Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2014-02-25 - AGENDA REPORTS - REGIONAL WATER MGMT PLAN (10)
CONSENT CALENDAR DATE: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: Agenda Item: 3 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval: Item to be presented by: February 25, 2014 Travis Lange ADOPT RESOLUTION TO ADOPT UPDATED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Public Works RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council adopt resolution to adopt the updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. BACKGROUND Since 2002, watershed areas are eligible for state water bond grants if they develop and implement an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. The purpose of the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan is for local agencies to work together and create balanced water priorities and solve water issues regionally. The Integrated Regional Water Management Plan considers water supply, water demand, water quality, flood protection, and resource stewardship in their objectives and in prioritizing water projects locally. The City of Santa Clarita (City) Open Space and Conservation chapter of the General Plan includes support of the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan in objective CO 4.2. Specifically, policy CO 4.2.5 states "Participate and cooperate with other agencies to complete, adopt, and implement an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan to build a diversified portfolio of water supply, water quality, and resource stewardship priorities for the Santa Clarita Valley." In 2008, agencies and stakeholders in the upper Santa Clara River Watershed developed an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. New regulations adopted by the California Department of Water Resources since the City Council approved the original plan in July 2008 require the goals and objectives to be revised. The revisions include an updated list of proposed projects and new sections not required in 2008. This update allows the upper Santa Clara River region to continue eligibility to apply for future state water grants and allows invoices by Continued%: 31Qs/�o y CG,I P1e2+le-,07 stakeholders of previously approved projects to continue. Any delay past March 2014 for adoption would affect current reimbursement of grant funding for stakeholders. The Integrated Regional Water Management Plan is managed by the Regional Water Management Group, which was formed by memorandum of understanding in 2008. This group includes the following members: • City of Santa Clarita • Castaic Lake Water Agency • Santa Clarita Water Division • Newhall County Water District • Valencia Water Company • Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District of Los Angeles County • Los Angeles County Department of Public Works • Rivers and Mountains Conservancy The Regional Water Management Group hosts regular meetings for a Stakeholder Advisory Group and invites hundreds of organizations and agencies to discuss issues pertinent to the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. The regularly participating stakeholders list is attached to this report. The update to the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan was initiated in 2012. The Regional Water Management Group, with Castaic Lake Water Agency acting as contract manager, hired a consultant to evaluate and update the document. Each section was updated and sent to the Regional Water Management Group for comments. The sections were then revised based on those comments and then returned to the Stakeholder Advisory Group for their comment. The final output of the process is the adoption of the updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. Newhall County Water District adopted the plan on February 13, 2014. Valencia Water Company adopted the plan February 11, 2014. The CasWc Lake Water Agency Water Resources Committee recommended approval of the plan on February 13, 2014 and is scheduled for Board approval on February 26, 2014. The other members will adopt on future dates. On March 27, 2014, the Regional Water Management Group will hold a hearing on the updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan consistent with the guidelines from the California Department of Water Resources. As a condition of the grant agreements signed with the Department of Water Resources, the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan must be updated using the new 2012 guidelines within two years of signing the agreement. The significant state requirements included a new section on climate change, new standards for governance, and additional information on the project review process and the plan relation to local water planning efforts. All members of the Regional Water Management Group and any entities that have received grant funds are required by the Department of Water Resources grant agreement to adopt the updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan by April 10, 2014, which is two years after the grant agreement was signed. The Regional Water Management Group for the Upper Santa Clara River received two grants from the California Department of Water Resources Proposition 84 program, a planning grant for $266,250 and an implementation grant for $6,931,000. Projects funded by these grants include the support for updating the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, moving a sewer line out of the river, expanding recycled water transmission pipes, and water efficiency programs. The City received $333,325 to continue the arundo and tamarisk removal from the Santa Clara River, and the project is currently underway. On February 4, 2014, the California Department of Water Resources approved the Regional Water Management Group grant application for an additional $7,006,481. The grant application includes projects for water conservation, improving and expanding water supply pipelines, the initial phase of a pellet water -softening project that will reduce the need for salt -based water softening, an automatic water softener rebate and public outreach program, and removal of arundo and tamarisk from Bouquet Canyon Creek and San Francisquito Creek. Sewage treatment ultraviolet disinfection to reduce chloride is a project within the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan eligible for future grant cycles. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Other action as determined by City Council. FISCAL IMPACT Without adoption, the City and the region could be ineligible for future State of California water grants, and current grant support could be suspended. ATTACHMENTS Resolution Regularly Participating Stakeholder List Notice of Exemption Public Hearing Notice Integrated Regional Water Management Plan 2008 and 2014 available in the City Clerk's Reading File Redline Version of IRWMP 2008 to 2013 available in the City Clerk's Reading File K RESOLUTION 14- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE UPDATED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, in 2002, the California legislature enacted Division 6, Part 2.2, of the California Water Code, known as the Integrated Regional Water Management Planning Act of 2002 ("Act") for, among other things, the purpose of encouraging local agencies to work together to manage their available water supplies and to improve the quality, quantity, and availability of those supplies; and WHEREAS, the Act encourages local agencies of different types to join together to form a Regional Water Management Group to address water supply, quantity, quality and resource stewardship issues in their areas; and WHEREAS, on July 8, 2008, the City of Santa Clarita approved Resolution 08-78 to approve the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed; and WHEREAS, in 2011, the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy joined the Regional Water Management Group and signed the Memorandum of Understanding; and WHEREAS, the Regional Water Management Group, of which the City of Santa Clarita is a member, has developed a proposed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Upper Santa Clara River, and pursuant thereto published notice of the group's intention to adopt such a plan in accordance with the requirements of the Act; and WHEREAS, the proposed Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan was developed through a comprehensive stakeholder process; and WHEREAS, California Department of Water Resources and State legislators have established program guidelines for the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan through Proposition 84 and Proposition IE (2012 Guidelines); and WHEREAS, the Regional Water Management Group for the Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Region has developed the 2014 Updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan to address the provisions of the 2012 Guidelines; and WHEREAS, adopting the 2014 Updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan will enable participants in the Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Region, including the City of Santa Clarita, to apply for future grant funding under various grant programs including Proposition 84 and Proposition 1 E; and WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita General Plan Open Space and Conservation chapter includes policy CO 4.2.5, which states "Participate and cooperate with other agencies to complete, adopt, and implement an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan to build a diversified portfolio of water supply, water quality, and resource stewardship priorities for the Santa Clarity Valley." WHEREAS, the 2012 Guidelines require the governing bodies of member agencies of the Regional Water Management Groups, as well as proponents of projects included in the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan grant funding proposals to adopt an updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan; and WHEREAS, to date, the California Department of Water Resources has awarded the Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Region seven million one hundred and ninety seven thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($7,197,250) in grant funding to implement 10 regionally significant water resources management planning and implementation projects and has recommended the award of an additional seven million six thousand four hundred eighty one dollars ($7,006,481) for 7 more projects as part of Round 2 implementation grant funding. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. The Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan is determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15262 and 15306 of the State CEQA Guidelines, since it involves only a conceptual plan associated with feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions, as well as basic data collection and resource evaluation activities, which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource. SECTION 2. The City of Santa Clarita City Council adopts the 2014 Updated Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. SECTION 3. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to take any and all actions necessary to approve the 2014 Updated Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (on behalf of the City of Santa Clarita for the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan and the Regional Water Management Group). SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2014. MAYOR ATTEST: INTERIM CITY CLERK m STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA) I, Arming Chaparyan, Interim City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarity at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of 2014, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: INTERIM CITY CLERK Al USCR IRWMP STAKEHOLDERS *Regular participants in 2014 Update are highlighted Stakeholder Mission Statement Municipal and County Government Agencies City of Santa Clarita To deliver the best and most cost-efficient municipal service to LACFCD the citizens and City Council of Santa Clarita. County of Ventura To provide public infrastructure, services, and support so that all SCWD residents have the opportunity to achieve a high quality of life Ranch. and enjoy the benefits of a healthy economy. Los Angeles County To provide public infrastructure and municipal services to protect Department of Public and enrich the daily lives of over ten million people in Los Works (LACDPW) Angeles County. Los Angeles County To support the Board of Supervisors in serving the people of Los Supervisor's Office Angeles County. Los Angeles County To improve the quality of life through innovative and resourceful Department of physical and environmental planning, balancing individual rights Regional Planning and community needs. Water Suppliers/Wastewater Management/Special Districts CLWA A public agency providing reliable, quality water at a reasonable To promote and protect the industry to ensure our members' cost to the Santa Clarita Valley. LACFCD To provide for the control and conservation of the flood, storm To provide a better quality of life for those who live and work in and other waste waters of the Flood Control District. SCWD A public agency providing reliable, quality water at a reasonable Ranch. cost to the Santa Clarita Valley. SCVSD To provide environmentally sound, cost-effective wastewater management, and in the process, convert wastewater into recycled water, a valuable water resource for the Santa Clarita Valley. NCWD To provide quality water service at a reasonable cost by practicing careful stewardship of natural resources, utilizing innovative measures, and providing a quality working environment. VWC To deliver a dependable supply of safe reliable water to existing and future customers at a reasonable cost. Business Organizations Building Industry To promote and protect the industry to ensure our members' Association (BIA) success in providing homes for all Southern Californians. Newhall Land and To provide a better quality of life for those who live and work in Farming Company the master planned communities of Valencia and Newhall Ranch. Stakeholder Atkins Environmental To be a resource for environmental, health & safety issues. To provide sparkling service with professionalism, honesty, integrity, trust, and respect. To seek to balance the demand for resources with the needs of the community. Recreational and Open Space Entitles Rivers and Mountains To preserve open space and habitat in order to provide for low - Conservancy impact recreation and educational uses, wildlife habitat (CDFW) restoration and protection, and watershed improvements within California Department of our jurisdiction. Nature Conservancy To preserve the plants, animals, and natural communities that (Caltrans) represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and California Department of waters they need to survive. Los Angeles County To provide the residents and visitors of Los Angeles County with Department of Parks quality recreational opportunities that promote a healthy lifestyle and Recreation and strengthen the community through diverse physical, Water Quality Control educational, and cultural programming, and to enhance the Board (RWQCB) community environment by acquiring, developing, and maintaining County parks, gardens, golf courses, trails, and open space areas. Mountains Recreation To acquire, develop, and conserve additional park and open and Conservation space lands with special emphasis on recreation and Authority conservation projects, the protection and conservation of watersheds, and the development of river parkways. Regulatory and Resource Agencies- State and Federal California Department of To manage California's diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, Fish and Wildlife and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological (CDFW) values and for their use and enjoyment by the public. California Department of Improve mobility across California. Transportation (Caltrans) California Department of To manage the water resources of California in cooperation with Water Resources other agencies, to benefit the State's people, and to protect, (DWR) restore, and enhance the natural and human environments. Los Angeles Regional To preserve and enhance the quality of California's water Water Quality Control resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Board (RWQCB) Natural Resources "Helping People Help the Lana," Dy proviamg proaucrs ano Conservation Service services that enable people to be good stewards of the Nation's (NRCS) soil, water, and related natural resources on non -Federal lands. no Stakeholder Mission Statement US Army Corps of To provide quality, responsive engineering services to the nation Engineers (US ACE) including: planning, designing, building, and operating water resources and other civil works projects (Navigation, Flood To develop and encourage cooperation among entities for the Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, etc.); development, protection, conservation and improvement of the designing and managing the construction of military facilities for total water resources for Ventura County. the Army and Air Force (Military Construction); providing design To be a resource for existing, new, and future residents of the and construction management support for other Defense and Agua Dulce/Acton community. federal agencies (Support for Others). US Fish and Wildlife To work with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, Service (US FWS) wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of consensus; to discuss issues concerning Agua Dulce, to invite the American people. US Forest Service- To sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's Angeles National forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future Forest generations. Non -Profit Organizations and Other Stakeholders Acton Town Council To provide a stronger local voice in community development, and to try to ensure the continuation of Acton's country lifestyle. Agricultural Access Association of Water To develop and encourage cooperation among entities for the Agencies of Ventura development, protection, conservation and improvement of the County total water resources for Ventura County. Agua Dulce/Acton To be a resource for existing, new, and future residents of the Country Journal Agua Dulce/Acton community. Agua Dulce Town To serve as a common meeting place for the free expression of Council all views and for the coming together of diverse opinions into a consensus; to discuss issues concerning Agua Dulce, to invite participation by the public, civic, and private organizations; to serve as Agua Dulce's representatives and to speak on behalf of the community; to review public and private proposals that may affect the community; to neither support nor oppose any political party or candidate. Castaic Area Town To act as an advisory board presenting community points of view Council to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and various County departments such as Regional Planning, Public Works, and Parks & Recreation. Santa Clarita To promote, protect, and preserve the environment, Organization for quality of life in the Santa Clarita Valley. Planning the Environment I Stakeholder Statement Santa Clarita Valley Well Preserve our present and future water supply by working Owners Association together to promote sustainable water consumption by all stakeholders in the aquifer's resource; protect our rights as private well owners and our collective parity as stakeholders in the management of the areas' subterranean water resources; educate our members in matters relative to water rights, quality, resources, historical data and any other information relevant to owning and maintaining a private water well system; advocate on behalf of the rights of private well owners collectively and individually. University of California The welfare, development, and protection of California Cooperative Extension agriculture, natural resources, and people. Ventura County To provide assistance to help both rural and urban communities Resource to conserve, protect, and restore natural resources. Conservation District (VCRCD) Santa Clara River Non-profit land trust and wildlife conservation organization, Watershed formed to advocate for and acquire undeveloped land in the Conservancy Santa Clara River watershed. Watershed Protection District (for WCVC) 10 Notice of Exemption To: County Clerk County of Los Angeles 12400 Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 From: Castaic Lake Water Agency 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road Canyon Country, CA 91350 Project Title: Adoption of the 2014 Updated Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Location — Specific: The Watershed of the Santa Clara River in northern Los Angeles County from its headwaters in the north south and east to the Los Angeles County/Ventura County Boundary on the west Project Location — City: Santa Clarita Project Location — County: Los Angeles Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project: Project is the adoption of the updated Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) which identifies goals objectives and implementation programs within the upper Santa Clara River watershed to improve water -related functions and values The adopted IRWMP has been updated to reflect new requirements in current law. The adopted IRWMP update also includes a climate change technical study. The adopted IRWM Plan will guide programs to benefit water dependent resources in the watershed Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Castaic Lake Water Agency Name of Person or Public Agency Carrying Out Project: Castaic Lake Water Agency Exempt Status: (check one) Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268, Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a), Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c); X Statutory Exemption; State type and section number: Feasibility and Planning Studies (Section 15262 of the State CEQA Guidelines) X Categorical Exemption; State type and section number: Class 6 (Section 15306 of the State CEQA Reason why this project is exempt: The adoption of the updated IRWMP are exempt under the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, since it involves only conceptual plans associated with feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions, as well as basic data collection and resource evaluation activities which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource. These activities will be strictly for information gathering purposes, or as part of studies leading to actions which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted, or funded. Accordingly, the adopted, updated IRWMP qualities for a feasibility and planning studies statutory exemption and a categorical exemption for information gathering purposes. Lead Agency Contact Person: Lauren Everett Water Resources Planner Area Code/Telephone/Extension: (661) 513-1282 Signature: Signed by Lead Agency Date: Title: PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF INTENTION NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ADOPT UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN MARCH 27, 2014 All interested persons are invited to attend and be heard at a public hearing to be held by the Upper Santa Clara River Regional Water Management Group (RWMG), on Thursday. March 27. 2014 at 2:00 p.m. at the Newhall County Water District, 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321. Consideration will be given to the following item: adopt the Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) February 2014. PROJECT INFORMATION: The Upper Santa Clara River RWMG was formed consistent with State law as a coalition of agencies, and consists of more than three public agencies, at least two of which have statutory authority over water supply, water quality, flood control and storm water. On October 17, 2011 the USCR RWMG directed the publication of a notice of intention to update a regional plan in accordance with Section 10543 of the Water Code and Section 6066 of the Government Code, held a public hearing making a determination to update the IRWMP on November 17, 2011, and is hereby publishing a notice of intent to adopt the updated IRWMP [per Water Code Section 10541(c)]. As noted above, the USCR RWMG will hold a public hearing on March 27, 2014 to consider whether or not to adopt the 2014 Updated USCR IRWMP [per Water Code Section 10541(d)]. The public comment period on the Public Review Draft of the IRWMP is complete, and the Final IRWMP is available on the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP website (scrwaterplan.org). At the conclusion of the public hearing, a regular IRWMP Stakeholder meeting will take place from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. at the same location. For more information please contact: Ms. Lauren Everett, Water Resources Planner Castaic Lake Water Agency 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road Santa Clarita, CA 91350 (661) 297-1600 x 282 e-mail at leverett@clwa.org 2 .�' LosAngmWCauntp— UPPE[i $ABTA CWRII C ATfRSHlC Prepared by:y Kennedy/Jenks Consultants 2775 North Ventura Road, Suite 100 Oxnard, California 93036 (805)973-5700 Table of Contents Listof Tables................................................................................................................................ ix Listof Figures................................................................................................................................ x Listof Appendices........................................................................................................................ xi Section1: Introduction...............................................................................1-1 1.1 Introduction to the Region...................................................................1-1 1.1.1 IRWMP Regional Boundary .....................................................1-7 1.2 Purpose of the Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional WaterManagement Plan.....................................................................1-7 1.3 Development of the IRWMP................................................................1-8 1.3.1 Regional Water Management Group.....................................1-12 1.3.1.1 RWMG Functions................................................1-13 1.3.1.2 RWMG Chair Roles and Responsibilities ............1-15 1.3.1.3 RWMG Vice -Chair Roles and Responsibilities .... 1-15 1.3.1.4 Grantee Roles and Responsibilities .....................1-15 1.3.1.5 Subcommittees....................................................1-16 1.3.1.6 Financing RWMG and IRWMP Activities.............1-16 1.3.2 Stakeholders..........................................................................1-16 1.3.2.1 Participating Stakeholders...................................1-17 1.3.2.2 Stakeholder Group Roles and Responsibilities....................................................1-22 1.3.2.3 Ground Rules and Operating Procedures ............ 1-23 1.3.3 Relationship with Neighboring IRWMPs................................1-24 1.3.3.1 The WCVC IRWMP Region.................................1-24 1.3.3.2 Kern IRWMP........................................................1-25 1.3.3.3 Antelope Valley IRWMP.......................................1-25 1.3.3.4 Greater Los Angeles County IRWMP..................1-26 1.3.4 Void or Excluded Areas.........................................................1-26 Section 2: Region Description....................................................................2-1 2.1 Introduction and Overview...................................................................2-1 2.2 Climate................................................................................................2-1 2.3 Land Use.............................................................................................2-5 2.3.1 Land Use Policies....................................................................2-6 2.3.1.1 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan...............2-9 2.4 Ecological Processes and Environmental Resources .......................2-10 2.4.1 Sensitive Biological Resources.............................................2-11 2.4.2 Wetland Habitat.....................................................................2-13 2.4.3 Wildlife Corridors...................................................................2-14 2.4.4 Locally Important Species and Communities ........................2-16 2.4.5 Significant Ecological Areas..................................................2-17 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 i Table of Contents (cont'd) 2.4.6 Recreation Resources...........................................................2-21 2.5 Social and Cultural Characteristics...................................................2-22 2.5.1 Demographics and Population..............................................2-22 2.5.1.1 Santa Clarita Valley.............................................2-22 2.5.1.2 City of Santa Clarita.............................................2-25 2.5.1.3 Unincorporated Areas of Watershed ....................2-25 2.5.2 Economic Factors..................................................................2-26 2.5.2.1 Santa Clarita Valley.............................................2-26 2.5.2.2 City of Santa Clarita.............................................2-26 2.5.2.3 Unincorporated Areas of Watershed ....................2-27 2.5.3 Disadvantaged Communities.................................................2-27 2.5.4 Social and Cultural Values....................................................2-28 2.6 Overview of Water Supplies..............................................................2-29 2.7 Major Water Related Infrastructure...................................................2-29 2.7.1 State Water Project...............................................................2-29 2.7.2 Bouquet Reservoir and Los Angeles Aqueduct .....................2-29 2.7.3 Metropolitan Water District Foothill Feeder ...........................2-30 2.7.4 Purveyor Water Infrastructure...............................................2-30 Section 3: Water Supplies and Water Demand...........................................3-1 3.1 Water Supply.......................................................................................3-1 3.1.1 Groundwater............................................................................3-1 3.1.1.1 Acton Valley Groundwater Basin ...........................3-3 3.1.1.2 Agua Dulce Groundwater Basin ............................3-4 3.1.1.3 Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel .........................3-4 3.1.1.4 Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin................3-4 3.1.1.5 Adopted Groundwater Management Plan for Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin................3-5 3.1.1.6 Available Groundwater Supplies ............................3-7 3.1.2 Imported Water Supplies.........................................................3-8 3.1.2.1 SWP Water Supplies.............................................3-9 3.1.2.2 Other Imported Supplies......................................3-10 3.1.3 Groundwater Banking............................................................3-11 3.1.3.1 Semitropic Water Banking Program .....................3-12 3.1.3.2 Rosedale -Rio Bravo Water Storage District Water Banking Programs.....................................3-12 3.1.3.3 Semitropic Water Banking Program — Newhall Land.......................................................3-12 3.1.3.4 West Kern Water District Storage Program .........3-12 3.1.4 Recycled Water.....................................................................3-12 3.1.4.1 New Wastewater Treatment Facilities .................3-14 3.2 Water Quality....................................................................................3-14 3.2.1 Surface Water Quality...........................................................3-14 3.2.1.1 Basin Plan............................................................3-14 ii Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Table of Contents (cont'd) Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page iii 3.2.1.2 Water Quality Management Tools .......................3-16 3.2.1.3 Section 303(D) List of Water Quality Limited Segments.............................................................3-17 3.2.1.4 TMDLs.................................................................3-17 3.2.2 Potable Water Quality............................................................3-21 3.2.2.1 Water Quality Constituents of Interest.................3-21 3.2.3 Imported Water Quality..........................................................3-23 3.2.4 Groundwater Quality..............................................................3-24 3.2.4.1 Agua Dulce Groundwater Basin ..........................3-24 3.2.4.2 Acton Valley Groundwater Basin .........................3-24 3.2.4.3 Santa Clara River Valley East Groundwater Subbasin..............................................................3-25 3.2.5 Water Quality Considerations for Recycled Water Use ......... 3-28 3.2.6 Water Quality Impacts on Reliability......................................3-28 3.3 Water Demand..................................................................................3-28 3.3.1 Projected Demand.................................................................3-29 3.3.2 Other Factors Affecting Water Demands...............................3-31 3.4 Summary of Major Water Issues and Problems................................3-31 Section 4: Watershed Flood Management..................................................4-1 4.1 Santa Clara River Hydrology...............................................................4-1 4.2 Drainage Infrastructure........................................................................4-2 4.3 Runoff and Flood Events...................................................................4-13 4.4 Factors Affecting Flooding and Geomorphic Processes ...................4-14 4.5 Flood Management...........................................................................4-17 4.6 Stormwater Management..................................................................4-18 Section 5: Climate Change.........................................................................5-1 5.1 Climate Change..................................................................................5-1 5.1.1 Legislative and Policy Context.................................................5-1 5.1.1.1 Current Regulatory Constraints.............................5-1 5.1.1.2 Future Regulatory Constraints...............................5-5 5.1.2 Vulnerability to Climate Change..............................................5-7 5.1.2.1 Climate Change Scenarios....................................5-7 5.1.2.2 Vulnerable Watershed Characteristics .................5-10 5.1.2.3 Vulnerability Sector Assessment .........................5-12 5.1.2.4 Vulnerability Prioritization....................................5-39 5.1.3 Adaptation to Climate Change...............................................5-39 5.1.3.1 Statewide Adaptation Strategies for the Water Sector..................................................................5-44 5.1.3.2 Regional Adaptation Strategies ...........................5-44 5.1.4 Next Steps for Future IRWMP Updates.................................5-48 5.1.4.1 Data Improvement...............................................5-48 5.1.4.2 Future Actions — Create a GHG Baseline ............ 5-52 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page iii Table of Contents (cont'd) iv Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 5.1.4.3 Future Actions — Quantify Adaption and Mitigation Strategies at the Project Level.............5-52 5.1.4.4 Future Actions — Develop Performance Metrics.................................................................5-52 Section 6: Plan Objectives..........................................................................6-1 6.1 Objective Development.......................................................................6-1 6.2 Regional Objectives............................................................................6-3 6.2.1 Reduce Potable Water Demand..............................................6-3 6.2.2 Increase Water Supply............................................................6-6 6.2.3 Improve Water Quality.............................................................6-7 6.2.4 Promote Resource Stewardship..............................................6-8 6.2.5 Flood ing/Hydromod ification...................................................6-12 6.2.6 Adaptation to Climate Change...............................................6-12 6.2.7 Promote Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................6-12 6.3 Strategies..........................................................................................6-13 Section 7: Resource Management Strategies Used to Meet Plan Objectives..................................................................................7-1 7.1 Overview.............................................................................................7-1 7.2 California Water Plan Resource Management Strategies ...................7-1 7.2.1 Reduce Water Demand...........................................................7-4 7.2.1.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ...........................7-4 7.2.1.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency...................................7-4 7.2.2 Improve Operational Efficiency................................................7-4 7.2.2.1 Conveyance...........................................................7-4 7.2.2.2 System Re-operation.............................................7-4 7.2.2.3 Water Transfers.....................................................7-4 7.2.3 Increase Water Supply............................................................7-5 7.2.3.1 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage..................................................................7-5 7.2.3.2 Desalination — Brackish/Seawater .........................7-5 7.2.3.3 Precipitation Enhancement....................................7-5 7.2.3.4 Recycled Municipal Water.....................................7-5 7.2.3.5 Surface Storage — CALFED...................................7-5 7.2.3.6 Surface Storage — Regional/Local .........................7-5 7.2.4 Improve Water Quality.............................................................7-6 7.2.4.1 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ............ 7-6 7.2.4.2 Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation .........................7-6 7.2.4.3 Matching Quality to Use.........................................7-6 7.2.4.4 Pollution Prevention...............................................7-6 7.2.4.5 Salt and Salinity Management...............................7-7 7.2.4.6 Urban Runoff Management...................................7-7 iv Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Table of Contents (cont'd) 7.2.5 Promote Resource Stewardship..............................................7-7 7.2.5.1 Agricultural Lands Stewardship.............................7-7 7.2.5.2 Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants, Water Pricing)...................................................................7-7 7.2.5.3 Ecosystem Restoration..........................................7-8 7.2.5.4 Forest Management...............................................7-8 7.2.5.5 Land Use Planning and Management ....................7-8 7.2.5.6 Recharge Areas Protection....................................7-8 7.2.5.7 Water -Dependent Recreation................................7-8 7.2.5.8 Watershed Management........................................7-9 7.2.6 Improve Flood Management....................................................7-9 7.2.6.1 Flood Risk Management........................................7-9 7.3 Resource Management Strategies Adopted by Stakeholders ........... 7-10 7.3.1 Reduce Potable Water Demand............................................7-11 7.3.1.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency .........................7-11 7.3.1.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency.................................7-11 7.3.2 Increase Water Supply..........................................................7-13 7.3.2.1 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage................................................................7-13 7.3.2.2 Desalination.........................................................7-14 7.3.2.3 Precipitation Enhancement..................................7-15 7.3.2.4 Recycled Municipal Water...................................7-15 7.3.2.5 Water Transfers...................................................7-15 7.3.2.6 Surface Storage — CALFED.................................7-15 7.3.2.7 Surface Storage — Regional/Local .......................7-16 7.3.2.8 Conveyance.........................................................7-16 7.3.2.9 System Re-operation...........................................7-16 7.3.3 Improve Water Quality...........................................................7-18 7.3.3.1 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution .......... 7-18 7.3.3.2 Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation .......................7-19 7.3.3.3 Matching Quality to Use.......................................7-20 7.3.3.4 Pollution Prevention and Urban Runoff Quality and Quantity............................................7-20 7.3.3.5 Salt and Salinity Management.............................7-27 7.3.4 Promote Resource Stewardship............................................7-28 7.3.4.1 Agricultural Lands Stewardship ...........................7-28 7.3.4.2 Economic Incentives............................................7-29 7.3.4.3 Ecosystem Restoration........................................7-29 7.3.4.4 Forest Management.............................................7-31 7.3.4.5 Land Use Planning and Management ..................7-31 7.3.4.6 Recharge Areas Protection..................................7-32 7.3.4.7 Water -Dependent Recreation..............................7-33 7.3.4.8 Watershed Management......................................7-33 7.3.5 Improve Flood Management..................................................7-34 7.3.5.1 Flood Risk Management......................................7-34 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page v Table of Contents (cont'd) 7.3.6 Resource Management Strategies........................................7-35 7.4 Call for Projects.................................................................................7-35 Section 8: Project Priorities and Implementation......................................8-1 8.1 Project Prioritization Process..............................................................8-1 8.1.1 Development of Project Ranking and Scoring Criteria ............8-2 8.1.2 Call for Projects.......................................................................8-2 8.1.3 Development and Refinement.................................................8-4 8.1.4 Initial Project Ranking..............................................................8-4 8.1.5 Review and Finalization of Ranking by RWMG Stakeholders............................................................................8-5 8.1.6 Selected Plan Projects............................................................8-5 8.2 Integration of Water Management Strategies......................................8-5 8.3 Benefits of Plan Implementation........................................................8-15 8.3.1 Benefits of Plan Implementation............................................8-15 8.3.2 Plan Beneficiaries..................................................................8-18 8.3.3 Interregional Benefits.............................................................8-18 8.4 Impacts of Plan Implementation........................................................8-18 8.5 Institutional Structure for Plan Implementation..................................8-23 8.5.1 Implementing Plan Activities..................................................8-24 8.5.1.1 Local Project Sponsors' Roles and Responsibilities....................................................8-25 8.5.1.2 IRWMP Term and Plan Revisions .......................8-25 8.5.1.3 IRWMP Adoption.................................................8-26 Section9: Finance Plan ..............................................................................9-1 9.1 Potential Funding Options...................................................................9-1 9.2 Local....................................................................................................9-1 9.2.1 Capital Improvements Program Funding (Revenue Bonds, Certificates of Participation)........................................9-1 9.2.2 Property Tax Assessment (Assessed Valuation) ....................9-2 9.2.3 User Fees................................................................................9-2 9.2.4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Fee......................................9-3 9.2.5 Clean Water Fee.....................................................................9-3 9.3 State....................................................................................................9-3 9.3.1 Proposition 84..........................................................................9-3 9.3.1.1 Integrated Regional Water Management Planning.................................................................9-4 9.3.1.2 Department of Water Resources — Local Groundwater Assistance Program .........................9-5 9.3.1.3 Department of Public Health - Emergency and Urgent Water Protection.................................9-5 9.3.1.4 State Water Resources Control Board — Storm Water Grant Program..................................9-5 vi Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Table of Contents (cont'd) Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page vii 9.3.1.5 Local Levee Assistance Program ..........................9-5 9.3.1.6 Flood Protection Corridor Program ........................9-5 9.3.1.7 Flood Control Subventions Program ......................9-6 9.3.1.8 Urban Streams Restoration Program.....................9-6 9.3.2 Proposition 1 E.........................................................................9-6 9.3.2.1 Stormwater Flood Management Program..............9-6 9.3.3 Proposition 50..........................................................................9-6 9.3.3.1 Department of Water Resources — Water Use Efficiency Grants....................................................9-6 9.3.3.2 Department of Water Resources — Contaminant Removal...........................................9-7 9.3.3.3 Department of Water Resources — UV and Ozone Disinfection.................................................9-7 9.3.4 Other State Funding................................................................9-7 9.3.4.1 State Revolving Fund............................................9-7 9.3.4.2 State Water Resources Control Board — Federal 319 Program.............................................9-8 9.3.4.3 State Water Resources Control Board — Water Recycling Funding Program ........................9-8 9.3.4.4 State Water Resources Control Board — Supplemental Environmental Proi.ects...................9-8 9.3.4.5 State Water Resources Control Board — Cleanup and Abatement Account ..........................9-9 9.3.4.6 State Water Resources Control Board — Agricultural Drainage Loan Program ......................9-9 9.3.4.7 State Water Resources Control Board — Agricultural Drainage Management Loan Program.................................................................9-9 9.3.4.8 State Water Resources Control Board — Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund ............ 9-9 9.3.4.9 Department of Water Resources — New Local Water Supply Construction Loans .........................9-9 9.3.4.10 Department of Housing and Community Development — Community Development BlockGrant..........................................................9-10 9.3.4.11 California Energy Commission (CEC) — Energy Financing Program..................................9-10 9.4 Federal..............................................................................................9-10 9.4.1 Environmental Protection Agency, Source Reduction Assistance.............................................................................9-10 9.4.2 Environmental Protection Agency, Wetlands Program Development Grants..............................................................9-10 9.4.3 Environmental Protection Agency, Five Star Restoration Program.................................................................................9-11 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page vii Table of Contents (cont'd) 9.4.4 National Park Service, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program.................................................9-11 9.4.5 Natural Resources Conservation Service, Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Grant.................................9-11 9.4.6 US Department of Agriculture — Rural Development, Water and Waste Disposal Program.....................................9-12 9.4.7 US Bureau of Reclamation, WaterSMART Grant Programs...............................................................................9-12 9.4.8 US Fish and Wildlife Service, North American Wetlands Conservation Act Grant.........................................................9-12 9.4.9 Federal Legislation................................................................9-13 9.5 Funding Sources...............................................................................9-13 9.6 Selected Plan Project Cost Estimates...............................................9-13 9.7 Grant Funding Package....................................................................9-13 Section 10: Data Management, Technical Analyses, and Plan Performance............................................................................10-1 10.1 Data Management and Technical Analyses for Plan Preparation ..... 10-1 10.1.1 Existing Information and Reports..........................................10-2 10.1.1.1 Water Resource Management Reports ...............10-2 10.1.1.2 Facilities Plans and Master Plans ........................ 10-3 10.1.1.3 City, County, and Federal Land Use Plans .......... 10-4 10.1.1.4 Resource Conservation Plans.............................10-5 10.1.1.5 Water Quality Plans.............................................10-7 10.1.2 Data Needs............................................................................10-7 10.2 Data Collection and Sharing.............................................................10-8 10.2.1 Monitoring and Data Management......................................10-10 10.2.2 Monitoring 10-10 10.2.2.1 Groundwater Monitoring....................................10-10 10.2.2.2 Water Quality Monitoring...................................10-11 10.2.2.3 Surface Water Flow Monitoring ..........................10-12 10.2.3 Data Reporting....................................................................10-12 10.2.3.1 Data Reporting as Part of the City of Santa Clarita Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit.................................10-12 10.2.3.2 Data Reporting as Part of County of Los Angeles Municipal Storm Water Permit.............10-13 10.2.3.3 Data Reporting as Part of the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California..................................10-13 10.2.4 Plan Performance................................................................10-14 10.2.5 Evaluation of Plan Performance..........................................10-14 10.2.6 Plan Performance to Date...................................................10-16 viii Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Table of Contents (cont'd) Section 11: Coordination and Outreach ..................................................... 11-1 11.1 Coordination with Local Land Use Planning......................................11-1 11.1.1 Linkages Between the IRWMP and Local Planning Documents............................................................................11-1 11.1.2 Participation by Local Planning Entities.................................11-2 11.2 Coordination with State and Federal Agencies.................................11-2 11.2.1 Participation in IRWMP Development...................................11-2 11.2.2 Participation in IRWMP Implementation................................11-3 11.3 Disadvantaged Community Outreach...............................................11-4 11.3.1 Environmental Justice...........................................................11-4 11.3.2 Native American Tribes.........................................................11-4 11.3.3 Public Outreach.....................................................................11-5 11.3.4 Public Outreach to Diverse Groups.......................................11-6 Section12: References...............................................................................12-1 List of Tables 1.3-1 Overview of Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Development 1.3-2 Roles and Responsibilities of the Regional Water Management Group 1.3-3 Stakeholder Groups 2.5-1 Population Comparison 2.5-2 Demographics of Outlying Areas of Watershed 2.5-3 Job Sectors, Unemployment Rates, and Total Populations of Outlying Areas of Watershed 3.1-1 Current and Projected Water Supplies in the Region (AFY) 3.1-2 Availability of Groundwater for the Region 3.1-3 SWP Table A Supply Reliability for CLWA and AVEK (AF) 3.2-1 Water Quality Objectives for Waters in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed 3.2-2 2010 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies — Upper Santa Clara River Watershed 3.2-3 TMDL for Ammonia on the Upper Santa Clara River 3.2-4 TMDL for Nitrate Plus Nitrite on the Santa Clara River 3.2-5 Status of Impacted Wells 3.3-1 Summary of Projected Water Demands 4.2-1 Drainage Facilities for the Santa Clara River and Major Tributaries 5.1-1 Summary of Global Climate Models 5.1-2 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Overview Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page ix Table of Contents (cont'd) 5.1-3 Estimated SWP Exports By Water Year Type — Future Conditions With and Without 1.1-2 Climate Change 5.1-4 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 6.1-1 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Objectives, Definitions and Measurements 7.1-3 Upper Santa Clara River Region Resource Management Strategies and California 2.5-1 Water Plan Resource Management Strategies 7.3-1 Upper Santa Clara River Region Resource Management Strategies and California 3.3-1 Water Plan Resource Management Strategies 7.3-2 Allowed Uses of Recycled Water 7.3-3 Upper Santa Clara River Reaches 8.1-1 Project Ranking and Review Criteria 8.1-2 Ranked IRWM Plan Projects 8.1-3 Conceptual IRWM Plan Projects 8.3-1 Potential Benefits and Impacts from Plan Implementation 9.1-1 Possible Funding Opportunities 9.1-2 IRWMP Financing 10.1-1 Data Needs 10.2-1 Data Collection and Sharing 10.2-2 Process for Measuring Plan Performance 10.2-3 Plan Performance to Date List of Figures 1.1-1 Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Hydrologic Features 1.1-2 Upper Santa Clara River Watershed/IRWMP Region 2.1-1 Santa Clara River Reach Boundaries 2.2-1 Annual Precipitation 2.4-1 Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Significant Ecological Areas 2.5-1 Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area Census Tracts 2.7-1 Major Water Related Infrastructure in the Region 3.3-1 Historical Water Use 4.2-1 Major Drainage Infrastructure Upper Santa Clara River Watershed 4.3-1 Historical Runoff for the Santa Clara River 5.1-1 Global Climate Change Models Used in Assessment of Water Resources 5.1-2 Historical and Projected Annual Average Air Temperature for the USCR Region: Average of Four GCMS for Two Emissions Scenarios x Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Table of Contents (cont'd) 5.1-3 Projected Annual Precipitation for USCR Region: Average of Four GCMS for Two Emissions Scenarios 5.1-4 Projected Average Monthly Temperature for USCR Region: Average of Four GCMS for Two Emissions Scenarios 5.1-5 Projected Average Monthly Evapotranspiration for USCR Region: Average of Four GCMS for Two Emissions Scenarios 5.1-6 Estimated Average, Maximum, and Minimum Annual SWP Exports — Future Conditions With and Without Climate Change 5.1-7 Estimated SWP Table A Delivery By Water Year Type — Future Conditions With and Without Climate Change 5.1-8 Estimated SWP Table A Delivery During Dry Periods — Future Conditions With and Without Climate Change 5.1-9 Groundwater Basin Boundaries in the Region 5.1-10 Upper Santa Clara River Sub -Watershed Floodplain Areas 5.1-11 Historical and Projected Runoff for Santa Clarita Region 7.1-1 Relationship Between Objectives, Strategies, and Projects 7.2-1 Twenty Seven Resource Management Strategies of the California Water Plan List of Appendices A Public Involvement B Memorandum of Understanding C Water Related Policies D Plan Projects Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page xi Table of Contents (cont'd) This Page Intentionally Left Blank. xii Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 1: Introduction The Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) was completed and adopted by the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) in 2008. This Plan updates and expands upon the original Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP, documents progress towards meeting IRWMP objectives, and identifies ongoing regional needs and issues. This section provides an introduction to the Region covered by this IRWMP, the Stakeholders participating in development of this IRWMP, and the Stakeholder process utilized to develop this IRWMP. 1.1 Introduction to the Region The Santa Clara River Watershed (Watershed) consists of approximately 1,634 square miles and contains the upper reaches of the Santa Clara River. The River, which is the largest natural river remaining in Southern California, travels through two counties, Los Angeles and Ventura. The Region included in this IRWMP is located within the Upper portion of the Watershed (see Figures 1.1-1 and 1.1-2). The Region represents an area of approximately 654 square miles. The Upper Basin of the Santa Clara River, as defined for the purposes of this IRWMP, is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and southeast, the Santa Susana Mountains to the southwest, the Transverse Ranges to the northeast, the Sierra Pelona Mountains to the east, and the Ventura County Line to the west. The Region encompasses the City of Santa Clarita, the unincorporated communities of Castaic, Stevenson Ranch, West Ranch, Agua Dulce, and Acton, as well as portions of the Angeles National Forest. The Upper Santa Clara River Watershed is a logical region for Upper Santa Clara River integrated regional water management due to its history of cooperative water management, the topography and geography of the Region and the similarity of water issues facing agencies in the Region. The Region is a contiguous geographic area and has been defined in a manner to maximize opportunities for integration of water management activities. Because the Santa Clara River travels through two counties, Los Angeles and Ventura, ongoing coordination of efforts is needed in order to address issues of mutual concern and benefit, such as water quality improvement. Therefore, representatives of the Region work with the stakeholders and agencies in the lower reaches of the Watershed, which lie in Ventura County, to include them in the IRWMP planning process and to coordinate efforts to protect the Watershed. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-1 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. Page 1-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 r..� . • 'l'�rr' LOS ANGELES COUNTY TR-AP+"S°VtR;SE• RANGES qr 'i Y+ pr Lail I -� Fd '• x . _.r i . dry... F, �x r ' a "s . _. .� teol r_" , �{`�■ rip �— ,or t�A'�—.�: X„4� �%1 ;T► � i�< x� ,.'�'��7 rr4Ip,, phfIV X7'1"/ R�".l• 1}- '=tr".P.'r - "d Pow RANGJ'y�. r rte* r ell F � loor pr e !ItoW,_ e;. JIM Ap Fill 'rll-IIIII PIP F + r. an K4 a mill - �k ` j..+. - *..'�` ' IIIF, I ti At . Tow -1 leNi (k WRP lF r n• i 'tlIN rf r.f x f 1 -•. r Y -,y WOO AP Ill Pl r:. 0 = 11 Ar S I A •y r I 1 r F �. � N` T Utp Fr Fla ;. MOUNT 'Pillor F ri.il+%xr'" �fr,�y.. f,►rl:., s p �, f ��fT �f ... r..] all � lir Vol a. 0 ,y ! i..• F fr • = ' -..+VSs �4r i FIF ' i! ,e:s { 3+ a I .' NST A I N H 79 n fol `r( MPM GIS Services 1 0 1.25 2.5 5 Miles �i Santa Clara River '`.'�'w.w• Streams ..... LA Flood Control District Boundary fti �: CLWA San Districts selection Valencia Water Company LA County WaterWorks District 36 IJ LA County WaterWorks District 37 Newhall County Water District QUAIL LAKE 11.,H., », m ilk 10 A,YCq an h Jr .A a Y.Yc e� 1 . on. .� aI7 Santa Clarita Water Division ��� 1•• • row 1 City of Santa Clarita ' 1 National Forest Boundary al i4 1. Upper Santa Clara River Watershed •�••� Park •�•-••g EFig..i m 3 • • l 4—fdo •••• a lilt ELIZABET ww LAKE i n. _.n 4.enue ,,, F- cm.mwmy J Fm AMtltl Pte` ry —w-Aw,,w ^ H w �•. ,� P,b t antaster y_ A. H M1 Villa H rP,rl COX Coursa It Yj Y Y Y Y Y s ... . ..........• .....MMMMMMMMUMMMMMM Y Y Y ki%Y Y p Y Y Y - Y '�Y % p Y %. pY Y!�IOr _ (PT ti ty ik�r ', 4i ', ih' y+w 0yi Ly ,.'w tii 'L _ 1,10 ell, oil A .iIL Ira' Mill 6 S Van" CUFARA RIVER. \ /Jy an Maer' r r`ry iiiiiiiia�wt. Moto ME •' ...b ...>e ..� ...b.r ..� Loan. i 1.1.1 IRWMP Regional Boundary The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Region boundary, as defined, is an appropriate area for integrated regional water management. The Region has been working successfully since 2006 through IRWMP development and into Plan implementation. With the exception of the Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County (WCVC) IRWMP, which is immediately downstream of the Upper Santa Clara River subregion, no other region is within the watershed, allowing for inclusion into the Region all of the water resources, related infrastructure, key agencies, and stakeholder interests within the upper watershed. There is no overlap of this Region with any other integrated water management planning region, except for a small area in the northernmost portion of the Region that overlaps with the Kern IRWM region. Because the Santa Clara River travels through two counties, Los Angeles and Ventura, ongoing coordination of efforts is needed to address issues of mutual concern and benefit, such as water quality improvement. Though there has been, and there continues to be coordination between the WCVC IRWMP and the Upper Santa Clara IRWMP regions, it has been mutually agreed that the two regions would remain separate for the reasons outlined below. The character of the Santa Clara River is different in the two counties; the upper areas within Los Angeles County have more ephemeral flows and there is separation near the county line by a "dry gap' which tends to isolate the low -flow surface water and geology which separates groundwater basins between the regions. The Ventura County side is characterized by more agricultural land use and perennial flows. In addition, the two regions have the following characteristics which lend themselves to continued separate regional efforts with cooperative co -existence: The two regions are each functionally effective and successful at their current scales/sizes and with their respective organizations and stakeholder mixes. 2. The political boundary which separates the two regions also functions as the boundary between agencies with duties that impact water resources, including land use planning, flood control, water supply, etc. Though there is agreement to remain separate entities, continued cooperation between the regions is expected to lead to greater mutual effort in IRWMP planning. 1.2 Purpose of the Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan The purpose of this IRWMP is to integrate planning and implementation efforts and facilitate regional cooperation with the goals of reducing potable water demands, increasing water supply, improving water quality, promoting resource stewardship over the long term, reducing negative effects from flooding and hydromodification, and adapting to and mitigating climate change. The intention of this IRWMP is not to duplicate existing and ongoing plans, but to better integrate these efforts and utilize the results and findings of existing plans to put forward the projects needed to address local objectives. This IRWMP effort is funded entirely by local participating agencies and state grant funding. A number of individuals have contributed to the development of this IRWMP, including Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-7 representatives of State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, local agencies, city and county staff, and consultants. This IRWMP is a comprehensive plan that primarily addresses region -wide water management and related issues. This IRWMP complies with the State Guidelines for an IRWMP and provides for integration of project and program implementation strategies which best address the needs and objectives of the Region. This IRWMP complies with Proposition 84, and IRWMP principles and criteria for integrated water management planning as set forth in the guidelines. In addition, development of this IRWMP includes the following: An inclusive and participatory public involvement process to ensure meaningful input (Section 1 and Appendix A) • Appropriate level of scientific watershed assessment information (Sections 2 through 5) Integration and coordination of planning with other agencies and entities (Sections 1 and 11) • Identification of multiple issues and objectives and potential solutions (Sections 2 through 6) A process for ongoing decision-making (Section 1) • Phased implementation and staging of resources (Section 8) • Ongoing monitoring of project and plan implementation (Section 10) A means for adaptive planning and management (Section 8) A long-term perspective This IRWMP provides integration of projects that protect the natural resources of the Region and identifies additional projects that are critical to achieving Regional objectives. PURPOSE ANoGOALSOFTHIS IRWMP: • Integrate water and watershed -related planning 1.3 Development of the efforts IRWMP • Facilitate regional cooperation • Reduce potable water demand The RWMG oversees the development of this . Increase water supply IRWMP, but this IRWMP reflects the input and effort of a broad stakeholder group. A broad • Improve water quality stakeholder outreach process was crucial to • Promote resource stewardship ensure that this IRWMP identifies local issues, . Improve flood management reflects local needs, promotes the formation of 0 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to partnerships, and encourages coordination with climate change State and Federal agencies. Residents of the Region are facing rapidly changing conditions, mainly related to urban growth, that create challenges in water resources management and the stewardship of environmental resources. Agencies and planning jurisdictions must work closely Page 1-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 together in order to assure the delivery of clean, reliable water supplies while maintaining the Region's quality of life and environmental values. The stakeholder group is an integral group of participants in the IRWMP process, consisting of members of the RWMG as well as an extensive mix of many other agencies and organizations with an interest in improving water supply, water quality, flood management, and ecosystems in the Region. Specific ongoing efforts, including direct emails, mailings, face to face interaction, event participation, classroom instruction, flyers, notices, surveys, and presentations have been performed to get environmental groups, conservancy groups, well owner groups, disadvantaged communities (DACs), water suppliers, municipalities, the local sanitation and flood control districts, American Indian Tribes, developers, landowners, adjacent IRWMP areas, State agencies, elected representatives, and others to take part in the IRWMP (participating Stakeholders are listed below in Section 1.3.2). With the involvement of the stakeholders, including the collaborative review of draft document materials, the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP has been able to incorporate a broad range of inputs and ideas. Every stakeholder was, and continues to be, able to add projects to the list of candidate projects for implementation of the IRWMP. The greatest advantage of this broad stakeholder effort has been the conversations between stakeholders about partnering on proposed projects. This has created the opportunity for not only pooling resources, but also the generation of regional solutions to issues that the entire IRWMP area is trying to address. The IRWMP process has been a great addition to the collaborative efforts already occurring in this region and has created a forum for establishing mutually beneficial partnerships to further these efforts. Table 1.3-1 provides an overview of the IRWMP development and implementation Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-9 TABLE 1.3-1 OVERVIEW OF UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER IRWMP DEVELOPMENT Activity Regional Water Management Group Stakeholders • Monitors IRWMP requirements/progress toward All Stakeholders including the RWMG members: goals 0 Select Plan objectives • Makes administrative decisions (managing grant • Select applicable resource management strategies applications, consultant selection) a Develop project review criteria Plan Participation Stakeholder outreach • Submit candidate projects for consideration • Communication with DWR 0 Review candidate projects and identify opportunities for • Communication and coordination with neighboring integration IRWMPs 0 Review and provide input on all chapters of the IRWMP • Acts as grantee for IRWMP grants • Coordination and communication with local agencies Plan Adoption Adopt plan through Board/Council resolution Stakeholders that are not members of the RWMG submit letters of support for the completed IRWMP Updating and The RWMG will re -adopt the IRWMP at a minimum every All Stakeholders including the RWMG members: Amending the Plan five years, or within one year of the following: a Update Plan objectives (1) significantly changed conditions impacting objectives, • Update applicable resource management strategies (2) achievement of a regional objective requiring • Update project review criteria development of an additional regional objective, or • Submit new candidate projects for consideration (3) need to set a new regional objective • Review candidate projects and identify opportunities for integration • Review and provide input on all chapters of the updated IRWMP Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 1-10 TABLE 1.3-1 (cont.) Activity Regional Water Management Group Stakeholders Major communication for the IRWMP occurs through: • Established email list maintained by RWMG. All meeting agendas are sent out via this email list. The list is also used to provide information on local, state, and federal funding opportunities; other public outreach activities; opportunities to provide input on topics of general interest (e.g., public meetings of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, meetings of/with neighboring IRWMPs). • IRWMP website: www.scrwaterplan.org • Newspaper notices: prior to kickoff of the IRWMP Update, a notice of intention to prepare the IRWMP was published in local newspapers. Prior to adoption of the IRWMP Update, a notice of intention was published in local newspapers. • Regular Stakeholder Meetings. Stakeholder meetings were held every other month during the development of this Communication IRWMP Update. All Stakeholders were asked to introduce themselves at each meeting. The purpose of each Stakeholder meeting was to take input on IRWMP topics. Each Stakeholder meeting provided opportunities for any stakeholder or the general public to provide input to the Plan. • Regular RWMG Meetings. RWMG meetings were held every other month during the IRWMP Update. The primary purpose of the RWMG meetings was to develop the agenda and meeting materials for the broader Stakeholder meetings. • Regular Salt/Nutrient Management Plan Task Force Meetings. Meetings were held to keep tasks on track and move forward on the completion of the Salt/Nutrient Management Plan. Focused discussions were held on progress made, data needs, and other topics such as data management and sharing. • Regular communication with neighboring IRWMP regions. Inclusion of neighbor IRWMP leadership in meeting notices and hearing notices. Decision Making Both the original 2008 IRWMP and the 2014 Update were developed through a collaborative, consensus -based process. However, if necessary, future decisions will be made through a vote of the overall stakeholder group. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 1-11 1.3.1 Regional Water Management Group The RWMG, the governing body and group responsible for development of the Plan, was initially established by a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in May 2007 between seven parties, in addition to one ex -officio member. A new MOU was entered into in 2011 by all eight parties, now all official members, to re-establish the governance structure for the IRWMP Update. The 2011 MOU prescribes the roles and responsibilities of the RWMG for the IRWMP Update including complying with the IRWMP sections of the Water Code (the 2011 MOU is included in Appendix B). The members of the RWMG that are signatories to the MOU are listed in Table 1.3-2 below. Stakeholder Meeting The RWMG members have contributed funding, in various amounts as described in the MOU, to retain a consultant to prepare and update the IRWMP for the Upper Santa Clara River, including developing hand out materials for discussion in Stakeholder meetings, in cooperation with RWMG members. The RWMG governance structure and approach has been effective in creating and updating the IRWMP and has ensured collaborative IRWMP efforts by encouraging Stakeholder involvement beyond the MOU signatories, through frequently scheduled Stakeholder meetings. The formation of the RWMG has strengthened the ability of the Region to address common needs and challenges. These participants' roles and responsibilities for managing water/natural resources and land use within the Region are summarized in Table 1.3-2. The Upper Santa Clara River RWMG includes the participation of at least three public agencies, two of which have statutory authority over water management. The RWMG will incorporate new members into the governance structure by expanding outreach efforts to invite new groups of stakeholders, as required in the California Water Code, and requesting their attendance/input at stakeholder meetings. Additional parties may enter into the MOU by amendment and approval of all RWMG members. As the stakeholder process continues and the project database is populated with more projects that will help achieve the regional goals and objectives, if deficiencies in RWMG expertise or water management representation are discovered, entities that can provide the desired expertise or representation will be sought out and invited to participate. Researching which entity might provide the missing expertise/representation could include seeking references from existing stakeholders or other Regions, or seeking DWR advice as to how other Regions have filled any similar voids. Page 1-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 1.3-2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT GROUP City of Santa Clarita Municipal government that provides open space and land use planning as well as stormwater management, water conservation efforts on City -owned properties, and creek restoration within City borders. Los Angeles County Flood Provides flood management services within the District's Control District (LACFCD) boundaries Newhall County Water District Provides groundwater and imported water to portions of the (NCWD) City of Santa Clarita and unincorporated communities in Los Angeles County Kivers ana mountains Acquires parKs ana open space, restores natural parKs ana Conservancy (RMC) open space, provides watershed improvements, and provides low impact recreation improvements within the conservancy area (1,600 square miles in Eastern Los Angeles County and Western Orange County) Santa Clarita Water Division Provides groundwater and imported water to portions of the of CLWA (SCWD) City of Santa Clarita and unincorporated communities in Los Sanitation District of Los high-quality recycled water for the City of Santa Clarita and Angeles County (SCVSD) unincorporated communities in Los Angeles County Valencia Water Company Provides groundwater, imported water, and recycled water (VWC) to portions of the City of Santa Clarita and unincorporated communities in Los Angeles County 1.3.1.1 RWMG Functions While roles and responsibilities are prescribed in the MOU, the general RWMG structure and member functions that shall be performed for effective IRWMP Planning consist of the following: Total membership of the RWMG may be up to 11 entities and comprised of agencies/organizations whose primary mission is consistent with one or more of the IRWMP main objectives. 2. The RWMG will include at least three agencies, two of which have statutory authority over water resources. 3. RWMG membership within each of the main Regional objectives will be re-evaluated every three years to verify that an adequate number of agencies/groups whose primary duty is related to each particular objective are represented on the RWMG. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-13 4. The RWMG will strive to ensure balanced representation across the IRWMP objectives, as well as geographic diversity across the Region. 5. RWMG members will be recommended by the Stakeholder group to achieve the balance described above. 6. The RWMG should annually select or reaffirm a Chair and a Vice -Chair to conduct meetings. 7. In the event a clear consensus cannot be reached each RWMG member will have a single vote at RWMG meetings. 8. RWMG members must have authority to enter into a legal agreement to form a RWMG (e.g., MOU, joint powers authority, or other legal document) and will seek legal counsel to prepare a formalized governance document as needed to provide for the ongoing IRWMP's governance and implementation of the regional objectives. 9. Members of the RWMG are expected to contribute some level of financial or in-kind services towards IRWMP preparation/update and need to allow for considerable staff time during normal working hours to work on plan preparation and to attend meetings. Exceptions may be made on a case-by-case basis. 10. RWMG members shall commit to all of the responsibilities and activities of a Stakeholder. 11. RWMG will review and comment on all versions of the IRWMP and any grant application(s) and will decide on the disposition of conflicting comments. 12. RWMG will help to determine project priorities and maintain prioritized project lists. 13. RWMG will provide oversight to the IRWMP and resolve significant issues among the Stakeholder group. 14. RWMG will direct the Chair to call Stakeholder meetings as needed and will consult on a periodic or as needed basis with the Stakeholder group. 15. Provide outreach to local entities and communities to ensure adequate input from all Stakeholders. 16. RWMG will hire consultant(s) as needed (e.g., to update IRWMP, prepare grant application, aid in performing Grantee responsibilities, provide Stakeholder facilitation services, etc.). 17. RWMG will monitor IRWMP progress toward achieving objectives and decide whether significant changes in conditions warrant an update and subsequent re -adoption of the IRWMP. 18. RWMG will re -adopt the IRWMP a minimum of every five years, or within one year of one or more of the following conditions: (1) significantly changed conditions impacting Page 1-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 objectives, (2) achievement of a regional objective requiring development of an additional regional objective, or (3) need to set a new regional objective. 19. RWMG will identify and pursue funding opportunities. 20. RWMG will select a Grantee from within the RWMG members. 21. Based on results of the project prioritization process and Stakeholder input, RWMG will make a final decision on the project suite to be submitted for funding to any funding agencies. 22. RWMG will represent the Region's needs to the State including sustaining an open dialogue with the funding agency (State Department of Water Resources) regarding progress on the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP implementation and continuing to provide feedback on project progress with cooperation from the Local Project Sponsors. 1.3.1.2 RWMG Chair Roles and Responsibilities Call and attend RWMG, RWMG subcommittee, and Stakeholder meetings, and prepare and distribute agendas. 2. Act as primary liaison between Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Region, RWMG, Stakeholders, other IRWMP Regions, and funding agencies. 3. Be selected or reaffirmed annually by RWMG. 1.3.1.3 RWMG Vice -Chair Roles and Responsibilities 1. Assume role of Chair in the absence of the Chair. 2. Assist Chair when needed. 1.3.1.4 Grantee Roles and Responsibilities 1. Apply for grant funding on behalf of the IRWMP Region. 2. Provide administration of any grant funds to help implement the IRWMP. 3. Work with Local Project Sponsors to solicit feedback on the grant administration process and help to resolve any disputes if needed. 4. Ensure effective communication between the funding agency and the Local Project Sponsors. 5. Maintain an open dialogue with the funding agency regarding progress on the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP implementation and continue to provide feedback on project progress with cooperation from the Local Project Sponsors included in the successful grant application. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-15 1.3.1.5 Subcommittees Subcommittees that focus activities within the RWMG to support plan development and implementation are created on an as needed basis. There have been three subcommittees of the RWMG formed to date. The Governance Subcommittee, comprised of Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Castaic Lake Water Agency, Santa Clarita Water Division, and the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District, was tasked with defining and recommending a governance structure to succeed the governance structure formalized in the 2007 MOU. The Disadvantaged Community Subcommittee, comprised of Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, City of Santa Clarita, and the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy, is an ongoing committee tasked with identifying, seeking input from, and communicating with disadvantaged communities within the IRWMP Region. The Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Task Force is comprised of the RWMG and any interested Stakeholders. The Salt and Nutrient Management Task Force has met as needed to provide input into preparation of the Salt and Nutrient Management Plan and to provide review of work products as they are developed (water balance, water quality projections, monitoring plan). The activities of subcommittees are reported at each stakeholder meeting. 1.3.1.6 Financing RWMG and IRWMP Activities One expectation of becoming a RWMG member in the past has been an ability to contribute some level of financial or in-kind services towards IRWMP preparation/updates, and other administrative activities undertaken by the RWMG (holding stakeholder meetings, developing the IRWMP, etc.). The expectation is not meant to exclude any entity from having a "vote" if the entity does not have an ability to pay. On the contrary, requiring the RWMG members to bear the burden of the cost of the IRWMP program is intended to benefit all stakeholders by allowing everyone's participation and voting at stakeholder meetings without regard to their ability to contribute financially, while still guaranteeing enough funding to implement the IRWMP. One example of the necessity to make an exception to the expectation of funding contributions is the membership by the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC). The budget problems facing the State of California have severely impacted RMC's ability to attend meetings due to staffing layoffs. Every effort has been made to continue to inform and seek input from the RMC based on their importance to the Region. Rather than sharing the costs of the IRWMP update, as is done across the other seven RWMG members, RMC will provide grant funds, as specified in the MOU, if IRWMP update expenses are greater than anticipated. To date, the RWMG has not sought funding from general stakeholders, but based on economic realities, the long term funding strategy for this Region may include requesting contributions from the stakeholders that are not RWMG members. 1.3.2 Stakeholders The Stakeholder group has met periodically since February 2007 to discuss issues facing the Region. The purpose of the group is to identify regional objectives and strategies to meet the identified objectives, as well as to provide advice and feedback to assist with the development and update of the IRWMP, including developing projects to implement the IRWMP. Stakeholders were identified during preparation of the 2008 IRWMP and revisited during the 2014 IRWMP Update through their involvement or interest in water, environment, and similar projects in the past. Brainstorming sessions were used to identify potential stakeholders. These Page 1-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 entities were sent a letter asking for participation in the IRWMP process. These groups in turn were asked to identify other potentially interested groups. By this process, a varied and broad group was invited to become stakeholders, and this group included entities, like well owners, that were not necessarily involved with any past efforts. Stakeholders have continued to hold regular meetings throughout the update of the IRWMP to provide an opportunity for any interested party to participate in plan development and implementation. Stakeholder meetings are open to the public and all other interested parties. Notifications via email and the website have been used to keep the Stakeholder group informed of meetings and updates. �s �e ei5aame1ar,RvgPlae a- ® 6b-aPage .oTell, - EVENTS Integrated Regional Water Management Plan May 15 Jtl EtakeholOers Idea thee Cam River Santa CaRiver Watershed are colooneorIngto Develop alntegrateO Region al Water stakeholder ManagementPWnthat Tocuses on water rewurce ManagementwN!le creating a pNttorm for future Tund!ng and we Meeting want your input! Meeting SAHTA CLAM RIVER WATERSHED Au9uW ifi 5N eting tier ^� Meeting e0 I el 11 4 September 27 bib Stakeholder Meeting October 19 Due Date November 13 1m Stakeholder ," • Meeting February is Legend B[M1 Stakeholder -'• Meeting WATERSHED May1 :,-. CIonw, Vice ce Draft IRWMP iedvR recr Peblic -= Done The IRWMP website is an important tool for facilitating communication. 1.3.2.1 Participating Stakeholders q100% The following subsection lists all of the Stakeholders grouped into several categories and describes their specific roles in the planning process. The broad array of participants includes the agencies that comprise the RWMG, as well as an extensive mix of town councils, regulatory, environmental, agricultural, and land use planning entities that represent all areas of the Region. A brief discussion of coordination efforts with local planning, State, and Federal agencies is also provided where appropriate. Table 1.3-3 provides a list of the stakeholders and their mission statements. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-17 TABLE 1.3-3 STAKEHOLDER GROUPS Stakeholder Mission Statement Municipal and County Government Agencies City of Santa Clarita To deliver the best and most cost-efficient municipal service to the citizens and City Council of Santa Clarita. County of Ventura To provide public infrastructure, services, and support so that all residents have the opportunity to achieve a high quality of life and enjoy the benefits of a healthy economy. Los Angeles County To provide public infrastructure and municipal services to protect Department of Public and enrich the daily lives of over ten million people in Los Works (LACDPW) Angeles County. Los Angeles County To support the Board of Supervisors in serving the people of Los Supervisor's Office Angeles County. Los Angeles County To improve the quality of life through innovative and resourceful Department of physical and environmental planning, balancing individual rights Regional Planning and community needs. Water SuppliersMastewater Management/Special Districts CLWA A public agency providing reliable, quality water at a reasonable cost to the Santa Clarita Valley. LACFCD To provide for the control and conservation of the flood, storm and other waste waters of the Flood Control District. SCWD A public agency providing reliable, quality water at a reasonable cost to the Santa Clarita Valley. SCVSD To provide environmentally sound, cost-effective wastewater management, and in the process, convert wastewater into recycled water, a valuable water resource for the Santa Clarita Valley. NCWD To provide quality water service at a reasonable cost by practicing careful stewardship of natural resources, utilizing innovative measures, and providing a quality working environment. VWC To deliver a dependable supply of safe reliable water to existing and future customers at a reasonable cost. Business Organizations Building Industry To promote and protect the industry to ensure our members' Association (BIA) success in providing homes for all Southern Californians. Newhall Land and To provide a better quality of life for those who live and work in Farming Company the master planned communities of Valencia and Newhall Ranch. Page 1-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Stakeholder Mission Statement Atkins Environmental To be a resource for environmental, health & safety issues. To and Conservation provide sparkling service with professionalism, honesty, integrity, Authority trust, and respect. To seek to balance the demand for resources with the needs of the community. Recreational and Open Space Entities Rivers and Mountains To preserve open space and habitat in order to provide for low - Conservancy impact recreation and educational uses, wildlife habitat values and for their use and enjoyment by the public. restoration and protection, and watershed improvements within Improve mobility across California. our jurisdiction. Nature Conservancy To preserve the plants, animals, and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and To manage the water resources of California in cooperation with waters they need to survive. Los Angeles County To provide the residents and visitors of Los Angeles County with Department of Parks quality recreational opportunities that promote a healthy lifestyle and Recreation and strengthen the community through diverse physical, Water Quality Control educational, and cultural programming, and to enhance the Board (RWQCB) community environment by acquiring, developing, and Natural Resources maintaining County parks, gardens, golf courses, trails, and open Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-19 space areas. Mountains Recreation To acquire, develop, and conserve additional park and open and Conservation space lands with special emphasis on recreation and Authority conservation projects, the protection and conservation of watersheds, and the development of river parkways. Regulatory and Resource Agencies- State and Federal California Department of To manage California's diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, Fish and Wildlife and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological (CDFW) values and for their use and enjoyment by the public. California Department of Improve mobility across California. Transportation (Caltrans) California Department of To manage the water resources of California in cooperation with Water Resources other agencies, to benefit the State's people, and to protect, (DWR) restore, and enhance the natural and human environments. Los Angeles Regional To preserve and enhance the quality of California's water Water Quality Control resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Board (RWQCB) Natural Resources "Helping People Help the Land," by providing products and Conservation Service services that enable people to be good stewards of the Nation's (NRCS) soil, water, and related natural resources on non -Federal lands. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-19 Stakeholder Mission Statement US Army Corps of To provide quality, responsive engineering services to the nation Engineers (US ACE) including: planning, designing, building, and operating water resources and other civil works projects (Navigation, Flood Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, etc.); designing and managing the construction of military facilities for the Army and Air Force (Military Construction); providing design and construction management support for other Defense and federal agencies (Support for Others). US Fish and Wildlife To work with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, Service (US FWS) wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. US Forest Service- To sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's Angeles National forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future Forest generations. Non-Profft Organizations and Other Stakeholders Acton Town Council To provide a stronger local voice in community development, and to try to ensure the continuation of Acton's country lifestyle. Association of Water To develop and encourage cooperation among entities for the Agencies of Ventura development, protection, conservation and improvement of the County total water resources for Ventura County. Agua Dulce/Acton To be a resource for existing, new, and future residents of the Country Journal Agua Dulce/Acton community. Agua Dulce Town To serve as a common meeting place for the free expression of Council all views and for the coming together of diverse opinions into a consensus; to discuss issues concerning Agua Dulce, to invite participation by the public, civic, and private organizations; to serve as Agua Dulce's representatives and to speak on behalf of the community; to review public and private proposals that may affect the community; to neither support nor oppose any political party or candidate. Castaic Area Town To act as an advisory board presenting community points of view Council to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and various County departments such as Regional Planning, Public Works, and Parks & Recreation. Santa Clarita To promote, protect, and preserve the environment, ecology, and Organization for quality of life in the Santa Clarita Valley. Planning the Environment Page 1-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Stakeholder Mission Statement Santa Clarita Valley Well Preserve our present and future water supply by working Owners Association together to promote sustainable water consumption by all stakeholders in the aquifer's resource; protect our rights as private well owners and our collective parity as stakeholders in the management of the areas' subterranean water resources; educate our members in matters relative to water rights, quality, resources, historical data and any other information relevant to owning and maintaining a private water well system; advocate on behalf of the rights of private well owners collectively and individually. University of California The welfare, development, and protection of California Cooperative Extension agriculture, natural resources, and people. Ventura County To provide assistance to help both rural and urban communities Resource to conserve, protect, and restore natural resources. Conservation District (VCRCD) Santa Clara River Non-profit land trust and wildlife conservation organization, Watershed formed to advocate for and acquire undeveloped land in the Conservancy Santa Clara River watershed. 1.3.2.1.1 Municipal and County Government Agencies Municipal and county government agencies include local jurisdictions and land use planning agencies that have been involved in the identification of issues, formation of objectives, and development of projects to implement this IRWMP. Their participation provides a link between local planning agencies and this IRWMP by offering discussion in meetings, providing accurate, consistent land use planning information, and incorporating local planning documents and goals into the project objectives. The City of Santa Clarita, the Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning, the County of Ventura, LACDPW, and the Los Angeles County Supervisor's Office are examples of land use agencies and entities participating in the meetings. 1.3.2.1.2 Water Suppliers/Wastewater Management/Special Districts The water suppliers, wastewater management agencies, and special districts of the Region have been involved in the development and implementation of the objectives and projects for this IRWMP. Their participation has focused particularly on the water supply issues pertaining to the Region. These agencies include CLWA, LACFCD, SCWD, SCVSD, NCWD and VWC. Additionally, the Sierra Pelona Mutual Water Company and the Lake Elizabeth Mutual Water Company have been invited to participate in the process. 1.3.2.1.3 Business Organizations The Building Industry Association's (BIA) interest is in land -use planning and growth management within the Region. The building industry entities involved include the Greater Los Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-21 Angeles/Ventura Chapter of the BIA. Agricultural and farm interests for the Region have been represented by the Newhall Land and Farming Company. Their role is to ensure that agricultural and farm interests are incorporated in this IRWMP. Input was also solicited from the broader business community at the start of the Stakeholder process. 1.3.2.1.4 Recreational and Open Space Entities The role and responsibility of the recreational and open space entities is to ensure that issues and goals related to conservation and protection of the natural resources and habitat within the Region are incorporated in this IRWMP. Those involved include the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy and the Nature Conservancy. Input was also solicited from the Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation, the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority, and City of Santa Clarita's Open Space Preservation District. 1.3.2.1.5 Regulatory and Resource Agencies - State and Federal Several State and Federal regulatory agencies have been involved in the identification of issues, formation of objectives, and development of projects for this IRWMP. Coordination with these regulatory agencies is essential to the development and implementation of all recommended projects due to the need for regulatory and environmental approval prior to implementation. Their roles and responsibilities are to ensure that regulatory compliance standards and goals are incorporated in this IRWMP. The agencies include: CDFW, Caltrans, DWR, Los Angeles RWQCB, NRCS, US ACE, US FWS, and US Forest Service - Angeles National Forest. 1.3.2.1.6 Other Stakeholders/Non-Profit Organizations Other Stakeholders involved in the development and implementation of the objectives for this IRWMP include the following: Agua Dulce/Acton Country Journal, Agua Dulce Town Council, Atkins Environmental, Castaic Area Town Council, Foothills Associates, Santa Clara River Watershed Conservancy, Santa Clarita Organization for Planning for the Environment, Santa Clarita Valley Well Owners Association, University of California Cooperative Extension, Town Councils of Acton and West Ranch, and the VCRCD. 1.3.2.1.7 Stakeholder Group Roles and Responsibilities The following is a list of roles and responsibilities for the Stakeholder group. 1. Attend and participate in stakeholder meetings. 2. Be an agency/organization with an interest in a watershed related issue. 3. Offer suggestions for meeting IRWMP objectives. 4. Propose and/or sponsor projects. 5. Provide input on the project prioritization framework development. Page 1-22 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 6. Make recommendations regarding project ranking within the process outlined in the project prioritization framework. 7. Review and comment on all versions of the IRWMP. 8. Represent each agency/organization having a single vote at a Stakeholder meeting. 9. Be able to show support for the IRWMP (e.g., adopt it [if the Stakeholder meets the requirements for adoption as set forth in the funding guidelines], sign a resolution in support of it, or submit a letter of support to the RWMG for inclusion in the adopted IRWMP). 1.3.2.2 Ground Rules and Operating Procedures In order to guarantee a fruitful process and foster full participation, Stakeholder meetings are governed by a set of agreed-upon "ground rules' and 'operating procedures' as listed below. 1.3.2.2.1 Ground Rules for Participation 1. Cooperate with the process, including the scope and intent of our planning effort together and specific agenda topics. 2. Work toward shared goals, proposing strategies that relate to the goals and that may be acceptable to all stakeholders. 3. Base your opinions, ideas and comments on facts and experience rather than on perception. 4. Participate fully in the group discussion. 5. Keep your comments brief and constructive. 6. Focus on issues instead of people or personalities. 7. Reference the past if needed, but look to the future. 8. Be respectful of differing perspectives and opinions. 9. Stay with the topic at hand or hold your comment and yield to someone who has a comment on the topic at hand. 10. Be open to new ideas and be expansive in your thinking. 1.3.2.2.2 Operating Procedures 1. Stakeholders will abide by the agreed upon participation ground rules and operating procedures during this process. 2. We will strive for mutual agreement but note when we have a minority opinion. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-23 3. Stakeholders are encouraged to participate consistently and attend all meetings. If unable to attend, a Stakeholder may send an alternate to ensure the organization's consistent participation. 4. Stakeholders who are participating based on their organizational affiliation represent the organization; their opinions should be consistent with and as authorized by the organization. As described in the following sections, participants in the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP have been able to address, discuss and recommend regional objectives and strategies and propose projects to meet those objectives. 1.3.3 Relationship with Neighboring IRWMPs The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Region is adjacent to four planning regions that are currently represented by IRWMPs. These consist of the Antelope Valley IRWMP in the North/South Lahontan-Funding Region, the Kern County area in the Tulare/Kern-Funding Region, the Greater Los Angeles County Region IRWMP in the Los Angeles -Funding Region; and as described earlier, the WCVC IRWMP, also within the Los Angeles -Funding Region. These four plan areas surround the Region (however none overlap with the Upper Santa Clara IRWMP Region except for a minor portion of the Kern IRWMP). Therefore, the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP plays an integral role in completing watershed analyses for the Los Angeles -Funding Region and providing an important link to the neighboring North/South Lahontan and Tulare/Kern-Funding regions. The collective efforts of these interconnected IRWMPs will not only benefit their respective regions, but each other and the watersheds of Southern California as a whole. 1.3.3.1 The WCVC IRWMP Region The WCVC and Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP regions have undertaken separate, but coordinated, planning efforts since 2006. The two regions are currently cooperating on a number of programs and working together through their respective stakeholder processes, planning efforts, projects, and programs to ensure that the entire Santa Clara River watershed is protected and managed appropriately, despite the division of the county boundary. Specific collaborations include: 1. Joint Stakeholder Meetings — To coordinate and share plan and project implementation, the Upper Santa Clara River and WCVC IRWMP regions regularly hold joint stakeholder meetings, alternating meeting locations in both Ventura and Los Angeles counties. 2. Climate Change Workshop — A common stakeholder outreach and input meeting was held for the Upper Santa Clara IRWMP, WCVC, and the Santa Barbara Countywide IRWMP. The workshop educated stakeholders on climate change and climate change vulnerabilities and acted as a forum to identify opportunities to share data. 3. Watershed U — Collaboration throughout the Santa Clara River Watershed led by U.C. Cooperative Extension with participation in both counties. Page 1-24 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 4. Memorandum of Understanding between United Water Conservation District and water agencies in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed regarding groundwater modeling, water rights, quality and quantity. 5. Upper and Lower Santa Clara River Conservation Plans prepared by the Nature Conservancy with participation in both counties. 6. Natural Flood Plain Management efforts, including land acquisition for easements in the flood plain, led by the Nature Conservancy with participation in both counties. 7. Santa Clara River Parkway Project — Led by California Coastal Conservancy with participation in both counties. 8. Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan —Joint planning effort with entities in both counties and the Army Corp of Engineers. 9. Army Corps Feasibility Study — A geomorphology assessment that included a joint effort with both counties and the Army Corps of Engineers. 10. Land use planning — Ongoing discussions between Ventura and Los Angeles counties' land use planning agencies regarding land development projects in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. 11. Ongoing efforts to improve habitat and provide stewardship for resources in the entire watershed. Some local environmental groups cover the entire watershed. 12. Ongoing coordination between Los Angeles and Ventura Counties regarding flood control projects. Over the past several years multiple alternatives for compliance with the chloride TMDL have been evaluated by all Stakeholders, including members of the USCR and WCVC Regions. On October 28, 2013, the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District certified the Final Chloride Compliance Facilities Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report and approved a project consisting of ultraviolet disinfection, advanced treatment using reverse osmosis, and deep well injection for brine disposal, that complies with the final wasteload allocations of the chloride TMDL. 1.3.3.2 Kern IRWMP At the northernmost portion the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP shares a very small piece of boundary with the Kern IRWMP. The consultant team for the Kern Region, which also prepared the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP, has consulted with the RWMG for the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP regarding this small shared area, and has not identified issues needing further coordination between the two planning regions. 1.3.3.3 Antelope Valley IRWMP To the northeast, the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP shares a boundary with the Antelope Valley IRWMP. Common stakeholders of the two IRMWP regions include the Waterworks Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 1-25 Districts of Los Angeles County and Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. Frequent communication occurs also with staff from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts working on the neighboring IRWMPs. Though there is some overlap in water resource agency jurisdiction, the areas are separated by a significant watershed boundary and the Antelope Valley IRWMP region is outside of the Santa Clara River watershed. 1.3.3.4 Greater Los Angeles County IRWMP The Greater Los Angeles County IRWMP resides to the south of the Upper Santa Clara IRWMP. There is some overlap in water resource agency jurisdiction (e.g., Los Angeles Department of Public Works); however, these two IRWMPs do not have common local water resources. The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP interacts with the Greater Los Angeles Region as part of the Roundtable of Regions. Additionally, the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP has actively participated with both WCVC and the Greater Los Angeles regions in efforts to develop a funding formula for the Los Angeles -Funding Region. 1.3.4 Void or Excluded Areas The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP region does not have any voids or excluded areas immediately outside or within its boundaries with the exception of a small area of Arroyo Simi in the western portion of Los Angeles County within the watershed of Calleguas Creek. This area lies outside of the IRWMP management at this time. If required to belong in an IRWMP region, either WCVC or the Greater Los Angeles areas would be appropriate since the Arroyo Simi is within a WCVC watershed and also within the same political boundary (City of Los Angeles) as the Greater Los Angeles IRWMP region. Page 1-26 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 2: Region Description 2.1 Introduction and Overview This section discusses why preparation of an IRWMP for this Region is appropriate, describes the physical and environmental characteristics of the Region, describes social and demographic characteristics of the Region, and provides an overview of the Region's water system. The major water bodies in the Region include the Santa Clara River and its tributaries. The principal tributaries are Castaic Creek, San Francisquito Creek, Bouquet Creek, Mint Canyon and the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. Upper tributaries also contribute to the riparian network, including, but not limited to Gorman Creek and Amargosa Creek. Additionally, the Santa Clara River receives tertiary -treated recycled water discharged from the Saugus and Valencia water reclamation plants, which are operated by the SCVSD. The main channel of the Santa Clara River is the last major undammed river system in Southern California, a situation that makes its preservation extremely important to the stakeholders. Figures 1.1-1 and 1.1-2 map the Region boundaries and the key hydrologic features. As shown in Figure 2.1-1, the Santa Clara River is divided into various reaches; within the Upper Santa Clara River there are four defined reaches (as defined by the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan): • Reach 5 (Blue Cut). Upstream of the USGS Blue Cut Gauging Station to the West Pier Highway 99 (now the Old Road Bridge) • Reach 6 (Highway 99). Upstream of Highway 99 (now Old Road Bridge) to Bouquet Canyon Bridge • Reach 7 (Bouquet Canyon). Upstream of Bouquet Canyon to Lang Gauging Station • Reach 8 (Above Lang Gauping Station). Lang Gauging Station to headwaters The upper portion of the Santa Clara River and its tributaries are typically ephemeral streams, having intermittent surface flows only during, and immediately after, periods of intense precipitation. The geologic characteristics of the alluvial sediments in the riverbed in this section of the river provide excellent percolation, and flowing water quickly recharges to the underground aquifers below the river. Perennial flows begin near the Old Road Bridge, due to both recycled water discharges and unique geologic conditions that force groundwater to rise to the surface. However, downstream of Blue Cut a "dry gap' from near Blue Cut to Piru Creek exists for much of the year, making the Upper Santa Clara River a hydrologically independent system from the Lower Santa Clara River for much of the year. Because of these characteristics and due to its history of cooperative water management, the topography and geography of the Region and the similarity of water issues facing agencies within the Region, the Upper Watershed is a logical region for integrated regional water management. 2.2 Climate The watershed is characterized by an and climate. Intermittent periods of less -than -average precipitation are typically followed by periods of greater -than -average precipitation in a cyclical pattern, with each wetter or drier period typically lasting from one to five years. The long-term Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-1 average precipitation is 17.8 inches (1931-2010), as shown in Figure 2.2-1 for the Newhall- Soledad 32c gage. The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) and LADPW have maintained records for the Newhall-Soledad 32c gage since 1931. In general, periods of less -than -average precipitation are longer and more moderate than periods of greater -than -average precipitation. Recently, the periods from 1971 to 1976, 1984 to 1991, and 1999 to 2003 have been drier than average; the periods from 1977 to 1983 and 1992 to 1996 and year 2005 have been wetter than average. Starting in 2006, the Region has experienced drier than average conditions, with a minimum annual precipitation of less than 14 inches measured at the Newhall-Soledad gauge in 2007. Year 2008 was an exception with average rainfall, as was year 2010 with above average precipitation of over 24 inches (CLWA et al. 2012). However, 2011 was again below average with approximately 16 inches (LADPW 2012). Uf Tk v 40 s C 30 a FIGURE 2.2-1 ANNUAL PRECIPITATION Wo IE c 20 c 10 0 -40 m 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 j i i I i i 11111111111 La a 1.I 111141Ia u 1 I i 11111 I I I S 1111 I I 1 I I 1 i 1111 I n Il l Il l Il uiLi.MM11110r. .1 1 1935 1W 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Calendar Year Source: CLWA, et al. 2012 (SCV Water Report). Page 2-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 0 Legend WATERSHED —SCR Reach ] I Cky Boundaries O UPPER SANTA CLARA SCR Reach LakelReservoir O LOWER SANTACLARA—SCR Reach 5 ® Forest Boundaries O CALLEGUAS _SCR Reach O VENTURA —SCR Reach 3 —SCR Reach 2 25 20 Figure 2.1-2 Santa Clara River Reach Boundaries As part of this IRWMP Update a Climate Change Technical Study was prepared. The Climate Change Technical Study provides details on the potential effects of climate change (changes in temperature, changes in precipitation), describes the Region's vulnerability to climate change, and identifies strategies for adapting to climate change. The Climate Change Technical Study is Chapter 5 of this IRWMP Update. 2.3 Land Use Major existing land use categories identified in the 2011 City of Santa Clarita General Plan and the 2011 Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, described in Section 2.3, within the Region include the following: • Residential: Residential uses include a mix of dwelling units developed at varying densities and with varying housing types. Residential uses in the Region include single- family — detached and attached, multiple -family, mobile home, senior housing, as well as live -work units and group living facilities. • Commercial: This category includes retail and offices that offer goods and services to the general public, and wholesale and service uses provided to businesses. This category also includes food services, personal services, automobile services, entertainment, and hospitality services, day care services, and regional commercial uses such as big box retailers and auto malls. • Mixed Use: This category includes commercial retail, office, and service uses intermingled with higher density residential uses, within a master -planned complex designed to ensure that residents are not adversely impacted by commercial operations or traffic, and that businesses benefit from the proximity of customers living nearby. • Industrial: The industrial category includes heavy manufacturing and light industrial uses found in business, research, and development parks. Light industrial activities include warehousing, wholesale trade and some types of assembly work. This category may also include fabrication and assembly of large items, resource extraction, processing of raw or recycled materials, and businesses that use or generate hazardous materials. • Public /Institutional: Government buildings, hospitals, libraries, schools, fire and police stations, solid waste facilities, cultural and community centers and other public institutions are found in this category. Uses in this category support the civic, cultural, and educational needs of residents. Special uses such as correctional facilities are also grouped in this category. • Transportation, Communication, and Utilities: This category includes freeways and major roads, bikeways, railroads, park and ride lots, truck terminals, airports, communication facilities, and similar uses. (This category is included under the Public/Institutional category in the Santa Clarita General Plan.) • Open Space and Recreation: This category encompasses the Angeles National Forest and land used for private and public recreational facilities, conservancy land and other land set aside for preservation of open space and natural resources, and local and Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 2-5 regional parks and multi-purpose trails. Recreational areas, including golf courses and water bodies and water storage. • Rural: The rural lands category includes low-density residential uses on large lots, in areas characterized by rural development interspersed with natural open space. Agricultural uses in rural lands include grazing horticulture, row, field, and tree crops, and limited keeping of livestock, horses and other large animals. 2.3.1 Land Use Policies There are three land use jurisdictions in the Region; the City of Santa Clarita, the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County, and the Angeles National Forest. The land use policy documents that govern the Region and their areas of jurisdiction are as follows: 2011 City of Santa Clarita General Plan. This plan encompasses the City of Santa Clarita and the communities of Newhall, Canyon Country, Valencia, and Saugus. Los Angeles County General Plan 2035 City of Santa Clarita City Hall (Draft). This document covers all of the unincorporated County. Two components of this plan are the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan and the Antelope Valley Area Plan.The Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan covers the unincorporated portions of the Santa Clarita Valley and includes the communities of Castaic, Agua Dulce, San Francisquito Canyon, Val Verde, West Ranch, Stevenson Ranch, Westridge, Violin Canyon, Hasley Canyon, Hillcrest, and the future Newhall Ranch. Several Antelope Valley Area Plan communities within the Santa Clara River Watershed include Gorman, Acton, Three Points, The Lakes, and Green Valley. 2005 Southern California National Forests Land Management Plans. A large portion of the watershed includes the Angeles National Forest and also a portion of the Los Padres National Forest, which are covered by their respective Forest Plans developed by the US Forest Service. Los Angeles County Hall of Administration Concurrently with the 2011 adoption of the City of Santa Clarita General Plan, the County of Los Angeles adopted the One Valley One Vision (OVOV) Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan. OVOV is a joint effort between the County, the City of Santa Clarita, and Santa Clarita Valley (Valley) residents and businesses to create a single Page 2-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 vision and defining guidelines for the future growth of the entire Valley Planning Area'. The OVOV effort is intended to achieve enhanced cooperation between the County and the City, coordinated land use planning, improved infrastructure and natural resource management, and enhanced quality of life for those who live and work in the Valley. The Vision and Guiding Principles formulated as part of the process serve as a framework for the preparation of consistent Plans for the Valley by both the City of Santa Clarita and Los Angeles County. The updated Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan is consistent with both the County's comprehensive General Plan and with the City's General Plan. It does not include all of the mandatory General Plan elements, as these are addressed on a Countywide basis by the County's General Plan. OVOV policies will be implemented and managed by the County of Los Angeles through adoption of the updated Area Plan as part of its General Plan and based on goals and policies contained in the Area Plan. The portions of the planning area within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Santa Clarita will be regulated by the City's updated General Plan, which like the Area Plan, reflects the common goals and policies agreed to as part of the OVOV effort (County of Los Angeles 2011, City of Santa Clarita 2011). In connection with the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan Update, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was also completed. The individual General Plans of the County and City of Santa Clarita and the Valley Area Plan contain policies which govern the decision-making entity as to how they review and condition individual development projects and formulate their future improvements. Typically, such policies are grouped together into elements including "Air Quality" and "Transportation." Water management has typically been included in the "Open Space and Conservation" section. One of the results of this IRWMP is an inventory of water -related policies and programs in order to assist each jurisdiction in planning its water management efforts. Such an inventory has been collected, discussed, and redistributed to these jurisdictions and is found in Appendix C. By heightening the awareness of those directly responsible for the jurisdictions' General Plans, it is expected that additional and more effective policies and programs will be introduced into their decision-making/review processes. For example, the City of Santa Clarita, the County of Los Angeles, and National Forest Service respective land use plans have a number of adopted programs, policies and procedures which affect water management including: The Los Angeles County General Plan, under its "General Goals and Policies" and in the "Conservation and Open Space Element," contains specific goals and policies governing water supply, water conservation, water quality, and natural watershed processes and protection. • The Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan and City of Santa Clarita's General Plan have generally coinciding "Conservation and Open Space' elements which provide policies on water resources, specifically addressing issues related to surface water, groundwater and long-term water supply, as well as flood control, water conservation, and water quality. In the initial planning phases of the One Valley, One Vision process, the community of Acton was included within the planning area. The 2004 Technical Background Report was prepared assuming inclusion of Acton in the planning area. However, since 2004, Acton has joined the Antelope Valley Planning Area. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-7 • The Forest Plans outline several goals and objectives to strategically manage the forests and their water resources, including watershed and riparian system improvements and groundwater management. While these planning documents contain some strategies for water management, it is recognized that additional strategies may be available to further water management. The information compiled by, and contained in, this IRWMP will help the jurisdictions working together to better manage water resources. In addition to the authority vested in public land use planning agencies, other entities including water agencies, LAFCO, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) also influence land use. Under State law (Senate Bill 221 [Chapter 642 Statutes of 2001] and Senate Bill 610 [Chapter 643 Statutes of 2001]), land use planning agencies must consult with local water agencies to determine if adequate supplies of water are available to serve proposed land developments. Additionally, water agencies must coordinate with land use planning agencies in the development of their urban water management plans, which include projections of future water demand and water supply availability during normal and dry periods. Water agencies and land use planning agencies within California are working together to ensure adequate management and planning for water supplies to meet the needs of growing communities. The 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan, developed by SCAG, is a holistic, strategic plan for defining and solving inter -related housing, traffic, water, air quality, and other regional challenges. The plan identifies the following regional challenges with respect to water resources: "Recent projections indicate that nearly half of the state's population will reside within the SCAG region by 2030. This underscores the importance of questions about Southern California's future water supply, and of reliably meeting our urban water demands in a way that is sensitive to both ecological imperatives and the evolving emphasis on sustainable development. We also face challenges in how we assure a high quality water supply for consumption, recreational, habitat, and other needs. Eliminating water quality impairments throughout the region's urban watersheds is a major challenge. These impairments (usually caused by "non -point" source pollutants) are largely caused by urban and stormwater runoff and must be cleaned up under the Clean Water Act. As a result, water quality regulators are imposing significant and costly pollution control measures on local agencies with compliance deadlines." The Regional Comprehensive Plan focuses on three strategies and goals for addressing these water supply and water quality issues. First, is the development of sufficient water supplies to meet the water demands created by continuing regional growth through promoting policies that encourage environmentally sustainable imports, local conservation and conjunctive use, and reclamation and reuse. Second, is to improve water quality by implementing land use and transportation policies and programs that promote water stewardship and eliminate water impairments and waste through more concentrated and clustered developments. Page 2-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Third, the region needs to improve comprehensive and collaborative watershed planning that yields water wise programs and projects. This IRWMP directly helps to meet the first and third strategies. Preparation of this IRWMP was coordinated with local land use agencies; details of this coordination appear in Section 11 of this IRWMP. 2.3.1.1 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan In 2011, as part of the OVOV plan process, the City of Santa Clarita began developing a Climate Action Plan (CAP), which will serve as a component of the general plan document for the City to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The State of California requires all cities updating or creating a new general plan document to consider its impacts on GHG emissions, which requires completion of a CAP. The CAP must achieve the emission reduction goals outlined in the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), requiring statewide GHG emissions to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Regional targets to enable meeting statewide goals are set according to SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, and served as a guideline for the City's CAP. The purpose of the CAP is to measure the amount of GHG emissions generated within the City and to develop strategies to reduce future emissions. Year 2005 baseline year GHG emissions were used, as established by SB 375, to conduct an inventory for the entire community from all sources, primarily from vehicles and energy use in buildings. On -road vehicle emissions made up the majority of baseline year GHG emissions with 60 percent. Several strategies, consistent with the goals and objectives outlined in the new General Plan, were identified for reducing GHG emissions as part of the CAP mitigation plan. It was determined that the largest portion of total GHG emission reductions, 65 percent, can be achieved by decreasing vehicle miles traveled in the City via changes in land use patterns and increased emphasis on transit and alternative transportation programs. Creation or acquisition of new vegetated space, including tree planting could contribute to 21 percent of emission reductions. Water efficiency measures could account for 11 percent of reductions and include recycled water use, SMART controllers for irrigation and other water conservation measures. Finally, energy conservation through increased use of solar and wind power is estimated to contribute to 3 percent of total emission reductions. Implementation of the developed mitigation plan would result in 2020 net emissions approximately 4 percent below 2005 City baseline levels, and thereby exceeding the AB 32 statewide GHG emission reduction mandate. The efforts associated with the Climate Action Plan and this IRWMP are highly complementary and strategies from both plans clearly align. Regional climate change impacts and vulnerabilities that have been assessed as part of this IRWMP update are described in Section 5. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-9 2.4 Ecological Processes and Environmental Resources This section describes the basic environmental resources and ecological processes of the Watershed, and also describes relevant issues and existing and potential venues for resolution of these issues. The principal natural features of the Upper Santa Clara River Region include the Santa Clara River, Aliso Canyon, Soledad Canyon, the Santa Clarita Valley, Castaic Valley, San Francisquito Canyon, Bouquet Canyon, Placerita Canyon, and Hasley Canyon, as well as the open space and forest resources of the Angeles National Forest. This complex topography provides a natural setting that supports a diverse assemblage of biotic communities. As one of the last free-flowing natural riparian systems remaining in Southern California, the Santa Clara River provides breeding sites, traveling routes and other essential resources for wildlife, thereby contributing to the great diversity and abundance of organisms in the Region. The Upper Santa Clara River Region is home to a range of endangered, threatened and rare species, including fish species such as unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni). The natural ecosystem, comprised of a wide variety of biological resources (plant and animal species), as well as physical attributes (land, water, air and other important natural factors), is a vital resource contributing to the economic and physical well being of the communities of the Upper Santa Clara River. Disruption of one factor may intrinsically affect another due to its inter -relationship, and the significance of those effects is difficult to determine without consideration of the whole system. All native species and ecosystems are of aesthetic, ecological, educational, historic, recreational and scientific value. Ecological processes in the Region which are influenced and improved by water management measures are numerous. Of major concern in the Upper Santa Clara River Region is natural water production and watershed protection, which is critical to maintaining a healthy and balanced ecosystem, one which protects plant and wildlife species and provides for regionally valuable NATURAL FEATURES of THE UPPER recreational uses (e.g., hiking, camping, hunting, and SANTA CLARA RIVER many other forms of outdoor recreation). . Angeles National Forest The Upper Santa Clara River system is largely defined as an ephemeral stream with highly variable flows, depending on precipitation levels. It can also be prone to flooding, as was observed during the 2004- 05 rainy season, which resulted in damage to many agricultural and urban properties. However, some flood control and prevention measures can have negative impacts on natural habitat, particularly riparian habitat. • Aliso Canyon • Bouquet Canyon • Castaic Valley • Hasley Canyon • Placerita Canyon • San Francisquito Canyon • Santa Clara River • Santa Clarita Valley • Soledad Canyon Vasqu • Vasquez Rocks Water reclamation, aerial deposition, imported water use, as well as urban and agricultural land practices can affect water quality (see Section 3). Impaired waterbodies in the Upper Santa Clara River Region are listed in Section 2.8.1 of this IRWMP. Implementation of programs such as the TMDL program, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the Nonpoint Page 2-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Source Pollution Control Program are key to integrated water management to protect water quality and beneficial uses of the State's waterbodies. Part of the intent of IRWM program is to create a framework and a collaborative process whereby conflict between different water uses can be avoided or reduced. In the past, development of water supply for human use was done without due regard for habitat preservation or restoration. However increasing priority is being given to changing the process of water resource development and human use to conduct these activities in ways which will not damage natural resources, and to restoring damaged natural habitats so that they not only survive but thrive. A large and growing preservation and restoration movement is underway in the Region which has local jurisdictions working in conjunction with habitat preservation advocacy groups, in an attempt to restore balance and improve water quality of one of the last large, natural riparian ecosystems in Southern California. 2.4.1 Sensitive Biological Resources The Region is host to at least 26 special status plant species and 46 special status wildlife species. These are species of plants and animals that are designated endangered, threatened or rare by the California Fish and Game Commission or the U.S. Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce. A federally listed endangered species is one facing extinction throughout all, or a significant portion of, its geographic range. A federally listed threatened species is one likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The State of California considers an endangered species as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy; and a threatened species as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. The Rare species designation applies only to California native plants. Additionally, there are many species whose survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy and are considered to be sensitive to further intrusion upon their habitat. Species that are not listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act or the California Endangered Species Act, but which nonetheless are declining at a rate that could result in a designation of Endangered, Threatened or Rare, are classified as Species of Special Concern. The vegetation and habitat types in the Region that merit "special status" because they are considered unique, are limited in distribution in the Region, or provide particularly high wildlife value include: native grassland, coast live oak riparian forest, southern willow scrub, big -cone spruce -canyon oak forest, southern sycamore -alder woodland, southern cottonwood -willow riparian woodland and forest, freshwater marsh, alluvial fan sage scrub, and vernal pool (CLWA 2007 and County of Los Angeles 2012). In addition, coastal and desert biomes meet in this Region, allowing breeding and cross pollination of otherwise isolated species. Following are descriptions of these significant plant communities: • Native grassland communities consist of low herbaceous vegetation dominated by grasses, often mixed with native bulbs and other herbaceous species. Representative native grasslands in the Region include the significant patches of needlegrass and melic grass species. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-11 • Coast live oak riparian forest consists of dense overstory formations of coast live oak generally occurring in narrow formations along water channels. Common understory species include the willow, California bay, mulefat, and other riparian understory species common to Southern California. • Southern willow scrub occurs along seasonal or permanent water courses and is comprised of dense thickets of broad -leafed winter -deciduous riparian species. This community's 'scrub' formation is maintained by frequent heavy over -flooding. Dominant species of this community include mulefat, sandbar willow, and arroyo willow. • Big -cone spruce -canyon oak forest generally consists of shade -loving species such as big -leaf maple and California bay, and occurs in higher elevations on north -facing slopes. Chaparral species generally dominate the understory. • Southern sycamore -alder woodlands in the Region are generally found on broad plains with heavy alluvial substrates along creeks and streams with permanent flows. This community only occurs in the upper reaches of the watershed, in areas within Bear, Sand, Placerita and Aliso Canyons. • Southern cottonwood willow riparian natural areas are dominated by Fremont cottonwood and provide broad -leafed winter -deciduous habitat. This community forms mature overstory areas along many reaches of the Santa Clara River and its main tributaries. Extensive formations occur just west of Acton in Upper Aliso Canyon and lower San Francisquito Canyon. • Freshwater marsh communities in the watershed are dominated by the perennial, emergent cattail or bulrush, which often grows dense enough to form a closed canopy. Freshwater marsh generally develops in areas of still or slow-moving permanent freshwater and occurs in scattered ponds and slow -flow reaches of the Santa Clara River and its tributaries. • Alluvial fan sage scrub is made up of a variety of shrubs that can establish themselves and persist within floodplains, alluvial plains, or alongside seasonal streams, where infrequent flooding occurs. Dominant shrubs vary depending on location but include scalebroom, Great Basin sage brush, rabbitbrush and foothill yucca. High diversity stands exist around Acton, Sand Canyon, Santa Clarita, and in lower San Francisquito Canyon. Vernal pools are seasonal bodies of standing water, generally formed in closed where a heavy clay layer holds surface water following rain events, and are very rare in the Los Angeles County and the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. Two verified vernal pools have been identified on Cruzan Mesa and Plum Canyon. Additionally, a small seasonal pond with typical vernal pool characteristics is known to exist near the Placerita Canyon -Sand Canyon divide. Extensive patches of high quality riparian habitat, including basins Yellow Warbler Page 2-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 southern cottonwood -willow riparian forest and mulefat scrub are present along the length of the Santa Clara River and its tributaries. These plant communities provide nesting and foraging habitat for many sensitive bird species including the endangered least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) and southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), and State species of special concern, including the yellow -breasted chat (Icteria virens) and the yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia brewsteri). They are also habitat areas for the federally and state -listed endangered fish species unarmored threespine stickleback. The riparian scrub habitats in Mint Canyon and other tributaries to the Santa Clara River may also support the State endangered slender -horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras) (VCWPD 2005). The Angeles National Forest, a large portion of which is located within the watershed, is also occupied by approximately 45 known species that are deemed sensitive by the US Forest Service, and provides shelter for at least 16 federally listed threatened and endangered plants and animals. Many of these are found in few other places. The forest is a critical habitat for the arroyo toad (Bufo californicus microshapus), mountain yellow -legged frog (Rana muscosa), California red -legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), and several species of fish. Sensitive species such as the California spotted owl Nelson bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsons) are also found there California red -legged frog (Strix occidentalis) and (US Forest Service 2003). Pressures for growth and recreational activities in the Region have been linked to significant declines in sensitive species. Growth of urban areas results in loss of available or suitable habitat for sensitive species. Besides loss of habitat, proximity to human development can be harmful to sensitive species. Human development introduces roadway traffic, pesticides, urban runoff and non-native species, which degrade habitat and food sources for sensitive species. Land use practices, such as cattle and sheep grazing and mining are also considered harmful to many species. Recreational uses, such as off-highway vehicle use are known to conflict with sensitive species habitat. Improper disposal of food wastes and trash by recreational users often attracts predators of the sensitive species, such as common ravens. Dogs brought onto public lands by recreation can also disturb, injure, or kill sensitive species. 