[Senate Hearing 110-460]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-460
CURRENT WATER BILLS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 2259 H.R. 1140
H.R. 31 H.R. 1503
H.R. 716 H.R. 1725
H.R. 786 H.R. 1737
H.R. 813 H.R. 2614
__________
APRIL 8, 2008
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
43-951 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
RON WYDEN, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington BOB CORKER, Tennessee
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
JON TESTER, Montana MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
Frank Macchiarola, Republican Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Republican Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Water and Power
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota, Chairman
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota BOB CORKER, Tennessee
RON WYDEN, Oregon LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
JON TESTER, Montana JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
Jeff Bingaman and Pete V. Domenici are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator From South Dakota................ 1
Polly, Kris, Deputy Commissioner for External &
Intergovernmental Affairs, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of
the Interior................................................... 2
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 15
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 17
CURRENT WATER BILLS
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Water and Power,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:37 p.m., in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tim Johnson
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH
DAKOTA
Senator Johnson. I have called this hearing for the Water
and Power Subcommittee. It is my pleasure to welcome everyone
here this afternoon.
Today's hearing is relatively straightforward. Pending
before the subcommittee are 10 bills that seek to authorize new
projects under the Bureau of Reclamation's water reuse and
recycling program, otherwise known as the Title 16 program. The
BOR is involved in assessing feasibility of each of these
projects, and today we will hear the results of BOR's
evaluation.
All the bills before this subcommittee today, except one,
involve communities in California. I will briefly summarize
these bills for the record.
One, S. 2259 and its companion H.R. 813, the Santa Ana
River Water Supply Enhancement Act.
Two, H.R. 31, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
Recycled Water Act.
Three, H.R. 716, the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Act.
Four, H.R. 786, authorizing a water supply demonstration
project in Los Angeles County.
Five, H.R. 1140, the South Orange County Recycled Water
Enhancement Act.
Six, H.R. 1503, an Arizona bill authorizing the Avra/Black
Wash Riparian Restoration Project.
Seven, H.R. 1725, the Rancho California Water District
Recycled Water Act.
Eight, H.R. 1737, the city of Oxnard Water Recycling and
Desalination Act.
Nine, H.R. 2614, authorizing recycling projects for the
Yucaipa Valley Water District and the city of Corona,
California.
These bills demonstrate the popularity of the Title 16
program. Communities of all sizes are striving to improve the
efficiency with which they use water in order to address long-
term needs. The subcommittee's goal is to ensure that any
legislation that moves forward is consistent with the purpose
of the Title 16 program and supports the projects that are
technically and economically viable. I, therefore, look forward
to learning more about these projects during today's hearing.
Since there are no Senators otherwise in attendance, we
will now turn to the sole witness for today's hearing.
Representing the administration is Kris Polly, the Deputy
Commissioner for External and Intergovernmental Affairs with
the Bureau of Reclamation. Welcome and thank you for being
here, Mr. Polly.
Before starting, I would like to quickly note that the
subcommittee has received additional written testimony on
several of the bills before us today. That testimony, as well
as the written submission of Mr. Polly, will be made part of
the official hearing record.
Senator Johnson. Mr. Polly, please go ahead and summarize
your written testimony. Following that, we will have a brief
question and answer period.
STATEMENT OF KRIS POLLY, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR EXTERNAL &
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR
Mr. Polly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Kris Polly, Deputy
Commissioner for the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department's views on nine bills which
would amend Title 16 of Public Law 102-575, the Reclamation
Wastewater and Groundwater Study Act.
For the reasons described below, the Department cannot
support these bills.
H.R. 813 would authorize the Secretary to participate in
several projects in southern California.
Section 2 of the bill authorizes the Secretary to
participate in the planning and construction of treatment
systems and wetlands for the flows of the Santa Ana River into
the Prado Basin. The bill authorizes an appropriation of $20
million to carry out this function.
On March 18, 2007, Reclamation approved the feasibility
study for this project and deemed two of the four component
treatment systems feasible. The remaining two systems will be
addressed upon completion of ongoing studies.
Section 3 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the
Interior to assist local agencies and projects to construct
regional brine lines to export salinity to the Pacific Ocean.
Section 4 of the bill authorizes the Secretary to
participate in the planning and construction of the Lower Chino
Dairy Area Desalination Demonstration and Reclamation Project.
Reclamation approved the feasibility study associated with the
project on November 28, 2006, and deemed it to be feasible.
The Department is concerned that under section 4, the
legislation proposes a cost sharing of 25 percent, or $50
million. The Department does not believe there is justification
to support assigning a cap higher than the current $20 million
for this project and strongly opposes this provision.
For these reasons, the Department cannot support H.R. 813.
H.R. 31 would authorize Interior to participate in the
planning and construction of facilities to treat and distribute
recycled water within the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District service area. H.R. 31 provides a Federal funding of 25
percent of the total project cost, or $12.5 million, whichever
is less.
The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District is heavily
dependent on imported water provided by the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California. In order to lessen this
dependence and provide for future growth, the district is
developing plans for recycled water systems in the Alberhill
and Wildomar areas. The Alberhill system consists of the
wastewater treatment facility and distribution system including
pumps, pipelines, and storage facilities. A preliminary
construction cost estimate for the Alberhill system is $38.5
million. The Wildomar system also consists of pumps, pipelines,
and storage facilities. The total estimated cost of the
Wildomar system is about $19 million.
Reclamation determined the Wildomar project to be feasible
on November 15, 2007. The Alberhill system has not been
reviewed.
H.R. 716 would authorize the Secretary to participate in
the planning and construction of the Santa Rosa Urban Water
Reuse Plan. Under the proposed legislation, costs incurred by
the city of Santa Rosa prior to the date of enactment would be
credited by the Secretary toward the total cost of the Santa
Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan. Reclamation is working with the
city to develop a feasibility study, but Reclamation has not
yet determined the feasibility of this project.
The project envisioned in H.R. 786 involves infiltration of
storm water runoff to recharge the groundwater basin in the Los
Angeles and San Gabriel watersheds.
The Department believes that it is not necessary to
specifically authorize a demonstration project under Title 16
since section 1605 already provides authority to participate in
demonstration projects. Further, Congress appropriated $492,000
for this demonstration project in fiscal year 2008, and
Reclamation has already begun participation in this project.
H.R. 1140 would authorize planning and construction for two
projects.
Section 2 of the bill deals with the San Juan Capistrano
Recycled Water System, with a Federal cost share not to exceed
25 percent and a funding authorization of $18.5 million.
Reclamation reviewed this project as part of the CALFED Title
16 review and found the information submitted for this project
lacks six of the nine requirements needed to determine
feasibility. Absent these items, Reclamation cannot determine
the feasibility of this project.
Section 2 of the bill would also authorize the San Clemente
Reclaimed Water Project. The local district has not been in
consultation with Reclamation, nor has Reclamation received any
copies of a feasibility study to support the authorization of
this project.
H.R. 1503 would authorize the Secretary to participate in
the planning and construction of a water recycling facility to
enhance and restore riparian habitat in the Black Wash Sonoran
Desert Ecosystem in Avra Valley, Arizona. H.R. 1503 provides
for Federal funding of 25 percent of the total project cost, or
$14 million, whichever is less.
Pima County intends to expand its 1.5 million gallon per
day wastewater treatment facility to a capacity of 5 million
gallons per day. Currently treated effluent is not reused. The
proposed project would provide tertiary treatment and establish
procedures to recharge the reclaimed water in ponds and the
Black Wash. Recharging the water in the channel of Black Wash
will create and preserve wildlife habitat.
The Department supports efforts to increase reclaimed water
use in southern Arizona. Reclamation has been working with Pima
County to review the technical, regulatory, and contractual
issues involved in the project. The discussions have been
preliminary. To date, steps necessary to prepare a feasibility
report have not been discussed.
H.R. 1725 would authorize participation in the planning and
the construction of the Rancho California Water District's
facilities for water recycling, desalination, and distribution
of non-potable water supplies.
The Rancho California Water District is heavily dependent
on imported water provided by the Metropolitan District of
Southern California. In order to lessen this dependence, the
district has developed a regional integrated resources plan.
Together, the component projects would expand local water
resources by increasing conjunctive use, expanding the use of
recycled water, and substituting untreated water for the
treated water that is currently being used for agricultural
irrigation.
Implementation of the plan would require the construction
of pipelines, pumping plants, an advanced water treatment
facility, and brine disposal facilities. Reclamation, in
collaboration with the district, recently completed work on a
feasibility study, and on November 15, 2007, deemed this
project feasible.
In fiscal year 2008, Congress appropriated $123,000 for
this project. Using these funds, Reclamation is working with
the Rancho California Water District to complete compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act for this project.
H.R. 1737 would authorize participation in the planning and
construction of the Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and
Treatment Project, also known as the GREAT project, which would
reclaim impaired water in the area of Oxnard, California.
The GREAT project consists of three parts: one, a regional
groundwater desalination facility; two, a recycled water system
to serve agricultural water users and to protect groundwater
sources from saltwater intrusion; and three, a brine line that
will convey desalination concentrates to an enhanced saltwater
wetland.
Reclamation currently is reviewing the feasibility study
submitted by the city of Oxnard for this project.
H.R. 2614 would authorize the planning and construction of
two projects that treat impaired surface water, reclaim and
reuse impaired groundwater and wastewater, and provide brine
disposal in the State of California.
First, this bill would authorize the Yucaipa Valley
Regional Water Supply Renewal Project. Reclamation has reviewed
the facility and the feasibility study submitted by the Yucaipa
Valley Water District, and this project was deemed feasible on
March 26, 2008.
H.R. 2614 would also authorize the city of Corona Water
Utility, Water Recycling, and Reuse Project. Reclamation has
reviewed the feasibility study submitted by the city of Corona.
Based on the technical information provided, Reclamation cannot
determine the feasibility of this project and additional
information has been requested from the city.
In closing, I would like to note that of the 35 Title 16
projects specifically authorized and the 2 demonstration
projects undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects
are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal cost
share for the active projects, after fiscal ear 2008, is nearly
$400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects
currently not being pursued is an estimated $220 million.
Given Reclamation's current annual budget of approximately
$900 million, this is not an insubstantial number. In light of
this fact and the substantial Federal cost share associated
with the active Title 16 projects, we cannot support the
authorization of new projects at this time.
While the Department is not able to support new project
authorizations, we certainly understand the projects
established by Title 16 are important to many water users in
the West. To that end, Reclamation actually works with local
sponsors on feasibility reviews of Title 16 projects. By doing
so, we believe that Reclamation can play a constructive, albeit
limited, role with local sponsors in weighing the merits and
ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my comments. I would be happy
to answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Polly follow:]
h.r. 813
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department's views on HR 813, the Santa Ana
River Water Supply Enhancement Act of 2007. The Department does not
support this bill.
HR 813 would amend Title XVI, the Reclamation Wastewater and
Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior to participate in several projects.
Section 2 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, in
cooperation with the Orange County Water District, to participate in
the planning, design, and construction of the natural treatment systems
and wetlands for the flows of the Santa Ana River, California, and its
tributaries into the Prado Basin. Section 2 of the bill authorizes an
appropriation of $20 million to carry out this function. With regard to
this project, on March 18, 2007, Reclamation approved the feasibility
study and deemed two of the four component treatment systems feasible.
The remaining two systems will be addressed upon completion of ongoing
studies.
Section 3 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior,
under Federal reclamation law and in cooperation with units of local
government, to assist agencies in projects to construct regional brine
lines to export the salinity imported from the Colorado River to the
Pacific Ocean.
Section 4 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, in
cooperation with the Chino Basin Watermaster, the Inland Empire
Utilities Agency, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, acting
under Federal Reclamation laws, to participate in the design, planning,
and construction of the Lower Chino Dairy Area desalination
demonstration and reclamation project. With regard to this project,
Reclamation approved the feasibility study on November 28, 2006 and
deemed this project feasible.
These three projects would have to compete with other needs within
the Reclamation program for funding priority in the President's Budget.
In addition to the proposed three projects, the Department is also
concerned that under section 4, the legislation proposes a cost sharing
of 25 percent, not to exceed $50.0 million. The Department does not
believe there is justification to support assigning a cap higher than
$20.0 million, the cap for Title XVI projects enacted after 1996, and
strongly opposes this provision.
