HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-08-16; City Council; 9598; Funding for Water Reclamation StudyE JI
%
n
U t!
$
.. z 2 I- 0 a
$ z 3 0 0
i. . -' Cl.pi OF CARLSBAD - AGENa BILL !.
AB#.-- TITLE: DEBT.
CITY A MTG. 8-16-88 - FUNDING FOR WATER RECLAMATION STUDY
DEPT. U/M - CITY k
R ECO M M EN D E:D ACTION :
1. Adopt. Resolution SC I fr-$Yfapproving tile i:ransfer of $7,415 tc
Carlsba.d! s share of the Cnu1;t.y ic'ater iiuti;r;rity 1 ~1icilla p,zLsin
Recla.inatlon Project ?base 1 : conniilt.ant st.ucly a11.ci. a~~~.~-!or~z,c t.hr
Xanager EO execute the attached Cost S1iarirrg Agreement bcc:.,iee11 ti
Diegc, Coii~t>~ Water Authority aiid the City of i::arlsbad.
~dopt: pLesolu.ti.on ~0. fNapprnpriating s~o,~oo t:] fur,d prep2ra.t:
a Caz:l~hd. Xat.er ZeclalIiatLoi1 Yaster Plan 31x2 direct staff *LO prel
SCOPE ~5 wrk and solicit proposals from clus..li_fied engineering consu:
to prepare a iiatel: 3ecla:nation Plan. for the City of !:arlsb~d.
2,
3, 3irec: t staff to prepare for Council consi.derztion a coripreke.;
reclaiaed x%; ter- x:a:i!?af:,ry use c;rdinaIice ~
The attached. Water Reclam:Ltion report exarnines che cu-Trent. status of
recimatic)n activities iii tho Czx.lsl;ad area ZLZ:~ propi;ses several actions
take.11 should the Council &sire to begin a 5;ater Reclamation ?rr:gram f:;r th
of Carlsbad,
Specif ical1.y the reports Iclentif;es :
1, \+ater Reclarcation Xaster PILaii Cpc!ate, The 1979 ?faster Zlaa for
5.eclarnation WRS c::iicei7,7ed, as <>ne of se.i:erai methods 5~3~ allev
nrl7,7es been irnp1einei;ttic' aixi IS need of update and re:;isicl; TO r'
-.
?., <,czrishad's - , sevxz- moratorirt:;i existing at time, The M:,;ster ?I%
-,
wate.r reclamatic>n CFp<IirL"*-'; ties diic:i preser:tly <?xist. ?lor,
a pLan to pro.</.de f(:>s the in5ras:rucrure req~ired i(> dist
reclai.il;,ed wzLter is ri;eczssary If the C:ity (if Ciarisbad is T(
advar-itage cLF serlai. - ti;a';er' prodwe:! by :)tiler agexicies rr.2
to the Eneina Easin.
The Encina %eclaa:aticn Report , The Sount>~! s E:ic:iIra Easi:; Reci:.,~
Eepor-t i:?.ei;tiSies pot.ential vatex re~se inarkets wi::Z& tile t-i'
area of the EncLj-m TJater ?ol.lu:.icr, Con.tro1 fac<Iit>- (\\ycF) .
aaeellite reclp..matina playits 7'nd the Enci:la T<PCI; rii ~11 ;3L i
2,
stU:Il_y! ::fl>i.:l: is j---' 1. ,-;.y pyeliniiiiar>: i:i nature ~ coiisider.~ 11111
ei !;\ig~yi!ic tiou :eeoi t::: bpyye sik es";i&-j F~:&la
~ l:;c.LE.c:.l~lg Zh0 ~~l~~i-~ c<jrtic':p. :>f C:aylsha:j, Tj
Diegc ZCWJI~>- i.;ater X.i;thority has ;..greet? to fund 53% of 8. ::31ic
stady EO prepare .r2 ci:ietailecf facilities ~lan Ecr t.he p
ccnceptvallzed in the C(;rr;zty' s E~ciiia &isi:i Recla:nat-ior:_ Report
ot.her pgeczles in ;he EncIila .Basin, inc].~~d<ng tl-le City of e---- cc L
1ia~:e been re.;Ize,;ted. t(:, fun:S the remzili:i;ig j~)?:, (if tlig pxnjec~
Carlsbad's c-1;ai-e r;f the prc,je>:t ?(;st will be $7,$:s,:C, ~11~
Lteresf, 1~~:s. Ea lesiga :x:::l r:::,nstr~~Ct r-?cia;~xeci riat:?r d<.s~.yi'
-1
. - ..
ide al:- G? tilt. infozi.iatj.on req~:i~er? t:: appl~. ."<:>x Sta -. , ,-*
0 9 *
L
PAGE 2 OF A2.v $&'yf
- * ,. ., faciliries, ;he ~ity ~f [:arlshd ~j.il ~~1<eiy rec_.eiy.:e th~
bensf-Lt frc3ni the St an:- it is rec~~nn~ended that the ccui..ci.l a
a;!.:'; au ti1c: 1 iZE par i2:arinn in the s tudq- x1d c,.pFrog.ria;.r
$7: :;.73,93 ES zhe ::it!.- :;f ~a~.l~bzj' s shy2 ~
.,
-- -, 3. Yanc!atory :- se Zrdillance, To :ir,col:rage xi:? eqe te r.ecia:c;ed.
use i~ C.%ri~bac? and ZG prep2x.e f:jx pnssi1)j.e Si;at,e fur-icling assis
I :: is reccJmme;ided chat czrlsbd p.dopt smile t>;pe of cow;>re'ilr
ol'!7_man@ . Exister1ce (25 2 ::1gr1,
<.Lie. ciq of C,2Y.!.Shr?d the a;:i11t5; tc:; qr
-,r-.jects fu:ilde:li !>>: the State lo~iis. $20 re o\i
.I
,A &; t(j K;? f 2 (2 1;; i;[)Q 3 \<At[? L'
.L 1. ?-i.gp, ijrdi~.ar,ce ccill p?~
f.2~ 5';~~~e l:>z.ils \<ith the need to have cclntracts in 1312
use of 50% :f the r.cclai::led r,;;ater ::hat UOLI
ii; anda.::o ~3- 13 s e c; r ?Li:yLz~:c e WOI; LC,. p 7 =v i c! p 2 r:: r 0 r :!e r l y ircp 1 ement 8 t 1 -.
~er plszi 5e-;;elopq.:l ad appr::~, .: ::ir- the City CouncLi.
FI.S,C.IL I.fIJAr:?;
T113 ~eco;ii~~ei~&~. ;.ctisris t:iL1 1 5cic.ire 7 ,515 in funds to accc;iralish the rec
1 ak,.jr;<, -, , F11n3.:; 2x5 avzilehie ipL thc T-T;12 r(:jpri~Lted Reserve of the S,e:<er %z;ce:
F:3.UCi,
yyaIp.ITS :
1 I. Resolu.t ion x:;. &s- &P,
T 2. hes~l:;.t i(>il SO. =$
4 . Scope of 3ork - Encilia Ee.si tior, Projec; ?'base I F,
T' v~acer zeclaization i9'sS-S9 P~.-cgram Xepori ,
PlxlILlg.
EQE Eficinz ?,2.s.i.;,
.i .
c 1 iLIL* 5 2, Lll,Lpei,>:ell~ L o*. fair S~1~::i;~g C:~E= :epa:-ati<;i-i :;f e F:-tciLi:l~.s Pia: :~';"c -
L
I
L
L
1
0 e
FtE~~>Lf.~TIO?; X(?, 88-298
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE TFLANSFE
!>-XEIE.!S! tl!k> I icy of c~irlsh 5 share !:If the C,oUllt)- G;l tel. AidI.hl 1‘:” .
Easic Ret:.laiilarii>tl Pr:; je<:-t Phtxse. 1X~jultant Sf:ud> ic 57, 143; ::~tc1
F’HEF,Eh’j , t;l i s rtltlt K>>S 110c pk31-t [.;f tile Fi~~;il ‘<ra~ !O:i8-89 bt~dg~
\<‘FIEREAS, fui-ids a? a::ailahl.e in the I‘napptopriated Reser~ec i.)f the
Enterprise Fiitld,
XOh‘, THEREFORE, EVE IT RESOLVED b> the Lit:; Li.~unc:il (.if the City of Car
California, as foll~~r;s :
The ;xbolie recitations are tlrue xid cc!rrect. i.
7 The appiopr iation of 57 i 145, 00 froiii the ‘I‘napprc.,printet:l Rese L.
i:he C;e%er Enterprise Faid tc: ;iccmint numher 511-940-6110-2&7? is authori;
appr‘ow:! ,
PASSED ., ;IPFF;OITP AS0 APOPTED at a regular niee Liiig Of [lie Car!.Zhil
C:.iunr:il held c.i11 rhe 16th c!ak- of August . 1!388, h:- the fo3
x.- c.1 t t? . t D ii i t :
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Mamaux and Larson
XIES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Pettine
I i 1 I
I (y’; dp L’
,. d/f?),$44 , / I; ,+y+ -
c;L.ALDE d * LEWIS, ?la>‘OL’
ATTEST:
AA 0 ALETHA L + RALTEWRAXZ, tit>- C1esk/
(SEAL)
1
2
3
r
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 *
FIESOLPTIOS NO, 88-299
.L\ RESOLPTION OF THE CITY C:OPX.'i;TL (UF THE CITY OF ~:ARLSE.L\D. c:&\L~F(?R~I+~.~ .:PFI
THE TRAXSFEK OF .56(.11 000 TO FL-XD THE PF:EPAPJTIOh' C)F .A (:.wLSp,.u; \<.;?ITER [%Ec:L,>,!
?:-AX ;\sn TO DIRE(:;T STAFF TO PREPARE 1 S!;O?E OF W(jF,I; .AND TO ji:~LIf:Tf pp,(jpos,
PRED.ARE A \<ATEX RECLA.WTZON PI..\?:
KHEREAS, there is ;i necessit!- for the City of C;arlshad to ple11;:rp ;I
Re~:lamaric.)n Plari: anti
GHEREAS. the City staff w::rklo:id :inc-l expertise pre(:lLdes LC ~L!JIX PLPI
~he F1::xn in-hwse ; arid
hXEEE.45, the (;it)- staff should prepare the scope vf xork and s;
p 1 c)po s :i 15 f L' o!!i qua 1 i f ie d Prig i ne e x ing (:mis~i 1 tan t s t 11 pr e pa I e t lie p lan : an1
\.;HEREAS I t.he aunouiit of $60 I 000 for preparation of the Plan cv'as zit)
of the fisc:al :.ear 1989-89 budget: arid
hXEREX5 . fuids afr aL-ailable in the I_inappropr-iatcd Reser-~,-e <.)f rhe
Eriterpzise Fun:3.
