HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-10-24 - Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Packet
AGENDA
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, October 24, 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 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. 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.
4.1. Conservation Update and Monthly Water Supply Report
4.2. Director's Report
4.3. Future Agenda Items
5. ADJOURNMENT
5.1. The next Citizens Advisory Committee meeting is scheduled to be held
Monday, November 28, 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.
ITEM NO. 4.1
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: October 24, 2016
Subject:Conservation Update and Monthly Water Supply Report
ATTACHMENTS:
Name:Description:Type:
Water_Supply_Report.pdf Backup Material Backup Material
DATE: October 17, 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 August.
Fig. 2 OC Water Usage, Monthly, Comparison to Previous Years Water usage in
August 2016 was low compared to the last 5 years with the exception of
August 2015. Lower usage is primarily due to strong conservation efforts and
mandatory restrictions set by the Governor for the period of June 2015 to May
2016. In June 2016 all water conservation became voluntary for MWDOC
agencies.
Fig. 3 Historical OC Water Consumption OC water consumption is projected to be
519,000 AF in FY 2016-17 (this includes ~15 TAF of agricultural usage and
non-retail water agency usage). This is about 20,000 AF more than FY 2015-
16 and is about 53,000 AF less than FY 2014-15. Water usage per person is
projected to be slightly higher than in FY 2015-16 for Orange County at 145
gallons per day (This includes recycled water). 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.
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
Memorandum
magnitude of supplies from the three watersheds that are the principal sources of water for
OC. Note that a hydrologic year is Oct. 1st through Sept. 30th.
Orange County’s accumulated rainfall through September was well 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. El Nino conditions have diminished and NOAA has shifted its prediction from
La Nina to a greater chance of neutral conditions for the 2016-17 winter (La Nina is
generally associated with cool dry winters in Southern California).
Northern California accumulated precipitation in September was around 115% of
normal for this period. The Northern California snowpack is 97% of normal as of April
1st. 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 at 60% as of the end of June.
Colorado River Basin accumulated precipitation in September was 96% average for
this period. The Upper Colorado Basin snowpack was 85% of normal as of April
15th. This follows two below-average hydrologic years, the Colorado River Basin is in
the recovery of 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 1,075 ft. 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 September Lake Mead levels
were hovering right at the “trigger” limit but fortunately levels are expecting to
increase due to water releases schedule at Lake Powell. The USBR predicts that
the “trigger” level will not be hit by the end of 2016.
M
AN
IC-AL Surface Water =Non-OCWD Groundwater
Fig. 1A OC Water Usage, Monthly by Supply Recycled (Non Potable) Import[1]
I=oA... with projection to end of fiscal year =projected [3] =OCWD Basin [2]
Rainfall
60,000 1 .0
- 0.9
50,000
- 0.8
W
LU 40,000 0.7
0.6
a 30,000 �� 0.5
- 0.4 --
20,000
0.3 �
10,000 - 0.2
- 0.1
co co co co co (0 rl- ti ti r` ti ti
+r L L
Q U) O z 0 LL 2! Q 2
[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.
MUNICIPAL oSurface Water oNon-OCWD Groundwater
WATER Fig. 1 B OC Water Usage, Monthly by Supply Recycled (Non Potable) Import[1]
olsTRlcr
1oUNT with projection to end of fiscal year oOCWD Basin [2] =projected [3]
--c>..-Hiph Temp
60,000 90
LL
50,000 5 1
(D
L
— 80 +,
W �
w 40,000 - 75 2-
E
30,000 709
— 65 =
20,000 'FOO�
— 60
10,000
— 55
Q
0 To 50
CO CO (0 (D c4 (D ti ti ti ti 1` 11-
6)
`I I A. I I 1 1 L i 1 1
Q (n 0 Z 0 ti 2: Q 2
[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.