While the Department supports efforts to increase local water
supplies and increase recycled water use in California, the Department
does not support HR 813. The Department continues to believe it is not
prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal
cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively
pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The remaining
authorized Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008,
is nearly $400 million. The authorized Federal cost share for the 12
projects currently not being pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 813. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 31
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department of the Interior's views on HR 31, the
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wastewater and Recycled Water
Facilities Act. Although the Wildomar portion of this project has been
deemed technically feasible, the Department does not support HR 31.
HR 31 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study
and Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), to
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design,
planning, and construction of facilities needed to treat wastewater and
distribute recycled water within the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District's service area. It provides for Federal funding of 25 percent
of the total project cost or $12.5 million, whichever is less.
The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District is located in
southwestern Riverside County, which has been experiencing rapid
growth. The District is heavily dependent on imported water provided by
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. In order to
lessen this dependence and to provide for additional future growth, the
District is developing plans for recycled water systems in the
Alberhill and Wildomar areas.
The Alberhill system consists of a wastewater treatment facility
and distribution system, which includes pumps, pipelines, and storage
facilities. A preliminary construction cost estimate of the Alberhill
system is $38.5 million. The Wildomar system consists of a distribution
system which includes pumps, pipelines, and storage facilities. Total
estimated cost of the Wildomar system is about $19 million.
Reclamation has determined the Wildomar project to be feasible on
November 15, 2007. The Alberhill system has not been reviewed.
While the Department supports efforts to increase local water
supplies and increase recycled water use, we do not support HR 31.
These projects would have to compete with other needs within the
Reclamation program for funding priority in the President's Budget. The
Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new
Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already
authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 31. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 716
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to
provide the Department of the Interior's views on HR 716, a bill to
authorize Reclamation to participate in the design, planning, and
construction of the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan. The Department
does not support HR 716.
HR 716 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study
and Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, Title XVI) to include the City
of Santa Rosa, California, Urban Water Reuse Plan. Under the proposed
legislation, costs incurred by the City of Santa Rosa prior to the date
of enactment would be credited by the Secretary toward the total cost
of the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan.
Reclamation is working with the City of Santa Rosa to develop a
feasibility study, but Reclamation has not yet determined the
feasibility of this project. I would like note that the Department does
support efforts to increase local water supplies and increase recycled
water use in the West; however, Title XVI provisions require that these
technical studies be completed and reviewed to determine the
feasibility and cost effectiveness. The Department believes this
legislation should not be enacted without a proper analysis to ensure
this project is feasible.
Further, H.R. 716 authorizes the appropriation of up to $20 million
or a maximum of 25 percent of total project costs, whichever is less.
This project would have to compete with other needs within the
Reclamation program for funding priority in the President's Budget. The
Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new
Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already
authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has
developed Directives and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI
projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can play a more
constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the merits and
ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
For the reasons noted above, the Department does not support HR
716. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions.
h.r. 786
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department's views on HR 786, the Los Angeles
County Water Supply Augmentation Demonstration Project. The Department
does not support this legislation. It is not necessary to specifically
authorize a demonstration project under Title XVI of P.L. 102-575, as
amended, since Section 1605 already provides authority to participate
in demonstration projects. We are already implementing this proposed
project using funds appropriated in FY 2008.
The project that HR 786 would involve infiltration of storm water
runoff to recharge the groundwater basin in the Los Angeles and San
Gabriel Watersheds. The project consists of a neighborhood
demonstration project that would demonstrate the potential for
infiltration of storm water runoff to recharge groundwater by
retrofitting one or more sites in the Los Angeles Area with state-of-
the-art best management practices and perform pre-development and post-
development monitoring to assess the resulting potential new water
supply.
This project was jointly developed by the Los Angeles and San
Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council, City of Los Angeles Department of
Water and Power, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Los
Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, Water Replenishment District of
Southern California, City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, and the
City of Santa Monica Environmental Programs Division, with technical
input from Reclamation. Project benefits include local drought
protection, water quality improvements and reduced dependence on
imported water.
HR 786 would authorize Reclamation to participate in planning,
design, construction and assessment of a demonstration project. The
legislation does not specify an authorization of appropriations amount,
but provides that the Federal share should not exceed 25 percent of
project costs. However, since Section 1605 of Title XVI already
authorizes the Secretary to construct, operate, and maintain
demonstration projects, and since Congress has appropriated $492,000
for this demonstration project in Fiscal Year 2008, Reclamation has
already initiated participation in this project. Because of other
priorities in the President's Budget, we have not included funding for
this project in our FY 2009 budget.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 786. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 1140
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am here today to
present the views of the Department of the Interior on HR 1140, a bill
to authorize water recycling projects in Southern California. HR 1140
would amend Title XVI, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study
and Facilities Act (P.L. 102-575) to include design, planning, and
construction authority for two local projects. For reasons described
below, the Department does not support HR 1140.
HR 1140, as written, would amend Title XVI to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and
construction of two water recycling projects in south Orange County in
the State of California.
Section 2 of the bill would authorize the San Juan Capistrano
Recycled Water System, with a Federal cost share not to exceed 25
percent, and a funding authorization of appropriation of $18.5 million.
Reclamation reviewed this project as part of the CALFED/TitleXVI review
and found the information submitted for this project lacked 6 of the 9
requirements needed to determine feasibility. Absent these items,
Reclamation could not determine the feasibility of the project. This
does not mean the project is not feasible, but rather that until the
six remaining items are completed, Reclamation cannot provide a
feasibility determination.
Section 2 of the bill would also authorize the San Clemente
Reclaimed Water Project. The local district has not been in
consultation with Reclamation nor has Reclamation received any copies
of a feasibility study to support the authorization of this project.
Without a proper analysis to ensure this project meets appropriate
federal guidelines for consideration of construction authorization, we
cannot support Reclamation's participation in the planning, design and
construction activities.
While the Department supports efforts to increase local water
supplies and increase recycled water use, we do not support H.R. 1140.
This project would have to compete with other needs within the
Reclamation program for funding priority in the President's Budget. The
Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new
Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already
authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes by testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 1140. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 1503
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department of the Interior's views on HR 1503,
the Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration Project Act.
The Department does not support HR 1503.
H.R. 1503 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
Study and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and
construction of water recycling facilities to enhance and restore
riparian habitat in the Black Wash Sonoran Desert ecosystem in Avra
Valley, west of the metropolitan Pima County area in Arizona. It
provides for Federal funding of 25 percent of the total project cost or
$14 million, whichever is less.
Pima County intends to expand the 1.5 million gallon per day
wastewater treatment facility to a capacity of 5 mgd. Currently,
treated effluent is not reused. The proposed project would provide
tertiary treatment and establish procedures to recharge the reclaimed
water in ponds and the Black Wash. The treated effluent that was
previously evaporated would instead recharge the aquifer, and state law
would allow this recharge to be measured and stored as credits to be
pumped at a later date. By recharging the water in the channel of Black
Wash, riparian and wildlife habitat will be created, preserved and
protected. The project includes plans to provide baseline ecological
reconnaissance for monitoring of diversity and ecological health of the
site.
The Department supports efforts to increase reclaimed water use in
southern Arizona. Reclamation has been working with Pima County to
review the technical, regulatory and contractual issues involved in the
project but discussions have been preliminary. To date, the steps
necessary to prepare a feasibility report that meet the requirements
for feasibility of Title XVI projects have not been discussed. Because
the technical studies are not complete, the feasibility and cost
effectiveness of this project cannot be determined.
In addition, while the Department supports efforts to increase
local water supplies and increase recycled water use, we do not support
H.R. 1503. The Department continues to believe it is not prudent to
authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share
already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued.
This project would have to compete with other needs within the
Reclamation program for funding priority in the President's Budget.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on H.R. 1503. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 1725
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department of the Interior's views on HR 1725,
the Rancho California Water District Recycled Water Treatment and
Reclamation Facility Act. Although the project has been deemed
technically feasible, the Department does not support HR 1725.
HR 1725 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
Study and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and
construction of the Rancho California Water District's facilities for
water recycling, demineralization, desalination, and distribution of
non-potable water supplies in Riverside County, California.
The Rancho California Water District is located in southwestern
Riverside County, which has been experiencing explosive growth. The
District is heavily dependent on imported water provided by the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. In order to lessen
this dependence the District has developed a Regional Integrated
Resources Plan that includes three components. Together, the component
projects will expand local water resources by increasing conjunctive
use by about 13,000 acre-feet per year, expanding the use of recycled
water by about 16,000 acre-feet per year, and substituting untreated
water for the treated water that is currently being used for
agricultural irrigation. Implementation of the Regional Integrated
Resources Plan would require the construction of pipelines, pumping
plants, an advanced water treatment facility, and brine disposal
facilities. The total estimated cost is about $350 million.
Reclamation, in collaboration with the District, recently completed
work on a feasibility study and, on November 15, 2007, deemed this
project feasible. In Fiscal Year 2008, Congress appropriated $123,000
for this project. Using these funds, Reclamation is working with the
Rancho California Water District to complete compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for this project.
H.R. 1725 authorizes the appropriation of up to $20 million or a
maximum of 25 percent of total project costs, whichever is less. The
Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies and
increase recycled water use in southern California. However, this
project would have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation
program for funding priority in the President's Budget. While we are
committed to working with the District to address its water supply
needs, the Department continues to believe it is not prudent to
authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share
already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 1725. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 1737
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be
here today to give the Department's views on HR 1737, the City of
Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act of 2007. Due to the reasons
outlined below, the Department cannot support this legislation.
HR 1737 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
Study and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.) to authorize the
Secretary to participate in the design, planning, and construction of
permanent facilities for the Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and
Treatment (GREAT) project, which would reclaim impaired water in the
area of Oxnard, located in Ventura County, California. It provides for
Federal funding of 25 percent of the total project cost or $20 million,
whichever is less.
The City of Oxnard, Port Hueneme Water Agency, United Water
Conservation District, and Calleguas Municipal Water District have
jointly developed the GREAT project, which consists of three parts: (1)
a regional groundwater desalination facility; (2) a recycled water
system to serve agricultural water users and to protect groundwater
sources from seawater intrusion; and (3) a brine line that will convey
desalination concentrates to an enhanced saltwater wetland. Project
benefits include local drought protection and reduced dependence on
imported water.
Mr. Chairman, the Department supports efforts to increase local
water supplies, including brackish groundwater desalination and
reclaimed water use, in southern California. However, HR 1737 would
authorize the design and construction of the project before the
feasibility study is completed. Reclamation prefers that feasibility
studies be completed first to determine whether a particular project
warrants Federal construction authorization.
With regard to this specific project, Reclamation currently is
reviewing the feasibility study submitted by the City of Oxnard for
this project. Therefore, the Department believes the legislation to be
premature and cannot support HR 1737 at this time. This project would
have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for
funding priority in the President's budget. The Department continues to
believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light
of the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects now
being actively pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 1737. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
h.r. 2614
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly,
Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. I am here today to
present the views of the Department of the Interior on HR 2614, a bill
to authorize water supply, reclamation reuse and recycling, and
desalination projects in Southern California. HR 2614 would amend Title
XVI, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities
Act (P.L. 102-575) to include design, planning, and construction
authority for two specific projects. For reasons described below, the
Department does not support HR 2614.
HR 2614, as written, would authorize the design, planning, and
construction of projects to treat impaired surface water, reclaim and
reuse impaired groundwater and wastewater, and provide brine disposal
in the State of California.
Specifically, this bill would authorize the Yucaipa Valley Regional
Water Supply Renewal Project. Reclamation has reviewed the feasibility
study submitted by the Yucaipa Valley Water District. Based on the
technical information provided, Reclamation could not determine the
feasibility of the project, and additional information was requested.
The District recently submitted the additional information, and
Reclamation's final analysis of the project's feasibility is expected
soon.
HR 2614 would also authorize the City of Corona Water Utility,
California Water Recycling and Reuse Project. Reclamation has reviewed
the feasibility study submitted by the City of Corona. Based on the
technical information provided, Reclamation could not determine the
feasibility of the project, and additional information has been
requested from the City. This does not mean the project is not
feasible, but rather that until the remaining information is reviewed,
Reclamation cannot provide a feasibility determination.
Mr. Chairman, the Department supports efforts to increase local
water supplies and increase recycled water use in southern California.
However, HR 2614 would authorize the design and construction of these
projects before the feasibility study is completed. Reclamation prefers
that feasibility studies be completed first to determine whether these
particular projects warrant Federal construction authorization. The
Department believes this legislation is premature and does not support
HR 2614.