?;OW, THEREFORE! EE IT RESOLVED I.??. he City Council vf tlie Cic:.- (:if Car
r:alifornia, as follows :
1. The ah0L.e recitations are true and correct I
3 The :apprc.rpriat1on of SGO . 000 fruiit che Vnappropriated Fteserve L.
Seuer Enterprise Fund to account nw;her 511-540-6110-2479 is her.eh:= auth
aiid approved.
ill
i I/
111
Ill
ill
Ill
I
0
*
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
0 *
PASSED, APPY,OS'EJj AS11 .ID:iPTED a[ ::i r?gulai iUet!t ing i.if th? CA~'i~>b;l
C,otinril held cm the 16th :l;?y ::f August , i'3S3. t)!. t!lp foi
\'ore , tc. Tiir :
< %tE5: -. Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Mamaux and Larson
NOES: None
AFiSENT: Council Member Pettine
ATTEST:
01 ALETH.~ L. RAtiTENKRAx\iZ, City Clerk)
(SEAL!
~ 19
2o
21
22
23
24 25
26
27
28
I i '
11 f?J COQ
~ I
2
4
I e e
CITY OF CARLSBAD
WATER RECLAMATION 1988-89 PROGRAM
A Report Prepared for
the Carlsbad City Council
BY
the Utilities and Maintenance Department
Ralph W. Anderson, Director
July, 1988
I 0 e
TABLE OF CON!FENTS
Pagc
A. Introduction iii
C. Mandatory Use Ordinance iv
Executive Summary
B, Encina Basin Reclamation Report iii
D. Water Reclamation Master Plan Update V
A. Report Purpose 1
B. Background 1
1. Declining Water Supply And Growing Demand 1
2. Reclaimed Water To Supplement Supply 3
3. Uses Of Reclaimed Water 3
4. Existing State Reclamation Use Policies 5
A. Background 9
Study 9
Advisory Committee (WARAC) 10
B. Proposed Detailed Facilities Plan Report 11
C. Conclusions And Recommendations 12
1 Conclusions 12
2. Recommendations 12
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Chapter 2 - Encina Basin Reclamation Report
1. San Diego County Encina Basin Feasibility
2. Formation of Water Authority Reclamation
Chapter 3 - Mandatory Use Ordinance
A. State Board Loan Program 13 B. Example Use Ordinances 14
1, Imine Ranch Water District 14
2. City Of Mesa, Arizona 15
3. Clark County Nevada 16
4. Pacific Rim Development 16
C. Conclusions and Recommendations 17
1. Conclusions 17
2. Recommendations 17
Chapter 4 - Water Reclamation Master Plan Update
A. Past Reclamation Master Planning 18
2. 1979 Master Plan Study 19
3. Lake Calavera Reclamation Facility Studies 21
4. Costa Real MWD Non-Potable Master Plan 22 B. Existing Situation 22
1. 1979 Master Plan Implementation 22
1. 1978 Overview Report 18
2. Lake Calavera Water Reclamation Plant 23
3. La Costa Country Club Reclamation 23
4. Agreement With Costa Real MWD 24
5, Pacific Rim Reclamation Planning 25
6. Encina Basin Facility Plan Report 25
i
r e 0
TABLE OF COWENTS (continued)
C. Proposed Carlsbad Reclamation Master Plan
1. Master Plan Content 25
2. Need For Independent Plan- 26
D. Conclusion And Recommendations 27
1. Conclusions 27
2. Recommendations 27
ii
*
9 0 0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. INTRODUCTION
San Diego County is again experiencing a threatened drough situation and water conservation is being strongly encouraged b State and local officials. Water reclamation is a locally controlled method of stretching our existing water supplies With imported water supply sources shrinking, local populatio and water demand increasing, the cost of potable domestic wate
reclamation has become a prudent, economical method of producin additional non-potable water for landscape irrigation and lak
replenishment.
Several State documents mandate or encourage the use of reclaime water in water-short areas of the State for replacing potabl domestic water used for irrigation and landscaping. Thes include the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, th Policy and Action Plan for Water Reclamation in California an the Comprehensive Water Oualitv Control Plan Report San Dieq Basin (9).
This report discusses three water reclamation issues that affec the City of Carlsbad and provides conclusions and recommende action items on each issue to be considered by the City Council Those issues are 1) the need for and funding of the Encina Basi Water Reclamation Project report, 2) the need for a reclaime
water mandatory use ardhance in Carlsbad, and 3) the need for a
up-to-date reclaimed water master plan specific to Carlsbad' boundaries, goals, and needs.
increasing, and the cost of treating sewage increasing
B. ENCINA BASIN RECLAMATION REPORT
In February 1988 the San Dieso Water Reuse Study. Volume V Encina Basin Feasibility Study was completed. The study wa authorized by the County of San Diego Office of Special Project with State and Federal grant funds. The study identified th potential water reuse markets within the tributary area of th
Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) and investigate the feasibility of reclamation within this basin. The stud
considers linking four satellite reclamation plants (Shadowridge
Meadowlark, Gafner and Lake Calavera Hills) and the Encina WPC with a common reclaimed water distribution system to serve a extensive Encina Basin reuse market, including the souther portion of Carlsbad.
After the initiation of this study, but before its completior the San Diego County Water Authority formed its Water Authorit Reclamation Advisory Committee (WARAC) in November 1987, made 1: of all public water purveyors and sewering agencies in San Die5 County. WARAC assumed the responsibilities of the former Sz
iii
0 0
Diego Region Water Reclamation Agency of which Carlsbad was
evaluate, and make policy recommendations to the Board of the Sa Diego Water Authority (CWA) . WARAC has recommended, and the CW
has approved, a fiscal year 1988-89 budget of $300,000 fo technical assistance to member agencies to study wate
cost sharing with the agencies sponsoring each project and i limited to $50,000 (by the CWA) for each individual project.
The Encina Basin Subcommittee of WARAC was formed in the sprini of 1988 composed of representatives of the cities and agencie
tributary to the Encina WPCF, including Carlsbad, San Marc0 County Water District, Leucadia County Water District, Buenl Sanitation District, Olivenhain Municipal Water District, Sa: Dieguito Water District and the County of San Diego. As a mode
project the Subcommittee agreed to prepare a scope of work an[ solicit proposals from qualified engineering consultants tc
in previously referenced Encina Basin Feasibility Study. In Junc
1988, WARAC recommended approval of a proposal by the consultinc firm of John S. Murk Engineers, Inc. to prepare a detailec
facility plan titled, Encina Basin Water Reclamation Proiec. Phase I Facility Planninq, for an estimated fee of $88,982.
In June 1988, CWA approved the work proposal by the consultani and agreed to fund fifty percent of the study ($44,492) Thc
remaining funding is to be shared by six participating agencies Carlsbad, San Marcos CWD, Leucadia CWD, Buena SD, Olivenhain MWI and San Dieguito WD, each contributing $7,415. Carlsbad is
thus, asked to contribute its share to this study amounting tc one-twelveth the total project cost.
C. MANDATORY USE ORDINANCE
In the State's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, which wa: enacted in 1969 and became Division 7 of the Water Code, thc
legislature found it wasteful or unreasonable to use potablc domestic water for the irrigation of greenbelt areas, whei adequately treated reclaimed water is available and no1 unreasonably costly. This finding would appear to all01 individual cities and agencies in California to adopt ordinance! requiring mandatory use of reclaimed water when available Requiring the use of reclaimed water in Carlsbad would encouragt the use of reclaimed water by: providing a market; providing ai
incentive for treatment plant owners to update their treatmenl levels; forcing newly developing areas to construct dual watei systems: planning for long-term use programs; and assuring long- term use thereby qualifying for State funding assistance.
The State Water Resources Control Board low-interest loan prograr
for reclaimed water facilities requires either a long term usc agreement between the purveyor and user, or a mandatory Usc ordinance by the agency supplying the reclaimed water.
founding member, WaRAC'a primary missiaa is to study, considelc
reclamation programs. The CWA support is cantingent upan 50s
Cr8-A7A-,t 2 detai4lad facilfties :'-- uiaii LuI =-- A.1- Llle ------L ~LUJ~LL conceptualizec
iv
I 0 6
Example reclaimed water use ordinances or policies presented il this report include: Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine California; City of Mesa, Arizona; Clark County, Nevada: and tht recent development map condition for the Pacific Rim Country Clul
and Resort in Carlsbad. Of particular interest is the City 0: Mesa, Arizona Ordinance No. 2119 adopted October 22, 1986. Thc intent of the ordinance is to restrict the use of potable wate: for the filling of "artificial lakesi1 and the irrigation 0. "turf-related facilities," which includes parks, golf courses cemetaries , road medians, etc. The ordinance requires ai
applicant to obtain a permit from the City to fill a man-mad(
pond or lake and to irrigate landscaped areas of ten acres 01 more. Permit approval is contingent upon the lake being fillec
or the landscaped area being irrigated with either reclaimec water, storm water runoff, poor quality groundwater or excesz Central Arizona Project water. Also, the ordinance allows tht
existing artificial lakes and turf-related facilities, which haw previously been supplied by the City's municipal system 01 another water source. Violation of any provision of tht ordinance may result in up to a $1,000 fine and/or six month': imprisonment.
Resolution No. 1977-49 of the Irvine Ranch Water District states its intent to provide its water service applicants, desirinc water for landscape and agricultural irrigation, constructior water, industrial process water, or recreational impoundments, with reclaimed water in lieu of potable water. Each use must be
approved on a case-by-case basis and the District may deterrninc in its discretion whether it is necessary or desirable to furnisk the applicant potable water. The District uses the previous11 referenced wording in the State's Porter-Cologne Water Qualit1 Act to impose mandatory use of reclaimed water on its customers.
TO encourage and expedite reclaimed water use in Carlsbad, and tc prepare for possible State funding assistance, it is recommended that Carlsbad adopt some type of comprehensive mandatory reclaimed water use ordinance.
