HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04231996 - MR1 (2) MR. 1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA
DATE: April 23 , 1996 , MATTER OF RECORD
SUBJECT: Joint Meeting with East Bay Municipal Utility District
and Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors .
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County and the. Board
of Directors of the East. Bay Municipal Utility District held a
Special Joint meeting at Park Place, 1395 Civic Drive, Walnut
Creek, Ca, and considered the items as listed on the agenda.
No formal action was taken.
THIS IS A MATTER FOR RECORD PURPOSES ONLY
NO BOARD ACTION TAKEN
F 7
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE April 23. 1996
EBM(JD
TITLE 1996 WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY AND DEFICIENCY REPORT
■MOTION o RESOLUTION o ORDINANCE
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Accept the Water Supply Availability and Deficiency Report(Report)for 1996. This report summarizes the
status of the East Bay Municipal Utility District's water supplies as of April 1, 1996,in accordance with the
District's Policy Number 52(attached).
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
The District's Water Supply Availability and Deficiency Policy 52 requires an annual review of the capability
of the District's water supply to meet current year and future year customer demand. On October 26, 1993,
the District adopted the Updated Water Supply Management Program EIR(WSMP)and Findings which
further defined criteria for assessing the District's available and future water supply. A fishery management
plan(which is a critical factor affecting supply capability)was developed as a part of the WSW and
presented in the SWRCB Mokelumne Water Rights Hearing in 1992 (Hearing). Although a ruling from the
Hearing is still pending,the fishery management plan was implemented by the following language in
Resolution 32808 adopting the Updated WSMP:
This Board further directs that until such time as the District's need for water can be met through
implementation of Updated WSMP program components, and pending regulatory action by the State
Water Resources Control Board and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, District staff shall
work with DF&G, USFWS, WID and other agencies to implement instream flow improvements
consistent with the LMRMP and with water supply availability.
The District's fishery management plan has been the base from which settlement discussions to the
Proceeding initiated by the FERC have been built. These discussions involved the California Department of
Fish and Game (CDF&G),United States Fish and Wildlife Service(USF&WS)and other agencies. Since
that time,a settlement document entitled"Principles of Agreement"has been initialed by the USF&WS,the
Date Funds available FY
(Commi tee)
Recommendation Yes o No o Vote Budget Code
DEPARTMENT SUBMITTING AS ENE GER o CTOR APP tOVED
1AW-1010W
•/G.9G General Manager
List one item only. Attach backgro60115aterial if required. Submit original and two copies to the Secretary's Office
by Noon on Friday two weeks before the Board meeting.
1996 Water Supply Availability and Deficiency Report
April 23, 1996
Page 2
CDF&G(collectively referred to as Resource Agencies)and the District to settle all disputes and
issues between and among them regarding the FERC Proceedings. The District is currently
preparing, with the Resource Agencies, a joint settlement agreement to be filed for FERC
consideration.
The following Report is an assessment using the criteria presented in the WSW,updated to reflect
the modifications to the fishery management plan authorized by the Board as part of the formal Offer
of Settlement filed with the FERC but not yet considered by the Commission. Projections of the
supply from runoff in the Mokelumne Basin and the customer demand in the coming months,as well
as the operating plans for fishery management and other users of the Mokelumne are considered in
this Report.
RUNOFF
Mokelumne basin precipitation and runoffhave been above normal this past winter. Projected runoff
for Water Year 1996 will result in sufficient inflow to Pardee Reservoir to fully meet expected
customer demand as well as all other needs including releases to meet the entitlements of all senior
water rights and the District fishery management plan. It will be necessary to make additional
releases to reduce system storage to meet the flood control requirement level in November, and a
portion of this water is considered surplus to District need.
STORAGE
Total System Storage is targeted to be maintained at about 600,000 acre-feet on September 30, 1996,
or 100%of average for the end of September. Total System Storage will be maintained at historical
average levels,to provide flood control storage space required by the Corps of Engineers prior to
November 5. To meet this requirement, flood control releases for the period April through June
totaling up to 100,000 acre-feet will be necessary.
MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF ANNUAL DEMAND
The current maximum level of average annual demand which can be satisfied is estimated to be 196
MGD. This level would require customer rationing of up to 25% during the "design drought
sequence". The District's normalized average annual demand (1995 customer demand adjusted to
1984-86 demand rates, less subsequent conservation and rationing) is approximately 222 MGD,
exceeding the acceptable maximum level as noted in the Findings for the WSW in October 1993.
Actual average customer demand was 191 MGD during the past calendar year.
SURPLUS IN SUPPLY
Surplus water is available this year through November 5,the date by which flood control storage
must ail have been released. The amount available for transfer is limited by water code provisions.
Although runoff is well above normal,under the Municipal Utility District Act,the District can only
1996 Water Supply Availability and Deficiency Report
April 23, 1996
Page 3
transfer water that is surplus to its needs but to which it has entitlements. Although under the
District's entitlements,up to 100,000 acre-feet could be considered available but surplus to District
need this year;as a practical matter, lack of facilities, administrative provisions and the period of
availability all limit this full amount from being available. The availability of surplus water will
have to be assessed on the specific circumstances of any request received. Recently,the District and
the City of Brentwood have initiated investigation of possible re-establishment of sales to the city.
LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS
District estimates of customer demand exceed the estimated available supply from the Mokelumne
River during a design drought with 25% maximum rationing. This assessment, made under the
provisions of Policy 52 is referenced in District Policy 51 (Effects of Extension of Water Beyond
the Ultimate Boundary) and Policy 53 (Interruptible Sale of Surplus Water). These policies
collectively require that neither the quantity,quality,nor cost of water service to existing or future
customers within the service area shall be affected by extension of service outside the District's
Ultimate Service Boundary,or by sales to other agencies. A sale of water to other agencies beyond
November 5 of any year would take water from storage that could be needed by customers in the
upcoming year. Until projects are implemented as part of the Water Supply Management Program
that result in supply exceeding the maximum acceptable level of demand for existing and future
customers,this situation will continue.
The District adopted a demand forecast in the FY 96 Budget which assumed a customer demand
below demand normalized to 1986 levels which reflects the current reduced customer demand. A
continuation of reduced customer demand below normal is assumed in the District's FY96-2000
Five-Year Plan. Customer demand will be monitored to see if it is due to permanent changes or will
rebound to former levels. Changes will be incorporated into future plans.
Attachments: Policies 51,52, 53
ZA004a
Policy si
�� ao®
I EFFECTIVE 8 MAR 83
EFFECTS OF EXTENSION OF MATER BEYOND TME ULTIMATE BOUNDARY SUPERSEDES
IT IS THE POLICY OF THE EAST SAY iUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT THAT:
The District will not extend water to areas outside the present boundary of
the District. if such extension would result in:
1. A reduction in the quantity of water available to District customers to
satisfy existing or projected levels of demand; or
2. A reduction in the quality of water available to the District customers
from the District's present water sources; or
3. An increase in costs of service for District customers.
The phrase "District customers" as used in this policy shall mean (i) existing
water service customers of the District and (ii) future customers, located
within the present District boundary, but not now receiving water service.
This policy shall not apply to proposed annexations of property within the
current sphere of influence or ultimate service area of the District and such
annexation shall continue to be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Reference: Board .Motion adopted on March St 1983
D5.123 0/0
EBMUD Policy 52
EFFECTIVE 09 MAY W
WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY AND DEFICIENCY suPasMs 14 MAY 85
R IS THE POLICY OF THE EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILiTY DISTRICT TO:
Evaluate the availability of the District's water supplies (supplies of the same or similar quality
to that of the Mokelumne River supply) and determine the acceptable maximum level of
average annual demand for the District's service area based on limiting the water supply
deficiency In a repeat of 1976.77 hydrologic conditions to a maximum of 25%.
Annual Water Review and report shall be made on the current and long-term adequacy
Supplies Report of the District's water supplies annually on or about April 15. The report
shall include the acceptable maximum level of demand, projected water
requirements, and the estimated surplus in supplies over and above the
project requirements.
Projections Projections shall be made of average annual demand for evaluating the
adequacy of water supplies assuming:
• Water service will be provided in response to reasonable requests for
service to properties located within the District's service area.
• Annexation of property within the District's ultimate boundary will be
considered pursuant to normal District procedures in response to
reasonable request for service.
• A water conservation program will be implemented as provided in the
District's Urban Water Management Plant.
Requests for A review and report shall be made on the long-term adequacy of the .
Replacement District's water supplies when considering case-by-case decisions on
Supplies requests for replacement supplies which increase the average annual
demand by one percent or more or annexation beyond the ultimate
boundary.
• A request for annexation beyond the ultimate boundary for extension of
water service to-new development will-be considered only if It
represents the most practical and feasible method of obtaining service
and the acceptable maximum level of average annual demand is not
exceeded.
Water Supply Availability and Deficiency NUMBER 52
PAGE NO.: 2
EFFECTIVE DATE 09 MAY 89
• A request for a replacement supply for another water agency will be
considered only If the other agency maintains a reliable alternative
source of supply. This requirement may be waived.at the discretion of
the Board of Directors when the replacement supply Is needed because
of serious water quality problems or for public health reasons.
* District policy on Effects of Extension of Water Beyond the Ultimate
• Boundary shall be applicable in each case.
Supplemental The District shall consider appropriate demand management measures
Supplies and/or implementation of supplemental supply if existing supplies are
found to be inadequate. In the event that demand management
measurements and the availability of supplemental supplies fail to result in
a supply adequate to meet projected demand,the limited amount of
excess supply shall be equitably allocated in consultation with affected
cities and counties.
Authority Resolution 31,246, May 14, 1988, as amended by Resolution No. 32,204,
May 9, 1989.
References Policy 51 . Effects of Extension of Water Beyond the Ultimate
Boundary
ESP 830.0 • Water Supply Availability and Deficiency
EBMI/D Policy 53
EFPECTNE m ocr W
INTERRUPTIBLE SALE OF SURPLUS WATER superam
iIT LS THE POLICY OF THE EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT TO:
Respond to requests from governmental entities for delivery of water by entering into
contracts for the sale of surplus water on an interruptible basis.
It is expected that in some, but not all, of the coming years the District's existing water supply
will produce water surplus to the District's needs. The sale of such surplus water for
municipal and industrial purposes will benefit the potential users principally in the
Improvement of water quality and benefit EBMUD ratepayers in the reduction of future
charges.
interruptibility The sale of surplus water, as governed by Section 12804 of the Municipal
Utility District Act, is by definition interruptible. Provisions of this policy
designed to further ensure interruptibility of delivery include the procedure
by which purchasers must request delivery quantities each year for the
District's determination of availability, the requirement that each purchaser
maintain an adequate backup supply, and the provision for cancellation of
the contract by either party.
Water The estimated quantity of surplus water will,be determined each year prior
Availability to May 1, in accordance with the provisions of the Water Availability and
Deficiency Policy. The sale of surplus water must have no adverse impact
on the availability of water to customers within the District. The District
reaffirms that its first obligation is to serve customers within the District.
Quantity to be The total quantity to be sold each year will be Limited to the quantity of
Sold surplus water estimated to be available. Each purchaser shall pay for a
minimum quantity of not less than 20 percent of the maximum annual
quantity to be delivered under its contract, provided that the minimum
quantity is available. Annual requests for delivery quantities shall be
submitted to the District by April 1 each year. if the total of all requested
deliveries exceeds the water estimated to be available, the allocation to
each purchaser will be proportionate to the average of the actual quantities
of surplus water used in the preceding three years or the average of the
minimum quantities paid for in the same period, whichever is greater,
subject first to the priority given below. If water is unavailable to a
purchaser in any year, then EBMUD shall have no obligation to deliver
water under that contract for that year (May 1 to April 30).
interruptible Sale of Surplus Water NUMBER 53
PAGE NO.: 2
EFFECTIVE DATE:07 OCT e6
Priority in the allocation of the available quantity of surplus water each year for
delivery under existing contracts or new contracts, the first priority shall be
given to the requirements of purchasers whose existing supply does not
meet primary drinking water standards.