MUNICIPAL
WATER Fig. 2A OC Monthly Water Usage [1]: Comparison to Last 4 Fiscal Partial Year
DISTRICT
OF
ORANGE
- COUNTY Subtotals
111111111111 Years
70,000 700,000
60,000 - 600,000
50,000 500,000
LL 40,000 400,000
W
W W
4
a 30,000 W 300,000
a
20,000 200,000
10,000 100,000
0 —
Q CO Z3
(n 0 Z 0 li 2 Q
❑ FY 11-12 ❑ FY 13-14 ❑ FY 14-15 ❑ FY 15-16 ❑ FY 16-17
[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
OF MISTFICT Fig. 213 Orange County Cumulative Monthly Consumptive Water Usage [1]:
ORANGE
c�uNTV present year compared to last 4 calendar years
650,000
600,000 - -CY 2012, 588 TAF
-CY 2013, 605 TAF
550,000
CY 2014, 612 TAF /
500,000 - •
• CY 2015, 515 TAF /
•
450,000 - -0-CY 2016, ??? TAF
� 400,000
Lb 350,000
a 300,000 .MIQ IkIrr.I I Lei -
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000 ,
50,000 -
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
u= MSTRCT Fig. 3A HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[l] AND POPULATION[2] IN OC �Consumptive Water Use
of
R --o—Population
OANGE
COUNTY
800,000 3.50
Strong Economy
750,000 � �
- 3.00
700,000
- - --
a Weak Economy 2.502
Lu 650,000 Dry Year
2.00 0
Lu � �
Q
600,000 Dry YearWet Year Dry Year
Wet Year Wet Year
- 1.500
a
550,000 Wet Year
Wet Year
Wet Year
1.00
500,000
450,000 0.50
400,000 0.00
90 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
-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 -17
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.
MUNICIPAL
WATER Fig. 313 HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1]AND Annual Rainfall[2] oConsumptiveWaterUse
' olsTR�cr
._
co'u"'n,TV
--........... E IN OC S.A.Rainfall
750,000 35
Strong Economy
700,000 30
I
650,000 Weak Economy 25
LL N
Q t
W
600,000 20
� w
Lu S
Q �
550,00015
0/ V_ 01
500,000 10
T
450,000 5
400,000 0
190 191 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 105 '06 '07 '08 109 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
-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 -17
Fiscal Year
[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
Ma ..�ar=P Fig. 3C HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND Annual Average High Consumptive Water
-" oisraicr
aF ti�E __0_High Temp
E
Temperature[21 IN OC
750,000 85
Strong Economy - 84
i
700,000 - 83
- 82
650,000 iI - 81
vveaic Economy
U_ - 80
LU
m 600,000 79
W - 78 fl-
w £
a - 77 0
550,000 76 2x
75
500,000 74
- a
73
OF
450,000
72
� - 71
400,000 �— 70
90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 199 100 01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 108 109 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
-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 -17
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'
WATER MUNICIPAL Fig. 3D HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND Average Unemployment[2] IN
DISTRICT
of
ORANGE O C
COUNTY
750,000 0%
oConsumptive Water Use
Strong Economy 1%
--0—Unemployment% ,
700,000 2%
Weak Economy 3%
650,000 F_ I I 4%
Q5%
Lu0
600,000 6/° g
a 7% e
W o
aoo 8%
d
550,000 9% c
10% £
500,000 W
11%
0' - 12%
450,000 13%
14%
400,000 LL15%
190 191 '92 '93 '94 195 '96 '97 '98 199 100 101 '02 '03 '04 105 '06 '07 108 109 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
-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 -17
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
httpj/www.bls.Rov/lau//www.bls.eov/lau
--==-=- MUNICIPAL
OPTRCT Fig. 3E HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[1] AND POPULATION DENSITY[2] IN OCI
ORANGE
II I COUNTY
750,000
Consumptive Water Use
o
Strong Economy - 4,000
--0—Population Density Dry Year
700,000
Dry Year
650,000 F__1 -
a r i 3,750 m
Weak Economy
U) Wet Year to
600,000 Dry YeCD
ar
d' Wet Year
W Wet Year l
G1
Q 3,500 0
550,000 Wet Year m
Wet Year Wet Year d
T
Z
500,000 o
-01 3,250 z
450,000
a
400,000 14 1 i I i J 1 i i 1 111 111 11i 1 �- 3,000 IL
90 191 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 198 199 100 101 '02 '03 '04 105 '06 '07 '08 109 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
-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 -17
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.
Y WATER'PALFig. 3F HISTORICAL WATER CONSUMPTION[l] AND GPCD [2] IN OC oConsumptiveWaterUse
+- � ORANGE
couniTv �GPCD
750,000 240
Strong Economy
230
700,000
220
�\ � - 210
LL 650,000 - Weak Economy 0
a 200 a
W n
600,000 190
w 180
Q
550,000 170
160
dl
500,000
150
140
450,000
130
400,0001.1 Li I
�- 120
190 191 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 199 100 101 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 109 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
-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 -17
Fiscal Year
[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).