D. WATER RECLAMATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE
Carlsbad's previous reclaimed water master plan reports are now for the most part outdated. Satellite treatment plants proposed in the late 1970's and early 1980's providing secondary treatment
at a time of sewer moratorium were not constructed in Carlsbad, with the exception of the Lake Calavera Hills plant. The 1.2 million gallon per day (MGD) Lake Calavera Hills plant has never been operated, and is inadequate to meet strict reclaimed water treatment levels for unrestricted irrigation usage. The CWA is coordinating an effort by the Encina Basin Subcommittee of WARAC to prepare a detailed water reclamation facilities plan which
includes portions of Carlsbad. However, a comprehensive reclamation master plan update is needed for Carlsbad as a guide for funding, constructing, and coordinating a major reclaimed water distribution system for all of Carlsbad.
city to substitute adequately treated reclaimed water foi
V
J e 0
Several reclamation planning studies have been prepared in th
past involving Carlsbad including the following: Overview o Waste Water Reclamation Opportunities (1978), City of Carlsba Waste Water Reclamation Master Plan study (1979), Environmenta ImDact and Facilities Plan for a Satellite Sewase Treatmen
Facility (1978 for the Lake Calavera Hills plant), Propose Revision Basin Plan Objectives Carlsbad and a Portion of the Asu Hedionda Hydrosraphic Subareas (1980), Overview for Public Non Potable Water Sources and Master Plan for Public Non-Potabl Water System (1982), Lake Calavera Hills Reclamation Svste UDdate Remrt (1983).
The only current reclamation activity on-going in the City is b the La Costa Country Club for the irrigation of up to 15 holes o its 36-hole golf course. Reclaimed water is supplied by the Cit of La Costa from the Meadowlark Water Reclamation Plant owned b
the San Marcos County Water District. The City has also require the new Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort to provide reclaime
Pacific Rimt s owners to provide reclaimed water either fr& th Meadowlark plant or the Leucadia County Water District's Gafne Water Reclamation Plant.
The "Water Service Agreement" executed between the City and th
Costa Real Municipal Water District in May 1983 requires the Cit to adopt a reclaimed water master plan. It is recommended tha an updated reclamation master plan be prepared for Carlsbad an be built on past studies, current research, and Carlsbadl specific goals and objectives.
water distribution facilities, trnd City staff is wrsrjdnn; Kif
vi
I e 0
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
A. REPORT PURPOSE
San Diego County is beginning to understand that it is in l
critical water supply situation. At the end of major aqueduct
bringing imported water from both the Colorado River and Norther
California. San Diego County is particularly vulnerable to wate supply problems. One means of stretching the usefulness o existing water supply is to adequately treat and reuse ou
domestic wastewater for irrigation and other non-drinkin purposes.
This report discusses the need for reclaimed water planning i San Diego County, and presents three action items for th
ccnsiderztisn I.,~Y HZ the ~euncil te prcmote water reclamatio
implementation in Carlsbad. The three items are: (1) to approv the City's share of funding for the Encina Basin Wate Reclamation Project Phase I Facility Planninq, (2) to adopt a ordinance requiring the use of reclaimed water to irrigat
existing and proposed open-space, landscaping, parks, go1 courses and agricultural lands in Carlsbad, and (3) to approv funding Carlsbad's Water Reclamation Master Plan UPdate-
B. BACKGROUND
1. Declinins Water Supply and Growins Demand
A recent May 1988 newspaper article in the San Diego Dail TranscriDt states, "Population Growth Will Outrun Water Supply. The story about Southern California's acute water shortag problems was based on remarks by State Water Resources Contro
Board Chairman, W. Don Maughan. His remarks came on the fina day of a two day hearing on steps taken by California wate distributors to cope with this and next year's potential drough conditions. Mr. Maughan stated that, 'IYou (Southern California are sitting at the end of a whole lot of water import systems In 15 or 20 years there is not enough water in sight to meet you projected population growth. In the 1990's and up to the yea
2000 you are going to have a problem."
At that conference, water officials from urban Souther California said their shortage in the current drought is les serious than Northern California's, mostly because of th enormous amount of water stored by dams on the Colorado River
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD expects to get 1.15 million acre-feet of Colorado River wate during the 1988-89 fiscal year. Wiley Horne, drought coordinato for MWD stated that the water stored in the Colorado River syste is four times as large as the River's average annual runoff Because of this surplus and because Arizona is still not usin
I 0
its full entitlement from the Colorado River, MWD can hope for a surplus from the River until about 1992. After the Central Arizona Project begins making full use of its Colorado River
allocation, MWD will be limited to its legal entitlement Of
550,000 acre-feet per year.
Mr. Horne went on to state that water runoff into the Coloradc River was only 63 percent of normal last winter, increasing tht possibility that surpluses stored in dams will decline in tht
future. Further aggravating the water supply situation is thc threat of a third critically dry year in the Sierra Nevadas nex winter. The past two drier-than-normal seasons in Norther California will leave reservoirs very low by the end of thi summer. The existing drought has already forced San Franciscan to begin water rationing and northern utilities that rely o
hydro-electric power generation to switch to more expensiv sources resulting in rate hikes.
Because of the drought, Los Angeles has been forced to use mor Colorado River and Northern California water. Los Angele
normally gets about 75 percent of its Water Supply Separatel from InyO and Mono Counties. Because of the drought, Los Angel€
will get only about 70 percent of its usual supply from tk. eastern Sierras, and has thus turned to MWD to make up tl difference. This demand in Los Angeles conflicts with San Die! County's need, which depends heavily on supply from MWD.
The San Diego County Water Authority (CWA), which is a membg agency of MWD, imports about 84 percent of its water from MWD ( about 550,000 acre-feet per year. Lester Snow, general manag of the CWA reports that about 80 percent of San Diego County water is consumed by urban users and 20 percent goes . agriculture. Of that urban usage, approximately half goes irrigation of greenspace, recreational areas and landscaping a half goes to in-house uses.
Even without drought conditions adequate water supply to Southe California will be a problem in the future. The faciliti
needed to supply Southern California with additional water fl
Northern California have not been built, typified by the defc of the voter initiative in 1982 to construct the Periferal Cane Also, a 1964 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court cut MWC allocation of Colorado River water by 55 percent starting
1985. MWD's loss was Arizona's gain, and the now over-subscril Colorado River is projected to ultimately have a 662,000 aci feet per year shortfall - enough water to supply 3 mill: people.
Finally, under the Metropolitan Water District Act, each of
27 member agencies (including the CWA) is entitled tc preferential right to purchase water from MWD based on historical total tax payment by each member. This could ca San Diego County problems since the CWA has historica
purchased up to 30 percent of MWD's supplies, but according the Act is only entitled to approximately 11 percent.
2
, a a
2. Reclaimed Water to Supplement SUP^
Highly treated domestic sewage, or reclaimed water, is virtuall! an untapped, local water supply source. While 550,000 acre-feel per year of water is imported to San Diego County, only a fei thousand acre-feet per year of reclaimed water is recycled. Thii
compares with about 160,000 acre-feet. per year of reclaimec water produced by the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angele:
County. About 46,000 acre-feet per year is used directly fo irrigation and the remainder is recharged into the groundwate basin.
In developing its program to extend imported water supplies, th CWA is evaluating water conservation, reclamation, and associate
innovative water management practices. Of the three methods, th
CWA believes water reclamation holds the greatest potential t
expand local supplies, and it is expected to play an essentia role in future water supply planning.
To promote and encourage water reclamation, the CWA ha established some ambitious goals and made some projection concerning future water reclamation use. By the year 2010 twelve percent of the region's total water production is expecte to be reclaimed water. Approximately 30 water reclamation plant are expected to treat and distribute about 100,000 acre-feet pe
year of reclaimed water to over 100 separate sites. Many o these projects will go beyond traditional irrigation practices t encompass groundwater recharge and industrial applications.
3. Uses of Reclaimed Water
The uses of reclaimed water in California are primarily regulate by two State agencies: California Regional Water Quality Contrc Board (Regional Board) and the California Department of Healt Services State Health Department).
The types of uses that reclaimed water can be used for ai determined by the degree of treatment provided. Regarding publj health issues, the level of treatment required is established 1 the State Health Department in a document titled Wastewatc Reclamation Criteria, An Excerpt from the Californi Administrative Code, Title 22, Division 4, Environmental Healt (Title 22 Requirements). The highest level of treatment providc for in the Title 22 Requirements allows the resultant reclaimc water to be used to irrigate edible fruits and vegetables, go! courses, school yards, cemeteries, and parks: to suppl decorative lakes where public fishing, boating, and even swimmil are permitted, to enhance or supply stream flows for ripark
habitat restoration, and provide a source of graundwatc recharge. Uses of reclaimed water in relation to the level ( treatment provided and according to the Title 22 Requirements a: shown in Table 1.
3
e *
TABLE 1
RECLAIMED WATER USES AND TITLE 22 REQUIREMENTS
TREATMENT WATER USE
TERTIARY~~
Coagulated, clarified, filtered 1, Spray irrigation of food cr
2 turbidity units 2. Non-restricted recreational coliform: 2.2/100 medianb/ pondments (allow swimming).
23/100 once/30 days 3. Landscape irrigation for la parks, playgrounds and golf courses adjacent to lawns.
SECONDARY
Oxidized 1. Surface irrigation of food
High performanct reliable 2. Restricted recreational crops.
and fishing).
disinfection impoundments (allows boatin
SECONDARY
Oxidized 1. Landscape impoundments. Average performance disinfection 2. Pasture for milking animals coliform: 23/100 median 3. Landscape irrigation, golf courses not adjacent to lab
PRIMARY
1/2 ml/l hr. settleable solids 1. Orchard & vineyard (no sprz
2. Surface irrigation - foddei irrigation) .
fiber & seed crops,
NOTES: a/ An alternative treatment method using filtration extended chlorine contact may be substituted for system described above,
Coliform bacteria measured as Most Probable Number
100 milliliters sample (MPN/100 ml). b/
4
e a
Other reclaimed water quality requirements, such as mineral anc nutrient content, are established in the Regional Board':
Comprehensive Water Quality Control Plan for the San Dieso Basil
Board to establish allowable mineral and nutrient qualit! requirements for reclaimed water used for various purposes ii each hydrologic basin in the San Diego Region. Reclaimed wate; uses in California include:
0 Landscape Irrigation - including golf courses, parks, schoo
yards, cemeteries road medians, open space, fire breaks, an! other public and private greenspace,
0 Landscape Impoundments - including decorative an recreational lakes and ponds,
0 Agricultural Irrigation - including fruits, vegetables
0 Industrial Supply - sand and gravel washwater, cooling wate
0 Groundwater Recharge - to replenish depleted groundwate basins for pumping and reuse or to prevent salt wate intrusion from the ocean,
Commercial Supply - to provide non-drinking water service t commercial buildings for toilets and urinals (up to 80% o daily use),
0 Stream Flow and Habitat Replenishment - to provide a sourc
of stream flow, lagoon and lake replenishment, riparia habitat, preservation of rare and endangered species.
4. Existinq State Reclamation Use Policies
(Basin Plan). This document provides guidance for the Regiona: -
orchards, pasture, flowers,
make-up, process water for industries,
0
The State of California has adopted several resolutions, orders and policies encouraging the use of properly treated reclaim€
water to conserve and extend our existing water supply source:
terms, the following documents provide an agency State polic guidelines to adopt specific reclaimed water use ordinances.