Backup Supply Each purchaser shall maintain a backup supply adequate to meet the
demand in Its service area when the delivery of surplus water is reduced or
interrupted.
Costs The charge for water will be based on the costs of operation and
maintenance of the Mokelumne system including the costs of pumping
and lost power revenues,plus a capital cost component equal to a
proportionate share of the District's original cost of constructing the
existing facilities. Purchasers shall pay the one-time cost of installing the
connecting facilities and any subsequent costs of repair or removal.
Cancellation A contract may be canceled by either party on July 1 of any year provided
that a minimum of 48 days.advance written notice is given.
Water Each purchaser shall provide by April 1 of each year an updated report on
Conservation water management in its service area to ensure that the purchaser's water
conservation efforts will achieve improvements in the efficiency of water
use similar to those adopted by the District.
Supplemental Each purchaser shall cooperate with and assist the District in obtaining
Water Supply increased quantities of water equivalent in quality to that being delivered
from the Mokelumne River, including but not limited to administrative,
legislative, and planning activities.
Authority Resolution No. 31,738, October 7, 1986.
Policy I
4673
EBMUD EPMME 14 FEB 91
ANNEXATIONS SUPERSEDES 14 Nov 89
IT IS THE POLICY OF THE EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT TO:
Consider annexing territory,when requested by owners of the property or public agencies
having jurisdiction, subject to the following conditions:
1. The territory shall be within the District ultimate service boundary.
2: Generally there should be an immediate need for water service on a part or all of the
territory being annexed.
3. The territory proposed for annexation should include any parcels required to make a
logical boundary.
4. The annexation should facilitate the operation of the utility and be of advantage to the
community.
5. The annexation should be economically sound.
6. Territory within the watersheds of the District's existing or proposed terminal reservoirs
must, before annexation:
a. Provide adequate facilities for removal of sewage from the watershed; and
b. Comply with the District's requirements for control of soil erosion within the
territory.
7. Opposition shall be expressed to all proposed annexations outside of the ultimate
service boundary unless:
a The requested annexation is a small boundary adjustment found by the District to
be in its best interests based on the following conditions:
(1) The property and dwelling units are the smaller part of a larger development
project located primarily within the ultimate boundary;
(2) The development project is desired and approved by the city or county land
use planning agency with jurisdiction, and the land use planning and
environmental documentation recognize EBMUD as the logical provider of
water service;
(3) Annexation of the property to EBMUD represents the most practical and
feasible method of obtaining water service;
(4) The cumulative number of dwelling units outside the ultimate boundary
added as a result of such small boundary adjustments shall not exceed 100
in any two-year period; and
Continued on next page
ANNEXATIONS NUMBER 1
PAGE NO. 2
uncTNE DATE 14 FEB 91
(5) District Policies 51 and 52 are satisfied with regard to the effects of extension
of water beyond the ultimate boundary; or
b. The requested annexation is to mitigate health risks, as established by the
appropriate agency, associated with existing water supplies.
Amended: Board Motion 91-012, February 14; 1991
08MUD Policy 52
EFFECTNE 09 MAY W
WATER SUPPLY AVAILABILITY AND DEFICIENCY SUPERSEDES 14 MAY 65
R IS THE POLICY OF THE EAST SAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT TO:
Evaluate the availability of the District's water supplies (supplies of the same or similar quality
to that of the Mokelumne River supply) and determine the acceptable maximum level of
average annual demand for the District's service area based on limiting the water supply
deficiency in a repeat of 1976.77 hydrologic conditions to a maximum of 25%.
Annual Water Review and report shall be made on the current and long-term adequacy
Supplies Report of the District's water supplies annually on or about April 15. The report
shall include the acceptable maximum level of demand, projected water
requirements, and the estimated surplus in supplies over and above the
project requirements.
Projections Projections shall be made of average annual demand for evaluating the
adequacy of water supplies assuming:
• Water service will be provided in response to reasonable requests for
service to properties located within the District's service area.
• Annexation of property within the District's ultimate boundary will be
considered pursuant to normal District procedures in response to
reasonable request for service.
• A water conservation program will be implemented as provided in the
District's Urban Water Management Plant.
Requests for A review and report shall be made on the long-term adequacy of the
Replacement District's water supplies when considering case-by-case decisions on
Supplies requests for replacement supplies which increase the average annual
demand by one percent or more or annexation beyond the ultimate
boundary.
• A request for annexation beyond the ultimate boundary for extension of
water service to new development will-be considered only if it
represents the most practical and feasible method of obtaining service
and the acceptable maximum level of average annual demand is not
exceeded.
Water Supply Availability and Deficiency HUMBER 52
PAGE NO.: 2
EFFECTIVE DATE:09 MAY 89
• A request for a replacement supply for another water agency will be
considered only If the other agency maintains a reliable alternative
source of supply. This requirement may be waived at the discretion of
the Board of Directors when the replacement supply is needed because
of serious water quality problems or for public health reasons.
• District policy on Effects of Extension of Water Beyond the Ultimate
Boundary shall be applicable in each case.
Supplemental The District shall consider appropriate demand management measures
Supplies and/or implementation of supplemental supply if existing supplies are
found to be inadequate. In the event that demand management
measurements and the availability of supplemental supplies fail to result in
a supply adequate to meet projected demand, the limited amount of
excess supply shall be equitably allocated in consultation with affected
cities and counties.
Authority Resolution 31,246, May 14, 1985, as amended by Resolution No. 32,204,
May 9, 1989.
References Policy 51 - Effects of Extension of Water Beyond the Ultimate
Boundary
ESP 630.0 - Water Supply Availability and Deficiency
Policy 70
Sam=
VMC"A 28 JUN 04
RESPONSIBILITY TO SERVE
WATER CUSTOMERS SUPERSEDES NEW
R IS THE POLICY OF THE EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT THAT:
• because of limited water supplies the water for EBMUD's customers was rationed
during the 1976.1977 drought and again during the 1987-1992 drought; and
• the water available for supplying to EDMUD's customers is expected to be diminished
by Increasing diversions by water users on the Mokelumne River who hold senior
water rights; and
• the water available for supplying to ESMUD's customers may be further diminished by
Increasing requirements for instream flows to protect fish and wildlife in the
Mokelumne River and In the Sacramento - San Joaquin River Delta and San
Francisco Bay; and
• it Is the responsibility of water agencies to plan carefully to meet the needs of their
customers through periods of drought with minimal disruption to residential,
commercial, and industrial activities within their service areas.
Water Service The East Bay Municipal Utility District recognizes that when there is a
Responsibility water shortage or threatened water shortage, the District's responsibility to
serve its customers and service area is as follows:
• First, to serve its existing customers within its existing area.
• Second, to serve expected new customers within its existing service
area, but only if this does not impair the District's ability to serve its
existing customers.
• Third, to consider serving new customers outside of its existing area,
but only If this does not Impair the District's ability to serve existing
customers within its service area.
Authority Resolution No. 32867.94, June 28, 1994.
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE Agril 23.1996
EBMUD
TITLE ANNUAL REPORT ON THE WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
® MOTION a RESOLUTION a ORDINANCE
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Accept the April 23, 1996 staff report summarizing actions undertaken since October 26, 1993 to implement
the Preferred Alternative(Composite Program II)of the Updated Water Supply Management Program
("WSW")and the WSMP Action Plan approved by the Board on September 12, 1995.
SUMMARY
On October 26, 1993,the EBMUD Board of Directors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for
the Updated WSW and adopted Composite Program II as the Preferred Alternative for meeting EBMUD's
water needs through the year 2020. Composite Program II includes elements of water conservation,water
reclamation and reuse, groundwater storage/conjunctive use,aqueduct security,and a fisheries management
plan for the lower Mokelumne River. In its Findings on the WSMP EIR,the Board directed District staff to
proceed with development and evaluation of these project elements and to report on their status annually.
The 1996 WSMP annual report highlights the current status of the WSMP. The aqueduct seismic
strengthening, water conservation,water reclamation,and LMRMP are currently in various stages of
implementation consistent with the WSMP. However,the implementation of the groundwater storage project
in San Joaquin County has proven to be complex,due to concerns raised by San Joaquin County interests and
certain technical and regulatory considerations.
In January 1995,the Board reviewed progress on the conjunctive use effort and determined that a broader
implementation approach was merited. Staff was directed to pursue alternative approaches consistent with
the original WSMP briefings and EIR which incorporated multiple water supply options including multi-
party regional projects. On September 12, 1995,the Board approved the most promising of these alternatives
for further development. The resulting WSMP Action Plan consists of the following elements:
I. Initiate preliminary design,prepare project-level environmental documentation and initiate applicable
permit processes and USBR contract modifications for a pipeline connection between Folsom South
Canal and the Mokelumne Aqueducts for the purpose of delivering water to the customers of EBMUD as
a stand-alone project,not dependent upon any additional water supply project components.
w:wpl�(W c C1wS1�AM"D 1 ALEX.W PD
Date Funds available FY'95-96
(Committee)
Recommendation Yes a No a Vote Budget Code
DEPARTMENT SUBMITTING D11 O NAGER i APPR VED
WATER AND NATURAL RESOURCES
ohn pe y/7 1
General Manager
Annual Report on the Water Supply Management Program
April 23, 1996
Page 2
2. Continue negotiations with San Joaquin County interests regarding a joint EBMUD/San
Joaquin County conjunctive use project to provide additional storage to meet EBMUD's
need for additional water.
3. Initiate discussions with Sacramento-area interests regarding a potential joint
EBMUD/Sacramento-area conjunctive use project to provide additional storage to meet
EBMUD's need for additional water, including negotiations with Sacramento Area Water
Forum and San Joaquin County Interests on a multi-regional water solution that can be
implemented in the near-term,based on a"Freeport South"alternative that does not include
an extension of the Folsom South Canal.
4. Initiate project-level studies for raising Pardee Dam to provide additional storage to meet
EBMUD's need for additional water,while simultaneously evaluating Middle Bar and Duck
Creek Reservoirs as possible alternatives to raising Pardee, and make further
recommendations as to the best reservoir option by December 1995 (in November 1995,
Raising Pardee Dam was determined to be the best available option for increasing
Mokelumne River storage capacity).
The 1996 WSMP Annual Report highlights the elements of Composite Program II and the
September 12, 1995,WSMP Action Plan in the following order:
1. Water Conservation Master Plan
2. Water Reclamation Implementation Plan
3. Groundwater Storage/Conjunctive Use Studies
4. Mokelumne Aqueduct Seismic Upgrades
S. Lower Mokelumne River Management Plan
(this element is covered in a separate annual report)
6. WSMP Action Plan
-Folsom South Canal Connection
-Joint Project with San Joaquin County Water Interests
-Joint Project with Sacramento-area Water Interests
-Enlarge Pardee Reservoir Surface Storage Alternative
EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
February 23, 1996
MEMO TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Dennis M. Diemer, General Manager
SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation of the General Manager for Revisions to the Water
System Schedule of Rates and Charges to Finance the Seismic Improvement
Program
INTRODUCTION
This General Manager's Report contains recommendations regarding proposed changes to the
funding for the Seismic Improvement Program (SIP). The Municipal Utility District Act
requires filing such a report before adoption of changes to the rates and charges.
Background
On November 22, 1994,the Board adopted a funding mechanism for the ten-year$189 million
SIP. This included a 4.35% surcharge on all components of the water bill to collect half the
required revenue,and a general tax based on parcel size to be collected on the property tax bill to
collect the other half. On September 28, 1995 the California Supreme Court determined in the
case of Santa Clara County Local Transortation Authority v. Guarding that the provisions of
Proposition 62 requiring general taxes to be approved by majority vote of the voters is
constitutional,thereby overturning previous appellate court rulings to the contrary. The decision
became final on December 14, 1995.