2.4.2 Wetland Habitat Wetland habitats are transitional lands between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface, or the land is periodically covered with shallow water due to underlying soils, geography and topography. Wetlands include, but are not limited to, marshes, bogs, sloughs, vernal pools, wet meadows, river and stream overflows, mudflats, ponds, springs, ephemeral springs, and seeps. Wetlands may also include open water habitats like lakeshores. Important wetland systems found in the Region include, but are not limited to, freshwater marshes, vernal pool systems and other perennial overflow areas. Freshwater marsh develops in areas of still or slow-moving permanent freshwater, and therefore occurs in scattered pond areas and slow -flow portions of the Santa Clara River and its tributaries. Vernal pools are seasonal bodies of standing water that typically form from spring runoff, dry out completely in Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 2-13 the hotter months, and often refill in the autumn. Vernal pools range from extensive, densely vegetated lowland bodies to smaller, isolated upland bodies with little permanent vegetation. The identified vernal pools and vernal -like seasonal pond are unique biotic communities in the Region. The variety of riparian and wetland vegetation types that exist within the Region provide habitat for a diverse assemblage of plant and animal species. Supported species include vascular plants, vertebrates and invertebrate communities. Slope wetlands in the region support native grasslands such as needlegrass species and melic grasses, and seeps found in chaparral areas frequently support stands of giant rye. Vernal pools provide important breeding habitat for many terrestrial or semiaquatic species such as frogs, salamanders, and turtles. Wetlands found throughout the Region support communities of invertebrates such as native fairy shrimp, craneflies, stoneflies, water boatmen, and various beetle species. The health of the more sensitive of these invertebrate species serves as an important indicator of the overall integrity of the riverine, riparian and wetland ecosystems. Many of the Region's special status and sensitive species are dependent upon wetland habitats for their survival. The EIR completed in association with the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan Update lists many of the animal species known to occur within the Region that have been federally listed or highlighted by the state as endangered, threatened, protected, or of special concern. Listed wetland species include vascular plants such as the spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis), found in the Newhall area, and California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica), and invertebrates, such as the Riverside, vernal pool and San Diego fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni, Branchinecta lynchi, Branchinecta sandiegoensis, respectively) primarily found in the identified vernal pools. The southwestern pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata pallida) is found in Ben Canyon and Vasquez Rocks, and several records indicate the presence of the two -striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondil) in perennial waters of the Upper Santa Clara River. Sensitive bird species reliant on wetland habitat and known to occur or commonly migrate to the Region include the western least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis hesperis), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and the merlin (Falco columbarius). 2.4.3 Wildlife Corridors Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by urbanization creates isolated "islands" of wildlife habitat. In the absence of habitat linkages that allow movement to adjoining open space areas, various studies have concluded that some wildlife species, especially the larger and more mobile mammals, will not likely persist over time in fragmented or isolated habitat areas because they prohibit the infusion of new individuals. In addition, such islands often provide the only available habitat for species that occupy the corridor area. Biologists have identified areas that experience recurrent aquatic, riparian, or terrestrial species movement that are crucial to these species as wildlife "corridors" or habitat linkages. These corridors encourage The River is a Valuable Wildlife Corridor Page 2-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 preservation of plant and animal populations by allowing greater access to food and water and a larger gene pool. The river corridor acts as a landscape linkage and escape route, providing for wildlife movement between and among habitat patches from the San Gabriel Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. The Region hosts a wide diversity of wildlife including mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, fish and invertebrates, as described above. Some of these species migrate along ridgelines in the mountainous terrain where there are fewer interfaces with urban uses. Other species migrate along the arroyos, rivers and other riparian and wetland corridors, where urban development is nearer, and the potential for adverse impacts much greater, when these natural habitats are encroached upon. Habitat loss and fragmentation are the leading threats to biodiversity. This highlights the need to conserve well-connected networks of large wildland areas where natural processes can continue operating over large spatial and temporal scales. Adequate landscape connections allow these ecosystems to respond appropriately to natural and unnatural environmental perturbations, such as fire, flood, climate change, and invasions by non-native species. Maintaining wildlife corridors helps compensate for fragmentation of habitats. Several key wildlife movement corridors within the region have been identified and several ongoing efforts are targeting preservation of these lands through acquisition (City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles 2011). Within the Region, the Angeles Linkage Conceptual Area Protection Plan (CAPP) was developed as part of an extensive partnership effort involving representatives from CDFW, US FWS, US Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project, Caltrans, Los Angeles RWQCB, RMC, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, The Nature Conservancy, Trust for Public Land, Friends of the Santa Clara River, South Coast Wildlands, and others. The principle goal of the CAPP is to preserve essential open space and viable connections for wildlife movement between two core habitat areas, the San Gabriel Mountains and the Castaic Ranges (including the Sierra Pelona), both part of the Angeles National Forest managed by the US Forest Service. The land between these two core habitat areas encompasses a unique ecological transition zone between coastal and desert habitats. Coastal sage scrub and chaparral blankets the hillsides in the western part of the CAPP, with dense coast live oak woodlands in canyons, and high quality riparian scrub and woodlands at lower elevations. The easternmost part of the linkage has a strong desert influence dominated by desert scrub, with scattered juniper and Joshua tree woodlands (Penrod et al. 2004). Within this CAPP, a system of mostly unaltered natural hydrological features currently supports these vegetation types in the upper watershed; the demand for housing and infrastructure development poses a threat to this resource and to wildlife movement. A main feature of the proposed CAPP is the Santa Clara River as it acts as a natural linkage. The CAPP is intended to secure a functional landscape level connection between the San Gabriel and Castaic core areas and help to ensure the ecological integrity of areas already protected in the linkage. There is a number of existing conservation investments (e.g., BLM, County Parks, City of Santa Clarita, etc.) in the linkage, covering 1,514 acres, which are protected from habitat conversion. The CAPP encompasses a total of 8,697 acres on 392 parcels, which have been targeted for acquisition or conservation easements in the County. To date, the City has secured and preserved over 1,000 acres of wildlife corridor lands, including Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 2-15 243 acres in Agua Dulce Canyon, which is considered to be a crucial linkage within the CAPP area. 2.4.4 Locally Important Species and Communities The diverse topography and climate of the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed and environs provide an environment that sustains certain plant and animal species or communities not found elsewhere; these are considered locally important as they are characteristic of or unique to the Region. Locally important communities identified for the Region include types of coastal sage scrub and oak and riparian woodlands, among others. Certain species found within these habitat types are considered candidates for designation by the California Fish and Game Commission or the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, if they are not already so designated. Important habitats and biological resource areas within the Region include (City of Santa Clarita 2011): • Land within the Angeles National Forest, and wildlife corridors within the Santa Clara River Valley, the Santa Susana Mountains and the San Gabriel Mountains and the southern slopes of the Sierra Pelona range. • Santa Clara River system, as one of the last free-flowing natural riparian systems in Southern California, supports a diversity of wildlife and vegetation, providing breeding sites, traveling routes, and other important ecosystem services. • Canyon areas, including San Francisquito Canyon, Soledad Canyon, and Bouquet Canyon, which provide important habitat (water, food and shelter) and biological resources. • Habitat for federally and state -listed endangered, threatened or rare plant and wildlife species within the river channels, the open upland areas and the National Forest lands, including those associated with riparian woodlands in the Santa Clara River, and in chaparral and coastal sage scrub vegetation. • Open water habitat provided by Castaic Lake, Castaic Lagoon, Bouquet Reservoir, and isolated locations along the Santa Clara River. • Oak communities located within and outside the City of Santa Clarita, riparian scrub and woodlands and other diverse vegetation located within and around National Forest lands. • Habitat and associated biological resources in the five significant ecological areas (SEAS) designated by the County, and described below in Section 2.4.5. The Angeles National Forest has some unique topography that also affects its plant and animal life. Lower elevations of the forest are covered with dense chaparral and riparian vegetation along stream channels, while the high mountains are blanketed by evergreen forests of pine, fir, and cedar (US Forest Service 2005). Page 2-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 2.4.5 Significant Ecological Areas SEAS are defined by the County and generally encompass areas that are valuable as plant or animal communities and often important to the preservation of threatened or endangered species. Preservation of biological diversity is the main objective of the SEA designation. SEAs are neither preserves nor conservation areas, but areas where the County requires development to be designed around the existing biological resources (County of Los Angeles 2012). Design criteria in SEAS include maintaining watercourses and wildlife corridors in a natural state, set -asides of undisturbed areas, and retaining natural vegetation and open space. The City and County have designated the following five SEAS within the Santa Clarita Valley (see Figure 2.4-1): Cruzan Mesa Vernal Pools SEA: This SEA lies in the southeastern portion of the Liebre Mountains, north of the Santa Clara River, and southeast of Bouquet Canyon. The boundaries of the SEA encompass the watershed and drainages of the Cruzan Mesa and Plum Canyon vernal pools, which support both of the regionally unique vernal pools. The two vernal pool areas together form one ecologically functional unit. This designated area includes a wide range of natural features, including mesas, canyons, and interior slopes, as well as the Plum Canyon creek which crosses the SEA to the south. The SEA maintains a variety of valuable biological resources, including several sensitive species and habitats. The seasonally wet vernal pools, surrounding open coastal sage scrub and chaparral, and topographical features, such as steep cliffs and crevices, harbor a variety of migrant and resident bird species, including birds of prey, sensitive amphibians, Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) and other native sage scrub vertebrate species. These vernal pools are among only three or four identified such pools in Southern California and as such support sensitive resources that are locally and regionally unique. Santa Clara River SEA: This is the largest SEA in the Santa Clarita Valley and encompasses the entire length of the Santa Clara River and the significant tributary drainages, including Piru Creek, Sespe Creek, Santa Paula Creek, and Wheeler Creek. The SEA embraces the river corridor and east -west linkage zones that have historically served as primary connections for wildlife movement between the Pacific coastline and coast and interior ranges. Due to the extensive acreage of natural open space and great diversity of habitat types present within this designated area, wildlife within this SEA is plentiful, including abundant and diverse amphibians, reptiles and other herpetofauna, birds and other native mammals. As one of the last free-flowing natural riparian systems remaining in Southern California, the Santa Clara River provides breeding sites, traveling routes and other essential resources for wildlife, thereby contributing to the great diversity and abundance of organisms in this SEA and the entire Region. Sensitive plant communities and habitat types present in this SEA include big -cone spruce -canyon oak forest, coast live oak riparian forest, southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, and native grassland. Sensitive species found within this SEA include the slender -horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras), Riverside fairy shrimp, unarmored threespine stickleback, California red -legged frog, California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus), and ringtail cat (Bassariscus astutus). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-17 Santa Felicia SEA: This SEA encompasses nearly the entire Los Angeles County portion of the Santa Felicia watershed draining into Lake Piru, consisting of largely undeveloped lands with vast stands of intact coast sage scrub and chaparral communities in the uplands and mixed riparian, oak riparian and coast live oak forests and alluvial scrub in the bottomlands. The wide variety of topographic features and diverse habitat types within the SEA support a wide variety of wildlife species, including large numbers of amphibians, diverse year-round, seasonal, migrant and song bird populations, and considerable native mammal populations. Sensitive habitat types within this SEA include coast live oak riparian forest, alluvial fan sage scrub, and native grassland. Sensitive species in the SEA include the California condor, California red -legged frog and arroyo southwestern toad (Bufo californicus). The Santa Felicia watershed provides an important wildlife corridor with movement occurring along and within the riparian systems between Piru Lake and the San Gabriel Mountain range and beyond. • Santa Susana Mountains/Simi Hills SEA: This SEA is located northwest of the San Fernando Valley and includes much of the Santa Susana Mountains, Santa Susana Pass, Chatsworth Reservoir, and the eastern portion of the Simi Hills. The Santa Susana Mountains are one of several relatively small ridges (dominated by Oat Mountain at elevation 3,747 feet) that form the western end of the transverse ranges and blend eastward into the larger San Gabriel and San Bernardino mountains. The north slopes of the Santa Susana Mountains are within the Santa Clara River watershed which drains the Los Padres National Forest, the Angeles National Forest, and the Santa Susana Mountains. The remainder of the SEA is within the Los Angeles River watershed. The majority of the land within the SEA is natural open space with very sparse disturbances. The Santa Monica Mountains are also part of this system. Vegetation within the SEA consists of coastal sage scrub on the south facing sunlit slopes and dense chaparral on the north facing slopes. Due to the extent of natural open space, topographic complexity and combination of coastal and desert influences, this SEA supports a wide variety of habitat species and generally diverse and abundant wildlife, including an unusually high diversity of bird species. Unlike many other hills within the Los Angeles Basin, the SEA is large enough to support diverse and relatively stable large mammal populations. Riparian and oak woodland vegetation are found along stream drainages and within canyons, along with big -cone spruce (Pseudotsuga macrocarpa), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and California walnut (Juglans californica hindsii). The oak woodland habitat is extremely diverse containing six species of oaks, one of which is found only in this area of the County (the Dunn Oak, Quercus dunnii). The interior portions of this SEA are largely undisturbed by the urbanization that has occurred both to the south (San Fernando and Simi Valleys) and north (Santa Clarita). The vast open space corridor is important for maintaining gene flow and wildlife movement between the Santa Monica, San Gabriel mountains, and Los Padres National Forest which are now largely isolated from one another by urban development. Page 2-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 _ KERN COUNTY �— — QUAIL LOS ANGELES COUNTY LAKE ---�z ^ A � 60 illar, 1 ME 58 Cq</,cO PYRAMID L E v qQ UFo HUGHES LAKE ELIZABETH N MGMLIS Services Ow... 1i Santa Clara River 0`i Streams 0/� City of Santa 0 arita C3Upper Santa Clara River Watershed ED National Forest Boundary Significant Ecological Area 2010 - JOSHUA TREE WOODLAND HABITAT - KENTUCKY SPRINGS LYON MOUNTAIN ®. PORTAL RIDGE-LIEBRE MOUNTAIN ® SAN FRANCISQUITO CANYON ® SANTA CLARA RIVER ® SANTA SUSANA MOUNTAINS m TEHACHAPI FOOTHILLS ® VALLEY OAKS SAVANNAH, NEW HALL Figure 2.4-1 Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Significant Ecological Areas rem LAKE SANTA CLARA N IN ffA Valley Oak Savannah: The SEA is located west of Interstate -5, northeast of the Santa Susana Mountains and west of the Angeles National Forest. This SEA is almost completely undisturbed except for few dirt roads. Due to its small size, vegetation within the SEA is limited to a few community types. These factors will unlikely support highly diverse wildlife although the simple vegetative communities within the SEA and the mosaic of vegetative communities in adjoining areas create a functional ecosystem, part of the larger regional system. Also, while the SEA does not support regional corridors itself, adjacent lands may be important linkages for wildlife movement between the Santa Susana Mountains and the Santa Clara River. As a result this SEA may be important as a corridor buffer and/or adjacent foraging grounds. The majority of the vegetation within the SEA consists of valley oaks savannah containing over 1,000 trees and a small portion is covered by coastal sage scrub, both of which are sensitive plant communities, and non-native grasses. Sensitive species within the SEA include San Diego coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum), sharp -shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), and Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi). (City of Santa Clarita 2011, County of Los Angeles 2012, Los Angeles County 2006, Santa Clarita 1999, City of Santa Clarita and Los Angeles County 2004). 2.4.6 Recreation Resources With its natural resources, in addition to parks, open spaces and reservoirs, the Region offers numerous opportunities for sports and outdoor recreation, including hiking, camping, hunting, fishing and swimming. An extensive parks system exists within the Santa Clarita Valley with County parks totaling 578 acres throughout the Valley. These parks range from small neighborhood parks of five to ten acres to regional parks over 50 acres in size, such as the Val Verde Park in the western portion of the Region offering various sports facilities. Within the parks system are also nature and open space preserves covering over 10,000 acres to protect scenic and biological resources and open spaces, which provide outdoor recreation opportunities, such as hiking horseback riding and camping, as well as educational opportunities with nature centers and nature interpretation. Among these preserved lands are the Santa Clara River Open Space and the Placerita Canyon Open Space, the latter located adjacent to one of the Region's State parks. There are three State parks within the Santa Clarita Valley that are operated by the County. Vasquez Rocks State Park includes a 750 acre reserve with unique red rock formations providing opportunities for climbing, hiking and camping among other things. The Placerita Canyon State Park includes the 350 acre wildlife sanctuary with extensive trails, a nature center, and restored historic facilities. The Castaic Lake Recreation Area centers around the state water reservoir, extending over 9,000 acres. This State park provides outdoor and water recreation opportunities, including camping, boating, fishing and swimming. Opportunities for water recreation are also available at Elizabeth Lake and Lake Hughes. The City of Santa Clarita and the County of Los Angeles have also developed trail plans to be adopted as part of the General Plans, in compliance with State requirements, to enhance recreational opportunities and connectivity for recreationists in the Region (County of Los Angeles 2011). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-21 2.5 Social and Cultural Characteristics 2.5.1 Demographics and Population 2.5.1.1 Santa Clarita Valley A summary of Santa Clarita Valley demographics was prepared as part of the 2011 One Valley One Vision process. As described in the OVOV, the Santa Clarita Valley experienced significant growth from 1990 to 2000; nearly 39 percent in that period. With this growth, the Santa Clarita population also diversified. It is estimated that approximately 38.5 percent of the Santa Clarita Valley population is of Hispanic, Asian, African-American or mixed ethnicity (Los Angeles County 2011, based on 2000 Census). The Santa Clarita Valley reflects larger households which are indicative of young families with children (Los Angeles County 2011, based on 2000 Census). Figure 2.5-1 depicts the boundaries of the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area, its census tracts, and relationship to the City of Santa Clarita as well as unincorporated County. The unincorporated County areas are anticipated to grow at particularly high rates in all categories, while more moderate rates are anticipated for the City of Santa Clarita. In Table 2.5-1, the OVOV projections and SCAG projections indicate a 1.6 to 1.8 percent annual growth rate of population for the Santa Clarita Valley for years 2010 to 2050. TABLE 2.5-1 POPULATION COMPARISON (a) Total CLWA Santa Clarita Valley Notes: (a) Source: CLWA et. al. 2011, Table 2-10. (b) Data from Los Angeles County OVOV EIR, as referenced in CLWA et. al. 2011, Table 2-10. (c) The OVOV estimated population in 2008 was 252,000 which, for this analysis, was assumed to occur in 2010. (d) 2010 and 2035 Projection for Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area are the sums of the City of Santa Clarita and unincorporated Los Angeles area. The unincorporated area provided by the County of Los Angeles Department of Planning from adjusted GIS data from U.S. Census Bureau & SCAG data provided by email communication, April 5, 2011. (e) Year 2030 value adjusted. Actual GIS data had 2030 value of 414,612 which was higher than 2035 value. Used growth rate assumptions to correct. (f) Years 2040-2050 assumed 2010-2035 growth rates. Page 2-22 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 9012.03 N MVM -GIS Services o-= r09>�r� N O� 2 Census Tract 2010 Santa Clanta 100 -Year Floodplain For The Santa Clam River Lakes and Reservoirs National Forest Boundary OUpper Santa Clara River Watershed Figure 2.5-1 Census Tracts in the Upper Santa Clara River Wa Path: \\PvvgisNe\smpm\GIS Services\MPMGIS\prcjects\c `9201.05 1 9202.00 9201.06 O� y0 y N�NR 9203.27 9203.26 9203.03 KERN CC UNTY I- LOS ANGELES C UNTY m I=- 9201.03 0 W AVENUED � 9200.15 9201.07 r 9200.16 WASTER R P/Ne OAN�O 9201.09 'zo1.1 �szoo.la 9200.19 9201.0 9201.10; --� 9200.17 O ' 'I. % 9201.12 `V 9201.07 �� �,✓-�.� n 9201.13/ r 9200.13 9203.28 901 9203.29 t 9203.14 L 9203.30 3.27 9203.31 4) 92 .34 9200.14 O= .> .,.,,., ,.., 9108.04 U` 9200.27 J b 9200.26 9108. 9200.32 9200. 91008 •II ,'�-44 Iq 9108.05 SOLEDAD CANYON RD 9302.00 9200.29 9200.23 9200.30 9200.31 931)(' 2.5.1.2 City of Santa Clarita The City of Santa Clarita's population was 176,320 in 2010 (Census 2012), and falls into the category of one of the ten largest cities within the County. However, Santa Clarita differs from the rest of the entire Los Angeles County in general in almost every statistic. According to the City's website (http://www.santa-clarita.com), while the growth rate of County was 1.7 percent as of 2003, Santa Clarita saw a higher population growth rate of 3 percent. Between 2000 and 2010, the City of Santa Clarita's population grew by 16.7 percent. The mix of the City's population is not as diverse as the entire City of Santa Clarita Residential Development County's population. Based on 2010 Census data, close to 71 percent of Santa Clarita's population describes itself as White. Of the remaining 29 percent, major groups include Asian and African American, as well as other unspecified races, and those of two or more races. As Hispanics may be of any race, data include Hispanics in all applicable race categories. Of the City's total population, approximately 30 percent are of Hispanic or Latino origin. Santa Clarita is a more affluent city compared to the County as a whole. The 2009 median household income (MHI) for Santa Clarita was estimated at $82,602. In comparison, the MHI for the County was estimated at $54,375 (Census 2012). Table 2.5-1 shows projections regarding the City's population growth. 2.5.1.3 Unincorporated Areas of Watershed To some extent, the outermost unincorporated areas of the watershed overlap with the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area of the OVOV project (City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles 2011). However, it appears that the planning area identified in that report does not reach the far eastern and northern portions of the watershed (see Figure 2.5-1). Unincorporated areas of the watershed are likely best characterized by summarizing recent Census data (see Table 2.5-2). From evaluation of five census tracts located outside the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area, but within the watershed, these areas are generally sparsely populated, rural communities. The total population of these five census tracts is approximately 14,000 people. MHI for these census tracts ranges from approximately $63,964 to $77,938. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-25 TABLE 2.5-2 DEMOGRAPHICS OF OUTLYING AREAS OF WATERSHED Total Number of Median Household Census Tract Households Total Population Income 9012.03 719 11864 $63,964 9201.03 12500 4,331 $71,038 9108.05 1,644 4,384 $75,667 9012.06 478 11283 $77,938 9012.04 943 2,200 $80,068 .,. _ ,.... .. .. These five census tracts were included in the Region and analyzed in this section because the majority of their areas fell outside of the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area boundary, but within the overall watershed boundary. Census tracts with the majority of their areas within the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area were included in the Santa Clarita Valley analysis above. Those census tracts which partially fell within the watershed boundary, but with most of their areas beyond the watershed boundary, were not included in any of the analyses above and were not considered part of the Region. 2.5.2 Economic Factors 2.5.2.1 Santa Clarita Valley The dominant job sectors in the Valley include services, retail trade and manufacturing, and construction which experienced significant growth between 2000 and 2005, with 3,900 additional jobs per year in those sectors (County of Los Angeles 2011). The services sector has accounted for the greatest number of new jobs between 1992 and 2005, with nearly half in business services, as well as growth in transportation and utilities, and retail trade. While construction jobs have significantly increased with development of the Valley, the rate of job growth in this sector is projected to decrease, while the manufacturing sector is projected to remain strong. Since 1992, the rate of job growth has far outpaced that of Los Angeles County. The Valley has a higher percentage of jobs in the agriculture and mining, construction, manufacturing, and retail trade sectors than the rest of the County, and is becoming a significant employment center for the County. 2.5.2.2 City of Santa Clarita The local economy is primarily a service based economy with 42 percent of the businesses in that sector. An additional 22 percent of businesses are in retail trade and 11 percent are in finance, insurance, and real estate (SCV Chamber of Commerce 2011). Santa Clarita maintains one of the lowest unemployment rates in Los Angeles County. In 2007, the City's unemployment rates was 2.7 percent, compared to the County's 4.4 percent, whereas these rates have increased to current rates of 6.5% and 7.7%, respectively (Census 2010). The poverty rate in Santa Clarita is also substantially lower than the County with an estimated 7.6 percent of individuals living in poverty as of 2009. However, increasing housing costs are recognized as a potential problem, with some households paying a high percentage of their income toward housing or households with limited resources living in smaller housing units or sharing housing. Page 2-26 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 2.5.2.3 Unincorporated Areas of Watershed Employment and economic factors are difficult to succinctly summarize for these areas. The projections for the Santa Clarita Valley would apply to most of the Watershed. However, 2010 Census data for five census tracts that lie outside of the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area, but within the Watershed, best describes these outlying areas (see Table 2.5-3). There are many different job sectors within which individuals are employed and there is a range of incomes. Yet overall, these areas can be characterized as affluent as previously indicated with major job sectors including educational, health and social services; arts and entertainment; finance and real estate; professional, scientific, management and administrative services; information, construction and manufacturing. 2.5.3 Disadvantaged Communities As defined by DWR, a disadvantaged community is a municipality, including, but not limited to a city, town or county, or a reasonably isolated and divisible segment of a larger municipality, that has an average MHI that is less than 80 percent of the statewide annual MHI. A MHI of less than $48,706 meets this threshold (DWR 2012). Using DWR's newly developed DAC mapping tool, which is based on American Community Service data between 2006 and 2010, it can be seen that none of the communities within the geographic areas described above including the County, the City of Santa Clarita, the Valley, and the outlying areas of the watershed meet this standard. This means that all areas reported average median household incomes greater than 80 percent of the statewide annual MHI for that period. The County had a reported MHI of $55,476 and the City of Santa Clarita had a reported MHI of $82,642 during that period. The Santa Clarita Valley Planning area had a reported average annual household income of $83,900 in 2004 (City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles 2004). While no disadvantaged communities that met the strict state definition were identified, both the City of Santa Clarita and the County have identified areas where particular outreach efforts are merited, due either to substandard infrastructure, substandard housing, or similar concerns. These outreach efforts are detailed in Section 11 of this IRWMP. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-27 TABLE 2.5-3 JOB SECTORS, UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, AND TOTAL POPULATIONS OF OUTLYING AREAS OF WATERSHED Census Unemployment Total Tract Major Job Sectors Rate (%) Population 9201.03 Educational, health, and social services, Arts 6.2 41331 and entertainment, Finance 9012.06 Construction, Finance, Educational, health, and 11.5 13283 social services 9012.04 Educational, health, and social services, Arts 5.4 21200 and entertainment, Manufacturing 9012.03 Construction, Educational, health, and social 7.9 1,864 services, Professional services 9108.05 Construction, Educational, health, and social 3.1 43384 services, Information c.., ren. iii 9nln These five census tracts were included in the Region and analyzed in this section because the majority of their areas fell outside of the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area boundary, but within the overall watershed boundary. Census tracts with the majority of their areas within the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area were included in the Santa Clarita Valley analysis above. Those census tracts which partially fell within the watershed boundary, but with most of their areas beyond the watershed boundary, were not included in any of the analyses above and were not considered part of the Region. 2.5.4 Social and Cultural Values One vision of the Valley for the next two decades is a young but maturing network of communities balancing rural and suburban neighborhoods, with areas that offer urban lifestyles. The Valley provides residents varied housing opportunities and offers multiple employment opportunities that result in a dynamic economy and appropriate job - housing balance. The Valley has developed excellent public services, all of which support a high quality of life. The communities of the Valley include Castaic, Val Verde, Valencia, Saugus, and Newhall. They have a lot of Melody Ranch Motion Picture Studio character and history, and they each have their own unique identities. However, common threads throughout these communities include the results of the influence of the old West on the area. These communities were mostly characterized as rustic and rural, and were ranching or mining communities that still maintain pride in those traditions. The influence of motion picture filming has been noted especially in Newhall with the use of Melody Ranch in movie making. The natural setting of the Valley, including its open space and surrounding canyons and trees, is closely associated with the identities of these communities according to residents. Valencia, while considered the most urban of these communities, still maintains a rural sense of place without the trappings of a large metropolitan area. All are characterized as tight -knit and family-oriented and supportive of a high quality of life (City of Santa Clarita 2002). Page 2-28 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Unincorporated areas in the upper parts of the watershed (tributary canyon areas, Acton, Agua Dulce) tend to be rural in character, with large lot sizes. Many properties have small ranching or farming operations, and include equestrian properties. Agua Dulce has a private small general aviation airport - the only such facility located in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. 2.6 Overview of Water Supplies Water supply in the IRWM Region comes from numerous sources, which include groundwater, imported water, recycled water and, when needed, banking programs. Of these sources, imported water, primarily State Water Project (SWP) supplies, makes up the largest portion, with over 50 percent of all supplies as of 2010. Local supplies, consisting primarily of local groundwater, make up approximately 45 percent. In comparison, recycled water currently makes up less than 1 percent (CLWA, et al. 2011, UWCD and CLWA 1996). Details on the Region's water supply are provided in Section 3 of this IRWMP. 2.7 Major Water Related Infrastructure The following includes a discussion of the major water related infrastructure in the Region, shown in Figure 2.7-1. 2.7.1 State Water Project The SWP is the largest state -built, multi-purpose water project in the country. It was authorized by the California State Legislature in 1959, with the construction of most initial facilities completed by 1973. Today, the SWP includes 28 dams and reservoirs, 26 pumping and generating plants, and approximately 660 miles of aqueducts. The primary water source for the SWP is the Feather River, a tributary of the Sacramento River. Storage released from Oroville Dam on the Feather River flows down natural river channels to the Sacramento -San Joaquin River Delta (Delta). While some SWP supplies are pumped from the northern Delta into the North Bay Aqueduct, the vast majority of SWP supplies are pumped from the southern Delta into the 444 -mile -long California Aqueduct. The California Aqueduct conveys water along the west side of the San Joaquin Valley to Edmonston Pumping Plant, where water is pumped over the Tehachapi Mountains and the aqueduct then divides into the East and West branches. CLWA takes delivery of its SWP water at Castaic Lake, a terminal reservoir of the West Branch. From Castaic Lake, CLWA delivers its SWP supplies to the local retail water purveyors through an extensive transmission pipeline system. 2.7.2 Bouquet Reservoir and Los Angeles Aqueduct Bouquet Reservoir is a reservoir about 15 miles west of Palmdale in the County. It is at an elevation of 2,993 feet in the Sierra Madre Mountains. The reservoir has a capacity of 36,500 AF and is formed by the Bouquet Canyon Dam on Bouquet Creek, which is a tributary of the Santa Clara River. The dam was built by the City of Los Angeles in 1934. The reservoir is a part of the Los Angeles Aqueduct system, which is what supplies most of its water. The Los Angeles Aqueduct system moves water from the Mono Basin and Owens Valley to the City of Los Angeles. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 2-29 2.7.3 Metropolitan Water District Foothill Feeder The Metropolitan Water District Foothill Feeder is a pipeline that conveys SWP raw water from Castaic Lake to its terminus at the Joseph Jensen Filtration Plant in Granada Hills, located near the intersection of Balboa Boulevard and Interstate 5. The plant and feeder began operation in 1972. The feeder is capable of conveying up to 1,800 cfs of water, while the plant can treat up to 750 mgd. At the filtration plant, the Foothill Feeder control structure contains two hydroelectric power plants at 4.5 megawatts each. As the structure controls the water flow into the plant, the energy is harnessed and electricity is generated. Along the feeder, there are several blow -off structures that can release water into the Santa Clara River, Placerita Creek, San Francisquito Canyon, Charlie Canyon, and Castaic Lagoon. 2.7.4 Purveyor Water Infrastructure CLWA owns and operates water conveyance pipelines and water treatment facilities to supply water delivered through the SWP to the four retail purveyors within its boundaries. DWR transports water via the California Aqueduct to Castaic Lake and releases water to the Agency through the outlet tower at Castaic Lake. The reservoir is a multiple use reservoir that is the terminal point of the west branch of the California Aqueduct, and it stores approximately 320,000 AF of water. The Agency's major facilities consist of the Earl Schmidt Intake Pump Station (ESIPS), the 56 mgd Earl Schmidt Filtration Plant (ESFP), the Rio Vista Intake Pump Station (RVIPS), the 66 mgd Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant (RVWTP), and a system of pipelines and ancillary facilities which convey treated water to the four retail purveyors: NCWD, SCWD, VWC, and LA County Waterworks District 36. CLWA treats the imported water stored in Castaic Lake at either the ESFP or the RVWTP and delivers it to the water purveyors through a transmission system. The main transmission line, the Castaic Conduit, is located east of the Golden State Freeway, generally paralleling the Freeway and Magic Mountain Parkway from Castaic Lake to a point just north and west of Bouquet Junction where two laterals begin. The Honby Lateral roughly follows the north side of the Santa Clara River to the east, where it crosses to the south to serve Saugus. Headed in a southerly direction, the Newhall Lateral parallels San Fernando Road to serve Newhall and Valencia. At the present time, CLWA delivers water to the purveyors through 11 turnouts. Page 2-30 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 KERN COUNT LOS ANGELES COUNTY m Q/NV�' W LANCASTE F- R W AVENUE D n QUAIL 1 ''FAKE LU 1 AVENUE G EAVENUE G v1 LANCASTER RD ��� A rv•,j W AVENUE I I EA ENUE I \ •t ��__ c'qC/,c o EAVENUE J Ir PYRAMID ' SRN/ T \ LAKE = A pNQ(Jqp D �♦ �HUGHES 1 F ♦ Jp LAKE ELIZABETH F(� ♦♦ © ��G� LAKE \♦ BOUQUET RESERVOIR ' .1 I 1 Q" �KEQE AL WLE BLVD 1 -1 1I�rllii AVENUE S �1 O `0 N z- v G mZ i� 1 r 1 lu MVM -GIS Services O O o-= I 1 SOLED a OA 'YON RD ; O Debris Basin / 1 1 = 0 Dams �.EN TA c ARA ' RIVLR Upper Saha Clara River Watershed 1 100 -Near Floodplain For The Santa Clam River J National Forest Boundary :rat • - f 1 ■ Lakes and Reservoirs Surname .r 1 Om%� Sman Drains and Channels ' \� Santa Clare River ' 1 1 i � � �• IF 1 Figure 2.7=1 Drainage Infrastructures Path: \\Pwgisfie\smpm\GIS_Services\MPMGIS\projects\mpm\wk_Drainagelnfrastructure\Potential FigVUI FIGURE\2_7_1.mxd Section 3: Water Supplies and Water Demand As summarized in Section 2, the Regional water supplies include groundwater, imported water, and recycled water. This Section describes the water resources available to the Region, the quality of these resources, and Regional demand for water. Information in this section is primarily based on the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, which provides additional details on these topics. The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP is available at www.clwa.org/publications/2010-urban-water-management-plan. 3.1 Water Supply This section describes the water resources available to the Region through 2050. The currently available and planned water supply sources are summarized in Table 3.1-1 and discussed in more detail below. As used in this IRWMP and defined by DWR, a dry year is generally considered to be a year with below average runoff for a given watershed. The impact of low precipitation in a given year on a particular supply may differ based on how low the precipitation is and the previous year's hydrology. For the SWP, a low -precipitation year may or may not affect supplies, depending on how much water is in SWP storage at the beginning of the year. Also, dry conditions can differ geographically. For example, a dry year can be local to the Region (thereby affecting local groundwater replenishment and production), local to northern California (thereby affecting SWP water deliveries), or statewide (thereby affecting both local groundwater and the SWP). When the term "dry" is used in this IRWMP, statewide drought conditions are assumed, affecting both local groundwater and imported supplies at the same time. 3.1.1 Groundwater DWR delineates two groundwater basins in the Santa Clara River Floodplain: Acton Valley Basin and Santa Clara River Valley Basin, but locally additional groundwater areas are recognized: • Acton Valley Groundwater Basin ■ Agua Dulce Groundwater Basin • Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel • Santa Clara River Valley Basin, East Subbasin ■ Alluvium ■ Saugus Formation Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-1 TABLE 3.1-1 CURRENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES IN THE REGION (AFY)lal 2015 2020 2025 Recvcled Water`"' Total Recvcled 325 325 325 325 325 325 325 325 325 Water Planned East Subbasin - Alluvium - 1,000 2,000 31000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 East Subbasin - Saugus Formation 1,375 11375 1,375 11375 1,375 1,375 1,375 1,375 Total Planned Groundwater 1,375 2,375 3,375 4,375 5,375 6,375 7,375 %375 (a) The values shown under "Existing Supplies" and "Planned Supplies" are projected to be available in average/normal years. The values shown under "Existing Banking Programs" and "Planned Banking Programs" are the maximum capacity of program withdrawals. (b) Existing groundwater supplies represent the quantity of groundwater anticipated to be pumped with existing wells. (c) UWCD and CLWA 1996. (d) SCWD's existing Saugus 1 and Saugus 2 wells resumed production in 2011 with the completion of the perchlorate treatment facility. (e) Represents recycled water being delivered in 2010 with existing facilities. CLWA currently has 1,700 AFY recycled water under contract. (f) SWP supplies are based on the Department of Water Resources "2009 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report' as presented in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP. It is assumed 3 percent imported water delivered to the Antelope Valley East Kern Water Agency available to Region. Updated projections from the 2011 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report differ from values presented here, however adequate supplies are anticipated to be available throughout the planning horizon. (g) Includes both CLWA and Ventura County entities flexible storage accounts. Initial term of agreement with Ventura County entities expires after 2015. (h) Supplies shown are annual amounts that can be withdrawn and would typically be used only during dry years. (i) Planned groundwater supplies represent new groundwater well capacity that may be required by an individual purveyor's production objectives in the Alluvium and the Saugus Formation. Page 3-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 3.1.1.1 Acton Valley Groundwater Basin The Acton Valley Groundwater Basin encompasses an area of approximately 13 square miles (DWR 2002a) in the northeastern portion of the Upper Santa Clara River watershed. It is bounded by the Sierra Pelona on the north and the San Gabriel Mountains on the south, east and west. It is drained by the Santa Clara River. The Acton Valley Groundwater Basin is an alluvial basin consisting of two water bearing geologic units: the Holocene age undifferentiated alluvium and the Pleistocene age stream terrace deposits. Groundwater in these deposits is unconfined. 3.1.1.1.1 Hydrogeology Alluvial deposits are encountered in the town of Acton and its vicinity, and along upper Soledad Canyon, beginning just southwest of Soledad Pass. They are thickest in the Santa Clara River channel, and reach their maximum thickness of 225 feet near Acton, thinning east and west of the town. Alluvial deposits consist of unconsolidated, poorly bedded, poorly sorted to sorted sand, gravel, silt and clay with some cobbles and boulders. Specific yield in the alluvium ranges from ten to 19 percent (DWR 2002a). Terrace deposits occur in the northern part of the basin, north of Acton, where they reach the maximum thickness of 210 feet (Slade 1990). They consist of crudely stratified, poorly consolidated, only locally cemented, angular to subangular detritus of local origin (DWR 2002a). Specific yield in terrace deposits ranges from three to five percent (DWR 2002a). The Acton Valley Groundwater Basin is transected by numerous faults. Three of the principal faults are the northwest -trending Kashmere Valley and Acton faults, and the northeast -trending Soledad fault system. The geologic history and seismic activity of these faults are not known. Although these faults offset the basement rocks, they have not been shown to offset younger alluvial and terrace deposits (UWCD and CLWA 1996). No groundwater measurements data are available to determine whether these faults form barriers to groundwater flow in the basement complex. DWR does not consider these faults to be barriers to groundwater flow in the alluvium (DWR 1993). 3.1.1.1.2 Groundwater Flow The groundwater within the basin flows toward the channel of the Santa Clara River. It then flows in the southwest direction toward Soledad Canyon at an average gradient of 64 to 91 feet per mile. The gradient varies seasonally, with the lowest gradient during dry seasons, and the highest during wet seasons. The Soledad Canyon forms the only outlet for groundwater underflow and for surface water outflow from the basin. 3.1.1.1.3 Recharge (Replenishment) Areas The basin is recharged largely by deep percolation of direct rainfall and rainfall runoff captured in the Acton Valley, Santa Clara River and its tributaries. Deep percolation of water from excessive irrigation of lawns and agricultural areas, and from private onsite septic tanks and leachfield systems, provide additional amounts of replenishment (UWCD and CLWA 1996; DWR 2002a). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-3 3.1.1.1.4 Groundwater Quantity The total storage capacity of the basin is estimated at approximately 40,000 to 45,000 AF (UWCD and CLWA 1996; DWR 2002a). Historically, the estimated amount of groundwater in storage ranged from 14,883 AF for a relatively dry period (1965) to 34,395 AF for a relatively wet period (1945) (UWCD and CLWA 1996). There are several water -supply wells that extract groundwater from the alluvium at rates greater than 100 gallons per minute (GPM), and numerous small -volume domestic water supply wells scattered throughout the basin region. The major water pumpers are the Los Angeles County Water Works District No. 37 (LACWWD No. 37), Acton Camp, a trailer park, and a few large private wells installed in the southern part of the basin (UWCD and CLWA 1996). Since 2000, LACWWD No. 37 pumping has ranged between 977 and 2,118 AFY. Historical groundwater elevations within the main alluvial channel of the Upper Santa Clara River have ranged from about 2,570 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) at Acton Camp to 2,997 feet AMSL in the northern portion of the basin during a relatively dry hydrologic period (1964-65), and from 2,616 feet AMSL at Acton Camp to 3,085 feet at the Vincent Fire Station during the 1984-85 wet period (UWCD and CLWA 1996, Slade 1990). In general, groundwater levels declined during the 1950s through the mid 1970s, rose during the late 1970s to the mid 1980s, and continued to decline after the 1980s (Slade 1990). 3.1.1.2 Agua Dulce Groundwater Basin Although not formerly recognized as a groundwater basin by DWR until 2003, and then only as a portion of the Acton Valley Groundwater Basin, the Agua Dulce groundwater basin consists of potentially water -bearing alluvial type sediments over an area of approximately 4,620 acres within Sierra Pelona Valley (Slade 2004), northeast of the Santa Clarita Valley. Pumping occurring within the Agua Dulce portion of the Acton Valley Groundwater Basin includes pumping for the Agua Dulce Winery and Vineyards, the Sierra Pelona Mutual Water Company (which serves the Sierra Colony Ranch Estates Tract 34038) and six other small water systems (Slade 2004), all of which are regulated by the Los Angeles County Environmental Health Department. 3.1.1.3 Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel The Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel is approximately nine miles long. It is bordered by the Acton Valley Groundwater Basin on the east, and by the Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin on the west (UWCD and CLWA 1996). DWR does not designate the Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel as a groundwater basin. The water -bearing formation of the Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel consists of alluvium deposited in the Santa Clara River bed. Twenty one private water -supply wells extract groundwater throughout the channel. Groundwater extraction data, groundwater storage, and yield data are not currently available (UWCD and CLWA 1996). 3.1.1.4 Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin The groundwater basin generally beneath the Valley is identified in DWR's Groundwater Bulletin 118 as the Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin (Basin No. 4-4.07). The Santa Clara River Valley East Groundwater Subbasin encompasses an area of approximately 103 square miles (DWR 2002b). It is bordered by the Piru Mountains on the north, on the west Page 3-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 by impervious rocks of the Modelo and lower Saugus Formations, and a constriction in the alluvium, by the San Gabriel Mountains on the south and east, and by the Santa Susana Mountains on the south. It is drained by the Santa Clara River, Bouquet Creek, and Castaic Creek (DWR 2002b). 3.1.1.4.1 Hydrogeology The Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin, consists of two aquifer systems, which are the Alluvium and the Saugus Formation. The Alluvium generally underlies the Santa Clara River and its several tributaries, where it reaches a maximum thickness of about 200 feet. The Saugus Formation underlies practically the entire Upper Santa Clara River area, to depths of at least 2,000 feet. There are also some scattered outcrops of Terrace deposits in the basin that likely contain limited amounts of groundwater. However, since these Terrace deposits are located in limited areas that are situated at elevations above the regional water table and are also of limited thickness, they are of no practical significance as aquifers for municipal water supply. Consequently, Terrace deposits have not been developed for any significant water supply in the basin (CLWA, et al. 2011 and 2012). 3.1.1.5 Adopted Groundwater Management Plan for Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin CLWA prepared a groundwater management plan in accordance with the provisions of Water Code Section 10753, which was originally enacted by Assembly Bill (AB) 3030 (Chapter 903, Statutes of 1991). The general contents of CLWA's groundwater management plan (GWMP) were outlined in 2002, and a detailed plan was drafted and adopted in 2003 to satisfy the requirements of AB 134 (Chapter 929, Statutes of 2001). The plan both complements and formalizes a number of existing water supply and water resource planning and management activities in CLWA's service area, which effectively encompasses the East Subbasin of the Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin. Notable, CLWA's GWMP also includes a basin - wide monitoring program, the result of which provide input to annual reporting on water supplies and water resources in the East Subbasin, as well as input to assessment of basin yield for water supply as described below. The GWMP contains four management objectives, or goals, for the basin including: (1) Development of an integrated surface water, groundwater, and recycled water supply to meet existing and projected demands for municipal, agricultural, and other water uses; (2) Assessment of groundwater basin conditions to determine a range of operational yield values that use local groundwater conjunctively with supplemental SWP supplies and recycled water to avoid groundwater overdraft; (3) Preservation of groundwater quality, including active characterization and resolution of any groundwater contamination problems; and (4) Preservation of interrelated surface water resources, which includes managing groundwater to not adversely impact surface and groundwater discharges or quality to downstream basin(s). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-5 In 2001, out of a willingness to seek opportunities to work together and develop programs that mutually benefit the region as well as their individual communities, several agencies prepared and executed an MOU prior to preparation and adoption of the GWMP. Those agencies were CLWA, Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 3636 (LACWWD No. 36), NCWD, SCWD, VWC, and United Water Conservation District (UWCD) in neighboring Ventura County. The MOU is a collaborative and integrated approach to several of the aspects of water resource management included in the GWMP. As a result of the MOU, the cooperating agencies integrated their respective database management efforts and continued to monitor and report on the status of basin conditions, as well as on geologic and hydrologic aspects of their respective parts of the overall stream -aquifer system. Following adoption of the GWMP, the water suppliers developed and utilized a numerical groundwater flow model for analysis of groundwater basin yield and for analysis of extraction and containment of groundwater contamination (CLWA, et al. 2011). The adopted GWMP includes 14 elements intended to accomplish the East Subbasin management objectives listed above. In summary, the plan elements include: • Monitoring of groundwater levels, quality, production and subsidence • Monitoring and management of surface water flows and quality • Determination of East Subbasin yield and avoidance of overdraft • Development of regular and dry -year emergency water supply • Continuation of conjunctive use operations • Long-term salinity management • Integration of recycled water • Identification and mitigation of soil and groundwater contamination, including involvement with other local agencies in investigation, cleanup, and closure • Development and continuation of local, state and federal agency relationships • Groundwater management reports • Continuation of public education and water conservation programs • Identification and management of recharge areas and wellhead protection areas • Identification of well construction, abandonment, and destruction policies • Provisions to update the groundwater management plan Work on a number of the GWMP elements had been ongoing for some time prior to the formal adoption of the GWMP, and expanded work on implementation of the GWMP continues. Page 3-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 3.1.1.6 Available Groundwater Supplies The groundwater component for the East Subbasin groundwater supply in the Region derives from a groundwater operating plan for the East Subbasin developed over the last 25 years to meet water requirements (municipal, agricultural, small domestic) while maintaining the East Subbasin in a sustainable condition (i.e., no long-term depletion of groundwater or interrelated surface water). This operating plan also addresses groundwater contamination issues in the East Subbasin, all consistent with both the MOU and the GWMP described above. The groundwater operating plan is based on the concept that pumping can vary from year to year to allow increased groundwater use in dry periods and increased recharge during wet periods and to collectively ensure that the groundwater East Subbasin is adequately replenished through various wet/dry cycles. As ultimately formalized in the GWMP, the operating yield concept has been quantified as ranges of annual pumping volumes to capture year-to-year pumping fluctuations in response to both hydrologic conditions and customer demand. Ongoing work through implementation of the GWMP has produced three detailed technical reports. The first report, dated April 2004, documents the construction and calibration of the groundwater flow model for the Valley (CH2M Hill 2004). The second report, dated August 2005, presents the modeling analysis of the purveyors' groundwater operating plan (CH21M Hill and Luhdorff & Scalmanini 2005). The most recent report, an updated analysis of the basin (Luhdorff & Scalmanini and GSI 2009) presents the modeling analysis of the current groundwater operating plan, including restoration of contaminated wells for municipal supply after treatment and also presents a range of potential impacts deriving from climate change considerations. The primary conclusion of the modeling analysis is that the groundwater operating plan will not cause detrimental short or long term effects to the groundwater and surface water resources in the Valley and is therefore, considered sustainable (CLWA, et al. 2011). The updated groundwater operating plan, summarized in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP and Table 3.1-2 is as follows: Alluvium: Pumping from the Alluvium in a given year is governed by local hydrologic conditions in the eastern Santa Clara River watershed. Pumping ranges between 30,000 and 40,000 AFY during normal and above -normal rainfall years. However, due to hydrogeologic constraints in the eastern part of the subbasin, pumping is reduced to between 30,000 and 35,000 AFY during locally dry years. Saugus Formation: Pumping from the Saugus Formation in a given year is tied directly to the availability of other water supplies, particularly from the SWP. During average - year conditions within the SWP system, Saugus pumping ranges between 7,500 and 15,000 AFY. Planned dry -year pumping from the Saugus Formation ranges between 15,000 and 25,000 AFY during a drought year and can increase to between 21,000 and 25,000 AFY if SWP deliveries are reduced for two consecutive years and between 21,000 and 35,000 AFY if SWP deliveries are reduced for three consecutive years. Such high pumping would be followed by periods of reduced (average -year) pumping, at rates between 7,500 and 15,000 AFY, to further enhance the effectiveness of natural recharge processes that would recover water levels and groundwater storage volumes after the higher pumping during dry years. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-7 TABLE 3.1-2 AVAILABILITY OF GROUNDWATER FOR THE REGION Groundwater Production Aquifer Normal Year Dry Year 1 Dry Year 2 Dry Year 2 East Subbasin to 403000 303000 to to 15.000 15.500 to Acton Basin 343400 143900 14,900 142900 Total 71,900 to 89,400 60,400 to 74,900 65,900 to 74,900 65,900 to 84,900 Source: 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (CLWA, et al. 2011), Table 3-5, and UWCD and CLWA 1996. Additionally, availability of groundwater from the Acton Groundwater Basin is estimated to range from 14,883 AF for a relatively dry period to 34,395 AF for a relatively wet period (UWCD and CLWA 1996). Over time, directly related to the rate of suburban development and corresponding decrease in agricultural land use, the amount of Alluvium pumping for agricultural water supply is expected to decrease, with an equivalent increase in the amount of Alluvium pumping for municipal water supply, resulting in total pumping remaining essentially constant through 2050. In the future, Alluvium pumping is intended to remain within the sustainable ranges in the Groundwater Operating Plan. Planned Saugus Formation pumping increases are also expected to remain at levels consistent with the operating plan. Overall, the municipal groundwater supply, distributed among the retail purveyors, recognizes the existing and projected future uses of groundwater by overlying interests in the Valley such that the combination of municipal and all other groundwater pumping remains within the groundwater operating plan, which has been analyzed for sustainability (CLWA, et al. 2011). 3.1.1.6.1 Impacted Well Capacity As discussed in the 2008 IRWMP, certain wells in the Basin were impacted by perchlorate contamination and thus represented a temporary loss of well capacity within CLWA's service area. The remediated wells (two Saugus wells and one Alluvium well) and the replacement wells (one Saugus and one Alluvium well), collectively restore much of the temporarily lost well capacity and are now included as parts of the active municipal groundwater source capacities. More details on perchlorate contamination and remediation in the Region are provided below it Section 3.2.4.3.3. 3.1.2 Imported Water Supplies Imported water supplies in the Region consist primarily of SWP supplies, which were first delivered to CLWA in 1980. Detail on the SWP facilities and background is also provided in Section 2.7.1. In addition to its SWP Table A Amount, CLWA has developed other imported water supplies. CLWA Castaic Lake has purchased an imported surface supply from the Buena Vista Water Storage District Page 3-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 (BVWSD) and Rosedale -Rio Bravo Water Storage District (RRBWSD) in Kern County, which was first delivered to CLWA in 2007. CLWA wholesales these imported supplies to each of the local retail water purveyors. Newhall Land and Farming (Newhall Land) has acquired a water transfer supply from a source in Kern County. This supply, referred to as "Nickel water," would be made available to VWC. Additionally, a small amount of SWP water is available to a portion of the eastern part of the Region through deliveries from the Antelope Valley -East Kern Water Agency (AVEK). 3.1.2.1 SWP Water Supplies CLWA and AVEK are two of 29 water agencies (commonly referred to as "contractors") that have an SWP Water Supply Contract with DWR. Each SWP contractor's SWP Water Supply Contract contains a "Table A," which lists the maximum amount of water an agency may request each year throughout the life of the contract. Currently, CLWA's annual Table A Amount is 95,200 AF2. AVEK's annual Table A Amount is 141,400 AF, but only approximately 3 percent (or 4,242 AF) of that amount is available to the eastern parts of the IRWM Region. In addition to Table A supplies, additional types of imported water may be made available by DWR including Article 21 water, Turnback Pool water and Dry Year Water Purchase supplies. However, due to uncertainty in availability, they are not included as supplies in this IRWMP. 3.1.2.1.1 Flexible Storage Account As part of its water supply contract with DWR, CLWA has access to a portion of the storage capacity of Castaic Lake. This Flexible Storage Account allows CLWA to utilize up to 4,684 AF of the storage in Castaic Lake, which must be replaced by CLWA within five years of its withdrawal. In 2005, CLWA negotiated with Ventura County SWP contractor agencies to obtain the use of their Flexible Storage Account. This allows CLWA access Loanother 1,376 AF of storage in Castaic Lake. CLWA access to this The Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta additional storage is available on a year-to-year basis through 2015. While it is expected that CLWA and Ventura County will extend the existing flexible storage agreement beyond the 2015 term, it is not assumed to be available beyond 2015 in this Plan. AVEK does not have access to SWP flexible storage. 3.1.2.1.2 Factors Affecting SWP Table A Supplies The amount of SWP water actually available and allocated to SWP contractors each year is dependent on a number of factors including, primarily, the availability of water at the source of supply in northern California, the ability to transport that water from the source to the primary diversion point in the southern Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta and the magnitude of total 2 CLWA's original SWP Water Supply Contract with DWR was amended in 1966 for a maximum annual Table A Amount of 41,500 AF. In 1991, CLWA purchased 12,700 AF of annual Table A Amount from a Kern County water district, and in 1999 purchased an additional 41,000 AF of annual Table A Amount from another Kern County water district, for a current total annual Table A Amount of 95,200 AF. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-9 contractor demand for that water. More detail on this is found in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP. The "State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, " prepared by DWR, assists SWP contractors and local planners in assessing the reliability of the SWP component of their overall supplies. In the 2011 Reliability Report (DWR 2012), DWR estimates that for all contractors combined, the SWP can deliver a total Table A supply of 61 percent of total maximum Table A Amounts on a long-term average basis, under current conditions and 60 percent of total maximum Table A Amounts under future conditions. In the worst-case single critically dry year, DWR estimates the SWP can deliver 9 percent of total maximum Table A Amounts under current conditions and eleven percent under future conditions. During multiple -year dry periods, DWR estimates the SWP can deliver a total Table A supply averaging 35 to 38 percent of total maximum Table A Amounts under current conditions and 30 to 35 percent under future conditions. Table 3.1-3 shows CLWA's and AVEK's SWP supplies projected to be available to the Region in average/normal years (based on the average delivery over the study's historic hydrologic period from 1922 through 2003). Table 3.1-3 also summarizes estimated SWP supply availability in the Region in a single dry year (based on a repeat of the worst-case historic hydrologic conditions of 1977) and over a multiple dry -year period (based on a repeat of the historic four-year drought of 1931 through 1934). Supply availability is agency -specific and may differ from combined contractor estimates described above. Table 3.1-3 does not include the 11,000 AFY available from the Buena Vista -Rosedale transfer in an average, single -dry, or multiple -dry year, as this supply is a firm amount in all year types. 3.1.2.2 Other Imported Supplies 3.1.2.2.1 Buena Vista - Rosedale CLWA has executed a long-term transfer agreement for 11,000 AFY with the BVWSD and RRBWSD and began taking delivery of this supply in 2007. The supply is based on existing long-standing Kern River water rights, which would be delivered by exchange of SWP Table A Amount. This water supply is firm; that is, the total amount of 11,000 AFY is available in all water year types based on the Kern River water right. 3.1.2.2.2 Nickel Water— Newhall Land Newhall Land has acquired a water transfer from Kern County sources known as Nickel water. This source of supply totals 1,607 AFY. The Nickel water comes from a firm source of supply and was acquired in anticipation of the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan development. In this IRWM Plan, it is anticipated that the Nickel water will be available to the VWC. Page 3-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 TABLE 3.1-3 SWP TABLE A SUPPLY RELIABILITY FOR CLWA AND AVEK (AF)Iallbl Wholesaler (SUDDIV Source) 2011 2015 2020 2025 2030-2050 Table A Supply CLWA 607000 603000 603000 603000 573000 % of Table A Amount 63% 63% 63% 63% 60% Table A Supply CLWA 127000 122000 123000 123000 103000 % of Table A Amount 13% 13% 13% 13% 10% Notes: (a) Supplies to CLWA and AVEK provided by DWR from detailed delivery results from the analyses presented in DWR's"2011 SWP Delivery Reliability Report. As indicated in the 2011 Reliability Report, the supplies are based on existing SWP facilities and current regulatory and operational constraints. (b) Table A supplies include supplies allocated in one year that are carried over for delivery the following year. (c) Based on average deliveries over the study's historic hydrologic period of 1922 through 2003. (d) Supply as a percentage of CLWA'S Table A Amount of 95,200 AF; Supply as a percentage of AVEK Table A water estimated to be available to Region (4,242 AF). (e) Based on the worst case historic single dry year of 1977. (f) Supplies shown are annual averages over four consecutive dry years, based on the historic four-year dry period of 1931-1934. 3.1.3 Groundwater Banking In 2003, CLWA produced a Water Supply Reliability Plan (Reliability Plan), and updated it in 2009 (CLWA 2009). The Reliability Plan outlines primary elements that CLWA should include in its water supply mix to obtain maximum overall supply reliability enhancement. These elements include both conjunctive use and groundwater banking programs, which enhance the reliability of both the existing and future supplies, as well as water acquisitions. Conjunctive use is the coordinated operation of multiple water supplies, generally based on storing groundwater supplies in times of surplus for use during dry periods and drought when surface water supplies would likely be reduced. During water shortages, the stored water is pumped out and conveyed to the banking partner, or used by the farmers in exchange for their surface water allocations, which are delivered to the banking partner. CLWA is a partner in four existing groundwater banking programs, the Semitropic Water Storage District (SWSD) Banking Program, the West Kern Water Storage District Program and two RRBWSD Banking programs, discussed below in Sections 3.1.4.1 and 3.1.4.2 respectively. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 3-11 Newhall Land is also a partner in the SWSD Banking Program, as discussed in Section 3.1.4.3, with its supplies assumed to be available to VWC. 3.1.3.1 Semitropic Water Banking Program In 2002, CLWA entered into a temporary storage agreement with SWSD and stored an available portion of its Table A Amount (24,000 AF) in an account in SWSD's program. In 2004, 32,522 AF of available 2003 Table A supply was stored in a second temporary SWSD account. In accordance with the terms of CLWA's storage agreements with SWSD, 90 percent of the banked amount, or a total of 50,870 AF, will be available to CLWA to meet demands. Of this recoverable storage, 4,950 AF has been withdrawn, with 1,650 AF delivered in 2009 and 3,300 AF delivered in 2010, leaving a balance of 45,920 AF in storage available to meet future CLWA needs. CLWA executed an amendment with SWSD for a ten-year extension of each banking agreement in April 2010. Current operational planning includes use of the water stored in SWSD for dry -year supply. 3.1.3.2 Rosedale -Rio Bravo Water Storage District Water Banking Programs CLWA has entered into a long-term agreement with RRBWSD that provides it with storage and pumpback capacity of 20,000 AFY, with up to 100,000 AF of storage capacity. CLWA began storing water in this program in 2005 and has 94,270 AF currently available for withdrawal. CLWA also has a two-for-one banking program with the RRBWSD that has a recoverable capacity of 9,500 AF. CLWA began storing water in this program in 2011 and has 7,470 AF of recoverable water as of 2012. These projects are water management programs to improve the reliability of CLWA's existing dry -year supplies; they are not an annual source of supply that could support growth. 3.1.3.3 Semitropic Water Banking Program — Newhall Land One of SWSD's long-term groundwater banking partners is Newhall Land. In its agreement with SWSD, Newhall Land has available to it a pumpback capacity of 4,950 AFY and a storage capacity of 55,000 AF. Newhall Land has a current storage balance of 26,059 AF. This supply is assumed to be available to VWC and is planned to be used only in dry years. 3.1.3.4 West Kern Water District Storage Program CLWA has entered into a two-for-one program with the West Kern Water District and has put 5,000 AF of water into the program in 2011. This results in CLWA having 2,500 AF of recoverable water in the program in 2012. 3.1.4 Recycled Water At the current time the necessary infrastructure to produce and utilize recycled water exists within the CLWA service area only. Hence the following section on recycled water focuses on the CLWA service area, describing existing and future recycled water opportunities. Currently there are two water reclamation plants (WRPs) within the CWA service area, treating water to tertiary level. Additionally, the Newhall Ranch development is also planning to construct a Page 3-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 WRP, and recycled water from this source may be incorporated into the CLWA recycled water system. By utilizing the recycled water from the WRPs for irrigation and other non -potable purposes, CLWA can more efficiently allocate its potable water and increase the reliability of water supplies in the Valley. CLWA's 2002 Draft Recycled Water Master Plan (Recycled Plan) and the associated 2007 Program Environmental Impact Report outline a multi -phase plan to supply recycled water to the CLWA service area, which is currently in its second phase (Phase 2). The two WRPs in the CLWA service area, the Saugus WRP and the Valencia WRP, are owned and operated by the SCVSD. The Valencia WRP, located on The Old Road near Magic Mountain Amusement Park, was completed in 1967. The Valencia WRP has a current treatment capacity of 21.6 million gallons per day (MGD), equivalent to 24,192 AFY. In 20111 the Valencia WRP produced an average of 15 MGD of tertiary recycled water. Use of recycled water from the Valencia WRP is permitted under Los Angeles RWQCB Order Nos. 87-48 and 97-072. The Saugus WRP, completed in 1962, is located southeast of the intersection of Bouquet Canyon Road and Soledad Canyon Road. The Saugus WRP has a current treatment capacity of 6.5 MGD (7,280 AFY). No future expansions are possible at the plant due to space limitations at the site. In 2011, the Saugus WRP produced an average of 5 MGD of tertiary recycled water. Use of recycled water from this facility is permitted under Los Angeles RWQCB Order Nos. 87-49 and 97-072. Phase 1 of the Recycled Plan has been constructed and begins with a 4,000 GPM pump station at the Valencia WRP that connects to a 1.5 MG reservoir in the Westridge area. It serves landscape customers along The Old Road and the Tournament Players Club (TPC) golf course, all of which are VWC customers. Phase 1 of the recycled water system can deliver up to 1,700 AFY. In 2011, CLWA reused approximately 337 AF of recycled water. Phase 2, will provide the infrastructure to deliver another approximately 1,600 AFY recycled water to residential developments and large irrigation customers. This second phase is divided into three separate sub phases that are currently in design: Phase 2A, 2B, and 2C. Phase 2A will divert recycled water from the Saugus WRP and distribute it to identified users to the north, across the Santa Clara River and then to the west and east. Customers included in this expansion will be Santa Clarita Central Park and the Bridgeport and River Village developments. Additionally, large customers will be served with this expansion with a collective design that will increase recycled water deliveries by 500 AFY. Phase 2B includes the rehabilitation of the Honby Pump Station, the conversion of an existing pipeline from potable to recycled water use, and additional storage in the eastern portion of CLWA's service area. Phase 2B will extend recycled water distribution 9,500 feet to an industrial area north and east of the intersection of Soledad Canyon Road and Golden Valley Road. Phase 2C further expands the recycled water program with the South End Recycled Water Project, which is a project proposed under the Proposition 84 Round 1 Implementation Grant program. VWC has initiated project design to expand the existing recycled water transmission and distribution system southerly to supply recycled water to additional customers as well as potentially supply a source of recycled water to customers of adjacent water agencies. Phase 2C will expand recycled water distribution in the City of Santa Clarita easterly along Valencia Boulevard and southerly along Rockwell Canyon Road and Orchard Village Road to Lyons Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 3-13 Avenue. Phase 2C will result in the use of up to 910 AFY of recycled water from the Valencia WRP. Ultimately, the CLWA recycled water system, along with the recycled water system proposed as part of the Newhall Ranch Development, will recycle approximately 22,800 AFY for non -potable uses. 3.1.4.1 New Wastewater Treatment Facilities A third Valley reclamation plant, the Newhall Ranch WRP, is proposed as part of the Newhall Ranch project. This proposed facility would be located near the western edge of the development project along the south side of Valencia Water Reclamation Plant State Route 126. The plant would be constructed in stages, with an ultimate capacity of 6.8 MGD (7,616 AFY) as stated in the RWQCB's Order R4- 2007-0046. According to the Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan/Spineflower Conservation Plan EIS/EIR of April 2009, approximately 5,400 AFY of the tertiary treated water from this plant is projected to be used by the Newhall Ranch Project. The WRP will serve the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan and a new County Sanitation District has been created to operate and maintain the Newhall Ranch WRP. 3.2 Water Quality The Region's water is an important resource and its quality is of vital importance. The quality of water affects the ability to use it, affects the cost of providing treated drinking water, affects habitat conditions, and can impair or enhance recreation. 3.2.1 Surface Water Quality This section discusses water quality as it pertains to pollution and the natural environment. 3.2.1.1 Basin Plan The Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan (1994) includes water quality objectives for the entire Santa Clara River Watershed. These objectives were established to protect the various beneficial uses for that particular water body or reach. The water bodies of the Upper Santa Clara River watershed, which include streams, natural lakes and reservoirs, span a wide variety of existing, potential and/or intermittent beneficial uses. The following is a list of the beneficial uses identified in the Upper Santa Clara River Region: • Municipal and Domestic Supply • Industrial Service Supply • Industrial Process Supply • Agricultural Supply • Groundwater Recharge Page 3-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 • Freshwater Replenishment • Hydropower Generation • Water Contact and Non -contact Water Recreation • Warm and Cold Freshwater Habitat • Wildlife Habitat • Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species • Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development All of the water bodies in the Region support the designated beneficial uses (either existing or intermittent) of municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, groundwater recharge, water contact recreation, non -contact water recreation, wildlife habitat, and warm freshwater habitat. In addition, many water bodies (such as Bouquet, San Francisquito, and Soledad Canyons) support the designated beneficial uses (either existing or intermittent) of rare, threatened or endangered species; wetland habitat; and/or spawning, reproduction, and/or early development. Regional reservoirs that support hydropower generation include Elderberry Forebay, Castaic Lake, Dry Canyon Reservoir, Bouquet Reservoir, and Pyramid Lake. Local surface waters are not a direct source of drinking water supply in the Region, but they are a continual source of recharge to groundwater which is used to meet municipal water demands. Table 3.2-1 shows Basin Plan water quality objectives of selected conventional pollutants meant to protect the beneficial uses in the Upper Santa Clara River watershed. The Basin Plan also outlines many narrative water quality objectives as well as various statewide plans and policies which contain applicable water quality objectives, some of which have been found to be causing impairment in the Upper Santa Clara River. In addition to the aforementioned water quality objectives, since the 1994 version of the Basin Plan was adopted, several key plans and policies which affect California were developed containing water quality standards. U.S. EPA adopted the National Toxics Rule (NTR) on December 22, 1992, and later amended it on May 4, 1995 and November 9, 1999. About 40 criteria in the NTR were applicable in California. On May 18, 2000, U.S. EPA adopted the California Toxics Rule (CTR). The CTR promulgated new toxics criteria for California and, in addition, incorporated the previously adopted NTR criteria that were applicable in the state. The CTR was amended on February 13, 2001. These rules contain water quality standards for priority pollutants. The State Water Board adopted the Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California (State Implementation Policy or SIP) in March 2000 and amended it in February 2005. The SIP establishes implementation provisions for priority pollutant criteria and objectives and provisions for chronic toxicity control. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-15 TABLE 3.2-1 WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR WATERS IN THE UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED Francisquito Canyons ' VV 1VV ��v I V,YJ, 1 V, 1 11r I.V Castaic Valley 1000 150 350 10;45;10;1(') NA 1.0 Saugus Formation - - NA - (a) The RWQCB has adopted revised Site -Specific Objectives (SSOs) for chloride. See RWQCB Order No. R4-2008-012. (b) SAR = Sodium adsorption ratio. (c) 10 mg/L nitrogen (as nitrate + nitrite); 45 mg/L nitrate (as NO3); 10 mg/L nitrate -nitrogen; 1 mg/L nitrite -nitrogen. 3.2.1.2 Water Quality Management Tools The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was originally passed by Congress in 1974 to protect public health by regulating the nation's public drinking water supply. SDWA applies to every public water system in the United States. SDWA authorizes the US EPA to set national health - based standards for drinking water to protect against both naturally -occurring and man-made contaminants that may be found in drinking water. Originally, SDWA focused primarily on treatment as the means of providing safe drinking water at the tap. Amendments in 1996 greatly enhanced the existing law by recognizing source water protection, operator training, funding for water system improvements, and public information as important components of Page 3-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TDS Chloride Sulfate Nitrogen SAR Boron (mg/L) (mg/L)la) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)(b) (mg/L) Inland Surface Waters Above Lang gaging station 500 50 100 5 5 0.5 (Reach 8) Between Lang gaging station and Bouquest Canyon Road 800 100 150 5 5 1.0 Bridge (Reach 7) Between Bouquet Canyon Road Bridge and West Pier Highway 1000 100 300 10 5 1.5 99 (Reach 6) Between West Pier Highway 99 and Blue Cut gaging station 1000 100 400 5 10 1.5 (Reach 5) Groundwater Basins Acton Valley 550 100 150 10;45;10;1(') NA 1.0 Sierra Pelona Valley (Agus 600 100 100 10;45;10;1(`) NA 0.5 Dulce) Upper Mint Canyon 700 100 150 10;45;10;1(') NA 0.5 Upper Bouquet Canyon 400 30 50 10;45;10;1 ` NA 0.5 Green Valley 400 25 50 10;45;10;11c1 NA - Lake Elizabeth -Lake Hughes 500 50 100 10;45;10;1(`) NA 0.5 area Francisquito Canyons ' VV 1VV ��v I V,YJ, 1 V, 1 11r I.V Castaic Valley 1000 150 350 10;45;10;1(') NA 1.0 Saugus Formation - - NA - (a) The RWQCB has adopted revised Site -Specific Objectives (SSOs) for chloride. See RWQCB Order No. R4-2008-012. (b) SAR = Sodium adsorption ratio. (c) 10 mg/L nitrogen (as nitrate + nitrite); 45 mg/L nitrate (as NO3); 10 mg/L nitrate -nitrogen; 1 mg/L nitrite -nitrogen. 3.2.1.2 Water Quality Management Tools The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was originally passed by Congress in 1974 to protect public health by regulating the nation's public drinking water supply. SDWA applies to every public water system in the United States. SDWA authorizes the US EPA to set national health - based standards for drinking water to protect against both naturally -occurring and man-made contaminants that may be found in drinking water. Originally, SDWA focused primarily on treatment as the means of providing safe drinking water at the tap. Amendments in 1996 greatly enhanced the existing law by recognizing source water protection, operator training, funding for water system improvements, and public information as important components of Page 3-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 safe drinking water. Under the SDWA, technical and financial aid is available for certain source water protection activities. The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) contains two strategies for managing water quality including, (1) a technology-based approach that envisions requirements to maintain a minimum level of pollutant management using the best available technology; and (2) a water quality - based approach that relies on evaluating the condition of surface waters and setting limitations on the amount of pollution that the water can be exposed to without adversely affecting the beneficial uses of those waters. Section 303(d) of the CWA bridges these two (2) strategies. Section 303(d) requires that the States make a list of waters that are not attaining standards after the technology-based limits are put into place. For waters on this list (and where the US EPA administrator deems they are appropriate), the States are required to develop a numeric Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). A TMDL must account for all sources of the pollutants that caused the water to be listed. Federal regulations require that the TMDL, at a minimum, account for contributions from point sources (Federally permitted discharges) and contributions from nonpoint sources. A TMDL is a number that represents the assimilative capacity of receiving water to absorb a pollutant. A TMDL is the sum of the individual wasteload allocations for point sources, load allocations for nonpoint sources, an allotment for natural background loading, as well as a margin of safety and additional accounting for seasonal variation. TMDLs can be expressed in terms of mass per time (the traditional approach) or in other ways such as toxicity or a percentage reduction or other appropriate measure relating to a state water quality objective. A TMDL is implemented by reallocating the total allowable pollution among the different pollutant sources (through the permitting process or other regulatory means) to ensure that the water quality objectives are achieved. 3.2.1.3 Section 303(D) List of Water Quality Limited Segments The 2010 Section 303(d) Impaired Waterbodies List for the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed was approved by the SWRCB on September 21, 2009 and was approved by the US EPA on October 11, 2011. There area number of constituents that are on the 2010 303(d) list for Reaches 5, 6 and 7 of the Santa Clara River, and for Lake Hughes, Lake Elizabeth and Munz Lake, which are also within the Region. Figure 2.1-1 shows the various reaches of the Santa Clara River. Table 3.2-2 provides a summary of the current listings of impaired water bodies of the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. 3.2.1.4 TMDLs The Santa Clara River currently has three adopted TMDLs due to non -attainment of water quality objectives, one pertaining to chloride, another pertaining to nitrogen compounds, and a third pertaining to bacteria. Another TMDL is in place for three lakes within the Region that are impaired with trash. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-17 TABLE 3.2-2 2010 303(D) LIST OF IMPAIRED WATER BODIES — UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED Proposed/ Est. Size Approved Pollutant/ Potential Typical Basin Plan Affected TMDL Name Stressor Sources Data Range Objective (acres) Completior Organic Eutrophication Nonpoint Annual mean > NA 21 Enrichment/ Low Nonpoint 0.8— 7.0 mg/L; No 123 2019 Elizabeth Lake Dissolved 2019 11.0 mg/L sample < Nonpoint NA Oxygen 21 2019 5.0 mg/L Trash Nonpoint pH Nonpoint 7.3-9.6 6.5-8.5 123 2019 Trash Nonpoint NA NA 123 2008 I2I_ k A Santa Clara River, Reach 7 (Bouquet Cyn Coliform Nonpoint NA NA 21 2019 Rd to Lang Gaaina) Source: SWRCB 2010. Note: (a) MPN = Most Probable Number Page 3-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Eutrophication Nonpoint NA NA 21 2019 Lake Hughes Fish Kills Nonpoint NA NA 21 2019 Odor Nonpoint NA NA 21 2019 Trash Nonpoint NA NA 21 2008 Eutrophication Nonpoint NA NA 7 2019 Munz Lake Trash Nonpoint NA NA 7 2008 Chloride Nonpoint/ 10- 80 — 100 mg/L 9 2005 Point 138 mg/L Santa Clara 30 -day log River, Reach 5 mean < 200 (Blue Cut to 20-24 ' 000 MPN(a)/100 mL; West Pier Coliform Nonpoint/ MPN a)/ no more than 9 2019 Hwy 99) Point 100 mL 10% of samples > 400 MPN (a)/100 mL Iron Nonpoint NA NA 9 2021 Chloride Nonpoint/ 10- 80 — 100 mg/L 5 2005 Point 138 mg/L Chlorpyrifos Unknown NA NA 5 2019 30 -day log Santa Clara mean < 200 River, Reach 6 Nonpoint/ 20-24000 ,000 MPN(a)/100 mL; Coliform MPN /100 noo more than 10 5 2019 (West Pier Hwy Point mL /a of samples > 99 to Bouquet 400 Cyn Rd) MPN %100mL Cooper Nonpoint NA NA 5 2021 I2I_ k A Santa Clara River, Reach 7 (Bouquet Cyn Coliform Nonpoint NA NA 21 2019 Rd to Lang Gaaina) Source: SWRCB 2010. Note: (a) MPN = Most Probable Number Page 3-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 3.2.1.4.1 Nitrogen Compounds The nitrogen compounds TMDL for Reaches 5 and 6 (previously Reaches 7 and 8) of the Santa Clara River went into effect on March 23, 2004. Nitrogen compounds can cause or contribute to eutrophic effects such as low dissolved oxygen, algae growth and reduced benthic macro invertebrates. The identified source of nitrogen compounds in the Santa Clara River are wastewater discharges, with possible other sources being agricultural runoff, stormwater runoff, groundwater discharge and atmospheric deposition. Given these sources, wasteload allocations for nitrogen compounds were assigned to the various sources (LARWQCB 2011). In 2003 the SCVSD upgraded the treatment processes at the Valencia and Saugus WRPs to include nitrification/denitrification to address nutrients. The 2011 average ammonia levels in the Valencia and Saugus WRP recycled water were 1.02 and 1.32 mg/L, respectively. The 2011 average nitrate plus nitrite levels in Valencia and Saugus WRP recycled water were 2.60 and 4.36 mg/L, respectively (CLWA, et al. 2011). The numerical TMDL targets established for ammonia and for nitrate plus nitrite are shown in Table 3.2-3 and Table 3.2-4, respectively. (As referred to in Tables 3.2-3 and 3.2-4, Reaches 7 ad 8 are the same as Reaches 5 and 6 referred to in Table 7.3-3 and elsewhere in this document). The Santa Clara River is not longer considered to have impairments related to nitrate; the river no longer appears on the 303(d) list for nitrate. TABLE 3.2-3 TMDL FOR AMMONIA ON THE UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER One-hour average NTlal Thirty -day average NT Reach (mg-N/L) (mg-N/L) Reach 8 14.8 3.2 Reach 7 above Valencia 4.8 2.0 on TMDL for Nitrogen Compounds Staff Report, June 2003. Note: (a) NT = Numeric Target. TABLE 3.2-4 TMDL FOR NITRATE PLUS NITRITE ON THE SANTA CLARA RIVER Thirty -day Average Reach (mg -NIL) Reach 8 9.0 Source: 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (CLWA, et al. 2011), based on LARWQCB Santa Clara River TMDL for Nitrogen Compounds. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-19 3.2.1.4.2 Chloride The Chloride TMDL was established due to the original listing of Reaches 5 and 6 of the Upper Santa Clara River for chloride on the 1998 303(d) list of impaired water bodies. Originally adopted in 2002, the most recent Basin Plan Amendment for this TMDL was unanimously adopted by the RWQCB in on December 11, 2008 with final approval by the US EPA on April 6, 2010. Beneficial uses currently impacted include salt -sensitive agriculture. Irrigation of salt sensitive crops such as avocados, strawberries, and nursery crops, with water containing high chloride levels allegedly results in reduced yields of such high value crops. Sources of chloride include self -regenerating water softeners, drinking water, and other additives that contribute to chloride in wastewater effluent. Wastewater discharges from the Saugus and Valencia WRPs were determined to be the principal source, making up an estimated 70 percent of the chloride load into Reaches 5 and 6 (LARWQB 2011). The TMDL implementation schedule allows for several special studies to determine whether existing water quality objectives and waste -load allocations for chloride can be revised. The TMDL established final waste load allocations of 100 mg1L and higher conditional waste load allocations for the Saugus and Valencia WRPs, and provides for a 10 -year schedule to attain compliance with the conditional water quality objectives and waste -load allocations for chloride. On October 28, 2013, the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District certified the Final Chloride Compliance Facilities Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report and approved a project consisting of ultraviolet disinfection, advanced treatment using reverse osmosis, and deep well injection for brine disposal, that complies with the final wasteload allocations of the chloride TMDL. 3.2.1.4.3 Bacteria The upper Santa Clara River has been listed as impaired by elevated levels of indicator bacteria, starting in 1996 at Reach 6. During the 1998 Water Quality Assessment, Reaches 5 and 7 were also found to be impaired by high coliform counts and were added to the 303(d) List. Elevated bacterial indicator densities have shown to be closely related to adverse health effects and impair water quality for water contact recreation. As a result of this impairment to beneficial uses, the Indicator Bacteria TMDL was adopted by the RWQCB for all three reaches on July 8, 2010 and went into effect on March 21, 2012 (DOT 2011). Major contributors of bacteria to the Upper Santa Clara River are discharges from the stormwater conveyance system that drains urban areas. In contrast, runoff from natural landscapes has not been found to be a significant source of bacteria. Numeric TMDL targets, expressed as allowable exceedance days, are used to calculate waste load and load allocations for non -point and point sources. They are based on an acceptable health risk for recreational waters as recommended by the US EPA and take into consideration that natural sources of bacteria exist that may cause or contribute to exceedances of objectives. Regulatory mechanisms that will be used to implement the adopted TMDL include the general NPDES permits, individual NPDES permits, MS4 Permits covering jurisdictions within the Upper Santa Clara River watershed, the Statewide Industrial Stormwater General Permit, the Statewide Stormwater Permit for Caltrans Activities, the Conditional Waiver for Irrigated Lands, Waste Discharge Regulations, and waivers thereof, as well as additional applicable California Water Code Sections and other appropriate mechanisms (LARWQCB 2010). Page 3-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 3.2.1.4.4 Trash On March 6, 2008, a trash TMDL became effective for Lake Elizabeth, Munz Lake, and Lake Hughes. Sources of trash have been identified as litter from adjacent lands, roadways, and direct dumping, as well as storm drains. By 2011, targeted efforts in the vicinity of Munz Lake resulted in the finding that the lake was no longer impaired; however levels of trash discharges to Lake Elizabeth and Lake Hughes are still resulting in water quality objective violations. The beneficial uses being impacted are water contact and non -water contact recreation, warm freshwater and wildlife habitat, and rare and threatened species. Structural and non-structural best management practices have been identified as a means of addressing this TMDL (LARWQCB 2011). LA County completed the installation of the required five full -capture trash devices in September of 2012 and is thereby in full compliance of this TMDL. 3.2.2 Potable Water Quality The previous section discussed water quality as it pertained to pollution and the natural environment. This section identifies water quality regulations related to potable water delivered to customers. The quality of water received by individual customers will vary depending on whether they receive imported water, groundwater, or a blend. Some will receive only imported water at all times, while others will receive only groundwater. Others may receive water from one well at one time, water from another well at a different time, different blends of well and imported water at other times, and only imported water at yet other times. These times may vary over the course of a day, a week, or a year. The following sections provide a general description of the water quality of both imported water and groundwater supplies as well as a discussion of potential water quality impacts on the reliability of these supplies. 3.2.2.1 Water Quality Constituents of Interest Some contaminants are naturally -occurring minerals and radioactive material. In some cases the presence of animals or human activity can contribute to the presence of certain constituents in the source waters. The Santa Clarita Valley's water suppliers are committed to providing their customers with high quality water that meets all federal and state primary drinking water standards (CLWA, et al. 2011). Common water constituents that are regularly tested for, include metals and salts, disinfection by-products, microbial contaminants, radioactive compounds, organic compounds, and hardness. General findings are listed below and more details on these constituents can be found in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP and the Santa Clarita Water Quality Report (CLWA 2012). Perchlorate is an additional constituent that has been a water quality concern in the Region and is discussed in detail below. • Metals and Salts. Metals and salts are tested in groundwater once every three years and in Castaic Lake water every month. Small quantities of naturally occurring arsenic are present in Castaic Lake and in groundwater wells; however arsenic levels are below the allowable drinking water maximum contaminant level (MCL). Maximum tested levels of chloride in water throughout the Santa Clarita Valley are all well below the minimum Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-21 MCL set for chlorides and nitrate levels in drinking water also meet federal and state MCL standards (CLWA 2012). Disinfection By -Products. CLWA uses ozone and chloramines to disinfect its water. Disinfection By -Products (DBPs), such as Trihalomethanes and Haloacetic Acids, are generated by the interaction between naturally occurring organic matter and disinfectants such as chlorine and ozone. Ozone is a very powerful disinfectant that can also interact with bromide, a naturally occurring salt, to produce bromate. The potable water systems are tested regularly for these constituents and levels are within drinking water standards (CLWA 2012). • Microbial Contaminants. Microbiological drinking water tests are conducted weekly for total coliform bacteria. No E. coli was detected in any drinking waters in 2011. Additional microbiological tests for the water -borne parasites Cryptosporidium parvum and Giardia lamblia are performed on water from Castaic Lake and have been negative (CLWA 2012). • Radioactive Compounds. Testing is conducted for alpha and beta radioactivitiy. If concentrations are measured above a given threshold, uranium and radium tests are also required. Current levels of radioactive compounds meet federal and state MCL standards (CLWA 2012). • Organic Compounds. Castaic Lake and local wells are tested at least annually for volatile organic compounds and periodically for non-volatile synthetic organic compounds. Trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene have been found in trace levels in groundwater in the Valley, but test levels are below the MCL and generally below the detection limit for reporting (CLWA 2012). • Hardness. Hard water is the primary complaint from Valley customers and despite the ban on automatic water softeners in the Valley, some households still use these units to remove hardness. In addition to having high operating costs, many of these units are designed to discharge a brine (salt) solution to the sanitary sewer system that is eventually discharged to the Santa Clara River (CLWA, et al. 2011). • Perchlorate. Perchlorate, a chemical used in making rocket and ammunition propellants, has been a water quality concern in the Santa Clarita Valley since 1997 when it was originally detected in four Saugus Formation groundwater wells. To date, perchlorate has been detected in a total of 8 wells, in both the Saugus Formation and the Alluvium, including most recently in VWC's Saugus Well 201, in August 2010. Six wells were ultimately taken out of service upon the detection of perchlorate. All wells have either been (1) abandoned and replaced, (2) returned to service with the addition of treatment facilities that allow the wells to be used for municipal water supply as part of the overall water supply systems permitted by the California Department of Public Health (DPH) or (3) are targeted for treatment or replacement. Returning impacted wells to municipal water supply service by installing treatment requires DPH approval before the water can be considered potable and safe for delivery to customers. Before issuing a permit to a water utility for use of an impaired source, DPH requires that studies and engineering work be performed to demonstrate that Page 3-22 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 pumping the well and treating the water will be protective of public health for users of the water. Ultimately, VWC's plan, as described below, and DPH requirements are intended to ensure that the water introduced to the potable water distribution system has no detectable concentration of perchlorate (CLWA, et al. 2011). A more detailed discussion on the perchlorate contamination and remediation efforts can be found below in Section 3.2.4.3.3. • Other. Other water quality parameters that may pose more aesthetic concerns, such as the odor threshold, color and turbidity have also tested below drinking water MCLS (CLWA 2012). 3.2.3 Imported Water Quality CLWA provides SWP water and other imported water to the Valley. The source of SWP water is rain and snow of the Sierra Nevada, Cascade, and Coastal mountain ranges. This water travels to the Delta through a series of rivers and various SWP structures. From there it is pumped into a series of canals and reservoirs, which provide water to urban and agricultural users throughout the San Francisco Bay Area and central and southern California. The southernmost reservoir on the West Branch of the SWP California Aqueduct is Castaic Lake. CLWA receives water from Castaic Lake and distributes it to the retail water purveyors following treatment. As surface water is exposed to a variety of microbial contaminants, there are considerably more water - quality regulations for surface water providers than apply to groundwater. CLWA has two surface water treatment plants, the Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant located in Saugus and the Earl Schmidt Water Filtration Plant located near Castaic Lake. Both of these plants have a multi -barrier strategy. The first barrier is the application of ozone, a powerful disinfectant, which has the ability to kill a broad range of microbes. The second barrier is the addition of chemicals to remove particles from the water, which can hide and protect microbes. Removing particles improves the anti- microbial action of the disinfectants. The water is then passed through two sets of filters, and chloramines are then added to the water. Chloramines contain chlorine and ammonia and prevent the growth of bacteria in the distribution system, which delivers water from the treatment plants to the retail water purveyors. An important property of SWP water is the chemical make-up, which may fluctuate and is influenced by its passage through the Delta. The Delta is basically a very large marsh (or estuary) with large masses of plants and peat soils. These contribute organic materials to the water. Salt water can also move into the Delta from San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. This brings in salts, notably bromide and chloride. Chloride levels from the Delta may elevate local chloride levels. Additionally, disinfectant by-products (DBPs) are generated when bromide and organic materials react with disinfectants such as ozone and chlorine. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-23 SWP water is generally low in dissolved minerals, such as calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, manganese, and nitrate. Dissolved mineral concentrations (total dissolved solids [TDS]) range between approximately 250 to 360 mg/L and hardness ranges between about 105 to 135 mg/L (as calcium carbonate). Historically, the chloride content of SWP water has varied widely from over 100 mg/L to below 40 mg/L, depending on Delta conditions. However, resulting from increased demand and dry period projections, a greater portion of water in the SWP has been pumped in from water banking programs, which can reduce peak chloride concentrations in SWP water (CLWA, et al. 2011). As reported in the Water Quality Report (CLWA 2012), all constituents meet the federal and state drinking water standards, but management remains a concern in order to continue to provide highest quality water. 3.2.4 Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality in the Region is generally good. Local groundwater generally does not have microbial water quality problems and has generally very little organic matter. The mineral content is fairly high, resulting in very "hard" groundwater, which although is not a health issue, is a water quality concern for this water resource. Presence of nitrate is an ongoing issue in the Agua Dulce groundwater basin where nitrate has been detected at levels exceeding drinking water standards. In the Acton Valley groundwater basin, elevated chloride, TDS, and sulfate levels have been detected and pose an ongoing water quality issue. In the Santa Clara River Valley East groundwater subbasin, the primary water quality concern has been perchlorate contamination. 3.2.4.1 Agua Dulce Groundwater Basin The water quality in the Agua Dulce groundwater basin is generally calcium bicarbonate in character with a mixed calcium magnesium bicarbonate character deeper down. TDS ranges from 330 to 520 mg/L and total hardness ranges from 230 to 330 mg/L (Slade 2004). Although some random inorganic compounds have been detected, all levels have been well below the allowed MCLs. The major water quality issue for the basin is the presence of nitrate. Nitrate has been detected as high as 69.1 mg/L in one well in the basin, which exceeds the MCL of 45 mg/L for this constituent. More typical ranges for nitrate in the basin are between 20 and 40 mg/L (Slade 2004). 3.2.4.2 Acton Valley Groundwater Basin Groundwater in this basin is generally classified as calcium -bicarbonate (DWR 2002a), although groundwater in the broad valley north of Acton exhibited calcium -magnesium bicarbonate to calcium -magnesium -sulfate character (Slade 1990). Based on sampling of 5 public water -supply wells, DWR reported TDS concentrations ranging from 424 to 712 mg/L, with an average concentration of 579 mg/L (DWR 2002a). During June 1988 to June 1989, the concentrations of TDS ranged from 279 to 480 mg/L, total hardness (TH) ranged from 172 to 271 mg/L, and nitrate concentrations ranged from 3.9 to 24.7 mg/L (Slade 1990, UWCD and CLWA 1996). The TDS content is greatly influenced by deep percolation of the rainfall runoff; it increases as rainfall declines and vice versa (UWCD and CLWA 1996). Page 3-24 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 DWR evaluation (DWR 2002a) indicated high concentrations of TDS, sulfate and chloride in 75 wells in the northern part of the basin, with some concentrations exceeding drinking water standards (Slade 1990; DWR 1993). Nitrate concentrations in two wells were above drinking water standards as well (DWR 1968). 3.2.4.3 Santa Clara River Valley East Groundwater Subbasin As previously mentioned, this subbasin has two sources of groundwater. Most local wells draw water from the Alluvium whose quality is primarily influenced by precipitation and stream flow. A smaller portion of the Valley's water supply is drawn from the Saugus Formation, a much deeper aquifer than the Alluvium, which is recharged primarily by a combination of rainfall, where exposed, and deep percolation. The two aquifers' water quality changes at different rates and much more slowly than surface water. Local groundwater generally does not have microbial water quality problems. Parasites, bacteria, and viruses are filtered out as the water percolates through the soil, sand, and rock on its way to the aquifer. Even so, disinfectants are added to local groundwater when it is pumped by wells to protect public health. Local groundwater has very little organic material and generally has very low concentrations of bromide, minimizing potential for DBP formation. Taste and odor problems from algae are not an issue with groundwater. The mineral content of local groundwater is very different from SWP water. The groundwater is very "hard," in that it has high concentrations of calcium and magnesium (approximately 250 to 500 mg/L total hardness as CaCO3) (CLWA, et al. 2011). Groundwater may also contain higher concentrations of nitrates and chlorides when compared to SWP water. However, all groundwater meets or exceeds drinking water standards. 3.2.4.3.1 Groundwater Quality— Alluvium Water quality in the Alluvium generally exhibits a "gradient" from east to west, with lowest dissolved mineral content to the east, and an inverse correlation with precipitation and streamflow, with a stronger correlation in the easternmost portion of the subbasin, where groundwater levels fluctuate the most. Wet periods have produced substantial recharge of higher quality (low TDS) water, and dry periods have resulted in declines in groundwater levels, with a corresponding increase in TDS (and individual contributing constituents) in the deeper parts of the Alluvium. The aquifer varies from calcium bicarbonate character in the east to calcium sulfate character in the west. Nitrate levels decline in the west and TDS levels increase (DWR 2002b). The presence of long-term consistent water quality patterns, although intermittently affected by wet and dry cycles, supports the conclusion that the Alluvium is a viable ongoing water supply source in terms of groundwater quality. The most notable groundwater quality concern in the Alluvium is perchlorate, detailed in Section 3.2.4.3.3. 3.2.4.3.2 Groundwater Quality— Saugus Formation Water quality in the Saugus Formation has not historically exhibited the precipitation -related fluctuations seen in the Alluvium. Based on available data over the last fifty years, groundwater quality in the Saugus had exhibited a slight overall increase in dissolved mineral content. More Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-25 recently, several wells within the Saugus Formation exhibited an additional increase in dissolved mineral content, similar to short term changes in the Alluvium, possibly as a result of recharge to the Saugus Formation from the Alluvium. Since 2005, however, these levels have been steadily dropping or remained constant (CLWA, et al. 2011). Dissolved mineral concentrations in the Saugus Formation remain below the Secondary (aesthetic) MCL. Groundwater quality within the Saugus will continue to be monitored to ensure that degradation does not threaten the long-term viability of the Saugus as an agricultural or municipal water supply. An ongoing water quality issue in the Saugus Formation is perchlorate contamination, detailed in Section 3.2.4.3.3. 3.2.4.3.3 Groundwater Contamination (Perchlorate) and Well Restoration Perchlorate has been the most notable groundwater quality concern in the Santa Clarita Valley. To date, perchlorate has been detected in a total of 8 wells, in both the Saugus Formation and the Alluvium, including most recently in VWC's Saugus Well 201 in August 2010. Table 3.2-5 summarizes the current remediation status of all wells where perchlorate has been detected. TABLE 3.2-5 STATUS OF IMPACTED WELLS Year Perchlorate Groundwater Detected Purveyor Well Aquifer 1997 SCWD Saugus 1 Saugus 1997 SCWD Saugus 2 Saugus Status January 2011; well in active service utilizing approved perchlorate treatment. DPH approved wells return to service in January 2011; well in active service utilizing 2002 SCWD Stadium Alluvium Destroyed and capacity replaced by new well. Well DPH approved perchlorate treatment removal 2005 VWC Well Q2 Alluvium in 2007; treatment was installed in 2005 and relocated for potential future use; well remains in service. NCWD Well DPH approved quarterly monitoring, results 2006 N-13 Saugus have always been below the detection limit for reporting; well remains in service. 2010 VWC Well 201 Saugus Out of service pending additional monitoring and evaluation of remediation alternatives. Source: 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (CLWA, et al. 2011) Page 3-26 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Perchlorate was initially detected in 1997, in four wells operated by the purveyors in the eastern part of the Saugus Formation, near the former Whittaker-Bermite facility. In late 2002, the contaminant was detected in a fifth well, an Alluvium well (SCWD's Stadium Well) also located near the former Whittaker-Bermite site, which was immediately taken out of service and subsequently destroyed. Perchlorate was detected again in early 2005 in a second Alluvium well (VWC's Well Q2) near the former Whittaker-Bermite site, and in 2006 in very low concentrations (below the detection limit for reporting) in a Saugus well (NCWD's N-13) near one of the originally impacted wells. In 2002 CLWA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) signed a cost-sharing agreement for a feasibility study of the area. Under federal and state law, the owners of the Whittaker- Bermite property have the responsibility for the groundwater cleanup. In February 2003, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the impacted purveyors entered into a voluntary cleanup agreement entitled Environmental Oversight Agreement. Under the Agreement, DTSC is providing review and oversight of the response activities being undertaken by CLWA and the purveyors related to the detection of perchlorate in the impacted wells. Under the Agreement's Scope of Work, CLWA and impacted purveyors prepared a Work Plan for sampling the production wells, a report on the results and findings of the production well sampling, a draft Human Health Risk Assessment, a draft Remedial Action Work Plan, an evaluation of treatment technologies and an analysis showing the integrated effectiveness of a project to restore impacted pumping capacity, extract perchlorate -impacted groundwater from two Saugus wells for treatment, and control the migration of perchlorate in the Saugus Formation. Based on treatment method pilot studies, selected ion exchange was determined to be the preferred treatment method for removing perchlorate. Environmental review of that project was completed in 2005 with adoption of a mitigated Negative Declaration. The Final Interim Remedial Action Plan for containment and extraction of perchlorate was completed and approved by DTSC in January 2006. Design and construction of the treatment facilities and related pipelines to implement the pump and treat program and to also restore inactivated municipal well capacity was completed in 2007. Treatment of the water began in 2010 and since 2011, the restored wells are now returned to service as part of the operational Saugus groundwater supply. In 2012, the Environmental Oversight Agreement was amended to include VWC Well 201. In 2007, a final settlement was completed and executed to fund, remediate and treat the contaminated water from the impacted wells. The "Rapid Response Fund" established under this litigation settlement will be used if the remedy to contain perchlorate contamination in the Alluvium and portions of the Saugus Formation does not prevent migration of the perchlorate plume towards downgradient threatened wells (VWC Wells N, N-73 N-8, S6, S7, S8, 201 and 205 and NCWD Wells N-10, N-12 and N-13). The Rapid Response Fund provides up to $10 million for any additional costs of providing replacement water, associated operations and maintenance costs of treatment equipment and resin under the terms of the Agreement. Most recently, in August 2010, perchlorate was detected in VWC's Saugus Well 201. Sampling in the months that followed confirmed the detection of perchlorate at concentrations that ranged from 5.7 to 16 micrograms per liter (Ng/L). VWC removed Well 201 from service when perchlorate was first detected and is currently evaluating remediation alternatives, including wellhead treatment, in order to return the well to service and restore impacted well capacity. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-27 Additional information on the perchlorate contamination and remediation efforts can be found in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP and through a DTSC information repository. 3.2.5 Water Quality Considerations for Recycled Water Use The SWRCB adopted a statewide Recycled Water Policy (Policy) on February 3, 2009 to establish uniform requirements for the use of recycled water. The purpose of this Policy is to increase the use of recycled water from municipal wastewater sources in a manner that implements state and federal water quality laws. The Policy states that salts and nutrients from all sources, including recycled water, should be managed on a basin wide or watershed wide basis in a manner that ensures attainment of water quality objectives and protection of beneficial uses. The Policy finds that the appropriate way to address salt and nutrient issues is through the development of regional or sub -regional salt and nutrient management plans rather than through imposing requirements solely on individual recycled water projects. Salt and nutrient plans must include a basin/sub basin wide monitoring plan that specifies an appropriate network of monitoring locations. The monitoring plan should be site specific and must be adequate to provide a reasonable, cost-effective means of determining whether the concentrations of salt, nutrients and other constituents of concern as identified in the salt and nutrient plans are consistent with applicable water quality objectives. A salt and nutrient management plan is being prepared concurrently with this IRWMP Update. After appropriate public review, the salt and nutrient management plan and associated data will be finalized, made available to IRWMP Stakeholders and submitted to the LARWQCB. 3.2.6 Water Quality Impacts on Reliability Since 1997, when perchlorate was originally detected in Valley groundwater supplies, the presence of this constituent has raised water quality concerns as well as concerns over the reliability of those supplies. The protection of groundwater sources (wells) from known contamination or provisions for treatment in the event of contamination is crucial to the availability and reliability of this water supply source. However, monitoring well installation has been completed; and a focused study of the Saugus Formation has ultimately been incorporated into the overall groundwater remediation and perchlorate containment efforts, which will enhance the reliability of groundwater in this region. All remedial action has now been reviewed by the DTSC. Overall, the plans developed for groundwater operation will allow CLWA and the retail purveyors to meet near term and long term demand within the CLWA service area. No anticipated change in reliability or supply due to water quality is anticipated based on the present data. 3.3 Water Demand A summary of the Region's historical water demand is provided below. Figure 3.3-1 shows the historical use of all water supplies for municipal water uses, including local groundwater, imported water supplies and recycled water. As seen in the figure, this use Page 3-28 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 shows an increasing trend in water demand since 1995 with a downturn in recent years likely due to response by customers to conservation efforts and economic conditions. FIGURE 3.3-1 HISTORICAL WATER USE Source: CLWA, et al. 2012. 3.3.1 Projected Demand The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP utilized existing land use data and new housing construction information to project water demands in the CLWA service area. Table 3.3-1 summarizes the current and projected water demands for the CLWA service area through 2050, based on individual purveyor projections of single family homes, multi -family homes, commercial, industrial, institutional/government, and landscape accounts. It is anticipated that these projected demands can be met using the water supplies described above. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-29 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 Y d O! 40,000 u 4 30,000- 20,000 10,000 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year tLACWWD36 f Newhall County Water District 4 Santa Clarita Water Division --YF Valencia Water Company All Retail Purveyors Source: CLWA, et al. 2012. 3.3.1 Projected Demand The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP utilized existing land use data and new housing construction information to project water demands in the CLWA service area. Table 3.3-1 summarizes the current and projected water demands for the CLWA service area through 2050, based on individual purveyor projections of single family homes, multi -family homes, commercial, industrial, institutional/government, and landscape accounts. It is anticipated that these projected demands can be met using the water supplies described above. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-29 TABLE 3.3-1 SUMMARY OF PROJECTED WATER DEMANDS 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 LACWWD 36'u' 11243 13583 13801 21145 21489 21833 3,177 37520 33864 NCWD 10,560 113406 11,764 13,440 15,115 16,791 18,466 20,142 213818 SCWD 27.816 28.209 27.757 30.938 34.119 37.300 40.481 43.662 46.843 SPVMWC`°' 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Total PurveyorDemand 72,323 753093 75,058 83,787 92,514 1013343 109,671 117,998 1263327 Non -Purveyors e Acton Private Users(c) 1.500 1.900 2.300 2.700 3.100 3.500 3.500 3.500 3.500 Total Water Demands 91,782 94,553 94,218 102,647 109,674 118,203 125,531 132,858 140,687 (a) Reflects existing and projected demands in CLWA service area only. CLWA's Annexation Policy requires annexing parties to provide additional fully reliable supplies. Purveyor demands reflect demands with conservation. (b) Source: 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (CLWA, et al. 2011), Table 2-2 (for 2010 demands) and Table 2-22 (for 2015-2050 demands). (c) Source: Acton -Aqua Dulce Conceptual Master Plan for Water Facilities 2004. Assumes build -out would occur in 2030 with an even growth rate throughout the planning period. Water demands after 2030 kept constant based on build -out demands. (d) Estimate from Slade 2004. (e) Non -purveyor demands do not include conservation. (f) Source: 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (CLWA, et al. 2011), Table 3-7. (g) 2010 demand for agricultural and other taken from CLWA, et al. 2012, Table 2-2. Page 3-30 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Projected demands reflect conservation activities planned by agencies in the IRWMP Region to comply with Senate Bill 7 of Special Extended Session 7 (SBX7-7). As described in SBX7-7, it is the intent of the California legislature to increase water use efficiency and the legislature has set a goal of a twenty percent per capita reduction in urban water use statewide by 2020. As SBX7-7 applies to retail water suppliers, NCWD, SCWD and VWC must comport with its requirements. For more detail, see the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (www.clwa.org/publications/201 0 -urban -water -management -plan). 3.3.2 Other Factors Affecting Water Demands Besides population, the major factors that affect water usage are weather and water conservation. Generally, when the weather is hot and dry, water usage increases. In the Santa Clarita Valley, the largest amount of water use occurs during the end of summer and in the beginning of fall months, whereas water is used least in the cooler months leading into spring. In addition, past studies have indicated that during dry years, demands within the Santa Clarita Valley can increase from between five to ten percent. During cool -wet years, historical water usage has decreased to reflect less water usage for external landscaping. The extent to which water demand changes is also dependent on the conservation activities imposed. Residential, commercial, and industrial usage can be expected to decrease as a result of the implementation of more aggressive water conservation practices and stricter building codes. The greatest opportunity for conservation is in developing greater efficiency and reduction in landscape irrigation as it typically represent as much as 70 percent of the water demand for residential customers depending on lot size and amount of irrigated turf and plants. Details on planned conservation activities can be found in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP. California, as a whole, faces the prospect of significant water management challenges due to a variety of issues including population growth, regulatory restrictions and climate change. Climate change is of special concern because of the range of possibilities and their potential impacts on essential operations, particularly operations of the SWP. The most likely scenarios involve increased temperatures, which will reduce the Sierra Nevada snowpack and shift more runoff to winter months, and accelerated sea level rise. These changes can cause major problems for the maintenance of the present water export system since water supplies are conveyed through the fragile levee system of the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta. The other much-discussed climate scenario or impact is an increase in precipitation variability, with more extreme drought and flood events posing additional challenges to water managerS3. Climate change vulnerabilities in the IRWM Region are discussed in detail in the following Sections. 3.4 Summary of Major Water Issues and Problems Over the course of the series of Stakeholder meetings, many issues and topics were discussed. However, many of the issues raised can be summarized into these themes: 3 Final California Water Plan Update 2009 Integrated Water Management: Bulletin 160. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-31 • Continued growth in water demand while imported water supplies become less reliable. As described earlier in this section, the long-term estimated delivery of SWP water is 60 percent; in a dry year SWP supply may be as low as seven percent. In addition, reliability of SWP could be affected by climate changes (see Section 5). In the meantime population in the Region is anticipated to nearly double by year 2050. • Difficulty in maintaining open space, habitat areas, and groundwater infiltration areas given population growth and increased urbanization. Planning agencies in the area have plans and policies to increase urban density to minimize "sprawl" and to maintain open space and habitat (which also function as groundwater recharge areas) but it is expected that there will be some land use conversion. • High cost of supplying recycled water. Recycled water is one of the Region's options to enhance local water supplies in order to meet growing water demands. However, it requires costly new infrastructure to distribute water to its users. These are major considerations when promoting and expanding its use within the Region. • Controlling the introduction, spread, and habitat degradation, related to invasive species. Invasive species can irrevocably modify and disrupt the ecological systems in which they spread, causing harm to native species through sudden increased competition for the same resources. The resulting reduction in ecological diversity makes the native ecosystems more susceptible to further disturbances and reduces their ability to provide valuable ecological services. Considering the high diversity of the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed and numerous special status species in the Region, the control of invasive species is considered important to sustain and enhance the existing natural systems and ecological processes in the Region. Invasive species are particularly an issue in floodplain areas. Variety of water quality issues, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), chloride and bacteria, as well as the ongoing cost of monitoring and treating perchlorate contamination. Maintaining high levels of water quality is a crucial component of water resources management in the Region, affecting the availability and reliability of local water supplies. Various factors contribute to continued need for rigorous monitoring and protection of water supply sources. As discussed above, recycled water discharges have been identified as major sources of chlorides to water resources in the Region. In addition, with increased recycled water use in the Region, additional water quality considerations must be taken into account that will require effective salt and nutrient management in order to continue to meet water quality objectives. Perchlorate contamination has raised water quality concerns since 1997 when it was first detected in drinking water wells and requires continued monitoring and treatment at considerable financial costs. Runoff and drainage issues in the more rural areas that result in negative effects to the rural areas and areas downstream. Need to enhance flood management in rural communities with expanded flood and drainage infrastructure. Runoff and drainage issues related to urbanizing areas in the floodplain. It is difficult to manage stormwater given the variability of quality and quantity of stormflow. There is an Page 3-32 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 increasing regulatory emphasis on limiting pollution in stormwater runoff. Ongoing urbanization adds impervious surfaces and introduces more pollutants. Habitat degradation due to lack of flows. The diverse natural systems in the Upper Santa Clara River Region are highly dependent on the health of the riparian systems throughout the Region, which includes the mainstem of the Santa Clara River, one of the last free-flowing river systems in Southern California. Maintaining minimum in -stream flows to sustain riparian system functions, including species habitat, remains a challenge and may become increasingly challenging with predicted climate change impacts. These identified issues were important in establishing the Plan objectives as described in Section 6. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 3-33 This page intentionally left blank. Page 3-34 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 4: Watershed Flood Management 4.1 Santa Clara River Hydrology The following detailed narrative is modified in large part from the 1996 Water Resources Report (UWCD and CLWA 1996). The Upper Santa Clara River is a large ephemeral stream that comprises the headwaters for the Santa Clara River system. The intermittent flows of the Santa Clara River are fed by tributary inflow as well as treated wastewater discharge from the Saugus and Valencia WRPs. The river originates as a typical mountain stream with a relatively narrow channel incised into hard bedrock that formed the local mountains. It has a straight to meandering channel pattern, and characteristic channel bedforms represented by a sequence of bars, riffles and pools. The bars are accumulations of the bed material positioned successfully downriver on the opposite sides of the channel. The pools are deep zones located directly opposite the bars, and the riffles are the shallow zones between the pools. The coarsest material is deposited in the bars. In alluvial channels, often a coarse-grained lag is left on the riffle, and fine-grained material is deposited in the pool. As the river exits the confinement of the mountains, it has a typical braided stream geomorphology characterized by the frequently shifting network of channels and the intervening bars, the broad floodplain area, and typical braided stream deposits composed of coarse sediment ranging in size from coarse sand to boulder. In and and semiarid climates, the morphology of such streams is controlled by stormwater flows originating in highland areas and storms of short duration and great intensity can result in flash floods in this area (UWCD and CLWA 1996). Such braided rivers typically transport large volumes of bedload. It is believed by fluvial geomorphologists that bank erosion is the most necessary factor in creating braided stream systems. As the Upper Santa Clara River enters the mountains, it narrows down into a single channel, and as it exits, it becomes distinctly braided. In the area where the river system exits Aliso Canyon and Soledad Pass, the morphology of the river is broad and flat. In Aliso Canyon the width of the 500 -year floodplain ranges from 400 to 600 feet and drains to the north. As the river exits Aliso Canyon, it abruptly turns to the west and the floodplain widens to a width of approximately 2,000 feet near Acton. At Acton, the river channel abruptly turns south, and the floodplain narrows down to a width ranging between 600 and 800 feet across as it enters Soledad Canyon near Ravenna. Leaving the canyon just east of State Highway 14 at Soledad, the river traverses the Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin. There, it becomes broad and shallow, and displays typical braided stream geomorphological features, such as point bar deposits, gravelly stream bottoms, and broad wide washes that contain an abundant coarse - size material (sand, gravel, cobble and boulder). The 500 -year floodplain formed along this reach of the river contains mostly fine sediment (silt and clay) and varies from about 1,000 to 2,000 feet wide. As the river enters the main Santa Clarita Valley, it is joined by Bouquet Creek and further down by the tributary in San Francisquito Canyon that display similar morphology. As the river passes through the west-northwest trending valley, the width of the floodplain abruptly narrows to about 500 feet before reaching Interstate -5. Castaic Creek enters the Santa Clara River from the north at the Castaic Junction area, and the river course continues in the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 4-1 southwestern direction. The width of the floodplain ranges between about 800 feet and 3,000 feet along this reach to the Los Angeles -Ventura County Line (VCWPD and LACDPW 2005). 4.2 Drainage Infrastructure There are many flood improvements in the Region, major drainage infrastructure is shown in Figure 4.2-1. Table 4.2-1 below documents drainage facilities for the Santa Clara River and the major tributaries. TABLE 4.2-1 DRAINAGE FACILITIES FOR THE SANTA CLARA RIVER AND MAJOR TRIBUTARIES Main River Current Improvement Compatible Future Channel /Tributary Improvement Santa Clara River Soft bottom with protective levee Soft bottom with stabilizers where necessary Tick Canyon Lower reach -concrete channel Upper reach -concrete channel with debris control Mint Canyon Lower reach -concrete channel Middle reach -concrete channel Upper reach -soft bottom with stabilizers Bouquet Canyon Middle reach -soft bottom with Lower and Upper reaches -soft bottom stabilizers with stabilizers Dry Canyon Lower reach -concrete channel Upper reach -concrete channel Haskell Canyon Lower reach -concrete channel Upper reach -soft bottom with stabilizers Upper reach -concrete channel with Plum Canyon Lower reach -concrete channel debris control or soft bottom with stabilizers Lower reach -soft bottom with Lower reach -soft bottom with stabilizers South Fork — stabilizers Upper reach -concrete channel with Santa Clara Middle reach -concrete channel debris control Lower reach partly soft bottom with Pico Canyon Upper reach -soft bottom with stabilizers stabilizers partly concrete channel Lower reach -soft bottom with San Francisquito Upper reach -soft bottom with stabilizers stabilizers Upper reach -soft bottom with debris Violin Canyon Lower reach -concrete channel control Castaic Creek Below 1-5 Freeway -soft bottom with Above 1-5 Freeway -soft bottom with protective levee stabilizers or concrete channel Source: LACDPW 2006, Table 2.2.1 Page 4-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 N W E S 5 Miles N KERN COUNTY _\ LOS ANGELES COUNTY /� Data contained in this map is produced in whole or part from the Thomas Bros. Maps & This map is copyrighted, and reproduced with permission granted, by Thomas Bros. Maps V. All rights reserved. o Debris Basin 0 Reclamation Plants ♦ Water Treatment Plants 0 Dams — Storm Drains and Channels Lakes and Reservoirs C3Upper Santa Clara River Watershed d Upper Santa Clara River 100 -year Floodplain �•n L"J Cities n,. tom r^11„.w cln" rte.,{..;t f+is{•i�{ B,.f ..