Fig. 4 MWDOC's Firm Water Purchases in CY 2016 oUntreated Total oTreated
Monthly Actual and Projected to CY Total oProj Monthly Purchases Cumulative Actual
30,000 350,000
----------
25,000
Tier I 300,000
250,000
20,000 dW
vow
_ — 200,000
15,000
m >_
•
T J 150,000
000 EU
10,000
r
100,000
Projected
5,000 6 Year Monthly MAX 50,000
6 Year Monthly Lo
6 Year Monthly Low
Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16
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 10/3/2016
- DISTRICT
OF *numbers are subject to change
_ _......
ORANGE
COUNTY
--
Accumulated Precipitation
for the Oct.-Sep. water year, through Early October 2016
1 This Year to date ■ Average to date Average End of Year
% = Percent of Average to Date
60
55 CA Snowpack
50 on 4/1/2016 Colorado
45 Snowpack on
4/15/2016
40
a,
35 97%
30
25
10 100% 85
10
5 0% 00%
0
ORANGE N. SIERRAS 8- NORTHERN UPPER BASIN UPPER BASIN
COUNTY STATION INDEX CALIF. COLORADO COLORADO
(SANTA ANA) ASNOWPACK PRECIP. SNOWPACK
nnuNcipA� *The date of maximum snowpack accumulation (April 1st in Northern Calif., April 15th in the
WATER
oFTR'CT Upper Colorado Basin) is used for year to year comparison.
ORANGE
COUNTY
MUNICIPAL
WATER
SWP TABLE A ALLOCATION
_. DISTRICT
ORANGE
-- COUNTY FOR STATE WATER PROJECT CONTRACTORS
65% 65% Final 2012: 65%
60% 605'
60% � ' Final 2016: 60%
60% 60% 60%
0% 50%
40% 40% 40% 5 0
o
35% q,c,o� 35/0 ° Final 2013: 35%
30° 0°
20% 20% 20% 20%
15%-15° 15% a Final 2015: 20%
000
10% 10
11.,1 10% 5% 5%
5°
5/° Final 2014: 5%
5%� 0% °0/o
0
Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun.
In =Water Year 2012 - -Water Year 2013 m mWater Year 2014 - -Water Year 2015 mWater Year 2016
1 Imported Water Deliveries Vs. California Population Growth
I Wo�tir"QL/ 2003,CRA QSA is signed lowering _
45
CD CRA usage to 4.4 MAF _
0 500 - N
Q - 40 .o
x =
ILL 400
Q � - 35r
U) O
300 - - 30 3
> a
O
200 2008,ESA results in Delta Pumping 25 a
restrictions M
L
Q 100 20
� R
0 15U
�°�6�,�91°,��1`�,��1�`,��'l�O,��'l`b,��4'°�9q,`L��gN��g�o��g2)��gO��4ti�901��o�ro���' °°° °°ti'L°°� °°�o °°Y� °,�° °,�ti�°NN °��o
=CA Population Total SWP Deliveries —CRA Deliveries to MWD —CRA Deliveries to CA
SWP Allocation % Vs. Station 8 Accumulated Rainfall I been
Ahocation%has only
L.J'been 100%once since the
100% _ J 100% 100% year 2000 - 100
90% so% 100% 100% so% 90% 90% - 90 t
100
80% 80 O
Z
= 70% 70% 70 C
65% 65% N
.2 60% 60% 601410 O L
ID
p 50% 50% 50% 50 r
a5%a Q
40% 39% R
a0% 40 'v _35% 20% i L
30% 30% 3s% — 30 IL
o 20
o Natural Accumulated Run _ v
10% pff – 10
0% 5% 0 E
Q
,��,Z,��a° °�� °a1`,��ab,��a ,���°No NI)�°cb�,��"8b ((Z�) �(°,��q`�,���° ,��0),���P�°°°�°°tip°01�°° °°�b N°�°� °\°� N� a
=Station 8 Accumulated Rainfall (Inches) —SWP Allocation %
WATER
MIWYRII O.C. Basin Accumulated Overdraft
DISTRICT
= OF 1
ORYNGE
Annual, 1969 to Present
50,000 Basin Full in 1969
381,500 AF end of August
2016
100,000
150,000
200,000
a
a
250,000
a
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000 ume
filledwith water GWRS Online Jan 2008
500,000
01 O .-1 N M V 111 O n 00 01 O .-1 N M V 1A W 1, 00 01 O N N M V 1A W n 00 01 O .-1 N rn 111 O n 00 01 O r1 N M 1A W 1�
W 1, n n n n n n n n n 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 O O O O O O O O O O r1 -4 c'1 -4 ''1 c'1 -4 c'1
01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 O m m O 01 01 O m 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 M 01 01 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
!-1 a-1 !-1 !-1 a-1 !-1 !-1 a-1 !-1 a-1 a-1 14 a-1 14 !-1 -4 !-1 !-1 -4 !-1 -1 N 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
Acre-Feet
lfl A A W W N N
O In O In O In O In O In
O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O
1969 DOO M
1970 OmIjIc
CD .1i?