The Board,on January 23, 1996, suspended the collection of the tax-funded portion of the
required revenue for future fiscal years and directed staff to develop other SIP funding
alternatives,considering the following:
• Options for collecting revenues lost by suspension of the tax
• Options for refunding the FY96 tax payments
• Options for modifying the SIP scope and duration to reduce the impacts on rates
and charges
The original funding mechanism was adopted as a combination of surcharge and tax. Since
suspension of the tax has eliminated half of that combination,the entire funding mechanism has
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 2
been reviewed to ensure that any rate adjustments to accommodate that change appropriately
reflect the benefits derived from the program.
RECONMNDATIONS
• Place all of the SIP funding on the rates and adopt the following monthly charges to cover
the entire program cost:
Customer Class Post-Earthquake Water Post-Earthquake Fire Total
Service Availability Fighting Capability
Single Family $0.80 $0.80/equiv. meter $1.60*
Residential
Multiple Family $3.76 $0.80/equiv. meter $4.56*
Residential
Other $0.08/CCF $0.80/equiv. meter Variable
*
Ass umin one a uivalent meter per customer
• Refund the FY 96 parcel tax via a direct mailing of refund checks by EBMUD based on tax
roll information obtained from the counties.
• Retain the SIP scope and timing as originally adopted.
DISCUSSION
Options for Collecting Revenues Lost by Suspension of the Tax
Recommended Funding.Qption
The currently approved SIP consists of$189 million in improvements to the District's water
distribution and treatment systems. The improvements are to be made over a 10 year period.
The$189 million dollar program requires a uniform annual revenue stream of$12.8 million per
year to cover all costs of the program. This is the basis of the funding evaluation presented.
The two major benefits the program provides are:
• Availability of water after an earthquake and restoration of normal service as rapidly as
possible.
• Fire flow availability' immediately following an earthquake
r ' 1
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 3
To determine how to apportion the costs of these two factors,each project in the SIP was
examined to determine its contribution to post-earthquake fire flow capability and to post-
earthquake water supply availability. The aggregated costs associated with fire flow capability
for all projects was identified as 53%of total program costs. The remaining 47%is attributed to
post-earthquake water supply. -For the purpose of this funding evaluation,they were considered
to be equally split.
The recommended funding method is based on a combination of the following approaches to
allocating costs:
• Consumption basis(i.e.,a charge based on the amount of water used)to reflect post-
earthquake water service availability
Equivalent meter basis (i.e.,a charge based on the customer's meter size)to reflect post-
earthquake fire fighting capability
nsumZion Basis-The SIP provides the benefit of improving the availability of post-
earthquake water service for all customers. While this benefit is related to the amount of water a
customer consumes, there will likely be post-earthquake restrictions in non-essential usage, e.g.,
landscaping, car washing,etc.,while repairs of earthquake damage are made. For residential
customers,the essential uses are most closely approximated by average District-wide
consumption during the lowest usage winter month when most non-essential uses do not occur.
This average lowest winter month usage is recommended as the basis for residential charges
related to post-earthquake water service availability.
Since Single Family Residential (SFR)and Multiple Family Residential (MFR)customers have
different typical minimum monthly use levels,they were calculated separately. The charge is
determined by dividing the total cost allocated to SFR or MFR customers by the number of
customers in each class. This results in uniform charges in each of these customer classes.
Typical consumption patterns of"other"accounts(industrial,commercial,etc.),unlike
residential, generally do not show a consistent variation. There is also much greater variability
among individual customers. Following a seismic event, all customers would be expected to cut
back to essential uses. However,the variability of usage within this class makes it difficult to
establish a class-wide level.of essential uses,as was done for residential users. Thus, specific
usage levels would be difficult to identify for this large class of customers. The post-earthquake
usage of this user class is better estimated as a percentage reduction from normal usage. Since
this is proportional to normal usage, a consumption-based charge per billing unit is
recommended for this class.
Eguivalent Meter Basis-As discussed above,approximately half of the SIP costs are for
improvements to post-earthquake fire fighting capability. The current meter charges include a
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 4
component for fire protection costs,and that component is allocated on an equivalent meter
basis. The use of equivalent meters as the basis for cost allocations relates to the hydraulic
capacity of the meter,i.e.,how much flow the meter can deliver for the customer's use. (For
example,a 4-inch meter has the capacity to handle 25 times as much flow as a 5/8-inch meter.
The 4-inch meter is therefore considered to have an equivalent meter factor of 25..Exhibit 1
shows the equivalent meter factors for all meter sizes.) It is consistent with this existing rate
structure methodology to allocate a portion of the SIP costs on an equivalent meter basis to
account for the added fire protection benefits of the SIP.
Recommended Rates - The recommended rates include the following:
• Monthly charge for availability of post-earthquake water service:
- Single Family Residential -$0.80
- Multiple Family Residential - $3.76
- Other- $0.08/CCF
• Monthly charge for post-earthquake fire fighting capability
- All customers- $0.80/Equivalent Meter
Exhibit 2 presents a comparison of the existing seismic charges(surcharge plus tax)to the
recommended charges, for a variety of hypothetical customers. A typical residential customer
(250 gallons per day consumption)with a parcel less than one-quarter acre,pays $1.57 per month
under the current seismic charge. Under the proposed rates,the charge would be $1.60 per
month.
SIP Funding Alternatives Considered
Several other funding models were considered for the SIP,including:
- Percentage increase (i.e.,a surcharge based on all components of the bill)
- Equal flat charge for All customers
- Equivalent meter basis for funding the entire program
For the purpose of comparison,the rate impacts of these alternatives are presented in Exhibit 3.
Any of these models could be applied to varying degrees in an allocation of SIP costs that
reflect the program benefits. For example,the SIP rate structure adopted in November 1994
combines a percentage increase on the total water bill to reflect the benefit of post-earthquake
water service availability, and a tax(based on parcel size)to reflect the benefit of improved post-
earthquake fire-fighting capacity.
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 5
Percentage Increase -A percentage increase to the entire bill allocates the SIP costs to all billing
components, including meter charges and consumption. This is similar to the recommended rate
structure, but the proportional allocation of the costs is different,with a greater proportion
allocated to consumption.
Egual Flat Charge-This mechanism would allocate an equal charge for the SIP to AU customers.
To the extent that all customers benefit from the SIP,an equal flat charge apportions the costs
equally.
EQuivalent Meter Basis Only-The equivalent meter calculation reflects the capacity of the meter
to deliver water to the customer. This basis can be utilized to allocate the SIP benefits pertaining
to those components.
An additional cost allocation concept is based on location within the District. This concept is not
recommended because the SIP improvements provide District-wide benefits and such a
geographical allocation of costs does not reflect such benefits. The District-wide benefits of the
SIP are also discussed below.
Regional Benefits of the SIP -The SIP includes a variety of individual improvements throughout
the District',3,°. The combination of these improvements provides benefits on a District-wide
basis. The regional nature of the improvements and their benefits are discussed below.
The District's facilities potentially could be impacted by a number of faults'. The Hayward and
the Calaveras Faults are within the service area. The San Andreas and Concord Faults lie outside
the service area but have the potential to impact District facilities. The SIP includes
improvements throughout the service area to address the impacts of&of these faults. In an area
as seismically active as this,prudent planning must include all these possibilities. The planned
improvements are spread throughout the District and will be of benefit to the whole District in
the event of a quake on any of these faults.
The majority of the SIP improvements are designed to treat, store and move water throughout the
District. Four major components of the SIP' provide the ability to store water and to move it
around the District after a major earthquake: the Southern Loop,the Claremont Tunnel Upgrade,
the reservoir upgrades,and the transmission system improvements (reference Exhibit 4). The
Southern Loop will allow moving water both ways between the San Ramon Valley and the
Castro Valley areas in the southern part of the District's service area. The Claremont Tunnel
Upgrade provides a reliable water supply to the west of the hills area in the event of an
earthquake on the Hayward Fault and provides the source of supply for water to be transmitted to
the San Ramon Valley through the Southern Loop after an earthquake on the Concord or
Calaveras Faults. The reservoir upgrades provide reliable storage of water that can then be
moved by the transmission system throughout the District. The transmission upgrades provide
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 6
improvements to major transmission facilities to allow movement of water throughout the
District. These $171.9 million in improvements represent 91%of the total SIP.
Conservation of water supplies in any part of the District following a major earthquake provides
more available water for other parts of the District. For example,damage to water storage in the
southeastern part of the District can be compensated for by storage in the northwestern part of the
District. Water can be moved through existing aqueducts upgraded under the SIP and ultimately
moved to the southeastern areas through the Southern Loop. The ability to move water east to
west and west to east improves the supply potential after a major earthquake to all customers in
the District.
Water is the lifeblood of the East Bay's economy. Damage to any part of the system will result
in great economic loss to the region as a whole. A study 'of the economy in the area served by
the District shows losses in the Gross Regional Product ranging from $24 million (Concord 6.5
Magnitude Earthquake)to $1.35 billion(Hayward Magnitude 7 Earthquake)without the seismic
improvements. With the SIP upgrades,these economic losses are reduced to $11.9 million to
$271 million respectively.
Hardening District facilities will shorten the time needed to repair damage to the water system.
There is a finite limit on the available trained repair crews for fixing system damage. A large
earthquake, such as a Magnitude 7 earthquake on the Hayward Fault will cause widespread
damage to much of the service area. By upgrading components,the available crews will be able
to move through the District faster to repair damage that does occur. This will benefit customers
throughout the District.
Options for Refunding the FY96 Tax Payments
Refunding Considerations
The Board asked for a staff analysis of how refunds for FY 96 SIP tax bill payments could be
made to customers. The FY96 parcel tax billing was$7.0 million. It is assumed this total
amount would be considered for refunds. Given that the total program cost is$189 million,this
refund amount represents a small percentage and does not significantly impact the long-term
program funding.
If refunds are to be made, several activities will need to be staffed and funded.Among these
activities are:
• Communicating with taxpayers regarding refunding process
• Verifying that taxpayers have remitted parcel tax payment
• Handling inquiries before and after refunding
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 7
• Handling reimbursement to counties for removal of delinquent parcel taxes from tax roll
• Identifying taxpayer name and address information with consideration to the following:
a Locating information missing from the counties'data base
II Locating taxpayers who have moved since the tax was levied
n Allocating refunds when ownership transfers have occurred since the tax was levied
n Allocating refunds when subdivision of parcels has occurred since the tax was levied
n Allowing for time-lag for counties to update data base
Recommended Method
Staff recommends that the District issue refund checks based on tax roll information(with
assistance from the consultant originally retained to prepare the tax rolls) , at a total cost of
$372,000. Significant efforts will be directed towards the verification of parcel owner name and
address information,particularly where change of ownership has occurred, so that refunds will
reach the appropriate parties. This is the recommended option because it is the most convenient
method for taxpayers to receive refunds.
The costs the District will incur in refunding the tax are summarized below:
• Summary of All Costs to Refund Tax
- Payment to counties for name and address info
and for removal of tax from delinquent bills $ 55,000
- Postage(390,000 checks @ 27.4 cents) 107,000
- Check stock and envelopes 40,000
- Public information 10,000
- ConsuItant costs 160.000
Total Estimated Costs $ 372.000
The updated tax roll information(reflecting property ownership and owner address changes
during FY96)will be available in early July. The refunds can then be issued within 60 days.
Counties charge approximately 1.7%of the funds collected for their service in managing the
property tax bills. This one time refund expenditure would be offset within 4 years by the
savings resulting from the District billing all charges on its own water bills.
Alternative Refund Methods Considered
Apply Tax Credit on Future Tax Bill -Alameda and Contra Costa Counties will not credit tax
bills due to significant problems associated with ownership changes.
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 8
A=lly Credit on Water Bill-The SIP tax was levied based on parcel size,using the parcel
number as the billing identifier. Parcel numbers,however,have no linkage to customers'water
accounts and this linkage would be very difficult and expensive to establish.