�,�.,,: Z,C. o P AA Gz�A PAGE ♦ PAGE PAGE l 1 2 3 o� < o4011,11., " Santa Clara ' 4�� , 001�w� Data contained in this map is produced in whole or part from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Work's precise database. N PAGE 4 Figure 4.2-1 Major Drainage Infrastructure [Upper Santa Clara River Watershed PAGE 1 NENRY MAYA pR R� OMnas z N T ,m .A 3 o o, o s we C) I^ fib i S NENRY MAYA pR R� OMnas Figure 4.2-1 Major Drainage Infrastructure Upper Santa Clara River Watershed z T ,m .A Z o o, o C) I^ fib Figure 4.2-1 Major Drainage Infrastructure Upper Santa Clara River Watershed PAGE 2 IF IF •v w w w. •v ,v w w •r w •v IF w w w w •v w v w IF IV I 1s L " L � 1' `�, 3, 3+ 3, 1' �Y � 1i , 3, d1 1 i, 'v Y Y , 4,, . y 1 sf 11 1 IY 3, b 3, )o w Y w Y 3, �• J, w n Y °b S, - v 1 X 2y Y ,Y 3i Z '1. 11iy��1 Y13,:YYAt A? vil 1 L:Y�3,13,1,1'3,�yY�✓�1'1,��.3,1a,�,1 y1 a'�, S'�%ks. _ ,IF 3'•Y .w1�wAt yvyIll `3� IF Vrf y3ya,la,a,�,3, IP 3 Y y � y Y •Y' :y, J% Y w IP y •2, 1 ,h •Y Z w 1° -Y 4s, m IP F y IV if Y : .Y ,if ?'r y J2 4r Ify 24 Y 21PJ, It, 1 ,y' NP V Y 1.1 w � �Y Y Y S= 1• Y u -r 1= 3, ys y s J, t Santa Clara QO \J� GP2 T `J'�-j41Y• k � O ,Y w Yi Y J• ,v �e Ss y 3 - I If Px� �, ,lo �X" I O P GP 7 O1, 13, 1 2 3, 1a 1' �• 3, a �1, 1, Via• - 3 Al 4• S y . ,Y -,I, -,iv�, xY, �+1, 3, 1, xl 1,°. y' • Il,...._Y 21+ 5L- -Ass.' xls v=�•�+. a.. Y 3% y ]Y 3= Si% 41! 2 ry � . y 11 1% Y Y 3, S, 1, 1, -11? IN S, 1 1, 1, 3,2i? .v A, Y 1 ,L, -.. Y v3, 3, 1,1\3. 'y 1° ... .y yS1°Y3 Y1.5 ' ,"�,,v 3,1 1' & 3, 14l1 ,1,�"a 3, 1 1 - ,..3 Q Debris Basin Lakes and Reservoirs 0 Upper Santa Clara River 100 -year Floodplain Storm Drains and Channels Upper Santa Clara River Watershed OReclamation Plants River, Streams and Creeks Cities QDams ® U S Forest Remarry o Mlles Figure 4.2-1 Major Drainage Infrastructure pper Santa Clara River Watershed PAGE 3 C3•�l/ 1 1 1> �> /. 111111'111 111' 111112 ks �> 1 1 1 2 j 1 1 S1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2> 1> > 1 1r 1 1 1 1 1 Y 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 21111111+111112>1 �vl>>��41 A?-�1>�> 2 ]> lip �3>�4' ]'��>. 1 1 1 1 �!> 1, hLy 1r �> 1 1 1• �> �Lp 1 1 1 1 1 iv 1 1 1 1 1' 1 2 1 111%AP le Ap 111 ? 3>A3> -4re -v >—A? )1? -1)? - 3)? 1Y,� y>-yl+� 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1111211111 1 1 11. 1111.11 e'1 11211111 w�y�ylyy��L1> � � -�V Nip 111 �l? Ae 4 f! 2 1 1& 1 1111111111' 1 111 11111111121111 1� �, �> 10 1 �> .,�• 1 1 �b 1> 2> 1, 1 s? �' A? A? 3> � 1, 3, 2, 2, 111111111 1iv1�Y1111>�1> ,12 11111;x, e „� 1.11, N 1 21? 4>1J11>1Y1 �1>J1 yV y�y�Yyy J11,. y11, ,Y1 1>�,y,J1yJ 1y1 k 111)0y1 Y day 1 �> 1y111�1I)p�y1 `a' �A? A� 1>.._1 1> �• 1 47 �•� �1�. 1 1 �1nix2�> ��1 � 1 1 lip J,1112�y't12 11>1111>1111112, u11 k' 111 ��A�A A2111 1 11 �1?_IV ,.1111111 37 1> �1 1 1 1 1 11 1J 111111>1 �vf 1 A>�1 1 zk Dams Lakes and Reservoirs a Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Awa m Debris Basin '� Storm Drains and Channels d Upper Santa Clara River 100 -year Floodplain Figure a.2 -f r f Major Drainage Infrastructure Reclamation Plants -...— River, Streams and Creeks L Cities Upper Santa Clara River Watershed s This map is copyrighted andreproducedwith permission granted, by Thomas Bros Maps®. All rights reserved. ED U S Forest Boundary Miles PAGE 4 x- o m a fYv\'wz. �jY �1 m ;d Y�L.'d 11W�1 y,1`� 1 \ . �. v d 1 7/ 3/ -- y Y0y,L y�L�Ly 11r\ Yyy N m Debris Basin Storm Drains and Channels O Upper Santa Clara River 100 -year Floodplain zk Dams River, Streams and Creeks 0 Upper Santa Clara River Watershed w r DO Reclamation Plants Lakes and Reservoirs ® U S Forest Boundary C:..3 Cities S This map is copyrighted, and reproduced with permission granted, by Thomas Bros. Maps®. All rights reserved. 4, b )/ r�4� �yy•by:v�LyY�Y` l�:dLy,y ),A i rel �P Figure 4.2-1 Major Drainage Infrastructure Upper Santa Clara River Watershed oMiles 4.3 Runoff and Flood Events Typical to watersheds in and to semi -arid climates, annual rainfall and resulting peak flows are highly variable. Flood flows in the Upper Santa Clara River increase, peak, and subside rapidly in response to high-intensity rainfall. The "flashy' hydrograph produced by these conditions shows a rapid increase in discharge over a short time period with a quickly developed peak discharge compared to normal baseflow. The active river channel has adjusted in response to large flood events. Several major natural flood events have occurred in the Region, including during the winters of 1969, 1978, 1983, and 2004/2005. Two storm events occurred in January and February 1969 and produced the worst floods in the area in recorded history (VCWPD and LACDPW 2005, Stillwater Sciences 2011). During January 18 through January 26 there was a two-phase storm event, with a peak flow of 14,800 cubic feet per second (cfs) recorded on the Santa Clara River at the Old Highway Bridge/Interstate 5. The other storm occurred from February 23 through 25 with the Santa Clara River flows at the Old Highway Bridge peaking at 31,800 cfs, exceeding all previous records. Problems encountered in the Valley were much greater during the February storm event than the January event, and the damage was caused mostly by erosion the Bouquet Canyon Road of rather than debris deposition. In this area, Cross -Section tion of fGaging Station high flows caused severe erosion of Stream watercourses and the destruction of many bridges and improvements along these watercourses. Serious erosion at the south abutment of the Interstate -5 Bridge forced the closure of the freeway. Significant among these damages was also the destruction of the Africa -USA zoological compound located in the Santa Clara River floodplain near the eastern end of the Valley. Considerable damage was caused in the Iron Canyon and Sand Canyon drainages as debris deposition blocked roads, plugged culverts, and damaged bridges. Throughout the rest of the Valley, miscellaneous flooding and erosion caused minor damage, including the destruction of 2,000 feet of waterline which served as the sole source of domestic water for the community of Val Verde. Storms during the months of February and March, in1978, led to major flooding and related damages along the Sespe Creek. Significant sediment transport and deposition occurred, which resulted in its overflow of the creek and damage of over 370 homes from tons of silt and debris. A large contributor to the sedimentation and degree of damage experienced was the Mill fire, which burned 70.3 square miles in 1975. Losses of this flood event included one fatality and over $6 million in damage in the Los Serenos area of Fillmore. This flood event eventually led to the construction of the Fillmore levee and installation of the first real-time flood warning system (Automated Local Evacuation in Real Time [ALERT]) in Ventura County (Brooks 1982, County of Ventura 2013). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 4-13 The major storm event of 1983 took place from February 26 to March 6 (Los Angeles County Flood Control District 1983). Los Angeles County was hit by a series of storms which brought approximately 26 inches of rain to the San Gabriel Mountains. While extensive flooding did not occur, several new records for rainfall and runoff were produced. Mountainous areas of the Region experienced landslides and debris runoff. The damages occurred along natural watercourses, in canyons where no flood protection existed, to waterfronts, and to existing flood control facilities. Areas protected by the flood control system received insignificant damage. Damage to facilities along the Santa Clara River included: erosion of a reach of gunite lining in the vicinity of Lang Station Road adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks which prevented use of the tracks; street and trunk sanitary sewer in Lost Canyon Road were severely damaged by meandering flows upstream of Sand Canyon Road; south approach to the Sand Canyon Road Bridge above the Santa Clara River was completely washed out, and flows destroyed underground and overhead utilities; the south approach to the Sierra Highway Bridge and some utilities were damaged; a carport and the utilities in a trailer park located on the north side of the river west of Sierra Highway were destroyed; Soledad Canyon Road and Southern California Edison Company's main power lines (upstream of Bouquet Canyon Road) were damaged; the large structural steel power transmission tower west of the Golden State Freeway on Magic Mountain Parkway was toppled over by flows; the east approach to the Magic Mountain Parkway Bridge west of San Fernando Road was completely washed out; and a portion of the Bouquet Canyon concrete channel wall in the vicinity of Alamogordo Road and Bouquet Canyon Road was washed away, requiring emergency restoration work. In the winter of 2004 to 2005 the City of Santa Clarita declared a state of emergency when the Region experienced severe rains with reports of about 37 inches falling in the Newhall area. The intense precipitation resulted in record discharge levels in the Santa Clara River and major floods and mud slides. Massive amounts of mud and debris transported by the floods jammed and collapsed the Newhall Creek drainage system and damage to a total of 64 homes and buildings was recorded in the area. In total, flood damages to private and public property amounted to over $5.8 million (PCA 2006, City of Santa Clarita 2010, HK&C 2010). Figure 4.3-1 provides a summary of historic runoff for the Santa Clara River at three locations: the Lang Gage, which is at the eastern edge of the CLWA service area; the County Line Gage near the Ventura/Los Angeles county line; and the Piru gage near the Ventura County community of Piru. 4.4 Factors Affecting Flooding and Geomorphic Processes Flood hazards in the Upper Santa Clara River watershed are often associated with episodic occurrences of high-intensity storms with debris -laden flash floods. Given the highly dynamic morphology and periodically intense delivery of water and sediment, the Upper Santa Clara River is subject to significant adjustments within its bed and movement into adjacent floodplain areas. Beginning in the 1960s when rapid urbanization occurred in the Region, natural runoff and sediment transport patterns were modified by construction of impervious surfaces, such as paved streets and building rooftops. During the growth period in the 1980s the Upper Santa Clara River floodplain and channel were increasingly modified to provide for urban development, as well as associated flood control and debris flow protection infrastructure. Page 4-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 10(),000 90,000 80.000 70,000 A 80,000 FIGURE 4.3-1 HISTORICAL RUNOFF FOR THE SANTA CLARA RIVER 30.000 C LWA 20,000 Boundary 1 10,000 i? 0 pyo hh SCRNear Plru Gage f. --�t 1111 90001 � � caa u K a Lang _ + cage CountyLine Gage ".,A (11108500) Source: CLWA, eta1. 2011 (SCV Water Report) 00 re rp gh 00 ,r0 N Calendar Year I] Counly Line Gage (11108500) ■SCR Near Piru Gage (11109000) MLang Gage Nate.- Calendar Year 1996 contains sheam0ow data /mm the County Line Gage lar Januarythrough September and dale Gom the SCR Near Pim Gage for October through December The Ictais are combined For that year. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 4-15 Page 4-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Common consequences of urban development are increased peak discharge and frequency of floods. Hydromodification activities, such as increased paved surfaces for urban development, impact the watershed's ability to capture rainfall and convey flows. With a reduction in permeable surfaces, a smaller proportion of rainfall infiltrates in the ground, thereby increasing the amount, velocity, flow rate, and often the timing, of surface runoff. Resulting increased stream discharge rates can increase stream channel instability and streambank erosion (SWRCB 2009). In addition, the conversion of native shrublands to non-native grasslands have shown to contribute to higher sediment yields and can lead to an increase in landslide frequency (Stillwater Sciences 2011). With development in the floodplain, a river loses its natural outlet and ability to migrate into adjacent areas. The mainstem of the Upper Santa Clara River retains much of its natural attributes, including a sand -bedded, braided channel and broad floodplain terraces. However, throughout much of the Region, particularly in the more urbanized areas of Santa Clarita, including the South Fork Santa Clara River, Bouquet and Mint Canyons, active channel widths have been reduced by floodplain encroachment and river channel encroachment over the past several decades. Encroachment has constricted flows and reduced sediment storage and has created unstable conditions in the river's morphology. Results include accelerated changes to channel bed levels, bank failure and increased hazards to people and infrastructure. Levee construction, bank stabilization, channelization, and flow and sediment routing structures, such as stormdrains and debris basins,could result in unpredictable river responses during large flood events and increase risk to public safety and damage to ecological functions (Stillwater Sciences 2011). Watershed hydrology and geomorphic dynamics are also affected by wildfires, which accelerate erosion and sedimentation. Following fires, rain infiltration rates are significantly reduced, thereby increasing overland flows, peak flows and sediment yield in the watershed. Post fire periods in and to semi -arid regions, such as the Upper Santa Clara River Region, are typically characterized by a so-called "fire -flood" sequence as increased runoff and accelerated erosion on hillsides result in debris flows, landslides and floods (Stillwater Sciences 2011). While, big fires are natural events, urban expansion has placed people in fire -susceptible landscapes and this encroachment has been found to increase overall fire frequency in southern California wilderness areas. With large areas in the Region dominated by fire - dependent vegetation and hilly terrain in addition to dry weather conditions, wildfires in the Upper Santa Clara River watershed will continue to affect watershed hydrology and geomorphic dynamics at varying scales (Stillwater Sciences 2011). 4.5 Flood Management Various programs and policies guide flood management in the Region and promote flood protection to the community, including ordinances adopted by the City and County, as well as federal requirements. Generally, development in the Region is required to be protected from flood hazards through avoidance of flood -prone areas or through elevation of building pads in certain areas prone to flooding (County of Los Angeles 2011). The City of Santa Clarita participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is intended to lessen financial devastation by allowing City residents to obtain direct federal relief Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 4-17 following declared flood disasters. The major elements of this program include flood hazard mapping, flood insurance, and floodplain management. The NFIP requires the City to adopt a local floodplain ordinance and to regulate development in floodplains. In exchange, FEMA provides the community with flood maps that show risk of flooding, offers federally backed flood insurance and provides assistance in flooding events. The original flood maps for the City were produced over 30 years ago. FEMA embarked on a national Map Modernization Program in 2005 to update the country's aging flood maps. The flood maps for the Santa Clara River and eight major tributaries in the Santa Clarita Valley have been restudied and are in draft form. After a quality assurance review and public notification process, the City expects to have the new food map data adopted by year 2018. The City Floodplain Management Ordinance, adopted in 2008, is based on the California Model Floodplain Management Ordinance. The ordinance consists of regulations that control alterations to natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, and includes requirements that control activities in special flood hazard areas. The City of Santa Clarita uses these maps and the ordinance to regulate development in floodplains. All development goes through a review process across several divisions to insure proper elevation, required flood - proofing and proper drainage control. The City also participates in the Community Rating System (CRS) program which is a voluntary program administered by FEMA that encourages development standards that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. As a result, flood insurance premiums within the community are reduced based on the level of reduced flood risk. The City's current rating in the CRS program is a Class 8 which offers a 10% discount to the flood insurance premiums. This equates to a savings on average of $154/policy per year (City of Santa Clarita 2012, C. Monde 2012). The County has also adopted a Floodplain Management Ordinance consistent with the NFIP, which establishes floodway maps and governs land uses and construction of structures within floodplains. Additionally, drainage requirements are outlined in other portions of both the County Code and City Municipal Code, in order to prevent flooding and ensure that stormwater flows are properly diverted from away buildings and into drainage devices (County of Los Angeles 2011). 4.6 Stormwater Management Stormwater and non-stormwater discharges in the Region are currently regulated under the countywide discharge requirements of the Los Angeles County Municipal Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit, Order No. 01-182. This Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit, originally adopted in 2001, was recently revised and newly adopted on November 8, 2012 by the LARWQCB after circulation of a draft tentative order and solicitation of public comments. The MS4 permit regulates discharge across the jurisdictional boundaries of the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County and 84 cities within the LACFCD. The main purpose is to implement effective pollution prevention programs that will reduce the discharge of pollutants from the storm drain system in order to protect receiving waters and their beneficial uses. The MS4 permit requirements primarily focus on the following areas: Page 4-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Non-stormwater discharge prohibitions • TMDL water quality based effluent limitations • Receiving water limitations • Watershed management program provisions • Minimum control measures Standard provisions of the MS4 permit that constitute minimum control measures to be implemented include the following categories: Public Information and Participation Program, to increase public knowledge of stormwater issues, improve stormwater-related behavior and engage diverse socio- economic and ethnic groups. Planning and Land Development, applicable to new development and redevelopment, requirements under this provision include implementing smart growth and low impact development strategies, minimizing impervious surfaces, implementing hydromodification control BMPs and increasing the control and beneficial use of stormwater runoff. Development Construction Program, requiring each permittee to establish an erosion and sediment control ordinance for soil -disturbing construction projects and to implement a program to prevent construction -related pollution discharges. Public Agency Activities Program, to control stormwater pollution impacts from permittee -owned and operated facilities and activities. Illicit Connections and Illicit Discharges Elimination Program, to detect, investigate, and eliminate illicit connections and discharges to the MS4. These programs may be implemented in accordance with the requirements listed in the MS4 permit or addressed within an approved watershed management program. The watershed management program provisions in the MS4 permit allow flexibility to develop watershed -wide programs in order to address the highest watershed priorities and achieve compliance with permit requirements, including TMDLs, receiving water limitations, and non -storm water action levels. These programs focus on designated watershed management areas, such as the Santa Clara River Watershed Management Area. An integrated monitoring and assessment program is required in order to assess progress towards meeting applicable limitations. Starting in 2015, an adaptive management process will be required annually in order to enhance effectiveness of the watershed management program. The 2012 permit primarily differs from the previous order in that it will incorporate additional provisions consistent with 33 TMDLs, new requirements for hydromodification and low impact development, and new requirements for monitoring (SWRCB 2012). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 4-19 Industrial/Commercial Facilities Program, designed to prevent illicit discharges and reduce discharges into the MS4 and receiving waters through monitoring and education. Planning and Land Development, applicable to new development and redevelopment, requirements under this provision include implementing smart growth and low impact development strategies, minimizing impervious surfaces, implementing hydromodification control BMPs and increasing the control and beneficial use of stormwater runoff. Development Construction Program, requiring each permittee to establish an erosion and sediment control ordinance for soil -disturbing construction projects and to implement a program to prevent construction -related pollution discharges. Public Agency Activities Program, to control stormwater pollution impacts from permittee -owned and operated facilities and activities. Illicit Connections and Illicit Discharges Elimination Program, to detect, investigate, and eliminate illicit connections and discharges to the MS4. These programs may be implemented in accordance with the requirements listed in the MS4 permit or addressed within an approved watershed management program. The watershed management program provisions in the MS4 permit allow flexibility to develop watershed -wide programs in order to address the highest watershed priorities and achieve compliance with permit requirements, including TMDLs, receiving water limitations, and non -storm water action levels. These programs focus on designated watershed management areas, such as the Santa Clara River Watershed Management Area. An integrated monitoring and assessment program is required in order to assess progress towards meeting applicable limitations. Starting in 2015, an adaptive management process will be required annually in order to enhance effectiveness of the watershed management program. The 2012 permit primarily differs from the previous order in that it will incorporate additional provisions consistent with 33 TMDLs, new requirements for hydromodification and low impact development, and new requirements for monitoring (SWRCB 2012). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 4-19 In compliance with the county -wide MS4 permit, the City of Santa Clarita is conducting individual efforts to manage stormwater quality and discharge. The City has adopted a Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control ordinance that prohibits discharge of any pollutant into the storm drain system, as well as the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan Implementation ordinance, that outlines stormwater-related requirements for new development and redevelopment. Regular maintenance of the storm drain system and catch basins is conducted by the City and is in part financed through the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Fee paid by all Santa Clarita property owners. In addition, efforts to manage stormwater quality include providing information and education to residents to improve awareness of stormwater pollution issues, and providing the City's Stormwater Hotline to report illicit dumping to the storm drain system (City of Santa Clarita 2012). In addition to floodplain management ordinances and stormwater permitting programs, policies applicable to the Region include requirements for Low Impact Development (LID) techniques for development projects, in order to manage stormwater and reduce runoff volumes. Whereas constructed impervious surfaces alter regular drainage patterns and watershed hydrology, in part by increasing runoff volume and stream sedimentation, LID is a land -use planning approach that incorporates measures that protect natural, pre -development water flow and drainage characteristics in order to minimize urbanization impacts. Stormwater is thereby managed by creating permeable surfaces, such as through zero runoff and biofiltration measures, where runoff can infiltrate/be retained and stormwater can be treated (County of Los Angeles 2011). The Conservation and Open Space elements of the City of Santa Clarita General Plan and the OVOV Area Plan, include policies to require LID techniques in the design of private development and capital projects. In 2008, the County adopted an LID ordinance as part of the County Green Building Program (County of Los Angeles 2011). Page 4-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 5: Climate Change Climate change refers to significant changes in temperature, precipitation, wind patterns and other weather that occur over several decades and beyond. Climatic changes observed in recent decades are occurring due to rising average global temperatures that are the result of elevated levels of gases released primarily by human activities, which trap heat in the atmosphere in a process known as the greenhouse effect. These so-called greenhouse gases include, among others, water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4). Climate change is impacting California water resources in many ways, including through rising sea levels, reduced snowpack, and more frequent and severe droughts. Impacts and vulnerabilities vary by region resulting in the need for tailored actions to ensure the viability of regional watersheds, including the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. These actions focus on reducing the intensity of climate change through mitigation measures and adapting to climate change effects. 5.1 Climate Change This climate change section was developed to be consistent with the following Proposition 84 IRWMP Guidelines (October 2012): • Describe, consider, and address the effects of climate change on the region and disclose, consider, and reduce where possible greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions when developing and implementing projects • Identify climate change impacts and address adapting to changes in the amount, intensity, duration, timing, and quality of runoff and recharge • Consider the effects of sea level rise on water supply conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures • Describe policies and procedures that promote adaptive management This section is intended to focus on climate change adaptation and instill climate change adaptation as an overarching theme throughout the Plan. Climate change mitigation measures are included in future actions discussed in this section, are integrated in IRWMP objectives, and are an important consideration when prioritizing projects to implement this IRWMP. The recently issued Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning dated November 2011 (Schwarz et al 2011) was used for guidance in developing this Plan section. 5.1.1 Legislative and Policy Context 5.1.1.1 Current Regulatory Constraints 5.1.1.1.1 US EPA Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule The US EPA Reporting Rule, which started in 2011, requires reporting for 2010 emissions for sources or single facilities with more than 25,000 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 5-1 (MTCO2e) annually. The rule can be found at: hffp://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/qhqrulemaking.htmi. 5.1.1.1.2 Title V of the Clean Air Act Title V of the federal Clean Air Act reauthorization (1990) requires each state to develop a permit -to -operate system and emission fee program for major sources of air pollution. Title V only applies to "major sources." US EPA defines a major source as a facility that emits, or has the potential to emit (PTE) any criteria pollutant or hazardous air pollutant (HAP) at levels equal to or greater than the Major Source Thresholds (MST). The MST for criteria pollutants may vary depending on the attainment status (e.g., marginal, serious, extreme) of the geographic area and the criteria pollutant or HAP in which the facility is located. Title V permit holders must incorporate GHG requirements when renewing or revising a permit. EPA has continued to pursue regulations to address issues related to climate change. The EPA already requires large emissions sources (greater than 25,000 MTCO2e) to annually report their emissions. As well, the EPA has published rules to start directly regulating GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. Under the EPA's Tailoring Rule, facilities responsible for nearly 70 percent of the nation's GHG emissions will be subject to GHG emissions permits. None of the water utilities in the Region are currently subject to these federal regulations because none own or operate a single facility that meets the current emissions threshold of 25,000 MTCO2e per year. 5.1.1.1.3 AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act and Executive Order S-3-05 California continues to lead the nation in developing public policy responses to address issues related to climate change and GHG emissions — most notably through the implementation of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32). AB 32 established GHG reduction targets for California and put the California Air Resources Board (ARB) in charge of implementation and rulemaking through the development of the "Scoping Plan." AB 32 aims to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels (427 million MTCO2e) by 2020. California is currently at about 469 million MTCO2e, and under the business -as -usual case, most recently updated in 2010, 2020 emissions are expected to be about 507 million MTCO2e. In order to meet the 2020 target, California will need to reduce GHG emissions by about 80 million MTCO2e, an approximate 16 percent reduction from the state's projected 2020 emissions, by 2020. To meet these targets a two percent reduction is needed each year for the next ten years. To accomplish the goal the state is pursuing a number of direct regulations and market-based mechanisms that have been laid out in a Scoping Plan. The core measures of the Scoping Plan are tailpipe standards, transportation and land -use changes, low carbon fuel standard, enhanced energy efficiency, a Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) of 20 percent by 2010 and 33 percent by 2020, and a Cap & Trade program. More information about the Scoping Plan can be found at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm. 5.1.1.1.4 California ARB's Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulation ARB's Mandatory Reporting Rule requires the state's largest emitters (single sources with GHG emissions greater than 25,000 MTCO2e per year) to annually report and verify their GHG emissions. The rules were revised to harmonize the state's reporting rules with the US EPA's Page 5-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Mandatory Reporting Rule and streamline the reporting and verification process for sources with GHG emissions between 10,000 and 25,000 MTCO2e. ARB finalized the proposed changes in 2011. The rule can be found at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccei.htm. 5.1.1.1.5 Cap -and -Trade Rule and Compliance Offsets The most far-reaching regulatory action to emerge from AB 32 is the development of rules implementing a cap -and -trade program for California. Under cap -and -trade, an overall limit on GHG emissions from capped sectors will be established and lowered every year until 2020. Facilities subject to the cap will be able to trade permits to emit GHGs or acquire offsets from uncapped sectors. Starting in 2012, entities with GHG emissions greater than 25,000 MTCO2e in process and combustion emissions (not indirect electricity emissions) will be subject to cap. Water utility facilities in the Upper SCR are below this threshold for their facilities and will not be included in the Cap and Trade regulation. More information about the Cap and Trade regulation can be found at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/capandtrade.htm The cap -and -trade program will effectively put a price on GHG emissions and implicitly on energy (transportation fuel and electricity) prices. While water utilities in the Region may not be directly subject to a cap on emissions they may be subject to higher prices for fossil fuels and electricity. Water utilities may also see carbon prices manifested in its supply chain as suppliers pass their compliance and higher energy costs onto their customers. "The regulation will cover 360 businesses representing 600 facilities and is divided into two broad phases: an initial phase beginning in 2012 that will include all major industrial sources along with utilities; and, a second phase that starts in 2015 and brings in distributors of transportation fuels, natural gas and other fuels. Companies are not given a specific limit on their greenhouse gas emissions but must supply a sufficient number of allowances (each covering the equivalent of one ton of carbon dioxide) to cover their annual emissions. Each year, the total number of allowances issued in the state drops, requiring companies to find the most cost-effective and efficient approaches to reducing their emissions. By the end of the program in 2020 there will be a 15 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to today, reaching the same level of emissions as the state experienced in 1990, as required under AB 32. To ensure a gradual transition, ARB will provide significant free allowances to all industrial sources during the initial period (2012-2014). Companies that need additional allowances to cover their emissions can purchase them at regular quarterly ARB auctions, or buy them on the market. Electric utilities will also be given allowances and they will be required to sell those allowances and dedicate the revenue generated for the benefit of their ratepayers and to help achieve AB 32 goals. Eight percent of a company's emissions can be covered using credits from compliance -grade offset projects, promoting the development of beneficial environmental projects in the forestry and agriculture sectors. Included in the regulation are four protocols, or systems of rules, covering carbon accounting rules for offset credits in forestry management, urban forestry, dairy Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-3 methane digesters, and the destruction of existing banks of ozone-depleting substances in the U.S. (mostly in the form of refrigerants in older refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment)."" California is coordinating the development of its program with the Western Climate Initiative (WCI). WC] is a multi -jurisdictional initiative to develop regional market-based mechanisms (i.e., cap -and -trade program) to reduce GHGs. The rationale for a broader regional approach is that it could provide greater flexibility for emitters in how, when and where to achieve emissions reductions; and create a more fluid and robust marketplace for trading. 5.1.1.1.6 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Guidance for CEQA Greenhouse Gas Significance Thresholds Consistent with Senate Bill (SB) 97, projects subject to CEQA review must estimate GHG emissions and consider potential impacts, and projects with potential significant impacts must consider mitigating project related emissions. In 2007, the California Legislature directed the Natural Resources Agency to develop specific guidelines for lead agencies on how to quantify, evaluate and mitigate a project's potential GHG emissions and climate change impacts. Under the guidelines, finalized in February 2010, a lead agency must calculate GHG emissions from a project, assess the impacts of these emissions, make a significance determination, and if necessary consider mitigation measures. The definitions of significant impacts and determination of significance thresholds are subject to interpretation of pre-existing CEQA guidelines and jurisprudence. SCAQMD has developed interim draft guidance establishing a process for evaluating whether or not GHG emissions from an industrial project (i.e., stationary source) are significant where SCAQMD is the lead agency. SCAQMD is currently considering expanding its guidelines for use by other local lead agencies. The proposal includes a significance threshold for commercial and institutional land use projects (e.g., new construction). SCAQMD draft interim guidance significance thresholds are: 10,000 MTCO2e/year for industrial projects (SCAQMD lead agency), and 3,000 MTCO2e/year (proposed) for commercial/institutional projects. SCAQMD guidance does not distinguish between biogenic (naturally occurring) and anthropogenic (human caused) emissions. Wastewater plant emissions are considered biogenic. More information about the Guidance can be found at: http://www.aqmd.gov/cega/handbook/GHG/GHG.html, htti)://www.water.ca.gov/climatechange/docs/CEQA GHG Guidance.pdf and http://www.ceres.ca.gov/ceoa/docs/Final Statement of Reasons.pdf. 5.1.1.1.7 Executive Order S-13-08 By Executive Order S-13-08, the California Governor directed the California Natural Resources Agency, DWR, the Office of Planning and Research, the California Energy Commission, State Water Resources Control Board, and other State agencies to research and advance California's ability to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Results of this work include the California Sea Level Rise Assessment and the California Climate Change Adaptation Strategy. ARB press release dated December 16, 2010. The full press release can be found at: hffp://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/newsrelease. ph p?id=170. Page 5-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 5.1.1.1.8 California Ocean Protection Council Resolution The California Ocean Protection Council Resolution adopted March 11, 2011 requires that projects or programs funded by the State of California consider sea level rise. 5.1.1.2 Future Regulatory Constraints 5.1.1.2.1 US EPA Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule US EPA is considering rules targeting sources below 50,000 short tons CO2e (about 45,000 MTCO2e) by 2016. The current rule applies to sources greater than 75,000 short tons CO2e (about 68,000 MTCO2e). US EPA is also reviewing an accounting approach for biogenic emissions sources. In its final Tailoring Rule, US EPA committed to exclude sources with GHG emissions below 50,000 short tons CO2e (about 45,000 MTCO2e) per year from new permitting requirements through at least 2016. During this period, US EPA plans to conduct a study of the permitting burdens that would exist if the Tailoring Rule were to be applied to smaller sources. Based on the outcome of the study US EPA may expand the tailoring rule to include additional small sources or permanently exclude them from a GHG permitting system. Given the political constraints facing the agency, including efforts in the U.S. Congress to repeal or delay US EPA's authority to enact the rules, it is unlikely that the agency will pursue aggressive regulation of small sources such as those operated by CLWA. As currently adopted, the Tailoring Rule does not distinguish between GHG emissions from fossil and biologically derived fuels. US EPA concluded a public comment period in September 2010 seeking information on approaches to account for GHG emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic sources. US EPA is under considerable political pressure to revisit the decision to treat emissions from biomass the same as emissions from fossil fuels. No decision has yet been made on this issue. 5.1.1.2.2 Federal Cap -and -Trade Program or other Market -Based Mechanism to Create a Price for GHGs or Carbon While the Clean Air Act allows US EPA to use economic incentives, including emissions trading programs, to control emissions; the prospects for legislation establishing a national economy wide cap-and—trade program, or alternative carbon pricing policies such as a carbon tax, are highly unlikely in the near-term. Congress may act to increase incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy production. The most likely mechanism for renewable resources incentives is through a federal clean energy standard that would include nuclear energy resources. Enactment of a federal clean energy standard is unlikely to impact the Region as none of the current federal policy proposals would preempt California's far more ambitious renewable energy portfolio standard. 5.1.1.2.3 AB 32 Scoping Plan Water Sector Recommendations In addition to regulatory approaches to meet the state GHG emissions reduction goals; the ARB Scoping Plan calls for the "water sector" to implement six voluntary measures to achieve 4.8 million MTCO2e in emissions reductions by the year 2020. The measures include: increased Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-5 water use efficiency, broader implementation of water recycling, improvements to the energy efficiency of the state's water and wastewater infrastructure, low impact development techniques, development of in -conduit hydroelectric and wastewater treatment renewable energy resources, and instituting a public goods charge to finance investments in water conservation and water sector energy efficiency. More information about these measures can be found at: http://www.arb.ca.aov/cc/scoi)ingplan/document/appendices volumel.pdf. Both the Association of California Water Agencies and the California Association of Sanitation Agencies have active programs to track and monitor the development of any legislation or regulatory initiatives to mandate these measures. The ARB Scoping Plan will be updated in 2013, which will allow past performance to be evaluated and policies to be re -assessed. 5.1.1.2.4 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan Consistent with requirements by the State of California, the City of Santa Clarita completed a CAP, outlining how emissions reduction goals required under AB 32 will be achieved (see also Section 2.3.1.1). The CAP will serve as a component of the general plan document for the City to address GHG Emissions. Based on the goals, objectives, and policies of the recently adopted General Plan, the CAP identified measurable mitigation strategies that will enable the City of Santa Clarita to meet and even exceed the 2020 GHG emissions targets. Mitigation measures included in the CAP focus actions in four categories. • Energy o Installation of higher efficiency public street and area lighting o Replacement of traffic lights with LED traffic lights o Establishment of onsite renewable energy systems — Solar Power Transportation Overall land use/locations measures, which include reducing total vehicle miles travelled and improving traffic flow by increasing density of in -City development and diversity of mixed use developments, increasing location efficiency, destination and transit accessibility, integrating affordable and below market rate housing, improving the transit system, and improving the pedestrian network. • Water o Use of reclaimed water o Installation of low -flow water fixtures o Use of water -efficient landscape irrigation systems Vegetation o Urban tree planting o Creation of new vegetated open space Page 5-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Implementation of these CAP measures is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions in the City of Santa Clarita by 193,000 MTCO2e per year. 5.1.2 Vulnerability to Climate Change This section identifies the potential climate change vulnerabilities of the Region's water resources. The climate change assessment presented in this section is at least equivalent to the checklist assessment in DWR's Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning and consistent with climate change requirements in the Proposition 84 IRWMP Guidelines (October 2012). 5.1.2.1 Climate Change Scenarios Climate change assessment is performed using the output of computer models that project future conditions from inputs on GHG emissions. These models are not predictive, but provide projections of potential future climate scenarios that can be used for planning purposes. The primary climate variables projected by global climate models (GCMs) that are important for water resources planning in California are changes in air temperature, changes in precipitation patterns, and sea level rise. The State of California 2009 Climate Change Impacts Assessment (California Climate Change Center 2009) provides the scientific basis for developing statewide climate change impact projections. The 2009 assessment provided future climate projections to support water resources decision making in California. A set of six GCMs were run for two GHG emissions scenarios, A2 and B1, selected from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES). The IPCC report provides a family of common scenarios that cover a range of plausible trends in GHG emissions over the 21 st century as a result of economic, technological, and population change (IPCC 2007). Scenario A2 assumes higher GHG emissions and high growth in population and represents a more competitive world that lacks cooperation in development (similar to business as usual), while 131 is a lower GHG emission scenario that represents social consensus for sustainable development. Each GCM was used to simulate a historical period from 1950-1999 and a future projection period from 2000 to 2100. The 1950-1999 period serves as a baseline or "present condition" for the models so that future conditions can be projected. Table 5.1-1 lists the six GCM models and their sponsoring organization. TABLE 5.1-1 SUMMARY OF GLOBAL CLIMATE MODELS GCM Sponsoring Organization and Model Name NCAR-PCM1 a National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Parallel Climate Model (PCM) r_Cni rRAoI a n�s,.....i n.....,.. �,..,..a Administration (NOAA) Geophysical Fluids Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) model, version 2.1 NCAR-CCSM3 a NCAR Community Climate System Model (CCSM) MPI-ECHAM5 Max Plank Institute ECHAM5/MPI-OM Used by DWR for its climate change analysis for the 2009 Reliability Report and 2011 update. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 5-7 MIROC32 MIROC 3.2 medium -resolution model from the Center for Climate System Research of the University of Tokyo and collaborators CNRM-CM3 a French Centre National de Recherches Meteorologiques (CNRM) models Four Model Cal -Adapt website. Average of the following four GCMs: NCAR-PCM1, Average(a) GFDL-CM21, NCAR-CCSM3, and CNRM-CM3. Used in this analysis for Upper Santa Clara River Region DWR used the MPI-ECHAM5 model with the A2 emissions scenario when preparing the 2011 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report. MPI-ECHAM5 represents the median of the six GCMs listed in Table 5.1-1. The California Energy Commission's Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER) recently established the Cal -Adapt website (http://cal-adapt.orq/), whose purpose is to explore California's climate change research. In part, the website provides output from four climate models (NCAR-PCM1, GFDL-CM21, NCAR-CCSM3, and CNRM-CM3) and two GHG emission scenarios (A2 and B1) downscaled to any location in California. The four GCMs are a subset of the six GCMs used in DWR's climate change assessments. Because the MPI-ECHAMP5 GCM is not included in Cal -Adapt, an average of the four GCMs (also provided by Cal -Adapt) with the A2 emission scenario was used in this analysis for Upper Santa Clara River Region to be consistent with the DWR analysis. Figure 5.1-1 provides a visualization of which global climate change models were used in the above-mentioned climate change assessments and assessment tools. Page 5-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 FIGURE 5.1-1 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE MODELS USED IN ASSESSMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 5.1.2.1.1 Statewide Climate Change Projections Statewide climate change projections, based on the 2009 Scenarios Project assessment, were used to assess Regional vulnerabilities described in Table 5.1-2. All of the models show increased warming throughout the 21" century, with average annual air temperature increasing about 2°F to 5°F by 2050. The Mediterranean seasonal precipitation pattern is expected to continue during the 21s` century, with most of the precipitation occurring during winter from North Pacific storms. The hydro -climate is expected to be influenced by the EI Nino -Southern Oscillation (ENSO) with alternating periods of wet and dry water years. In the Sierra Nevada Mountains, there will be some shift to more winter precipitation occurring as rain instead of snow, with a reduction in snowpack accumulation and shifts in runoff patterns, especially during the summer and fall. 5.1.2.1.2 USCR Region Climate Change Projections Locally, overall air temperatures are expected to rise from 1°F to 2.3°F over the next few decades. The historical average annual temperature in the Upper Santa Clara River region is 61.9°F; the A2 and B1 scenarios project increases of 6.9°F and 4.3°F by the end of the 21st Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 5-9 century. Figure 5.1-2 shows the projected air temperature change for the four GCMs averaged from 2000 through 2100, compared with the historical baseline from 1950-2000 used for the initial conditions for the models (see Section 5.1.2.1) The temperature projections begin to deviate between the A2 and 131 scenarios around mid-century, with the A2 scenario increase about twice the B1 scenario by 2100. For purposes of this analysis, an air temperature increase of 4°F has been assumed. Precipitation in the Region is essentially all due to rain, and significant shifts in the timing of precipitation are not expected to occur. One of the four climate models projects slightly wetter winters, and others project slightly drier winters with a 10 to 20 percent decrease in total annual precipitation. The drier conditions projected may result in a higher wildfire risk in the Region. Figure 5.1-3 shows the decadal precipitation projections from 1960 through 2100. There appears to be continued variable precipitation over the next century, with overall decrease. For purposes of this analysis, a 10 percent decrease in annual precipitation has been assumed. 5.1.2.2 Vulnerable Watershed Characteristics Identification of watershed characteristics that could potentially be vulnerable to future climate change is the first step in assessing the climate change vulnerabilities in the Region. In the context of this analysis, vulnerability is defined as the degree to which a system is exposed to, susceptible to, and able to cope with and adapt to, the adverse effects of climate change, consistent with the definition in the recently issued Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning. Table 5.1-2 provides a summary list of water -related resources that are considered important in the Region and potentially sensitive to future climate change. The summary table provides the main categories applicable to water planning in the Region with a general overview of the qualitative assessment of each category with respect to anticipated climate change impacts. The main categories follow the climate change vulnerability checklist assessment as defined in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning. These categories also reflect a combination of the IRWMP requirements and are consistent with Proposition 84 requirements. Page 5-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 FIGURE 5.1-2 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED ANNUAL AVERAGE AIR TEMPERATURE FOR THE USCR REGION: AVERAGE OF FOUR GCMS FOR TWO EMISSIONS SCENARIOS 75 70 v 6s M d a E (r7 P 60 55 a -I ci rl rY 'i N N N N N N N N N N N Year —Low Emissions Scenario (B1) —High Emissions Scenario (A2( —Historical Measurements Note : Historical meumrementroauerme period from 1950 to 2000. rrajectbns represent the period from moo to MD. Source: Source data are based on Cal -Adapt website for the Santa Clarita area. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-11 FIGURE 5.1-3 PROJECTED ANNUAL PRECIPITATION FOR USCR REGION: AVERAGE OF FOUR GCMS FOR TWO EMISSIONS SCENARIOS 21 18 15 a s C 12 c 0 n 9 M .0 d 6 6 R C c 3 Q 0 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Year IN Low Emissions Scenario (61) ■ High Emissions Scenario (A2) Note: Hatonral measurements cover the pewAfrom 1550 to 200n. nrgeaionsrepresentthe period from 20no to nor. (a) Source: Source data are based on Cal -Adapt website for the Santa Clarita area. Table 5.1-2 identifies the anticipated climate change impacts on these identified resources only qualitatively. It should be noted that resources that are likely to be vulnerable to climate change are considered for further analysis in the following subsections. Table 5.1-2 also highlights those resources in the Region that are unlikely to be affected by climate change and therefore they do not warrant further analysis and consideration at this time. 5.1.2.3 Vulnerability Sector Assessment Climate change processes are supported by extensive scientific research and are based on a vast number of peer-reviewed and published technical literature. Much of the available literature presents general information, but there is relatively little information that presents specific tools on how to apply impacts in the context of addressing climate change impacts on water resources. In addition, far less information is available on smaller geographic areas and the spatial resolution of the existing climate change models is still quite low. One additional challenge is that precipitation projections cannot be easily converted directly into surface runoff and groundwater recharge to connect with the local water resources planning activities. Page 5-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 5.1-2 CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Water Demand Urban and Agricultural Water Demand — Changes of hydrology in the Region as a result of climate change could lead to changes in water demand, both in quantities and patterns. Increased irrigation (outdoor landscape or agricultural) is anticipated to occur with temperature rise, increased evaporation losses with warmer temperature, and longer growing season. Water Supply SWP Imported Water — SWP water is an important portion of the water resources available to the Region. Potential impacts on SWP water availability resulting from climate change directly affect the amount of imported water supply delivered to the Region. Groundwater — Changes in local hydrology could affect natural recharge to the local groundwater aquifers and the quantity of groundwater that could be pumped sustainably over the long-term. Decreased inflow from runoff, increased evaporative losses, warmer and shorter winter seasons can alter natural recharge of groundwater. In addition, additional reductions in the SWP imported water imposed by climate change would lead to more reliance on local groundwater. Water Quality SWP Imported Water — Sea level rise could result in increases in chloride and bromide (a disinfection by product precursor), potentially requiring changes in drinking water treatment. Increased temperature could result in increase in algal blooms and taste and odor events. Regional Surface Water— Increased temperature could result in lower dissolved oxygen in streams. Decrease in annual precipitation could result in higher concentrations of contaminants in streams during droughts. Increased wildfire risk and flashier storms could increase turbidity loads for water treatment. Sea Level Rise The Region is not directly subject to sea level rise. However, potential effects of sea level rise would affect SWP water supply conditions. As discussed above, the principal concern is the potential for sea water intrusion to increase Delta salinity. As sea level rise is not a direct regional concern, it is not discussed further in this vulnerability assessment. Flooding Local surface flows could change as a result of more frequent and intense storm events, leading to more areas susceptible to flooding, and increasing risk of direct flood damage in the Region. Ecosystem and Increased temperature and potential decreases in annual precipitation Habitat could put stress on sensitive ecosystems and alter habitats. Water - dependent recreation could also be affected by water quality impacts. In addition, the Region may be subject to increased wildfire risk, which could alter habitat. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-13 Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Hydropower Currently, the Region produces only minimal hydropower; thus, climate change effects on hydropower are not likely to be considerable and were not considered further in the analysis at the time of this IRWMP update. This section presents the vulnerability of each sector identified in Table 5.1-2 with respect to climate change projections given the existing tools and available data. This is an initial attempt using projections specific to the Region for the vulnerability assessment in support of the IRWMP. The outcome of this initial assessment is intended to help understand the potential impacts, to integrate climate change into long-term planning, and to improve understanding of the uncertainties associated with climate change effects. Consistent with the water resources planning horizon in the Region through 2050, the vulnerability analysis considers projections for mid -21st century (2050), consistent with DWR's modeling approach to climate change. 5.1.2.3.1 Water Demand Demand management is an important adaptation given decreased water supply as a result of climate change. A simple methodology was used to relate historical water demand with temperature. Reasonable projections were made for potential variations in water demand, based on anticipated temperature increase as a result of climate change. The Cal -Adapt A2 emissions scenario used to project temperature and precipitation with climate change and the MPI-ECHAM5-MPI model used by DWR for SWP reliability analysis are similar with respect to the level of future projected emissions. The Cal -Adapt A2 emissions scenario projects a temperature increase for the Region of about 4°F by the mid-century (2050) and increase of about 7°F by the end of century. The projected average annual air temperature rise of 4°F by 2050 appears small against the background historical annual variability and characterizing the impacts of temperature rise on water demand is a difficult task and discussed on a qualitative basis. While water use varies considerably depending on other factors such as regional economy, population, and land use, a qualitative assessment of water demand increase can be noted based on the projected temperature increase from the Cal -Adapt A2 emission scenario. Limited historical temperature data are available for the Region from the Castaic Dam Evaporation Station (Site 252CE), provided by the LADPW. Based on 20 years of limited data between 1991 and 2011, the average of the maximum temperature varied from 62.9°F in February to 95.1°F in August, with the highest temperature of 98.4°F measured in August 1998. The average of the minimum temperature over the same historical period varied from 43.8°F in February to 62.6°F in August, with the lowest temperature of 39.1 OF measured in March 2006. Although data records are limited covering a relatively short period of time, significant seasonal and annual variations are noted. Historical water demand shows an increasing trend since 1995 with a downturn in recent years, likely due to response by customers to conservation efforts and the economic downturn. Water use to meet municipal water needs increased from approximately 45,700 AF in 1995 to nearly 77,500 AF in 2007, and was about 70,000 AF in 2009. Water demand is projected to gradually Page 5-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 increase from almost 95,000 AF in 2015 to nearly 141,000 AF in 2050 (Section 3.3.1). This projection accounts for projected land use changes and conservation to comply with SBX7-7. Weather affects water demand in the Region. The largest water use occurs during the end of summer and the beginning of fall months (July, August, and September) and water is used least in cooler months leading into spring (February and March). Total water use can vary more than 50 percent seasonally, indicating a significant monthly and seasonal variation in water use with weather conditions. Higher temperature is likely to increase water demands. While the ten percent increase of water demand per capita has been assumed to account for dry years in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, there are not sufficient data available to quantify the effect from increasing temperature resulting from climate change. For a qualitative discussion, the projected increases in temperature and evapotranspiration (ET) have been evaluated to show seasonal changes in projections with climate changes compared with historical trends. Figure 5.1-4 shows the projected average monthly air temperature change for the four GCMs averaged from the present (1950-2000) through 2100 for the Region. The temperature projections are higher for the A2 and B1 emissions scenarios than the historical observed data and the A2 scenario projections are consistently higher than the B1 scenario projections. Based on the monthly average temperature, the projections with climate change show increase in temperature throughout the year with higher temperature increase in dry or summer months than wet or winter months. Under the A2 scenario, the projected temperature increase would be about 4°F during summer months compared with about 3°F during winter months. Qualitatively, these projections suggest water demand in the Region is likely to increase as a result of the projected higher temperature with a higher temperature increase anticipated during dry months compared to wet months. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-15 FIGURE 5.1-4 PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE FOR USCR REGION: AVERAGE OF FOUR GCMS FOR TWO EMISSIONS SCENARIOS 90 80 s 70 d A `m 60 E E i- 50 40 > O z o f Month Law Emissians Scenario (B1) High Emissians Scenaria (/12) �Hinarical Measurements Note: Histoncal mea5urem ents cover he perim! from 1950 to 2000. Pmledcros representthe period from 2000 to 2IDP. Source: Source data are based on Cal -Adapt website for the Santa Clarita area. The most important effect of changing weather conditions is likely to be on agricultural demand. Higher temperature generally increases ET rates, but some research studies also suggest higher CO2 levels and higher temperature increase rates of plant growth and can shorten the time to plant maturity (Hanak and Lund, 2008). This would reduce the overall plant water uptake, partially compensating for potential reductions in agricultural water supply. Thus, the net effect on agricultural crops is still uncertain (Kiparsky and Gleick, 2005) and remains an important area of ongoing research. Figure 5.1-5 shows the projected average monthly ET change for the four GCMs averaged from the present (1950-2000) through 2100 for the Region. In general, both the background historical and projections with climate change show higher ET during dry months (March through July) with a sharp decline in ET during August and September. The ET projections are generally higher for the A2 and 131 emissions scenarios than the historical observed data during months of the year where ET tends to be higher (January through June months). For months where ET is generally lower, a shift is anticipated between the background historical data and projections, where the historical data become slightly higher than the A2 and B2 scenario projections. Qualitatively, the ET projections with climate change suggest water demand for agriculture in the Region is anticipated to increase during months where ET is high and decrease in months where ET is low. As a result of increased ET, urban water demand is anticipated to increase with greater outdoor water use for landscape irrigation. The temperature and ET projections with climate change as shown in Figures 5.1-4 and 5.1-5 demonstrate the effects of climate change on the future water demand based on seasonal variations; however, the projected water Page 5-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 demand increase with population growth and land use changes is large in the Region and these factors are likely to be more significant drivers of outdoor water use than the effect of climate change alone. FIGURE 5.1-5 PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY EVAPOTRANSPIRATION FOR USCR REGION: AVERAGE OF FOUR GCMS FOR TWO EMISSIONS SCENARIOS 30 25 20 v z c 15 F W s 30 C O 5 0 `m n m c m n a U LL a g a' Uri O z oa Month Law Emissions Scenario (Blj tHigh Emissions Seen aria (F2) �Hinarical Measurements Note: Hmtoriral measurements cover the rerioofrom1950 to 26M. ProjeRpns representthe retinol from 2008 to Mx. Source: Source data are based on Cal -Adapt website for the Santa Clarita area. 5.1.2.3.2 Water Supply For long-term water supply planning, coping with variability is a challenge. With potential additional changes imposed by climate change, there will be a heightened need to evaluate and respond to increased water supply variability. A broad range of impacts could be produced by climate change in the Region, yet some of the most significant impacts of climate change are anticipated to occur on water resources. An analytical approach was used to identify and describe water supply availability under climate change, and includes DWR's modeling analysis of SWP imported water reliability. SWP delivery to the Region comprises about 54 percent of total existing water supplies projected through 2050 in the Region in normal/average years (Table 3.1-1). Groundwater pumping from local aquifers and additional sources from groundwater banking activities make up the remaining major water sources used to meet the Region's municipal and agricultural water demand. The Region relies on imported SWP supplies and any reduction or change in the timing or availability of those supplies could have negative impacts on the Region. Reductions in the SWP imported water would lead to increased reliance on local groundwater or Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-17 other sources of supplies. Changes in local hydrology could affect natural recharge to the local groundwater and the quantity of groundwater that could be pumped in a sustainable manner. Reductions in SWP imported water as a result of climate change could lead to increased groundwater production. Although SWP supply is mainly controlled by hydrologic conditions in the northern part of the state, the groundwater resources would be affected by local conditions, whereby climate change effects on these resources could occur at the same time. Therefore, the combined effects on SWP imported water and groundwater resources can exert more magnified stress on the Region's water supply planning than the effects on individual resources. The following is an assessment of climate change on SWP imported water and groundwater resources. The SWP imported water assessment is presented first to identify potential reductions in SWP deliveries. The outcome of the SWP assessment is tied to the groundwater assessment as SWP reductions may lead to increased reliance on local groundwater. 5.1.2.3.2.1 SWP Imported Water Availability of future SWP imported water supplies to the Region was assessed within the context of climate change impacts. The methodology used for the vulnerability assessment includes a comparison of estimated future SWP deliveries with and without climate change to evaluate the potential vulnerability of the SWP imported water. Future projections of SWP deliveries are based on the modeling analysis performed by DWR, as reported in the recently issued 2011 Reliability Report (DWR 2012). DWR conducted an assessment of the impacts of climate change on the state's water supply using MPI-ECHAMPS Global Climate Model. As described earlier, the model output is based on the A2 emission scenario with mid-century (2050) projections. The assumption used for the emissions level in the DWR modeling analysis is consistent with the Cal -Adapt A2 emissions scenario used for forecasting temperature, precipitation, ET, and runoff projections with climate change. DWR's modeling analysis is based on the 82 years of hydrologic data (water years 1922-2003) and uses projected levels of climate change through year 2050, with 2020 land use levels. The analysis accounts for potential hydrologic changes that could result from climate change and the effects of sea level rise on water quality, but does not incorporate the probability of catastrophic levee failure (DWR 2012). On a qualitative basis, DWR's climate change modeling analysis indicates increased temperature, decreased water availability with reduced Sierra Nevada snowpack, early snow melt, and a rise in sea level (DWR 2012). DWR's 2011 Reliability Report provides SWP system- wide deliveries expressed as a percentage of total maximum Table A amounts for future conditions with climate change. These percentages do not reflect the differing allocations to individual contractors. In the absence of detailed results for each contractor, this vulnerability assessment assumed that changes in total SWP Table A deliveries resulting from climate change are a reasonable representation of future SWP imported water supply to the Region. The underlying assumption is that future reductions in SWP imported water to the Region would be proportional to projected reductions in total SWP deliveries. DWR's modeling analysis provides future projections of SWP deliveries both with and without climate change, each using the 82 years of hydrologic data. Using DWR's modeling analysis for Page 5-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 the assessment of climate change is consistent with the ongoing long-term water planning in the Region. In addition, results from DWR's climate change analysis allows for a direct comparison of SWP supply vulnerability of future conditions with and without climate change on a quantitative basis. As described above, the climate change model MPI-ECHAMPS with the A2 emission scenario was used by DWR in the 2011 Reliability Report for the future SWP delivery projections with climate change. The maximum SWP Table A demands for deliveries to SWP contractors from the Delta is 4,133 thousand acre feet (TAF) based on the current demands developed by DWR. In the 2011 Reliability Report, the maximum SWP Table A demands for deliveries from the Delta are assumed to be the same as 4,133 TAF under future conditions, both with and without climate change effects. In other words, the maximum annual SWP Table A demand of 4,133 TAF is assumed in all 82 years of the simulation (note there is no variation in demand due to different annual hydrologic conditions). In the context of evaluating the climate change effects in this study, reductions in SWP deliveries with and without climate change are presented as percentages of the maximum SWP Table A delivery amount of 4,133 TAF annually. It should be noted that SWP supplies to CLWA, as reported in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, are based on DWR's more detailed, contractor -specific delivery data from its analyses for the 2009 Reliability Report. In the 2010 UWMP, DWR's analysis of current (2009) conditions was used to estimate 2010 SWP supplies and its analysis of future (2029) conditions was used to estimate 2030-2050 SWP supplies. SWP supply to CLWA by 2050 is projected to be at 57,400 AFY (60 percent of CLWA's 95,200 AFY Table A amount) in average/normal years, 9,100 AFY (10 percent of Table A amount) in a single dry year and 33,000 AFY over a multi- year dry period. Average. Maximum, and Minimum Annual SWP Table A Deliveries Figure 5.1-6 presents the estimated long-term average, maximum, and minimum annual SWP Table A deliveries for the future conditions with and without climate change. The long-term average is based on the projections for the 82 years of hydrologic period (1922 to 2003) modified to reflect climate change. Based on the future conditions with climate change, SWP Table A deliveries range from an annual minimum of 579 TAF to a maximum of 4,087 TAF, with the long-term average of 2,363 TAF. These estimates show that the maximum annual delivery increases by 33 TAF per year (1 percent) under the future conditions with 2050 climate change, relative to the future conditions with no climate change effects. Estimated minimum annual delivery is 279 TAF (48%) higher with climate change than without climate change. However, the average annual deliveries decrease from 2,574 TAF under the future conditions without climate change to 2,363 TAF under the future conditions with climate change. This is a reduction of 211 TAF annually at the system -wide level. In assessing the future SWP delivery reliability, the long-term average SWP delivery from the 2011 Reliability Report is directly applicable to individual contractors. The long-term average of future SWP deliveries with climate change is lower than the long-term average without climate change, as depicted in Figure 5.1-6. The average value represents the long-term trend over the entire 82 years of the hydrologic data. This decreasing trend in the average SWP delivery projections with climate change is consistent with the expected reduction in the reliability of the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-19 SWP water supply system due to climate change impact (DWR 2009). SWP future projections associated with any particular year (i.e., the minimum and maximum values) or over a short period of time (i.e., a single dry period or single wet period) should be viewed carefully because these results are dependent upon the rainfall that has occurred in previous years. In addition, reservoir storage for the beginning of any year varies depending upon the weather conditions in the previous year. Therefore, the results for any single year, such as the minimum and maximum values as shown in Figure 5.1-6, should be interpreted with caution as they may be affected by the amount of water assumed to be available from the previous year. While the long- term SWP future projections with climate change indicate reduction in deliveries, SWP projections for a single year (or over a short period of time) does not follow the decreasing trend. As described above and shown in Figure 5.1-6, the minimum and maximum values are projected to be higher with climate change. Since they represent projected deliveries in a single year, the increasing trend with climate change could be attributed to the factors that occur in the previous years, such as weather and or reservoir storage conditions, that affect deliveries. FIGURE 5.1-6 ESTIMATED AVERAGE, MAXIMUM, AND MINIMUM ANNUAL SWP EXPORTS — FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH AND WITHOUT CLIMATE CHANGE 4,500 4,000 3,500 m 3,000 a 2,500 0 n 2,000 1,500 9 E 1,000 M9 0 0 500 0 Average Maximum Minimum ■SWP Table ADelivery -Future Conditions without Climate Change (TAF) ■SWPTable A Delivery -Future Conditions with 2050 Climate Change (TAF) Source: Figure based on Draft Technical Addendum to the State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2011, Table 12. Long-term average SWP Table A deliveries are estimated to be 57 percent of Table A amount for the future conditions with climate change; without climate change long-term deliveries are expected to be 62 percent of Table A amounts. Assuming available SWP supply to the Region would be proportional to the SWP system -wide supply conditions, projected SWP import ed Page 5-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP •February 2014 water delivery to CLWA with climate change corresponds to about 54,500 AF (or 57 percent of Table A amount based on CLWA's annual contract amount of 95,200 AF of SWP water) and 59,300 AF (or 62 percent of Table A amount) without climate change. The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, based on the 2009 Reliability Report, assumed SWP supply of 57,400 AFY. The new modeling in the 2011 Reliability Report suggests that CLWA SWP average supply could be 2,900 AFY less (about 3%) than assumed in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP. For the purpose of this analysis, results from the 2011 Reliability Report were used consistently for future projections with and without climate change. In light of the long-term water supply availability, this reduction appears small and comprises a relatively small portion of the Region's total water supply. It should also be noted that the current assumptions used in DWR's 2009 and 2011 Reliability Report present a conservative projection of SWP delivery reliability. Several emerging factors related to the biological opinions on the Delta operations, issued by US FWS and the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS), have the potential to affect the availability of SWP supplies. Therefore, the projections presented herein also present conservative estimates concerning the long-term delivery reliability of SWP supplies. These projections should be revisited during future IRWMP updates. SWP Table A Deliveries by Water Year Types Figure 5.1-7 and Table 5.1-3 show estimated SWP Table A deliveries by water year type under future conditions with and without climate change. In Figure 5.1-7 and Table 5.1-3, estimated SWP exports reported by DWR for the 82 years of hydrologic data (water years 1922 to 2003) were averaged according to water year type. This representation shows how the estimated SWP exports would vary by hydrologic year types over the entire 82 years of the modeling analysis. Overall, the future conditions with climate change forecast lower deliveries under all water year types, with the largest difference for dry years. Deliveries decrease by as little as 51 TAF (5%) during critical years to as much as 371 TAF (20%) during dry years under the future conditions with climate change relative to no climate change. TABLE 5.1-3 ESTIMATED SWP EXPORTS BY WATER YEAR TYPE — FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH AND WITHOUT CLIMATE CHANGE Future Conditions Future Conditions Difference, Future with and (2050) with (2050) without without Climate Change Climate Change Climate Change Above Normal 23706 21857 -152 -6 Below Normal 23634 21802 -168 -6 Dry 13817 21188 -371 -20 Critical 13132 11183 -51 -5 Average 23363 21574 -211 -9 Source: Estimated SWP exports are based on the 82 years of hydrologic data (water years 1922-2003) from Draft Technical Addendum to the State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2011, Table 12 SWP Table A Deliveries Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-21 for Future Conditions. Hydrologic data were averaged according to water year types based on DWR's Sacramento Valley water year index (http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/iodir/WSIHIST). FIGURE 5.1-7 ESTIMATED SWP TABLE A DELIVERY BY WATER YEAR TYPE — FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH AND WITHOUT CLIMATE CHANGE 4,500 4,000 1 11 1 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 1�1 11 3,500 m v r LL 3,000 ti Z 2,500 KI v 11 11 1m._ 1 0 2,0001 Q 11 11 11 Mimi 1 20 115001 r v 1,000 E E 500 0 Wet Above Below Dry Critical Average Normal Normal ■ SWP Table A Delivery -Future Conditions without Climate Change (TAF) ■ SWPTahle A Delivery -Future Conditions with 2050 Climate Change (TAF) Source: Estimated SWP exports are based on the 82 years of hydrologic data (water years 1922-2003) from Draft Technical Addendum to the State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2011, Table 12 SWP Table A Deliveries for Future Conditions. Hydrologic data were averaged according to water year types based on DWR's Sacramento Valley water year index (hftp://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi- progs/iodir[WSIHIST). 1 11 1 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 1�1 11 11 Dry -Year SWP Table A Deliveries Figure 5.1-8 shows a comparison of estimated SWP Table A deliveries under future conditions with and without climate change during possible drought conditions. Unlike Figure 5.1-7 that shows the average of dry and critical years over the entire 82 years of hydrologic period, Figure 5.1-8 shows estimates of SWP exports for a single dry year, or the average of the consecutive dry years. Droughts are analyzed using historical drought -period precipitation and runoff patterns from 1922 through 2003. Future conditions with land use and climate change are also accounted for. As shown in Figure 5.1-8, estimated annual SWP deliveries can be expected to range from 579 TAF to 1,551 TAF under the future conditions with climate change, relative to 300 TAF to 1,468 TAF without climate change effects. This indicates a 12% to 48% increase for the single dry year and 2 -year drought, respectively, with climate change. Under both future Page 5-22 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP •February 2014 conditions, the single year drought (1977) is the most intense dry period, with the lowest delivery. As shown in Figure 5.1-8, the increasing trend for the single dry and 2 -year drought with climate change is different than the overall decreasing trend seen in SWP projections with climate change. As discussed above, the long-term average SWP delivery is projected to be lower with climate change (Figure 5.1-6). Similarly, a decreasing trend is seen for the average deliveries by water year types where the future conditions with climate change forecast lower deliveries under all water year types (Figure 5.1-7). However, as discussed above, the minimum and maximum values are projected to be higher with climate change (Figure 5.1-6), similar to the increasing trend seen for the single -dry year and 2 -year drought projections with climate change (Figure 5.1-8). As discussed earlier, the projections over a single year (i.e., minimum, maximum, or a single dry period) or over a short period of time (i.e., 2 -year drought) should be interpreted carefully because the results for the beginning of any year are dependent upon the rainfall and reservoir storage conditions in the previous year. While the increasing trend with climate change does not follow the overall expected trend for decreasing SWP deliveries with climate change, it could be attributed to the factors that occur in the previous years, such as weather and or reservoir storage conditions that affect deliveries. While SWP supplies are anticipated to increase during short period drought conditions, as depicted in Figure 5.1-8 for the single dry year and 2 -year drought, during the multi-year (4 -year and 6 -year) drought projections under future conditions are lower with climate change than without climate change. This is consistent with the decreasing trend seen with climate change for the long-term average and the average deliveries during different water year types. For the 4 -year and 6 -year drought, SWP Table A deliveries with climate change decrease by 10% to 19%, respectively, compared with future conditions without climate change. For the 6 -year drought, SWP supply to the Region is anticipated to be reduced by 4,900 AF per year, as a result of decrease in SWP Table A delivery from 36% of Table A amount without climate change to 32% of Table A amount with climate change. Assuming that the Region's SWP supply reliability would be proportional to SWP system -wide supply reliability, there is potential for slightly increased SWP supply to the Region during a single year and 2 -year drought with climate change assumptions compared with no climate change effects. In the worst-case single critically dry year (1977), estimated SWP Table A delivery increases from 7% of total maximum Table A amount without climate change to 14% of Table A amount with climate change. This represents a 7% increase and corresponds to about 6,500 AF additional SWP supply to the Region (based on the annual contract amount of 95,200 AF of SWP water). During the 2 -year drought, the projected increase in SWP supply is about 5% of total Table A amount or 4,500 AF more of SWP supply. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-23 FIGURE 5.1-8 ESTIMATED SWP TABLE A DELIVERY DURING DRY PERIODS — FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH AND WITHOUT CLIMATE CHANGE Source: Figure based on Draft Technical Addendum to the State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2011, Table 12 SWP Table A Deliveries for Future Conditions. 5.1.2.3.2.2 Groundwater As discussed in the Water Supplies and Water Demand Section (see Section 3.1-1 and Table 3.1-1), the Region relies on groundwater mainly in two groundwater basins: Acton Valley Basin and Santa Clara River Valley Basin, East Subbasin. The boundaries of the basins are shown in Figure 5.1-9, as defined by DWR Bulletin 118 (DWR, 2003). There are also groundwater areas that are recognized locally (Agus Dulce Basin and Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel) and used for pumping, but they are not designated as a groundwater basin by DWR. Groundwater extraction data, groundwater storage, and yield data for these locally recognized basins are not currently available. A detailed description of the hydrogeologic characteristics of the basins, groundwater flow and water quality conditions, and storage capacity of the aquifers is presented in the previous sections and additional details can be found in other existing reports (CH2MHill 2005; LSCE 2011). Page 5-24 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 4,500 4,000 3,500 `m a � 3,000 r � 2,500 a w 2,000 4 1,551 R 1,500 1,468 a — 4 1,000 579 500 0 Single Dry Year 2 -Year Drought 4 -Year Drought 6 -Year Drought (1977) (1976-1977) (1931-1934) (1987-1992) � SW P TableA Delivery - Future Conditions without Climate Change (TAF) SSW P TableA Delivery - Future Conditions with 2050 Climate Change (TAF) Average- Future Conditions without Climate Change (2,574 TAF) Average- Future Conditions with 2050 Climate Change (2,363 TAF) ----- Maximum SWP Table A delivery (4,133 TAF) Source: Figure based on Draft Technical Addendum to the State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2011, Table 12 SWP Table A Deliveries for Future Conditions. 5.1.2.3.2.2 Groundwater As discussed in the Water Supplies and Water Demand Section (see Section 3.1-1 and Table 3.1-1), the Region relies on groundwater mainly in two groundwater basins: Acton Valley Basin and Santa Clara River Valley Basin, East Subbasin. The boundaries of the basins are shown in Figure 5.1-9, as defined by DWR Bulletin 118 (DWR, 2003). There are also groundwater areas that are recognized locally (Agus Dulce Basin and Soledad Canyon Alluvial Channel) and used for pumping, but they are not designated as a groundwater basin by DWR. Groundwater extraction data, groundwater storage, and yield data for these locally recognized basins are not currently available. A detailed description of the hydrogeologic characteristics of the basins, groundwater flow and water quality conditions, and storage capacity of the aquifers is presented in the previous sections and additional details can be found in other existing reports (CH2MHill 2005; LSCE 2011). Page 5-24 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Groundwater basins in the Region are recharged largely by infiltration of surface water flows in the Santa Clara River channel and deep percolation of precipitation and runoff in its tributaries. Surface water flows percolate through the alluvial deposits along the stream channels, recharging the Alluvium, and the underlying Saugus Formation. Groundwater in the Santa Clara River Valley Basin is produced from the Alluvium and Saugus Formation. Based on the groundwater operating plan for the Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin, total groundwater production in a given year varies depending on the hydrologic conditions. Based on the existing and planned pumping, groundwater is anticipated to provide about 43,600 AF through year 2050 (35,225 AF existing and 8,375 AF planned) (see Table 3.1-1). In some years groundwater supplies could be supplemented with banked groundwater. With the existing (24,950 AF) and planned (20,000 AF) banking programs, total (maximum) capacity of the banking program withdrawals would reach 44,950 AF annually through 2050, but this banking water is typically used only in dry years. The projections of pumping are well within the available groundwater supply for the Region. Total combined groundwater available from the Alluvium, Saugus Formation, and Acton Basin ranges from 71,900 AFY to 89,000 AFY during normal and above normal years and reduces to 60,400 AFY to 74,900 AFY during dry years (see Table 3.1- 2). While the basins have supply exceeding the future projected pumping levels, in light of the basin characteristics and natural recharge processes in the basins, changes in local hydrology and natural recharge are anticipated to have a direct impact on available groundwater storage. Warmer winters would increase the amount of runoff available for groundwater recharge, but reductions in inflow from runoff and increased evaporative losses could reduce the amount of natural recharge. While the extent to which climate change will change the natural recharge processes and the impact of that change are not exactly known and are difficult to quantify, simplifying assumptions were applied to provide initial estimates. For this analysis, precipitation reduction of 10 percent was assumed to occur in the Region on a long-term basis. Assessment of climate change impacts on groundwater resources is presented in two parts. The first part of the analysis uses a "what if' scenario to evaluate if groundwater aquifers could make up for SWP supplies impacted by climate change while staying within a safe operating range. The underlying assumption was that reduced SWP supplies would be solely made up by groundwater pumping and that future pumping levels could be potentially higher than the future pumping projections reported in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP. The second part of the analysis is based on a "what if' scenario to evaluate the combined effects of climate change on SWP supplies, in conjunction with potential climate change effects on groundwater resources. In this scenario, it was assumed that 10 percent precipitation reduction would result in 10 percent reduction in the current safe groundwater pumping operational range. This is considered as an initial assessment of climate change effect on groundwater resources and further analysis may be warranted. Following is a brief discussion of historical and operational range of pumping from the Alluvium, Saugus Formation, and Acton Basin, as this information is pertinent to the assessment of future pumping projections with climate change effects. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-27 Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin — Alluvium Pumping from the Alluvium in a given year is governed by local hydrologic conditions in the eastern Santa Clara River watershed. Therefore, changes in local hydrologic conditions resulting from climate change are anticipated to directly affect the available supply in the Alluvium. Groundwater production from the Alluvium is projected to range from 38,100 AFY to 38,600 AFY through year 2050 under normal years (CLWA, et al. 2011). Future projections of pumping account for land -use changes including a decrease in agricultural land use and decrease in agricultural pumping and the equivalent amount of increased pumping for municipal water supply. Future pumping projections are consistent with the long-term sustainable pumping operations and are within pumping capacity and historical ranges of pumping in the Alluvium. The Alluvium can supply groundwater on a long-term sustainable basis in the overall range of 30,000 to 40,000 AFY during normal and above -normal years, with a probable reduction in dry years to 30,000 to 35,000 AFY. In terms of pumping capacity, the combined maximum pumping capacity of the three retail water purveyors with Alluvium wells (NCWD, SCWD, and VWC) is approximately 67,000 AFY (CLWA, et al. 2011), which is more than sufficient to meet the potential future groundwater supply from the Alluvium. However, as a result of the groundwater operating plan, pumping to full capacity is not permitted. Historical pumping data show that since the beginning of SWP deliveries to the Region in 1980, total pumping from the Alluvium ranged from 20,000 AFY (in 1983) to slightly more than 43,000 AFY (in 1999). During recent years between 2005 and 2009, pumping from the Alluvium was at the upper end of the operating plan range, from nearly 38,700 AF (in 2005) to slightly over 43,000 AF (in 2006). The groundwater modeling analysis, prepared by CH2M Hill and LSCE (2005), was used to examine the yield and sustainability of the Alluvium in response to pumping in the 30,000 to 40,000 AFY range under average/normal and wet conditions, and in the 30,000 to 35,000 AFY range under locally dry conditions. The model was based on a 78 -year hydrologic period from historical precipitation and considered a number of hydrologic conditions expected to affect groundwater pumping and recharge. The modeling analysis showed no evidence of long-term decline in groundwater levels or storage. The updated basin yield analysis (LSCE & GSI 2009) resulted in similar findings as the original modeling analysis, providing further evidence that the operating plan reflects the ongoing sustainable groundwater supply rates. On an overall basis, projected groundwater production from the Alluvium is intended to remain within the sustainable ranges in the groundwater operating plan (CLWA, et al. 2011). Santa Clara River Valley Basin - Saugus Formation Pumping from the Saugus Formation in a given year is tied directly to the availability of other water supplies, particularly from SWP. Therefore, reductions in the SWP imported water from climate change impacts would lead to more reliance on the Saugus Formation. Based on the future projections of groundwater pumping through year 2050, the Saugus Formation would supply water from 11,500 AFY to 12,500 AFY in normal years (CLWA, et al. 2011). On an overall basis, projected groundwater production from the Saugus Formation remains well within the sustainable ranges defined in the groundwater operating plan (CLWA, et al. 2011). Based on the historical operating ranges and recent modeling analyses (2005 and 2009), the Saugus Formation can supply groundwater on a long-term sustainable basis in the Page 5-28 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 overall range of 7,500 to 15,000 AFY during normal years, but has the capacity to produce more in dry years. As presented earlier in Table 3.1-2, planned dry -year pumping from the Saugus Formation ranges between 15,000 and 25,000 AFY during a drought year and can increase to between 21,000 and 25,000 AFY if SWP deliveries are reduced for two consecutive years and between 21,000 and 35,000 AFY if SWP deliveries are reduced for three consecutive years. Based on a combination of historical operating experience and recent groundwater modeling analysis in 2005 and 2009, the Saugus Aquifer can be considered a sustainable water supply source to meet the Saugus portion of the operating plan for the groundwater subbasin. The operating plan for the Saugus, with fairly low pumping in wet/normal years and increased pumping through dry periods, reflects sustainable groundwater supply rates. Limited data exists regarding groundwater levels in the Saugus Formation; however, the existing data indicate no trend toward a sustained decline in water levels or storage indicative of overdraft. Acton Groundwater Basin The Acton Basin consists of alluvial and stream terrace deposits and is under unconfined conditions. The basin is drained by the Santa Clara River and recharged largely by deep percolation of direct rainfall runoff captured in the valley floor, and Santa Clara River and tributaries. As seen in Table 3.1-2, availability of groundwater from the Acton Basin is estimated to range from 14,900 AF for a relatively dry period to 34,400 AF for a relatively wet period. Based on the historical data, groundwater levels declined during the 1950s through the mid-1970s, rose during the late 1970s to the mid-1980s, and continued to decline after the 1980s (Slade 1990). "What If"Scenario 1: Projected Future Groundwater Pumping with Reduced SWP Supplies This scenario assumes (1) SWP supplies with climate change as reported in the 2011 Reliability Report and (2) groundwater supplies consistent with the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP. This section presents the first part of the analysis where future groundwater pumping volumes are projected to accommodate the reduced SWP supplies as a result of climate change effects on SWP supplies. The future projections of pumping from the Alluvium, Saugus Formation, and Acton Basin, as reported in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, were evaluated in light of the operating plan pumping range and reduced SWP supplies resulting from climate change based on the vulnerability assessment of SWP supplies presented above. This is a qualitative analysis to evaluate if the basins have the potential to make up for reduced SWP supplies resulting from climate change without long-term effects on groundwater levels and storage. The current analysis is mainly based on the long-term average trends to capture the long-term response from climate change. Conditions during a multi-year (6 -year) drought were also assessed as a conservative approach. Based on DWR's modeling analysis of climate change effects on SWP supplies, CLWA's SWP imported water supply is estimated to decrease by 4,900 AFY both on the long-term average basis and during the multi-year (6 -year) drought, relative to future projections without climate change. In average/normal years, the future pumping projections of 38,100 AFY to 38,600 AFY in the Alluvium, as described in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP (CLWA, et al. 2011), would be in the upper range of the operating plan (up to 40,000 AFY, Table 3.1-2). Additional pumping from the Alluvium to accommodate the reduced SWP delivery of 4,900 AFY would Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 5-29 exceed the sustainable yield. In addition, pumping higher than the estimated sustainable Alluvium yield at 38,600 AFY could potentially result in both short-term and long-term groundwater levels and storage depletion in this basin. For the purpose of this assessment, it was assumed that the Alluvium could potentially produce 38,600 AFY on the long-term average. During a multi-year drought, the potential for the basin to support additional pumping of 4,900 AFY is low, given that the basin operating yield decreases to 34,850 AFY (CLWA, et al. 2011). Historical pumping in the Saugus Formation, on the other hand, has been fairly low and increased pumping up to about 15,000 AFY over a four-year period showed short-term water level impacts but produced no long-term depletion of the substantial groundwater storage. While the future projection of pumping from the Saugus Formation ranges from 11,500 AFY to 12,500 AFY, the basin has the potential to pump additional amounts in the short-term, as high as 35,000 AFY during a single dry year and up to 32,550 AFY during a multi-year drought in the case of reduced SWP deliveries. For the purposes of this assessment, it was assumed that, both on the long-term basis, and multi-year drought conditions, the entire amount of reduced SWP supplies could be potentially made up by pumping in the Saugus Formation. If the reduced SWP supply was made up solely by groundwater pumping in the Saugus Formation, pumping would increase by an equivalent amount of reduced SWP delivery, or 4,900 AFY. This would result in pumping in the range of 16,400 AFY to 17,400 AFY on the long-term average. This range is slightly higher than the upper end of the planned use of the aquifer in normal years, but lower than the upper range of pumping in dry years when reduced SWP deliveries occur during consecutive years (up to 35,000 AFY). As discussed earlier, the full Saugus Formation supply of 35,000 AFY in certain dry years would require restoration of perchlorate impacted wells with additional wells, but pumping in the range of 16,400 AFY to 17,400 AFY is not anticipated to be affected by well capacity. Overall, additional pumping from the Saugus to make up for reduced SWP supplies is within the range of pumping identified in the recent basin analysis found to protect long-term groundwater sustainability. Groundwater levels could potentially go below historical levels in response to greater long-term use of the aquifer, but the basin is anticipated to show recovery of groundwater levels and storage after cessation of higher pumping. Given that the Acton Basin is under unconfined conditions and shows historical groundwater level declines, the basin is anticipated to be most vulnerable to local changes in hydrology and reduced natural recharge. For the purpose of this assessment, no additional pumping from the Action Basin was assumed to occur to respond to reduced SWP deliveries resulting from climate change. "What If"Scenario 2: Projected Future Groundwater Pumping with Reduced SWP Supplies and Reduced Precipitation This scenario assumes (1) SWP supplies with climate change as reported in the 2011 Reliability Report and (2) groundwater supplies reduced to reflect anticipated reductions in recharge with climate change. For the purpose of this part of the analysis, SWP projections with climate change remain the same as discussed in the "What If' Scenario 1. However, the groundwater operating range was modified based on the simplifying assumption that a 10 percent reduction in precipitation would lead to a 10 percent reduction in the operational range. This is done on a long-term basis and does not account for year-to-year variations in precipitation change or any resulting annual Page 5-30 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 changes in groundwater resources. The intent is to evaluate if the basins can still support the additional pumping in the long-term without adverse long-term effects in groundwater storage and levels when SWP deliveries are reduced because of climate change effects on SWP supplies. Given a 10 percent reduction in the operational yield, available pumping from the Alluvium is assumed to decline to 27,000 AFY to 36,000 AFY, less than the current operating range of 30,000 AFY to 40,000 AFY. Future projected groundwater production from the Alluvium (without climate change) ranges from 38,100 AFY to 38,600 AFY, which exceeds the modified operational yield. While the 10 percent reduction assumption is very broad and conservative, this suggests that, the Alluvium may not have the capacity to support future projections of pumping in the long-term, and may not support additional pumping that may be required when SWP supplies are reduced. In addition, future pumping of 38,100 AFY to 38,600 AFY may require further analysis of the operational range to maintain the long-term sustainability of the basin. Assuming a 10 percent reduction in the operational yield, the Saugus Formation could potentially range from 6,750 to 31,500 AFY, compared with the current range of 7,500 AFY to 35,000 AFY. If the reduced SWP supply of 4,900 AFY was made up solely by groundwater from the Saugus Formation, pumping would range from 16,400 AFY to 17,400 AFY on the long-term average, compared with future pumping projection of 11,500 AFY to 12,500 AFY without climate change. This increased pumping is higher than the upper end of the modified operating range in normal years (13,500 AFY), but still lower than the upper range of the modified operating use in consecutive dry years (22,500 AFY for a dry year 2 and 31,500 AFY for dry year 3). With the modified (reduced) operating range, it appears that the Saugus Formation could potentially support pumping up to 13,500 AFY in the long-term without affecting the long-term stability of the basin. Therefore, the Saugus Formation has the potential to make up for a portion of the additional pumping when SWP deliveries are reduced with climate change, but a combination of other sources should be considered to make up the difference and meet the water demand in the Region. 5.1.2.3.3 Water Quality Improving water quality is a Plan objective that may be impacted by climate change. Studies of potential climate change impacts on water quality exist, but few trends in relationships between hydroclimate (hydrology and weather variables) have been identified. Key climate vulnerabilities potentially important to the Region include increasing temperature and changes in precipitation patterns. Increased wildfire risk is another potential factor that could affect water quality in the Region. Outside the Region, sea level rise in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta is expected to impact water quality of imported SWP water. Surface waters in the Region are expected to be more directly vulnerable to water quality impacts of climate change, while water quality impacts to groundwater sources would be indirect. Key surface water sources include imported SWP water stored in Castaic Lake and flowing water in the Upper Santa Clara River and its tributaries such as Bouquet Creek. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-31 SWP Imported Water SWP water is vulnerable to potential effects of climate change at the source in the Delta and in storage in Castaic Lake. The effect in the Delta would be due to sea level rise which increases the intrusion of salinity into the exported SWP water. This will increase chloride and bromide (a disinfection byproduct precursor that is also a component of sea water) concentrations in the SWP imported water. In addition, decreased freshwater flows into the Delta could increase organic matter, which contribute to disinfection byproduct formation, in the SWP water. Water stored in Castaic Lake will also be vulnerable to climate change. A prior study of potential climate change impacts on the water quality of Lake Cachuma near Santa Barbara found that water quality parameters related to rainfall -runoff (turbidity and apparent color) during the wet season, winter, and/or spring could be evaluated by looking at total precipitation while water parameters related to taste and odor (increasing water temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), threshold odor number (TON), pH, and percent DO saturation) during the dry season, spring, and summer could be evaluated by looking at air temperature parameters and/or evaporation (Drago and Brekke 2005). Extreme storm events, although rare, may be more intense under climate change and may present treatment challenges for source water with increased turbidity. In the past, high turbidity events in Castaic Lake during 1998 and 2005 required modification of the drinking water treatment processes (primarily additional chemical usage) for extended periods. In 2005, an intense winter rainfall event after a wildfire in the watershed the prior year resulted in extremely high turbidities (peak over 80 NTU) in the lake. Although the treatment plants were able to treat the water, the additional sludge production overwhelmed the solids handling equipment and the plants had to be shut down for a brief time. This combination of more intense rainfall events and increased wildfire risk is more likely under projected climate change conditions. The warmer temperatures could lead to increased taste and odor events triggered by algal blooms, which are characterized by water quality changes such as increases in DO and DO saturation, pH, and TON, during the spring and summer. CLWA's two surface water treatment plants are designed to address taste and odor events through preozonation, although use of higher ozone dosages to control taste and odor events must also consider the need to control bromate formation (from the oxidation of bromide), which could increase due to greater bromide levels in the imported SWP water affected by climate change. Regional Surface Waters The primary Regional surface water is the Upper Santa Clara River and its tributaries, including Bouquet Creek. The Upper Santa Clara River is largely defined as ephemeral with highly variable flows, depending on precipitation levels. Water quality impacts to rivers due to climate change include increased temperature, more frequent heavy rainfall events, and longer periods of low natural stream flow due to decreased annual precipitation. A prior study of 43 rivers found that surface water temperatures increased 0.4 to 0.6°F for each 1 IF rise in air temperature (Morrill, Bales, and Conklin 2005). Increased water temperature generally reduces dissolved oxygen and can promote algal blooms if nutrients are available in the source. The storm events can transport sediments and other pollutants along the river, while long periods of low flow can increase concentrations of pollutants from wastewater plant and non -point discharges. Increased wildfires may contribute to the turbidity events. Page 5-32 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Key water quality considerations are nitrogen concentrations and chlorides in stretches of the river, both of which may be impacted by climate change. Nitrogen concentrations can be influenced by low stream flows and increased temperatures that may promote eutrophication. Regional Groundwater Any water quality impacts to groundwater sources due to climate change are expected to be indirect, primarily due to decreased recharge from lower precipitation and increased use of groundwater to make up loss of SWP imported water. Decreased recharge and increased groundwater pumping may allow concentrations of groundwater contaminants such as perchlorate and volatile organic compounds to increase, which may trigger additional treatment requirements and increase groundwater treatment costs. 5.1.2.3.4 Flooding Flooding is the most costly and destructive natural disaster; thus, a change in flood risk is a potential significant effect of climate change that could have great implications for the Region. Figure 5.1-10 present the 100 -year and 500 -year floodplains within the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed, showing areas that would be most vulnerable to flooding, based on data available from FEMA. It should be noted that FEMA does not provide 200 -year floodplain maps . In general, the floodplains are primarily located along the Santa Clara River and its major tributaries and correspond to surface water bodies such as Castaic Lake and Bouquet Reservoir. In general, land use within the floodplains typically includes residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural areas. While the Cal -Adapt climate change model projects precipitation decrease of 10 percent by 2050 on the long-term basis, research data suggest that there is a risk of increased flooding in California (Kiparsky and Gleick 2005). Flooding depends not only on average precipitation but on the timing and intensity of precipitation. For the purpose of the assessment of future flooding from climate change, Cal -Adapt model results for runoff were used to make a general assessment for the likelihood of future flooding events in the Region. Cal -Adapt provides projections of monthly and annual runoff for the Santa Clarita region for the period 1950 to 2099, based on the four different models. Monthly runoff from the four climate change models were averaged to provide an estimate for the Region. Historical monthly averages were compared with future projections to provide an indication of future changes in runoff due to climate change. Figure 5.1-11 shows results of the annual runoff for the historical period (1950 to 2000 base period) and projections (2000 through 2099), based on the average of results from the four different climate models under A2 emissions scenario. Overall, future runoff projections are slightly higher than historical trends. On the long-term average, monthly runoff is slightly higher for the future projections (0.26 inches/month from 2000 through 2050) than the historical period (0.24 inches/month for 1950-2000). Similarly, the maximum monthly runoff is also higher for future projections (7.32 inches//month) than historical data (4.62 inches/month). Future projections generally suggest the possibility of increased amount and intensity of runoff than historically observed, in addition to more variable runoff with climate change. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-33 This page intentionally left blank. Page 5-34 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 _ - IWIRI Id pad 1 allx a e Poppy Rasary S Nwi=.�JlrjF 3L, 1 > I �^ 1 Fairmont/��� r 100 11111111111111 Reservoir. Jill Lure r I I m /- t t Hughes — -- J Elizabe� the _ .. Lake' \ rflim_ 0" � � Vistat��� udreane Legend 500 -Year Flooding (Zone x500) 1 N"OV_ A _ �� .� - - 1\ ��— 100 -Year Flooding (Zone A) n 1 _ III% d J O V r A Y Qj ��A/) A\ J -,� Bo q gt M1 ! pa "� An area that is located within a �" a e a Cao 1� y Reservoir E R A p ® community or county that i5 not mapped on any published FIRM. QO yj l , �' . . Casta c s Lake J^,,,.. �t' '� ( (f `k Palmdale � ��—� O Upper Santa Clara Sub -Watershed � r Upper Santa Clara w Streams k- 16 Water Body C �I �—�� wee Castatcor, Lagoon � �� ,I' 4z 1 _cam _ \ Santa Clara River rJ l_ 0 1.5 r `,/ 1, - / -- �� Miles l C TT 1 ��� _ �4 Kennedy/Jenks Consultants \ Y P`� L _ \/ CLWA IRWMP Grant Application k Los Angeles County, California \, g Upper Santa Clara River Sub -Watershed Ji Flood Plain Areas \ N I e�2 �. inn Source: A O RC1 a_ MVFn O Flood Plain Arespublished by the 11$9057.00 \j �; O Federa l EmQrgen cy M anagem ent Age ncy February 2012 zc���1i�ka��/�� (FEMA).�._..__V. .M FIGURE 5.1-11 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED RUNOFF FOR SANTA CLARITA REGION Source: Source data are based on Cal -Adapt website for the Santa Clarita area. These projections are intended to provide general trends for future projections and are considered reasonable when compared to historical trends over a long -period of time. However, these are runoff estimates over large areas and considered relatively straightforward evaluations of changes in large scale precipitation patterns. The climate change model results may not capture the timing and intensity of runoff and the model resolution is insufficient to account for small-scale watershed characteristics that play a significant role in flooding events. Historical runoff data used in the climate change models were analyzed for the periods of historical flooding events in the Region to demonstrate if Cal -Adapt model results are able to capture the site specific trends that occurred historically. As presented earlier (Section 4.1), major floods in the Region occurred during the winters of 1969 (January and February) and 1983 (in February and March). Historical runoff data from Cal -Adapt model are 0.68 inches/ month for January 1969 and 3.7 inches/month for February 1969, which are considerably higher than the long-term monthly average runoff of 0.24 inches/month. For the 1983 flood event, runoff of 1.8 inches/month for February and 0.76 inches/month for March predicted by Cal - Adapt are also much greater than the historical long-term averages. While the comparison was done for only limited flood occurrences, Cal -Adapt seems to generally respond to site conditions with anticipated runoff. Therefore, results from Cal -Adapt could be used as a general guidance for potential occurrence of future floods in the Region. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-37 In some ways, risk of flood from climate change could be more problematic than for water supply. Water supply issues usually arise over a period of months to years, allowing time to respond to changes. In contrast, while large floods are relatively rare, they are swift and devastating if preparations are insufficient. There is no window to prepare for a flood once the flood waters arrive; floods must be addressed through advanced preparation and quick response in the course of an event. Various major flood events have occurred within the Region in the past, as described in Section 4.3, resulting in damages to bridges, roads, homes, waterlines and other infrastructure. Increased floods with climate change may increase the risk of, and potentially exacerbate, these types of flood -related damages. Greater flood risk should be considered when evaluating new development in the 500 -year floodplain. 5.1.2.3.5 Ecological Health and Habitat Ecosystem health and habitat protection are important to the Region. Increased temperature, changes in precipitation patterns, and increased wildfire risk projected for potential climate change scenarios are potential stressors to ecosystems and habitat in the Region. Principal features in the Region include the Upper Santa Clara River and several canyons that provide complex topography that support diverse ecosystems and habitat (see Section 2.4 for a detailed description of ecological processes and environmental resources in the Region). These include at least 26 special status plant species, 45 special status wildlife species, several significant habitats (native grasslands, forests, fresh water marshes, vernal ponds, wetland habitat, and wildlife corridors), and five significant ecological areas (Cruzan Mesa Vernal Ponds SEA, Santa Clara River SEA, Santa Felicia SEA, Santa Susanna Mountains/Simi Hills SEA, and Valley Oak Savannah SEA). All of these species and habitats have acclimated to the historical climate and water resources and may or may not to adapt to potential changes due to future climate change. Increased air temperature will increase water temperature in rivers, tributary streams, ponds, and lakes, with resulting decreases in DO. This combination may stress fish and biota that depend on higher DO levels and colder water which may impact their sustainability. The increased annual average air temperatures may also alter plant habitat by changing the length and timing of the growing season and/or allowing non-native species to outcompete native species and disrupt ecosystems that depend on the present habitats. Thus, measures to control non-native species may be needed to maintain habitats. Water available for plant habitat could be impacted by potential decreases in annual precipitation and increases in ET due to projected increases in temperature. Decreased precipitation could also directly affect formation of vernal ponds. Climate change may also affect water -dependent recreation primarily through water quality impacts on recreational lakes in the Region, as described in Section 5.1.2.3.3 Water Quality. Effects may include potential health concerns and aesthetic issues limiting use of these resources. Fire is an important process in maintaining a diverse ecosystem in the Region. Projected increases in wildfire risk due to climate change are not well understood, but it appears that summer dryness could begin earlier and fires could burn longer and affect more land area. It is unclear at this time whether projected increased fire risk will be beneficial or harmful to long Page 5-38 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 term ecosystem health and habitat maintenance, but will likely negatively impact water quality as discussed in Section 5.1.2.3.3. 5.1.2.4 Vulnerability Prioritization This section discusses a list of prioritized vulnerabilities based on the vulnerability assessment presented in the earlier subsections and stakeholder input on the importance of these sectors to the Region. The watershed vulnerability assessment (Section 2.12.2.3) identifies the water resources characteristics for each sector most vulnerable to potential climate change projections. The Region can use the assessment results to prioritize the sectors with vulnerabilities and develop adaptive strategies to respond to potential climate change impacts. Based on the inputs from the stakeholders in the Region, the sector vulnerability prioritization is defined as follows (1 being the sector most prioritized and 4 being the sector least prioritized with respect to climate change vulnerability): 5. Water Supply; Water Quality 6. Water Demand; Flooding 7. Ecosystem and Habitat 8. Sea Level Rise; Hydropower Table 5.1-4 summarizes the climate change vulnerability based on the results of the vulnerability assessment. With respect to climate change effects, the vulnerability prioritization is intended to identify if existing sectors can handle the impacts that would occur under future climate change, and to evaluate alternative water management options and projects. This also assists IRWMP's decision making process as part of proposed measures for adapting to climate change (see Section 5.1.3). The vulnerability assessment and prioritization was conducted based on data currently available and inputs from the stakeholders involved in the preparation of this study for the Region. This assessment can be improved in the future with further data gathering and analyzing of the prioritized vulnerabilities. 5.1.3 Adaptation to Climate Change Adaptation to climate change involves adjustments in natural and human systems that occur in response to projected impacts of climate change. The goal of adaptation is to minimize risks associated with anticipated impacts and take advantage of beneficial opportunities that may arise from climate change. Adaptation strategies are developed in conjunction with GHG mitigation strategies, which may overlap. For example, promoting water and energy efficiency are both GHG mitigation and climate change adaptation strategies. Adaptation strategies discussed in this section provide the Region with guidance related to projects that will enhance the Region's preparedness to plan and react to these potential impacts. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-39 TABLE 5.1-4 CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Water Supply Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Climate change projections suggest continued highly variable annual precipitation with a slightly drier climate by mid-century. The overall impact on SWP imported water and groundwater supplies would be significant and can affect the long-term planning. Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning SWP Imported Water - SWP supply to the Region is projected to be impacted by climate change on a long-term basis, based on DWR's latest analysis of SWP delivery reliability with climate change effects. Based on the future conditions with 2050 climate change, the long-term average SWP system -wide deliveries are projected to be reduced by 5%, from 62% of Table A amount without climate change to 57% of Table A amount with climate change. Assuming the Region's SWP supply would be proportional to SWP's system -wide supply reliability, this represents a reduction of 4,900 AFY, of CLWA's SWP Table A amount. While this appears to be a small impact and comprises a small portion of future water supply in the Region, it should be viewed in light of the cumulative effects of climate change on other water resources, such as the local groundwater availability. Groundwater — Natural recharge to the local groundwater aquifers is likely to be affected by projected changes in precipitation pattern and amount (a long-term reduction of about 10% by 2050), increased evaporative losses, and warmer and shorter winter seasons. The overall impact on groundwater resources could be significant. Reduced natural recharge would affect the amount of groundwater available in the long-term. Reductions in the SWP imported water imposed by climate change would lead to more reliance on local groundwater. However, with potential reductions in natural recharge, groundwater may only make up a portion of reduced SWP supply. Future planned projects need to meet the water demand to accommodate the effects of climate change on water demand and water supplies. IRWMP Objective Impacted — Increase Water Supply Performance Metric Development — Performance metrics should be based on SWP delivery and groundwater operation range limitations and quantities of new supply development (reclaimed water, water baking, etc.). Page 5-40 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Water Quality Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Climate change projections suggest continued highly variable annual precipitation with slightly drier climate by mid-century. Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning SWP Imported Water — SWP imported water stored in Castaic Lake is potentially vulnerable to water quality changes from climate change, mainly because of the vulnerability of SWP source water in the Delta, resulting from sea level rise and increased salinity of SWP water. Extreme storm events could also result in increased turbidity. Potential changes in the water quality of Castaic Lake could present challenges at the surface water treatment plants in the Region and may require modifications to treatment processes. Regional Surface Water— The Upper Santa Clara River and its tributaries are vulnerable to potential water quality impacts due to climate change as a result of increased temperature, more frequent heavy rainfall events, increased wildfire risk, and longer periods of low natural stream flow from decreased annual precipitation. Key water quality constituents of concern are nitrogen and chloride, in addition to reduced DO and increased algae growth, turbidity and sedimentation. Regional Groundwater— Groundwater aquifers in the Region are subject to indirect water quality impacts, primarily due to decreased natural recharge under future conditions of decreased precipitation and increased use of groundwater to make up for reduced SWP supply. Increased groundwater pumping may present challenges with the management of perchlorate in groundwater, leading to additional treatment or treatment cost. IRWMP Objective Impacted — Improve Water Quality Performance Metric Development — Performance metrics should be based on source water quality exceedances (e.g., consecutive days with turbidity exceeding a trigger value, frequency of algal blooms) and frequency of meeting water quality standards (e.g., chloride, nitrogen). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-41 Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Water Demand Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Projected increase in average annual air temperature by mid-century and increased evaporative losses are expected to increase both urban and agricultural water demand. Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning Urban Water Demand — Water demand in the Region is affected by weather and shows large seasonal variations, with the largest water use in the summer months and the least in cooler months. Water demand is likely to increase in the Region as a result of projected increase in annual average air temperature due to climate change (about 4°F by 2050). However, water demand increase resulting from this projected temperature increase appears minor relative to other major factors, such as population growth and land use conversion from agriculture to urban. Urban outdoor landscape is expected to be impacted most from climate change, with temperature rise, increased evaporation losses with warmer temperature, and longer growing season. Agricultural Water Demand — Climate change is expected to increase agricultural demand, as a result of projected increased annual average temperature, increased evaporation losses with warmer temperature, and longer growing season. The Region's agricultural demand is projected to decrease over time as a result of land use conversion from agriculture to urban. Thus, any climate change effects on agricultural demand are likely to be outweighed by decrease in agricultural activities. IRWMP Objective Impacted — Reduce Water Demand Performance Metric Development — To be determined. It is unclear that sufficient information is available to develop a performance metric unless a correlation between air temperature and water demand for the Region can be developed (data gap). Flooding Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Climate change projections are not sensitive enough to assess short term extreme events such as flooding, but the general expectation is that more intense storms would occur. Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning The Region could be potentially subject to more frequent and intense storm events resulting in increased annual runoff and short-term peak flows with climate change. This could present larger areas susceptible to flooding and increase the risk of direct flood damage in the Region. IRWMP Objective Impacted — Promote Resource Stewardship. Performance Metric Development — Consider excluding placement of critical infrastructure within the 500 year (or 200 year, if defined) floodplain. Page 5-42 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Ecosystem and Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Climate change projections of Habitat increasing annual average temperature suggest potential environmental stressors. Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning The Upper Santa Clara River and several canyons in the Region support diverse ecosystems and habitat that may need to adapt to potential changes due to future climate change. Increased air temperature, increased ET, decreased precipitation and resulting water temperature increases, in addition to decreased DO may impact the sustainable habitat of fish and biota. Increased air temperature, increased ET, and decreased precipitation may also change water available to plant habitat, resulting in habitat alteration. Increased risk of wildfire is projected, but the impact is unclear. IRWMP Objective Impacted — Promote Resource Stewardship Performance Metric Development — Consider use of metrics such as acres of habitat maintained. Sea Level Rise Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Studies project the sea level off most of the California Coast to rise by over half a meter by mid-century and by about one meter by the end of the century (NRC 2012). Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning The Region is not directly subject to sea level rise. However, potential effects of sea level rise would affect SWP water supply conditions, mainly because of the potential for sea water intrusion to increase Delta salinities (see water quality above). IRWMP Objectives Impacted — Improve Water Quality Performance Metric Development — No performance metric is recommended because the climate change response will be undertaken by DWR for SWP deliveries. Hydropower Potential Climate Change Vulnerability — Climate change projections suggest continued highly variable annual precipitation with slightly drier climate by mid-century. Sector Response in Context of Regional Planning Currently, the Region produces only minimal hydropower; thus, climate change effects on hydropower are not likely to be considerable. However, DWR operates hydropower projects as part of the SWP and any decreases in hydropower production would result in higher energy costs to the Region. IRWMP Objective Potentially Impacted — Increase Water Supply Performance Metric Development — Performance metrics should be based on energy charges from DWR. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-43 5.1.3.1 Statewide Adaptation Strategies for the Water Sector The California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), working through the Climate Action Team, is responsible for leading the effort to develop adaptation strategies for California. Strategies were published as a report to the Governor entitled 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy (CNRA 2009) and will be updated approximately every two years. Additional guidance for regional and local strategies is provided in the 2012 California Adaptation Planning Guide (CNRA 2012), which helps communities address climate change consequences in a proactive manner. Specific adaptive water management strategies for the water sector were developed by DWR. The statewide adaptation strategies target fundamental improvements in water management systems and enhancements in ecosystem sustainability. DWR (2008) developed the following 10 statewide adaptation strategies for the Water Management Sector: • Strategy 1: Provide sustainable funding for statewide and integrated regional water management • Strategy 2: Fully develop the potential of integrated regional water management • Strategy 3: Aggressively increase water use efficiency • Strategy 4: Practice and promote integrated flood management • Strategy 5: Enhance and sustain ecosystems • Strategy 6: Expand water storage and conjunctive management of surface and groundwater resources • Strategy 7: Fix Delta water supply, quality, and ecosystem conditions • Strategy 8: Preserve, upgrade and increase monitoring, data analysis and management • Strategy 9: Plan for, and adapt to, sea -level rise • Strategy 10: Identify and fund focused climate change impacts and adaptation research and analysis These statewide strategies provide guidance specifically aimed at addressing the impacts of climate change. Some of DWR's strategies can be directly applied to Regional management strategies, while others are supportive of Regional efforts that are discussed in the following section. 5.1.3.2 Regional Adaptation Strategies In this analysis, potential adaptation strategies have been grouped by watershed characteristics (or sector) and priorities developed in the climate change vulnerability analysis. This approach Page 5-44 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 will allow the Regional Management Group and other stakeholders to incorporate climate change adaptation and GHG mitigation measures in projects developed and evaluated as part of the IRWMP process. While the focus of this discussion is adaptation, some of the adaptation strategies will overlap with and enhance GHG mitigation measures. 5.1.3.2.1 Vulnerability Priority 1 (Highest) Sectors: Water Supply and Water Quality Water supply and water quality were identified as the highest priority sectors that could potentially be impacted by climate change. The potential impacts due to climate change and the suggested regional adaptation strategies are summarized below. 5.1.3.2.2 Water Supply Climate change projections suggest continued highly variable annual precipitation with slightly drier climate by mid-century. The overall impact will include reductions in SWP imported water and greater reliance on groundwater supplies with the potential to affect long-term planning. Suggested Regional adaptation strategies to address potential reductions in water supply include the following: • Expand water storage and conjunctive management of surface and groundwater resources. • Reduce reliance on imported SWP water, which depends on the Sierra snowpack for water supply. • Enhance use of recycled water for appropriate uses as a drought -proof water supply. • Enhance practices of water exchanges and water banking outside the Region to supplement water supply. • Encourage local agencies to develop and implement AB 3030 Groundwater Management Plans as a fundamental component of the IRWM plan. • Develop plans for local agencies in the Region to monitor the elevation of their groundwater basins. • Encourage cities and the county agencies in the Region to adopt local ordinances that protect the natural functioning of groundwater recharge areas. 5.1.3.2.3 Water Quality Climate change projections suggest increased temperature and continued highly variable annual precipitation with slightly drier climate by mid-century that could degrade water quality. Suggested Regional adaptation strategies to address potential water quality impacts include the following: • Support DWR strategies that protect or enhance water quality delivered by the SWP. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 5-45 • Consider coordination with DWR to improve water quality in Castaic Lake through lake aeration practices. • Consider water quality improvements associated with water transfers and water banking on Regional water supply. • Consider riparian forest projects that provide cooling for habitat (see Ecosystem Health and Habitat). • Encourage projects that improve water quality of contaminated groundwater sources. • Increase implementation of LID techniques to improve stormwater management • Comply with NPDES permits to ensure water quality protection 5.1.3.2.4 Vulnerability Priority 2 (Second Highest) Sectors: Water Demand and Flooding Water demand and flooding were identified as the second highest priority sectors that could potentially be impacted by climate change. The potential impacts due to climate change and the suggested regional adaptation strategies are summarized below. 5.1.3.2.5 Water Demand Climate change projections suggest increases in average annual air temperature by mid-century and increased evaporative losses are expected to increase both urban and agricultural water demand. Suggested Regional adaptation strategies to address potential increases in water demand include the following: • Aggressively increase water use efficiency • Encourage agricultural users to adopt efficient water management practices • Encourage landscape water users to adopt efficient water management practices, including xeriscaping 5.1.3.2.6 Flooding Climate change projections are not sensitive enough to assess short term extreme events such as flooding, but the general expectation is that more intense storms will occur. Suggested Regional adaptation strategies to address potential increases in flood risk include: • Improve emergency preparedness and response capacity in anticipation of potential increases in extreme events. • Practice and promote integrated flood management among water and flood management agencies. Page 5-46 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Flood management should be integrated with watershed management on open space, agricultural, wildlife areas, and other low-density lands • Avoid significant new development in areas that cannot be adequately protected from flooding. • Encourage land use policies including low impact development (LID) that maintain or restore historical hydrological characteristics. • Control invasive species, such as arundo donax, within floodplains that could contribute to floods and related damages. 5.1.3.2.7 Vulnerability Level 3 (Third Highest) Sector: Ecosystem and Habitat Ecosystem Health and Habitat was identified as the third highest priority sector category that could potentially be impacted by climate change. The potential impacts due to climate change and the suggested regional adaptation strategies are summarized below. Climate change projections of increasing annual average temperature suggest potential environmental stressors that may affect the sustainability of existing ecosystems and habitat. Suggested Regional adaptation strategies to address potential Ecosystem Health and Habitat impacts include the following: Promote water resources management strategies that restore and enhance ecosystem services. • Provide or enhance connected "migration corridors' for animals and plants to promote increased biodiversity and allow the plants and animals to move to more suitable habitats to avoid serious impacts and support increased biodiversity. • Consider projects that provide seasonal aquatic habitat in streams and support corridors of native riparian forests that create shaded riverine and terrestrial habitat. 