Municipal Water Leader July/August 2015

July/August 2015 Volume 1 Issue 1

Building Resiliency Into Southern California’s Water Future: An Interview With Jeffrey Kightlinger

Municipal Water Leader Magazine

By Kris Polly Welcome to the first issue of Municipal Water Leader magazine. Managing a drinking water or wastewater agency is an exceptionally difficult and challenging job. The men and women who fill those positions must possess a variety of skills and abilities required of different jobs that range from engineer to politician. There is no how-to manual or playbook for managing a water agency. First-hand knowledge and years of experience remain the most important teachers and qualifications. The mission of this magazine is to focus on the solutions, leadership, professionalism, and experience of those many accomplished individuals whose agencies are tasked with providing the United States with safe, reliable, and affordable drinking water.

Additionally, this magazine is to serve as a forum for the general managers, boards of directors, and engineers of water agencies to share ideas and learn

from each other. Most importantly, this magazine is intended to help our nation’s decisionmakers better understand the public drinking water and wastewater sectors and the multitude of infrastructure and regulatory challenges they face. To that end, this magazine is provided to the leadership of key federal agencies and to every governor, legislator, and member of Congress in all 50 states.

Kris Polly is editor-in-chief of Municipal Water Leader and Irrigation Leader magazines. He is also president of Water Strategies LLC, a government relations, marketing, and publishing company he began in February 2009 for the purpose of representing and guiding water, power, and agricultural entities in their dealings with Congress, the Bureau of Reclamation, and other federal government agencies. He may be contacted at Kris.Polly@wateretrategies.com.

The Water and Power Report www.WaterAndPowerReport.com The Water and Power Report is the one-stop aggregate news site for water and power issues in the 17 western states. Sign up for the free “Daily� service to receive e-mail notice of the top headlines and press releases each business day.

2

Municipal Water Leader

JULY/AUGUST 2015

C O N T E N T S 2 Municipal Water Leader Magazine

Volume 1 Issue 1

By Kris Polly

4 Building Resiliency Into Southern

Municipal Water Leader is published 10 times a year with combined issues for July/August and November/December by Water Strategies LLC 4 E Street SE Washington, DC 20003

California’s Water Future: An Interview With Jeffrey Kightlinger

10

A Step Ahead of California’s Mandatory Water Conservation Measures

STAFF: Kris Polly, Editor-in-Chief John Crotty, Editor Valentina Valenta, Writer Robin Pursley, Graphic Designer Capital Copyediting LLC, Copyeditor

By Katie Ruark

SUBMISSIONS: Municipal Water Leader welcomes manuscript, photography, and art submissions. However, the right to edit or deny publishing submissions is reserved.

Submissions are returned only upon request.

ADVERTISING: Municipal Water Leader accepts one-quarter, half-page, and full-page ads. For more information on rates and placement, please contact Kris Polly at (703) 517-3962 or Municipal.Water.Leader@WaterStrategies.com.

CIRCULATION: Municipal Water Leader is distributed nationally to managers and boards of directors of water agencies with annual budgets of $10 million or more; governors; state legislators in all 50 states; all members of Congress and select committee staff; and advertising sponsors.

For address corrections or additions, please contact our office at Municipal.Water.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

Copyright 2015 Water Strategies LLC. Municipal Water Leader relies on the excellent contributions of a variety of natural resources and water industry professionals who provide content for the magazine. However, the views and opinions expressed by these contributors are solely those of the original contributor and do not necessarily represent or reflect the policies or positions of Municipal Water Leader, its editors, or Water Strategies LLC. The acceptance and use of advertisements in Municipal Water Leader do not constitute a representation or warranty by Water Strategies LLC or Municipal Water Leader magazine regarding the products, services, claims, or companies advertised.

COVER PHOTO: Jeffrey Kightlinger, General Manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.

(Photo provided by Metropolitan.)

Municipal Water Leader

DISTRICT FOCUS 12 Sacramento Suburban Water District

By Robert Roscoe

Water Associations 16 Tim Quinn, Association of California

Water Agencies

22 The National Water Resources Association

By Bob Johnson

Water Law 24 Assessing the Final Waters of the

United States Rule

By Mark Pifher and Steve Dougherty

Manager Profile 28 Dan Masnada, General Manager,

Castaic Lake Water Agency

Business Leaders 32 Tim Chinn, Global Drinking Water

Program Director, AECOM

The Innovators 36 Lining Pipe to Provide Long-Term Water

Infrastructure Repair Solutions

By Shah Rahman

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS 38 Classifieds 3

Building Resiliency Into Southern California’s Water Future:

An Interview With Jeffrey Kightlinger The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) is a wholesale water provider serving 14 cities, 11 municipal water districts, and 1 county water authority across a 5,200-square-mile area in southern California. In turn, those entities provide water to more than 19 million people. That makes Metropolitan the largest distributor of treated drinking water in the United States.

For the last decade, Jeffrey Kightlinger has served as Metropolitan’s general manager. Over the years, he has guided the agency toward a diversified water portfolio, and he is currently navigating its efforts through an unprecedented drought. Prior to his appointment as general manager, Mr. Kightlinger was general counsel. Before joining Metropolitan in 1995, he worked in private practice representing public agencies.

Mr. Kightlinger has a bachelor’s degree in history from the University of California, Berkeley, and a law degree from the Santa Clara University Law School. He is an eighth-generation Californian on his father’s side.

Municipal Water Leader’s editor-in-chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Mr. Kightlinger about operating a water district in a time of drought, navigating the need for storage, and stabilizing water supplies for long-term growth and prosperity.

Kris Polly: California is experiencing historic drought conditions. Recently, California Governor Brown called for a 25 percent reduction in water use by municipalities. What actions are being taken by Metropolitan to meet this new level of conservation?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: This action by the State of California is unprecedented. Typically, when the state has reacted to drought, those reactions have been localized because the effects of drought are local.

A statewide mandate to cut water use is uncharted territory.

At Metropolitan, we have done two things to help our member agencies to meet the mandate set forth by the governor. First, we have implemented our water supply allocation plan. That is something that we have done only a couple of times in our history—we mandate a cut in wholesale purchases for Metropolitan across the entire service area. We have taken a Stage 3 reduction, which roughly equals 15 percent for most of our member agencies.

The other measure we have taken is to provide 4

an unprecedented amount of money for rebates on conservation devices and turf removal. Our typical annual budget for turf removal and device rebates on ultra-low-flow toilets, front-loading clothes washers, certain sprinklers, and nozzles is $20 million.

This past year, our budget [for the rebate program] was $100 million because of the strong demand. After the governor’s announcement, consumer demand exploded, so our board increased the budget by an additional $350 million for a total of $450 million.

That amounts to more than a 10-fold increase in the program. The local consumer demand is off the charts because people are responding to this drought with the tools available to them. We also expect to exhaust this additional money by this summer.

Our member agencies spent an additional $50 million, so all told, Southern California put $500 million into conservation over an 18-month Municipal Water Leader

period. That, as far as we can tell, has never been attempted anywhere in the nation. We intend to thoroughly study the long-term impacts and benefits of this program to see how this affected long-term trends.

Kris Polly: Of all the conservation devices you have mentioned, which gives the ratepayer the most bang for the buck?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: There’s an interesting conundrum here. The ones with the most bang for the buck are the items inside the household, the hard-wired, device-driven pieces. Items such as ultra-low-flush toilets and low-flow showerheads save the most water. But while the demand for them remains strong, we have seen that Southern California’s water usage remains, at the household level, 50 to 60 percent outdoors.

So, under our turf program we pay people to tear up their lawn and replace it with California native species and drip irrigation. If they do that, we give them $2 a square foot, up to $6,000. While it is not as cost effective as the indoor mechanisms, we are tackling the biggest usage of water at the household level. We have dedicated a big block of money toward it because we believe that in the long run, we have to change attitudes about outdoor use.

Kris Polly: Tell our readers about Metropolitan’s infrastructure improvement program.

Jeffrey Kightlinger: Like most large utilities around the country, we are faced with aging infrastructure and

growth in our service area. We are still adding 150,000 people a year in Southern California. Our focus in the last few years has been on our repair and replacement program, on which we are spending on average more than $200 million a year. It is about 70 percent focused on upgrading our existing system and 30 percent dealing with growth management projects. The biggest piece of it is the 200 miles of prestressed concrete pipe in our system, installed in the 1970s. The repair rate is such that we have decided to steel line the entire system, which is going to cost us about $1 billion over the next 20 years.

We are currently tackling it in segments. Because these are existing, in-use pipelines, typically 8 to 12 feet in diameter, we’ll shut down a portion of our system, build up local storage, and tell people we are shutting down for a couple of weeks. We have everything geared up around it: We have the excavation crews prepared, and then we trigger the shutdown and dewater the system. For two weeks, we work around the clock to complete 10 to 15 miles a stretch.

Ultimately, our concerns about concrete pipe failure pushed us to redo the entire system rather than repair on a piecemeal basis.

Kris Polly: Metropolitan receives a substantial amount of its water supply from the Colorado River system. What would a shortage declaration for Lake Mead mean for California, and what actions are being taken to avoid a shortage declamation?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: In a typical year, Metropolitan supplies 55 percent of Southern California’s water from imports—25 percent of that is Colorado River water and 30 percent is from northern California through the State Water Project. The remainder is local water, mostly rain

Jeff signed off on the Arrowhead Tunnels in 2009. Metropolitan’s Inland Feeder Program consists of 44 miles of pipeline and tunnels that conveys State Water Project flows from the Devil Canyon Second Afterbay to Diamond Valley Lake.

The Arrowhead Tunnels were the final component of the project.

Municipal Water Leader

5

and groundwater. The Colorado River water has been the backbone of our supply during this drought because we have been so severely reduced on our northern California supplies. We would have been in dire straits but for the fact that during these last four years, our Colorado River Aqueduct has delivered close to 1 million acre-feet a year. If the river goes into shortage, it is going to impact Metropolitan.

We have had great flexibility in storing water in Lake Mead as intentionally created surplus, or ICS, since 2007.

Our use of that ICS has been so valuable these last four years as we have worked our way through this California drought. In a shortage, we would not be able to use that ICS in the same fashion.

Nevada, Arizona, and California have all been working together to try and come up with cooperative programs to avoid any shortage. We have put up some amounts of funding to purchase water. Southern Nevada Water Authority, Metropolitan, the Central Arizona Project, and Denver Water have purchased water to leave in Lake Mead to help avoid a shortage. We hope to expand on this pilot program over the next few years, with a significant federal match. If we can start returning water to Mead through conservation programs, we hope we can buy time until this drought breaks.