Issue Refund Through Claims Process-The District would notify the public that SIP refunds are
available upon the submission of a claim. Claims forms would be made available to anyone who
is eligible for a refund. The claims process is likely to be negatively perceived as cumbersome
by the public and would require a significant amount of manual processing.
Options for Modifying the SIP Scope and Duration to Reduce the Impacts on Rates and
Charges
The Board also requested staff to Develop options for modifying the SIP scope and duration to
reduce the impacts on rates. These analyses are presented below.
Reduce Program Scone
Staff has developed two options for reducing the SIP program scope:
• Delete the Southern Loop and Claremont Tunnel Upgrades
• Reduce SIP from Level 3 to Level 2 Improvements
As adopted,the SIP provides the benefits of improved post-earthquake fire fighting capability
and water service availability with a high degree of reliability. To the extent that the program is
reduced,the level and certainty of these benefits are also reduced.
Exhibit 4 provides a breakdown of the SIP costs into major components. These are discussed in
the options for program reduction.
Delete the Southern Loop and Claremont Tunnel 1JJ29M es-These two projects help ensure the
District's ability to transmit water in a post earthquake environment from areas that have water
available to areas where water is badly needed. Deleting the Southern Loop would eliminate
redundancy to the Castro Valley area if the Upper San Leandro Water Treatment Plant(USL
WT?)is damaged or if the pipes from USL WT?to Castro Valley are damaged. Deleting the
Southern Loop would also eliminate the redundancy from USL to San Ramon Valley in case the
Calaveras Fault ruptures. The Claremont Tunnel is the major transmission line for providing
water to 70%of the District's customers. Deletion of this project will greatly worsen the water
supply to these customers after an earthquake as well as limiting water that could be transported
to San Ramon Valley via the Southern Loop. Deleting both projects would result in severe
rationing in some areas of the District after an earthquake.
Board of Directors
February 23, 1996
Page 9
Deleting these two major projects would decrease the SIP cost by$56 million,or a 30%
reduction in program scope. The District would need overall revenues of$133 million,or$9.0
million of annual revenues. If this option is pursued,it will be necessary to revisit the benefit
allocation analysis and develop an rate methodology. However,for purposes of demonstration
(using the recommended rate model),the average residential rate would be$1.13 per month as
compared to$1.60 for the full program.
Reduce SIP from Level 3 to Level 2 Improvements-Level 2 upgrades enable limited water
service for all pressure zones following the Maximum Earthquake event(Hayward M7). It
includes upgrades that secure one reservoir and one pumping plant for each pressure zone,but
does not include securing all reservoirs,pumping plants and critical pipelines,the Southern Loop
or the Claremont Tunnel Upgrade. Reducing the SIP from Level 3 to Level 2 will greatly
decrease the District's overall ability to provide post earthquake water service and will also
reduce fire suppression capabilities following a major earthquake.
Reducing the SIP from Level 3 improvements to Level 2 improvements would decrease the SIP
cost by$118 million, or a 62%reduction in program scope. The District would need overall
revenues of$71 million, or$4.8 million of annual revenues.Again, if this option is pursued,it
will be necessary to analyze customer benefits and design an appropriate methodology for
allocating costs. However,using the recommended rate model for purposes of illustration,the
average residential rate would be $0.60 per month.
Increase Program Duration from 10 Years to 15 Years
If the SIP implementation period were lengthened from 10 years to 15 years the average
residential rate would be$1.44 per month(using the recommended rate model). This small
decrease(10%)reflects the fact that the program will be bond-funded using 20-year bonds.
Thus,the financing period is extended from 30 years to 35 years,a smaller proportional change
than the extension from 10 to 15 years.
Exhibit 5 summarizes the rate impacts of these options.
DMD:MLM:bjc
t:gmrpt4.wpd
REFERENCES
1. Indirect loss Estimation-Fire Following Earthquake, G&E Engineering Systems Inc., March,
1994.
2. Seismic Evaluation Program Final Report, G & E Engineering Systems, Report R10.5
Revision 1, January 1994.
3. Seismic Evaluation Program Final Report.Appendix A, G&E Engineering Systems, Report
R10.04.01, Revision 1, April 1, 1994.
4.General Manager's Memorandum to Board of Directors: Seismic Evaluation Program, Jorge
Carrasco, January 28, 1994.
5. Assessment of Earthquake-Related Geologia/Geotechnical Hazards at Service Area Facility
Sites and Regional Hazard Assessments-East Bay Municipal Utility District Water System
Seismic Evaluation Program, Volume 1: Main Report and Volume 2:Appendices, Geomatrix
Consultants, October 25, 1993.
6. Seismic Improvement Program Implementation Plan, Seismic Improvement Program,
January 1995.
7. Economic Impacts of Scenario Earthquakes on the East Bay Municipal Utility District Service
Area, HORNER, Gerald L. and GOETTEL, Kenneth A., April 1, 1994.
1
r\
W
a
a o a a a
�°; o o a o o Q �n a 4ei c uci
r
o C4 ori ao N oo M
d
ELa 0
a �
c W
W
� Z
•� Q �i
r
f
LU 8 � � � r° m � �Sm « 8 < 88 $
m �p cs
N � � vi � WNN 16 L6d 0* V), -W Cy AM p a 'QN
ol0 � � N CYm8 r0wm r�ii � >CC
m V H C m m
U �
W oo opO pppp ppc�
W Recesses ie 9 28888 0008
W � � COCCOCCC !�! e'! P) c7l'� Oe � �N $ CGOO
O
Q 0 m
z
w
� a m 85888888 88eQ8 m � eI p
0 8 e8 $ 8
CL '�K OCOGGClVN NNmmQ OO10f0 � IDN � N
W 1A � m �y O
IV cc N 0 mm � m
NNNQ� Pt) NO UW? C� Ov 10000 Q l7NOQ
1H46W: PihQm m
m1D -� � gFiDMlP. W5
LU tofy r � NNP- fDNO
CD
Q r
2 N
V m N N N N N ��ppQQO N am 0 NNeP00 Opp
IDmiUQ� mfOON mNQ 04010 " < aN88
N C0C) 0 0 Iia^D riW: eq
LU
W z pp p p p
N O & N100> OfO, s8a Vol� ^ � 8 mN � � S � 80Q
\► %n O C iD i0 ��yy
�E Q W tD 46 c; C4 t7Rh NiG � Nm OO � cy OO0 Cos
NO
Im O V ¢ I �AT
-
co
r V H O� NON> tN0CYm00 U) CO 4q :�
OlP � lVrirOcoed ppGOfa ' {� � 1!> N
C CY N fO . R t0 1f� 1tf 1A
� N1nQ t7 i01b � 1l') r !")
W � ,� c Amo
c N Lu
p
a W 2222 °° °° 88888 88888 8885
z N � � N ffiOm � « � N10Q W ^ f /*
W y yV �'
d �
N Q • e In v < e .r •r v •� a
Q W ry +ti +ri +rilt� ariarimap mow � � inlgm � � := In Mri
8
oo pp pp• NNNNNNpp 19
oo•p NNpp p 8 9888 888 r
�
r M
N m 0000000 OOO WZt7 O C Cif OG -
ww- V:N N%dc;&! f ufC; cif Q 'b
16 9- N 7 N IN .
1Cf
CD
G N
O {pm
AAA^ AA
�o m ,� OooOooN n � naooS _S0000c �
N ri Lu ¢ wrrvvv�rO �N...vv�N �`Di�vD m.vN ��..
¢ � .� N —Cy M Nv NQ m OLL cc
V
11
E _.
g, E o
cn U
m
em
x
W
� ogga8
0 Qwr¢ Q rrrrrr {f � �t � � r � rr � ' �O � tJNO
> Wcc r111�A
0 V
U W
W 8888888 89888 88888 8888
a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Z =
¢ U p N Q� �p p� �p �p pp
�1 C7W arDQtr0 �7eOD < t7t0 N � VNN5? tOlnOtppA �
Q co 0 CYItL N0) Ln 1AtvNQm rcoN {AN � NpNpN
UJ *03
Q r r r {p f0
W Q ¢ 0 N
W
V5a
c �
E 3 � � 3 � 85 �yg�p8 X888
V (n WQ ¢ rrrrrrl11l1t WLD0ON '' � N �78
SM Z z Q r rN
` C Wv m
d N O
E > ui
¢ W
d � N
Lq N � 0pp CNN p pph
NO �w 4C � C .Z � GC
cc Mf� � N � rRQ � N � � fCNm
0 CY
V J W y U
a
441
a � CQV
s � 9 � 9E99 99 9 cC999 99
r � rN rNKlON rLl�d NLep
�p N NO $
mvC
ID N C
NLL OOOOOOIA� yll�0C? 0O �O1p C`potOl!
` .�CrypSeDp ...vQvD vv vNi:iOvN Ir --c6 C6 N vN t6D7 !7
m .Es SD 12S9912Srr NN � W � � NN aT N �COO
U. co m e6
4) 4 E
c E
U
N
t
- m
K
W
0 0 0 0
�n rn o
m N QI I Go
Z
W
O 0
a
O
a IL ea
E Sri a o
H
H E
Q *0 a �
E h d�
aqi EE c
d V
r
CL r_ LO N
8 H ji
co U H N
U
a
v
m vm
x
W
irm � � c°$ Cli
J
W? -t ir`O. . aoo,
r Q
rrrrrrNN U) W) 0) M FcliI�IOD t�3GO
v� N
LU v
U W •-
N a �
W N m tOtD �OtOtOiO � o arD CR S � v� a �
m p�
V J E C C C G6 C r r N cmM co O r CO
L6 O
4
r0, m
Q
� E
LLI d y mmmmmme ; n Loigmmts go OD co aoQ $ o
CD r r r �- r r p> CD 04 r r r to IV 14 IV0880V
Q N C m rr� rrrrr- r O �tf� l� � � � �CNA FO � ct �
W LU � V �
E Cq
N
a� O oW SSNa � 8 � Qp8 $ 8
d LU a ZQ rr' rrrNfV 1c) tpOC N r .et NA8 :t
d V -
WV
E
0 5 r
WW
CL m
E0 v f� r r r v ao h pp N O CD N O ao OD 1� w
O Z V W N � NCf . . I . . . lOOQ l7Ow trlNOef
E a � � Q � rNNC� iC) 49 � lhl. co rQ V- oto m
b9
CY
N
Z LXUwU r
N
U g fs- csm Csy � � � � � �
r � ..: :c �N49O �49OKf "i qg
C r r N N O
v _
C
G1 C
NU! y(D000000u�� �A�00� 0000,p p� p '
yri CvN �`r'�cd co v
m $ •E?3 �5i � u�i �tr •- �rrNN � �eNN � N .raoao
r
LL m
B
c E gv1 U
W
a
O
U
N
W
Q
xN
W
m
a>
as
�. All opo
IF •�
Lo
r[
1,51 GNN
P"
� N
O � w
� VIII II W
too
Is
�$ � 4t trj{L ill "' rd. Q•
�ryN a G�i�
L ,r
� s
m
a
r
L)
g
v o id �� am ;
sad
� .. roE
e
m
es
'114
4�
U)
cr)
�p p
C DD 's p V p tp O y
O Q iu CW _ami m O ip d !� O :��1 .
