercial and industrial customers.
residential, and govemmentall
institutional customers.
2. Plumbing, New and Retrofit
a. Enforcement of water-conserving a. 199 1-92 a. On March 26, 199 1 , City Council approved Ordinance 17626, which requires installafion of ULFT's in
plumbing fixture standards all new construcfion effective May 1 , 1991.
including requirement for ULFT's
in all new construction beginning b. 1991-92 b. The City supported this legislafion that was effective January 1 , 1994.
January 1, 1992.
c. 1992-93 c. All 150,000 pre- 198 1 single-family households retrofitted in FY 9 1-93. Multi-family and Mobile Hom
b. Support of State and Federal retrofit program implemented in FY 93.
legislation prohibiting sale of
toilets using more than 1 .6 In 199 1 , in associafion with CWA, showerheads were distributed to public facilities including the Na
gallons per flush. and several umversities.
c. Plumbing retrofit.
3. Distribution system water audits. 1991-92 Leak Detection Unit in operafion since 1987.
Leak detection and repair. 1992-93
4. Metering with commodity rates for all 1992-93 Ml of the City's water service connecfions are metered. Water rates promote conservation.
new connections and retrofit of
existing connections.
5. Large landscape water audits and 1993-94 Avallable for City water customers witn two acres or more of turf.
incentives.
6. Landscape~water conservation 1991-92 Landscape conservation promoted through the Citys Landscape Ordinance (1986) and Landscape
requfrements for new and existing Technical Manual (1959).
commercial, industrial, institutional,
governmental, and multi4amily
developments.
PAGE 113 Show Image
7. Public information. 1991-92 Ongoing since the 1976-77 Drought. Includes a 24-hour Water Conservation Hotline, distribution of
written materials, tours of water treatment facilities and Speakers Bureau.
8. School Education 1991-92 Conducted by CWA.
9. Commercial and industrial water 1993-94 Program planned for FY 1995.
conservation.
10. New commercial and industrial water 1993-94 Program planned for FY 1995.
use review.
1 1 . a. Conservation pricing. 1992-93 a. Conservation pricing adopted by the City Council for residential and non-residential accounts. All
water service connections in the City are metered.
b. Billing for sewer service based on 1993-94 b. Sewer service rates, for residential and non-residential customers, are based upon water usage.
metered water use.
12. Landscape water conservation for new 1992-93 On-going program. Landscape and ~gation information furnished to new single-family homeowners
and existing single-family homes. shortly after they purchase residence.
13. Water waste prohibition. 1991-92 The City's Emergency Water Conservation Ordinance, adopted in 1987, prohibits the waste or
unreasonable use of water. Water Conservation Field Representatives have responded to waste water
complaints since 1989. Water Conservation Hotline installed June, 1990.
14. Water Conservation Coordinator 199 1-92 Formal Water Conservation Program headed by Water Conservation Frogram Manager since 1985.
~Jl
15. Financial incentives. 1993-94 City Council approved ULFT Rebate Program on May 6, 1991.
16. Ultra-low flush toilet replacement 1992-93 On March 26, 199 1 , City Council approved Ordinance 17626, requiring installation of ULFT's in all new
construction effective May 1, 1991.
City Council approved ULFT Rebate Program on May 6, 1991. Between May 1991 and December 1994,
more than 82,000 uift's were installed through this program.
ULFT replacement program for City facilities implemented in FY 92. Between July 1992 and December
1994, more than 1,198 ulft's were installed in 226 ft~cilities through this program.
On November 25, 1991, the City Council adopted Ordinance 17712 which requfres the installation of uift'
upon change of property ownership or bathroom remodel effective January 1 , 1992.
PAGE 114 Show Image
In hearings convened by the State Water Resources Control Board (Board)
between 1987- 1994, conservation was one of several proposed factors to be
considered in detenriirnng water exports from the San Francisco-Sacramento-San
Joaquin River Delta (Bay-Delta) area to Central and Southern Califbrnia. Shortly
after the release of the first draft report, a working group evolved to advise the
Board on technical issues and water conservation strategies. Overtime the BMP's
were developed by this work group. The widespread implementation of BMP's,
particularly by water agencies located in Southern California, is recognized as a
factor in suspending the debate linking conservation efforts to exported water
allocations.
The California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) is the formal
organization established by the MOU to monitor, guide and assist signatories in
implementing BMP's. The CUVVCC meets quarterly to review ongoing studies and
projects, approve new signatories, and discuss current water resource
management issues. MOU signatories are encouraged to send a representative to
CUWCC meetings as well as serve on the many subcommittees involved in BMP
research efforts and projects. The City has been an active participant on the
CUWCC as well as on one of the subcommittees. The City files an annual report
with the CUWCC summarizing the progress made on each BMP. The City~s 1995
annual BMP report is found in Appendix I. The following section describes the
Best Management Practices implemented by the City beginning in 1 99 1 . The
City's long-term water conservation programs, their implementation date,
estimated water savings, and funding information is displayed in Figure 5.4.
RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS
Many of the initial water conservation programs implemented by the City focused
on reducing residential interior water usage. Residential customers were targeted
because they account for 57 percent of annual water consumption in the City. In
199 1-92 the majority of single-family households, multi-family units, and mobile
homes in the City received retrofit kits. The City also promotes the installation of
ultra-low flush toilets for permanent water savings, as well as water-efficient
landscape and irrigation design to new homeowners.
Residential Interior Plumbing Retrofit Program
The Residential Interior Plumbing Retrofit Program (Residential Retrofit Program)
retrofitted 147,000 pre-1981 single-family households within the City with water
saving retrofit kits (low-flow showerheads, toilet tank displacement devices, and
leak detection tablets). Using the deliver and canvass method, kit distribution was
completed in three phases, from Spring of 199 1 through the Fall of 1992. The
96
PAGE 115 Show Image
Figure 5.4
City of San Diego Water Conservation Programs
Estimated Water Savings
____________ Fiscal Year 1991-1995 ___________ _________ ______ _________
Estimated Daily City's
Program lmplementaUon Quantity stimated Device LifetimE `Nater Savings As Total City Cost per ~ and CWA
____________________ Date Completed ____________________ of June 30, 1 995 Share of Cost \F Savec co~unding
Residential Interior 3191-11192 148,000 homes showerhead kit - 10 years 1.9 MGD $1.6 M $75 $1.4 M
Plumbing Retrofit
Multi-Family Retrofit 7/92 - I 1/92 1001000 units showerhead kit - 10 years I .6 MGD $450,000 $25 $6O7~675
Mobile Home Retrofit 6192 1 228 homes showerhead kit - I 0 years I 9,600 gpd $5,61 2 $25 $1 I 224
School Showerhead I 1193 - 2194 3,569 homes Showerheads and toilet 43,742 gpd $14,000 $29 $14,000
tummies 10 yearS
Residential Water Survey 7192 - present 9,770 homes showerhead kit - 10 years 373,339 gpd $300,418 $1 I I $81,765
Operates Summer and irrigation -2 years FY 95 only
Fall only
Ultra-Low Flush Toilet 5/91 - present 96,000 rebates toilets - 20 years 3.4 MGD $4.1 M $55 $6.2 M
Rebate _______________ _____________ showerheads - 10 years ____________ ____________
Community Based Toilet I 1/93 - 6194 1 0,861 toilets toilets - 20 years 501 000 gpd $288,000 $26 $877,405
Replacement showerheads - 10 years
City Facilities Retrofit 6192 - present I 391 toilets in toilets - 20 years I 00,000 gpd $248,950 $1 I I $226,390
264 bldgs _____________________ ______________ _____________ _____________
TOTAL WATER SAVINGS = 7.9 MGD or 8,914 Acre-Feet Per Year $7.0 M Average $9.4 M
(43%) $57 (57%)
* The City of San Diego cannot quantify water savings directly associated with the implementation of other on-going water conservation programs such as New Homeowner
Outreach, Xeriscape Demonstration Garden, and Public Information and Education Programs. These programs provide water saving information to the public, but water
savings derived from the actual implementation of these measures are not available.
** To evaluate a program's cost effectiveness, City staff compares the City's costs to implement vs. not implement the program (purchase water that could have been
saved by the program). As of July 1 , 1 995, the City's cost to purchase water is $424 per acre-foot. All programs listed above are more cost effective to implement than
purchasing an equal amount of imported water.
PAGE 116 Show Image
Residential Retrofit Program's estimated water savings is 1 .9 million gallons of
water per day or 2, 173 acre~feet* per year. The City's cost per acre-foot saved to
implement this program was $75. City staff continue to issue retrofit equipment
upon request to single-family households who did not participate in the program.
Multi-Family Interior Plumbing Retrofit Program
The Multi-Family Interior Plumbing Retrofit Program (Multi-Family Retrofit
Program) offered similar retrofit kits to the City's multi-family residential
customers between July-November 1992. When the Program Office closed its
doors, more than 100,000 pre-1981 multi-family residential units had been issued
water saving retrofit kits using the depot style of distribution. The Multi-Family
Retrofit Program1s estimated water savings is 1 .6 million gallons of water per day
or 1 ,792 acre~feet* per year. The City's cost per acre-foot saved to implement this
program was $25. City staff continue to issue retrofit equipment to multi-family
complexes that did not participate in the program when operational, but are now
seeking the associated water savings.
Mobile Home Showerhead Retrofit
The Mobile Home Showerhead Retrofit Program utilized a direct installation
approach when it distributed water-saving retrofit kits to approximately 1,250
mobile homes city-wide in June 1992. Along with the retrofit kits, field crews
installed energy efficient compact fluorescent lightbulbs, courtesy of the San Diego
Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) . The Mobile Home Showerhead Retrofit
Program's estimated water savings is 19,649 gallons of water per day or 22 acre-
feet* per year. The City's cost per acre-foot saved to implement this program was
$25. If requested, City staff will provide low-flow showerheads to mobile homes
that have not participated in the program.
School Showerhead Program
The School Showerhead Program was implemented during the 1993-94 school
year, targeting children from Kindergarten through 6th Grade. The goal of this
program was to increase children's awareness and understanding of residential
water use through a simple self audit conducted in their home with the assistance
of their parents. Using a cartoon map that acted as a guide through all water
using appliances and fixtures found in a typical home, students and parents were
given information on appropriate water conservation measures. The program
taught school children to identify potential water conservation measures, and
distributed low-flow showerheads and toilet displacement devices where needed.
*Afl acre-foot is 325,851 gallons, the amount ofwater used by two average size households per year.
98
PAGE 117 Show Image
Participating students were given incentives including a colorful wnstwatch,
refrigerator magnets, pencils, and coupons from corporate sponsors such as
El Pollo Loco and KidSofr. This program was implemented in conjunction with the
MWD. The School Showerhead Program1s estimated water savings is 48,500
gallons per day or 54 acre~feet* per year. The City's cost per acre-foot saved to
implement this program is $29.
Residential Water Survey Program
The Residential Water Survey Program (Survey Program) offers customers an
interior and exterior water use survey of their home. The in-home service consists
of a complete water usage analysis which includes measuring showerhead and
sink faucet flow rates, checking for leaks, installing water-saving devices (low-flow
showerheads and toilet displacement devices) , and providing water efficient
landscape and irngation recommendations. The survey includes a "catch can"
test to check for uniform sprinkler head distribution, and identif~~ing soil type and
plant materials to calculate the optimum seasonal irrigation schedules. During
the appointment, the surveyor helps the customer identify ways to save water.
A typical household participating in the Survey Program can reduce their daily
water consumption by 1 3 percent.
In September 1994, the City entered into an agreement with the MWD to receive
up to half of the program's funding for FY 94-95. As a component of the MWD
agreement, Survey Program staff conducted a pilot field data tracking program
utilizing laptop computers to determine their effectiveness and efficiency in a field
setting.
Survey Program participants are given discount coupons for water-saving
landscape products courtesy of the California Association of Nurserymen, energy
conservation and earthquake preparedness materials provided by SDG&E, and
water conservation information literature from the City and the CWA. SDG&E has
participated in two phases of the Survey Program, providing low-flow
showerheads, compact fluorescent light bulbs, and energy savings records and
analysis.
Beginning in August 1994, a Quality Control survey card was distributed to each
Survey Program participant to monitor program effectiveness through customer
feedback. More than 1 ,000 customers (28.5 percent) have submitted compliments
about the program or the surveyor. Suggestions are evaluated and incorporated
for program improvement if feasible.
* An acre-foot is 325,851 gallons, the amount used by two average size households per year.
99
PAGE 118 Show Image
As of June 30, 1995, more than 8,070 single and multi-family households
(2-8 units) have participated in this city-wide water conservation program since
it began in 1992. The Survey Program 5 estimated water savings is 308,800
gallons per day or 346 acre~feet* per year. The City's cost per acre-foot saved to
implement this program is $133.
Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Rebate Program
The Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Rebate Program (Rebate Program) promotes the
voluntaiy installation of ultra-low flush toilets (ulftts), which use 1.6 gallons of
water per flush, by providing customers with a financial incentive to conserve.
City residents receive a rebate of up to $75 for each installed ulft. Participants
also receive free low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators.
The Rebate Program began in May of 199 1 . The City was a participant in CWA's
regionally run program during the first three program phases (1991-92). Due to
operational and legal constraints, the City developed and implemented its own
Rebate Program in 1993. The City's Rebate Program is currenfly managed by
v'EWtech, a vendor hired by the City to manage day-to-day program operations.
As the Rebate Program Manager, VIEWtech is responsible for processing rebate
applications, verifying ulft installations, preparing and mailing rebate checks, and
picking up and recycling old toilets.
As of June 1995, more than 96,000 ulft's have been installed in the City of San
Diego through this program. The Rebate Program is undoubtedly our most
popular and widely accepted conservation program. City staff assigned to the
Rebate Program regularly conduct customer satisfaction surveys by randomly
phoning program participants to assess their satisfaction with the program and
the toilet fixture they installed. Survey data shows that 33 percent of program
participants install a ulfr to save water, 24 percent to save money or receive a
rebate, 22 percent because they needed a new toilet, 16 percent to comply with
a local Ordinance, and five percent for other reasons. Although the toilet rebates
are available to all City water customers, the majonty of ulft's are installed
through the program are in single-family homes (6 1 percent) , followed by multi-
family units (37 percent), and commercial and industrial structures (two percent).
The City has been successful in securing funding from the CWA and MWD to
cover approximately two-thirds of total Rebate Program costs. As of
June 30, 1995, more than 96,000 ulft's have been installed though this
conservation program. It is expected that another 18,000 ulft's will be installed
by the end of calendar year 1995. The Rebate Program's estimated water savings
is 3.4 million gallons a day or 3,852 acre~feet* a year. The City's cost per acre-foot
saved to implement this program is $55.
*Afl acre4oot is 325,851 gallons, the amount ofwater used by two average size households per year.
100
PAGE 119 Show Image
Community Based Toilet Replacement Program
On June 28, 1993, the City Council approved the implementation of the
Community Based Toilet Replacement Program (Toilet Replacement Program) The
goal of this program is to provide ulft's free of charge to single-family, owner-
occupied households whose total income meets the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development's low-income limits. The program assists low-income
City residents who want to conserve water by installing a ulft but do not have the
financial resources to do so. By implementing the Toilet Replacement Program,
the City is able to support a segment of residents interested in reducing their
household water consumption by installing ulft's who otherwise were unable to
participate in the Rebate Program.
The Toilet Replacement Program utilizes local community based organizations
(CBO's) to promote and distribute ulft's. In October of 1993, three strategically
located offices managed by Triple Crown and the MAAC Project, two local CBO's,
opened their doors to the public. The first phase of the program distributed
approximately 10,000 ulft's from October of 1993 through the end of June 1994.
The second phase, which started in May 1995, distributed another 850 toilets to
qualif~~ing households. Participating households can receive up to two ulft's per
residence.
Program participants are encouraged to self-install the ulfr's. However,
installation assistance is available from the CBO's. Participants are given
installation instructions (available in English and Spanish) with the ulft's, and a
video explaining the installation processes plays in the office waiting area.
The City has been successful in securing funding from the CWA and MWD to
cover up to three-fourths of the total Toilet Replacement Program costs. As of
June 30, 1995, approximately 10,860 ulft's have been installed through this
program. The Toilet Replacement Program's estimated water savings is 50 1 ,OOO
gallons a day or 56 1 acre~feet* a year. The City1s cost per acre foot saved for
implementing the Toilet Replacement Program is $26.
New Homeowner Outreach Program
One way to convince residential customers to consider water-efficient landscape
and irrigation systems is to offer them the information at the time they are
deciding what type to install. The goal of the New Homeowner Outreach Program
is to furnish new homeowners with water-wise landscape and irrigation
information within a few weeks after they move into their residence. Single-family
new home and resale homeowners are sent a letter describing this program.
*Afl acre-foot is 325,851 gallons, the amount ofwater used by two average size households per year.
101
PAGE 120 Show Image
Those interested in receiving water-efficient landscape and irrigation materials are
mailed a packet containing this information, and discount coupons for landscape
products redeemable at local nurseries. This program started in March of 1993,
and has generated an interest among new homeowners. Approximately 25 to
30 percent of new homeowners contacted express an interest in receiving the
water saving landscape informational materials. The water savings of this
program are unknown.
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS
Commercial, industnal, and institutional water customers account for
approximately 30 percent of total water usage in the City, thus providing a great
potential for water savings. Aside from the toilet rebates offered to commercial
and industrial customers through the Rebate Program, the City now offers
complimentary water audits to the top 1 0 percent of water users in this sector.
Also, in an effort to make government buildings more water-efficient and show its
commitment to water conservation, the City is retrofitting City-owned and
operated buildings with ulft's.
Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Water Conservation Survey Program
Starting in the June of 1995, the City, in corjunction with the CWA and the MWD,
began offering comphmentaiy water use surveys to its commercial and industrial
customers. The purpose of the program is to offer cost-effective recommendations
on how to reduce water consumption without affecting processes or production
levels, thereby lowering water and sewer bills. Water conservation measures
implemerited by these types of customers often yield water savings of up to
20 percent.
A water use analyst from the City or from the program's engineering consultant
visits the facility to observe all water use. From the data collected, the analyst
develops a detailed report quantifying water usage, and a water conservation
action plan with specific recommendations for conserving water.
The MWD funds half of the program costs, with the other half divided between the
CWA and the City. Since the program has just begun, water savings figures are
not yet available.
City Facilities Retrofit Program
The City believes in the permanent water savings derived from ulft's, and therefore
demonstrates its support and commitment to water conservation by installing
ulft's in City owned and operated buildings. Through the City Facilities Retrofit
102
PAGE 121 Show Image
Program, more than 1 ,800 high volume toilets in 350 facilities will be replaced
with ulft's over a five year period that began in July 1992.