Kris Polly: What are some other ways that the reliability of Metropolitan’s water supplies can be increased?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: Metropolitan has focused on a three-pronged strategy: a strong baseline of imported

supply; a long-term investment strategy with a focus on local supplies—groundwater, recycled, reclaimed, and desalinated; and demand management to keep demand flat despite continued regional growth. We have done quite well with local supply and demand management.

What has been the biggest stress has been the investment needed to shore up our imported supplies.

We have invested quite a bit over the last decade on the Colorado River in partnering with the Palo-Verde Irrigation District, developing conservation programs in the Imperial Valley, and lining the Coachella and AllAmerican Canals. All of those programs have contributed to increased agricultural-to-urban transfers. In 2003, our ability to deliver water through the [Colorado River] Aqueduct was around 600,000 acre-feet; over the last few years, the aqueduct has reliably delivered more than 1 million acre-feet per year. That result has required a lot of investment and continued work.

We are going to apply the same effort to our State Water Project to restore the reliability of that supply.

Kris Polly: What has to be done to drought-proof California?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: I do not think there is such a thing as drought proofing.

There are always going to be some hard years, and with climate change, conditions are becoming even more challenging. The drought we are in right now is unprecedented—it is drier than any eight-year period in recorded California history. What has made it even more challenging are the high temperatures. Last year and this

Jeff at the 2011 Solar Cup. Each May, Metropolitan hosts the nation's largest solar boat program. The Solar Cup is a high school education program in which teams of students from throughout Southern California build and race solar-powered boats. The seven-month program culminates in a three-day competition at the Lake Skinner Recreational Area.

Municipal Water Leader

are the hottest years ever recorded in California history. It is really hard to drive water usage lower during a drought when temperatures are rising dramatically.

What we have to do is continue to build robust infrastructure to make the state as resilient as possible.

There are going to be periods of time when we cut back in response to drought, but we have to keep that window as narrow and as short as possible by having large amounts of storage. We also need to build more storage—California has not invested in storage in a significant way since 1960.

We need the state to increase its storage reserves in both northern and central California.

Along the Colorado River, there is four times the amount of storage as the annual flow, whereas in California, we have the opposite. California’s annual flow is four times the possible storage. We need more surface and groundwater storage facilities as our population grows.

Kris Polly: Describe the unique relationships Metropolitan has developed over the years to increase water reliability.

Jeffrey Kightlinger: For the last 15 years, Metropolitan has made a concerted effort to form good working partnerships with agriculture. Agriculture used to be the biggest water user in Metropolitan—there is a reason Orange County is named Orange County. Now, farming has become a pretty small part of our service area— 10 percent of the water used in Metropolitan’s service area is for agriculture.

We have worked closely with agencies in the Central Valley and the Colorado River system—Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley Water District, Kern County Water Agency, Semitropic Water District, and Arvin-Edison Irrigation District, among others. In some areas, it is investing in wells and recharge facilities; in others, it involves investing in water efficiency; and still in others, it involves paying farmers to not farm for parts of the year. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. Each district has its own needs.

There used to be a lot of mistrust; but now, we have partnerships with more than a dozen agricultural water agencies.

Kris Polly: Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency released its revised rule on waters of the United States, with the intention of clarifying federal jurisdiction.

How will this rule affect Metropolitan and its service areas?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: We have tracked this issue for the last couple of decades. One of our concerns over the years has been the impact of potential [jurisdictional Municipal Water Leader

determinations] along our 240‑mile Colorado River Aqueduct, which crosses hundreds of ephemeral streams. Some interpretations of the rule would require us to obtain permits from the [U.S.] Army Corps [of Engineers] in order to maintain our system. Because the rules have been shifting for the last 20 years, we wanted clearer permitting requirements so we know what the rules are.

Kris Polly: What is your message to Congress as it considers legislation to address drought and water supply?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: It is not just California. The entire Southwest has been hit with drought over the last decade. We need Congress to look at the entire region.

It is a long-term issue, and that is always a challenge for Congress. Most water projects that would get to the root of the problem take a decade for us to implement. An increase in storage may not help with the current drought, but it will help for the next one. The major short-term solution is to allocate money, but unless our leaders in Washington, DC, and Sacramento are willing to address permitting and study requirements, there are no projects that will be shovel ready to put that money to use.

Kris Polly: What is the most significant accomplishment in your 10‑year tenure as general manager of Metropolitan Water District?

Jeffrey Kightlinger: The most significant accomplishment is the reinvestment and rebuilding of Southern California’s imported water supply. If you looked at our Colorado River Program in 2003, our delivery of 1.2 million acre-feet was cut back to 600,000 acre-feet.

Generally, if you lose your supply due to regulation, you won’t get it back. We managed to restore our Colorado River Aqueduct to a highly reliable 1 million acre-feet a year.

Through a lot of hard work, we put together a comprehensive endangered species permitting program for the Colorado River and partnered with agricultural water agencies and other partners in the lower [Colorado River] basin states to help ensure supplies. That rebuilding has been essential to the success of Metropolitan.

We now have to turn around and do the very same thing with the California State Water Project supply.

We have a strong partner in the [Governor] Brown administration that is committed to doing that. The governor has committed to building more storage and investing in new supplies via a statewide bond, and we are nearing the completion of an environmental review for a new conveyance system.

7

ADVERTISEMENT

Water supply Flood protection Water quality Recreation Enriching communities. Improving the quality of life. l

l

l

800 E. Northside Drive Fort Worth, TX 76102 (817) 335-2491 www.trwd.com

ADVERTISEMENT

A Step Ahead of California’s Mandatory Water Conservation Measures

By Katie Ruark Five straight years of statewide drought have prompted California officials to adopt the state’s first set of mandatory water restrictions. On April 1, 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order directing the State Water Resources Control Board (SWB) to restrict California’s 411 large water suppliers with the goal of reducing urban potable water use by 25 percent.

On May 5, pursuant to the order, the SWB adopted an emergency regulation requiring large urban water suppliers to reduce water use from 4 percent to 36 percent of 2013 per-capita water use. The cutbacks took effect on June 1, and the SWB will begin assessing compliance with the publishing of the June water use report.

Prior to the recent emergency guidelines and mandates, many California water providers have implemented creative water conservation programs to stretch supplies for their customers and keep water bills down. The Desert Water Agency (DWA) is a public water utility that serves the 325 square miles in and around the Palm Springs area. While the agency has adopted mandatory water use restrictions to comply with the SWB’s emergency regulations, it has been actively promoting residential and commercial water conservation for years—DWA has reduced water use in its service area by 20 percent since 2007.

The DWA service area is home to a large number of part-time residents—30 percent of the agency’s water bills are sent out of its service area. Corralling the water use of absentee homeowners, in addition to year-round residents, is a real challenge.

The main driver of water use reductions in DWA’s service area has been the implementation of a variety of conservation programs and incentives.

In August 2014, DWA launched a turf buy-back program. The agency provides a rebate of $2.00 for each square foot of turf removed—up to $3,000 for residential properties and $10,000 per project for commercial properties. Customers must pay a minimum of 25 percent of the total cost of their project. Prompted by significant customer participation, the agency allocated $1 million toward the buy-back program within the first two months of its launch. Using a combination of agency budget and grant funds, DWA will again have a $1 million program for the 2015–2016 fiscal year.

Smart controllers regulate the timing and activity of sprinkler systems via weather sensors. Sprinkler sensors calculate evapotranspiration rates through onsite solar 10

Conservation Standards for Urban Water Suppliers* Tier

R-GPCD** range from to

Conservation standard (%)

1

Reserved

4

2

0

64.9

8

3

65

79.9

12

4

80

94.9

16

5

95

109.9

20

6

110

129.9

24

7

130

169.9

28

8

170

214.9

32

9

215

612

36

Adapted from the California State Water Board. *Serving more than 3,000 customers or delivering more than 3,000 acre-feet of water per year and accounting for more than 90% of urban water use. **Residential–gallons per capita daily.

and temperature measurements and adjust water rates accordingly. DWA has partnered with CPV Sentinel to launch a program that enables DWA customers to have an irrigation controller installed on their property at no cost to the customer.

In addition, DWA has upgraded its operational infrastructure to deliver water as efficiently as possible.

DWA recycles nearly 100 percent of its sewer effluent, serving it to golf courses, parks, sports fields, and municipal uses. Generally, recycled water accounts for about 10 percent of production and has been steadily increasing.

DWA has developed two shallow wells at our recycling facility to capture previously untapped water supplies. The new wells can produce up to 1,000 acre-feet per year.

While this source of water is of lower quality, containing higher levels of nitrates, it is useful for irrigation water for landscaping.

The recycling program saves energy—only using a quarter of the energy required to pump groundwater from deep wells—and saves millions of gallons of potable drinking water. In addition, recycling reduces the percolation of lower quality water into the groundwater basin that DWA relies on for drinking water.

Katie Ruark is the public information officer for Desert Water Agency and a native of the Palm Springs area. You can contact Katie at (760) 323‑4971 or kruark@dwa.org.

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

Sacramento Suburban Water District DISTRICT FOCUS

roughly 735 miles of main line, 12,000 valves, 6,000 hydrants, and 50 emergency interties with neighboring water districts.

In addition to using groundwater from 85 active wells, SSWD uses treated surface water from Folsom Reservoir and the American River. The district has contractual rights to purchase 26,064 acre-feet per year from a City of Sacramento water entitlement and up to 29,000 acre-feet per year of surface water from the Placer County Water Agency.

Installation of 48-inch transmission main.

By Robert Roscoe The Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD) is a publicly owned and operated water supplier that is regulated by the California State Water Resource Control Board, Division of Drinking Water, under state water laws. A five-member, elected board of directors governs the SSWD. All expenditures are financed through water service charges and connection fees.

SSWD is organized as a county water district and does not have wastewater authority. Wastewater from SSWD customers is treated at a regional inland sanitation plant, operated by the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District. The wastewater plant is undergoing a $1.5 billion to $2 billion upgrade that, when completed, will increase water recycling opportunities.

SSWD formed on February 1, 2002, by the merger of two longstanding water districts in the area, the Arcade Water District and the Northridge Water District, both of which were established in the mid1950s. SSWD assumed all the assets and liabilities of its two predecessor districts. At the time, both predecessor districts had already begun the conversion from groundwater-only systems to a conjunctive use system to increase water supply reliability and prevent groundwater overdraft.