In addition, H.R. 2614 authorizes the appropriation of up to $20
million or a maximum of 25 percent of total project costs, whichever is
less, for each of these two projects. These projects would have to
compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding
priority in the President's Budget.
Moreover, the Department continues to believe it is not prudent to
authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share
already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued.
Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2
demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21
projects are actively being pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal
cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400
million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being
pursued is estimated at $220 million.
While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at
this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are
important to many water users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has
revised and improved its Directives and Standards that govern reviews
of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can
play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the
merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on HR 2614. I would be happy to answer any
questions at this time.
Senator Johnson. Mr. Polly, according to your testimony,
BOR has a backlog of about $400 million in Title 16 projects.
Yet, the President's 2009 budget requests only $7 million for
construction. This is a 70 percent reduction from the 2008
appropriations provided by Congress, which was $24 million.
In the face of increasing concerns about water
availability, whether due to draught, climate change,
environmental needs, or population increases, what is the
justification for the defunding of a successful program that
required a relatively low cost share and promotes water use
efficiency?
Mr. Polly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Title 16 program is an important program. It represents
new water. However, it is one program among many that the
Bureau of Reclamation and the Department has to divide our
limited resources to fund, and priorities are set accordingly.
Senator Johnson. Your testimony on H.R. 813 strongly
opposes a provision which would allow an increase in their
overall cap in the Lower Chino project to $50 million. The cap
in the Lower Chino project in its Senate counterpart, S. 2259,
is $26 million. The general cap on an individual Title 16
project under existing law is $20 million in October 1996
prices. If the $20 million cap is based on 1996 prices, what is
the cap in today's dollars?
Mr. Polly. Mr. Chairman, the cap is probably closer to $30
million. However, we will get you a thorough, comprehensive
answer for you and the committee.
Senator Johnson. S. 2259 calls for the establishment of a
center for technological advancements of membrane technology
and education in Orange County. Your written testimony does not
address this provision. What is the Department's position on
the establishment of the center?
Mr. Polly. Mr. Chairman, the Bureau of Reclamation has a
technical services center in Denver, Colorado that, among other
things, does desalination research. We also have a facility in
New Mexico called Tula rosa that specifically works on brackish
groundwater desalination. For those reasons, we did not think
an additional facility was necessary.
Senator Johnson. Your testimony indicates that the BOR is
already participating in the demonstration project that is the
subject of H.R. 786. This innovative approach to groundwater
recharge would seem to have potential application elsewhere.
Does BOR view this as a worthwhile project which warrants more
support?
Mr. Polly. Yes, it is a worthwhile project. However, our
participation is based on appropriations, and our priorities
have to be set according to our budget demands.
Senator Johnson. Three of the bills before this
subcommittee today involve desalination projects: S. 2259, H.R.
737, and H.R. 2614. Obviously, desalination must be
economically viable in southern California. Are the economics
associated with these projects unique to southern California,
or is desalination becoming viable in other areas of the
country?
Mr. Polly. Desalination is primarily of great interest to
those regions with very limited water supplies. It is our
understanding that in the private sector, the cost for
desalination ranges between $400 and $1,200 per acre foot. I
know at the Bureau of Reclamation's own desalination plant in
Yuma our costs are between $300 and $900 per acre foot.
Ultimately, the viability of desalination rests within the
pocketbook of the beholder.
Senator Johnson. Your testimony notes that the BOR has not
yet prepared a feasibility report for the Avra/Black Wash
project in Arizona and that the necessary technical studies
have not been completed. Has Pima County done any technical
work which it has submitted to the BOR for review? Does BOR
know the basis for the $14 million authorized for the project?
Mr. Polly. We have been in conversations with Pima County
since 2005. However, our conversations have been largely
conceptual. We have not discussed feasibility reports.
As to the $14 million, we cannot speak to that.
Senator Johnson. The status of the feasibility reviews for
several projects is not clear from your testimony. For example,
one, a regional brine line in H.R. 813; two, the Alberhill
project in H.R. 31; three, the Santa Rosa project in H.R. 716;
four, the Oxnard project in H.R. 1737; and five, the projects
in H.R. 2614.
Can you elaborate on the specific status of the pending
feasibility reviews or at least provide them for the record? If
and when BOR makes a positive feasibility determination on any
of these projects, will you ensure that the subcommittee is
informed?
Mr. Polly. Mr. Chairman, the status of the feasibility
studies are the subject of ongoing conversations between our
people in the field and the project sponsors. So we are happy
to obtain that information and provide a comprehensive answer
to you and the committee.
As for reporting on the status of those feasibility studies
once they are complete, our history has always been to send a
letter to the project sponsors to inform them their project has
become feasible, and we are happy to provide that same
information to the committee, should the project sponsors and
the committee wish that.
Senator Johnson. I have no additional questions. Thank you,
Mr. Polly, for representing the administration's views today.
For the information of Senators and their staffs, questions
for the record are due by close of business tomorrow.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:59 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Kris Polly to Questions From Senator Johnson
Question 1a. Your ``revised and improved Directives and Standards''
for the Title 16 program indicates that BOR ``may also receive funding
from the non-Federal project sponsor to perform the [feasibility]
review process.'' Has BOR requested funding in the 2009 budget for
performing feasibility reviews for Title 16 projects, or does it rely
on non-Federal project sponsors?
Answer. The President's FY 2009 budget contains a request for
$800,000 for research and administration of the Title XVI program--
including $50,000 for Reclamation's participation in the review of
appraisal and feasibility level studies.
Question 1b. Did BOR receive funding from the non-Federal project
sponsors of the projects being heard today? How much funding does BOR
ask for to do its reviews?
Answer. Reclamation did not obtain any money from the non-Federal
sponsors of these projects. Reclamation does not ask for funds from
sponsors to perform its reviews. We perform this work as a general
service for our customers.
Question 2. Your testimony on H.R. 813 strongly opposes the
provision that would increase the overall cap on the Lower Chino
Project to $50 million. The cap on the Lower Chino Project in the
Senate counterpart--S.2259--is $26 million. The general cap on
individual Title 16 projects under existing law is $20 million in
October 1996 prices. If the $20 million cap is based on 1996 prices,
what is the cap in today's dollars?
Answer. In very basic terms, the cap in today's dollars would be
approximately $27 million. However the law gives Reclamation discretion
in implementing the cap. Any expansion of this cap would further
jeopardize Reclamation's ability to address the approximately $655
million backlog of already authorized Title XVI projects. The
Department does not believe there is justification to support assigning
a cap higher than $20.0 million, the cap for Title XVI projects enacted
after 1996. While Reclamation is not supporting new project
authorizations at this time, we understand that the projects
established by Title XVI are important to many water users in the West.
Question 3. S. 2259 calls for the establishment of a ``Center for
Technological Advancement of Membrane Technology and Education'' at
Orange County. Your written testimony does not address this provision.
What is the Department's position on the establishment of the Center?
Answer. Reclamation already has a Technical Service Center in
Denver which is a world-class engineering, science, research, and
support center for water related projects. Similarly, Reclamation, in
conjunction with experts from across the country, operates the Tularosa
Basin National Desalination Research Facility in New Mexico and the
Water Quality Improvement Center in Yuma Arizona. In light of these
facilities and the expertise possessed by Reclamation, this Center is
unnecessary.
Question 4a. The status of feasibility reviews for several projects
is not clear from your testimony. For example, (1) the regional brine
lines in H.R. 813; (2) the Alberhill project in H.R. 31; (3) the Santa
Rosa project in H.R. 716; (4) the Oxnard project in H.R. 1737; and (5)
the projects in H.R. 2614. Can you elaborate on the specific status of
the pending feasibility reviews, or at least provide them for the
record?
(1) Regional Brine Lines.--The feasibility of this project was
approved in 2004 and construction is currently underway.
(2) Alberhill Project.--This project is still in the conceptual
stage, and its sponsor Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District has not
submitted information regarding the project
(3) Santa Rosa Project.--Since August 2006, the City of Santa Rosa
has submitted: 1) an Engineering Evaluation; 2) an Economic Analysis;
3) a Financial Feasibility Analysis; and 4) a Draft Environmental
Impact Report, and other documents; however, a determination of
feasibility has not yet been possible.
Oxnard Project.--The City recently submitted a feasibility study
to Reclamation for this project. A formal review of the study is
underway.
(4) Projects in H.R. 2614.--Yucaipa: The Yucaipa Valley Water
District recently provided the necessary information, and on March 26,
2008, the feasibility study for the Yucaipa project was approved.
Corona: Reclamation is awaiting submittal of additional
information. The City of Corona has not provided the requested
information to date.
Question 4b. If and when BOR makes a positive feasibility
determination on any of these projects, will you ensure that the
Subcommittee is informed?
Answer. Typically, Reclamation provides feasibility determinations
via letter to the project sponsors so that they can determine their
future activities from that point onward. If it is the desire of the
Committee and the project sponsor, we can share those letters with the
Committee and have done so upon request in the past.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Statement of the Rancho California Water District (RCWD), Riverside
County, CA, on H.R. 1725
H.R. 1725, Rancho California Water District's (RCWD) water
reclamation project (``Rancho California Water District Southern
Riverside County Recycled/Non-Potable Distribution Facilities and
Demineralization/Desalination Recycled Water Treatment and Reclamation
Facility Project'') will substantially expand the use of recycled and
raw water in Riverside County, California. This project is vital to
Southern California and will impact water supplies in all the Western
states. RCWD provides water supply, wastewater collection and
treatment, and water recycling services to over 110,000 businesses and
individual customers in an area encompassing 160 square miles in one of
the nation's most rapidly growing areas. Riverside County--where RCWD
is located--is the third fastest growing county in the nation. RCWD's
service area includes the Cities of Temecula, portions of the City of
Murrieta and unincorporated portions of Southwest Riverside County. The
Cities of Temecula and Murrieta, alone, respectively experienced a 15
percent growth rate in 2006.
Due to the ongoing growth in Southwest Riverside County, total
demands for RCWD's service area are estimated to rise to almost double
the current demand by the year 2050. For this reason, and the ever-
increasing demand on the California Bay Delta and the Colorado River
systems, implementation of creative and innovative projects such as
RCWD's proposed project is critical to meeting the demands of not only
RCWD but all of the West.
We want to thank the Honorable Chairman, Senator Tim Johnson, and
other Subcommittee Members for holding this hearing to consider H.R.
1725. We also want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for the
excellent work of their staff, Mike Connor and Josh Johnson, whose
counsel and advice over the past year has been invaluable to us. We
also would like to thank Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senator Barbara
Boxer and their staff for helping us to have this hearing become a
reality. It is our hope that this hearing will lead us quickly to a
markup of the bill and ultimate passage by the Senate and a signature
by the President, so that we can continue to progress on this vital
project to Southern California, which will impact water supplies in all
the Western states.
We feel strongly, that due to the progress RCWD has made to date on
its project, it merits passage by the Subcommittee, the full Committee
and the full Senate. Since the introduction of H.R. 1725 in early 2007,
it was passed by the full House; and the project received the
statutorily required positive feasibility determination from the Bureau
of Reclamation in November 2007. RCWD is currently working with the
local Bureau of Reclamation to complete National Environment Policy Act
(NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements,
which will be completed by the end of 2008, and for which funding was
received in the fiscal year 2008 Omnibus Appropriations bill. RCWD
already has exceeded the required local 50 percent match for those
funds. Moreover, RCWD--having completed study and design of the first
phase of its project--will begin construction by mid-2008. The Water
District has requested FY09 appropriations for its project, which makes
passage of authorization legislation even more crucial.
passage of h.r. 1725 critical to local and regional economy
RCWD has maximized the development of its local well water
resources, groundwater recharge program, recycled water production and
delivery systems and has implemented an aggressive water conservation
program which includes a conservation rate structure. RCWD's innovative
targeted conservation program won statewide recognition in 2007 when it
was awarded the Clair Hill Environmental award by the Association of
California Water Agencies.
Even with all of the above-mentioned efforts, if RCWD takes no
action, future demands will have to be met with high-cost treated
imported water creating additional burdens on the California Bay Delta
and Colorado River systems. In order to meet these future demands in a
sustainable manner and contribute to State and Federal solutions for
the California Bay Delta and Colorado systems, RCWD invested in the
preparation of a regional Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) that was
completed in October of 2005.
The regional IRP examined current and future supply issues with a
long-term perspective that analyzed all possible supply-side and
demand-side management opportunities. Due to the extensive technical
nature of the IRP and the quality of the proposed project resulting
from its completion, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California incorporated the RCWD IRP results into its Integrated Area
Planning Program.
