Monterey Peninsula Water Management District

Technical Memorandum 2006-02

 

Existing Water Needs of Cal-Am Customers within MPWMD Boundaries and

Non Cal-Am Producers within the Seaside Groundwater Basin

Adjusted for Weather Conditions During Water Years 1996 through 2006

 

 

Introduction

 

This technical memorandum updates the information that was provided at the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (District or MPWMD) Board workshop on March 23, 2006, regarding existing water needs of customers in the California American Water (Cal-Am) main distribution system[1] in the Monterey Peninsula area.  Specifically, the estimate of existing average annual water demand that was developed for the workshop, based on actual production during the 1996 - 2005 period, was recalculated to include production information for Water Year (WY) 2006 and all of the annual values were adjusted to account for weather conditions during this period of analysis.  In addition, this technical memorandum expands the analysis of existing water needs with the MPWMD boundaries to include:

 

(1)                           existing water needs of customers in Cal-Am’s smaller systems in the Highway 68 corridor – Ryan Ranch, Hidden Hills, and Bishop Units – that derive their source of supply from the Laguna Seca Subarea (also known as the Southern Inland Subarea) of the Seaside Groundwater Basin,

 

(2)                           existing water needs of customers in Cal-Am’s main system in the event that the water rights recognized by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in Order No. WR 95-10 and held by Cal-Am are reduced to reflect reduced storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir due to sedimentation, and 

 

(3)                           existing water needs of non Cal-Am producers that derive their source of supply from the Coastal Subareas and Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin.

 

The purpose of the technical memorandum is to provide reasonable and defensible estimates of the amount of water currently needed by all customers served by Cal-Am within District boundaries[2] and non Cal-Am producers within the Seaside Groundwater Basin.  In this context, the memorandum provides an estimate of the amount of water that Cal-Am must develop to replace supplies that are either unlawful, exceed Cal-Am’s adjudicated rights, or may be reduced by further regulatory action and that are needed to meet existing water demand within the District.  These estimates of existing water demands will be compared to Cal-Am’s recognized rights in the Carmel River Basin and Cal-Am and non Cal-Am adjudicated rights in the Seaside Groundwater Basin to determine the amount of “replacement” supplies needed to meet existing demand.

 

The technical memorandum is divided into four sections.  In the first section, a technique to adjust monthly water production values for wet and dry weather conditions is described and applied to Cal-Am’s monthly production from Carmel River sources and Seaside Coastal Subarea sources during the selected period of analysis.  In the second section, these weather-adjusted existing demand estimates are compared to Cal-Am’s recognized rights to divert Carmel River water and Cal-Am’s adjudicated rights to pump groundwater from the Coastal Subareas and Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin to quantify the water supplies that Cal-Am must develop to replace existing supplies that are being unlawfully diverted from the Carmel River or that exceed Cal-Am’s adjudicated rights in the Seaside Groundwater Basin, as specified in the recent adjudication.  In the second section, the loss of storage capacity in Cal-Am’s Los Padres Reservoir and its possible effect on Cal-Am’s recognized rights and Cal-Am’s need to develop additional replacement supplies is also discussed.  In the third section, weather-adjusted existing demand estimates are developed for non Cal-Am producers in the Coastal Subareas and Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin and compared to the non Cal-Am adjudicated rights in these subareas to quantify additional replacement supplies needed to comply with the natural safe yield for the basin specified in the adjudication.  In the fourth section, the replacement requirements are summarized and “yield targets” are recommended that should be used to size water supply alternatives being developed to meet existing water demand in the Monterey Peninsula area.

 

This technical memorandum should be read in conjunction with the staff note that was prepared for the March 23, 2006 workshop.  This staff note includes useful background information on the regulatory and judicial constraints on water use within the District and is included as Appendix A.       

 

Section 1:   Weather-Related Water Demand Adjustments

 

Unadjusted Cal-Am Water Demand:   At the March 23, 2006 Board workshop, a summary table was presented that compared Cal-Am’s annual production from its Carmel River sources for the ten-year period from WY 1996 through WY 2005[3] with the annual production limits set by the SWRCB in Order 95-10 for each of these water years.  The table also indicated water year type (e.g., “wet”, “normal”, and “below normal”) for each year and showed the amount of water that Cal-Am produced in excess of its recognized water rights.  This table, updated to include production data for WY 2006, is included as Table 1 and shows that, on average, Cal-Am produced 7,639 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water from its Carmel River sources in excess of its recognized water rights during this 11-year period.  At the workshop, it was noted that the ten-year period of analysis, i.e., WY 1996 - WY 2005, was “wetter” than normal and did not include any dry or critically-years, which would be expected to occur approximately 25% of the time.