5.1.3.2.8 Vulnerability Priority 4 (Lowest) Sectors: Sea Level Rise and Hydropower Sea level rise and hydropower were identified as the lowest priority sectors for the Region. 5.1.3.2.9 Sea Level Rise Climate change projections suggest sea level rise off most of the California Coast of over half a meter by mid-century and by about one meter by the end of the century (NRC 2012). Suggested Regional adaptation strategies to address potential reductions in water supply include the following: • Support DWR strategies that minimize the impact of sea level rise on salinity intrusion into the Delta and impact water quality deliveries in the SWP. • Support DWR strategies for protecting levees in the Delta from the potential effects of projected sea level rise. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 5-47 5.1.3.2.10 Hydropower Climate change projections suggest continued highly variable annual precipitation with slightly drier climate by mid-century, affecting hydropower generation. Strategies to address potential reductions in hydropower generated by the SWP include the following: • Support DWR strategies to maximize hydropower in SWP facilities that reduce energy charges to the Region. 5.1.4 Next Steps for Future IRWMP Updates 5.1.4.1 Data Improvement The climate change assessment conducted in this Plan update is qualitative in some areas due to limited data, high level of uncertainty, and, in some cases, because impacts to a given sector are not expected to be severe. The intent of future data gathering is to address gaps in the current vulnerability assessment, to improve the understanding of climate change impacts and vulnerabilities, and to enable a more quantitative analyses. Recommended future data gathering efforts will include data that facilitate more quantitative analysis of the vulnerability, as described in the following sections. Data gathering efforts will be considered in the context of the current and proposed projects and funding available. This section describes potential areas of future data gathering efforts for the priority sectors identified earlier. The recommendations focus on the top four priority sectors; namely, water supply, water quality, water demand, and flooding. The lower priority sectors include ecosystem health and habitat, sea level rise, and hydropower, which require a lesser degree of data collection. Climate change vulnerability of ecosystem health and habitat is difficult to quantify, and reliance on generalized studies will likely satisfy the Region's needs. As previously noted, sea level rise and hydropower vulnerabilities are not directly applicable to, or not applicable to a considerable extent within, the Region. Rather, they are indirectly important to the imported SWP water supply that is the responsibility of DWR. Thus, the Region should prioritize data gathering efforts for the sectors most vulnerable to climate change impacts. 5.1.4.1.1 Climate Change Models and Scenarios Cal -Adapt modeling results for the Santa Clarita Region were used for projections of temperature, ET, precipitation, and runoff for the Region. The California Energy Commission maintains the Cal -Adapt site and will update the modeling tools as new climate change modeling results, based on more refined data, become available from the ICCC. Thus, to the extent feasible, the available climate change tools and projections for the Region will be reviewed periodically and the vulnerability assessment updated in future versions of the Plan. 5.1.4.1.2 Updates on Climate Change Research Research on the climate change impacts on water resources is ongoing and continues to evolve with further analysis and more refined methodologies. During the preparation of this Plan update, key literature resources on climate change have been reviewed. New scientific findings will be reviewed periodically and incorporated into the climate change vulnerability assessment, Page 5-48 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 especially the findings pertinent to the sectors most vulnerable to the climate change in the Region. 5.1.4.1.3 Vulnerability Assessment Update As noted above, a goal of further data collection is to enable a more quantitative analysis of the high priority watershed sectors that are more vulnerable to climate change in future Plan updates. Water supply and water quality were identified as the highest priority sectors and water demand and flooding were identified as the second highest priority sectors that could potentially be impacted by climate change. Water Supply In this Plan update, the assessment of the vulnerability of water supply to potential climate change impacts is presented for the SWP imported water delivery to CLWA and groundwater pumping. As discussed earlier, climate change impacts on the SWP imported water supply were based on the future projections of SWP deliveries from DWR's modeling analysis reported in the 2011 Reliability Report (DWR 2012). The assessment of groundwater supply vulnerability is based on existing and planned pumping and the current capacity of the water banking programs to respond to reductions in imported SWP water deliveries. Future assessment of water supply climate change vulnerability will incorporate the most up-to-date data available from DWR and the most current groundwater supply availability. Suggestions for future data gathering efforts to quantify the climate change effects on water supply include the following: • Update DWR SWP Delivery Reliability Report projections - DWR provides updated analysis and report every two years. Update available groundwater supply projections — Groundwater production in a given year varies depending on hydrologic conditions. Changes in local hydrology and natural recharge are anticipated to have a direct impact on available groundwater storage and may affect current safe operating ranges. Updates on the groundwater safe operating ranges will be needed when further assessments of water supply vulnerability to climate change are performed for future Plan updates. • Evaluate the effects of reduction in precipitation from climate change on the groundwater operational ranges - A simplifying assumption was used for a 10 percent reduction in the operational range in response to the 10 percent reduction in precipitation. Further analysis is suggested to refine this assumption and quantify the potential reduction in groundwater supply due to reduction in precipitation from climate change. Water Quality The assessment of the vulnerability of water quality to potential climate change impacts is qualitative due to the limited Regional monthly and seasonal weather information related to air temperature and precipitation over long time periods and limited access to long-term water quality data. The vulnerability assessment instead relied on Cal -Adapt model outputs for annual air temperature increases and precipitation changes and prior studies of how water quality in the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-49 Region may be affected by these climate change impacts. Key water quality changes identified for the Region include potential increases in taste and odor events due to increased likelihood of algal blooms and short-term high turbidity events due to storms, especially following wildfires. Collection of historical water quality data within the Region (e.g., Castaic Lake and other locations) would greatly improve the understanding of Regional water quality and how it may be impacted by climate change. For imported SWP water, the vulnerability analysis relied on DWR projections of water quality impacts in the Delta due to sea level rise and increases in salinity. Future analyses will incorporate updated DWR studies on the potential impacts of climate change on SWP quality. Suggestions for future data gathering efforts to quantify the climate change effects on water quality include: • Monitor future and collect historical water quality data within the Region during storm events. • Develop a long-term water quality record for Castaic Lake that would assist in improving the understanding of Regional water quality. • Collect long-term weather records associated with air temperature, precipitation, and ET to assess potential correlations with seasonal water quality. • Develop, to the extent possible, a long term surface/ground/aerial deposition model that can be continuously updated and refined with newly available data. Model should be ready accessible to stakeholders and in an user-friendly format to allow better understanding of trends over time. Water Demand The assessment of the effect of climate change on water demand is based on the Cal -Adapt projections for ET and temperature. Cal -Adapt projections suggest water demand in the Region is likely to increase as a result of higher temperature with the greatest temperature increase anticipated during dry months compared to wet months. The ten percent increase of water demand per capita has been assumed to account for dry years in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, but historical records of annual water demand data currently available are not specific enough to quantify the effects from increasing temperature. As discussed earlier in the vulnerability assessment (Section 5.1.2), the most important effect of changing weather conditions is likely to be on agricultural demand, but the overall effects on agricultural water demand is uncertain. Suggestions for future data gathering efforts to quantify the climate change effects on municipal and agricultural water demand include the following: • Collect and analyze historical monthly records of water demand data for the Region to quantify the weather effects on water use and seasonal variations in response to changes in historical temperature. Page 5-50 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Collect and analyze historical monthly records of water demand data for each purveyor in the Region to demonstrate purveyor -specific patterns in response to changes in climate. • Based on the water demand and temperature data, develop a regression analysis correlating water demand to temperature on a monthly or seasonal basis for the Region and each purveyor. The historical response can be used to infer future response with the projected changes in temperature with climate change. • Characterize the variations in indoor and outdoor water use, both for the Region and each purveyor. Future data gathering should focus on the seasonal and monthly patterns both in indoor and outdoor usage to evaluate the effects of weather conditions on each use category. • Collect and analyze historical agricultural water demand to quantity the weather effects on water use and seasonal variations in response to changes in historical temperature. • Identify the major industries in the Region that require cooling and/or process water. As water temperature increases, cooling water needs may also increase. Flooding A quantitative assessment of the potential impacts of climate change on flooding cannot be performed as climate projections are not sensitive enough to project short-term extreme events such as flooding. Rather, the 100 -year and 500 -year floodplains were used to define flooding risk zones that should be considered in location of water infrastructure. The Cal -Adapt model runoff outputs appear to represent the historical runoff record available. In examining the historical runoff record, there are data gaps as recording stations have started and stopped operation. Suggestions for future data gathering efforts to address the potential climate change effects on flooding include the following: • Perform an inventory of runoff monitoring stations in the Region to see if a more robust runoff record can be developed. Those data may allow an analysis of historical storm events correlated with precipitation events as well as annual precipitation to provide a better understanding of conditions that may lead to more extreme flooding conditions. As recommended by DWR's Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning, future work should focus on gathering the 200 -year floodplain maps for the Region after DWR develops them under the authorization of Senate Bill 5 (SB 5) enacted in 2007. Currently, the 100 -year and 500 -year floodplain maps are available from FEMA. Additional information on the DWR's Best Available Maps (BAM) program can be found at the following website: htti):Hqis.bam.water.ca.gov/bam/. Coordinate with the Region stakeholders for advanced flood preparation and quick response and document the protocol(s). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-51 Perform an inventory of critical infrastructure located in floodplains, especially those that were impacted during the historical flood events in 1969 and 1983. • Update the projections of runoff with climate change as updates from Cal -Adapt become available. • Work with local flood plain managers and/or equivalent to determine areas of concern as information from FEMA evolves. 5.1.4.2 Future Actions — Create a GHG Baseline To be accurate in the estimation of each agency's GHG emissions; an agency -specific comprehensive GHG inventory should be developed. The City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan recently completed this baseline for their general plan items, which could serve as a reference. A comprehensive inventory would use a well established protocol to calculate all of the GHG emissions created by each agency. It is recommended that each agency eventually conduct a GHG inventory, but in the absence of agency specific GHG inventories, gross GHG emissions can be calculated by developing agency -specific GHG intensity factors. An agency - specific GHG intensity factor calculates the estimated metric tons of CO2 per acre foot of water delivered or million gallons of wastewater treated by the agency (MT CO2/AF). Knowing this will enable an estimation of the GHG emission baseline for a particular agency and the Region. It will also allow for the estimation of the GHG emission reductions associated with an individual project or strategy that reduces water demand. For each of the RWMG water or wastewater entities data will need to be collected for actual annual electricity, natural and fleet fuel used, as well as the amount of imported water from DWR and other suppliers. Using known GHG intensity factors for DWR water supplies, electrical supplies, natural gas and fleet fuel and applying these factors to the amount an agency uses, GHG emissions (MT CO2/year) can be estimated for each agency. By dividing the total emissions by the total AF of water delivered or the million gallons of wastewater treated, agency -specific GHG intensity factors (MT CO2/AF) can be developed. The calculation should use data from the same year. While not as precise and accurate as a comprehensive GHG inventory, a GHG intensity factor will create an estimated baseline of GHG emissions for each agency and the Region. 5.1.4.3 Future Actions — Quantify Adaption and Mitigation Strategies at the Project Level As part of this Plan update, the climate change impacts of specific projects proposed for implementation are being considered (see Section 8). Future Plan updates may have the data available to further quantify climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies and apply them at the project level. For each proposed project it may be desirable to identify GHG emissions and to identify and evaluate GHG mitigation. Proposed projects could be evaluated against the GHG Baseline and evaluated for their ability to reduce agency -specific GHG intensity factors. 5.1.4.4 Future Actions — Develop Performance Metrics As part of future Plan updates the Region may choose to develop performance metrics specific to water and wastewater projects and climate change. Proposed IRWMP projects would be Page 5-52 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 evaluated against these metrics and these metrics would provide a measure of Plan performance. Table 5.1-4, shown above, provides a starting point for the development of performance metrics. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 5-53 This page intentionally left blank. Page 5-54 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 6: Plan Objectives The purpose of this section is to identify objectives for the IRWMP, or broadly what the Stakeholders and the RWMG have determined they would like the IRWMP to accomplish when implemented. The following pages include an overview of the IRWMP objectives and describe how objectives were developed utilizing the Stakeholder process. To the extent feasible, objectives have been quantified. Quantifying objectives is intended to provide a means by which the future success of IRWMP implementation can be measured. 6.1 Objective Development Objectives for the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Region were developed through regular Stakeholder meetings during the development of the 2008 IRWMP. During the IRWMP Update, objectives were re-evaluated and updated to reflect current issues of importance. As part of the update, the topic and concept of `objectives" was re -introduced to the group, goals and objectives from neighboring IRWMPs were presented and reviewed, and the Stakeholders held brainstorming sessions to revise, update, and enhance the objectives. In developing objectives, Stakeholders determined that it was important that they be measureable in order to gauge successful implementation of the IRWMP. Over three sessions stakeholders developed objectives and applicable measurements. The resulting objectives generally apply to the Region as a whole and are meant to focus attention on the primary needs of the Region. During stakeholder meetings, the topic of prioritizing the Regional objectives was discussed. It was concluded that the objectives would not be prioritized in this Plan because all objectives are equally important in the Region. Table 6.1-1 presents the objectives for the Region, the definition of each objective, and proposed means for measuring progress toward achieving each objective as the IRWMP is implemented. The success of the IRWMP will depend on how well the individual Plan objectives are accomplished, which requires ongoing monitoring and evaluation. The OBJECTIVES OF UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER IRWMP • Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. • Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. • Improve Water Quality: Supply y drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. • Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health, and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. • Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce flood damage and/or the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. • Take Action within the Watershed to Adapt to Climate Change • Promote Projects and Actions that Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions discussion related to Plan performance is provided in Section 10. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 6-1 In developing these objectives, Stakeholders determined that it was important that they not only be measurable, but also that the existing condition of the resources at issue be quantified so that change/progress could be reasonably ascertained at a later date. Stakeholders evaluated a variety of reports and studies to determine existing conditions. These reports also identified and contained valuable insight about how change or progress towards a given objective could be measured. References used to develop measurable objectives included: • Antelope Valley -East Kern Water Agency (AVEK). 2011. 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. • CLWA, Santa Clarita Water Division of CLWA (SCWD), Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 36 (LACWWD No. 36), Newhall County Water District (NCWD), and Valencia Water Company (VWC). 2012. The 2011 Santa Clarita Valley Water Report. June. • CLWA, SCWD, LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, and VWC. 2012. The Santa Clarita 2012 Water Quality Report. • CLWA, SCWD, LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, and VWC. 2011. 2010 Santa Clarita Valley Urban Water Management Plan. • CLWA. 2007. Recycled Water Master Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. • CLWA. Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Strategic Plan. • City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles. 2012. Final Draft Environmental Impact Report. Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan. January. • City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles. 2012. Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan ("One Valley, One Vision'). • City of Santa Clarita. 2012. Climate Action Plan — Draft Report. • LACWWD No. 37. 2004. Acton -Agus Dulce Conceptual Water Master Plan for Water Facilities. • Los Angeles RWQCB. 2012. Tentative Order No. R4-2012-XXXX, NPDES Permit No. CAS004001 — Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Including the County of Los Angeles, And the Incorporated Cities Therein, Except the City of Long Beach. June. • Los Angeles RWQCB. 2008. Reconsideration of the Upper Santa Clara River Chloride TMDL Implementation Plan & Revise Chloride Water Quality Objectives. Resolution Number R4-2008-012. • Los Angeles RWQCB. 2011-2013. Trennial Review. December. Page 6-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Penrod, K., C. Cabanero, P. Beier, C. Luke, W. Spencer, and E. Rubin. 2004. South Coast Missing Linkages Project: A Linkage Design for the San Gabriel-Castaic Connection. South Coast Wildlands, Idyllwild, CA. www.scwildlands.orq • Stillwater Sciences. 2011. Assessment of Geomorphic Processes for the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. Prepared for VCWPD, LACDPW and US ACE. May. • Ventura County Resource Conservation District. 2006. Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Program. Long -Term Implementation Plan. • Ventura County Watershed Protection District (VCWPD) and LACDPW. 2005. Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan. • US Forest Service. 2003. Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest. November. R5 - MB -020. 6.2 Regional Objectives The following paragraphs provide background for the regional objectives developed by the Stakeholders and the various means of measuring whether or not the objectives are being achieved. 6.2.1 Reduce Potable Water Demand Potable water demand continues to increase as the population continues to grow in the Region, with an anticipated doubling of the population by 2050. Water conservation provides a viable long-term means to reduce potable water demand and enhance supply. It also saves considerable capital and operating costs, particularly energy costs, for both utilities and their rate payers, and can avoid environmental degradation associated with developing new supplies. Both wholesale (CLWA and AVEK) and retail water agencies are pursuing conservation in the Region. CLWA has programs related to reducing potable water demand. CLWA performs system water audits (to find and correct leaks in its system), conducts public and school education programs within its service area on the need for conservation, and provides financial incentives to its purveyors to advance water conservation. Retail agencies (NCWD, SCWD, VWC, and LACWWD No. 36), in coordination with CLWA have also implemented conservation rates and demand reduction measures, including plumbing retrofit programs, and have undertaken pilot studies on the best ways to implement conservation practices for large landscape areas and commercial, industrial, and institutional customers. In addition, NCWD and VWC have individual programs offered to customers such as free water audits to residential and commercial water users and inviting customers to participate in a pilot program to test the effectiveness of automated irrigation controller systems. In addition, the retail agencies and CLWA completed the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan (SCVWUESP; CLWA, et al. 2008) for their service areas in the Valley, which provides recommendations for a variety of water conservation measures that can be incorporated into the IRWMP through time. Programs outlined in the SCVWUESP promote Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 6-3 TABLE 6.1-1 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER IRWMP OBJECTIVES, DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENTS Objective Measurement Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement Twenty (20) percent overall reduction in projected urban water technological, legislative and behavioral demand throughout the Region by 2020 through implementation changes that will reduce user demands for of water conservation measures. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Increase use of recycled water by up to 9,600 AFY by 2030, consistent with health and environmental requirements. Improve water system operational flexibility and efficiency. Increase water supply as necessary to meet anticipated peak demands at buildout in the LACWWD No. 37 service area (7.91 MGD) and peak demands at buildout in the Acton and Ague Dulce areas (up to 12.16 MGD). Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water Meet all drinking water standards. with appropriate quality; improve groundwater Prevent migration of contaminant plumes. quality; and attain water quality standards. Comply with TMDLs. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve In areas of the floodplain where the majority of plant species are and improve ecosystem health; improve flood invasive: management; and preserve and enhance • Reduce invasive plant species to 40 percent or less water -dependent recreation. cover of the understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. • Every five (5) years reduce by half the percentage of invasive species. • In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive species to 5 percent or less. Keep invasive species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. Acquire 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor. Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage. Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce flood Meet state permits and policies related to stormwater damage and/or the negative effects on management. waterways and watershed health caused by Reduce impervious area within the watershed. hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic Promote low impact development, green streets and other to the Santa Clara River. stormwater recharge projects. Page 6-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Objective Measurement Take actions within the watershed to adapt Implement strategies that adapt flood management, water to climate change supply, water quality, water dependent recreation, water - dependent habitat, and fire risk for climate change, but also have other benefits that would occur in the absence of climate change ("no regrets strategies") Promote project and actions that reduce Prioritize development and use of water source with lowest GHG greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions emissions. Identify and implement the use of renewable energy and conservation of energy within water and wastewater systems. With assistance of local energy utility, perform energy audits on all water -related facilities regularly. Reduce, on an agency -by -agency basis, energy use per volume treated or delivered. more efficient use of water and have been successfully implemented in various combinations by the retail agencies, including the following: 1. High Efficiency Toilet Rebates (Single and Multi -Family) 2. Large Landscape Audits (with incentives) 3. CII Audits and Customized Incentives 4. Landscape Contractor Certification 5. High Efficiency Clothes Washer Rebates 6. New Construction Building Code 7. Valley -Wide Marketing With the adoption of SBX7-7 water use efficiency targets, the implementation and expansion of conservation programs and efforts has gained increased urgency. The retail agencies and CLWA are intending to update the SCVWUESP with these reduction mandates in mind. The update will analyze current data on water consumption in the Valley, assess the implementation of the 2008 Strategic Plan, and identify additional conservation programs and efforts necessary to meet 2020 urban demand reduction targets of 20 percent. AVEK has responsibility for the far eastern end of the watershed and according to its 2010 UWMP, is committed to implementing water conservation and has assisted, as a wholesale water agency, with public information and school education programs for conservation purposes. In addition, AVEK audits system losses on a monthly basis and makes regular repairs to minimize water loss. Its service area, however, covers a relatively small portion of the Region (the far eastern edge). Given past demand reduction success and taking into consideration the state-wide urban water use efficiency targets of SBX7-7, the Stakeholders have identified the following measurement: Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 6-5 • Twenty (20) percent overall reduction in projected potable water demand throughout the Region by 2020 through implementation of water conservation measures and/or recycled water 6.2.2 Increase Water Supply At the same time that water demand is growing in the Region, water supplies to the Region, specifically imported water supplies, are becoming less reliable. A reliable water supply is necessary to protect the economic vigor of the Region and meet anticipated needs of the Region's population. As discussed in Section 3 and the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, the CLWA service area portion of the Region's anticipated demand in a normal year is projected to be about 122,000 AF in 2050 (with conservation), but this could increase in a multi-year dry situation to an estimated 136,000 AF in 2050. Concurrently in a multi-year drought scenario, supplies will decline. For this reason the water agencies in the CLWA service area have planned for other sources to increase their water supply and their water supply reliability, including programs to restore groundwater production, to utilize recycled water, and to bank groundwater (CLWA et al.2011). With the expansion of the Region's water supply portfolio, there is a need for matching supplies to uses, adapting operations to required outputs and overall improving system efficiencies. These considerations are important to optimize resource uses and are particularly important when expanding certain water supplies that are associated with high costs, as is the case with recycled water. On a sub -regional scale there is a projected imbalance between supply and demand. Peak demands during the summer need to be accounted for in order to size water supply, treatment, and transmission facilities, which run approximately two times the average daily demands. Existing demand for water in the LACWWD No. 37 service area is 2,300 AFY with peak demand at 4.02 MGD. Existing water supply sources for LACWWD No. 37 include three wells and the imported water from the AVEK water treatment plant (WTP) with a combined capability of delivering about 7.17 MGD. At buildout, the projected demand in the LACWWD No. 37 area is 4,431 AFY with peak demand at 7.91 MGD which exceeds peak supply by 0.74 MGD. Options available to meet the additional demand include expansion of the AVEK WTP, drilling additional wells, water conservation (reducing projected water demands) and water reclamation, or a combination of all four (4) options (LACCWD No. 37 2004). The Acton and Agua Dulce areas (outside of the LACWWD No. 37 service area) obtain water from local wells and in some cases hauled water. The 2004 LACWWD study of 3,707 parcels in the Acton and Agua Dulce area, adjacent to the LACWWD No. 37 service area, estimated the existing demand to be approximately 3,283 AFY with a peak demand of 5.86 MGD. At buildout estimated water demand for Acton and Agua Dulce areas (excluding LACWWD No. 37) will increase to 6,813 AFY and peak demand to 12.16 MGD. It is uncertain whether local wells will be sufficient to meet future demand. County policy requires that property owners demonstrate proof of reliable potable supply before proceeding with new development (LACWWD No. 37 2004). Related to water supply the Stakeholders have identified the following measurement Page 6-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Increase use of recycled water by up to 9,600 AFY by year 2030; consistent with health and environmental requirements • Improve water system operational flexibility and efficiency Increase water supply as necessary to meet anticipated peak demands at buildout in the LACWWD No. 37 service area (7.91 MGD) and peak demands at buildout in the Acton and Agua Dulce areas (up to 12.16 MGD) Stakeholders in the Region are taking action to improve water supply. The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP projects that 9,600 AFY of recycled water will be available by 2030. The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP also contemplates long-term water transfers and groundwater banking programs as a means for enhancing future water supply. 6.2.3 Improve Water Quality Water quality is an important consideration not only for water delivered to the customer, but for ecosystems. The majority of drinking water served in the Region is treated at either the ESFP or the RVWTP, both operated by CLWA. These plants use ozone, chemicals, and filtration to treat water. Chloramines and/or chlorine may also be added to the water following treatment to prevent the growth of bacteria in the distribution systems. In the LACWWD No. 37 service area, water is treated at the AVEK WTP. Currently, these facilities provide water that consistently meets drinking water standards. Outside of the CLWA or LACWWD No. 37 service areas, many water users in the Region rely on privately operated wells for their water supply. In the Acton Valley Groundwater Basin, assessments by DWR and others have indicated that levels of TDS, sulfate, chloride, and boron can exceed drinking water standards. Though data is somewhat limited, there are also indications that nitrates can exceed drinking water standards in the Agua Dulce Groundwater Basin as well (NPRI 0-191-254). Therefore, related to water quality, the Stakeholders have identified the following measurement: Meet all drinking water standards The detection of perchlorate in Valley groundwater supplies has raised concerns over the reliability of those supplies and has pointed to the need to monitor for, and mitigate, any contaminant plumes. In cooperation with state regulatory agencies, CLWA and the local retail water purveyors have developed a plan to pump and treat perchlorate in a manner to limit contaminant plume migration. Based on the experience with perchlorate the Stakeholders have identified the following measurement: Prevent migration of contaminant plumes Surface waters in the Region exceed water quality standards for TMDLs are Intended to Protect Beneficial Uses, Including Habitat Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 6-7 various contaminants. As described in Section 3, various waterbodies that do not meet water quality objectives and are not supporting their beneficial uses have been identified on the State's 2010 303(d) list as impaired. Total Maximum Daily Loads or TMDLs have been established for portions of the Upper Santa Clara River in addition to various lakes in the Region. A TMDL must account for all sources of the pollutants that cause the waterbody to be impaired. A TMDL is implemented by reallocating the total allowable pollution among the different pollutant sources to ensure that the water quality objectives are achieved. Portions of the Upper Santa Clara River are listed as impaired for chloride, nutrients and indicator bacteria, among others. Chloride can be harmful to salt sensitive agriculture such as strawberry and avocado crops, which is a beneficial use in the adjacent Lower SCR Watershed IRWM region. Sources of chloride include the potable water supply as well as residential, commercial and industrial uses of water. The Upper Santa Clara River Chloride TMDL was originally adopted by the Regional Board in 2002 and subsequently modified several times. Indicator bacteria affect the Recreational (REC-1 and REC-2) Beneficial Uses of a waterbody. Sources of indicator bacteria include urban runoff from point and non -point sources as well as natural sources. The Santa Clara River Bacteria TMDL was adopted by the Regional Board in March 2012. The Santa Clara River nutrients TMDL was adopted by the Regional Board in March 2004. Elevated nutrient levels can threaten warm water fish and wildlife habitats and groundwater recharge beneficial uses of the river. As a result of implementation of the nutrients TMDL, the Santa Clara River was de -listed as impaired for nutrients in the 2010 303(d) list. Trash in three lakes in the Region, Elizabeth Lake, Lake Hughes, and Munz Lake, has led to water quality impairments, requiring adoption of TMDLs in 2008. Targeted efforts have shown improvements in Munz Lake and LA County is now in full compliance with the TMDL having completed installation of trash capture devices on the impaired lakes. However, there are other constituents of concern in the Region that may result in additional future TMDLs. For example, the three lakes in the Region listed on the 2010 303(d) list are considered to be impaired by various pollutants and stressors, including, but not limited to, eutrophication, organic enrichment, pesticides, and issues with pH. Upper reaches of the Santa Clara River are listed as having impairment related to insecticide residues and coliform bacteria, among other things. Proposed TMDL completion dates for these impairments start in 2019. Therefore, related to water quality the Stakeholders have identified the following measurement: • Comply with TMDLs. 6.2.4 Promote Resource Stewardship Water is intended for many beneficial uses including agricultural water supplies, groundwater recharge, water replenishment, recreation, wildlife habitat, rare and endangered species, and wetland ecosystems. Page 6-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 To this end, Stakeholders have investigated multiple objectives related to resource stewardship, including removal of invasive species, acquisition of floodplain areas for recreation and flood easements, and acquisition of habitat. Healthy riparian ecosystems, dominated by native plants, provide a plentitude of benefits that include: - Soil stabilization — native riparian plants often have extensive root systems that prevent streambank erosion, - Buffer zones that slow surface runoff and filter out pollutants, - Flood protection by slowing surface runoff and regulating water flows, - Enhanced water supply through enhanced infiltration and groundwater recharge, - Critical wildlife habitat, as a transition zone between aquatic and terrestrial habitats, with unusually high biodiversity, and - Recreational opportunities (VCRCD 2006). These benefits may be impacted by invasive species that disrupt the ecological systems in which they spread. Invasive plants in the watershed, such as arundo (Arundo donax) and tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) negatively affect water quality, crowd out native plants and species, and increase flood risk, erosion hazard, and wildfire risk. With few natural predators and other controls, invasive species can outcompete native species for vital resources. Non-native plants are heavy water users, for example, tamarisk uses almost twice as much water as native riparian vegetation (VCRCD 2006). Increased water uptake reduces water supplies for other uses, including instream flows to support native aquatic species. Reduced water flows also impact water quality by increasing water temperatures and impacting nutrient flows. In addition, enhanced erosion further degrades water quality and aquatic habitat. Both arundo and tamarisk are highly flammable, and due to plant height (up to 30 feet), a fire in arundo or tamarisk can easily spread to nearby tree canopies. These factors contribute to increased fire frequencies among invasive plant species. Fires in turn can enhance flood impacts with increased erosion and reduced water infiltration. Large stands of arundo or tamarisk can also obstruct stream flows and shunt flow outward, exacerbating bank erosion. In addition, invasive species reproduce quickly and resprout more rapidly after disturbances, thereby increasing their dominance and reducing biodiversity in an area. As stated in a 2012 assessment by the USFS, invasive and nonnative species have severely degraded the Santa Clara River and have increased over time. If the invasive species are not controlled, the ecosystem in the watershed could be dramatically changed with effects including those listed above. Weed management strategies outlined in the National Forest Plan, include coordinated invasive species control and removal that target Bouquet, Arroyo Seco, San Francisquito, and Soledad Canyons, as well as, upper Castaic Creek located in the Region (USFS 2012). Non-native and Invasive Arundo Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 6-9 Among the invasive species impacting the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed, arundo and tamarisk pose particularly severe threats to the riparian ecosystems and are categorized as the most invasive and widespread wild -land pest plants by the California Invasive Plant Council. Arundo is a destructive invasive species that is affecting all of the large river systems in southern California and dominates large portions of the Santa Clara River and its tributaries. Efforts to control population expansion of arundo beginning in 1995 have been partially successful, such as in Soledad Canyon and San Francisquito Canyon, however small amounts are showing up again in treated areas. Like arundo, tamarisk has spread throughout the Santa Clara River system, and while less prevalent, this invasive species also poses a major problem in portions of the upper watershed with typical invasive characteristics ( USFS 2012, VCWPD 2006). Stakeholders have identified the following measurements related to resource stewardship: • In areas of the floodplain where the majority of plant species are invasive: o Reduce invasive plant species to 40 percent or less cover of the understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. o Every five (5) years thereafter reduce by half the percentage of invasive plant species. o In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive plant species to 5 percent or less. • Keep invasive plant species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. This overall measurement is to remove non-native plant species and promote revegetation by native plant species in the Upper Santa Clara River and protect its 500 -year floodplain. In addition, this measurement is intended to prevent establishment of new species of invasive plants within the Watershed, as it is the most cost effective way to control these plants and prevents further habitat degradation. A phased goal has been established over a 20 -year period due to the persistence of these species, the expense of removal, the short annual removal period, and the changing nature of the Watershed. Specifically, the overall goal is to keep invasive species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located and reduce invasive plant species to 5 percent or less in the areas of the floodplain where invasive plant species currently dominate. In areas where invasive plants have taken hold, the goal is to establish areas of the floodplain where invasive species comprise 40 percent or less cover of the understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. The goal will be halved every five (5) years (20 percent: years 6 to 10, 10 percent: years 10 to 15, 5 percent: years 15 to 20). In years 20 and beyond, a goal of 5 percent or less has been established. Recreation and flood control are both important activities on Pyramid, Castaic, and Elizabeth Lakes, as well as the Upper Santa Clara River and, in many cases, these can be competing interests. However, the purchase of public easements along the Upper Santa Clara River is one method to create land uses that would accommodate both the protection of flood inundation areas and recreational facilities, as described in the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan (County of Los Angeles 2011). Stakeholders have identified the following measurement related to resource stewardship: Page 6-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Acquire 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor As described in Section 2, within the Region, the South Coast Missing Linkages (SGML) Project is a partnership involving representatives from the US Forest Service, The Wildlands Conservancy, The Nature Conservancy, California State Parks, the National Park Service, Zoological Society of San Diego Applied Conservation, Conservation Biology Institute, the California State Parks Foundation, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, South Coast Wildlands, and many others. This project has focused on defining and preserving ecological linkages throughout Southern California and Baja California, an area collectively termed the South Coast Ecoregion. The principle goal of the SCML-proposed San Gabriel-Castaic Connection, primarily located in the Upper Santa Clara River Region, is to preserve essential open space and viable connections for wildlife movement between two core habitat areas, the San Gabriel Mountains and the Castaic Ranges (including the Sierra Pelona), both part of the Angeles National Forest managed by the US Forest Service. A feature of the proposed linkage is the Santa Clara River as it acts as a natural linkage. The SCML has identified approximately 10,900 acres in Soledad Canyon (between Acton and the mouth of Agua Dulce Canyon), Hauser, Long, Bobcat, Escondido, Upper Mint, and Tick canyons for preservation. For this reason, the Stakeholders have identified the following measurement related to resource stewardship: • Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage Finally, Stakeholders of this IRWMP process have identified encroachment of private property into the floodplain as an issue. Currently, there are approximately 4,900 acres in the 100 -year floodplain of the Upper Santa Clara River. Protection of the Santa Clara River floodplain is important in order to maintain the river's natural character and protect existing and future development from flood hazards. Encroachment and development within the natural floodplain inhibits the rivers natural dynamism during high flow events, while placing developed properties in the path of the river when it does migrate into adjacent areas. Encroachment activities impact the natural hydrology and contribute to faster storm flows, higher water levels, bank failure and increased hazards to people and infrastructure. Protection of the floodplains from development and designation of open space along the river provides multiple benefits, including helping maintain a natural buffer from flood hazards and improving natural watershed functions (Stillwater Sciences 2011, County of Los Angeles 2011). Encroachment has also been raised as an issue and concern as part of past studies, most notably the Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan (VCWPD and LACDPW 2005). This Plan specifically recommended acquisition of land adjacent to the river for open space, recreational, and flood protection uses. Stakeholders have identified the following measurement related to resource stewardship: • Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 6-11 6.2.5 Flood ing/Hydromodification Large volumes of runoff and sediments generated within the Region and surrounding foothills and mountains are transported along the Santa Clara River system. The natural drainage system is designed to accommodate and adjust to these processes, however urbanization has modified watershed characteristics, including original runoff and sediment transport patterns, through the construction of impervious areas and man-made drainage structures. The alteration of natural watershed hydrology and sediment -transport processes impacts the system's natural ability to capture rainfall and convey flows. Hydromodification alters drainage patterns and results in a larger proportion of rainfall becoming runoff, thereby increasing the velocity, flow rate, and often the timing, of runoff. Increased stream discharge rates also decreases the amount of infiltration and recharge to groundwater, and can result in stream channel instability and streambank erosion (SWRCB 2009). All these factors may contribute to new flood management challenges and general degradation of water resources. The stakeholders have identified measurements with the overall goal of reducing flood damage and the negative effects on waterways and watershed health that is caused by hydromodification and flooding outside of the natural erosion and deposition process of the Santa Clara River. Meet state permits and policies related to stormwater management Reduce impervious area within the watershed Promote low impact development, green streets and other stormwater recharge projects 6.2.6 Adaptation to Climate Change With growing recognition of the potential impacts of climate change to the Region, particularly related to water resources, Stakeholders have identified the need to take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change. As described in Section 5, climate change is projected to impact multiple watershed characteristics that may increase the challenges of water resource management in the Region. Stakeholders have therefore identified the following measurement related to climate change adaptation: Implement strategies, that adapt flood management, water supply, water quality, water dependent recreation, water -dependent habitat, and fire risk for climate change, but also have other benefits that would occur in the absence of climate change (no regret strategies) 6.2.7 Promote Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions As part of this Plan update, specific projects proposed for implementation will be evaluated in part based on their contribution to climate change, particularly their emissions per acre foot of water deliver, treated, or produced. Stakeholders have identified a goal to promote projects and actions that reduce GHG emissions with the following measurement: Page 6-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Prioritize development and use of water sources with lowest GHG emissions Identify and implement the use of renewable energy and conservation of energy within water and wastewater systems • With assistance of local energy utility, perform energy audits on all water -related facilities regularly Reduce, on an agency -by -agency basis, energy use per volume treated or delivered 6.3 Strategies Following identification of objectives, the Stakeholders then moved to refining strategies appropriate to achieving the objectives. This process and its outcomes are described in Section 7. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 6-13 This page intentionally left blank. Page 6-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 7: Resource Management Strategies Used to Meet Plan Objectives 7.1 Overview Section 6 of this IRWMP introduced the resource management objectives for the Region, as identified by the Stakeholders of the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP. This section of the IRWMP is intended to introduce the reader to resource management strategies, or general means by which the broad objectives listed in Section 6 will be realized. Eventually, individual projects will be identified in Section 8, which are the specific means proposed by the Stakeholders for implementing the resource management strategies identified in this section. Figure 7.1-1 graphically demonstrates the relationship between objectives, strategies, and projects. This section introduces a diverse menu of resource management strategies available to meet the resource management objectives within the Region. The State of California has identified 27 different resource management strategies that can be used to improve water resource management. Section 7.2 defines and discusses each of the 27 resource management strategies of the 2009 California Water Plan, in order to provide the reader with an understanding of the State's vision for possible ways to meet future resource management challenges. This section also serves to provide background for the common resource management tools available. Section 7.3 demonstrates how the Stakeholders have built upon the resource management strategies in the California Water Plan and resource management strategies already implemented in the area and have tailored these strategies to meet the resource management objectives of the Region. Finally, Section 7.4 describes the "Call for Projects' process and gives an overview of projects submitted for inclusion in the IRWMP which will implement these strategies to meet the regional objectives. 7.2 California Water Plan Resource Management Strategies This section describes the California Water Plan and each of the 27 resource management strategies (please see Figure 7.2-1). The California Water Plan, which is updated every five years as required by the California Water Code, is a resource for water planners, managers and policy -makers faced with the task of acting as stewards of this resource. More concisely, it is a strategic plan for all regions of the State that addresses the uncertainty of future water needs by recommending a diversified approach, consisting of multiple strategies and a range of short - and long-term actions. Given the many water challenges the State must actively respond to, the California Water Plan deems it imperative that planning take place on a regional scale and that planning constitute an inclusive process involving multiple players, particularly local agencies and governments and their citizens. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-1 FIGURE 7.1-1 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OBJECTIVES, STRATEGIES, AND PROJECTS Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Objective Objective) (Objective Objective Strategies Projects Strategies Projects Strategies Projects List of Prioritized Proje; Strategies Projects Page 7-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 FIGURE 7.2-1 TWENTY SEVEN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES OF THE CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN Flood Risk Manage ment /Agricultural Lands Stewardship Economic Incentives Ecosystem Restoration Forest Manage me nt Land Use Planning and Management Recharge Area Protection Water -dependent Recreation Agricultural Water use Ettlrienc: U roan Water Use Efticlenc/ California Water Plan Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Matching Water quality to Use Pollution Prevention Salt and Salinity Management Urban Runoff Management Conveyance System Re -operation WaterTrans ers Conjunctive Management/ Groundwater Storage Desalination Precipitation Enhancement Recycled MunicipafWater Sort ace Storage—CALFED Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-3 The following resource management strategies are projects, programs or policies that can be used to manage water and related resources in such a way that will expand local water portfolios and encourage efficient water allocation and use. The following descriptions are taken from the California Water Plan. 7.2.1 Reduce Water Demand 7.2.1.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Agricultural water use efficiency involves improvements in technologies and management of agricultural water that result in water supply, water quality, and environmental benefits. Efficiency improvements can include on-farm irrigation equipment, crop and farm water management, and water supplier distribution systems. 7.2.1.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency Urban water use efficiency involves technological or behavioral improvements in indoor and outdoor residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional water use that lower demand, lower per capita water use, and result in benefits to water supply, water quality, and the environment. 7.2.2 Improve Operational Efficiency 7.2.2.1 Conveyance Conveyance provides for the movement of water. Specific objectives of natural and managed water conveyance activities include flood management, consumptive and non - consumptive environmental uses, water quality improvement, recreation, operational flexibility, and urban and agricultural water deliveries. Infrastructure includes natural watercourses as well as constructed facilities like canals, pipelines and related structures including pumping plants, diversion structures, distribution systems, and fish screens. Groundwater aquifers are also used to convey water. 7.2.2.2 System Re -operation Installation of a conveyance pipeline in the City of Santa Clanta by Castaic Lake Water Agency System re -operation means changing existing operation and management procedures for such water facilities as dams and canals to meet multiple beneficial uses. System re -operation may improve the efficiency of existing uses, or it may increase the emphasis of one use over another. In some cases, physical modifications to the facilities may be needed to expand the re -operation capability. 7.2.2.3 Water Transfers A water transfer is defined in the California Water Code as a temporary or long-term change in the point of diversion, place of use, or purpose of use due to a transfer or exchange of water or Page 7-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 water rights. A more general definition is that water transfers are a voluntary change in the way water is usually distributed among water users in response to water scarcity. Transfers can be from one party with extra water in one year to another who is water -short that year. 7.2.3 Increase Water Supply 7.2.3.1 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage Conjunctive management is the coordinated operation of surface water storage and use, groundwater storage and use, and the necessary conveyance facilities. Conjunctive management allows surface water and groundwater to be managed in an efficient manner by taking advantage of the ability of surface storage to capture and temporarily store storm water and the ability of aquifers to serve as long-term storage. 7.2.3.2 Desalination — Brackish/Seawater Desalination is a water treatment process for the removal of salt from water for beneficial use. Desalination is used on brackish (low -salinity) water as well as seawater. In California, the principal method for desalination is reverse osmosis. This process can be used to remove salt as well as specific contaminants in water such as disinfection byproduct precursors, volatile organic compounds, nitrates, and pathogens. 7.2.3.3 Precipitation Enhancement Precipitation enhancement, commonly called "cloud seeding," artificially stimulates clouds to produce more rainfall or snowfall than they would naturally. Cloud seeding injects special substances into the clouds that enable snowflakes and raindrops to form more easily. 7.2.3.4 Recycled Municipal Water Water recycling, also known as reclamation or reuse, is an umbrella term encompassing the process of treating wastewater, storing, distributing, and using the recycled water. Recycled water is defined in the California Water Code to mean "water which, as a result of treatment of waste, is suitable for a direct beneficial use or a controlled use that would not otherwise occur." 7.2.3.5 Surface Storage — CALFED The CALFED Record of Decision (2000) identified five potential surface storage reservoirs that are being investigated by DWR, the US Bureau of Reclamation, and local water interests. Building one or more of the reservoirs would be part of CALFED's long-term comprehensive plan to restore ecological health and improve water management of the Bay -Delta. The five (5) surface storage investigations are: Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, In -Delta Storage Project, Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation, North -of -the -Delta Offstream Storage, and Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion. 7.2.3.6 Surface Storage — Regional/Local Surface storage is the use of reservoirs to collect water for later release and use. Surface storage has played an important role in California where the pattern and timing of water use Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-5 does not always match the natural runoff pattern. Most California water agencies rely on surface storage as a part of their water systems. Surface reservoirs can be formed by building dams across active streams or by building off -stream reservoirs where the majority of the water is diverted into storage from a nearby water source. 7.2.4 Improve Water Quality 7.2.4.1 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Drinking water treatment includes physical, biological, and chemical processes to make water suitable for potable use. Distribution includes the storage, pumping, and pipe systems to protect and deliver the water to customers. 7.2.4.2 Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Groundwater remediation involves extracting contaminated groundwater from the aquifer, treating it, and discharging it to a water course or using it for some purpose. It is also possible to inject the treated water back into the aquifer. Contaminated groundwater can result from a multitude of sources, both naturally occurring and anthropogenic. Examples of naturally occurring contaminants include heavy metals, high TDS, and high salinity from specific geologic formations or conditions. Groundwater can also be contaminated from anthropogenic sources with organic constituents, inorganic constituents, and radioactive constituents from many point and non -point sources. These anthropogenic sources include industrial sites, mining operations, leaking tanks and pipelines, landfills, impoundments, dairies, agricultural and storm runoff, and septic systems. 7.2.4.3 Matching Quality to Use Matching water quality to water use is a management strategy that recognizes that not all water uses require the same quality water. One common measure of water quality is its suitability for an intended use, and a water quality constituent is often only considered a contaminant when that constituent adversely affects the intended use of the water. High quality water sources can be used for drinking and industrial purposes that benefit from higher quality water, and lesser quality water can be adequate for some uses, such as irrigation. Further, some new water supplies, such as recycled water, can be treated to a wide range of purities that can be matchec to different uses. 7.2.4.4 Pollution Prevention Pollution prevention can improve water quality for all beneficial uses by protecting water at its source, reducing the need and cost for other water management and treatment options. By preventing pollution throughout a watershed, water supplies can be used, and re -used, for a broader number and types of downstream water uses. Improving water quality by protecting source water is consistent with a watershed management approach to water resources problems. Page 7-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 7.2.4.5 Salt and Salinity Management Salts are materials that originate from dissolution or weathering of rocks and soils, whereby the term salinity describes the condition where these dissolved minerals are present. With the exception of freshly fallen snow, salt is present to some degree in virtually all natural water supplies, because soluble salts in rocks and soil begin to dissolve as soon as water reaches them. While generally beneficial when present in low concentrations, salinity very quickly becomes a problem when consumptive use and evaporation concentrates salts to levels that adversely impact beneficial uses. Water reuse can contribute to increased salinity since each use subjects the water to evaporation and additional dissolved salts will be picked up when this water resource passes through soil. Salt and salinity management contributes to improving water supplies and reducing the salt loads impacting a region through salt treatment, disposal, storage, and by achieving a sustainable salt balance. 7.2.4.6 Urban Runoff Management Urban runoff management is a broad series of activities to manage both storm water and dry - weather runoff. Dry weather runoff occurs when, for example, excess landscape irrigation water flows to the storm drain. Urban runoff management is linked to several other resource strategies including pollution prevention, land use management, watershed management, water use efficiency, recycled water, protecting recharge areas, and conjunctive management (combined use of surface and ground water systems to optimize resource use and minimize adverse effects of using a single source). 7.2.5 Promote Resource Stewardship 7.2.5.1 Agricultural Lands Stewardship Agricultural lands stewardship broadly means conserving natural resources and protecting the environment by land managers whose stewardship practices conserve and improve land for food, fiber, watershed functions, soil, air, energy, plant and animal and other conservation purposes. It also protects open space and the traditional characteristics of rural communities. Further, it helps landowners maintain their farms and ranches rather than being forced to sell their land because of pressure from urban development. 7.2.5.2 Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants, Water Pricing) Economic incentives are financial assistance and pricing policies intended to influence water management. For example, economic incentives can influence the amount of use, time of use, wastewater volume, and source of supply. Economic incentives include low-interest loans, grants, and water pricing rates. Free services, rebates, and the use of tax revenues to partially fund water services also have a direct effect on the prices paid by the water users. Governmental financial assistance can provide incentives for resource plans by regional and local agencies. Also, government financial assistance can help water agencies make subsidies available to their water users for a specific purpose. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-7 7.2.5.3 Ecosystem Restoration Ecosystem restoration can include changing the flows in streams and rivers, restoring fish and wildlife habitat, controlling waste discharge into streams, rivers, lakes or reservoirs, or removing barriers in streams and rivers so salmon and steelhead can spawn. Ecosystem restoration improves the condition of our modified natural landscapes and biotic communities to provide for the sustainability and for the use and enjoyment of these ecosystems by current and future generations. 7.2.5.4 Forest Management California's major water development projects rely on water produced in forested watersheds. Almost all forest management activities can affect water quantity and quality. This strategy focuses on those forest management activities that are designed to improve the availability and quality of water for downstream users, on both publicly and privately owned forest lands. Examples of forest management activities include vegetation and fuels management to enhance soil moisture, groundwater recharge and streamflows. 7.2.5.5 Land Use Planning and Management Integrating land use and water management consists of planning for the housing and economic development needs of a growing population while providing for the efficient use of water, water quality, energy, and other resources. The way in which we use land — the pattern and type of land use and transportation, and the level of intensity — has a direct relationship to water supply and quality, flood management, and other water issues. For example, more compact development within existing urban areas can limit development in the floodplains, leading to improved flood management. Low impact development and stormwater recharge strategies can also provide benefits related flood management, as well as water quality and water supply. 7.2.5.6 Recharge Areas Protection Recharge area protection includes keeping groundwater recharge areas from being paved over or otherwise developed and guarding the recharge areas so they do not become contaminated. Protection of recharge areas, whether natural or man-made, is necessary if the quantity and quality of groundwater in the aquifer are to be maintained. However, recharge areas only function when aquifer storage capacity is available and when adequate supply of good quality water to recharge the aquifer is secured. Existing and potential recharge areas must be protected so that they remain functional and continue to serve as valuable components of a conjunctive management and groundwater storage system. 7.2.5.7 Water -Dependent Recreation Water -dependent recreation includes a wide variety of outdoor activities that can be divided into two (2) categories. The first category includes fishing, boating, swimming, and rafting, which occur on lakes, reservoirs, and rivers. The second category includes recreation that is enhanced by water features but does not require actual use of the water, such as wildlife viewing, picnicking, camping, and hiking. Page 7-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 7.2.5.8 Watershed Management Watershed management is the process of creating and implementing plans, programs, projects, and activities to restore, sustain, and enhance watershed functions. These functions provide the goods, services and values desired by the community affected by conditions within a watershed boundary. A primary objective of watershed management is to increase and sustain a watershed's ability to provide for the diverse needs of the communities that depend on it, from local to regional to State and federal stakeholders. Using watersheds as an organizing unit has proven to be an effective scale for natural resource management. The watershed is an appropriate scale to coordinate and integrate management of the numerous physical, chemical, and biological processes that make up a river basin ecosystem. It serves well as a common reference unit for the many different policies, actions, and processes that affect the system. Using the watershed as a basic management unit also provides a basis for greater integration and collaboration. 7.2.6 Improve Flood Management 7.2.6.1 Flood Risk Management Flood Risk Management is a strategy specifically intended to enhance flood protection. It includes projects and programs that assist individuals and communities to manage floodflows and to prepare for, respond to, and recover from a flood. This strategy is a key element of integrated flood management, which considers land and water resources at a watershed scale, employs both structural and nonstructural Flooding in the Upper Santa Clara River Region measures to maximize the benefits of floodplains and minimize loss of life and damage to property from flooding, and recognizes the benefits to ecosystems from periodic flooding. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-9 7.3 Resource Management Strategies Adopted by Stakeholders In this report, we have organized the 27 different management strategies into five broad categories, under consideration of the California Water Plan and based on the measureable objectives defined by the Stakeholders (reduce potable water demand, increase water supply, improve water quality, promote resource stewardship, and improve flood management). In addition to these five categories, this IRWMP also includes two objectives that relate to multiple resource management strategies: adaptation to climate change and actions to reduce greenhouse gases. These latter two objectives take into consideration the strong link between OBJECTIVES OF UPPER SANTA CLARA climate change and water use, supply, and RIVER IRWMP quality, as well as natural resource stewardship. Reduce Potable Water Demand: The objectives developed by the Stakeholders, including those related to climate change, Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will factored into the selected resource management reduce user demands for water. strategies. As shown in the adjacent text box, seven broad objectives were adopted by the Stakeholders in the process described in Section 6.1: As described in Section 6, a Stakeholder process was used to develop objectives for the IRWMP. The same Stakeholder process was used to develop strategies to meet the IRWMP objectives. While brainstorming issues, goals, and objectives for the Upper Santa Clara River Region, Stakeholders discussed and developed potential strategies to address these issues. A long "laundry list" of potential resource management strategies was presented to the Stakeholder Group during the March 2012 Stakeholder meeting. A matrix matching strategies, objectives, and California Water Plan strategies was prepared for the March 2012 Stakeholder meeting and this matrix has been refined at subsequent meetings. Table 7.3-1 demonstrates the relationship of the Region's resource management strategies with the California Water Plan strategies. Note that the table, due to its size, has been placed at the end of this section. There are several strategies in the matrix that are not described in detail herein; • Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. • Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. • Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health, and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. • Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce flood damage and/or the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. ■ Take Action within the Watershed to Adapt to Climate Change • Promote Projects and Actions that Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions the list serves as a starting point for potential future strategies as this IRWMP evolves based on Stakeholder review and input. Strategies will be reviewed, enhanced, added or subtracted as the IRWMP progresses through time. Page 7-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 7.3.1 Reduce Potable Water Demand Existing methods to reduce water demand in the Region include the various water conservation programs implemented in the Region by the retail water purveyors for both urban and agricultural users. 7.3.1.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Agricultural water use is diminishing in the Region as land uses change through time to generally more urban uses. The Region has no formal water use efficiency programs targeted specifically at agricultural users. However, certain users located within the Region have installed drip irrigation or utilize on-farm practices to maximize efficiency of water use. 7.3.1.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency CLWA, the retail purveyors and LACWWDs are signatories to the "Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California" (MOU). The urban water conservation Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in the MOU are intended to reduce California's long-term urban water demands. By signing the MOU, CLWA, LACWWDs and the purveyors became members of the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) and report their progress on BMP implementation to the CUWCC. LACWWDs signed on behalf of the various district service areas in 1996. CLWA signed the urban MOU in February 2001 on behalf of its wholesale service area and pledged to implement several BMPs (listed below) at a wholesale support level. NCWD signed the MOU in 2002 on behalf of its retail service area. VWC signed the MOU in 2006 on behalf of its own retail service area. CLWA and the purveyors coordinate wherever possible to maximize efficiency and ensure the cost effectiveness of their conservation programs. Castaic Lake Water Agency's Conservatory Garden and Learning Center The MOU and BMPs were substantially revised by the CUWCC in 2008. The revised BMPs now contain a category of "Foundational BMPs" that signatories are expected to implement as a matter of their regular course of business. These include Utility Operations (metering, water loss control, pricing, use of a conservation coordinator, wholesale agency assistance programs and water waste ordinances) and Education (public information and school education programs). The remaining "Programmatic" BMPs have been placed into three categories: Residential, Large Landscape, and Commercial, Industrial, Institutional (CII) Programs and are similar to the original quantifiable BMPs. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-11 In coordination with the purveyors, CLWA has been implementing the foundational BMPs. For example, in connection with water loss control, CLWA does a monthly review of metered sales within their wholesale system compared to metered supply to determine if there is any water loss within their system. CLWA recently completed the American Water Works Association's M36 Water Loss analysis, which included categorizing leaks into "revenue" and "non -revenue' categories, and an economic analysis of recoverable loss. Since 2001, CLWA has also instituted implementation of residential programmatic BMPs, including Residential Plumbing Retrofits and Residential Ultra Low Flush Toilet Replacement Programs on behalf of the purveyors. After signing the MOU, the purveyors have initiated implementation of the remaining BMPs that are specific to retail water suppliers. Currently, programmatic BMPs that these purveyors are implementing include residential survey and audit programs; residential and large landscape survey and incentive programs; and rebate programs for WaterSense Specification toilets; among other programs. Descriptions and reports to the CUWCC on BMP implementation by CLWA and the purveyors were included in the 2010 UWMP. The retail purveyors met the CUWCC BMP reporting requirements by providing information on their demand management measures in the associated section of the 2010 UWMP. LACWWD Nos. 36 and 37 submit reports to the CUWCC separately. Additional savings are occurring Region -wide due to state interior plumbing code requirements that have been in effect since 1992, as well as due to changes in lot size and reduction in exterior square footage of new housing and commercial developments. These have begun to impact overall demand in the Region. Water demand trends are continuously monitored to assess factors leading to water use reduction and to quantify and water demand reductions. CLWA is also working with its retail purveyors to identify and implement water use efficiency programs that meet long-term reduction goals, in addition to meeting its MOU commitments. In 2007, CLWA and the retail water purveyors entered into an MOU to prepare a Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan (SCVWUESP). The purpose of the effort was to prepare a comprehensive long-term conservation plan for the Santa Clarita Valley by adopting objectives, policies and programs designed to promote proven and cost-effective conservation practices. A consultant was hired to prepare the SCVWUESP, which included input from stakeholders and the community at large. The SCVWUESP was completed in 2008 and provides a detailed study of existing residential and commercial water use, and recommends programs designed to reduce overall Valley -wide water demand by ten percent by 2030. The programs are designed to provide Valley residents with the tools and education to use water more efficiently. The seven programs identified in the SCVWUESP are: 1. High Efficiency Toilet Rebates (Single and Multi -Family) 2. Large Landscape Audits (with incentives) 3. CII Audits and Customized Incentives 4. Landscape Contractor Certification 5. High Efficiency Clothes Washer Rebates 6. New Construction Building Code 7. Valley -Wide Marketing Page 7-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 In addition to these seven programs, the SCVWUESP also identifies other key factors that will help reduce the Valley's overall water demand including passive conservation and new, more water efficient building ordinances. By 2009, CLWA and the water purveyors were implementing the majority of the programs identified in the SCVWUESP. In addition to the commitment of compliance with the BMPs as signatories to the MOU, CLWA and the retail purveyors are subject to the Urban Water Management Planning Act, Assembly Bill (AB) 1420 (Chapter 628, statutes of 2007), in effect as of January 2009. AB 1420 requires any urban water supplier to demonstrate implementation or plans for implementation of water use efficiency demand management measures (equivalent to CUWCC BMPs) in order to be eligible for grant or loan funding administered by DWR, the SWRCB or the Bay -Delta Authority (such as funding through Propositions 50 and 84). Additionally, Senate Bill 7 of Special Extended Session 7 (SBX7-7) (Chapter 4, statutes of 2009), was signed into law in November 2009, which calls for progress towards a 20 percent reduction in per capita water use statewide by 2020. The legislation mandates each urban retail supplier to develop and report a water use target in the retailer's 2010 UWMP. The legislation further requires that retailers report an interim 2015 water use target, their baseline daily per capita use and 2020 compliance daily per capita use, along with the basis for determining those estimates. Descriptions of the compliance efforts by the retail purveyors are described in the 2010 UWMP. CLWA and the purveyors are intending to update the SCVWUESP. The update will analyze current data on water consumption in the Valley, the implementation of the 2008 SCVWUESP, and identify conservation programs necessary to reduce urban demand by 20 percent by 2020. The update was proposed by the IRWM Region for funding under the Proposition 84 Round 2 Planning Grant process and was recommended for funding by DWR in 2012. Outside of the Valley, the only portion of the Region included in an urban water use efficiency program is LACWWD No. 37, by merit of LACWWDs being a signatory to the CUWCC MOU. 7.3.2 Increase Water Supply Several studies and assessments have been conducted in recent years in order to identify potential methods to increase water supply to the Region. A brief summary of these plans is provided below. 7.3.2.1 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage As discussed in Section 3.1.3, CLWA produced a Water Supply Reliability Plan (Reliability Plan) in 2003 and updated it in 2009. The Reliability Plan outlines primary elements that CLWA should include in its water supply mix to obtain maximum overall supply reliability enhancement. These elements include both conjunctive use and groundwater banking programs, which enhance the reliability of both the existing and future supplies, as well as water acquisitions. CLWA has established conjunctive use management efforts through water banking and groundwater storage as discussed in Section 2.6.4. Existing water banks in which CLWA Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-13 participates for the benefit of its service area include the Semitropic Water Storage District, West Kern Water District and Rosedale -Rio Bravo Water Storage District water banks. The Reliability Plan presents the implementation schedule recommended for both water banking storage and pumpback capacity beginning in 2010 and incrementally increasing through 2050. CLWA's plans call for development of additional groundwater banking programs, with pumpback capacity of at least an additional 10,000 AF by 2025, and a second 10,000 AF by 2035. AVEK is in the process of developing a groundwater banking program in its service area. This program has not yet been developed to a level that would provide detailed information about its capabilities or its availability to users within the Region. 7.3.2.2 Desalination 7.3.2.2.1 Groundwater/Brackish Water The two sources of groundwater in the Region are water drawn from the Alluvial Aquifer and from the Saugus Formation. Neither of these supplies can be considered brackish in nature and desalination is not required. Water managers in the Region could partner with SWP contractors and provide financial assistance for the construction of regional groundwater desalination facilities, in exchange for SWP supplies. The desalinated water would be supplied to users in communities near the desalination plant, and a similar amount of SWP supplies would be exchanged and allocated to CLWA or AVEK (the two SWP contractors in the Region). In addition, should an opportunity emerge with a local agency other than an SWP contractor, an exchange of SWP deliveries would most likely involve a third party, such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). Most local groundwater desalination facilities would be projects implemented by retailers of SWP contractors and, if an exchange program were implemented, would involve coordination and wheeling of water through the contractor's facilities to CLWA or AVEK (CLWA 2010). 7.3.2.2.2 Seawater Because the Region is not in a coastal area, it is neither practical nor economically feasible for water managers in the Region to implement a seawater desalination program. However, similar to the brackish water and groundwater desalination opportunities described above, water managers in the Region could provide financial assistance to other SWP contractors in the construction of their seawater desalination facilities in exchange for SWP supplies. Most of the existing and proposed seawater desalination facilities are or would be operated by agencies that are not SWP contractors. However, in these cases (as described above for groundwater/brackish water), an exchange for SWP deliveries would most likely involve a third party (SWP contractor), the local water agency constructing the desalination facility (retailer), and CLWA or AVEK (CLWA 2010). For example, the Bay Area Regional Desalination Partnership, made up of five agencies collaborating on a Regional Desalination Project in the San Francisco Bay Area, is working to develop desalination as a water supply for that region. This partnership, comprised of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, Santa Clara Valley Page 7-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Water District, East Bay Municipal Utilities District, Contra Costa Water District, and Alameda County Flood Control, is in the process of planning regional seawater/brackish water desalination facilities. CLWA could participate in this regional desalination project on an exchange basis (CLWA 2010), and would receive exchanged SWP Table A Amount from one of the partners who is an SWP contractor. 7.3.2.3 Precipitation Enhancement At this time, no known precipitation enhancement efforts have occurred or are planned in the Region. Data are very limited to assess the feasibility of precipitation enhancement activities in the Region and funding for research and implementation of such projects has been largely unavailable, so that efforts in the Region are being focused more on strategies whose results can generally be better assessed. 7.3.2.4 Recycled Municipal Water CLWA is preparing its 2012 Recycled Water Master Plan Update, which is based on its 1993 and 2002 Draft Recycled Water Master Plan. The Recycled Water Master Plan Update identifies the sources of recycled water in the CLWA service area, potential recycled water use constraints, and potential recycled water users. A recycled water model was prepared to size the recommended recycled water infrastructure system. Additionally, the Recycled Water Master Plan Update presents the regulatory and permitting requirements, potential funding opportunities, and an implementation plan for the proposed system. The Final EIR for the 2002 Recycled Water Master Plan was certified in March 2007, and the Notice of Determination was filed on March 29, 2007. To date, Phase 1A of the proposed recycled water system has been completed. 7.3.2.5 Water Transfers CLWA has entered into a long-term agreement with Buena Vista Water Storage District/Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District for a transfer of 11,000 AFY of firm water supply. The supply is based on existing long-standing Kern River water rights. This transfer is an example of a voluntary agreement among parties for an exchange of water. Some of the parties have rights to supplies in excess of their needs, and another party will be assisted in meeting its increasing demands. This transfer also allows for conjunctive use options, in that water not needed in a given year can be banked in Rosedale -Rio Bravo Water Storage District until a later time when it may be needed. This flexibility provides several operational efficiencies as well as increasing water supply to the Region. In addition, Newhall Land has also acquired a water transfer from Kern County totaling 1,607 AFY in supplies. 7.3.2.6 Surface Storage — CALFED The CALFED Record of Decision from 2000 identified five potential surface storage reservoirs that have since been undergoing investigation by DWR, US BR, and local water interests. The projects include: Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, North -of -the -Delta Offstream Storage (Sites Reservoir), In -Delta Storage Project, Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion, Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation (Temperance Flat Reservoir. By 2013, Final Environmental Impacts Studies and Reports are anticipated to be complete for the surface storage projects, with the decision phase ending in 2014 (DWR 2010). These analyses will help Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-15 determine if the water agencies in the Region will be willing to financially participate in the construction and operations and maintenance of either of these surface storage options in the future. 7.3.2.7 Surface Storage — Regional/Local As part of its water supply contract with DWR, CLWA has access to a portion of the storage capacity of Castaic Lake. This Flexible Storage Account allows CLWA to utilize up to 4,684 AF of the storage in Castaic Lake. Any of this amount that CLWA borrows must be replaced by CLWA within five years of its withdrawal. CLWA manages this storage by keeping the account full in normal and wet years and then delivering that stored amount (or a portion of it) during dry periods. The account is refilled during the next year that adequate SWP supplies are available to CLWA to do so. In 2005, CLWA negotiated with Ventura County SWP contractors to obtain the use of their Flexible Storage Account. This allows CLWA access to another 1,376 AF of storage in Castaic Lake. CLWA access to this additional storage is available on a year-to-year basis through 2015. The total storage amount is 6,060 AF. 7.3.2.8 Conveyance Every three years, CLWA prepares a Capital Improvement Plan, which outlines the necessary infrastructure improvements needed to maintain operational efficiency. These include modifications to pipelines or pump stations, as well as operations management systems (such as supervisory control and data acquisition [SCADA]). The Capital Improvement Plan outlines the costs for the recommended facilities. 7.3.2.9 System Re -operation LACWWD No. 37 is currently planning a potential system modification to add the areas of Acton and Agua Dulce to its service area. This modification is discussed in the Acton -Agus Dulce Conceptual Master Plan for Water Facilities (2004) and is based on an assessment of current capacity and projected buildout water demands for Acton, Agua Dulce and LACWWD No. 37. The addition would improve operational efficiency in the two areas not currently being supplied. Among other infrastructure improvements, the expansion would require expansion of AVEK's treatment plant and supply pipeline and storage systems, as well as expansion of the Vincent Pump Station in LACWWD No. 37. Water managers in the Region are constantly looking for ways to improve system operation efficiencies, with a particular emphasis on energy efficiency. Treatment plant and distribution system pumping schedules are constantly reviewed and assessed to obtain maximum operational efficiency. For example, NCWD participates in energy efficiency programs in partnership with Southern California Edison (SCE). They have implemented SCADA upgrades that provide NCWD the ability to operate pumps remotely including the ability to turn pumps off during high peak times. They have made these upgrades at three locations: Castaic Forebay, Newhall Well 12, and Pinetree Lost Canyon Booster Station. NCWD also participates in EnerNOC's demand response program. SCE calls for energy load reduction through EnerNOC and NCWD shuts down equipment for a period of time to help reduce load on SCE. Initially, it was estimated that demand response events would occur up to six times a year; however, during the summer months, due to high demand for electricity, it may happen more often. SCE also tests pumps and motors for operational efficiency and if found to be inefficient, NCWD will Page 7-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 replace the equipment and obtain a rebate from SCE. In addition, NCWD practices time -of -day pumping whereby pumping is conducted during off-peak hours. An example location where this program is conducted is within NCWD's Tesoro system. NCWD's Tesoro SCADA system is set so that the pumps fill the storage tanks only during off-peak hours. SCWD is also always looking for ways and programs to improve efficiencies. SCWD currently works with SCE to test all of the system's pumps and motors for efficiency. If they are found to be inefficient they are enrolled in the Agriculture Energy Efficiency Program for replacement. This program pays incentives for replacement of inefficient pump and motors. SCWD meets with SCE regularly to discuss rate structure for its facilities and adjusts them to fit current conditions. In 2012, SCWD applied for SCE's Technical Assistance and Technology Incentives program, which will analyze SCWD operations and recommend ideas to improve energy efficiency. In addition, SCWD is currently enrolled in a demand response program with EnerNOC; SCE calls for energy load reduction through EnerNOC and SCWD shuts down equipment for a period of time to help reduce load on SCE. Similar to NCWD, SCWD also installed a new SCADA system in 2011 that will allow SCWD to take advantage of time of use pumping (SCWD 2012). VWC is also continually looking for ways to improve efficiencies. VWC currently has SCE test all of the system's pumps and motors annually for efficiency. Based on the results, VWC schedules inefficient units for upgrades and modifications through SCE's Agriculture Energy Efficiency Program. VWC has most of its facilities on SCE time of Use schedules which help shift electric load to periods of low demand. VWC also participates in the EnerNOC / SCE program wherein VWC has a number of facilities that are subject to request from EnerNOC for shut down/load reduction during high demand periods. CLWA is taking measures to increase treatment plant efficiency and reduce the waste of water. As part of the RVWTP Expansion, CLWA implemented new means of treating waste washwater whereby more water will be recovered and put back into the treatment process. Another example is the Valencia WRP where power is generated using byproducts of the treatment process. At the Valencia WRP, a 500 kilowatt (kW) generator is driven by a reciprocating engine that runs on compressed digester gas. The electricity generated is returned to the Valencia WRP power grid, thus reducing the amount of electricity purchased for use at the WRP. In addition, the thermal energy generated by the engine is used to produce hot water, which is used to heat the WRP digesters. In 2011, CLWA completed installation of approximately 3.4 acres of high efficiency solar panels on its property. This 1 megawatt solar power system is anticipated to supply more than 98 percent of the energy needed to power CLWA's headquarters and the Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant. Additionally, through a 20 -year power purchase agreement, CLWA will be paying a set rate for electricity with an annual increase less than that expected for traditional energy. This newly implemented solar power system will thereby help mitigate rising energy costs while cutting CLWA's greenhouse emissions. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-17 7.3.3 Improve Water Quality 7.3.3.1 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution In 2005, CLWA completed a Chloramines Conversion Project. The project involved the system- wide conversion from chlorine disinfection methods to chloramines disinfection techniques. There are multiple benefits from using chloramines instead of chlorine for disinfection of water. Chloramines last longer in water, they are effective at inactivating pathogens like bacteria and viruses, and they produce fewer disinfection by-products (e.g., Trihalomethanes). CLWA converted to chloramines in order to meet drinking water standards as required by the US EPA. This project ensures that the higher water quality standards are met. CLWA operates two water treatment plants: the ESFP located in Castaic and the RVWTP located in the City of Santa Clarita. In 2008, the RVWTP Castaic Lake Stores SWP Water for Treatment was expanded from 30 mgd to 60 mgd. The RVWTP obtains its raw water supply from SWP water stored in Castaic Lake via a 201 -inch diameter pipeline (the Foothill Feeder) owned and operated by MWD, one 42 -inch diameter pipeline connection to the Foothill Feeder and one 102 -inch diameter pipeline (that conveys raw water to CLWA's Intake Pump Station [IPS]), and a 102 -inch diameter raw water pipeline between the IPS and the RVWTP site. The increase in capacity of the RVWTP was in response to current and new water quality standards, and has improved the ability to meet existing customer demands and planned future demand. The 16,790 AFY of additional treated water is able to serve approximately between 17,309 and 18,054 households, or between approximately 55,389 and 57,773 persons (CLWA 2006). The ESFP was expanded from 33.6 mgd to 56 mgd and the upgraded facility went online in August 2005. Originally built in 1980 and expanded in 1987, the ESFP treats SWP water transported to Castaic Lake. From there, the water is piped to the ESFP for treatment. The expansion project had several components: improvements to the existing raw water treatment system, including replacement of the existing raw water pumping plant with a 56 mgd capacity pump facility, and installation of a 54 -inch bypass pipeline within the existing easement to improve the existing raw water gravity flow system; at the filtration plant, construction of a new structure containing new ozone facilities for primary disinfection and chemical system for secondary disinfection; pre -filtration improvements, including new contact clarifiers and other equipment; conversion of the filtration system to deep bed monomedium filters using anthracite filter media and related equipment upgrades; and modifications to the washwater recovery system including installations of a new treatment system within an existing structure. Some of the proposed modifications were needed to comply with changing regulations that regulate drinking water quality. The existing ESFP would have been out of compliance by 2004. Expansion of the water treatment plant provided a component of the CLWA water delivery system necessary to treat the water for a portion of planned growth in the Valley (CLWA 2002). Page 7-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 7.3.3.2 Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation The detection of perchlorate in Valley groundwater supplies has raised concerns over the reliability of those supplies, in particular the Saugus Formation, where six out of a total of twelve wells have been impacted by perchlorate. Perchlorate was initially detected in four Saugus Formation production wells operating near the former Whittaker-Bermite site in 1997 and were removed from service. In 2002, perchlorate was detected in the SCWD Stadium well located directly adjacent to the Whittaker-Bermite site. This Alluvial well was also removed from service and subsequently capped in 2009. It was replaced with a new well, the SCWD Santa Clara well, also in 2009. Since the initial detection of perchlorate and resultant inactivation of impacted wells, the retail water purveyors have continued to conduct regular monitoring of active wells near the Whittaker-Bermite site. In late March 2005, that monitoring detected the presence of perchlorate in VWC's Alluvial Well Q2, located immediately northwest of the confluence of Bouquet Creek and the Santa Clara River. VWC subsequently removed the well from active service and immediately pursued permitting and installation of wellhead treatment. The well was returned to water supply service in October 2005. In 2006, NCWD's Saugus Well N-13 had concentrations of perchlorate below the detection limit for reporting and has remained in active water supply service. Most recently, in August 2010, VWC's water sample tests, taken from August 2010 through April 2011, confirmed the presence of perchlorate above the regulatory standard at VWC's Saugus Well 201. VWC immediately took the well out of service and notified the California Department of Public Health (DPH). VWC continues to monitor the inactive well on a monthly basis. The most recent sample confirmed that perchlorate is still present and that remediation is needed as outlined by the 2007 Whittaker-Bermite Litigation Settlement Agreement. Based on the results of CLWA's investigation of perchlorate removal technologies, a technical group's evaluation, and DPH's approval of single -pass ion exchange for treatment in other settings, CLWA and the local retail water purveyors have selected and installed single -pass ion exchange as the treatment technology for restoration of impacted capacity (wells). The perchlorate treatment facility includes an ion exchange process located at the Rio Vista Intake Pump Station. This wellhead treatment was successfully implemented at VWC Well Q2 in 2007 and is being considered for installation at the recently impacted VWC Well 201 to restore that impacted Saugus well's capacity. The Final Interim Remedial Action Plan for containment and extraction of perchlorate was completed and approved by DTSC in January 2006. Construction of the perchlorate treatment facility and related distribution system, the main components of the "pump and treat program," began in November 2007 and was completed in May 2010. In combination with start-up of the treatment system, the SCWD Saugus 1 and 2 wells (two of the four wells that were taken out of service in 1997) were returned to service in January 2011 after DPH issued an amendment to CLWA's Operating Permit in December 2010. After consideration of groundwater modeling results and engineering analysis, the parties to the Settlement Agreement agreed to operate the Saugus 1 and 2 wells at 1,100 gallons per minute (gpm) each (2,200 gpm total) in order to optimize both the contaminant plume containment and well production. An extended test of the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-19 wells that were eventually returned to service was performed as part of restoring a portion of the impacted well capacity and controlling the migration of perchlorate in the aquifer. See also Section 3 for additional discussion on perchlorate contamination in the Region. 7.3.3.3 Matching Quality to Use Not all water uses require the same quality of water or level of water treatment. Potable water should be reserved for those uses that require potable water standards (e.g., drinking water supplies), while other uses that do not require potable water (industrial, construction, landscape and agricultural irrigation) can use recycled water. Various laws are in place to ensure water quality matches use, including Title 22, Chapter 4 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 22). Title 22 identifies several levels of recycled water based on level of treatment and disinfection, including: Disinfected Tertiary Recycled Water; Disinfected Secondary -23 Recycled Water; Disinfected Secondary -2.2 Recycled Water; and Undisinfected Secondary Recycled Water. Title 22 further identifies allowable uses for each of these different levels of recycled water based on the potential impacts to public health. Table 7.3-2 summarizes the allowable uses of water given various treatment levels. Table 7.3-2 demonstrates that there are many potential uses for recycled water. The Saugus and Valencia WRPs provide primary, secondary and tertiary treatment. Primary treatment removes a large portion of wastewater solids using settling basins and flocculation (primary treated water is not used in California). Secondary treatment adds biological treatment and may or may not include disinfection. Tertiary treated recycled water involves coagulation, flocculation, clarification, filtration and disinfection steps. The Saugus and Valencia WRPs produce disinfected tertiary recycled water, suitable for the anticipated use of recycled water for landscape irrigation for users identified in the 2002 Draft Recycled Water Master Plan. As noted in Chapter 3, advanced treatment consisting of ultraviolet disinfection and reverse osmosis will be added to enable the WRPs to comply with the chloride TMDL, which may result in new opportunities for water recycling that require this level of treatment. Matching quality of water to use is not limited to recycled water. For example, water high in nitrate must be blended in order to make this water appropriate for drinking water. However, this same water, if managed properly, can be used for irrigation. Water high in nitrate is only recommended for certain types of crops and must be applied in combination with the right fertilizers. For some applications, nitrate in irrigation water reduces the need to apply fertilizers with nitrogen. 7.3.3.4 Pollution Prevention and Urban Runoff Quality and Quantity IRWMP stakeholders have identified objectives that combine the California Water Plan strategies of Pollution Prevention and Urban Runoff Management. Pollution prevention acts to limit discharges to water that negatively affect beneficial uses. The Los Angeles RWQCB seeks to avoid pollution by regulating discharges from various land uses, industrial uses, septic systems, leaking underground storage tanks, and by controlling dredging. Improving water quality/pollution prevention assists other resource management strategies such as "Promote Resource Stewardship." Implementation of programs such as the TMDL program Page 7-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) are key to integrated water management in the Region. TABLE 7.3-2 ALLOWED USES OF RECYCLED WATER Treatment Level Disinfected Disinfected Disinfected Undisinfected Parks and playgrounds. Tertiary Secondary- Secondary- Secondary School yards. Recycled 2.2 Recycled 23 Recycled Recycled Potential Use Water Water Water Water Use of Recycled Water for Irrigation Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Food crops where recycled water contacts the edible portion of the crop, including Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Parks and playgrounds. Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed School yards. Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Residential landscaping. Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Unrestricted access golf Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed courses. Food crops where edible portion is produced above Allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed ground and not contacted by recycled water. Cemeteries. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Freeway landscaping. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Restricted access golf Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed courses. Ornamental nursery stock and Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed sod farms. Use of Recycled Water for Irrigation Pasture for milk animals. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Nonedible vegetation with access control to prevent use Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed as a park, playground or school yard. Orchards with no contact between edible portion and Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed recycled water. Vineyards with no contact between edible portion and Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed recvcled water. Non food -bearing trees, including Christmas trees not Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed irrigated less than 14 days before harvest. Fodder crops (e.g., alfalfa) Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed and fiber crops (e.g., cotton). Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-21 Treatment Level Disinfected Disinfected Disinfected Undisinfected Tertiary Secondary- Secondary- Secondary Recycled 2.2 Recycled 23 Recycled Recycled Potential Use Water Water Water Water Seed crops not eaten by Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed humans. Food crops that undergo commercial pathogen - Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed destroying processing before consumption by humans. Allowed") Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Ornamental nursery stock, sod farms not irrigated less Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed than 14 days before harvest. Use of Recycled Water for Impoundments Non -restricted recreational Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed impoundments, with Allowed(a) Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed supplemental monitoring. Restricted recreational impoundments and publicly Allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed accessible fish hatcheries. w Groundater under special Groundwater Groundwater recharge Landscape impoundments Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed without decorative fountains. permits by Use of Recycled Water for Cooling Industrial or commercial cooling or air conditioning involving cooling tower, Allowed") Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed evaporative condenser, or spraying that creates a mist. Industrial or commercial cooling or air conditioning not involving a cooling tower, Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed evaporative condenser, or spraying that creates a mist. Use of Recycled Water for Other Purposes Allowed under Allowed special case- w Groundater under special Groundwater Groundwater recharge by -case recharge case-by-case recharge permits by permits by Flushing toilets and urinals Allowed toilets and Allowed toilets and urinals urinals Primingdrain traps Allowed Priming drain Allowed Priming drain Ptri^, tr�n, Industrial process water that may contact workers Industrial process water Allowed that may contact Industrial process water Allowed that may contact workers workers Structural fire fighting Allowed Structural fire Allowed Structural fire fighting fighting Page 7-22 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Treatment Level Disinfected Disinfected Disinfected Undisinfected Tertiary Secondary- Secondary- Secondary Recycled 2.2 Recycled 23 Recycled Recycled Potential Use Water Water Water Water Decorative fountains Allowed Decorative Allowed Decorative Soil compaction. Allowed Allowed Allowed Use of Recycled Water for Other Purposes Commercial laundries Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Consolidation of backfill material around potable water Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Artificial snow making for Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed commercial outdoor uses. Commercial car washes not done by hand & excluding the Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed general public from washing process. Industrial boiler feed. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Nonstructural fire fighting. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Backfill consolidation around Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed nonpotable piping. Soil compaction. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Mixing concrete. Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Dust control on roads and Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed streets. Cleaning roads, sidewalks Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed and outdoor work areas. Flushing sanitary sewers. Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Notes: (a) With "conventional tertiary treatment." Additional monitoring for two years or more is necessary with direct filtration. (b) Drift Eliminators and/or biocides are required if public or employees can be exposed to mist. (c) Refer to Groundwater Recharge Guidelines, California Department of Health Services. Source: California Health Laws Related to Recycled Water, "The Purple Book" Excerpts from the Health and Safety Code, Water Code, and Titles 22 and 17 of the California Code of Regulations. Last Update: June 2001 7.3.3.4.1 Total Maximum Daily Loads The portion of the Santa Clara River within the Region currently has two TMDLs for chemical impairments adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB, one for nitrogen compounds (Reaches 7 and 8) and one for chloride (Reaches 5 and 6). An Indicator Bacteria TMDL also recently went into effect, in 2012, for reaches 5 through 7. Table 7.3-3 identifies and describes the geographic locations of the reaches of the Upper Santa Clara River that lie within the Region as identified in the adopted Basin Plan (see also Figure 2.1-1). Another TMDL is in place for three lakes within the Region that are impaired with trash. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-23 TABLE 7.3-3 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REACHES Reach Number Reach Name Geographic Description 5 Upstream of USGS Blue Cut Gauging (part of Reach 5 is outside the Blue Cut Station to the West Pier Highway 99/01d Region, in Ventura County) Road Bridge 6 Highway 99 Upstream of Highway 99 to Bouquet Canyon Bridge 7 Bouquet Canyon Upstream of Bouquet Canyon to Lang Gauging Station 8 AboveLang Lang Gauging Station to headwaters Gauging Station The nitrogen compounds TMDL was established due to the listing of various reaches of the Santa Clara River for Nitrate + Nitrite on the 303(d) list of impaired water bodies initially in 1998 and again in 2002. The primary source of the identified nitrogen compounds to the Santa Clara River were wastewater discharges, with possible other sources being agricultural runoff, stormwater runoff, groundwater discharge and atmospheric deposition. Given these sources, wasteload allocations for nitrogen compounds were assigned to the various sources. These findings led to a Basin Plan Amendment for a nitrogen compounds TMDL for the Santa Clara River that went into effect on March 23, 2004. Since that time, there has been success in reducing nitrate in the river; the Upper Santa Clara River was not listed as nitrate impaired in the 2010 303(d) list. The chloride TMDL was established due to the listing of Reaches 5 and 6 of the Upper Santa Clara River for chloride on the 303(d) list of impaired water bodies in 1998. Wastewater discharges from the Saugus and Valencia WRPs were determined the principal sources, contributing up to 70 percent of the chloride load into Reaches 5 and 6. As a result, the TMDL established waste load allocations for the Saugus and Valencia WRPs. The implementation schedule allowed for a number of special studies to provide scientific certainty over the appropriate wasteload allocations and objectives for chloride that are necessary to protect various beneficial uses, including salt -sensitive agriculture and endangered species. In 2008, a trash TMDL became effective for Lake Elizabeth, Munz Lake, and Lake Hughes. Targeted efforts in the vicinity of Munz Lake have paid off, in 2011 it was determined that the lake was no longer impaired by trash. In September, 2012, LA County completed implementation of five trash capture devices at the impaired lakes and is thereby in full compliance with the TMDL. Resulting from an assessed impairment to beneficial uses, an Indicator Bacteria TMDL was adopted by the RWQCB for Santa Clara River Reaches 5, 6, and 7 on July 8, 2010 and went into effect on March 21, 2012. Initially, Reach 6 of the upper Santa Clara River was listed as impaired by elevated levels of indicator bacteria in 1996. During the 1998 Water Quality Assessment, Reaches 5 and 7 were also found to be impaired by high coliform counts and were added to the 303(d) List. Primary contributors of bacteria to the Upper Santa Clara River have been found to be discharges from the stormwater conveyance system that drains urban areas. Page 7-24 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 A more detailed discussion on 303(d) listings and TMDLs is also found in Sections 3.2.1.3 and 3.2.1.4. 7.3.3.4.2 Stormwater Runoff The US EPA approved the SWRCB and nine RWQCBs for enforcement of the stormwater regulations identified in the Clean Water Act. The SWRCB issues permits for Construction and Industrial sites. Cities and Los Angeles County are issued the joint permit. The RWQCBs issue the NPDES permit for municipal discharges, known as the MS4 permit. Construction The SWRCB elected to issue one statewide General Construction Activities Stormwater Permit (General Construction Permit), the most recent of which was adopted in 2009 and became fully enforceable in September 2011. This General Construction Permit applies to all construction projects that encompass one or more acres (except those areas on Indian lands and the Lake Tahoe Hydrologic Unit). In the Region, the Los Angeles RWQCB enforces stormwater regulations. The General Construction Permit requires the development and implementation of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP), emphasizing stormwater BMPs and monitoring programs. All dischargers must prepare, retain at the construction site, and implement a SWPPP. The SWPPP has two major objectives: • To help identify the sources of sediment and other pollutants that affect the quality of stormwater discharges. • To describe and ensure the implementation of BMPs to reduce or eliminate sediment and other pollutants in stormwater and non-stormwater discharges. The SWPPP should include the following information: • Site description addressing the elements and characteristics specific to the site, including site maps showing drainage patterns across the project. • Descriptions of BMPs the discharger will use to prevent stormwater runoff and the placement of those BMPs. These must include: ■ BMPs that address source control ■ BMPs that address pollutant control ■ BMPs that address treatment control • Acknowledgement and implementation of approved local plans. • Proposed post -construction controls, including description of local post -construction erosion and sediment control requirements. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 7-25 • Non-stormwater management. Prior to issuing a grading or building permit, the City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles require that each entity applying for such demonstrate compliance with the General Permit (where applicable) or by implementation of alternative grading and construction activity run-off control programs. Industrial The statewide NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities is currently being updated and the new order is anticipated to become effective in 2013. The Industrial General Permit regulates discharges associated with 10 broad categories of industrial activities, including for example manufacturing facilities and wastewater treatment works. Industrial activities that fall under this permit must implement management measures that will achieve the performance standard of best available technology economically available and best conventional pollutant control technology. Similar to the Construction General Permit, the Industrial Permit also requires the development of a stormwater pollution and prevention plan, and a monitoring plan. The SWPPP shall identify sources of pollutants and describe methods for managing those sources to reduce stormwater pollution. Under the new Industrial General Permit, dischargers are required to implement a set of minimum BMPs, in combination with additional facility specific BMPs. Reports are required to be submitted on an annual basis. The City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles require that entities engaged in industrial activities and subject to the General Industrial Activities Stormwater Permit demonstrate compliance with that permit prior to making any discharges to the sewer system. Municipal Municipal sewer system discharges are regulated under regional MS4 permits. The City of Santa Clarita is one of 84 cities along with the LACFCD (the primary permitee) that are covered by the Los Angeles County Municipal Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES No. CAS004001), issued by the Los Angeles RWQCB. The objective of this permit is to protect the beneficial uses of receiving waters in the County. To meet this objective, the permit requires that BMPs will be implemented to reduce the discharge of pollutants in stormwater to the maximum extent practicable. The Los Angeles County municipal permit includes: non -storm water discharge prohibitions (such as irrigation flows, potable water discharges), receiving water limitations, monitoring programs, incorporation of TMDLs, as well as minimum control measures. Minimum control measures require programs in illicit connection and discharges, public education and outreach, commercial and industrial inspections (where cities/county are required to perform inspections of the SWRCB issued industrial NPDES Permits), development programs (where cities/county require to enforce the SWRCB issued construction NPDES Permit and require post construction treatment for new and redevelopment), public agency activities (such as street and catch basin maintenance), and trash management. Permitees are currently negotiating a new Los Angeles County Municipal Stormwater NPDES Permit. Page 7-26 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 In addition to construction, industrial and municipal NPDES stormwater regulations, stormwater regulations also exist for irrigated farmland activities. In 2005, the LA RWQCB adopted a Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges from Irrigated Lands Within the Los Angeles Region. This program requires owners of irrigated farmlands to measure and control discharges from their property, but allows individual landowners and growers to collectively work towards compliance. In Ventura County, agricultural organizations, water districts and individuals came together in 2006 to form a unified discharger group, the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group (VCAILG). 7.3.3.4.3 Wastewater Discharges The City of Santa Clarita owns the local sewers within its borders, and Los Angeles County owns the majority of the local sewers located in unincorporated areas. Local lines are sewers that, typically, convey wastewater from a user's property line to the trunk sewers. The Los Angeles County Consolidated Sewer Maintenances District operates and maintains these local sewers (LACSD 2012). The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District owns, operates, and maintains the wastewater conveyance system for the Santa Clarita Valley, conveying wastewater and wastewater solids from the local sewer lines to the Saugus and Valencia water reclamation plants. The Saugus and Valencia water reclamation plants are subject to waste discharge requirements issued by the Los Angeles RWQCB. Effluent limitations have been set for 21 parameters, including BOD, TDS, chloride, and nitrogen compounds. The Newhall Ranch WRP that is planned for construction is described in the individual NPDES Permit and waste discharge requirements issued by the RWQCB in 2007. The NPDES Permit contains effluent limitations to control the amount of conventional, non -conventional, and toxic pollutants discharged to receiving waters, including chloride. In addition, the smaller, proposed plant for Vista Canyon Ranch is also in the process of obtaining applicable wastewater discharge permits that will contain effluent limitations to protect water quality and beneficial uses. In addition to the NPDES waste discharge requirements mentioned above, the SWRCB adopted statewide general waste discharge requirements for sanitary sewer systems in an effort to address sanitary sewer overflows. Under this order, public agencies in the Region that own or operate sanitary sewer systems are required to develop and implement sewer system management plans and report all sanitary sewer overflows to the SWRCB's online database. 7.3.3.5 Salt and Salinity Management A Salt and Nutrient Management Plan is being prepared for the Santa Clara River Valley East Groundwater Subbasin. The SWRCB adopted a statewide Recycled Water Policy on February 3, 2009 to establish uniform requirements for the use of recycled water. The purpose of this Policy is to increase the use of recycled water in a manner that implements state and federal water quality laws. A Salt/Nutrient Management Plan Task Force was convened to work with the RWMG, Regional Water Quality Control Board and Stakeholders to establish clear and specific objectives to protect water quality given use of recycled water. The Salt and Nutrient Management Plan has identified sources of salt and nutrients and has evaluated the subbasin's assimilative capacity for these constituents. The Salt and Nutrient Management Plan includes Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-27 BMPs to avoid impacts from salt and nutrients and lays out a groundwater monitoring program to monitor groundwater quality. 7.3.4 Promote Resource Stewardship Existing practices employed in the Region as part of ongoing resource stewardship efforts include the following broad-based land use, watershed and floodplain management activities, policies and programs implemented by various entities in the Region for both urban and agricultural users. Efforts include, but are not limited to: land use management plan development; land and habitat conservation plan development; land use designation for conservation; land acquisition for conservation; impact mitigation plan development; endangered species recovery plan development; restoration and enhancement plan development; Sensitive Resource Area designation; SEA planning (County); and the work of private resources, conservation organizations, tasks forces, and concerned citizen groups, as summarized below (VCWPD and LACDPW 2005). Aerial View of the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed 7.3.4.1 Agricultural Lands Stewardship Agricultural lands stewardship is a critical component of planning for resource conservation and water use efficiency. Approximately 38,400 acres in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed are zoned agricultural. Several well-established incentive programs to support agricultural land preservation are implemented throughout the Region. A Williamson Act Contract, prepared pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, provides an approximately 25 to 75 percent property tax break to private landowners in exchange for a voluntary agreement to maintain ongoing agricultural use for a rolling 10 -year period. The contract automatically renews at the end of 10 years unless a notice of non -renewal is filed prior. Numerous federal programs administered by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) provide support for protecting water resources and natural habitats while preserving agricultural and grazing lands. These Farm Bill programs, resulting from passage of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 and renewal of funding for its key conservation programs in 2007, provide farmers and ranchers incentives such as cost -share, land rentals, incentive payments, and technical assistance, to respond to the range of emerging natural resource challenges related to the management of their lands. Local land use planning also serves as an important venue to promote agricultural land stewardship. Updates and modifications to policies further supporting and protecting existing and future agricultural use from urban encroachment and conversion are included as part of the Los Angeles Countywide General Plan update and the Valley's OVOV Area Plan update. National and regional non-profit organizations are also involved in implementing resource conservation strategies that focus on agricultural land management. The Nature Conservancy provides one example. Currently, The Nature Conservancy is exploring possibilities to Page 7-28 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 implement a program designed to encourage ecologically compatible and economically viable local farming operations to act as a buffer zone between the river and developed areas. 7.3.4.2 Economic Incentives Economic incentives to promote resource stewardship include the provision of grants and other forms of financial assistance to land owners, water purveyors, and wastewater agencies, bonding and tax policies, as well as the implementation of pricing to promote efficient water use. Land acquisition for the purpose of protection and restoration of significant ecological areas is another important strategy that utilizes the financial market to help achieve stewardship goals. In addition to the incentive programs discussed under the agricultural land stewardship section, other voluntary restoration programs offer financial incentives to landowners. US FWS "Partners for Fish & Wildlife" Program is one such program offered in the Region. The Partners for Fish & Wildlife Program provides funds and technical assistance to landowners, and supports the restoration and enhancement of wetlands, native grasslands, and other declining habitats, for the benefit of threatened and endangered species, migratory birds, and other wildlife. Supported regional activities include the removal of invasive non-native plants, such as arundo, and reintroduction of native plant species to riparian areas. Large land acquisition efforts are also underway by the Coastal Conservancy and The Nature Conservancy for watercourse expansion, flood management activities, and the protection and restoration of habitat and wildlife corridors along the Upper Santa Clara River. For several years, the City of Santa Clarita has been working to purchase land around the City to create a greenbelt buffer of preserved, undeveloped property and make a positive and significant impact on the retention of wildlife corridors. In July 2007, the City of Santa Clarita property owners voted to create the Open Space Preservation District, funded by a special assessment paid by property owners. As of 2012, the City of Santa Clarita had over 7,000 acres in dedicated open space. 7.3.4.3 Ecosystem Restoration Ecosystem restoration refers to the restoration of natural areas that have been altered as a result of anthropogenic pressures such as agriculture, urban development and pollution. In many ways, the purpose of ecosystem restoration is not only to improve the intrinsic value of the lands themselves, but to strengthen their ability to provide important ecosystem services such as groundwater recharge and flood protection. Various restoration efforts are underway throughout the Region. The Nature Conservancy is facilitating restoration of southern steelhead habitat along the Santa Clara River through a variety of measures, including planting vegetation filter strips along urban and agricultural interfaces to filter contaminants, planting native vegetation along riverbanks to lessen erosion and to reduce sediment loading, and conducting exotic plant removal and native vegetation restoration pilot projects. The Nature Conservancy has acquired 40 acres in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed with immediate plans to acquire an additional 350 acres (3 parcels total) in the floodplain (personal communication, EJ Remson 2007). In addition, the Sierra Club's Santa Clara River Greenway Campaign is underway to bring the entire 500 -year floodplain of the Santa Clara River from the City of Fillmore to the community of Acton into public ownership and protection for improved water quality and quantity, enhancement of plant and wildlife Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 7-29 species habitats, protection of open space attributes and aesthetics, increased river fluvial dynamics, and maintenance of agricultural resources. The Friends of the Santa Clara River (Friends) is another non-profit conservation group with a focus on the protection, preservation and enhancement of the Region's riparian and watershed - dependent resources. In the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed, Friends works with The Nature Conservancy and Southcoast Wildlands on some of their acquisition efforts in the Soledad Canyon area. They also have a stream team that samples the river water once a month at two Upper Santa Clara River sites. Other restoration efforts underway include implementation of the ARCO Oil Spill Restoration Plan, developed by the US FWS and the CDFW's Office of Spill Prevention and Response. This restoration plan resulted from an oil spill settlement that stipulated funds be used for habitat rehabilitation, re -vegetation and/or protection of areas within the Santa Clara River Watershed, and for wildlife projects that benefit endangered species. In July 2007, voters in the City of Santa Clarita voted to form an open space preservation district. The annual cost to single family homeowners will be $25; condominium and townhouse owners will pay slightly less and those who own larger, non residential parcels will pay more. In future years, fees for the open space preservation district can increase by no more than $1 per year and only if approved by the City Council, following a public hearing. The open space preservation district is intended to purchase lands in and around the City and finish the City's greenbelt buffer (City of Santa Clarita 2007). Increasing threats by invasive weeds in the Upper Santa Clara River watershed have resulted in various efforts to enhance management of these weeds. The Santa Clara River Invasive Weeds Task Force was created to restore the Santa Clara River through collaborative management of invasive weeds in the watershed. Stakeholders involved in the task force include government agencies, non-profit organizations, agricultural interests, environmental consultants, landowners, local academic institutions, and represent members from the upper and lower watersheds, as well as both, the Los Angeles and Ventura County Weed Management Areas. This task force has proposed to implement a regional arundo and tamarisk eradication program that will demonstrate measureable improvements with goals and objectives consistent with the national nonpoint source program and water management initiative. This program has resulted in the development of the Upper Santa Clara Arundo River Watershed Removal Plan (SCARP), a long-term eradication, monitoring, and maintenance plan. The goal of the plan is to provide a comprehensive document to allow any agency or organization to perform arundo/tamarisk removal projects within upper Santa Clara watershed of any scale. In order to facilitate implementation of projects under this program, the plan takes into consideration, among other things, how to comply with environmental agency restrictions and permits, including CEQA, NEPA, which permits need to be obtained by individuals and organizations, as well as mechanisms for funding projects. In addition, the Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers Ranger District of the Angeles National Forest is proposing a long-term invasive plant treatment project in the Santa Clara River watershed. The project will consist of long-term invasive plant management, at least 15 years that could include the use of herbicides, manual, mechanical, biological, and fire wilting methods. The project area will include all National Forest System lands within the watershed, potentially including Page 7-30 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 treatment areas outside of the National Forests. An Environmental Assessment for this project was released for public review in 2012. 7.3.4.4 Forest Management A large portion of the Santa Clara River watershed includes the Angeles National Forest and the Los Padres National Forest. National forest watersheds are managed to provide many benefits including flood protection and quality drinking water for downstream communities, as well as protection of Wildland/Urban Interface areas from wildland fires. They also offer a haven for native plants and animals, and provide unique and irreplaceable habitat for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. The four national forests in southern California (Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres, San Bernardino) are among the most urban -influenced, national forests in the total National Forest System. Revised in 2005, the land management plans, also known as the Forest Plans, were developed for the southern California national forests, based on the concept of sustainable use of the national forests. These plans outline the goals and strategic direction for land and natural resource management activities on a program -level over the next 10 to 15 years. The forest plan defines the parameters for management, but offers the flexibility to adapt decisions to accommodate rapidly changing resource conditions. Strategies are designed to achieve the national forests' desired conditions relating to ecological, economic, and social attributes. Among the 12 goals described in Part 1 of the Forest Plan, based on the Forest Service National Strategic Plan, are (a) Improve watershed conditions through cooperative management and (b) Improve riparian conditions. The desired condition is that national forest watersheds are healthy, dynamic and resilient, and are capable of responding to natural and human caused disturbances while maintaining the integrity of their biological and physical processes. Additionally, with respect to riparian systems, the desired condition is that watercourses are functioning properly and support healthy populations of native and desired nonnative riparian dependent species. Specific objectives that help achieve these desired conditions are: Assess and restore high-priority watersheds and maintain riparian habitat within these watersheds. • Monitor water quality impacts of activities on National Forest System lands. • Restore and maintain native and desired nonnative plant and animal species diversity within terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and reduce the rate of species endangerment by contributing to species recovery. 7.3.4.5 Land Use Planning and Management Urban land use decisions generally occur at the local level, but these decisions can impact the ecological health of regional systems, including the hydrologic cycle and local water quality and supply. General plans throughout the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed are therefore important policy tools that can guide land use decision-making to simultaneously protect the community's economic interests and public and environmental health needs. A joint planning process by the City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles, "One Valley, One Vision" (OVO) was completed in 2012. The OVOV creates a single general plan for the Valley and its communities. In addition to policies established by local land use plans, existing local policies Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 7-31 and ordinances encourage and, in some cases, mandate low impact development adjacent to affected waterways in the Region. For example, development setbacks and landscape guidelines for fuel management zones are established by the applicable land use jurisdiction for new development adjacent to or within the immediate vicinity of a water body, and the identification and implementation of sensitive biological resource areas overlay zones are under consideration, such as the one described below. Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning has proposed (but not yet adopted) the creation of a SEA that encompasses the entire County reach of the Santa Clara River. The proposed SEA meets several designation criteria and supports the protection and preservation of many regional biological resources, including habitat for core populations of endangered species, migration corridors, diverse and abundant plant and wildlife species assemblages, regionally distinct biotic communities, and areas that have high value for preservation because they represent relatively undisturbed examples of natural biotic communities in the Region. Management recommendations for the proposed SEA include limiting new developments to outside the existing floodplain margins to obviate the necessity for further bank stabilization, stringent review of proposals for new or increased groundwater extraction to prevent overdrafting of the shallow aquifer supporting riparian habitat areas, and requiring agricultural activities to employ BMPs to avoid unnecessary impacts to habitats. This range of proposed management strategies above represents the variety of resource stewardship approaches discussed so far. The Newhall Land and Farming Company (NLF) is currently planning for the development of Newhall Ranch, a new community that will be located on NLF land west of the Interstate -5 freeway. The site is comprised of 12,000 acres, of which approximately half will be developed and half will be preserved as open space. NLF has obtained long term federal and state environmental permits from agencies including the US ACOE, CDFW, and US FWS, as well as the County, with an aim to balance development with environmental protection. In September of 2012, the LA RWQCB issued a 401 Water Quality Certification and Waste Discharge Requirements, which was the last outstanding federal permit relating to environmental issues on Newhall Ranch. Under the issued Waste Discharge Requirements, the project will preserve and protect approximately 612 acres of waters of the United States, including 272 acres of wetlands in perpetuity. 7.3.4.6 Recharge Areas Protection The availability of local groundwater supplies is derived in part from the sustainability of the groundwater resource, or its ability to recharge. Groundwater resources rely heavily on groundwater recharge areas such as natural drainage channels, floodways and floodplains that help to replenish underlying aquifers. Identification and management of recharge areas is one of 14 elements comprising CLWA's 2003 Groundwater Management Plan. Such activities are critical to ensuring that the Valley groundwater basin continues to readily recharge, as historical operating experience demonstrates it has in the past. The Los Angeles RWQCB is charged with the responsibility of developing solutions which will restore water quality and protect beneficial water uses, including groundwater recharge. The Los Angeles RWQCB's implementation of pollution prevention programs such as the federal Nonpoint Source Pollution Program, and participation in the US EPA's Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment Agency Program, are significant components of recharge area protection. Page 7-32 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Regional arundo removal efforts and the removal of other invasive, water -intensive plants also contribute to the protection of groundwater recharge areas. A significant improvement to recharge area protection in the Valley will be provided by the ongoing remediation of the former Whittaker-Bermite site, which still contains soils contaminated with perchlorate and other contaminants. Additionally, TMDLs in place for nitrogen compounds and chloride will contribute to improved water quality and thereby contribute to recharge area protection in the Region. 7.3.4.7 Water -Dependent Recreation Water -dependent recreation includes activities such as boating and fishing, which occur on lakes, reservoirs and rivers, and passive recreation such as camping and hiking that is enhanced by water features. Multiple lakes within the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed provide recreational opportunities of the first type to Region residents and seasonal visitors. Castaic Lake State Recreation Area, owned by DWR and managed by Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation, offers boating, swimming and fishing opportunities. For anglers, Castaic Lake is known primarily for its largemouth bass fishing, but the lake also hosts a variety of additional game fish including trout and striped bass. Castaic Lake hosts team bass tournaments in the summer. Fall through spring, CDFW stocks Castaic Lake Lagoon with rainbow trout; Bouquet Creek, a tributary of the Santa Clara River, is stocked late spring through summer. In addition to fishing, Castaic Lake offers boating, waterskiing and jet skiing opportunities in approved areas. The Parks and Recreation Element of City of Santa Clarita's General Plan has established the goal of utilizing the Santa Clara River as a central corridor for recreation. Policies proposed to achieve this goal included establishing the Santa Clara River as a major recreational focal point within the Valley, in part through the development of a regional plan for the Santa Clara River. Because of the ephemeral nature of the river, water -dependent recreation in the Upper Watershed is severely limited and, throughout much of the year, non-existent. However, the County's backbone trail system runs along the river, improving river access and providing trails for walking, hiking and equestrian uses. The City of Santa Clarita has constructed a bike path system along major portions of the river and its tributaries within its jurisdictional limits. 7.3.4.8 Watershed Management City of Santa Clarita Equestrian and Bike Trail Watershed management is a holistic and politically inclusive approach to protecting water and other natural resources that focuses on land use and development within the boundaries of an identified watershed. Following a Reconnaissance Phase Study initiated in March 2002, the Los Angeles District of the US ACE determined that a Santa Clara River Watershed feasibility study was merited. This effort would cover the whole Watershed, and would assess the predevelopment conditions of the Watershed, the current condition, and future condition Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 7-33 scenarios. The effort will involve extensive modeling of the Watershed, and will be designed as a tool for decision makers. The study will include a comprehensive update of hydrologic, hydraulic, and sediment (yield and transport) models for a range of flow rates for existing conditions and future conditions within the Santa Clara River. The study will include generating new cross section data from new topographic maps for specific areas with existing urbanization and areas with the potential of urbanization in the near future within the Santa Clara River Watershed. One outcome of the study will be computer models that can simulate the existing and future land use changes upstream and provide data to forecast changes to the flood flows (10-, 20-, 100 -year floods) and low flows (daily, 1 -year, 2 -year flows) in the Santa Clara River. A sediment transport study has been completed, but, due to a lack of funding, the Santa Clara River Watershed feasibility study is behind schedule. The Goals of improving watershed and riparian system conditions have also been described in the updated Forest Plans, as described above in Section 7.3.5.4. 7.3.5 Improve Flood Management 7.3.5.1 Flood Risk Management The Santa Clara River system plays a major role in transporting large volumes of runoff generated within the Region and the surrounding foothills and mountains. The natural and constructed drainage system is designed to accommodate runoff from normal precipitation (15 to 19 inches per year on average throughout the watershed with up to approximately 30 inches in high elevations [County of Los Angeles 2011, Stillwater Sciences 2011]); however, the rapid urbanization in the Region that began in the 1960s has increased the amount of impervious areas with more roof tops and paved parking lots and streets, thereby modifying original runoff patterns. In order to prevent increased velocities and flows through stormwater channelization, the majority of the Santa Clara River has been kept in a natural condition and flood control improvements necessary to protect development from flood hazards have generally consisted of buried bank stabilization projects. Buried bank stabilization has been implemented along various reaches of the Upper Santa Clara River, including along the South Fork and San Francisquito Creek within Reach 6. The Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan finalized in 2005 provides guidance on the resources management within the 500 -year floodplain limits, including acquisition of land adjacent to the river for flood protection, among other uses. Hundreds of acres of such land have since been acquired by the City of Santa Clarita for such purposes. Land adjacent to the River has also been set aside within Los Angeles County's adopted Newhall Ranch Specific Plan, where floodplain protection will be achieved through projects that include bank stabilization, detention basins combined with habitat areas, rip rap, and soft - bottom channels. LACFCD operates and maintains major flood control facilities, including drainage channels, storm drains, sediment basins, and streambed stabilization structures and has constructed concrete -lined portions of the Santa Clara River and tributaries. Within the County areas, future major drainage improvements will primarily be constructed by developers as required for new master -planned communities. The City of Santa Clarita currently has no plans for new major drainage facility improvements. Page 7-34 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 The original flood maps for the City of Santa Clarita were produced over 30 years ago. FEMA embarked on a national Map Modernization Program in 2005 to update the country's aging flood maps. The Santa Clara River and eight major tributaries in the Santa Clarita Valley have been restudied and are in draft form. After a quality assurance review and public notification process, the City expects to have the new data adopted in three to five years. These maps, together with the local floodplain ordinance, are used by the City to regulate development in floodplains (C. Monde 2012). More detail on ongoing flood management is described in Section 4. 7.3.6 Resource Management Strategies In addition to the 27 main water resource management strategies, the 2009 California Water Plan lists and describes other strategies that have potential to contribute to meeting one or more resource management objectives. Strategies listed in the Water Plan are: • Crop idling for water transfers • Dewvaporation or atmospheric pressure desalination • Fog collection • Irrigated land retirement • Rainfed agriculture • Waterbag transport/storage technology While it was recognized in the Water Plan that these strategies have limited capacity for strategically addressing long-term regional water planning needs and may still require further research and development, these strategies were discussed among IRWMP stakeholders. It was concluded that these additional strategies are currently not feasible options for the Region. Strategies relating to agriculture, including crop idling, irrigated land retirement and rainfed production would provide only limited benefits to this Region, as agriculture makes up less than 1 percent of the approximately 654 square miles of the Region (1,994 acres according to County of Los Angeles 2011). The inland location and topographical and climatic conditions in the Region are not conducive to intense fog development, rendering fog collection a less feasible resource management strategy for the Region. Other strategies listed above are still in the research and development stages and may be considered in the future once they have been better established. As a result, no efforts will be pursued at this time to incorporate these strategies into the set of regional resource management strategies in this IRWMP. 7.4 Call for Projects Projects are the specific means for implementing strategies and the way objectives are ultimately achieved. To identify the many potential projects in the Region and to assess the collective contribution of these projects towards meeting the IRWMP objectives, development of this IRWMP includes a "Call for Projects" which gives stakeholders the opportunity to directly submit their projects and project concepts for consideration. Stakeholders are encouraged to Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 7-35 submit projects at any stage of development. Avenues available for participating in the Call for Projects include submission of projects on a standard project information form, either submitted by electronic mail, by facsimile, or sometimes directly on-line via the IRWMP website (www.scrwaterplan.org ). The 2008 IRWMP also included a "Call for Projects". In order to track progress of projects, to reflect changes in Plan objectives, and to insure projects in the Plan are periodically reviewed and vetted by stakeholders, a project had to be submitted or resubmitted during the "Call for Projects' period in order to be included in this IRWMP Update. To facilitate resubmittal of projects from the 2008 Plan, all 2008 project sponsors were provided with electronic copies of their project forms and changes in the project submittal form were denoted by colored text. While many of the projects lack detailed supporting information, the Call for Projects provided a mechanism to engage Stakeholders in the process of sharing project information and discussing the issues related to the integration of projects. Many of the projects discussed in this section provide multiple benefits, spanning more than one strategy. Therefore, some assumptions were made with regard to which resource management strategy a particular project would most benefit, to begin the initial organization of the projects. For example, a groundwater recharge project generally was assumed to provide water supply benefits, with a possible secondary benefit of addressing water quality needs. Section 8 will address this issue further by examining in greater detail how these projects can be integrated to provide multiple benefits. The RWMG can hold a "Call for Projects' and update the IRWMP Project list at anytime. Revision of the IRWMP Project list does not require that the entire IRWMP be revised and re- adopted, rather the updated project list can be amended to the existing plan upon simple majority vote by the RWMG. Appendix D, Part 3, demonstrates the relationship between the projects received as part of the Call for Projects and the 27 California Water Plan resource management strategies. In Appendix D, the projects are organized by project proponent (e.g., project sponsored by CLWA are given the names CLWA-1, CLWA-2, etc.). Page 7-36 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 7.1-3 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 7-37 CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN STRATEGIES o z W z O z z W LU z 2 z O Q W (0 W U Z w w W w r Q LL W g z O >- W W w 0 U W W U r z LU LL Z W Q OQ Z Q U Q J Q O Z¢Z O U ~ o O W LU LU W O (D K Q Q 1 O O H a z O W K I- z Q d UJ w a Q o a w LL' F Q 2 O (W7 N Q�Q � "� Z U (D C7 J K W X w > ~ Q Z t/7 W z z U Q z W Q z JQ K W LL K ll. Z Q UOQ W a. W H > W Z LL J J W W U' Z W O Q a z H o Or zz Q d z J Q W K w U 0 W Q Q z 0 w Q O z K= LU Q a z W Y > >' U Q Z d' U 5 Q I- Q O U V) H LL (7 V Z U J V) U W W W W co F- Q ~ O ~ UA UA Z O X J 0 IY W > af z z J U U z Z m ZOZ U UJ K LL' LU ¢ LU J u�llz co LU= K LL m z r~n Q z 0 U W U X X U z H Q m K W O O K z z U Q Q O (7 LL K O > O W K W > > W K- Q O Q X O H U U O Q Q W J �- W D U U U U 0 a- W 0 co W 0 Ol U 0_ U D U W W LL J 2 cr LL O REDUCE WATER DEMAND BMPs Conservation Coordinator Water Waste Prevention Water Loss Control Metering with Commodity Rates Retail Conservation Pricing Public Information Programs School Education Programs Residential Survey and Retrofit Residential Landscape Water Survey WaterSense Specification Toilets Commercial, Industrial, Institutional Large Landscape Agricultural Water -Use Efficiency Measures INCREASE WATER SUPPLY Surface Reservoir or Storage Tank Surface Water Diversion Groundwater Extraction Facilities Aquifer Storage and Recovery Groundwater Management and Planning Policies Groundwater Replenishment Including Spreading Grounds and Injection Wells Aquifer Recharge with Reclaimed Water Aquifer Recharge with Septic Hydrologic Modeling and Monitoring Recycled Water for Irrigation or Other Beneficial Uses Surplus Recycled Water from Other Regions Increased Uses for Recycled Water through Policy Change and Education Imported Water Watershed Planning Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 7-37 Page 7-38 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN STRATEGIES } Z ❑ p Q H W z Z O Z Q Z W Or Z O H W W U) W Z UJ LU W 2Q LL W Z O } W W U LU r LL LL O W W U Q U Q JHJ Q Z QZ W C7 O H O Z O U W W Z W LL' W W Z O C7 Q J 1 p p O H Q Z O N W K I Z Q d W Q ~H Z ¢ a W !r F d Q Z O � O z Q Q N Z W Q U) Z W U Q C7 J x W W W > J F>-, Z to W Z U Q z W Z J K W LL p_' Z K Z Q U W H r W Z LL J W W O Z W p Z Q a rn W Z Z 7 Q Q K J LL a U Q F. W FW- U O QZQ >~ Q O O o o W W 0_ Q O K x z Z Q 0_ Z ¢ a p .1 Z W K H 0O H ~ p VI y li O N Z O m U W W W W W m Z ~ Z Z ~ = Z 0 O w ❑ vi W U U z z m Z g co (0 of U U Q > H W 7 Q Y LL LL O Y W ¢ U W Q Z to W Q x W W p W K m Z i- Z O m U W U X X C7 Z CO _U K O O K p Z U �' x LL C7 LL K O y } Q O X W K W > > W K N Q Q O JQ K W C7 H U U O Q Q W Q Q O H Lu U U U U' ❑ 0_ of 0 V) of ❑❑ U 0_ U U W W LL J K LL O Rainwater Collection Systems (Cisterns) Greywater Systems Water Banking, Exchange and Transfer Projects Drought Contingency and Emergency Planning Urban Water Management Planning Removal of Invasive, Water -Thirsty Plants Understand Total Water Usage in Region Rehabilitation, Replacement, or Removal of Existing Facilities Improved Operational Efficiency Measures Intertie Projects IMPROVE WATER QUALITY Build Sewer Treatment Collection and Distribution Systems Rehabilitate or Upgrade Sewer Treatment Collection and Discharge Systems Relocate and Protect Sewer Treatment Collection and Discharge Systems - Remove from Vulnerable Locations TMDL Development and Implementation Pump and Treat Water for Quality Enhancement Remove or Prohibit On -Site Water Softening Devices Replacement of Problematic Septic Tank Systems with Sewer Hook -Ups Fertilizer, Herbicide, and Pesticide Application Reduction Low Level Storm Water Treatment Non -Point Source Pollution Control LandscapelHardscape Retrofits Water Quality Monitoring (Requires Coordination Among Sampling Entities to be Effective) Improve Water Quality Being Discharged Brownfields Remediation Page 7-38 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 7-39 CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN STRATEGIES } Z ❑ o Q W z Z O Z Q Z W Or Z O H W W U) W Z Uj LU W 2Q LL W Z O } W W U LU r LL LL O W W U Q U Q JHJ Q Z QZ W C7 O H O Z O U W w Z W LL' w w Z O c� a a 1 o O Q Z o N w z Q a w Q ~H Z a w F d Q Z O � o z Q Q y Q) Z W U C7 J x iR W W W > J F>-, Z to W Z Q z W Z K Z Q U W H r W Z LL J W W O Z W U Z Q a y W Z Z 7 Q Q K J LL a U Q g F. K LU U o QzQ > Q o o g o o o w w 0- Q o x z Z Q d z ¢ a o Y Z W K H H ~ p VI y li C7 N Z O m U W W W W W m ~ Z Z ~ = z❑ O vwi w ❑ ai LU v v z z m Z g co of U U Q >LU W 7 Q } LL LL O Y K ¢ U W Q Z to W Q x W W p W K m Z i- Z O m U W U X X m Z m _U K O O K p Z x LL C7 LL K O m } Q O X W K w > > w K y Q Q O JQ K W 0 H U U O Q Q W Q Q O H LU D U U U U' 0 0_ of 0 V) of ❑ 0 0 2 0_ U D U W W LL J K LL O Wellhead Recharge and Protection Emerging Contaminant Problems - Monitoring and Management Control and/or Enforce Prohibitions on Illegal Discharge of Controlled or Toxic Substances Leaking Underground Storage Tank Remediation Outreach and Education Biological Treatment of Water (e.g., Treatment Via Wetlands) Improve Riparian Habitat PRACTICE RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP Levee Construction Channel Improvement Projects Detention Basins Debris Basins Ongoing Facility Maintenance Removal of Hazards or Facilities from Floodways Storm Monitoring and Modeling - Flows, Water Quality Coordinated Hydrogeomorphic Modeling Incentives for Landowners - Public/Private Partnerships Evaluate Process for Reconstruction Following Emergencies (Floods, Landslides) Public Information Programs Regarding Flood Prevention Land Acquisition for Watercourse Expansion/Flood Management Protect And Enhance Native Ecosystem Diversity Control, Remove, and Prevent Invasive Species Protect Existing Habitats from Degradation Urban Stream Restoration and Revitalization Land Acquisition and/or Easements for Protection and Restoration of Habitat Areas Landscape LinkageslWildlife Movement Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 7-39 Page 7-40 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN STRATEGIES } z ❑ p Q H W z z O W z W Q Z z W w LL W z ° } W z W O U W U) LL Uj LU O 2Q W Q O JHJ Z QZ W O O LU U r W Z W LL' LL Z W U U Q Q O Q C7 N H Z Q O W W W O C7 Q J ¢ 1 m p p H z O W K z z O d W Q y ~H Z Z a w C7 F d W Q z F>-, O � z z Q Q W LL U) p_' W U Z J Q x W W W r > W Z LL J Z W to W W O Z z Q W W p Z Q J K a rn W Z Z 7 U H Q Q K J LL J a U Q F. W z FW- U O QZQ >~ Q O O o o w W d Q O K x z z Q 0_ Z ¢ a p .1 Z W K P H ~ p (n y li C7 N z U) z O m U W W W W W (e F- z o Z ~ W z = z❑ O z X z g N (0 w ❑ ai w X cwi cwi z m U U Q >LU W 7 Q U Y LL LL O Y K ¢ U W Q _U Z y W p Q x W W p W K LL m Z m H Q Z O m W U X X m z y Q JQ m K W O O K z Q Q O C7 LL K O } O X W K w > > w K Q O K 0 H U U O Q Q w H W D U U U U' ❑ d of 0 V) of ❑❑ U 2 d U D U W W LL J K LL O Protect and Restore Fish and Wildlife Migration Corridors and Landscape Linkages; Where Necessary Create Or Modify Structures to Facilitate Fish and Wildlife Movement, such as Fish Ladders, Road Undercrossings, etc. Restore Natural Hydrograph and Sediment Transport in Local Watercourses Mitigation Banking Integrated Watershed GIS "Spatial Database" Identify and Collect Biological Resources Data for Comprehensive Database: (1) Ecosystem Function Analysis (2) Water Quantity and Quality Needs of Fish and Wildlife Provide for Long -Term Stewardship of Natural Resources, Especially Public Land: Staff, Funding, Organizational Structure (District or Conservancy) Monitoring and Enforcement Conservation Plans: (1) Evaluate Multiple Scale Habitat Needs of Aquatic and Riparian Dependent Species Active and Passive Recreation Areas Related to Water Resources Enhance Appropriate Public Access Updates and Modifications to General Plan Policies Watercourse Set -Back Ordinances or Policies lit I Riparian Corridor Buffers Floodplain Development Restrictions Sensitive Biological Areas Overlay Zones Flood Hazard Mapping Require Evaluation of Footprint Impacts in Newly Developing Areas Create Incentives (Tax Credits) for Landowners to Protect and Restore Habitats and Ecosystems on Their Property Agricultural Lands Stewardship Post -Fire Rehabilitation Landscape Guidelines for Fuel Modification/Defensible Space in New Development Urban Landscape Management Planning Open Space Acquisition/Purchase Page 7-40 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 8: Project Priorities and Implementation 8.1 Project Prioritization Process The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP will be implemented through specific studies and actions. In order to identify potential projects that facilitate IRWMP implementation (e.g., "Candidate Projects'), the RWMG held an open `ball for projects." Stakeholders and others were encouraged to submit projects during multiple stakeholder meetings, in email correspondence solicitations, and via the project website. Project proponents that had submitted projects as part of the 2008 IRWMP were given copies of their previous submittals and asked to revise the forms to reflect the current project status and to provide information relevant to the latest IRWM Guidelines (e.g., climate change information, cost -benefit information), and resubmit the project for consideration. To implement water management strategies identified in the IRWMP, Stakeholders identified 55 separate projects during this 2014 IRWMP update. The timeline for project solicitation was as follows: April 2012 Development of project ranking and review criteria by RWMG, development of project solicitation forms W 11 Review of project ranking criteria, introduction to data May 2012 needed for project submittal, announcement of "Call for Projects" during Stakeholder Meeting July 2012 Refresher on data needed for project submittal, reminder of "Call for Projects" during Stakeholder Meeting August 2012 Project submittals due IPresentations by Stakeholders on projects "ready to September 2012 proceed", review of opportunities to integrate projects, project refinement Presentations by Stakeholders on projects "ready to October 2012 proceed", review of opportunities to integrate projects, project refinement November 2012 Initial Project Ranking by RWMG Selection of IRWM Plan Projects December 2012 Review and refinement of project ranking by Stakeholders Final IRWMP project ranking Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 8-1 The RWMG, with input from Stakeholders, developed a process to prioritize projects, with the intent that highest -ranked projects be put forth in applications for funding. The prioritization of projects is based upon a detailed screening process. The process had five major steps: 1. Development of Project Ranking and Scoring Criteria 2. Call for Projects 3. Development and Refinement 4. Initial Project Ranking 5. Review and Finalization of Ranking by RWMG and Stakeholders All projects will be maintained on the IRWMP Project list, and the list will be updated on a regular basis as new projects are submitted and as projects are developed through time and re - prioritized. The RWMG can hold a "Call for Projects' and update the IRWMP Project list at anytime. Revision of the IRWMP Project list does not require that the entire IRWMP be revised and re -adopted, rather the updated project list can be amended to the existing plan upon simple majority vote by the RWMG. 8.1.1 Development of Project Ranking and Scoring Criteria The RWMG determined that it was important to develop a systematic process to review projects for inclusion in the IRWMP. To this end the RWMG prepared a project review structure based on a point system. Points are awarded based on (1) how well a project implements the IRWMP objectives and (2) to what extent the project is consistent with the 2012 IRWM Proposition 84 Guidelines. The project ranking and scoring criteria are shown in Table 8.1-1. The project review criteria were developed by the RWMG and reviewed and confirmed by the broader Stakeholder group. 8.1 .2 Call for Projects Once the project review process was established, the project solicitation forms were developed. The RWMG wanted to encourage broad participation and directed the preparation of two different forms, a long -form for projects "ready to proceed" and a short -form for more conceptual projects. The long forms were intended to capture all the information needed to rank and review a project; the short -forms were intended to collect the information necessary to determine if a project is consistent with the IRWMP. Forms were distributed at Stakeholder meetings, provided to the email list, and posted at the IRWMP website (www.scrwaterplan.org). Completed forms could be submitted to the IRWMP website, submitted via email to the IRWMP consultant, via email to Castaic Lake Water Agency, or provided in hardcopy during a Stakeholder meeting. Forms submitted during the 2012 "Call for Projects' are provided in Appendix E. Page 8-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 8.1-1 PROJECT RANKING AND REVIEW CRITERIA Criterion Possible Points Pass/Fail Criteria If project affects groundwater: (1) There must be a GWMP prepared an implemented in compliance with CWC §10753.7 or applicant consents to be subject to a GWMP or other program that meets the requirements of CWC §10753.7. (2) Or the proposal must include development of a GWMP within 1 year of grant submittal date. (3) Or the project conforms to requirements of an adjudication of water Project and Project rights in the subject groundwater. Applicant Eligible If no to all = Fail If project proponent or project beneficiary is Urban Water Supplier: (1) They must have completed and submitted an Urban Water Management Plan (2) And be incompliance with AB1420 (3) And meet water meter requirements (CWC §525) If no to any of the three = Fail 5 points if Project Proponent has adopted or will adopt the Integrated Plan 25 points for each item below`, up to 200points: Local Cost Share Confirmed Construction Drawings completed Permits completed Readiness to Proceed CEQA/NEPA completed Project benefits and costs defined at a level of detail that will allow cost- effectiveness analysis or benefit -cost analysis Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates complete Feasibility complete Conceptual Plans complete 'Points were awarded if item was not applicable. Addresses Multiple 15 points for each objective addressed, up to 100 points Objectives Integrates Multiple Resource Management 5 points for each applicable Resource Management Strategy, up to 100 points Strategies Benefits a Disadvantaged Community/Increases Yes = 50 points Disadvantaged No = 0 points Community Participation Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 8-3 Table 8.1-1 cont. Criterion Possible Points Addresses Critical Water Issues for Native Yes = 50 points p If Native American Tribal Community Qualifies as DAC, points American Tribal No = 0 points will be awarded per box above and this box will not apply. Communities Environmental Justice Concerns 50 points Project redresses inequitable distribution of environmental burdens Consistent with Local Yes = 100 points Land Use Plans No = 0 points Improves Interregional Yes = 100 points Coordination No = 0 points For any projects ranked in the top 15 with the same score the following points will be awarded: 10 pts Project with lower cost per acre-foot of water conserved Tie — Breaker Points 10 pts Project with the greatest reduction in electrical/energy use per acre-foot of water 10 pts Project with lower cost per new acre-foot of water supply 10 pts Project with lower cost per acreage of habitat improved 10 pts Project with lower cost for per unit of flood reduction 8.1.3 Development and Refinement Over the course of two workshops, those project proponents with projects 'ready to proceed" presented information on their projects and took questions from the Stakeholders and public. These workshops served to: (1) identify opportunities for collaboration between Stakeholders, (2) identify opportunities for integrating different implementation projects, and (3) utilize the collective group experience to refine and improve proposed projects. 8.1.4 Initial Project Ranking CANDIDATE PROJECTS A large number of projects were submitted by Stakeholders. During the project development and refinement process, two project proponents observed commonalties in their projects and decided to form a partnership and Based on information provided in the project solicitation forms as well as information gained at the project workshops, the RWMG scored each of the projects that had an associated long -form using the project ranking and review criteria (Table 8.1-1). The scoring criteria and resulting points for each of the 18 'long -form" projects was displayed in a matrix form. As a group the RWMG reviewed and refined project scores. Where necessary, project proponents were asked to provide additional information about their proposed project. Page 8-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 The RWMG also reviewed each of the 37 short -form projects for consistency with the IRWMP. The "short -form" projects are more conceptual and do not have the information necessary to be ranked. While these conceptual projects are not yet ready for implementation they offer ideas about how to further the objectives of the IRWMP and improve water management in the Region. For this reason the RWMG and Stakeholders want to capture these projects for further consideration. 8.1.5 Review and Finalization of Ranking by RWMG Stakeholders The initial project ranking developed by the RWMG was presented to the Stakeholders during the regular December 2012 Stakeholder meeting. The Stakeholders were given the opportunity to review scoring for each of the 18 long -form projects as well as the review of each of the 37 short -form projects for consistency with the IRWMP. 8.1.6 Selected Plan Projects Those Candidate Projects selected for inclusion in the IRWMP by the RWMG and Stakeholders become IRWM Plan Projects. The ranked IRWM Plan Projects are presented in Table 8.1-2; conceptual IRWM Plan Projects (not ranked) are presented in Table 8.1-3. It should be noted that Tables 8.1-2 and 8.1-3 represent a "snapshot' particular to this edition of the IRWMP. Over time, new Candidate Projects will be evaluated, added to the plan, and ranked according to the established criteria. The list of IRWM Plan Projects is intended to continually grow and change as projects are completed and new project concepts are added. The list of IRWM Plan Projects is provided in this IRWMP, was distributed to Stakeholders at the December 2012 Stakeholder meeting, and is available at the IRWMP website (www.scrwaterplan.org ). 8.2 Integration of Water Management Strategies CWC § 79501 states the following: The people of California find and declare that it is necessary and in the public interest to do all of the following... Establish and facilitate integrated regional water management systems and procedures to meet increasing water demands due to significant population growth that is straining local infrastructure and water supplies. Improve practices within watersheds to improve water quality, reduce pollution, capture additional storm water runoff, protect and manage groundwater better, and increase water use efficiency. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 8-5 The Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 8-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP• February 2014 TABLE 8.7-2 RANKEND IRWM PLAN PROJECTS Page S-7 Objectives � C/ a a 0 Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Coordinating/ Partnering Agency Estimated Cost va a o o �; Nsa a c c o o Z Rank c o v o 3 o LL E a' x $0.5M -$20M (Capital); Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Santa Clara River Conservancy; Angeles National ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ SC -1 City of Santa Clarita $25-$100k/yr over 15 ♦ t Removal Program (SCARP) Implementation Forest; Santa Clara Invasive Weeds Task Force years (0&M) SCVSD Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation $1.110/yr over 3 years SCVSD-1 City of Santa Clarita; County of Los Angeles Public Outreach Program District (O&M) Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant- $250,000-$500,000 NCWD-2 Newhall County Water District NA ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 3 Phase 1 (Capital) Agricultural Access/Bouquet Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District; Natural Resource Conservation District; Cooper $20,240- $52,852 AA/BCN-1 Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration, Control Canyon Network (Currently no Ecological Monitoring/Leathermann (Capital); $13,052/yr ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ a of Invasive Weeds eligible applicantSponsor BioConsulting, Inc.; LA County Fire; Angeles over 5 years (0&M) Agency)) National Forest July 2012 Santa Clarita Water Division Water $301,930-$2,520,469 SCWD-2 Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Water Use Santa Clarita Water Division Castaic Lake Water Agency; City of Santa Clarita (Capital); $62,370- $8M-$1410 (Capital); SCVSD-2 Saugus Water Reclamation Plan - Ultraviolet Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation Castaic Lake Water Agency $2K/yr for 20 years ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ti Light Disinfection Facility District (O&M) Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency LACWDp36; Newhall County Water District; $1M over 8 CLWA-3 Castaic Lake Water Agency Santa Clarita Water Division; Valencia Water Strategic Plan yeaarsrs (Cap Company $5107$910 (Capital); SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 1 and Los Angeles County Flood LADPW-9 NA $50K/yr over 50 years ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ a Spreading Grounds Control District (O&M) $3M -$5M (Capital); Newhall County Water District; City of Santa CLWA-8 Foothill Feeder Connection Castaic Lake Water Agency $50K/yr over 50 years ♦ s Clarita; LACWDJ136 (O&M) $4M -$6M (Capital); Biofiltration and Low Impact Development SC -5 City of Santa Clarita Los Angeles County; Castaic Lake Water Agency $200,000/yr over 15 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 10 Retrofits years (0&M) $25M -$35M (Capital); SC -6 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita NA ♦ ♦ ♦ 11 unknown O&M Page S-7 Table 8.7-2 cont. Objectives o > > uLX o v c Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Coordinating/ Partnering Agency Estimated Cost o :.' a, a c y z crank .~�, a 0 0 c' C $14,910,000-$16110 CLWA-7 Castaic Conduit Castaic Lake Water Agency NA (Capital); $5,000/yr ♦ 12 (O&M) $2,880,000-$3,2000000 CLWA-10 Distribution System - RV -2 Modification Castaic Lake Water Agency NA (Capital); $5,000/yr ♦ 13 (O&M) West Saugus Formation Groundwater CLWA-9 Castaic Lake Water Agency NA $6280675 ♦ ♦ 14 Resources Monitoring Project $20500,000 - $4,000,000 Santa Clara River — Sewer Trunk Line NCWD-1 Newhall County Water District NA (Capital); $30K/yr over ♦ ♦ ♦ 2s Relocation Phase II and III 50 years (O&M) Castaic Lake Water Agency; Santa Clarita Water 625000 (Capital); NCWD-3 Santa Clarita Valley Residential Turf Removal Newhall County Water District Division; Valencia Water Company; LA County $312,500/yr over 2 years ♦ ♦ is Program Waterworks #36 (O&M) Santa Clarita Valley Volatile Organic Carbon Newhall County Water District; City of Santa CLWA-11 Castaic Lake Water Agency $250,000-$5M (Capital) ♦ ♦ 17 Groundwater Investigation Clarita; LACWDp36 TABLE 8.1-3 CONCEPTUAL IRWM PLAN PROJECTS Objectives v L OI Coordinating/ Partnering -u d N r a$ a o Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a : s a a u a a Agency o 3 3° o° i a w v 0 wl�7 Q v o o `n j¢ 'u 2 t� w c a 2 ac Feasibility of Arundo Stem Cutting Agricultural AA/BCN-2 Ram (ASCR) Access/Bouquet Canyon NA <$100K Castaic Lake Water CLWA-1 Irrigation Efficiency Program NA $100K -$1M Agency CLWA-2 Water Use Efficiency Certification Castaic Lake Water NA $100K -$1M Agency Castaic Lake Water CLWA-4 ESFP Sludge Collection System NA $1M -$1M Agency Saugus Formation Replacement Castaic Lake Water CLWA-5 NA $1M -$10M Wells Agency CLWA-6 Santa Clarita Valley Drought Castaic Lake Water NA $1M -$1M Relief Wells Agency CLWA-12 Update Rio Vista WTP Education Castaic Lake Water NA <$100,000 Model Agency LACWD36-1 Advanced Meter Infrastructure LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 LACWD36-2 Cash for Grass Rebate Program LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 LACWD36-3 Landscape Irrigation Efficiency LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 Program LACWD36-4 Apam and Bayfield Water Main LACWD#36 NA $100K -$1M Hasley Canyon Road Water Main, LACWD36-5 Turnout Connection, and Pump LACWD#36 NA $1M -$10M Station Project Table 8.1-3 cont. Page 8-10 Objectives w L Q � Coordinating/ Partnering L Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° Agency o 3 3 CAC v 0 wU Ln U Ct LACWD36-6 Replacement of 8 -inch Water LACWD#36 NA $100K -$1M Main along Del Valle Road $3M -$6M Lower San Francisquito Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-1 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $2M -$5M Newhall Creek In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW 2 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $3M -$7M Placerita Creek Off -River Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-3 NA Spreading Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $4M -$7M Santa Clara In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-4 NA Grounds No. 1 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Page 8-10 Table 8.1-3 cont. Page 8-11 Objectives w L Q � Coordinating/ Partnering L Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° Agency o 3 3 CAC v 0 wU Ln U Ct $2M -$5M Santa Clara In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-5 NA Grounds No. 2 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $4M -$7M Santa Clara Off -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-6 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Santa Clara River Rubber Dam Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW 7 NA No.1 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $7M -$10M Santa Clara River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW 8 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-10 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 2 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-11 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 3 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Page 8-11 Table 8.1-3 cont. Page 8-12 Objectives w L Q � L Coordinating/ Partnering Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° Agency o 3 3 CAC v 0 wU Ln Ct U $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-12 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 4 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $3M -$6M Upper San Francisquito Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-13 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Recycled Water Onsite Newhall County Water NCWD-4 NA $100K -$1M Conversion District Advanced Metering Infrastructure Newhall County Water NCWD-5 NA $1M -$10M Program District Upper Santa Clara River SC -2 Arundo/Tamarisk Removal City of Santa Clarita Forest Service; Santa $1M -$10M Clara River Conservancy Program (SCARP) Implementation City of Santa Clarita Biofiltration SC -3 and Low Impact Development City of Santa Clarita NA $1M -$10M Retrofits SC -4 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita NA >$10M Santa Clarita SCEEC-1 Linking SCEEC to the Upper Santa Environmental NA <$100K Clara River IRWMP Education Consortium Page 8-12 Table 8.1-3 cont. Page 8-13 Objectives w L Q � Coordinating/ Partnering L Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o a ° Agency o o 3 3 v 0 wU CAC Ln U Ct Advanced Metering Infrastructure Santa Clarita Water SCWD-1 NA $1M -$10M Program Division GIS Development and Santa Clarita Water SCWD-3 NA $1M -$10M Implementation Division Regional High Resolution GIS Valencia Water VWC-1 NA $100K -$1M Mapping Company Valleywide Conservation Valencia Water VWC 2 NA <$100K Database Company Advanced Metering Infrastructure Valencia Water VWC-3 NA $1M -$10M Program Company Valencia Water VWC-4 CII Consevation Plan NA <$100K Company Page 8-13 The Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 8-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP• February 2014 Protect urban communities from drought, increase supplies of clean drinking water, reduce dependence on imported water, reduce pollution of rivers, lakes, streams, and coastal waters, and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Integrated regional water management planning meets this intent by encouraging broad evaluation of watershed related issues as well as identification of projects to address these needs. Integrated regional water management planning solicits the input and expertise of various groups, including water agencies, flood control agencies, local planning entities, conservancies, sanitation districts, business organizations, open space and recreation interests, and habitat preservation interests. One of the benefits of this planning process is that it brings together this broad array of groups into a forum to discuss and better understand shared needs and opportunities. This format assures that a full range of Issues and needs are considered. BENEFITS OF PLAN IMPLEMENTATION It also ensures that an extensive range of expertise is used to evaluate projects and • Regional planning and communication identify means to improve and integrate projects. • Creation of partnerships Examples of regional integration took place in the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP process. Efficiency (shared data and know-how) During the stakeholder meetings, all entities • Consideration of all watershed components that submitted Candidate Projects for inclusion in the IRWMP were asked to give presentations 0 Sharing of potential impacts and benefits on their proposals. These presentations and subsequent discussions allowed the group to become familiar with the various Candidate Projects. This information assisted with project sorting, but also led to suggestions for project improvement and led to integration of two Candidate Projects. As part of the initial "Call for Projects," two separate stakeholders proposed projects that focused on removal of the non- native plant Arundo donax. Following Stakeholder discussions on these various proposals, entities decided to join and collaborate rather than duplicate effort and are now jointly sponsoring a single, more regional project for Arundo removal. 8.3 Benefits of Plan Implementation 8.3.1 Benefits of Plan Implementation The primary benefit of the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP is development of a framework supportive of collaborative regional planning. This IRWMP allows for Stakeholders in the community to create a vision for watershed planning in the Region, and identify appropriate means to achieve this vision. Creation of the IRWMP has facilitated partnerships between local, State, and Federal entities. For example, several IRWM Plan Projects are being jointly sponsored by multiple local entities. The IRWMP process fosters coordination, collaboration, and communication among entities in the Region and has resulted in greater efficiencies (e.g., efforts are not duplicated, information is shared), will enhance public services, and will facilitate public support for watershed projects. As part of preparing this IRWMP, the regional agencies have provided input as to their ongoing Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 8-15 research and data collection projects. Knowledge of these research and data collection projects assists other agencies from duplicating efforts. Knowledge of each other's efforts has allowed Stakeholders to better coordinate data (developing consistent formats and consistent means of examining data). This "pooled" data results in a larger and more significant data set. For example, CLWA, SCWD, LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, and VWC annually coordinate preparation of a summary of water supplies and demands. In addition, during IRWMP preparation many of the agencies and non-profit groups shared the experience gained in implementing past projects — passing their know-how to others. For example, the City of Santa Clarita provided details related to their experience with Arundo removal, including information on successful removal techniques and the tradeoffs with various approaches. VWC provided information on their experience with water softening technologies. Efficiencies have also been achieved by cooperating on regional efforts rather than separate localized efforts. A regional planning effort ensures that all potential components of watershed planning are considered rather than one particular area or project type dominating. Regional planning improves the likelihood that benefits and impacts are shared instead of one group or area reaping the benefits while another bears the impacts. Regional planning efforts also increase the likelihood that projects that implement one particular objective (e.g., water supply) are considerate of other objectives (e.g., flood control or habitat preservation). As part of project integration, projects can be refined so that they achieve multiple objectives. The IRWMP will allow otherwise separate agencies to speak as a region and to improve policies, regulations and laws related to water demand, water supply, water quality, operational efficiency, and resource stewardship. The range of projects identified by this IRWMP meet all objectives identified by the Stakeholders: • Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. • Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. • Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and maintain water quality standards. • Promote resource stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health Improve flood management Preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation • Reduce flood damage and/or the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. • Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change. • Promote project and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Page 8-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Full implementation of this IRWMP will result in multiple benefits associated with these objectives. In addition, the IRWMP will provide for the following specific benefits through implementation of these projects: Projects to Reduce Potable Water Demand. IRWM Plan Projects include preparation of a Valley -wide conservation strategic plan and technical support to improve water use efficiency in large landscape areas. More efficient water use will result in less demand on imported water supplies from the Delta, less energy usage for treatment and delivery of water, and reduced demand for new or expanded water supply infrastructure. In addition, improved outdoor irrigation reduces the flows of poor quality urban run-off. Water Supply Projects. The majority of IRWM Plan Projects submitted by Stakeholders relate to water supply, particularly stormwater capture, groundwater recharge, and development of recycled water supplies. Stormwater capture and subsequent groundwater recharge provides for increased use of local supplies rather than imported water. These projects assist in maintaining the long-term sustainability of the groundwater supply. Depending on project specifics, these projects can also serve to decrease peak flood flows and provide opportunities for habitat improvement and restoration. Recycled water supplies, likewise, decrease demand for imported water. Recycled water can offset potable water demand, recharge groundwater, and be used to create and restore wetland areas. Water Quality Improvement Projects. IRWM Plan Projects include efforts to reduce use of water softeners in the Region, removal of septic systems, and installation of improved water treatment technologies. The primary benefit from implementing some of these water quality projects would be the reduced potential for human exposure to potentially harmful substances. These projects would also improve the efficiency of both water and wastewater treatment processes. Besides improving drinking water, these projects could potentially benefit other types of water users, such as agricultural water users and water dependent wildlife habitat. Resource Stewardship Projects. IRWM Plan Projects include invasive species removal programs. Projects that remove trash and non-native species, such as Preservation of Ecosystem Health is an Arundo, improve overall habitat quality. IRWMP objective These projects also reduce flooding by removing obstructions in the river that can result in significant erosion and damage to public facilities. Arundo removal also increases water supply as this plant utilizes large quantities of surface and groundwater. • Flood ing/Hvdromodification Projects. Several projects focus on reducing flood damage and improving stormwater management. These include invasive species removal projects, low impact development projects, and on- and off -stream groundwater recharge projects. These activities will help avoid damage to property from floods, Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 8-17 reduce impervious surfaces and associated runoff, and reduce the amount of polluted runoff which could enter waterways. 8.3.2 Plan Beneficiaries The potential beneficiaries of the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP are residents of the Region, water agencies, local, State and Federal agencies, businesses, wildlife and associated habitats, and others within the jurisdictions served by IRWMP projects. These beneficiaries are represented by members of the RWMG and the larger Stakeholder group. Potential benefits and impacts from Plan implementation are summarized in Table 8.3-1. 8.3.3 Interregional Benefits The Region is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and southeast, the Santa Susana Mountains to the southwest, and the Liebre Mountains and Transverse Ranges to the northeast and northwest. Therefore, projects implemented in the Region are unlikely to directly affect IRWMP efforts in the neighboring Antelope Valley or greater Los Angeles areas. However, the Region does have a hydrologic connection to the portion of the Santa Clara River in Ventura County. It is likely that projects to enhance and protect the watershed may have downstream benefits. 8.4 Impacts of Plan Implementation Negative impacts that may be associated with the Plan Projects include (1) short-term, site- specific impacts related to site grading and construction, and (2) long-term impacts associated with project operation. For the purposes of this IRWMP, impacts are discussed at a screening level below. Project -specific and/or programmatic environmental compliance processes (consistent with CEQA and, if applicable, the National Environmental Policy Act) will evaluate the significance of the impacts. Under CEQA, impacts determined to be significant must be mitigated to a level of non -significance (unless the lead agency makes findings of overriding consideration). The IRWMP itself does not lead to the implementation of any specific project. It has been determined that the IRWMP itself is exempt from CEQA. The following provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines apply: • Statutory Exemption (15262 for Feasibility and Planning Studies) • Categorical Exemption (15306 -Information Collection) CEQA review of specific projects will provide an evaluation of impacts in much greater detail than discussed below: • Aesthetics. Projects that include construction activities and new infrastructure have the potential to affect aesthetics. However, it is likely that projects would be constructed in areas that are already disturbed, or would include mitigation measures that would return disturbed areas to their pre -construction conditions. Page 8-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 8.3-1 POTENTIAL BENEFITS AND IMPACTS FROM PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 8-19 Within IRWM Region Inter -Regional Potential Benefits Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Potential Impacts • Less demand for imported Water conservation projects Reduced demand for potable Development of recycled water are unlikely to result in water would reduce water to offset potable ground disturbance or other demands for Sacramento- demand could introduce salts • Less energy usage for related impacts. San Joaquin Delta water and to the lower Santa Clara treatment and delivery of this would have benefits River water Development of recycled outside of the Upper Santa Projects to Reduce •Avoided need to expand water could have temporary impacts to aesthetics, air Clara River Region 9 Potable Water Demand water supply infrastructure quality, biological resources, • Reduced urban runoff cultural resources, noise and soils. Use of recycled water • Benefits extend to broad could increase salinity in Region, including any groundwater and the Santa disadvantage communities Clara River. No environmental justice or DAC impacts anticipated • Increased supply Development of water supply Reduced demand for Development of recycled projects could result in imported water, resulting water to offset potable • Enhanced supply reliability ground disturbance and have from development of local demand could introduce salts • Reduced dependence on temporary impacts to supplies, would reduce to the lower Santa Clara imported water aesthetics, air quality, demands for Sacramento- River biological resources, cultural San Joaquin Delta water and Projects to Increase • Potential wetland resources, noise, soils, and this would have benefits Water Supply restoration transportation systems. Use outside of the Upper Santa of recycled water could Clara River Region • Improved groundwater increase salinity in recharge groundwater and the Santa • Benefits extend to broad Clara River. Region, including any No environmental justice or disadvantaged communities DAC impacts anticipated Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 8-19 Table 8.3-1 cont. Page 8-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP• February 2014 Within IRWM Region Inter -Regional Potential Benefits Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Potential Impacts . Reduced human Projects to improve water Improved water quality in the No inter -regional impacts exposure to pollutants quality that involve Upper Santa Clara River anticipated construction could result in would also benefit the Lower . Improved efficiency of temporary impacts to Santa Clara River and water and wastewater aesthetics, air quality, associated groundwater treatment biological resources, cultural basins Projects to Improve Water . Preservation of aquatic resources, noise, soils, and transportation systems. Quality habitat . Improvement water- No environmental justice, or based recreation DAC, or tribal community impacts anticipated . Benefits extend to broad Region, including any disadvantaged communities . Improved habitat quality Projects to remove invasive Removal of invasive species No inter -regional impacts species could have in the Upper Santa Clara anticipated . Reduced erosion temporary negative impacts River would reduce the to aesthetics, biological transport and deposition of . Reduced fire risk resources, cultural invasive species to the Projects to Promote • Improved water supply resources, and soils Lower Santa Clara river. Resource Stewardship . Improved water quality No environmental justice, or . Benefits extend to broad DAC, or tribal community Region, including any impacts anticipated disadvantaged community Page 8-20 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP• February 2014 Table 8.3-1 cont. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 8-21 Within IRWM Region Inter -Regional Potential Benefits Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Potential Impacts • Reduced erosion Flood reduction projects Flood reduction projects in Depending on the nature of could result in ground the Upper Santa Clara River the flood reduction project, • Reduced flood damages disturbance and have could benefit the Lower flood -related impacts could • Improved groundwater temporary impacts to Santa Clara River through: be increased downstream. recharge aesthetics, air quality, .Reduced erosion Flooding/ biological resources, cultural • Benefits extend to broad resources, noise, soils, and • Reduced flood Hydromodification Region, including any transportation systems damages Projects disadvantaged community Depending location on the locon of • Improved groundwater the flood -related project, p recharge there could be inequitable distribution of impacts affecting disadvantaged or minority communities. Actions to Adapt to Climate Change Actions to incorporate climate change will occur in conjunction with other types of projects described above. Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Actions to incorporate climate change will occur in conjunction with other types of projects described above. Emissions Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 8-21 • Air Quality. Short-term air quality impacts could result from construction of Plan Projects. However, through the CEQA process potential air emissions would be minimized through application of BMPs identified by the air quality management district or mitigation measures. • Biological Resources. Short-term biological impacts could result from construction activities as well as non-native plant removal. Most of these negative effects would be avoided or minimized through mitigation efforts related to CEQA. Additionally, the IRWMP includes preservation of ecosystem health as one of its objectives. Thus, if implemented, Plan Projects could result in overall benefits to biological resources. • Cultural Resources. Impacts to cultural resources (historical, archeological, and paleontological resources) could result from construction activities from Plan Projects. As part of the CEQA process it will be necessary to develop mitigation measures to avoid or minimize these potential impacts. • Geology and Soils. Plan Projects with the potential to impact geologic resources would be required to undergo geological feasibility studies which would specify the appropriate engineering standards the contractor would have to comply with during construction. Compliance with these standards would mitigate project site geological and soil impacts. • Hydrology and Water Quality. It is anticipated that impacts to hydrology and water quality would be generally beneficial because in the long-term Plan Projects are intended to improve water supply reliability and water quality. For short-term erosion or sedimentation, project -specific BMPs would be identified as part of the NPDES permitting process. A number of Plan Projects proposed in this IRWMP are groundwater recharge projects using either stormwater or recycled water. Because recycled water generally contains more salts than other water sources in the Region, recharge with recycled water could increase the salinity of the local groundwater. There is also concern that groundwater recharge with stormwater and recycled water will result in decreased flow in the Santa Clara River. These issues merit particular analysis in project specific CEQA documentation. Land Use and Planning. The Plan Projects were evaluated as to their compatibility with other planning documents for the Region, including local and regional General Plans. Therefore, no significant land use changes or inconsistencies with policies are anticipated. • Noise. Noise impacts could result from construction activities from some of the proposed projects. However, through the CEQA process most of these activities would be minimized through mitigation efforts and no long-term noise impacts are expected. • Population and Housing. No adverse impacts to population and housing are anticipated. IRWMP implementation would help to meet the water demands of the existing and anticipated future population. Page 8-22 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 • Public Services and Utilities. Many of the IRWM Plan Projects are intended to enhance water supply, water quality, and improve storm water management and flood control. These types of projects would benefit the utilities and service systems in the Region. • Recreation. One of the objectives of the IRWMP is to preserve and enhance water - dependent recreation. Therefore, impacts to recreation from IRWMP implementation are likely to be beneficial. Transportation and Circulation. Transportation and circulation could be temporarily impacted during construction of some of the Plan Projects. Construction can temporarily increase traffic congestion due to transportation of equipment and trips by workers. Construction of projects located near roadways can result in temporary lane closures and detours. However, through the CEQA process most of these activities would be avoided or minimized and no long-term transportation and circulation impacts are expected. 8.5 Institutional Structure for Plan Implementation The RWMG governance structure and approach used to -date have been successful in adopting the IRWMPand communicating with stakeholders about progress made in developing and implementing the IRWMP goals. After the 2008 IRWMP adoption, the RWMG formed a governance subcommittee based on the need to develop a more formal agreement to facilitate the sustained development of regional water management and the IRWM process, both now and beyond the state grant IRWM funding programs. The Subcommittee, comprised initially of a subset of the RWMG group, identified and prioritized objectives for the re-established governance structure, as well as recommended roles and responsibilities for all participants in the IRWMP process, as discussed below. The Governance Subcommittee first identified the purposes that a governance structure would be designed to fulfill for the benefit of IRWMP implementation, and subsequently identified which group (e.g., RWMG, Stakeholders, etc.) would best govern each of those efforts: • Provide focused leadership for implementing and updating the IRWMP (RWMG in lead, with input from Stakeholders). • Track and report progress in meeting IRWMP goals (RWMG and Stakeholders). • Identify potential sources of outside funding and assist local entities to compete for those funds (RWMG, Stakeholders, and other sources of information). • Provide leadership to focus cooperation for broad regional planning and implementation efforts such as (RWMG with input from Stakeholders): regional water recycling regional water quality preservation regional water conservation programs Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 8-23 regional data and information management • Select a contracting agency for any State or Federal grant funds obtained for implementation of the IRWMP (RWMG to select Grantee from among its members in accordance with applicable grant requirements, once the RWMG is formalized). The Governance Subcommittee next identified the following factors that must be provided within a new governance structure to successfully accomplish these purposes and serve the recommended roles: • Staff dedicated to provide leadership in the following areas: - Initiate actions - Collaborate with others - Call public/stakeholder meetings, set agendas, and lead meetings - Prepare background documents for IRWMP updates - Identify, select, and apply for appropriate funding opportunities - Oversee update of the IRWMP • Capability to gather, compile and manage data and information. • Ability to execute and manage contracts. • Ability to receive and process financial transactions and meet Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. • Expertise to make a valuable contribution of services to IRWMP preparation. • Ability to obtain funds to contribute to IRWMP preparation. • Ability and willingness to serve as a point of contact for IRWMP related information. • Willingness to support process facilitation and outreach. 5.1 Implementing Plan Activities The expectation is that the same stakeholder process that guided the selection of water management strategies applicable to the Region, regional goals and objectives, a project prioritization framework, and Disadvantaged Community Outreach, will be used to implement the Plan. The roles and responsibilities of the various participants envisioned to carry out the broad purposes of the governance structure have been described in Section 1. In addition to the RWMG, another subset of the Stakeholder Group critical for Plan implementation is the local project sponsors, as described below. Page 8-24 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 8.5.1.1 Local Project Sponsors' Roles and Responsibilities Local Project Sponsors are those IRWMP Stakeholder agencies or entities having IRWM Plan Projects that are included in the IRWMP database. Information on each of the IRWM Plan Projects and a summary list of all IRWM Plan Projects is maintained at www.scrwaterplan.org ("Projects' tab). The database is intended to be a comprehensive list of projects that, when completed, will aid in advancing the IRWMP's regional objectives. It is envisioned that the Local Project Sponsors will have the following roles and responsibilities: 1. Provide project -specific information for the database that may aid in advancing the IRWMP's regional objectives. 2. Seek opportunities to integrate, where possible and practical, IRWM Plan Projects in the database in order to most -efficiently achieve the regional objectives. This process may be facilitated at Stakeholder meetings, but Local Project Sponsors are also encouraged to seek these opportunities outside of that forum. 3. Provide updated project -specific information for the database as necessary to reflect major project milestones (e.g., CEQA completion, 100% design, construction underway, construction complete, and project completion). Although this particular role is not a requirement, it is in the best interest of the Local Project Sponsors to keep the database current, so the most updated information is used to evaluate projects using the project prioritization framework as outside funding sources become available. 4. Participate in Stakeholder meetings to educate others about the Local Project Sponsor's project(s) in the database. This happens naturally as a result of casual collaboration with other Local Project Sponsors but may also be in the form of presentations made at Stakeholder meetings. 5. Identify a point person for each project who will provide in a timely manner to the RWMG and/or consultant, requested information for projects selected for inclusion in a grant application. 6. Identify a point person for each project who will provide in a timely manner to the Grantee and/or consultant, requested information for projects selected for funding through a funding agency. 7. Comply with grant requirements, as identified by the funding agency, in order to qualify for grant funding. 8.5.1.2 IRWMP Term and Plan Revisions The first IRWMP was adopted in July 2008. The stated goal of the RWMG is to update and re- adopt the plan a minimum of every five years, sooner if one of the following events triggers re - adoption within 1 year of the event, prior to the scheduled five-year interval: • Significant change in conditions as defined by the RWMG with input from the Stakeholders. • Achievement of an objective which necessitates setting a revised or replacement regional objective. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 8-25 • The need, as determined by the RWMG with Stakeholder input, to set new regional objectives. 8.5.1.3 IRWMP Adoption The decision of which entities should appropriately adopt the IRWMP is directly related to the intent of the IRWMP's governance structure. The RWMG's membership is intended to ensure balanced representation across the IRWMP's three main regional objectives (i.e., water supply, water quality, and resources stewardship), as well as geographic diversity across the Region. Given this balanced representation, it is therefore appropriate that all the RWMG entities with governing bodies adopt the IRWMP. Additionally, given the benefits to all Stakeholders in the Region of achieving the regional objectives set forth in this IRWMP, it is further appropriate that any stakeholder (including Local Project Sponsors) with an interest in this Region's watershed issues also be encouraged adopt the IRWMP, provide a resolution in support of the IRWMP or provide a letter in support of the IRWMP, whichever is appropriate based on the type of entity. Because the IRWMP is envisioned to "live through time' regardless of the makeup or turnover of the RWMG, a change in RWMG membership would not trigger re -adoption of the IRWMP. Additionally, modifying or updating the IRWMP in order to qualify for funding through a funding agency would not automatically trigger re -adoption of the IRWMP. Ongoing review of plan performance and an adaptive management process will allow the IRWMP to evolve in response to changing conditions and ensure that the IRWMP and associated objectives are current. Page 8-26 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 9: Finance Plan 9.1 Potential Funding Options Initial funding for IRWMP preparation was provided by the RWMG through an MOU; IRWMP implementation will require additional funding. There are opportunities for grant funding that are available to the Stakeholders in the Region and that are well suited to many Plan Projects. Many of these grant opportunities require that the Local Project Sponsor provide matching funds ('local match") and funds for operations and maintenance once a project or program is constructed. The source of local match and funds for operations and maintenance may include: water and wastewater service charge revenues/connection fees; capital improvement funds; and general funds from local Cities, County departments, private organizations, member dues, etc. Local taxpayers may also fund these projects through rate increases, bond measures, and tax increases. This section identifies various funding sources and their associated requirements and guidelines to assist with implementation of Plan Projects. Sections 9.2 through 9.4 present information on local, state, and federal funding sources, while Section 9.5 focuses on direct funding options for Plan Projects. Table 9.1-1 provides a summary of funding opportunities broken into local, state, and federal funding sources and provides contact information for each funding program. Due to the length of Table 9.1-1 it is provided at the end of this section. Table 9.1-2 below documents near-term funding for the IRWMP. 9.2 Local In the past, local entities have planned, implemented, and funded construction and operation of water -related projects. These funds may be available to fund Plan Projects or to provide the local match. 9.2.1 Capital Improvements Program Funding (Revenue Bonds, Certificates of Participation) Government entities (e.g., water districts, counties and cities) can raise funds by issuing municipal bonds or certificates of participation. Bonds and certificates of participation are governed by an extensive system of laws and regulations. Under these systems, investors provide immediate funding for the promise of later repayment. Generally, bonds and certificates of participation are used for capital improvement projects. In the case of a water district, bonds and certificates are secured by revenues from the water system and by property taxes received by the agency. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-1 TABLE 9.1-2 IRWMP FINANCING IRWMP Planning Efforts $62,000 O&M 0&M Approximate Funding Source and Funding Finance Finance Activity Description Total Cost %Total Cost Certainty/Longevity Source Certainty IRWMP Planning Efforts $62,000 RWMG-25% Secure through Fall NA NA Planning Grant -75% 2013 Special Studies $103,000 RWMG— 25% Secure through Fall NA NA Climate Chane Planning Grant -75% 2013 Special Studies $165,000 RWMG— 25% Secure through Fall NA NA Salt and Nutrient Planning Grant— 75% 2013 Management Plan Special Studies $707,000 RWMG— 25% In draft Planning Grant NA NA Recycled Water Masterplan Planning Grant— 75% Round 2 funding Update and CEQA Document recommendation. Special Studies $240,400 RWMG — 25% In draft Planning Grant NA NA Santa Clarita Valley Water Planning Grant — 75% Round 2 funding Use Efficiency Plan Update recommendation. Implementation Project— $1,958,000 Retail Agencies, CLWA— Grant funds included in NA NA Santa Clarita Valley Water 50% Proposition M grant Use Efficiency Programs Implementation grant— award, local funds 50% contributed by project sponsors Implementation Project— $240,000 Implementation Grant— Grant funds included in NCWD Secured Removal of Sewer Trunk Line 100% Proposition a4 grant operation by NCWD Phase 1 award budget rates Southern End Recycled $11,053,500 Implementation Grant— Grant funds included in CLWA Secured Water Phase 2C 41% Proposition M grant operation by CLWA CLWA— 59% award, local funds in budget, rates CIP budget recycled water sales Santa Clara River and San $726,449 Implementation Grant — Grant funds included in NA NA Francisquito Creek Awndo 92% Proposition M grant and Tamarisk Removal City of Santa Clarita — 8% award, local funds in CIP budget 9.2.2 Property Tax Assessment (Assessed Valuation) Property taxes are a large source of revenue for water -related projects and agencies in the Region. The Los Angeles County Tax Assessor collects the charges on behalf of various districts. This funding is used for general expenditures, capital improvements, and to service bond and certificate debt. While this is a large and important source of funding for local agencies, in some cases, the State of California can divert these funds. For the 2012/2013 fiscal year, it is not anticipated that the State will divert property tax revenue away from CLWA. However, future diversions of property tax revenues may hinder the ability to fund water -related projects, so that CLWA continues to monitor the State's activities (CLWA 2012). 9.2.3 User Fees For water agencies, funding for operation and maintenance of water -related projects often comes from user fees, which are charges for water delivered to a home or charges for wholesale water supplies. In addition to these fees, many water agencies also charge "hook - Page 9-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 up" or "connection" fees — charges for providing facilities to provide water services to a new development. These fees are also known as "facility capacity fees." Facility capacity fee revenue is difficult to forecast due to the unpredictable timing of development activity. Development activity depends on real estate demands, the regional economy, and land use planning activity. Starting in 1981, a connection fee program was implemented across the sanitation districts throughout Los Angeles County. These fees are imposed on all new users of the sewerage system, as well as existing users who expand their wastewater discharge and apply to residential, commercial and industrial dischargers. Revenue from this program provides funds for capital expenditures necessary to accommodate additional wastewater contributions within the sewer system. 9.2.4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Fee Property owners in the City of Santa Clarita currently pay a yearly fee to fund the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program. Fees are based on the estimated amount of stormwater runoff a property generates, based on the impervious surface area. Fees are used to fund activities, such as the maintenance, improvement and replacement of the City's storm drainage facilities, monitoring, inspection and enforcement, as well as other requirements set forth in the NPDES permit. This fee is anticipated to bring in between $2.8 to $2.9 million a year. 9.2.5 Clean Water Fee As part of Los Angeles County Flood District's Water Quality Improvement Program and the Clean Water, Clean Beaches Measure, the County is proposing to establish a Clean Water Fee, also known as a Water Quality Fee, on all properties within the County. Fees will be based on the amount of stormwater runoff generated by a property. Revenue collected from this fee would fund local and regional projects to protect water quality with a focus on stormwater pollution prevention and stormwater capture in Los Angeles County. Funds collected within the Santa Clara River watershed would be specifically used for projects within that watershed. An initial public hearing on this fee will be held on January 15, 2013. 9.3 State r Potential funding for IRWMP implementation may be available through various State programs, including Propositions 84, 1 E, and 50. The discussion below and Table 9.1-1 provide information on State funding opportunities. Potential State Funding Sources for IRWMP Implementation: • Proposition 84 • Proposition 1E • Proposition 50 i Other (Pending Legislation, State 9.3.1 Proposition 84 Revolving Fund) The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Act of 2006 (Public Resources Code § 75001, et seq.), was passed by California voters in the November 2006 general election. Proposition 84 will be implemented by DPH, Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-3 DWR, and the SWRCB. Specific grant funding programs available under Proposition 84 are highlighted below: 9.3.1.1 Integrated Regional Water Management Planning DWR offers grants for projects that assist local public agencies to meet the long-term water needs of the State including the delivery of safe drinking water and the protection of water quality and the environment. Proposition 84 allocated $1 billion to integrated regional water management planning and implementation grants; of this amount, $215 million is earmarked for the Los Angeles -Ventura area. As part of Proposition 84 DWR has offered two different IRWMP related grants. One grant program has focused on planning activities (e.g., development of an IRWMP, special studies such as climate change and salt and nutrient management plans); one grant program has focused on implementation of activities (e.g., construction projects, water conservation projects, habitat restoration projects). Under Proposition 84 there have been two different planning grant opportunities (referred to as Round 1 and Round 2). Planning Grant Round 1 awards occurred in February 2011. Planning Grant Round 2 awards were announced in November 2012. At the current time no additional planning grants rounds are proposed. Three rounds of implementation grants are anticipated. Round 1 implementation grant awards were made in May 2011. Round 2 implementation grant applications were due in March 2013 with awards anticipated sometime later that year. The third, and probable last round of implementation grants is anticipated in 2014. Eligible implementation grant projects must be part of integrated regional water management plans. Under current Guidelines, projects eligible for integrated regional water management plan funding include: • Programs for water supply reliability, water conservation, and water use efficiency • Storm water capture, storage, treatment, and management • Removal of invasive non-native plants, the creation and enhancement of wetlands, and the acquisition, protection, and restoration of open space and watershed lands • Non -point source pollution reduction, management, and monitoring • Groundwater recharge and management projects • Contaminant and salt removal through reclamation, desalting, and other treatment technologies • Water banking, water exchange, water reclamation, and improvement of water quality • Planning and implementation of multipurpose flood control programs that: protect property; improve water quality, storm water capture and percolation; and protect or improve wildlife habitat • Watershed management planning and implementation • Demonstration projects to develop new drinking water treatment and distribution methods Page 9-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Pending legislation may alter the types of projects eligible for funding as part of an integrated regional water management plan. After awards of the first round of planning and implementation grants, the remaining balance for the Los Angeles -Ventura area is approximately $145 million (or 68 percent of the initial bond allocation). 9.3.1.2 Department of Water Resources — Local Groundwater Assistance Program The Local Groundwater Management Assistance Act of 2000 (CWC § 10795 et seq., Assembly Bill 303) was enacted to provide grants to local public agencies to conduct groundwater studies or to carry out groundwater monitoring and management activities. Priority for grant funding is given to local public agencies that have adopted a groundwater management plan and demonstrate collaboration with other agencies in the management of the affected groundwater basin. Eligible applicants are public agencies with groundwater management authority. Grants up to $250,000 were available for the last solicitation in 2012, after which Program funds ran out. While funding could possibly become available in the future, DWR currently has no immediate plans for another proposal solicitation round. This program is funded with Proposition 84, Chapter 2 funds. 9.3.1.3 Department of Public Health - Emergency and Urgent Water Protection DPH offers grants for projects that address emergency and urgent situations related to drinking water supplies. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, provision of alternate water supplies, improvements to existing water systems to avoid contamination, establishment of new connections, and purchase and installation of water treatment equipment. The program is open to local water suppliers. 9.3.1.4 State Water Resources Control Board — Storm Water Grant Program The SWRCB provides grant funds for projects designed to reduce and prevent storm water contamination of rivers, lakes, and streams. The initial budget was $90 million, with $32 million remaining for Round 2 implementation grants. Up to $3 million per project is available. These grants are available to local public agencies. Preference is given to projects consistent with an integrated regional water management plan and projects that promote long-term water quality. 9.3.1.5 Local Levee Assistance Program DWR provides grants for projects that evaluate levees or other flood control structures (not part of the State Plan of Flood Control) through geotechnical studies and for the design, repair and improvement of damaged levees or other unstable flood control structures. These grants are available to local public agencies. Up to $2 million are available per levee evaluation project and up to $5 million are available per urgent repair project. 9.3.1.6 Flood Protection Corridor Program DWR awards grant funds to public agencies and non-profit organizations for flood risk reduction projects in floodplains through primarily non-structural flood management methods (e.g., detention basins, levee removal). All projects must include wildlife habitat enhancement and/or agricultural land preservation. The maximum grant amount per eligible project is $5 million. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-5 9.3.1.7 Flood Control Subventions Program DWR provides financial assistance to local agencies implementing federally authorized flood control projects and watershed protection flood prevention projects authorized by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. The percentage of the state cost share for reimbursable costs ranges from 50 to 70 percent. 9.3.1.8 Urban Streams Restoration Program DWR awards grant funds to public agencies and non-profit organizations to help local communities reduce urban flooding and erosion, restore environmental values and promote community stewardship of urban streams. Examples include creek cleanups, eradication of exotic or invasive plants, bioengineering bank stabilization projects, acquisition of parcels critical for flood management and coordination of community involvement in projects. Up to $1 million is available per project. 9.3.2 Proposition 1 E Proposition 1 E, the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Protection Bond Act, encourages new investments for flood protection and stormwater management programs. 9.3.2.1 Stormwater Flood Management Program Within the Stormwater Flood Management Program, $30 million in grants are available from DWR to local entities for stormwater runoff projects. These projects must be outside of the State Plan of Flood Control and be consistent with an integrated regional water management plan. In addition, local match must be at least 50 percent of project costs. Preference is given to projects that use stormwater management to improve groundwater supplies, improve water quality, and to restore ecosystems. 9.3.3 Proposition 50 The Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002, Water Code §79500, et seq., was passed by California voters in the November 2002 general election. Proposition 50 authorized $3,440,000,000 in general obligation bonds, to be repaid from the State's General Fund, to fund a variety of water projects including: specified CALFED Bay -Delta Program projects including urban and agricultural water use efficiency projects; grants and loans to reduce Colorado River water use; purchasing, protecting and restoring coastal wetlands near urban areas; competitive grants for water management and water quality improvement projects; development of river parkways; improved security for state, local and regional water systems; and grants for desalination and drinking water disinfecting projects. Many grant programs funded by Proposition 50 have concluded, but those funding programs still accepting applications are summarized below. 9.3.3.1 Department of Water Resources —Water Use Efficiency Grants This grant program is intended to fund agricultural and urban water use efficiency projects. The program focuses on funding projects that are not locally cost effective, and that provide water savings or in -stream flows that are beneficial to the Bay -Delta or the rest of the State. Page 9-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Consideration is also given to projects that address water quality and energy efficiency. Specific types of projects that can be funded include: water use efficiency implementation projects providing benefits to the State; research and development projects; feasibility studies, pilot or demonstration projects; training, education or public outreach programs; and technical assistance programs related to water use efficiency. Cities, counties, joint power authorities, public water districts, tribes, non-profit organizations (including watershed management groups), other political subdivisions of the State, regulated investor-owned utilities, incorporated mutual water companies, universities and colleges, and State and Federal agencies are eligible applicants. Grants to urban water suppliers are conditioned on implementation of the Demand Management Measures described in CWC §10631. Funding has been made available through SB 23, Proposition 13 and Proposition 50. Since inception of the Program in 2001 through 2012, $132.5 million has been allocated to fund water use efficiency grants. Currently, upcoming funding opportunities are only applicable to agricultural water use efficiency projects and there are no planned opportunities for urban water use efficiency at this time. 9.3.3.2 Department of Water Resources — Contaminant Removal DWR (previously funded through DPH) provides funds for contaminant treatment or removal technology pilot and demonstration studies for specific categories of contaminants including petroleum, perchlorate, heavy metals, pesticides, and herbicides. Grants are a minimum of $50,000, up to a maximum of $5,000,000. A 50 percent match is required, but this requirement is waived in part or in full for Disadvantaged Communities and small water systems. Public water systems and public entities are eligible for this funding program. 9.3.3.3 Department of Water Resources — UV and Ozone Disinfection Grants to support projects using ultraviolet or ozone for disinfection of drinking water are also offered by DWR (previously funded through DPH). A funded project must address a drinking water compliance violation, surface water treatment requirements, or other mandatory disinfection requirement. Public water systems are eligible for this funding program. 9.3.4 Other State Funding 9.3.4.1 State Revolving Fund The Federal Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 authorized the creation of a revolving fund program for public water system infrastructure needs specific to drinking water. There is similar State legislation and the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund reflects the intent of Federal and State laws to provide grant funding or low-interest loans to correct deficiencies in public water systems based on a prioritized system. There are three different entities that provide loans and/or grants under the state revolving fund (SRF). 9.3.4.1.1 Safe Drinking Water SRF Under this SRF program, DPH provides loans to assist public water systems in achieving and maintaining compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. Up to $20 million is available per project. Disadvantaged community systems can obtain a zero interest loan and may be eligible Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-7 for partial grant funding. All applications to this program are initially made for loans, however financial review may determine if grant funds apply. 9.3.4.1.2 Infrastructure SRF The California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, also known as I -Bank, provide: financing to local municipal entities for construction and/or repair of publicly owned water supply, treatment and distribution systems, and drainage, and flood control facilities. In addition to water -related projects, loans are available for public infrastructure projects that include parks and recreational facilities and environmental mitigation. 9.3.4.1.3 Clean Water SRF SWRCB also provides financing for wastewater treatment facility construction projects and expanded use projects such as nonpoint source and estuary projects. Funding options are available to public agencies, as well as non-profit organizations and Native American tribes, for up to $50 million per year. 9.3.4.2 State Water Resources Control Board — Federal 319 Program This program, administered by the SWRCB, is a nonpoint source pollution control program that is focused on controlling activities that impair beneficial uses and on limiting pollutant effects caused by those activities. The program is federally funded on an annual basis. Project proposals that address TMDL implementation and those that address problems in impaired waters are favored in the selection process. There is also a focus on implementing management activities that reduce and/or prevent release of pollutants that impair surface and ground waters. Nonprofit organizations, local government agencies including special districts, tribes, and educational institutions qualify. State or federal agencies may qualify if they are collaborating with local entities and are involved in watershed management or proposing a statewide project. 9.3.4.3 State Water Resources Control Board — Water Recycling Funding Program This is a long-term program operated by the SWRCB that offers grants and low-interest loans for the planning, design and construction of water recycling facilities. Grants are provided for facilities planning studies to determine the feasibility of using recycled water to offset the use of fresh/potable water from state and/or local supplies. Pollution control studies, in which water recycling is an alternative, are not eligible. Planning grants are limited to 50 percent of eligible costs, up to $75,000. Construction grants are limited to 25 percent of project costs or $5,000,000, whichever is less. Only public agencies are eligible. The Water Recycling Funding Program receives funding from various sources, including Proposition 50 and the State Revolving Fund. Due to the varying funding sources, preferences for funding can vary. For example, funding from Proposition 50 gives preference to those recycling projects that result in benefits to the Delta. 9.3.4.4 State Water Resources Control Board — Supplemental Environmental Projects The State Water Board or Regional Water Board may allow part of a monetary assessment made in an administrative civil liability order to be satisfied in part by completing or funding one Page 9-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 or more Supplemental Environmental Projects. These projects may either be performed by the discharger or by third parties paid by the discharger and must directly benefit or study groundwater or surface water quality or quantity in the area impacted by the violation. Generally, projects with a value of at least $50,000 will be considered under this program. Sign up forms for the project proponent list are available on the SWRCB website. 9.3.4.5 State Water Resources Control Board — Cleanup and Abatement Account This account generally provides public agencies with grants for emergency cleanup or abatement of conditions of pollution where no viable responsible parties are available to undertake the work. Funds can be used for, among other things, waste cleanup and abatement of effects of a waste, and remedying a significant water pollution problem. Requests for funding can be made on a continuous basis for projects up to $100,000 and may be approved for projects exceeding $100,000 on a case by case basis. 9.3.4.6 State Water Resources Control Board — Agricultural Drainage Loan Program The Water Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of 1986 provides funds for this program with the intent to address treatment, storage, conveyance, or disposal of agricultural drainage water that threatens water of the State. Loans are available for implementation projects and feasibility studies with a funding cap of $20 million and $100,000, respectively. As of the beginning of 2012, less than $7 million was available for funding under this program. 9.3.4.7 State Water Resources Control Board — Agricultural Drainage Management Loan Program Similar to the Agricultural Drainage Loan Program, this program provides loans for addressing treatment, storage, conveyance, or disposal of agricultural drainage water that threatens waters of the State. Funds for this program come from Proposition 204, and are available in amounts up to $5 million for implementation projects and $100,000 for feasibility studies. Approximately $10 million in funds are still available. 9.3.4.8 State Water Resources Control Board — Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Funds provided through the Barry Keene Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Act of 1989 provide means for petroleum underground storage tank owners and operators to meet federal and state requirements, in addition to assisting in covering unexpected and catastrophic expenses associated with the cleanup of leaking petroleum underground storage tanks. Special programs include, among others, the Orphan Site Cleanup Fund, which provides loans up to $1.5 million per occurrence in the case of no viable financially responsible party, and the Replacing, Removing or Upgrading Underground Storage Tanks Program, which provides loans of up to $750,000 for complying with continuing regulatory requirements. 9.3.4.9 Department of Water Resources — New Local Water Supply Construction Loans Under this program, DWR provides loans to local public agencies for projects. Eligible projects include canals, dams, reservoirs, desalination facilities, groundwater extraction facilities, or Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-9 other construction or improvements which will remedy existing water supply problems. Loans for construction projects can be provided for up to $5 million, with an interest rate equal to those of the general obligation bonds sold to finance the program. 9.3.4.10 Department of Housing and Community Development— Community Development Block Grant The California Department of Housing and Community Development provides grants to cities and counties with a program emphasis on creating or retaining jobs for low-income workers in rural communities. Activities may include housing rehabilitation and public improvements, which may involve among other things, water, wastewater and other infrastructure projects as well as feasibility studies. 9.3.4.11 California Energy Commission (CEC) — Energy Financing Program The California Energy Commission provides loan financing for water and wastewater utilities for energy efficiency projects, feasibility studies, and implementing energy-saving and renewable energy measures. Eligible uses include, but are not limited to, lighting, motors or variable frequency drives, pumps, insulation, HVAC, energy generation and cogeneration. 9.4 Federal This section includes a discussion of funds available through various federal programs and specifies eligibility requirements. A summary of potential federal funding sources is provided in Table 9.1-1. 9.4.1 Environmental Protection Agency, Source Reduction Assistance The purpose of this program is to prevent the generation of pollutants at the source and ultimately provide an overall benefit to the environment. This program seeks projects that support source reduction, pollution prevention, and/or source conservation practices. Source reduction activities include: modifying equipment or technology; modifying processes or procedures; reformulating or redesigning products; substituting raw materials; and generating improvements in housekeeping, maintenance, training, or inventory control. Pollution prevention activities reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants via such procedures as: using raw materials, energy, water or other resources more efficiently; protecting natural resources through conservation; preventing pollution; and promoting the re -use of materials and/or conservation of energy and materials. Eligible organizations include units of State, local, and tribal government; independent school district governments; private or public colleges and universities; nonprofit organizations; and community-based grassroots organizations. 9.4.2 Environmental Protection Agency, Wetlands Program Development Grants This program seeks projects that promote the coordination and acceleration of research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of water pollution. The US EPA Page 9-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 has identified three priority areas: (1) the development of a comprehensive monitoring and assessment program; (2) the improvement of the effectiveness of compensatory mitigation; and (3) the refinement of the protection of vulnerable wetlands and aquatic resources. Awards for 2012 were anticipated to range from $50,000 to $3503000. A 25 percent match is required. Eligible entities include States, tribes, local governments, interstate associations, intertribal consortia, and national non-profit, non-governmental organizations. 9.4.3 Environmental Protection Agency, Five Star Restoration Program This program is a partnership among various entities, including the EPA, National Association of Counties and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. This program provides challenge grants, technical support and opportunities for information exchange to facilitate community-based wetland, riparian and coastal habitat restoration projects. In addition to on the ground restoration, key elements of project funded by this program include meaningful environmental education, diverse partnerships, and measurable ecological and educational/social benefits. Funding may range between $5,000 to $40,000 and is awarded on an annual basis. 9.4.4 National Park Service, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program The purpose of this program is to conserve rivers, preserve open space, and develop trails and greenways. The program provides staff assistance, but not funding, to meet this intent. Projects will be evaluated on how successfully they meet the following criteria: (1) a clear anticipated outcome leading to on -the -ground success; (2) commitment, cooperation, and cost- sharing by interested public agencies and non-profit organizations; (3) opportunity for significant public involvement; (4) protection of significant natural and/or cultural resources and enhancement of outdoor recreational opportunities; and (5) consistency with the National Park Service mission. Eligible organizations include non -profits, community groups, tribes or tribal governments, and state or local government agencies. 9.4.5 Natural Resources Conservation Service, Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Grant The purpose of the program is to support activities that promote soil conservation and that promote the preservation of the watersheds of rivers and streams throughout the US. This program seeks to preserve and improve land and water resources via the prevention of erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages. The program supports improvement of: (1) flood prevention including structural and land treatment measures; (2) conservation, development, utilization, and disposal of water; or (3) conservation and proper utilization of land. Successful applicants under this program receive support for watershed surveys and planning, as well as watershed protection and flood prevention operations. Funding for watershed surveys and planning is intended to assist in the development of watershed plans to identify solutions that use conservation practices, including nonstructural measures, to ultimately solve problems. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-11 Matching funds are not required; however, applicants must generally provide matches ranging from 0 percent to 50 percent in cash or in-kind resources depending on such factors as project type and the kinds of structural measures which a project proposes. Eligible entities include: states, local governments, and other political subdivisions; soil or water conservation districts; flood prevention or control districts; and tribes. Potential applicants must be able to obtain all appropriate land and water rights and permits to successfully implement proposed projects. 9.4.6 US Department of Agriculture —Rural Development, Water and Waste Disposal Program The Water and Waste Disposal Program provides financial assistance in the form of grants and loans for the development and rehabilitation of water, wastewater, and storm drain systems within rural communities. Funds may be used for costs associated with planning, design, and construction of new or existing water, wastewater, and storm drain systems. Eligible projects include storage, distribution systems, and water source development. There are no funding limits, but the average project size is between $3 and $5 million. Projects must benefit cities, towns, public bodies, and census -designated places with a population less than 10,000 persons. The intent of the program is to improve rural economic development and improve public health and safety. 9.4.7 US Bureau of Reclamation, WaterSMART Grant Programs This grant program is intended to fund collaborative local projects that improve water conservation and management through advanced technology and conservation markets. Through this program, federal funding is provided to irrigation and water districts for up to 50 percent of the cost of projects involving conservation, efficiency and water marketing. Eligible applicants include irrigation and water districts and state governmental entities with water management authority. Applicants must be located in the western US (California is an eligible area). Applicants do not have to be part of a Reclamation project but proposals with a connection to Reclamation will receive more weight in the evaluation process. Past and proposed programs have included Water and Energy Efficiency Grants, Advanced Water Treatment Pilot and Demonstration Projects, and Grants to Develop Climate Analysis Tools. Funding opportunities vary depending on available program funding. 9.4.8 US Fish and Wildlife Service, North American Wetlands Conservation Act Grant This grant program provides funds for projects that provide long-term protection of wetlands, and the fish and wildlife that depend upon wetlands. Applicants must provide local match equal to that requested. The Small Grants Program provides up to $75,000 in funding and the Standard Grants Programs averages $40 million annually for the whole U.S. and is applicable to projects exceeding $75,000. Entities that are eligible include organizations and individuals who have developed partnerships to carry out wetlands conservation projects in the US, Canada, and Mexico. Small Grants only apply to the U.S. Applications are continuously accepted by the US FWS for this grant. Page 9-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 9.4.9 Federal Legislation Specific congressional authorizations and funding may be obtained to study, build, and construct specific projects in the Region. Potential sources include legislation and funding associated with renewal of the CWA, SDWA, and appropriations for specific agencies, such as the US ACOE and the US EPA. The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) authorizes projects and policies of the Civil Works program of the US ACOE. The US ACOE is a federal agency in the Department of Defense with military and civilian responsibilities. At the direction of Congress, US ACOE plans, builds, operates, and maintains a wide range of water resources facilities in US states and territories. The agency's traditional civil responsibilities have been creating and maintaining navigable channels and controlling floods. However, in the last two decades, Congress has increased US ACOE's responsibilities in ecosystem restoration, municipal water and wastewater infrastructure, disaster relief, and other activities. WRDA often includes specific authorizations for federal, regional, and local projects. Inclusion in WRDA authorizes a given project but does not guarantee funding for a specific project. Local projects can also receive authorization and federal funding as part of appropriations for the US EPA. The US EPA will enter into assistance agreements with local agencies to fund studies and projects associated with: (1) various environmental requirements (e.g., wastewater treatment); (2) identifying, developing, and/or demonstrating necessary pollution control techniques to prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution; and/or (3) evaluating the economic and social consequences of alternative strategies and mechanisms for use by those in economic, social, governmental, and environmental management positions. 9.5 Funding Sources With numerous funding opportunities available from state and federal sources, the RWMG and Stakeholders of the IRWM recognize the importance of identifying and developing local sources for securing project funding. 9.6 Selected Plan Project Cost Estimates Estimated costs, matching funds, and potential funding sources for Plan Projects will be identified after project selection has taken place. 9.7 Grant Funding Package Securing funding for the selected Plan Projects is a significant issue for IRWMP implementation. For each funding source identified, suitable projects on the Plan Projects list will be put forward in an application. A summary of funding needs and the funding status for each Plan Project will be prepared after project selection has taken place. This summary will include estimates of outside funding assistance, amount of matching funds, type of matching funds, and whether the matching funds have been secured. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 9-13 This page intentionally left blank. Page 9-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 9.1-1 POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES LOCAL Local funding opportunities include revenue bonds, certificates of participation, property taxes, existing capital improvement budgets, and user fees. STATE Funding Objective Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact Proposition 84 (bycha ter Integrated $1 B budget, $215M allocated to the Public agencies and non - Applications submitted via the DWR Water Quality, Profit organizations (other Water Supply, Regional Water Grants for development and revisions of IRWM Ventura -Los Angeles Funding Area may also receive Bond Management System. Current Joe Yuri (916) 653-9222 DWR Management 9 plans and implementation of projects in IRWM p p P 1 After Round 1 of Implementation and ( P groups applications for the R2 Implementation PP P un water.ca. ov lY @ 9 Resource (Round 2 and plans. Planning Grant Awards, funding if teamed with are due March 2013 and final awards Stewardship Round 3) approximately $145M remains) Public agency or non-profit will be announced in Mid 2013. organization) Local Grants for conducting groundwater studies or Applications accepted in periodic Water Quality DWR Groundwater carrying out groundwater monitoring and Up to $250,000 per eligible applicant Public agencies application cycles, but currently no Tom Lutterman (916) 651-9263 Assistance management activities. funding available for future awards. Emergency/urgen Emergency/urgent water supply protection. For Request for funds based on as needed DPH (916) 449-5600 Water Quality DPH t water supply projects that address emergency and urgent $10M budget; max grant $250,000 Local water suppliers dwpfunds@cdph.ca.gov; Brian Kinney protection situations related to drinking water supplies. basis. (916) 449-5630 This grant program is intended for projects that $90M budget; —$32M for Final Guidelines November Water Quality SWRCB Storm Water manage stormwater runoff to reduce flood Implementation Round 2; $3M per Local public agencies 200TRo2 process anticipated to Laura McLean (916) 341-5877 Grant Program damages that are ready or nearly ready to be project 201 begin in 2013. implemented. DWR provides grants for projects that evaluate levees or other flood control Local Levee structures including through geotechnical $60M budget. $2M for Levee Applications accepted in periodic Flood Management DWR Assistance studies (not part of the State Plan of Flood Evaluation; $5 max for Urgent Repair Local public agencies application cycles. David Wright (916) 574-1191 Program Control) and for the design, repair and improvement of damaged levees or other flood control structures. Grant for projects that reduce flood risk Application via the DWR Bond Flood Management DWR Flood Protection reduction using non-structural means and that Max $SM per project Local public agencies and Management System. Applications Earl Nelson (916) 574-1481 Corridor Program include wildlife habitat enhancement and/or non-profit organizations agricultural land preservation components. accepted in periodic application cycles. Flood Control Claims reimbursement grants for Flood Management DWR Subventions implementation of federally -authorized flood State cost -share between 50%-70% Local public agencies Applications accepted in periodic Nahideh Madankar (916) 574-1459 control projects and watershed protection flood application cycles. Program prevention projects. Resource Urban Streams Grants for projects that reduce urban flooding Local public agencies and Applications accepted in periodic DWR Restoration and erosion, restore environmental values, and Max $1 M per project Jerry Snow (916) 651-9626 Stewardship Program promote stewardship of urban streams. non-profit organizations application cycles. TABLE 9.1-1 POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Funding Objective Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact Proposition 1E Grants for stormwater flood management projectswithnon-state cost share of not less Local agency or nonprofit FloodSAFE than 50%; projects must not be part of State Max $30 million per eligible project; Applications accepted in periodic floodSAFE@water.ca.gov Joe YuriFlood Management DWR California Plan for Flood control, must have multiple 50% cost -share representing an IRWM application cycles. (916) 651-9222 benefits, comply with Basin Plans, and be effort consistent with an IRWMP. Early Funds to rehabilitate, reconstruct or replace $313 budget; Max state funding Applications accepted in periodic Flood Management DWR Implementation levees, weirs, bypasses and facilities of the allowed $200M per project Local Agencies application cycles. Kelly Fucciolo (916) 574-2640 Pro ram IState Plan of Flood Control. Proposition 50 Program primarily funds projects not locally Cities, districts, , Applications accepted in periodic cost effective, and that provide water savings, Two step on-line process application tribes, non -profits; utilities application cycles. There are currently Water Supply DWR Water Use or in -stream flows that are beneficial to the Bay process: first step is concept proposal and mutual water no anticipated funding opportunities for Fethi Benjemma (916) 651-7026 Efficiency Grants Delta or the rest of the state. Consideration and second step is detailed on-line companies, universities, urban WUE. Upcoming opportunities also for water quality and energy efficiency submittal. colleges, state and federal will only apply to agricultural WUE. agencies Treatment or removal technology for the following contaminants: Petroleum products, project Funding: $50,00045 million Demonstration such as MTBE and BTEX, N- No more than 30% of the funds can Projects and Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), Perchlorate, address a single contaminant. 50% Public water systems Applications accepted in periodic Water Quality DWR Studies for Radionuclides, such as radon, uranium, and match that can be waived for under DPH regulation application cycles. Steve Giambrone (916) 653-9722 Contaminant radium, Pesticides and herbicides, Heavy Disadvantaged Communities or small Removal metals, such as arsenic, mercury, and water systems. chromium, Pharmaceuticals and endocrine Must address an Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) compliance violation, surface water treatment microbial requirements, or other mandatory disinfection that can only be met by Project Funding: $50,000-$5 million; Ultraviolet (UV) UV/ or ozone; the water system must 50% match that can be waived for Public water systems Applications accepted in periodic Water Quality DWR and Ozone demonstrate that it can operate and maintain Disadvantaged Communities or small under DPH regulation application cycles. Steve Giambrone (916) 653-9722 Disinfection the treatment facilities; ozone treatment water systems. projects shall be designed and operated to minimize residual disinfection byproduct formation from the ozone treatment TABLE 9.1-1 POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Funding Objective Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact Other City with less than 50,000 Notices of funding availability Community Grants are available with a program emphasis Grants of up to $2.SM are available, residents and County scheduled for release in January each Water Supply HUD Development on creating or retaining jobs for low income whereby award limits are typically jurisdictions with less than year. Applications are invited by an Steven Marshall (916) 319-8410 Block Grant workers in rural communities. $1.5M. 2,00,000 residents in annually and are continuously received Program unincorporated areas. and reviewed throughout the year. Awards are made on an ongoing basis. Eligible projects include a canal, dam reservoir, desalination facility, groundwater extraction Loans: $5M max per construction New Local Water facility, or other construction or improvement, project, $500,000 max per feasibility Water Supply pp y DWR Supply including rehabilitation of a dam for water project. The interest rate is equal to Local Public Agencies 9 Continuous) accepting applications. y p 9 pp Jerry Snow 916 651-9264 ry ( ) Construction supply purposes by a local public agency for the rate that the State pays on the Loans the diversion, storage, or distribution of water general obligation bonds sold to which will remedy existing water supply finance the program. problems. Low interest loan financing for water and Max loan amount is $3M per Publicly owned water and Energy Financing wastewater utilities for energy efficiency application or 12 times the annual wastewater treatment Applications are available on the CEC Shahid Chaudry (916) 654-4858; CEC Energy Efficiency CEC Program projects, feasibility studies, and implementing energysavings, whichever is less. facilities, cities, counties, website Special projects office (916) 654-4104 energy-saving and renewable energy interest rateergy 3 . special districts, or other measures. non-profit entities. Publicly owned treatment Applications vary depending on type of DPH, SWRCB, State Revolving Provides low-interest loans and/or grants to Grants and loans can be combined works, local public project and agency from which funds Steve Woods (DPH) (916) 449- Water Quality -Bank Fund (SRF) assist public agencies in correcting with other funding sources. agencies, non-profit requested. Applications are accepted 5624 Dave Kim (SWRCB) deficiencies in water infrastructure organizations, and private on a continuing basis. dkirn@waterboards.ca.gov parties Provides low interest loans or grants to assist public water systems in achieving or Pre -application invitations annually. Safe Drinking maintaining compliance with the Safe Drinking Up to $500,000 per planning study; Disadvantaged system can obtain a Water Quality CDPH Water State Water Act. Project include water treatment $20M per project and a max of $30M Public Water System zero interest loan. Applications are for Dat Tran (916) 449-5644 Revolving Fund facilities, replace aging infrastructure, planning per entity loans; financial review determines if studies, consolidation of water systems, source grant funds apply. water protection, etc. Projects must be needed to comply with Safe Drinking Water Act. The California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank provides loans for construction and/or repair of publicly owned Loan: $10M per project ($2M max per Infrastructure water supply, treatment and distribution environmental mitigation project per Water Quality I -Bank State Revolving systems, and drainage, and flood control year, $2M max per project for parks Local Municipal Entity Preliminary applications are at Diane Cummings (916) 324-4805 facilities. Loans are also available for public ibank.ca.gov Fund Program andrecreation facilities) and $20M infrastructure, such as solid waste collection per jurisdiction per fiscal year. and disposal, environmental mitigation, as well as projects such as parks and recreational facilities and public safety facilities. TABLE 9.1-1 POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Funding Objective Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact Low-interest loans and other financing Clean Water mechanisms are available for wastewater Max $50M per agency per year, with Public Agencies, non- Applications are accepted on a Water Quality SWRCB State Revolving treatment facility construction projects and a Max financing term of 20 years. profit organizations, Native continuing basis. Fund expanded use projects that include nonpoint American tribes CleanWaterSRF@waterboards.ca.gov, source and estuary ro'ects. (916) 327-9978 Project Funding: $250,000-$1 million. 25% local match required, but waived for Disadvantaged Communities and Applications accepted in periodic Federal CWA Funding to support projects throughout the small water systems. For 2012, Public agencies, public application cycles. During the project Patricia Leary (916) 341-5167; Matthew 319(h) Program funding for planning/assessment colleges, 501(c)(3) non- solicitation process, applicants submit a Freese (916) 341-5485 Water Quality SWRCB (Nonpoint source State to restore impaired surface waters projects ranges between $75,000 and profit organizations, tribes, brief concept proposal via FAAST. grant program) through the control of nonpoint source pollution $125,000 and funding for state and federal entities Applicants with the highest-ranking CPs implementation projects ranges will be invited to submit a full proposal. between $250,000 and $750,000. Grants are provided for facilities planning Grants for planning studies will cover studies to determine the feasibility of using 50% of eligible costs, up to $75,000. Water Recycling recycled water to offset the use of Grants for construction will cover up Applications accepted on continuous Water Supply SWRCB Funding Program fresh/potable water from state and/or local to 25% of costs or $5M (whichever is Public agencies basis. Dan Newton (916) 324-8404 supplies. Water recycling construction projects less). Construction projects not that meet objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta eligible for grants may also apply for This account generally provides public Use of funds are limited to activities Cleanup and agencies with grants for emergency cleanup or specified by the State Water Board Public agencies with Requestors must first contact the State Water Quality SWRCB Abatement abatement of conditions of pollution where no and include among other things, authority to cleanup or Water Board or submit an online Ruben Mora or Mark Fong (916) 341- Account viable responsible parties are available to waste cleanup and abatement of abate a waste. application using FAAST. Requests 5387 undertake the work. effects of a waste, and remedying a can be made on an ongoig basis. significant water pollution problem. Funding cap is $20 million for City, county, district, joint Agricultural This programs provides loans, from the Water implementation projects and powers authority or other Water Quality SWRCB Drainage Loan Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of $100,000 for feasibility studies. Rates political subdivision of the Applications are accepted on a Conny Mitterhofer (916) 341-5720 Program 1986, to fund treatment, storage, conveyance, are set at 1/2 of the State's General State involved with water continuous basis. or disposal of agricultural drainage water. Obligation bond rate management Funding cap is $5 million for City, county, district, joint Agricultural This programs provides loans, from implementation projects and powers authority or otherApplications Water Quality SWRCB Drainage Proposition 204, to fund treatment, storage, $100,000 for feasibility studies. Rates political subdivision of the are accepted on a Conny Mitterhofer (916) 341-5720 Management conveyance, or disposal of agricultural are set at 1/2 of the State's General State involved with water continuous basis. Loan Program drainage water. Obligation bond rate management Funds are available to provide a means for petroleum UST owners and operators to meet Underground the federal and state requirements. The Fund Loans are available in amounts up to Various entities depending Applications are accepted on a Water Quality SWRCB Storage Tank also assists a large number of small $1.5 million, depending on project and Judy Reid (916) 341-5760 Cleanup Fund businesses and individuals by providing special program. on special program. continuous basis. reimbursement for unexpected and TABLE 9.1-1 POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Funding Objective Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact The SWRCB or Regional Boards may allow Supplemental Environmental Projects to be Projects may eithe rbe Water Quality, Supplemental implemented or funded to part partially satisfy a Generally, projects with a value of at performed by the Sign up forms for the project proponent SWRCB Environmental monetary assessment made ina n least $50,000 will be considered list are available on the SWRCB Kristie Kao kkao@waterboards.ca.gov Water Supply Projects 1 adminstrative civil liability order. Projects must discharger or thir parties under this program. website. paid by the discharger. directly benefit or study groundwater or surface FEDERAL Funding Category Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact Three priority areas identified by the EPA: Developing a comprehensive States, tribes, local Projects that promote the coordination and monitoring and assessment program; governments, interstate Water Quality and EPA Wetlands acceleration of research, investigations, improving the effectiveness of associations, intertribal Suzanne Marr Program experiments, training, demonstrations, compensatory mitigation; and refining consortia, and national Applications accepted in periodic Resource EPA Development surveys, and studies relating to the causes, the protection of vulnerable wetlands non-profit, non- application cycles. US EPA Region 9 Stewardship Grants effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and and aquatic resources. Awards for governmental (415) 972-3468 elimination of water pollution 2012 were anticipated to range from organizations are eligible $50,000 to $350,000. 25% match to apply. required. This program provides challenge grants, Schools, youth groups, Carrie Clingan National Association of Five Star technical support and opportunities for Key project elements include on the public, private or corporate Counties (202)942-4246 Resource EPA and other information exchange to facilitate community- ground restoration, environmental landowners, local, state Applications generally open in late fall, Stewardship partners Restoration based wetland, riparian and coastal habitat education, partnerships and and federal government with award notification in late spring. a Lacy Alison Program restoration projects. Project sites may be measurable results. agencies, local non-profit National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Nato l Fish and W public or private land. organizations, etc. (202) 857-0166 Lacy.Alison@niwf.org Projects will be evaluated on how they meet the following criteria: 1) A clear outcome leading to on the ground The program provides technical and staff success; 2) Commitment, Nonprofits, community Rivers, Trails, assistance to conserve rivers, preserve open cooperation, and cost-sharing by groups, tribes, or tribal Applications are due August 1st for Anne Dove (323) 441-9307, Patrick Resource National Park and Conservation space, and develop trails and greenways. applicant; 3) Opportunity for governments; and state or assistance during the next fiscal year. Johnston (323) 441-21177 MaLisa Stewardship Service Assistance Note: RTCA does not provide monetary grants significant public involvement; 4) local government http://www.nps.gov/rtca/ Martin (323) 276-0968 Program loans. protection of significant natural and/or or cultural resources and enhancement agencies. of outdoor recreational opportunities; and 5) Consistency with the National Park Service mission. TABLE 9.1-1 POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Funding Objective Agency Program Brief Description Key Points Eligibility Submit Grant Application Contact States, local governments, and other political Matching funds are not required: subdivisions; soil or water applicants must generally provide conservation districts; Natural Watershed Funding for activities that promote soil o-50% o in matching ranging from 0% flood prevention or control Luana Kiger, Acting Director Resource Resources Protection and conservation and the preservation of the cash or in-kind resources depending districts and tribes. Not currently soliciting applications. Watershed Planning Services Stewardship Conservation Flood Prevention watersheds of rivers and streams throughout on such factors as project type and Potential applicants must (530) 792-5661 Service the US. the kinds of structural measures a be able to obtain all appropriate land and project proposes. water rights and permits to successfully implement proposed projects. Funds may be used for planning, design, and construction of new or Cities, towns, public United States existing systems; eligible projects bodies, and census Department of Program that provides financial assistance include storage, distribution, source designated places with Water Quality Agriculture Water and Waste (loans and grants) for community water, development; no funding limits, but populations less than Applications accepted on a continuous Dave Hartwell USDA State Office (USDA) Rural Disposal Program p g wastewater, and drainage systems in rural g y average project size is $3-5 million. 10,000. Must basis. 530 792-5818 ( ) Development areas Greater funding share provided for demonstrate financial low-income communities. Grants may need. be made for up to 75% of eligible Reclamation provides 50/50 cost share funding Eligible applicants include to irrigation and water districts and states for irrigation and water United States projects focused on water conservation, Matching funds are required. districts, state Bureau of WaterSMART efficiency, and water marketing. Past and Applicants must provide a minimum governmental entities with Funding opportunities vary depending Water Supply Reclamation Challenge Grant ro osed programs have included Water and p p p 9 50% of project costs in non -Federal p 1 water management g on available program funding.Dean p 9 Marrone (303) 445-3577 (Reclamation) Programs Energy Efficiency Grants, Advanced Water cash or in-kind resources. authority. Projects must be Treatment Pilot and Demonstration Projects, located in Western United Grants to Develop Climate Analysis Tools. States. The Small Grants Program provides funding, Organizations and up to $75,000, for projects that provide long- individuals who have Division of Bird Habitat Conservation, US Fish and North American term protection of wetlands and wetlands developed partnerships to Applications accepted on continuous (703) 358-1784; Joint Venture Resource Wildlife Wetlands dependent fish and wildlife. Funding available Partners must match the grant carry out wetlands basis. Proposals may be submitted at Coordinator: Robert Mesta Stewardship Service Conservation Act under the Standard Grants Program averages request ata 1 to 1 ratio. conservation projects in any time during before the fiscal year robert_mesta@fws.gov; Small Grants (USFWS) $40M annually for the whole U.S. and is the US, Canada, and deadline. Program Coordinator: Rodecia provided to projects exceeding $75,000 per Mexico. Small Grants only McKnight (703) 358-2266 proposal. apply to the U.S. Section 10: Data Management, Technical Analyses, and Plan Performance This section is organized into two parts to summarize the data management, technical analyses, and performance of the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP. Section 10.1 describes the data management efforts and technical analyses conducted during preparation of the IRWMP. Section 10.2 examines monitoring, ongoing data management, and plan performance during implementation, and describes how performance data will be used to improve future versions of the IRWMP. In general, the success of the IRWMP will depend on how well the individual plan objectives are accomplished. Achievement of all of these objectives will, in large part, determine the success of local integrated regional water management planning processes. The following objectives, discussed in Section 6, were developed to allow progress of the overall IRWMP to be measured: • Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. • Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. • Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. • Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. • Flooding/Hydromodiiication: Reduce flood damage and/or the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. • Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change • Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions 10.1 Data Management and Technical Analyses for Plan Preparation The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP documents the results of a collaborative effort of over 10 public agencies with varying water, resource management and flood management responsibilities, as well as numerous other interested entities. The IRWMP was prepared using information and guidance provided by the RWMG and Stakeholder group. The IRWMP in turn, will be used by these same entities to guide and support their future water management efforts. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 10-1 Extensive information and data on the Region have been prepared by various agencies and groups. That information was reviewed and evaluated as part of this IRWMP and served as the foundation for the development of this plan, as described below. 10.1.1 Existing Information and Reports The following documents contain the baseline information used in the development of the IRWMP. A brief summary of the reports, how often they are updated, identification of who participates in their preparation and identification of the type of information generated by the document is provided for each report listed. 10.1.1.1 Water Resource Management Reports These reports document the reliability and availability of the Region's water supplies to meet current and projected demands. These reports include both urban water management plans and groundwater management plans. The California Urban Water Management Planning Act applies to public and private municipal water suppliers with more than 3,000 connections or supplying more than 3,000 AFY. The act requires suppliers to describe and evaluate sources of water supply, efficient uses of water, certain demand management measures (DMMs), implementation strategy and schedule, and other relevant information and programs. This information is used by the urban water supplier to develop an UWMP which is submitted to DWR in years ending in five and zero (e.g., 2000, 2005, 2010). AB 3030, the Groundwater Management Act, authorized local agencies to prepare groundwater management plans for groundwater basins not subject to adjudication or other form of regulation. AB 3030 lays out a procedure for development of a groundwater management plan. The act also specifies twelve technical components which can be included in a groundwater management plan, including replenishment strategy, mitigation of overdraft, mitigation of contaminated groundwater, and avoidance of saline intrusion. 2010 Antelope Valley -East Kern Water Agency UWMP A small amount of SWP water is available to a portion of the eastern part of the Region through deliveries from AVEK, a wholesale SWP provider. The 2010 AVEK UWMP assesses current and projected (through 2030) water supplies for AVEK's service area. AVEK's UWMP will be updated in 2015. 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP The 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP was prepared for CLWA and three of the purveyors: NCWD, SCWD, and VWC. The fourth purveyor, LACWWD No. 36, was not included because it does not meet the Urban Water Management Plan Act's threshold requirements for preparation of UWMPs. However, LACWWD No. 36 participated in the development of the plan. The 2010 UWMP contains information on water use, water resources, recycled water, water quality, reliability planning, DMMs, and water shortage contingency planning within the CLWA service area. The 2010 UWMP will be updated in 2015. Page 10-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Castafc Lake Water Agency GWMP CLWA has prepared a GWMP, pursuant to AB 3030 for the Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin. The East Subbasin is comprised of two aquifer systems, the Alluvium generally underlying the Santa Clara River and its several tributaries, and the Saugus Formation which underlies much of the entire Upper Santa Clara River area. The GWMP provides background information on the East Subbasin. The GMWP has also led to on- going data monitoring and reporting, detailed in section 10.1.3. Annual Santa Clarita Valley Water Reports Publication of the Annual Santa Clarita Valley Water Report began in 1998. These reports provide current information about local groundwater resources, SWP water supplies, water conservation, and recycled water in the Valley on an annual basis. The reports review the sufficiency and reliability of supplies in the context of existing water demand, with focus on actual conditions in the year prior to publication, and provide a short-term outlook of water supply and demand for the upcoming year. The reports are prepared by CLWA and the four water purveyors: LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, SCWD, and VWC. 10.1.1.2 Facilities Plans and Master Plans A facilities plan and/or master plan is a physical development plan that provides the framework by which future planning decisions are made. It is an action plan for a particular resource or service such as recycled water, flood control, and wastewater facilities. 2015 Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System Facilities Plan The 2015 Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System Facilities Plan (2015 Plan), was prepared in 1998 by the LACSD Nos. 26 and 32. LACSD No. 26 and 32 provide sewerage services to the Valley including the City of Santa Clarita and unincorporated County areas. The objective of the 2015 Plan is to provide for the necessary wastewater conveyance, treatment, and disposal facilities to meet the needs of the projected service area for LACSD Nos. 26 and 32 through the year 2015 in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner. Since preparation of the 2015 Plan, LACSD No. 26 and 32 have merged to form the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (SCVSD). Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District FinalChloride Compliance Facilities Plan This plan examines a wide range of options to remove chloride from wastewater and the associated costs. An assessment of potential environmental impacts was prepared concurrent with the Chloride Compliance Facilities Plan. The Facilities Plan and EIR were approved by the SCVSD Board of Directors on October 28, 2013. Acton-Agua Duke Conceptual Master Plan for Water Facilities Acton and Agua Dulce are communities located in the unincorporated areas of the County in the upper parts of the Watershed. The 2004 Acton-Agua Dulce Conceptual Master Plan for Water Facilities was prepared for LACWWD No. 37 for the purpose of developing a conceptual plan for providing water service to Agua Dulce and portions of Acton in order to assess the feasibility Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 10-3 and interest in connecting these areas into the District's existing distribution system. The report provides the current and forecasted water demands for Acton and Agua Dulce private users, and for the Agua Dulce Winery and Vineyard. CLWA Draft Recycled Water Master Plan CLWA's 2002 Draft Recycled Water Master Plan (2002 Master Plan) is a planning document that updates the 1993 Draft Reclaimed Water Master Plan. The 2002 Master Plan was prepared to provide the information necessary to allow CLWA to develop a cost-effective recycled water system within its service area. The document considers significant issues affecting recycled water sources, supplies, users, and demands. CLWA is currently in the process of preparing its Recycled Water Master Plan Update, which updates sources of recycled water in the CLWA service area, their potential constraints, and potential recycled water users. 