SSWD now supplies water to nearly 175,000 people across 36 square miles with 46,000 service connections. The distribution system contains 12

Conjunctive Use Although SSWD is surrounded by the Sacramento and American Rivers, surface water is not available in those river systems in dry times. As the state’s population grows, there will be a growing conflict between human and environmental water needs and available supply. Like other water suppliers throughout California, our goal is to find common-sense ways to invest in local resource strategies to maximize available supplies and increase long-term reliability for our customers, including additional storage, infrastructure upgrades and replacements, increased water conservation and other demand management efforts, and increased conjunctive use of groundwater and surface water.

One of the main reasons we invested in a conjunctive use system was because our groundwater supply was becoming strained. Cumulative groundwater extraction

by SSWD and others in the region was exceeding the sustainable yield of the basin.

With our conjunctive use system, we can purchase surface water during wet times when excess surface water is available. This allows us to rest our wells and provides an opportunity for our groundwater basin to recover.

Essentially, the conjunctive use system affords us the opportunity to bank groundwater during wet periods, which has significantly increased long-term groundwater sustainability during dry years.

Since starting this program, we have banked over 185,000 acre-feet of water in excess of SSWD’s obligations to the groundwater Municipal Water Leader

basin as defined by the Sacramento Groundwater Authority—the entity responsible for managing regional groundwater sustainability. Instead of dropping 2 feet per year, we have seen groundwater levels climb a half foot to a foot per year over the past decade.

Since surface water is not available to us at this time due to the ongoing California drought, we are using 100 percent groundwater as we did prior to using the conjunctive supply system. Conjunctive use of both surface and groundwater is an expensive water supply system, but it has proven to be reliable, resilient, and sustainable.

Aging Infrastructure In addition to managing challenges with supply, another issue we are facing in our community is aging infrastructure. California did not have a significant water resources infrastructure prior to the turn of the 20th century. Much of SSWD’s infrastructure was installed during the World War II era, when the suburbs around downtown Sacramento were first being developed. That infrastructure is rapidly reaching the end of its operational life.

The ongoing repair and replacement of our infrastructure is expensive and time consuming. Our annual budget is around $45 million, including operation and maintenance costs. The capital improvement and replacement portion of the budget is around $18 million to $24 million a year. We spend roughly half of that on distribution system replacements.

As we upgrade our distribution system and work to keep our 85 active wells fully serviceable through repair, rehabilitation, and replacement, one of our highest priorities is the replacement of the bare steel piping that was installed in this area shortly after World War II. Much of that piping has exhibited extensive corrosion and now contributes to wasteful leaks.

A lot of our World War II–era water mains are located in narrow back and side yard public utility easements. As we replace the mains, we are installing new pipes in the

Installation of 12-inch distribution main.

Municipal Water Leader

right-of-way of the paved streets in the front of homes and businesses to make it easier for us to access in the future. Our customers are generally not happy when their utility company has to enter their backyard to dig a deep hole to repair a leak in the public water line. It is a very expensive process that involves reconnecting the home to a new front yard service line.

SSWD is replacing all the old 4- to 6-inch diameter pipes with 8- to 12-inch pipes and modern fire hydrants, which increases fire flows for public safety. Overall, we are spending about $1.6 million to $1.8 million per mile of pipe replacement.

Metering We also have to comply with a new state law that requires all communities to be metered by 2025. SSWD is on schedule to complete the metering ahead of the statutory deadline. Interestingly, the district was historically unmetered, so we have been presented with a unique challenge. In the 1850s, during the California gold rush, the City of Sacramento organized under a charter that prohibited the measurement of water to miners.

In fact, many communities in central California also developed on unmetered water systems.

SSWD must now pay to retrofit all services with water meters. While we will spend millions of dollars to comply with state law, metering will provide us with a better opportunity for improved water management and equitable billing. For customers who do not have meters, we use a flat-rate billing system, based on lot size, to cover our operating capital requirements. No matter how much we fine tune that system, there will always be inequities, with some charged too much and others not charged enough. In addition, because of the historic drought in California, all state water utilities have been ordered to conserve. Volumetric billing is a very valuable tool in that effort.

SSWD is working hard to get the entire district metered as quickly as possible, but we also do not want to put a meter on old mains due to be replaced. So we coordinate distribution system replacement with our meter retrofit program.

Pricing and Long-Term Sustainability No one likes to discuss increasing the prices associated with water services, but we have been engaged in that conversation with our customers for the past decade.

SSWD implemented some very large rate increases over the course of my tenure, primarily to help us deal with our aging infrastructure, which was previously not handled programmatically. We developed asset management plans for all of our major infrastructure pieces to better prepare the district to manage the cost projections associated with the replacements.

13

This is a good start, but it is important to understand that our current rate structure does not yet allow us to claim long-term sustainability. The goal is to make sure we are charging the right amount for the present use of the system so we leave future generations with an affordable, functioning, and sustainable water system. We are much closer to that goal than we were a decade ago, and while we continue to make progress, we recognize that setting rates is a political Evening well drilling. process of great concern to our customers—particularly those on low or fixed incomes. The challenge is to create a rate structure that is equitable and affordable, yet sufficient to allow us to replace our infrastructure at the pace it is wearing out.

We have aggressively pursued both state and federal grant opportunities to reduce the amount of capital needed from our customers.

Today, SSWD’s tap water remains an incredible value—the average household water bill is less than $50— compared with the cost of other household services, such as electricity, cell phone, Internet, and cable television. In the future, we expect rates will increase, not only to adjust for increasing capital improvement costs, but for a variety of reasons, including increased energy costs, environmental stewardship, and additional regulations.

Technology SSWD has made great strides over the last decade, and we are poised to continue our advances into the future.

Much of the district’s success can be attributed to its talented workforce, which is committed to the SSWD mission and willing to incorporate technology into the work. In 2003, our work order system consisted of a pad of yellow paper in a superintendent’s truck. We have made huge advancements since that time.

Integrated software systems for work orders, accounting, finance, customer service, and billing, automated meter reading systems, SCADA (supervisory 14

control and data acquisition) systems, and document management—all tied to a geographic information system, or GIS—have revolutionized how the district operates.

This change provides our people with the right tools to do their jobs in a more efficient and customer-oriented manner. While technological advances have certainly changed the drinking water industry, we are not about to buy whatever the latest products promise. Technology is valuable to us only if we can show the economic value and return for our ratepayers.

Although we do not use social media as vigorously as other water suppliers, we provide a lot of information to our customers on our website (sswd.org). The public can learn about specific projects being performed by the district, conservation requirements, and billing. There are a lot of security concerns associated with the newer forms of social media, and there have been some notorious security breaches in which private data were hacked. We take customer data and privacy issues very seriously.

Serving the Public Another priority is customer service. SSWD employees are required to have special certifications and receive ongoing technical training, whether they work in our customer service center, as distribution and treatment operators, or as water resources engineers. We make a tremendous investment in every person we hire so that he or she can provide our customers with the service they expect and deserve.

At SSWD, we recognize that we are in the public service business. We understand that we provide our customers a public resource for public health and safety using public money. We place a high value on maintaining full transparency and accountability in what we do.

Although we are facing a variety of challenges, it is our job to ensure that all our water assets are reliable and ready for service without interruption. Our customers expect and deserve a 24/7 commitment. We are in a partnership with our customers. Our mission is simple: No matter how complex the struggle, we will do everything possible to deliver a high-quality, reliable supply of water and superior customer service at a reasonable price.

Robert S. Roscoe, PE, has been general manager of the Sacramento Suburban Water District since March 2003. Prior to his current position, he served as northern California manager for the CaliforniaAmerican Water Company. Mr. Roscoe has more than 35 years of experience in public and private utility systems and as a consulting civil engineer. You can reach him at (916) 972-7171.

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

Exploration Resources International

Co n t a c t u s : i n fo @ x r i g e o. c o m 1 - 8 6 6 -X R I - 6 8 6 7 w w w. x r i g e o. c o m

WATER Associations

Tim Quinn, Association of California Water Agencies As executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), Tim Quinn leads the largest water organization of its kind in the nation. Tim, who became ACWA’s executive director in July 2007, has more than 25 years of experience in California water issues.

Prior to joining ACWA, he served as deputy general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. He earned his bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Colorado in 1974 and his master’s and doctorate degrees in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles, in 1976 and 1983, respectively.

He was born and raised in Nebraska.

Municipal Water Leader’s editor-in-chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Mr. Quinn about California’s water resources challenges and what ACWA is doing to help its membership manage limited supply during the drought and work toward the implementation of policy that will better equip the utilities to successfully serve their communities well into the future.

Kris Polly: For our readers who are not familiar with ACWA, how would you describe your association?

Tim Quinn: ACWA is an association of 430 public water agencies that have highly diverse interests and water supply operations. Our members are located in northern, central, and Southern California; in coastal areas, urban areas, and irrigation districts. Additionally, many of our member agencies use a combination of resources, such as imported surface water and local groundwater. Others also produce or purchase recycled water. ACWA works hard to represent our membership’s collective interest before the U.S. Congress and the executive branch, the Governor Jerry Brown’s administration, and all the federal and state regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over our industry.

Kris Polly: Please tell us about some of ACWA’s activities regarding the drought.

Tim Quinn: Let me start by saying that this drought is particularly bad in California, where nearly half of the state is still experiencing exceptional drought conditions. According to recent tree ring studies, the years 2012 to 2014 were the driest 3-year sequence in more than 1,200 years, and 2015 was no better. So, you could say that we are having the millennial drought in California. ACWA has confronted these drought conditions in several ways.

16

We took the lead in engaging the California State Water Resources Control Board as it developed the first-ever statewide mandatory reductions in urban water use. The drought emergency regulations were completed under intense time pressure and will need some improvement in the future, but the fact is, Californians are conserving water in record amounts. ACWA also manages the Save Our Water program on behalf of the State of California.

The program is a $7 million effort to encourage Californians to use water wisely, especially under drought conditions. But perhaps the most important thing that water managers have done with regard to this drought is that we were better prepared for it than many recognize.

Since the last great drought in California, 1987 to 1992, local and regional water managers have spent roughly $20 billion to conserve, reuse, desalinate, market, and store water. Per capita water use over my career has dropped by about half in California. While this drought has regrettably hit portions of our agricultural economy pretty hard, over all, the California economy is growing faster than the national average by a fair margin, despite the fact that we are experiencing a millennial drought.