 

Adjusted Cal-Am Water Demand:   To account for the “wet” weather condition during the period of analysis, Cal-Am’s actual production was adjusted using a monthly procedure developed for the District’s operation model, known as the Carmel Valley Simulation Model (CVSIM).  With this procedure, monthly unimpaired streamflow at the San Clemente Dam site is used as a proxy value for weather conditions.  Based on predetermined exceedence frequency values, the monthly unimpaired flow is classified as wet, normal, dry, or critically-dry[4].  Based on the assumption that the streamflow values accurately reflect weather conditions that influence water demand (e.g., air temperature and rainfall) actual water production is decreased during wet months, unchanged during normal months, and increased during dry and critically dry months.  The change in actual monthly production for weather conditions varies by month and was determined by reviewing historical production records under varying weather conditions.

 

Table 2 summarizes the monthly adjustments that were made to the Cal-Am’s production from its sources in the Carmel River Basin and Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin during the 11-year period of analysis, WY 1996 through WY 2006. Columns 2, 3 and 4 show Cal-Am’s unadjusted monthly production from the Carmel River Basin (CRB), Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin (SCS), and Monterey Peninsula Water Resources System (MPWRS), respectively.  The MPWRS value is the sum of the CRB and SCS values and represents Cal-Am’s total monthly production for customers in its main system.  Columns 5, 6 and 7 show the monthly unimpaired inflow at San Clemente Dam, its inflow status[5], and weather condition type, respectively.

Columns 8, 9 and 10 show the first adjustment made to the monthly MPWRS production values. In this first adjustment, all of the values are normalized or adjusted to the normal range.  In this first step, normal monthly values (e.g., 369 AF in October 1995) are unchanged; wet values (e.g., 29,961 AF in February 1996) are increased; and dry or critically-dry values (e.g., 680 AF in December 1999) are decreased.  Columns 11, 12 and 13 and columns 14, 15 and 16 show the second adjustment made to the monthly MPWRS production values.  In this second step, all of the normalized monthly  MPWRS values are increased as if all of the months during the period of analysis had been dry (columns 11, 12, and 13) or critically-dry (columns 14, 15, and 16), respectively. 

 

Table 3 summarizes the unadjusted annual production values and the adjusted normal, dry, and critically-dry year production values by Cal-Am from the MPWRS for customers in Cal-Am’s main system for the period of analysis.  As shown, Cal-Am’s average annual unadjusted production from the MPWRS was 14,710 AFY.  Cal-Am’s average annual adjusted production from the MPWRS, assuming each month during the period of analysis had been normal, would have been 15,095 AFY or approximately 2.5% greater than reported.  Table 3 also shows that Cal-Am’s average annual adjusted production from the MPWRS, assuming each month during the period of analysis had been dry, would have been 15,474 AFY or approximately 5.2% greater than reported.  Similarly, Table 3 shows that Cal-Am’s average annual adjusted production from the MPWRS, assuming each month during the period of analysis had been critically-dry, would have been 15,858 AFY or approximately 7.8% greater than reported.  While it is unlikely that every month during the 132-month period of analysis would have been critically-dry, the critically-dry year values provide a worst-case basis for assessing the effect of weather on water production during the period of analysis.

 

If the adjustment factor for critically-dry years (7.8%) is applied to Cal-Am’s average annual unadjusted production from Carmel River sources during the period of analysis (11,015 AFY, see Table 1) and also applied to Cal-Am’s average annual unadjusted production from sources in the coastal area of the Seaside Groundwater Basin during the period of analysis (3,695 AFY, see Table 4), then the weather-adjusted average annual production by Cal-Am from Carmel River and Seaside Coastal sources during the period of analysis assuming constant critically-dry conditions would be  11,874 AFY and 3,983 AFY, respectively.  Notably, there are other factors that have affected the amount of water demanded by customers in Cal-Am’s main system and produced by Cal-Am from its sources in the Carmel River and Seaside Groundwater Basin during the period of analysis. These factors include the threat of action by the SWRCB and significant fines if Cal-Am exceeds the production limit set by Order 95-10, increased water rates, extensive public outreach regarding the need to conserve water, resource management by the District, appreciable unaccounted-for-water losses in Cal-Am’s main distribution system, and new technologies.  Notwithstanding, it is believed that the weather-adjusted production estimates are reasonable and defensible as conservative values and should be used for water supply planning rather than the unadjusted production values that do not account for the wetter-than-normal period of analysis.  Thus, in the following sections the term “weather-adjusted” means that the critically-dry year factor (i.e., 7.8% increase in normal year demand) has been applied to the reported production during the period of analysis.     