0 Resional Board's Basin Plan
Although not mandating the use of reclaimed water in specifj
This comprehensive water quality control plan for the Si Diego region was developed by the San Diego Regional Watt Quality Control Board and adopted by the State Watt Resources Control Board in 1975. Among the many watt
quality issues discussed, reclamation and reuse were adoptc as part of the plan as noted by the following quotes:
"The development of this Water Quality Control Plan . directed towards achieving the following goals of tl California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diel Region ;
5
, 0 0
. - . . . . . . (4) Maximize the use of municipal and industrial waste waters as part of an integrated system of fresh water supplies to achieve maximum benefit of fresh water resources. I1
"To implement these goals the Regional Board will be guided
by the following principals in regulating community and industrial waste discharges and in controlling other sources
of waste:
. . . * - . . . (3) Wherever feasible water qualit] systems throughout the basin shall provide for eventual waste water reclamation.11
California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act (Porter-Cologne Act] was enacted in 1969 and became Division 7 of the Californiz
Water Code. It is concerned primarily with the cor.trei e water quality, and an excerpt that addresses wastewate reuse is quoted below:
0
"Article 7. Waste Water Reuse
13550. The legislature hereby finds and declares that th use of potable domestic water for the irriqation o sreenbelt areas, includinq. but not limited to, cemeteries qolf courses, p arks, and hiahwav landscaped areas, is
waste or an unreasonable use of such water within th meaning of Section 2 of Article X of the Californi Constitution when reclaimed water which the state board
after notice and a hearing, finds meets the followin conditions is available:
a. The source of reclaimed water is of adequate qualit
for such use and is available for such use.
Such reclaimed water may be furnished to such greenbel areas at a reasonable cost for facilities for SUC delivery. In determining reasonable cost, the stat board shall consider all relevant factors, includin! but not limited to, the present and projected costs ( supplying potable domestic water to affected greenbe:
areas and the present and projected costs of supplyii potable domestic water to affected greenbelt areas ai the present and projected costs of supplying reclaim1 water to such areas, and shall find that the cost I supplying such reclaimed water is comparable to, I less than, the cost of supplying such potable domest water.
b.
C. After concurrence with the State Department of Heal Services, the use of reclaimed water from the propos source will not be detrimental to public health.
6
I c Q
d. Such use of reclaimed water will not adversely affect downstream water rights, will not degrade water quality, and is determined not to be injurious to plantlife. The state board may require a public agency or person subject to this article to furnish such
information as may be relevant to making the findings
required by this section.
13551. A person or public asencv, includins a state asency. city, county, city and county, district, or any other
political subdivision of the state. shall not use water from anv source of aualitv suitable for Dotable domestic use for
the irrisation of areenbelt areas when suitable reclaimec' water is available as provided in Section 13550; providec that any such use of reclaimed water in lieu of tht extraction of ground water shall, to the extent of sucl reclaimed water so used, be deemed to constitute i reasonable beneficial use of the ground water and such US(
uL I~bAaIALI~u waLt==I shall fi~t cause any loss or diminution 0:
any existing water right however acquired.It
Policy and Action Plan for Water Reclamation in California
In January, 1977, the State Water Resources Control Boarc adopted the Policy and Action Plan for Water Reclamation ii
California (Reclamation Policy) in conformance with thc
doing so, they established the following principles: th( State and Regional Boards shall (1) encourase reclamatio. and reuse of water in water-short areas of the State; (2 encourage water conservation measures which further exten the water resources of the State; and (3) encourage othe agencies, in particular the Department of Water Resources to assist in implementing the Reclamation Policy. Use c reclaimed water must be consistent with the principles se out in the State Board's Resolution No. 68-16 (Non Degradation Policy) .
Policy of Water Reclamation in the San Diego Region
On March 25, 1986, the San Diego Regional Board adopted tf-
POliCY of Water Reclamation in the San Dieqo Reqion (Se Dieso Resion Reclamation Policvl, Resolution No. 86-06,
Resolution Adopting Amendments to the Comprehensive Watc
Of the "San Diego Region Reclamation Policy** states that tl following goal shall be added to the Basin Plan:
"It shall be the goal of the Regional Board to encourage ai promote water reclamation while taking into consideratic the Regional Board's responsibility of protecting ai enhancing beneficial uses and recognizing the need ' protect the public health and environment."
-
-G ,-, ,,:...-a -*-&A-
0
Legislature's intent to encourage water reclamation. I1
0
Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Region. Key wordir
7
m a
The Policy added an action plan to the Regional Board's
Basin Plan encouraging: amendments to the Basin Plan to
promote reclamation, consideration of use of reclaimed water
for stream and lagoon replenishment, and consideration of
downstream. The action plan also required all discharges tc develop water reclamation plans. and to seek special reclamation funding.
the use of streams far conveyance of reclaimed water market8
8
, B e
CHAPTER 2
ENCINA BASIN RECLAMATION REPORT
A. BACKGROUND
1. San Dieso County Encina Basin Feasibility Study
In 1987 and 1988 the six-volume San Dieao Area Water Reuse Stud was completed, discussing water reclamation County-wide in a Overview Report, and specifically in the Encina Basin, Sa Dieguito Valley, San Pasqual Valley, Santee/San Diego Rive Basin, and in the Otay Basin.
Section 201 Water Reclamation Study Grant of the Federal Clea
Water Grant Program by the U. S . Environmental Protection Agenc (EPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) The City and County of san Diego were ioi~i reci~be~ts of th
grant and both contributed local funds td the proje&s completed
In May 1987, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors directe
its Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to use a portion of th San Diego Water Reuse Study funds to further study wate
reclamation potential in the Encina Basin, particularly th "live-stream*f discharge of reclaimed water to convey it fro satellite reclamation plants to downstream users. The CAOf
Special Projects Office was placed in-charge of th administration of the water reclamation study for the Encin Basin.
In February 1988, a report titled San Dieao Area Water Reus
Feasibility Study) was completed by John S. Murk Engineers. Tk
quantity and quality in the Encina Basin, examined the regulatol requirements for water reuse in the Basin, evaluated tl potential markets for reclaimed water in the area, and describe the water reclamation facilities required to produce reclaim( water in the Basin.
The study describes the Encina Basin as 77,000 acres in size
with a population (in 1980) of 137,400. It includes portions c the Cities of Vista, San Marcos, Carlsbad and Encinitas. Existi1 potable water supply to the Encina Basin consists of 70 percei imported water and 30 percent local. surface water from Lakt Henshaw and Hodges. Groundwater resources in the Basin ai utilized only by a few privately owned wells for residential us(
irrigation and sand washing. The groundwater quality is poo: The solids content (TDS) ranges from 980 to 3,630 mg/l and t] chloride levels average 465 mg/l.
The studies were funded through
Study, Volume V, Encina Basin Feasibility Study (Encina Basj
Encina Basin Feasibility Study, reviewed the existing vat'
9
m a
Wastewater from the Encina Basin is primarily treated at the
Encina WPCF. There are also four satellite water reclamation plants located within the Basin which can provide wastewater treatment and production of reclaimed water. The quality of the
reclaimed water produced is suitable for most irrigation purposes. The TDS levels range from 800 to 900 mg/l. The
chloride level averages 174 mg/l.
The study reports that reclamation and water reuse in the Encin: Basin are regulated by the Regional Board, who determines tht
requirements for effluent discharge. The Encina Basin watei
quality objectives allow for use of reclaimed water throughoul most of the Basin without demineralization.
Potential markets for reclaimed water in the Encina Basin includ agricultural irrigation, landscape irrigation (golf courses parks, etc.),. and industrial use. The study estimates that 3,90 acre6 of ZgriCiiltutral area could be served with 7,800 acre-fee
of reclaimed water per year. The potential for reclaimed wate use for approximately 2,200 acres of landscape irrigation i
approximately 5,700 acre-feet per year. Industrial use o reclaimed water includes the potential trash to energy plant i San Marcos and the SDG&E power plant in Carlsbad. These market could potentially use 1,400 acre-feet of reclaimed water pe year.
The water reclamation facilities available to produce reclaim€
Water include the Encina WPCF (22-5 MGD) , the Buena Sanitatic
District Shadowridge Water Reclamation Plant (1 MGD), the Se Marcos County Water District Meadowlark Water Reclamation Plar
(2 MGD), the Leucadia County Water District Gafner Wate Reclamation Plant (0.75 MGD) , and ‘the City of Carlsbad La1 Calavera Hills Water Reclamation Plant (1.2 MGD) . Only the La1 Calavera Hills Plant is not operational at this time.
The Study recommends upgrades to the Encina, Gafner, Shadowridgc
and Lake Calavera Hills Plants be made to provide the higher level of treatment required for unrestricted use of reclaim( water. For the Encina WPCF, it was proposed to provide th. level of treatment for 2 MGD only. Interconnection of tl
reclaimed water transmission systems was proposed so that reclaimed water network could be formed. Also the constructil
of pumping facilities would be required to provide reclaim water to the proposed markets. The preliminary cost estima
Approximately $5,341,000 of this cost is estimated to be the co required to add reclamation components to the existing plants.
water quality objectives for the Basin and establishes thr
for the proposed capital improvements is $9,625,00
2. Formation of Water Authority Reclamation Adviso Committee (WARAC)
The San Diego County Water Authority (CWA) initiated t formation of WARAC in November 1987. WARAC assumed the activit:
10
e 0
and responsibilities of the San Diego Region Water Reclamation Agency of which Carlsbad was a founding member. WARAC is made UF
of all public water purveyors and sewering agencies in San Diega County and Carlsbad's representative is the City's Utilities & Maintenance Director. The purpose of WARAC is to study and make
policy recommendations to the CWA regarding water redamation h'
San Diego County. 1) institutional arrangements for the management of reclaimed watei resources; 2) public acceptance of reclaimed water use: 3) thc pricing structure for the sale of reclaimed water: and 4) tht involvement of the SDCWA in the funding of capital facilities fo: reclaimed water treatment, storage and distribution.
Subcommittees of WARAC were formed for major hydrologic drainagc basins in San Diego County. The Encina Basin Subcommittec
includes the representatives of the following agencies: the Sa: Marcos County Water District; the Leucadia County Water District the Olivenhain Municipal Water District; the Costa Real Municipa Water District; the City of Vista; the City of Carlsbad, Sa Dieguito Water District, County of San Diego, and the Vist Irrigation District.
