1995 Urban Water Management Plan Review Summary

Introduction

The Urban Water Management Planning Act required that urban water suppliers submit an urban water management plan by December 31, 1995. The Department of Water Resources began receiving urban water management plans in mid-1995. During the following three years, 315 California water suppliers submitted urban water management plans. Water suppliers of various sizes submitted plans to DWR. These plans varied in the scope of their discussions.

This report summarizes the review conducted by DWR of the 1995 Urban Water Management Plans prepared by California urban water suppliers. This report includes (1) a brief summary of the requirements of the law, (2) procedures used by DWR in evaluating the plans, (3) results of the review, and (4) suggestions for future actions.

Requirements of the Law

General Provisions
In 1983, State Assembly Bill 797, modified the California Water Code, Division 6, by creating the Urban Water Management Planning Act. The UWMPA states that urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more connections or that deliver at least 3,000 acre-feet of water supplies annually are required to prepare urban water management plans.

Except for a few minor changes, DWR’s role in the water management planning process has not changed since passage of the original law in 1983. DWR receives the UWMPs, and prepares and submits a report to the Legislature summarizing the plan status and outstanding plan elements. DWR must also prepare reports and provide data, as necessary, for legislative hearings designed to consider the effectiveness of submitted UWMPs. State Assembly Bill 116, enacted into law in 1995 and amended in 1996, instructed DWR to postpone the preparation of the report to the Legislature through 1999.

Requirements for the 1995 Plans
Since 1990, water suppliers have had to describe historic, current and future supplies and demands for water. They have described deficiencies in times of drought and emergency, and their ability to meet these deficiencies. Plans have reported on several conservation measures including, but not limited to, consumer education, metering, water saving fixtures and appliances, pool covers, lawn and garden irrigation techniques, and low water use landscaping.

Several amendments have been made to the original UWMPA, which have increased the data requirements and planning elements to be included in the 1995 plans. There are new provisions about recycled water supply and use, new demand management measures, and a water shortage contingency plan must be included with the plan.

Since 1990, a number of water suppliers have become members of the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) and implement water conservation programs and policies known as the Urban Best Management Practices. These water suppliers prepare annual reports that are submitted to the CUWCC in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California. The UWMPA was amended to permit CUWCC members to attach copies of the annual reports to their UWMPs to document their water conservation program activities.

Water Management Plan Preparation and Review Process

To perform the UWMP reviews, DWR gathered staff from its headquarters and each of its districts. This team of individuals came together to assist in the development of water management plans. In 1995, DWR staged a series of workshops for all interested water suppliers and consultants to explain the requirements of the 1995 version of the UWMPA. A number of water suppliers also received individualized technical assistance to complete their plans. In addition, DWR developed and distributed a sample urban water management plan.

In preparation for the plan submittals, DWR developed two standardized review forms. One review form is for water supply and use statistics, and another is for water conservation measures. The standardized forms helped to ensure consistency among the various review staff. These review forms also enabled staff the flexibility to account for regional variations.

For the water supply and use statistics, DWR based its review criteria on the individual provisions for each plan element. The reviewers then determined if the UWMPs addressed or did not address elements.

DWR reviewed each of the water conservation elements. The UWMPA states that each water conservation element must meet the same provisions of the UWMPA. The reviewers checked to verify whether the water supplier discussed each of these provisions for each water conservation measure.

The review results were entered in a database. The data was aggregated and reports to water suppliers were prepared and distributed.

Results of the Reviews

As of January 1, 1999, 315 of from the over 420 water suppliers required to prepare plans had submitted UWMP’s to DWR. DWR had two goals when reviewing the UWMPs. The first was to prepare the summary data for the report to the legislature. The other was to gather data to help guide DWR with the local assistance it provides to water suppliers.

Table 1 summarizes the results of the water supply and use, and water shortage contingency planning elements addressed in the plans. This table breaks down the provisions of the law into eight elements. Two elements need special attention. The first is Recycled Water Opportunities. Only those water suppliers that expected to experience a reduced supply in the near future were required to provide data for this section. Seventy-four water suppliers provided information about recycled water opportunities.