RCWD's project meets the ``federal need'' requirement for federal
water projects in that it has been determined to be financially and
technically viable and feasible. Further, because the project fills an
identified treated water shortfall gap for California's Inland Empire
as identified in the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California's recently completed GAP Analysis, it relieves regional
demands on the State Water and Colorado River systems, creates
substantial energy savings for the State of California as a whole,
sustains agriculture and open space for the region, and helps further
the federal government's goal of increased beneficial reuse of recycled
water, H.R. 1725 is worthy of passage and the project is worthy of
federal funding.
The current water crisis in Southern California, which resulted in
a 30 percent mandatory water cutback to agricultural customers adds to
the sense of urgency for the project. Local agriculture, which accounts
for 47 percent of RCWD's customers, cannot be sustained without a
reliable and affordable water supply. (RCWD is the largest retail
agricultural water supplier in the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California's service area.) The current water supply
conditions in the State provide no hope of either a sustainable or
affordable water supply for Southern California agricultural users.
RCWD's project, however, provides both an affordable and sustainable
water supply because the cost per acre foot of water produced from the
project is at a level that can be sustained by the current water rate
charged to the agricultural customers of the Rancho California Water
District.
The agricultural industry in RCWD's service territory is the major
employer for members of the local disadvantaged communities. There is a
high probability that if the project is not implemented in the next
five years a substantial portion of the local agricultural industry
will be lost forever. If this occurs, it will create a severe hardship
to the local disadvantaged and business communities, substantial open
space and wildlife corridors will be lost, and over $1.4 billion of
local and regional economic stimulus will needlessly be lost.
NOTE: Background on the recent 30 percent mandatory
agriculture water cutback--the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California Interim Agricultural Water Program (IAWP)
provides for the delivery of surplus water for agricultural
purposes at a discounted rate. In exchange for the discounted
rate, agency participants agree to reduce import water
deliveries by 30 percent in times of shortage. In October 2007,
MWD published updated IAWP reduction guidelines and called for
a mandatory 30 percent reduction, which began January 1, 2008.
Additionally, there will be a 20 percent rate increase by the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California over the next two
years for all users including agricultural users.
project background and benefits
The project will provide cost-effective and sustainable water
supplies to meet local demands through 2050. It will free up enough
treated water to serve 70,000 new households in Southern California by
converting agricultural demands from treated water to recycled and raw
water. It will shift 144 cubic feet per second (cfs) peak demand off of
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's treated water
system. It will create the ability beneficially to reuse 16,000 acre
feet (AF)/year of recycled water, which will relieve demands on the
statewide system (California Bay Delta and Colorado River). (One AF of
water equates to approximately 326,000 gallons or enough water to
supply two families for over one year.)
The project will increase the sustainability of Southern Riverside
County's avocado, citrus and wine industries. These agricultural
industries add exponentially to the regional economy and provide
environmental benefits as they contribute over $1.4 billion annually,
employ over 150,000 people in Riverside County and preserve open space.
In addition, the agricultural industry contributes positively to the
environment as avocado trees produce approximately 185 million pounds
of oxygen and absorb 7.1 million pounds of pollutants in the air
annually, including 2.8 million pounds of ozone and 2.1 million pounds
of particles.
The project also will enable RCWD to retain 10,000 AF/year of
additional Colorado River and California Bay Delta water for use during
peak, traditionally high cost recycled and raw water demand months, by
storing this water in low demand/high supply winter periods. The
project will save the Water District $200/AF and will reduce energy
costs expended for the pumping of imported water by approximately $1.5
million annually and for pumping recycled water out of the watershed by
approximately $1.3 million annually.
RCWD's project will provide numerous environmental benefits such as
reducing the carbon footprint by eliminating emissions by 4.9 million
pounds/year and reducing energy use and costs by $3 million/year,
alleviating substantial stress on California's severely strained energy
system. Additionally, the project will reduce energy demand by 9,765
Kilowatts per hour by reducing pumping costs for diverting treated
wastewater that currently is being pumped out of the basin.
united states bureau of reclamation feasibility determination
Significantly, the project already received a positive feasibility
determination by the Bureau of Reclamation in November 2007, which
declared the project technically and economically feasible. To
facilitate that positive determination, in May 2007, RCWD--in
cooperation with Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and Western
Municipal Water District (WMWD)--completed a $430,000 twelve-month
feasibility study which insured viability of the project. As noted, the
results of the RCWD feasibility study facilitated the Bureau of
Reclamation's finding that the RCWD feasibility study met the Bureau's
``Directives and Standards'' for feasibility studies and its official
positive feasibility determination.
rcwd may 2007 joint feasibility study results
RCWD's feasibility study determined that it is technically and
economically feasible for RCWD to demineralize wastewater and convey
the demineralized and raw imported water to agricultural areas, through
the construction of new pumping, piping, and storage infrastructure in
order to replace the current use of costly, imported potable/treated
water for these demands. The study also examined facilitating
additional storage in Vail Lake to capture otherwise lost winter flows
for high demand summer use. Over forty project alternatives were
considered, before arriving at the final project recommendation.
status of the project
RCWD completed the study and design of the first phase of the
project in early 2008 and is slated to begin construction by mid-2008.
The required regional and federal processes are well underway. RCWD is
working with the Bureau of Reclamation on California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environment Policy Act (NEPA)
requirements, which will be completed by the end of 2008.
regional and federal support
As a demonstration of its regional support and the federal need for
RCWD's project, it was selected as a Tier I priority under the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's Official
Integrated Area Study, which stated, ``This project is considered to be
highly adaptable, low risk, and has excellent overall benefits.'' The
project also was approved by California's Proposition 50 Integrated
Regional Water Management Plan and is expected to receive funding under
California's Proposition 84 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan,
the latter of which process is currently underway.
The project received $123,000 in the Fiscal Year 2008 Omnibus
Appropriations bill, which is being used with the local Bureau of
Reclamation to complete CEQA and NEPA requirements. RCWD has already
provided over the required 50 percent local match by contributing over
$200,000 toward this effort.
The project is enthusiastically supported by numerous regional and
local entities including but not limited to Riverside County; the
cities of Temecula and Murrieta; Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, the major purveyor of water to Southern
California; The Nature Conservancy; the California Avocado Commission,
which serves 6,500 grower members; Sunkist Growers; Eastern Municipal
Water District; Western Municipal Water District; the Santa Ana
Watershed Project Authority, which includes the five largest water
agencies in the Santa Ana River Watershed (Inland Empire Utilities
Agency, Orange County Water District, San Bernardino Valley Municipal
Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District and Western Municipal
Water District); and McMillan Farm Management Company, an agribusiness
that operates over 1,500 acres of avocados and citrus in RCWD's service
area and contributes approximately $20 million to the local economy.
(Letters of support have been sent to RCWD's California congressional
delegation from these organizations and can be provided to Energy
Committee Members upon request.)
RCWD's Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09) $2 million appropriations request
for the project was included in Riverside County and the City of
Temecula's FY09 Priority Lists as a project of regional importance.
Both the county and the city asked the appropriate California
congressional delegation Members to support RCWD's FY09 federal funding
request.
total project cost and post-implementation cost savings
The total project cost is currently estimated at $141 million. (It
has been reduced to this amount through cost offsets.) H.R. 1725--under
consideration by this Committee--will authorize the statutory limit of
$20 million for Title XVI water reclamation projects or only 14 percent
of the total cost of the project. Local funds will provide the
remaining $121 million or 86 percent of the total cost of the project.
(RCWD is expecting to receive $4 million in California Proposition 84
Integrated Regional Water Management Plan funding.)
The project will save the Water District $200/AF. When implemented,
it is estimated that the project will produce a gross savings of $789
million in purchased water costs over the 30-year life of the project.
When the capital costs of the project are netted against the purchase
water savings, the project produces a significant net savings (NPV) of
$83 million over its lifetime.
economic benefits of the project
Reduces Risk of Losing Critical Agricultural Industry
Industry contributes $1.4 billion annually to Riverside
County
Industry directly employs 150,000 people in Riverside County
Agriculture processing contributes 4,000 additional jobs to
the County
Agriculture processing contributes $7 million annually to
Riverside County
Avocado trees in RCWD's service area produce approximately
185 million pounds of oxygen each year
Avocado trees also absorb approximately 7.1 million pounds
of pollutants from the air each year including 2.8 million
pounds of ozone and 2.1 million pounds of particles
energy savings and other benefits to the environment
As the western United States continue to battle rising energy costs
and continued risk of brownouts and blackouts, finding ways to reduce
energy demand continues to be a critical component of any federal
project. Implementing RCWD's water reclamation project not only will
free up substantial amounts of water for other users in California, but
will also significantly lower energy demands, bringing with it the
resultant benefits.
Lowers greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the electrical
energy associated with conveying imported water to the region,
treating imported water, and exporting recycled water out of
the basin.
Reduces energy demand by 9,765 Kilowatts per hour by
reducing pumping costs for diverting treated wastewater that
currently is being pumped out of the basin
Saves $3 million in annual energy costs
Reduces carbon emissions by 4.9 million pounds per year
Sustains open space
project specifics
The project consists of three distinct, but integrated components,
which will provide vast regional and federal benefits. The estimated
total project cost is $141 million.
component one--expand local recycled and raw water resources
Construct a 48-inch pipeline to transport raw water from MWD's
aqueduct system for storage in Vail Lake. By storing this water in low
demand/high supply winter periods, up to 10,000 AF/year of additional
Colorado River and California Bay Delta water can be retained for use
during peak recycled and raw water demand months. Water cost will be
$230-$330/AF, saving the district approximately $200/AF. Estimated
project component cost: $28 million.
component two--convert east side agriculture to a combined recycled and
raw water system
Convert Water District's east side agricultural delivery system
(vineyard and citrus) to a combined recycled and raw water system to
allow recycled water, untreated water stored in Vail lake, or raw water
purchased from MWD to be used for agricultural irrigation. Build
delivery system to transport water from Vail Lake to convert wine and
citrus agriculture to non-potable water and link east side non-potable
system to recycled water. Water cost will be $230-$330/AF, will save
the water district approximately $200/AF for water treatment, and will
relieve peak demand on MWD's regional treatment facilities, the
Colorado River and California Bay Delta systems.(Will relieve 5K AF/
year of treated water demands.) Estimated project component cost: $57
million.
component three--demineralize / desalinate recycled water and convert
west side agriculture to recycled system
Construct demineralization/desalination plant to lower total
dissolved solids (TDS) levels of recycled water from EMWD's wastewater
reclamation facility below 500 parts TDS and convert Water District's
west side agricultural delivery system to a non-potable system.
Lowering the TDS limits below 500 parts TDS will allow RCWD to utilize
recycled water which currently is pumped to dispose of in the Santa Ana
River. RCWD currently cannot reuse this water because the State Water
Control Board limits of 500 parts TDS are below the wastewater plant's
recycled water level of 750 parts TDS. Running 50 percent of this water
through a micro filtration and reverse osmosis process will lower the
TDS levels below the current basin standard of 500 parts TDS and will
allow up to 16,000 AF of recycled water to be retained in the basin
annually for reuse. In addition to creating a new beneficial reuse of
recycled water, this project component will provide a non-
interruptible, sustainable supply of water to our agricultural
customers. Estimated project component cost: $56 million.
______
Tucson Audubon Society,
Tucson, AZ, April 22, 2008.
Hon. Tim Johnson,
Chairman, Water and Power Subcommittee.
Dear Sir: Tucson Audubon Society is a 501(c) 3 non-profit
environmental organization based in Tucson Arizona, serving residents
of eastern Pima County and Santa Cruz County. Established in 1949,
Tucson Audubon partners closely with government agencies and other NGOs
to promote environmental education, conservation, and outdoor
recreation.
Tucson Audubon supports HR1503 and the April 8, 2008 testimony of
Michael Gritzuk, Director of Pima County Regional Wastewater
Reclamation Department, on behalf of the bill that would establish
water reclamation and environmental restoration in the Avra Valley/
Black Wash area of Pima County.
Riparian habitat is extremely important for wildlife in our region.
We have lost much of our former riparian habitat through overgrazing,
erosion and groundwater pumping. Many species of conservation concern
are dwindling due to these losses.
Tucson Audubon and its partners work to conserve water and to
restore habitats, using water harvesting techniques, and sometimes with
the use of reclaimed wastewater. Creating new riparian and wetland
habitat is an important step toward redressing habitat losses.