Contrary to the image created in the media, one of the lessons of this drought just may be how resilient our water management strategies and economy are in California.

Municipal Water Leader

Kris Polly: What are some of ACWA’s longer-term priorities?

Tim Quinn: In 2013, ACWA’s board of directors adopted a comprehensive Statewide Water Action Plan (SWAP) that was developed in cooperation with many of our member agencies to help all the water utilities chart a sustainable path forward for the state. It outlines 15 actions to improve water supply reliability, respect water rights, protect the integrity of the state’s water system, and promote new conservation and stewardship initiatives.

We all know that we will never again have the option of operating reactively, but we also have to start looking farther down the road to improve overall water supply reliability and harness new resources. Conservation alone will not provide us with long-term sustainability. We also need to continue to explore new technologies and pursue additional storage projects, above and below ground, and find some way to fix the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, which has bedeviled the state for decades. SWAP provides our membership with a set of actions that will ensure they are able to meet the growing demands of their customers.

When we released SWAP, one of our goals was to encourage Governor Brown to think comprehensively about the future of California’s water policy. We were quite pleased when the Brown administration responded to our plan by adopting a very similar plan, the California Water Action Plan, which calls for a comprehensive set of investments to secure California’s water future.

Proposition 1, a $7.5 billion water bond, overwhelming approved by the voters in 2014, was designed to jump-start action on the governor’s comprehensive plan. Since passage, ACWA has been working with the Brown administration and the legislature to accelerate the payment of money from that bond toward new projects.

Many people ask what the water bond will do for them.

In my mind, the most important provision in the water bond is the one that allocates $2.7 billion to the California Water Commission to finance the public benefits of storage projects. Under the terms of Proposition 1, the state funding provided by the water bond will leverage even more funding from the water supply agencies that will benefit from the storage projects. These storage provisions reflect a new direction in California water policy. Under a broadly supported law passed in 2009, the central tenet of California water policy is the coequal goals of improving water supply reliability and ecosystem health. The water storage projects of the 21st century will improve water supply, but they will also be designed to provide substantial public benefits, most importantly improved dry period flows and temperatures for fish. Under Proposition 1, water users will pay for supply benefits through their water rates, and the taxpayer will pay for public benefits through Proposition 1. It is something of a bold public policy experiment, but one that really needs to work.

Municipal Water Leader

The bond also provides about $2.4 billion for local resource development, including recycling, desalination, cleaning up contaminated groundwater basins, and storm water recapture. In addition, nearly $2 billion is provided for investments in California’s watersheds, and about $0.5 billion was provided for investments to improve water supply and water quality for disadvantaged communities.

These watershed investments fit well with ACWA's priorities, which include a major commitment in the last strategic plan approved by the ACWA board to partnering with other stakeholders to improve the management of California’s forests and headwaters.

Lastly, ACWA’s board of directors also recently approved the creation of a Water Transfers Work Group, which is composed of a number of water resources experts from ACWA’s board and our member agencies, to make recommendations to Governor Brown about how we can significantly improve the functioning of California’s water market. A water transfer policy statement adopted by the ACWA board at its July 2015 meeting urges the governor to make an enhanced water market in California the foremost water management tool in fighting a continuing drought. The worse the drought gets, the more important it will be that market forces, and not centralized regulators, drive the decisions about where water is used in the California economy.

Kris Polly: Please tell us about California’s new groundwater law.

Tim Quinn: Implementing this new groundwater law is another high priority for ACWA during the next few years. Signed by Governor Brown in 2014, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) is arguably the most important piece of water legislation passed in California in more than 100 years. SGMA provides a framework for sustainable management of groundwater supplies by local authorities, with a limited role for state intervention in order to protect the resource.

Due to a number of causes, the groundwater conditions in California, especially in our central valley, which is the largest producer of agricultural products and goods in the world, were rapidly reaching an alarming condition. This was a great concern to local water managers. In fact, I have been working on this groundwater issue since I arrived at ACWA in 2007.

In 2009, ACWA’s board of directors adopted a general set of policy principles that established groundwater sustainability as a high priority for the association and its membership. In response to the rapidly declining state of our groundwater basins, in 2011, the board approved a groundwater framework document that clarified its position on the issue. Though ACWA has always protected local agencies from state incursions in the management of their water resources, the document made it clear that ACWA’s board felt that local managers had an obligation to manage 17

groundwater resources in a sustainable manner. If local water managers make the hard choices to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions, then they should be shielded from state intervention. If they don’t make such decisions, the Board reasoned the state might be justified in intervening in local groundwater management. In the end, this was the logic applied in SGMA, which absolutely preserves local authority so long as the local agencies are moving to create institutions and plans to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions in a reasonable time frame.

In 2013, the board approved a very specific set of negotiating principals to guide the development of what became the framework for SGMA. If legislation was going to be passed that affected our groundwater basins, we wanted to have a seat at the drafting table, and we did.

Unlike the water bond, which was overwhelmingly popular and had bipartisan support, SGMA was very controversial.

Though it faced a lot of opposition in the Central Valley, since SGMA’s passage, local water managers are now rolling up their sleeves to implement the new law, and ACWA is doing everything it can to help give them the tools to comply with the law to responsibly improve our groundwater basins.

Specifically, SGMA requires the formation of local groundwater sustainability agencies that must assess conditions in their local water basins and adopt and implement locally-based groundwater sustainability plans over the next 20 years. It protects existing surface water and groundwater rights and does not impact current drought response measures.

Kris Polly: What is your message to policy makers with regard to the federal drought legislation?

Tim Quinn: The federal government has a huge presence in California water and they have to play a role in coping with this drought. The federal government operates the biggest water project in the state of California, the Central Valley Project, which provides 20 percent of California’s irrigation and municipal water supplies. No less important, the federal government is by far the toughest regulator of this system, particularly with regard to the implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as it relates to water withdrawals.

Our member agencies have worked hard to advance legislation at the federal level that will help us deal with the myriad of challenges we are facing during the drought.

Though the ESA did not cause the drought, it is certainly making the jobs of our member agencies unnecessarily more difficult during an already tough time when our limited resources are stretched thin. We would like to see a strong bipartisan bill passed in Congress that addresses the drought in California and throughout the western states, one that helps provide water managers with the tools they need to effectively carry out their jobs.

18

Kris Polly: In addition to drought legislation, does ACWA plan to focus on other federal bills this year?

Tim Quinn: We are working with NWRA and other stakeholders to advance legislation in congress that will result in the dramatic improvement of how forests are managed in the Western states. The bills collectively promote more collaborative decision-making among the various entities of jurisdiction.

The House bill, H.R. 2647 (Westerman), the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2015, was recently passed by a 262157 vote. The legislation contains some very important provisions that will help us improve the management of our forests by promoting healthy systems and preventing destructive wildfires.

H.R. 2647 contains streamlining provisions related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Over the years, the NEPA process has become overly burdensome for so many involved in the natural resources industry, costing them valuable time when they can least afford it. Though controversial among environmentalists, NEPA must be amended in order for our resources leaders to do their jobs.

For example, we don’t have a year or more to wait for an Environmental Impact Statement to be released after a catastrophic fire. We need to be able to access the site within weeks, not within 12-18 months.

Both the House and Senate bills contain provisions that address the plethora of lawsuits that seem to accompany decisions by the U.S. Forestry Service to improve forest management. There is a keen interest amongst the agencies and the associations in finding a way to discourage frivolous lawsuits, so our forest service managers can focus on doing their jobs without fear of constant litigation. Though it is not clear if all of these provisions will weather the legislative process, it is our hope that a bill will be sent to the President’s desk that aims to improve the management of our forests.

Moreover, like so many other associations across the country, we will continue to work with our membership to support current and future legislation that will protect the agencies and the public from overzealous regulations such as the Waters of the United States rule.

Kris Polly: What is the most important thing you learned as an association executive?

Tim Quinn: I learned that a bottom up approach is preferable to a top down command and control structure in the water resources business. The best policies are those that are developed and advanced at the grassroots level.

What makes ACWA so strong is that its membership works together to advocate toward a common agenda. I believe that an organized stakeholder effort is much more powerful than one delegated from the ivory tower. No one knows their water system better than the people who wake up every day to care for and use that resource.

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

New water for a

thirsty world The innate connection between the sun, sea and wind existed long before man. Using today’s technologies, AECOM is re-connecting these elements to create resilient water and energy solutions. By coupling the power of sunlight and wind, we can harness sustainable energy to provide new water supplies to water scarce areas. Advances in desalination technology not only convert sea water into freshwater, but make it an affordable reality. www.aecom.com

Our economists assist utilities in communicating the true value of their wa

Our desalination and sustainability expe help drought-impacted communities do more with less by producing, managing conserving water supplies. The mission simple – to bring new water for a thirsty

water.

erts o and n is y world.

ADVERTISEMENT

WATER ASSOCiAtionS

By Robert Johnson

The National Water Resources Association

The National Water Resources Association (NWRA) is a nonprofit federation of state associations, individuals, and water agencies whose mission is to advocate for the sound management, development, and beneficial use of water resources. The NWRA’s top priorities include the fair and reasonable implementation of U.S. environmental laws, rehabilitation and modernization of water supply infrastructure, and maximizing funding for federal water projects and other water program needs. This year, the NWRA has been at the forefront of addressing issues important to municipal water providers, including western drought relief and the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule.

The NWRA has represented municipal and agricultural water interests at the federal level for more than 80 years. Our strength is a reflection of the tremendous grassroots participation generated on issues affecting water conservation, management and development. Through its diverse membership, the NWRA is uniquely positioned to bring together municipal, agricultural, and industrial water interests to speak with one voice in Washington, DC. From its onset, the NWRA has been instrumental in the promotion of the development of the water infrastructure for municipal and agricultural suppliers.

During the depths of the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt telegrammed attendees at the 2nd Annual Meeting of the National Reclamation Association, the NWRA’s predecessor organization, with a message that resonates as much today as it did then: “Reclamation as a federal policy has proven its worth and has a very definite place in our economic existence.

Spread over one-third of the territory of the United States and creating taxable values and purchasing power affecting municipal[,] state[,] and federal governments and private industry[.] It is only reasonable that we should all take pride in its achievements and success[.]”