10.1.1.3 City, County, and Federal Land Use Plans Land use plans provide for the scientific, aesthetic, and orderly disposition of land, resources, facilities and services of urban and rural communities. General plans are a compendium of city or county policies regarding long-term development, in the form of maps and accompanying text. In California, general plans have seven mandatory elements (circulation, conservation, housing, land use, noise, open space, safety and seismic safety) and may include any number of optional elements (such as water, air quality, economic development, hazardous waste, and parks and recreation). Most local general planning documents generally have identified water management resource strategies that integrate with land use planning efforts. By law, each city and county is required to update the Housing Element of its general plan every five years and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research recommends that the remaining elements be reviewed every eight to ten years. City of Santa Clarita General Plan The City of Santa Clarita General Plan was prepared in 2011. The General Plan is comprised of 7 elements, which encompass the seven elements mandated by the State and one additional element: Land Use, Economic Development, Circulation, Noise, Conservation and Open Space, Safety, and Housing. Los Angeles County General Plan The Los Angeles County General Plan, originally published in 1980, is currently being updated as the Los Angeles County General Plan 2035, with adoption anticipated to occur in 2013. This document is the outline for growth and development in the unincorporated areas of the County. The Plan provides for the management and preservation of existing land uses and community character, including agricultural, residential, open space, etc. within the County, while providing for new recreational opportunities and infrastructure to support the population's needs. The General Plan is designed to guide the The most recent draft of the Los Angeles County General Plan 2035 was released in 2012. Page 10-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 long-term physical development and conservation of the County's land and environment through a framework of goals, policies and implementation programs. The General Plan also provides a foundation for more detailed plans and implementation programs, such as Area or Community Plans, zoning ordinances, and Specific Plans. Newhall Ranch Specific Plan The Newhall Ranch Specific Plan, prepared for the County and adopted in 2003, guides future development of the Newhall Ranch property. The document sets forth a comprehensive set of plans, development regulations, design guidelines, and implementation programs designed to produce a project consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Los Angeles County General Plan and Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, as proposed for amendment according to General Plan Amendment No. 94-087. This Specific Plan is regulatory in nature and serves as zoning for the Newhall Ranch community. Subsequent development plans and subdivision maps must be consistent with both this Specific Plan and the Los Angeles County General Plan. Los Angeles County, One Valley One Vision Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan In 2011, the One Valley One Vision (OVOV) Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan was adopted by Los Angeles County for use in making public policy decisions relating to the future of the entire Santa Clarita Valley planning area through the year 2035. OVOV is a joint effort between the County, the City of Santa Clarita, and many regional stakeholders to define guidelines for future growth of the Valley and the preservation of natural resources. The Area Plan provides population forecasts for the communities within the Valley, as well as policies relating to the specific needs and characteristics of the Valley. OVOV is consistent with both the County's and the City of Santa Clarita's General Plans, but does not include all the mandatory General Plan elements that are already covered in the County's General Plan. Day-to-day implementation of this General Plan, based on the Guiding Principles, is administered by both the City of Santa Clarita and County for lands within their respective jurisdictions. National Forests Land Management Plans (Forest Plans) The Forest Plans for the southern California national forests, which cover a large portion of the Region's open space, were developed by the US Forest Service as a strategic guidance for managing the land and its resources and were last revised in 2005. The Forest Plans define the parameters for management, while promoting adaptive management for flexibility in the face of rapidly changing resource conditions. The Forest Plans outline goals and objectives to manage the forests and their water resources, including desired forest conditions, and list place -specific standards and possible strategies to implement management activities. In addition, the Forest Plans list the various laws regulations, and policies applicable to natural resource management. Under the National Forest Management Act, these documents are required to be revised every 10 to 15 years. 10.1.1.4 Resource Conservation Plans Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan The purpose of the SCREMP is to provide a guidance document for the preservation, enhancement, and sustainability of the physical, biological, and economic resources that occur Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 10-5 within the 500 -year floodplain limits of the Santa Clara River, one which will be of benefit to Stakeholders when planning and implementing projects and activities. The plan was prepared by the Ventura County Watershed Protection District (VCWPD) and the LACDPW. The final SCREMP document summarizes reports that were prepared in 1995 and 1996, characterizing biological and water resources, cultural resources, aggregate, flooding, and access and recreation. More recent products include wetland plant and environmental permitting guides for stakeholders, a workstation at the County that will allow the public to use available information to develop their environmental permit application materials, and a water quality monitoring station at the Los AngelesNentura County line to improve the existing river water quality database. South Coast Missing Linkages Project In 2006, South Coast Wildlands, an environmental non-profit (501c3) organization dedicated to protecting and restoring connected wildland systems and the ecosystems upon which these systems rely, completed the South Coast Missing Linkages Project, aimed at maintaining and restoring highest priority connections between wild lands in the South Coast Region. The steering committee for the report included staff from the US Forest Service, CDFW, and US FWS. The report, "South Coast Missing Linkages," examines 15 specific geographic connections in Southern California that conserve essential biological and ecological processes. More than 125,000 acres of open space between Los Padres National Forest and the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area are named as areas that need protection to create wildlife corridors. The report is intended to be a guide for cities, counties, Caltrans and land protection groups such as The Nature Conservancy looking to mitigate the effects of development on wildlife. There are three identified linkages in the Region: Santa Susana Mountains to the Sierra Madre Range, Sierra Madre Range to Castaic Range, and San Gabriel Mountains to Castaic Range. Upper Santa Clara River Upper Watershed Conservation Plan This plan was developed by the Nature Conservancy to guide conservation activities in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed, with particular emphasis on protecting the wildlife corridor known as the San Gabriel-Castaic Linkage. Using input from over a dozen different entities, natural communities and species to be conserved were identified, threats to the viability of natural communities were documented, and opportunities for protection and enhancement were charted. Based on this information conservation targets are developed. The plan identifies strategies that can be undertaken to enhance the viability of the conservation targets. Benchmarks are described against which plan success can be measured. Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Program Long -Term Implementation Plan The Ventura County Resource Conservation District (VCRCD), as lead agency for the Ventura County Arundo Task Force, in conjunction with its partners, are developing and implementing a regional Arundo and Tamarisk eradication program in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. The Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo/Tamarisk Removal Plan (SCARP), developed in Invasive tamarisk plant Page 10-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 2006, provides guidance to stakeholders for implementing arundo and tamarisk removal projects of any size within the Upper Santa Clara River watershed. The project benefits the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed, and helps restoration efforts downstream in Ventura County as it will reduce the amount of Arundo that annually washes out of the river channel and is deposited on downstream beaches. The long-term goal of the Ventura County Arundo Task Force is the eradication of Arundo from all portions of the Santa Clara River, both in Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The SCARP is intended to be a living document that will be updated periodically to incorporate new technologies, changes in regulations or newly identified issues. 10.1.1.5 Water Quality Plans Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan and Amendments The Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan, prepared in 1994, is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of water within the Los Angeles region. Specifically, the Basin Plan designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state's anti -degradation policy, and describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the Region. In addition, the Basin Plan incorporates (by reference) all applicable State and Regional Board plans and policies and other pertinent water quality policies and regulations. As conditions change, such as the identification of new TMDLs or water quality standards, the Basin Plan is amended. Following adoption by the RWQCB, the Basin Plan and subsequent amendments are subject to approval by the SWRCB, the State Office of Administrative Law, and the US EPA. 10.1.2 Data Needs During the course of the preparation of this IRWMP, stakeholders were queried about data needs and data needs were identified by resource specialists working on the plan. Table 10.1-1 documents data needs identified for the Region. TABLE 10.1-1 DATA NEEDS Current data on water consumption patterns Market saturation of water conservation fixtures Sediment transport factors on the Santa Clara River Correlation between precipitation reduction and effects on groundwater supply Monthly and seasonal weather data (precipitation, air temperature) Long-term water quality data correlated to air temperature Long-term annual and seasonal agricultural water demand Inventory of critical infrastructure in floodplain Greenhouse gas baselines for water agencies Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 10-7 10.2 Data Collection and Sharing The USCR Region is comprised of multiple stakeholders with resource management duties. As such these agencies regularly collect and disseminate data as part of their normal operation. The USCR will take advantage of these resource activities to collect data and disseminate data to Stakeholders, the public, and the State. Table 10.2-1 documents how data is collected and shared in the Region. TABLE 10.2-1 DATA COLLECTION AND SHARING Data Management Activity Protocol Water Supply and Demand. Water data related to supply and demand is collected by the water agencies consistent with the California Urban Water Management Plan Act, the Groundwater Management Act, and the Public Water Systems Production Survey. These activities insure monthly and annual data on water demand and production are collected. Population and Land Use Trends. Land use jurisdictions in the Region collect data consistent with California Government Code (Sections 65000 et seq.) Typical Data and use this data to prepare "a comprehensive, long-term general plan for Collection physical development." Techniques Water Quality. Under Health & Safety Code §116470, water agencies must collect data on the raw water and provide annual reports on the quality of the water supplied to customers. Under §303 of the Clean Water Act, dischargers to waterways must collect and report data on the water quality of their discharges. Besides data collected by agencies in their resource management roles, as part of the IRWMP, stakeholders are invited to provide data, reports, or studies to benefit information contained in the IRWMP. Resource agencies providing water supplies, sanitary services, or regulating land use have the responsibility to maintain this data consistent with the laws described above (Water Code, California Government Code, Clean Water Act). Responsibility for Castaic Lake Water Agency, or current chair of the RWMG, will require Maintaining Data project proponents implementing grant -funded projects as part of the IRWM Program, to collect and maintain data generated as part of their project (ambient groundwater quality, treated water quality, amount of invasive species removal, volume of water treated, amount of pipeline improved or replaced) during project implementation. Data collected by resource management agencies is done based on specific protocols established by regulatory agencies such as the Department of Data Water Resources, the California Department of Public Health, and the Validation/Quality Regional Water Quality Control Board. These protocols and submittal of data Assurance to these agencies provides quality assurance and quality control. In addition, water supply data, land use data, and water quality data is regularly published and becomes part of planning documents vetted in public hearings (e.g., urban water management plans). Page 10-8 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Table 10.1-2 cont. The USCR Region has undertaken four planning studies and four implementation projects. Two of the planning studies (climate change and the Salt and Nutrient Management Plan for the Upper Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin) will be included as part of this IRWM Plan update. The data associated with these studies will be transferred and shared in the IRWM Plan update. Two other planning studies are underway, one to update the Recycled Water Master Plan for CLWA and the other is the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan. Preparation of these studies will require a great deal of coordination between water agencies and land use agencies in the Region. The plans themselves will be provided on the IRWMP website (www.scrwaterolan.org). In addition, as is tradition in the Region, an update on the studies will be made at the beginning of each Stakeholder meeting. Several actions will be taken to keep the RWMG, Stakeholders, and other interested parties informed about these implementation projects: Posting of implementation project description, map, and contact Data Sharing information on IRWMP website. • Quarterly posting (during project implementation) of project progress reports on IRWMP website • Upon project completion, posting of a summary of project evaluation measures, targets, and performance of the project compared to the target. Regular progress reports during Stakeholder meetings These actions will make the RWMG, Stakeholders, and other interested parties aware of the types of projects and types of data being collected in the Region and will make it possible for interested persons to acquire Regional data. The IRWMP website will provide links to further facilitate data sharing. Links will direct visitors to the relevant water agency website, relevant land use agency websites, and State database websites (CEDEN, CASGEM, SWAMP, GAMA). To make data from the Region accessible and compatible with State databases, the RWMG will require implementation projects clearly delineate the nature of the data being collected (parameters, units), the timeframe associated with the data, and the location associated with the data. Data Consistency Within the Region, CLWA is the local monitoring entity for the California with State Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program (CASGEM). CLWA Databases reports available groundwater level data to the CASGEM program bi-annually. CLWA will continue in this role and provide data consistent with the CASGEM program. USCR IRWMP implementation projects affecting surface water will be required to report ambient surface water conditions to the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (or its successor program) before taking actions that could affect ambient water quality. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Page 10-9 10.2.1 Monitoring and Data Management Within the Region there is an existing system in place for collecting data on groundwater and surface water supplies and water quality. Collection of data can be used to help quickly identify data gaps, assess project and program performance, support statewide data needs, and integrate with other regional and statewide programs. Data is vitally important to agencies trying to maximize operating efficiency and design projects with limited budgets. The types of data available, current relevance and trends, and knowledgeable people that can interpret the data are all important. Equally important is the opportunity for Federal and State agencies to view local data for their own monitoring needs and to better understand local conditions. 10.2.2 Monitoring 10.2.2.1 Groundwater Monitoring MOU and GWMP between the Santa Clarita Valley Purveyors and the United Water Conservation District United Water Conservation District (UWCD) is a water district in Ventura County that encompasses 214,000 acres of the Santa Clara River Valley and the Oxnard Plain. In 2001, Upper Basin Water Purveyors (CLWA, LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, SCWD, and VWC) and UWCD prepared and executed a MOU to cooperatively manage local groundwater supplies. A: a result of the MOU, the cooperating agencies have undertaken the following measures: integrated their database management efforts; developed and utilized a numerical groundwater flow model for analysis of groundwater basin yield and containment of groundwater contamination; and continued to monitor and report on the status of Basin conditions, as well as on geologic and hydrologic aspects of the overall stream -aquifer system. This information is now embodied in the Region's GWMP. Regional Groundwater Flow Model for the Santa Clarita Valley The development and calibration of a numerical groundwater flow model of the entire basin was initiated in 2003, subsequent the adoption of the GWMP among the Upper Basin Water Purveyors (CLWA, LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, SCWD, and VWC) and UWCD. The groundwater model was initially intended for use to predict aquifer response to the planned operating ranges of pumping. However, the groundwater flow model has also been used to analyze the control of perchlorate contaminant migration under selected pumping conditions. In 2004, the DTSC reviewed and approved the construction and calibration of the regional model as described in the final model report, Regional Groundwater Flow Model for the Santa Clarita Valley, Model Development and Calibration (CH2M Hill 2004a). After DTSC approval, the model was used to simulate the capture and control of perchlorate by restoring impacted wells, with treatment. The results of that work are summarized in a second report, Analysis of Perchlorate Groundwater Observation Well Page 10-10 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Containment in Groundwater Near the Whittaker-Bermite Property, Santa Clarita, California (CH2M Hill 2004b). Application of the groundwater model for analysis of basin yield was documented in the 2005 Analysis of Groundwater Basin Yield, Upper Santa Clara River Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin. The analysis was updated in 2009 in order to further assess groundwater development potential and possible augmentation of the groundwater operating plan under consideration of potential global warming impacts, reduced state water reliability, and planned recharge projects. Groundwater Operating Plan (from 2005 UWMP) The groundwater component of overall water supply in the Region derives from a groundwater operating plan developed over the last 20 years to meet water requirements (municipal, agricultural, small domestic) while maintaining groundwater in a sustainable condition (i.e., no long-term depletion of groundwater or interrelated surface water). This operating plan also addresses groundwater contamination issues, consistent with both the MOU and the GWMP described above. The groundwater operating plan is based on the concept that pumping can vary from year to year to allow increased groundwater use in dry periods and increased recharge during wet periods and to collectively ensure that groundwater is adequately replenished through various wet/dry cycles. As described in the MOU, and subsequently formalized in the GWMP, the operating yield concept has been quantified as ranges of annual pumping volumes. The current purveyors' groundwater operating plan has been in the 2008 basin yield report and is summarized in the 2010 Santa Clarita Valley UWMP, as described in Section 3.1.1.6. Ultimately, the intent of the operating plan is to maintain sustainable groundwater conditions to support the combination of municipal (purveyor), agricultural, and small private groundwater use on an ongoing basis. 10.2.2.2 Water Quality Monitoring Drinking water quality is monitored through the following means. Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Compliance Monitoring and Reporting All public water systems are required to produce water that complies with the SDWA. To this end, specific monitoring information is required and conducted routinely. Results of the monitoring are reported to DPH. In addition, monitoring information is required to be published in an annual Consumer Confidence Report (described below). Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule Results The 1996 SDWA Amendments mandate that the US EPA publish a list of unregulated contaminants that may pose a potential public health risk in drinking water. This list is called the Contaminant Candidate List. The initial 1998 accounting listed 60 contaminants. US EPA uses this list to prioritize research and data collection efforts for future rulemaking purposes. The 1996 SDWA Amendments incorporated a tiered monitoring approach. The rule required all large public water systems and a nationally representative sample of small public water systems Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 10-11 serving less than 10,000 people to monitor the contaminants. The information from the monitoring program for the Region are compiled and submitted to the State. Monitoring Done as Part of TMDL Implementation As discussed in Section 10.1.1.5, as conditions change in the Region, such as the identification of new TMDLs or water quality standards, the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan is amended. Compliance monitoring is required by the Los Angeles RWQCB, and performed on an ongoing basis in order to determine if a watershed is in compliance with an identified TMDL. A compliance monitoring program for implementing a TMDL would generally include the anticipated compliance points for the monitoring program, parameters to be measured, analytical methods and their sensitivity for reliably detecting the regulated chemicals, frequency of measurements, etc. With such information it will be possible to evaluate whether the proposed compliance monitoring could be expected to be adequate for detecting significant violations of the requirements set forth in the TMDL. 10.2.2.3 Surface Water Flow Monitoring LACDPW operates and maintains six automatic rain gauges and two stream flow gauges in the Region. Rain gauges continuously record information for precipitation in durations ranging from 5 minutes to 24 hours. Rain gauges are located in Newhall, Aliso Canyon, Bouquet Canyon, Mint Canyon, Acton Camp, and at the Santa Clara River headwaters. The two stream flow gauges are located near the Lang railroad bridge and near the Interstate -5 crossing of the Santa Clara River. The records for these gauges go back for many years. For example, the Lang stream flow gauge record goes back to April 1970 and the Old Road Bridge (Interstate -5) gauge goes back to September 1981. 10.2.3 Data Reporting 10.2.3.1 Data Reporting as Part of the City of Santa Clarita Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit The City of Santa Clarita's Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit requires developers of certain developments/redevelopments to prepare engineering documents to prevent potential pollutants from entering the storm drain system, such as an Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (USMP) and/or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The municipal NPDES requires that the City of Santa Clarita submit an Annual Storm Water Permit Report and Assessment to the Los Angeles RWQCB. The Annual Reports include the information necessary to assess compliance relative to the permit, and the effectiveness of implementation of permit requirements on storm water quality. Further, a new Los Angeles County NPDES Permit was adopted in 2012. The permit regulates discharges into storm drains and requires permittees to prohibit or severely restrict non storm water discharges (flows when it's not raining), including overflowing landscape irrigation, from getting into the storm drain. Specifically, the NPDES permit requires the City and Los Angeles County to develop and implement procedures that minimize discharge of landscape irrigation to the storm drain by promoting conservation programs. This will result in enhanced data collection and reporting. Page 10-12 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 10.2.3.2 Data Reporting as Part of County of Los Angeles Municipal Storm Water Permit The County of Los Angeles Municipal Storm Water Permit provides the waste discharge requirements for the discharge or contributions to discharges of storm water and urban runoff from municipal separate storm sewer systems (storm drain systems). The countywide permit covers the LACFCD, the County, and the 84 incorporated cities within the LACFCD, including the City of Santa Clarita. Each entity permitted under the countywide permit must implement a storm water quality management program (SQMP). The data that is collected as part of the SQMP is submitted annually to the Los Angeles RWQCB, which is then compiled in the unified Annual Storm Water Program Report. Data will be collected related to receiving water quality, at stormwater outfalls, and at established TMDL monitoring points. Each unified report documents the Permittees' progress in implementing the SQMP and the requirements of the countywide permit. Data that is collected, including the annual reports, are available for public review on the Los Angeles RWQCB's website. Annual Santa Clarita Valley Consumer Confidence Reports The preparation of Consumer Confidence Reports is required by the California Health and Safety Code §116470, as well as the SDWA and US EPA. This code requires every public water system, as a condition of its operating permit, to annually prepare a report and provide a copy of that report to each customer. It also requires public water systems with more than 10,000 service connections that detect contaminants above their public health goals (PHGs) to provide PHG exceedance reports every three years and to hold public hearings regarding their reports. The Consumer Confidence Report includes information on a system's source water, the levels of any detected contaminants, and compliance with drinking water regulations, plus some educational material. Contaminants typically reported include turbidity, coliform, lead/copper, unregulated contaminants, and those contaminants of concern specific to a particular location. The annual Consumer Confidence Report for the Valley (titled the Santa Clarita Valley Water Quality Report) is provided by CLWA and the local water purveyors. The goal of the report is to provide customers with the most current information about the quality of their water. Each report contains a summary of thousands of water quality tests performed in the Valley, as well as discussions of noteworthy contaminants, updates on regulatory news, and tips on saving indoor and outdoor water use. 10.2.3.3 Data Reporting as Part of the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California The Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California was originally executed in 1991. The MOU includes several water conservation BMPs intended to reduce California's long-term urban water demands, and signatory agencies report progress on their implementation to the CUWCC. The BMPs are currently implemented by MOU signatories on a voluntary basis, but existing legislation also institutes requirements for demonstration of water conservation measure implementation in order to qualify for State grant funding. The County signed the MOU in 1996 on behalf of all its Waterworks Districts. CLWA signed the MOU in 2001 on its own behalf as a water wholesaler, and on behalf of the local retail water Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 10-13 purveyors. NCWD signed the MOU separately on its own behalf in 2002. VWC signed the MOU separately on its own behalf in 2006. Each of these agencies now files BMP implementation reports with the CUWCC. 10.2.4 Plan Performance Generally, the success of the IRWMP will depend on how well the individual plan objectives are accomplished. Achievement of all of these objectives will, in large part, determine the success of local integrated regional water management planning processes. As described in Section 1, IRWMP updates are a defined task within the USCR Regional Water Management Group Memorandum of Understanding. This IRWMP is a dynamic document and is part of an ongoing local effort to achieve integrated local water management. The process, through Stakeholder participation and plan revisions, will continue for many years and will be an effective mechanism for addressing the water management issues facing the Region. As a consequence, IRWMP objectives, regional priorities, and statewide priorities will continue to be reviewed for relevance and modified as needed to ensure the overall IRWMP reflects regional changing needs and continues to be effective. Additionally, Candidate Projects will be reviewed and evaluated on a regular (every five years) basis to ensure that current plan objectives will be met and that the resulting Plan Projects offer the greatest benefit possible. Periodically, a new set of Plan Projects will be selected to address revised IRWMP objectives and State and regional priorities. This ongoing review and update allows the plan to undergo "adaptive management", e.g., allow the IRWMP to evolve in response to changing conditions and as better data is developed. IRWMP revisions will result in: (1) An updated evaluation of information and data related to watershed conditions (2) An evaluation of projects/actions and their contribution to meeting IRWMP objectives (3) Revised objectives, strategies, and projects based on new conditions and past project successes As projects are implemented in the Region as part of this IRWMP, project performance will be assessed and outcomes will be monitored, and the results from this monitoring will be used to guide future project implementation. If monitoring reveals, for example, that a project is progressing as planned and regional changes do not necessitate revisiting project implementation, then changes to project prioritization would not be anticipated. However, if monitoring reveals that a project, or suite of projects, are not producing the anticipated result, corrective actions (whether it be improving a specific project, changing the project prioritization, strengthening the measures by which those projects are being monitored, etc.) can be implemented. This information will feed into future updates of the plan, and keeps it a living document. 10.2.5 Evaluation of Plan Performance Table 10.2-2 lists the process that will be used to evaluate plan performance. Page 10-14 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 10.2-2 PROCESS FOR MEASURING PLAN PERFORMANCE Responsibility for IRWMP The RWMG, led by the Chair, will be responsible for evaluating IRWMP Implementation implementation performance Evaluation Frequency of The RWMG will annually evaluate success at implementing projects in the Evaluation IRWMP Data, project descriptions, maps, and contact information for implementation projects will be posted on the IRWMP website. Upon project completion, there will be a posting of a summary of project evaluation measures, targets, Tracking and performance of the project compared to the target. This data will make it Implementation possible to determine how projects are advancing IRWMP objectives. The RWMG, lead by the Chair, will be responsible for tracking IRWMP implementation and ensuring implementation project data is available to the RWMG, Stakeholders, and other interested parties. "Lessons Learned" will be incorporated during each update of the IRWMP. A Improving Plan update has the benefit of input from the RWMG and the broader Implementation of Stakeholder group. During Plan updates objectives and measures are Future Projects reviewed, refined, and revised if necessary to reflect regional conditions and needs and to incorporate new data. Applicable Resource Management Strategies, to meet objectives, are also re-evaluated during each update. Responsibility for The project proponent will have the responsibility for development of project - Project Specific specific monitoring plans and will be responsible for project -specific Monitoring Plans monitoring activities. Timing of Project Project specific monitoring plans shall be prepared prior to the start of project Specific Monitoring construction or implementation. Plans Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 10-15 Table 10.2-1 cont. 10.2.6 Plan Performance to Date Since the inception of the IRWMP progress has been made to meet the stated objectives of reducing water demand, increase water supply, improve water quality, and promote resource stewardship (objectives of the 2008 IRWMP). Table 10.2-3 provides a summary of plan performance to date. Since 2008 the Upper Santa Clara River Region has aggressively implemented water conservation actions to reduce potable water demand. This includes actions undertaken as part of the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan, a plan to identify programs and projects that will most effectively reduce per capita water use in the Santa Clarita Valley. The goal of the Plan is to achieve a long-term reduction in water demand of at least 10 percent over the next 20 years. Activities include audits for large landscape areas, audits for commercial and industrial customers, and installation of weather based irrigation controllers. These programs have already demonstrated savings of 986 AF. Full implementation is expected to reduce water demand by 6,580 AF (over the lifetime of the various devices and programs). Other projects in the Region to reduce potable water demand include the CLWA Recycled Water Master Plan. Page 10-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Project specific monitoring plans shall include, at the minimum, the following: A description of what is being monitored. Examples include: • The amount of recycled water production • Number of customers connecting to recycled water system • Change in invasive species cover • Change in dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, turbidity, salinity • Change in average number of different species occurring within a Contents of Project- given area (habitat diversity) Specific Monitoring A description of measures to remedy problems encountered during Plans monitoring. A description of the location of monitoring and monitoring frequency. A description of monitoring protocols and methodologies, and assignment of the responsibility for monitoring. A description of what data will be shared with the IRWMP Stakeholders and with what frequency. Identification of what State databases information will be provided to, and requirements for data submittal. Resources and procedures to ensure the monitoring schedule will be maintained (e.g., identify responsible parties and alternates and funding for monitoring). 10.2.6 Plan Performance to Date Since the inception of the IRWMP progress has been made to meet the stated objectives of reducing water demand, increase water supply, improve water quality, and promote resource stewardship (objectives of the 2008 IRWMP). Table 10.2-3 provides a summary of plan performance to date. Since 2008 the Upper Santa Clara River Region has aggressively implemented water conservation actions to reduce potable water demand. This includes actions undertaken as part of the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan, a plan to identify programs and projects that will most effectively reduce per capita water use in the Santa Clarita Valley. The goal of the Plan is to achieve a long-term reduction in water demand of at least 10 percent over the next 20 years. Activities include audits for large landscape areas, audits for commercial and industrial customers, and installation of weather based irrigation controllers. These programs have already demonstrated savings of 986 AF. Full implementation is expected to reduce water demand by 6,580 AF (over the lifetime of the various devices and programs). Other projects in the Region to reduce potable water demand include the CLWA Recycled Water Master Plan. Page 10-16 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 TABLE 10.2-3 PLAN PERFORMANCE TO DATE The Region has seen actions to enhance water supply. This includes the Santa Clarita Valley Southern End Recycled Water Project. This project will make it possible to deliver reclaimed water to 69 additional customers. When fully complete, this project will offset 910 AFY potable water demand. Also providing water supply benefits is the San Francisquito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project undertaken by the City of Santa Clarita and US Forest Service. This project will remove approximately 20 acres of the invasive species (arundo and tamarisk) within a 150 -acre area. Both arundo and tamarisk consume large amounts of water, which negatively affects both surface water and groundwater availability. Dudley (personal communication 2010) estimates that every acre of arundo removal by the project will result in a water savings of approximately 10 AFY. Hendrickson and McGaugh (2005) estimate that savings associated with an acre of tamarisk removal amount to about 4 AFY. Native vegetation that replaces the arundo and tamarisk once it is removed uses about 2 AFY per acre. Thus, every acre of arundo removed will result in 8 AFY of water savings. Every acre of tamarisk removed will result in a savings of 2 AFY. Many projects implemented in the Region contribute to improved water quality. This includes the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan, which reduces urban water runoff and associated pollution. The San Franciscquito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project improves water quality by promoting the restoration of native plants and the associated benefits of stream shading (reduced algae blooms) and by reducing the river bank erosion. NCWD, a Stakeholder in the IRWMP Region is in the process of removing a sewer trunk line from the Santa Clara Riverbed. Large flows on the Santa Clara River are known to erode the dirt around the sewer line and propel debris that could cause a line break. A line break would cause an unauthorized release of raw sewage in the Santa Clara River. Not only would a line break be detrimental to the ecosystems in and around the river, but also could affect domestic Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 10-17 Ob'eclives M a m N CL a d y W N N aE ° E`m 3 o E Plan Projects rr _S a` v> Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan Programs X X X X Removal of Sewer Trunk Line from Santa Clara Riverbed X X Santa Clarita Valley Southern End Recycled Water Project Phase 2C X X X X San Francis uito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project X X X Upper Santa Clara River Salt and Nutrient Management Plan X Climate Change Technical Study X The Region has seen actions to enhance water supply. This includes the Santa Clarita Valley Southern End Recycled Water Project. This project will make it possible to deliver reclaimed water to 69 additional customers. When fully complete, this project will offset 910 AFY potable water demand. Also providing water supply benefits is the San Francisquito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project undertaken by the City of Santa Clarita and US Forest Service. This project will remove approximately 20 acres of the invasive species (arundo and tamarisk) within a 150 -acre area. Both arundo and tamarisk consume large amounts of water, which negatively affects both surface water and groundwater availability. Dudley (personal communication 2010) estimates that every acre of arundo removal by the project will result in a water savings of approximately 10 AFY. Hendrickson and McGaugh (2005) estimate that savings associated with an acre of tamarisk removal amount to about 4 AFY. Native vegetation that replaces the arundo and tamarisk once it is removed uses about 2 AFY per acre. Thus, every acre of arundo removed will result in 8 AFY of water savings. Every acre of tamarisk removed will result in a savings of 2 AFY. Many projects implemented in the Region contribute to improved water quality. This includes the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan, which reduces urban water runoff and associated pollution. The San Franciscquito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project improves water quality by promoting the restoration of native plants and the associated benefits of stream shading (reduced algae blooms) and by reducing the river bank erosion. NCWD, a Stakeholder in the IRWMP Region is in the process of removing a sewer trunk line from the Santa Clara Riverbed. Large flows on the Santa Clara River are known to erode the dirt around the sewer line and propel debris that could cause a line break. A line break would cause an unauthorized release of raw sewage in the Santa Clara River. Not only would a line break be detrimental to the ecosystems in and around the river, but also could affect domestic Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 10-17 groundwater wells within the Region. Removal of the truck line will avoid negative flooding impacts, protect water quality, and protect environmental quality. Projects implemented in the Region generally have multi -benefits. Many of the projects described for their water supply, water quality, and flood benefits also promote resource stewardship. Reduced urban runoff from the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan reduces pollution in Region's streams and creeks. The Santa Clarita Valley Southern End Recycled Water Project reduces demand for imported water and reduces stress on the Sacrament -San Joaquin Bay Delta. The San Franciscquito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project promotes restoration of native species and biodiversity in the Region. The removal of the sewer trunk line from the Santa Clara River avoids risk of untreated sewage entering the river and thereby impacting its varied environmental resources. In addition to the ongoing projects described above, a set of six projects prioritized during this 2014 IRWMP update are seeking funding under the Proposition 84 IRWM Round 2 Implementation Grant. These projects will significantly contribute to meeting IRWMP objectives by adding to the benefits being accrued by the ongoing projects, including water conservation, water quality improvement, and resource stewardship enhancement. Projects include (1) Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Removal Program Implementation, (2) Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach Program, (3) Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant, (4) Santa Clarita Water Division Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Water Use Efficiency Programs, (5) Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan (additional projects), and (6) Foothill Feeder Connection. Page 10-18 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 11: Coordination and Outreach This section provides information on outreach and coordination with local agencies and the broader public, undertaken as part of IRWMP development. 11.1 Coordination with Local Land Use Planning The RWMG includes the City of Santa Clarita, CLWA, LACFCD, NCWD, RMC, SCWD, SCVSD, and VWC. The City of Santa Clarita is the land use planning agency responsible for land use decisions within City borders. Los Angeles County is the land use agency for the unincorporated areas of the Region. Most projects envisioned within this IRWMP in some way are affected by land use planning. 11.1.1 Linkages Between the IRWMP and Local Planning Documents This section describes the linkages and dynamics between the IRWMP and local planning. The IRWMP has drawn heavily on existing planning documents and planning programs of local agencies in the following ways: Regional Description. The IRWMP has utilized information from the Los Angeles County General Plan, the County's Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan, and the Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest, as well as discussions with City, County, and National Forest planning staff, to describe the Region. The IRWMP relies on these planning documents to describe the existing setting of the Region, including existing and planned land uses (see Section 2). In addition to providing information on the social and cultural makeup of the regional community, these plans also provided information on population projections, economic conditions and trends and special environmental resources and environmental water demands. The Los Angeles County General Plan, the County's Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan, OVOV, and the Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest provided a framework from which to further analyze potential regional issues and needs with the Stakeholder group. • Evaluation of Climate Change. The Climate Action Plan by the City of Santa Clarita informed and enhanced the IRWMP description of potential climate change impact and potential climate change vulnerabilities. Regional Issues, Needs, and Objectives. Stakeholders were asked to identify major water issues and problems. Specific consideration of regional water supplies and issues was informed with data from multiple local planning documents, but primarily from UWMPs prepared by the local water agencies. Water quality issues were examined using information contained in the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan and its amendments. Habitat, species, and resource stewardship issues were examined based on general plans, the Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest, planning documents prepared by the Ventura County Watershed Protection District (VCWPD), Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 11-1 including the Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan and documents of, and discussions with, the Ventura County Resource Conservation District (VCRCD). Based on the issues identified, Stakeholders were then asked to develop IRWMP objectives. As described in Section 6, in developing objectives for the IRWMP, Stakeholders determined that it was important that objectives not only be measurable, but also that the existing condition of the resources at issue be quantified so that change/progress could be reasonably ascertained at a later date. The existing condition was evaluated and summarized using a variety of reports and studies and provided to the Stakeholders for review and comment. These reports and Stakeholder comments contained valuable insight about how change or progress towards a given objective could be measured. Local planning references used to develop measurable objectives are identified in Section 6. • Outreach. Because the County and City of Santa Clarita general plans, along with the Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest, provide a comprehensive overview of the Region, these plans were reviewed to assist with identifying potential Stakeholders and interests for participation in the IRWMP. • Project Prioritization Process. One of the criteria used to rank projects is the project's compatibility with other planning documents for the Region (see Section 8). 11.1.2 Participation by Local Planning Entities Local planning entities, including City of Santa Clarita and County planning staff, local US Forest Service personnel, and Resource Conservation District staff participated in development of the IRWMP and will participate in continuing IRWMP implementation. These local planning entities participated in Stakeholder meetings, provided updated data (as described above), reviewed and commented on IRWMP sections, sponsored Candidate Projects, and participated in the review of Candidate Projects. As described in Section 8.5.1, these planning agencies, along with the general Stakeholder group, will be asked to participate in all updates of the IRWMP, by participating in meetings, providing information and data necessary to revise objectives, by making recommendations regarding project ranking, and by sponsoring projects. Coordination of water management and activities of local agencies is meant to avoid conflicts and take advantage of efficiencies. As described in section 10.1, local land use plans were important sources used in the preparation of this Plan. 11.2 Coordination with State and Federal Agencies 11.2.1 Participation in IRWMP Development RWMG members have a long history of working with State and Federal agencies to address water management issues. Local agency staff and elected officials have worked closely over the years with the Los Angeles RWQCB, CDFW, DWR, Resource Conservation districts, DPH, the US ACE, the US FINS, and the US Forest Service. Page 11-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 The Los Angeles RWQCB, DWR, and US Forest Service are active participants in development of the IRWMP. These agencies regularly attended Stakeholder meetings and participated in the group discussions. These agencies also provided up-to-date information related to the resources they are tasked with managing and protecting. In general, State and Federal agency Stakeholders: • Participated in Stakeholder meetings • Reviewed and commented on IRWMP sections • Provided guidance on project ranking • Submitted Candidate Projects At key milestones in plan development, the RWMG sought input on the plan from DWR. On multiple occasions, DWR participated in Stakeholder meetings. 11.2.2 Participation in IRWMP Implementation As described in Section 8.5.1, the RWMG intends to continue coordination with State and Federal agencies as the IRWMP is updated through time. It is anticipated that State and Federal agencies will continue to participate in the IRWMP as Stakeholders and Local Project Sponsors. Ongoing participation by these entities will enhance the technical data and knowledge in the IRWMP. These agencies will also be able to identify and recommend funding sources for IRWMP implementation. In addition, implementation of Plan Projects will require coordination with multiple Federal and State agencies, such as: CDFW and US FWS. CDFW and US FWS oversee implementation of the California and Federal Endangered Species Act and regulate activities that may impact endangered species and their habitats (Fish and Game Code, Sections 2050 et seq.). Any Plan Projects with potential impacts to sensitive species will require coordination with these agencies. CDFW also oversees any activity that will substantially modify a river, stream, or lake (Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.). Before undertaking any activity that would result in modification of a river, stream, or lake, it will be necessary to obtain a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. • DPH. DPH regulates public water systems, including allowable treatment technologies for drinking water and the treatment and distribution of recycled water. Any Plan Projects that involve treatment of drinking water or recycled water will require coordination with DPH. Los Angeles RWQCB. The Los Angeles RWQCB sets goals for groundwater and surface water quality in Los Angeles and Ventura counties. Based on these goals, the Los Angeles RWQCB regulates discharges to groundwater and surface water, including stormwater runoff. Any Plan Projects that could result in stormwater runoff or which could result in a change in discharges to surface or groundwater may have to coordinate with the Los Angeles RWQCB. Under the federal Clean Water Act Section 401, every applicant for a federal permit or license for any activity which may result in a discharge to a water body must obtain State Water Quality Certification (called a 401 Certification) to ensure that the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 11-3 proposed project will not violate state water quality standards. Most 401 Certifications are issued in connection with US ACE permits for dredge and fill discharges. The Los Angeles RWQCB reviews projects for 401 Certification. • US ACE. US ACE has regulatory authority over all discharges of dredge and fill materials within navigable waters and waters (such as intermittent streams and wetlands) with significant connection to navigable waters. The US ACE regulates such projects through the issuance of permits. Any Plan Projects that could result in discharge of dredge and fill material to a water body may have to coordinate with the US ACE. 11.3 Disadvantaged Community Outreach As defined by the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Guidelines, a disadvantaged community (DAC) is a municipality, including, but not limited to a city, town or county, or a reasonably isolated and divisible segment of a larger municipality, that has an average median household income (MHI) that is less than 80 percent of the statewide annual MHI. In 2010, 80 percent of the State of California's MHI was $48,706. As described in Section 2.5.3, no communities that meet the strict State definition of a DAC were identified within the Region. However, because cost of living varies from place to place, a statewide income measure may not be entirely applicable to a specific area. This fact is illustrated by the City of Santa Clarita housing assistance guidelines. The City of Santa Clarita housing assistance guidelines were used as a proxy measure of what income levels could be characterized as disadvantaged within the Region. By these proxy standards, a household of 4 persons would be considered disadvantaged if household income were less than $59,200. In the spirit of providing "a safe, clean, affordable, and sufficient water supply to meet the needs of California residents, farms, and businesses" (CWC §79501(b)), an outreach effort directed at DAC members was developed during the 2008 IRWMP process. An initial DAC Outreach Subcommittee was formed, consisting of the City of Santa Clarita, LACDPW, and RMC. During this initial effort, as well as during the IRWMP update with the assistance of DWR's DAC Mapping Tool, no DACs were identified within the Region. As a result, the subcommittee has not actively conducted outreach during the IRWMP update. 11.3.1 Environmental Justice Concerns for environmental justice will need to be addressed as part of IRWMP implementation. As the Region continues to develop, care will need to be taken to prevent creating environmental justice issues that unfairly affect certain communities. The IRWMP objectives of reducing potable water demand, increasing water supply, improving water quality, promoting resource stewardship, addressing flood ing/hydromodification, taking actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change, and promoting projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, must be consistently applied to future projects so as to ensure greatest regional benefits without placing an undue burden on a specific community. 11.3.2 Native American Tribes Open channels of communication and good working relationships are already established between agencies/companies of the Santa Clarita Valley and the Tataviam Band of Mission Page 11-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Indians due to several development projects involving their lands. Invitations for the IRWMP meetings were extended; a representative from the group attended early stakeholder meetings and communication is maintained with the tribe via email. 11.3.3 Public Outreach The planning process used during the development of the Upper Santa Clara IRWMP created many opportunities for the public to be both part of, and aware of, regional water management and the IRWMP efforts. Public outreach was, and continues to be, an on-going effort during the IRWMP planning effort. Public outreach is accomplished through a variety of means including: • Advertisement of the public hearing to initiate the preparation of the IRWMP • Maintaining a project website to facilitate public and Stakeholder outreach • Advertising the IRWMP and its development on agency websites, in agency newsletters and local newspapers • Inclusion of a public comment period on the agenda at each Stakeholder meeting • Using direct mail and email to inform Stakeholders and possible interested parties about upcoming meetings • Using email to facilitate distribution, review, and comment on the IRWMP by Stakeholders • Holding a public workshop to review the draft IRWMP • Regularly providing information to local media • Teaching and discussing the material in classes at a local community center • Discussing the issue with attendees at City of Santa Clarita events • Brainstorming with stakeholder group regarding ideas to expand the group • Asking stakeholders what time works best for them to attend meetings • Soliciting input from stakeholders on IRWMP drafts and other documents The Upper Santa Clara IRWMP coordinated and participated in multiple events as part of Watershed Awareness Month, providing members of the public an opportunity to learn more about local watersheds. For example, as part of the State of the Watershed Event for the Santa Clara River, more than 60 people attended a workshop and tours were conducted of the habitat restoration project on the Nature Conservancy property, history of agricultural practices at the Santa Paula Agricultural Museum, review of successful riparian plant restoration in the Upper Santa Clara River, and use of recycled water of a commercial nursery operation in the community of Piru. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 11-5 Efforts have also been undertaken to collaborate with the Lower Santa Clara River watershed group. Four joint Upper Santa Clara and Lower Santa Clara meetings were conducted during the IRWMP update. To enhance outreach and coordination with the public and the Stakeholder group, a website was established for the IRWMP (www.scrwaterplan.org). This website advertises the time and place of each of the upcoming Stakeholder meetings; the website also provides the handouts, agenda, and minutes for each of the past meetings. A visitor to the website can get maps of the Region, download sections of the draft IRWMP, and get the necessary forms and guidance for submitting a project concept. Links to the IRWMP website are provided on the websites of agencies participating in the RWMG. Each of the Stakeholder meetings was open to the public and each meeting included a period reserved for public comment. A specific public workshop was held to solicit public input on the draft IRWMP. Meeting materials can be found on the Upper Santa Clara IRWMP website. The RWMG provided the public with regular updates on the IRWMP. These updates were contained in agency newsletters and local newspaper articles (see Appendix A). Members of the RWMG also made an effort to provide IRWMP updates in other public forums, including the regular WCVC meeting and at the West Ranch Town Council. At the conclusion of the public draft IRWMP review period, public comments were incorporated, with guidance from the RWMG, so as to create the final IRWMP. The process for stakeholder involvement and communication while implementing the IRWMP, including future activities for updating the Plan, will be similar to those used to develop the Plan. 11.3.4 Public Outreach to Diverse Groups From the beginning of our IRWM process, the intent has been, and will continue to be, the involvement of all people and agencies that have an interest in water resources. Since the initial mailing efforts, records have been kept of interested groups and email has been used to keep them up to date on the process. The use of the local newspaper and the fact the stakeholder meetings are open to anyone maintains the ongoing ability for continued participation of diverse groups and the potential for new members to join the effort. The implemented outreach efforts as described above encourage involvement of diverse groups and outreach to new interested parties. Page 11-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Section 12: References AVEK [Antelope Valley -East Kern Water Agency]. 2011. 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Brekke, L.D., M.D. Dettinger, E.P., Maurer, and M. Anderson. 2008. Significance of model credibility in estimating climate change projection distribution for regional hydroclimatological risk assessments. Clim Change, 89(3-4), 371-394, D O I :10.1007/sl 0584-007-9388-3. Brooks, Norman H. 1982. Storms, Floods, and Debris Flows in Southern California and Arizona 1978 and 1980: Proceedings of a Symposium, September 17-18, 1980. California Climate Change Center. 2009. Using Future Climate Projections to Support Water Resources decision Making in California. May. California Department of Transportation. 2011. District 7 — TMDL Summary. Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist07/divisions/design/watershed/. Accessed on September 9, 2012. California Department of Water Resources [DWR]. 2012. Integrated Regional Water Management Grants — Resources and Links. Available at: http://www.water.ca.gov/irwm/integregio resourceslinks. cfm. Accessed on June 22, 2012. California Natural Resources Agency [CNRA]. 2009. "2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. www.climatechange.ca.gov/adaptation/documents/Statewide Adaptation Strategy.pdf California Natural Resources Agency [CNRA], California Emergency Management Agency [CalEMA]. 2012. California Adaptation Planning Guide. July. CH2M Hill. 2004. Analysis of Perchlorate Containment in Groundwater Near the Whittaker- Bermite Property, Santa Clarita, California. December. City of Santa Clarita and Los Angeles County. 2004. Santa Clarita Valley General Plan ("One Valley, One Vision') Technical Background Report. February. City of Santa Clarita. 2012. Climate Action Plan — Draft Report. May. City of Santa Clarita. 2011. General Plan. June. City of Santa Clarita. 2010. Hazard Mitigation Plan. City of Santa Clarita. 2007. Santa Clarita Open Space Preservation District. Information Available at: http://santaclaritaopenspace.com/index.asp City of Santa Clarita. 2004. City of Santa Clarita Community Demographics. Available at: http://www.santa-cla rita.com/cityha II/cd/ed/com m u n ity_profile/demog raphics.asp Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 12-1 City of Santa Clarita. 1999. City of Santa Clarita General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Element. Adopted June 1991, Amended through February 23, 1999. City of Santa Clarita. 1991. City of Santa Clarita General Plan, Parks and Recreation Element. CLWA [Castaic Lake Water Agency]. 2012. Castaic Lake Water Agency FY 2012/2013 Budget. May. CLWA, SCWD [Santa Clarita Water Division], LACWWD [Los Angeles County Waterworks] No. 36, NCWD [Newhall County Water District], and VWC [Valencia Water Company]. 2012. 2011 Santa Clarita Valley Water Report. June. CLWA, SCWD [Santa Clarita Water Division], LACWWD [Los Angeles County Waterworks] No. 36, NCWD [Newhall County Water District], and VWC [Valencia Water Company]. 2011. 2010 Santa Clarita Valley Urban Water Management Plan. June. CLWA, SCWD, LACWWD No. 36, NCWD, and VWC. 2008. Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan. September. CLWA 2007. Recycled Water Master Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report. CLWA. 2006. Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Strategic Plan. CLWA. 2003. Groundwater Management Plan - Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin, Los Angeles County, California. December. CLWA. 2002. Draft Recycled Water Master Plan. May. County of Ventura Public Works Agency. Flood Info — Community Rating System: Are You Prepared for a Flood in Your Neighborhood? Available at: hftp://www.vcfloodinfo.com/. Accessed on January 16, 2013. Dudley, T. 2000. "Arundo donax." Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. Bossard, Randall and Hoshovsky, eds. University of California Press. Berkeley. Drago, J.A. and L. Brekke 2005. Assessment Tool to Evaluate Climate Change Impacts on the Source Water Quality of Lake Cachuma, California. Final report prepared on behalf of the Goleta Water District for the Global Change Research Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under cooperative agreement number EPA -R-82980601. June. DWR [California Department of Water Resources]. 2012. State Water Project Final Delivery Reliability Report 2011. June. DWR. 2010. CALFED Surface Storage Investigations Progress Report. November. DWR. 2009. California Water Plan. DWR. 2008. Managing an Uncertain Future — Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for California's Water. October. Page 12-2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 DWR. 2002a. Acton Valley Groundwater Basin. California's Groundwater Bulletin 118. Last Update: February 2004. DWR. 2002b. Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, Santa Clara River Valley East Subbasin. California's Groundwater Bulletin 118. Last Update: January 2006. DWR. 1993. Investigation of Water Quality and Beneficial Uses: Upper Santa Clara River Hydrologic Area, Final Project Report. Hanak, E. and J. Lund. 2008. Adapting California's Water Management to Climate Change. November 2008 HK&C [Hart, King & Coldren]. 2010 City of Santa Clarita Approves $1.6 Million Dollar Capital Pass Through for Flood Damage Repairs. Hendrickson, D. and S. McGaugh. 2005. "Arundo Donax (Carrizo Grande/Giant Cane) in Cuatro Cienegas". http://www.utexas.edu/tmm/sponsored sites/dfc/cuatroc/organ isms/non native/ arundo/Arundo.html. Accessed December 2010. Kiparsky, M., and P.H. Gleick. 2005. Climate Change and California Water Resources: A Survey and Summary of the Literature. Prepared by Pacific Institute for California Energy Commission. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. 2006. Sedimentation Manual. March. Los Angeles County Sanitation District. 2012. Website: Wastewater Collection Systems. Available at: http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/wcs.asp. Accessed on July 30, 2012. Los Angeles County Waterworks District [LACWWD] No. 37. 2004. Acton -Agus Dulce Conceptual Water Master Plan for Water Facilities. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power — Water Resources Division. 2012. Hydrologic Records, 406-Newhall-Soledad. Available at: http://www.ladpw.org/wrd/precip/. Accessed June 22, 2012. Los Angeles RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board). 2011. Proposed Basin Plan Language for Amendment to the Basin Plan — Update to Chapter 7. Available at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/rwgcb4/water issues/programs/basin plan/index.shtml. Accessed: May 30, 2012. Los Angeles RWQCB [Regional Water Quality Control Board]. 2010. Resolution No. R10-006. Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region to Incorporate a Total Maximum Daily Load for Indicator Bacteria in Santa Clara River Estuary and Reaches 3, 5, 6, and 7. July. Available at: http://www.waterboards. ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/docs/santaclarariver—bacteria/at t_agnd.pdf . Accessed on September 9, 2012. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP # February 2014 Page 12-3 Los Angeles RWQCB. 2006. Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region through Revision of the Implementation Plan for the Upper Santa Clara River Chloride TMDL Resolution 04-004. Resolution Number R4-2006-016. August. Los Angeles RWQCB. 2003. Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region to include a TMDL for Nitrogen Compounds in the Santa Clara River. Resolution Number 03-011. August. Los Angeles, County of. 2012. Final Program EIR for the County of Los Angeles' Proposed Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan — One Valley One Vision. January. Los Angeles, County of. 2011. Final Draft Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan. September. Los Angeles, County of. 2006. General Plan Comprehensive Update and Amendment Initial Study. Los Angeles, County of. 2004. American Community Survey, General Demographics Statistics. Available at: http://planning.lacounty.gov/doc/stat/LA_PopulationEthnicity.pdf Morrill, J.C., R.C. Bales, and M.H. Conklin 2005. Estimating Stream Temperature from Air Temperature: Implications for Future Water Quality. Journal Environmental Engineering, 131(1)3 139-146. National Research Council. 2012. Sea -Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. The National Academic Press. Penrod, K., C. Cabanero, P. Beier, C. Luke, W. Spencer, and E. Rubin. 2004. South Coast Missing Linkages: A Linkage Design for the San Gabriel-Castaic Connection. Unpublished report. South Coast Wildlands, Idyllwild, CA. www.scwildlands.org. Portland Cement Association (PCA). 2006. Soil -Cement Solutions: Soil -Cement Stands the Test of Near Record Breaking Rainfall in Southern California. Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce. 2011. Regional Facts and Figures. Available at: http://www.scvchamber.com/live-work/Regional Facts Figures.aspx. Accessed: June 1, 2012. SCVSD (Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District). 2013. Final Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Chloride Compliance Facilities Plan and EIR. October. Santa Clarita Water Division of Castaic Lake Water Agency [SCWD]. 2012. Forwarded email correspondence from A. Pontious. SCAG [Southern California Association of Governments]. 2008. Final 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan. October. Schwarz et al., 2011, Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning. Prepared by CDM for US Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 and California Department of Water Resources. November 2011. Page 12-4 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 SCVSD [Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation Districts]. 1998. Final 2015 Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System Facilities Plan and Environmental Impact Report. January. Slade, Richard C. and Associates. 2004. Peer Review and Hydrogeologic Assessment, Agua Dulce Winery and Vineyards, Northeastern Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for LACDPW. March. Slade, Richard C. and Associates. 1990. Assessment of Hydrogeologic Conditions Within Alluvival and Stream Terrace Deposits, Acton Area, Los Angeles County. Prepared for LACDPW and ASL Consulting Engineers. Stillwater Sciences. 2011. Assessment of Geomorphic Processes for the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed. Prepared for VCWPD, LACDPW and US ACE. May. SWRCB [State Water Resources Control Board]. 2012. Stormwater — Municipal Permits — County of Los Angeles. Available at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/. Accessed: August 9, 2012. SWRCB. 2010. Final 2010 Integrated Report. Available at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/tmdl/integrated20lO.shtml. Accessed: June 1, 2012. SWRCB. 2009. Nonpoint Source Encyclopedia. 5.0 Hydromodification — Stream Channel Modification. Available at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/prog rams/n ps/encyclopedia/5.0_hydromod. sht ml. Accessed: August 9, 2012. The Nature Conservancy. 2007. Personal communication, EJ Remson. The Nature Conservancy. 2006. Santa Clara River Upper Watershed Conservation Plan. Fall. U.S Census Bureau. 2012 State and County Quickfacts - Santa Clarita (city), California. Available at:http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0669088.htmi. Accessed: June 1 2012. U.S Census Bureau. 2012 State and County Quickfacts — Los Angeles County, California. Accessed on June 1, 2012. <http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html> U.S. Census Bureau. 2010 American Community Survey. US Census Bureau. 2000. Census 2000 Data Releases. US Forest Service. 2012. Environmental Assessment — Invasive Plant Treatment Project: Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers Rangers District, Angeles National Forest, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, California. July. US Forest Service. 2007. Angeles National Forest. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/angeles/. Accessed: March 7, 2007. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP * February 2014 Page 12-5 US Forest Service. September 2005. Land Management Plan (Forest Plan) — Part 2 Angeles National Forest Strategy. US Forest Service. 2003. Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest. November. R5 -MB - 020. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/business-plans/angeles/ UWCD [United Water Conservation District] and CLWA. 1996. Water Resources Report. April. VCPD [Ventura County Planning Division]. 2006. Guide to Native and Invasive Streamside Plants — Restoring Riparian Habitats in Ventura County & along the Santa Clara River in Los Angeles County. May. VCRCD [Ventura County Resource Conservation District]. 2006. Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Program. Long -Term Implementation Plan. VCWPD [Ventura County Watershed Protection District] and Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). 2005. Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan. May. Page 12-6 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP • February 2014 Appendix A Public Involvement NOI for Stakeholder Participation Stakeholder Meeting Materials Additional Public Event Materials NOI for Stakeholder Participation PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF INTENTION NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PREPARE AN INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (IRWMP) UPDATE AND ASSOCIATED TECHNICAL STUDIES All interested persons are invited to attend and be heard at a public hearing to be held by the Upper Santa Clara River Regional Water Management Group (RWMG), on Thursday. November 17, 2011 at 2:00 .mm. at the Newhall County Water District, 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321. Consideration will be given to the following item: prepare an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) Update and associated technical studies. PROJECT INFORMATION: The Upper Santa Clara River RWMG was formed consistent with State law as a coalition of agencies, and consists of more than three public agencies, at least two of which have statutory authority over water supply, water quality, flood control and storm water. On October 17, 2011 the USCR RWMG directed the publication of a notice of intention to update a regional plan in accordance with Section 10543 of the Water Code and Section 6066 of the Government Code and also directed the publication of this notice of a public hearing to be held on November 17, 2011. The purpose of the hearing is to initiate the update of the IRWMP, which was adopted in July, 2008, to make it consistent with new requirements mandated by Proposition 84. Being prepared concurrently with the update of the IRWMP are two focused technical studies for the watershed; a climate change technical study, required by Proposition 84 and a salt and nutrient management plan required by the State Water Resources Control Board's Recycled Water Policy. At the conclusion of the public hearing, a regular IRWMP Stakeholder meeting will take place from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. at the same location. The Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Stakeholder group was formed during the preparation of the 2008 IRWMP as part of the public participation process and will continue to hold regular meetings through the update of the IRWMP to provide an opportunity for any interested party to participate in plan development and implementation. For more information please contact: Ms. Lauren Everett, Water Resources Planner Castaic Lake Water Agency 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road Santa Clarita, CA 91350 (661) 297-1600 x 282 e-mail at leverett@clwa.org IRWMP Update Public Meeting and Stakeholder Kickoff Meeting, November 17, 2011 Agenda PowerPoint Presentation: IRWMP Guidelines Updates Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Thursday, November 17, 2010 I RWMP Update Public Hearing 2:00 pm -2:30 pm Regular Stakeholder Meeting 2:30 pm —4:00 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA91321 Meeting Objectives: ff Public Noticing of IRWMP Update ff Discuss I RWMP Update and Technical Study Preparation Work Efforts Watershed Updates Describe Ongoing and Future Funding Opportunities 2:00 I. Public Hearing on the Update of the I RWMP Stakeholder Meeting 2:30 11. Welcome and Introductions 2:40 3:15 A. Meeting purpose and outcomes B. Stakeholder self- introductions Jeff Ford, CLWA I I I. I RWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study Process, Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Process A. Scope/Schedules B. Stakeholder participation C. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Subcommittee membership Meredith Clement, Kenn IV. Watershed Updates Jenks, Lauren Everett, CLWA A. Municipal Stormwater Permit B. Bacteria TMDL C. 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Heather Merenda, City of Santa Clarita/Jeff Ford, CLWA 3:45 V. Implementation Grant Status and Future Grant Funding Opportunities Lauren Everett, CLWA 4:00 VI. Close Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP November 15, 201 1 2 pm Prop 84 I RWM P Updates Address Statewide Priorities Meet New I RWM Plan Standards (16) $6.9M implementation grant is contingent upon update of the plan! Statewide Priorities New Technical Studies Climate Change Technical Study Adaptation to Climate Change Effects Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Surface and Groundwater Quality Protection As required by the State Water Resources Control Board's Recycled Water Policy Plan Standards Overview Governance (New RWMG Standard) Region Description Objectives Resource Management Strategies Integration Project Review Process (NEW) Impact and Benefit Plan Performance and Monitoring Data Management Finance Technical Analysis Relation to Local Water Planning (NEW) Relation to Local Land Use Planning Stakeholder Involvement • Coordination • Climate Change (NEW) Updates Integration Continue to use successful framework Governance Update with narrative from (RAP) application Stakeholder Involvement Region Acceptance Process Update with RAP and meetings undertaken as part of IRWMP Update Coordination Update with RAP California Climate Adaptation Strategy Membership in CA Climate Action Registry City of Santa Clarita's Climate Sensitivity Study Updates Region Description RAP update Ongoing efforts New land use map per One Valley, One Vision Climate change technical study Impact and Benefit Within IRWM region and between regions DACs, EJ, Native American tribal communities Updates Finance O&M costs Updated list of funding sources and mechanisms Technical Analysis Update with revised technical resources Climate change technical study Selection of water management strategies Updates Plan Performance and Monitoring Data management System (DMS) Track and document implementation progress Store and disseminate monitoring data Findings and "lessons learned" Policies and procedures for adaptive management Data Management DMS for data integration into State databases RWMG document review process Data sharing Updates Objectives Measurement and prioritization Adaptation to climate change impacts Update water quality improvement objective with Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Resources Management Strategies California Water Plan Update 2009 strategies "No -Regrets" adaptation strategies Updates Relation to Local Water Planning Standard met by existing Plan Strategies from local plans to address climate change standard Relation to Local Land Use Planning Standard met by existing Plan Information sharing and collaboration with land use planning efforts to address climate change standard Updates Project Review Process (NEW) RAP update Contribution to climate change adaptation Contribution to GHG emission reductions GHG emissions CEQA analysis Climate Change Standard (NEW) Adaptation responses to climate change effects Mitigation of GHG emissions Technical Study Climate Change Technical Study Identify Vulnerability to Climate Change Influences Region Description, Objectives, Relation to Local Water Planning, Relation to Local Land Use Planning, and Project Review Process of IRWMP Update Identify Adaptation Strategies Influences Objectives, Relation to Local Water Planning, Relation to Local Land Use Planning and Project Review Process of IRWMP Update Recommendations on Data Collection/Next Steps for Climate Change in IRWMP Updates Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Prepare Salt and Nutrient Management Plan for submittal to RWQCB Influences Objectives, Plan Performance and Monitoring, and may result in new projects for consideration in IRWMP Salt and Nutrient Management Plan SWRCB Recycled Water Policy — 2009 Local Stakeholder Cooperative Development of Implementation Plans Basin -wide Management of Salts and Nutrients Salts —Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) and Chloride Nutrients —Ammonia and Nitrate plus Nitrite (nitrogen compounds) Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Required Components of the Plan: Basin -wide water quality monitoring plan Emerging constituents consideration (e.g., PPCPs, EDs) Water recycling and stormwater recharge goals and objectives Salt and nutrient source identification Basin loading/assimilative capacity estimates Salt mitigation strategies Anti -degradation analysis Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Suggested Elements of the Plan: Background — to include stakeholder roles and responsibilities Groundwater Basin Characteristics Basin Evaluation Salt and Nutrient Management Strategies Basin Management Plan Elements CEQAAnalysis Antidegradation Analysis Plan Implementation Questions? Qbp 17 Stakeholder Meeting, January 26, 2012 - Agenda PowerPoint Presentation: IRWMP Update Handout: Region Description Update UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER integrated Regional Water Management Regular Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, January 26, 2012, 2:30 pm -4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Meeting Objectives: • Provide Update on IRWMP Update and Technical Study Efforts • Engage in Updating Water Management Strategies for IRWMP Update • Provide Funding Update and Other Watershed Activities 2:30 I. Welcome and Introductions A. Meeting purpose and outcomes B. Stakeholder self -introductions Jeff Ford, CLWA 2:40 11. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study • Update existing sources of information B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan • 1" Task Force Meeting 2/23 Meredith Clement, Kennedv/Jenks, Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:15 111. Water Management Strategies A. New Resource Strategies B. Updating Old Strategies Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks 3:50 IV. Funding Update A. Planning Grant R1 Progress Report B. Planning Grant R2 PSP C. R1 Implementation Grant Agreement D. Timing of Implementation Grant R2 and R3 Lauren Everett, CLWA 4:10 VI. Other Watershed Activities A. Climate Change Workshop - March 15, 2012 B. Joint IRWMP meeting with WCVC SCR Watershed Region Lauren Everett. CLWA 4:20 VII. Close www.scrwaterplan.org PPO \J� Topics to be Addressed Updated California Water Plan Strategies • 2005 California Water Plan • 24 Water Management Strategies • Updated Zoog California Water Plan • 27 Resource Management Strategies • Other Potential Strategies Plan for Updating Region Description • Existing Data Sources vs. New Sources Identified Regional Objectives The originally 24 Water Management Strategies were organized into 5 regional IRWMP objectives: • Reduce Water Demand • Improve Operational Efficiency • Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship 21008 IRWMP Objectives and CA Strategies Agriculturai Water Use Efficiency Uman Wa®er Use Etrlclency Agricultural Lands Stewardship Economic Incentives Ecosystem Restoration Floodplain Management Recharge Areas Protection Urban Land Use Management Water -Dependent Recreation Watershed Management California Water Pia n Drinking Water Treatment and ni!trihidinn Groundw terlAquffer Remediation Matching Qualityfo Use Polluliur Prevention Urban Runoff Management Conveyance System Re-Opelancin Wate r Trarisfe rs Conjunctive Managementf Orniinrl aier Storage Desalination Precipitation En harcement Recycled Municipal Water Surface Storage — CALFE D Surface Storage — RegionafLucal Required Stakeholder Involvement Do 2oo8 strategies still apply? Are new strategies applicable to the region? • Examples of regional strategies Are there resource management strategies not listed in the California Water Plan that the group wants considered in the Plan? Examples of strategies See handout showing current Regional Strate ies (rows) and current California Water Plan Strategies (columns) Relationship of Regional and CA Strategies Cal ifarnia Water Plan Strategies TABLE 4.2-1 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES oo C g N IIS 15 CC ❑ j REDUCE WATER DEMAND Urha- '8: a!=• I_ s= =fficienry Measures Er,= =--:_ -, SunreYPmgrams E.."-'=: _: --Plurbing Re7oft EC= - '•-Auli15 ELI= .•L.i:- ':s. ol:e --:.:ion EI-' ..I"ra':i+l nau::':.•s.'u[mal EV='- .:h: -::x: -ss.=_ts-ee Programs EL'- - :zi:n :.D,4;nabr El, =-:==s:=:bl 'o---:;=.sh Toilet Replacement P ;am Aar;-117LL - ;'r a -s'-1 se E9 : e -:y 'deasures IMPROVE OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY Rehabildation. Replacement. or Removal of Exi=_dn6=a-ili:ies Improved Operational Eff ciency Measures Interde Projects INCREASE WATER SUPPLY Surface Reservoir w Storage Tank Surface Water Diversion Smunc water Extraction Faciftnes Agra efer Starage and Rewrery Groundwater Management and Planning Policies Gx ndwater Replenishment Including Spreading Grounds and Infection Wells AzN far Renharge molt Reclaimed Water Agrar Recharge mm Septic Hy4otcgic WdEling and Mwtitoring 2009 Resource Management Strategies Reduce Water Demand • Agricultural Water Use Efficiency • Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency • Conveyance - Delta/Regional/Local • System Reoperation • Water Transfers 2009 Resource Management Strategies Increase Water Supply • Conjunctive Management/ Groundwater Storage • Desalination • 2oo8 IRWMP said this not applicable to Region. Still the case? • Precipitation Enhancement • 2oo8 IRWMP said this not applicable to Region. Still the case? • Recycled Municipal Water • Surface Storage - CALFED • Surface Storage - Regional/Local 2009 Resource Management Strategies Improve Water Quality • Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution • Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation • Matching Water Quality to Use • Pollution Prevention • Salt and Salinity Management (NEW) • Is this applicable to Region? Examples of this in Region? • Urban Runoff Management 2009 Resource Management Strategies Promote Resource Stewardship • Agricultural Lands Stewardship • Economic Incentives • Ecosystem Restoration • Forest Management (NEW) • Is this applicable to Region? Examples of this in Region? • Land Use Planning and Management/ Formerly Urban Land Management • Recharge Area Protection • Water -dependent Recreation • Watershed Management 2009 Resource Management Strategies Improve Flood Management • Flood Risk Management (NEW) • Is this applicable to Region? Examples of this in Region? Other Strategies (NEW) • Crop Idling for Water Transfers • Dewvaporation or Atmospheric Pressure Desalination • Fog Collection • Irrigated Land Retirement • Rainfed Agriculture • Waterbag Transport/ Storage Technology Region Description Update Major sections will be updated with most recent and available sources to address: *Land Use *Ecological Processes *Water Supply *Flood Management Regional Vulnerability to Climate Change Required Stakeholder Involvement Other Sources for Region Description Update? Major Water Issues and Problem Updates? Strategy Update Considerations Land Use ExistinLj Data Source 2004 Santa Clarita Valley General Plan Technical Background Report Strategy for Updating 2011 City of Santa Clarita General Plan 2011 One Valley One Vision/Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan Ecological Processes Existing Data Source 2005 Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan 2003 Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest 1999 City of Santa Clarita General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Element Strategy for Updating Zoll City of Santa Clarita General Plan and Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, Conservation and Open Space Element Zolo OVOV EIR Recent land acquisition reports/documents Water Supply Existing Data Source 2005 Urban Water 2005 DWR Reliabi DWR ZOOZ Califor 2003 Groundwater Zoog Santa Clarita Zoog Groundwater Management Plan lity Report nia's Groundwater Bulletin iib Management Plan Valley Water Report Basin Yield Analysis Strategy for Updating Zolo Urban Water Management Plan Zoog DWR Reliability Report Zolo Santa Clarita Valley Water Report Zolo Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Reduced Discharge Technical Study 2012 Recycled Water Master Plan Update Flood Management Existing Data Source United Water Conservation District and Castaic Lake Water Agency 1996 Water Resources Report Strategy for Updating Sources? Regional Vulnerability to Climate Change (NEW) Strategy for Updating Climate Change Technical Study City of Santa Clarita, Climate Change Assessment Ft h, Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Stakeholder Meeting Strategies for Updating the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Region Description Region Section Existing Data Source Land Use 2004 Santa Clarita Valley General Plan Technical Background Report Ecological Processes Water Supply Flood Management • 2005 Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan • 2003 Business Plan for the Angeles National Forest • 1999 City of Santa Clarita General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Element • 2005 Urban Water Management Plan • 2005 DWR Reliability Report • DWR 2002 California's Groundwater Bulletin 118 • 2003 Groundwater Management Plan • 2009 Santa Clarita Valley Water Report • 2009 Groundwater Basin Yield Analysis • 1996 Water Resources Report by United Water Conservation District and Castaic Lake Water Strategy for Updating _ • 2011 City of Santa Clarita General Plan • 2011 One Valley One Vision (OVOV) Los Angeles County Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan • 2011 City of Santa Clarita General Plan and Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, Conservation and Open Space Element • 2010 OVOV EIR • Recent land acquisition reports/documents • Others? • 2010 Urban Water Management Plan • 2009 DWR Reliability Report • 2010 Santa Clarita Valley Water Report • 2010 Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Reduced Discharge Technical Study • 2012 Recycled Water Master Plan Update • Others? • Sources? Regional Vulnerability I [New section] Climate Change to Climate Change Technical Study • City of Santa Clarita, Climate Change Assessment Summary of Major Water Issues and Problems from 2008 IRWMP that may require updates: Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Stakeholder Meeting • Continued growth in water demand while imported water supplies become less reliable. The Stakeholders expressed a need for a comprehensive picture of available water supplies and the desire to find alternative water sources • Difficulty in maintaining open space and habitat areas given population growth and increased urbanization • Variety of water quality issues, including perchlorate contamination, and TMDLs for chloride and nitrate compounds • Runoff and drainage issues in the more rural areas that result in negative effects to the rural areas and areas downstream • Runoff and drainage issues related to urbanizing areas in the floodplain Stakeholder Meeting, March 22, 2012 Agenda Handout: Upper Santa Clara River 2008 IRWMP Objectives Handout: Climate Change Vulnerabilities in the USCR Region - Handout: Upper Santa Clara River Region Water Management Strategies and California Water Plan Resource Management Strategies PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Regular Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, March 22, 2012, 2:30 pm — 4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Meeting Objectives: • Provide update on IRWMP funding and on Consultants progress on IRWMP Update and associated technical studies • Discuss preliminary results of Climate Change Technical Study and rank vulnerabilities • Update I RWMP Objectives AGENDA 2:30 I. Welcome and Introductions A. Meeting purpose and outcomes B. Stakeholder self- introductions Lauren Everett, CLWA 2:35 II. Funding Update A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. R1 Implementation Grant Agreement C. Roundtable of Regions Meeting 3/20 Lauren Everett. CLWA 2:45 111. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks, Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:00 IV. Climate Change A. Rank Vulnerabilities Meredith Clement, Kennedv/Jenks 3:30 V. Update I RWMP Objectives Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks 4:20 VII. Close www.scrwaterplan.org UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER 2008 IRWMP OBJECTIVES (WITH DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENTS) Objective Measurement Reduce Water Demand: Implement Ten (10) percent overall reduction in projected urban water technological, legislative and behavioral demand throughout the Region by 2030 through implementation changes that will reduce user demands for of water conservation measures. water. Replace up to 4,300 outdated water meters per year. Improve Operational Efficiency: Maximize With assistance of local energy utility, perform electrical audit on water system operational flexibility and all wholesale and purveyor water facilities once every five years. efficiency, including energy efficiency. Reduce, on an agency -by -agency basis, energy use per acre- foot treated and delivered. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Increase use of recycled water by up to 17,400 AFY by 2030, regional demands and obtain necessary water consistent with health and environmental requirements. supply sources. Implement long-term transfer and exchange agreements for imported water with other water agencies, up to 4,000 AFY by year 2010 and 11,000 AFY by year 2030. Increase water supply as necessary to meet anticipated peak demands at buildout in the LACWWD No. 37 service area (-0.74 mgd) and peak demands at buildout in the Acton and Agua Dulce areas (up to 12.16 mgd). Capture and recharge 5,000 to 103000 AFY of urban and storm water runoff in a manner consistent with the pending update to the regional groundwater flow model and Basin Yield Study.. Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water Meet all drinking water standards. with appropriate quality; improve groundwater Prevent migration of contaminant plumes. quality; and attain water quality standards. Comply with existing and future TMDLs. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve In areas of the floodplain where invasive species have taken and improve ecosystem health; improve flood hold, reduce invasive species to 40 percent or less cover of the management; and preserve and enhance understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. Every five (5) years water -dependent recreation. reduce by half the percentage of invasive species. In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive species to 2 percent or less. Keep invasive species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage. Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain. Acquire 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Stakeholder Meeting CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITIES IN THE USCR REGION Watershed Characteristics General Overview of Vulnerabilities Water Supply SWP Imported Water - SWP water is an important portion of the water resources available to the Region. Potential impacts on SWP water availability resulting from climate change directly affect the amount of imported water supply delivered to the Region. Groundwater — Changes in local hydrology could affect natural recharge to the local groundwater aquifers and the quantity of groundwater that could be pumped sustainably over the long-term. Decreased inflow from runoff, increased evaporative losses, warmer and shorter winter seasons can alter natural recharge of groundwater. In addition, additional reductions in the SWP imported water imposed by climate change would lead to more reliance on local groundwater. Water Quality SWP Imported Water— Sea level rise could result in increases in chloride and bromide (a disinfection byproduct precursor). Increased temperature could result in increases in algal blooms and taste and odor events. Regional Surface Water — Increased temperature could result in lower dissolved oxygen in streams. Decreases in annual precipitation could result in higher concentrations of contaminants in streams during droughts. Increased wildfire risk and flashier storms could increase turbidity loads for water treatment. Water Demand Urban and Agricultural Water Demand — Changes of hydrology in the Region as a result of climate change could lead to changes in water demand, both in quantities and patterns. Increased irrigation (outdoor landscape or agricultural) is anticipated to occur with temperature rise, increased evaporation losses with warmer temperature, and a longer growing season. Ecosystem and Increased temperature and potential decreases in annual precipitation could put Habitat stress on sensitive ecosystems and alter habitats. In addition, the Region may be subject to increased wildfire risk, which could alter habitat. Flooding Local surface flows could change as a result of more frequent and intense storm events, leading to more areas susceptible to flooding, and increasing risk of direct flood damage in the Region. Sea Level Rise The Region is not directly subject to sea level rise. However, potential effects of sea level rise would affect SWP water supply conditions. The principal concern is the potential for sea water intrusion to increase Delta salinity. Hydropower Currently, the Region does not produce hydropower; thus, climate change effects on hydropower are not likely to occur. Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Stakeholder Meeting California Water Plan Strategies UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND ❑ CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESw r O o y 2 J U W W >>4 2 O 0 ❑ UJ w Z LL Lu ZLU W Q Z J U W Q 7 O ¢ V) co< UJ ~ ¢ K W a w F w ¢ Q o z m ¢ m ¢ Z Q z U J d' Z i y ~ 1U) Z W ¢ w z Z LL' W W QC7 O W W > UJ z J LU (n W(if O Z J cc d Y) W Z Z 7 K U H I- ¢ W J LL J U K Z LU UJ Z >� a o o g ° oo¢m w �w o_ ¢ z �_ a az ¢ LU ❑ ¢ Z W H H O (n (0 a, LL 0 y Z V% J 7 CO U w W W W O W y F ~ P O Z O Z 0 J W y V) ❑ J W_ > Z O Z J U U Z Z W U U ¢ > W 7 ¢ U > a l¢i Z❑ Q U W Q U Z W W S W K W p W ¢ W W W Q a OU OU O¢Z ¢ ¢ C7 LL K O > O K K Z) 7 K Z O ¢ K C7 H O Q a W W - F- W ❑ U rn U U' ❑ 0- K (n (n � ❑ U' 0_ ❑ r4 W W LL J K LL 16 REDUCE WATER DEMAND Conservation Coordinator Water Waste Prevention Water Loss Control Metering with Commodity Rates Retail Conservation Pricing Public Information Programs School Education Programs Residential Survey and Retrofit Residential Landscape Water Survey WaterSense Specification Toilets Commercial, Industrial, Institutional Large Landscape Agricultural Water -Use Efficiency Measures IMPROVE OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY Rehabilitation, Replacement, or Removal of Existing Facilities Improved Operational Efficiency Measures Intertie Projects INCREASE WATER SUPPLY Surface Reservoir or Storage Tank Surface Water Diversion Groundwater Extraction Facilities Aquifer Storage and Recovery Groundwater Management and Planning Policies Groundwater Replenishment Including Spreading Grounds and Injection Wells Aquifer Recharge with Reclaimed Water Aquifer Recharge with Septic Hydrologic Modeling and Monitoring Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 2 California Water Plan Strategies UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ANDy °z p Z w z Z CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES (CONT.) Z ¢ Z p w ° L Z ° ~ O J O H Q ZO W U Z U W W >>¢ W p W Z Lu W Z K Z J U W Q 7 O ¢ Q to W Q H ¢ d' W Lu O ¢ ¢ I I x p H Z p R' Z W >¢ y ¢ K Z z a w F i w y ¢ 1 g Z N Z > = af LL 11J ¢ W Lu W J W p Q J K W d m K W Z Z Z Z) W¢ U W H r ¢ Z CY J LL J W U W O Z K Z ¢ W o z o o g o 0 0¢ o w a ¢ o_ z a Z ¢ a p ¢ Z W Q H H (n to � LL W N Z J U) ¢ w W W W co �ZZ ~ ~ p P 7 O p J� U W 2 O J W y Z p Z J U U Z Z 67 z Z 0Z_' N y W I U > W W 7 < O ¢ W J U N Q T W W Q ¢ U y laL Z W Z U Q Z W p W LL m Z y ¢ Z O y W U C7 J J CO W. W O O K Z Z U ¢ ¢ S C7 Lu D U U) U U' 0 d d' Co (n d' C1 C1 U' 2: d (n D (n W Lu LL J 2 Of LL O Recycled Water for Irrigation or Other Beneficial Uses Surplus Recycled Water from Other Regions Increased Uses for Recycled Water through Policy Change and Education Imported Water Watershed Planning Rainwater Collection Systems (Cisterns) Greywater Systems Water Banking, Exchange and Transfer Projects Drought Contingency and Emergency Planning Urban Water Management Planning Removal of Invasive, Water -Thirsty Plants Understand Total Water Usage in Region IMPROVE WATER QUALITY Build Sewer Treatment Collection and Distribution Systems Rehabilitate or Upgrade Sewer Treatment Collection and Discharge Systems Relocate and Protect Sewer Treatment Collection and Discharge Systems - Remove from Vulnerable Locations TMDL Development and Implementation Pump and Treat Water for Quality Enhancement Remove or Prohibit On -Site Water Softening Devices Replacement of Problematic Septic Tank Systems with Sewer Hook -Ups Fertilizer, Herbicide, and Pesticide Application Reduction Low Level Storm Water Treatment Non -Point Source Pollution Control Landscape/Hardscape Retrofits Water Quality Monitoring (Requires Coordination Among Sampling Entities to be Effective) Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 2 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 3 California Water Plan Strategies UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ANDy °z p Z w z Z CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES (CONT.) Z ¢ z p w ° U z ° ~ O J O H Q ZO W U z U W W 2 (D UJ>>¢ W p z LU W z K Z J U W Q 7 O ¢ Q to W Q H ¢ X d' W Lu O ¢ ¢ I I X p H Z p R' z z W >¢ y ¢ K Z z a w F i w y ¢ 1 g N z > = af LL 11J ¢ W LU W J W p Q J K W d m K W Z Z Z W¢ U W H r ¢ z 0_' J LL J W U W O Z K Z ¢ UJ LUp z > p o g o 0 0¢ o w a ¢ o_ ? z a z ¢ Wa p ¢ Z W Q H H (n to � LL W N Z J y ¢ w W W W co �Z ~ ~ p P 7 O p J U W O J W y Z p Z J U U Z Z 67 z Z D_' N y W y IY U > W 7 O ¢ W J t U N Q W W Q ¢ U y laL laL Z Z U Q Z W p W LL m Z y ¢ z O v> W U W X 0 ¢ J J CO W. W O O K z Z U ¢ ¢ S Ir 0Lu C7 D U U) U U' 0 0- IY (n (n IY C1 C1 U' 2 d (n D (n W W LL J 2 Of LL O Improve Water Quality Being Discharged Brownfields Remediation Wellhead Recharge and Protection Emerging Contaminant Problems - Monitoring and Management Control and/or Enforce Prohibitions on Illegal Discharge of Controlled or Toxic Substances Leaking Underground Storage Tank Remediation Outreach and Education Biological Treatment of Water (e.g., Treatment Via Wetlands) Improve Riparian Habitat PRACTICE RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP Levee Construction Channel Improvement Projects Detention Basins Debris Basins Ongoing Facility Maintenance Removal of Hazards or Facilities from Floodways Storm Monitoring and Modeling - Flows, Water Quality Coordinated Hydrogeomorphic Modeling Incentives for Landowners - Public/Private Partnerships Evaluate Process for Reconstruction Following Emergencies (Floods, Landslides) Public Information Programs Regarding Flood Prevention Land Acquisition for Watercourse Expansion/Flood Management Protect And Enhance Native Ecosystem Diversity Control, Remove, and Prevent Invasive Species Protect Existing Habitats from Degradation Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 3 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 4 California Water Plan Strategies UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ANDy °z p Z w z ZLD CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES (CONT.) ° Z ¢ Z X p w ° 2 Z ~ O J O H Q ZO W U Z U W W >>¢ W p Z LU W Z K Z J U W Q 7 O ¢ Q to W Q H ¢ X d' W W O ¢ ¢ I I X p H Z p R' Z Z W >¢ y ¢ K Z z a w F i w y ¢ 1 g N Z > = Qf LL 11J ¢ W LU W J W p Q J K W d m K W Z Z Z W¢ U W H r ¢ Z 0_' J LL J W U W O Z K Z ¢ Uj LUp z > p o g o 0 0¢ o w a ¢ Z_ ? z a Z ¢ Wa p ¢ W Q (n to � W J y ¢ w W W W �Z Z ~ H H ~ p P LL 7 O N Z p J U W O co J W y Z p Z J U U Z Z 67 z Z d' N y W y 0' U > W 7 O ¢ W J t U N Q W W Q ¢ U y laL laL Z Z U Q Z W p W LL m Z y ¢ Z O y W U X X 0 ¢ J J CO W. W O O K Z Z U ¢ ¢ S Ir 0W Qf C7 D U U) U U' 0 0_ d' (n (n d' C1 C1 U' 2 D_ (> > U) W W LL J 2 O li O Urban Stream Restoration and Revitalization Land Acquisition and/or Easements for Protection and Restoration of Habitat Areas Landscape Linkages/Wildlife Movement Protect and Restore Fish and Wildlife Migration Corridors and Landscape Linkages; Where Necessary Create Or Modify Structures to Facilitate Fish and Wildlife Movement, such as Fish Ladders, Road Undercrossings, etc. Restore Natural Hydrograph and Sediment Transport in Local Watercourses Mitigation Banking Integrated Watershed GIS "Spatial Database" Identify and Collect Biological Resources Data for Comprehensive Database: 1) Ecosystem Function Analysis 2) Water Quantity and Quality Needs of Fish and Wildlife Provide for Long -Term Stewardship of Natural Resources, Especially Public Land: Staff, Funding, Organizational Structure (District or Conservancy) Monitoring and Enforcement Conservation Plans: 1) Evaluate Multiple Scale Habitat Needs of Aquatic and Riparian Dependent Species Active and Passive Recreation Areas Related to Water Resources Enhance Appropriate Public Access Updates and Modifications to General Plan Policies Watercourse Set -Back Ordinances or Policies Riparian Corridor Buffers Floodplain Development Restrictions Sensitive Biological Areas Overlay Zones Flood Hazard Mapping Require Evaluation of Footprint Impacts in Newly Developing Areas Create Incentives (Tax Credits) for Landowners to Protect and Restore Habitats and Ecosystems on Their Property Agricultural Lands Stewardship Post -Fire Rehabilitation Landscape Guidelines for Fuel Modification/Defensible Space in New Development Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 4 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGION WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES (CONT.) Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Page 5 Stakeholder Meeting, May 24, 2012 Agenda PowerPoint Presentation: City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan Handout: Linkages between IRWMP Objectives, Strategies and Projects Handout: Upper Santa Clara River 2012 IRWMP Objectives Draft (with edits from March Stakeholder Meeting) Upper Santa Clara River 2012 IRWMP Objectives Draft (Results from May Stakeholder Meeting) PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, May 24, 20127 2:30 pm — 4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Meeting Objectives: • Consultant Progress & Funding Updates • Complete IRWMPObjectives Update • Call for Projects www.scrwaterplan.org AGENDA 2:30 I. Welcome Lauren Everett, Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) 2:40 11. Presentation on the City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan David Peterson, City of Santa Clarita 3:15 111. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks (KJ), Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:25 IV. Funding Update A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. R1 Implementation Grant Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:35 V. I RWMP Objectives Meredith Clement, KJ 4:10 VI. Call for Projects Meredith Clement, KJ 4:30 VII. Close www.scrwaterplan.org City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan May 24, 2012 IRWMP Stakeholder Meeting Newhall County Water District Introduction • What is a Climate Action Plan (CAP)? • Why is the City doing a CAP? — Assembly Bill 32 — Office of the Attorney General — New General Plan — Local thresholds for environmental review of projects • What if the City doesn't do a CAP? — Compliance Order Climate Action Plan Contents • Inventory — Establish base year emissions • Forecast and Analysis — Compare base year emissions to forecast emissions • Mitigation — Quantify strategies for reducing GHG emissions to achieve state mandate • Monitoring — Plan for monitoring progress • Outreach component • ENVIRON International — Consultant nventory • Establish base year emissions: — Base year of 2005 at the recommendation of CARB and SCAG • Why not 1990? • Base Year Emissions of 1.71 mmtCO2e — What is mmtCO2e? Forecast and Analysis • Compare base year emissions to forecast emissions - 2020: — Business as Usual (BAU): 1.98 mmtCO2e — BAU — "Big 3": 1.84 mmtCO2e — 120,562 mtCO2e between 2005 and 2020 to mitigate Mitiqation • Quantify strategies for reducing GHG emissions to achieve state mandate • New General Plan Goals, Objectives and Policies & Existing City Programs since 2005 • Forecast Emission Reductions (in mmtCO2e): - VMT Reduction & Land Use - 124,631 - Open Space Acquisition & Tree Planting - 40,083 - Water Efficiency - 21,507 - Energy Conservation - 6,085 - Total GHG Reductions: 193,020 mtCO2e • Net 2020 Emissions: 1.65 mmtCO2e Monitoring • Will develop performance measures based on goals, objectives and policies included in the General Plan • Progress reports created every four years —Annexations included • Update of greenhouse gas inventory and mitigation measures every eight years Implementation • All development must be consistent with the CAP — Will require General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes and some larger development projects to demonstrate a 12% reduction of GHG emissions from "business as usual" Tentative Public Process Calendar • 30 Day Public Review — May 171h to June 18th — Required by CEQA — Negative Declaration — CAP Document will be available on: • Planning Commission — June 19th • City Council — August 281h Questions David Peterson Assistant Planner II City of Santa Clarita, Planning Division (661) 284-1406 dpeterson@santa-clarita.com L. ML •#Cnlm J J • 3 oil - ■ Arl 1 _. L 1 1 WLJ i6d z Y n 1 ) ' 0 _• 1+ Linkage between I RW M P Objectives, Strategies and Projects Regional needs, issues and goals the IRWMP addresses Ex. Increase water supply General means for addressing identified needs and achieving broad objectives Ex. Groundwater replenishment; increase recycled water use; removal of invasive plants Specific implementable means of carrying out strategies and ultimately realizing objectives Ex. SCR San Francisquito Creek Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Project 'roject evaluation and prioritization based in part on applicability to regional objectives UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER 2012 IRWMP OBJECTIVES (WITH DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENTS) duce Potable Water Demand: Implement Twenty (20)Ten-(k0) percent overall reduction in projected t chnological, legislative and behavioralotp ableafbar4 water demand throughout the Region by 2020439 changes that will reduce user demands for through implementation of water conservation measures. ! Er�ersrrir.��errrnrreirr_:...._ ;tease water Supply: understand future Increase use of recycled water by up to 44-,4449 JbUU AF by 3ional demands and obtain necessary water 2030, consistent with health and environmental requirements. pply sources. Improve water system operational flexibility and efficiency. 'RqpleMeRt IeRg tPFRqtFARR_. ---- supply... peak buildoutdemands at Agua Dulce areas (up to 12.16 .. ... .... . Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water Meet all drinking water standards. with appropriate quality; improve groundwater Prevent migration of contaminant plumes. gality; and attain water quality standards. Comply with ei�TMDLs. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve In areas of the floodplain where invasive species have taken and improve ecosystem health; improve flood hold, reduce invasive species to 40 percent or less cover of the management; and preserve and enhance understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. Every five (5) years water -dependent recreation. reduce by half the percentage of invasive species. In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive species to 2 percent or less. Keep invasive species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage. To date 6,100 acres have been conserved) Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain. Acquire up to 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor. F oodin /H dromodification ??? management, water supply, water quality, water dependent recreation, water -dependent habitat, and fire risk. Measurement GHG emissions. Identify and implement the use of renewable energv and conservation of energv within water and wastewater systems. With assistance of local energv utility, perform energv audits on all water -related facilities regularly. Reduce, on an agency-bv-agency basis, energv use per volume treated or delivered. UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER 2012 IRWMP OBJECTIVES (WITH DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENTS) Potable Water Demand: Implement Twenty (20)Te� percent overall reduction in projected gical, legislative and behavioralotp ableafbae4 water demand throughout the Region by 202038 that will reduce user demands for through implementation of water conservation measures and/or recycled water. ! Er�eer�nsrcomerrrnrreirrirre�r�ar.'crnaaarrev ;rease water supply: understand future increase use of recycled water by up to ' '- 46P49 WQ AF by lional demands and obtain necessary water 2030, consistent with health and environmental requirements. pply sources. Improve water system operational flexibility and efficiency. IMPIOR2191214 - - tQPM #RRRf-FAR-IARGI - - - -- -- -- - - - supply. . meet anticipated demands buildout D No. 37 service area . to 12.16 mgd). Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water Meet all drinking water standards. with appropriate quality; improve groundwater Prevent migration of contaminant plumes. gality; and attain water quality standards. Comply with = '�TMDLs. note rmesource stewarasmp: rreserve in areasOT the Tioodpiam wnere the maionty or plant species are improve ecosystem health; impfeve Geed invasiveSPGG086have taken , agement; and preserve and enhance Rreduce invasiveIp ant species to 40 percent or less r -dependent recreation. cover of the understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. • Every five (5) years thereafter reduce by half the percentage of invasive Ip ant species. • In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive plant species to 2-5 percent or less. Keep invasiveIp ant species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage. Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain. Acquire up to 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor. Measurement reduce hydromodification in existing urban areas. Address reduction of impervious areas within the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County. Increase a percent of pervious surface. management, water supply, water quality, water dependent recreation, water -dependent habitat, and fire risk for climate change, but also have other benefits that would occur in the absence of climate change ("no regret strategies"). Prioritize development and use of water sources with lowest GHG emissions. Identify and implement the use of renewable energy and conservation of energy within water and wastewater systems. With assistance of local energy utility, perform energy audits on all water -related facilities regularly. Reduce, on an agency -by -agency basis, energy use per volume treated or delivered. Stakeholder Meeting, July 26, 2012 Agenda PowerPoint Presentation: Highlights of Proposition 84 and 1 E 2012 Draft Guidelines and PSPs Handout: Upper Santa Clara River 2012 IRWMP Objectives Upper Santa Clara River 2012 IRWMP Objectives (finalized) Handout: Project Prioritization Schedule Handout: Proposed Project Scoring and Ranking Methodology (with edits from July Stakeholder Meeting) Handout: Summary of Major Water Issues and Problems PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, July 26, 20121 2:30 pm — 4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Meeting Objectives: • Consultant Progress & Funding Updates • Develop strategy for evaluating IRWMP projects • Update Plan's discussion on regional water issues AGENDA 2:30 I. Welcome Lauren Everett, Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) 2:40 11. Santa Clarita Environmental Education Consortium Jia -YY Cheng -Levine, Ph.D., College of the Canyons 3:00 III. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study • Flood Control Objective www.scrwaterplan.org B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks (KJ), Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:10 IV. Funding Update A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. Implementation Grant R1 & R2 • New Draft Guidelines and Proposal Solicitation Packages Lauren Everett, CLWA, Meredith Clement, KJ 3:30 V. 2nd Solicitation - Call for Projects Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:40 VI . Project Scoring/ Project Prioritization Meredith Clement, KJ 4:10 VII. Discussion on Summary of Major Water Issues and Problems Meredith Clement, KJ 4:30 VIII. Close www.scrwaterplan.org Upper Sanƒ a C |ar a § W P "ofit » oo o P © if z� ma *171,71417, \/ �{ nm.m q ]/ ] [7{ƒ Tr 41 M [ q ,/ F u n d I n 97, Proposition 84 Proposition 1 E Storrrwweter Manerw sl O 1�r1��;�ltfl��tfl �lr�ll r !�l'J'lvl.il�J.r� �;.?�)I� puj, Pj. Fr (o nx I m c i t Qe S c h ea d U I es. �r) Prop 874, imple...)mentiaflon Applicant Workshops Application Deadline Public Meeting on Funding Recommendations DWRApproval of Final Grant Awards Ja nua ry 2013 March 2013 August 2013 September2013 All r p., purowdimate Schedule P rop I E S tico r , mm, vw\vco7 ter Applicant Workshops Application Deadline Public Meeting on Funding Recommendations DWRApproval of Final Grant Awards November2012 December 2012 May 2013 July 2013 *) t ) Chang e.,,..,cs mo Plan Stianda Frcds > ("firrlf r Nr�r�r� > INIO rrl or f.A. Jr1J rJ��� �1J l Jl �;lr �l'Ct�lTC; I E no no Pi b I e G r a n t P Fr, co)jj e dits Proposition 84 (0 tP,rjou Irlc'jJrj ll'1 VII l . t ex LAW I � / ' F /' 1 /^ F1•� � /� n � n be. Proposition 1 E 6 )\AUS, yieJj rnij -E.Dla banaeiil"S Grant PFr(olj ect Ell 97,pl b itiyy C I tr 6i; ). Frl (07 • ' ' r r� 1 LeCCC TT4 a VYYVI� `gyp aM O r�,J�lr. Cj 'rJl' -Wig �� �r r`a r fir' ,cir dr -Ir e"e Qrant ApplCcation Arit alCch m enis Work Plan 15 Budget 5 Schedule 5 Monitoring, Assessment and Performance 5 Measures Technical Justifications 10 Benefits Costs Ana lysis 30 Program Preferences 10 Total 80 enefit Cyst AnalysisMEOW • • . - jro nrAcylb"ju al Lei Ute' � jr 'oo� 'tJ�r e pl ra :rIg ori j�� h) ra r: r Appflllru tion /Aktitacfh mernt� - Technical J�� 411RO fiO N 4) S j P'S :)4a 04 =4VW w it: -'r �. 0`Wo 4 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER 2012 IRWMP OBJECTIVES (WITH DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENTS) Measurement Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement Twenty (20) percent overall reduction in projected potable water technological, legislative and behavioral demand throughout the Region by 2020 through implementation changes that will reduce user demands for of water conservation measures and/or recycled water. water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Increase use of recycled water by up to 9,600 AFY by 2030, regional demands and obtain necessary water consistent with health and environmental requirements. supply sources. Improve water system operational flexibility and efficiency. Increase water supply as necessary to meet anticipated peak demands at buildout in the LACWWD No. 37 service area (7.91 mgd) and peak demands at buildout in the Acton and Agua Dulce areas (up to 12.16 mgd). Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water Meet all drinking water standards. with appropriate quality; improve groundwater Prevent migration of contaminant plumes. quality; and attain water quality standards. Comply with TMDLs. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve In areas of the floodplain where the majority of plant species are and improve ecosystem health; and preserve invasive , and enhance water -dependent recreation. • Reduce invasive plant species to 40 percent or less cover of the understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. • Every five (5) years thereafter reduce by half the percentage of invasive plant species. • In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive plant species to 5 percent or less. Keep invasive plant species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage. Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain. Acquire up to 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor. re effects on waterways and watershed state permits and policies related to stormwater managem caused by hydromodification and Address redastienA#Reduce impervious areas within the g outside the natural erosion and watershed. tion process endemic to the Santa Clara 6e� native analysis of measurement targets Promote low impact development and green streets As of June 21, 2012 Regional Water Management Group Meeting Objective Measurement Take actions within the watershed to adapt Implement strategies that adapt flood management, water to climate change supply, water quality, water dependent recreation, water - dependent habitat, and fire risk for climate change, but also have other benefits that would occur in the absence of climate change ("no regret strategies"). Promote projects and actions that reduce Prioritize development and use of water sources with lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions GHG emissions. Identify and implement the use of renewable energy and conservation of energy within water and wastewater systems. With assistance of local energy utility, perform energy audits on all water -related facilities regularly. Reduce, on an agency -by -agency basis, energy use per volume treated or delivered. As of June 21, 2012 Regional Water Management Group Meeting UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER 2012 IRWMP OBJECTIVES (WITH DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENTS) Measurement Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement Twenty (20) percent overall reduction in projected potable water technological, legislative and behavioral demand throughout the Region by 2020 through implementation changes that will reduce user demands for of water conservation measures and/or recycled water. water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Increase use of recycled water by up to 9,600 AFY by 2030, regional demands and obtain necessary water consistent with health and environmental requirements. supply sources. Improve water system operational flexibility and efficiency. Increase water supply as necessary to meet anticipated peak demands at buildout in the LACWWD No. 37 service area (7.91 mgd) and peak demands at buildout in the Acton and Agua Dulce areas (up to 12.16 mgd). Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking water Meet all drinking water standards. with appropriate quality; improve groundwater Prevent migration of contaminant plumes. quality; and attain water quality standards. Comply with TMDLs. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve In areas of the floodplain where the majority of plant species are and improve ecosystem health; and preserve invasive , and enhance water -dependent recreation. • Reduce invasive plant species to 40 percent or less cover of the understory and canopy in years 1 to 5. • Every five (5) years thereafter reduce by half the percentage of invasive plant species. • In years 20 and beyond, keep invasive plant species to 5 percent or less. Keep invasive plant species to 2 percent or less in the upper reaches and tributaries where little to no invasive plants are currently located. Acquire acreage or conservation easements for 10,900 acres of remaining proposed South Coast Missing Linkage. Purchase private property from willing sellers in the 100 -year floodplain. Acquire up to 12 miles along the Santa Clara River for development as a recreational trail/park corridor. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce flood Meet state permits and policies related to stormwater damage and/or the negative effects on management. waterways and watershed health caused by Reduce impervious area within the watershed. hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic Promote low impact development, green streets and other to the Santa Clara River. stormwater recharge projects Take actions within the watershed to adapt Implement strategies that adapt flood management, water to climate change supply, water quality, water dependent recreation, water - dependent habitat, and fire risk for climate change, but also have other benefits that would occur in the absence of climate change ("no regret strategies"). As of July 26, 2012 Stakeholder Group Meeting Objective Measurement Promote projects and actions that reduce Prioritize development and use of water sources with lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions GHG emissions. Identify and implement the use of renewable energy and conservation of energy within water and wastewater systems. With assistance of local energy utility, perform energy audits on all water -related facilities regularly. Reduce, on an agency -by -agency basis, energy use per volume treated or delivered. As of July 26, 2012 Stakeholder Group Meeting ID (Task Name (Start 1,'11 May 13,,'1 Jun 10, ill Jul 8,'12 1 Aug 5,14 Sep 2,'1A Sep 30,'1 Oct 28,'11 Nov 25, J Dec 23, 17 Jan 20,' d41 Stakeholder Meeting Thu 5/24/12 2 Solicit Call for Projects Thu 5/24/12 3 Stakeholder Meeting Thu 7/26/12 2nd Call for Projects Thu 7/26/12 5 Project Scoring/Project Thu 7/26/12 Prioritization Stakeholder Meeting Thu 9/27/12 Project Presentations Thu 9/27/12 Project Integration Thu 9/27/12 Stakeholder Meeting Thu 11/15/12 Project Ranking Thu 11/15/12 RWMG Selects Initial Suite Thu 12/20/12 of Projects for Round 2 Funding Stakeholder Meeting Thu 1/24/13 Review of Proposed Round Thu 1/24/13 2 Prop 84 Implementation Fri 3/15/13 I I I I I I 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Prop 84 Implementation Fri 3/15/13 Grant Due dS14 Task External Milestone O Manual Summary Rollup Split Inactive Task O Manual Summary IF Project: Project Prioritization Sche Milestone ♦ Inactive Milestone Start -only C Date: Wed 7/25/12 Summary W Inactive Summary Finish -only 3 Project Summary W�=•G3 Manual Task ® Deadline ♦ External Tasks Duration -only ,___ Progress Page 1 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Proposed Project Scoring and Ranking Methodology Projects will receive a score based on the point system described in the table below. Projects receiving the highest number of points will have priority for implementation. Criterion Possible Points Pass/Fail Criteria If project affects groundwater: (1) There must be a GWMP prepared an implemented in compliance with CWC §10753.7 or applicant consents to be subject to a GWMP or other program that meets the requirements of CWC §10753.7. (2) Or the proposal must include development of a GWMP within 1 year of grant submittal date. (3) Or the project conforms to requirements of an adjudication of water rights in the Project and Project Applicant subject groundwater. Eligible If no to all = Fail If project proponent or project beneficiary is Urban Water Supplier: (1) They must have completed and submitted an Urban Water Management Plan (2) And be incompliance with AB1420 (3) And meet water meter requirements (CWC §525) If no to any of the three = Fail 5 points if Project Proponent has adopted or will adopt the Integrated Plan 25 points for each item below, up to 11p4e 200 -points based ^^ the f9IleWiRg: 29B Local Cost Share Confirmed and tams below Ggmpleted 16B Construction Drawings RRd 's below completed 15B Permits and 211 tems-bele%-completed Readiness to Proceed 4-2B CEQA/NEPAaadall toms-bele%-completed 10B Project benefits and costs defined at a level of detail that will allow cost-effectiveness analysis or benefit -cost analysis go Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates and -" items below omplete 60 Feasibility aadall_iYeras-bele%-complete 30 Conceptual Plans complete Addresses Multiple Objective 15 points for each objective addressed, up to 100 points Integrates Multiple Resource 5 points for each applicable Resource Management Strategy, up to 100 points Management Strategies Benefits a Disadvantaged Yes = 50 points Community/Increases No = 0 points Disadvantaged Community Participation Addresses Critical Water Yes = 50 points If Native American Tribal Community Qualifies as DAC, points will be Issues for Native AmericanNo = 0 points awarded per box above and this box will not apply. Tribal Communities Environmental Justice Concerns 50 pints- Project redresses inequitable distribution of environmental burdens Consistent with Local Land Yes = 100 points Use Plans No = 0 points Improves Interregional Yes = 100 points Coordination No = 0 points For any projects ranked in the top 15 with the same score the following points will be awarded: 10 pts Project with lower cost per acre-foot of water conserved Tie - Breaker Points 1O_ts Project with the greatest reduction in electrical/energy use per acre-foot of water 1 O_ts Project with lower cost per new acre-foot of water supply 1 O_ts Project with lower cost per acreage of habitat improved 1 O_ts Project with lower cost for per unit of flood reduction Summary of issues, including Maior Water nitrate Issues and Problems — from 2008 IRWMP Over the course of the series of Stakeholder meetings, many issues and topics were discussed. However, many of the issues raised can be summarized into five themes: • Continued growth in water demand while imported water supplies become less reliable. • Difficulty in maintaining open space and habitat areas given population growth and increased urbanization. • Variety of water quality issues, including perchlorate contamination, and TMDLs for chloride and nitrate compounds. • Runoff and drainage issues in the more rural areas that result in negative effects to the rural areas and areas downstream. • Runoff and drainage issues related to urbanizing areas in the floodplain. Manor Water Issues and Problems — IRWMP Update (Proposed) • Continued growth in water demand while imported water supplies become less reliable. • Difficulty in maintaining open space, habitat areas, and groundwater infiltration areas given population growth and increased urbanization. • High cost of producing and supplying recycled water. • Variety of water quality issues, including chloride and nitrate compounds, as well as the ongoing cost of monitoring and treating perchlorate contamination. • Runoff and drainage issues in the more rural areas that result in negative effects to the rural areas and areas downstream. • Runoff and drainage issues related to urbanizing areas in the floodplain. Increased regulatory compliance burden to limit pollution in stormwater runoff. Stakeholder Meeting, September 27, 2012 - Agenda Stakeholder Project Presentations/Handouts: o LACDPW o NCWD o SCWD o SCVSD Meeting Objectives: PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, September 27, 2012, 2:30 pm — 4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 • Consultant Progress & Funding Updates • Stakeholder Project Presentations 2:30 I. Welcome Lauren Everett, Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) 2:35 11. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks (KJ), Lauren Everett, CLWA 2:45 111. General Updates A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. Implementation Grant R1 & R2 C. Next joint meeting with lower Santa Clara River watershed stakeholder group — November 1, 2012 D. DWR sponsored one -day I RWMP interactive workshops Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:00 I V. Stakeholder Presentations Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Santa Clarita Water Division, Newhall County Water District, Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District 4:30 VI I I . Close - next meeting date: October 25, 2012 www.scrwaterplan.org SANTA CL ARA RIVER SDLooLTI-t FDRK. PUBLICWORKS Rl tggER DAM NO. i AND SPR.E.4DINCj CrR.DL*tNDS W -rhe south �oriz of the s,ta G av,ara River joms the mates sawta Clara River just east of the Mcgeaw ParlZwaU crosslwg awd turves south awd thew southwest to Ct s {-� headworhs wear the iwterstate 5 crossCwg ow the southwesterw part of the Cttu of sawta clar�ta. The Los .4wgeles CouwtU f=Lood cowtroL Dlstrat proposes to %wstaLL a rubber davu. Cw the sawta URN River south i=orfz awd divert water to a Mw T adiiacewt recharge faclLltu. w�tY Rubber dRMS wUL, greatLu twcrease grouwdwater recharge from LOcaL storm water. This proposed project MLL pr'Lvu.arUH I,Mprove the heaLth awd Lowg- term of the basi,w, twcrease Local grouwdwater suppUes, awd reduce the reg%owls reLlawce ow water Cvxports. AdokfIowaL bewef&ts are water quoUtU ewhawcemewts that WUL help to aUevtate dowwstream cowcerws. Trash WILL be collected at dCvers6ow facCLCtCes. The river has recreatCow Eve the forwi of btlee paths alowg river awd addtttowaL recreatlow These areas are aacewt to power Uvi.e easements which maU proVwle avi, opportuwlty for habitat restoraelai4l' W �i N The deslgw phase was compLeted OMMarch2012.. EwVErovk .ewtaL perwuts awd Laved easements MILL weed to be obtalwed. The cowstructtovwphase could beglw les the summer of 2014. WH -ER 6 Los.4wgeles CouwtU .SupervisorialDtstrict5 Pr Umt,"rd CoKstru.ctiow Cost Esem&ates: 40 M U Wvu Cost sharf-wg Partwers � Fuwd%wg OpportuwUttes Lk Couwtd FLood CowtroL Dlstnat; Possible gra wt fuwd%wg from IRWMP t� l t( i ;'. •OC'e5 f tj f 1 ae. w�tY Rubber dRMS wUL, greatLu twcrease grouwdwater recharge from LOcaL storm water. This proposed project MLL pr'Lvu.arUH I,Mprove the heaLth awd Lowg- term of the basi,w, twcrease Local grouwdwater suppUes, awd reduce the reg%owls reLlawce ow water Cvxports. AdokfIowaL bewef&ts are water quoUtU ewhawcemewts that WUL help to aUevtate dowwstream cowcerws. Trash WILL be collected at dCvers6ow facCLCtCes. The river has recreatCow Eve the forwi of btlee paths alowg river awd addtttowaL recreatlow These areas are aacewt to power Uvi.e easements which maU proVwle avi, opportuwlty for habitat restoraelai4l' W �i N The deslgw phase was compLeted OMMarch2012.. EwVErovk .ewtaL perwuts awd Laved easements MILL weed to be obtalwed. The cowstructtovwphase could beglw les the summer of 2014. WH -ER 6 Los.4wgeles CouwtU .SupervisorialDtstrict5 Pr Umt,"rd CoKstru.ctiow Cost Esem&ates: 40 M U Wvu Cost sharf-wg Partwers � Fuwd%wg OpportuwUttes Lk Couwtd FLood CowtroL Dlstnat; Possible gra wt fuwd%wg from IRWMP Santa Clara River South Fork Rubber Dam No. 1 & Spreading Grounds ar= Los Angeles County Flood Control District Water Conservation Planning Section Vie n aux Di �� � � :+ •' P O �r sa G �� N f' idA / 1�C r1 rn pt OV ROO,16 of Do O` L a { +fug tit 4 r a� iiW t40 � q' L e oto- - •r. q.o ,�IL 04 C. I v A Clip oN _ y 1 IP -. mrva� Ph- _< y'o Baca r ! '' ~ d yao %. .. � be ♦ ? e a oii w o -ea `� 'a `avr`n 1 T 9 ' a.Atad ¢note e"° anda F �aA ` ao\-S jr,c •J®P q' �tlorra Via P`�a ` L ♦ 6.. • rr � J. ae "9 Uata b o N FA -, 5 aN�d �Y. NG°h GEBCO x r �[,Zoil 2'GosO� urve � Y• - age 5 Geo�aglcarrl5- mvep u • Proposed Water Recharge Project: Location Map it � ���g�PYO[IOSP(I i+:Q(C6N �.. ,! \ J. � � . � ,w3^ .Yy� �•� ell Ou R f r& tr a i,a v�f _ Existing Drop Structure at Rubber Dam Location No. 1 (Looking Upstream) Pedestrian Bridge and Bike Trail at Dam Location No. 1 (Looking Downstream) r 3 Streamgaging Station in the River + A7 ll�!4 M�4, 4 J. Newhall County Water District Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project —Sewer Trunk Line Relocation Phase II and III ta+` 4 At 10 IoI IS car, f �. '(e l `•• yam. ( � lir , A l 1 y r Proposed ��" �MbilHme��S City Sewer, Pump,„ Stabon;(Fer NCWD) „• 1 �. 1 V'ant vropaty r' 1 r , 1 a j X fc y 1 Proposed Vista Canyon a �i ,_ i (TN169117 5`1 64) 1 _ i _.. 1 Vementry; 1 scM1ool" 1 Current Project Status — Phase 1 (Design and Permitting) 1. Engineering firm selected 2. Cursory review of alternatives to a sewer lift station underway 3. Discussions underway regarding areas requiring easements Readiness to Proceed — (At Completion of Phase 1) 1. Local Cost Share — NCWD will budget for the shared portion 2. Phase 1 includes—construction drawings, permitting, CEQA, and cost estimates 3. Consistent with Land Use Plans IRWMP Objectives Addressed — Phase 2 & 3 (Construction) 1. Increase Water Supply — the avoidance of lost groundwater supply in the event of a sewer break located in the Santa Clara River 2. Improve Water Quality — the avoidance of groundwater quality degradation in the event of a sewer break in the Santa Clara River 3. Promote Resource Stewardship — the avoidance of wildlife and riparian habitat exposure to raw sewage in the event of a sewer break in the Santa Clara River. �. ' / ♦, _ice , ��J `or` ^ `V s � 1 ♦ �O�/ _ a ♦� , , �, �`` ''Existing Newhall County �' . ♦t4 ; 1 N Water District Well Site - \ ` ► '� ,Y 94 (•14,000 sqk) � � z �p01 _ G 10 1 rl may.