Since the program started, the CWA and the MWD have provided 58 percent of the
funding for the purchase of ulft's and accessory items installed. A City plumber
installs the ulft's, and Water Conservation staff collect consumption data on the
facilities in order to determine the program's total water savings. A consultant,
under contract to MWD, has relied upon this data to conduct a preliminary study
on the program's water savings and effectiveness for ulft's installed in
195 buildings. The study found that water savings varied widely depending upon
the facility type. For example, a savings of 1 16 gallons per day (gpd) was found
for fixtures installed in Comfort Stations, Recreation and Senior Centers, while a
savings of 20 gpd was achieved for ulft's installed in Police Substations.
As of June 30, 1995, a total of 1,391 ulft's have been installed in 264 City
facilities. The program's estimated water savings is 100,000 gallons a day or
1 12 acre~feet* a year. The ~ityt5 cost per acre-foot saved to implement this
program is $111.
LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
The City has actively promoted water efficient landscaping practices by sponsoring
and designing demonstration gardens, funding the retrofit of public irrigation
fixtures, offering irrigation audits and classes on efficient irrigation management,
and encouraging customers with extensive landscaped areas to participate in
programs in order to efficiently irrigate turf areas.
Mira-Mesa Xeriscape Demonstration Garden
The Mira Mesa Garden was previously a low-water use demonstration garden
constructed in 1988. However, poor maintenance work left the garden in disrepair
when the maintenance contractor failed to address the special needs of this
garden and its unique landscape and irrigation system maintenance
requirements. In 1992, the City's Water Conservation Landscape Architect
developed a new design to renovate the demonstration garden.
The new Mira Mesa Demonstration Garden, completed in 1993, presents City
residents with an example of a water efficient landscape and irrigation system.
The garden features two different kinds of grass, three types of irrigation systems,
and an array of native and traditional plants. Low-water use plants throughout
the garden are identified with plaques and two large signs describe general
*An acre-foot is 325,851 gallons, the amount of water used by two average size households per year.
103
PAGE 122 Show Image
Xeriscape principles to visitors. The Garden is open to the public for informal
viewing at all times. In addition, it is used for training and public presentations.
A comparison of historical water usage data shows that the previous garden used
a maximum of 520 HCF per year while the new garden used only 149 HCF in
1994.
San Diego Wild Animal Park Water-Wise Garden
In March of 1995, the City of San Diego contributed $10,000 to the San Diego
Xeriscape Council to support the renovation and maintenance of the Water-Wise
Garden located at the San Diego Wild Animal Park. This Garden features
water-efficient plants, efficient irrigation techniques and other water saving
measures. Tours, exhibits, and Xeriscape related classes are held at the site. The
Garden's water conservation message is seen by 1 .3 million visitors annually.
Public Facilities Irrigation Assistance Program
Through the Public Facilities Irrigation Assistance Program (PFIAP) the Water
Utilities Department, Water Conservation Program, has contributed $10,000 in
each of the past two years to tax supported public agencies for the purchase of
devices to conserve water by improving the efficiency of irrigation systems. Many
public facilities recognize the importance of landscape and irrigation efficiency by
having an exterior landscape audit conducted (some through the CWA's Large Thrf
Water Management Program), but do not have the financial resources available to
implement the auditts water saving recommendations. The PFIAP is considered
part of the' BMP's the City agreed to implement in September of 1991.
Funding of Irrigation Fixtures
The Water Utilities Department has agreed to fund the replacement and upgrade
of irrigation fixtures in City parks. The proper maintenance and repair of
irrigation systems in City parks helps reduce water consumption and maximizes
the efficient use of water at these public facihties. It also sets a good example for
residents to see the City using water wisely. This cooperative endeavor with the
Parks and Recreation Department is in its fourth year. More than $957,000 worth
of replacement fixtures have been installed.
Large Thrf Water Management Program
The Large Thrf Water Management Program (LTWMP) offers complimentary
irrigatiQn audits to properties with two or more acres of turf. LTWMP participants
receive a thorough report documenting the condition of their landscape, needed
104
PAGE 123 Show Image
improvements and a recommended irrigation schedule. Public agencies
participating in the program are eligible to submit a proposal for funding through
the PFIAP.
The LTWMP is coordinated by the CWA for its member agencies. Since the City
started participating in the LTWMP in the Spring of 1993, over 280 sites within
the City have been audited through this program.
Protector del Agua
The Protector del Agua is a program offering a series of five half-day classes on the
essentials of efficient irrigahon management. The classes are taught in both
English and Spanish by the Cal Poly Irrigation and Research Training Center, are
coordinated locally by the CWA, and funded by the CWA and the MWD. The
classes have been offered for the past three years, usually during the winter
months. The City helps promote the program and encourages its ground
maintenance personnel and landscape contractors to attend.
WATER CONSERVATION DATABASES
To understand its water customers and provide them with service in the most
efficient manner, the City has invested in two databases that provide valuable
information on water usage patterns, consumption histoiy, program participation,
conservation program effectiveness, and program water savings. This information
is available to staff directly in contact with customers as well as program
managers who use this information to develop new programs to meet the changing
needs of our customers.
Water Consumption Database
Water consumption data, which defines usage trends and characteristics by
customer class, is a valuable tool to use when developing water conservation
programs designed to meet the specific needs of the City1s water customers. In
order to develop a true understanding of water usage trends by customer class the
City, together with the San Diego Data Processing Corporation (SDDPC), hired a
firm in 1991 to conduct a survey and develop a reliable water consumption
database. The Water Consumption Database contains the survey results of more
than 1,700 single and multi-family residential, commercial and industrial water
customers, and the water consumption data for these accounts. The survey data
measured conservation attitudes, water use behaviors, and situational
characteristics. Water Conservation staff have analyzed the data to assist them
in assessing customer interest, and for planning future water conservation
programs.
105
PAGE 124 Show Image
Consolidated Water Conservation Database
The city-wide implementation ofwater conservation programs designed to promote
permanent water savings began in 199 1 As each new program began, data was
collected and tracked on five separate, stand-alone personal computers (PC's).
Each pc constituted a distinct system containing unique program data. Mter two
years of collecting and entering program data, Water Conservation Program staff
recognized the need to centralize and consolidate all information into an
integrated and relational database linking all program and participant data.
The Consolidated Water Conservation Database (CWCD) project began in 1993.
The project team consisted of Water Conservation Program staff, and technical
staff from the SDDPC. Project objectives included: ( 1) centralizing all water
conservation program information and simplifying program participation
validation; (2) identif~ng program effectiveness and water savings on both detail
and program summary levels; (3) developing a means to identify target groups of
customers for future current program participation; and, (4) maintaining the most
currenti accurate customer information.
SDDPC developed a software application in a Windows environment to administer
and report on the CWCD. The Windows application is used for program data
maintenance, editing, participation validation, and program evaluation. The
system runs on a Local Area Network (LAN) allowing staff members to access the
CWCD from their pc's. The CWCD has proven to be a positive business
improvement for the Water Conservation Program through the consolidation of
program ~d customer information. Improved practices include: validation of
program participation, standardization of program data, integration of customer
consumption information, automation of program participation requests, and an
increase in staff efficiency and productivity.
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
Several City water conservation programs have been the focus of independent
research studies performed by consultants. In February 1993, Planning and
Management Consultants, Ltd., submitted a technical report analyzing the water
savings achieved from Phase 1 of the Residential Interior Plumbing Retrofit
Program. A & N Technical Services, a consultant hired by the MWD to perform
techrncal studies on water conservation programs, issued reports evaluating the
water savings and program results for the Residential Water Survey Program and
the City Facilities Retrofit Program. The review of program data from the City
Facilities Retrofit Program was crucial because it provided for standardized water
savings data from non-residential retrofits which were not available before the
study.
106
PAGE 125 Show Image
AWARDS
Resource Conservation Award
In 1993, the City's Residential Water Survey Program received a Resource
Conservation Award from the California Municipal Utilities Association for
excellence and innovation in water and ener~ conservation and efficiency. The
Survey Program was developed to assist City residents in determining how water
is used inside and outside their homes. The survey consists of a thorough interior
and exterior water usage analysis, installation of low-flow showerheads, faucet
aerators, toilet tank devices, and compact fluorescent light bulbs. Water-saving
recommendations and energy consumption information were provided to program
participants. The Survey Program was a unique partnership between the City's
Water Utilities Department and the San Diego Gas and Electric Company. This
cooperative conservation approach provided city residents with simple
conservation measures that produced both water and energy savings.
Water Awareness Award
In 1994, the City Facihties Retrofit Program received a "Water Awareness Award"
for its outstanding contribution and excellence in the area of water conservation
and management from the California Water Awareness Campaign. The City
Facilities Retrofit Program was recognized in the Govemmenti Pubhc Works
category. The program has a goal of instalhng 1 ,887 ulft's in City owned and
operated facilities over a five-year period. The City Facilities Retrofit Program is
the largest public facilities retrofit program of its kind in the United States,
affirming the City's dedication to water conservation and providing an example for
others to emulate.
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
In addition to learning about water conservation through existing programs, the
City provides residents with an array of informational and educational materials
available through various means. An automated telephone Hotline was
established in 1990 to provide customers with instant, 24-hour access to water
conservation information, materials and programs. City residents can hear and
voice their opinion on water conservation programs and issues as they are
presented to community representatives belonging to the City Manager's Water
Conservation Advisory Committee. Through these efforts, the City is able to
communicate to its residents the importance of using water efficiently and
effectively.
107
PAGE 126 Show Image
The Water Utihties Department also does public outreach through presentations
made by members of the Speakers Bureau. Although the majority of requests for
speakers are on water conservation related topics, the bureau also offers
presentations on a wide array of water topics, including water treatment and
filtration, water quality, and water resources.
Public Information and Education Program
Public information and community outreach programs are an important
component of all water conservation programs. The success of the City1s water
conservation effort is dependent upon the public's interest, concern and
knowledge of the particular program or issue. A variety of informational materials
are available for customers to read and become better informed about such topics
as water-efficient landscape, learning how to read a water meter, ulft's, and
conservation measures to adopt around the home. These materials are available
free of charge and are distributed in the following ways: 1) information displays;
2) by Water Conservation staff; 3) Neighborhood Service Centers; 4) City branch
libraries; 5) community events; 6) water treatment facihty tours; and 7) customers
requests via the Water Conservation Hotline. From January 1992 to June 1995,
Water Conservation staff worked in 53 community events reaching an audience
of more than a million people.
Water Conservation Hotline
The City's Water Conservation Hotline was installed in June 1990 to respond to
customer requests for information and materials, and to report water waste. The
automated' Hotline operates twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Water
Conservation Program staffanswer Hotline calls during week-day business hours.
The majority of callers request program specific information (64 percent), followed
by general water conservation inquiries (30 percent), and reports of water waste
(six percent).
City Manager's Water Conservation Advisory Committee
The City Manager's Water Conservation Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee)
was established in May of 1990 to review the water conservafion component of the
proposed 1990 Urban Water Management Plan. The Advisory Committee is
composed of 14 individuals representing organizations having an interest in, or
who would be most affected by, the implementation of water conservation
measures (Appendix J). Committee members represent the following sectors:
landscaping, plumbing, real estate, property management, construction,
manufacturing (biotech), and public interest (environmental). The San Diego
County Water Authority is also an Advisory Committee member.
108
PAGE 127 Show Image
The Advisory Committee meets quarterly to review water policies and issues
affecting water supply, and discuss the merits of various water conservation
programs. Since 1990, the Advisory Committee has discussed a variety of timely
water resource issues including the San Francisco-Sacramento Bay-Delta
standards, Water Repurification and the CWA's Emergency Water Storage Project.
The Advisory Committee receives regular updates on water conservation programs
being developed by the City, and on proposed water related legislation.
Advisory Committee meetings also serve as a forum for public comment. All
meetings are properly noticed in two major local papers, and comply with
Americans with Disabilities Act standards in terms of providing notices in
alternative formats and meeting accessibility.
WATER CONSERVATION MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS
The City of San Diego has adopted two Ordinances that set water-conserving
plumbing standards for new construction and for properties changing ownership
or undergoing a bathroom alteration. The City also supports federal and state
legislation that establishes water conservation plumbing standards.
San Diego Municipal Code Section 93.0206
Recognizing that a significant amount of water could be saved through the
installation of water-conserving plumbing fixtures, the City Council adopted an
Ordinance requiring the installation of ulft1s in all new construction effective
May 1 , 199 1 . This Ordinance was later amended to include the installahon of
low-flow showerheads (2.5 gallons per minute or less) and faucets (2.2 gallons per
minute or less) for all new construction effective December 1 , 1 99 1 (Appendix K).
San Diego Municipal Code Section 93.0208
In March of 199 1 , U.S. District Court Judge Brewster issued a Memorandum
Decision concluding the penalty phase of the lawsuit against the City of San Diego
for violations of the Clean Water Act. In his decision, the Judge outlined four
optional water conservation measures the City could chose to adopt to avoid
paying a $2.5 million fine. Two of the measures were to implement
water-conserving plumbing fixture standards upon change of property ownership
and upon bathroom alteration.
On November 25, 199 1 , after extensive debate and discussion, the San Diego City
Council adopted an Ordinance requiring the installation of water-conserving
plumbing fixtures upon change of property ownership or bathroom alteration.
Informational brochures detailing the Ordinance provisions were mailed to
San Diego County real estate and escrow professionals, plumbing contractors, and
109
PAGE 128 Show Image
plumbing fixture retailers by the Januaiy 1, 1992, effective date (Appendix K).
San Diego Municipal Code (SDMC) Section 93.0208 requires that all buildings
changing ownership be equipped with the following water-conserving plumbing
fixtures prior to the close of escrow/transfer of ownership:
. Toilets manufactured to use no more than 1 .6 gallons per flush (gpf)
(existing toilets manufactured to use no more than 3.5 gpf need not be
replaced);
. Urinals manufactured to use no more than 1 .0 gpf;
* Showerheads manufactured to use no more than 2.5 gallons per minute
(gpm);
* Sink faucets that do not emit more than 2.2 gpm;
* Residenfial reverse osmosis systems equipped with a shutoff valve.
Two years after the adoption of SDMC Section 93.0208, Judge Brewster inquired
about its effectiveness and the compliance rate. This query prompted City staff
to critically review SDMC Section 93.0208 and develop proposed changes to
improve its effectiveness and enhance comphance. Led by staff from the Water
Utilities Department and the City Attorney's Office, City staff presented the
proposed changes to the City Manager1s Water Conservation Advisory Committee.
The draft, Ordinance was presented to the Public Facilities and Recreation
Committee (March and April 1994) and the City Council (July, October, and
November 1 994) . Several meetings were held with representatives of the
San Diego Association of Realtors, and many of their comments and ideas were
incorporated into the draft Ordinance. Also included in the draft Ordinance was
a transfer of administrative and enforcement responsibilities from the
Development Services to the Water Utihties Department. The proposed Ordinance
was adopted on November 28, 1994, and went into effect February 26, 1995.
The adopted Municipal Code changes were designed to make the language clearer
thus making it easier for City residents to understand and comply with the Code
requirements. The major changes that took effect include an ability to transfer the
retrofit responsibility from the seller to the buyer, requiring the buyer's signature
on the Water Conservation Certificate (used to certify compliance) , having the
seller certif~~ under penalty of penury that the property complies with the Code,
allowing additional exemptions, and identif~4ng specific types of transfers not
affected by the Code requirements.
110
PAGE 129 Show Image
Other Legislative Activities
City Water Utilities staff routinely review and recommend that the City support
state and federal legislation promoting effective water conservation practices. One
example of City supported legislation was a state bill sponsored by the CWA
prohibiting the sale or installation of toilets using more than 1 .6 gallons of water
perflushafterJanuary 1, 1994.
POTENTIAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The MOU contains eleven Potential Best Management Practices (PBMPtS) (Figure
5.5). The CUWCC and its subcommittees are studying the PBMP's to determine
their cost-effectiveness, estimated water-savings and any barners to their
acceptance and/or implementation. As a CUWCC member, the City is also
evaluating PBMP's utilizing similar criteria.
CITY-WIDE CONSERVATION POLICIES
Water Theft Prevention Program
A Water Loss Prevention and Revenue Recovery Program was implemented by the
Cityts Water Utilities Department in 1988. The Program is currenfly staffed by two
Code Compliance Officers. Program staff have been trained to identify water loss
due to theft or waste, and to properly document evidence for prosecution when
circumstances warrant such action.
Code Compliance Officers have the authority to issue citations for violation of the
Municipal Code Sections pertaining to water theft and water-waste. The Program
encourages voluntary compliance by customers, thereby eliminating the need for
legal actions in the majonty of cases.
City-Wide Metering
The City's Municipal Code requires that all new service connections to the City's
water system include an appropriately sized water meter to accurately account for
all water delivered through the connection. To ensure accurate accountability for
all water deliveries, the City's 248,240 existing water service connections are
metered. Most meters are read by the City's Water Utilities Department personnel
every other month. However, more than 8,500 meters are read and billed
monthly. Each water customer receives a bill which includes a statement of the
total amount of water used during the current billing period, as well as the
amount used during the same period for the previous year.
111
PAGE 130 Show Image
Figure 5.5
POTENTIAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (PBMPs)
1 Rate structures and other economic incentives and disincentives to
encourage water conservation. ~Phis is the top priority PBMP to be studied.
Such studies should include seasonal rates; increasing block rates;
connection fee discounts; grant or loan programs to help finance
conservation projects; financial incentives to change landscapes; variable
hook-up fees tied to landscaping; and interruptible water service to large
industrial, 12 months from the irntial signing of the MOU. At least one of
these studies will include a pilot project on incentives to encourage
landscape water conservation.}
2. Efficiency standards for water using appliances and irrigation devices.
3. Replacement of existing water using appliances (except toilets and
showerheads whose replacements are incorporated as best management
practices) and irrigation devices.
4. Retrofit of existing car washes.
5. Graywater use.
6. Distribution system pressure regulation.
7. Water supplier billing records broken down by customer class (e.g.,
residential, commercial, and industrial.)
8. Swimming pool and spa conservation including covers to reduce
evaporation.
9. Restrictions or prohibitions on devices that use evaporation to cool exterior
spaces.
10. Point-of-use water heaters, recirculating hot water systems and hot water
pipe insulation.
1 1 . Efficiency standards for new industrial and commercial processes.