Representing Municipal Interests Although our roots are in water for irrigation, the association has evolved over the last 50 years to incorporate municipal interests and concerns. That evolution reflects the population growth of urban areas and associated municipal water needs. Today, the water supplies of municipal and agricultural water providers are inexorably intertwined.

NWRA’s Municipal Caucus provides municipal

22

water policy perspectives to the board of directors and management staff to guide the association’s advocacy on key issues affecting municipal water providers before federal officials and Congress. The caucus aims to enable municipal water providers to better meet the challenge of providing reliable and safe drinking water to growing populations. This year, key federal priorities were the WOTUS rule, point source pollution, and water treatment; aging water infrastructure; and the permitting of chemical storage used for water purification.

Looking Ahead The NWRA has engaged Congress and partnered with federal agencies to help meet many of our nation’s most pressing water supply needs. Our association has strong working relationships with numerous federal agencies ranging from the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Interior to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. NWRA and its members will continue to work with those entities to promote the development of water supply capacities nationwide and the regulatory flexibility necessary to maintain and improve America’s water infrastructure.

Bob Johnson is the executive vice president of the National Water Resources Association. He was the commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation from 2006 to 2009. He can be reached at (202) 698-0693 or bjohnson@nwra.org.

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

proviDing WATER • WASTEWATER • RECYCLED WATER sErvicEs for 65 yEars

Industry leader in water reuse and brackish water desalination programs EastErn Municipal WatEr District • pErris, california WWW.EMWD.org

WATER LAW

Assessing the Final Waters of the United States Rule

By Mark Pifher and Steve Dougherty On June 29, 2015, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (together, referred to as the agencies) published in the Federal Register a final rule defining the phrase “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The final rule responds to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) and Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States (Rapanos) decisions. See 79 Federal Register 22188. Although it not known how the agencies will interpret the final rule, it is expected to expand the geographic scope of jurisdiction under section 404 of the CWA when compared with how the agencies currently determine the geographic scope of their section 404 jurisdiction.

The final rule establishes three broad categories of waters and wetlands: • those that are categorically jurisdictional by rule • those that are not jurisdictional by rule • “other waters” to be evaluated on a case-specific basis under the “significant nexus” test to determine jurisdictional status This approach is intended to establish bright-line categories and reduce the number of case-by-case jurisdictional determinations by the agencies.

24

The final rule also • maintains the existing exemptions for agriculture • clarifies that groundwater is not a water of the United States • addresses the jurisdictional status of irrigation ditches • establishes numerous new terms

What Is Jurisdictional?

The following water bodies were considered jurisdictional in the past and will remain jurisdictional by rule: • (a)(1) Traditional navigable waters (TNWs)—waters that are currently used, were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in the future for interstate or foreign commerce • (a)(2) Interstate waters and wetlands— waters and wetlands that flow across or form parts of state boundaries regardless of navigability • (a)(3) Territorial seas • (a)(4) Impoundments—impoundments of TNWs, interstate waters and wetlands, the territorial seas, and now tributaries (see below) And, for the first time, the following water bodies will be jurisdictional by rule: • (a)(5) All tributaries • (a)(6) All waters “adjacent” to TNWs, interstate waters, territorial seas, or tributaries Other waters are those that are not jurisdictional by rule or categorically excluded from jurisdiction and are determined, on a case-specific basis, to have a significant nexus to a TNW, an interstate water, or a territorial sea. The final rule includes two types of waters that may be determined jurisdictional on a case-by-case basis. The first type consists of five identified categories of waters and wetlands (prairie potholes, Carolina bays and Delmarva bays, pocosins, western vernal pools, and Texas coastal prairie wetlands). The second type consists of Municipal Water Leader

waters that are within the 100‑year floodplain of an (a)(1) through (a)(3) jurisdictional water and all waters within 4,000 feet of the high tide line or ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of an (a)(1) through (a)(5) jurisdictional water. A water has a significant nexus when any single function or combination of functions performed by the water, alone or together with similarly situated waters in the region, contributes significantly (must be more than speculative or insubstantial) to the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of the nearest TNW, interstate water, or territorial sea.

The final rule identifies nine aquatic functions to be considered in determining a significant nexus: • sediment trapping • nutrient recycling • pollutant trapping/transformation/filtering/transport • retention and attenuation of flood waters • runoff storage • contribution of flow • export of organic matter • export of food resources • provision of life cycle–dependent aquatic habitat What remains unclear is how the use of these functions is consistent with Supreme Court precedent and how they allow a water body to be found jurisdictional independent of the TNW to which it is ostensibly connected. Simply stated, many of the functions identified in the rule can be equally well served by dry land or man-made structures, such as sediment barriers or traps, and lined side-channel detention facilities. But the mere existence of these functions does not mean that the dry land qualifies as jurisdictional or is somehow inseparably bound up with the TNW. The final rule uses a variety of terms, many of which are new to section 404 of the CWA. Most of the new terms are related to defining the geographic scope of section 404 jurisdiction and the case-specific significant nexus determination for other waters.

What is Not Jurisdictional?

The final rule states that the following are not a water of the United States: • (b)(1) Wastewater treatment systems • (b)(2) Prior converted cropland • (b)(3) The following ditches: - ditches with ephemeral flow that are not a relocated tributary or excavated in a tributary - ditches with intermittent flow that are not a relocated tributary, excavated in a tributary, or drain wetlands - ditches that do not flow, either directly or through

Municipal Water Leader

another water, into a jurisdictional water • (b)(4) The following features: - artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land should application of water to that area cease - artificially constructed lakes and ponds created in dry land such as farm and stock watering ponds, irrigation ponds, and settling basins - artificial reflecting pools or swimming pools created in dry land - small ornamental waters created in dry land - water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to mining or construction activity, including pits excavated for obtaining fill, sand, or gravel that fill with water - erosional features, including gullies, rills, and other ephemeral features that do not meet the definition of a tributary; nonwetland swales; and lawfully constructed grassed waterways - puddles • (b)(5) Groundwater • (b)(6) Stormwater control features constructed to convey, treat, or store stormwater that are created in dry land • (b)(7) Wastewater recycling structures constructed in dry land, detention and retention basins built for wastewater recycling, groundwater recharge basins, percolation ponds built for wastewater recycling, and water distributary structures build for wastewater recycling

Key Proposed Changes

The final rule would affect the geographic scope of the agencies’ section 404 jurisdiction in the following ways.

Eliminate the Isolation of Waters and Wetlands Based on Breaks in Jurisdiction The final rule would significantly expand the geographic scope of section 404 jurisdiction in the arid West, where there are numerous intermittent and ephemeral drainages. The headwaters of many of these drainages are currently considered “isolated” (per guidance following SWANCC). Currently, when a drainage lacks continuous characteristics of a water of the United States (i.e., OHWM, bed, and bank), the agencies typically consider the reaches of the drainage and any associated wetlands upgradient of this break in jurisdictional characteristics as isolated or lacking a significant nexus to a TNW and, therefore, nonjurisdictional.

The final rule proposes that a water that otherwise qualifies as a tributary does not lose its status as a tributary if, for any length, there are one or more man-made breaks, 25

or one or more natural breaks, so long as a bed, bank, and OHWM can be identified upstream of the break. The proposed elimination of breaks in jurisdiction isolating the upper reaches of drainages would translate to an increase in the scope of section 404 jurisdiction on intermittent and ephemeral drainages and their associated wetlands.

Adjacent Waters Are Waters of the United States The final rule would make adjacent waters, rather than simply adjacent wetlands (the current situation), a water of the United States. For example, open water ponds adjacent to a river with no outlet to the river are currently considered nonjurisdictional, but wetlands in these ponds are considered adjacent and jurisdictional. Under the final rule, both the water and wetlands in the ponds would be considered adjacent and jurisdictional.

Ditches The final rule declined to define “ephemeral” and “intermittent” for ditches because these flow regimes are described earlier in the rule, have been used by the agencies consistently, and are readily understood by field staff and the public. However, where these terms are described earlier in the rule, they are described in the context of streams.

The final rule is also not clear on what constitutes a relocated tributary. Many agricultural ditches in the western United States intercept the flow of drainages that may qualify as a tributary, including the situation in which a tributary ends in a canal and the canal conveys the water carried by the tributary. Reference is also made in the final rule’s preamble that a ditch does not qualify for an exclusion if it “redirects the majority of a stream’s flow.”

Many canals and ditches in the western United States derive their water from the exercise of lawful decreed diversions from rivers or streams, and it is not uncommon for a ditch or series of ditches along a stream reach to divert, under their respective priorities, the majority of the natural flow regime. The final rule is clear that the jurisdictional status of a ditch can be determined by ditch segment (i.e., it is possible to have jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional segments on the same ditch).

Finally, it is unclear how the criteria for what renders a ditch nonjurisdictional applies to canals. There is no

26

mention in the final rule of any exclusion for “canals” even though, in the western United States, canals often operate in a manner similar to ditches. The definitions for ditch exclusions readily apply to constructed roadside ditches and drainage ditches, but they do not fit well with irrigation and water supply canals and ditches, which commonly occur throughout the western United States.

Tributaries Under the final rule, any water that meets the definition of a tributary is a water of the United States.

In addition to breaks in jurisdictional characteristics not isolating drainages (discussed above), the final rule would also establish other situations that do not eliminate jurisdiction, including the following: • Tributaries that have been channelized in concrete, or otherwise have been human altered, may still meet the definition of tributaries under the final rule so long as they still contribute flow to an (a)(1) through (a)(3) water.

• Waters that meet the definition of tributary under the final rule are jurisdictional even if there is an impoundment at some point along the connection from the tributary to the (a)(1) through (a)(3) water. Because an impoundment is considered by rule to not cut off a connection between upstream tributaries and a downstream (a)(1) through (a)(3) water, tributaries above the impoundment are still considered tributary to a downstream (a)(1) through (a)(3) water even where the flow of water is impeded due to the impoundment.

• The significant nexus between a tributary and a jurisdictional water is not broken where the tributary flows through a culvert or other structure.

Groundwater The final rule states that groundwater is not a water of the United States. However, a shallow subsurface hydrologic connection can be used to demonstrate that a wetland or water is adjacent to a jurisdictional wetland or water. Guidance is not provided on how to demonstrate whether a particular water or wetland has a shallow subsurface hydrologic connection. Groundwater

Municipal Water Leader

monitoring studies can be time consuming, so the responsibility and cost will likely fall on the project proponent to demonstrate the lack of a connection or, in the interest of time, assume a connection and jurisdiction.