• ,Y' c. a NewHall, Santa Claritar CA �� {► J _f 4 PE CO2 STORAGE DISINFECTION -- SYSTEM I I MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION BOOSTER SYSTEM PORTABLE SELF DRAINING PELLET CONTAINER BENEFITS: Softer water Less detergent and soap use Reusable by-product Eliminates need for POU Softeners More efficient than POU Softeners Cost Effective Efficiency Strategic IRWMP Proposition 84 Round 2 Implementation Funding SCWD Water Use Efficiency Strategic 1 Completed ,July 2012 Strategy to provide tools, incentives and education needed to promote ME and affect behavioral changes Targeted a suite of programs to achieve 20% by 2020 goal Designed to be implemented immediately All programs were vetted for cost effectiveness Valleywide WUE SP was completed in 2008 Acts as "umbrella" of projects for all areas of the Valley where all purveyors are involved The SCWD WUE Plan focuses on additional conservation programs needed to fill gaps Together, both plans work toward achieving SBX7-7 goal of reducing water demand by 20% by 2020 and promoting stewardship of our water resources Create incentives and develop outreach programs to encourage behavioral changes Ten programs that after implementation will save over 4400 AF by 2020: • Residential Audits • Low -Flow Showerhead Distribution • Ultra -High Efficiency Toilet Distribution • MF/Institutional HE Toilets (and direct install) • Turf Removal • High Efficiency Nozzles Distribution • Large Landscape WBIC Direct Install • Residential/Commercial Rebate Program • Large Landscape Water Budgets 1jectives Addressed Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Promote Projects and Actions That Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions P r0i ect Readiness Project is ready to implement Currently implementing 3 of 10 programs: Low -flow showerheads HE irrigation sprinkler nozzles HET and HEW rebates Project Ranking Eligibility - Yes Readiness to proceed - 100 of 200 possible points Multiple Objectives - 75 of 100 points Multiple Resource Mgmt Strategies - 8 total; 40 points DACs, Native Americans Justice Concerns - NA and Environmental Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes, 100 points Improves Interregional Coordination - No mhj /mwLJ)AA j lo e Mov Frank Guerrero Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District September 27, 2012 *Valencia and Saugus Water Reclamation Plants (WRPs) *Tertiary Treated Recycled Water •28 MGD Design Capacity 20 MGD Current Flows *Serves 250,000 people in Santa Clarita and unincorporated areas yea UO � kj e e •Set By Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board •Chloride Limits of 100 mg/L or conditional 117 mg/L in Santa Clara River •WRPs not designed to remove chloride •Alternatives being evaluated . Source Control . Upgraded Treatment . Others A l e N wiallav jbioriab tolh ic -tAWLP VlRAM . ��� Ptgitim ill ej it DAC •Rebate is 75% of the reasonable value for AWS ($206 to $2,000) •Free AWS removal & disposal •Free AWS pickup if residents remove AWS themselves & reimburses $50 for materials 1J 76 . Public Outreach Element (through September 15, 2012) AWS Removed Phase I & II Rebate Program Removals 7,070 Rental AWS Removals 835 TOTAL REMOVALS 79905 ESTIMATED REMAINING AWS in OPERATION 500 Y Llintom )ija 3 p am Yd 9 w I B lid ftigUal e As 9 104 *am 99% ID �Ywb Doi�] ptojad3 • Enforcement Program — Preliminary Notification Letters Sent August 2011 Known/Suspected AWS Confirm removals Notification of Future Home Inspections — Reduced Minimum Rebates ($150 = $2000) Still most cost effective way to remove chloride — Pilot home inspection program Determine best use of resources Escalating enforcement Issue Notice of Violation No initial fines — Increased Chloride Monitoring 3 ML'] pzoat� JtWA • Continue public outreach program • Project Goal Reduce chloride in WRP Recycled Water . (up to 5 mg/L) Prevent backsliding • Approved by SCVSD Board of Directors • Estimated total O&M cost of $3.3M over 3 period. year WA ir iry0 Lei - = *Reduce Potable Water Demand — AWS Regeneration Process is Water -Intensive. 7,800 to 10,400 gallons of water per year (EPA) *Improve Water Quality — AWS Regeneration Process adds chloride *Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions — Minimizing the size/operation of future energy -intensive chloride compliance facilities ffi e e C LI LI JV -1 *Primary . Salt and Salinity Management *Secondary . Urban Water Use Efficiency . Pollution Prevention �*Vj dal4wo k A 6 DheievAola,3 LLjhl L�i��i� P p f J�ml allij lilb'= � � - i�.�n13 PM L01 )Inj D I • Main UV components: UV I lamps, channels housing the lamps, power distribution equipment, and associated control • WW&mmon in the U.S. after chlorination Chlorination/ Dechlorinatio n System Filters Final Sedimentatio n Tanks L%uLej!�oUf Flow Equalizatio n System Aeratio n Tanks Primary Sedimentatio n Tanks UV Facility would be con ructed on the top of the existing chlorine contact tanks W JJjl`13 JeblAlaA *Main Objective: minimize chloride addition during the wastewater treatment *Additional benefits from UV disinfection — Reduces environmental health and safety risks — Improves water quality — Eliminates risks with over dosing WA ir iry0 Lei - = •Reduce Potable Water Demand — Meet Title 22 for Recycled Water (Match water quality to use) •Increase Water Supply — Meet Title 22 for Recycled Water •Improve Water Quality — Reduce Chloride — Eliminate Potential for Disinfection By Products •Promote Resource Stewardship I e e C LILIJVJJL7 *Primary — Pollution Prevention — Salt and Nutrient Management •Secondary — Urban Water Use Efficiency — Recycled Municipal Water — Agricultural Lands Stewardship Stakeholder Meeting, October 25, 2012 Agenda Stakeholder Project Presentations: o Bouquet Canyon Network o City of Santa Clarita o CLWA Meeting Objectives: PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, October 25, 2012, 2:30 pm — 4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 • Consultant Progress & Funding Updates • Stakeholder Project Presentations 2:30 I. Welcome Lauren Everett, Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) 2:35 11. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks (KJ), Lauren Everett, CLWA 2:45 111. General Updates A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. Implementation Grant R1 & R2 C. DWR IRWMP interactive workshop — November 1, 2012 D. Next joint meeting with lower Santa Clara River watershed stakeholder group — November 8, 2012 Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:00 I V. Stakeholder Presentations A. Recap of September Presentations B. New Presentations Agricultural Access/Bouquet Canyon Network, City of Santa Clarita, Castaic Lake Water Agency 4:30 VI I I. Close www.scrwaterplan.org k.oun ' .t CaAvon Gr'Iae lit Upper Santa Clara River Int;, ed Regia g µre i � - ��'��A ..,��� � �'� -� vim. �1��P� � � �� i"�� � it F i' ��• bit ' c u " � ',�.� A'., .. -��--- , �Z. n��,f�fh' �"rT �`��1 * .� it � '7'E ' •!• �� .a` � �,1�. � — "ice' J`n*'� .T�t ��.._ •r �I. Bouquet Canyon Network tri k -•�= Fall 2012- y• �t - - r�- Who is concerned? • Bouquet Canyon Private Property Owners (BCN) • Natural Resources Conservation Service(NRCS) • LA County Fire (Bouquet Canyon Unit) • AV Resource Conservation District (RCD) 0 US Forest Service (USFS) l r l2` L`��1 • � 1 - .1ty W, A �►�/il �LL y , �Pr F IV, j�i� ♦ I It p ♦ Le { I t t` 4 r r— dI f Io- li ' A• 4I i 3. - .1ty W, A �►�/il �LL y , �Pr F IV, j�i� ♦ I It p ♦ Le { I t t` 4 r r— dI f Io- li ' A• 4I i Protect Critical Watersheds .�. Mid Lak Labee Castaic Legend Major Tributary ei Jr 1 Minor Tributary QAdministrativeBoundry esrzeto 0 2.5 5 is Kilo meters Miles 0 5 10 GI 8.1 mils Santa Clara Watershed P blic Western Portion Rip n :',t.- ELESNATIONALF.-,P'_-;F Habitat' Lake Hi I ti 'r3Rive � Aqua 3.3 miles Private Riparian Habitat Why is it a concern ? " Bureau of Land Management estimates that the United States is losing 6, 000 acres of public land every day to invasive non-native plants, rendering land economically useless and biologically impoverished " -The Role of Herbicides in Preserving Biodiversity Sigg, J. October 1998, Fremontia 26:4 `Y,were created from A�undo donax ;betw;echFths by the Rico Reedompany ny in.. alifornia O_tF Arundo don�ax iso niwers.ities - . , ---- bioe gy Imo• ct Y Where is it a concern? _ s� mos AJ+JGELES Forestry oundar - BQ(JQLJET l3NI'NCORPORATEQ SANTA CLARlTA A/ALLEY � ANGEiES NATl£D'NAi FOREST - ` LEGENQ i �--� aas STREAMS sg 3MfitnP1` PARCELS 1HTERSEGTiHG BOflp UF! CANYON � �y 1 4 ` ai3m STREAM BEO � O OTRER PARCELS ` 28 `� � �'� NATIO NAi FOREST, 613m za is O G!T Y OF SANTA CLARITA y �aeano�o,a UNIN:[.ORPORATED SAl4lTA CLARFFA VAiLEY — _ - — - � 5 ( ' 3m 054 �araoo�n,s LOS iiY11GELE5.,- (�\ JlM F2 `y If :- ��---- a -------- j r s private aoq cou How much concern is there? I. Do we anticipate the control of invasive weeds prior to their establishment ? II. Do we desire to conserve the biological resources of our local ecology; specifically native flora, fuana, and especially water ? III. Do we want restore our local tributories in order to preserve and secure our watershed for the future ? Five Majors Steps First Ta a 7 f a Secure r per Biolo Af `\ J Initial Funds of WRIP Project Task WRP BCN NRCS CEI CCC SUBTOTAL $15000.00 TASK I. Map & Biological $2,700.00 $1,500.00 $2,400.00 $103700.00 Monitoring II. Remove& $89300.00 $13600.00 $4,500.00 $14,400.00 Dispose III. Prevent $800.00 $300.00 $1,100.00 Reemergence IV.Restore, $59600.00 $1,500.00 $42000.00 Revegetate, & Educate AVRCD $1,840.00 $13840.00 Administration Fuel (Diesel, Gas, $1000.00 $1000.00 Propane) $20,240.00 TOTAL: TOTAL $2,900.00 $3,000.00 $2,400.00 $4,500.00 $33, 040.00 Budget Notes BCN = Bouquet Canyon Network (Private Property owners of 3.5 mile stretch of Bouquet Canyon) NRCS = Natural Resources Conservation Service and Earth Team Volunteer CEI = Cooper Ecological Monitoring, Inc. CCC = California Conservation Corps AVRCD = Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District (Grant Administration 10%) Note: Contributions by BCN, NRCS, CEI, and CCC are "in-kind" or donated hours of labor, equipment, or expertise provided to the project. a � � d TSi- f�,44 d % I a rY k14 .. r ..' L 1� e + r Ir Create a site-speb•r r ap o f rundo dohaxl-, _ k 3�Fs. 14, _ , T;4. � 's� • �}yam •� _ (2ANYON 3.5 mile section of Bouquet Canyon Creek and thezTe:location of three invasive weed hctspots. FIRE RD - ir I --I- LOSY CRrcEK FtD, 61 RD dWJ ___ Z CANYON PIE) tov ESGLIERRRR6, — .—.; _. , . �O�g. •♦►�- __ _ .._,-:= t uRLTON RD - - ssem¢ .. _ ♦ -' -.. - °- I .. N '"; `'lan' .k law Q&I... w J not, oil r. - a 9�2 qr ORR 9f all -: L'J� ST �ala5wn nteers ire�Bi_ble Tabernacle CCC 104 t r � ,.. LA Cao i. 1L Ab . �� low H :Bouquet Canyon ep,--,Ole hent - .s r;'_ - y .0 - 'y;hoc i. 1L Ab . �� low H :Bouquet Canyon ep,--,Ole hent .s 1 I- w f�rfrr. 1.4-.Y.Yw tiY wf5w.a.ti-. w r..... rr.rr r 1 I- w f�rfrr. 1.4-.Y.Yw tiY wf5w.a.ti-. w r..... rr.rr e [ rT Ar r 00 ..o Itt LL f Y N� FS �1-TIR r� .ser ll�` _ —_ 4JJ L � r UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER WATERSHED ARIINDO AND TAMARISK REMOVAL PROGRAM I.ONCrTERM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN �`I x nValley'�� 1 a VEr Corm RE umi CoNs¢ Avn D� Ju 2"6 _I�L`j r2i) � no '6 's � c) a izc d i ca M � d var4 0105 3 'x, Somali \(j, Form Wulb a rW %: ! 3 emrm Cmron t l to �/ e'NO mV c;�eeL warpe 14 Reach 2 Reach 1 r> x Ny >' —+ Reach 3 l Reach 4 �+ Reach i_ ay..od.. Gn I C\\ �mouna Reach6 f ewmar r W y' c.nrun i Mnt 1 a 11 3 jy. L V .. -l. .Is SCARP Upper Santa Clara River Sub -Watershed —Santa Clara River Reaches Legend o=wr E-Demw na=,ra, as Ma ckca Rhx Rwoe Reechl -Reach 3 Reach reach Reac46 Maly Roads —Llmlfed P®ea Harvey —Rienaer Major Roaft L«alion Map } E LE IN MILES ;;r _ riw S, r. .In r r t r / I�7 ILL, ILL, ILL f. Mt lot C _ A ILL - Y l�g;,a4s' Lt LI L!Icra i T- I PI ILL, � 7 Y 4 Y. Low Impact $4,000,000 to Development $6,000,000 Voluntary Septic Tank Retirement Santa Clara River Arundo Removal Project $1,000,000 =I"' 50% $8,000,000 to $12,000,000 25% $15250,000 $2,0005000 25% $25500,000 Total $7,000,000 to 40% $11,750,000 to $9,000,000 15,750,000 — �.� 2 �a � � � � � \ ® ■, r y«2f.2 ' / % r rP . V - -.. AL. J7al t MY LOWr jLa ttl ee, r, IW 7se-I E f1f i re I i lfi� MC y § TLolf N � 4 mi qC P, d'i .,If.t7e, Background * Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan (SCV WUE) adopted in 2oo8 SCV WUE Strategic Plan included ($1,000,000 budget) • High -Efficiency Toilet Rebates (single and multi -family) • Large Landscape Audits with incentives • CII Audits with incentives • Residential Landscape Contractor Certification (with wbic) • High -Efficiency Washing Machine Rebates • New Construction Building Codes • Social Marketing Program Program Development M Nbos- nmwarfdbaginnalRRand�nai p!p Dined)-flutrhadif ci. 01 Obi vowsdebt cuttin. '. 51 Hot Programs (I —. C' D wwuvsavhZoprogramsmm y 0101 D mrwte, CcnuVarmg. •Tool&ow V CIotI Waz sMe. a5u9g sits D Irrigation Associate.,, D Legulrtiveservics D Resew Nalco m.,, D Plug aeratoaJp9 F i ooaunarasouaino SCV H2O Programs ILL 0 y wae: Io d User Login Fb ave vaaaatedyour ease login below_If t validated your accountarve so on our dationpage- axouri- Pa w F&' Fbi Request new Password Navigation Welcome to SCV H2O Programs To get started, simply follow these three steps. It's fast and it's easy! I Valuate your a¢nuntby sets ding Ne Icon of your age ng belota` z Enter your account numbs r, of rude and seam address. 3 The sedimwlll deals your accountand w auto aH Tt hg you In. You can Thai after causes. pahldpateln our user pool and get access to great water saving resources" -You only need to validate your account on your doss It On subsequent Pars all you need to do Is login wM Ne command and passwomyou nested atroodepnon. "You need to write down your us seams and reasswordto' Thai amiss to the site - LArWDI .I 0Fill IN oan rv® The SM Family of Water Suppliers (Family) Is comprised ofCastalcLake Water Agenq, Los Angeles Carry Waterworks Thousand Newhall County LACWp Water District , Santa Giants Water DIAs ion, surged Water Company and Ne Cry, of nh Clan. Together . they work to prymote Ne emclenl use of wand- ..... (JL'WD and fund programs to reduce the per capita water use In ourValley. IRWMP Objectives Addressed • Reduce Potable Water Demand • Improve Water Quality • Promote Resource Stewardship • Promote Projects and Actions That Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Project Ranking Eligibility - Yes • Readiness to proceed -175 of Zoo possible points • Multiple Objectives - 6o of ioo points • Multiple Resource Mgmt Strategies - 9 total, 45 points • DACs, Native Americans and Environmental Justice Concerns - N/A Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes, ioo points Improves Interregional Coordination - No Castaic Lake Water Agency Castaic Conduit I RWMP Proposition 84 Round 2 Implementation Funding I RWMP Stakeholder Meeting October 25, 2012 �i962° w cAnAi a m w► A K I; 0 d Ca s t a i c Co n d u i Duna„aDr Canyon r5 '- o _ oOf pN — Parts p 9° E �Pampk`o o c loos n p` e �Alf CdnL'Frei w' moo° T boa ady19`e DI sante C g Qarila Ctov ON _ `^ f Park °+ear's i c a n c j ✓ R Airyu`eV 0 eWga//S 9ya Location , 0 4i S nC �\ Raneh Ito kyr -CuGtP° DaGO'o Dr u o<a rG On V Cant yOr t'a byh Pao ♦♦ o do e 9 0 Tha O/o 9i. ♦♦ ♦1 O LD¢ i;0o C. r +� 0 N 2 _ O Ambao fo p e Pd pa ♦♦ at e c x .ns,a to Or o° r C n J ♦ L u DNryo d �f Ca°yo °Not 9a Ox IRu J Qre7v m c9 a pYe yNo q .� � t, °ey a Posac O ca coos 900 a °ad oil, ,ao 7 > ?v foWlew Or Ca�Dr Central P° °a °or o a; ad Of Park hoe P°`o° At ♦ F l?3l3 oay Or ee £°s ♦♦,♦♦ CncNen°e Ot is QvNg Or ♦ o esP �a!7i ♦♦ ♦ Bndpeport {° Six Flags Rd ♦ Cornmuniy Ono Magic V Bridgeport Ln Park Rd Mountain Joo Newhall Rance' Magic MogntLg Ph, giverchase0 o Saugus Si tgnpp Dr C odOca wL yap 3 nea4o/dea nada Or - pr WY ynn TAan91e' or a Rd eo . Gg .Pe Circa c ao O Valencia P p \” Country 9 Val ell Cp �� c'ad o°WY v ©Club v I Town yOn Mme K S 04 s Center Santa las as'si „ Clarita - wY >> hl400eie rF s O 1'ti3�c OS`r�`GReys °n nti• 0N+b CoeonuOs. ),Be . asye Tournament Ccc' ,oa.JOf"r TOIaPaOna Otl, WesaltlgerPlayers Chin Valencia College ohnfam0a srda0 t<aAoQ De.. Of The OValencia Cantone D ` pi al '•\ CCra.tnc � alRl a Dnr aoLn 0Pe/a ion Circle Word Ln J Ranch '46°Park e°tls ° Mcbean PkY Calitomia o Institute �C c h R D OI The Arts qSt Sle tevenson Fo Pace Ranh s 1 b. rb Iw , t CentrePdn NP Un . «y . a zF 0 0 ® 3r 44. � >/\ * ~ .ƒ .. i� : � Castaic Conduit Project Readiness 6 Project is ready to implement 6 Preliminary design complete i CEQA complete 6 Permits in process Construction drawings in process 6 Design funded in FY 2012/13 capital budget 6 Anticipate Construction: FY 2013/14 Estimated Total Project Cost yi MUM= 1 iii • "" I RWMP Objectives and Water Management Strategies 6 IRWMP Objective ➢ Increase Water Supply reliability by improving the system's operational efficiency 6 Water Management Strategies ➢ Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ✓ Conveyance Castaic Conduit Project Ranking 6 Eligibility - Yes i Readiness to proceed e 150 of 200 possible points 6 Multiple Objectives -15 of 100 points Multiple Resource Mgmt Strategies -1 total; 5 points i DACs, Native Americans and Environmental Justice Concerns a NA 6 Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes,100 points 4 Improves Interregional Coordination - No Foothill Connection project IRWMP Proposition 84 Round 2 Implementation Funding Foothill Feeder Connection Proi eo ► Since RVWTP start-up in 1996, CLWA has received SWP water through a "temporary" connection, which now has 60 MGD capacity Raw SWP water from Castaic Lake is wheeled to RVIPS and RVWTP via MWDSC's Foothill Feeder pipeline Permanent connection design completed 10/2012 Can be implemented immediately Capacity is needed Current RVWTP permitted capacity is 66 MGD Ultimate RVWTP capacity could be up to 90 MGD Permanent connection will allow for 90 MGD Allow RVWTP to operate at full current rated capacity of 66 MG "Permanent" connection is required Project will provide additional tie-in from Foothill Feeder to CLWA raw water line to serve as a back-up when primary feeder is out for maintenance Construct and install new vaults, pipelines, valves, electrical equipment and control systems to increase capacity of line that feeds RVIP Station from 60 MGD to 90 MGD. 1jectives Addressed Increase Water Supply P r0i ect Readiness Design is complete Project is ready to implement Project Ranking Eligibility - Yes Readiness to proceed - 175 of 200 possible points Multiple Objectives - 15 of 100 points Multiple points Resource Mgmt Strategies - 1 total; 5 DACs, Native Americans Justice Concerns - NA and Environmental Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes, 100 points Improves Interregional Coordination - No Castalc Lake Water Agency Distribution System — Rio Vista Valve No. 2 (RV -2) Modifications I RWMP Proposition 84 Round 2 Implementation Funding I RWMP Stakeholder Meeting October 25, 2012 �i962° w cAnAi a m w► A K I; 0 Distribution System — RV -2 ModifirattDions � Canyon gOr Oa — Park =.mPtd ae e G manas 4 �b x Ko OI x°a y v tpias o ° g Gama° Part ar Q'AirY Oenoro Dr N nk ✓ R ° 3 a j n ieo,ya'oj pb 9Fe u ri O o 4i S °C �\ J Ranch ayr o c a CV elP° DeGO'g Dr m o<w rG G' a Cant Rd apr u 6e eac do Is ha3 0 The OJa, o° 10 4s 2 .zOcj n 0�0C u Ambaor Pb Cw Pe "Kyw c , x ansh to Or o' r o �pn gad rr,P BO 2 Gare m wfw 93 %0 Car` 400 � ♦ e a,Ca Poop O PJaoJ° 90 4D �ea °°cPC `0 ?O rn'r Iew Or Cam r Central o Of Park '40 goo°e pe0vidad of Oagara90aY 'Ce s Gnellen°° e b EsPa Mia Or �°!>r Bnapeport q° Six Flags Ro Conan iy Ce° Magic Bridgeport Ln Park Rd Mountain Pa Nevins" Rancn Magic Modeard Pty Rlverchase Or Odd S es Si NYrgnpn bock ♦y° Or .e o cee0 Wy D n °ks/oe n N °Or `{oi yon Triangle oa or Rg s . Gg .Pw Cirga °ey �'� Valencia a p Country Valencia Val<na>^ O Clu�n Cee daWV v b Town yon M°ae K © S a center Santa 126 Rd �. g� N Clarita av >' b Valicie ON a Tournament Players Club WesaltlgeValencia College uO giOIlr EtPas yeGcr',oa.JOroO�hr jnOfOarmsl' Of The OValencia Canyons O`00 A_1ei Dei i ®Carddl of a4 Ln tkadera0a CenlreP owav Un Circle Oxford Ln Baa T ah° J Ranch daJ°a al Park P to, s c ` �eCeq" rF 13' OrRs C California - Mcbean Pky Institute aael� V Ra % RdD Of The Arts a e6Fanik Stevenson , �y`I> S' a as pia°O nK Ranch sbr A 1 e>Ro as cs a 5 O SG rb°n Iw ... �. Sao ♦6 e^ _ vaun site w. �i Distribution System — RV -2 Modifications Project Readiness 6 Project is ready to implement 6 Preliminary design complete i CEQA complete 6 Permits in process Construction drawings in process 6 Design funded in FY 2012/13 capital budget 6 Anticipate Construction: FY 2013/14 Estimated Total Project Cost # H * ®i iii *" F i i i i i iii I RWMP Objectives and Water Management Strategies 6 IRWMP Objective ➢ Increase Water Supply reliability by improving the system's operational efficiency 6 Water Management Strategies ➢ Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ✓ Conveyance ✓ System Reoperation Distribution System — RV -2 Modifications Project Ranking 6 Eligibility - Yes i Readiness to proceed e 150 of 200 possible points 6 Multiple Objectives -15 of 100 points Multiple Resource Mgmt Strategies - 2 total* 10 points i DACs, Native Americans and Environmental Justice Concerns a NA 6 Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes,100 points 4 Improves Interregional Coordination - No IRWMP Proposition 84 Round 2 Implementation Funding West Saugus Groundwater Resources Monitoring Project Several Saugus Formation (groundwater bearing unit) in the SCV are vulnerable to groundwater contamination beyond those already affected Strategically placed monitoring wells can provide chemical and water level data for GW flow and transport models Horizontal and vertical extent of groundwater contamination is not fully understood GW Models predict groundwater flow and the transport of contaminants �k4'9zoc-� L Newhal Ranh Rd Pta Clara River A' M a RVWTP Saugus2 Former Whittaker-Bermite Facility m w 7 n 0 A a NC -11 1 J`a e55a SCV Production and Monitoring yells 117 r I MIS „ N 41 III OO-1On ;OU u a i M1,�r R I 111 41 �i r. MIS „ N 41 III OO-1On ;OU u a i M1,�r 1Proi ect Need More data are required to: Measure horizontal and vertical extent of contamination Serve as a warning to currently functioning wells ')asin management rbom Project Description Construct and install monitoring wells in west portion Saugus Formation Improve Water Quality Promote Water Stewardship Conceptual plans Need/ Feasibility identified and verified Preliminary design/cost estimates CEQA readily obtained as no detrimental impacts foreseen. Eligibility - Readiness points Yes to proceed - 75 of 200 possible Multiple Objectives - 30 of 100 points Multiple Resource Mgmt Strategies - 3 total; 15 points DACs, Native Americans .Justice Concerns - NA and Environmental Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes, 100 points Improves Interregional Coordination - No Santa Clarita Valley Volatile Groundwater Investigation IRWMP Proposition 84 Round 2 Implementation Funding SCV Volatile is _ Compound Groundwater -s ► VOCs have been detected in some SVC municipal wells Two possible sources have been identified Others are possible Possible sources have been somewhat cooperative Comprehensive investigation is necessary Remediation could be required R�hRd 00JQ RVWTP Santa Clara River y/4,9i V W C Q c �04��dijl pL V-157 Sa us 1 Stadium s. V0011cla ,<; Saugus 2 Blvd, Former Whittaker-Bermite Facility O A n NC -1 J 1'2 7' 0,N0 SSV Production and Monitoring Wells 1VM V 2 OU4 0 OU3 t m 0 G Out 0 : N aLLroe SCV production wells need to be protected Thorough investigation required to properly determine sources and potential extent of VOC contamination If the results indicate an imminent threat to SCV wells then remediation action must commence Project Management by CLWA best ensures that investigation is thorough enough to identify Coordinate with current efforts (SIC and Whittaker- Berm ite) Evaluate current data set, including those from production and monitoring wells Identify data gaps; determine need for additional monitoring wells If appropriate, locate, design and construct new monitoring wells. Develop groundwater model to forecast transport of VOCs Identify sources 1jectives Addressed Improve Water Quality Promote Water Stewardship P r0i ect Readiness Conceptual plans Need/ Feasibility identified and verified CEQA readily obtained as no detrimental impacts foreseen. Project Ranking Eligibility - Yes Readiness to proceed - 75 of 200 possible points Multiple Objectives - 30 of 100 points Multiple Resource Mgmt Strategies - 3 total; 15 points DACs, Native Americans Justice Concerns - NA and Environmental Consistent with Land Use Plans - Yes, 100 points Improves Interregional Coordination - No Stakeholder Meeting, December 18, 2012 - Agenda - Handout: Candidate Projects for IRWM Plan Update - Handout: Ranking Criteria - Handout: Matrix of Prioritized Projects and Applied Criteria - Recommend Suite of Projects, Proposition 84 Round 2 Grant Application PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Stakeholder Meeting Tuesday, December 18, 2012, 2:00 pm — 4:00 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Meeting Objectives: • Consultant Progress & Funding Updates • Present Project Prioritization & Round 2 Implementation Grant Proposal 2:00 I. Welcome Lauren Everett, Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA 2:05 11. Consultant Progress Updates A. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study B. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks (KJ), Lauren Everett, CLWA 2:15 111. General Updates A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. Implementation Grant R1 & R2 Lauren Everett, CLWA 2:25 IV. Present Project Prioritization/ Ranking Meredith Clement, KJ 2:55 V. Present R2 Implementation Grant Projects Lauren Everett, CLWA 3:35 VI. Implementation Grant Application — Cost Share Allocation Lauren Everett, CLWA 4:00 VI I I. Close www.scrwaterplan.org Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Projects submitted with a Lone Form Long Forms are used for projects that are deemed ready for implementation and for which detailed project information is available. These projects were scored and ranked based on established criteria. Page 1 of 7 Objectives a p > a > O o w rn o Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Coordinating/ Partnering Agency Estimated Cost _ 10 o o .�°i, N z o a o ° za Rank 3 a o a o a v � o u � E N � x $0.5M -$20M (Capital); Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Santa Clara River Conservancy; Angeles National SC -1 City of Santa Clarita $25-$100k/yr over 15 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 Removal Program (SCARP) Implementation Forest; Santa Clara Invasive Weeds Task Force years (O&M) SCVSD Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation $1.11v1/yr over 3 years SCVSD-1 City of Santa Clarita; County of Los Angeles ♦ ♦ 2 Public Outreach Program District (O&M) Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant- $250,000-$500,000 NCWD-2 Newhall County Water District NA ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ a Phase 1 (Capital) Agricultural Access/Bouquet Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District; Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration, Control Canyon Network (Currently no Natural Resource Conservation District; Cooper $20,240- $52,852 AA/BCN-1 Ecological Monitoring/Leathermann (Capital); $13,052/yr ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 4 of Invasive Weeds eligible applicant as Sponsor BioConsulting, Inc.; LA County Fire; Angeles over 5 years (O&M) Agency) National Forest July 2012 Santa Clarita Water Division Water $301,930-$2,520,469 SCWD-2 Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Water Use Santa Clarita Water Division Castaic Lake Water Agency; City of Santa Clarita (Capital); $62,370- ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ' $8M -$14M (Capital); Saugus Water Reclamation Plan - Ultraviolet Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation SCVSD-2 Castaic Lake Water Agency $2K/yr for 20 years ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ e Light Disinfection Facility District (O&M) Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency LACWDft36; Newhall County Water District; $1M-$51v1/yr over 8 CLWA-3 Castaic Lake Water Agency Santa Clarita Water Division; Valencia Water Strategic Plan years (Capital) Company $5M7$9M (Capital); SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 1 and Los Angeles County Flood ♦ LADPW-9 NA $50K/yr over 50 years ♦ ♦ ♦ a Spreading Grounds Control District (O&M) $3M -$5M (Capital); CLWA-8 Foothill Feeder Connection Castaic Lake Water Agency Newhall County Water District; City of Santa $50K/yr over 50 years ♦ a Clarita; LACWDJt36 (O&M) $4M -$6M (Capital); SC -5 Biofiltration and Low Impact Development City of Santa Clarita Los Angeles County; Castaic Lake Water Agency $200,000/yr over 1S ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Io Retrofits years (O&M) Page 1 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 2 of 7 Objectives o > > LX o v c Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Coordinating/ Partnering Agency Estimated Cost o :.' v a c y z Rank a a a rc . a a c+ .~�, a 0 0 c' C $25M -$35M (Capital); SC -6 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita NA ♦ ♦ ♦ 11 unknown O&M $14,910,000-$16M CLWA-7 Castaic Conduit Castaic Lake Water Agency NA (Capital); $5,000/yr ♦ 12 (O&M) $218800000-$3j200,000 CLWA-10 Distribution System - RV -2 Modification Castaic Lake Water Agency NA (Capital); $5,000/yr ♦ 13 (O&M) CLWA-9 West Saugus Formation Groundwater Castaic Lake Water Agency NA $628,675 ♦ ♦ 14 Resources Monitoring Project $2,500,000 - $4,000,000 NCW0-1 Santa Clara River — Sewer Trunk Line Newhall County Water District NA (Capital); $30K/yr over ♦ ♦ ♦ 15 Relocation Phase II and III 50 years (O&M) Castaic Lake Water Agency; Santa Clarita Water 625000 (Capital); Santa Clarita Valley Residential Turf Removal NCWD-3 Newhall County Water District Division; Valencia Water Company; LA County $312,500/yr over 2 years ♦ ♦ 16 Program Waterworks ri36 (O&M) Santa Clarita Valley Volatile Organic Carbon Newhall County Water District; City of Santa CLWA-11 Castaic Lake Water Agency $250,000-$5M (Capital) ♦ ♦ v Groundwater Investigation Clarita; LACWDtF36 Page 2 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Projects submitted with a Short Form Objectives Short Forms are used for projects that are primarily in a conceptual phase and not deemed ready for implementation. These projects were not scored or ranked. Page 3 of 7 Objectives v CL C3 a 'o u o QJ Coordinating/ Partnering v a i > j a ° 3 ,° C: a o o Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost -Q a °: Q v o � u o ' Agency o 3 a a o o v Q v CL QJ or 'o o Ln -C3 ¢ 2 -C3v QJ U E CL. _ or Feasibility of Arundo Stem Cutting Agricultural AA/BCN-2 Ram (ASCR) Access/Bouquet Canyon NA <$100K Castaic Lake Water CLWA-1 Irrigation Efficiency Program NA $100K -$1M Agency Castaic Lake Water CLWA-2 Water Use Efficiency Certification NA $100K -$1M Agency CLWA-4 ESFP Sludge Collection System Castaic Lake Water NA $1M -$1M Agency Saugus Formation Replacement Castaic Lake Water CLWA-5 NA $1M -$10M Wells Agency Santa Clarita Valley Drought Castaic Lake Water CLWA-6 NA $1M -$1M Relief Wells Agency CLWA-12 Update Rio Vista WTP Education Castaic Lake Water NA <$1001000 Model Agency LACWD36-1 Advanced Meter Infrastructure LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 LACWD36-2 Cash for Grass Rebate Program LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 Landscape Irrigation Efficiency LACWD36-3 LACWD#36 NA <$1001000 Program LACWD36-4 Apam and Bayfield Water Main I LACWD#36 NA $1007s1M Page 3 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 4 of 7 Objectives w Coordinating/ Partnering L Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° z Agencyoc o 3 3 v0 N v o wU Ln U ct Hasley Canyon Road Water Main, LACWD36-5 Turnout Connection, and Pump LACWD#36 NA $1M -$10M Station Project Replacement of 8 -inch Water LACWD36-6 LACWD#36 NA $100K -$1M Main along Del Valle Road $3M -$6M Lower San Francisquito Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-1 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $2M -$5M Newhall Creek In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW 2 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (0&M) $3M -$7M Placerita Creek Off -River Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-3 NA Spreading Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Page 4 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 5 of 7 Objectives w Coordinating/ Partnering L Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° z Agencyoc o 3 3 v0 N v o wU Ln U $4M -$7M Santa Clara In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-4 NA Grounds No. 1 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $2M -$5M Santa Clara In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-5 NA Grounds No. 2 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $4M -$7M Santa Clara Off -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-6 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Santa Clara River Rubber Dam Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-7 NA No.1 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $7M -$10M Santa Clara River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-8 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-10 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 2 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Page 5 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 6 of 7 Objectives w L Coordinating/ Partnering Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° z Agencyoc o 3 3 v0 N v o wU Ln U Qc $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-11 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 3 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-12 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 4 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $3M -$6M Upper San Francisquito Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-13 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Recycled Water Onsite Newhall County Water NCWD-4 NA $100K -$1M Conversion District NCWD-5 Advanced Metering Infrastructure Newhall County Water NA $1M -$10M Program District Upper Santa Clara River SC -2 Arundo/Tamarisk Removal City of Santa Clarita Forest Service; Santa $1M -$10M Clara River Conservancy Program (SCARP) Implementation City of Santa Clarita Biofiltration SC -3 and Low Impact Development City of Santa Clarita NA $1M -$10M Retrofits SC -4 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita NA >$10M Page 6 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 7 of 7 Objectives w Coordinating/ Partnering L Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a ° z Agencyoc o 3 3 v0 N v o wU Ln U ct Santa Clarita Linking SCEEC to the Upper Santa SCEEC-1 Environmental NA <$100K Clara River IRWMP Education Consortium Advanced Metering Infrastructure Santa Clarita Water SCWD-1 NA $1M -$10M Program Division GIS Development and Santa Clarita Water SCWD-3 NA $1M -$10M Implementation Division Regional High Resolution GIS Valencia Water VWC-1 NA $100K -$1M Mapping Company Valleywide Conservation Valencia Water VWC 2 NA <$100K Database Company Advanced Metering Infrastructure Valencia Water VWC-3 NA $1M -$10M Program Company Valencia Water VWC-4 CII Consevation Plan NA <$100K Company Page 7 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Update Stakeholder Meeting Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Proposed Project Scoring and Ranking Methodology Criterion Possible Points Pass/Fail Criteria If project affects groundwater: (1) There must be a GWMP prepared an implemented in compliance with CWC §10753.7 or applicant consents to be subject to a GWMP or other program that meets the requirements of CWC §10753.7. (2) Or the proposal must include development of a GWMP within 1 year of grant submittal date. (3) Or the project conforms to requirements of an adjudication of water rights in the Project and Project Applicant subject groundwater. Eligible If no to all = Fail If project proponent or project beneficiary is Urban Water Supplier: (1) They must have completed and submitted an Urban Water Management Plan (2) And be incompliance with AB1420 (3) And meet water meter requirements (CWC §525) If no to any of the three = Fail 5 points if Project Proponent has adopted or will adopt the Integrated Plan 25 points for each item below*, up to 200points Local Cost Share Confirmed Construction Drawings completed Permits completed Readiness to Proceed CEQA/NEPA completed Project benefits and costs defined at a level of detail that will allow cost-effectiveness analysis or benefit -cost analysis Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates complete Feasibility complete Conceptual Plans complete *Points were awarded if item was not applicable. Addresses Multiple Objective 15 points for each objective addressed, up to 100 points Integrates Multiple Resource 5 points for each applicable Resource Management Strategy, up to 100 points Management Strategies Benefits a Disadvantaged Yes = 50 points Community/Increases No = 0 points Disadvantaged Community Participation Addresses Critical Water Issues Yes = 50 points If Native American Tribal Community Qualifies as DAC, points will be for Native American Tribal awarded per box above and this box will not apply. No = 0 points Communities Environmental Justice Concerns 50 points Project redresses inequitable distribution of environmental burdens Consistent with Local Land Use Yes = 100 points Plans No = 0 points Improves Interregional Yes = 100 points Coordination No = 0 points For any projects ranked in the top 15 with the same score the following points will be awarded: 10 pts Project with lower cost per acre-foot of water conserved Tie — Breaker Points 10 pts Project with the greatest reduction in electrical/energy use per acre-foot of water 10 pts Project with lower cost per new acre-foot of water supply 10 pts Project with lower cost per acreage of habitat improved 10 pts Project with lower cost for per unit of flood reduction Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Draft Ranking, Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 1 of 1 Objectivesc `a 'O c u v a n a s 0 3 E m c ov •" i m e -ts zz Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost a o a+ a chs u ° c e t m ,°,' u ¢" •— u` A E c w •3 a = E Y Total Rank o a m N w ��w, O e a ? N m LD ou013 _v c ix a` m0 G N~ w c E U Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Removal Program $0.5M -$20M (Capital); $25k - $100k/yr over 15 SC -1 City of Santa Clarita SCARP Implementation (SCARP) p years (0&M) s 90 60 0 0 0 100 loo zoo a sss 1 SCVSD Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation SCVSD-1 $1.1M/yr over 3 years (0&M) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Program District 5 as 20 0 0 0 100 100 200 0 470 2 NCWD-2 Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant - Phase 1 Newhall County Water District $2500000 - $500,000 (Capital) S 60 25 0 0 0 100 200 0 390 3 Agricultural Access/Bouquet Canyon Network (Currently no $20,240 - $52,852 (Capital); $13,052/yr over 5 AA/BCN-1 Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration, Control of Invasive Weeds eligible applicant as Sponsor years (0&M) Agency) 0 90 45 0 0 0 100 0 150 0 385 July 2012 Santa Clarita Water Division Water Use Efficiency $301,930-$2520,469 (Capital); $62,370 - SCWD-2 Santa Clarita Water Division Strategic Plan Water Use Efficiency Programs $366,223/yr over 8 years (0&M) s 60 25 0 0 ol 100 0 175 0 365 SCVSD-2 Saugus Water Reclamation Plan - Ultraviolet Light Disinfection Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation $8M -$14M (Capital); $2K/yr for 20 years (O&M) Facility District 5 45 25 D 0 0 100 100 75 0 350 CLWA-3 Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Castaic Lake Water Agency $1M-$SM/yr over 8 years (Capital) 51 45 251 01 0 0 a0 0 150 0 325 J LADPW-9 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 1 and Spreading Grounds Los Angeles County Flood $SM -$9M (Capital); $50K/yr over 50 years (0&M) Control District s so 35 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 300 g CLWA-8 Foothill Feeder Connection Castaic Lake Water Agency $3M -$5M (Capital); $50K/yr over 50 years (0&M) ♦ s 15 15 0 0 0 100 0 150 0 las 9 $4M -$6M (Capital); $200,000/yr over 15 years SC -5 Biofiltration and Low Impact Development Retrofits City of Santa Clarita (O&M) 1 1 5 90 50 0 D 0 100 0 25 10 280 10 SC -6 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita $25M -$35M (Capital); unknown O&M 1 51 45 45 50 0 0 100 0 25 0 270 11 CLWA-7 Castaic Conduit Castaic Lake Water Agency $14,910,000-$16M (Capital); $5,000/yr (0&M) s 15 10 0 0 0 100 01 125 0 255 12 $2,880,000-$3,200,000 (Capital); $5,000/yr CLWA-30 Distribution System - RV -2 Modification Castaic Lake Water Agency (0&M) 5 15 15 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 235 CLWA 9 West Saugus Formation Groundwater Resources Monitoring Castaic Lake Water Agency $628,675 Project 5 30 20 0 0 0 100 0 75 0 230 $21500,000 - $4,000,000 (Capital); $30K/yr over NCWD-1 Santa Clara River — Sewer Trunk Line Relocation Phase II and III Newhall County Water District 50 years (O&M) 5 30 30 0 0 0 100 0 25 0 190 NCWD-3 Santa Clarita Valley Residential Turf Removal Program Newhall County Water District 625000 (Capital); $312,500/yr over 2 years (O&M) s 30 zs o o a 100 o zs o las CLWA-11 Santa Clarita Valley Volatile Organic Carbon Groundwater Castaic Lake Water Agency $250,000 -$SM (Capital) Investigation 5 30 20 0 0 0 100 0 25 0 180 Page 1 of 1 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Selected Grant Application Projects Page 1 of 1 Requested Grant Funds Project ID Project Name Estimated Cost Funding Match ($) ($) (Minimum required is 25%) SC -1 Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tama risk Removal Program $,5M -$20M (Capital); $25k-look/yr over 15 years (O&M) $138,000 $414,000 (SCARP) Implementation SCVSD-1 SCVSD Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach $1.1 M/yr over 3 years $825,000 $2,475,000 Program NCWD-2 Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant - Phase 1 $200,000 $50,000 $150,000 SCWD-2 July 2012 Santa Clarita Water Division Water Use Efficiency $301,930-$2,520,469 (Capital); $62,370-$366,223/yr over 8 years $75,000 $225,000 Strategic Plan Water Use Efficiency Programs (O&M) CLWA-3 Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan $1M-$5M/yr over 8 years (Capital) $625,000 $1,875,000 CLWA-8 Foothill Feeder Connection $3M -$5M (Capital); $50K/yr over 50 years (O&M) $10500,000 $1,500,000 Grant Administration $0 $175,000 OTAL MATCH $3,213,000 TOTAL GRANT REQUEST $60814,000 MATCH AS PERCENT TOTAL COST 32% Page 1 of 1 Stakeholder Meeting, February 28, 2013 Agenda PowerPoint Presentation: Where are We Now and Where are We Headed? PER SANTA CLARA RIVER grated Regional Water Management Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, February 28, 2013, 2:30 pm — 4:30 pm Newhall County Water District Headquarters 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 2:30 I. Welcome Lauren Everett, Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) 2:35 11. General Updates A. Planning Grant R1 & R2 B. Implementation Grant R1 & R2 C. Local Groundwater Assistance Grants Lauren Everett, CLWA 2:50 III. Consultant Progress Updates A. Salt and Nutrient Management Plan B. IRWMP Update and Climate Change Technical Study Public comments on Chapters 1 & 2 Updated schedule Lauren Everett, CLWA, Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks (KJ) 3:20 IV. IRWMP Process — Where are we now and where are we headed? Meredith Clement, KJ 3:50 V. Upcoming Meeting Notices & Watershed Updates A. Joint Meeting of Upper & Lower IRWM Groups/Invasive Weeds Task Force B. DWR IRWM Strategic Planning Workshops C. DWR/WEF IRWM Conference & IWM Summit D. Stakeholder updates Lauren Everett, CLWA 4:30 VIII. Close www.scrwaterplan.org Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Where are We Now and Where are We Headed February 28, 2013 2:30 pm - 4:30 pm Komrdomks Cow Why do IRWMP Update? Lots of New Information! Climate Change Technical Study Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Updated Water Demand Information A rAM O [d"TM O:ATIVA A 11*1115=.115=1 Continue Stakeholder Coordination Identify Current Regional Issues & Needs KwwwdWJwb Cow 1 IRWMP Update Content I. Introduction 2. Overview of Region 3. Water Supplies,Water Quality, and Water Demands 4. Watershed Flood Management 5. Climate Change 6. Objectives 7. Resource Management SW - 8. Project Prioritization and Integration 9. Finance Plan 10. Data Management 11. Coordination and Outr 12. References - KonmdWbob ComuNam IRWMP Update Public Review cc I. Introduction 2. Overview of Region 3. Water Supplies,Water Quality, and Water Demands 4. Watershed Flood Management 5. Climate Change & Objectives 7. Resource Management Strategies S. Project Prioritization and Integration 9. Finance Plan 10. Data Management 11. Coordination and Outreach 12. References Kroegybnb Cam 2 Final Updated IRWMP Anticipated July 2013! Will need to be adopted by Resolution by the governing bodies of each agency that is part of RWMG Will need to be adopted by each IRWMP grant project proponent Will need to notice intent to adopt IRWMP per Government Code section 6066 Per the Proposition 84 Round I Grant Agreement, adoption needs to be complete by April 2014 Krwrdp'inb Cam I Final IRWMP Update DWR Evaluation DWR will review/evaluate IRWMP for consistency with 2012 Standards Exact nature of evaluation not yet known, anticipate checklist To be eligible for Proposition 84 Round 3 funding need IRWMP meeting 2012 Standards Anticipate DWR will solicit plans for evaluation in Spring 2014 KamadWJwkB Cam I 3 Ongoing/Future IRWMPActivities Technical Studies Update Recycled Water Master Plan Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Update Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Implement Projects! Region will compete for Proposition 84 Round 2 funding Application due March 29, 2013 Draft Funding Recommendations August 2013 KomrdWJ=ks Cow Ongoing/Future IRWMPActivities Implement Even More Projects! Proposition 84 Round 3 funding coming up! The Round 3 Application will be a two step process: Step I. Submit IRWMP Plan for Review by DWR (Spring 2014), if plan deemed adequate you can move on to Step 2 Step 2. Submit implementation grant application (early 2015) Potential call for projects Spring/Summer 2014 — start thinking about your projects Kroegybnb Cow M Questions? �a.41"n4 4 Konmdomks 6omuNam 5 Additional Public Event Materials Central and Southern California: IRWMP Planning and Climate Change Agenda Watershed Awareness Month Flyer CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: IRWMP PLANNING AND CLIMATE CHANGE Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County, Santa Barbara County and Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Thursday, March 15, 2012 ' 9:00 a.m. —12:30 p.m. Lower Plaza Assembly Room, Hall of Administration Ventura County Government Center, 800 S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura Objective • To provide an introduction to incorporating climate change into IRWMP planning Audience • Members of the WCVC, Santa Barbara and Upper Santa Clara River including Processes water managers, technicians, stakeholders and other interested parties • Local land use, air quality and climate change managers, planners/ stakeholders Desired Outcome • Shared understanding of (a) climate change impacts on California, and (b) IRWMP/climate change planning process AGENDA 1. Welcome and Introductions Lynn Rodriguez, Project Manager, WCVC and Ann Hewitt, Anacapa Consulting Services, Inc. 2. Our Watersheds and Climate Change (Facilitated Discussion) • Where are we most vulnerable to climate change? What are the most significant impacts? • What strategies can we adopt to mitigate our contributions to climate change? • What strategies can we adopt to adapt to the impacts of climate change? • Is climate change a "game changer' for water planning? What are the challenges? 3. State of California: Department of Water Resources, Southern Region Office — 9:40 —10:30 - 50 minutes California, Water and Climate Change: Overview of Climate Change and IRWMP Planning Processes Lauma Jurkevics, Climate Change Specialist, California Department of Water Resources (Southern Region) Break —10:30 (Refreshments will be Served) 1 4. Southern Central California: Climate Change, Water and Adaptation • Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County - Lynn Rodriguez and Ann Hewitt • California Coastal Conservancy — Bob Thiel, Project Manager • Santa Barbara County IRWM Group — Kathy Caldwell, Sr. Project Manager, RMC Water and Environment • Upper Santa Clara River IRWM Group — Meredith Clement, Water Resources project Manager, Kennedy/Jenks • Calleguas Municipal Water District — Henry Graumlich, Manager of Strategic Planning • Questions and Answers 5. Conclusions • Panel conclusions • Wrap-up — Lynn Rodriguez and Ann Hewitt Please note —no pre -registration is required and there is no fee to attend. If you have questions, please contact Lynn Rodriguez at (805) 654-2455 UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER ntey'ated Regional Water Management a ; c/'=I11tipiI ra County 2 WATERSHED AWARENESS Am on T h,� SAVE THE DATES! Celebrate with us and bring awareness about the Santa Clara River Watershed Where: Faulkner Farm, 287 S. Briggs Rd. in Santa Paula When: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 - 4:00 — 7:00 p.m. Learn from local leaders managing our resources in the Santa Clara River watershed about successful projects and programs that further our knowledge and preserve the health of the watershed. You're also invited to visit several local success stories offered through tours listed below. Tours of the Watershed Saturday, May 12, 2012 9 -10 a.m. Nature walk and talk, The Nature Conservancy Property, Santa Paula 11 a.m.— noon Guided tour Agriculture Museum, Santa Paula Saturday, May 19, 2012 9-10 a.m. Bouquet Creek Restoration Project, Central Park, Santa Clarita 11 a.m. — noon Recycled water system, La Verne Nursery, Piru Brought to you by the Santa Clara River Watershed Committee, a subcommittee of the Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County, and the Upper Santa Clara River Water Management Group Stay Tuned for Further Details Appendix B Memorandum of Understanding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Castaic Lake Water Agency, the Santa Clarita Water Division of the Castaic Lake Water Agency, Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District of Los Angeles County, City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Newhall County Water District, Valencia Water Company, San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy. May 01, 2012 t 1 1 IL I s •• "To Enrich Lives Through E?'KNe arx QC Ping Setvke" 900 SOUTH FREMONT AVENUE ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNfA 91803-1331 Telephone: (625) 456-5100 http : /fd p w. l a c o u *. g o v The Honorable Board of Supervisors County of Los Angeles 383 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, California 90012 Dear Supervisors: ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: P,O. BOX 1460 ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91802-1460 ADOPTED BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 39 May 1, 2012 SACHI A. HAMAI EXECUTIVE OFFICER UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT GROUP MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AND MANAGEMENT GROUP AGENCIES TO UPDATE THE INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UPPER BASIN OF THE SANTA CLARA RIVER (SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 5) (3 VOTES) SUBJECT This action is to authorize the Chief Engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District or her designee to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with other members of the Upper Santa Clara River Regional Water Management Group to update the existing Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Upper Basin of the Santa Clara River, and authorize a contribution, in an amount not to exceed $7,750 toward the costs of the Plan update. The estimated cost of the Plan update is $355,000 and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District's share is for an amount not to exceed $7,750. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD ACTING AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT: 1. Authorize the Chief Engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District or her designee to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the other members of the Upper Santa Clara River Regional Water Management Group to update the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Upper Basin of the Santa Clara River. The Honorable Board of Supervisors 5/112012 Page 2 2. Authorize a contribution by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District toward the preparation of the Plan update in an amount not to exceed $7,750. PURPOSE/JUSTIFICATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTION The purpose of the recommended actions is to authorize the Chief Engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) or her designee to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with other members of the Upper Santa Clara River Regional Water Management Group (Group) substantially similar to the enclosed draft, to update the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (Plan), and to authorize the LACFCD to contribute a total amount not to exceed $7,750 toward the costs to update the Plan. Senate Bill 1 Second Extraordinary Session, Chapter 1, Statutes of 2008 (Perata) requires the update to include preparation of a focused climate change technical study, and a salt and nutrient management plan pursuant to the State's Recycled Water Policy. The two technical studies need to be integrated into the Plan to produce a final update, which meets the proposition 84 Guidelines, fills indentified data gaps, and meets the specific water -quality objectives for the Plan. Implementation of Strategic Plan Goals The Countywide Strategic Plan directs the provision of Operational Effectiveness (Goal 1) by developing partnerships to effectively leverage resources by using a collaborative effort to develop and implement the Plan, Organizational Effectiveness (Goal 3) by utilizing a collaborative effort to implement projects, and Fiscal Responsibility (Goal 4) by actively seeking grant funds to augment the County's funding sources. FISCAL IMPACT/FINANCING There will be no impact to the County General Fund The LACFCD will fund its fair share of the activities noted in this letter not to exceed $7,750, and the other Group members will fund their appropriate fair shares. Sufficient funds to cover the LACFCD's share are available in the Fiscal Year 2011-12 Flood Fund Budget. FACTS AND PROVISIONS/LEGAL REQUIREMENTS The LACFCD joined the current Group pursuant to your Board's authorization on May 1, 2007. The Group was initially formed to prepare and adopt a Plan in accordance with the provisions of Proposition 50, Chapter 8, and Sections 10530 to 10541 of the California Water Code to develop a Plan to improve water supply reliability, water quality, and environmental Stewardship. Proposition 84 designates $215 million in grant funding to be divided among the Los Angeles and Ventura County Region including the Group for projects identified in or consistent with the Plan. IRWM groups are required to update their existing plans to address the provisions of Senate Bill 1 (2008 - Perata). The estimated cost of the Plan update is $355,000. The Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) applied for a Department of Water Resources (DWR) Proposition 84 Planning Grant to update the Plan and prepare two technical studies. The CLWA was awarded $266,250; therefore, the remaining balance of $88,750 to update the Plan will need to be funded by the Group. Per the enclosed draft MOU, the CLWA will contribute $50,000 and the remaining contribution of $38,750 will The Honorable Board of Supervisors 5/1/2012 Page 3 be divided equally among the LACFCD, City of Santa Clarita, Newhall County Water District, Santa Clarita Water Division, and Valencia Water Company or $7,750 each. The MOU will be executed by the current Group members consisting of: the LACFCD, Castaic Lake Water Agency, Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District of Los Angeles County, City of Santa Clarita, Newhall County Water District, Santa Clarita Water Division of the Castaic Lake Water Agency, the Valencia Water Company, and the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy as a new member. The MOU has provisions for others to join the Group in the future. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION The recommended actions are not projects pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because they are activities that are excluded from the definition of a project by Section 15378 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines. The proposed actions would create a government funding mechanism that does not involve any commitment to a specific project, which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. IMPACT ON CURRENT SERVICES (OR PROJECTS) Approval of these actions will benefit the County services by allowing the LACFCD to compete for new State grant funding opportunities that leverage Flood Funds. CONCLUSION Please return three adopted copies of this letter to the Department of Public Works, Watershed Management Division. Respectfully submitted, GAIL FARBER Director GF:GH:sw Enclosures c: Chief Executive Office (Rita Robinson) County Counsel Executive Office UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT GROUP MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (hereinafter referred to as MOU) is entered into and is made effective on the date the last Party signs, and is between the CASTAIC LAKE WATER AGENCY (Agency), including its SANTA CLARITA WATER DIVISION (Water Division), SANTA CLARITA VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Sanitation District), the CITY OF SANTA CLARITA (City), the LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT (LACFCD), NEWHALL COUNTY WATER DISTRICT (Water District), the VALENCIA WATER COMPANY (Water Company), and the SAN GABRIEL AND LOWER LOS ANGELES RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY (Conservancy) (hereinafter, collectively the Parties or individually as Party). WHEREAS, the Parties to this MOU establish and participate in the Upper Santa Clara River Regional Water Management Group (hereinafter referred to as GROUP) under the California Water Code Division 6, part 2.2, known as the Integrated Regional Water Management Planning Act (hereinafter referred to as the ACT); and WHEREAS, Section 10531 of the ACT includes the following declarations: (a) "Water is a valuable natural resource in California, and should be managed to ensure the availability of sufficient supplies to meet the state's agricultural, domestic, industrial, and environmental needs. It is the intent of the Legislature to encourage local agencies to work cooperatively to manage their available local and imported water supplies to improve the quality, quantity, and reliability of those supplies." (b) "Local agencies can realize efficiencies by coordinating and integrating their assets and seeking mutual solutions to water management issues." (c) "The reliability of water supplies can be significantly improved by diversifying water portfolios, taking advantage of local and regional opportunities, and considering a broad variety of water management strategies as described in the California Water Plan." (d) "The implementation of this part will facilitate the development of integrated regional water management plans, thereby assisting each region of the state to improve water supply reliability, water quality, and environmental stewardship to meet current and future needs." (e) "Water management is integrally linked to public health and the health of all natural resources within our watersheds. It is the intent of the Legislature that water management strategies and projects are carried out in a way that promotes these important public values"; and Page 1 of 14 WHEREAS, Section 10539 of the ACT states that a Regional Water Management Group means a group in which three or more local agencies, at least two of which have statutory authority over water supply or water management, as well as those other persons who may be necessary for the development and implementation of a plan that meets the requirements in Sections 10540 and 10541, participate by means of a Joint Powers Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding, or other written agreement, as appropriate, that is approved by the governing bodies of those local agencies; and WHEREAS, under the ACT, the Agency, Water Division, Sanitation District, City, LACFCD, Water District, and Water Company collaboratively prepared an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Upper Basin of the Santa Clara River (hereinafter referred to as PLAN) pursuant to a 2007 Memorandum Of Understanding; and WHEREAS, the upper portion of the Santa Clara River Watershed, as defined for the purposes of the PLAN as the USCR IRWM Region, is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and southeast, the Santa Susana Mountains to the southwest, the Liebre Mountains and Transverse Ranges to the northeast and northwest, and westward to the Ventura County Northeasterly Boundary Line; and WHEREAS, Agency, Water Division, LACFCD, City, Water District, Sanitation District, Water District, Water Company and the Conservancy have agreed to work collectively to prepare an update of the PLAN, including a Salt and Nutrient Management Plan, and Climate Change Technical Study (hereinafter referred to as PLAN update); and WHEREAS, Conservancy has requested that it be admitted as a party to this MOU and as a member of the GROUP; and WHEREAS, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has approved the USCR IRWM Region in its Region Acceptance Process; and WHEREAS, there is a need to prepare a PLAN update to reflect the requirements of Senate Bill 1 Second Extraordinary Session, Chapter 1, Statutes of 2008 (Perata), which requires as a condition of grant acceptance, the commitment of the GROUP to prepare an updated Plan consistent with new Plan guidelines prepared by DWR; and WHEREAS, the State Water Resources Control Board's Recycled Water Policy requires the development of a regional Salt and Nutrient Management Plan for the Eastern Santa Clara Groundwater Basins; and WHEREAS, there is a need to pay the costs of the PLAN update; and WHEREAS, the study area for the PLAN update includes all or a portion of the service areas of the Parties; and Page 2 of 14 WHEREAS, Parties are willing to contribute to the PLAN update with the necessary data to prepare PLAN update and to review and comment on the draft versions of PLAN update; and WHEREAS, Agency, on behalf of Parties, submitted a planning grant application for preparation of PLAN Update, funded equally by Agency and the Sanitation District, to DWR and DWR has authorized a planning grant in the amount of $266,250 toward PLAN Update; and WHEREAS, DWR requires a minimum contribution of 25 percent matching funds as a condition of receipt of the grant for preparation of PLAN Update; and WHEREAS, PLAN update costs are currently estimated to be $355,000 and this MOU allocates the cost difference between the estimated cost of PLAN Update and the required 25 percent matching fund cost (estimated to be $88,750) as described in provision 3b; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the Parties and of the promises herein contained, Parties agree as follows: (1) All recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and constitute a part of the MOU among Parties. (2) Upon the Effective Date of this MOU, the Group is hereby reestablished and includes each of the Parties. (3) Parties shall cooperate in the preparation of PLAN update as follows: a. Agency will solicit bids, select a consultant, award, and administer a contract to prepare PLAN update, and for purposes of filling that role shall hereinafter be referred to as CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR. b. The matching funds cost of the update of the PLAN required by DWR as a condition of the planning grant award, will be paid for as follows: $50,000 to be contributed by Agency and $38,750 to be divided equally among the LACFCD, City, Water Division, Water Company, and the Water District or $7,750 each. C. The Conservancy will award a $10,000 grant to the Agency, which will be used at the end of the PLAN Update to reimburse Agency for any PLAN Update related expenses that exceed the expected $355,000 in costs. d. Agency will pay the consultant(s) selected to prepare PLAN Update, Salt and Nutrient Management Plan, and Climate Change Technical Study, and will seek reimbursement for a portion of those costs from DWR pursuant to the planning grant award. Agency will invoice each Party listed in item (3)b above one time after January 1, 2012, for its share of the $38,750 nongrant funded costs. Page 3 of 14 e. This MOU will remain in effect, unless, upon a ten (10) day prior written notice to the other Parties, a majority of the Parties terminate this MOU. f. The Parties shall provide and share all of their necessary and relevant information, data, studies, and/or documentation for PLAN update in their respective possession as may be needed for PLAN update in a timely manner, as requested. g. Each Party shall review and comment on the draft(s) and final version(s) of technical reports and each draft of PLAN update in a timely manner, as requested. h. Agency shall act on behalf of all Parties with respect to the requirements of Water Code, Section 10543(a) and (b). (4) IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS: a. The GROUP shall not formally adopt PLAN update until at least three Parties have endorsed PLAN update by Resolution or other formal action of each entity's legislative or governing body, including at least two agencies with statutory authority over water supply or water management, those being Agency, Sanitation District, LACFCD, and Water District. b. If the governing body of any Party determines not to endorse PLAN update, such action shall constitute automatic withdrawal from GROUP. A Party that automatically or voluntarily withdraws from GROUP shall not be entitled to reimbursement of any amounts previously paid by that Party. A Party that is deemed to have withdrawn from GROUP under this subsection shall automatically be reinstated when that Party endorses PLAN update and accepts and executes any additions or amendments to this MOU. C. This MOU may be amended or modified only by mutual written consent of all Parties that are members of GROUP at the time of such amendment or modification. No waiver of any term or condition of this MOU by any Party shall be a continuing waiver thereof. d. There may be additional parties entering into this MOU by amendment. Any MOU amendment adding a new party or parties must be approved by all Parties. e. If any provision of this MOU is held, determined, or adjudicated to be illegal, void, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, Parties agree that the remainder of this MOU shall be given effect to the fullest extent possible. f. Notice: Any correspondence, communication, or contact concerning this MOU shall be directed to the following: Page 4 of 14 Agency: Mr. Dan Masnada General Manager Castaic Lake Water Agency 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Fax No.: (661) 297-1610 Water Division: City: Mr. Mauricio Guardado Retail Manager Santa Clarita Water Division of the Castaic Lake Water Agency 22722 West Soledad Canyon Road Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Fax No.: (661) 286-4333 Mr. Ken Pulskamp City Manager City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 300 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Fax No.: (661) 259-8125 Water District: Mr. Steve Cole General Manager Newhall County Water District 23780 North Pine Street Newhall, CA 91321 Fax No.: (661) 259-8137 LACFCD: Ms. Gail Farber Director of Public Works County of Los Angeles P.O. Box 1460 Alhambra, CA 91802-1460 Fax No.: (626) 458-4022 Page 5 of 14 Sanitation Districts: Mr. Stephen R. Maguin Chief Engineer and General Manager Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District of Los Angeles County 1955 Workman Mill Road Whittier, CA 90601 Fax No.: (562) 695-8660 Water Company: Mr. Keith Abercrombie General Manager Valencia Water Company 24631 Avenue Rockefeller Valencia, CA 91355 Fax No.: (661) 294-3806 Conservancy: Mr. Mark Stanley Executive Officer Rivers and Mountains Conservancy "EI Encanto" 100 North Old San Gabriel Canyon Road Azusa, CA 91702 g. Notice shall be deemed as given upon personal delivery, receipt of fax confirmation, or five days after deposit in U.S. Mail, first-class postage, prepaid, and addressed as set out above. h. Each person signing this MOU in a representative capacity for a Party represents that he or she has the necessary power and authority to bind that Party. i. This MOU may be executed in counterparts, each counterpart being an integral part of this MOU. The Parties are signing this MOU as of the date stated opposite each signature. Page 6 of 14 The Parties are signing this MOU as of the date stated opposite each signature. Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kidman, Behrens and Tague wfy Legal -- CASTAIC LAKE WATER m Page 7 of 14 General Manager P Date ATTEST: NOV 0 9 2011 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaarrddj&`Smith By ` �7 District Counsel SANTA CLARITA VALLEY SANIT TION DIS I F LO ANGE S NTY By Page 8 of 14 Date G� ATTESTt City Clerx APPROVED AS TO FORM: Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP By LegalAunsel Page 9 of 14 CITY, OFFSSANTA I CLLAARITA: By KEN PULSKAMP, City Manager Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: By C unty Counsel LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONSTRICT 4� GAIL FARBER, Chief Engineer Page 10 of 14 VALENCIA WATER COMPANY // Keith Abercrombie, General Manager Date Page 11 of 14 SANTA CLARITA WATER DIVISION By__ ' MAURIC O GUARDADO JR., RetailfAanager Date q/ Page 12 of 14 NEWHALL COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Date ID, 11. W 1 1 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Legal Counsel Counsel c� A 1 By STE OCE, General Manager Page 13 of 14 March 28, 2011 - Item 18 RESOLUTION NO. 2011-12 RESOLUTION OF THE SAN GABRIEL AND LOWER LOS ANGELES RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY (RMC) AUTHORIZING A GRANT AND MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR THE UPPER SANTA CLARA RIVER INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE AND GRANT ADMINISTRATION (RMC 10018) WHEREAS, The legislature has found and declared that the San Gabriel River and its tributaries, the Lower Los Angeles River and its tributaries, and the San Gabriel Mountains, Puente Hills, and San Jose Hills constitute a unique and important open space, environmental, anthropological, cultural, scientific, educational, recreational, scenic, and wildlife resource that should be held in trust to be preserved and enhanced for the enjoyment of, and appreciation by, present and future generations; and WHEREAS, The people of the State of California have enacted the Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhoods, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2002 (Park Bond Act Proposition 40) which provides funds for the RMC Grant Program; and WHEREAS, The people of the State of California have enacted the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002 (Proposition 50), which provides funds for the RMC grant program; and WHEREAS, The people of the State of California have enacted the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 84), which provides funds for the RMC grant program; and WHEREAS, The RMC may award grants to local public agencies, state agencies, federal agencies, and nonprofit organizations for the purposes of Division 22.8 the Public Resources Code; and WHEREAS, The Applicant has submitted a project which is consistent with the purposes of Division 22.8 of the Public Resources Code and the Bond Act; and WHEREAS, this action is exempt from the environmental impact report requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and NOW Therefore be it resolved that the RMC hereby: FINDS that this action is consistent with the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Act and is necessary to carry out the purposes and objectives of Division 22.8 of the Public Resources Code. 2. FINDS that the actions contemplated by this resolution are exempt from the environmental impact report requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 3. Authorizes the Executive Officer enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Update and Grant Administration provided the final draft is substantially similar to the March 2011 MOU. 4. Authorize the expenditure of $10,000 allocated from the support budget for expenses which are consistent with Proposition 84. 5. ADOPTS the staff report dated March 28, 2011 End of Resolution ~ Passed and Adopted by the Board of the SAN GABRIEL AND LOWER LOS ANGELES RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY on March 28, 2011 ATTEST: Frank Colonna, Chair Appendix C Water Related Policies List of Water Related Policies and Programs within the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Region Agency Plan, Policy or Program Water Resource Management Strategy/Linkage Document Location California Association of Resource Conservation Districts Guide to Watershed Permitting for the State of California Land use planning http://ucanr.org/sites/csnce/files/ 57548.pdf California Department of Water Resources California Water Plan Updates 2009 and 2013 Water planning, land use, and climate change nexus http://www.waterplan.water.ca.g ov/cwpu2009/index.cfm; and http://www.waterplan.water.ca.g ov/cw p u 2013/i n d ex. cf m California Department of Water Resources Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program Water planning, water conservation, land use planning http://www.dwr.water.ca.gov/irw m/grants/index.cfm California Department of Water Resources DWR Environmental Stewardship Policy Environmental stewardship http://www.waterplan.water.ca.g ov/docs/news/EnvironmentalSte wardshipPolicy2010.pdf California Department of Water Resources DWR's Sustainability targets Water conservation, energy, climate change, sustainability http://www.water.ca.gov/climate change/docs/Memo sustainabilit y-Sept°/6202010.pdf California Department of Water Resources DWR's Climate Action Plan (greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan) Water conservation, energy, climate change http://www.water.ca.gov/climate change/CAP.cfm California Department of Water Resources DWR's Sustainability Policy Environmental stewardship, water conservation http://www.water.ca.gov/climate change/docs/Sustainability Policy .pdf California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Los Angeles Region State of the Watershed - Report on Surface Water Quality The Santa Clara River Watershed Water quality http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/1 osangeles/water issues/programs /regional program/wmi/ws sant aclara.shtml California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Los Angeles Region Los Angeles Region Basin Plan Water quality http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/1 osangeles/water issues/programs /basin plan/basin plan documen tation.shtml City of Santa Clarita City of Santa Clarita General Plan - Conservation and Open Space Element Water resources, surface water, groundwater, long-term water http://www.codepublishing.com/ CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClarita Agency Plan, Policy or Program Water Resource Management Document Location Strategy/Linkage supply, flood control, water GP/SantaClaritaGP.html conservation, water quality City of Santa Clarita Resolution No. 05-103 A Resolution Of Resource stewardship http://www.santa- The City Council Of The City Of Santa clarita.com/Modules/ShowDocum ent.aspx?documentid=2666 Clarita, California, For The Adoption Of A Program Regarding Environmentally Preferable Purchasing County of Ventura Planning Final Wetland Permitting Guide; Land use planning http://www.ventura.org/rma/pla nning/pdf/bio/FinalPDF.pdf Division Permitting Stream and Wetland Projects in Ventura County, along the Santa Clara River in Los Angeles County (2006) Department of Water and 1932 Agreement Between LADWP and Flood control Hardcopy Available at CLWA Power City of Los Angeles UWCD for Flows from Bouquet Canyon and United Water Dam Conservation District Los Angeles County Los Angeles County General Plan - Water supply, water http://planning.lacounty.gov/gen eralplan Conservation and Open Space Element conservation, water quality, and General Goals and Policies natural watershed processes and protection Los Angeles County Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan - Water resources, surface water, http://Planning.lacounty.gov/ovo v Conservation and Open Space Element groundwater, long-term water supply, flood control, water conservation, water quality Newhall County Water Ordinance No. 112, An Ordinance Water conservation, emergency http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanw atermanagement/2010uwmps/Va District Amending Ordinance 101 Water supply lencia%20Water%20Company/Ap Conservation, Shortage, Drought and pendix%20F DraftWaterShortage Emergency Response Ordinance of ContingencyOrdinances.pdf Newhall County Water District Santa Clarita Valley 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Water supply, water http://clwa.org/publications/2010 -urban-water-management-plan conservation, water quality, water Agency Plan, Policy or Program Water Resource Management Strategy/Linkage Document Location quality Santa Clarita Valley Family of Water Suppliers Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan Water supply, water conservation http://clwa.org/wp- content/uploads/2011/09/Santa- Cla rita-Va I ley-W U E-Strategic-Pla n- Final-Sept-2008 FINAL.pdf Appendix D Plan Projects Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Projects submitted with a Lone Form Long Forms are used for projects that are deemed ready for implementation and for which detailed project information is available. These projects were scored and ranked based on established criteria. Page 1 of Objectives n o a 12 o w Cz Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Coordinating/ Partnering Agency Estimated Cost 10 a :: .�°', v a e r s Rank r 3 3 3 °o E" o o x p v v > E N LL�� Q 2 u O U b C � u � ¢ E C S 2 $O.SM-$20M (Capital); Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Santa Clara River Conservancy; Angeles National ♦ ♦ SC -1 City of Santa Clarita $25-$100k/yr over 15 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 Removal Program (SCARP) Implementation Forest; Santa Clara Invasive Weeds Task Force years (0&M) SCVSD Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation $1.11M/yr over 3 years SCVSD-1 City of Santa Clarita; County of Los Angeles ♦ ♦ 2 Public Outreach Program District (O&M) Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant- $250,000-$500,000 NCWD-2 Newhall County Water District NA ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ a Phase 1 (Capital) Agricultural Access/Bouquet Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District; Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration, Control Canyon Network (Currently no Natural Resource Conservation District; Cooper $20,240- $52,852 AA/BCN-1 Ecological Monitoring/Leathermann (Capital); $13,052/yr ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 4 of Invasive Weeds eligible applicant as Sponsor BioConsulting, Inc.; LA County Fire; Angeles over 5 years (O&M) Agency) National Forest July 2012 Santa Clarita Water Division Water $301,930-$2,520,469 SCWD-2 Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Water Use Santa Clarita Water Division Castaic Lake Water Agency; City of Santa Clarita (Capital); $62,370- ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ' $8M -$14M (Capital); Saugus Water Reclamation Plan - Ultraviolet Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation ♦ ♦ SCVSD-2 Castaic Lake Water Agency $2K/yr for 20 years ♦ ♦ e Light Disinfection Facility District (O&M) Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency LACWDft36; Newhall County Water District; $1M-$51v1/yr over 8 CLWA-3 Castaic Lake Water Agency Santa Clarita Water Division; Valencia Water Strategic Plan years (Capital) Company $5M7$9M (Capital); SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 1 and Los Angeles County Flood ♦ ♦ LADPW-9 NA $50K/yr over 50 years ♦ ♦ a Spreading Grounds Control District (O&M) $3M -$5M (Capital); CLWA-8 Foothill Feeder Connection Castaic Lake Water Agency Newhall County Water District; City of Santa $50K/yr over 50 years ♦ a Clarita; LACWDJt36 (O&M) $4M -$6M (Capital); SC -5 Biofiltration and Low Impact Development City of Santa Clarita Los Angeles County; Castaic Lake Water Agency $200,000/yr over 15 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Io Retrofits years (O&M) Page 1 of Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 2 of 7 Objectives o > > n o v Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Coordinating/ Partnering Agency Estimated Cost o :.' .�°i, i a e y s Z Rank v o a o m n 10 a i otu 3 y o E LL o o 0 E C 2 u lo CL C $25M -$35M (Capital); SC -6 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita NA ♦ ♦ ♦ 11 unknown O&M $14,910,000-$16M CLWA-7 Castaic Conduit Castaic Lake Water Agency NA (Capital); $5,000/yr ♦ 12 (O&M) $2j8800000 -$3j200,000 CLWA-10 Distribution System - RV -2 Modification Castaic Lake Water Agency NA (Capital); $5,000/yr ♦ 13 (O&M) CLWA-9 West Saugus Formation Groundwater Castaic Lake Water Agency NA $628,675 ♦ ♦ 14 Resources Monitoring Project $2,500,000 - $4,000,000 NCW0-1 Santa Clara River — Sewer Trunk Line Newhall County Water District NA (Capital); $30K/yr over ♦ ♦ ♦ 15 Relocation Phase II and III 50 years (O&M) Castaic Lake Water Agency; Santa Clarita Water 625000 (Capital); NCWD-3 Santa Clarita Valley Residential Turf Removal Newhall County Water District Division; Valencia Water Company; LA County $312,500/yr over 2 years ♦ ♦ 16 Program Waterworks ri36 (O&M) Santa Clarita Valley Volatile Organic Carbon Newhall County Water District; City of Santa CLWA-11 Castaic Lake Water Agency I I $250,000-$510 (Capital) ♦ ♦ v Groundwater Investigation Clarita; LACWDtF36 Page 2 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Projects submitted with a Short Form Short Forms are used for projects that are primarily in a conceptual phase and not deemed ready for implementation. These projects were not scored or ranked. Page 3 of 7 Objectives v CL a a 'o z u o QJ ss Z Coordinating/ Partnering v a i ° 1° a o Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o a o o s o o a Agency g Y o 3 3 v a o o n, a v QJ N QJ y O y �O O� s U v 'o o Ln -C3 ¢ 2 'U�o QJ C CL. 2 U C Feasibility of Arundo Stem Cutting Agricultural AA/BCN-2 Ram (ASCR) Access/Bouquet Canyon NA <$100K Castaic Lake Water CLWA-1 Irrigation Efficiency Program NA $100K -$1M Agency Castaic Lake Water CLWA-2 Water Use Efficiency Certification NA $100K -$1M Agency CLWA-4 ESFP Sludge Collection System Castaic Lake Water NA $1M -$1M Agency Saugus Formation Replacement Castaic Lake Water CLWA-5 NA $1M -$10M Wells Agency Santa Clarita Valley Drought Castaic Lake Water CLWA-6 NA $1M -$1M Relief Wells Agency CLWA-12 Update Rio Vista WTP Education Castaic Lake Water NA <$1001000 Model Agency LACWD36-1 Advanced Meter Infrastructure LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 LACWD36-2 Cash for Grass Rebate Program LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 Landscape Irrigation Efficiency LACWD36-3 LACWD#36 NA <$100,000 Program LACWD36-4 Apam and Bayfield Water Main LACWD#36 NA $100K -$1M Page 3 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 4 of 7 Objectives w Coordinating/ Partnering v v N t a a o 0 Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a s c u a a Agency o 3 3 voc 0 N v o w U ct Hasley Canyon Road Water Main, LACWD36-5 Turnout Connection, and Pump LACWD#36 NA $1M -$10M Station Project Replacement of 8 -inch Water LACWD36-6 LACWD#36 NA $100K -$1M Main along Del Valle Road $3M -$6M Lower San Francisquito Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-1 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $2M -$5M Newhall Creek In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW 2 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $3M -$7M Placerita Creek Off -River Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-3 NA Spreading Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Page 4 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 5 of 7 Objectives w Coordinating/ Partnering v v N t a a o 0 Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a s c u a a Agency o 3 3 voc 0 N v o w U Qc $4M -$7M Santa Clara In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-4 NA Grounds No. 1 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $2M -$5M Santa Clara In -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-5 NA Grounds No. 2 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $4M -$7M Santa Clara Off -River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-6 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Santa Clara River Rubber Dam Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-7 NA No.1 Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $7M -$10M Santa Clara River Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-8 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-10 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 2 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Page 5 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 6 of 7 Objectives w v t a a 0 Coordinating/ Partnering v N o Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a s c u a a Agency o 3 3 voc 0 N v o w Qc U $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-11 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 3 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $5M -$7M Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-12 SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 4 NA Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) $3M -$6M Upper San Francisquito Spreading Los Angeles County (Capital); $25K/yr LADPW-13 NA Grounds Flood Control District over 50 years (O&M) Recycled Water Onsite Newhall County Water NCWD-4 NA $100K -$1M Conversion District NCWD-5 Advanced Metering Infrastructure Newhall County Water NA $1M -$10M Program District Upper Santa Clara River SC -2 Arundo/Tamarisk Removal City of Santa Clarita Forest Service; Santa $1M -$10M Clara River Conservancy Program (SCARP) Implementation City of Santa Clarita Biofiltration SC -3 and Low Impact Development City of Santa Clarita NA $1M -$10M Retrofits SC -4 Septic to Sewer Retrofit Project City of Santa Clarita NA >$10M Page 6 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Projects Submitted During 2012 Call for Projects Page 7 of 7 Objectives w Coordinating/ Partnering v v N t a a o 0 Project ID Project Name Sponsor Agency Estimated Cost o o a s c u a a Agency o 3 3 voc 0 N v o w U ct Santa Clarita Linking SCEEC to the Upper Santa SCEEC-1 Environmental NA <$100K Clara River IRWMP Education Consortium Advanced Metering Infrastructure Santa Clarita Water SCWD-1 NA $1M -$10M Program Division GIS Development and Santa Clarita Water SCWD-3 NA $1M -$10M Implementation Division Regional High Resolution GIS Valencia Water VWC-1 NA $100K -$1M Mapping Company Valleywide Conservation Valencia Water VWC 2 NA <$100K Database Company Advanced Metering Infrastructure Valencia Water VWC-3 NA $1M -$10M Program Company Valencia Water VWC-4 CII Consevation Plan NA <$100K Company Page 7 of 7 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: ICity of Santa Clarita Valencia Blvd. Clarita, CA 91355 anta Clara Task Force Name:* Heather Merenda Title: / Individual Address: nta Environmental Programs Coordinator/Sustainability Planner Telephone:* Fax: 661-284-1413 661-255-4356 Email:* hmerenda@santa-clarita.com www.vcrcd.org/scarp.cfm Name:* Page 1 of 14 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. (approximate near Bouquet Canyon Rd and Santa Clara River) Project Latitude: 340 25' N Project Longitude: Page 2 of 14 The entire upper Santa Clara River Watershed is part of the work. However, the more recent work is two fold — one area is the City Location Description: owned river property that served as a demonstration site. This is 297 acres of Santa Clara River roughly between Bouquet Canyon Road and the 5 freeway. The second effort really encompasses the entire upper Santa Clara River region, including Angeles National Forest and tributaries to the Santa Clara River Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Angeles National Forest • Santa Clara River Conservancy ect Status Part 2. Project Need* IITWA It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not implemented. Page 3 of 14 The City of Santa Clarita, Angeles National Forest, and other stakeholders are implementing an environmentally beneficial project in the upper Santa Clara River watershed including its tributaries (-16,300 acres) — the Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Removal Plan (SCARP). Restoration of riparian habitat, increase of water quantity, improvement of water quality, and reduction of flood/wildfire hazard will be accomplished through the removal of invasive plant species, some of which have colonized in large extents of the Upper Santa Clara River watershed. The primary species of concern are arundo (Arundo donax) and tamarisk (Tamarix spp.). The harmful effects of invasive non-native plants such as arundo and tamarisk are well documented. In fact, the removal of arundo and other non-native invasive plants is a priority task for several regulatory agencies in Southern California. Invasive weed infestations are most effectively addressed on a regional scale and done systematically over a period of many years. Since most invasive plants are spread via travel downstream, it is important to begin in the uppermost reaches of the watershed and work down. Both arundo and tamarisk are officially recognized as undesirable invasive plants. Both plants are listed as `A-1' invaders (the most invasive and widespread wildland pest plants) by the California Invasive Plant Council and as noxious weeds by the California Department of Page 3 of 14 Part 3. Project Description" A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Page 4 of 14 Food and Agriculture (CDFA). While the degree and specifics of problems associated with these species vary, general negative effects associated with the establishment of arundo and tamarisk within the watershed include the following: • Water Quality: Reduction in the shading of surface water, thereby resulting in reduction of bank -edge river habitats, higher water temperature, lower dissolved -oxygen content, raised pH, and conversion of ammonia to toxic unionized ammonia, chloride salt deposition; Arundo also serves to collect and increase trash. • Water Supply: Loss of surface and groundwater through heavy consumption and rapid transpiration. • Flooding: Obstruction of flood flows with associated damage to public facilities including bridges and culverts, and to private property such as important farmland. • Erosion: increased erosion of streambanks, associated damage to habitats and farmlands due to channel obstructions, and decreased bank stability associated with shallow -rooted arundo. • Fire Hazards: Substantially increased danger of wildfire occurrences, intensity, and frequency, and a decrease in the role riparian areas infested with arundo play as firebreaks or buffers. • Native Habitats: Displacement of critical riparian habitat through monopolization of soil moisture by dense monocultures of arundo and tamarisk. • Native Wildlife: Reduction in diversity and abundance of riparian -dependent wildlife due to decreased habitat quality, loss of food and cover, and increased water temperatures. • Threatened and Endangered Species: Substantial reductions in suitable habitat available for state and federally listed species such as the least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, yellow -billed cuckoo and red -legged frog. Part 3. Project Description" A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Page 4 of 14 Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. Page 5 of 14 Part 3. Project Description A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate.* The SCARP implementation project will focus on removal of non-native invasive species, primarily arundo, from the sites identified in the planning phase. The current estimate is approximately 1,500 acres. However, since the SCARP implementation is a long-term project with extensive costs and logistical issues. The project will consisted of two phases. The first phase included the initial treatment of the arundo, which includes biomass removal and herbicide application on the demonstration site. Arundo may be ground in place with mechanical equipment such as a brush grinder (where appropriate), or removed by manual means employing tools such as chain saws and brush cutters. Upon removal of the target vegetation, appropriate aquatically approved herbicide will be applied. In areas where mechanical vegetation grinding is to occur, arundo will be allowed to resprout to a height of 2 to 3 feet, and herbicide will be applied via foliar spray. In areas where manual removal is to occur, herbicide will be applied immediately to the cut stumps via daubing or painting. Foliar application of herbicide may also occur on stands where appropriate. In addition to arundo, other invasive plants may be removed, if applicable. The second phase is a diligent monitoring and maintenance program to facilitate retreatments and avoid re -infestation of the site and expanding to additional areas of the upper Santa Clara River. The second phase, which has begun, expands these efforts beyond arundo and the demonstration site. Private property owners in Bouquet Canyon have collaborated to start addressing the arundo in that tributary. Angeles National Forest has an Environmental Assessment for public comment and plans to remove arundo from Bouquet Creek and San Francisquito Creek. There are City owned properties that this second phase will focus on. The next phase addresses tamarisk and other plants identified is the SCARP document. In addition, once arundo has had initial treatment, a different management technique is required. As arundo contains significant energy resources in its root structure, it is difficult to eradicate it in a single treatment phase. Therefore, this project proposal also includes a long-term maintenance period for each site after initial treatment. During this time, retreatments of herbicide will be applied regularly to exhaust the belowground resources of the plant and lead to its elimination from the treatment area. Project reconnaissance visits to areas upstream of the treatment area indicate that significant arundo populations do not exist above the site. As potential for re -infestation from upstream sources is thus low, it is expected that in five years, arundo will be eradicated from the project site, and significant growth of native riparian vegetation will be achieved. Frequent monitoring of the site will ensure that any changes in the site, such as additional arundo resprouts, will be treated in a timely manner. In addition to removal of noxious weeds, this project contains a potential restoration Page 6 of 14 component. Monitoring of the site will indicate if revegetation is necessary. Native species common to the site such as willows (Salix sp.) and mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia) reestablish readily through natural recruitment once competition from non-native species is removed. However, it may be determined that certain areas within the site require more rapid enhancement than natural recruitment can provide. This would be accomplished through the installation of willows (Salix sp.) and mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia) cuttings, as appropriate. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River • alluvial groundwater under the Santa Clara Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Plan Long Term Implementation Plan • Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Plan Santa Clarita Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Plan Environmental Page 7 of 14 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. reduces the environmental water demand from the Santa Clara River which is 50% of the SCV water supply Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. The supply of water is increased for other uses because the arundo and tamarisk demand much more water than native riparian forest Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Tamarisk is a source of chloride, as it drops chloride from its leaves to the surface, which is picked up by rain and other flows. The reduction in shade increases water temperature resulting in higher chance of algal blooms Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Arundo and tamarisk take over native habitat, destroying native flora and fauna. Arundo infestation use so much water they desiccate ponds of water that stickleback depend on. Flooding/Hydromodification Large stands of arundo create a flooding hazard and can cause severe erosion from the large mats of roots that hold the stands of arundo in place Climate Change Adaptation During the summer months, arundo turns into a dry straw. It is a fire hazard, as firefighters direct fires to the Santa Clara River as a fire break. Dry arundo actually spreads fire. California proiects a higher number and bigger intensity of wildfires. Climate Change Prevention Increased local water supplies reduce the energy needed to pump water from northern California. Page 8 of 14 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Primary Water Transfers ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA X Secondary Other (Please State): Reduce Delta demand Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Reduced environmental water Improve Water Quality ❑Primary ❑Secondary X NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) water temperature and algae Page 9 of 14 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: fire management Is the proposed project an element or phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program X Yes ❑ No Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Plan Page 10 of 14 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans complete July 1, 2006 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study complete July 1, 2006 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates complete July 1, 2006 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA complete February 1, 2006 (mmlddlyyyy) Permits regional permits complete various 2006 (mm/ddlyyyy) Construction Drawings (mmlddlyyyy) Funding (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. All permits have been secured, or have enough of a history that the project permitting would not be extensive. The project is focusing on the overall area and tributaries, as well as secondary cutting and management Page 11 of 14 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No X Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No X Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No X Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 12 of 14 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. X Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency X Adaptation to Climate Change X Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources X Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency X Provides Additional Water Supply X Promotes Water Quality Protection X Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise X Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: fire management and reduction X Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) X Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors X Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds X Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems X Other (Please State): preserves ponding water that is stickleback habitat ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency X Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling X Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources X Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 13 of 14 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): $1,000,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): $20,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): 0 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 100,000 Design Life of Project (years): 15 Page 14 of 14 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District / Individual Address: 955 Workman Mill Road Vhittier, CA 90601 Possible Name:* Francisco Guerrero Title: Project Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 562-908-4288 x 2832 562-908-4293 Email:* FGuerrero@lacsd.org Website: www.lacsd.or Project Name:* SCVSD Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach Proqram, Enforcement Phase Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1 34.41983951 Project Longitude: -118.54102332 Page 1 of 11 Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Service Area Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): City of Santa Clarita County of Los Angeles Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iemencea. The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (Sanitation District) operates two water reclamation plants (WRPs) in the Santa Clarita Valley, the Saugus and Valencia WRPs, along with more than thirty miles of Sanitation District's operated trunk lines and one pumping plant. The Saugus and Valencia WRPs discharge treated wastewater into the Upper Santa Clara River, which contain chloride in excess of the water quality objective for the upper Santa Clara River of 100 mg/L. In 2002, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region first adopted the Upper Santa Clara River Chloride Total Maximum Daily Load, which was subsequently revised most recently under Resolution No. R4-2008-012, requiring the Sanitation District to reduce chloride levels in the discharges from the WRPs. The Sanitation District has conducted a ground breaking, nationally recognized source control program for chloride in the Santa Clarita Valley. Because automatic water softeners (AWS), also known as self -regenerating water softeners, have been the largest controllable source of chloride, the source control efforts have focused on the removal of these units. However, Sanitation District efforts to reduce chloride sources have also focused on the industrial sector, commercial sector, hauled waste, and treatment plant operations. The Santa Clara River Chloride Reduction Ordinance of 2008 (Ordinance) was approved by voters and took effect on January 1, 2009. The Ordinance required the removal and disposal of all existing residential AWS by June 30, 2009. Over 7,900 AWS have been removed, but approximately 500 may still be discharging and several thousand may still be installed. The goal of the Enforcement Phase of the Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach Proqram is to remove the remaininq automatic water softeners in the Sanitation District's service Page 2 of 11 area, and thereby reduce the chloride load in the District's final effluent and recycled water at the Saugus and Valencia WRPs by up to 5 mg/L. Reducing the chloride load in the Sanitation District's final effluent from the remaining automatic water softeners will minimize the size and operation of future chloride compliance facilities and help comply with the Upper Santa Clara River Chloride Total Maximum Daily Load. Part 3. Project Description' A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The Sanitation District's Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach Program, Enforcement Phase will focus on removing the remaining automatic water softeners in the Santa Clarita Valley. The program will consist of home inspections, issuing Notices of Violations to residents that still have their automatic water softeners, issuing rebates to residents that remove their automatic water softeners, chloride monitoring, and public outreach. The Sanitation District has already sent letters to residents suspected of having automatic water softeners to inform them that the ordinance requires them to remove the units. The Sanitation District intends to launch a pilot scale home inspection program, begin public outreach and conduct additional chloride monitoring in the near future. The program has already been approved by the Sanitation District's Board of Directors and is ready to proceed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the Santa Clara River Page 3 of 11 • Santa Clara Eastern Groundwater Basin Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • 2011 Chloride Source Identification/Reduction, Pollution Prevention, and Public Outreach Plan, November 2011 • Agenda of the Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District, October 18, 2010 • Santa Clara River Chloride Reduction Ordinance of 2008 Page 4 of 11 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking The program will improve water quality by reducing the water with appropriate quality; improve chloride loading into the Upper Santa Clara River from the groundwater quality; and attain water quality Saugus and Valencia WRPs. standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce The program will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions minimizing the size of future chloride compliance facilities that would otherwise be required to remove chloride from the WRP discharges. Page 5 of 11 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention (chloride) ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 6 of 11 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program ® Yes ❑ No Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Automatic Water Softener Rebate and Public Outreach Program Page 7 of 11 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 10/18/2010 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study N/A (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete 10/18/2010 (mm/ddlyyyy) C EQA/NEPA N/A (mml ddlyyyy) Permits N/A (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings N/A (mmlddlyyyy) Funding In Process 07/1/2011 (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. The District has sent letters to homeowners informing them of the program and is ready to proceed with home inspections, public outreach, and chloride monitoring. The project received approval to proceed from the District's Board of Directors on October 18, 2010. The Sanitation District will first conduct pilot work before finalizing approach for full enforcement program. Page 8 of 11 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) The Sanitation District's goal is to remove all remaining automatic water softeners in the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District service area. By removing these units, the Sanitation District expects to achieve a reduction in the chloride discharged from the Saugus and Valencia WRPs of approximately 5 mg/L. In addition, the publicity associated with this project is expected to prevent backsliding (residents installing and/or using illegal automatic water softeners) by keeping awareness of the chloride problem high in the community. Reducing the chloride load in the Sanitation District's WRP discharges to the river from the remaining automatic water softeners will also minimize the size of future chloride compliance facilities and help the Sanitation District comply with the Upper Santa Clara River Chloride Total Maximum Daily Load. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 9 of 11 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ® Other (Please State): Reduces energy consumption needed for future chloride compliance facilities Page 10 of 11 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 0 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 0 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): $1.1 million Design Life of Project (years): 3 years Page 11 of 11 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Newhall County Water District / Individual Address: Newhall County Water District / 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Name:* Steve Cole Telephone:* Fax: 661-259-3610 661-259-9673 Email:* scole@ncwd.org Website: www.ncwd.org Project Name:* Pellet Water Softening Treatment Plant —Phase 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1 34023.584 Project Longitude: 118°32.285 Page 1 of 10 Existing Newhall Well 12/ Disinfection Facility Site Location Description: 25143 Railroad Ave, Santa Clarita, CA 91321 Project Cooperating A enc ies /Or anization s /Individuals : Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Newhall County Water District (NCWD) provides a blend of local groundwater from the Saugus Formation and imported State water through a Castaic Water Agency (CLWA) turnout (N-3) to the Newhall System. Local groundwater, especially from the Saugus Formation, is high in calcium and magnesium which results in high hardness. Total hardness has ranged from a low of 285 mg/L as CaCO3 to a high of 400 mg/L as CaCO3 from NCWD's two Saugus wells over the last 7 years. Hard water can cause several problems for customers including; spots on glasses, dishes, windows, etc., shortens the life of appliances such as, hot water heaters, dishwashers, etc., dry skin, and increased use of soaps and detergents. As a result, customers have sought to alleviate some of these problems by installing point -of -use (POU) water softeners. POU treatment devices result in an increased cost to consumers. In addition, self - regenerating water softeners produce a high chloride, brine discharge to the wastewater system and is a primary cause of treated wastewater discharged to the Santa Clara River exceeding the impending discharge limitation for chloride of 100 mg/L. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The main objective of the Pellet Softening project is to improve drinking water quality by removing calcium. This intern will reduce the consumer need for point -of -use water softeners and help reduce the amount of chloride discharged to the local Water Reclaimation Plants. This would serve as Phase 1 of a 3 phase project. Phase 1 would focus on the feasibility, conceptual design, and cost estimates for the construction and operation of a Pellet Softening Treatment Facility for two (2) Saugus Wells for the NCWD- Newhall service area. A feasibility report would be prepared along with conceptual layout, and estimates for design, construction, operation and maintenance. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River • Saugus Formation Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Well Softening Feasibility Study for Valencia Water Company - by Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Engineers, and Scientists • Optimal Operation of the Pellet Softening Process - by Rietveld, L.C., Van Schagen, K.M., Kramer, O.J.I., Delft Universitv of Technoloay. The Netherlands Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Hard water contributes to the inefficiency of Implement technological, legislative and household appliances, increases the need for behavioral changes that will reduce user additional soaps and detergents, and contributes to the demands for water. increased use of point -of -use treatment devices, all of which increase water use. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking The project would improve drinking water quality water with appropriate quality; improve by reduce the amount of calcium hardness. In addition, groundwater quality; and attain water quality the project would reduce the need for POU water standards. softeners and result in a reduction in the chloride concentration discharged to the sewer. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve By eliminating the need for self -regenerating and improve ecosystem health; improve water softeners, this project would reduce chloride flood management; and preserve and loading by eliminating the need for the remaining enhance water -dependent recreation. outlawed units. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce Currently, many customers who soften their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions water do so through canisters that are exchanged on a regular basis. By centralizing the water softening location, it eliminates the need for customers point -of - use softening canisters. This, in turn, would eliminate routine delivery truck stops at customers homes, ultimately reducing GHG emissions in the area. Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality ®Primary [-]Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. NCWD has staff with experience with the design, construction, and operation of a full- scale pellet softening treatment facility. In addition, resources are available to aid in the feasibility study, conceptual design, and cost estimates. NCWD will utilize staff resources and consultant expertise to assist with Phase 1. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 250,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 500,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): NA Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): NA Design Life of Project (years): NA Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a2)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. / Individual: * There four main partnering agencies involve in the Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration. ect: 1. The Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District, which initially served as the iinistrator to our grant funds, 2. The Natural Resources Conservation Service which helped in 3/GIS mapping of the invasive weed sites, 3. Los Angeles County, whose property lies within project boundary and contains a large density of invasive weeds, 4. Angeles National Forest, se property lies above the project boundary and contains quantities of invasive weeds. Other contributors to the project are: 1. The Bouquet Canyon Network, a core group of ity private landowners who reside within the project boundary, 2. The private biological suiting company Cooper Ecological Monitoring /Leathermann BioConsulting, Inc. who are >onsible for protecting native plants and wildlife during project implementation, 3. California �artment of Fish & Game, who have issue the project a Stream Alteration Agreement for a Name:* Roger A. Haring Title: Project Coordinator / CCA / QAL Telephone:* Fax: 805-641-3781 Email:" rah@agricultureaccess.com Website: N/A ect Name:* I Bouauet Canvon Creek Restoration: Control of Invasive Weeds I Project Latitude: I N34 29.813' Project Longitude Page 1 of 12 W1 18 27.442' The project site is located within an unincorporated region of Los Location Description: Angeles County, between northeast city limits of Santa Clarita (1,400' a.s.l) and southwest boundary of the Angeles National Forest (1,600' a.s.l) Geographically the project lies within the Mint Canyon Quadrangle of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographical map. Project Cooperating Agency(les)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): Natural Resources Conservation District NRCS Antelope Valley Resource Conservation District AVRCD • LACo FIRE — Forestry Unit of Bouquet Canyon • Bouquet Canyon Network BCN Status (e. -q., new, onqoinq, expansion, new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts mac Win occur Ic cne proposal Is noc Im The Bouquet Canyon Creek is a small tributary to the upper Santa Clara River Watershed. While most of this natural watershed is located within the Angeles National Forest (>7.0 miles), a 3.5 mile portion of the creek interfaces a contiguous group of private and county properties. Based on topographical map studies, most of the riparian region in lower portion of Bouquet Canyon Creek is designated a 500 -year floodplain; as such, the management of the region is left in a natural state. However, recent natural disasters within the region; fires (2007) and flooding (2005), have significantly damaged the native ecology and has caused the contracted 5-cfs discharge from the Bouquet Canyon Reservoir to be diminished. Seasonal watershed capture through the private and county properties have been significantly reduced; thereby reducing the health of the native ecology, the recharge of wells, and loss of biodiversity due to changes in the native habitat toward invasive weed species. The dilemma encountered while attempting to implement a watershed project of this nature is how to accomplish the project in the face of an already flood and fire damaged ecology, confounding private property rights, and increased environmental pollution. Additional hindrances arise when environmental permits and regulation consume time and money, private property access is denied, and/or extreme climate events disturb the ecology. The main concern is how to cope with sudden environmental changes; such as flash flooding, outbreaks of fires, or high winds that can rapidly degrade a recovering native ecology. Page 2 of 12 Part 3. Project Description" A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. The Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration project hopes to achieve three main goals: First, the reduction and control of invasive weeds (Arundo donax, Nicotiana glauca) which are known to significantly damage the ecology and private properties of the region. Second, to improve the watershed of Bouquet Canyon creek by revegetating with native plant species found within the ecology. And third, to educate the private property owners on the value of Bouquet Canyon watershed for both the anthropomorphic and ecological habitats it supports. To accomplish the first goal, all above -ground biomass of Arundo donax and Nicotiana glauca will be physically removed by weed abatement crews. The use of an Integrate Pest Management (IPM) protocol will then target the rhizome of the weed sites in order to suppress any regrowth. This protocol includes: a) Application of a stream compatible herbicide (Glyphosate), b) Application of 500K BTU Weed Flamer, or c) Application of Opaque Tarps. The combination of biomass removal and IPM protocol may require multiple seasons to completely suppress, but once implement it will considerably enhance watershed within the riparian habitat. To accomplish the second goal, the revegetation of various sections of the creek will take place over a series of winter seasons in order to help accelerate native plant habitat return. The three main species to used in rehabilitation of the riparian region, include: a) Mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia ), b) Sage (Artemesia californica), c) Oak/Sycamore (Quercus agrifolia / Platanus racemosa). These species are selected for being endemic to the local habitat, providing multi- level canopy cover over the riparian region, and give the best opportunity for long-term recovery. To accomplish the third goal, community outreach will take place in order to provide private property owners knowledge on the responsibilities of stewardship for riparian habitats. The education of private property owners will occur on a biannual basis to all those participating in the project. Various components of program will allow private and region technicians (LA County Fire, NRCS, CCC) to provide resources, advice, and activities to help inform landowners of ways to improve their individual riparian habitats. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Bouquet Canyon Reservoir • Bouquet Canyon Creek Watershed • Santa Clara River Watershed Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the proposed • Bouquet Canyon Creek Site Specific Restoration Plan (AVRCD) • Santa Clara River Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Plan (SCARP) • Santa Clara River Watershed Invasive Plant Treatment Proiect Page 3 of 12 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future This project increases water supply by removing invasive regional demands and obtain necessary weed populations (Arundo donax) that have the potential to water supply sources. significantly reduce surface and ground water that support private, county, and agricultural properties. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking This project reduces salt accumulation by removing invasive water with appropriate quality; improve weed populations (Arundo donax) that can impede water groundwater quality; and attain water quality flow, concentrate salts, and reduces salt dilution due to lower standards. amounts of water volume. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve This project increases private property knowledge of the and improve ecosystem health; improve riparian habitat, the watershed mechanism, the protection of flood management; and preserve and native plants and wildlife, and the overall health of the enhance water -dependent recreation. ecology. Reduces fuel, which reduces potential fire hazard. Flooding/Hydromodification This project reduces flooding by removing bottle -necks in the riparian habitat, and decreases streambank erosion. Climate Change Adaptation This project anticipates climate adaptation by implementing a practical mechanism to restore a habitat that may become damaged to fire or flooding events. Climate Change Prevention This project increases biodiversity by enhancing native plant populations within a riparian region that is prone to habitat loss due to invasive weeds, anthropomorphic intervention, and natural disasters. Page 4 of 12 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply V❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local ,`❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Availability of surface water for both private and county properties. Improve Water Quality ❑Primary ❑Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution N/❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention 1I❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management -/❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other: Increase Flow Rates that Flush salts downstream Page 5 of 12 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) 1/❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration N/❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management 1/❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water-Dependent Recreation 1/❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management V❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies VEI Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Mitigate Fires Hazards / Fuel Reduction Is the proposed project an element or -%/❑ Yes ❑ No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program: Santa Clara River Watershed Invasive Plant Treatment Project. Santa Clara River Invasive Weed Task Force Page 6 of 12 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status Date (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete Conceptual Plans Completed January 2005 Feasibility Study N/A N/A Preliminary Design and Completed October 2009 -10 Cost Estimates CEQA Completed August 2011 Negative Declaration # 2011098367 Permits (DFG / USFWS) Completed June 2011 Streambed Alteration Agreement # : 1600 -2011- 0063 -85 -Revision 1 No -Take Concurrence Request: May 27, 2011 GIS Mapping Completed November 2011 NRCS Landowner Conservation Plans Funding In Process August 2011 LA Weed Management Area / Wetland Recovery Program For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. This project has accomplished planning, permits, and grant funding between 2009-2011. The project has initiated implementation of weed management and Integrated Pest Management (IPM), and revegetation in Fall 2011. The first three seasons of implementation (2011-13) will entail invasive weed management for a 3.5 mile stretch of riparian habitat. The fourth and fifth seasons (2014-16) will entail restoration of the riparian habitat on private and county properties Page 7 of 12 Part 7. Other Project Benefits " Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This five year restoration project has initiated implementation in 2011 with the goal to control the major invasive weed species infiltrating the riparian habitat, and thereby help restore a healthy watershed within Bouquet Canyon Creek. There are three main benefits to the local environment will be achieved by this project: The first main benefit is a long-term strategy for quickly revegetating, restoring, and mitigating damage to native plant ecologies. This is particularly critical for narrow canyon topographies that are prone to environmental damage from inclimatic events (fire, flooding, wind, storms). The second main benefit is the development of a new methodology for canyon environments that must contend with mid-sized environmental disasters caused by climate change. Often local communities or neighborhoods are unable to gain access to improving their local environments because of stringent regulations, high fees associated with permits, and the lack of capacity to perform such emergency type work. This project helps streamline activities for implementing local restoration by drawing from the collective effort of private property owners and neighboring county properties. Finally, the propagation and development of local native plant seedling stocks, and having them available in quantities that can be quickly mitigate loss of vegetation after critical periods of a natural disaster. By having adequate amount of living - keystone native species ready, timely environmental recovery after natural disasters will be possible. Native watersheds will be maintained and protect for future generations. There are also regional benefits that this project will achieve. The Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration project is complementary to a long-term, larger invasive weed control and restoration project that is taking place in the upper watershed of the Angeles National Forest (ANF). The boundary of the Angeles National Forest (Santa Clara / Mojave Rivers Ranger District) is just north of the proposed Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration project; and comprises of approximately 7.5 miles of riparian habitat. The objective of the ANF project is "...eradicate, control, containment, and /or suppression of existing and new infestations of invasive and non- native plant species that are undesirable, noxious, harmful, injurious, or poisonous in the Santa Clara Watershed." This regional project is termed to be completed in fifteen years. Hence, it is in the best interest of private, county, state, and federal properties to collaborate at this moment in time in the effort to remove invasive weeds from the watershed before major colonization occurs; thereby preventing native habitat degradation, and provide the best opportunity for the watershed to be restored. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No V❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? V❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? VF❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: LARC RANCH Page 8 of 12 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. Adaptation to Climate Change V❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency �❑ Provides Additional Water Supply �❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise V❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: Development of Native Plant Seedling Stock for Revegetation _V❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) _V❑ Promotes Habitat Protection V❑ Establishes Migration Corridors -V❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds V❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): �❑ Other (Please State): Creek provides natural evaporative cooling Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand ❑ Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources V❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) N/❑ Other (Please State): Enhances Evaporative Cooling of Valley Page 9 of 12 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 20, 240.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 52.852.49 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost (Administration/Project Coordination) ($): 13,052.20 Design Life of Project: 5 years Budget Narrative: The capital investment for this project entails supporting two areas with awarded funds. The first portion of IRWMP Funds ($26,104.00) will be used in supporting the 2012-13 season in order to continue implementation of the Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project invasive weed management. The second portion of IRWMP Funds ($26,104.00) will then be used in the 2013-14 season for accelerating the restoration of the riparian habitat, and this is the main goal of the project. Since one of the main goals of the project is to control major invasive weed sites existing within a 3.5 mile stretch of riparian region. This first phase of the project has required a series of tasks aimed to removing biomass of non-native vegetation already established within the riparian region of the project area. The 2011- 12 season initiated abatement of over twenty private and two county properties within the Bouquet Canyon tributary, and is now preparing to implement an integrated pest management program for the rootzone of those invasive weed sites. The objective in restoring the riparian habitat of the project area entails a two -fold approach: First, educating the private and county property owners how to invest in proper native plant restoration techniques that can improve the watershed and sustain native wildlife within the region. As with any group of private landowners whose property interfaces natural resources, there is a need to share, educate, and help steward individuals on the native resources that exist in the region. It becomes a difficult process to collectively organize and coordinate a diverse group of rural landowners because each has individual property rights and management styles. It is the goal of this restoration process that a `sense of ecological community' will develop within the region. To help instill this sense of responsibility to an'ecological habitat' there will be out- reach and education to the community on a biannual basis to all private property owners participating in the project. The educational component will comprise regional technicians (LA County Fire, NRCS, AVRCD) in order to provide advice, technical skill, and opportunities for private property owners to come together, meet, and discuss local natural resource needs. Secondly, implementation and use of a new plant palette and restoration protocol. This new plant palette consists of propagating three complementary species of native plants: Mulefat (Baccharis sp.), Sage (Artemesia sp.), and Oak (Quercus sp.) in manner that when planted together will be complementary to each other; helping them to quickly establish and grow. This new plant palette will be created and packaged in the form of what is termed: Native Plant Seedling Mixtures (NPSM). The NPSM technology comprises of a group of complementary native plants that mimic the natural ecosystem, and thus allows them to quickly form an ecological niche within the landscape. The advantage of the NPSM technology is that when a region has become degraded or disturbed by fire, flooding, non-native plants, or pollutants it will be more likely to return to a native ecology if planted with species that support the growth of one another. Equally, the competitive advantage of these complementary species is they provide suppression of growth from other non-native species through a physiological mechanism called allelopathy. Page 10 of 12 Table 1: Overview of projected use of IRWMP Grant Funds for (2012-14). Project Task WRP Funds 2011-2012 IRWMP Funds 2yrs.) Grand Total Map & Biological Monitoring $2,700.00 $12,000.00 $14,700.00 Remove & Dispose $8,300.00 $122000.00 $20,300.00 Prevent Reemergence $ 800.00 $5,292.00 $6,092.00 Restore, Reve etate,Educate $5,600.00 $62000.00 $11,600.00 Fuel $13000.00 $22000.00 $3,000.00 Grant Administration 10% $0.55/mile $1,840.00 $32729.20 $5,569.20 Project Coordinator 25% N/A $9,323.00 $9,323.00 $113945.5 Overhead Costs 5% N/A $1,864.60 $13864.60 Total: $207240.00 $52,208.80 $721448.80 Project Task Budgets Map & Biological Monitoring: The proposed work of monitoring the Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project will be required as part of the CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement (Notification #:1600-2011-0063- R5 Revision 1), as outlined in sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5. The four areas of monitoring include: I. Single Pre -Project Survey that will be conducted no earlier than 1 -week prior to the start of work, regardless of season, to detect any general sensitive species within the project area. 11. Biological Monitoring that will be conducted on the first day of work to advise the work crew about avoidance of sensitive species, and/or to re- locate any vertebrates observed in the work area. 111. Presence / Absence Survey that will be conducted a single time, 3-5 days prior to project activities within the project area during periods of aviary nesting season (3/1-9/31). This procedure entails ensuring that no active aviary nests are impacted by project work, and advises applicant of avoidance measures (100'-300' bufferzone around active nests.). IV.Fo1Iow-up Monitoring will be conducted during any `short-term' project implementation or activities (i.e. quick reapplication of herbicide / handcutting, etc.) when performed during aviary nesting season. Table 2: Mapping and Biological Monitoring Budget (2012-14) Task Rate Mileage Hours Miles Total Cost Pre -Project Survey $60-80/hr. $0.55/mile 12 60 $993.00 Biological Monitoring $60 $0.55/mile 120 1000 $7750.00 Presence / Absence Survey $60 $0.55/mile 12 60 $993.00 Follow-up Monitoring $60 $0.55/mile 36 90 $2209.5 Total: $113945.5 Removal & Disposal: The proposed work of invasive weed biomass reduction from the Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project will be required as part of the CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement (Notification #: 1600-2011-0063-R5 Revision 1), outlined in sections: 2.14, 2.2, and 3.1 Three areas of abatement include: I. Staging of any equipment and/or materials must be located outside the streambed channel. II. Disposal of Non -Native Vegetation must be removed from stream and adjacent areas prior to those plants producing seed and placed into an area where it can not become re-established, enter the streambed channel, or impact sensitive plant resources, etc. Non-native vegetation should be mulched, chipped, hauled to landfill, or burned. III. Non -Native Vegetation Removal techniques must be defined that specifically control non-native vegetation, including subsequent follow-up treatments, and proper disposal methods. Page 11 of 12 Table 3: Removal and Disposal (2012-14) Task Rate Units Hours Total Staging Equipment (Chipper/Flatbed $70- 1 equip. 36 $210-900.0 Truck/PPE 300/da 4-10 84 1512.00 Removal Methods (Hand -labor, $600.00/day 10-12 495 $6000- Chainsaws) persons 7200.00 Disposal Methods $ 30/Ton <10 tons 24 $150- 300.00 Extra Days of Removal (Hand -labor, $600.00 10-12 247 $47200.00 Chainsaws) persons Total: $127600.00 Prevent Reemergence: The proposed work of controlling invasive weed with an integrated pest management approach in the Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project will be required as part of the CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement (Notification #:1600-2011-0063-R5 Revision 1), as outlined in section: 2.13, and the Site Specific Restoration Plan. There is one area of compliance when implementing the prevention of reemergence for this project: I. Herbicide Applications must be applied in accordance with state and federal law. No herbicides shall be used within the bufferzone where special status species reside. No herbicide shall be sprayed when wind velocities are above five miles per hour. The use of integrated pest management protocols (i.e. PE tarpping, 500K BTU Weed Flamer, and/or CDA herbicide applications) should help suppress the continued development of the rootzone. Table 4: Prevent Reemergence Budget (2012-14) Task Rate # Personnel Hours Total Cost Herbicide Application $45/hr. 1-2 84 3780.00 IPM Application $18/hr. 4-10 84 1512.00 Total: $5,292.00 Page 12 of 12 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: " Santa Clarita Water, a Division of Castaic Lake Water Agency SCWD / Individual Address: Summit Circle, Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Name:* ICathy Z. Hollomon Title: Associate Water Resource Planner Telephone:* Fax: (661) 259-2737 (661) 286-4330 Email:* chollomon@scwater.org Website: www.scwater.org Project Name:* July 2012 Santa Clarita Water Division Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Water use efficiency Programs Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34024'47.47" Project Longitude: 118030'33.32" Page 1 of 10 Service area of SCWD in the Santa Clarita Valley, the north section of Los Angeles County Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Castaic Lake Water Agency • City of Santa Clarita Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. In SCWD's efforts to achieve SBX7-7 requirements, SCWD completed a Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan (WUESP) in July 2012 that outlines the following action items as specified in their Executive Summary: 1. Develop a water use efficiency program that fulfills SCWD's requirements as a signatory to the MOU. 2. Promote programs that enable residential customers to improve water use efficiency in a cost-effective manner. 3. Promote programs that encourage Commercial/Industrial/Institutional (CII) water users to implement water efficiency improvement programs in a cost-effective manner. 4. Promote efficient use of water through appropriate incentive programs. 5. Provide appropriate educational and informational programs to encourage water use efficiency. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The SCWD WUESP specifies ten (10) water use efficiency programs that create incentives and develop outreach programs to encourage behavioral change in residential and non-residential customers to practice cost-effective water use efficiency. Those programs and measures deemed to be cost-effective will be selected for implementation by the purveyors: 1. Residential Audits 2. Low -Flow Showerhead Distribution 3. Ultra -High Efficiency Toilet (UHET) Distribution 4. Multi-Family/Institutional/High-Efficiency Toilet/UHET Direct Installation 5. Turf Removal 6. High Efficiency Nozzle Distribution (freesprinklernozzles.com) 7. High -Efficiency Nozzle Direct Installation 8. Large Landscape Weather -Based Irrigation Controller Direct Installation 9. Residential and Commercial Rebate Program 10. Large Landscape Water Budgets If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River • Eastern Santa Clara Basin — Santa Clara — Mint Canyon Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the I • Santa Clarita Water Division Water Use Efficiencv Strategic Plan, Julv 10, 2012 1 I • Santa Clarita Vallev Water Use Efficiencv Strategic Plan. 2007 1 Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: The SCWD WUESP has various incentive and Implement technological, legislative and outreach/education programs that install water -efficient hardware and change future customer water use behaviors. behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future As water use is reduced, we become less reliant on imported supplies from the State Water Project and on water supplies regional demands and obtain necessary banked overtime. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking The use of more efficient irrigation can result in reduced urban runoff. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The programs seek to reduce urban runoff and potential pollutant and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce Reduced dependence on imported State Water reduces the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions use of pumps and equipment to transport the imported water to the Santa Clarita Valley. Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers E] Primary ®Secondary E] NA Other (Please State): Reduction in Power Use and Labor to Maintain Water System Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality ❑Primary ❑Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program ® Yes ❑ No The SCWD 2012 WUESP sites the following reports as its major contributors: the 2007 Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan and the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 06/30/2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study NA (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete 06/30/2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA NA (mmlddlyyyy) Permits NA (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings NA (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Ongoing (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Currently, we are operating three of our ten WUE Programs in the WUESP as follows • Low Flow Showerhead Distribution • High Efficiency Nozzle Distribution (freesprinklernozzles.com) • Residential and Commercial Rebate Program With additional funding, we would like to operate the following proposed projects: 1. Residential Audits 2. Ultra -High Efficiency Toilet (UHET) Distribution 3. Multi-Family/Institutional/High-Efficiency Toilet/UHET Direct Installation 4. Turf Removal 5. High -Efficiency Nozzle Direct Installation 6. Large Landscape Weather -Based Irrigation Controller Direct Installation 7. Large Landscape Water Budgets Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) The SCWD WUESP indicates water savings that vary with each proposed program. Primary Benefits: • Improve Urban Water Use Efficiency • Increase Water Supply • Practice Resource Stewardship by providing cost-effective water use efficiency • Improve Watershed Management Secondary Benefits: incentives and encourage behavioral change in Limit use of imported state water and limiting the energy and resources to convey water from the Delta to the Santa Clarita Valley Prevent urban runoff by using more efficient landscape irrigation systems, which limits pollution transport due to runoff Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ® Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ® Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ® Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ® Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ® Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: Decrease energy and resources required to transport imported State Water to the Santa Clarita Valley by limiting amount of this water supply by the Valley. ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ® Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling El Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand ❑ Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): $301,930 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): $2,520,469 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): LO Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): From $62,370 to $366,223 Design Life of Project (years): 8 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District SCVSD / Individual Address: 955 Workman Mill Rod Name:* Francisco Guerrero Telephone:* Fax: 562-908-4288 ext 2832 Email:* FGuerrero@lacsd.org Website: www.lacsd.org Project Name:* Saugus Water Reclamation Plant — Ultraviolet Light Disinfection Facility Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34025'47" Project Longitude: 118035'27" Page 1 of 10 Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Castaic Lake Water Agency Project Status (e.g., new, ongoing, expansion, new phase): Treatment upgrade Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iemencea. The The prosect is located within the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant Location Description: aquatic (WRP) species site at 26200 Springbrook Avenue, Saugus, CA 91350 the underlying Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Castaic Lake Water Agency Project Status (e.g., new, ongoing, expansion, new phase): Treatment upgrade Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iemencea. The Santa Clara River supports aquatic species and habitat and recharges the underlying groundwater basin that serves as a water supply. The most recent Upper Santa Clara (UV) disinfection at the Saugus WRP will reduce chloride loading associated with the existing chlorine based disinfection facilities at the WRP and help towards achieving compliance with the Upper Santa GIaFa River Chloride TMDL. In addition, the use of UV disinfection will reduce the potential for the formation of disinfection byproducts ir.iN^i.... ethanes and "'-"';«.^^^a; ^«h•,'^ ^' associated with chlorination disinfection processes. Utilization of UV disinfection will ensure recycled water from the Saugus WRP meets all Department of Public Health Title 22 Water Recycling Criteria. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The Saugus Water--Resl;;m@tierPla4# UV Disinfection Facilityieswll.-would reduce chloride loading from existing chlorine based disinfection, preserve and expand the use of recycled water in the USCR IRWMP Region, which is an important component of the Valley's water resources, and improve recycled water quality by reducing chloride levels and the potential to generate disinfection by-products. The project would replace the existing chlorination system at the Sauaus WRP with a UV disinfection facility. which would•^" Opmonstratp the spioul^ntiM yc;p based (A"saf^ scssa"h^ `RSP. be constructed within the boundaries of the Saugus WRP. The UV Disinfection Facility would include construction of UV reactors containing lamps and appurtenant electrical, mechanical, and control systems. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposedproject: • Santa Clara River • Santa Clara Eastern Groundwater Basin — Alluvial Aquifer Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Draft Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Chloride Compliance Facilities Plan and Environmental Impact Report (Tentatively Available late 2012) Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Utilization of UV d9isinfection will ensure recycled water produced at the Saugus WRP meets all Department of Public Health Title 22 Water Recycling Criteria, thus promoting the use of recycled water in the USCR IRWMP Region, which i 44mwould reduce the Santa Clarita Valley's demand on groundwater and imported water resources. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Utilization of UV dQisinfection will ensure recycled water produced at the Saugus WRP meets all Department of Public Health Title 22 Water Recycling Criteria, thus promoting the use of recycled water in the USCR IRWMP Region. Recycled water use directly increases local water supply, reducing demand on groundwater and imported water. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Utilization of UV Disinfection will reduce chloride contribution from +•e^ o^ of wastewater treatment and help comply with the 6SC4-sChloride TMDL. Utilization of UV Disinfection will reduce the potential to form common disinfection byproducts associated with the use of chlorine based disinfection. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Improve quality of water discharged to Santa Clara River, which would benefit river's ecosystems Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to ,adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local E] Primary E] Secondary NAB NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality ❑Primary ❑Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary E] Secondary N,�lNAe Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary [RD Secondary ❑j4 NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program ® Yes ❑ No Santa Clarita Valley Chloride Compliance Facilities Plan and EIR Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In Process tbd (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study In Process tbd (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates In Process tbd (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA In Process tbd (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not Initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not Initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Approved for Planning and June 2011 (mmlddlyyyy) Design Not Initiated for Construction For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project reaumess-to Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) Conversion to UV disinfection from the chlorine based disinfection would reduce the chloride loading in the WRP's effluent and improve recycled water quality by reducing chloride levels and the potential to generate disinfection by-products. It is expected that the conversion to the UV disinfection would remove approximately 140,000 pounds of chloride annually. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ® Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ® Reduces Water Demand ® Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) 08 Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ®e Other (Please State): Improved water quality to river ecosystems supported by that water ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency ® Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand ❑ Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($):$8,000,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($):14,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): LO Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($):$200,000 Design Life of Project (years): 20 yearstt3d Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(g)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Castaic Lake Water Agency SCWD / Individual Address: 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Los Angeles County Waterwoi Newhall County Water District Santa Clarita Water Division Valencia Water Company Name:* Stephanie Anagnoson Title: Water Conservation Program Coordinator Telephone:* Fax: (661) 513-1231 (661) 297-1611 Email:' sanagnoson(@clwa.org Website: www.clwa.org Project Name:* Santa Clarita Vallev (SCV) Water Use Efficiencv (WUE) Strategic Plan (SP) Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I Project Longitude: Page 1 of 10 Santa Clarita Valley Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Waterworks #36 • Newhall County Water District Santa Clarita Water Division • Valencia Water Company Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Before SBX7-7, the Family of Water Suppliers proactively adopted a plan to achieve 10% water demand by 2030. This is currently funded partially by IRWMP for approximately 1 million dollars over two years. With the current state mandate of 20% water demand reduction by 2020, the Family of Water Suppliers needs to continue to fund programs within the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan and seek continued funding from IWMP. The 2010 UWMP assumes almost 17,000 AF in savings by 2020 from conservation. WhilE some of this conservation may be passive (from updates to plumbing code in new construction), considerable new programs and expanded current programs will need to be implemented toreach these goals. Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not Page 2 of 10 be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan was developed in 2008 and approved by the Castaic Lake Water Agency Board for implementation in 2009. The Programs are being implemented on an ongoing basis, including High -Efficiency Toilet Rebates High -Efficiency Washing Machine Rebates Residential Landscape Program (Free Weather -Based Irrigation Controllers) Large Landscape and Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Rebates Social Marketing Campaign (Public Outreach) The SCV WUE SP will be updated in 2012 and 2013 and may including additional programs to achieve 20% reduction in water demand by 2020. Vallev Water If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the or000sed oroiect: • Santa Clara River Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the Urban Water Management Plan, 2010 • Santa Clarita Vallev Water Use Efficiencv Strategic Plan. 2007 Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: The primary goal of the SCV WUE SP is to reduce potable Implement technological, legislative and water demand by installing hardware for residential, behavioral changes that will reduce user commercial and landscape accounts as well as changing demands for water. behavior to decrease water use. Increase Water Supply: Understand future With a decrease in potable water demand, we will be able to regional demands and obtain necessary increase the amount of water available for banking (and water supply sources. increase the reliability of the water supply). Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Water quality will be increased by reduced run off. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers E] Primary ®Secondary E] NA Other (Please State): Reduction in Power Use to Treat Water Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality ❑Primary ❑Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program ® Yes ❑ No The 2007 Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan and the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 08/30/2008 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study NA (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete 08/30/2008 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA N/A N/A (mmlddlyyyy) Permits N/A N/A (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings N/A N/A (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Ongoing N/A (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. we are funding all five programs suggested High -Efficiency Toilet Rebates High -Efficiency Washing Machine Rebates Residential Landscape Program (Free Weather -Based Irrigation Controllers) Large Landscape and Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Rebates Social Marketing Campaign (Public Outreach) Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) The Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Programs have the following benefits: Primary Benefits: • Increase Urban Water Use Efficiency • Increase Water Supply Reliability Secondary Benefits: • Decrease reliance on imported state water and limit the energy and resources to convey water from the Delta to the Santa Clarita Valley • Decrease urban runoff by using more efficient landscape irrigation systems Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ® Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ® Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ® Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ® Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ® Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: Decrease energy and resources required to transport imported State Water to the Santa Clarita Valley by limiting amount of this water supply by the Valley. ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ® Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling El Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand ❑ Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): $1,000,000 per year Upper estimated total capital cost ($): $5,000,000 per year Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): LO Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): N/A Design Life of Project (years): 8 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 1 and Spreading Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34023'29.15"N Project Longitude: 1118032131.77"W Page 1 of 10 Santa Clara River South Fork, Newhall Avenue Bridge Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer • Integrated Regional Water Management Plan ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. An air -inflatable rubber dam will be installed utilizing the location of an existing drop structure in the Santa Clara River South Fork. During storm flows the rubber dam will inflate, and water will pond and percolate behind the rubber dam. The rubber dam will also divert the water into three proposed spreading basins which will then also percolate into the aquifers. After the water percolates, the rubber dam will slowly deflate and lay flat across the drop structure allowing lower flows in the river to pass without obstruction. Spreading basins could have habitat restoration along the levees, and that area could be preserved as an open space. Passive recreation would be possible at this location. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve heavy metals and trash from the water. Trash will be groundwater quality; and attain water quality collected and removed at the rubber dam and from the standards. spreading basins. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the rubber dam and spreading basins and improve ecosystem health; improve could provide habitat restoration and/or possible removal of flood management; and preserve and non-native invasive species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the river for recharge may prevent negative effects on waterways and flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) missions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 10/27/2009 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete 03/13/2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. The river has recreation in the form of bike paths along a large stretch of the river. These areas are adjacent to power line easements that may provide an opportunity for habitat restoration. Trash will be collected and removed from the spreading grounds. The project will provide storage for 145 acre-feet of storm runoff and 430 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 4 acres of riparian habitat area, and 8 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 9,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 50,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Castaic Lake Water Agency / Individual Address: 27234 Bouquet Canyon Rd. Santa Clarita, CA 91350 istrict, City of Santa Clarita, Name:* James Leserman Title: Senior Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 661-297-1600 Ext. 245 661-513-1202 Email:* leserman@clwa.org Website: Project Name:* Foothill Feeder Connection Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1 34025'331)N Project Longitude: 11803234&W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Project Cooperating Connection Project will A enc ies /Or anization s /Individuals : ect Status (e.a.. new. onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. The Foothill Feeder Connection Project will provide additional capacity to CLWA's water system allowing the Agency to more reliably meet consumers' demands. Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and Page 2 of 10 readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The Foothill Feeder conveys untreated surface water from the terminus of the State Water Project—Castaic Lake—to the Metropolitan Water District's Jensen Water Treatment Plant and to a connection to a raw water pipeline, which conveys water to CLWA's Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant (RVWTP). The current connection to CLWA's water system was made in 1996. It was intended to be temporary. It has a lower capacity -60 millions of gallons per day (MGD)—than the recently expanded RVWTP-66 MGD. So in order to utilize the full capacity the connection needs to be increased. A more permanent structure would also provide better reliability. The project has already been designed. Bidding and Construction can proceed once funding becomes available. Construction will consist of installing and connecting valves, pipelines, and associated electrical hook-ups and controls. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Castaic Lake Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Rio Vista Treatment Plant Expansion EIR • Foothill Feeder Turnout CLWA-01 Drawings and Specifications Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Would enable more water to be delivered into the CLWA system. Would improvement water delivery reliability. regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Increase water supply reliability Improve Water Quality [-]Primary ®Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ® Yes ❑ No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant Expansion Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 2006 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete 2011 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Complete 2005 (mmlddlyyyy) Permits In Process (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Complete June 2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) Funding In Process (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ® Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 3,000,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): <$10,000 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): $50,000 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: City of Santa Clarita / Individual Address: 23920 Valencia Blvd Clarita CA 91355 Los Angeles Name:* Title: Telephone:* Fax: 661-284-1413 661-255-4356 Email:" hmerenda@santa-clarita.com Website: ect Name:* I Biofiltration and Low Impact Development Retrofits I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I Project Longitude: Page 1 of 11 City of Santa Clarita sub drainage areas determined to have high Location Description: levels of bacteria, nutrients, trash and other pollutants in runoff and storm drain outfall Project Cooperating A enc ies /Or anization s /Individuals : ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for the storm drain system in Los Angeles County is scheduled to be approved in October 2012. Draft versions of the permit require permittees create lists of opportunities to retrofit areas with biofiltration and/or low impact development. The permit will incorporate all Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) in the watershed. It also has substantial requirements for trash management. The City needs to ensure that the storm drain urban runoff quality is working towards meeting the water quality standards in the TMDLs and the NPDES Permit itself. The Bacteria TMDL for the Santa Clara River became effective in March 2012. It requires meeting dry weather bacteria waste loads by 2017 for all sources, including the storm drain system. There are also effective TMDLs for nutrients and chlorides. While several projects have installed permanent best management practices for treating oils and grease, trash and other traditional urban runoff pollutants, there is no current treatment for bacteria on the vast majority of storm drains. Page 2 of 11 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will This project will consist of three parts of green infrastructre: biofiltration, green streets, and parking lot low impact development retrofits. The project would evaluate and retrofit neighborhoods that have persistent problematic flow at the outfall. Anticipate that this would include 5 — 10 biolfiltration areas and up to 100 acres of parking lot retrofit. There would be a significant number of neighborhood streets that would have green streets retrofits. These elements may be used together in the same site or individually in different locations. This along with outdoor water use education to reduce over watering and other urban runoff behaviors will reduce the flows and improve water quality. The areas evaluated would be mature existing neighborhoods with consistent urban runoff problems LID consists of building and landscape features designed to retain or filter storm water runoff. Biofiltration is a structural best management practice that reduces storm water pollutant discharges by intercepting rainfall on vegetative canopy, and through evapotranspiration, incidental infiltration, and filtration. As described in the Ventura County Technical Guidance Manual, studies have demonstrated that bioinfiltration of 1.5 times the storm water quality design volume (SWQDv) provides approximately equivalent or greater reductions in pollutant loading when compared to bioretention or infiltration of the SWQDv.50 Incidental infiltration is an important factor in achieving the required pollutant load reduction. Therefore, the term "biofiltration" as used in this Order is defined to include only systems designed to facilitate incidental infiltration. Biofiltration BMPs include bioretention systems with an underdrain and bioswales. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposedproject: • Santa Clara River • various groundwater basins Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • EPA Green Infrastructure Case Studies • EPA Manaqinq Wet Weather with Green Infrastructure - Green Streets Page 3 of 11 • EPA Managing Wet Weather with Green Infrastructure — Green Infrastructure Retrofit Policies Page 4 of 11 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Street landscaping would be supplemented with dry weather flows and wet weather rain flows related to urban runoff from streets Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Low impact development encourages infiltration into groundwater rather than runoff Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. These best management practices have been shows to reduce metals, bacteria and nutrient. These project would also deal with trash. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Improved water quality in the river helps support habitat for endangered fish, birds, turtles and other species dependant on the Santa Clara River Flooding/Hydromodification Increased infiltration reduced peak flows Climate Change Adaptation Higher intensity storms peaks would be reduced Climate Change Prevention Page 5 of 11 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): groundwater infiltration Improve Water Quality ❑Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Matching Quality to Use X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 6 of 11 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Water -Dependent Recreation X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ❑ No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program NPDES Permit and TMDL compliance Page 7 of 11 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 8 of 11 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No X Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No X Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 9 of 11 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. X Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency X Adaptation to Climate Change X Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources X Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency X Provides Additional Water Supply X Promotes Water Quality Protection X Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling X Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: X Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) X Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors X Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems X Other (Please State): fish habitat improvement ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling X Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources X Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 10 of 11 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 4,000,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 6,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 200,000 Design Life of Project (years): 15 Page 11 of 11 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: City of Santa Clarita / Individual Address: 23920 Valencia Blvd Clarita CA 91355 Name:* Title: Telephone:* Fax: 661-284-1413 661-255-4356 Email:" hmerenda@santa-clarita.com ect Name:* Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I Project Longitude: Page 1 of 10 City of Santa Clarita sub drainage areas determined to have high Location Description: levels of bacteria, nutrients, trash and other pollutants in runoff and storm drain outfall associated with neighborhoods with septic tanks Project Cooperating Age ncy(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): ect Status (e.q., new, ongoinq, expansion, new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iementeu. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for the storm drain system in Los Angeles County is scheduled to be approved in October 2012. Draft versions of the permit require permittees create lists of opportunities to retrofit areas with biofiltration and/or low impact development. The permit will incorporate all Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) in the watershed. It also has substantial requirements for trash management. The City needs to ensure that the storm drain urban runoff quality is working towards meeting the water quality standards in the TMDLs and the NPDES Permit itself. The Bacteria TMDL for the Santa Clara River became effective in March 2012. It requires meeting dry weather bacteria waste loads by 2017 for all sources, including the storm drain system. There are also effective TMDLs for nutrients and chlorides. While several projects have installed permanent best management practices for treating oils and grease, trash and other traditional urban runoff pollutants, there is no current treatment for bacteria on the vast majority of storm drains. Aging septic tanks, or septic tanks without sufficient leach field expansion, overflow and reach tributaries and the Santa Clara River. There are 1,000 to 2,500 septic tanks identified in the City limits. Not all can connect to the water reclamation plants, but some may be able to. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function. and treatment methods. as aoorooriate. There are 1,000 to 2,500 septic tanks properties within City limits. This project would provide financial incentives and infrastructure to connect these properties to the sewer. It would also help provide sewer line expansions to areas that are persistently contributing to bacteria, nutrient, or other kinds of pollution. Financial incentive for disadvanted community members will be an important part of this effort, as well as other assistance measure for current septic tank owners. This project may include laterals, septic tank abandonment, extending sewer mains, and related efforts needed to support moving property owners from septic to sewer. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River • various groundwater basins Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the Santa Clara River Bacteria TMDL • Santa Clara River Bacteria TMDL Staff Report Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. By connecting to the sewage treatment infrastructure, the project will increase the amount of recycled water produced Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Removing septic tanks that are failing may improve water quality through elimination of sewage entering tributaries and the Santa Clara River Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Reduce toxicity for fish species through reducing septic tank leaks to the habitat Flooding/Hydrom odifica tion Climate Change Adaptation Climate Change Prevention Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Desalination - Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Precipitation Enhancement X Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Surface Storage - CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality ❑Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary X Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Forest Management X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Water -Dependent Recreation X Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary X NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or X Yes ❑ No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program TMDL and NPDES Permit compliance Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans in process 12/1/2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This project will provide financial assistance to disadvantaged communities. There will be a system in place for grants to assist those community members. Also, the disadvantaged community members are more likely to come into contact with the river water as they are more likely to recreate in the river. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No X Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? X Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? X Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: downtown Newhall Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency X Adaptation to Climate Change X Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency X Provides Additional Water Supply X Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand X Advances/Expands Water Recycling X Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) X Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems X Other (Please State): improved fish habitat ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency X Advances/Expands Water Recycling X Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 25,000,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 35,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): unknown Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): unknown Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Castaic Lake Water Agency / Individual Address: Castaic Lake Water Agency Name:* Brian Folsom Telephone:* Fax: 661-297-1600 661-513-1202 Email:* bfolsom@clwa.org Website: www.clwa.org Project Name:* Castaic Conduit Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I 3402627.79"N Project Longitude: 118034'19.41"W Page 1 of 10 The new pipeline will start in Newhall Ranch Road, approximately 1,180 feet east of the Newhall Ranch Road and Copper Hill Drive Location Description: intersection. The pipeline will travel east along Newhall Ranch Road, then turn southwest along Avenue Tibbits, then turn southeast along Avenue Mentry, then turn southeast along Avenue Rockefeller, then turn southeast along Avenue Scott, then cross under the San Francisquito Creek, continue along Avenue Scott and end at the intersection of Avenue Scott and McBean Parkway. Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): ect Status (e.a.. new. onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not Castaic Lake Water Agency's (CLWA) two existing treatment plants, the Earl Schmidt Filtration Plant and the Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant, are connected through a series of transmission mains. The majority of these transmission mains are 54 inches in diameter and larger. However, an approximately 7,565 -foot portion of the existing transmission system, known as the Castaic Conduit Pipeline, is only 39 inches in diameter and reduces to 36 inches before connecting to another 54 -inch pipeline. This portion of the pipeline has historically caused reduced water pressure in portions of the transmission main system. Construction of the proposed Castaic Conduit Bypass Pipeline (Project) would eliminate this constriction by bypassing narrower sections of the pipeline with a new 54 -inch -diameter pipeline connecting the existing larger sections. The pipeline would remedy low water pressure issues with turnouts in the Project vicinity, but would not increase the amount of water delivered to the turnouts or to the service area as a whole. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The project consists of the installation of approximately 7,960 linear feet of 54 -inch diameter pipeline and appurtenances. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • The pipeline will cross under the San Francisquito Creek. Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Castaic Conduit Bypass Pipeline Project Preliminary Design Report • Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration • Notice of Determination Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future The project will increase the water supply reliability by improving the operational efficiency of the system. regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary ®Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans complete August 2010 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete August 2010 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Complete March 9, 2011 (mmlddlyyyy) Permits In process Anticipate June 30, (mmlddlyyyy) 2013 Construction Drawings In process Anticipate June 30, (mmlddlyyyy) 2013 Funding Design funded in FY 2012/13 FY 2012/13 (mmlddlyyyy) budget For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): $14,910,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): $16,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): $250,000 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): $5,000 Design Life of Project (years): TBD Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Castaic Lake Water Agency / Individual Address: Castaic Lake Water Agency Name:* Brian Folsom Telephone:* Fax: 661-297-1600 661-513-1202 Email:* bfolsom@clwa.org Website: www.clwa.org Project Name:* Distribution System — RV -2 Modifications Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I 3402634.91"N Project Longitude: 1118032111.70"W Page 1 of 10 At the Agency's existing valve vault located in an enclosed site approximately 90 feet south of Newhall Ranch Road, and Location Description: approximately 240 feet east of Bouquet Canyon Road. See above for the project's location coordinates. Project Cooperating A enc ies /Or anization s /Individuals : Project Status (e.g., new, ongoing, expansion, new phase): This will be a new construction oroiect that is in the final desion phase. Part 2. Project Need" It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not implemented. The project will improve the operational flexibility and system reliability of the Agency's transmission system by replacing the existing damaged Rio Vista Valve #2 with a new valve and the addition of a pressure regulating valve. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The project consists of replacement of an existing 72 -inch valve with a new valve; installation of a new pressure regulating valve; and modifications of the valve vault and surrounding site. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Rio Vista Valve #2 Modifications Proiect Preliminary Desian Reoort I Page 3 of 10 ro osea project: Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Rio Vista Valve #2 Modifications Proiect Preliminary Desian Reoort I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Project helps to increase water supply reliability by improving the system's operational efficiency. regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary ®Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete February 2011 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Complete February 2011 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Complete December 2010 (mmlddlyyyy) Permits In process Anticipate June 2013 (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings In process Anticipate June 2013 (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Design funded in FY 2012/13 FY 2012/13 (mmlddlyyyy) budget For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): $2,880,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): $3,200,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): $50,000 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): $5,000 Design Life of Project (years): TBD Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Castaic Lake Water Agency / Individual Address: 27234 Bouquet Canyon Rd. Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Name:* James Leserman Title: Senior Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 661-297-1600 Ext. 245 661-513-1202 Email:' leserman@clwa.org Website: Project Name:* West Saugus Formation Groundwater Resources Monitoring Proiect Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1 340 25'N Project Longitude: 1180 33'W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: All of the Santa Clarita Valley with particular emphasis on the east side of Railroad Avenue south of Bouquet Junction Project Cooperating A enc ies /Or anization s /Individuals : Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. The primary objective of the project is to determine the horizontal and vertical extent of perchlorate migration in the Saugus Formation, a major source of drinking water in the Santa Clarita valley. The project will include a permanent, multi-level monitoring well and will provide geologic, hydraulic, and water quality data for an area downgradient of water supply wells that have been impacted by perchlorate. These wells are completed in the Saugus Formation, which is the deeper of two aquifers that are present in the Santa Clarita Valley. Currently, it is unknown whether perchlorate has migrated downgradient of the group of perchlorate -impacted Saugus Formation wells and to what extent, if any, that the downgradient wells might be threatened with future contamination. This uncertainty is of heightened concern to the water providers in the valley because of the importance of the Saugus Formation aquifer for providing drought -year firming supplies for urban areas in the Santa Clarita Valley. Consequently, conducting the proposed project to meet the data needs objectives specified above will also address and inform a larger CLWA objective of implementing its groundwater management plan and developing long-term solutions for managing the perchlorate plume that is present in the Saugus Formation. Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Page 2 of 10 Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will tunction, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The proposed project consists of planning, design, and construction of a deep, multi-level monitoring well. It includes borehole drilling, multi-level monitoring well installation, and groundwater monitoring at a location downgradient of areas of known perchlorate contamination in the Santa Clarita basin's deep aquifer system (the Saugus Formation). Specific activities to occur under the proposed project are: • Project planning including well siting, agency coordination, design of the new monitoring well and selection of a qualified drilling contractor. • Drilling and geologic and geophysical logging to identify hydrostratigraphic units at the drilling location. • Installing a permanent, multi-level monitoring well that can be used to monitor for perchlorate presence and/or changes in perchlorate concentrations through time. The primary goal of the project is to determine the horizontal and vertical extent of perchlorate migration in the Saugus Formation, a major source of drinking water in the Santa Clarita valley. The project will include a permanent, multi-level monitoring well and will provide geologic, hydraulic, and water quality data for an area downgradient of water supply wells that have been impacted by perchlorate. These wells are completed in the Saugus Formation, which is the deeper of two aquifers that are present in the Santa Clarita Valley. Currently, it is unknown whether perchlorate has migrated downgradient of the group of perchlorate -impacted Saugus Formation wells and to what extent, if any, that the downgradient wells might be threatened with future contamination. This uncertainty is of heightened concern to the water providers in the valley because of the importance of the Saugus Formation aquifer for providing drought -year firming supplies for urban areas in the Santa Clarita Valley. Additionally, this uncertainty has a bearing on current efforts to design a hydraulic containment system that has the objective of containing the perchlorate plume while restoring groundwater production (with wellhead treatment) at the impacted production wells. Consequently, conducting the proposed project to meet the data needs objectives specified above will also address and inform a larger CLWA objective of implementing its groundwater management plan and developing long-term solutions for managing the perchlorate plume that is present in the Saugus Formation. Specifically, conducting this project at a location west and northwest of VWC- 201 and VWC-205 will inform groundwater modeling and other hydrogeologic and engineering analyses that are in progress by CLWA. These analyses are evaluating the likely ability of alternative pumping strategies to meet the CLWA's goals of creating a hydraulic containment zone in the Saugus Formation, protecting downgradient impacted wells, and (with wellhead treatment) restoring water supply production capacity at impacted Saugus Formation wells. In meeting this broader objective, the proposed project will further facilitate CLWA's ability to address concerns by state regulatory agencies with which it is working (the county Department of Public Health (DPH) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), which is reviewing and overseeing the ongoing voluntary cleanup activities in the area). If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the All Formation Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Groundwater Quarterly Monitoring Reports, Operable Unit 7, Former Whittaker Bermite I • 2003 CLWA Groundwater Manaqement Plan I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply. Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality: Supply drinking The project would improve water quality by providing water with appropriate quality; improve geologic, hydraulic, and water quality data necessary in groundwater quality; and attain water quality order to assess the potential for groundwater contamination; standards. and to develop long-term solutions for pollution prevention within the aquifers. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The projects characterization and solution of groundwater and improve ecosystem health; improve contamination problems would promote resource flood management; and preserve and stewardship by preserving the groundwater quality for enhance water -dependent recreation. beneficial use in the basin and for beneficial use of surface water and groundwater discharges from the basin. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to ,adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary ®Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status Date briefly describe the project (e.g., not initiated, in Droceed. process, complete) Conceptual Plans Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Cost Estimate Preliminary Design and (mm/ddlyyyy) Available Cost Estimates Exempt, Class 4 and Class 6 CEQA/NEPA (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Will require a monitoring well (mm/ddlri>ry) permit with Los Angeles County Dept of Public Health Construction Drawings NA (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to Droceed. A scope of work, proposal schedule, and cost estimate have been developed for the project and are available. This information was recently provided in the DWR Proposition 84 Local Groundwater Assistance grant application in March 2012. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ® Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): Upper estimated total capital cost ($): Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): Design Life of Project (years): DRAFT COST ESTIMATE Budget Category Funding Match Requested Grant Funding Total Task 1. Well Siting and Agency Coordination $10,810 $0 $105810 Task 2.1 Specifications and Public Bid Package $18,590 $0 $185590 Task 2.2 Well Drilling, Construction, and Development $2025315 $2505000 $452,315 Task 2.3 Initial Groundwater Monitoring $20,650 $0 $20,650 Task 2.4 Reporting $182020 $0 $185020 Task 2.5 Safety and Quality Assurance $14,270 $0 $145270 Task 2.6 Stakeholder Coordination and Communication $12,020 $0 $12,020 Project Contingency (15%) $82,000 $0 $825000 Total $378,675 $250,000 $628,675 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Newhall County Water District / Individual Address: County Water District 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, Ca 91321 Name:* Steve Cole Telephone:* Fax: (661)259-3610 (661)259-9673 Email:* scole@ncwd.org Website: www.ncwd.org Project Name:* Santa Clara River -Sewer Trunk Line Relocation Phase II and III Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 134.41 Project Longitude: 1118.43 Page 1 of 10 Project Santa Clara River. The sewer trunk line being removed is in the Location Description: Santa Clara River Bed near the Sand Canyon Bridge, and approximately one mile downstream Project Cooperating Age ncy(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): ect Status (e.q., new, ongoinq, expansion, new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iementeu. The Santa Clara River is dry most of the year. However, it is susceptible to flooding and high amounts of seasonal flows. Within the riverbed, Newhall County Water District (NCWD or District) maintains a portion of sewer trunk line in the Canyon Country area of Santa Clarita. When rainfall amounts are extremely large, the Santa Clara River swells and impacts the area occupied by the trunk line. The large River flow erodes the dirt around the sewer line and propels debris that could cause a line break. A line break would cause an unauthorized release of raw sewage in the Santa Clara River. Not only would a line break be detrimental to the ecosystems in and around the river, but also could affect domestic groundwater wells within the region. The project will meet the following objectives of the IRWMP: Improve Water Quality and Promote Resource Stewardship. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. Within the riverbed, Newhall County Water District (NCWD) maintains a portion of a sewer trunk line in the Canyon Country area of Santa Clarita. NCWD has owned and operated this trunk line since the late 1960's and has previously combated sewer trunk line breakage by preventative maintenance and proactive responses. Nevertheless, the threat of an accidental release has become increasingly evident and relocation of the trunk line out of the riverbed is now a priority. A line break would be detrimental to the ecosystems in and around the river and also could affect domestic groundwater wells within the region. The Sewer Trunk Line Removal Project is proposed in phases, with Phase 1 being the engineering and planning associated with relocating the sewer trunk line out of the Santa Clara riverbed. Phase 2 would concentrate on the actual removal or the gravity feed portion of the sewer trunk line. Within Phase 2, construction activities would relocate the sewer flow fed by gravity, prior to the proposed sewer lift station, into the public right-of-way. In Phase 3, the construction of a sewer lift station, forced sewer main, and the remaining gravity feed portion of the sewer trunk line to complete the relocation project. Funding is being requested for Phases 2 and 3. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Upper Santa Clara River Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • Sand Canyon Sewer Relocation Report, Alliance Land Planning and Engineering. (November 2009) Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future During large storms, there is a possibility that large regional demands and obtain necessary debris washed down the stream channel could hit the water supply sources. sewer line and cause a break. Such a break would cause release of raw sewage into the stream channel, requiring SCWD to stop pumping from their five groundwater wells located downstream. When there is a spill, it is assumed that groundwater pumping from SCWD's wells will need to be stopped for 2 months to allow for cleanup. During that time, lost groundwater pumping will be replaced by additional imported water brought to the region by CLWA. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking It is possible that this project could have an indirect water with appropriate quality; improve positive impact to the underlying groundwater basin by groundwater quality; and attain water quality increasing reliability of the resource by protecting the standards. recharge area, and improving the water quality. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve Extensive patches of high-quality riparian habitat exist and improve ecosystem health; improve along the length of the Santa Clara River downstream flood management; and preserve and of the project area. In addition, the river serves as an enhance water -dependent recreation. important wildlife corridor. Without the project, when a raw sewage spill occurs as a result of a break of the sewer line, it will be discharged directly into the river. This would result in short-term adverse effects on the surrounding Santa Clara River ecosystem. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to ,adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program ® Yes ❑ No Phase II and III of the Santa Clara River - Sewer Trunk Line Relocation Project. Phase was funded by the Round 1 Implementation grant and is currently being implemented. Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 11/2009 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study In process 12/2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates In process 12/2012 (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated 06/2013 (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated 06/2013 (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings In process 06/2013 (mmlddlyyyy) Funding In process (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ® Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ® Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 2,500,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 4,000,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): none for Phase 2 and 3 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 30,000 Design Life of Project (years): 50 years Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Newhall County Water District / Individual Address: Newhall County Water District / 23780 North Pine Street, Newhall, CA 91321 Castaic Lake Water Agency, County Waterworks #36 Name:* Steve Cole Title: General Manager Telephone:* Fax: 661-259-3610 Email:* sole@ncwd.org Website: www.ncwd.org Project Name:* Santa Clarita Vallev Residential Turf Removal Proqram Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I Project Longitude: Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Project Cooperating A enc ies /Or anization s /Individuals : ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Turf grass is the highest user of irrigation water in the Santa Clarita Valley. By incentivizing the removal of turf grass and replacing it with either low water using plants or by creating a non water using habitat, we expect to reduce runoff and decrease water usage. The program would reduce turf grass by 292,500 sq ft in year 1 and 585,000 sq ft total over 2 years. The estimated water savings is 20/21 acre feet for year 1. 40/42 acre feet for year 2. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The project would offer residential customers a rebate of up to $1,500 per residence to remove up to 1,500 sq ft of turf grass. We would offer $1.00 per sq ft removed. The program will be designed with Long Beach Water Departments Lawn to Grass Program as our model. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposedproject: Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the I • Lona Beach Water Lawn to Garden Proaram - www.lblawntoaarden.com I Page 3 of 10 Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the I • Lona Beach Water Lawn to Garden Proaram - www.lblawntoaarden.com I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: The program would reduce potable water usage by 20/21 ac ft in year 1 and 40/42 ac ft in year 2. Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve and improve ecosystem health; improve flood management; and preserve and enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the The program will reduce runoff from watering turf grass. negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ® Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ® Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 625,000 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 625,000 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 312,500 Design Life of Project (years): 2 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Castaic Lake Water Agency / Individual Address: 27234 Bouquet Canyon Rd. Santa Clarita, CA 91350 istrict, City of Santa Clarita, Name:* James Leserman Title: Senior Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 661-297-1600 Ext. 245 661-513-1202 Email:* leserman@clwa.org Website: Project Name:* Santa Clarita Valley Volatile Organic Carbon Groundwater Investgation Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1 340 26'N Project Longitude: 1180 35'W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: All of the Santa Clarita Valley with particular emphasis on the east side of Railroad Avenue south of Bouquet Junction Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Newhall County Water District • Los Angeles County Water District #36 Status (e.a.. new. onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iemernea. Groundwater provides the Santa Clarita Valley (SCV) with about half of its water supply. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) have contaminated SCV aquifers. VOCs have been detected in some SCV municipal water wells at levels below the current maximum contaminant level (MCL). CLWA and the retail water agencies are concerned that an increase in concentration and a likely reduction in the MCL for certain VOCs (TCE and PCE) could cause come current municipal wells to exceed the MCL. Unless action is taken and the threat is removed, this vital source of SCV's water supply could become compromised and ultimately eliminated. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The project would be divided into three basic phases: investigation, design phase and construction. The investigation phase would include VOC sources identification and pathways to drinking water wells determination. The design phase would include selection of a strategy (containment at the source vs. wellhead treatment), selection of a removal technology (granular activated carbon, air stripping, etc.) and actual design of the wells and treatment processes. Depending on the results of the first two phases the construction phase could include construction and installation of wells, construction of a VOC removal process and associated piping. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Alluvial Aquifer • Saugus Formation Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the • East Santa Clara Basin Groundwater Study • Groundwater Quarterly Monitoring Reports, Operable Unit 7, Former Whittaker Bermite I • 2003 CLWA Groundwater Manaqement Plan I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future regional demands and obtain necessary water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking The project would improve water quality by providing water with appropriate quality; improve geologic, hydraulic, and water quality data necessary in groundwater quality; and attain water quality order to assess the potential for groundwater contamination; standards. and in order to develop long-term solutions for pollution prevention within the aquifers. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The projects characterization and solution of groundwater and improve ecosystem health; improve contamination problems would promote resource flood management; and preserve and stewardship by preserving the groundwater quality for enhance water -dependent recreation. beneficial use in the basin and for beneficial use of surface water and groundwater discharges from the basin. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the negative effects on waterways and watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to ,adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary ®Secondary ❑ NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status Date (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Conceptual Plans Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) Cost Estimates CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ® Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ❑ Provides Additional Water Supply ® Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ❑ Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): $250,000 (for just study looking at data from existing wells) Upper estimated total capital cost ($): $5,000,000 (maximum if drilled more monitoring wells, analyzed data, and included extraction wells with treatment) Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): Design Life of Project (years): Page 10 of 10 UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Feasibility of Arundo Stem Cutting Ram (ASCR) Project Sponsor (Required): Agriculture Access / Bouquet Canyon Network If Joint Project, Other Partners: N/A Project Website (if available): www.agricultureaccess.com Project Contact, Person: hone FAX Email, Roger A. Haring 805-641-3781 rah(a)agricultureaccess.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): An hydraulic ram will be used to drive a large blade through clumps of Arundo donax stems, efficiently cutting at the base of the rh Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): ment of an Arundo Stem Cutting Ram (ASCR) could be used for any Arundo donax removal projectsrequire large clumps (Acres) Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): The project is an independent feasibility study performed by Agriculture Access and a Welding Sub -Contractor of the SCV Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): This project would be designed, built, and tested in the Santa Clarita Valley. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ L2 Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete El R1 El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2013 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or Tpww. Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) If a tool can efficiently cut and remove 'whole stems' of Arundo donax from a riparian habitat without disturbing the soil or rhizomes, it will increase the speed at which biomass can be removed without inducing potential spread of invasive weed propaauies andx m . This tool would be attached to a hydraulic arm that can reach, II, and lift laroe cuantitiesf Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. IRWMP Objectives Met ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑� Promote Resource Stewardship ❑� Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change 2 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑v Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑° Agricultural Lands Stewardship ' Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑° Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑° Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑° Forest Management ❑ Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers 2 Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the RWMIP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: ESFP Sludge Collection System Project Sponsor (Required): Castaic Lake Water Agency If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person:_ Email Jason Yim 661-297-1600 661-513-1202 lyim(a)olwa.orq Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): This project consists of modifications to the wash water return and sludge collection system at CLWA's Earl Schmidt Filtration Plant. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project improves the operational reliability of the wash water return system and the maintenance of the sludge collection system. As a result, it improves water quality and increases water supply in the region. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Capital Improvement Plan Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Castaic Lake Water Agency Earl Schmidt Filtration Plant, 32700 N. Lake Hugh Road, Castaic CA Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ Lat: 34029'53.67"N Lone 118036'2.6891W Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM ❑ ❑ o ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2015 to 2017 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or MM Tpww. Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) The wash water return system provides up to 10% of the water being treated at the Earl Schmidt Filtration Plant (ESFP). The capacity of the ESFP is 56 mgd. Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement IRWMP Objectives Met ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑v Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce areenhouse aas emissions Project Benefits ❑ Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region rl Effectively Intearate Water Manaaement with Land Use Plannina CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management 0 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑ Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Water Use Efficiency Certification Project Sponsor (Required): CLWA If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: Nancy Warfel 661-513-1206 661-297-1611 Email nwarfel(Q)CIWa.orq Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): This program provides incentives to professionals in fields utilizing water, such as landscape maintenance contractors and plumbers, to become certified as good stewards of water. This program would utilize existing certification programs such as California Landscape Contractors Assiciation (CLCA) Water Management Certification Program and the Master Plumbers & Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project integrates with the current portfolio of water use efficiency education programs offered in the Santa Clarita Valley. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): N/A Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Latitude/Longitude - info available at: http://geocoder.us/ Lat: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K ❑ Long: $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$10M o ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual J ❑ In -Design El Ready for CEQA Complete ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑J 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification 2 Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED 0 Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑' Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Irrigation Efficiency Program Project Sponsor (Required): CLWA If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: Email Nancy Warfel 661-513-1206 661-297-1611 nwarfel(Q)CIWa.orq Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): This program provides financial incentives to end users help to increase the speed of implementation and use of efficient irrigation technologies in the Santa Clarita Valley in order to promote water use efficiency. Devices include, but are not limited to, high -efficiency sprinkler nozzles, pressure regulators, in -stem flow regulators and drip irrigation. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project -integrates with the current portfolio of water use efficiency programs in the Valley, and could be integrated into new conservation projects proposed as part of the update of the Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Update Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Latitude/Longitude - info available at: http://geocoder.us/ Lat: Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$10M ❑ o ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual J ❑ In -Design El Ready for CEQA Complete ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2014 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑J 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Agricultural Water Use Efficiency R Precipitation Enhancement IRWMP Objectives Met Rv Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification 2 Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce areenhouse aas emissions Project Benefits ❑ Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region rl Effectively Intearate Water Manaaement with Land Use Plannina CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies R Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention R Agricultural Water Use Efficiency R Precipitation Enhancement R Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage R Recharge Areas Protection R Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water R Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management R Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED R Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local R Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation R Flood Risk Management ❑' Urban Runoff Management R Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency R Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Update of the Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant Education Model Project Sponsor (Required): CLWA If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact, Person: _ Email Casey Gordon 661-513-1275 661-297-1611 cgordon()clwa.Orq Project Description Project Description It -2 sentences): CLWA believes in the importance of educating our youth, our future leaders of tomorrow, on the benefits of protecting and conserving our water supply. Part of the Education Program features interactive student activities that present interesting and age- appropriate water treatment and conservation topics. One of the teaching instruments is a large demonstration educational scale model of the Rio Vista Treatment Plant (RVWTP). The model was originally built in XXXX, and demonstrates all of the treatment activities that occur here at the RVWTP, from the clarifiers, to ozone injection, XXX, XXX. The model needs updating to match the current activities at the plant and to be consistent with current water quality regulations. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): CLWA Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant Administration Building Latitude/Longitude - info available at: http://geocoder.us/ Lat: Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$10M R ❑ ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2014-2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Agricultural Water Use Efficiency R Precipitation Enhancement IRWMP Objectives Met Rv Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality 2 Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification 2 Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce areenhouse aas emissions Project Benefits ❑ Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region rl Effectively Intearate Water Manaaement with Land Use Plannina CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies R Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention R Agricultural Water Use Efficiency R Precipitation Enhancement R Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage R Recharge Areas Protection R Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water R Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management R Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED R Economic Incentives R Surface Storage - Regional/Local R Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation R Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management R Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency R Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Santa Clarita Valley Drought Relief Wells Project Sponsor (Required): Castaic Lake Water Agency If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact, Person: James Leserman 661-297-1600 Ext. 245 661-513-1202 jleserman(oiclwa.orq Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Two new wells would provide additional capacity that would be utilized during extreme droughts and emergencies (e.g., following a major earthquake that affected the ability of the State Water Project to convey water) Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): The project would complement recycled water and water conservation as a means of providing increased reliability and additional supplies during periods of water shortages. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Capital Improvement Plan, 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): TBD Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ L2 1TBD Long: TBD Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM ❑ ❑ o ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑J 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits ❑� Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑v Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement 0 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑° Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑ Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Saugus Formation Replacement Wells Project Sponsor (Required): Castaic Lake Water Agency If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact, Person: James Leserman 661-297-1600 EM. 245 661-513-1202 jleserman(oiclwa.orq Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Two new wells perforated in the Saugus Formation would replace groundwater production replacing capacity that was lost to Perchlorate contamination. Project would include design and construction of wells, reservoir and pipelines to connect to CLWA's existing transmission system. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): Project would complement the Saugus Perchlorate Treatment Facility (SPTF) project by providing additonal capacity over and above that which was replaced by the SPTF. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Capital Improvement Plan, 2003 Groundwater Management Plan, 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Magic Mountain Parkway west of 1-5 Latitude/Longitude - info available at: http://geocoder.us/ La, 340 25' 16.82" Long: 118035'25.96't Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM ❑ ❑ o ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑J 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality 0 Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits ❑ Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑v Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship ' Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement 0 Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑° Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑ Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑v Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Apam and Byfield Water Main Project Sponsor (Required): LA County Waterworks District No. 36 If Joint Project, Other Partners: N/A Project Website (if available): N/A Project Contact Person: Sami Kabar 626-300-3339 626-300-3385 skabar(a)dpw.lacounty.gov Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): The project consists of installing approximately 1500 linear feet of 12 -inch diameter water main along Byfield Road and Apam Avenue. The proposed 12 -inch pipe will help improve the low pressure conditions currently experienced in the surrounding area. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): N/A Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Waterworks District No. 36, Val Verde Capital Improvement 5 -yr Plan. Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): The proposed pipeline will be installed along a private dirt road beinning near 30334 Byfield Road going east, then continuing south on the private dirt road onto Apam Avenue, ending at the intersection of Apam Avenue and Hawkset Street. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto:/lgeocoder.us/ La Long: 34.476576 -118.66518 Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <900K $10❑OK-$1M $10-$10M 10M 4 L 600,000 Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEFV Complete O E]Corstruction LJ El Estimated Year of Construction: 2014 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Lj 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Improved water pressure to local residents by 10-20 psi during high water demand periods. Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration System Reoperation Flood Risk Management Urban Runoff Management Forest Management Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Landscape Irrigation Efficiency Program Project Sponsor (Required): Los Angeles County Waterworks District #36 (LACWD#36) If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: Rea Gonzalez 626-300-3338 626-300-3385 rloseph(a)d pw.lacounty.gov Project Description Project Description It -2 sentences): This program will provide a service to customers to help decrease outdoor water use. It will involve an intensive water use survey of the lanscaped area and the installation of high efficiency nozzles. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This program can be offered region -wide. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Water Conservation/Efficiency Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Val Verde Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ La Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM o ❑ ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ El El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑J 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or MM Tieated Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Cash for Grass Rebate Program Project Sponsor (Required): Los Angeles County Waterworks District #36 If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: Rea Gonzalez 626-300-3338 626-300-3385 rloseph(a)d pw.lacounty.gov Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): The Cash for Grass Rebate Program will offer customers a rebate per square foot of grass removed and replaced with water - efficient lanscaping. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): J This project can be integrated by offering the same rebate program to all customers of the region. This can be a region wide program administered by each provider. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Water Conservation/Efficiency Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Val Verde Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ La Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM o ❑ ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ El El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑J 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or MM Tpww. Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Advanced Meter Infrastructure Project Sponsor (Required): Los Angeles County Waterworks District #36 (LACWD#36) If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: EaX Rea Gonzalez 626-300-3338 626-300-3385 rloseph(a)dpw.lacounty.gov Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): This project will entail the installation of Automatic Meter Infrastructure (AMI) in all properties served by LACWD #36. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project will provide customers the ability to use water more efficiently and provide LACW D #36 the ability to detect problems on their systems and operate them more efficiently. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Water Conservation/Efficiency Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Val Verde Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ La Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$10M o ❑ ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ El El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑J 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or MM Tpww. Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Replacement of 8 -inch Water Main Along Del Valle Road Project Sponsor (Required): LA County Waterworks District No. 36 If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: FAX.. Email Ramy Gindi 626-300-3349 rgindi(o@dpw.lacounty.gov Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Replace 6,900 feet of existing 8 -inch water main along Del Valle Road with a 12 -inch water main. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): N/A Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Capital Improvement Plans Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): The water main will commence at the intersection of Del Valle Road and Hasley Canyon, and connect to the existing system 6,900 feet south of the intersection. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ LA 34.449296 ° Long: -118.626739 ° N34°26' W 118°37' Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM ❑ o ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or Tpww. Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) The project is a water system reliability project that would provide a more reliable potable water supply to 1,346 customers. The proposed project would replace aged infrustructure with high susptability to leaks. Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement IRWMP Objectives Met ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce areenhouse aas emissions Project Benefits ❑ Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region rl Effectively Intearate Water Manaaement with Land Use Plannina CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management 0 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Hasley Canyon Road Water Main, Turnout Connection, and Pump Station Project Project Sponsor (Required): LA County Waterworks District No. 36 If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: FAX Email Ramy Gindi 626-300-3349 rgindigDdpw.lacounty.gov Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Design and construction of a new turnout, pump station and 5,700 feet of water main to provide a more reliable connection with Castaic Lake Water Agency. The proposed connection would supplement a smaller and an aged connection that is more suspetable to failure and leaks. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): N/A Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Capital Improvement Plan Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): The turnout will be located on Sedona Way near the intersection with The Old Road in Castaic. The water main will commence at the intersection of Hasley Canyon and The Old Road, and connect to the existing system at Industry Drive. The pump station Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://geocoder.us/ Lat: 34.457908 ° Long: -118.617326 ° N34°27' W 118°37' Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$10M ❑ ❑ o ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or Tieated Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) The project is a water system reliability project that would provide a more reliable potable water supply to 1,346 customers. The connection is estimated to deliver 585 AFY. The project would minimize the amount of water lost through leaks. Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement IRWMP Objectives Met ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce areenhouse aas emissions Project Benefits ❑ Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region rl Effectively Intearate Water Manaaement with Land Use Plannina CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management 0 Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Newhall Creek In -River Spreadinq Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34022'41.20"N Project Longitude: 1118031110.45"W Page 1 of 10 Near Confluence of Newhall Creek and Santa Clara River South Location Description: Fork Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function. and treatment methods. as aoorooriate. The Newhall Creek In -River Spreading Grounds Project would consist of excavating a portion of the river and widening the river to provide in -stream recharge basins. Habitat could be restored along the river. Earthern berms would be constructed to divert the water into the basins. The berms may be washed out during high flows and would need to be reestablished. Trash would be detained in and then removed from the outer basins. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the I • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibility Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Trash will be collected in and removed from the outer basins water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds could provide and improve ecosystem health; improve habitat restoration and/or possible removal of non-native flood management; and preserve and invasive species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2013 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected and removed. Habitat restoration and/or the removal of invasive species will be performed to offset any disturbances caused by the construction of the project. The project will result in a temporary storage of 25 acre-feet of storm runoff which equates to about 75 acre-feet of water conservation. It will benefit 1 acre of riparian habitat area, and 4 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 2,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): Unknown Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: NA Project Name:* Lower San Francisauito Spreading Grounds Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1 34026'53.27"N Project Longitude: 118°33'30.51 "W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: San Francisquito Creek, Upstream of Decoro Drive, North Bank Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function. and treatment methods. as aoorooriate. This project consists of building a recharge facility and diversion. Flows will be redirected to the west bank and to the property adjacent to the river where basins for recharge will be excavated. An earthen diversion will wash out during major storms and will later need to be rebuilt. There may be opportunities for habitat restoration and passive recreation in the surrounding areas. Trash that washes into the river will be collected in the basins and be removed regularly. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • San Francisquito Canyon Creek Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve heavy metals and trash from the water. Trash will be groundwater quality; and attain water quality collected and removed before entering the spreading standards. grounds. Annual basin maintenance will remove the top clogging layer of soil where the heavy metals settle out. Additional water recharged would serve to blend any groundwater that may have contaminants. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds provides habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the main river for recharge may negative effects on waterways and prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A ,greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ® NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected and habitat restoration and/or passive recreation are possible at the site. The project will result in a temporary storage of 190 acre-feet of storm runoff for a water conservation benefit of about 570 acre-feet. It will benefit 10 acres of riparian habitat area, and 35 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 3,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 6,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): Unknown Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Placenta Creek Off -River Spreading Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34023'29.64"N Project Longitude: 118032'5.73"W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Near Confluence of Placerita Creek and Santa Clara River South Fork Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The Placerita Creek Off -River Spreading Grounds Project would consist of building a recharge facility and a diversion structure. Storm flows from the creek and the South Fork of the Santa Clara River would be diverted into the spreading basin using an earthen berm. Trash would wash into the spreading grounds and be removed post storm. The spreading grounds could incorporate habitat restoration and/or passive recreation. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve metals and trash from the water. Trash will be collected and groundwater quality; and attain water quality removed before entering the spreading grounds. standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds could provide and improve ecosystem health; improve habitat restoration and/or possible removal of non-native flood management; and preserve and invasive species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the main river for recharge may negative effects on waterways and prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected and removed. The site has potential for habitat restoration and/or passive recreation features. The project will result in a temporary storage of 75 acre-feet of storm runoff which equates to about 220 acre-feet of water conservation. It will benefit 3 acres of riparian habitat area, and 14 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 3,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($): Unknown Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Santa Clara River Spreading Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34024'57.84"N Project Longitude: 118026'3.47"W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Santa Clara River between 14 FWY and Sand Canyon Road Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. This project would construct earthen levees in the river to slow down and spread flows across the river. Another levee would direct flows to an adjacent property along the south bank. The diversion levee would wash-out during higher flows to minimize damage to the proposed levees. The off -river portion of this proposal could be designed to incorporate habitat and passive recreation. Trash would be diverted and detained at the basins for post -storm removal. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve metals and trash from the water. Trash will be collected and groundwater quality; and attain water quality removed at the spreading grounds. standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds provides habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected at the spreading grounds. Habitat restoration and/or passive recreation could be implemented at the spreading grounds site. The project will result in storage of 348 acre-feet of storm runoff and 1040 acre-feet of water conservation benefit in an average water year. It will also benefit 10 acres of riparian habitat area, and 74 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 10,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Santa Clara River Rubber Dam No. 1 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34025'28.15"N Project Longitude: 1118032123.15"W Page 1 of 10 Santa Clara River, Bouquet Canyon Road Bridge Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. An air inflatable rubber dam will be constructed at the proposed location in the Santa Clara River. During storm flows, the rubber dam will inflate, and the water will pond and percolate behind the rubber dam. During nonstorm weather, the rubber dam will stay deflated to allow lower flows in the river to pass without obstruction. Habitat will be restored along the river. Trash that collects behind the rubber dam will be removed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Trash will be collected and removed at the rubber dam. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the rubber dam could provide habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Detaining the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2013 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected and removed at the rubber dam. Removal of non-native species could be incorporated at the site. The project will result in storage of 78 acre-feet of storm runoff, and 230 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. The project will also benefit 6 acres of riparian habitat area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Santa Clara Off -River Soreadinq Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34024'34.74"N Project Longitude: 1118028120.72"W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Upstream of Whites Canyon Road Crossing on Santa Clara River. Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. The project would install a diversion in the Santa Clara River that would convey water to the adjacent property where recharge basins would be constructed. Trash would be collected in the spreading grounds. The streamflow gages would be placed to determine the amount of water that is being directed to the spreading grounds. Passive recreation and habitat restoration could be incorporated into the design of the facility If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project* Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve heavy metals and trash from the water. Trash will be groundwater quality; and attain water quality collected and removed before entering the spreading standards. grounds. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds provides habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the main river for recharge may negative effects on waterways and prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) missions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected at the spreading grounds. Habitat restoration and/or passive recreation could be incorporated at this location. The project will result in storage of 223 acre-feet of storm runoff and 670 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 10 acres of riparian habitat, and 41 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 4,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 2 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34024'26.41"N Project Longitude: 1118032128.57"W Page 1 of 10 Santa Clara River South Fork, Near Covala Drive Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. This project will involve the installation of an inflatable -rubber dam to aid in conserving storm - water within the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. Since the rubber dam will be installed on an existing drop structure, the native ground surface will not be disturbed. During storm flows, the rubber dam will inflate, and water will pond and percolate behind the dam. After the water percolates, the rubber dam will slowly deflate and lay flat across the drop structure and allow lower flows in the river to pass without obstruction. Habitat could be restored along the banks of the river. Trash that washes into the river will be collected at the rubber dam and it will be removed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Trash will be collected and removed at the rubber dam. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the rubber dam will provide habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Holding the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 10/27/2009 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. The river has recreation in the form of bike paths along a large stretch of the river. These areas are adjacent to power line easements which may provide an opportunity for habitat restoration. Trash will be collected and removed. The project will result in storage of 32 acre-feet of storm runoff and 96 acre feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 36 acres of riparian habitat area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 3 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34024'45.59"N Project Longitude: 1118032135.95"W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Santa Clara River South Fork, Continuation of Pueblo Drive Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained at the rubber dam and will be removed when the water level drops. The adjacent power line easement will be used for habitat restoration. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. This project will install an air -inflatable rubber dam, utilizing the location of an existing drop structure on the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. During storm flows the rubber dam will inflate, and water will pond and percolate behind the rubber dam. After the water percolates, the rubber dam will slowly deflate and lay flat across the drop structure. This will allow the lower flows in the river to pass without obstruction. Habitat will be restored along the banks of the river. Trash that washes into the river and collects behind the rubber dam will be removed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Trash will be collected and removed at the rubber dam. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the rubber dam could provide habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Holding the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 10/27/2009 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. The river has recreation in the form of a bike path along a large stretch of the river. These areas are adjacent to power line easements that may provide an opportunity for habitat restoration. Trash will be collected and removed. The project will result in storage of 44 acre-feet for storm runoff and 130 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 14 acres of riparian habitat area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Upper San Francisauito Spreading Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34028'42.63"N Project Longitude: 1118032145.91"W Page 1 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Santa Clara In -River Spreading Grounds No. 2 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: I 34025'51.48"N Project Longitude: 1118022154.67"W Page 1 of 10 Santa Clara River, Upstream of Lang Station Road Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description` A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function. and treatment methods. as aoorooriate. The spreading grounds would utilize earthen levees to redirect flows to the outside banks of the Santa Clara River. Small recharge basins and finger levees along the outer banks would slow flows and increase recharge in this stretch of the river. Trash would typically be detained in the outer basins and removed from the river post storm. High flows would wash out the low levees, and they would be rebuilt after larger storms. Adjacent areas may provide opportunities for habitat restoration and possible invasive species removal. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve heavy metals and trash from the water. Trash will be groundwater quality; and attain water quality collected and removed from the outer basins. standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds provides habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the river for recharge may prevent negative effects on waterways and flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected and removed from the outer basins. The surrounding areas will be evaluated in terms of habitat restoration need or non-native species removal. The project will provide storage of 75 acre-feet of storm runoff and 225 acre-feet of water conservation in an average water year. It will benefit 5 acres of riparian habitat area, and 13 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 2,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 San Francisquito Creek, Upstream of Copper Hill Drive Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. This project will construct earthen levees that will divert water to the outside limits of San Francisquito Creek where recharge basins will be constructed. During higher flows, the earthen levee would wash out and regular maintenance to restore the levees will be necessary. There may be opportunities for habitat restoration and passive recreation in the surrounding areas. Trash that washes into the creek will be detained at the recharge basins and will be removed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • San Francis uito Canyon Creek Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the I • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve metals and trash from the water. Trash will be collected and groundwater quality; and attain water quality removed before entering the spreading grounds. standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds could provide and improve ecosystem health; improve habitat restoration and/or possible removal of non-native flood management; and preserve and invasive species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the river for recharge may prevent negative effects on waterways and flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected at the basins. There is a potential for habitat restoration and/or passive recreation. The project will result in 232 acre-feet of storage for storm runoff and 700 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 10 acres of riparian habitat area, and 43 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 3,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 6,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 3 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34024'45.59"N Project Longitude: 1118032135.95"W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Santa Clara River South Fork, Continuation of Pueblo Drive Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer ect Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained at the rubber dam and will be removed when the water level drops. The adjacent power line easement will be used for habitat restoration. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. This project will install an air -inflatable rubber dam, utilizing the location of an existing drop structure on the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. During storm flows the rubber dam will inflate, and water will pond and percolate behind the rubber dam. After the water percolates, the rubber dam will slowly deflate and lay flat across the drop structure. This will allow the lower flows in the river to pass without obstruction. Habitat will be restored along the banks of the river. Trash that washes into the river and collects behind the rubber dam will be removed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Trash will be collected and removed at the rubber dam. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the rubber dam could provide habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Holding the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans Complete 10/27/2009 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. The river has recreation in the form of a bike path along a large stretch of the river. These areas are adjacent to power line easements that may provide an opportunity for habitat restoration. Trash will be collected and removed. The project will result in storage of 44 acre-feet for storm runoff and 130 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 14 acres of riparian habitat area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I SCR South Fork Rubber Dam No. 4 1 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 1340257.5311N Project Longitude: 1118032154.69"W Page 1 of 10 Location Description: Santa Clara River South Fork, Valencia Blvd. Bridge. Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained at the rubber dam and will be removed when the water level drops. The adjacent power line easement will be used for habitat restoration. If the project is not constructed, imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. Utilizing the location of an existing drop structure, this project will install an air -inflatable rubber dam in the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. During storm flows the rubber dam will inflate, and water will pond and percolate behind the rubber dam. After the water percolates, the rubber dam will slowly deflate and lay flat across the drop structure and allow lower flows in the river to pass without obstruction. Habitat will be restored along the banks of the river. The adjacent power line easement provides opportunities for habitat restoration and possible recreation. Trash will be removed at the rubber dam after storms. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • Santa Clara River South Fork Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the 1 • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Trash will be collected and removed at the rubber dam. water with appropriate quality; improve groundwater quality; and attain water quality standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the rubber dam could provide habitat and improve ecosystem health; improve restoration and/or possible removal of non-native invasive flood management; and preserve and species in the river and/or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Holding the water for recharge to an in -stream area in the negative effects on waterways and river may prevent flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2013 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. The river has recreation in the form of bike paths along a large stretch of the river. These areas are adjacent to power line easements which may provide an opportunity for habitat restoration. Trash will be collected and removed. The project will result in 115 acre-feet of storm runoff storage and 340 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will also benefit 25 acres of riparian habitat area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 5,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 7,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 Upper Santa Clara River Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Project Identification —Long Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement(a)kennedyienks.com. Items denoted with an asterisk are required. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Los Angeles County Flood Control District / Individual Address: 1 900 South Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 1 Possible Name:* Ken Zimmer Title: Senior Civil Engineer Telephone:* Fax: 626-458-6188 626-979-5436 Email:' kzimmer@dpw.lacounty.gov Website: N/A ect Name:* I Upper San Francisauito Spreading Grounds I Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: 34028'42.63"N Project Longitude: 1118032145.91"W Page 1 of 10 San Francisquito Creek, Upstream of Copper Hill Drive Location Description: Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • Los Angeles County Flood Control District/Ken Zimmer Status (e.a.. new, onaoina. expansion. new Part 2. Project Need* It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide. Information provided in this section defines the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and will help to catalog existing need(s) or issue(s) in the Upper Santa Clara River Watershed Region. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the need(s) or problem(s) that the project will address. As applicable, discuss the water supply need, operational efficiency need, water quality need, or resource stewardship need (e.g. ecosystem restoration, floodplain management) need. Discuss critical impacts that will occur if the proposal is not iememea. Capturing stormwater that is currently lost to the ocean will improve the health and long-term sustainability of the basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Trash from the surrounding urban watershed will be partially detained and removed at the spreading grounds. If the project is not constructed imported water purchases will not be offset by the additional available local groundwater supplies, trash in the river will not be reduced at the location, and the native vegetation will not be restored to provide habitat for native species. Page 2 of 10 Part 3. Project Description* A general description of the proposed project is needed. This section will provide information associated with the project concept, general project information, and readiness to proceed. It is recognized that much of the requested information may not be available for projects that are at a conceptual level of project development. We appreciate and need your ideas. Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the project including the general project concept, what will be constructed/implemented, how the constructed project will function, and treatment methods, as appropriate. This project will construct earthen levees that will divert water to the outside limits of San Francisquito Creek where recharge basins will be constructed. During higher flows, the earthen levee would wash out and regular maintenance to restore the levees will be necessary. There may be opportunities for habitat restoration and passive recreation in the surrounding areas. Trash that washes into the creek will be detained at the recharge basins and will be removed. If applicable, list surface water bodies and groundwater basins associated with the proposed project: • Santa Clara River Watershed • Santa Clara River Valley Groundwater Basin, East Subbasin • San Francis uito Canyon Creek Please identify up to three available documents which contain information specific to the I • Santa Clara River Watershed Water Conservation Feasibilitv Studv I Page 3 of 10 Part 4. IRWMP Objectives Addressed by Project" Describe how the project meets any of the following IRWMP objectives: Reduce Potable Water Demand: N/A Implement technological, legislative and behavioral changes that will reduce user demands for water. Increase Water Supply: Understand future Additional recharge of the aquifer will increase the available regional demands and obtain necessary local supplies and reduce the demand of imported water. water supply sources. Improve Water Quality. Supply drinking Soil aquifer treatment will remove contaminants such as water with appropriate quality; improve metals and trash from the water. Trash will be collected and groundwater quality; and attain water quality removed before entering the spreading grounds. standards. Promote Resource Stewardship: Preserve The construction of the spreading grounds could provide and improve ecosystem health; improve habitat restoration and/or possible removal of non-native flood management; and preserve and invasive species in the river or adjacent property. enhance water -dependent recreation. Flooding/Hydromodification: Reduce the Diverting the water from the river for recharge may prevent negative effects on waterways and flooding downstream. watershed health caused by hydromodification and flooding outside the natural erosion and deposition process endemic to the Santa Clara River. Take actions within the watershed to N/A adapt to climate change Promote projects and actions that reduce N/A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Page 4 of 10 Part 5. Resource Management Strategies Please indicate California Water Plan strategies addressed by the proposed project. (Check all that apply) Reduce Water Demands ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ®NA Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Urban Water Use Efficiency Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Conveyance — Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA System Reoperation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water Transfers ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State):_ Increase Water Supply ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Desalination — Brackish/Seawater ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Recycled Municipal Water ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Surface Storage — CALFED or Regional/Local ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Water Quality [-]Primary [-]Secondary ® NA Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Matching Quality to Use ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Pollution Prevention ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Salt and Salinity Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Urban Runoff Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State) Page 5 of 10 Practice Resource Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Agricultural Lands Stewardship ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Economic Incentives (loans, grants, water pricing) ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Ecosystem Restoration ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Forest Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Land Use Planning and Management ® Primary ❑ Secondary ❑ NA Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Watershed Management ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Other (Please State): Improve Flood Risk Management ❑ Primary ® Secondary ❑ NA Flood Risk Management Other Strategies ❑ Primary ❑ Secondary ® NA Please State: Is the proposed project an element or ❑ Yes ® No phase of a regional or larger program? If yes, please identify the program Page 6 of 10 Part 6. Project Readiness* Item Status (e.g., not initiated, in process, complete) Date Conceptual Plans In process 06/15/2014 (mm/ddlyyyy) Feasibility Study Complete 11/14/2007 (mm/ddlyyyy) Preliminary Design and Cost Estimates Not initiated (mm/ddlyyyy) CEQA/NEPA Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Permits Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Construction Drawings Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) Funding Not initiated (mmlddlyyyy) For projects that do not include construction, please briefly describe the project readiness -to proceed. Page 7 of 10 Part 7. Other Project Benefits Please provide a 1-2 paragraph description of the benefit(s) that the project will address. Information provided will be used in the assessment of project benefits. Quantify benefits to the extent possible (e.g., project will result in x acre-feet of water savings, project will benefit x acres of habitat) This proposed project will primarily improve the health and long-term sustainability of the groundwater basin, increase local groundwater supplies, and reduce the region's reliance on water imports. Additional benefits are water quality enhancements that will help to alleviate downstream concerns. Trash will be collected at the basins. There is a potential for habitat restoration and/or passive recreation. The project will result in 232 acre-feet of storage for storm runoff and 700 acre-feet of water conservation benefit per average water year. It will benefit 10 acres of riparian habitat area, and 43 acres of non-developed open space area. Does the project address any known environmental justice issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Is the project located within or adjacent to a disadvantaged community? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure Does the project include disadvantaged community participation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Sure If yes, please identify the group or organization: Page 8 of 10 Please indicate to what extent your project contributes to Climate Change Response Actions. ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Adaptation to Climate Change ❑ Increases Water Supply Reliability ❑ Advances/ Expands Conjunctive Management of Multiple Water Supply Sources ❑ Increases Water Use and/or Reuse Efficiency ® Provides Additional Water Supply ❑ Promotes Water Quality Protection ❑ Reduces Water Demand ❑ Advances/Expands Water Recycling ® Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse ❑ Addresses Sea Level Rise ❑ Addresses other Anticipated Climate Change Impact (e.g. through water management system modifications) Please State: ® Improves Flood Control (e.g. through wetlands restoration, management, protection) ❑ Promotes Habitat Protection ❑ Establishes Migration Corridors ❑ Re-establishes River -Floodplain Hydrologic Continuity ❑ Re -introduces Anadromous Fish Populations to Upper Watersheds ❑ Enhances and Protects Upper Watershed Forests and Meadow Systems ❑ Other (Please State): ❑ Other (Please State):_ Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Energy Consumption ❑ Promotes Energy -Efficient Water Demand Reduction or Increases Water Use Efficiency ❑ Improves Water System Energy Efficiency El Advances/Expands Water Recycling ❑ Promotes Urban Runoff Reuse that Leads to Reduced Energy Demand El Promotes Use of Renewable Energy Sources ❑ Contributes to Carbon Sequestration (e.g. through vegetation growth) ❑ Other (Please State): Page 9 of 10 Part 8. Project Cost Estimate Project cost information is needed to assist in comparing benefits and costs. Additionally, knowledge of the project type and cost will assist in identifying funding sources for potential projects. Please indicate the estimated total capital cost for project implementation. These costs include land purchase/easement, planning/design/engineering, construction/ implementation, environmental compliance, administration, and contingency. Lower estimated total capital cost ($): 3,000,000.00 Upper estimated total capital cost ($): 6,000,000.00 Of the total capital cost, please indicate the estimated cost for land purchase / easement ($) Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost ($): 25,000.00 Design Life of Project (years): 50 Page 10 of 10 UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Recycled Water Onsite Conversion Project Sponsor (Required): Newhall County Water District If Joint Project, Other Partners: Phase 2C of CLWA Recycled Water Master Plan Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: Email Steve Cole (661)259-3610 (661)259-9673 scole(a)ncwd.Orq Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): This project would address onsite plumbing conversions of five locations to allow the use of both potable and recycled water. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project integrates with the the Santa Clarita Valley Southern End Recycled Water Project Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Castaic Lake Water Agency Recycled Water Master Plan Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Landscape irrigation for Hart High School, Placenta Junior High School, Newhall Elementary School, Hart Park, and Newhall Park Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ La Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM El ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or: Tpww. Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) This project would allow approximately 180-240AF of potable water savings by dedicating recycled water usage for landscape irrigation. Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑ Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification 2 Climate Change Adaptation ❑ Climate Change Prevention Project Benefits ❑� Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑v Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑v Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local 0 Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use 0 Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Advanced Metering Infrastructure Program Project Sponsor (Required): Newhall County Water District If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: Phon FAX ffh.Email Steve Cole 661-259-3610 scole()ncwd.or9 Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Develop an advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) system within the districts' service areas. This system will allow NCWD to collect real-time water demand data from customer meters. The system will give customers current usage data and allow NCWD to be proactive with leak detection. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project is consistent with the CALFED Bay Delta Program Goals #1, 2, 3 and 4 and goals identified in the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): This project is located in Castaic, Newhall, Valencia and Canyon Country which is in Los Angeles County. It would cover an area of approximately 35 square miles. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://aeocoder.us/ Let: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimatef:.l Project Cost: <$10oK $10❑0K-$1M $1M❑ -$10M 10M L LJ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEOA Complete ❑ O Construction IJ E]Estimated Year of Construction: 2013 through 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Li 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or IVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) This project will reduce the amount of water lost to leaks and result in better dry -year reliability. By providing real-time water consumption data to all customers, water use efficiency will increase, reducing overall demand for imported water sources and helpino to maintain tin ble aroundwater supply. Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation Flood Risk Management ❑v Urban Runoff Management Forest Management ❑v Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Septic to sewer retrofit project Project Sponsor (Required): City of Santa Clarita If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact. Person: _ Eini Heather Merenda 661-284-1413 661-255-4356 hmerenda(o)santa-clarita.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): There are 1,000 to 2,500 septic tanks properties within City limits. This project would provide financial incentives and infrastructur Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): Related to TMDLs, NPDES Permit compliance, protecting groundwater, and DACs in Newhall. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Bacteria TMDL for the Santa Clara River Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Newhall, Sand Canyona and Placenta Canyons primarily Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ L2 Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ El El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or 10,000 MM Tieated Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) reduce grounwater contamination from septic tanks; Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. IRWMP Objectives Met M ❑ Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑v Improve Water Quality 2 Promote Resource Stewardship ❑ Flooding/Hydromodification ❑ Climate Change Adaptation ❑ Climate Chanoe Prevention Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑ Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑v Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑v Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship ' Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local 0 Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑' Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED 0 Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑° Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑' Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑ Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑v Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑� Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use 0 Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: City of Santa Clarita Biofiltration and Low Impact Development Retrofits Project Sponsor (Required): City of Santa Clarita If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact. Person: _ Eini Heather Veranda 661-284-1413 661-255-4356 hmerenda(a)santa-clarita.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Project would identify and retrofit neighborhoods and parking lots with biofiltration or low impact development. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): Work with NPDES Permit holders, TMDL compliance, and projects related to poor street drainage and root damaged sidewalks Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): NPDES Permit for Los Angeles County, EPA Green Streets Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): City of Santa Clarita sub drainage areas determined to have high levels of bacteria, nutrients, trash and other pollutants in runoff Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ La Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$tOM El El ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ ❑ Construction ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2014 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑J 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or 10,000 MM Tiewted Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. IRWMP Objectives Met M ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑v Improve Water Quality ❑ Promote Resource Stewardship ❑� Flooding/Hydromodification ❑� Climate Change Adaptation ❑ Climate Chanoe Prevention Project Benefits ❑� Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑� Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions ❑� Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑� Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑� Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship ' Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage 0 Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑' Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑° Flood Risk Management ❑' Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑v Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑� Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use 0 Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRW MP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Upper Santa Clara River Arundo/Tamarisk Removal Program (SCARP) Implementation Project Sponsor (Required): City of Santa Clarita If Joint Project, Other Partners: Forest Service, Santa Clara River Conservancy Project Website (if available): Project Contact. Person: Eni Heather Merenda 661-284-1413 661-255-4356 hmerenda(o@santa-clarita.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): The SCARP implementation project will focus on removal of non-native invasive species, primarily arundo, from the sites identifie Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): The Santa Clara River Invasive Weeds Task Force helps coordinate invasive species projects throughout the watershed Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Santa Clara River Watershed Arundo and Tamarisk Removal Plan Long Term Implementation Plan Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): The entire upper Santa Clara River Watershed is part of the work. However, the more recent work is two fold — one area is the Cit Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://oeocoder.us/ LatL340 25' N 1180 32' W Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K - $1M $1M -$10M >$tOM ❑ ❑ o ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete El ❑ Construction J ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: 2006 started Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑J 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or 20 miles IVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): 1500 acres restored Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. IRWMP Objectives Met M ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑v Improve Water Quality ❑� Promote Resource Stewardship ❑� Flooding/Hydromodification ❑� Climate Change Adaptation ❑� Climate Chanoe Prevention Project Benefits ❑� Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑� Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship ' Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage 0 Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑' Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑° Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑° Flood Risk Management ❑' Urban Runoff Management ❑° Forest Management ❑ Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use 0 Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Linking SCEEC to the Upper Santa Clara River IRWMP Project Sponsor (Required): Santa Clarita Environmental Education Consortium (SCEEC) If Joint Project, Other Partners: Project Website (if available): Project Contact Person: _ FAX Email Jia-Yi Cheng -Levine, Ph.D. 661-362-5806 Jia-Yi.Cheng-Levine(a)canyons.edu Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): The mission of SCEEC is to proactively provide educational resources to promote environmental literacy in Santa Clarita valley. It aims to establish environmental resources for educators and students; create and provide exemplary supplementary curriculum; as well as contribute to the revitalization of K-14 students' love for environmental science. Funding is being sought to link implementation of the goals and objectives of IRWMP with the mission of SCEEC. One of the ways this could be done is to engage students in in -field studies that would directly relate to the IRWMP objectives; benefiting both the student, and the IRWMP. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Santa Clarita Valley Latitude/Longitude - info available at: http://,qeocoder.us/ Lat: Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost: <$100K $100K -$1M $1M -$10M >$10M o ❑ ❑ ❑ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEQA Complete J ❑ El ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) ❑ 1-100 AF ❑ 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Project Criteria ias review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the oroiect meets the criteria. Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged IRWMP Objectives Met ❑v Reduce Potable Water Demand M Increase Water Supply ❑v Improve Water Quality ❑� Promote Resource Stewardship ❑� Flooding/Hydromodification ❑� Adapt to climate change ❑ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Project Benefits 2 Include Regional Projects or Programs ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR ❑ Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions 2 Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program ❑ Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region ❑ Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning CA Water Plan • Water Management Strategies ❑ Agricultural Lands Stewardship L1 Pollution Prevention ❑ Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement ❑ Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection ❑ Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water ❑ Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management ❑ Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED ❑ Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local ❑ Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation ❑ Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management ❑ Forest Management ❑' Urban Water Use Efficiency ❑ Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers ❑ Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation ❑ Matching Water Quality to Water Use 0 Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: GIS Development and Implementation Project Sponsor (Required): Santa Clarita Water Division If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: FAX Cathy Z. Hollomon 661-259-2737 661-286-4330 chollomon(apscwater.org Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Develop a compreshensive GIS system within the service area. This includes software, data collection, data input and integration with SCADA. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project is consistent with CALFED Bay Delta Program Goals #1 and #2, goals identified in the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan and the SCWD Conservation Strategic Plan. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): This project is included in SCWD's Capital Improvement Plan. Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): This project is located in Los Angeles County, specifically within the eastern half of the Santa Clarita Valley. It would cover an area of approximately 35 square miles. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: http://g-eocoder.us! Lat: 34" 17' 28.6" Long: 118" 22' 24.7" Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate): Project Cost:1�00K $10❑OK-$1M $1M❑ --$10M 10M J Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEOA Complete 0 o Cold ruction LJ ❑ Estimated Year of Construction: present until complete (around 2015) Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Lj 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF FI Water Quality Area Drained: and/or IVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation (acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) This project will provide SCWD the tools necessary to efficiently manage water suppies, improve operational effectiveness, maintain accurate asset records and allow interaction/sharing of spatial data with other agencies for improved watershed management and coordinated actions during emergency situations. Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management Forest Management ❑v Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use 0 Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Advanced Metering Infrastructure Program Project Sponsor (Required): Santa Clarita Water Division If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: Pho Cathy Z. Hollomon 661-259-2737 661-286-4330 chollomon(a)scwater.org Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Develop an advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) system within service area. This system will allow SCWD to collect real-time water demand data from customer metersa nd provide the tools the both SCWD nad its customers to identify and repoarit leaks and better manage water supplies. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project is consistent with the CALFED Bay Delta Program Goals #1, 2, 3 and 4 and goals identified in the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): This project is included in SCWD's Capitol Improvement Plan. Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): This project is located in Los Angeles County, specifically within eastern half of the Santa Clarita Valley. It would cover an area of apprpoximately 35 square miles. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://aeocoder.us/ L '. 34 17 28.6 Long: 118 22 24.7 Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate):, _ - Project Cost: <$10oK $10❑0K-$1M $1M❑ -$10M 10M L LJ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEOA Complete ❑ O Construction IJ E]Estimated Year of Construction: 2013 through 2015 Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Li 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) This project will reduce the amount of water lost to leaks and result in better dry -year reliability. By providing real-time water consumption data to all customers, water use efficiency will increase, reducing overall demand for imported water sources and helpino to maintain tin ble aroundwater supply. Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation Flood Risk Management ❑v Urban Runoff Management Forest Management ❑v Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: CII Conservation Plan Project Sponsor (Required): Valencia Water Company If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: Phon FAIM Matt Dickens 661-295-6543 mdickens(iyalenciawater.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): This project is the development of VWC's Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) Conservation Plan. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project could integrate with the Valleywide Conservation Database. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Santa Clarita Valley Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://aeocoder.us/ Let: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate)c Project Cost:<$10oK Long: $10❑0K-$1M - $1M❑ -$10M 10M Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual v❑ In -Design ❑ Ready for Construction LJ CEOA Complete E]Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Li 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management Forest Management ❑v Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Advanced Metering Infrastructure Program Project Sponsor (Required): Valencia Water Company If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: Phon F '. Matt Dickens, Chris Perez 661-295-6543 mdickenS valenciawater.com cperezCLDvalen, Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Develop an advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) system within the districts' service areas. This system will allow VWC to collect real-time water demand data from customer meters. The system will give customers current usage data and allow VWC to be proactive with leak detection. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project is consistent with the CALFED Bay Delta Program Goals #1, 2, 3 and 4 and goals identified in the Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Santa Clarita Valley Water Use Efficiency Plan. Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): This project is located in Valencia, Los Angeles County. Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://aeocoder.us/ Let: Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate)c Project Cost:<$10oK $10❑0K-$1M - $1M❑ -$10M 10M L LJ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEOA Complete v❑ ❑ Construction LJ E]Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Li 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) This project will reduce the amount of water lost to leaks and result in better dry -year reliability. By providing real-time water consumption data to all customers, water use efficiency will increase, reducing overall demand for imported water sources and helping to maintain a sustainable groundwater supply. Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation Flood Risk Management ❑v Urban Runoff Management Forest Management ❑v Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Valleywide Conservation Database Project Sponsor (Required): Valencia Water Company If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: PhqQiiIil FAX= , Matt Dickens 661-295-6543 mdickens(a)valenciawater.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences): Develop a valleywide conservation database, similar to the Energy Star program, which would catalog all of the specific consumption uses for differing building types. Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): This project could integrate with the Regional High Resolution GIS Mapping project. Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Santa Clarita Valley Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://aeocoder.us/ Let: Long: Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate)c Project Cost:<$10oK $10❑0K-$1M - $1M❑ -$10M 10M Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual In -Design Ready for CEOA Complete v❑ ❑ Construction LJ E]Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Li 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local ❑ Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater ❑ Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution ❑ Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives ❑ Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration ❑ System Reoperation Flood Risk Management ❑ Urban Runoff Management Forest Management ❑v Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation ❑ Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management ❑ Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use ❑ Watershed Management UPPER SANTA CLARA WATERSHED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CALL FOR PROJECTS Project Identification Short Form Note: This two page project identification short form gathers the minimum amount of information required to submit a project for consideration in the IRWMP. More information may be required at a later date. This form may be printed, filled out by hand and mailed back to Meredith Clement, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2775 North Ventura Road, Oxnard, CA 93036 OR electronically filled out and e-mailed BY AUGUST 17, 2012 to: MeredithClement@kennedyjenks.com. Updated information is in BLUE text. General Information (Required) Project Name: Regional High Resolution GIS Mapping Project Sponsor (Required): Valencia Water Company If Joint Project, Other Partners: NA Project Website (if available): NA Project Contact Person: Phon F , Matt Dickens 661-295-6543 mdickens(a)valenciawater.com Project Description Project Description 1 -2 sentences Develop a regional high resolution Geographic Information System (GIS) asset management mapping tool for the Valley. Santa Clarita Project Integration (Describe how the project does or could integrate with other projects in the Region): Project Source (Cite Plan(s) to which the project belongs [e.g., Watershed Master Plans, Capital Improvement Plans]): Project Location Descriptive (Description of property location etc.): Santa Clarita Valley Latitude/Longitude - info available at: htto://aeocoder.us/ Let: Long: I Estimated Capital Costs: (Note estimated cost, if known OR check rough estimate):. Project Cost:<$10oK $10❑0K-$1M - $1M❑ -$10M L 10M LJ Project Status (Check all that apply): Conceptual v❑ In -Design ❑ Ready for Construction LJ CEOA Complete E]Estimated Year of Construction: Project Benefits Water Supply: New Supply Created (AFY) (Check one) Li 1-100 AF 100-1000AF ❑ 1000+ AF Water Quality Area Drained: and/or JVolume Treated: Public Access, Open Space, Habitat, Recreation acres created/restored): Other: (Describe X amount of benefit) Criteria ise review the project against the Statewide Priorities, Program Preferences, and Water Plan Management Strategies and place a check in if the Droiect meets the criteria. NP Objectives Met Reduce Potable Water Demand Increase Water Supply Improve Water Quality Promote Resource Stewardship Flooding/Hyd romod ification Adapt to climate change Reduce areenhouse oas emissions Include Regional Projects or Programs Effectively Integrate Water Management Programs and Projects within a Hydrologic Region Identified in the CA Water Plan; the RWQCB Region or Subdivision; or Other Region or Sub -Region Specifically Identified by DWR Effectively Resolve Significant Water -Related Conflicts within or between Regions Contribute to Attainment of One or More of the Objectives of the CALFED Bay -Delta Program Address Critical Water Supply or Water Quality Needs of Disadvantaged Communities within the Region Effectively Integrate Water Management with Land Use Planning Water Plan - Water Management Strategies Agricultural Lands Stewardship LJ Pollution Prevention Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ❑ Precipitation Enhancement Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage ❑ Recharge Areas Protection Conveyance - Delta, Regional/Local Recycled Municipal Water Desalination - Brackish & Seawater Salt & Salinity Management Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Surface Storage - CALFED Economic Incentives Surface Storage - Regional/Local Ecosystem Restoration System Reoperation Flood Risk Management Urban Runoff Management Forest Management Urban Water Use Efficiency Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Water Transfers Land Use Planning & Management Water -Dependent Recreation Matching Water Quality to Water Use Watershed Management