112
PAGE 131 Show Image
Slow reading or malfunctioning meters are quickly spotted by the CityTs Water
Utilities Department employees who review the bi-monthly meter readings and
billings. These improperly operating meters are promptly repaired in the City's
meter repair shop or replaced. Older meters are also repaired and replaced on a
15-year maintenance schedule to ensure reliability. Approximately 8,500 meters
were repaired or replaced by the meter shop in Fiscal Year 1995.
Leak Detection Program
Since 1987, a Leak Detection Unit equipped with sophisticated sounding
equipment has been pinpointing leak locations in the City's water distribution
system. This Unit is also capable of determining the magnitude of leaks. The
Leak Detection Unit has served to minimize significant water losses and the
potential for damage to public and private facilities. In addition, costly searches
for the exact location of leaks by repair crews are avoided. Due to the cost
avoidance capability of this program, actual savings are difficult to identif~~.
However, annual savings are estimated to be in excess of $200,000 based solely
on the avoided water loss and crew expenses.
A second Leak Detection Unit was added in 1992. This additional Unit enables
the Water Utihties Department to pinpoint and expedite the process of locating
and promptly repainng leaks, thus preventing additional water loss.
The City's Water Utilities Department field personnel are trained to watch for, and
report, suspected water system leaks. All reported leaks are promptly investigated
and repaired., This prompt repair of system leaks greatly minimizes the amount
of water loss.
Metropolitan Industrial Waste Program
The Metropolitan Industrial Waste Program was established in 1982 to meet
standards set by the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. This Act requires that
municipalities identify industrial dischargers, and monitor and enforce hmitations
on the effluent discharged by these dischargers. The Industrial Waste Program
administers a permit system for businesses classified as industrial dischargers,
sets sewage discharge permit conditions conducts facility inspections, samples
significant discharges, monitors industry self-sampling, issues violation notices,
enforces discharge permit limits through violation negotiations and hearings, and
performs non-residential sewer classifications.
The Program currently has a staff of 22 personnel, an operating budget of
$2.5 million, and regulates more than 1,300 permitted industrial dischargers. A
water audit of an industrial facility is performed before a discharge permit is
issued or renewed. The water audit examines water usage at the facility and
113
PAGE 132 Show Image
identifies areas or processes which can benefit from instituting water conservation
methods. Industries have been very receptive to these conservation suggestions
as they usually translate into lower water and sewer bills. Numerous industrial
customers have received water conservation awards as a result of implementing
water conservation measures identified during an industrial waste audit.
CITY LANDSCAPE PRACTICES AND POLICIES
City Parks Landscape Conservation Practices
The Park and Recreation Department is one of the City's largest water users. In
Fiscal Year 1995, it purchased over 1 .4 billion gallons of water, and budgeted
$3.3 million for water purchases. Park-wide water use includes indoor and
outdoor usage, pool maintenance, vehicle washing, and landscape irrigation
including approximately 1 ,900 acres of turf
The Park and Recreation Department has had an active program for reducing
water consumption and conserving water for more than five years. This
Department works with the City1s Water Conservation Program, Mission Resource
Conservation District, the CWA and the MWD in its efforts to conserve water and
develop more efficient irrigation and water management practices.
The Department has a Water Conservation Program Manager with a horticultural
background. This position is funded by the Water Utilities Department, and is
responsible for developing and implementing the Department's water conservation
programs. This position is also responsible for responding to citizen concerns and
complaints, as well as those of Park and Recreation Department personnel.
A number of programs designed to conserve water have been developed and
implemented by the Park and Recreation Department. These programs include
a computerized monthly water conservation program, on-going turf audits, a
California Irrigation Management Information Services (CIMIS) Weather Station,
a Maxi III Controller (computerized time clock) at the Balboa Park Golf Course, a
new irrigation system with the centralized irrigation control for the South Course
of the Torrey Pines Golf Course, water efficient park design criteria, and employee
training and awareness. Retrofit projects of existing irrigation systems to enhance
water use efficiency are done as funding becomes available. In FY 1995, four
parks were retrofitted with funds furnished by the Water Utilities Department and
the CWA.
114
PAGE 133 Show Image
City Landscape Policies
In 1986, the City Council adopted a Landscape Ordinance and also approved
hiring a consultant to prepare a Landscape Technical Manual to establish
landscape standards, guidelines, and critena for both private and public land
development projects (Appendix L). The City Council approved the Landscape
Technical Manual (Technical Manual) in October 1989, pending a one-year trial
period. The Technical Manual was reviewed during the Fall of 1990, and
thereafter will be revised only as necessary. City Development Services
Department staff administer the Ordinance and the Technical Manual. The
standards of the Landscape Technical Manual are also enforced by the
Engineering and Park and Recreation Departments.
The city-wide Landscape Regulations establishes the minimum landscape
requirements, while the Technical Manual establishes the minimum performance
and implementation standards for landscape design of all City-approved public
and private development projects. Simply stated, the relationship between the
Ordinance and the Technical Manual is that the Ordinance mandates landscape
requirements while the Technical Manual states acceptable methods for
accomplishing those requirements.
Water conservation is addressed in the Technical Manual primarily through
specific standards and criteria for 1) appropriate plant selection for site and soil
conditions; 2) irrigation system design; 3) equipment; 4) operations and
maintenance requirements; and 5) controlhng the use of permanent irrigation.
The design and review process affords the City Development Services
Department's landscape planning staff the opportunity to review and comment on
the landscape plans of proposed developments. Planting and irrigation plans are
reviewed for compliance with the Ordinance and Technical Manual. City
Development Services Department staff routinely forward comments on submitted
designs to the applicant, both public and private, and revisions, if necessary, are
made. This process encourages voluntaxy water conservation landscape practices
through the design and review process, and through contact and discussions with
the general public.
115
PAGE 134 Show Image
116
PAGE 135 Show Image
CHAPTER VI. PRICING AND RATE STRUCTURES
Conservation through Pricing and Rate Structure
Sources of Revenue
The City of San Diego Water Utilities Department treats and delivers more than
1 82 million gallons of potable water to 1 .2 million customers each day. The
department also collects and treats !80 million gallons of sewage generated daily
by 1 .8 million customers. Sewage is collected from the City of San Diego and
15 municipalities, water agencies, and sanitation districts within the boundaries
of the Metropolitan Sewerage System.
The Water Utihties Department operates on a self-supporting basis with water and
sewer fees being the pnmary revenue source. Bonds, issued by the City of San
Diego in 1961 and 1966 for constructing water system infrastructure, upgrading
the sewerage system, and increasing the capacity of the existing sewerage system,
have since been retired. Bonds were issued by the City of San Diego in 1993 for
$250 million to pay for the upgrade of the Metropolitan Sewerage System in
compliance with legislative and judicial mandates.
The Water Utilities Department1s water pricing system is an important component
of the City's continuing efforts to encourage water conservation. The City has
chosen a water and sewer pricing program which promotes water conservation
and reduces wastewater discharges.
Water Rates Pricing Policy
The City of San Diego has histonca~ly based its water rate structure on the
amount of revenue needed to provide potable water to its customers. Elements
taken into consideration to establish the rate structure include the amount of
revenue needed for water operations, facilities maintenance, capital needs, and
water importation.
The general philosophy used was "postage stamp pricing." This allowed for
uniform rates to be used throughout San Diego I~ service area regardless of where
the customer was located. Although there is no formalized City Council Policy
regarding "postage stamp pricing," it was felt this approach was the most readily
acceptable system available to customers.
117
PAGE 136 Show Image
Current Water Rates
The City of San Diego currently linports between 80 to 90 percent of its water via
the MWD arid the CWA. In compliance with the federal Safe Dnnking Water Act
of 1974 arid its later amendments, the City operates three water treatment plants
to provide San Diegans with safe dnnking water for household, commercial, and
industrial needs. Water rates for the City are set at an amount which provides
adequate frinding for all phases ofwater importation, treatment, and delivery. The
current water rates are discussed in the following sections.
Single-Family Domestic Rates
The City's single-family domestic dwelling water pricing structure consists of a
monthly base fee and a two-tiered block rate. The first tier is a "lifeline" rate that
assists lower income customers and also encourages water conservation by
charging a reduced rate for lower water usage. Under the lifeline concept, adopted
by the City Council in 1983, customers pay $ 1 .379 for the first ten units of water
used each month. One unit is equal to one hundred cubic feet (HCF) or
748.5 gallons ofwater. Each addifional unit ofwater used is priced at $1.516 per
HCF. The monthly base fee for single-family accounts is $3.12.
Multi-Family, Commercial and Industn~al Rates
The City's current water pricing structure for multi-family, commercial, and
industrial customers consists of a single-tier water rate structure based on the
amount of water used. The water is priced at $ 1 .435 per HCF. Base fees range
from $3. 12 to $1,338.65 per month depending on meter size.
Water Capacity Charges
The City has a basic capacity charge of $4,012 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit
(EDU). In November 1994, the City Council approved a reduction in water
capacity charges to $2,500 per EDU for new or expanding commercial and
industrial businesses if certain criteria were met by the enterprises. Capacity
reduction critena is applicable to commercial and industnal firms who
demonstrate a long-term commitment to the community; improve the City's
economic base; generate or retain annual City revenues of at least $500,000;
create 200 quality jobs; and provide for substantial new or expanded scientific
research facilities. The capacity adjustment is a component of the City's overall
"Business and Industry Incentive Program," contained in Council Policy 900-12,
adopted August 9, 1993 (Appendix M).
118
PAGE 137 Show Image
Sewer Rates Pricing Policy
The present 1 .8 million sewerage system customers served by the City's Mum cipal
and Metropolitan Sewerage Systems are expected to grow to 2.9 million by the
year 2050. The City1s sewer rates reflect revenue required for the operation,
maintenance, and capital improvement needs of the sewerage systems, for which
significant future upgrade and expansion capital costs are anticipated. Relevant
projects are summarized in the following paragraphs.
The City is responsible for upgrading its sewage treatment facilities to comply with
fe4eral requirements. The Metropolitan Wastewater Plan has been proposed to
meet the prescriptions of the federal Ocean Pollution Reduction Act by assuring
advanced primary treatment at the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant and
providing for 45 million gallons per day (MGD) of water reclamation system by
2010, as well as the pump stations, pipelines, sludge processing facilities and
reclaimed water distributions systems to appropriately handle projected needs.
The future reclaimed water capacity will be composed of 30 MGD at the North City
Water Reclamation Plant, 7 MGD at the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant and
an additional 8 MGD at a site to be determined later based upon an updated
analysis of the region's evolving needs. Additionally, certain improvements are
planned to correct existing deficiencies or provide additional reliability in the
system. These include rehabilitation of portions of the North Metro and South
Metro Interceptor Sewers, improvements at the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment
Plant, and a parallel of the older portion of the Point Loma Ocean Outfall. Thus
a significant amount of reclaimed water will be used to irrigate freeway landscape,
nurseries, parks, and golf courses, and will help reduce San Diego's future
imported water needs.
Lastly, the Sludge Management Plan includes utilization of methane gas produced
by the digestion process for co-generation facilities, sludge application facilities,
and composting facilities.
Current Sewer Service Rates
Currently, single-family domestic customers are billed an average of $22.9 1 per
month based upon winter usage. Effective July 1, 1993, the City implemented an
individualized rate structure for single-family domestic customers based upon
water use during the prior winter months with a cap of 10 HCF' per month.
Winter is typically the time ofyear when the majority ofwater is used indoors and
disposed of through the sewerage system. However, water used during the winter
months will result in lower sewer bills for the ensuing 12 month period and
119
PAGE 138 Show Image
promote indoor water conservation practices. This prdgrarn was developed in
accordance with the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board
(State Board) which requires that the cost of providing sewer service be
proportionate to usage.
Rates paid by multi-family, commercial, and industrial customers vaiy depending
upon the customer's sewage classification. Sewage classifications are based upon
the amount and type of sewage discharged by the customer into the sewerage
system and enable the City to assess sewer charges proportionate to customer's
usage.
Sewer Capacity Charges
Currently the City has a basic capacity charge of $6,998 per EDU. In 1995,
capacity charges were adjusted to allow a reduction to $2,500 per dwelling unit
for new or expanding commercial and industrial business enterprises meeting the
revenue and job-generating criteria contained in Council Policy 900-12
(Appendix M).
Future Sewer Rates and Charges
Future adjustments to rates and charges are probable in order to fund the
system's operation, maintenance and described capital construction requirements.
The City's ten-year Sewer Financing Plan is reviewed annually to optimize
projected rates and debt financing, thereby ensuring the most cost effective
delivery of, sewerage service to the ratepayers in the interests of safety, public
health and the fulfillment of legal mandates.
Consumption Limits
Consumption limits are often used by urban water suppliers to reduce water
usage during a water shortage or emergency. 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 water
usage with incentives for conservation, or restrictions on specific uses.
The San Diego City Council adopted a comprehensive Emergency Water
Conservation Ordinance in 1987, which imposes water use restrictions in four
progressive stages. In April of 1991, the City Council amended the Ordinance to
allow for greater administrative ease when implementing the various stages of the
Ordinance (Appendix G). The revised Ordinance empowers the City Council to set
the consumption limits. This approach allows for maximum flexibility, as the
specific percentage reductions for each stage can be determined based upon the
120
PAGE 139 Show Image
seventy of the situation.
Penalties or Charges For Excessive Use
The City currently has a voluntaiy water conservation effort, and is not presenfly
imposing penalties or charges for excessive use in normal daily operations.
Histoncally, during periods of drought, the citizens of San Diego have
demonstrated that they are willing to embrace water conservation. During the
1976-77 state-wide drought, the MWD requested a 10 percent reduction in water
consumption from all citizens in its service area. San Diego residents responded
by voluntarily reducing water usage by almost 17 percent. The 1976-77 cutback
occurred not because of inadequate supplies, but as an effort to help mitigate the
severe effects of the drought in other areas of the state.
As California entered its fourth consecutive drought year in 1990, the MWD
devised a Drought Action Plan and called upon its member agencies to reduce
their water demands by at least 10 percent during the summer months (June-
September). In response to MWD1s request, the CWA requested that its member
agencies adopt and implement water conservation programs designed to save a
minimum of 10 percent. As result of a comprehensive water conservation
program and public information campaign, the City saved 10.7 percent during the
Summer of 1990.
Due to extended statewide drought conditions which reduced available imported
water supplies, in March 199 1 the CWA reduced delivery allocations to each
member agency by 30 percent ofthe agency1s adjusted 1989-90 base year dehvery.
The CWA readjusted member agency delivery allocations to 20 percent in April
199 1 , after evaluating the runoff figures associated with the rains of "Miracle
March." On April 2 1 , 199 1 , the City Council adopted a 20 percent city-wide water
conservation goal that remains in effect today. City residents responded to the
fifth year of drought by achieving a savings of 29 percent conservation, between
April and September of 199 1 , thus exceeding the established goal.
In the years of 1992-95, water conservation among City residents has continued
but at a reduced percentage. In 1992, water conservation was 24 percent of the
1989 base year consumption and 17 percent in 1993. By 1995, conservation is
proj ected at approximately 1 5 percent and it is expected to continue to reduce
until it stabilizes at 10 percent in 1999. It is estimated that water conservation
will remain at 1 0 percent because this percentage is the residual effect of the
installation of permanent water savers, such as ultra-low flush toilets and
low-flow showerheads.
121
PAGE 140 Show Image
Analysis of Revenue and Expenditure Impacts
An analysis of the impact of the Plan, including a prolonged water shortage or
emergency, 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 are examined in this Section.
To create an Analysis of Revenue and Expenditure Impacts Tables, several factors
must be considered including:
( 1 ) Examining the current number of customers accounts which total
248,240.
(2) Projecting future growth in accounts at 1.76 percent per annum.
The base period for sales projections is Fiscal Year 1989 (July 1 , 1988 to
June 30, 1989) the last pre-drought year. Table 6. 1 is a base case which shows
projections based on a gradual reduction in conservation starting with
approximately 16 percent in FY 1995 and lowering to 10 percent by FY 1999.
This is the percentage of water conservation from the 1989 base year that is most
likely to occur during a non-drought period.
In creating Table 6.2, rather than assuming gradual water supply reductions as
projected in Table 6. 1 , this case assumes conservation of 20 percent from the base
year in F'iscal Years 1996-97, and 10 percent conservation for Fiscal Years 1998-
2000.
In creating Table 6.3, rather than assuming a water supply reduction of
20 percent, projections are based on a 50 percent reduction in available supply.
This will impact the volume of water available for sale, and both the volume and
expenditure of purchased water.
As a result of these projections, it is clear that it will not be possible for the City
to sustain a 50 percent reduction in water sales volume for one to two years
without significantly increasing rates. The magnitude of rate increases required
and their timing is shown in Table 6.3A. In the event reductions of this
magnitude should occur, it would be necessary for the City Council to address the
revenue impacts.
There are no plans to establish a water contingency reserve per se. In the event
of an emergency, previously appropriated capital project funding could be
reallocated to meet short-term emergency needs.