m � to dOteO � � IM
0 S.cr � W .
�'e�v v; Q ''g Im
n E4 of
W~ .: 'p 4 .. N
W8 G N N O N 15 C r N t0. tll y W d p i"i C O
N CNi g � � m � `� � cc EX il
g o ev
N Q W tri cc golf EN-1 in Q
Jaz i i I s
C y m m •��� E y
x do m at
d oo> E E �Nh
s° o HIM
d
♦ i
a
d
p�
¢ ;QN N dN w o=11u) a=i
N
O
{y d LM m
m C p 2m
� N �
r {p
Q N
m
all
e °' s 0 r. I Ic
•� «
� v a
Eli
� � O ��W O:• � ��� ° a « p �.� e G Q
�
ISE
v oil
o mi
ICWQ ti � ��
Q A
To To
Zol.. -I& i-I !-• mill
2 WCC
c°1 a14°v °°$ a m�
�
m 33 $� i6o
WpNC� m OgunmOnOiCh
LU
Is
0 � o � ro1° � m r
Os Ln U� gu rmmr� � a
� �� N�_ Ea LL�mo � V � II� 88mv°, v, 3 d
2 j
fCVW mg
y
m gE E 2 %0
" 1it
W l7 m d N
N
06
c0
.o
m m vs m
g � L 5
�� Q « - p
. 0 3
Q m
W
LLJ 40
m
a r
�Sun)
W Z G0 '7
r C so
M �� C rp �� s m
G � �
dZ r .E we �� m �� o
g'� a
ZtuO 06
ogai =� 2 � m ox �y
N
VgW W syn ce� � °1 8 vOxm
n
COj �p Pi` QV germ = O
�+► ptitRey o� « 00to
a «V v
ly
ID
if U go
p ..
y N >
e
r
. tL
Q dN N V V N 02 U)<w F
EC N
� O
C6
H e m OD m
�• ., O t eF
m S rJ CL.Lm S
N
• 0 3
esu
cn
' ° d
_�
Six
Is N
i1! ds D G
�� i $
r
az a0. � s
a �s
To
UW f" wd m � es
a.�
r � m
N N m G
3
'S
N v t o
to a •3
�•• s �d his �s. 3
V r� � •-' d .� � * tJ�
� r
CD
ao $ � •-
�
.� � �.
m
_ill �� �
�.. .,
.ga � ego+ z� 0 �IE 1ID
` �
Is Lot) 4w
o tS
`a
N � m
Sc � m o o= h.2 u ;
o r E_ 4 = o $ Mo-
CI%NoE amE¢'oa n - ¢H « E
gra c
aszz Z o
Zm � ~ e $ iN.0
z LUw
t_
W � � ¢ lLy g.100
w0vWj 0 m
4>94N
N.W
zea
J
m
LU
s �
f rx .8
� SL�LNC� f6 3 dE2b0�b .tG.� U � �
it i c�
cc t—
G N
CLd
C d
F d QJ
w
� r
� � d
• • 3
CC)
a)
OP 9-
J a V ULLJoo w p j T
CL
H Lp
as S a Q «
h a c
a[ ac
oe Ios.
W Q > t co
x h N1
az .0..! ,I t
Zg� E
z - � � m mmr g >
y0 % .0 �og > E V
CWO C10
Cb g r �Ymo �Nm o
i0 {n N Cf
a« � «d�O.O°1m Vmnee 1- � d
LU
W F Wp
W > V
r � m
" IES afit
(a •� � � ,bow .� �
O Nom¢ ¢ •�Q �¢
oo r
J C O V a 5 U btu
CO)Av�`i m¢vVi gg toa H s
Oir
E
C w
O
ID
low WX
• • 3
.• CD
Q 0
Ina
r v a
in
TO
It
% CBUcE
$ mPz �D ' dC EL
4
e Z
w gE Mail .. E012286%
�°imo = °
IL ° Y
¢ 00
0i � a g,��p m m
.r C pp "
LU
LL w 8 L w
N0.6 i+ — 1 0 mcn � Q
QQ = m
< Z H Em ' Em mG3 L � $ °om
Va'a wEvew
._ ._
p m m
W its, m a. m O 3 w N twp O L W 10 L `4 O N
Q > W V i° poE � Eg CAl it
t
W W fD p a v ami
Hv S d O o
C> > � XQw � E�NE� 2� Noa�� mgCo m3 m
W Q O : m m 0 e m m - EmO �e► �o " zm L
m2d'�iw d
z P q
v
p O
y�.ENem
Lll
to++ C N �
a ��
a oTo83m fjn" om
U
O AL
C
c a
Oi7VVi
d
0
`t 06
• Uz oa�s � N ;
0 3
ep
m
m
O
0
S.
It
Mill
s It""
a
1,11
m '� •
a lit o.
N �
IV. I.% '
i t J r m
ts
a a o
w
.�
tip
o t
m4 z
ZJ p Sso � b �$
Yi ii► �' N
ct
lit
W m
C ..
.► o�V wp �•� d
u _
a � •
O
' I
Q
r
u 00
S
p t�3 E ,ie � Fa 63Amo o°
« rijb o
, ., m€ mgE o � .
i 3 Yv a Ig m IN� 1911
LU
Q W y c W m Qamt' o o my o
W 4�- V V� O
°ate C .T Oa O N
E so
a�— � � � m
m �+ a ', 02a o 3 o ac)�i¢ b
z a
V
6
N
a � U «
W
CL
Q g V
e �V o «
rc Q C1 0 � d
N
a
� � o
m v r m
a � 3
• • 3
Q oCDi
« has TZ
g �sam oNi r� a
a e 8 � E �' oo o B EooLLg o �
fn
W N
C � a �N
G
O r O W t
ll
r
0) � �pfHI I:N
O O
cc
z� L w
gn � m
�N 9�89 � N
un fmD 64 11 A
7p C4
f.
Z Z Q
;Z:
Lu
Z S E on°r a F- oft
IA
E.W m O
moi! yO„ y L
ova E
d c
•f3
N OD
v U E c
f >(A veu) ar�vc)vi � c
m
r+• t— L) o� m
r v
g V=_ . r
OKa
�t 3
� f� r
06 CD
a :+
�. 111
CD +.
a � «
I'm LU
;21
cn
Iir16
tot ~G 31
t op .61r
Q « .. c1 . I
IWO
Co. r dV �-
U,
QQ
QN
r
U
Cal r
O� �C nit t3
tun il? .0 G
C i O
m
r CD
a Of
N
E � �
a °C • •C�
0s �c� tCW
Joel � «o
Ic
� C p
tug 5-cu.
v ; -fir
�aacin
� wc�
a � � m
aZ ` a co a ' �cc t
�g � m �� a � .
Z p Q m.S 0= ^> $o W CIt
so Q3 QHS=«
IU COD a? � pm «Nr, 4) m � mai. 6g� eo
f � o � '° or � x.� coi° � = m
aso � a ; cl
U) �E3 E�3f 8 v « a � oa8Pm—°m a
Ir � a
� a (AZgm
h
pN'�
8 � O
w
x.c a��
a
a o �a $ oT.
`
V «tVt� V p M
W� Nm :N VS {n ip
d
CL
c �
Q c m
vg �� a
m - � ) C
U)
co
a cr)
w
lu
cc
at
0
Hill _ 10r�j
a
� � r a
e apc 8 �m b
ttAo ` '� ID A ° r• � i7 1fi r
_ �
�e Cr� �
o O �a w E �c•.� � � '9 g' 'm
« QQ
:..ZV.: o vOX
ao
< _ $
O>r ° LOy
.0 �CC
Q ¢ b O p ���Ln 5 O
Wpujtp O .C3 ��� � € maLmac
f f
I r >
yn � au � Ku
F � � m
fin
iW IV � pr 1'o to
d og off+
i m m wa000in E
L OON
in
X
V " U t m
0
« L d
a
O
u r m
W
c LL� 8t
• • 3
N m
$ u ��� �> ac � v a
w
V e e e �� iW
was W
1 E
� e
con) �
m €
IL -
6 � a
cr
p o«
jL"p> m �Til
o
pWNfa mo05p� . � m .-
Z5 P `D op
�DaJ o ..Etnr� � n d
�? m �O �n'w.�
�a
� b a m � > y m.93io
C n
N
U4,
Fm
v
� d
a � O
v 3
.�
Ss
o
A am
q
£ � O
� Q
m
.0
p y
•
N m
L �� CCN ¢ i C� F rc
`"ae E O a
o z
4C LL
Q � � e
.S �0) A
C6 Opti
Q
O N
so
e r X
Co
i
LLC ¢
m
ce
aCo
im c
sez
c e Esc M
W � tD
LO
mQJ EN a+ n pE $ �: f 2a {�D= IL
WN
Nto m V L° 51
c 0
oil U;I)
6
06
O¢Q ¢ V W V C
d
44P
0 CL
• Q
Co
i.7 > G t -e
Mm
ffi .O e Q _
e
IL
. • 3
d �
U � �
lop
fn
Zs" a
b
J
yr �
s
• s 3
Location of Major New Service
Affecting EBMUD Planning Area — Inside USB Attachment 81
e
MAJITNEZ
`y C• .... =ld�fl Ciafly0fl .
�Jrloie � Y: Cwlla Rtmch —LEGEND
,� Q Rt>� lir�otn Pritiiserdt Servio Ana
UoroU Sanbe Boundary
� � .
x
•� �� � �` �aaat ;* 0--Dawbprtt.rrt tiocations
a tsty �.
ivierma at
rine Bay "'+• r ilai�l60 a
' &APRVErYE oearnoor,. ei.
/ $ERKELEY Nrabra s aM�r empe PC"
;411tA110
ed�eal 'EtstBsy •' d`?"-.,. _ _s,,,� �t. A
villa '+.
F
j '? sols$� Amoalian SAN Erna
SAN
S,
pti e� ' k.r� Lawnnee/
• Lee=
FRANCISCO
utavat = !AN ClUb
';W1igs1de tM1A0N • cot
Ranch
�itpoaat And Awtatlwd Site J Y Bart Gee}v
zOmsQa AES ;�iYrademenn f . _i
troYasumVol
Chirch
NornasrN` i
Vulape
Nand Airpon Sballabon
�Ye+nll8esedllouanp _ DUBLIN
ANS�+~t1CKt0 n meta"
// Aiaiii»'Yfata
,'�1eat�.eY'" PtiaJhMowns
��MMVOIIHQO ��
�,,,,� • Paloma»s Road
,. � �Five Anr><ation
». �Mp � Padfic
Water Distribution Pkinning East Bay Municipal Utility District
April I M
>
Location of Major New Service
Affecting EBMUD Planning Area — Outside USB Attachment 82
.a.cu►
.r•
,y„ErnTseupto
- swnee:z
s � Flollander
� 6, —LEGEND-
26,
x °s4PnM wSerAos Area
URhrwe 6ervios Boundary
z 'S r ° , .s,e.,,4w7,, • c� �•�.DevvIaMent motions
4�wai os i
-BERKELEY ' = 4AM �,.
r
�
=-00
Cort»
" n
•
venal
wsonowr "�'»" Ranch
KLAM
C6 '`-1.
SAN
FRANCISCO oe 167ny j
71
Y jO
" y
'° PrOpsrry Owners
` z VUBUN IN�octi�tan
1�ilUilldQ?4 �� `
•� IIRrMfARD
Water Disftution Planning Fest Bey Municipal Utility District
April 1996
Notes:
VM*Dougherty Valley planning area includes Gale Ranch,Windemere and Camp Parks.
2rA%
EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
DATE: February 22, 1996
MEMO TO: Board of Directors
THROUGH: Dennis M. Diemer,General ManagerAwr
�r
FROM: John B. Lampe, i ector o Water Planning
SUBJECT: Development Projects Outside the Ultimate Service Boundary(USB)in
Southeast Contra Costa County
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memorandum is to inform the Board of recent development activity on
projects in the subject area. The Contra Costa County sent the Notice of Preparation(NOP) of
Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs)for three projects in January and February 1996. The
details of these projects are shown in Attachments 1 and 2. The Draft Environmental Impact
Report for the development of Tassajara Valley Property Owners Association properties is
expected to be available for public review in April 1996.
SUMMARY
The District's Department of Water Planning responded to Contra Costa County Community
Development Department on the NOPs of the EIRs for three development projects in the
unincorporated County area southeast of Danville and San Ramon. For two of these projects,
Tassajara Meadows and Wendt Ranch,the County identified the District as the water service
provider,subject to necessary annexations. As these projects are outside the District's USB, the
District's response to the County expressed opposition to the annexation and requested
consideration of another water service provider.