 

Section 2:   Cal-Am Replacement Requirements within MPWMD Boundaries

 

Carmel River Replacement Requirement:   Based on the weather-adjusted average annual production estimate by Cal-Am from Carmel River sources for the period of analysis (11,874 AFY) and Cal-Am’s recognized rights to divert Carmel River waters (3,376 AFY), Cal-Am needs to develop 8,498 AFY of replacement supplies to legalize its recent diversions from Carmel River sources for customers in its main distribution system.

     

Seaside Coastal Subareas Replacement Requirement:   Table 4 shows Cal-Am’s annual production from sources in the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin for the period of analysis.  Table 4 also shows Cal-Am’s “eventual” allocation from the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin that was specified in the final decision for the Seaside basin adjudication (California American Water v. City of Seaside, et al., Case No. 66343, Monterey County Superior Court, March 27, 2006). This “eventual” allocation represents Cal-Am’s share of the “Natural Safe Yield” for the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Basin.  As shown, Cal-Am’s annual production from the Coastal Subareas during the period of analysis averaged 3,695 AFY.  Based on the weather-adjusted average annual production estimate by Cal-Am from Seaside Basin coastal sources for the period of analysis (3,983 AFY) and Cal-Am’s eventual allocation to pump water from the Coastal Subareas (1,494 AFY), Cal-Am’s needs to develop 2,489 AFY to comply with the adjudication decision concerning the Coastal Subareas of the basin.

                                                                                                           

Laguna Seca Subarea Replacement Requirement:   In addition to Cal-Am’s replacement requirement in the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Basin under the adjudication decision, Cal-Am also needs to develop replacement supplies for its three smaller systems in the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Basin (i.e., Ryan Ranch, Hidden Hills, and Bishop Units).  Table 5 shows annual production from Cal-Am’s smaller systems in the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin for the period of analysis.  Table 5 also shows Cal-Am’s “eventual” allocation from the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin that was specified in the final decision for the Seaside Basin adjudication.  This “eventual” allocation represents Cal-Am’s share of the “Natural Safe Yield” for the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Basin and is zero because the amount of water allocated to the “Alternative Producers[6]” exceeds the Natural Safe Yield specified for the Laguna Seca Subarea in the final decision.    As shown, Cal-Am’s annual production from the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Basin during the period of analysis averaged 432 AFY.  Based on the weather-adjusted average annual production estimate by Cal-Am from the Laguna Seca Subarea for the period of analysis (466 AFY) and Cal-Am’s eventual allocation to pump water from the Laguna Seca Subarea (0 AFY), Cal-Am’s needs to develop 466 AFY to comply with the adjudication decision and continue to serve its customers in this area.

Los Padres Reservoir Replacement Requirement:   Cal-Am’s replacement requirement for the Carmel River (8,498 AFY) is based on Cal-Am’s water rights that were recognized by the SWRCB in Order 95-10 (3,376 AFY).  These recognized rights included:

(1)   right to divert to storage 2,179 AFY of water at Los Padres Reservoir, based on a post-1914 appropriative right (License 11866),

(2)   right to divert 1,137 AF directly from the Carmel River, based on a pre-1914 appropriative right, and

(3)   right to divert 60 AFY from the Carmel River, based on riparian rights.

If these recognized rights are reduced, then Cal-Am’s replacement requirement for Carmel River sources will increase correspondingly.

In this regard, the continuing sedimentation and loss of storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir can affect the amount of replacement water that Cal-Am is required to develop to cease its unlawful diversions from the Carmel River.  In Order 95-10, the SWRCB reduced the quantity of water that Cal-Am could divert to storage in Los Padres Reservoir under Cal-Am’s licensed right from 3,030 AFY to 2,179 AFY.  This reduction was based on the amount of reservoir storage capacity that Cal-Am had estimated was available in Los Padres Reservoir in 1984 and had provided to the SWRCB as part of the water right hearings in 1992 and 1994. 