122
PAGE 141 Show Image
TABLE 6.1
CITY OF SAN DIEGO WATER REVENUE FUND
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES STATEMENT
(Dollars in Thousands)
DESCRIPTION 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
ACTUALS EXPECTED
BASE CASE
(ANNUALIZED CONSERVATION: 15.73% IN FY 94, 14.86% IN FY 95, 13.5% IN FY 96, 12.3% IN FY 97, 11% IN FY98)
(10% IN FY 99-00)
STATISTICS
Accounts 246,407 248,240 251,517 255,943 260,448 265,032 269697
Sales thousands of HCF) 86,781 85,823 90,202 92,948 93,971 96,102 97,375
Water Purchases (Acre Feet) 133,123 164,301 164,030 200,604 202,998 207,646 210,419
Unit Customer Charge ($IYearAvg) $59.99 $60.15 $55.73 $70.06 $75.44 $81.28 $87.51
Unit Commodity Charge ($/HCF Avg) $1.3410 $1.3490 $1.5380 $1.7070 $1.9260 $2.1700 $2.41 10
WaterCost(PerAcreFoot) $388 $405 $430 $455 $488 $524 $551
EXPENSES
Capital Improvement Program $18,883 $27,206 $62,101 $109,157 $95,334 $164,076 $215,274
Capital Improvement Encumbrances $40,559 $39,045 $53,223 $39,012 $58,474 $79,409 $62,178
Operations & Maintenance Expenses $82,309 $83,838 $91,852 $96,750 $107,016 $113,501 $120,484
WaterPurchases $51,652 $66,542 $63,754 $79,127 $96,958 $108,669 $115,782
Debt Service $0 $0 $3,492 $10,993 $18,577 $28,469 $43,154
Continuing Appropriations $14,552 $27,254 $4,630 $3,955 $10,926 $19,158 $18,255
Accrued Annual Leave & Sick Leave $494 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300
Operating Reserve $0 $0 $16,482 $612 $1 ,283 $81 I $873
Total Expenditures $208,449 $244,185 $295,834 $339,906 $388,868 $514,393 $576,300
REVENUES
Balance from Prior Year $63,793 $84,188 $61 ,660 $98,703 $1 1 1 ,854 $80,357 $43,680
Prior Year Encumbrances Cancelled $5,293 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Continuing Appropriations $62,093 $55,1 1 1 $66,299 $57,853 $42,966 $69,400 $98,567
BondProceeds $0 $0 $78,591 $90,257 $80,441 $142,208 $188,305
Sale ofWater $126,178 $133,150 $151,952 $172,736 $195,278 $223,336 $250,486
Sale ofReclaimed Water $0 $114 $666 $719 $6,179 $8,284 $9,923
ServiceCharges $177 $170 $180 $191 $202 $215 $227
Fire Hydrant Rentals $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Land & Building Rentals $1,860 $1,719 $1,822 $1,931 $2,047 $2,170 $2,300
New Water Services $587 $450 $477 $506 $536 $568 $602
Sale of Discarded Materials & Facilities $30 $34 $36 $38 $40 $43 $45
SaleofSand&Gravel $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Interest Earnings $6,919 $7,000 $11,296 $13,009 $13,063 $14,030 $14,796
DamageRecovered $106 $160 $170 $180 $191 $202 $214
Refund of Prior Year Expenditures $0 $83 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Service Rendered Other Funds $5,838 $4,393 $4,657 $4,936 $5,232 $5,546 $5,879
Services Rendered To Others $700 $700 $742 $787 $834 $884 $937
Water Main Area Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WaterSystemCapacityCharges $10,302 $10,002 $6,542 $6,870 $7,212 $7,572 $7,952
Recreation Program & Fees $1,229 $1,341 $1,421 $1,507 $1,597 $1,693 $1,795
Grant Receipts $5,053 $817 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Grants Receivable/Reimbursable ($4,080) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Contribution in Aid $109 $735 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
SaleofLand $2,494 $100 $6,600 $100 $100 $100 $100
Other Revenue $565 $2,579 $1 ,424 $1 ,438 $1 ,453 $1 ,467 $1,482
Transfer from Rate Stabilization Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL REVENUE $289,246 $305,846 $394,535 $451 ,761 $469,225 $558,075 $627,290
Funds Available for Appropriation $80,797 $61 ,661 $98,701 $1 1 1 ,855 $80,357 $43,682 $50,990
123
PAGE 142 Show Image
TABLE 6.2
CITY OF SAN DIEGO WATER REVENUE FUND
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES STATEMENT
(Dollars in Thousands)
DESCRIPTION 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
ACTUALS EXPECTED
CASE2
(ANNUALIZED CONSERVATION: 15.73% IN FY 94, 14.86% IN FY 95, 20% IN FY'S 96-97; 10% IN FY 98-2000)
STATISTICS
Accounts 246,407 248,240 251,517 255,943 260,448 265,032 269,697
Sales thousands of HCF) 86,781 85,823 83,403 84,764 95,051 96,102 97,375
WaterPurchases(AcreFeet) 133,123 164,301 137,091 158,591 201,016 207,384 210,131
Unit Customer Charge ($IYearAvg) $59.99 $60.15 $65.73 $70.06 $75.44 $81 .28 $87.51
Unit Commodity Charge ($IHCF Avg) $1.3410 $1.3490 $1.5380 $1.7070 $1.9260 $2.1700 $2.41 10
Water Cost (Per Acre Foot) $388 $405 $430 $455 $488 $524 $551
EXPENSES
Capitallmprovementprogram $18,883 $27,206 $62,101 $109,157 $95,334 $164,076 $215,274
Capital Improvement Encumbrances $40,559 $39,045 $53,223 $39,012 $58,474 $79,409 $62,178
Operations & Maintenance Expenses $82,309 $83,838 $91 852 $96,750 $107,016 $1 13,501 $120,484
WaterPurchases $48,261 $66,542 $58,949 $72,159 $98,096 $108,669 $115,782
Debt Service $0 $0 $3,492 $10,993 $18,577 $28,469 $43,154
Conunuing Appropriations $14,552 $27,254 $4,630 $3,955 $10,926 $19,158 $18,255
Accrued Annual Leave & Sick Leave $494 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300
Operating Reserve $0 $0 $1 6,482 $61 2 $1 ,283 $81 I $873
TotalExpenditures $205,058 $244,185 $291,029 $332,938 $390,006 $514,393 $576,300
REVENUES
Balance from Prior Year $63,793 $84,188 $61 ,660 $93,282 $99,434 $68,120 $30,751
Prior Year Encumbrances Cancelled $5,293 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
ConUnuingAppropriations $62,093 $55,111 $66,299 $57,853 $42,966 $69,400 $98,567
Bond Proceeds
$0 $0 $78,591 $90,257 $80,441 $142,208 $188,305
Sale ofWater $126,178 $133,150 $141,874 $159,261 $197,277 $223,336 $250,486
Sale ofReclaimed Water $0 $114 $666 $719 $6,179 $8,284 $9,923
ServiceCharges $177 $170 $180 $191 $202 $215 $227
Fire Hydrant Rentals $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Land & Building Rentals $1,860 $1,719 $1,822 $1,931 $2,047 $2,170 $2,300
New Water Services $587 $450 $477 $506 $536 $568 $602
Sale of Discarded Materials & Facilities $30 $34 $36 $38 $40 $43 $45
Sale of Sand & Gravel $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
InterestEarnings $6,919 $7,000 $11,147 $12,518 $12,385 $13,337 $14,065
DamageRecovered $106 $160 $170 $180 $191 $202 $214
RefundofPriorYearExpenditures $0 $83 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Service Rendered Other Funds $5,838 $4,393 $4,657 $4,936 $5,232 $5,546 $5,879
Services Rendered To Others
$700 $700 $742 $787 $834 $884 $937
Water Main Area Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Water System Capacity Charges $10,302 $10,002 $6,542 $6,870 $7,212 $7,572 $7,952
RecreationProgram&Fees $1,229 $1,341 $1,421 $1,507 $1,597 $1,693 $1,795
GrantReceipts $5,053 $817 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Grants Receivable/Reimbursable ($4,080) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Contribution in Aid $1 09 $735 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sale of Land
$2,494 $100 $6,600 $100 $100 $100 $100
Other Revenue $565 $2,579 $1 ,424 $1 ,438 $1 ,453 $1 ,467 $1,482
Transfer from Rate Stabilization Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTALREVENUE $289,246 $305,846 $384,308 $432,374 $458,126 $545,145 $613,630
Funds Available forAppropriation $84,188 $61,661 $93,279 $99,436 $68,120 $30,752 $37,330
124
PAGE 143 Show Image
TABLE 6.3
CITY OF SAN DIEGO WATER REVENUE FUND
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES STATEMENT
(Dollars in Thousands)
DESCRIPTION 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
ACTUALS EXPECTED
CASE 3
(ANNUALIZED CONSERVATION: 15.73% IN FY 94, 14.86% IN FY 95, 50% IN FY'S 96-97; 10% IN FY 98-2000)
STATISTICS
Accounts 246,407 248,240 251,517 255,943 260448 265,032 269,697
Sales (Thousands of HCF) 86,781 85,823 52,026 52,876 95,051 96,102 97,375
WaterPurchases(AcreFeet) 133,123 164,301 94,619 114,131 205,329 207,646 210,419
Unit Customer Charge ($IYearAvg) $59.99 $60.15 $65.73 $70.06 $75.44 $81.28 $87.51
Unit Commodity Charge ($IHCF Avg) $1 .341 0 $1 .3490 $1 .5380 $1 .7070 $1 .9260 $2.1700 $2.41 I 0
WaterCost(PerAcreFoot) $388 $405 $430 $455 $488 $524 $551
EXPENSES
CapitallmprovementProgram $18,883 $27,206 $62,101 $109,157 $95,334 $164,076 $215,274
Capital Improvement Encumbrances $40,559 $39,045 $53,223 $39,012 $58,474 $79,409 $62,178
Operations & Maintenance Expenses $82,309 $83,838 $91,852 $96,750 $107,016 $113,501 $120,484
Water Purchases $48,261 $66,542 $36,771 $45,013 $98,096 $108,669 $115,782
Debt Service $0 $0 $3,492 $10,993 $18,577 $28,469 $43,154
ConUnuing Appropriations $14,552 $27,254 $4,630 $3,955 $10,926 $19,158 $18,255
Accrued Annual Leave & Sick Leave $494 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300
Operating Reserve $0 $0 $16,482 $612 $1,283 $811 $873
Total Expenditures $205,058 $244,185 $268,851 $305,792 $390,006 $514,393 $576,300
REVENUES
Balance from Prior Year $63,793 $84,188 $61 ,660 $68,260 $46,923 $12,639 ($27,868)
Prior Year Encumbrances Cancelled $5,293 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Continuing Appropriations $62,093 $55,1 I I $66,299 $57,853 $42,966 $69,400 $98,567
Bond Proceeds $0 $0 $78,591 $90,257 $80,441 $142,208 $188,305
Sale ofWater $126,178 $133,150 $95,363 $106,758 $197,277 $223,336 $250,486
SaleofReclaimedWater $0 $114 $666 $719 $6,179 $8,284 $9,923
SeMce Charges $177 $170 $180 $191 $202 $215 $227
Fire Hydrant Rentals $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Land & Building Rentals $1,860 $1,719 $1,822 $1,931 $2,047 $2,170 $2,300
NewWaterServices $587 $450 $477 $506 $536 $568 $602
Sale of Discarded Materials & Facilities $30 $34 $36 $38 $40 $43 $45
Sale of Sand & Gravel $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Interest Earnings $6,919 $7,000 $10,459 $10,386 $9,415 $10,200 $10,750
Damage Recovered $106 $160 $170 $180 $191 $202 $214
Refund of Prior Year Expenditures $0 $83 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
ServiceRenderedOtherFunds $5,838 $4,393 $4,657 $4,936 $5,232 $5,546 $5,879
Services Rendered To Others $700 $700 $742 $787 $834 $884 $937
Water Main Area Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WaterSystemCapacityCharges $10,302 $10,002 $6,542 $6,870 $7,212 $7,572 $7,952
RecreationProgram&Fees $1,229 $1,341 $1,421 $1,507 $1,597 $1,693 $1,795
GrantReceipts $5,053 $817 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Grants Receivable/Reimbursable ($4,080) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Contribution in Aid $109 $735 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
SaleofLand $2,494 $100 $6,600 $100 $100 $100 $100
OtherRevenue $565 $2,579 $1,424 $1,438 $1,453 $1,467 $1,482
Transfer from Rate Stabilization Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTALREVENUE $289,246 $305,846 $337,109 $352,717 $402,645 $486,527 $551,696
FundsAvailableforAppropriation $84,188 $61,661 $68,258 $46,925 $12,639 ($27,866) ($24,604)
125
PAGE 144 Show Image
TABLE 6.3A
CITY OF SAN DIEGO WATER REVENUE FUND
0, M&R RATE INCREASE REQUIREMENTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
DESCRIPTION ACTUALS EXPECTED
Revenue from Water Sales
fromCase3 $1263178 $133,150 $95,363 $106,758 $197,277 $223,336 $250,486
Rate Change Percent 0.0% 0.0% 17.5% 18.0% 0.0% 4.0% 0.0%
Cumulative Impact Percent 0.0% 0.0% 17.5% 35.5% 35.5% 39.5% 39.5%
Additional Revenue from
Rate Increase $0 $0 $7,913 $19,885 $22,867 $15,086 ($1,479)
TotalRevenuefromWaterSales $126,178 $133,150 $103,276 $126,643 $220,144 $238,422 $249,007
OtherRevenue $99,275 $88,507 $180,361 $178,841 $161,295 $254,530 $333,097
Total Revenue $225,453 $221 ,657 $283,637 $305,484 $381 ,439 $492,952 $582,104
RevenueRequirement $205,058 $244,185 $268,850 $305,793 $390,007 $514,393 $576,299
Net Annual Cash Flow $20,395 ($22,528) $14,787 ($309) ($8,568) ($21 ,441) $5,805
Add Funds from Prior Year $63,793 $84,188 $61,660 $76,447 $76,138 $67,570 $46,129
BalanceAvailable $84,188 $61,660 $76,447 $76,138 $67,570 $46,129 $51,934
126
PAGE 145 Show Image
APPENDIX A
PAGE 146 Show Image
PAGE 147 Show Image
CALIFORNIA
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING ACT
Established: AB 797, Klehs, 1983
Amended: AB 2661, Kielis, 1990
AB lix, Filante, 1991
AB 1869, Speier, 1991
AB 892, Frazee, 1993
SB 1017, Mc~orquoda1e, 1994
AB 2853, Cortese, 1994
CALIFORNIA WATER CODE DIVISION 6
PART 2.6. URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING
CHAPTER 1 GENERAL DECL~ON AND POLICY
10610. This part shall be kriowii and may be cited as the "Urban Water Management
P1annin~ 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 ificreasing
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.
A-i
PAGE 148 Show Image
CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS
1061 1 Unless the context otherwise requires, the definitions of this chapter govern the
construction of this part.
1061 1 .5. "Conservation'1 means those measures that lirnit 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, co~nmercial, 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
co
mmunity 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 ~.
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 w ater for rnunicipal purposes either directly or indirectly to more than ~
customers or supplying more than 3 ,OOO 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 ultjinate 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 149 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 3 1 , 1 984 , 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, region al, 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
contin~ 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.
1 062 1 . (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 marner 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
manage ment planning commensurate with the numbers of customers served and the volume
of water supplied.
A-3
PAGE 150 Show Image
1063 1 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 potable and recycid water use and, to
the extent records are available, segregate those uses between residential, industrial,
commercial, and governmental uses.
(1)) (1) Jdentif~ 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 `1Memorandum of
Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California, dated September 1991,
may submit the annual reports for the purposes of identifying conservation measures as
required by paragraph (1).
(c) Describe alternative conservation measures, mcluding, 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 mjnimum 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 151 Show Image
) Describe actions and p1~~g to ellininate the use of once-through cooling systems,
nonrecirculating water systems, and nonrecyclin~ 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 1063 1 , 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
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 include all of the following inforrnation:
(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 recycled 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, agncultural 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 feasibilitv 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.
(B) 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-5
PAGE 152 Show Image
(5) Consumption limits in the most restrictive stages. Each urban water supplier may use
any type of consumption lirnit in its water shortage contingency plan that would reduce water
use and is appropriate for its area. Examples of consumption ljniits that may be used include,
but are not lirnited 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 irnpacts of the plan on the revenues and expenditures of the urban
water supplier, and proposed measures to overcome those irnpacts, 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 contin~enc y plan.
(9) A mechanism for determ~g actual reductions in water use pursuant to the urban water
shortage contin~enc y 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 governrnental 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-6
PAGE 153 Show Image
() A plan for optirnizing 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) Issu:es relevant to meter retrofitting for all uses.
(5) Incentives to alter water use practices, inc~luding 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.
~) The preparation of the plan shall be coordinated with local water, waste water, and
plannmg agencies.
1 063 3 . The plan shall contain an evaluation of the alternative water management practices
identified in Sections 1063 1 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
riven 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 1 062 1 , and
any amendments or changes required as a result of that review shall be adopted pursuant to
this article.
A-7
PAGE 154 Show Image
10641 (a) An urban water supplier required to prepare a ~ 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 obta~ng 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.
1 0642 . 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 departtnent 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 summanzing
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 departtnent, the urban
water supplier and the department shall make the plan available for public review during
normal business hours.
A-8
PAGE 155 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 p[an shall be commenced within 18
months after that adoption is required by this part, or within 1 8 months after commencement
of urban water service by a supplier commencing that service after January 1 , 1984.
Q) Any action or proceeding alleging that a elan, 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 attach, 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.
1 0652 . The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 1 3 (commencing with Section
2 1 000) 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 1063 1 . 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
1063 1 , or any project for expanded or additional water supplies.
10653 . The adoption of a plan shall satisfy any requirements of state law, regu~tion~,. 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 obta~g 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 156 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.
1 0655 . If any provision 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
3 1 , 1 992 , 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 appropriatior~ is made and no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution or Section 223 1 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 1195
A-1O
PAGE 157 Show Image
APPENDIX B
PAGE 158 Show Image
PAGE 159 Show Image
1995 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Services Division
Water Conservation Program
Marsi A.Steirer
Water Conservation Program Manager
(619) 533-4112
Luis Generoso
Associate Management Analyst
(619) 533-5258
Patricia Egan
Administrative Intern
(619) 533-4177
Rate Analysis Program
Tandy Griskonis
Associate Administrative Analyst
(619) 235-1956
Water Production Division
Paul Gebert
Assistant Civil Engineer
(619) 668-2049
Tibor Varga
Senior Civil Engineer
(619) 668-2040
B4
PAGE 160 Show Image
Wastewater Collection Division
David Grossman
Associate Civil Engineer
(619) 654-4175
Water Distribution Division
Gary Hogue
Senior Civil Engineer
(619) 527-7432
Engineering Division
Oscar Khoury
Associate Civil Engineer
(619) 533-5147
Amy Romero
Assistant Civil Engineer
(619) 533-5159
METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT
Engineering and Water Reclamation Division
Jennifer Grier
Water Reclamation Marketing Analyst
(619) 533-4248
F. Cesar Lopez Jr.
Associate Civil Engineer
(619) 235-1959
B-2
PAGE 161 Show Image
APPENDIX C
PAGE 162 Show Image
PAGE 163 Show Image
(R-96-432)
RESOLUTION NUMBER R- 243
ADOPTED ON ~`! ()
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Oouncil of The City of San Diego,
that the Council hereby approves the 1995 City of San Diego Urban
Water Management Plan and Conservation Program, on file in the
office of the City Clerk as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager be and he is
hereby authorized to submit the approved 1995 Urban Water
Management Plan and Conservation Program to the California
Department of Water Resources by December 31, 1995.
APPROVED: JO W. WITT, Attorney
By
Deputy City A torney
KJS :pev
10/17/95
Or.Dept :W.Util.
