The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-03-28 - Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda PacketYorba Linda Hater District AGENDA YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016, 8:30 AM 1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS Lindon Baker Carl Boznanski Rick Buck Bill Guse Fred Hebein Joe Holdren Modesto Llanos Cheryl Spencer- Borden 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any individual wishing to address the committee is requested to identify themselves and state the matter on which they wish to comment. If the matter is on this agenda, the committee Chair will recognize the individual for their comment when the item is considered. No action will be taken on matters not listed on this agenda. Comments are limited to matters of public interest and matters within the jurisdiction of the Water District. Comments are limited to three minutes. 4. ACTION CALENDAR This portion of the agenda is for items where staff presentations and committee discussions are needed prior to formal committee action. 4.1. Committee Structure and Reorganization 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS This portion of the agenda is for matters such as technical presentations, drafts of proposed policies, or similar items for which staff is seeking the advice and counsel of the Committee members. This portion of the agenda may also include items for information only. 5.1. Staff Analysis of Assessed Administrative Penalties (Ordinance No. 15 -01) 5.2. Status of Refunding Revenue Bonds Series 2016A 5.3. Conservation Update and Monthly Water Supply Report 5.4. Director's Report 5.5. Future Agenda Items 6. ADJOURNMENT 6.1. The next Citizens Advisory Committee meeting is scheduled to be held Monday, April 25, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. Items Distributed to the Committee Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting Pursuant to Government Code section 54957.5, non - exempt public records that relate to open session agenda items and are distributed to a majority of the Committee less than seventy -two (72) hours prior to the meeting will be available for public inspection in the lobby of the District's business office located at 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue, Placentia, CA 92870, during regular business hours. When practical, these public records will also be made available on the District's internet website accessible at http: / /www.ylwd.com /. Accommodations for the Disabled Any person may make a request for a disability - related modification or accommodation needed for that person to be able to participate in the public meeting by telephoning the Executive Secretary at 714 - 701 -3020, or writing to Yorba Linda Water District, P.O. Box 309, Yorba Linda, CA 92885 -0309. Requests must specify the nature of the disability and the type of accommodation requested. A telephone number or other contact information should be included so the District staff may discuss appropriate arrangements. Persons requesting a disability - related accommodation should make the request with adequate time before the meeting for the District to provide the requested accommodation. Meeting Date: Subject: ATTACHMENTS: Presentation.pdf AGENDA REPORT March 28, 2016 ITEM NO. 5.1 Staff Analysis of Assessed Administrative Penalties (Ordinance No. 15 -01) Description: Backup Material Type: Backup Material Yorba Linda Water District em �A. « VP Administrative Penalty Review Presented By: Marc Marcantonio, General Manager Delia Lugo, Finance Manager Cindy Botts, Management Analyst Marc 6JI66- History of Penalty Implementation • SWRCB Mandated 36% Conservation -DistrictwideJ-d C alendar Y6# Mj 3 • G or 's Exe ive Order B -29 -15 Ma mated Pricing Mechanisms to Encourage Conservation - Rate Structures - Surcharges — Fees — Penalties • Penalties Effective June 1., 2015 • Board Requested Options for Altering