Wastewater treatment plants offer particular opportunities for creating
new riparian habitat.
Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) is
particularly innovative in providing reclaimed water for wildlife
habitat and incorporating wildlife habitat into new wastewater plant
designs. PCRWRD has responded to a key recommendation in the Sonoran
Desert Conservation Plan to utilize reclaimed water for habitat
restoration projects. The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan is a long
term vision for protecting the heritage and natural resources of the
west in Pima County.
The Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department is sensitive too to
the wildlife watching industry, which has an annual total economic
effect of approximately $1.5 billion in Arizona. By proactively
incorporating facilities for bird watchers and other wildlife watchers
to the habitats created at their plant sites, the Department adds to
the value of our region to wildlife tourists.
In addition, by restoring the riparian habitats to critical to
wildlife, the Department is adding to the quality of life for the
people that live nearby.
Tucson Audubon supports HR1503 and the April 8, 2008 testimony of
Michael Gritzuk, Director of Pima County Regional Wastewater
Reclamation Department, on behalf of the bill.
Yours Sincerely,
Dr Paul Green,
Executive Director.
______
Statement of Michael Gritzuk, P.E., Director, Pima County Regional
Wastewater Reclamation Department, Tucson, AZ, on H.R. 1503
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, Pima County, Arizona
is submitting this testimony for the record to the Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water and Power on April
8, 2008 regarding ``HR 1503, The Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and
Riparian Restoration Project''. My name is Michael Gritzuk and I am the
Director of the Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department
in Pima County, Arizona which is the lead agency for this Project.
Pima County, Arizona would like to solicit the support of the
Committee for the establishment of the water reclamation and
environmental restoration project contained in HR 1503 for the Avra
Valley/Black Wash area of Pima County, a predominantly rural area with
exceptional environmental values, which is undergoing rapid population
growth and corresponding wastewater infrastructure expansion. This
project is located at the current Avra Valley Water Reclamation
Facility site, in the northerly portion of Avra Valley adjacent to the
Black Wash riparian area. Project stakeholders with whom we have
consulted have included the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Pima County
Regional Flood Control District, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tucson
Audubon Society, City of Tucson Water Department and the Pima County
Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation Department.
To understand the importance of this project, I would like to tell
you about Pima County's environmental initiatives and the Department's
efforts to meet the needs of our growing population in an
environmentally sensitive manner. Pima County, Arizona, is located in
the southernmost part of Arizona among the magnificent mountains and
valleys of the Sonoran Desert. Pima County has a climate typical to the
lower desert elevations in the American Southwest with only 8 -12
inches of annual rainfall.
Pima County includes a central metropolitan area containing the
City of Tucson, City of South Tucson, Town of Oro Valley, Town of
Marana, Town of Sahuarita; a substantial urban population in the
unincorporated areas of the County adjacent to these municipalities;
significant amounts of rural ranch and farm lands; and the Pasqua Yaqui
Tribe and the Tohono O'odham Nation (whose lands cover a large portion
of Western Pima County).
The population of Pima County reached one million in January 2007,
and is projected to grow significantly over the next 20 years. Official
growth projections are 9 percent between 2010 and 2015, 10 percent
between 2015 and 2020, 10 percent between 2020 and 2025, and 9 percent
between 2025 and 2030.
These significant projected increases in population demonstrate
that Pima County is feeling the growth pressures which have made
Arizona one of the fastest growing states in the Nation with
significant statewide issues regarding water availability, local and
regional transportation infrastructure, and wastewater conveyance and
treatment capacity. In the mid-1980's, Arizona instituted the Active
Management Area Program, which established a goal of safe-yield for
water demand and use within the state's major metropolitan areas. This
concept is now being expanded to the rural areas of the state, an even
more necessary measure given the current drought conditions in the
Southwest. In this water-scarce environment, reuse, recharge and
environmental restoration have become increasingly important uses for
high quality reclaimed water.
To manage the critical issues of accommodating a steadily
increasing population and preserving environmentally sensitive areas
for future generations to enjoy, Pima County has developed and begun to
implement its award-winning Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan over the
last decade.
The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, which received the American
Planning Association's 2002 Outstanding Planning Award, covers a 3.9
million-acre portion of the Sonoran Desert ecosystem in Pima County,
Arizona. The Pima County Board of Supervisors and Administrator
initiated the Plan in 1998 in response to conservation needs for rare
animal and plant species, most significantly the federally listed
cactus ferruginous pygmy owl. The purpose of the Plan is to ensure the
long-term protection of ``the heritage and natural resources of the
west in Pima County.'' The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan contains
six areas of focus: Protection of Critical Habitat; Biological
Corridors; and Mountain Parks; Riparian Restoration; Historic and
Cultural Preservation and Ranch Land Conservation. Over 205 reports
have been produced, including a mapped conservation reserve design that
prioritizes the protection of the region's biodiversity by applying the
six areas of focus above.
The Pima County Board of Supervisors has led this effort,
coordinating with 12 major government land managers and about 40
community groups. In December 2001, Pima County incorporated the
Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan into its comprehensive land use plan.
The comprehensive land use plan addresses many problems caused by urban
sprawl, such as a declining tax base, land consumption, water
availability, and a loss of cultural identity. It prescribes the
Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan to address natural and cultural
resources protection and incorporates the conservation reserve design
into a Conservation Lands System categorizing future land use in all
unincorporated lands in the planning area. The land use categories in
the Conservation Lands System include: Important Riparian Areas,
Biological Core Areas, Scientific Research Management Areas, Multiple
Use Management Areas, Recovery Management Areas, Agriculture within
Recovery Management Areas and Critical Landscape Connections.
The planning process generated a series of policy changes and
conservation achievements. Over the years, a series of ordinances have
been passed that seek to protect biological resources while promoting
better quality urban design. Ordinances include buffer overlay zones
around biological preserves, hillside development restrictions,
riparian habitat mitigation, native plant protection, conservation
subdivisions, big box store limitations and home design standards. More
significantly to this project, the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan
also recommends effluent utilization for habitat restoration projects.
The Pima County Wastewater Reclamation Department, as a self-
sustaining utility enterprise of the County, has a dual mandate to (1)
provide regional wastewater conveyance, treatment and reclamation
facilities for the public health and welfare of the community and (2)
implement the environmental land use and conservation policies of the
Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. To accomplish these goals, the
Department operates three major metropolitan wastewater treatment and
reclamation facilities and eight smaller subregional reclamation
facilities spread throughout the 2,500 square mile service area of
Eastern Pima County which treat a total of 69 million gallons of
wastewater per day (MGD). The Department also maintains a rigorous
operations and maintenance and rehabilitation program for its 3,300
linear miles of sewer conveyance lines. The Department has been
innovative and aggressive in confronting the challenges of protecting
the public health and safety while producing a high quality reclaimed
water product for multiple uses within the community, including reuse
on parks and school grounds, recharge to the aquifer and restoration of
environmentally sensitive areas.
As part of its innovative program, the Department also managed the
Arid West Water Quality Research Project, from 1995 to 2007, which was
a cooperative regional approach to water quality issues in the Arid
West funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pima County
also constructed the Kino Ecosystem Restoration Project in cooperation
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This Project captures and
harvests storm water for use on the turf facilities of the spring
training complex for the Arizona Diamondbacks, Colorado Rockies and
Chicago White Sox. The Department is currently implementing (in
coordination with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality) a
$1+ billion program to optimize advanced treatment, odor control and
bio-solids handling at its major metropolitan treatment facilities,
including the construction of a new 32 million gallon per day (MGD)
Water Reclamation Campus. The new water reclamation campus will provide
reclaimed water for a proposed major community sports and park complex
planned to be constructed adjacent to this campus. The sports and park
complex would include multiple softball, baseball and soccer fields, as
well as park facilities and ecosystem enhancement and trails along the
Santa Cruz River. This will be in addition to the existing community
water reclamation system which provides irrigation for local golf
courses, city and county parks and street medians.
In addition to these accomplishments, the Department faces
continuing challenges in expanding and upgrading its rural treatment
facilities to provide needed sewer capacity in time to meet the demands
of growth while providing a sustainable environment for the new
facilities in the adjacent area.
The Department recently upgraded the Green Valley Water Reclamation
Facility (WRF), which serves a major retirement community south of the
Tucson metropolitan area. The existing facility now produces Class A+
effluent which is then sold for reuse to an adjacent golf course resort
complex. This integrated and sustainable approach to water reclamation
has enabled the community to conserve 2 million gallons per day of
groundwater resources while providing a valuable recreational amenity
to the Green Valley community.
A similar opportunity exists 40 miles to the northwest of Green
Valley in the Avra Valley/Black Wash area. Formerly a highly rural and
ranching area, this valley is bordered on the east by the Tucson
Mountain Regional Park, which includes the famous Old Tucson movie set
and the internationally recognized Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum and the
Saguaro National Monument, and on the southern and western boundaries
by ranch lands, grasslands, the Tohono O'odham Nation and the Pascua
Yaqui Tribal lands.
The Department currently operates a wastewater treatment facility
utilizing percolation and evaporation ponds for this area--the Avra
Valley Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). The Pima County Board of
Supervisors has developed the Southwest Area Infrastructure Plan to
accommodate the rapid growth in this area by establishing urban
densities in the center of Avra Valley while maintaining the rural
character and open space on the Valley's perimeters, thus preserving
the magnificent panoramas of the rugged Sonoran Desert landscape for
future generations.
To accomplish the wastewater functions of this Plan, the Department
intends to upgrade and expand the existing Avra Valley WRF, currently
permitted for 2.2 MGD, to a 4.0 MGD facility with advanced ultra-violet
disinfection and filtration which will produce very high quality Class
A+ water suitable for reuse, recharge and environmental restoration.
Further, the additional percolation ponds required for the expanded
facility will be designed to enhance the habitat and environmental
benefit to the area. However, even in its present configuration, the
Avra Valley WRF is already well known to the regional and national
birding community due to its unique juxtaposition of desert upland
habitat and ample surface water in the percolation ponds and its
proximity to the Black Wash riparian area. Sonoran Desert bird species,
such as the Roadrunner, Gambel's Quail, Cactus Wren, Curved-bill
Thrasher, White-Wing Doves and Harris's Hawk can be seen on and
adjacent to the Avra Valley Facility. Priority vulnerable species using
the area include the Bell's Vireo, Rufous-winged Sparrow, and Abert's
Towhee. Shorebirds and waterfowl including herons, egrets, sandpipers,
glossy ibis, and other migratory birds are found in and around the
ponds (as well the occasional pelican or seagull blown off-course by
the summer monsoon storms). In addition to the bird species, the
adjacent Black Wash area also provides valuable breeding areas for
desert amphibians as well as habitat for jack rabbits, javelina, deer,
snakes, lizards, and Gila monsters.
In order to continue and enhance these environmental benefits of
the Facility, the Department proposes to create a multi-purpose
facility incorporating wastewater treatment and watershed reclamation,
habitat conservation, education and recreation, including wildlife
watching with interpretative and hiking trails as part of the site
expansion. This will establish the area as an educational site for the
sustainable use of water resources, habitat conservation and
restoration that is consistent with the Sonoran Desert Conservation
Plan. The existing percolation ponds would be rehabilitated to better
perform their technical function while still retaining their usefulness
as habitats for waterfowl and shorebirds. As noted previously, the
Department will also create additional percolation basins which would
be designed in a more natural pond-like configuration with trails for
birders and hikers to provide year-round access. Thus, the expansion of
the habitat will be coupled with an expansion of the viewing
opportunities for visitors and yet maintain the functional benefit of
the ponds for the Avra Valley WRF. Further, advanced treatment with
ultra-violet disinfection and filtration facilities will be installed
for the new plant capacity of 4.0 MGD which will continue to keep the
effluent quality and value consistently high. Additional features for
visitors will include a public restroom and signage along the birding
trails for wildlife education and information. In addition to these
features, significant environmental restoration is proposed around the
perimeters of the Facility as well as a continuing effort to preserve
and enhance the riparian environment in the Black Wash which runs along
the western edge of the WRF.
The total Project costs for the 4.0 MGD water reclamation and
environmental restoration project are now estimated at $56 million
(2008 dollars). The federal support of $14 million requested in HR 1503
would be utilized for the environmental features and water quality
treatment processes discussed in this testimony. All the water
resources for this project are under the control of Pima County as an
integral part of the wastewater treatment process and maintenance of
facility site.