R-96-432
Form=r-t
-PAGE 1 OF 1-
PAGE 164 Show Image
().*~9.s5
Pas-scd and adoptcd by ihe Council ofT~)c Ci~ ofS~ii Dicgo on NDV
by tiic following votc:
Council Members Yc~ Nays No~ Prcscnt mcligiblc
HarryMathis ~ F] [2 LII
Scott Harvey ~ LII [2 [3
ChnstineKchoe ~ [3 [3 [3
GeorgeScevens ~ [3 [3 [3
BarbaraWarden ~ [3 [3 [3
V~]erie Siallings ~ [3 [3 [3
Judy McCarty ~ [3 [3 [3
juanV~rgas ~ [3 [3 [3
Mayor Susan Golding ~ [3 [3 [3
AUTHENTICAT£D BY: SUSAN COLDING
M¾or ofThe City ofSan Dieo Calirorn.
CHARLES G. ABDELNOUR
(&a])
City' Ole~k ofThe City of$an Di~go Ca~;Lror:~~.
omce of ih~ Cicy ClLrk, Sai Diego CaIiforn~
R't~ludo ,) . . .
Numbcr.....i\ ~ Adopted ~OvO619S5
PAGE 165 Show Image
APPENDIX D
PAGE 166 Show Image
PAGE 167 Show Image
CITY OF SA DIEC. CALIFORNIA
r COUNCIL POLICY
`ECT POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER RECLAMATION/REUSE NUMBER 400-12
EFFECTIVE
DATE 11/28/88
BACKGROUND
The City of San Diego currently faces the twin challenges of
assuring an adequate future water supply and upgrading its sewage
treatznent to the secondary level.- Federal and -state statutes
mandate secondary levels of treatinent, while the City's position at
the end of the water supply system ipakes future supplies
precarious. The City of San Diego I ~ decision to upgrade the level
of treatment provides the opportunity to incorporate water
reclamation as a inajor focus of the project. Treatment of sewage
within the Metropolitan Sewerage System offers the ability to
provide another source of water for the future. The San Diego
County Water Authority (CWA) imports approximately 90% of the
region1s water needs through the Metropolitan Water District (MWD)
of Southern California. CWA currently purchases approximately 30~
of MWD1s supplies; however, under the Metropolitan Water District
Act, the CWA is only entitled to approximately 11% of the supplies
available. Region-wide population growth will increase demands for
water~in the future and MWD is predicting a shortfall in the water
supply. It is imperative that water reclamation be implemented to
supplement the available supplies and help keep pace with the
projected demand.
PURPOSE
To establish policies to encourage water reclamation/reuse.
POLICY
It is the policy of the City Council to:
A. Prepare a Reclamation Facilities Master Plan.
1. The Reclamation Facilities Master Plan shall be prepared as
an element of the City's secondary treatment/water
reclamation facilities planning effort. It shall delineate
the location and size of future facilities for conveyance,
treatment, and utilization of reclaimed water.
2. The~goal of the Master Plan will be to develop and require
a plan for major water reclamation throughout the
Metropolitan Sewage System.
3. The Master Plan should incorporate to the extent possible
the planning and research work on reclamation already
* completed.
D-1
PAGE 168 Show Image
C: 0 SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA
COUNCILPOLICY ]
SUBJECT POLICT
NUM6ER
IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER REcLA~~TIONIREusE
EFFEC~IVE
SATE
4. The Master Plan shall delineate present and future
reclajined water sources.
.5. The MasterPlan shall define present and future reclamation
markets.
B. Target Goals for Water Reclamation and Reuse.
The City of San Diego has established a goal to reclaim and
reuse a minimum of 70,000 acre-feet/year (approximately 64 mdg
average) of reclaimed water by the year 2010.
C. Draft a Mandatory Use Ordinance.
1. A mandatory use ordinance shall be drafted to require the
use of reclaimed water rather than potable water where it
is available.
2. Dual piping shall be reguired in new developments if future
reclamation facilities are proposed in the masterplan which
could serve the development.
3. Turfrelated facilities, i.e. golf courses and larks, shall
be required to use reclaimed water for irritation where it
is proposed in the master plan.
4. Artificial lakes and man-made decorative ponds where public
contact is restricted shall be required to use reclaimed
water where it is available.
D. Reguire a Mandatory Water Quality Management Plan.
1. A mandatory water auality management plan shall be
established to ensure the auality of the reclaimed water.
2. Industrial wastes~which
might adversely effect the cuality
of the reclaimed water shall be identified, monitored, and
controlled.
3. If it is determined that the salt discharges from
regenerative type water softeners or conditioners adversely
affects the quality of reclaimed water, the Water Utilities
Director or his/her designee shall introduce an ordinance
to restrict the use of, or require a use permit and a
treatment fee for the additional costs associated with
adequately treating the wastewater.
D-2
PAGE 169 Show Image
CITY CF $AN DIEGO. CAIFORNIA
COUNCIL POLICY
CT IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER RECLAMATION/REUSE poLIcy NUMBER
EFFECTVE
DATE 11/28/88
E. Public Information
The City will conduct a public information program which
increases public education and awareness of the need for water
reclamation. Included will be information about the
restriction of regenerative type water softeners or
conditioners.
F. Rules and Regulations
The Water Utilities Departrnent will work with Building
Inspection, Planning and Engineering and Development to develop
rules and regulations to implement this policy. This includes
drafting plan review and permitting procedures required to
implement a mandatory use ordinance.
HISTORY
Adopted by Resolution R-272439 11/28/88
________________________ D-3
PAGE 170 Show Image
(R-89-1043)
RESOLUTION NUMBER R- 272439
ADPTED ON N0V281988
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNCIL POLICY NO.
40012 REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER
RECLAMATION/REUSE.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of The City of San Diego, fiat
Council Policy No 400-12 entitled, "IMPL~~NTATION c)F ~
?~CLAMA~ION/REflSE," be ana is hereby established as set forth in
the Council Policy filed in the Office of the City Clerk as
Document No. RR-272439
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby
instructed to add the aforesaid to the Council Policy manual.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager is hereby
directed to continue working with the County Water Authority on a
regional Mandatory Use Ordinance as well as a Mandatory Use
Ordinance specific to the City of S~ Diego and its member
agencies.
APPROVED: John W. Witt, City Attorney
By
Ted Brom ie
Chief Deputy Cit Attorney
TB:js
1l/15~88
Or.DePt:W.Util.
R-89-1043
Form=r.estcp
D-4
PAGE 171 Show Image
NOV28 188
Passed and adopted by the Coun. f The Ciy of San Diego on~..
by the following vote:
Go-~nci1 Merribers Yeas Nays Not Present Ineligibie
Abbe Wolfsheimer ~ E) [1] L]
m
Pr',' P~~J~c I' LJ
Gloria M~o11 (1) 5 5
H Wes Pratt ~ S 5 LI
EdStruiksma LI LI ~ LI
J Bruce Hendesson ~ LI LI LI
ii m
LI LJ
ludy M~~rty
Bob Fiincr ~ LI LI LI
Mayor Maureen O'Coanor ~ LI LI LI
AUTHE~CAThD BY: MAURE£N O'CONNOR
Mayor of TheCity o[ San Diego. Ca1ilonii~
CHARLES G. ABDELNOUR
(Seal) city. cicrk ci Th~ city of San Diego. Caiiforni~
~
Office or the ~ty Clerk. S~ Diego, C~lifcmia
Resoltitlo p272439 p'oV 2 8 1988
Nutnber .. -..-.........Adopted.........-*-
Cc~12Th (if'. 12w)
D-5
PAGE 172 Show Image
PAGE 173 Show Image
APPENDIX E
PAGE 174 Show Image
PAGE 175 Show Image
SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE §64.0804
wholly or partly for a landscape irnpoundinent, a
DIVISION 8 restricted recreational irnpoundment or a non-res-
Water Reclamation tricted recreational impoundment.
(Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327NS.) (c) COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING: Any
building for office or commercial uses with water
requirements which include, but are not limited to,
§ 64.0801 Findings, Purpose and Intent landscape irrigation, toilets, urinals and decorative
fountains.
The Council of The City of San Diego finds that: (d) GREENBELT AREAS: A greenbelt area
a) the people of the State of Caiifornia have a includes, but is not limited to, golf courses, cemeter-
primary interest in the development of facilities to jes, parks and landscaping.
reclaim water containingwaste to supplement exist- (e) INDUSThIAL PROCESS WATER: Water used
ing surface and underground water supplies and to by any industrial facility with process water re-
assist in meeting the future water requirements of quirements which include, but are not lirnited to,
the state; (California Water Code section 13510); rinsing, washing, cooling and circulation, or con-
and struction, including any facility regulated by the
b) conservation of all available water resources industrial waste water discharge ordinance of the
requires the maximum reuse of wastewater for City. (Municipal Code, Chapter VI, Article 4).
beneficial uses of water eater Code section 461); (f) OFF-SITE FACIUTIES: Water (or reclaimed
and water) facilities from the source of supply to the
c) continued use of potable water for irrigation point of connection with the on-site facilities, nor-
of greenbelt areas and for other uses where the use mally up to and including the water meter.
ofreclaimed water is suitable maybe an unreasona- (g) ON-SITE FACIUTIES: Water (or reclaimed
ble use of such water where reclaimed water is water) facilities under the control of the owner
available; and normally downstream from the water meter.
d) the state policies described above are in the (h) POTABLE WATER: Waterwhich conforms to
best interest ofthe City. The m~orityofjurisdictions the federal, state and local standards for human
in San Diego County have adopted measures to consumption.
promote water reclamation. This ordinance is (i) RECLAIMED WATER: Water which, as a
necessary to protect the common water supply of result of treatment of wastewater, is suitable for a
the region which is vital to public health and safety, direct beneficial use or controlled use that would
and to prevent endangerment ofpublic and private not otherwise occur. (See Water Code section
property. San Diego County is highly dependent on 13050(n).)
limited imported water for domestic, agricultural U) RECLAIMED WATER DISTRIBUTION: A pip-
and industrial uses. The reliability of the supply of ing system intended for the delivery of reclaimed
imported water is uncertain. By developing and util- water separate from any potable water distnbution
izing reclaimed water, the need for additional system.
imported water can be reduced. In light of these (k) WASTE DISCHARGE: Waste discharge
circumstances, certain uses ofpotable water maybe means water deposited, released or discharged into
considered unreasonable or to constitute a nuisance a sewer system from any commercial, industnal or
where reclaimed water is available or production of residential source which contains levels of any sub-
reclaimed water is unduly impaired. stance which may cause substantial harm to any
(Added 7-24-89 by0-1 7327NS.) water treatment or reclamation facility or which
may prevent any use of reclaimed water authorized
§ 64.0802 Water Reclamation Policy by law, provided levels exceed those found in water
It is the policy of the City that reclaimed water actually delivered to the source of the waste dis-
shall be used within its jurisdiction wherever feasi- charge by the water purveyor.
ble, and consistent with legal requirements, preser- (Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327NS.)
vation of public health, safety and welfare, and the
environment. § 64.0804 Administration
(Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327NS.) (a) GENERAL The CityManager shall administer,
implement and enforce the provisions of this ordi-
§ 64.0803 Definitions nance. Any powers granted to or duties imposed
The following terms are defmed for purposes of upon the City Manager maybe delegated by the City
this ordinance: Manager to persons in the employ of the City.
(a) AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES: Agricultural (b) REGULATIONS. The City Manager shall make
purposes include the growing of field and nursery and enforce regulations necessary to the adminis-
crops, row crops, trees, and vines and the feeding of tration of this ordinance. The Manager may amend
fowl and livestock~ such regulations from time to time as conditions
(b) ~FlCIAL LAKE: A human-made lake, require. These regulations shall be consistent with
pond, lagoon, or other body of water that is used the general policy established herein by the City
Council.
(1.89) MC ~192.49
E-1
PAGE 176 Show Image
§64.0804 SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE
(Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327N.S.) (4) QUALITY OF WATER TO BE RECLAIMED. An
evaluation ofwater qualitywith respect to the effect
§ 64.0805 Penalty for Violation on anticipated uses ofreclaimed water to be served
(a) PUBLIC NUISANCE: Discharge of wastes or by each treatment facility. An evaluation of sources
the use of reclaimed water in any manner in viola- of waste discharge and sewer inflow that may,
tion of this ordinance or of any permit issued directly or cumulatively, substantially contribute to
hereunder is hereby declared a public nuisance and adverse water qualityconditions in reclaimed water.
shall be corrected or abated as directed byCity. Any In the event that sufficient data is not available,
person creating such a public nuisance is guilty of a recommendations on an enhanced sampling and
misdemeanor. monitoring program to provide additional data for
(b) INJUNCTION: Whenever a use of reclaimed further development of reuse options or necessary
water is in violation of this ordinance or otherwise discharge regulation.
causes or threatens to cause a condition or nui- (5) TRIBUTARY PROTECTION MEASURES.
sance, the City may seek ir~Iunctive relief as may be Recommendations of control measures and man-
appropriate to enjoin such discharge or use. cement practices for each designated tnbutary
(c) PERMIT REVOCATION: In addition to any ~ea to maintain or improve the quality ofreclaimed
other statute or rule authorizing termination of water. Such control measures may include capital
reclaimed water service, the City Manager may i'flprovements to the sewer collection system and
revoke a permit issued hereunder if a violation of waste discharge restrictions for industnal, commer-
anyprovision ofthis ordinance is found to exist or if cial and residential discharges.
use ofreclaimed water causes or threatens to cause (6) SCHEDULE. A schedule for implementation,
a nuisance. including additional planning and pre-design steps,
(d) PENALTY: Any owner and/or operator who institutional arrangements, permits, land acquisi-
violates any penal provision ofthis ordinance shall tion, design, construction, startup, and facilityphas-
for each day ofviolation, or portion thereof, be sub-' ing for each reclaimed water service area.
ject to a fine not exceeding $1,O()(). In addition, water (Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327NS.)
service to the property may be discontinued.
(:4dded 7-24-89 byO-17327NS.) § 64.0807 WaterReclamationMasterplan
(a) GENERAL. No person or public agency, as
§ 64.0806 WaterReclamationMasterplan used in California Water Code section 13551, shall
(a) GENERAL: Upon adoption of this ordinance, use water from any source or of quality suitable for
the City shall prepare and adopt a Water Reclama- potable domestic use for the irrigation of greenbelt
tion Master Plan to define, encourage, and develop areas, or other uses where the use of reclaimed
the use of reclaimed water within its boundaries. water is suitable, when reclaimed water is available.
The Master Plan shall be updated every five years. (b) IDENTIFICATION OF USERS. Persons or
The Master Plan may be one or more documents agencies who are mandated to use reclaimed water
covering specific poitions of the planning ares are to be identified and permitted as described in
(b) CON'I~~ OF THE REGION MA~I~~R tIUS section.
PLAN: The Master Plan shall include, but not be (c) EXI~I'ING POTABLE WATER SERVICE:
(1) PREUMINARY DE'I~~RMINATION. Based
limited to, the following:
(1 ) PLANTS AND FACILITIES. Evaluation ofthe upon the Master Plan, upon the designation of each
location and size ofpresent and future reclamation reclaimed water service area or the commencement
treatment plants, distribution pipelines, pump sta- of the design of new reclaimed water facilities, the
tions, reservoirs, and other related facilities, includ- City shall make prelir~ary determinations as to
ing cost estimates and potential financing methods. which existing potable water customers shall be
(2) RECLAIMED WATER SERVICE AREAS. A converted to the use ofreclaimed water. Each water
designation, based on the criteriaset forth in Section customer shall be notified ofthe basis for a determi-
64.0802 and the information derived from Sections nation that conversion to reclaimed water service
64.0806(b)(1) and (1))(2) of the areas within the ~;ii be required, as well as the proposed conditions
City that can or may in the future use reclaimed and schedule for conversion.
water in lieu ofpotable water. Reclaimed water uses (2) NICE. The notice of the preliminary
can include, but are not limited to, the irrigation of determination, including the proposed conditions
greenbelt and agricultural areas, fling of artificial and time schedule for compliance, and a reclaimed
lakes, and appropriate industrial and commercial water permit application shall be sent to the water
uses. customer by certified'ma~
(3) TRIBUTARY AREAS. A designation of pro- (3) OBJE~flONS. The water customer mayffie a
posed tributary areas for each water reclamation notice of objection with the City Manager within
facility identified in the Master Plan, providing maps thirty (30) days after any notice ofdetermination to
showing locations of moor sewers tributary to an comply is delivered or mailed to the customer, and
existing or proposed plant site, and the tributary may request reconsideration of the determination
area served by the facility. or modification ofthe proposed conditions or sche-
dule for conversion. The objection must be in writing
MC ~192.5O (1.89)
E-2
PAGE 177 Show Image
SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE §64.0808
and specify the reasons for the objection. The preli- owner or applicant shall obtain a reclaimed water
minary determination shall be final if the customer permit.
does not file a timely oijection. The City Manager (1) PERMIT CONDITIONS. The permit shall
shall appoint a panel ofthree (3) staffmembers who specif~~ the design and operationai requirements for
shall review the objection and shall confirm, mode the applicant's water distribution facilities and
or abandon the preliminary determination. The schedule for compliance, based on the rules and
panel shall make a final determination within thirty regulations adopted pursuant to Section 64.0808(a)
(30) days of the tiling of the notice of objection. and shall require compliance with both the Califor-
(d) DEVELOPMENT AND WATER SERVICE nia Department ofHealth Services Wastewater Rec-
APPROVAL£: lamation Criteria (see California Code of Adminis-
(1) CONDrnONS. Upon application by a devel- trative Regulations, Title 22), and requirements of
oper, owner or water customer (herein referred to the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
as "applicant") for a tentative map, subdjvision map, (2) PLAN APPROVAL. Plans for the reclaimed
land use permit, or other development project as and non-reclaimed water distribution systems for
defmed byGovemment Code section 65928, the City the parcel shall be reviewed by the City and a field
Manager shall review the Master Plan and make a inspection conducted before the permit is granted.
preliminary determination whether the current or (3) PERMIT ISSUANCE. Upon approval of plans
proposed use ofthe subject propertyrequires it to be the permit shall be issued. Reclaimed water shall not
served with reclaimed water or to include facilities be suppiled to a propertyuntil inspection bythe City
designed to accommodate the use of reclaimed determines that the applicant is in compliance with
water in the future, due to its location within an the permit conditions.
existing or proposed reclaimed water service area. (f) TEMPORARY USE OF POTABLE WATER. At
Based upon such determination, a permit for such the discretion of the City, potable water may be
use may be required as a condition of approval of made available on a temporary basis, until
any such application, in addition to any other condi- reclaimed water is available. Before the applicant
tions of approval or service. receives temporary potable water, a reclaimed
(2) ALTERATIONS AND REMODELING. On a water permit, as described in Section 64.0807(c),
case by case basis, upon application for a permit for must be obtained for new on-site distribution facili-
the alteration or remodeling of multi-family, com- ties. Prior to commencement of reclaimed water
mercial or industrial structures, the City Manager service, an inspection of the on-site facilities will be
shall review the Master Plan and make apreliminary conducted to veriiy that the facilities have been
determination whether the subject propertyis with- maintained and are in compliance with the
in a reclaimed water service area (existing or pro- reclaimed water permit and current requirements
posed) and shall be served with reclaimed water or for service. Upon verification of compliance,
include facilities designed to accommodate the use reclaimed water shall be served to the parcel for the
of reclaimed water in the future. Based upon such intended use. Ifthe facilities are not in compliance,
determination that use ofreclaimed water and pro- the applicant shall be notified of the corrective
vision of reclaimed water distribution systems or actions necessary and shall have at least thirty (30)
other facilities for the use of reclaimed water is days to take such actions prior to initiation of
appropriate, a permit for such use may be required enforcement proceedings.
as a condition of approval of the application. (g) RECLAIMED WATER RATE: The rate charged
(3) REQUESTED SERVICE. On a case by case for reclaimed water shall be established by resolu-
basis, upon application for a permit to use reclaimed tion of the City.
water on a propertynot covered bySections 64.0807 (Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327 N.S.)