Pena at February 16, 2016 meeting History of Penalty Implementation • Original C uI tion.. r__ 'Strudfure, -q e 4erT =kb M • Residential: 25 units x 36% = 16 units + 2 extrc = 18 units- No Penalty • Commercial: 72 units x 36% = 46 units + 4 ext = 50 units- No Penalty • Irrigation: 162 units x 36% = 104 units + 1 1 exti = 115 units- No Penalty Current Administrative Penalty Structure Block 1 gi oe" Block 4 Block 5 Block 6 Residential Pq uiv. Family Size X19- �2- -4'_ s - Monthly 10.00 �� 22,440 30-49 Uni-�s a y $ 20.00 ,400 50 -74 Units - Monthly $ 40.00 56,100 34.0 75 -99 Units - Monthly $ 80.00 74,800 45.3 100+ Units - Monthly $ 160.00 74,800 45.3 Commercial Penalty # of Gallons Equiv. Family Size Block 1 1 -50 Units - Monthly $ - 38,148 23.1 Block 2 51 -75 Units - Monthly $ 25.00 56,848 34.5 Block 3 76 -100 Units - Monthly $ 50.00 74,800 45.3 Block 4 100 -150 Units - Monthly $ 100.00 112,948 68.5 Block 5 151 -200 Units - Monthly $ 200.00 149,600 90.7 Block 6 200+ Units - Monthly $ 400.00 149,600 90.7 Irrigation Penalty # of Gallons Equiv. Family Size Block 1 1 -115 Units - Monthly $ - 86,768 52.6 Block 2 116 -200 Units - Monthly $ 65.00 150,348 91.1 Block 3 201 -300 Units - Monthly $ 130.00 225,148 136.5 Block 4 301 -400 Units - Monthly $ 260.00 299,948 181.8 Block 5 401 -500 Units - Monthly $ 520.00 374,000 226.7 Block 6 500+ Units - Monthly $1,000.00 374,000 226.7 Equiv. Family Size = # of people with indoor only usage Residential Penalty Analysis 20,000, VP 16,000 14,000 12,000 1 0,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Blocks 1 -3 Only, Jun -Jan Usa - Block 1 Increases Over Tir ase Res Penalty B 1 Res Penalty B 2 Res Per July -36 day Aug - 28 day Sept - 36 day * Oct - 28 day ■ Nov - 28 Day ■ Dec - 36 Day* Jan - 28 Da Residential Penalty Analysis Res Penalty 6 1 Res Penalty 6 2 Res Penalty 6 3 Res Penalty 6 4 Res Penalty 6 5 Res Penalty 6 6 ' v =- Avg Assessed Penalties Jun - Feb 70.9 16.9% 8.8% 2.4% 0.6% 0.4% Avg Assessed Penalties Nov - Feb 79.1% 13.0% 5.8% 1.4% 0.4% 0.3% Avg Monthly Revenue $128,603 $87,803 LCE 625 525 425 325 225 125 25 -75 Commercial Penalty Analysis Comm Penalty B 1 Blocks 1 -3 Only, Jun -Jan Usage - Block 1 Increases Over Time - Blocks 2 & 3 Decrease Comm Penalty B 2 Comm Penalty B 3 July -36 day Aug - 28 day Sept - 36 day * Oct - 28 day ■ Nov - 28 Day ■ Dec - 36 Day* Jan - 28 Day ■ Feb - 28 day Commercial Penalty Analysis rte- �F.' • � Avg Assessed Avg Assess�� Penalties Penalties Jun - Feb Corn Penalty B 1 76.6% Corn Penalty B 2 6.3% Corn Penalty B 3 4.0% Corn Penalty B 4 4.9% Corn Penalty B 5 2.6% Corn Penalty B 6 5.6% Nov - Feb 78.7% 6.1% 3.7% 4.9% 2.5% 4.1% Avg Monthly Revenue $30,316 $24,813 Irrigation Penalty Analysis _ X950 850 - OW 750 650 550 450 350 250 nr•. r /rte\ - _ _ _ _ ..,.r _ - - -�%- Blocks 1 -3 Only, Jun -Jan Usage - Block 1 Increases Over Time - Blocks 2 & 3 Decrease 150 50 -50 Irrigation Penalty B 1 Irrigation Penalty B 2 Irrigation Penalty B - July -36 day Aug - 28 day Sept - 36 day * Oct - 28 day ■ Nov - 28 Day ■ Dec - 36 Day* Jan - 28 Day ■ Feb - Irrigation Penalty Analysis Irrigation Penalty 6 1 Irrigation Penalty 6 2 Irrigation Penalty 6 3 Irrigation Penalty 6 4 Irrigation Penalty 6 5 Irrigation Penalty 6 6 Avg Monthly Revenue Avg Assessed Avg Assessed Penalties Penalties Jun - Feb Nov - Feb 73.4% 81.3% 14.6% 11.1% 6.8% 5.0% 2.7% 1.4% 1.3% 0.7% 1.1% 0.5% $40,,874 $24,163 Average Monthly Usage- Changes in Behavior r— .'i'' go Residential Commercial Irrigation Usage listed in Units (748 gallons /unit) SWRCB Changes- Extension & Credits • Extension of Mandates until Oct 31, • Credits of 8% for IPR &Growth - 36% cumulative, now 28% Jun 2015- Oct Wr REVISED Calculation for Penalty Structure • Average Usage Jun -Feb 011 _wj-, 2&,% reduction- - - Residential: 25 units x 28% = 18 units + 2�extra = 20 units- No Penalty- (18 previously) - Commercial: 72 units x 28% = 52 units + 4 extra = 56 units- No Penalty- (50 previously) — Irrigation: 