za Ilan
1971 �m D
1972 �+
1973
1974
1975
1976 oWi n
v�
1977 3
1978 c aj
1979 —
n 1980 - r
1981 '-- D
c 1982
0 1983 _ ==
1984 r--------
8 1985 `�'_' f
1986 c (D
1987
0 1988
� O
'� p1
a 1989 1D (p
`0 1990 Q
1991 N
= 1992 (D ;:h
1993
0 1994
1995 D
o -
0 1996 =r�
1997 ��_•_ 3
x 1998 0)
a 1999
2000
0 2001 3•
2002 Qj
lb 2003
0 2004 - �a
2005
2006 - ------ -
c 2007 �:,. '� I
0 2008 " - 00 a, > o �
2009 c Ln o
^ 2010 .a7x = C °�
,. v, D <
'+
2011 _ N T a °-
o 2012 < a
r) f a-
^'
o 2013 D
- ' „
0 " —
s
2014ID
2015
2016
2017 ,.,................ ,. .... .........� �� �
O In O In
Annual Rainfall(inches)
ol
If I_ MLJNI=IPAL O.C. Basin Accumulated Overdraft Vs. BPP % ®Stored red Vol
WATER
_ OF TRICT O Dewatered Vo (AF)
., =FLINTY Annual, 1999 to Present -<= BPP% w
80
S0,000 80
75% 75% 75% 75%
100,000
150,000 �•.�-
60
200,000
50%
V
w �
w 250,000 a
_ a
40%
300,000
30%
350,000
400,000 20%
450,000
10%
•
500,000 0%
C1 O .••i N M R L O N W C1 O a y N M L O n
C1 O O O O O O O O O O ai ay ai ay ay ai ay ai
M O 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 N N
Accumulated Overdraft (dewatered volume)shown as white area,excluding the volume stored by Metropolitan.source:OCWD
VI,ATERIPALO.C. Basin Accumulated Overdraft Vs. Annual Rainfall �5toredVol(AF)
DISTRICT
aF O Dewatered Vol(AF)
AnnualAil, 1999 to Present Annual Rainfall(Inches)
50,000
30
100,000 `
150,000 25
200,000
20
t 1 1 c
250,000
1 �
15
1
300,000
� 1
350,000 10
1
400,000 1 ��
5
450,000 •
500,000 0
0) O ti N rn 1!1 to P 00 M O ci N M Ln l0 f\
01 O O O O O O O O O O ci ci ci ci N N N N
Ol O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
rl N 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
I State Water Proiect, Colorado River, and MWD Reservoir Storage 25 L l
as of October,3rd 2016 ---
20 -
Lake Shasta 4 0 Lake Oroville 1s LL
a.o - Y .
3.0
3.0 LL
10 Q
i 72/
2.U ,. o O
Q
2.0 0 61% 3 1.0 4500 740o 5
1.0 0.0 � 0 -
0.0
2.5 San Luis Resv.
2.0 Lake Mat
LL Lakhews
1.5 70%
0.0 ° Lake Mead
0.s X25 5310
o.0 25 -
Diamond Valley 20
r
v
1.0 68% 15
0.5
0.0aao
10
0
• of Capacity s2 37
• of Historical Avg. '' : 0
_ <<.DI,I oI
MLIM1 105P^L
Lake Mead Levels: Historical and Proiected = oATp,�T
1,180
projection per USBR 24-Month Study
1,170
D Historical ElProjected
\
1,160
1,150
1,140 \
1,130
0 1,120
I
_a', 1,110
W / 1
1,100 / 1
1,090
Shortage Trigger=1,075 ft
1,080
1,070
01
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