It should be noted that, although used by the SWRCB in Order 95-10, the 1984 estimate by Cal-Am is inconsistent with previous and subsequent storage estimates and likely in error.  A more accurate estimate was made by the United States Geological Survey (USGS, 1981[7]) for the District, following the Marble Cone Fire in 1977.  The USGS estimated that the total storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir was 1,950 AF at elevation 1,040 feet in 1978.  Based on this 1978 USGS estimate, and Cal-Am’s most recent estimate of storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir of 1,569 AF at elevation 1,040 feet in 1998, the average annual loss in storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir is approximately 19 AFY (381 AF ) 20 years = 19 AFY).  Assuming that this rate is correct and that average sedimentation conditions have continued over the last eight years, the storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir is now estimated to be 1,417 AF (1,569 AF – 152 AF = 1,417 AF). 

Therefore, if the SWRCB revisited Order 95-10 and applied the same logic regarding current recognized storage rights, i.e., the legal right to divert water to storage is limited by the physical capacity to store water, then Cal-Am’s recognized rights for diversion from the Carmel River could be reduced from 3,376 AFY to 2,766 AFY, based on Cal-Am’s 1998 estimate of storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir, or 2,614 AFY, based on estimated storage capacity in 2006.  In the first case, Cal-Am would need to develop an additional 610 AFY of replacement water.  In the second case, Cal-Am would need to develop an additional 762 AFY of replacement water.  Eventually, unless Cal-Am implements some type of dredging program at Los Padres Reservoir to maintain or recover storage capacity, Cal-Am will need to develop an additional 2,179 AFY of replacement water to comply with Order 95-10 and meet its customers needs.  For purposes of this memorandum, it is recommended that a replacement requirement for lost storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir of 762 AFY should be used, based on estimated current storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir.  If Cal-Am indicates that they do not plan to implement either a maintenance or recovery dredging program at Los Padres Reservoir, then this requirement will need to be revised.  

 

Section 3: Non Cal-Am Replacement Requirements in the Seaside Groundwater Basin

 

Seaside Coastal Subareas Replacement Requirement:   Table 6 shows non Cal-Am annual standard production from sources in the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin for the period of analysis.  The production values shown for “Non Cal-Am Production” include production by the City of Seaside Municipal Water Utility, Granite Rock Company, and DBO Development No. 27.  It should be noted that the reported production from the Granite Rock Company and DBO Development No. 27 has been zero AF for the last nine years, as these wells are either inactive or abandoned.  Table 6 also shows the “eventual” allocation for “Standard” non Cal-Am producers from the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin that was specified in the final decision for the Seaside Basin adjudication.  This “eventual” allocation represents the non Cal-Am standard allocation share of the “Natural Safe Yield” for the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Basin.  As shown, the non Cal-Am annual standard production from the Coastal Subareas during the period of analysis averaged 316 AFY.  Based on the weather-adjusted average annual production estimate for non Cal-Am standard production from the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Basin for the period of analysis (341 AFY) and the non Cal-Am eventual standard allocation to pump water from the Coastal Subareas (155 AFY), the non Cal-Am producers need to develop 186 AFY to comply with the adjudication decision concerning the Coastal Subareas of the basin.  Note that the average annual production value shown in Table 6 is for the WY 1996 – WY 2005 period, because production information for WY 2006 for the non Cal-Am standard producers in the Coastal Subareas is not available at this time.

 

Laguna Seca Subarea Replacement Requirement:   Table 7 shows annual production by the “Alternative” producers in the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin for the period of analysis.  As shown, for the ten-year period (WY 1996 through WY 2005), the non Cal-Am alternative production from the Laguna Seca Subarea averaged 418 AFY.  For the more recent five-year period (WY 2001 through WY 2005), however, the non Cal-Am alternative production from the Laguna Seca Subarea averaged 644 AFY.  Given the significant increase in production during the recent five years, it is recommended that the average annual production during the WY 2001 through 2005 period should be used to more accurately represent current pumping by the non Cal-Am alternative producers in the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin. Table 7 also shows the “eventual” alternative allocation from the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin that was specified in the adjudication decision.  This “eventual” allocation represents the non Cal-Am producers’ share of the “Natural Safe Yield” for the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Basin.  Because the non Cal-Am alternative production allocation exceeds the Natural Safe Yield, the non Cal-Am alternative producers will need to reduce their water demand or develop a replacement supply. As shown, the non Cal-Am annual production from the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Basin during the shortened period of analysis averaged 644 AFY.  Based on the weather-adjusted average annual production estimate for the non Cal-Am producers from the Laguna Seca Subarea for the period of analysis (694 AFY) and the non Cal-Am eventual alternative allocation to pump water from the Laguna Seca Subarea (608 AFY), the non Cal-Am producers in the Laguna Seca Subareas need to develop 86 AFY to comply with the adjudication decision.