B- PROPOSED DETAILED FACILITIES PLAN REPORT
Based on the previously referenced Encina Basin Feasibilit Study, in April 1988, the WARAC Encina Basin Subcommitte proposed a scope of work for a detailed facilities plan for wate reclamation in a portion of the Encina Basin. The plan is requirement for obtaining funds from the State Water Resource Control Board Loan Program and the next step before actual desi< and construction of facilities. The proposed plan must include detailed market assessment for reclaimed water. AlternatiT
markets, alternative facilities, and alternatives to watc reclamation or levels of water reclamation must be identified. recommended plan must be presented and include the followii information: preliminary design of the facilities, institution: arrangements; an implementation plan; an operational plan: construction financing plan and revenue program; ai environmental considerations.
In June 1988, WARAC recommended and CWA approved the proposal John S. Murk Engineers, Inc. for the preparation of a faciliti
planning report for the Encina Basin Water Reclamation Projec including an estimated fee of $88,982. Under the CWA Technic
Assistance Program, fifty percent of the project will be fund by the CWA. The remaining fifty percent will be shared equal by each of the six participating agencies: San Marcos Coun Water District; Leucadia County Water District; Buena Sanitati District; Olivenhain Municipal Water District; San Dieguito Wat District; and the City of Carlsbad. The City of Carlsbad h been asked to contribute its share, $7,415, toward this projec The CWA will serve as the lead agency.
The major issues to be studied included:
11
1 I 0 0
C. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Conclusions
0 With the formation of WARAC and the establishment of matching funds for reclaimed water planning studies, the San Diego County Water Authority has taken a positive and active role in developing alternative and supplemental water sources in San Diego County.
0 The formation of the Encina Basin Subcommittee of WARAC
provides an active vehicle for the planning and implementation of inter-agency water reclamation projects ir the Encina Basin.
0 The Encina Basin Subcommittee has endorsed the preparatior
of a detailed water reclamation facilities plan as a model
water reclamation project for a portion of the Encina Basir as conceptllalized h~ the pre~i~~~j.~ ref~,renc& ~nrinn gasir
Feasibility Study Volume V of the San Dieso Water Reus< Studv.
The City of Carlsbad, as reclaimed water purveyor within thl City's boundary, will benefit from this regional wate' reclamation facilities plan study, and is asked ti contribute $7,415 of the total study fee of $88,982, whic: is equivalent to one-twelveth (1/12th) of the study cost.
2. Recommendations
0
It is recommended that the City Council:
0 Appropriate funds totaling $7,415, as the City's portion c Cost Of the proposed Encina Basin Reclamation Facilitie
Plan.
0 Endorse the efforts of the Encina Basin Subcommittee c
WARAC, and authorize staff to work with other WARAC membei and the San Diego County Water Authority to prepare i Encina Basin water reclamation facilities plan that meel the goals and needs of the citizens of Carlsbad.
12
e a
CHAPTER 3
MANDATORY USE ORDINANCE
A review of State Law and related policies indicates that in
potentially water-short areas of the State, such as Southern California, the legislature finds it wasteful or unreasonable to use potable domestic water for the irrigation of greenbelt areas
when adequately treated reclaimed water is available and not unreasonably costly. The previously referenced Porter-Colognc Water Quality Act says as much. Further, referencing the State's
1977 Policy and Action Plan for Water Reclamation in California,
other agencies besides the State Water Resources Control Boarc are encouraged to reclaim wastewater in water-short areas of the State.
To encourage the use of reclaimed water in Carlsbad, it may bt nzczssary to require its use when available for the irrigation oj golf courses, parks, etc., and certain agricultural crops, Requiring the use of reclaimed water will do several things tc make large-scale water reclamation happen in Carlsbad:
0 Provide a market for reclaimed water, thus encouragin owners of satellite reclamation plants to treat wastewate to the levels required, and expand their treatmen facilities to meet the potential market needs.
0 Provide a means for developing areas to plan and budget fo
dual-water systems when they are least expensive to install
0 Expedite the planning and development of long-term reclaime water use programs thereby conserving and extending potabl domestic water supplies.
0 Provide a mechanism assuring long-term reclaimed water us in Carlsbad, thus meeting one of the requirements fc approval of State low-interest loan funding for reclaimc water facilities as specified by the State Water Resourcc Control Board (State Board).
A. STATE BOARD LOAN PROGRAM
The State Board has recently implemented a $25 million 101
interest, revolving loan program for individual agencies to fui water reclamation projects, as a part of the "Clean Water Bo] Law of 1984." Two additional water reclamation bond issues ai
on the ballot for voter approval in November 1988: Proposition I - Clean Water and Water Reclamation Bond Law of 1988 (SB NO. 99 for $65 million and Proposition 82 - Water Conservation Bond L of 1988 (AB No. 1715) for $60 million. Both would provide lo funds for some water reclamation projects.
13
e 0
In order for the State Board to approve a reclaimed water loan to an agency, it has asked for evidence of a contract obligating a
user to take at least 50 percent of the eligible project
capacity. For example, if Carlsbad were requesting a loan tc fund pumping and conveyance facilities to bring 1.0 million
gallons per day (MGD) of reclaimed water to XYZ Golf Course, the State Board would require a contract between Carlsbad and XY2
Golf Course for acceptance of at least 0.5 MGD of reclaimed
water.
In lieu of a contract between the purveyor and user of reclaimec
water, the State Board in a memorandum dated January 20, 1988, stated it would accept a mandatory use ordinance, as follows:
"Some agencies have ordinances or policies that require the USE of reclaimed water in place of freshwater if reclaimed water is made available. Such ordinances or policies are considerec acceptable equivalents of contractual obliqations and, therefore,
user contracts may not be required under certain conditions. 2 mandatory use ordinance or policy has effect only if a potentia:
user is capable and ready to accept reclaimed water by the timt of initial operation of the loan-funded project. A specia: condition has been drafted for inclusion in the loan contract:
that have a mandatory use ordinance or policy:
ordinance or enforceable policy of the Agency which requires tha
user to accept reclaimed water in lieu of freshwater and wher that user is either presently using freshwater or is constructin a facility which will be ready to receive reclaimed water up01 completion of construction of the Project.ll
NO user contract will be required far any user subject ka a
B. EXAMPLE USE ORDINANCES
1. Irvine Ranch Water District
In Resolution No. 1977-49, which was adopted on June 1, 1977, th Irvine Ranch Water District discusses its policies on reclaime Water use. After discussing the Districtfs goals of wate conservation and beneficially using reclaimed water in the mos economically sound, feasible, and practical manner, th resolution discusses the Districtls intent to provide it customers with reclaimed water in lieu of potable water, a
follows :
landscape irrigation, agricultural irrigation, constructio water, industrial process water, or recreational impoundment: i is the aeneral intent of the District to provide the applicant owner, or customer with reclaimed water in lieu of Dotable water
However, each use must be approved on a case-by-case basis, ar the District may determine in its discretion whether it i
necessarv or desirable to furnish the applicant, owner, c customer with potable water at potable water rates,
"In most instances where service is desired for the purposes 0
-
either on
14
0 0
permanent basis or on an interim basis. Determinations on the specific uses to be allowed shall be in accordance with the standards of treatment and water quality requirements set forth
in Title 22, Chapter 4 of the California Administrative Code,, and
with the intent of these Rules and Regulations to protect the public health. Each use shall, in addition, be subject to the availability of facilities and/or the feasibility of making such facilities available."
2. City of Mesa, Arizona
0 Policy for New Development
The City of Mesa, Arizona adopted Ordinance No. 2119 on Octobei
22, 1986, which describes its intent to restrict the use 01 potable water for the filling of "artificial lakes#! and for thc
irrigation of #'turf-related facilities. 1f An artificial lake ih defined in the ordinance as a man-made lake, pond, lagoon 01 other body of water that is used wholly 01: partly for lmdscape, scenic, or recreational purposes. A turf-related facility ih defined as a facility that applies water to ten or more acres oj
landscaping, such as golf courses, parks and recreational
facilities, school grounds, and cemeteries.
The ordinance requires an applicant desiring to fill a artificial lake to first obtain a permit from the City, and tha permit approval is contingent upon the lake being filled wit either effluent (reclaimed water), storm water runoff, poo
quality groundwater and/or excess Central Arizona Project water The ordinance also requires the artificial lake to be designed t minimize evaporation and the developer of the lake to implemen an effective indoor and outdoor water conservation program fo the rest of the development. The City Council may schedule public hearing on the application for the permit.
The ordinance requires an applicant desiring to apply water fc landscape watering of a turf-related facility to also obtain permit from the City. Again, a public hearing may be called k
issuance is contingent upon the turf-related facility beir
watered with either effluent, storm water runoff, poor qualit groundwater , or excess Central Arizona Project water. Also, tl permit requires that measures be taken to minimize evaporatic
loss of water and to use low-water-consuming turf and plants, e well as, the development of a water conservation program for tl development.
0 Policy for Existing Development
Of particular note, the ordinance allows the City to substitu
adequately treated reclaimed water for existing artificial lakt and turf-related facilities which have previously been suppli by the City's municipal water supply system or another wat source. The reclaimed water must meet the current heal.
the City Council on the permit application, and the permi
15
1 I P 1)
standards for full-body contact (which is equivalent to California's Title 22 Requirements) and the City can not charge more for reclaimed water than the current cost of the present water source.
Finally, the ordinance provides a penalty clause for the
violation of any of its provisions estqblishing up to a $1,000 fine and/or six months' imprisonment for each day of violation.
3. Clark County Nevada
The Clark County Sanitation District adopted on May 3, 1988, Resolution No. 88-002, "A Resolution Establishing Rates anc Regulations Governing the Storage, Sale, Charges, and Use oJ
Treated Effluent. I) Although apparently not a mandatory usc
Sanitation District has treated effluent available foi appropriate substitute reuse including urban irrigation, and ...
IM~; a Besire to mzke this effluent available at uniform rates foi beneficial use as a substitute to the use of potable water in al: urban and rural areas;"
The Resolution discusses the District's application process fo use of its reclaimed water, including a description of the state beneficial use, location, date of beginning use, facilitie required and quantity required. The District in reviewing th application can then determine if sufficient reclaimed water i available, and if the intended use is in fact a beneficial use i line with State and federal Policies.
If the reclaimed water is available, the applicant then must fil an application with the State Engineer of Nevada requesting secondary use permit. Upon approval of the secondary use permi
the applicant must provide plans for the means of delivery of th
reclaimed water, and a plan for system operations an maintenance. The Resolution requires the user to be responsibl for providing the design, installation, ownership and maintenanc of all pumps, pipes, valves and other facilities necessary fc
the conveyance of reclaimed water from the treatment plant to tl user's delivery point. The Resolution then discusses healtk safety, notification, and water quality criteria that j California would be required in separate documentation by the Sz
Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board.
ordinance, the Resolution was adopted because: "the Clark Count]
I---
4. Pacific Rim Development
The Carlsbad City Council on December 22, 1987, adopted tl following provision as a condition to approval of the developmei documents for the Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort:
"Development within this Master Plan shall utilize efflue or treated water for irriqation of the yolf course and 0th
major landscape areas maintained by the homeowne association when available from the appropriate agencies.