162 units x 28% _ 1 17 units + 1 1 extra = 128 units- No Penalty- (115 previously) Penalty Revision Options • Option 1: S � [ _P4� _�� -Ins �- - -- � �+•� .' _ � �` ... - - - -_ _ _ , = - _ • Option 2: Block 2, No Penalty — Allows up to 30 units (Res) with no penalty — Allows to up to 76 units no penalty (Com) with no penalty • Option 3: Block 2 & 3, No Penalty — Allows up to 50 units (Res) with no penalty — Allows up to 100 units (Com) with no penalty Note: Due to SWRCB focus on outdoor irrigation 40 40 irrigation blocks NOT included in Options Option 1- Adjust All Penalties 1 Block Reduced $0.00 ($29,742.50) ($26,550.00) ($13,230.00) ($7,880.00) ($10,400.00) Cohim_ j • Applied $0.00 $0.00 $13,275.00 $6,615.00 $3,940.00 $5,200.00 ($87,802.50) $29,030.00 ($58.,772.50) Reduced $0.00 ($1,287.50) ($1,550.00) ($4,125.00) ($4,250.00) ($13,600.00) Applied $0.0 $0.0 $775.0 $2,062.5 $2,125.0 ($24,812.50) $11,762.51 ($13,050.01 Net Reduction in Applied Penalties: $71,822-50 Option 2- Block 2, No Penalty Reduced Applied $0.00 ($29,742.50) ($29,742.50) ($29,742.50) _ s i Reduced $0.00 ($1,287.50) ($1,287.50) Appliei ($1,287. Net Reduction in Applied Penalties: $31,0, Option 3- Blocks 2 & 3, No Penalty Reduced $0.00 ($29,742.50) ($26,550.00) ($56,292.50) Applied ($56,292.50) t fT _ -- Reduced $0.00 ($1,287.50) ($1,550.00) ($2,837.50) Applies ($2,837 Net Reduction in Applied Penalties: $59,13C Adjustments to Ordinance 15 -01 - _ a - meets ZZ y _ done through a NEW OrdinanCE • Would take effect beginning Mi (Cycle 1) Questions? -ST �-w ITEM NO. 5.3 AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 28, 2016 Subject: Conservation Update and Monthly Water Supply Report ATTACHMENTS: Description: Type: Water Supply Report- March.pdf Backup Material Backup Material Memorandum DATE: March 4, 2016 TO: Member Agencies — MWDOC Division One FROM: Brett R. Barbre, Director — Division One SUBJECT: Monthly Water Usage Data, Tier 2 Projection & Water Supply Information The attached figures show the recent trend of water consumption in Orange County (OC), an estimate of Tier 2 volume for MWDOC, and selected water supply information. Fig. 1 OC Water Usage, Monthly by Supply OCWD Groundwater water was the main supply in January. Fig. 2 OC Water Usage, Monthly, Comparison to Previous Years Water usage in January 2016 was about very low compared to the last 5 years. Lower usage is primarily due to strong conservation efforts and mandatory restrictions set by the governor. Rainfall for January 2016 was also close to the historical average which helped with conservation efforts. Fig. 3 Historical OC Water Consumption OC water consumption was 571,000 AF in FY 2014 -15 (this includes —17 TAF of agricultural usage and non - retail water agency Usage). This is about 50,000 AF less than FY 2013 -14 but is about 16,000 AF higher than FY 2010 -11 (Fiscal year with lowest usage). Water usage per person was the lowest it has been for Orange County at 164 gallons per day. Although OC population has increased 20% over the past two decades, water usage has not increased, on average. A long -term decrease in per- capita water usage is attributed mostly to Water Use Efficiency (water conservation) efforts. High Temperature, precipitation and the economy all remain indicators to O.C. water consumption. Fig. 4 MWDOC "Firm" Water Purchases, 2016 "Firm" water above the Tier 1 limit will be charged at the higher Tier 2 rate. Our current projection of Tier 2 purchases is zero in 2016. Water Supply Information Includes data on: Rainfall in OC; the OCWD Basin overdraft., Northern California and Colorado River Basin hydrologic data; the State Water Project (SWP) Allocation, and regional storage volumes. The data has implications for the MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT • OF ORANGE COUNTY Memorandum DATE: March 4, 2016 TO: Member Agencies — MWDOC Division One FROM: Brett R. Barbre, Director — Division One