DISCUSSION
The requests for possible water service to the projects outside the current service area are subject
to the District's Policy No. 1 on annexations. This policy requires District opposition to the
annexation of property outside the USB,unless certain conditions are met. The subject projects
do not meet these conditions. The responses to the County(Attachments 3 through 6)express
the District's opposition to the annexation of properties outside the USB for water service. The
opposition to annexations that do not meet small boundary adjustment criteria is based on Policy
51,The Effects of Extension of Water Beyond the USB,and Policy 52, Water Supply
Availability and Deficiency.
In addition to the above,District staff will cooperate with the County to ensure that our technical
response to their requests for water supply availability and reliability is consistent with the
Board of Directors
February 22, 1996
Page 2
recently passed SB 901 (Costa)which requires that they request and we provide an appropriate
assessment. The County will use this assessment in their EIRs and in developing their findings.
JBL:DJR:dd
9604.dr
Attachments:
1 - Development Projects in Southeast Contra Costa County
2 - Location Map of Development Projects in Southeast Contra Costa County
3 - Letters from John B. Lampe to James W. Cutler, dated February 1, 1996, Dougherty
Valley General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments and Related Projects Notice of
Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
4 - Letter from John B. Lampe to James W. Cutler,dated February 1996, Tassajara Meadows
General Plan Amendment and Related Projects Notice of Preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Report
5 - Letter from John B. Lampe to James W. Cutler,dated February, 1996,Wendt Ranch
General Plan Amendment and Related Projects Notice of Preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Report
6 - Letter from John B. Lampe to James W. Cutler, dated May 19, 1993, Tassajara Valley
General Plan Amendment Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
Attachment 1
a CD
m
tO00)
cC ten.— '4000 O
)m mai4
d
to
gowB4u � w.0a a v,gaHc'ic�
0 w . u a ci a H C G ! W t m c
S. � me� 4 x � E �cn
u E � a E¢f a Ewo m� m 'pw0
FU ew O t0 p 00Cn
Coco
4
w
yaj w 4
F M p c
Q V t0 N V Q m
iAF Qm = w N
qwz N �0 »i F Ou
U
ID IA.
0 j 0 o c > m m G
�wQ o E� O cc0
co E ca
CO uj x LU
Q ? Q Q LU LU 1L�
fA
V a m W
Q M b
z NU w r
C U C
p � �YEc o
v R O
W LL
G v E.4
Q > a m «; H rp W > C
a� m
W m d r- .0 os
E
H tiy� GU'am— U m C.
0•r d H 'iM'00 to
N O!U m 7 a CO
G N i4 @ t4 N
Z a
_ P
Ca 00
�- m
b! Ci C
° I
> u
W W d n 4)
N
0 �+ E m to
x CL Ln
SO
•0 N to a CO
WOa. U Q d 0
� d m
> c o
c a o
z �V C cc t E� O «�
O 2° a U d o
Cr
WU
C? NU Oma p ? i°► .G+.N "
0 r-
q � c a
LU
7
u.t
~ D m m W
�0 Y Ix
V N g a c
r
Attachment 2
Location Map of Development Projects
In South-East Contra Costa County Outside the USB
-LEGEND- N
. ..emmone Ultimate Service Boundary A
`• EBMUD Service Area
•
' 9 •a
680 + Tessajara
'PI'. acheyr ■ ' Meadows
0°w ■■� (Corrie
aAnnexation)
r
• I a.s
DANYILLf Wendt
r� Ranch
pe`1 ewe ,S`
1
p +■.� -: Tess jara
' Va ey
�r r �� • Pro rty
t o '' • • - Ow ers
Ass iation
Dougherty Valley
(Shapell) 1
• Q t(Windemere) j
• �• peCD
r ` l
ial�i`■ .,iOANt t
AM N
�• � � �moi► � .
■ '• ■ Camp Parks 40
` • 10 � ♦
• ` 680 • •
00
i� DUBLIN
580
Water Distribution Planning East Bay Municipal Utility District
Attachment 3
EAST BAY WATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
JOHN S.LAMPE
HECTOR
February 1, 1996
Mr.James W. Cutler
Assistant Director of Comprehensive Planning
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street-4th Floor,North Wing
Martinez,CA.94553-0095
RE: Response to Notice of Preparation-Environmental Impact Report
Dougherty Valley General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments and Related Projects
Dear Mr. Cutler:
Thank you for the opportunity to offer the following comments on the scope of the proposed EIR
concerning development in the Dougherty Valley area:
1. As you know, implementation of the County's 1992 approvals for development in the
Dougherty Valley are subject to compliance with the requirements of a number of settlement
agreements,.including an agreement("Settlement Agreement")between EBMUD,the
County,and the Dougherty Valley developers. The Settlement Agreement requires the
County to designate Dublin San Ramon Services District("DSRSD"),rather than EBMUD,
as the preferred water provider for the portions of the Dougherty Valley other than the
County Club at Gale Ranch. The Settlement Agreement commits the County and developers
to seeking water service from DSRSD or other water sources or suppliers. The Settlement
Agreement also sets forth specific circumstances under which the developers may seek water
service from EBMUD after exhausting efforts to obtain service from an alternate provider.
The EIR should clearly acknowledge the key provisions of the Settlement Agreement .
concerning water service delivery to those areas of Dougherty Valley outside EBMUD's
Ultimate Service Boundary. The EIR should recognize that,if water service is sought from
EBMUD pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, such service may only be
provided under the.conditions and pursuant to the timetable set forth in the Settlement
Agreement.
While the EIR for the Dougherty Valley GPA will consider at least two water service
providers,it is imperative that the level of analysis for each alternative service provider be
specific,comprehensive,and sufficiently detailed to facilitate an objective evaluation of
competitive and viable project-level solutions to the water service needs that will be
generated by the proposed general and specific plan amendments and implementing
entitlements.
375 ELEVENTH STREET. OAKLAND. CA 94607.4140. 15101 267.1117. FAX (510)287.1275
P.O.SOX 24055.OAKLAND. CA 04673.1055
BOARD OFO/RECTORS JOHN A.COLEMAN. KATY FOULKES.JOHN M.GIOIA
FRANK MELLON. NANCY J.NADEL. MARY SELKIRK. KENNETH H.SIMMONS
Mr. James W. Cutler
February 1, 1996
Page 2
The analysis should include potential environmental,cumulative and growth inducing
impacts associated with both potable and reclaim water supply,additional treatment,
transmission and distribution improvements(including pumping plants and storage tanks)
required to service the Dougherty Valley for both domestic and irrigation purposes.
Necessary infrastructure improvements should be clearly identified. The use of reclaimed
water should be specifically analyzed,including applicable water conservation provisions
and ordinances that will be used to implement such programs. The identification and
thorough evaluation of specific potable and reclaim water sources is,of course, fundamental
to any discussion of providing water service to the Plan Area. With respect to any analysis
which assumes service by EBMUD,the EIR should include discussion of EBMUD's Water
Supply Management Program,including its conclusions concerning current and projected
short-term shortfalls in supply,the efforts which the District is making to overcome the
shortfalls,and the impact of such shortfalls on the District's ability to serve new customers
outside its Ultimate Service Boundary. The EIR should also discuss the social and
environmental impacts within the current USB of adding the new demands of the Dougherty
Valley project to the EBMUD system,assuming the District is not able to increase its source
of supply.
After describing these key provisions,the EIR should evaluate resulting changes to the
assumptions, conclusions and adequacy of mitigation that were contained in.the Dougherty
Valley Growth Management and Specific Plan FEIR dated June 9, 1992,especially in
Section 4.13 therein entitled"Water Supply and Service".
2. The NOP states (p.4,item#4)that the EIR will be utilized in connection with LAFCO-
related approvals, including sphere of influence changes and annexations to special districts
for providing water and other services. The EIR should include the analysis necessary for
determination of environmental impacts associated with these LAFCO actions. For example,
LAFCO must make certain factual determinations in connection with approvals for sphere of
influence revisions and annexations, including those set forth at Government Code sections
56425 and 56841. For the preferred water provider and each alternative provider,the
environmental impacts associated with each of the relevant factors for sphere of influence
revisions and annexations should be.analyzed.
3. On page 4.13-21 of the 06/09/92 FEIR,the discussion of reclaimed water for non-potable
applications should be updated in the subsequent EIR by acknowledging the creation of a
Joint Powers Agreement(JPA)between DSRSD and EBMUD in 1995. The JPA established
an agency,the DSRSD/EBMUD Recycled Water Authority(DERWA),copy attached,to
develop and provide recycled water projects in the region. Deliveries from the reclaimed
water system are expected to begin within the planning horizon of the proposed General
Plan/Specific Plan Amendment. This resource may affect the timing and direction of water
: utility service in the Dougherty Valley area,and should be examined. We direct your
Mr.James W. Cutler
February 1, 1996
Page 3
attention to the document entitled DSRSDfEBMUD Joint Water Recycling Program, Steering
Committee Report,June 1995 for a more complete discussion of the program's future service
capabilities.
4. The NOP lists on pages 2 through 4,a number of planning initiatives, studies and agency
actions which will influence the content of the proposed General Plan/Specific Plan
Amendment EIR. We suggest that this list mention specifically the status of the Tassajara
General Plan Amendment, since this development is immediately adjacent to the Dougherty
Valley planning area and should be part of the cumulative impact analysis on utility service,
especially potable and reclaimed water, for the region. The EIR should also very specifically
provide an analysis of impacts,both individual and cumulative,resulting from potential
annexation of the Tassajara Valley to EBMUD's USB (if approved by LAFCO), given the
District's policies on annexations outside the USB and the short-term water supply shortfall
projected in the WSMP for current and future customers within the USB. This analysis
should address impacts to water supplies(quality and quantity)and costs (rate implications)
likely to be associated with providing water service to accommodate a project of this size.
5. On Page 13, Section XII(A)of Exhibit C to the NOP,the text states that the project site is
outside the city limits of San Ramon. Please note in the EIR text,and by illustration in the
EIR,the locations of San Ramon's Sphere of Influence and EBMUD's Ultimate Service
Boundary.
Should the County need the District's assistance in preparing the referenced technical analysis for
water supply and related issues,a preliminary work agreement with appropriate compensation
can be developed between the County and the District.
The District would welcome the opportunity to discuss these comments with you at your
convenience. If you have questions or need additional information,please contact William R.
Kirkpatrick,Manager of Water Distribution Planning,at(510)287-1301.
g
ly 4War
. L oflanning
JBL:MC:dd
9602.mc
Attachment
Attachment 4
EAST BAY
WATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
JOHN B.LAMPE
DIREC'GR
February I5, 1996
Mr. James W. Cutler
Assistant Director of Comprehensive Planning _
Contra Costa County Community Development Department
651 Pine Street,4th Floor,North Wing
Martinez, CA 94553
SUBJECT: Tassajara Meadows General Plan Amendment and Related Projects,
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Dear Mr. Cutler:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject environmental document. The District has
the following comments regarding water service to the proposed development.
All of the proposed development lies outside the District's Ultimate Service Boundary (USB)
and therefore outside of its planning area. The District has a policy of opposing annexations
outside the USB. Pursuant to this policy, the District will oppose annexation of Tassajara
Meadows property to the District for purposes of providing water service to the proposed
development. The District's opposition is based on current District service obligations to present
and future customers within its current service area and USB. Findings in the District's long-
term Water Supply Management Program (WSMP) EIR (October 1993) confirmed that an
adequate source of reliable water to serve areas outside of the USB is currently not available
primarily due to increases in Mokelumne River diversions by agencies with senior water rights.
the potential for increased water demand for fisheries protection in the Mokelumne River and the
San Francisco Bay and Delta.and recurring drought conditions. Copies of the WSMP EIR have
previously been made available to the County. Additional copies will be made available upon
request.