16
0 0
Plans for each phase identifying these effluent irrigatio
areas and the location of the dual irrigation system neede to serve them shall be submitted to the Planning Direct0 and City Engineer for approval prior to approval of th
final map for each phase. The dual system shall b installed for the areas identified in the plan at the tim of development even if effluent is-unavailable at the tin of construction. I'
This may be one of the first mandatory use requirements adopt€
in San Diega County, although directed specifically at a sing1
development.
C. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Conclusions
0 A mandatory reclaimed water use ordinance for the City c Carlsbad appears to meet the intent of State wate reclamation policies by mandating the replacement c domestic potable water used for irrigation of landscaped ax agricultural lands with reclaimed water.
0 A mandatory use ordinance would facilitate and expedite tl development of reclaimed water in Carlsbad by forcing nc development to plan for its use on a City-wide basis, a1 may allow the City to replace potable domestic water wil
agricultural areas.
0 A mandatory use ordinance would facilitate State loar interest loan funding approval for reclaimed watc
facilities in Carlsbad by meeting the State's requireme] for insuring that reclaimed water will be used on( facilities are constructed.
2. Recommendations
reclaimed water on existing large area landscaped ar
It is recommended that the City Council:
0 Direct staff to prepare a draft mandatory reclaimed watc use ordinance for Council - consideration based on simili documents used by agencies in other water-short areas of tl country, consistent with State law, and consistent with tl goals, policies, and resolutions established in Carlsbad, t
surrounding agencies. well as those established for San Diego County by varioi
17
81, e 0
CHAPTER 4
WATER RECLAMATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE
To implement a mandatory use ordinance in Carlsbad, it i: necessary to have an up-to-date water reclamation master plan By showing where reclaimed water can and will be distributed i. the City, the master plan provides a guide to availability fo
potential use areas. Once it is known where reclaimed water wil be available in the City, potential users can be contacted fo voluntary or mandatory use, budgeting for facilities can b conducted, and programs can be implemented for reclamatio
funding assistance.
A. PAST RECLAMATION MASTER PLANNING
1. 1978 Overview Report
In March 1978, a report was prepared for the City titled Overview of Waste Water Reclamation OpDortunities, by th
consulting firm of Lowry & Associates.
agaln experiencing a drought) and a comprehensive discussion c related information and issues at the time,
The report provided comprehensive overview of the need for reclamation (the State wa
including:
o Reclamation program development,
0. Reclamation potential,
0 Satellite plant locations,
0 Reuse locations,
o Storage and fail-safe requirements,
0 Cost analysis,
0 Regulatory compliance,
The study reported that there was a viable, realistic opportunil to establish a wastewater reclamation and reuse program in tl city. It was determined that the potential needs fc
agricultural irrigation water in 1985 would be potential:
greater than the potential for reclaimed water production. Th. conclusion was based on land use figures for Carlsbad provided 1
the then-called Comprehensive Planning Organization showing ab01
9,000 acres of land classified as agricultural by 1985. TI
second largest potential use type was landscape irrigatiol followed by open-space irrigation, recreational impoundments ai industrial reuse. The study recognized the need for a fail-sa: connection to the Encina Ocean Outfall during times when t] reclaimed water could not be used.
The result of the study was a conceptual plan showing tentati location of satellite reclamation plants and reuse sites, T plants would mostly serve the City of Carlsbad but also t surrounding community and would be operated by Carlsbad, t Leucadia County Water District, San Marcos County Water Distric Vista Sanitation District and the Encina Joint Advise
18
" t e 0
Committee. Proposed satellite plant locations included the Encin
site, Palomar Airport, along Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda an Batiquitos Lagoons, in La Costa, and near the existing Lak Calavera Hills, Gafner, Meadowlark and Shadowridge treatmen
plants.
The study's preliminary financial analyds indicated there woul be no massive commitment of public funds, in that the cost of th program would be borne by a combination of contributions by loca developers, payments by reclaimed water users, and possible grar funding.
2. 1979 Master Plan Studv
Following the Overview Report, in September 1979, the City c Carlsbad Waste Water Reclamation Master Plan Studv was prepan by the consulting firm of Lowry & Associates. The study arc encompassed the entire City and its sphere of influence with tk -~-~.t=ption cjf those lands served by the Leucadia and San Marcc County Water Districts and the Lake Calavera Hills satellit reclamation plant study area. The study recommended a mastc plan for staged development of a reclaimed water systc incorporating several satellite reclamation plants. Initial1 the plants were conceived to primarily produce reclaimed watc for the irrigation of agricultural land. It was visualizec however, that with future urbanization, irrigation of landscapir
and open space in residential areas would gradually supplemer agricultural irrigation. Industrial use of reclaimed water wi encouraged but not quantified.
This Master Plan was conceived as one of several methods fc alleviating Carlsbad's sewer moratorium existing at that timt
Satellite reclamation plants were (and still are) a means fc
providing additional treatment capacity while furnishing significant source of supplemental non-potable water. The Cil Council desired to develop this Master Plan for wastewate reclamation within its jurisdiction before giving furthe consideration to additional satellite treatment plants, such i the one that had been just approved for the Lake Calavera Hil: development.
The Master Plan presented the following:
0 population and land use data,
0 description of reclamation concepts,
0 location and capacity of potential wastewater reclamatic
e.*--
plants,
o opportunities for use of reclaimed water and associatr volumes,
0 costs and scheduling.
19
L
'I e 0
Again, the immediate focus of the Master Plan was upon thos portions of the City outside of Lake Calavera Hills and th
Leucadia and San Marcos County Water Districts.
The Lake Calavera Hills reclamation plant study had been prepare for the City in 1978, by the consulting firm of James M Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc.. in a reported titled
Environmental Impact and Facilities Plan for a Satellite Sewaq
Districts were planning their own reclamation master plans at th
time.
The Master Plan recommended the construction of four separat
reclamation plants located and sized as follows:
0 Batiauitos Reclamation Facility - to provide reclaimed watc to agricultural areas lying north and west of Batiquitc Lagoon, a 0.4 million gallon per day (MGD) secondar treatment plant would be constructed ~ssr the existir Batiquitos Lagoon sewerage pump station. The initic potential market would have been 614 acres of agriculturz land, west of Interstate 5 where no demineralization woul be required,
0 Palomar Airport Reclamation Facility - to be constructed i
the confluence of major sewer lines immediately south (
Palomar Airport, and to serve reclaimed water to tf abundant agricultural areas nearby. The estimated reu: market was about 2,450 acre-feet per year in that area, ai
an initial 2.6 MGD secondary plant was proposed. Wastewatt from Carlsbad, San Marcos and Buena would be treated then In a later stage the plant would be expanded to 5.0 MGI with a pipeline to serve coastal markets,
0 Encina Reclamation Facility - to be constructed at tl Encina Water Pollution Control Facility site, tl
reclamation portion of the plant would be relatively sma and developed in later stages of the Master Plan. The 1 MGD reclamation facilities would require demineralizatic because of high total dissolved solid contents of wastewatc collected at the Encina WPCF, and the reclaimed water wou serve nearby agricultural, landscaping, and industrii users,
Treatment Facility, The Leucadia and San Marcos County Wate
0 Buena Vista Reclamation Facility - to provide up to 0.5 Mi
of secondary effluent by rehabilitating the abandoned Ci of Oceanside's plant located on the Buena Vista Lagoon ne the El Camino Real crossing. Most flows would have co from the Vista Sanitation District and the City 1 Oceanside. Unlike the other three reclamation plan proposed, the Buena Vista plant would have no direct oce
outfall access as a fail-safe. Thus, the plant was plann to be operated on an as-needed basis, treating only t amount of wastewater needed for the immediate reclamati
market, up to 85 acres of landscaping.
20
L
'1 b 0 a
3. Lake Calavera Reclamation Facility Studies
Although not independently studied by Lowry h Associates, th
results of the James M. Montgomery study of the Lake Calaver Hills reclamation facility were incorporated into the City's 197 Master Plan. The latter report proposed a 1.2 MGD satellit reclamation plant approximately one mile southwest of Lak
Hills development. As planned, the effluent from the Lak Calavera reclamation facility would have been initial1 percolated into the groundwater basin immediately upstream of tk Agua Hedionda Lagoon and pumped back out for agricultura irrigation. Later, it was proposed to construct an exces effluent line to the Encina ocean outfall.
In November 1980, two reports were completed for submittal i amendment requests to the San Diego Regional Water Qualit Control Board's ComDrehensive Water Oualitv Control Plan. TI
Calavera. The plant was to serve the 3,700 acre Lake Calaver
studies cs~,pfet& 5.77 My A.L- iiie - i.ir.?.cii- bvrrDuiiiiiij Az - - ez iiLiii -7 of L~Re-Dr;d@k, Cfv:
Engineers were titled Pramsed Revision Basin Plan Obiectivc Carlsbad Hydroqraphic Subarea, and A Portion Of The Aqua Hedionc
Subarea. The studies successfully provided sufficient analys: of these two groundwater basins to allow the Regional Board I significantly relax its groundwater objectives in and around tl
Lake Calavera Hills area, thus, eliminating the need for cost: demineralization of the Lake Calavera Hills plant's reclaimt water.
In May 1983, a report was prepared for the City titled &$ Calavera Hills Reclamation System Update Report, by Glenn I Reiter & Associates. The purpose of the report was to answc four questions:
0 Is there a demand for non-potable water, and if so, what
0 What capital facilities will be required to complete t
the demand, where is it, and how permanent is it?
(Lake Calavera Hills plant) reclamation program (i.e sewage disposal and water reclamation)?
0 when is the most opportune time to initiate a wastewat
0 What are the costs for a reclaimed water program?
The report concluded that there is a market for non-potable wat in an area that lends itself to the efficient distribution
reclaimed water from the Lake Calavera Hill plant. Further t report concluded the following:
0 The market is in a basin that does not requi
reclamation service?
demineralization,
0 The proposed distribution system is flexible and adaptak to meet demands I
21
" k 0 0
0 There is sufficient time to prepare for the implementatio
of the program, thus, ensuring the economic viability of th project at the most opportune time,
0 Reclamation should become a viable, economical program i the middle or late 1980's.
4. Costa Real MWD Non-Potable Master Plan
In September 1982, the Costa Real Municipal Water Distric completed a report titled, Overview for Public Non-Potable Wate
Sources and Master Plan for Public Non-Potable Water Svste prepared by the consulting firm of Woodside/Kubota an
Associates, Inc. The report restated much of the work done i previous reclamation studies referenced, such as availabl reclaimed water sources and potential use areas, with particular emphasis toward the goals and objectives of th District.