(d)(1) and (d)(2) above, the City Manager shall
review the Master Plan and make a determination § 64.0808 Implementation Program
whether the subject property shall be served with (a) RULESAND REGULATIONS. The CityManag-
reclaimed water. Based upon such determination, er shall establish general rules and regulations
the application for the permit shall be accepted and governing the use and distribution of reclaimed
processed subject to Section 64.0807(e). water.
(4) NOTICE OF DETERMINATION. A notice of (b) PUBLIC AWARENESS PROGRAM. The City
the basis for the preliminary determination, pro- Manager shall establish a comprehensive water rec-
posed conditions of approval and schedule for com- lamation public awareness program.
pliance shall be provided to the applicant prior to (c) COORDINATION AMONG AGENCIES. The
approval of the development application, or appli- City Manager shall coordinate efforts between the
cation for water service. City and other regional agencies to share in the
(e) RECLAIMED WATER PERMIT PROCESS: production and utilization of reclaimed water,
Upon a final determination by the City that a prop- where the potential exist.
erty shall be served with reclaimed water or adop- (d) FINANCING PROGRAMS. The City Manager
tion of a condition of development approval or may, through the Master Plan, or other program,
water service requiring use or accommodation of ident~ resources, and adopt measures to assist
the use of reclaimed water, the water customer, water users in the fmancing of necessary conver-
(189) MC ~192.51
E-3
PAGE 178 Show Image
§64.0808 SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE
sions mandated by this ordinance.
(:4dded 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327NS.)
§ 64.0809 Regulatiouo~asteDischargeto
Sewage Systems
(a) INTENT: The City recognizes that to maintain
adequate wastewater quality for water reclamation
treatment processes, and to protect public and pri-
vate property, restrictions may be required on cer-
tain industnal, commercial and residential waste
discharges to asewerage system that is located with-
in a designated tributary area of an existing or
planned reclamation facility.
(b) ADOFI'ED TRIBUTARY PROTE~ON MEA-
SURES: Waste disch&ges to the sewage system from
any industnal, commercial or residential source
maybe restricted or prohibited byordinance upon a
finding, following a noticed public hearing, that the
type or class ofdischarge involved is capable ofcaus-
ing or maycause substantial damage or harm to any
sewage treatment or reclamation facility or to any
significant user or users or potential user or users of
reclaimed water within an area which has been
planned for reclaimed water service. (Municipal
Code section 64.0514)
(Added 7-24-89 by0-17327NS.)
§ 64.0810 Validity
Ifanyprovision ofthis ordinance or the applica-
tion thereof to any person or circumstance is held
invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the
application of such provisions to other persons or
circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
(Added 7-24-89 by 0-1 7327NS.)
MC~192.52 E-4 (1-89)
PAGE 179 Show Image
APPENDIX F
PAGE 180 Show Image
PAGE 181 Show Image
CITY 0 SAN OIEGO. CAl FORNIA
COUNCIL POLICY Rev.
SUBJECT POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE
NUMBER OATE
E~RGENCY STORAGE OF WATER
400-4 12/27/73 1 OFi
BACKGROU~~
The City of San Diego I supply of water is through the aqueducts, canals,
and puinping plants of the bletropolitan Water District and the San Diego County
Water Authority. While such facilities have an excellent record of service, it
is entirely possible for service to be interrupted by floods, earthquakes, or
sabotage. Prior to 1963 the Water Utilities Department operated under an un
official policy of providing approximately one yearTs storage as an emergency
supply. An evaluation of the hazard and possible interruptions balanced against
the costs of emergency storage caused us to reevaluate this requirement.
PL~FOSE
To provide a minirnuin quantity of stored untreated water to provide for emer-
gencies such as aqueduct failure or aqueduct pump stations outage.
POLICY
The Water Utilities Department shall have six-tenths of the annual re~uire~ent
o~ the City of San Diego and its contractees as active, available storage at the
foll~~ing reservoirs: Lake Skinner, San Vicente, El Capitan, Leer Otay, murray,
and Miramar. The active, available storage shall include any water in the San
Vicente Reservoir stored to the account of the San Diego County Water Authority
or the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California but shall not include
any water stored at El Capitan Reservoir by the Helix Irrigation District. The
active, available storage shall also include 60% of the active, available storage
in the metropolitan Water District Lake Skinner Reservoir. Active, available
storage shall be that portion of the water which is above the lowest usable outlet
of each reservoir.
Adopted by Resolution No. 176832 8/13/63
Amended by Resolution No. 200189 7/2/70
Amended by Resolution No. 209553 12/27/73
CC~A (2-69) F-i
PAGE 182 Show Image
PAGE 183 Show Image
APPENDIX G
PAGE 184 Show Image
PAGE 185 Show Image
SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE §67.38.2
damaged pipes beyond the Department's meter. a written permit, furnished upon regular applica-
CIDGOIP 1-22-52 by 0-5046 NS., contained in tion, by the Department.
0-81 7A~S., adopted 1-28-36) (d) It is unlawful for any person to place upon or
about any fire hydrant, gate valve, manhole, stop-
§ 67.34 Regulation ofwater System Mis- cock, meter or meter box connected with water
cellaneous Services Not Mentioned Herein pipes of the systein of water works, any matenal,
debris or structure of any kind so as to prevent free
The Department is always wiii~g to render any access to the same at all times.
reasonable service in connection with the supply of (e) It shall be unlawful for any person or persons
water service to consumers upon application at the to willfully or neglectfully waste water in any
main office of the Department, providing, however, manner whatsoever, and any person having cowl-
that reasonable charges may be made for any edge of any conditions whereby water is being
expense involved in rendering the service.
(Incorp. 1-22-52 by 0-5046 N£, contained in wasted shall jinmediately notify the Water Utilities
0-81 7NS., adopted 1-28-36 .) Department of such fact.
(f) It shall be unlawful for any person or persons
§ 67.35 Regulation of Water System to use water from the City supply for sprinkling or
wetting parks, lawns, trees, shrubs, flowers, fruits,
Water Mains Property ofthe Department vegetables, grains, walils, drives, streets, or con-
All water pipes which have been approved by the struction work of any character between the hours
Department, laid in streets, alleys, or other public of8:OO ~m. and 5:00 p.m., provided notice to discon-
thoroughfares within the corporate limits of The tinue the use of water during these hours for these
City of San Diego shall become the property of the purposes has been published by the City Manager in
Department. the daily papers of the City of San Diego stating
(1flCOI~ 1-22-52 by 0-5046 N£, contained in therein the period for which this prohibition shall
0-817NS., adoptedin 1-28-36.) continue.
(Amended 5-25-77 by0-12()77N.£)
§ 67.36 Regulation of Water System -
Street Work § 67.38 Emergency Water Regulatious -
All contractors, persons, corporations, etc., who Declaration of Emergency
open, grade, regrade, fill, excavate, or otherwise That the City Manager be, and he is hereby autho-
work a street, shall give at least three days' written rized to determine and declare that a water shor-
notice to the Department for the removal, raising, tage emergency exists in any and/or all parts of The
lowering, or otherwise displacement of any water City of San Diego, and upon such deterrni~ation, to
mains, pipes, fittings, meters, or other water system promulgate such regulations, rules and conditions
property that may interfere with such street work relative to the time of using water, the purpose or
Contractors, or other persons perfontdflg such purposes for which it may be used, and such other
work,shallbeliablefordamagetocitywaterproper- necessary limitations as will, in his opinion, relieve
ties. the water shortage in any such section or sections of
UnCOIP. 1-22-52 by 0-5046 N.S., contained in The City.
0-81 7NS., adopted 1-28-36 .) (1flCO~ 1-22-52 by 0-5046 NS.)
§ 67.37 Regulation ofwater System - Fire § 67.38.1 Scope
Hydrants There is hereby established a City of San Diego
(a) Fire hydrants are provided for the sole pur- Comprehensive Water Conservation Plan.
pose ofextinguishingflres, and are to be opened and (Added ~22-87 by 0-16878 N£)
used onlybythe F~eDepartment and Water Utilities
Department, or such other persons as are specially § 67.38.2 Declaration of Policy
authorized bythe Department, upon such person or The City Council, by and through its Water Utili-
persons making application at the main office ofthe ties Department, finds and determines that a water
Department. shortage could exist based upon the occurrence of
(b) To insure safety of fire hydrants for fire pro- one or more of the following conditions:
tection, any person or persons authorized by the ~ A general water supply shortage due to
Department to open fire hydrants willbe required to increased demand or limited supply.
use only an approved Spanner wrench, and to b. Distribution or storage facilities of the Metro-
replace the caps on outlets when the same are not in politan Water District of Southern California, the
use. Failure to meet this requirement will be suffi- San Diego County Water Authonty, or the City of
cient cause to prohibit further use of the hydrants, San Diego become inadequate.
and the refusal of subsequent authorization for use c. A disruption of the supply, storage and distri-
of the fire hydrants. bution facilities of the Metropolitan Water District
(c) It is unlawful for any person or persons to ofSouthern California, the San Diego CountyWater
carry away anywaterfrom anyfire hydrant without Authority, or the City of San Diego occurs.
(91.589) G-1 MC 6-219
PAGE 186 Show Image
§67.38.2 SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE
It is hereby declared that, because of the condi- properties or public or private roadways or streets
tions prevailing in the City of San Diego, the general due to excessive irngation and/or uncorrected
welfare requires that the City maximize the benefi- leaks.
cial use ofits available water resources to the extent (2) A customer will not fail to repair a water
to which they are capable, and that the waste or leak
unreasonable use, or unreasonable method ofuse of (3) A customerwill not use water to wash down
water be prevented and the conservation of such sidewa11~, dnveways, paridrig areas, tennis courts,
water is to be extended with a view to the reason- patios or other paved areas, except to alleviate
able and beneficial use thereofin the interests ofthe immediate safety or sanitation hazards.
people of the City of San Diego and for the public The following stages shall take effect upon decla-
welfare. ration as herein provided.
(Amended 4-29-91 by 0-1 7634 NS.) (b) Stage 1. Voluntary Compliance Water
Watch.
§ 67.38.3 Audionzation Stage 1 applies during periods when the possibil-
The City Manager, or his designate, upon the itY exists that the City of San Diego Water Utilities
~commendation ofthe Director ofthe Water Utili- Department will not be able to meet all ofthe water
*.ies Department, and following public notice, is her- demands of its customers. All elements of Stage 2
~by authorized and directed to irnplement the shall during Stage 1 apply on avoluntarybasis only.
applicable provisions of Sections 67.38 through (c) Stage 2. Mandatory Compliance Water
67.38.8, upon his determination that such imple- Alert.
mentation is necessaryto protect the public welfare Stage 2 applies during periods when the proba-
and safety under the following conditions: bllityexists that the CityofSan Diego Water Utilities
~ In the event of an unforeseeable disaster or ~p~~ment will not be able to meet all ofthe water
water emergency such as an earthquake, aqueduct demands of its customers.
break, or other moor disruption in the water Upon implementation by the City Manager and
supply, the City Manager, or his designate, is autho- publication of notice, the following water conserva-
rized to implement the emergencyprovisions ofSec- tion measures shall applyto exceptwhen reclaimed
tions 67.38 through 67.38.8 as provided herein. Pub- water is used:
lic notice will follow enactment of said provision. (1) Lawn watering and landscape Irrigation,
b. In the event of a foreseeable water emergency including construction meter Irrigation, is permit-
such as extended drought conditions, the CityMan- ted only during designated hours on designated
ager, or his designate, may be authorized to imple- days. Watering is permitted at any time if~
ment the applicable provisions of Sections 67.38 (a) a hand-held hose equipped with a positive
through 67.38.8 as provided herein, after holding a shut-off nose is used, or
public hearing before the City Council. (b) a hand-held container is used, or
(Amended 4-29-91 by 0-1 7634 NS.) (c) a drip irrigation system is used.
Commercial nurseries, commercial sod farms
§ 67.38A Application and similarly situated establishments are exempt
The provisions of Sections 67.38 through 67.38.8 from Stage 2 Irrigation restrictions but will be re-
shall apply to all persons, customers and property quired to curtail all nonessential water use.
served by the Department of Water Utilities wher- (2) The washing ofautomobiles, trucks, trailers
ever situated. boats, airplanes and other types of mobile equip-
(Amended 4-29-91 by 047634 NS.) ment, is permitted at any time wlth a hand-held
bucket or a hand-held hose equipped with a posi-
§ 67.38.5 Water Conservation Stages tive shut-off nozzle for quick rinses.
Washing may be done at any time on the
No customer of the City of San Diego Water Utili- immediate premises of a commercial car wash or
ties Department shall make, cause, use or permit commercial service station, or by a mobile car wash
the use of water from the City for residential, com- or on-site car wash using high pressure washing
mercial, industnal, agricultural, governmental or equipment. Further, such washings are exempted
any other purpose in a manner contrary to any from these regulations where the health, safety and
provision ofSections 67.38 through 67.38.8, or in an welfare of the public is contingent upon frequent
amount in excess of that use permitted by the fol- vehicle cleanings, such as garbage trucks and vehi-
lowing conservation stages which are in effect pur- des to transport food and perishables.
suant to action taken by the City Manager, or his (3) The over~g of swimming pools, spas,
designate, in accordance with the provisions ofSec- ponds and artificial lakes is prohibited.
tions 67.38 through 67.38.8. At no time shall water (4) Irrigation of golf courses, parks, school
be wasted or used unreasonably. grounds and recreation fields is permitted only dur-
(a) Unreasonable uses ofwater shall include, but ing designated hours on designated days.
are not limited to, the following practices: (5) Use of water from fire hydrants shall be
(1 ) A customer shall not let water leave the sited to fire fighting, related activjties or other
customefs property by drainage onto adjacent actMties necessary to maintain the health, safety
MC 6~22O (91-589)
G-2
PAGE 187 Show Image
SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE §67.38.5
and welfare of the citizens of San Diego. welfare of the citizens of San Diego.
(6) Ml restaurants are prohibited from serving (7) All restaurants are prohibited from serving
water to their customers except when specifically water to their customers except when specifically
requested by the customers. requested by the customers.
(7) Water shall not be used to wash down side- (8) Water shall not be used to wash down side-
walks, driveways, parking areas, tennis courts, walks, driveways, parking areas, tennis courts,
patios or other paved areas, except to alleviate patios or other paved areas, except to alleviate
immediate fire or sanitation hazards. immediate fire or sanitation hazards.
(8) Ornamental fountains may operate if they (9) The operation of any ornamental fountain or
recirculate water. Ornamental fountains that do similar structure is prohibited except for short
not recycle water are prohibited. periods of time to prevent damage.
(9) Construction operations receiving water (10) The number of new construction meters
from a construction meter or water truck shall not shall not exceed the existing number of currently
use water unnecessarily for any purposes other authorized meters. A new meter shall be issued
than those required by regulatory agencies. Con- only when an old meter is returned. Construction
struction projects requiring watering for new land- projects requiring water from a construction meter
scaping materials should adhere to the designated or a water truck shall not use water unnecessarily
irrigation hours associated with subsection (1) of for any purposes other than those required by reg-
State 2. ulatory agencies. Construction projects requiring
(d) Stage 3. Mandatory Compliance- Water water for new landscapes shall adhere to the des-
Warning. ignated days and times as set forth in subsection
Stage 3 applies during periods when the City of (1) ofStage 2. Further, construction projects neces-
San Diego Water Utilities Depaftment will not be sary to maintaining the health, safety and welfare
able to meet all of the water demands of its cus- of the public are exempt from these regulations.
tomers. Upon implementation by the City Man- (11) The use of water for commercial manufac-
ager and publication of notice, the following water turing or processing purposes shall be reduced in
conservation measures shall apply except when volume by an amount determined by the City
reclaimed water is used: Council.
(1) Lawn watering and landscape irrigation, (e) Stage 4. Mandatory Compliance- Water
including with a hand-held hose equipped with a Emergency
positive shut~off nozzle, is permitted only during Stage 4 applies when a major failure of any
designated hours on designated days. Watering is supply or distribution facility, whether temporary
permitted at any hour, on any day, if a hand- held or permanent, occurs in the water distribution sys-
container or drip irrigation system is used. tem of the State Water Project, Metropolitan
(2) Commercial nurseries shall reduce water Water District, San Diego County Water Authority,
use by an amount determined by the City Council. or City of San Diego water facilities.