SUBJECT: Monthly Water Usage Data, Tier 2 Projection & Water Supply Information The attached figures show the recent trend of water consumption in Orange County (OC), an estimate of Tier 2 volume for MWDOC, and selected water supply information. Fig. 1 OC Water Usage, Monthly by Supply OCWD Groundwater water was the main supply in January. Fig. 2 OC Water Usage, Monthly, Comparison to Previous Years Water usage in January 2016 was about very low compared to the last 5 years. Lower usage is primarily due to strong conservation efforts and mandatory restrictions set by the governor. Rainfall for January 2016 was also close to the historical average which helped with conservation efforts. Fig. 3 Historical OC Water Consumption OC water consumption was 571,000 AF in FY 2014 -15 (this includes —17 TAF of agricultural usage and non - retail water agency Usage). This is about 50,000 AF less than FY 2013 -14 but is about 16,000 AF higher than FY 2010 -11 (Fiscal year with lowest usage). Water usage per person was the lowest it has been for Orange County at 164 gallons per day. Although OC population has increased 20% over the past two decades, water usage has not increased, on average. A long -term decrease in per- capita water usage is attributed mostly to Water Use Efficiency (water conservation) efforts. High Temperature, precipitation and the economy all remain indicators to O.C. water consumption. Fig. 4 MWDOC "Firm" Water Purchases, 2016 "Firm" water above the Tier 1 limit will be charged at the higher Tier 2 rate. Our current projection of Tier 2 purchases is zero in 2016. Water Supply Information Includes data on: Rainfall in OC; the OCWD Basin overdraft., Northern California and Colorado River Basin hydrologic data; the State Water Project (SWP) Allocation, and regional storage volumes. The data has implications for the magnitude of supplies from the three watersheds that are the principal sources of water for OC. Note that a hydrologic year is Oct. 1 st through Sept. 30t ". • Orange County's accumulated rainfall through February was below average for this period. This continues the impact of the previous four hydrologic years' below - normal rainfall in reducing those local supplies that are derived from local runoff. E Nino conditions are present but unfortunately there has not been amounts of precipitation for Southern California. • Northern California accumulated precipitation in February was around 101% of normal for this period. The Northern California snowpack is 90% of normal. This follows three below- average hydrologic years. The State of California has been in a declared Drought Emergency since January 2014. The State Water Project Contractors Table A Allocation is only 30% as of the end of February. Colorado River Basin accumulated precipitation in February was 97% average for this period. The Upper Colorado Basin snowpack was 100% of average for this time period. However, this follows two below- average hydrologic years, and this watershed is in a long -term drought. Lake Mead and Lake Powell combined have about 61 % of their average storage volume for this time of year. If Lake Mead's level falls below a "trigger" limit at the end of a calendar year, then a shortage will be declared by the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), impacting Colorado River water deliveries for the Lower Basin states. As of Late July Lake Mead Levels were hovering around the "trigger" limit but fortunately levels are expecting to increase from the large amounts of precipitation that hit the Colorado River Basin this summer and spring. The USBR predicts that the "trigger" level will not be hit by the end of 2016. MUNICIPAL �________�__ WATER OCOUNTY RANGE •1 111 50,000 w Lu 40,000 W U a 30,000 20,000 10,000 All Fig. 1A OC Water Usage, Monthly by Supply with projection to end of fiscal year Surface Water Non -OCWD Groundwater Recycled (Non Potable) Import [1] ®projected [3] �OCWD Basin [2] 3.0 2.5 Cn 2.0 U 1.5 c� 1.0 ry 0.5 11 [1] Imported water for consumptive use. Includes "In- Lieu" deliveries and CUP water extraction. Excludes "Direct Replenishment" deliveries of spreading water, "Barrier Replenishment" deliveries, and deliveries into Irvine Lake. [2] GW for consumptive use only. Excludes In -Lieu water deliveries and CUP water extraction that are counted with Import. BPP in FY '15 -16 is 75 %. [3] MWDOC's estimate of monthly demand is based on the projected FY 15 -16 "Retail" water demand and historical monthly demand patterns. [4] Total water usage includes IRWD groundwater agricutural use and usage by non - retail water agencies. L L Q (n Z 0 U_ Q 2.5 Cn 2.0 U 1.5 c� 1.0 ry 0.5 11 [1] Imported water for consumptive use. Includes "In- Lieu" deliveries and CUP water extraction. Excludes "Direct Replenishment" deliveries of spreading water, "Barrier Replenishment" deliveries, and deliveries into Irvine Lake. [2] GW for consumptive use only. Excludes In -Lieu water deliveries and CUP water extraction that are counted with Import. BPP in FY '15 -16 is 75 %. [3] MWDOC's estimate of monthly demand is based on the projected FY 15 -16 "Retail" water demand and historical monthly demand patterns. [4] Total water usage includes IRWD groundwater agricutural use and usage by non - retail water agencies. WATER o�sTR�cr ' OF _ ORANGE - COUNTY •1 111 50,000 W ur 40,000 W U a 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Fig. 1 B OC Water Usage, Monthly by Supply with projection to end of fiscal year Surface Water =Non -OCWD Groundwater Recycled (Non Potable) =Import [1] �OCWD Basin [2] =projected [3] —Hi h Temp 95 LO LO LO LO LO LO CD CD CD CD CD 0 , , �--� L L Q (n Z 0 U_ Q 90 U_ 85 c� 80 CL 75 E 9 70 = 0) 65 = a� 60 L 55 Q 50 [1] Imported water for consumptive use. Includes "In- Lieu" deliveries and CUP water extraction. Excludes "Direct Replenishment" deliveries of spreading water, "Barrier Replenishment" deliveries, and deliveries into Irvine Lake. [2] GW for consumptive use only. Excludes In -Lieu water deliveries and CUP water extraction that are counted with Import. BPP in FY '15 -16 is 75 %. [3] MWDOC's estimate of monthly demand is based on the projected FY 15 -16 "Retail" water demand and historical monthly demand patterns. [4] Total water usage includes IRWD groundwater agricutural use and usage by non - retail water agencies. Fig. 2A OC Monthly Water Usage [1]: Comparison to Last 4 Fiscal Years ❑ FY 11 -12 ❑ FY 12 -13 ❑ FY 13 -14 ■ FY 14 -15 ❑ FY 15 -16 + L L � U1 Q U > Q CO O Z 0 li Q Partial Year Subtotals 700,000 600,000 500,000 W 400,000 W LL 300,000 a 200,000 100,000 0 [1 ] Sum of Imported water for consumptive use (includes "In- Lieu" deliveries; excludes "Direct Replenishment "and "Barrier Replenishment') and Local water for consumptive use (includes recycled and non - potable water; excludes GWRS production, groundwater pumped to waste, and waste brine from water treatment projects.) Recent months numbers include some estimation. MI.INICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY 70,000 60,000 50,000 w Lu 40,000 w a 30,000 20,000 10,000 Fig. 2A OC Monthly Water Usage [1]: Comparison to Last 4 Fiscal Years ❑ FY 11 -12 ❑ FY 12 -13 ❑ FY 13 -14 ■ FY 14 -15 ❑ FY 15 -16 + L L � U1 Q U > Q CO O Z 0 li Q Partial Year Subtotals 700,000 600,000 500,000 W 400,000 W LL 300,000 a 200,000 100,000 0 [1 ] Sum of Imported water for consumptive use (includes "In- Lieu" deliveries; excludes "Direct Replenishment "and "Barrier Replenishment') and Local water for consumptive use (includes recycled and non - potable water; excludes GWRS production, groundwater pumped to waste, and waste brine from water treatment projects.) Recent months numbers include some estimation. ------ -- MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE 650,000 600,000 550,000 500,000 450,000 400,000 w w 4 350,000 w a 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 Fig. 213 