The conclusions are summarized briefly as follows:
0 A number of treatment plants are in the area with effluer pipelines passing through the District's service area,
0 Agricultural and dry-land areas in the District ar urbanizing with needs for landscaping irrigation,
0 The District, with its advantage of experience as E existing water purveyor, viewed the non-potable market plac
as growing and non-potable service as becoming cos effective,
0 The District provided a map of proposed non-potable watf lines within its service area which showed interrelatic with existing potable water lines and potential use areas,
0 Success of the program will be based on the ability 1 design an appropriate financing program.
B. EXISTING SITUATION
The following discussion briefly presents the current status ( water -reclamation in Carlsbad.
1. 1979 Master Plan Implementation
During the expansion of the Encina Water Pollution Contrc Facility, which was completed in 1983, and included an upgrade secondary treatment, the sewer moratorium in Carlsbad ende With additional capacity at the Encina WPCF, the return 1
extremely Wet years in California, and the existence of a waiv
from secondary treatment at the Encina WPCF, reclamation beca less of an issue. None of the four reclamation plants propos in the 1979 Master Plan Study (Batiquitos, Palomar Airpor Encina, and Buena Vista) were constructed. Thus, neither t
22
'1 h 0 0
1978 "Overview Report" nor the 1979 tlMaster Plan Study" wer implemented and both are outdated.
2. Lake Calavera Water Reclamation Plant
The Lake Calavera Water Reclamation Plant is owned by the City c Carlsbad. The plant was partially constpcted in 1981, and ha
never been completed nor operated. The existing facilities i
sludge process in the form of an oxidation ditch. The desic capacity of the plant is 1.2 MGD. The estimated current fl; rate possible to the plant from its intended service area is 0.;
MGD, and in five years will be about 0.56 MGD according to recer studies. Some of the major improvements needed to make the plar operational are:
0 Completion of a fail-safe pipeline to the Encina Ocee Outfall for excess effluent or untreated wastewater,
0 Completion of a sewage pump station at Tamarack Avenue ar El Camino Real,
0 If on-site solids handling is not desired, construction of gravity pipeline to the Encina WPCF is required for solic removed at the Lake Calavera Hills plant.
the plant provided secondary treatment only, using the activate
These improvements would bring the plant up to a secondai treatment level only. For unrestricted use of the reclaim6 water for irrigation, the plant requires additional treatmei
processes providing coagulation, flocculation, filtration, a1 chlorination to meet the State Health Departments "Title 2: requirements.
In 1980 the primary users proposed for the Lake Calavei reclaimed water were agricultural. Now major potential usel include the planned Macario Park and Rancho Carlsbad Golf Courst
which require treatment beyond a secondary level.
3. La Costa Country Club Reclamation
The La Costa Country Club currently uses reclaimed water 1
irrigate up to 15 holes of its 36 holes of golf course during s. months of the year. The reclaimed water is produced at tl Meadowlark Water Reclamation Plant which is owned and operated 1
wholesaled to the City of Carlsbad which then sells the water * La Costa according to procedures established in sever; documents, including these issued by the San Diego Region; Board:
0 Order No. 84-10, "Water Reclamation Requirements for t: City of Carlsbad for the Purveyance Water in San Diel County,It adopted by the San Diego Regional Water Quali Control Board on January 23, 1984, and which allows the Ci
the San Marcos County Water District. The reclaimed water
23
-8 r , 0 0
to distribute within its boundary reclaimed water producE by the San Marcos County Water District 1 s Meadowlark Watc Reclamation Plant, and
0 Order No. 87-81, "Waste Discharge Requirements for Sa Marcos County Water District Meadowlark Reclamatic
Projectss, adopted by the San Diego Regional Water Qualit Control Board on May 4, 1987, and which establishes the Se
Marcos County Water District as a wholesaler of reclaimc
water to the City of Carlsbad.
Reclaimed water is used only during the drier six months of tk year at La Costa because the ponds which store and he1 distribute it are not protected from 100-year flooding. Thus the Regional Water Quality Control Board has determined thz these ponds must either be protected from flooding in the wettt half of the year, or a federal permit must be applied fc allowing discharges to San Marcos Creek.
The reclaimed water provided to La Costa meets the stricte: treatment requirements of the State Health Department, ar
therefore can be used for all types of irrigation or landscar
impoundment replenishment with unrestricted public access. I Costa takes the reclaimed water on an as-needed basis with I formal agreement with the City. La Costa's managers have nc agreed to take reclaimed water in a long-term contract.
This situation becomes a problem for the nearby Leucadia Counl Water District which also desires to produce reclaimed water fc La Costa, and has in the ground a pipeline from this District' Gafner Water Reclamation Plant to La Costa's lower irrigatic water storage lakes. Leucadia CWD would like to upgrade il secondary plant to meet the most restrictive State Healt Department requirements for reclaimed water, and has alreac received conceptual approval from the State Water Resourcc Control Board for a low-interest loan to do so. The ox
stumbling block is the State's need for a user agreement for i least fifty percent of the reclaimed water produced by tl upgraded plant. Before approving any loan money for reclaimt
agreement or the existence of a mandatory reclaimed water u! ordinance within the boundaries of the overseeing agency.
water facilities, the State has asked for an executed usc
4. Asreement With Costa Real MWD
On May 25, 1983, an agreement between the City of Carlsbad ai Costa Real Municipal Water District titled "Water Servic
Agreement" was executed. The Agreement provides an understandii of how water service duties will be provided by the City and tl District. A portion of the agreement discusses reclaimed wate:
as follows:
24
-1 f e e
"10. Reclaimed Water.
(a) The City will be responsible for all phases of tl
reclaimed water system in the area and for the supply ai distribution of reclaimed water. The City, with input frc the District, will adopt a master Dlan of facilities, pla
and sDecifications, and resulations for the installatio
construction and operation of reclaimed water facilities.
(b) In all cases the City shall furnish to the District
copy of the "as built" plans of reclaimed water facilitier such plans to be used solely for information a1 coordination purposes in the operation of the potable watt system by the District."
The city adopted a set of standard plans, specifications, a]
regulations for the installation, construction and operation c reclaimed water facilities titled, IIRules and Regulations fc
Reclzzhed Water Service Provided By the City of Carlsbad In I1 Service Area" in July 1984.
5. Pacific Rim Reclamation Planninq
The Pacific Rim Country Club and Resort has planned to us reclaimed water from the Leucadia County Water District's Gafnc Water Reclamation Plant for several years. As presented j Chapter 3, the City has conditioned the approval of th development on the mandatory use of reclaimed water, i available, for the irrigation of the golf course and other majc landscaped areas within the development boundaries. The projec proponents are studying the alternatives of supplying reclaim€ water from either or both the San Marcos County Water Distric
and the Leucadia County Water District to Pacific Rim. This wo1 is being coordinated through the City's Utilities & Maintenanc Director.
6. Encina Basin Facility Plan ReDort
The background and status of the report is discussed in detail i Chapter 2. The report has and will provide significan reclamation facilities information for the southern portion c the City.
C. PROPOSED CARLSBAD RECLAMATION MASTER PLAN
To implement a major water reclamation program that is applicabl to both the long-term and short-term needs of the City an
citizens, an updated reclaimed water master plan is needed. Thi master plan would also serve as a tool for implementing th conditions of a reclaimed water mandatory use ordinance b
various areas of the city. presentin9 where and when reclaimed water will be available t
25
-< 1' , e e
1. Master Plan Content
Carlsbad's proposed Reclamation Master Plan Update would addre at least the following issues:
0
0
0
0 Loca t i on of proposed reclamation distributic
0 Inter-agency cooperation and agreements,
0 Infrastructural financing, revenue sources, rat4
0 Means for meeting regulatory and legal requirements,
0 Implementation scheduling.
Much information needed for the Master Plan Update has bec generated in past reports, and is being generated in presei research and studies. Many new reclamation policy, regulator) and legal issues are being decided for other municipalities E
this time and can be incorporated into the Carlsbad Master PhI
An effort is needed, however, to update past information a1
incorporate the results of recent and on-going studies into currently usable reclamation master plan specific to the City c Carlsbad.
Present reclamation development philosophy in Carlsbad,
Present and Future Reclamation Markets,
Present and Future Reclaimed Water Sources,
facilities,
structuring,
2. Need for Independent Plan
Although considerable effort is being made to develop a regiona water reclamation program, as discussed in Chapter 2, Carlsba should have a functional reclamation master plan addressing tk specific goals and needs of the City. However, without ownershi of any operating water reclamation facilities, the City i
dependent on other agencies at this time to supply reclaim€ water. Thus, the city also needs to participate in regione reclamation planning efforts to insure that it will be supplic reclaimed water.
A recommended approach is to incorporate those City approvc
facilities that are developed in regional planning efforts int
the Carlsbad Reclamation Master Plan Update. Building on pas . and current regional efforts, the City should independent1 develop a plan for reclamation infrastructure that will serve th entire city.
The completed Carlsbad Reclamation Master Plan Update, onc adopted by the City Council, can be used by City staff to pla
26
-- 11. , * 0
and implement mandatory reclaimed water use programs for ne development and existing major irrigation water users. It ca also be used by Carlsbad to seek special funding assistanc offered at present by the State, the Metropolitan Water Distric of Southern California, and possibly the San Diego County Wate
City staff for constructing adequately sized and locate reclaimed water storage and conveyance facilities as ne development plans are reviewed and existing potential use area are evaluated for future water supply. It is estimated that detailed Carlsbad Reclamation Master Plan UDdate report woul cost approximately $60,000 to prepare by a private consultin firm.
D. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Authority. Finally, the Master Plan will provide a guide fo
1. Conclusions
- 0 Kmierous stiiGies ai reclaimed water master planning haw been completed since the late 1970's for areas within th boundaries of the City of Carlsbad.
o Little if any of the reclamation facilities proposed in pas
reclamation master planning efforts have been Constructed and will not be constructed because the plans ar significantly outdated.
0 The "Water Service Agreement" executed between the City c Carlsbad and the Costa Real Municipal Water District in Ma
1983 requires the City to adopt a reclaimed water mast€ plan with input from the District.
0 Current efforts are being made by the WARAC Encina Basi Subcommittee of the CWA to develop a regional, inter-agenc
facilities plan, do not include the entire city of Carlsbac
and are primarily focused in the southern portion of tk City.
0 The City, having taken an active role in reclamation mast€ planning in the past and having recently required the use c
Country Club and Resort), needs to prepare an up-to-dat reclamation master plan for the entire City to provic guidance for staff and the City Council on futur reclamation projects.