The EIR must address the issue of whether there is an adequate water supply available in
quantity and quality to serve the proposed development. The District does not currently have a
sufficient water supply to reliably serve the proposed development. The District therefore
requests that the Tassajara Meadows EIR consider other water service providers and not assume
that EBMUD is the "automatic"or"logical"agency to provide water service for the proposed
project. The level of analysis for each alternative service provider must be specific.
comprehensive, and sufficiently detailed to facilitate an objective evaluation of competitive and
reasonable solutions to the water service needs that will be generated by the proposed general
plan amendment and preliminary development plan.
The Countv's EIR analysis should include potential environmental. cumulative and growth
inducing impacts associated with both potable and reclaimed water supple. additional treatment.
37EE:E:f'.TMSTREET. ZAKLAND. CA 94607.4110. .5 IC, .:
:5' ":' . . X :70; :97 ?.
VO BOX24055 . :AKLAj':D . CA 54623-::55
8OARD OF DIRECTORS _ONN A COLEMAN. KATY FOLILXES . .r.:' G DIA
:RANK i"ON. NANCY.' VACEL. VARYSELK/RK . KfN%E700^ St MC.VS
Mr. James W. Cutler
l February 15, 1996
Page 2
transmission and distribution improvements (including pumping plants and storage tanks)
required to serve both domestic and irrigation purposes. This analysis should include not only
Tassajara Meadows property, but also the larger Tassajara Valley Property Owners Association
(T VPOA)including Wendt Ranch. Consideration of the Tassajara Meadows property separately
from the TVPOA,as referred to in the NOP (Page 3 of Environmental Checklist,Additional
Information) will result in piece-meal impact analysis.
Social and environmental impacts within the current USB of adding new/cumulative demands
beyond the District's USB, assuming the District is not able to increase its source of supply, must
be evaluated where the District is considered as a possible provider of water service. San Ramon
Valley area water distribution system improvements made by EBMUD in the mid-1980 s did not
include capacity for projects such as Tassajara Meadows which are outside the District's
planning and service limits.
The DEIR should specifically provide an analysis of impacts, both individual and cumulative,
resulting from possible annexation of the Tassajara Valley to EBMUD's USB (if approved by
LAFCO), given the District's policies on annexations outside the USB and the water supply
shortfall projected in the WSMP for current and future customers within the USB. This analysis
should address impacts to water supplies (quality and quantity), water system facilities and
related costs (including impacts on water rates) likely to be associated with providing water
service to accommodate the proposed project.
Attached is a copy of the District's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) adopted on
February 13, 1996. Chapters III and IV review the District's water supply and water supply
planning issues. The UWMP discussion describes the District's problems and concerns related
to providing a reliable water supply to customers within its USB, the District's current planning
boundary. The addition of territory outside the District's USB could therefore adversely impact
current and future customers within the current service area.
Should the County need the District's assistance in preparing the referenced technical analysis
for water supply and related issues, a preliminary work agreement with appropriate compensation
can be developed between the County and the District.
If you have any questions,or if the District can be of further assistance,please contact Prab M.
Jog, Senior Civil Engineer, Water Service Planning at.(510)287-1026.
7B.
ly yo rs,
Lam of Water Planning
Mr. James W. Cutler
February 15, 1996
Page 3
JBL:DJR:dd
9602.dr
Attachment
cc: Ms. Anna Maria Perella
Contra Costa County LAFCO
Attachment 5
EAST BAY
MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT WATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JOHN B.LAMPE
DIRECTOR
February 16, 1996
Mr.James W. Cutler
Assistant Director of Comprehensive Planning
Contra Costa County Community Development Department
651 Pine Street,4th Floor,North Wing
Martinez,CA 94553
SUBJECT: ' Wendt Property General Plan Amendment and Related Projects,
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
Dear Mr.Cutler:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject environmental document. The District has
the following comments regarding water service to the proposed development.
All of the proposed development lies outside the District's Ultimate Service Boundary(USB)
and therefore outside of its planning area. The District has a policy of opposing annexations
outside the USB. Pursuant to this policy,the District will oppose annexation of the Wendt
property to the District for purposes of providing water service to the proposed development.
The District's opposition is based on current District service obligations to present and future
customers within its current service area and USB. Findings in the District's long-term Water
Supply Management Program(WSMP)EIR(October 1993)confirmed that an adequate source
of reliable water to serve areas outside of the USB is currently not available primarily due to
increases in Mokelumne River diversions by agencies with senior water rights,the potential for
increased water demand for fisheries protection in the Mokelumne River and the San Francisco .
Bay and Delta, and recurring drought conditions. Copies of the WSMP EIR have previously
been made available to the County. Additional copies will be made available upon request.
The Wendt Property EIR must address the issue of whether there is an adequate water supply
available in quantity and quality to serve the proposed development. The District does not
currently have a sufficient water supply to reliably serve the proposed development. The District
therefore requests that the Wendt Property EIR consider other water service providers and not
assume that EBMUD is the"automatic"or"logical"agency to provide water service for the
proposed project. The level of analysis for each alternative service provider must be specific,
comprehensive,and sufficiently detailed to facilitate an objective evaluation of competitive and
reasonable solutions to the water service needs that will be generated by the proposed general
plan amendment and preliminary development plan.
The County's EIR analysis should include potential environmental, cumulative and growth
inducing impacts associated with both potable and reclaimed water supply,additional treatment,
transmission and distribution improvements(including pumping plants and storage tanks)
375 ELEVENTH STREET. OAKLAND. CA 94607-4240. 1510/287.1127. FAX (510)287.1275
P.O.BOX 24055 . OAKLAND. CA 94523.1055
BOARD OF DIRECTORS JOHN A.COLEMAN. KATY FOULKES. JOHN M.GIOIA
FRANK MELLON. NANCY J.NADEL. MARY SELKIRK. KENNETH H.SIMMONS
Mr.James W. Cutler
February 16, 1996
Page 2
required to serve both domestic and irrigation purposes. This analysis should include not only
Wendt property,but also the larger Tassajara Valley Property Owners Association(TVPOA)
including Tassajara Meadows. Consideration of the Wendt property separately from the TVPOA
will result in piece-meal impact analysis.
Social and environmental impacts within the current USB of adding new/cumulative demands
beyond the District's USB,assuming the District is not able to increase its source of supply,must
be evaluated where the District is considered as a possible provider of water service. San Ramon
Valley area water distribution system improvements made by EBMUD in the mid-1980 s did not
include capacity for projects such as the Wendt property which are outside the District's planning
and service limits.
The DEIR should specifically provide an analysis of impacts,both individual and cumulative,
resulting from possible annexation of the Tassajara Valley to EBMUD's USB (if approved by
LAFCO), given the District's policies on annexations outside the USB and the water supply
shortfall projected in the WSMP for current and future customers within the USB. This analysis
should address impacts to water supplies(quality and quantity),water system facilities and
related costs(including impacts on water rates)likely to be associated with providing water
service to accommodate the proposed project.
A copy of the District's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)adopted on February 13, 1996
was supplied to the County in the District's Tassajara Meadows NOP response. Additional
copies will be made available upon request. Chapters III and IV review the District's water
supply and water supply planning issues. The UWMP discussion describes the District's
problems and concerns related to providing a reliable water supply to customers within its USB,
the District's current planning boundary. The addition of territory outside the District's USB
could therefore adversely impact current and future customers within the current service area.
Should the County need the District's assistance in preparing the referenced technical analysis
for water supply and related issues,a preliminary work agreement with appropriate compensation
can be developed between the County and the District.
If you have any questions,or if the District can be of further assistance,please contact Pmb M.
Jog, Senior Civil Engineer,Water Service Planning at(510)287-1026.
Purs,
pe
ater PI ng
JBL:DJR:dd
9603.dr
t r
Mr.James W. Cutler
February 16, 1996
Page 3
cc. Ms.Anna Maria Perella
Contra Costa County LAFCO
BOARD OF DIRECTORS *MR . )
EBMUD EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
375- 11 th Street,Oakland,CA 94607 Office of the Secretary: (510)287-0440
AGENDA
Special Joint Meeting With
Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors
Park Place
1395 Civic Drive
Walnut Creek, California
Wednesday, April 24, 1996
6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
DETERMINATION AND DISCUSSION:
1. Presentation by Contra Costa County on settlement agreement benchmarks implemented by
Contra Costa County.
2. Status of development plans in territories adjacent to EBMUD service area.
3. Presentation by EBMUD regarding seismic improvements and related funding.
4. Status of water rate issues and public review process.
PUBLIC COMMENT: The Board of Directors is limited by State law to accepting comments only on items appearing
on the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT:
The next regular meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled for 1:15 p.m. Tuesday, May 14,
1995 in the Administration Center Board Room, 375 Eleventh Street, Oakland, California.
w:w24spvc.96
SUMMARY OF
AGREEMENT TO SETTLE LITIGATION RELATING TO
THE DOUGHERTY VALLEY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT,SPECIFIC PLAN
AND ENVIRONMENTAL MACT REPORT
AND RELATING TO THE WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
AND ENVIRONMENTAL UWPACT REPORT
OF THE EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
The Board of Directors of East.Bay Municipal Utility District will be considering approval of a
proposed settlement agreement which sets forth the terms and conditions under which the district
would dismiss its lawsuit entitled EBMUD v.CmMV Contra Cog eta.,No.C93-00235,in Contra
Costa County Superior Court,challenging the county's appmval of a General Plan Amendment and
a Specific Plan for Dougherty Valley,and the environmental impact report on which such approval
was based. The settlement agreement also provides for dismissal of the lawsuit filed by Contra
Costa County,Windemere Ranch Partners,and Shapell Industries of Northern California challenging
the environmental impact report prepared by EBMUD for its Water Supply Management Program
adopted in October 1993. Provisions.of the agreement are summarized as follows:
.Section]. EARLY CONSULTATION BETWEEN EBMUD AND THE COUNTY
Under the agreement, EBMUD and the county would establish a regular meeting schedule for the
purpose of coordinating activities related to water supply planning and land use planning. A
notification and consultation process would be established to provide for early discussion and
exchange of information related to water demand of proposed new development,the availability of
water supply and system capacity to meet the demand,the impact on service to existing customers,
and availability of water supply sources to meet the needs of existing and future customers in the
county.
Section 2. CONFIRMATION OFSER WCE TO COUNTRY CLUB AT GALE RANCH
The agreement would confirm the provision of water service to the Country Club at Gale Ranch,
which is located within the district's cunt service boundaries, and further confirms that water
supply facilities will be sized to serve the Country Club at Gale Ranch only. EBMUD would agree
not to oppose annexation of school sites located near the Country Club at Gale Ranch development
and adjacent to the existing EBMUD boundary,provided that such school sites would be used only
for school and/or park purposes.
•1-
Sedion 3. DISMISSAL OF CHALLENGE 710 WSW
The agreement would provide for dismissal of the action filed by the county, Shapell and
Vrmdemere,challenging the adequacy of the environmental impact report for adoption of EBMUD's
Water Supply Management Program.
Section 4. DESIGNATION OFDSRSD AS PREFERRED WA7ER PROVIDER
The agreement would require Shapell and Windemere to continue to use best efforts to secure
permanent water service for the Dougherty Valley from the Dublin San Ramon Services District,
as an alternative to seeking water service from EBMUD. These efforts include contracts for the
transfer and delivery of water from Berrenda Mesa Water District to DSRSD, environmental
documentation,approval by applicable regulatory agencies,and LAFCO approval of annexation of
the Dougherty Valley property to DSRSD. In the event the proposed DSRSDBerrenda Mesa water
supply cannot be delivered using Zone 7 facilities, Shapell and Windemere will initiate efforts to
secure alternative methods of transfer and delivery,including design work for new DSRSD treatment
and conveyance facilities. If actions necessary to accomplish the Berreada Mesa transaction are not
completed by July 1, 1996,Windemere and Shapell will pursue efforts to obtain a water supply from
other sources,including other State Water Project contractors. Best efforts also include a significant
financial investment of$750,000 in efforts to secure an alternative supply for Dougherty Valley.