Orange County Cumulative Monthly Consumptive Water Usage [1]: present year compared to last 4 calendar years Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec [1 ] Sum of Imported water for consumptive use (includes "In- Lieu" deliveries; excludes "Direct Replenishment "and "Barrier Replenishment') and Local water for consumptive use (includes recycled and non - potable water; excludes GWRS production and waste brine from water quality pumping projects). MUNICIPAL - WATER olsrPlcr OF COUNTY Fig. 3A HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND POPULATION[2] IN OC 800,000 750,000 700,000 LL Q CO 650,000 M w a 600,000 550,000 500,000 450,000 400,000 '90 91 o Consumptive Water Use --o— Population 91 -'92 -'93 -'94 -'95 -'96 -'97 -'98 '99 -'00 -'01 -'02 -'03 -'04 -'05 -'06 -'07 -'08 -'09 - 10 11 12 13 14 15 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 Fiscal Year [1 ] Consumption includes potable, recycled and non - potable usage; excludes Barrier and Spreading water. The most recent data involve some estimation. [2] Population estimates in the 2000s decade were revised by the State Dept. of Finance to reflect the 2010 Census counts. [3] Projection of FY 15 -16 water use estimated by MWDOC based on partial -year data. 3.50 C1II17 2.50 c O 2.00 0 J 1.500- n 11 0.50 ZION MUNICIPAL WATER CIETRICT _____ ORANGE _ 800, 000 750,000 700,000 w 650,000 U) ... 600,000 Q 550,000 500,000 450,000 400, 000 90 -'91 -'92 -'93 -'94 -'95 -'96 -'97 -'98 -'99 -'00 -'01 -'02 -'03 -'04 -'05 06 07 08 09 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 Fiscal Year =ig. 313 HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND Annual Rainfall12 IN OC o Consumptive Water Use S.A. Rainfall 10 11 12 13 14 15 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 [1 ] Consumption includes potable, recycled and non - potable usage; excludes Barrier and Spreading water. The most recent data involve some estimation. [2] Rainfall data from Santa Ana Station #121 35 30 25 y a s c 20 = R w c 15 11 61 0 MUNICIPAL. WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY 800, 000 750,000 700.000 LL w 650,000 U) ... 600,000 550,000 500,000 450,000 400,000 Fig. 3C HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND Annual Average High Temperature[2] IN OC oConsumptive Water Use --0— High Temp 85 84 83 82 81 80 LL 79 78 E 77 76 s 75 74 73 72 71 70 190 -'91 -'92 -'93 -'94 -'95 -'96 -'97 -'98 -'99 -'00 -'01 -'02 -'03 -'04 -'05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 Fiscal Year [1] Consumption includes potable, recycled and non - potable usage; excludes Barrier and Spreading water. The most recent data involve some estimation. [2] Temperature data is from Santa Ana Fire Station, elevation 135' MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY 800, 000 750.000 700,000 LL Q w 650,000 U) 600,000 550,000 500,000 450,000 400.000 Fig. 3D HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[l] AND Average Unemployment[2] IN OC 190 -'91 -'92 -'93 -'94 -'95 -'96 -'97 -'98 -'99 -'00 -'01 -'02 -'03 -'04 -'05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 Fiscal Year [1] Consumption includes potable, recycled and non - potable usage; excludes Barrier and Spreading water. The most recent data involve some estimation. [2] Employment Data source Bureau of Labor Statistic for Long Beach - L.A. -Santa Ana Metro Area http://www.bIs.gov/1au/ 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% ` O a 6% Q J 7% e 8% N 9% 10% E a 11% S 12% 13% 14% 15% MUNICIPAL CWFTER Fig. 3E HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND POPULATION DENSITY[2] IN OC DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY 800,000 750,000 700,000 LL Q w 650,000 CO M M ... 