Significant Nexus Test A significant nexus occurs when it is determined that an other water significantly affects the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of an (a)(1) through (a)(3) water.

As proposed, the significant nexus test for other waters would be applied to waters and wetlands, either alone or in combination with other similarly situated waters in the region (i.e., a watershed). This allows the determination of a significant nexus to consider the individual water or wetland at issue or to group the individual water or wetland with other waters or wetlands in the watershed.

When the functional contributions of the aggregated waters and wetlands in a watershed are considered, it would be an unusual situation that—in the aggregate— there is no significant nexus to an (a)(1) through (a)(3) water. As proposed, a significant nexus for the aggregate translates to a significant nexus for the individual water or wetland in question. The combination of aggregating waters and wetlands in a watershed for the significant nexus test for jurisdiction for other waters, and including all tributaries as jurisdictional by rule (no jurisdictional breaks considered), would leave very few other waters as nonjurisdictional.

This becomes particularly clear when the agencies state that a hydrologic connection is not necessary to establish a significant nexus because, in some cases, the lack of a hydrologic connection would be a sign of the water’s function in relationship to an (a)(1) through (a)(3) water (e.g., sediment trapping, nutrient recycling, pollutant trapping and filtering, retention or attenuation of flood waters, runoff storage, and provision of aquatic habitat).

Finally, in the West, where water providers hold decreed water interests located in basins up to hundreds of miles from their service territory, a dilemma arises as, unbeknownst to them, dredge and fill applications are filed by others and significant nexus determinations are made for the entire set of similarly situated waters in the region without the benefit of the water providers’ knowledge or participation.

Municipal Water Leader

Final Thoughts

The final rule needs to be viewed in a broader context to determine its potential effects on the regulated public.

If the final rule is narrowly interpreted by the agencies in implementation, it will expand the scope of the agencies’ section 404 jurisdiction. Concurrently, there has been a trend of tightening the impact thresholds of nationwide permits (NWPs) each time the NWPs are renewed and modified. Increased geographic scope of jurisdiction, coupled with tightening the impact thresholds of the NWPs, will make it more challenging and expensive for project proponents to comply with section 404 of the CWA and avoid impacts on jurisdictional waters and wetlands, and it will likely increase the potential for projects to require the more lengthy individual permit process. In addition, the recent shift in how the Corps complies with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, combined with the final rule and expansion of jurisdiction, will likely result in more projects requiring cultural resource surveys and review by the State Historic Preservation Office.

Mark Pifher is the manager of the Southern Delivery System at the Colorado Springs Utilities and is the chair of the Water Quality Task Force of the National Water Resources Association.

You can reach Mark at mpifher@csu.org.

Steve Dougherty is a senior ecologist and principal with ERO Resources Corporation. He specializes in wetland and riparian systems, Endangered Species Act compliance, and environmental issues associated with water supply. You can reach Steve at sdougherty@eroresources.com.

27

MANAGER PROFILE

Dan Masnada, General Manager, Castaic Lake Water Agency The Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA), located 35 miles north of metro Los Angeles, is a public wholesale water agency that supplies Santa Clarita Valley (SCV) homes and businesses with about half the water they use. CLWA treats and delivers imported water from the California State Water Project and other sources to the valley’s four local water retailers: Los Angeles County Waterworks District #36, Newhall County Water District, CLWA Santa Clarita Water Division, and Valencia Water Company. Together, CLWA and its four purveyors are informally known as the valley’s Family of Water Suppliers.

Mr. Dan Masnada is CLWA’s general manager.

During his 13 years at the helm of CLWA, he has provided the leadership and vision to help ensure that the valley’s municipal and industrial (M&I) customers have a highquality, cost-effective, and reliable water supply. Prior to joining CLWA in 2002, Mr. Masnada served as executive director of the Central Coast Water Authority from 1992 to 2002. He serves on the boards of the State Water Contractors, the SCV Chamber of Commerce, and the Valencia Water Company.

CLWA’s community outreach and education platforms are an important component of the agency’s efforts to provide the public with a sustainable water supply by educating residents and businesses about the need to adopt a water use efficiency ethic as well as implementing programs that incentivize water use efficiency. Municipal Water Leader’s writer, Valentina Valenta, spoke with Mr. Masnada about CLWA’s community outreach program and how it integrates into the agency’s overall conservation agenda.

Valentina Valenta: Please tell us about CLWA’s public outreach program.

Dan Masnada: Let me begin by saying that the mission of CLWA is not only to sustain the community by providing an adequate and dependable water supply, but also to improve the local economy and preserve the quality of life of all residents. The ongoing drought has certainly increased challenges for water suppliers throughout California, but I believe that CLWA is able to accomplish its mission with the support of a variety of unique public outreach and education programs—in conjunction with the [outreach] campaigns of our four retail water purveyors—aimed primarily at one of our principal goals: water conservation.

When I joined the agency in 2002, CLWA was still 28

Dan Masnada speaking before members of the Speakers Bureau and others at the Valley Industry Association (VIA).

(Photo credit: VIA.)

developing the full scope of its community outreach platform.

At that time, most of our outreach was conducted through our grade school education program, but it has grown considerably since that time to include educational opportunities for all age groups and skill levels. For example, today we offer the valley’s residents a variety of gardening and drip irrigation classes as well as online courses in water use efficiency. Our main communication goal is to promote and enhance conservation efforts throughout the valley.

Currently, our public outreach seeks to build public awareness of water-related issues and move the public to adopt a permanent water use efficiency ethic. These efforts are divided into two spheres that work together hand in hand: a media relations component that is administered by our communications specialist, and an education component that is coordinated through our water conservation program coordinator. Both efforts strive to reinvigorate our community conservation ethic. They also use a variety of smart social marketing tools. We have had many campaigns during my time here, but our focus today is one that supports community-wide conservation efforts to both address today’s drought challenges and achieve long-term water savings.

Valentina Valenta: Would you please provide us an example of one of the water conservation and water use efficiency classes that CLWA offers to valley families?

Dan Masnada: We have a program to help our residents reduce and eliminate unnecessary lawns by replacing them with SCV-friendly landscaping. That program also provides rebates for artificial turf. We tell our community members Municipal Water Leader

that less mowing means more time for families and issues that matter. Last year, our lawn replacement rebate program allowed 129 residents to remove 153,000 square feet of thirsty turf and install low-water-use options that result in sustainable and beneficial landscapes. This program is facilitated through an online enrollment and education process.

To further enhance water conservation, we encourage high-water-use residents to take an online class about proper irrigation practices. On completion of the course, we give all participants a free weather-based irrigation controller, valued at over $600, that automatically delivers the right amount of water onto their landscaping. The controller makes adjustments for all types of weather conditions by automatically adjusting for temperature, number of hours of sunlight, and any precipitation that might be occurring.

We also coordinate drought messaging with our four retail water purveyors through a valley-wide outreach program. This program is designed to provide messaging related to wasteful water practices that are banned by the governor’s emergency drought declaration. Last year, we spent a combined $250,000 in drought media purchases, and we expect to spend a like amount this year. This year, with the State Water Resources Control Board imposing mandatory targets, we are also asking our community members to report water waste to their local water retailer.

Valentina Valenta: How has CLWA’s media campaign evolved?

Dan Masnada: Although we have used various print and other media for years, in 2009 we reached a turning point.

At that time, the CLWA board wanted to ensure that our outreach was measurably helping the agency do its job more effectively. We developed a survey and distributed it to various focus groups to gauge their opinion about CLWA’s services.

Although our survey respondents did not know much about our agency, they were generally very happy with our services.

For several years following that time, we used outside consultants, but we have found that conducting our own public outreach has several advantages. We have been able to

Castaic Lake Water Agency drip irrigation class, June 24, 2015.

Municipal Water Leader

Promotional materials for Santa Clarita Valley Family of Water Suppliers and Castaic Lake Water Agency.

build relationships with local media outlets, and we believe we are more agile when it comes to adjusting our efforts when conditions change. It’s a more effective and meaningful way to reach our residents and accomplish our mission. Over the past several years, we have created a campaign that goes above and beyond just simply encouraging conservation and understanding the local water picture. We have helped our community members understand the value of water, as opposed to its cost, and the need for a permanent fix in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. That is not an easy feat.

Valentina Valenta: How do you communicate with the valley’s residents?

Dan Masnada: We try to reach our residents by using all available forms of media. We use a fair amount of print. We run pieces in local newspapers. We also advertise in a variety of local journals and government magazines, such as Seasons magazine, which is a quarterly publication developed by the City of Santa Clarita. Local radio stations provide us with short spots to highlight our programs. We advertise on the Internet through various community and local government– related websites. We are very active on Facebook. We also send out an agency newsletter about CLWA’s activities and water conservation efforts, which reaches about 3,000 subscribers via e-mail.

CLWA also reaches out directly to the valley’s residents in person. The agency has an events coordinator who attends about 50 community events each year, such as concerts in the park, our local 10K run, and a large annual fundraiser for a local boys and girls club, and sets up booths to provide participants with water conservation information. Our events coordinator also hosts an annual agency open house.

Additionally, our board of directors has encouraged the development of two new programs that increase our agency’s interaction with the public. The Speakers Bureau program seeks to increase face time with our residents by sending 29

agency directors and staff to about 50 events on various topics, including water conservation. Our Blue Ribbon Committee program facilitates meetings between CLWA staff and local opinion leaders on a quarterly basis. CLWA staff provides important conservation and statewide regulation information to the business community during these gatherings. We have received terrific feedback about this program from our Blue Ribbon Committee members.

Valentina Valenta: Please tell us about CLWA’s student education programs.

Dan Masnada: Our student education programs have significantly expanded and evolved over the last two decades.

In 1993, our student outreach program consisted of only one science course that we made available to local fifth grade students. Today, CLWA’s education program is available to students in grades K–12 and college. We provide water resources education to as many as 13,000 kids annually. Our teachers design programs that are unique to each grade level.

If we can teach our children about conservation and water use efficiency at a very young age, our future leaders will have an engrained conservation ethic and will be more inclined to be efficient in their water use independent of economic considerations, which has been a challenge due to water’s relatively high affordability. Over the last decade, we have learned that our children have a unique perspective on conservation. Unlike adults, they don’t perform an assessment or cost-benefit analysis of this resource. Conservation isn’t about pricing for young students. It’s about doing the right thing.

Valentina Valenta: What are the differences in the programs for each grade level?