Section 4 of the agreement specifies terns, conditions and limitations which would apply in the
event that Shapell and Windermere are unsuccessful in securing an alternative water supply for
Dougherty Valley(having worked to do so in accordance with the provisions of the agreement),and
seek annexation for any portion of the Dougherty Valley to EBMUD. The terms, conditions and
limitations which would apply to such application for annexation to EBMUD are summarized as
follows:
(a) Shapell and Windemere would not submit an application to LAFCO for annexation to
EBMUD of Dougherty Valley property prior to July 1, 2000. EBMUD would not oppose such
application for annexation subject to the following conditions:
1) Shapell and Windemere have completed best efforts, as defined in the
agreement,to secure an alterative water supply,but have been unsuccessful;
2) water service for any portion of Dougherty Valley would be subject to an
offset fee to fund the cost of conservation programs or other methods
necessary to offset additional water demand created by new hook-ups in the
development. The offset fee would be calculated at 1.65 times the Future
Water Supply portion of the EBMUD System Capacity Charge in effect at
the time of payment. The offset fee would be paid no less than one year prior
to the issuance of the water meter in order that programs to offset the new
demand can be implemented in advance;
-2-
1
3) the number of new water service hook-ups per year would not exceed 600;
4) during any period in which the district has declared a drought emergency
pursuant to Water Code section 350, EBMUD would issue no new water
service hook-ups to the property,and there would be no application made to
LAFCO for annexation to EBMUD;and
5) EBMUD would not provide water service hook-ups within the annexed
Dougherty Valley property any time prior to January 1,2002.
(b) In order to allow for planning of facilities necessary to commence delivery of water service
after January 1, 2002, planning work could be undertaken at Shapell and Windemere's expense,
commencing January 1,2000,but such work would provide no assurance for the provision of water
service unless and until the property is annexed to EBMUD subject to the terms, limitations and
conditions of the agreement.
Sections. PROJECTS MUST BE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE RECLAIMED
WATER
The agreement would provide that EBMUD and the county will require that projects in Dougherty
Valley be designed and built to accept and utilize reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in public
and semi-public areas.
Section 6. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
The agreement would provide that any development agreements that may be adopted for Dougherty
Valley shall be consistent with the terms,conditions and limitations of the settlement agreement,and
any development agreement adopted for the property shall reference the terns and provisions of the
settlement agreement.
Section 7. RESOLUTION OFLAWSUIT RELATING TO THE 1992 APPROVALS
Based upon the terms of the settlement agreement,the parties would jointly seek modification of the
judgment and writ of mandate and/or dismissal of the Dougherty Valley lawsuit,thereby leaving the
1992 General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for Dougherty Valley in effect.
Section & DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS
This section would provide for an informal dispute resolution process,prior to initiation of litigation,
to resolve any dispute that may arise relating to the interpretation of,enforcement of,or compliance
with the terms of the settlement agreement.
-3.
s
Section 9. RULESAND REGULATIONS GOVERNING WATER SERVICE TO
CUSTOMERS OFEBMUD;FRUSTRATIONOFPURPOSES
This section would specify that water service provided to Dougherty Valley by EBMUD,pursuant
to the terms,conditions and limitations of the settlement agreement,would be subject to compliance
by Windemere and Shapell with the rules and regulations governing water service to customers of
EBMUD. This section would further provide that no party shall take any action which has the
purpose or effect of frustrating the purposes of the agreement or the exercise of rights conferred
under the agreement.
Section 10. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Under section 10 of the agreement,Shapell and Windemere would pay EBMUD attorneys' fees in
the amount of$194,000.
-4-
EXHIBIT A
PROCESS FOR NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION
CONCERNING LAND USE AND WATER SERVICE MATTERS
EBMUD and Contra Costa County are jointly committed to improving coordination of
Water Service planning with Land Use planning and decision making. To the end of
improving such coordination the Contra Costa Community Development Department
shall provide notification to EBMUD and shall consult with EBMUD concerning all
relevant applications for development which are filed with the County. Notification and
consultation shall occur in the manor below prescribed:
I. The County shall notify EBMUD of all applications for development within the
EBMUD current service boundary,sphere of influence boundary or where the county
anticipates EBMUD service might be requested or required either immediately or in the
future. Upon receipt by tate County of application,a referral shall be sent within one
week to EBMUD with sufficient detail to enable determination of the water supply
implications to EBMUD. The County will supply additional information as reasonably
requested by EBMUD to evaluate the water supply implications.
H. For all applications outside the EBMUD service boundary where the County
anticipates EBMUD service might be required and for any application involving an
amendment to the County General Plan inside the service boundary which EBMUD
determines to have significant impact upon its ability to supply water service to existing
customers,the County and EBMUD will coordinate their review and approval processes
with the objective of resolving or removing those aspects which create significant impact
upon EBMUD's ability to supply water to existing customers. EBMUD shall have a
minimum of 30 working days to provide comment and request formal coordination
pursuant to this paragraph
M. For all applications outside the EBMUD existing service boundary,the County
will insure that water supply planning and implications with respect to the EBMUD
existing and future customers within the existing EBMUD service area are integrated into
the land use planning and environmental documentation.
EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
DATE: March 29, 1996
MEMO TO: Board of Directors
THROUGH: Dennis M.Di General Manager
FROM: John B.Lam
SUBJECT: Major w ervice Acti eport-April 1996
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memorandum is to keep the Board informed of ongoing planning and
development activities related to major projects that are largely within the District's current
service planning area, i.e. within the Ultimate Service Boundary(USB). Major new service
activity is monitored by both the New Business Office and the Water Distribution Planning
Division as a function of:
• applicant inquiries and requests for water service,
• review of tentative development maps and predecessor documents,
• review of environmental impact reports,
• LAFCO requests for transfer of jurisdiction and notices regarding requests for
annexations/reorganization,and
• review of general and specific plan updates.
SUMMARY
Major development projects in progress have a potential impact on the District's water demand
and distribution system. These projects,both inside and outside the USB are listed in
alphabetical order in the Major New Service Activity Reports,Attachments Al and A2
respectively. Information regarding schedule and anticipated facility requirements is also
provided when known. The projects are located geographically on two figures entitled"Location
of Major New Service Affecting EBMUD Planning Area,"Attachments B 1 and B2.
Board of Directors
March 29, 1996
Page 2
New projects added to the list since the last bwa mittal to the Board are presented with shaded
highlight for ease of referral. Updated information on previously listed projects is identified with
an asterisk. Projects that have no recent development activity will be deleted from the next
report and can be identified with a bold note in the"Comments"section of the current report.
DISCUSSION
For planning purposes,major new service activity is generally defined as residential project with
50 or more units,commercial projects with 50,000 or more square feet of floor space, and any
development that requires either annexation or major facilities(i.e.storage,pumping and/or
transmission improvements)as a condition of service.
Several development projects are still in the proposal phase and have yet to receive approval
from local planning entities. Consequently,the final size and nature of some of the projects will
change during the course of the planning and environmental review process.
JBL:DJR:djr
WAWDPD4*W0RNEW.WPD
Attachments
Al and A2 Major New Service Activity Reports
Bl and B2 - Location of Major New Service
Affecting EBMUD Planning Area
CD
Q M
CL
j
CL 0
Is E �
� 1m
O W �
s �
r
m g
E € N
m
E � a 6U)w0�� bu :�
msr � g '
�N _ m— LD
Zp Q qE pie �' wu� NIN
� mCC a�
Z W O O
V � Vg � ' o a
N�inNh�D �
WoI m �� z SASS , O
0
o aZFa � ingwMI c,
V W �+
O
r C O O
H= it
8� E I EE
r E
Q V
n
QQC N
1YN OL73N fAOOtA C
N
O
C 4a
� O
h V Z m
d
m
a�
f
d I �• p 111 Y p i+ ° $ _ Q
Nd r°
SIA Ills J X%
w
a 5 VL .
f
WO
VS
af
u 10 "t t ''o + o
!zj
°
+ � W
eta 7 rw
. m a
7 f ; w
7
00 � y
V rto � O
N �V �
m
y u, OO Z s]LO r
9 a
oS Q
y
Q
0 -SEA
Q �
e8� h� g �
«
� F$ o �
b O W m
z w
zNp
z0 *, 2 . « Jnr
zW � to o �
g V �
a6 � ¢LU
!�
W Wm C CLF ;; O
V > WW � F I« w� ppc oaf
Vk
V W �
Q c
z E.1
x 7
WO O C 9n- _
J W V N L1
v E I a A
`ou
::5
of Q
��C N a
Y�CV Ulu G .h.
CL
C �
N
C d
v Q
m
0 -0
q ro
v ai as
� N
� • 3
as
d
�pss�
Tp $
a
@ll
•�• N t � ~
a � tr- j
;Al �-
W
r.
w
W
v
i7� t• r B w � m eh u a @ � @
{�I
iC iG 1► � C � O C�` ids'S+
lilt � �� •� � gi� a �� �� C
� ZFa ��fl
o uW � O
µ, o
3
d C
N t @
L O w
o �
Wa4N � ZS
� d
O
gQ
v
m
a �
{p yWy
�°" '�Of Q1 •�yp
$mks ro Q as Fr
E " ° ��p=tot
Jaoz ��NQ � � � �•��'p �
V xX V U p m =t y xx
S a> a g ate° ti
p c AC
y w+ c
LSF h2 C ° mr°Di
Zm � �' m ; EEyoc�
ZwQ
V ¢ « ELL CL
Q V '► 71 c m m m m
w m mw � ` � 1° �'4EE o
C� � NW a mie_g' LL my��
g� 0�
mSa mmmEE to
Vw c s ac
a = W a
TL °
: Fl U -
Vl a
� p m
o«N.EN aCYQ
v
C
a a V m
.,1 A Q ¢ ¢ C
V �+ C
�¢N 0 U) F
C �
q
d
a
♦ t = d C� Cl?
B
�t
C O�
uo v �r 3
• • 3
m
Q oh
4 is os
1.6
lit
a
sillm
M
� W.
1E
V Cm �a m E h g 0x $
Wow=
11 -6 Em8
..
Q � � y a�3 m m= 2
� o�
Q O OD N 43 00 L c+
g �
Z Y1
c
V W Y d V r 0 «Z7 « N W t� . . V r � � N
c
10
O 0` q m H c 7 g L O
t yep ;,v E _ $,� aa� m
11�� aoc �g ��
U'v+'ouen d
OQ h m uc L6
E cr
ii W y o a m
C m N N « ae
v3 E n a m E ami
Iv
e
ObOtun NGS III � low
C
ro
N
O
Cc
� d
Q CD
_ �
�v� � QQU �€ m « oc �,gv� � Q
Q def II Sz°� 3 � � C � e °
m «Q
w
'6�2
omit 3 3 G7 3N m SU)
�caft _ �
cr)J9
O O E
W q
5g 0y rqo� Noo N
W O W iC C W q 0 o O
$n € « Gq �
mQ S O O r 10
yZ � � � o vmaaua� d
zr J Q
V
LLI
� Q ~O
W
Z
«To V N .Q
o
O muuw W=ON
d
a .!r
O
t m
g o �
W $ c 3
• • 3
m
r
K�
Q
g�� s
m � G
u'
V g o t1n
40
ail W-t. r-
dllL
4 g
g c Ns�
f �q �CID
so
a� o
0
aS w Y Itsus rh
�p'`o s
a c
it
d O.
M t Ii1
I ¢f
mQ L
itsi
� s
B
�ism
m
rc6
.0t
v 0) A
~ N
V,PC-)
MI
lots
10
,Ot
ud 8 � y
�d
t Z �3.'
w
s a+
Y,
ton ? 3
v3
f�
Q a)
S �= " keV
44
WE
� M
SE 'S-
a w
QZ dl mU�
OM
W G
Q �M LO
LU
V � p
000m =
Vaow apt
; .
c
it
z �' �
� Q
fC V W °
a "
Q V W W 1 ;
N
"
YEN •O`
� c a
.+ C am z
N
.° a
•E � o
c m
QQ Q, m
E
m
v a
0
• • 3