2. Recommendations
reclaimed water for new development (such as the Pacific Rj
It is recommended that the City Council:
0 Direct staff to prepare a scope of work and a Request fc Proposal to solicit proposals from qualified engineerir
consultants to prepare the Carlsbad Reclamation Master P1; Update, incorporating the information provided by pas
27
-* * 1) * a
studies, current studies and related activities by variot
agencies, and the specific goals and objectives of the cit of Carlsbad.
Reclamation Master Plan Update. 0 Appropriate funds totalling $60,000 to fund the Carlsbz
28
0 0
- SCOPE OF WORK April 20, 1988
ENCINA BASIN WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT PHASE I FACILITIES PLANNING
A. WATER RECLAMATION MARKET ASSESSMENT
1.
2. DESCRIPTION OF ALL POTENTIAL USERS:
DESCRIPTION OF MARKET ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES,
a. TYPE OF USE.
.be EXPECTED ANNUAL RECLAIMED WATER USE.
c. PEAK USE.
d. ON-SITE CONVERSION COSTS.
e. DESIRE TO USE RECLAIMED WATER.
f.
g. QUANTITY OF USE.
h. QUALITY AND RELIABILITY NEEDS.
SUMMARY TABLE OF POTENTIAL USERS AND DATE
USE.
DEFINITION OF LOGICAL SERVICE AREA BASED ON RESULTS OF MARKET ASSESSMENT e -
PRESENT AND-FUTURE SOURCE OF WATER.
3. INITIAL OF
4.
B. PROJECT ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
1. PLANNING AND DESIGN CRITERIA:
a. DELIVERY AND SYSTEM PRESSURE
b. PEAK DELIVERY SCHEDULE
c. STORAGE PROVISION
d. COST BASIS: COST INDEX, DISCOUNT RATE, USEFUL
LIVES, ECT.
e. PLANNING PERIOD
2. WATER RECLAMATION ALTERNATIVES TO BE EVALUATED
a. SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES
i. BUENA SANITATION DISTRICT
ii. LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
lii.SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
b. TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
1
0 0
SCOPE OF WORK April 20, 1988
i. ALTERNATIVE LEVELS OF TREATMENT
ii. ALTERNATIVE UNIT PROCESSES TO ACHIEVE A GIVEN
LEVEL OF TREATMENT
c. PIPELINE ROUTE ALTERNATIVES,
d. ALTERNATIVE MARKETS:
i. BASED ON AVAILABLE RESOURCES.
ii. BASED ON DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SERVICE.
iii.GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS.
d. ALTERNATIVE STORAGE LOCATIONS.
‘e. SUBALTERNATES OF SELECTED ALTERNATIVE:
i. VARYING STORAGE, PUMP RATES, AND PIPELINE
ii. USE OF FRESH WATER BLENDING DURING PEAK
DIAMETERS o
IRRIGATION MONTHS.
3. INFORMATION SUPPLIED FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE TO INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO:
a. COST TABLES FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE WITH BREAKDOWN OF COSTS :
i. TOTAL CAPITAL COST.
ii. ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST.
iii.EQUIVALENT ANNUAL COST.
iv. UNIT COST AT THE POINT OF PRODUCTION.
v. UNIT COST AT THE POINT OF DISTRIBUTION TO THE USER.
be LISTS OF POTENTIAL USERS ASSUMED FOR EACH
C. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
ALTERNATIVE,
i. SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
ii. GROUNDWATER IMPACTS
4. COMPARISON OF ABOVE ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION OF SPECIFIC ALTERNATIVE.
..., C, RECOMMENDED PLAN
1. DESCRIPTION OF ALL PROPOSED FACILITIES AND BASIS FOR
2. PRELIMINARY DESIGN CRITERIA AND REFINED PIPELINE ROUTES
SELECTION
2
0 0
SCOPE OF WORK April 20, 1988.
3, COST ESTIMATES BASED ON TIME OF CONSTRUCTION
4. LIST OF ALL POTENTIAL USERS, QUANTITY OF RECLAIMED WATER USE, PEAK DEMAND, COMMITMENTS OBTAINED.
5. RELIABILITY OF FACILITIES COMPARED TO USER REQUIREMENTS.
D. INSTITUTIONAL mGEMENTS
1. COORDINATION WITH WATER SUPPLIERS,
2.
3,
4. ALLOCATION OF COSTS,,
5, 'DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES.
6. RECOMMENDED AGREEMENTS.
7. RECOMMENDED ORDINANCES.
DETERMINATION OF RECLAIMED WATER SUPPLIERS.
DETERMINATION OF RECLAIMED WATER PURVEYOR.
E. IMPLEMENTATION PW.
1. ABILITY AND TIMING OF USERS TO JOIN SYSTEM.
2.
3. COMMITMENTS FROM POTENTIAL USERS,
4, PERMITS, RIGHT-OF-WAY, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION.
5. DETAILED SCHEDULE.
TENTATIVE WATER RECLAMATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE RWQCB.
F. OPERATIONAL PW e
1. RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE, EQUIPMENT, MONITORING, IRRIGATION SCHEDULING, ECT.
G, CONSTRUCTION FINANCING PLAN AND REVENUE PROGRAM
1. SOURCES AND TIMING OF FUNDS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
2. WHOLESALE/RETAIL PRICING POLICY FOR RECLAIMED WATER.
3. COSTS WHICH CAN BE ALLOCATED TO WATER POLLUTION CONTROL.
4. ANNWAL PROJECTION OF:
a. FRESH WATER PRICES FOR EACH CATEGORY OF USERS.
be RECLAIMED WATER WED BY EACH USER.
e. ANNUAL COSTS (REQUIRED REVENUE) OF RECLAMATION PROJECT.
LOCAL PROJECTS PROGRAM. d. REVENUE AVAILABLE FROM METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT'S
e. ALLOCATION OF COSTS TO USERS.
3
a 0
SCOPE OF WORK April 20, 1988
f. UNIT PRICE OF RECLAIMED WATER FOR EACH USER OR
g. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ASSUMING PORTION OF POTENTIAL
CATEGORY OF USERS.
USERS FAIL TO USE RECLAIMED WATER.
H. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. REVISIONS TO BASIN PLAN OBJECTIVE
2. CONFORMANCE WITH NON-DEGRADATION POLICY
3, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION - RWQCB ENVIRONMENTAL
CHECKLIST
e
A - ,,+
4
0 0 EXHIBIT B .. .
AGREEMENT FOR
SHARING COST FOR PREPARATION OF A FACILITIES
PLANNING REPORT FOR ENCINA BASIN BY JOHN S. MURK ENGINEERS
Parties :
The parties to this agreement are:
1. San Diego County Water Authority (nAuthoritytt herein).
2, Leucadia County Water District ("LeucadiaN herein).
3. San Marcos County Water District ("San Marcos" herein).
4, San Dieguito Water District ("Sari Dieguito" herein).
5. Olivenhain Municipal Water District (ffOlivenhainfl
herein).
6. Buena Sanitation District ("Buena" herein).
7. City of Carlsbad ( I'Carlsbadlf herein) e
Recitals :
Authority has established a Water Reclamation Assistance
Program for the purpose of encouraging and supporting development
of water reclamation projects by assisting in funding facilities
planning, feasibility investigations and preliminary studies.
The parties have discussed the feasibility of developing a
water reclamation project'in the Enclfna Basin and have received
several proposals to prepare a report which makes a definitive
analysis of all aspects of such a project.
Xt is the desire of the parties that a contract be made by __-
the Authority, as lead agency, with John S. Murk Engineers, Inc.
substantially in accord with their proposal dated May 6, 1988.
-1-
e 0
.SI
- Authority will fund one-half of the cost and each other party
will fund one-twelfth (P/12) of the cost in accordance with this
agreement.
Aqreemen t $
4
Section 1. Project
The project is to prepare an Encina Basin Water Reclamation
Project Facilities Plan in substantially the form described in
the proposal of John S. Murk Engineers, Xnc. (“JSME” herein)
dated May 6, 1988.
by Authority in connection with the contract planned to be made
with JSME to secure a report.
The specific scope of work shall be developed
Section 2. Lead Agency
Authority shall be lead agency in terms of authority and
responsibility to make the contract and secure the report in
order to complete the project.
Section 3. Funding - c
The proposal from JSME was on a time and materials basis
not to exceed $88,982. The Authority will fund one-half
($44,492) of said cost and each of the other parties will fund
one-twelfth (1/12) of the cost ($7,415). Each of said parties
will pay their respective ’sums to Authority prior to execution by
it of a contract with JSME.
Section 4. Completion
Authority shall cause said project to be completed without
the requirement of any additional funding, unless each party (or
any one of them) subsequently agrees to supplemental funding.
-2-
e 0
.L
*
Authority shall cause copies of the project report to be
distributed to each party upon its completion. At such time the
project shall be deemed completed and this agreement terminated.
4 -
Section 5. Effective Date - Refunds
This agreement shall become effective on the first day after
Authority has received all the funding payments due from each of
the other parties hereunder.
If the project is completed at a cost less than the total
amount funded, Authority shall make a prorata refund to itself
and tRe other parties based upon the initial contributions made.
Section 6. Reimbursement To Authority
If, as a result of the project report, a project is
constructed and implemented and funding for such a project
becomes available from other sources, Authority shall be
reimbursed such amounts as.may be permitted from-the funding
source, not to exceed the amount contributed by Authority plus
interest calculated at the Authority’s average interest earnings
rate for the pertinent period.
Section 7. Cooperation
The parties shall cooperate during the project by making
data and personnel possessed by each of them available to
Authority and/or JSME as may be reasonably required to pursue the
study, make the analyses, and complete the report.
I/
Section 8. Miscellaneous
This agreement forms the full understandings between the
parties and prior discussions have all been integrated herein.
-3-
0 0
7-
v
It may not be modified except by a subsequent agreement in
writing approved and executed by each of the parties hereto.
The liability of each party is several and not joint and
none is liable for the obligations of another.
to perform its contractual obligations shall not be the
responsibility of Authority or any other party.
(but is not obligated to do so) seek judicial relief for
enforcement of JSME's obligations if it so chooses but no other
party is responsible to fund the cost of such action[s].
Failure of JSME
Authority may
In witness whereof, the parties have executed this agreement
on the date noted.
without the neeed for execution of a single original. - Date Party
This agreement may be signed in counterparts
LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
General Manager
*
SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
General Manager
SAN BIEGUITO WATER DISTRICT
General Manager
OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
General Manager
BUENA SAN~TATION DISTRICT
General Manager
-4-
e e
.I. . . - Date Party
CITY OF CARLSBAD
City Manager
SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
General Manager
PECWA. EB
c
, -+
-5-