Dan Masnada: For students in grades K–2, our conservation program coordinator sends teachers from CLWA directly to the schools to provide conservation education.

CLWA brings students in grades 3–6 to the agency’s grounds by bus to provide a hands-on experience. This program is a topical and timely water conservation effort that is designed specifically for students beginning their studies in the sciences.

Castaic Lake Water Agency Open House, 2015.

30

Our valley’s grade school teachers regularly give us very high marks for our efforts.

We also invite our valley’s high school students to participate in a special agency program that complements their AP [Advanced Placement] environmental science coursework.

Additionally, our agency supports the water education curriculum at our local community college by providing scholarships to promising students who are pursuing a career in the water industry.

Valentina Valenta: Please tell us about your gardening course.

Dan Masnada: Once a month, we host a gardening class at the agency for up to 60 residents that covers topics such as gardening tips for growing water-conserving plants. Some of our gardening classes are devoted to the care of shrubs and pruning. This summer, we are adding a course that will help our residents prepare their landscape to survive the drought. We also offer a drip irrigation class for community members; we give them a starter kit and teach them how to install their own drip irrigation.

Valentina Valenta: Where do you see these public outreach programs going in the future?

Dan Masnada: We will continue to integrate our community outreach and education programs into our overall water conservation program. Our public outreach model is one of the more cost-effective pieces of the valley’s conservation efforts.

Keeping in mind the carrot-and-stick analogy, incentives and education can and do make a bigger difference than mandates.

We teach our residents to help us, so we can help them.

Currently, our long-term water use efficiency strategic plan is intended to help the agency and the retailers achieve the conservation mandate established under California Senate Bill X7-7 to reduce per capita use by 20 percent by the year 2020.

The agency’s rebate and education programs are a component of meeting that mandate.

Valentina Valenta: What else would you like to tell our readers about your public outreach efforts?

Dan Masnada: Conservation programs are both good policy and good politics. Our approach leverages the support of those who already understand this point with the support of those whom we would like to convince. We create working relationships with our residents and businesses to seek sustainable solutions for economic and recreational development to preserve productivity and build on our water quality record of the last decade. Common-sense conservation measures can and should be encouraged.

If our public outreach and education campaigns continue to increase water use efficiency in the valley and help our residents further conserve this precious resource, then we know that we are on the right track.

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

Small Changes Yield Big Savings Using energy optimization, we helped one of the nation’s largest wastewater utilities realize big savings. Minor equipment modifications, improved processes and electrical demand management at three regional plants reduced HRSD’s operational costs by over $400,000 annually.

Their investment paid for itself within two years.

hdrinc.com

BUSINESS LEADERS

Tim Chinn, Global Drinking Water Program Director, AECOM T. David (Tim) Chinn is the director of AECOM’s Global Drinking Water Program, which provides services to both public and private clients in more than 100 countries. Based in Austin, Texas, Mr. Chinn has more than 35 of years professional engineering and consulting experience, specializing in civil, environmental, sanitary, and municipal engineering.

He is a highly regarded expert in the use of membrane technology for water and wastewater treatment.

Prior to joining AECOM, Mr. Chinn was the assistant director for governmental affairs for the American Water Works Association (AWWA) in Washington, DC. As a spokesman for AWWA on water policy in 1990, Mr. Chinn was quoted and is credited with coining the often-repeated phrase: “Water is to the economy of the 21st Century as oil was to the economy of the last century. It is the fuel of our economic engines of the future.” Mr. Chinn has written extensively and given numerous presentations on water issues. He authored the water supply chapters of the 5th and 6th editions of Salvato’s Environmental Engineering and Sanitation.

Municipal Water Leader’s editor-in-chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Mr. Chinn about desalination and his work with municipal water suppliers around the world to develop alternative water resources.

Kris Polly: What is your role at AECOM? Tim Chinn: I work with both our clients and our AECOM engineering staff who are assisting water utilities around the world to fulfill their mission, which, simply stated, is to deliver high-quality drinking water to their customers. While it’s a big challenge with a big responsibility, it’s also a big opportunity to have a lot of fun.

As the program director, I work with our technical experts as well as our operational staff.

We have roughly 6,000 people in our water unit operating around the world in the four subsectors of Water Resources, Drinking Water, Wastewater and Industrial Water. Of our total 6,000 staff, my group of about 1,600 people focuses solely on drinking water supply and treatment services.

We recently completed the acquisition of URS, an engineering and construction company, which allowed us to add additional staff and broaden the services we provide to clients. The integration of URS is complete, and we are fully synchronized now.

URS is a diverse and talented company that operates 32

in some parts of the world that AECOM had not.

Kris Polly: What are some of the top water projects in California and nationally on which AECOM is working?

Tim Chinn: We are blessed to have a fantastic résumé of ongoing and completed projects. One landmark project in New York City is especially noteworthy. Along with our partner Hazen & Sawyer, we helped the New York Department of Environmental Protection build its first filtration system at the Croton Water Filtration Plant. It is a brand-new, $4 billion plant that processes 290 million gallons per day (mgd). As of May 2015, many New Yorkers are drinking filtered water for the first time in their lives.

The Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Plant Project was another important effort for us. We are proud to have been involved with the conceptual design and feasibility aspects of the project some 10 years ago. We are even more thrilled that it is coming online this fall. It will provide a valuable, local source of water supply to San Diego County at a time when it really does need it. The San Diego County Water Authority had not utilized this technology in the past, Municipal Water Leader

but this will be the largest seawater desal plant in North America. The plant’s developer, Poseidon Resources, had the vision to begin this plant and the tenacity to address many challenges along the way. IDE Technologies completed the design of the plant and will also operate it to deliver about 54 mgd.

We are also working as program construction manager for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to enhance, upgrade, and strengthen its water system to improve the reliability of the supply and its resilience to seismic activity. The program comprises 83 separate construction projects, including a major dam upgrade, three tunnels, two existing and one new water treatment plant, and 280 miles of large pipelines.

Outside the United States, AECOM was involved in developing many of the Australian desalination plants constructed in response to its own tremendous and prolonged drought. The Sydney desalination plant is a 65-mgd plant with a future capacity of 130 mgd. Although the drought ended about three years ago, Australia found that desalination plants, while a major investment, certainly provide it with a essential new source of drought-proof water supply.

Kris Polly: Do you see desalination becoming a growing trend and a big part of the future in urban water supplies?

Tim Chinn: I do indeed see desalination becoming an important part of the total water supply portfolio in the United States. Large-scale reverse osmosis technology has already proven itself in water-scarce regions around the world. While we primarily think of seawater desalination as a way for coastal areas to add a new water source, we use the same desalination technology to treat other alternative-source waters all around the country, such as brackish groundwater and reused water. Though it is the most expensive water alternative, it is refreshing to know that we do have the technology to make desalinated seawater more affordable than it’s ever been. For example, San Diego will spend $2,500 to $2,800 per acre-foot on its desalinated water. While that’s clearly more expensive than what it spends to import water from the Colorado River, it is a totally independent source and is drought tolerant.

Municipal water suppliers are willing to pay more when they run out of traditional water supplies. I have no doubt that seawater desalination will be more widely adopted worldwide as the competition for drinking water sources increases in coastal regions.

Kris Polly: What are the biggest challenges in the immediate future for municipal water supplies?

Tim Chinn: What is not being talked about in this age of significant drought and water scarcity—whether it’s the ongoing drought on the West Coast, the six-year drought in Municipal Water Leader

Texas, or the former drought in Georgia and Alabama—is that these extreme events seem to be becoming the new normal. In the past, emergency preparedness meant that our water suppliers and communities should be ready to address temporary disruptions in water supply. Today however, we all need to be aware that business as usual cannot continue. All the folks in the water supply sector need to get used to the variability of these weather patterns, whether they are hotter, drier, wetter, or colder than usual. We are seeing tremendous weather variability all over the world. Some people call this climate change, and that’s an easy way to describe it, but there are a lot of very complex issues occurring that result in this variability. No matter which side of the political spectrum we find ourselves, water suppliers need to recognize that they have to find consistent ways to adjust to all of these extremes and become more resilient to whatever mother nature throws at them.

My fear is that as soon as a drought ends, we won’t think about developing alternative water sources. We can no longer revert to complacency. The time to be looking ahead is when our reservoirs are full. We are learning this lesson the hard way now. The traditional ways of thinking have to end. I believe that we experiencing a more persistent pattern of weather change, and we need to have all the alternative water supplies we can muster because we will continue to see these variations throughout our careers.

My hope is that, as an industry, we have the courage to continue with some of the plans we put in place during these dry years. My fear is that when these droughts end, which they will eventually, and probably with a flooding event, we may be tempted to abandon some of the aggressive water supply planning and emergency preparedness projects that we are heavily invested in right now.

Kris Polly: Where is AECOM going to be focusing its resources in the near future with regard to municipal water supply?

Tim Chinn: We are very close to our municipal water clients, and we understand the sensitivities of working in the public sector. Our professionals have a keen appreciation of the competition for scarce public dollars to build new facilities. We also understand the sensitivities of the various stakeholders that come to table. They are all emotionally attached to their water supply.

One way AECOM is assisting water clients is by helping them to tell this story and to quantify the true value of water.

Our economists and public involvement professionals have developed tools, such as a triple-bottom-line analysis, that balance the engineering and economic decisions with the social factors specific to each community. When the public knows the true value of water, not just the cost of water it pays each month, it becomes much more supportive of the water planning process.

Another area where AECOM is assisting water utilities 33

is in the management of the water distribution system.

When a community is struggling with water supply scarcity, lost and unaccounted-for water takes on a new, higher priority. We have partnered with IBM to develop smart water systems that use system data, analytics, and other technology to reduce leaks and help utilities account for their water. These smart water systems can also save power costs by shifting pumping to off-peak hours, as well as pinpoint line breaks quickly. By learning from past data, these systems can even predict line breaks before they happen.

Additionally, the water-energy nexus has always presented a real conundrum for many utilities, particularly when they put a new water supply in service. For example, desalination of seawater is a very high user of energy, and utilities have often had to face strong criticism from environmental groups whenever they develop these alternative water supply sources. AECOM understands these issues, and that is why we have become a world leader in introducing and incorporating renewable energy, such as wind and solar power, into our projects. We no longer have to make a choice between developing infrastructure and sustaining our environment. By coupling together renewable, sustainable energy and renewable, sustainable water, communities can choose to bring on new water supplies and be good stewards of the environment at the same time.