Finally, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, in response to
Deputy Commissioner's Kris Polly's testimony on H.R. 1503, Pima County
looks forward to working with Bureau of Reclamation staff to conduct
the required feasibility studies. We want to move forward together with
the Bureau in this unique opportunity to utilize reclaimed water to
achieve the ecosystem restoration and habitat enhancement goals of the
Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan through the Title XVI Program.
On behalf of Pima County, I thank the Committee for the opportunity
to provide this testimony.
______
City of Santa Rosa,
April 4, 2008.
Dear Chairman Bingaman: The City of Santa Rosa appreciates the
opportunity to submit written testimony to your committee regarding
H.R. 716--the Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Plan Act.
The Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Plan is a model for reuse of treated
wastewater for landscape irrigation. The project is especially
important in a region that remains semi arid for six months of the year
and where droughts pose a genuine threat to both human and protected/
threatened salmonid populations. Using recycled water for landscape
irrigation conserves valuable fresh water for not only human
consumption but also for watershed preservation and enhancement.
background
The Santa Rosa Regional Wastewater System serves the Northern
California cities of Santa Rosa, Cotati, Rohnert Park, Sebastopol and
parts of unincorporated Sonoma County, serving a population that
exceeds 225,000. This system recycles over 80 percent of its tertiary-
treated water to: 1) irrigate over 6,400 acres of farmlands, vineyards
and public and private landscaping; and 2) inject into the Geysers
geothermal fields to recharge natural geysers in order to produce green
electricity. The remainder of the water is seasonally discharged into
the Russian River.
Santa Rosa's reuse system has been developed over the last 40 years
and includes cutting edge projects, such as the public-private
partnership to use recycled water to produce green power at the
Geysers. The City is an experienced urban water recycler with programs
already in place at two city parks, a golf course and Sonoma State
University. As committed water recyclers, the City has invested over
$350 million in water treatment and re-use projects over the years.
major goals of the santa rosa urban reuse plan
Minimize the impacts to the Russian River (a vital migratory
corridor for three federally protected salmon species by
meeting sub-regional growth requirements with decreased water
diversions and a reduction in required seasonal recycled water
discharge.
Reduce irrigation of farmland listed as high quality habitat
for four endangered species, including the California Tiger
Salamander.
Use all recycled water produced by a growing population to
irrigate parks, schools, roadway median strips, cemeteries, new
commercial and residential developments, and golf courses.
Assist the City in meeting hot weather landscape irrigation
demands without increasing diversion of potable water from the
Russian River.
Provide flexibility to accommodate the use of recycled water
made available by neighboring agencies.
environmental benefits
The main conveyance of regional water supplies is the Russian
River, a 115-mile coastal stream that is a migration corridor for
threatened salmon and steelhead. The Urban Reuse Project--and similar
projects that will follow in its footstep--will result in fewer
withdrawals from the River and its tributaries and safeguard vital
habitat for threatened steelhead and coho salmon.
The Project will also help restore habitat for the endangered
California Tiger Salamander and three endangered plant species by
allowing formerly irrigated farmland to return to vernal pools, and in
some cases, providing recycled water for seasonal wetlands.
Finally, the project will allow winter water production to be used
for summer urban irrigation uses and reduce recycled water discharges
to the Russian River.
water conservation benefits
Most of the City of Santa Rosa's potable water is provided under
contract by the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), which withdraws
water from the Russian River. For three of the past six years, at the
request of the SCWA, the State Water Resources Control Board has issued
a Temporary Urgency Flow Modification Order for the Russian River,
reducing flows from an upriver dam and impacting local water
availability. The combination of regulatory requirements needed to
protect threatened species and warming climate trends increase the
likelihood that these ``temporary'' flow reductions may continue to
occur frequently or become permanent.
Even in ``normal'' weather years, the City of Santa Rosa,
experiences water supply problems on especially hot days, due to high
urban irrigation demands and a constrained delivery system operated by
the SCWA.
By replacing potable water used for urban landscape irrigation with
recycled water, the Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Project will significantly
reduce or eliminate the impacts of potential fresh water shortages.
project elements and costs
The project will provide recycled water to 1,000 of the largest
water users in the City, including parks, schools, fair grounds,
industrial and commercial facilities. The project will provide 1,000
million gallons of recycled water (3,000 acre-feet) per year for urban
irrigation, avoiding both fresh water withdrawals and treated
wastewater discharges of this volume into the Russian River. The total
projected costs are over $100 million dollars. The City's intent is to
have the Bureau of Reclamation review the feasibility study, the
completed environmental documents before moving ahead with the project.
It was our understanding that the Bureau would be charging a fee for
the initial review. We did not want to proceed with that level of
review until we knew if we would be getting Federal support with the
project. If the Committee reports the Bill, then the City will be
forwarding our documentation to the Bureau.
The City encourages you to approve H.R 716 Santa Rosa Urban Reuse
Project. If authorized, the City will continue to look at the cost
benefit of the Urban Reuse Project as well other options to creatively
reuse our recycled water resource.
We are very appreciative of the support we have received for this
project from our Representative, Ms. Lynn Woolsey, and her staff. Her
interest and encouragement have been important to the City's interest
in pursuing this legislative course.
Thank you for your consideration. The City is happy to answer any
additional questions the committee might have during its review.
summary
The Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Plan/Project consists of the following
elements and costs:
H.R. 716 would provide an authorization for up to $20 million of
the project cost but not more than 25 percent of total project cost,
with the remainder expected to be local funding.
project status
An Environmental Impact Report has been completed and certified,
and preliminary design work has been completed. With the appropriation
of federal funds, final design and construction can begin. With federal
appropriations, the first phase of the project could be completed, and
water delivered to customers by 2010. As demand grows over the next 5
to 7 years, the second and final phase of the project would be
completed. The City has a financing plan to cover the local (75-
percent) share of the Project cost. The first phase of the financing
plan will be implemented in summer 2007; bonds will be sold to finance
final design phase.
conclusion
In conclusion I would like to reiterate the importance of this
regional project which benefits water supply but also federally
protected salmon populations and the protected California Tiger
Salamander, while enhancing the Russian River Watershed. The City of
Santa Rosa's Sub-regional Wastewater System looks forward to continuing
to raise the bar with respect to conservation and recycling and the
approval of H.R. 716 should help ensure the viability of the Santa Rosa
Urban Reuse Plan as a model recycling program.
Senator Bingaman and members of the Committee, the City of Santa
Rosa and I appreciate your interest in the long term sustainability of
the water supply, environmental and species protection in this
important watershed.
Thank you,
Bob Blanchard,
Mayor.
*Map of Urban Reuse Plan Area has been retained in subcommittee
files.
______
Statement of Ronald Young, General Manager, Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District, on H.R. 31
Chairman Johnson, Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Ron
Young, and I serve as the General Manager of the Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District in Lake Elsinore, California. Thank you for
the opportunity to submit written testimony to the Subcommittee
regarding EVMWD's comprehensive plans for water recycling within two of
the fastest growing communities within our very large service area
along the I-15 corridor in Western Riverside County, California.
I also want to thank Senator Diane Feinstein for recommending HR 31
be given a hearing. Senator Feinstein and her staff have always been
very helpful and understood the importance of this legislation to our
region.
background
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) is located in the
southeastern portion of Riverside County and borders the eastern
boundary of Orange County. EVMWD's jurisdiction includes the City of
Lake Elsinore, the City of Canyon Lake, a portion of the City of
Murrieta, unincorporated areas of the County of Riverside, and a
portion of the Cleveland National Forest. EVMWD provides potable water
service, wastewater treatment and disposal, and recycled water to
customers within its jurisdiction. Currently, EVWMD has approximately
38,000 water service connections, most of which also include wastewater
connections. EVMWD is a sub-agency of the Western Municipal Water
District, a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California.
Water demand within EVMWD's service area has also been growing
rapidly due to new development and population growth. EVMWD expects
water demand to double by 2030. As a result, EVMWD seeks ways to use
recycled water to offset limited sources of potable water supply. EVMWD
has the opportunity to develop the Wildomar Recycled Water program and
the Alberhill Wastewater Reclamation Facilities. These two projects
will ultimately create approximately 4,500 acre feet a year in new
water; enough for 32,000 new people.
This new water supply is even more significant when we consider
that last year the City of Lake Elsinore was the third fastest growing
city in Riverside County and Riverside County was the second fastest
growing county in the Nation.
The incentive for using recycled water is to conserve a precious
local water source and substantially lower our customers' water costs.
The Lake Elsinore Unified School District will be one of the biggest
beneficiaries of this project. We expect the project could save the
school district over two hundred thousand dollars a year in water
costs. Given the current projected cuts in state funding for schools
over the next year; this project will help keep teachers in the
classroom and books on the shelves.
This project will also benefit Riverside County's newest city, the
City of Wildomar. The official incorporation date for Wildomar is July
1st 2008. There are many logistical and financial hurdles for new
cities to overcome and the cost of water is one of them. However, if
this bill is approved, EVMWD can begin supplying low cost recycled
water to all of the City of Wildomar's parks, greenbelts, and pubic
cemetery.
Another major user of recycled water in the Wildomar area will be a
golf course for the Summerly residential development being built by
John Laing Homes, Inc (JLH). The total cost for this first phase of the
Wildomar project is approximately $4.9 million. JLH's contribution is
$2.8 million and EVMWD's cost is approximately $2.1 million.
This is a key element to the overall Wildomar Recycled Water
project and to keep this project moving forward, we need Congress to
commit to funding $4.8 million immediately.
unique and immediate regional benefits
On March 6, EVMWD staff, Wildomar City Councilwoman Elect Marsha
Swanson, and Lake Elsinore Unified School District representatives met
with Chris Carillo and James Peterson of Senator Feinstein's California
staff. In that meeting the water district outlined the following eight
reasons that make this project so unique.
Nearly 20 percent of California's total energy use is used
to move water. This project will save approximately 15 million
kWh per year of electricity from reduce imported water.
Every acre foot of recycled water that is generated saves
our water district an acre foot of expensive imported water.
These two projects combined are estimated to save EVMWD over
$2.6 million a year in imported water costs.
Wildomar is the newest city in Riverside County and will
benefit greatly from the annual financial savings from using
recycled water to irrigate its parks, greenbelts, and public
cemetery.
The Lake Elsinore Unified School District has already seen
its water bills decrease over $100k a year due to the
installation of weather based irrigation controllers provided
by our water district. We currently anticipate an additional
annual savings of approximately $200k if H.R. 31 is passed.
The feasibility studies with the Bureau of Reclamation have
been completed and all design documents and construction plans
have been completed; this project can start construction
immediately.
To ensure full implementation and success of this project,
the cost of customer connections have been figured into the
overall cost of the project. Therefore, all 39 large users that
have been identified on the map on page six will be converted
immediately.
The regional benefits of this project include the
cooperation of several different agencies in southwest
Riverside County to treat and deliver the recycled water. Along
with our partners, Eastern Municipal Water District and Rancho
California Water District we represent over 800,000 customers.
One of the most significant aspects of this project is the
variety of funding sources committed to building this project.
EVMWD has committed $7.4 million, John Laing Homes has provided
approximately $2.8 million, and the State of California has
provided the water district with a grant for $4 million. Once
H.R. 31 is approved, the cost share for this regional project
will include $4.8 million from the Federal government for
fiscal year 2009.
wildomar recycled water project
EVMWD proposes to implement a Master Plan for a recycled water
system to serve its southern region. This Wildomar Recycled Water
project is intended to ultimately deliver 2,429 acre-feet per year (AF/
yr) of recycled water to 34 user sites. (see table 1) Potential users
include schools, homeowners' associations, parks, a cemetery, a
nursery, a church, and a stadium. The project would require
construction of pipelines, pump stations, and reservoirs to distribute
recycled water.
Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) recently constructed the
TVRWRF Effluent Disposal Pipeline. This pipeline conveys excess
effluent from EMWD's wastewater facility in Temecula and RCWD's Santa
Rosa Water Reclamation Facility (SRWRF) to EMWD's existing 54-inch
Reach 4 pipeline, which will ultimately discharge effluent in the
Temescal Wash, which is under the jurisdiction of Region 8, the Santa
Ana RWQCB.
EVMWD has purchased the ability to use a portion of the capacity in
the pipeline as part of a separate agreement with Eastern and Rancho
involving wastewater treatment of a portion of EVMWD's service area.
