130 likes | 264 Views
State Water Resources Control Board Draft Cease and Desist Order Community Leader Workshop March 28, 2008. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order 95-10. SWRCB Order 95-10 hearings ’92 – ’95: Determined waters in valley “underflow” - not groundwater
E N D
State Water Resources Control BoardDraft Cease and Desist OrderCommunity Leader WorkshopMarch 28, 2008
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order 95-10 • SWRCB Order 95-10 hearings ’92 – ’95: • Determined waters in valley “underflow” - not groundwater • Allowed California American Water (CAW) to continue to divert water from the Carmel River • Required CAW to diligently pursue alternative water supplies • Established measures to protect Carmel River and habitat
About the Draft Cease and Desist Order (DCDO) • Proposed by SWRCB staff • Sent via certified mail to Kent Turner, January 15, 2008 • It was a surprise • Changes Order 95-10, which originally limited CAW Carmel River diversions to 3,376 AFY with an interim goal of 11,285 AFY to: • Limit diversions to 5,642 AFY over next 7 years with a reduction diversion schedule • Is a 50% reduction from interim goal of 11,285 • Results in a 33% reduction in total customer usage from today
What the DCDO alleges • CAW has not complied with Order 95-10 • Unauthorized diversions constitute a “trespass” • Hearings on the DCDO will be held prior to adopting a final order • Reduction diversion schedule recommended
DCDO proposed reduction diversion schedule • Water year = October 1 – September 30 • Interim goal = 11,285 AFY (used as base line)
California American Water’s position • In compliance with Order 95-10 • Diligently pursuing an alternative water supply • Implementing required mitigation measures • Meeting interim goal of 11,285 through customer conservation • Proposed reduction schedule is problematic • Imposes requirements that company cannot control • Jeopardizes health and safety • Doesn’t recognize water supply project schedules with realistic delays • Requested a hearing • Opposing entities and individuals to becoming a “party” to proceeding • Encouraging entities and individuals to enter “policy” statements into the record at April 1 hearing
What CAW is doing to meet regulatory requirements • Pursuing appropriative permits for Carmel River water rights • Joint water rights owner with MPWMD, Phase 1 Aquifer Storage and Recovery – up to 2,426 AFY • Application to legalize 2,984 AF identified in Table 13 of SWRCB Decision 1632 (1995) • Pursuing additional sources of water supply • Coastal Water Project and alternatives • Sand City desal plant • Seaside Basin recycled water project • Partnership with Marina Coast Water District • Seeking contracts with other water rights holders • More aggressive conservation programs being implemented
Regulatory impacts to your water supply 9,626 AFY reduction from 2007 usage or replacement supply needed
Regional Plan Projects • Proposed supply will address following needs: • Will water project or projects deliver water to meet schedule? • Regional Project Range (6,500 AFY – 22,500 AFY)
Schedule of Proceedings • Tuesday, April 1: Public policy hearing • Monterey Conference Center, 1:00 p.m. • Thursday, June 19: Evidentiary hearing • Cal/EPA Building, Sacramento