I enjoy speaking to the public about where its water supplies originate. Much of the public simply doesn’t know how water supplies are developed. When I explain that we are helping utilities to treat wastewater and reuse it in communities, the public is often unaware that we already do this to a wide-ranging extent. In fact, we help water suppliers all over the world to get this done. It’s not an easy message to explain. The public is often worried that the treated water being reused is not as clean as other, more pristine water supplies.

I have a simply analogy. When we do work for private beverage companies, for example, we ensure that a consistently high quality of water is maintained as the primary ingredient in their beverages, regardless of what part of the globe the beverage plant is located. The best part of this story is that we incorporate the very same technologies with our beverage clients that we also use to treat inferior water supplies for high-volume municipal utilities.

The technical approaches are similar. For both our beverage clients and our utility clients, we use the same system of low-pressure membranes followed by highpressure, reverse-osmosis membranes, to remove all the suspended solids and dissolved constituents. Our beverage clients then follow the water treatment with their own recipe by adding a little bit of calcium, magnesium, and other minerals to improve the taste. I cannot think of a better way to reassure the public that it is getting as high, if not higher, quality water as the original water source.

Technology has allowed us to turn wastewater from a 34

product we simply want to get rid of into a product we can use over and over again.

Kris Polly: What advice would you offer to a municipal water authority that is struggling to expand its water supplies?

Tim Chinn: Developing new water supplies is never easy, or quick. Most major utilities have a 25- to 50-year planning horizon to identify, plan, and place new supplies into service.

Utilities have already developed their best and most-readilyaccessible water sources. Those next sources are sometimes a lower water quality, or are further away, or both.

In many areas, the public at large and our policymakers often don’t have a fine appreciation for the effort that it takes to deliver fresh water into our homes and businesses.

Today, we are facing record droughts and various other water supply disruption issues, and it is imperative that we educate our political decisionmakers at the federal, state, and local levels about the risk of inaction. It is important to understand that our political decisionmakers were elected or appointed, in part, to assist communities, including utilities, and their constituents in making tough decisions. Municipal water authorities also need to invite community stakeholders to join the discussion earlier. They need to be a part of the decisionmaking process from the beginning, not just as a recipient of the outcome of those decisions.

Above all else, I would tell our nation’s municipal water suppliers that if they want to succeed in the 21st century, they need to form strong partnerships with policymakers and water resources innovators. In fact, our public decisionmakers have just as strong an interest in wanting to assist our public utilities to solve water supply challenges as do the private enterprises.

Municipal water suppliers throughout the country, whether experiencing a drought or not, need to develop local, alternative water supplies, and there are many private water resources development companies that can help them do that. Our motto at AECOM is, “We want to bring new water supplies to a thirsty world.” We are constantly looking at ways to do that that have not been considered or developed in the past. Water conservation is not a new idea, but there are about a half-dozen new ways to do it.

Communities that are facing significant struggles will want to explore all the new and nontraditional menu options available to them, whether it’s developing low-quality water supplies and treating them with sophisticated technologies, reusing water, or increasing methods of water conservation.

We are all going to have to learn to do more with less.

Today, there are a variety of smart water tools available to water suppliers. They need to know that they are not alone in trying to overcome the struggles that plague so many water providers. There are a lot of folks out there, including consultants, who worry about the same issues. Together, we can bring new water to a thirsty world.

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

THE INNOVATORS

Lining Pipe to Provide Long-Term Water Infrastructure Repair Solutions

Inspection of a grout ring in a relined pipe.

By Shah Rahman Municipalities grappling with failing prestressed concrete cylinder pipes (PCCP) can tackle the problem with a reactive approach in which individual pipe segment repairs or replacements are performed when risk of failure is judged to be imminent based on condition assessment. Or, they can undertake a comprehensive and proactive program in which all PCCP within a system is ultimately lined with steel cylinders over a 20or 30‑year period. The comprehensive approach not only uses condition assessment and real-time-monitoring technologies, but also employs a risk-based analysis to determine the need for point repairs, such as removal and replacement of specific pipe sections; temporary repairs, such as carbon-fiber composites; or steel-cylinder lining of 1 to 5 miles of pipe at a time. Steel-based methods result in a new pipeline inside the structurally deficient host PCCP that will provide service life far in excess of 100 years.

Relining is a man-entry process that involves inserting a collapsed steel cylinder into the deteriorating host PCCP, rerounding the steel cylinders into place, performing fit-up by first welding each longitudinal seam and then welding the joints of adjoining sections, and filling the 36

annular space between the liners and host pipe with a cementitious grout. Relining requires entry and exit portals at the two ends of the pipeline being renewed, but it keeps excavation to an absolute minimum. The final step in installing reliners typically involves the internal application of cement mortar lining, onsite, for long-term hydraulic performance and corrosion protection.

Relining is a preferred buried pipe renewal method compared to traditional open trench options such as remove-and-replace, especially in highly developed urban areas.

The cutting of roads and other structures on the ground creates havoc that can be avoided using these minimally invasive rehabilitation methods.

Sliplining differs from relining in that instead of collapsed cylinders, full sections of steel pipe are inserted into the host PCCP. Once placed in the appropriate location, adjoining pipe sections are typically connected by lap welding the joints. Gasketed joints may also be used. Grout is then used to fill the annular space. Cement mortar lining may be applied onsite, but typically, cylinders are supplied with shop-applied cement mortar lining for improved hydraulics and corrosion protection. Sliplining can be successfully performed without man-entry of the host pipe and is ideal in most pipe diameters.

The manufacture of reliners and slipliners are quite different. Manufacturing collapsible cylinders used in relining is a specialized and labor-intensive process, while manufacturing sliplining cylinders requires conventional spiral-welded steel pipe equipment and machine welds.

The successful installation or fit-up of reliners within allowable tolerances specified by a designer requires specialized skill and is time consuming. Installation of slipliners, on the other hand, is less labor intensive because there are no longitudinal seams to weld in the field and the cylinders are typically shop lined with cement mortar prior to being Municipal Water Leader

transported to the project site. Consequently, it is not unusual to be able to install 25 to 35 60‑inch-diameter slipliner cylinders per day, versus 10 to 20 60‑inch-diameter reliners per day.

Even more important than the difference in the installation productivity between the two technologies is the amount of internal diameter that may be lost in the host pipe, depending on the renewal method used. When it is essential to not lose much internal flow area in the host PCCP, relining is always the preferred rehabilitation technique as long as the host pipe is large enough for man-entry—typically 54 inches and larger. It is typical to lose only 1 to 3 inches of internal diameter with reliners on host pipes 100 inches in diameter or larger. With sliplining, however, internal diameter loss on a 60‑inch internal diameter host pipe can be as high as 6 to 8 inches. In either case, the cylinder can be designed to handle increased pressures.

The steel-based lining of PCCP has been developed and tested in the field since the mid-1980s. The San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) has been at the forefront of the development and refinement of relining technology. For a period of 25 years starting back in the early 1960s, SDCWA installed PCCP throughout its water distribution system. After experiencing a series of catastrophic failures, SDCWA engineers developed the relining process and, in 1991, instituted a 30-year program to reline all 85 miles of its PCCP. To date, SDCWA has relined more than 40 miles within its service area.

The most recent public entity to institute and budget a comprehensive PCCP relining program is the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which will reline approximately 100 miles of PCCP over a 20‑year period at a cost of $1 billion. A reactive approach, instead of the comprehensive proactive one, would have cost Metropolitan $5.5 billion.

Manufacturing slipliner at Northwest Pipe Company facility.

Installing slipliner.

Shah Rahman is the director of trenchless technology and pipe rehabilitation at the Northwest Pipe Company. You can reach Shah at (817) 529‑8134 or srahman@nwpipe.com.

Inserting reliner.

Municipal Water Leader

37

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS 38

PRINCIPAL WATER RESOURCES PLANNER Closing Date/Time: Continuous Salary: $9,877.00 - $12,006.00 Monthly Job Type: Full-time Position Location: Castaic Lake Water Agency, 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road, Santa Clarita, California Department: Water Resources FLSA: Exempt View the Principal Water Resources Planner Recruitment Brochure at http://clwa.org/ wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Recruitment-Brochure-Principal-Water-Resources-Planner-CLWA. pdf and submit your application online.

This job posting will remain open until filled.

For information on posting to the Classified Listings, please e-mail Municipal.Water.Leader@WaterStrategies.com

Municipal Water Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

Aledo Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion

Sustain able water resources in the 21st century

Engineering Architecture Environmental Science Planning Program Management Energy Construction Services For water insights and industry news, visit: www.freese.com/fni-water

817-735-7300 www.freese.com

New water for a thirsty world www.aecom.com

2015 CALENDAR July 20–24 August 4–6 August 19–21 August 26–28 August 25–27 August 31–September 2 September 13–16 September 13–17 September 26–30 September 30–October 1 October 13–16 October 14–16 October 27 October 28–30 November 4–6 November 15–19 November 16–19 December 1–4 December 16–18 December 15–17

ESRI, User Conference, San Diego, CA National Water Resources Association, Western Water Seminar, Hyatt Regency Monterey, Monterey, CA Colorado Water Congress, Summer Conference, Vail, CO U.S. Water Alliance, One Water Leadership Summit, San Francisco, CA Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts, Groundwater Summit, San Marcos, TX Water Quality Association, Mid–Year Leadership Conference, Tucson, AZ Water Reuse Association, 30th Annual WateReuse Symposium, Seattle, WA Association of State Dam Safety Officials, Dam Safety 2015 National Conference, New Orleans, LA Water Environment Foundation, 88th Annual Technical Exhibition and Conference, Chicago, IL Texas Desalination Association, Texas Desal 2015, Austin, TX American Water Works Association, Water Infrastructure Conference, Bethesda, MD Texas Water Conservation Association, Fall Meeting, San Antonio, TX Utah Water Users Association, Utah Water Summit Conference, Provo, UT WESTCAS, Fall Conference, Tucson, AZ National Water Resources Association, Annual Conference, Denver, CO American Water Works Association, Water Quality Technology Conference, Salt Lake City, UT American Water Resources Association, Annual Conference, Denver, CO Association of California Water Agencies, Fall Conference & Exhibition, Indian Wells, CA Colorado River Water Users Association, Annual Conference, Las Vegas, NV National Ground Water Association, Groundwater Expo, Las Vegas, NV

To include your event in the calendar, e-mail Municipal.Water.Leader@waterstrategies.com.