(see map) This agreement allots EVMWD up to 1.5 million gallons a day,
or 1,680 acre feet per year of recycled water. EVMWD expects to
wholesale purchase the remaining supply of recycled water from Rancho
California Water District or Eastern Municipal Water District.
This project is solely for water development. EVMWD will promote
this project in the community through established outreach materials
developed by the District.
The total project cost for the design, planning, and construction
of permanent facilities needed to establish recycled water distribution
for the southern region of EVMWD's service area is estimated at $19
million. The funding support for this project is needed to match the
local and state funds that have been given to EVMWD to develop this new
water supply.
alberhill recycled water project
EVMWD, with the assistance of a $75k state grant, prepared a
recycled water Facilities Planning Report (FPR) for EVMWD's Alberhill
Service Area entitled The FPR Alberhill Service Area Recycled Water
Master Plan. The planning study is focused on providing recycled water
to potential customers within EVMWD's Alberhill Service Area. Within
this service area there are several potential sources of recycled
water, including EVMWD's proposed $38 million Alberhill Wastewater
Reclamation Facility, which will be implemented in three phases; 1, 2A,
and 2B.
Phase 1 includes all existing customers including six developers
within the proposed Alberhill Community Facilities District (CFD).
Phase 2A includes the future customer, Pacific Clay, which is a
proposed development near the Alberhill CFD. The significant recycled
water demand associated with this development will justify the capital
costs incurred for the additional facilities.
Phase 2B includes future customer, the Village Development, which
is not planned to be constructed until 2019.
EVMWD is currently completing the preliminary design for the
Alberhill WRF. Our goal for completing the first phase of the Alberhill
WRF construction is December 2010. The recent 2005 EVMWD Alberhill
Water & Wastewater Facilities Phasing Plan indicates that the initial
capacity for Alberhill WRF is 1.0mgd. The initial 1.0mgd plant will
need to incorporate 0.5mgd incremental treatment trains to accommodate
the uncertainties associated with planned developments. The ultimate
capacity of Alberhill WRF is 5.4mgd.
EVMWD is looking for a twenty-five percent match from the federal
government. This funding would be spread over eight years and total
$9.6 million
conclusion
Water demand within EVMWD's service area has also been growing
rapidly due to new development and population growth. EVMWD expects
water demand to double by 2030. As a result, EVMWD seeks ways to use
recycled water to offset limited sources of potable water supply. EVMWD
has the opportunity to develop the Wildomar Recycled Water program and
the Alberhill Wastewater Reclamation Facilities. These two projects
will create approximately 4,500 acre feet a year in new water. This
will offset the equivalent demands of about 30,000 residents.
This new water supply is even more significant when we consider
that last year the City of Lake Elsinore was the third fastest growing
city in Riverside County and Riverside County was the second fastest
growing county in the Nation.
This rapid growth in residential and commercial development is the
most opportune and economically feasible time to build recycled water
uses into these development projects.
I urge your speedy favorable action on HR 31, so construction of
these vital recycled water facilities can keep moving forward and EVMWD
can continue to meet the current and future water demands of its
customers.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
______
City of Wildomar,
April 2, 2008.
Hon. Tim Johnson,
U.S. Senate Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Johnson: I am writing to convey my support for H.R.
31, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wastewater and
Recycled Water Facilities Act of 2007. This legislation overwhelmingly
passed the House last July, and we encourage the Senate to do the same.
The Wildomar water recycling project, which would be authorized by
this legislation, is ready to begin construction and would bring
immediate benefits to our part of the Inland Empire.
Wildomar is the newest city in Riverside County and will benefit
greatly from the annual financial savings from using recycled water to
irrigate its parks and greenbelts.
Thank you again, Chairman Johnson for taking the lead on this most
significant recycled water project for the Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District. Federal funding support for this project is vital and
necessary to match the local and state funds that have been given to
EVMWD to develop this new water supply.
Sincerely,
Bob Cashman,
Mayor Elect.
______
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, on H.R. 31
Federal Request.--$14.4 Million
The Benefit.--An Energy-Efficient Alternative
1.5 billion gallons of `new' water created
Energy for one acre-foot of imported water costs
approximately $880, while the energy for one acre-foot of
recycled water costs $470
20% of all energy consumed in California is used moving
water
Water recycling is one of the most innovative, cost-
effective and promising solutions to conserve water and energy
The Need.--Reduced Reliance on Imported Water & Conserve Local Supplies
EVMWD serves the 3rd fastest growing area in Riverside
County, which is the 2nd fastest growing county in the nation
33% pumping cutbacks to the Delta will reduce the
reliability and availability of imported water supplies (Judge
Wanger Decision)
Prolonged droughts, unreliable water supplies and aging
infrastructure will become southern California's next major
crisis
proposed projects
Wildomar Recycled Water Project: Distribution Facilities
Total Project Cost: $19 million
Project Funding:
$4 million from state grant
$4.8 million from Congress
7.4 million EVMWD contribution
2.8 million Local Contribution
Alberhill Recycled Water Project: New Treatment & Distribution
Facilities
Total Project Cost: $38.5 million
Project Funding:
$9.6 million from Congress
$28.9 million EVMWD contribution
Defining a Recycled Water Model for California
1.5 billion gallons of `new' water each year, enough to
serve 36,000 people
$2.7 million saved a year in imported water costs
$1.8 million saved a year in electricity costs
15 million kWh of electricity saved, enough to serve 1,685
homes for a year
evmwd is going green . . .
765kWh of solar power produces 5 million gallons of recycled
water a day
12% of EVMWD's electricity needs are supplied by solar power
Recycled water is stabilizing lake levels in southern
California's largest natural lake
Lake Elsinore Advanced Pump Sotrage (LEAPS) will:
--Use `green' wind and solar power to maintain lake levels
--Generate more `green' hydropower for EVMWD to produce more
recycled water
--Provide `green' energy for southern California in times of
blackouts and brownouts
______
Statement of City of Oxnard, CA, Water GREAT Program, on H.R. 1737
introduction
Chairman Bingaman, Members of the Committee. . . I am Andres
Herrera, Councilman for the City of Oxnard. I am pleased to submit this
testimony to address a bill to amend the ``Reclamation Wastewater and
Groundwater Study and Facilities Act,'' better known as H.R. 1737.''
On behalf of the City of Oxnard, we would like to thank you for
this opportunity. We also wish to publicly recognize Congresswoman Lois
Capps for reintroducing this legislation as well as her continued
support for regional water supply solutions in her district.
background information
Known as ``The City That Cares,'' Oxnard is a beautiful community
to call home. It is enriched by a culturally diverse people, strong
economy and breezy weather. Located 62 miles northwest of downtown Los
Angeles and 35 miles south of Santa Barbara, Oxnard enjoys its rich
agricultural land and sandy beaches.
Oxnard's current water supplies consist of groundwater from the
coastal aquifers underlying the Oxnard Plain and imported state water
purchased from the Calleguas Municipal Water District. These sources
are blended in proportions necessary to balance water quality and water
supply cost. The groundwater supplies utilized by Oxnard are either
pumped from a groundwater recharge area and delivered to the city
through a local water management agency or pumped through extraction
facilities owned and operated by the City of Oxnard.
However, like other cities in California, Oxnard is faced with
several water resource challenges.
First, Oxnard is a growing community with a population of
nearly 200,000. The City of Oxnard is engaged in a general plan
update, as we speak. According to the California Department of
Finance, Demographic Research Unit, Oxnard is now the largest
city in Ventura County and the 20th largest city out of 475
cities statewide. A U.S. Census Bureau projection predicts that
the U.S. population will double by 2100 using moderate
assumptions. California's population is growing at a rate of
700,000 per year, which means the state's population will reach
50 million by 2020. It is a given--Oxnard will continue to grow
and so will demands on our water resources.
Second, to help restore overdraft conditions, the city's
groundwater allocation has been reduced by 20 percent over the
past twenty years through the efforts of the local groundwater
management agency. An additional five-percent reduction is
planned for 2010, for a total 25 percent reduction over
historical usage.
Third, imported Northern California water, through the State
Water Project, is becoming increasingly more costly and less
reliable as the demand on California's water supplies continues
to increase with the population.
the great program and its regional benefits
The solution to Oxnard's water resource challenges? The Groundwater
Recovery Enhancement And Treatment Program--or, as it's more commonly
known; ``the GREAT Program''.
The GREAT Program is a holistic, conjunctive use type water
resources project that combines wastewater purification and reuse,
groundwater injection, aquifer storage and recovery, and brackish or
groundwater desalination. Implementation of this program will provide
significant regional benefits:
Improved reliability of high-quality water deliveries to the
Oxnard Plain.
Sufficient water supplies to meet Oxnard's water resource
needs.
Enhanced local water supply stewardship through recycling
and reuse of a substantial portion of the region's wastewater
by upgrading the existing Oxnard Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The plant is currently a secondary treatment facility, with
effluent being discharged to the Pacific Ocean. Under the GREAT
Program, the plant will be converted to a 30-million gallon per
day tertiary and advanced treatment facility. The discharge
will then be used for agricultural irrigation, non-potable
municipal and industrial uses, and groundwater recharge.
Recapturing this lost resource will be made possible through a
new Advanced Water Purification Facility.
Reduced demand on imported water by pumping local
groundwater that is no longer pumped by agricultural interests.
Elimination of costly water delivery system improvements by
more efficiently using local water resources and reducing our
reliance on imported state water.
Reduced cost of wastewater reclamation due to a new brine
line for the Regional Groundwater Desalination Facility. We
believe desalination, one method of reusing water by removing
salts or salinity to meet purification standards, has enormous
potential.
Membrane concentrate from the new Groundwater Desalter and
Advanced Water Purification Facility will be utilized for
local, coastal wetlands restoration. This is a valuable water
resource that would otherwise be a waste product and disposed
of in the Oxnard Wastewater Treatment Plant's ocean outfall.
components of the great program
There are several components to the GREAT Program.
The Groundwater Desalter is currently under construction. It will
utilize 8-inch diameter reverse osmosis membrane treatment technology
to produce high-quality potable water that will be blended with
Oxnard's local groundwater sources. The Desalter will be capable of
producing 7.5 million gallons of water per day with an ultimate
capacity of 15 million gallons per day. This facility will be
operational in August 2008.
Construction should begin on the 30-million gallon per day Advanced
Water Purification Facility in the next 10 to 12 months. This project
includes tertiary treatment facilities to meet the State Department of
Health Services criteria for unrestricted reuse and advanced treatment
using large-diameter reverse osmosis membrane technology. Both
treatment facilities, the Desalter and Advanced Water Purification
Facility, are based on desalination technology.
The Advanced Water Purification Facility is also responsible for
producing a new water source. Referred to as GREAT ``Purified'' Water,
this resource will be utilized for various non-potable purposes and
will be of higher quality than existing local groundwater. The facility
will also help relieve overdrafting of the local groundwater basin,
which has led to seawater intrusion. However, even more beneficial, the
GREAT Program will create a seawater injection barrier to prevent the
ocean from mixing with and contaminating underground water supplies. We
have been working closely with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and
completed and submitted our required project feasibility study. The
project also has a certified environmental impact report and has
garnered all of its necessary land-use entitlements.
Finally, a silver lining of the GREAT Program is a component study
entitled the Membrane Concentrate Demonstration Wetlands Project. This
element was created to demonstrate the environmentally safe use of
membrane concentrate to restore coastal wetland ecosystems. Positive
results successfully demonstrated the viability of wetland-based
concentrate reuse. As home to one of the few remaining wetland
restoration sites in Southern California, this is very encouraging
news. This means that membrane concentrate, which is similar to
brackish water found within these estuaries, may be a suitable water
source to help restore the Ormond Beach wetlands.
public awareness and education
The GREAT Program has presented the City of Oxnard with a
tremendous opportunity to inform and educate residents, and the
surrounding region, on critical water resource issues such as
conservation, preservation of our wetlands and the facts surrounding
purified water. Experience has shown us that an effective public
awareness effort can help foster widespread understanding.
Our public outreach effort actually started months before the GREAT
Program was launched in 2001. The campaign has been well received and
widely reported in regional news and industry publications. It includes
media relations, an interactive website, informational brochures,
educational videos, presentations, public tours and numerous special
events.
award-winning program
The GREAT Program is a state and federal award-winning program.
Over the past few years it has garnered statewide and national
attention for its innovation. It was this year's recipient of the
prestigious League of California Cities Helen Putnam Award and was a
finalist for the Association of California Water Agencies 2004 Clair A.