Table 1
Summary Elements and Subelements
Included / Not Included / Total
Plan Adoption, Public Participation, Coordination with Others, History and Facilities
Coordination with other water suppliers and public agencies / 207 / 108 / 315
Evidence of community participation / 72 / 243 / 315
Public meeting notice/meeting held / 196 / 119 / 315
Resolution to adopt the 1995 Urban Water Management Plan / 216 / 99 / 315
Rate and Financial Information
Analysis of financial impacts of water shortages / 149 / 166 / 315
Penalties/charges for excessive use / 207 / 108 / 315
Sewer rate information / 57 / 258 / 315
Water rate structure and information / 224 / 91 / 315
Recycled Water Opportunities
Current/potential recycled water customers / 37 / 37 / 74
Description of wastewater collection and treatment / 46 / 28 / 74
Does the agency have a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water? / 34 / 40 / 74
Does the agency provide financial incentives to recycled water customers? / 16 / 58 / 74
Volume of recycled water collected / 35 / 37 / 72
Supply and Demand Comparison for 1975 to 2015
Comprehensive water balance to 2015? / 158 / 157 / 315
Three-Year Worst Case Supply Projection
Does the projection consider past shortages in conjunction with present and/or future demand? / 165 / 150 / 315
Estimate of minimum supply at the end of 12, 24 and 36 months, assuming worst case water supply shortages / 160 / 155 / 315
Water Shortage Contingency Analysis
Consumption limits - demand reduction program / 3
Consumption limits - flow restrictions / 9
Consumption limits - penalty for metered customers / 14
Consumption limits - per capita allotment / 97
Consumption limits - percentage reduction / 197
Consumption limits - reduce pressure in water lines / 2
Consumption limits - restrict building permits / 1
Consumption limits - surcharge/rate charges for excess use / 6
Consumption limits - warnings / 1
Consumption limits - water shortage pricing / 170
Monitoring mechanisms / 208 / 107 / 315
Resolution to declare a water shortage / 192 / 123 / 315
Stages and triggering mechanisms up to 50% reduction of supply / 207 / 108 / 315
Water Supply History and Forecast
1975-1990 water supply history / 208 / 107 / 315
1995-2015 future water supply / 213 / 102 / 315
Water Use History and Forecast: 1975 to 2015
1975-1990 water use history by customer sectors / 152 / 163 / 315
1995-2015 future water use by customer sectors / 191 / 124 / 315

The other element to focus on is the Water Shortage Contingency Analysis, Consumption Reduction Methods. The law does not specify which methods should be discussed in the urban water management plan. Water suppliers could discuss whatever methods they prefer. Therefore, none of the consumption reduction methods includes any numbers in the "Not Included" or "Total" columns.

Table 2 summarizes the findings of the water conservation measures. Findings indicate that at least 50 percent of the water suppliers are implementing 12 of the 16 water conservation measures. The four water conservation measures that have less than 50% water suppliers implementation are:

  • Large Landscapes and Water Audits and Incentives
  • Commercial and Industrial Water Conservation
  • New Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Water Use Review
  • Financial Incentives

Table 2
Summary of Best Management Practices
BMP / Best Management Practices / Implementing / Not Implementing / Total
1 / Interior and Exterior Water Audits for Single Family and Multi-Family Customers / 165 / 150 / 315
2 / New and Retrofit Plumbing / 238 / 77 / 315
3 / Distribution System Water Audits, Leak Detection and Repair / 211 / 104 / 315
4 / Metering with Commodity Rates / 265 / 50 / 315
5 / Large Landscapes and Water Audits and Incentives / 144 / 171 / 315
6 / Landscape Water Conservation / 200 / 115 / 315
7 / Public Information / 295 / 20 / 315
8 / School Education / 260 / 55 / 315
9 / Commercial and Industrial Water Conservation / 140 / 175 / 315
10 / New Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Water Use Review / 147 / 168 / 315
11 / Conservation Pricing / 205 / 110 / 315
12 / Landscape Water Conservation for New and Existing Single Family Homes / 193 / 122 / 315
13 / Water Waste Prohibition / 229 / 86 / 315
14 / Water Conservation Coordinator / 224 / 91 / 315
15 / Financial Incentives / 120 / 195 / 315
16 / Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Replacement / 179 / 136 / 315

Implementation - Reported can be any level of implementation, or another agency is implementing this BMP.
Implementation - Not Reported could mean that there is an exemption, the BMP is not applicable, or the agency is not implementing the BMP.

The second goal of analyzing the review results is to assess if there are any obvious patterns that will assist DWR with providing future local assistance. In addition to targeting the content where suppliers need assistance, DWR attempted to target water suppliers by size. DWR staff plotted water supplier size against the content of plan. The line of best fit was then calculated, and it was determined that the size of a water supplier is not related to the content of an UWMP. Figure 1 shows that there was no relationship between the size of a water supplier and the number of plan elements that were addressed in their UWMPs. A small water supplier was just as likely to discuss a particular water supply element as was a large water supplier.

Suggestions

DWR received plans from approximately 75% of the California water suppliers subject to the UWMPA. The experiences of DWR staff from reviewing these plans have highlighted a variety of areas where DWR may focus future local assistance.

It appears that there were several cases in which confusion arose. Some water suppliers did not understand the provisions of the UWMPA, concluded that an item of the Act did not apply to their agency, or conveyed information that differed from what DWR reviewers expected. This resulted in initial reviews of "Not Reported or Not Implemented." DWR staff was often able to correct these initial reviews after discussion with the water supplier.

To improve the review process in the future, DWR will increase efforts to contact water suppliers who did not prepare plans in 1995, and to provide technical assistance to water suppliers in need of support. DWR staff will update the sample plan and provide worksheets and checklists to help create UWMPs. Review criteria will be rewritten to become as objective as possible and DWR will continue to closely cooperate with the California Urban Water Conservation Council.