(3) The washing of automobiles, trucks, trail- Upon implementation by the City Manager and
ers, boats, airplanes and other types of mobile publication ofnotice, the following measures shall
equipment is permitted only during designated apply except when reclaimed water is used:
hours on designated days with a hand-held bucket (1)All outdoor irrigation ofturfand ground cov-
or a hand-held hose equipped with a positive ers is prohibited with the exception ofplant mate-
shut-off nozzle for quick rinses. Washing is per- rials classified to be rare, exceptionally valuable or
mitted at any time on the immediate premises of a essential to the well being of the public at large or
commercial car wash. The use ofwater by all types rare animals. Irrigation oftrees and shrubs is per-
of commercial car washes not using partially mitted only by hand-held hose equipped with a
reclaimed or recycled water shall be reduced in positive shutoff nozzle, hand-held container, or
volume by an amount determined by the City drip irrigation system. Greywater may be used in
Council. Further, such washings are exempt from accordance with Health Depaftment regulations
these regulations where the health, safety and to irrigate fruit trees, ground covers and ornamen-
welfare ofthe public is contingent upon frequent tal trees and shrubs. Greywater is defined as
vehicle cleanings, such as garbage trucks and vehi- household wastewater other than toilet waste.
des to transport food and perishables. (2) The use of water at commercial nurseries,
(4) The overfilling of swimming pools and spas commercial sod farmers and similarly situated
is prohibited. The filling or refilling of ponds and establishments shall be reduced in volume by an
artificial lakes is prohibited. amount determined by the City Council. Greywa-
(5) Watering golf courses, parks, school grounds ter may be used in accordance with Health Depart-
and recreation fields is permitted only during des- ment regulations to irrigate fruit trees, ground
ignated hours on designated days, except golf covers and ornamental trees and shrubs.
course greens. (3) The washing of automobiles, trucks, trail-
(6) Use ofwater from fire hydrants shall be lim- ers, boats, airplanes and other types of mobile
ited to fire fighting or other activities immediately equipment is prohibited. The use of water by all
necessary to maintaining the health, safety and types of commercial car washes or commercial
(93~31) G-3 MC 6~221
PAGE 188 Show Image
§67.38.5 SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE
vehicle service stations and not in the immediate niques. The fee will be based on the conservation
interest of the public health, safety and welfare offset required for an equivalent dwelling unit.
shall be reduced in volume by an amount deter- Such fee shall apply to residential as well as com-
mined by the City Council. Furthei; such washings mercial and industrial buildings, and may be
are exempt from these regulations where the adjusted from time to time as determined by the
health, safety and welfare of the public is contin- City Manager or his designee.
gent upon frequent vehicle cleanings such as gar- (14) Stage 4 unless sooner terminated by the City
bage trucks and vehicles used to transport food Council, shall terminate September 30, 1991, unless
and perishables. prior to said date the Council acts to extend it.
(4) The filling, refilling or adding of water to (Amended ~29-91 by 0-17634 N.S.)
swimming pools, spas, ponds and artificial lakes is
prohibited. § 67.38.6 Mandatory Conservahon Phase
(5) The watering of all golf cou~~se areas, except Implementahon
greens, is prohibited.
The Water Utilities Depaftment shall monitor
(6) Use ofwater from fire hydrants shall be lim- the projected supply and demand for watei; by its
ited to fire fighting or other activities immediately customers, on a daily basis during periods of emer-
necessary to maintain the health, safety and wel- gency or drought and shall recommend to the City
fare of the citizens of San Diego. Manager the extent of the conservation required
(7) Ml Restaurants are prohibited from serving through the implementation and/or termination of
water to their customers except when specifically pafticular conservation stages to prudently plan
requested by the customers.
and supply water to its customers. Thereaftei; the
(8) Water shall not be used to wash down side- City Manager may order the implementation or
walks, driveways, parking areas, tennis courts, termination ofthe appropriate phase ofwater con-
patios or other paved areas, except to alleviate servation in accordance with the applicable provi-
immediate fire or sanitation hazards. sions of Sections 67.38 through 67.38.8. The
(9) The operation ofany ornamentai fountain or declaration of any stage beyond Stage 1 shall be
similar structure is prohibited except for short made by public announcement and shall be pub-
periods oftime to prevent damage.
lished a minimum of one (1) time for three (3) con-
(10) The use ofwater for commercial, manufac- secutive days in a daily newspaper of general
turing or processing purposes shall be reduced in circulation. The stage designated shall become
volume by an amount determined by the City effective immediately upon announcement.
Council. (Amended ~29-91 by 0-17634 N.£)
(11) MI sales of non-reclaimed water outside of
the City limits shall be discontinued, with the § 67.38.7 Penalty.
exception of sales previously approved by the City It shall be unlay for any person, corporation
Council. or association to violate the provisions of Sections
(12) No new construction meters will be issued. 67.38 through 67.38.8. Violations of these provi-
Construction water shall not be used for earth sions shall be a misdemeanor subject to penalties
work or road construction purposes. Construction provided in San Diego Municipal Code section
projects necessary to maintaining the health, 12.0201. The Water utilities Department can aiter-
safety and welfare of the public are exempt from nativ
ely seek injunctive relief in the Superior
these regulations. Court pursuant to San Diego Municipai Code sec-
(13) Except as to property for which a building tion 12.0202 or pursue any administrative remedy
permit has been heretofore issued, no new building provided in Chapter I. In addition to any other
permit(s) shall be provided, except in the following remedies which the Water Utilities Department
arcumstances: may have for the enforcement of this ordinance,
(a) For projects necessary to protect the public's service of water shall be discontinued or appropn-
health, safety, and welfare;
ately limited to any customer who willfiilly uses
~) when using reclaimed water; water in violation of any provision hereof.
(c) When the recipient of the building permit (Amended 8-10-93 by 0-17956 N.S.)
can demonstrate that no net increase in water use
will occur, or § 67.38.8 ~e~era~ility
(d) Where the recipient of the building permit If any provision, section, subsection, sentence,
provides a conservation offset. For purposes of the clause or phrase of Sections 67.38 through 67.38.8,
section, "conservation offset" shall mean the or the application ofsame to any person or set ofcir-
implementation of proven conservation techniques cumstances, is for any reason held to be unconstitu-
which, when installed, will result in a reduction tional, void or invalid, the invalidity of the
equal to demand ofthe proposed use. A conserva- remaining portions of Sections 67.38 through
tion offset may be effected by paying a fee estab- 67.38.8 shall not be affected, it being the intent of
lished by the City Manager or his designee to the the City Council in adopting Sections 67.38 through
City Treasurer in an amount necessary to cover 67.38.8 that no portions, provisions, or regulations
the cost of implementing such conservation tech- contained herein shall become inoperative, or fail by
MC 6-222 (93.631)
G-4
PAGE 189 Show Image
SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL CODE §67A2
reason ofthe unconstitutionaiityofanyotherprovi- Section 836.5 ofthe Penal Code ofthe State ofCali-
sion hereof, and all provisions of Sections 67.35 fornia, to make arrests without awarrant whenever
through 67.38.8 are declared to be severable for that any such diver/ranger has reasonable cause to
purpose. believe that the person to be arrested has commit-
(Amended 4-29-91 by 0-1 7634 NS.) ted a misdemeanor in the diver's/ranger's presence
which is a violation of a statute or ordinance which
§ 67.38.9 Citations such diver/ranger has the duty to enforce.
Code compliance officers/code compliance B. ARRES'I~ AND C~ATIONS
supervisors of The City of San Diego are hereby That divers/rangers ofThe City of San Diego, be,
authorized, empowered and given the duty to and they are hereby authorized, empowered and
enforce provisions ofthe San Diego Municipal Code given the dutyto enforce provisions ofthe San Diego
and misdemeanors designated in the State Codes to Municipal Code and misdemeanors designated in
issue citations forviolations ofsaid Codes under the the State Codes; to make arrests without a warrant
provisions of Sections 836.5 and 853.6 of the Penal whenever any such diver/ranger has reasonable
Code of the State of California when violations cause to believe that the person to be arrested has
occur in the City of San Diego. committed a misdemeanor in the diver's/ranger's
(Added 3-7-88 by ~1 7036 NS.) presence; and while engaged in the performance of
their duties, to arrest persons and issue citations for
§ 67.39 Emergency Water Regulations violations ofsaid Codes under the provisions ofSec-
Publication of Terms of Water Use tions 836.5 and 853.6 of the Penal Code of the State
of California when violations occur in City of San
That upon such emergency declaration by the Diego Water Impounding areas.
City Manager, it shall be his duty to have public (~~ended 10-13-86 by 0-16725 NS.)
notice given bypublishing a notice giving the extent,
terms and conditions respecting the use and con- ~ 67.41 Water Impounding System -
sumption ofwater, at least once in the official news-
paper of said City; that upon such declaration and Designation of Permissible Uses:
publication of such notice due and proper notice (a) That the City shall designate, through the City
shall be deemed to have been given each and every Manager, which reservoirs or property ofthe water
consumer supplied with water by The City of San impounding system ofThe City of San Diego, or any
Diego. ofthem, shall be open to the public for the purpose
(1flCO~ 1-22-52 by 0-5046 NS.) of camping, boating, shooting, hunting and/or fish-
ing, and unless otherwise permitted thereby, no
§ 67.40 Water Impoundiug System - Post- reservoir or property of the water impounding sys-
tem of The City of San Diego shall be open to the
ing ofNotices - Authorityto Enforce Regula- public for any purpose.
dons (b) That the City Manager be, and he is hereby
(a) That ~he properties of the water impounding authorized and empowered to adopt such rules and
system owned by and under the control ofThe City regulations or modification thereof, regulating and
of San Diego shall be posted with notices against controlling entry, camping, boating, shooting, hunt-
trespassing, bathing, or unauthorizedshooting, ing and/or fishing privlleges and sanitation, upon
hunting, fishing or camping, and warning all per- the reservoirs and properties ofthe water impound-
sons against violation of any of the ordinances of ing system owned byor under the control ofThe City
The City of San Diego, of the laws of the State of of San Diego.
California, or any rules or regulations adopted pur- (1ncoip. 1-22-52 by 0-5046 NS.)
suant thereto, which provide for the protection of
any reservoir, or properties of the water impound- § 67.42 Water Impounding System - Dec-
ing system. laration of Regulations of Use:
(b) That all officials and employees of the Park That all rules and regulations or modifications
and Recreation Department and the Water Utilities thereof concerning entry, camping, boating, shoot-
Department of The City of San Diego are hereby ing, hunting and/or fishing privileges, and sanita-
vested with authority to enforce all laws, orders,
rulings and regulations enacted for the protection tion, upon the reservoirs or property of the water
of these waters and the properties pertaining impounding system owned by or under the control
thereto. ofThe City ofSan Diego, which are approved by the
(Amended 5-25-77 by 0-12077N£)
§ 67A0.1 Water Impounding System
~ PURPOSE AND IN'I~:NT
It is the purpose and intent of the Council in
enacting this section that all City divers/rangers be
specificallyauthorized pursuant to the provisions of
(91-589) MC 6~222.49
G-5
PAGE 190 Show Image
PAGE 191 Show Image
APPENDIX H
PAGE 192 Show Image
PAGE 193 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA
¼\
COUNCIL POLICY
SUBJECT POLICY
NUMBER 4 -
ACTION PLAN
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES DATE 09 21 87
BACKGROUND
The City of San Diego has implemented water conservation prograins
when necessary throughout its history of service to the area.
Burgeoning growth and seasonal dry periods furthered the
conservation appeal which, by 1960, had becoine a standard public
information prograin elerrient.
During the drought emergency of 1976-77, when a 10% water use
reduction was required, the City again made a major effort to
implement conservation programs. In addition to special programs
related to City customers, the City was involved in all of the
regional efforts undertaken during the drought including public
information kit distribution. Since then, most of the original
water conservation programs have been continued, but on a public
information level rather than a contingency or emergency level.
In 1982 the City adopted and implemented a Water Conservation Plan
and Work Program per Resolution R-256583 which identified
additional water conservation techniques to be implemented.
Further water conservation measures were included in the City1s
Urban Water Management Plan and Conservation Program adopted in
1985. This Council Policy incorporates and updates the 1982 Water
Conservation Plan and Work Program, and also includes concepts from
the Urban Water Management Plan and Conservation Program.
PURPOSE
To establish policies which assure that effective City water
conservation techniques are identified and implemented.
POLICY
It is the policy of the City Council that the following action plan
for implementation of water conserving techniques be adhered to.
ACTION PLAN
A. City Buildings and Facilities
Design of all City buildings and facilities will include
appropriate water conservation devices.
Action 1. City owned buildings and facilities will be
retrofitted with faucet flow restrictors,
reduced flush devices, self closing faucets and
hot water
CC-lB (11-85)
H-i
PAGE 194 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA
COUNCIL POLICY
SUBJECT POLICY
NUMBER
ACTION PLAN
FOR IMPL~M~NTATION OF EFFECTIVE
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNI UES OATE 7
pipe insulation where use of such devices are
appropriate.
2. New buildings will be initially designed with
such devices.
Responsible
Department(s) Buildings Division of the General Services Department
and the Housing Commission
Work Program 1. Evaluate plumbing fixtures in all City owned
buildings.
2. Develop priority list for retrofit.
3. Retrofit City facilities during regular
maintenance activities.
Timeline Initiated in FY 1983 and complete during FY 1987.
B. Plumbing Code Arnendments
The Municipal Plumbing Code will be amended to increase the use
of water conserving fixtures:
Action 1. Amend the municipal plumbing code to require:
a. Self closing faucets to be installed in all
unattended restrooms in new commercial,
industrial buildings.
b. Hot water pipes located in unheated spaces
such as attics and exterior walls are to be
insulated except in locations under
concrete floor slabs. This would apply to
all new construction.
Responsible
Department(s) Building Inspection and City Attorney.
Work Prograin 1. Evaluate the benefits and the cost of
proposed amendments.
2. Discuss amendments with plumbing and
building industry.
C~-19 (1185)
H-2
PAGE 195 Show Image
CITY OF ~N DIEGO. CALIFORNIA
1
COUNCIL POLICY
SUBJECT POLICY
ACTION PLAN NUMBER 40011
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES OATE 09/21/87
3. Present code ainendinents to City Council.
4. Implement code amendments if enacted.
Tiineline Initiated in FY 1983 and complete during FY
1987.
C. Landscaping and Irrigation: Private Development
The City will encourage enhancement of water conservation
practices in private development of landscape and irrigation
systems.
Action 1. Revise City standards and specifications to
encourage low water demand landscapes and
efficient irrigation systems where landscaping
is subject to City approval.
2. Initiate an information/education prograIT~ for
developers and landscape and irrigation
professionals to encourage this type of
landscaping and irrigation as standard practice
in situations where City approval is not
required.
3. Provide inforination to the public, particularly
new homeowners, on landscaping and irriaation
design and practices that minimize water
consumption.
Responsible
Department(s) 1. The revisions to City standards will be
accomplished through a coordinated effort by the
Planning, Engineering and Development, and Park
and Recreation Departments.
2. The Planning Department will coordinate the
information/education program for developers and
landscape professionals.
3. Information on landscaping and irrigation for
the public will be provided by the Water
Utilities Department as part of its general
public information program, and by the Building
Inspection Department at the time of issuing the
certificate of occupancy for residential
dwellings.
CC-19 (1~-a5) H-3
PAGE 196 Show Image
f CITY OF SAN DEGO. CALIFORNA
COUNCIL POLICY
suBJECT POLICY
ACTION PLAN NUM8ER 400-11
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EFF£CTIVE
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES DA~ 09121/87
Work Program 1. Evaluate City standards and specifications;
identify changes that will reduce water demand
and increase irrigation efficiency; review
proposed changes with industry representatives;
and present revisions for approval by the
appropriate City authority.
2. Contact industry associations to develop
interest in an information/education program;
identify a group(s) willing to sponsor the
program; and provide assistance in designing1
organizing, promoting and conducting the
program.
3. Obtain printed information from the State
Department of Water Resources (DWR) , the
Metropolitan Water District (NWD) of Southern
California, the San Diego County Water Authority
(CWA) and other appropriate sources; publicize
availability of this information; distribute
select brochures as appropriate and assemble and
distribute information packets for new home
owners.
Timeline Initiated Action 1 in FY 1983 and complete in FY
1987.
Actions 2 and 3 are ongoing activities which
were initiated during FY 1983.
D. Public Information
The City will conduct a public information program which
increases public participation in water conservation
activities.
Action 1. Conduct a public information program in
conjunction with CWA.
Responsible
Department(s) Water Utilities and Citizens' Assistance.
Work Program 1. Distribute water conservation information
provided by CWA.
CC-ID 1 I-8~)
H-4
PAGE 197 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA
COUNCIL POLICY
POLICY
SUBJECT NUMBER 400-11
ACTION PLAN
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES DATE 09121187
Action 1. Utilize low water demand landscaping and
efficient irrigation systems in all new projects
for City parks1 streets, buildings and other
public areas; also utilize where feasible in
replacement situations.
Responsible
Departinent(s) Engineering and Development, Park and
Recreation, General Services, and the Property
Departments.
Work Program 1. Evaluate present procedures and specifications,
identify changes that will reduce water demand
and improve irrigation efficiency.
2. Incorporate revised standards and specifications
in plans for landscape replacement or
renovation.
Tirneline This ongoing program was initiated during FY
1983.
G. Dernonstration Gardens
The City will promote low water use demonstration gardens which
encourage citizens to incorporate water conserving elements
into residential landscape design.
Action 1. Assist CWA in siting low-water-use demonstration
gardens within the City.
2. Develop demonstration gardens within City parks
and public building landscape areas.
Responsible
Department(s) Park and Recreation, Water Utilities and
Property Departments
Work Program 1. Inventory and evaluate existing City park,
public building and other publicly owned
properties for appropriate garden locations.
2. Solicit community participation in development,
maintenance and instructional use of
demonstration gardens.
cc-Is (11-85)
H-5
PAGE 198 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA
COUNCIL POLICY
SULJECT POLICY
ACTION PLAN NUMBER
400-11
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES DATE 09121/87
2. Cooperate with CWA to provide City staff as
speakers to community groups.
3. Develop and distribute specialized information
for citizens of San Diego where appropriate,
i.e. brochures, water bill stuffers.
4. Utilize space on the water bills to print a
conservation message.
5. Provide water use information on water bills for
the same billing period in the previous year.
Tirneline This ongoing activity was initiated in FY 1983.
E. Reduce Water Softener Recharge and Backwash Cycles
The City will participate in efforts to encourage water
efficient water softener usage.
Action 1. Provide information to the water softener
industry and seek their cooperation to achieve
the inaximurn efficiency of water softeners.
Responsible
Department(s) Water Utilities
work program 1. Meet with representatives of the water softener
industry to discuss a program to reduce backwash
and recharge cycles.
2. Provide the industry with the necessary
information to effect efficient use of water
softeners.
3. Continue to work with the industry throughout
the year.
Timeline This ongoing activity was initiated in FY 1983
and will be repeated periodically.
F. City Landscaping and Irrigation
Landscaping for all City owned property will include both
low-water-use vegetation and irrigation systems.
CC-lB (11-15) H-6
PAGE 199 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. CAL:FORN:A
COUNCIL POLICY
SUBJECT POLICY
ACTION PLAN NUMBER 400-11
EFFECTiVE
FOR INPLEMENTATION OF
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES DATE 09/21/87
3. Prioritize locations appropriate for development
by CWA and sites that should be developed
locally.