600,000 Q 550,000 500,000 450,000 400,000 190 -'91 -'92 -'93 -'94 -'95 -'96 -'97 -'98 -'99 -'00 -'01 -'02 -'03 -'04 -'05 -'06 -'07 -'08 -109 - 10 11 12 13 14 15 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 Fiscal Year [1] Consumption includes potable, recycled and non - potable usage; excludes Barrier and Spreading water. The most recent data involve some estimation. [2] Population estimates in the 2000s decade were revised by the State Dept. of Finance to reflect the 2010 Census counts. 4,000 3,750 a 2 a CO a a 3,500.2 CL 0 a a V! C N 3,250 z O 3 M a O n c CIO, DImuNicip STRICT Fig. 3F HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[l] AND GPCD [2] IN OC WATER DISTRICT ORANGE "- - COUNTY 800,000 750,000 700,000 Q w 650,000 U) ... 600,000 Q 550,000 500.000 450,000 400, 000 90 -'91 -'92 -'93 -'94 -'95 -'96 -'97 -'98 -'99 -'00 -'01 -'02 -'03 -'04 -'05 06 07 08 09 10 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 -11 Fiscal Year oConsumptive Water Use GPCD 240 230 220 210 200 a 0 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 11 12 13 14 15 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 [1] Consumption includes potable, recycled and non - potable usage; excludes Barrier and Spreading water. The most recent data involve some estimation. [2] Gallon per Capita Daily (includes all types of water usage and all type of water users). 30,000 25,000 20,000 Q 15,000 m 0 F- t c 0 10,000 5,000 Fig. 4 MWDOC's Firm Water Purchases in CY 2016 Monthly Actual and Projected to CY Total oUntreated Total Treated =Prof Monthly Purchases — Cumulative Actual 300,000 Jan -15 Feb -15 Mar -15 Apr -15 May -15 Jun -15 Jul -15 Aug -15 Sep -15 Oct -15 Nov -15 Dec -15 250,000 200,000 Q m 0 F- 150,000 E U 100,000 50,000 Notes 1. "Firm" includes Full Service (both Treated and Untreated) and Barrier water. 2. Basin Pumping Percentage (BPP) is the percentage of a retail water agency's total water demand that they are limited to pump from the OCWD- managed groundwater basin. BPP pertains to Basin agencies only. For example, if a Basin agency's total demand is 10,000 AF /yr and OCWD sets the BPP at 72 %, then the agency is limited to 7,200 AF of groundwater that year. There may be certain exceptions and /or adjustments to that simple calculation. OCWD sets the BPP for the Basin agencies, usually as of July 1st. MUNICIPAL WATER prepared by the Municipal Water District of Orange County printdate 2/29/2016 DISTRICT OF *numbers are subject to change ORANGE COUNTY 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Accumulated Precipitation for the Oct. -Sep, water year, through February 2016 This Year to date ■ Average to date Average End of Year = Percent of Average to Date 43% ORANGE COUNTY (SANTA ANA) Colorado 101% CA Snowpack Snowpack on on 2/29/2016 2/22/2016 90% 97/ 100% N. SIERRAS 8- NORTHERN UPPER BASIN UPPER BASIN STATION INDEX CALIF. COLORADO COLORADO SNOWPACK PRECIP. SNOWPACK MUNICIPMA * The date of maximum snowpack accumulation (April 1st in Northern Calif. , April 15th in the WATER °'STp' °T Upper Colorado Basin) is used for year to year comparison. CIF CW ORANGE COUNTY MUNI GIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY SWP TABLE A ALLOCATION FOR STATE WATER PROJECT CONTRACTORS Final 2016: ? ?? 65% 65% Final 2012: 65% 60% 60%. 60% 60% 0% 50% 40% 40% 40% 35% ° 35% 35% Final 2013: 35% 30% 20% 20% 20% 20% 15% 15% Final 2015: 20% 5 10% 10% 10% 10° 5 ° 5% 10% 5% ° 5% % o% 0% Final 2014: 5% 5% Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. m mWater Year 2012 m mWater Year 2013 m mWater Year 2014 m mWater Year 2015 m mWater Year 2016 0 °0 500 0 U 400 Q rn a� 300 •L 0 200 a� c 100 CL E 0 CA Population Total SWP Deliveries }CRA Deliveries to MWD +CRA Deliveries to CA SWP Allocation % Vs. Station 8 Accumulated Rainfall rbeen % tonceshnce the 100% ear 2000 100% 90% 100% 100% 90% 90% 90% 100% 90� 80% 70% 70% 65% 65% 60% 60% cc p 50% 50% so% 45% Q 40% 39% 40% >d 35% 20% 30% 30% 35% (n Due to drought conditions and California 20°/ population growth Southern California is o receiving very little waterfrom the State Water Natural Accumulated Run Project. 