Hill Award for Excellence. It also received recognition from the
Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of California.
conclusion
The City of Oxnard's GREAT Program will provide measurable
enhancements for Oxnard residents and its surrounding communities.
While municipalities across the state face many challenges, the GREAT
Program is an example of how challenges can be transformed into
opportunities to better serve residents, seek innovative technological
means to generate solutions, facilitate partnerships, build public
awareness and enhance public confidence. Yes...we believe that we have
made significant progress.
However, with your support of H.R. 1737, the ``City of Oxnard Water
Recycling and Desalination Act of 2005,'' we believe can work
cooperatively to make this essential project a reality. More
importantly, we will ensure a reliable and affordable source of high-
quality water for Oxnard residents.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee... Once again, the City of
Oxnard would like to thank you for convening this hearing. We are
extremely supportive of your efforts to ensure adequate and safe water
supplies for the entire country.
Thank you for the opportunity and for your consideration of the
Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and Treatment (GREAT) Program.
______
San Timoteo Watershed Management Authority,
Office of the Secretary,
Beaumont, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
United States Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
J Andrew Schlange,
General Manger.
______
Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Reclamation,
Temecula, CA, April 15, 2008.
Mr. Joseph B. Zoba,
General Manager, Yucaipa Valley Water District, P.O. Box 730, Yucaipa,
CA.
Subject: Approval of Feasibility Study; Yucaipa Valley Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Mr. Zoba: The Bureau of Reclamation is pleased to inform you
that the feasibility study for and supporting documentation submitted
for the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal Project meets the
requirements of a feasibility study as defined under the Reclamation
Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (43 U.S.0 390h et
seq), as amended.
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the formal approval
memorandum dated March 26, 2008. Please note that prior to the
execution of any construction funding agreements, completion of NEPA
compliance and the submittal of specific financial capability
documentation will be required.
If you have any questions, please call me at 951-695-5310.
Sincerely,
William J. Steele,
Area Manager.
Enclosure
MEMORANDUM
To: Director, Office of Program and Policy Services
Attention: 84-50000
Through: Lorri Gray, Regional Director
From: William J. Steele, Area Manager
Subject: Approval of Findings, Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply
Renewal Project
The purpose of this memorandum is to request your approval aouthern
California Area Office's (SCAO) findings for the feasibility study
report for the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal Project
(Title XVI feasibility report). For the reasons outlined below, the
SCAO finds that the feasibility study for the subject project is
complete and meet the requirements of the Title XVI program. Therefore,
SCAO recommends that the Bureau of Reclamation finds that this Title
XVI feasibility report meets the requirements of a feasibility study as
defined under Section 1604 of Public Law 102-575, as amended.
A meeting was held on August 18, 2006, between SCAO and the Yucaipa
Valley Water District (District) to discuss the feasibility study for
this project. Subsequently, on September 11, 2006, the District
submitted a feasibility study. Mr. Dennis Wolfe (SCAO), in consultation
with Messrs. Rick Martin and Dean Marrone (Office of Program and Policy
Services), reviewed the study and compared the documentation submitted
to the elements of a complete feasibility study as defined in the
``Guidelines for Preparing, Reviewing, and Processing Water Reclamation
and Reuse Projects under Title XVI of Public Law 102-57, as Amended''
(Title XVI Guidelines). On November 7, 2006, SCAO requested additional
information regarding the environmental analysis element from the
District. The requested information, which consists of a complete
Mitigated Negative Declarayion for the Yucaipa Brineline Project, was
received by SCAO on January 3, 2008, and has now been reviewed. The
additional information was found satisfactory by Messrs. Dennis Wolfe
and Miguel Rocha (Title XVI Program Manager, Office of Program and
Policy Services).
A waiver from the requirements identified in Reclamation Manual
Directive and Standard WTR 11-01, Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse
Program Feasibility Study Review Process (D&S) is requested for the
following reasons:
This review was initiated before the D&S was approved.
The D&S was modeled after the review process used for this
Title XVI feasibility study report resulting in minor variances
from the D&S.
Formally following the review process identified in the D&S
will require additional time and funding that will not result
in different findings.
This waiver will apply to this Title XVI feasibility study
report and will not have any Reclamation-wide effect.
Approval of this waiver will set a precedent for one other
report (City of Corona) where the review process was initiated
prior to signature of the D&S.
This memorandum will serve as the sole means of
communication of this waiver.
For the reasons set forth above, SCAO finds that the Title XVI
feasibility study report for the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply
Renewal Project now meets the requirements of a feasibility study as
defined under Section 1604 of Public Law 102-575, as amended. Your
concurrence and approval of SCAO's findings is requested.
Concur:
Lori Gray,
Regional Director.
Approve:
Roseann Gonzales,
Director, Office of Program and Policy Services.
______
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
Chair, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304
Dirksen Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Bingaman: Thank you for including my bill, H.R. 716,
the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan Act, as part of your hearing on
April 8, 2008, in the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources. Your continued leadership on
conservation issues is greatly appreciated.
As you may know, the Santa Rosa Water Reuse Plan will be vital in
helping the City of Santa Rosa (in my district in Sonoma County,
California) minimize its impact on the Russian River, the main
conveyance of regional water supplies and a vital migratory corridor
for threatened salmon and steelhead.
H.R. 716 will authorize $20 million to help design and construct
water recycling pipelines to distribute recycled wastewater throughout
Santa Rosa and its partner communities. Using treated wastewater to
irrigate new developments, median strips, and park landscapes will
yield long-term benefits in conserving valuable fresh water for human
consumption and watershed preservation and enhancement for Santa Rosa
and nearby communities. This is especially important in a region that
remains arid for six months of the year and where droughts pose a
genuine threat to humans and endangered species.
If this legislation is not authorized, Santa Rosa may resume
previous levels of discharges of untreated waters into the Russian
River, further endangering the river ecosystem. This will reverse years
of progress, ensuring years of conflict with downstream communities and
mounting costs to the city. Passing the Urban Water Reuse Program will
be helpful, in tandem with other programs, to reduce further Russian
River discharges.
Again, thank you for your consideration of H.R. 716, and I look
forward to working with you on this bill as it moves through your
committee.
Thank you, as always, for your leadership.
Sincerely,
Lynn Woolsey,
Member of Congress.
______
Lake Elsinore Unified School District,
Lake Elsinore, CA, April 1, 2008.
Hon. Tim Johnson,
U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington,
DC.
Dear Chairman Johnson: I am writing to convey my support for H.R.
31, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wastewater and
Recycled Water Facilities Act of 2007. This legislation overwhelmingly
passed the House last July, and we encourage the Senate to do the same.
The Wildomar water recycling project, which would be authorized by
this legislation, is ready to begin construction and would bring
immediate benefits to our part of the Inland Empire.
The Lake Elsinore Unified School District has already seen its
water bills decrease over $100k a year due to the installation of
weather based irrigation controllers provided by the water district. We
anticipate an additional annual savings of approximately $200k if H.R.
31 is passed and the water district can build the much needed recycled
water infrastructure outlined in this bill.
Thank you again, Chairman Johnson for taking the lead on this most
significant recycled water project for the Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District. Federal funding support for this project is vital and
necessary to match the local and state funds that have been given to
EVMWD to develop this new water supply.
Sincerely,
Dr. Frank W. Passarella,
District Superintendent.
______
Assembly California Legislature,
Sacramento, CA, February 6, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Subject: Support of HR 2614, Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional
Water Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate. Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water
District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water
infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, state, and federal
funds.
There is no opposition to this project. The 108th and 109th
Congress has passed it to the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the
project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109in Congress.
HR 2614 authorizes the construction of a twenty mile brine line and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in YVWD's
groundwater basin due their aggressive recycled water program. The
project will reduce demand on the State Water Project by four billion
gallons per year, or 27,000 families.
YVWD has become a conservation leader in the Inland Empire. This
project is important to the long-term goal of water self-sufficiency,
thereby protecting the residents of the East San Bernardino County from
drought.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Bill Emmerson,
Assemblyman, 63rd District,
Paul Cook,
Assemblyman, 65th District,
Robert Dutton,
Senator, 31st District.
______
Crafton Hills Open Space Conservancy,
Yucaipa, CA, February 7, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Subject: Support of HR 2614, Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional
Water Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate. Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water
District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water
infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, state, and federal
funds.
There is no opposition to this project. The 108th and 109th
Congress has passed it to the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the
project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
HR 2614 authorizes the construction of a twenty mile brine line and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in YVWD's
groundwater basin due their aggressive recycled water program. The
project will reduce demand on the State Water Project by over four
billion gallons per year.
YVWD has become a conservation leader in the Inland Empire. This
project is important to the long-term goal of water self-sufficiency,
thereby protecting the residents of the East San Bernardino County from
drought.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Ingrid Lagerlof,
Executive Director.
______
City of Yucaipa,
Yucaipa, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, as you are aware, the project
was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Dick Riddell,
Mayor.
______
City of Banning,
Office of the Mayor,
Banning, CA, February 28, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Subject: Support of HR 2614, Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional
Water Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate. Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water
District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water
infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, state, and federal
funds.
There is no opposition to this project. The 108th and 109th
Congress has passed it to the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the
project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
HR 2614 authorizes the construction of a twenty mile brine line and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in YVWD's
groundwater basin due their aggressive recycled water program. The
project will reduce demand on the State Water Project by four billion
gallons per year, or 27,000 families.
YVWD has become a conservation leader in the Inland Empire. This
project is important to the long-term goal of water self-sufficiency,
thereby protecting the residents of the East San Bernardino County from
drought.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Brenda Salas,
Mayor.
______
City of Banning,
Electric Department,
Banning, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re:Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
James Earhart,
Public Utilities Director.
______
Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District,
Beaumont, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re:Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ma Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
C.J. Butcher,
General Manager.
______
California Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Santa Ana Region,
Riverside, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re:Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalination facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan to improve water quality
in the watershed.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Gerard J. Thibeault,
Executive Officer.
______
City of Calimesa,
Calimesa, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Nan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
David A. Lane,
City Manager.
______
East Valley Water District,
Highland, CA April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water-recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty-mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in the
groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an
important element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Very truly yours,
Robert E. Martin, P.E.,
General Manager.
______
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District,
San Bernardino, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important legislation which
includes a water recycling project for the Yucaipa area.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in a groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan, as approved by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and the 2007 Upper Santa Ana River
Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
reduce the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation was passed by the 108th and 109th House of
Representatives but not the Senate. Furthermore, the project was
included in your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Randy Van Gelder,
General Manager.
______
San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency,
April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty-mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basins of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District and the Upper Santa Ana region in
general.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Very truly yours,
Jeff Davis,
General Manager & Chief Engineer.
______
Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority,
Riverside, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re:Support of FIR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, State, and Federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty-mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in the
groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an
important element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project also will
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Celeste Cantu,
General Manager.
______
Board of Supervisors,
County of San Bernardino,
San Bernardino, CA, May 6, 2003.
Mr. Bruce Granlund,
Board President, Yucaipa Valley Water District, 12770 Second Street,
Yucaipa, CA.
SUBJECT: Letter of Support for the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply
Renewal Project
Dear Mr. Granlund: The County of San Bernardino supports the
construction of the proposed Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply
Renewal Project. The project will involve the construction of a
desalinization facility and approximately 20 miles of brine disposal
pipeline. The project is essential to provide a reliable water supply
for the region and effectively eliminate the buildup of minerals and
various contaminants in the eastern portion of the Santa Ana Watershed.
This particular project, coupled with the Yucaipa Valley Water
District's aggressive recycled water program, is a vital step in
minimizing the amount of water imported from the fragile ecosystem in
northern California.
On behalf of the County of San Bernardino, I support the District's
project and believe it is prudent to secure the necessary funds to
implement the construction of these facilities.
Sincerely,
Dennis Hansberger,
Chairman, Supervisor, Third District.
______
Oak Valley Partners, L.P.,
Calimesa, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Mark Knorringa,
Director of Development.
______
SunCal Companies,
Inland Empire Division,
Corona, CA, April 3, 2008.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein,
U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support of HR 2614--Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water
Supply Renewal Project
Dear Senator Feinstein, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask
for your assistance in passing this important water recycling project
in the Senate.
Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD)
has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a
combination of ratepayer, state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would
authorize the construction of a twenty mile brine disposal pipeline and
a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in groundwater
basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important
element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also
lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the
Yucaipa Valley Water District.
This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to
the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in
your S. 3638 in the 109th Congress.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Peter Johnson,
Division President.