4. Begin site development in FY 1986.
Timeline This ongoing activity was initiated in FY 1984.
H. Water Conservation Home Design Awards
The City will participate in a program to award citizens for
use of water conservation techniques in home design.
Action 1. Develop criteria for housing designs that can be
designated as "Water Conservation Homes,11 and
sponsor annual awards for the best water
conservation building and landscape design.
This activity is to be a combined effort with
the Energy Prograrn V Energy Award Program.
Responsible
Department(s) Water Utilities, Planning and Energy Program.
Work Program 1. Work with CWA and the building industry to
develop criteria for housing designs that can be
designated as "Water Conservation Homes."
2. Implement the designation in conjunction with
the previously approved Energy Award Program.
3. Promote the criteria among the building
industry.
4. Encourage building design award programs
sponsored by professional organizations to
include water conservation features in their
judging criteria.
5. Sponsor an annual award for the best water
conservation building and landscape design.
Timeline This ongoing program was initiated in FY 1983.
I. Emergencies
CC-ID (ii-~s)
H-7
PAGE 200 Show Image
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. CALl FORNA
COUNCIL POLICY
POLICY
SUBJECT NUMBER 4 0-11
ACTION PLAN
EFFECTIVE
FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF
WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES DATE 09121187
The City will participate in developing plans to manage water
services during an emergency or drought conditions.
Action 1. Continue to develop programs to inanage City
operations in the event of ernergencies from
natural disaster or drought conditions.
2. Develop emergency plans for the management of
area-wide emergencies relating to water
shortage.
Responsible
Department(s) Water Utilities, Emergency Management Office and
CWA.
Work Program 1. Continue to develop emergency plans for
operation of City facilities.
2. Work with CWA to develop plans for emergencies.
3. Design public information literature to be used
in the event of emergencies.
4. Conduct exercises to simulate disasters to test
City department responses.
Timeline This ongoing program was initiated in FY 1983
ACTION PLAN REVIEW
Council will review progress in implementation of water
conservation techniques identified in this plan on an annual basis.
HI STORY
Adopted by Resolution R-269291 09/21/87
CCIB (11-85) H-8
PAGE 201 Show Image
(R-88-385)
RESOLUTION NUMBER R_______________-
~ ~N SEP 2 1 1987
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNCIL POLICY NO.
400-11 REGARDING ACTION PT£AN FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER CONSERVATION
TECHNIQUES.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of The City of San Diego, that
Council Policy No. 400-11 entitled, 1'ACTION PLAN FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER CONSERVATION TECri~;IQUES," be and is
hereby established as set forth in the Council Policy filed in
the Office of the City Clerk as Document No. RR- 2~929J
BE ~
ii ~u~iH~R RESOL~t;D, that the City Clerk is hereby
instructed to add the aforesaid to the Council Policy Manual.
APPROVED: John W. Witt, City Attorney
A
By I~f~i~£d
Te Brom ield
Chief Deputy C ty Attorney
TB:lfs:441
08/20187
Or.Dept:W.Util.
R-88-385
Form=r. estcp
H-9
PAGE 202 Show Image
PAGE 203 Show Image
APPENDIX I
PAGE 204 Show Image
PAGE 205 Show Image
CALIFORNIA URBAN WATER CONSERVATION COUNCIL
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
RETAIL WATER AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT
REPORT PERIOD JULY 1, 1994 TO JUNE 30, 1995
RETURN COMPLETED REPORT TO AGENCY AS REQUIRED:
DUE: OCTOBER 31, 1995 DUE: JANUARY 15, 1996 DUE: DECEMBER 31,1995
As a portion of Annual As a portion of the Urban Water
Conservation Update Management Plan
CUWCC US BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CA DEPT OF WATER RESOURCES
455 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 705 2800 COTTAGE WAY MP.402 P.O. Box 94236
SACRAMENTO1 CA 958144408 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 SACRAMENTO, CA 94236~OO1
WATER AGENCY AND SERVICE AREA INFORMATION
AGENCYNAME City of Sari Diego Water Utilities Department
ADDRESS 600 B Street, Suite 1210.
CITY,STATE ZIP San Diego, CA 92101
NAME OF CONSERVATION COORDINATOR Marsi A. Steirer
PHONE (619) 533-4112 FAX (619) 533-5300 E~MAILADDRESSMZS@SDDPC.SANNET.COV
NAME OF PERSON PREPARING THIS REPORT Marsi A. Steirer
PHONE (619) 533-4112 FAX (619) 533-5300 EMAILADDRESSNZS@SDDPC.SANNET.GOv
YEAR AGENCY SIGNED THE MOU 1991 DATE THIS REPORT SUBMITTED 11/8/95
THIS AGENCY IS A(N) MUNICIPALITY x SPECIAL DISTRICT INVESTOR OWNED MUTUAL_____
IS THIS AGENCY ALSO A WATER WHOLESALER? YES X NO_____
IN ADDITION TO WATER, UTILITY SERVICES PROVIDED BY THIS AGENCY INCLUDE:
SEWER X ELECTRICITY GAS RECLAIMEDWATER_x OTHER____
IS THIS AGENCY A BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CONTRACTOR? YES NO X
IS THIS AGENCY A STATE WATER PROJECT CONTRACTOR? YES_________ NO X
I-1
PAGE 206 Show Image
cu',',cc RETAIL WATER AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT -1994-95
AGENCY
BUDGET
.................... . p~P::.R9P.:os.E6 B.......................
.................................................. ........................... Y. ~........................................................
FY
* ~
PRIOR YEAR (ACTUAL) ~ REPORT YEAR (ACTUAL95 FOLLOWING~YEAR~(PROPOSE~6
*?~`
*
OPERATIONS $ 80,361,069 $ 190,814,738 $ 201,237,001
CAPITAL $ 267,645,450 $ 116,758,931 $ 89,855,405
TOTAL $ 354,586,047 $ 311,704,090 $ 295,245,722
CONSERVATION4* $ 6,579,528 $ 4,130,421 $ 4,153,316
CON$ERVAT1ON~2** $ $ $
TOTALCONSERVATION 6,579,528 4,130,421 4,153,316
1* IF CONSERVATION EXPENDITURES OR PROPOSE[5 BUDGET IS INCLUDED IN "TOTAL" LINE ABOVE, THEN
SHOW THAT AMOUNT ON LINE 1 (EXCLUDE YOUR AGENCY'S OWN EMPLOYEE STAFFING CO~
2** IF CONSERVATION EXPENDITURES OR PROPOSED BUDGET IS NOT INCLUDED IN £`TOTAL~ LINE ABOVE,
THEN SHOW CONSERVATION EXPENDITURES/PROPOSED BUDGET ON LINE 2. (EXCLUDE STAFFING)
3*** TOTAL FOR CONSERVATION INCLUDING STAFFING COSTS.
Note: * 201,237,001 includes unallocated reserves of $7 395,536
ANNUAL SUPPLY
Specify wholesalers or sources of supply with quantities during this report year:
.................................................................................:tA~L:~QUR~C ~ ~:::Q:.~~ .::.~ J ~ I ____________________
S[GNATORY U$T EACH SOURCE SEPARATELY . ACRE FEET
TOMOU ~
9/23/91 Im orted -
MWD of So. Cal. via San Diego County Water Authority 154,780 AF
Local - Surface Water Reservoirs 51,900 AF
Groundwater - Fletcher & Riverview Wells 295 AF
Waste Water Reclamation 743 AF
___________ Exchanges, other water agencies 2,841 AF
*......... IF WHOLESALER AS WELL, SUBTRACt AMOUNT SOLD TO RETAILERS 1 6 , 4 1 9
TOTAL WATER INTO THE RETAIL SYSTEM 194 ; 140
WATER REUSE SURVEY
IS YOUR AGENCY ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN WATER RECLAMATIQN PLANNING AND lMPLEMENTATION?
YES X NO_______
ATTACH AN EXPLANATION OF YOUR AGENCY'S RECLAMATION PROGRAM. (ATTACHMENT "A")
Retailed explanation from UWMP
1-2
PAGE 207 Show Image
! o :* : OO 0* (,`. (1, L:< ::½:¼~.':.::
~ ~ ;0 ~ ;0~ ~ z~ ~ Z Z ~ ~
0 0 m C;:: U, W5 0 0 C: Z:.
w(0-;;(i~~ m ~ ~ .~ *~ .com C ~ ~ G) oO~IllG) m
r~ ~ H CO c, --o~ ~
m ~ C)
m~o ~ ~ m ~ **.~ C 0 0 ~ ~
z ~ ~
oc" z z ~
(0 `0 ~ ~ C: ~ ~ ~ ~ 41: m
m ~~m~C
z~ (1) ~CDO ~ 50 0 z 0 ~ ~
m ~ * ~
c,)~~OCDOCo~O~ ..~z> ~ ~ ~ * * r~.* ~ 0 0 w ~ ~
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Co ~ ~ m r ~ ~ ~ * .... z ~ ~ ~ H
wCD ~ C) Co * ~ ~ H Lfl ~ >~
O0 ~ +0 0 m ~ C) ~ z ~
_ ~ ~ Co m~ ~ ~
z z ~ m O~OIO>~ m
m on z0cnm~~Z frt)O ~
0) z m
~ w ~ mO ZZZZm ~
<:m~ ~ ~ 0 0 * ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ m G)zCI)>m
~ m~ 5 0 ~ ~ 4~(0co m 0
z z r o.cn(oooow ~
5 M 3 ~.. >~oz~m~ OQ~
G) ~ 0 ~ :~ ~ G) cflZ 0
~ ~ `1 m ~ ~OO
> ~ ~ o~ *:~ d0 ~ ~
:< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. CT~ ~ ~ .~ 0 -7 z ci, m
~ 0 ~ ~
ZO m (0 ~ C 3 H a
~ CD a'
CD CD~ ~ H ~ ZZ0~~ ZO~ 0 O~ ~ z
~ Co ~ ~ CD CD (0 0
Co ~ 0)~ CD ~ ~
~ 0 + ~ -~(03 Qa ~ 0' H Q\ ~Ji m>~W ~ :`Cn ~
w ~ ~ fo ~ CLCD (0. Q)~ 0 ~ ~ ~ b) ~ ~ji Oo ~ ~ ~ m o ~ ~ H
LA) ~ ~ ~ 0~ ~
~ > ~ C, z ~ r H
H ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
0 > ~ ow ~ ~ *....**.......**.* ~ ~ ~ ~
~A) Ti ~ ~ ~ ci, 0
> `1 ~ C ~ ___ -- ~ m~ ~ ~
0 ~0 CD ~ mm
~ ~ CD~ Zo
0~ 0 3~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ CD
m CD ~ I ~;`
z m 0 CO 0
~ CD~ 3 a ~ a ~ ~ ~J1 ~ ~
H ~ 0 CD O W 0 LJ' ~ a a ~ ~`i
0 >< CD 11 ~ ~ ~ ~
CA) CD CD :::~ ~ 0z~ ~
CD
C k) (0 mom *;~ a'
~ - CD CD(0 HZ
-4 5. (0-. 3 ~ C 0 ~ZZ 0
0
Z ~ ni (0~ 5* ~ 0 ~
> ~ C ~ CD (0CD 0 Z ~ C
r ~ C ~`
~ Z ~G) H
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ (0 ZOZOZ~ Z U
~ ~ CD (0 ~
Z,,~ ~ Z
~ m (0 (0 w ~ 0 a
LA) ~(0 (0 0 ~Jl I ~ I I ~ mOOHWm ~ C;) m m~ LJl
CD~ ~ ~ _ ~ 0Z~Z
(0~ ~ ~0
;`0C')0 C) ~0 ~ ~ 0CD a ~;` ~ ~ I I ~ ~C:CI)OZ~ w
m ~
momo 0
HZ Z
PAGE 208 Show Image
cu','(cc RETAIL WATER AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT 1994-95
AGENCY
INVESTOR OWNED UTIL~ES
The Council recognizes the challenges of BMP implementation by all uUlities, and those of Investor Owned UUIIUes (lOUs) in
particular. Subject to regulation by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), JOUs are currently required to submit
Water Management Plans which include proposed conservation programs at the time of General Rate Case Filings. The
Council understands thatthe CPUC review and decision process can be lengthy. The Council and other interestedparties have
been1 and continue to be, involved in discussions with the CPUC with regard to the MOU and implementing BMPs.
In deference to the regulatory constraints lOUs are operating under, the checklist below has been developed to indicate efforts
on the part of the IOU to comply with the terms of the MOU. Responses will determine areas of the MOU and BMP
implementation prncess which require additional Council and CPUC discussion and/or refinement. Please include a completed
exemption form (Aftached) for each BMP not proposed in a rate case filing or not approved by the CPUC.
NAME OF OPERATING DISTRICT:_______________________________________________________
COMMUNITIES SERVED____________________________________________________________
Checklist should be corn leted for each 0 eratin District
B....................................................................................
. .. . E:::C~UC:::FOR:ApPROV L~:TO...:.iMP
.......................................... .... ...........~..........
..: PENDING APPROV:.ED.. . NOT
BMP PROPOSED APPROVED
I iNTERIOR AND EXTERIORAUDITS
2;PLUIYIB~lNG RET~ROFIT
3. SYSTEM:WATERAUDITS . .
~ .i~ATE~$ . _________ _________ _________
.~~(A+ERAUDITS . .. _________ ________ _________
.5.. LANDSCAPE
6. NON-RESIDE
NTIAL~LANDSCAPE __________
7. PuBLiC~1i~iFbRMATlON . . . .
8.~SCHOOIL:INFORMATlON
9. COMMERCIAL~AND INDUSTRIAL AUDITS
jo. NEW COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL AUDITS
1i~~CONSERVATIQN PRICING WATER
12. RESJDENTIA~LANDSC
i3.WATER WASTE'?R6HIBITION : .
14 CONSERVATIONCOORDINATOR
ISFINANCIAL INCENTIVES
i~~TOlLETREPLACEMENT . ...` ::.:.½.: . .
1-4
PAGE 209 Show Image
cuwcc RETAIL WATER AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT 1994-95
AGENCY City of San Diego Water Utilities Department
SURVEY OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
BMP I INTERIOR AND EXTERiOR WATER AUDITS AND INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL, MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND GOVERNMENTAUINSTITUTIONAL CUSTOMERS.
Jmplementa5on methods shailbe at least as effective as identifying the top 20% of water users in each sector, directly
contacting them (e.g. by mall andlor telephone) and offedng the service on a repeating cycle; providing incentives
sufficient to achieve customer implementation (e.g. free showerheads, hose end sprinkler timers, adjustment to hi~'h
wateruse bills ifcustomers implementwaterconservation measures etc) This couldbe a cooperative program among
organizations that would benefit from its implementation.
...... ........ T ER~R:AN6;~ ~ ER~:b
....... .. . . R::WATE:: R
..........................~ ::.:::: .
SURVEYDATA . SINGLE MULTI . GOVERNMENTAL!
FAMI~ FAVI LY . INSTITUTIONAL
CONNECTIONS HOUSEHOLDS CONNECTIONS HOUSEHOLDS CONNECTIONS
t NUMBEF~b~~ C~ONNECTIONS I
HOUSEHOLDS 197,386 197,386 28,155 1,941
2. TARGE# G6N:NEC.TI.ONS I
HOUSEHOLDS : . . . 39,477 - 5,631 - 388
(Line I x.200
3. SURVEYS COMPLETED
51NCE711188 9,125 - 645 - 15
(Line2Line3]+8yrs) .3,794 .. - 623 - 47
.1 . 3
i99~95. : ~ 70,843 - - - 2,321
6 SURVEYS COMPLETED 2
1994~5 3,666 - 489 - 15
7 SURVEYS PLANNED FOR
i99596 4,000 , 650 - -
S. A~ERAGE~C~OSTT6 YOUR
AGENCY~FOR SURVEYS. (DO
NOT 1NCLubE~SUBSIDY FROM
OThERAGENCY(S).. .. . . ... $ 48.37 $ - $ 48.37 ~ - $ -
UNE3+UNE6..¼...~:::...:..¼ LINE 3 + ~I~E 6 LINE 3.~+ LINE ~
9.TOTALSURVEYS ... ... . 9,125 . .. 645 15
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE MEASURES INCLUDED IN SURVEYS AND THE METHOD OF PROGRAM DELIVERY ON A
SEPARATE SHEET. Include the folIDwing information: Method oftargeting and assumpUons and calculation of savings.
(TITLED ATTACHMENT BMP I
IF YOU HAVE ANY DATA REGARDING WATER SAVINGS FOR THIS BMP, PLEASE ATTACH
(TITLED ATTACHMENT BMP I
EXEMPTION:~ :
AGENCY EXEMPTS ITSELF FROM IMPLEMEi~TING THIS BMP. .
AN EXEMPTION REQUIRES A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS. PLEASE ATTACH (TITLED "AUACHMENT BMP I C ) ~
1-5
PAGE 210 Show Image
CD C 0 0 co w Z ~
m.o ~o.G)Z Z
f-fl Co ~ mO 0 C,) 0 m 0 C,) ~ C,)
0 0 ~ cbOO~ ~m ~
m `1 .~ r C,) m z~
`1 ~ C,) ~
IG) -0 *~ C,) C,) Z ~ ~ ~
0'i ~ ZC 0 ~ z C,) m ~ ~
~ CD~ ~ ~m z~ ,m~. C,) ~ m ~ ,`0;0 ~
~ m m~ r ril ~
o~+~b. .1.:': m~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ H' m
~ .* ~ G) R~ ~ ~. 0 . m ~: (00 ~ m ~ . ~ ~ OQ~ ;0
~ ~.. ~ e.m~ *,10 ~ 0 ~
~ ~ ~ ~ m C,) 011Z
~ ~ >- ~ C,) ~G) ~ ~0 *~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
!T'~ m~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ m
~ ~ _ < (!) m
m O~
~ w. m
~ I~ ~ CD m w ~ W
~ mm ~ . . . . *. ~ ~ ~ m m ~ ~ ~ m ~
co~ C,) ~ C,, ~ ~ 0 r~ vb ~ ~ m H
Hm ~0 ,` ~ o~ m
~ ~. *m
C ~: ~ m ~ ~ ~ z H
co0 ~ Z wz 0
~ ~ C,) H
C ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ G) ~ 0 H
i~ m ~ ~ "~ k)
w~w z ~ ~ZO
#1 0 0 Co-. m....................~ ~ ~ ~
w ~