10% Off - s =Station 8 Accumulated Rainfall (Inches) —SWP Allocation % 40 rn r_ O 35 r_ 30.2 cc M Q 250 20 0 15 cc U 100 90 80 O Z 70 a 60 o� 50 .Q 40 L L 30 ° 20 U 10 s 0 a MUNER ICI PAL WPT pISTRIET OF ORANGE GCI.JNTY O.C. Basin Accumulated Overdraft 50,000 , Basin Full in 1969 100,000 150,000 450,000 Annual, 1969 to Present w%' ��` 394,000 Al end of December 2015 500,000 cn O a-I N M Ln lD r, co cn O a-I N M Ln lD r, co cn O a-I N M Ln lD r, co cn O a-I N M -* N lD r, co cn O a-I N M -* N lD �D I� n n n n n n n n n W 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Accumulated Overdraft (dewatered volume) shown as white area, excluding the volume stored by Metropolitan. source: OCWD Stored Vol (aF) O.C. Basin Accumulated Overdraft Vs. Annual Rainfall E Dewatered Vol (AF o�srcxicr _ ._. ORANGE Annual, 1969 to Present -C, Annual Rainfall (inches) COUNTY 35 50,000 Basin Full in 1969 - 30 100,000 ` 394,000 AF end of 150,000 200,000 v w 250,000 Q 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 I M \ I u 0 \ 1 5 1/ 1 1/ 1 500,000 1 0 cn O a-I N M Ln l0 r, co cn O a-I N M Ln l0 r, co cn O a-I N M Ln l0 r, co cn O a-I N M -* N l0 r, co cn O a-I N M -* N l0 �O I� n n n n n n n n n W 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-4 a-4 a-4 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Accumulated Overdraft (dewatered volume) shown as white area, excluding the volume stored by Metropolitan. source: OCW D December 2015 25 II 11 I1 1 I t 20 c 1 15 I Aj 10 I M \ I u 0 \ 1 5 1/ 1 1/ 1 500,000 1 0 cn O a-I N M Ln l0 r, co cn O a-I N M Ln l0 r, co cn O a-I N M Ln l0 r, co cn O a-I N M -* N l0 r, co cn O a-I N M -* N l0 �O I� n n n n n n n n n W 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-4 a-4 a-4 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Accumulated Overdraft (dewatered volume) shown as white area, excluding the volume stored by Metropolitan. source: OCW D ` MUNICIPAL WATER Ole TRIC =T of ORANGE � � � O C Basin Accumulated Overdraft Vs BPP % D Dewatered Vl (AF) 7Dew teredVol a,; COUNTY Annual, 1999 to Present -0- BPP% r 90% 80% . 50,000 75% 74% ♦ . 80% 100,000 ♦♦ 69% ��. �♦ 69% �♦♦ 68% !0% 66% 66q 64% "yam ♦'i♦ - 65% _i ► -� 70% 150,000 60% 200,000 v 50% L 250,000 a a 40% 300,000 30% 350,000 400,000 20% 1111 v.♦.. va�� vv�u��c � ' rWRS nnlinP Ian BOOR., = 500,000 � 0% Cn O a-I N rn Ln W I, 00 Cn O a-I N rn Ln W Cn O O O O O O O O O O a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I a-I Cn O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Accumulated Overdraft (dewatered volume) shown as white area, excluding the volume stored by Metropolitan. source: OCWD O.C. Basin Accumulated Overdraft Vs. Annual Rainfall Annual, 1999 to Present 50,000 100,000 �K 150,000 200,000 v w 250,000 Q 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500, 000 Ql Ql Ql a-I Stored Vol (AF) D Dewatered Vol (AF) —O— Annual Rainfall (Inches) 35 ' A 30 25 20 c ?. c 15 3 � c � Q 10 i i O a-4 N M N W r, 00 Cn O a-4 N M N W O O O O O O O O O O a-4 a-4 a-4 a-4 a-4 a-4 a-4 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ^'Accumulated Overdraft (dewatered volume) shown as white area, excluding the volume stored by Metropolitan. source: OCWD 0 Lake Mead Levels: Historical and Projected MUNICIPAL osT �T GRANGE 1,180 projection per USBR 24 -Month Study ----------- �o�Nrr ■ Historical B Projected 1,170 1,160 1,150 1,140 1,130 LL 0 1,120 f6 w 1,110 W 1,100 1,090 Shortage Trigger = 1,075 ft 1,080 1,070 JJf /j f/ 1,060 1,050 Jan 02 Jan 03 Jan 04 Jan 05 Jan 06 Jan 07 Jan 08 Jan 09 Jan 10 Jan 11 Jan 12 Jan 13 Jan 14 Jan 15 Jan 16 Jan 17 Jan 18 1,250 1,200 1,150 �L 1,100 0 a 1,050 0 a� -1,000 950 •II Lake Mead Historical Water Elevation Level Historic Peak July 1983 @ 1,225 Feet ti�I� ti�No ti�b, ti ()�o ti� <)� ti ()�� ti ()6� ti��o ti�� ti ()$O ti ()�, ti0 ()o ti0 (), ti (3(3o ti (3�� WATER PAL WATER OISTRIGT OF ORANGE COUNTY ti�I� ti�No ti�b, ti ()�o ti� <)� ti ()�� ti ()6� ti��o ti�� ti ()$O ti ()�, ti0 ()o ti0 (), ti (3(3o ti (3��