Section 4: Summary and Recommendations

 

This technical memorandum provides reasonable and defensible estimates of the amount of water that is produced by Cal-Am to meet existing customer demand in Cal-Am’s water distribution systems within District boundaries.  The production estimates have been adjusted to account for the wetter-than-normal conditions that occurred during the 11-year period of analysis, i.e., Water Years 1996 through 2006.  Specifically, based on results from a monthly analysis, the reported annual production values were increased 7.8% to reflect critically-dry conditions during the period of analysis. The decision to use critically-dry conditions was made to provide a worst-case basis for assessing the effect of weather on reported production during the period of analysis and is considered appropriate for conservative water supply planning purposes.  Based on the adjustments made, Cal-Am’s reported average annual production for customers in its main system during the period of analysis increased from 14,710 AFY to 15,858 AFY, an increase of 1,148 AFY.  This technical memorandum also provides weather-adjusted estimates of the amount of water that is produced by non Cal-Am producers to meet existing needs in the Seaside Groundwater Basin. 

 

These weather-adjusted production values for Cal-Am were compared to Cal-Am’s recognized rights to divert water from the Carmel River and Cal-Am’s adjudicated rights to produce groundwater from the Coastal Subareas and the Laguna Seca Subarea of the Seaside Groundwater Basin to quantify the water supplies that Cal-Am must develop to replace existing unlawful diversions from the Carmel River or production in excess of its eventual adjudicated rights in the Seaside Groundwater Basin.  To comply with SWRCB Order 95-10 and the adjudication decision in the Coastal Subareas, Cal-Am needs to develop 10,987 AFY of replacement supplies.  In addition, to continue to serve its customers in the Laguna Seca Subarea, Cal-Am needs to develop an additional 466 AFY of replacement supplies.  Also, if Cal-Am’s recognized rights to divert Carmel River water were reduced by the SWRCB to reflect the reduced storage capacity in Cal-Am’s Los Padres Reservoir due to sedimentation, then Cal-Am’s replacement requirement to comply with Order 95-10 would increase accordingly.  Based on the current estimated storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir, Cal-Am would need to develop an additional 762 AFY of replacement supplies.  Altogether, assuming critically-dry conditions during the period of analysis, Cal-Am would need to develop 12,215 AFY of replacement supplies to continue to meet existing customer demand for its systems within the District, comply with SWRCB Order 95-10, and conform with the natural safe yield that was specified for the Seaside Groundwater Basin in the adjudication decision.  The replacement requirements for the Cal-Am systems within the District are summarized in Table 8.

 

For this technical memorandum, it was assumed that the project or projects that Cal-Am develops to provide the required replacement supplies would be sized to meet existing non Cal-Am water needs in the Seaside Groundwater Basin.  While Cal-Am is not directly responsible for developing replacement supplies for the non Cal-Am producers in the Seaside Basin, it is reasonable to assume that based on economies of scale, Cal-Am should be able to provide the least costly replacement supplies for the non Cal-Am producers in the Seaside Basin as part of the proposed Coastal Water Project (CWP).  This assumption is consistent with Section III.M.1, California American Obligation to Augment Water Supply, in the Seaside Basin adjudication decision.   In this regard, non Cal-Am production values for the Coastal Subareas and Laguna Seca Subarea were compiled and adjusted for weather conditions, using the same factor as used for Cal-Am production.  The weather-adjusted production values for the non Cal-Am standard producers in the Coastal Subareas and the production values for the non Cal-Am alternative producers in the Laguna Seca Subarea were compared with the non Cal-Am standard producers’ eventual allocation in the Coastal Subareas and with the assumed natural safe yield in the Laguna Seca Subarea to determine non Cal-Am replacement requirements in the Seaside Basin.  These requirements for the Coastal Subareas and Laguna Seca Subarea are 186 AFY and 86 AFY, respectively, and are also shown in Table 8.  If these non Cal-Am replacement requirements in the Seaside Basin are summed (272 AFY) and added to Cal-Am’s replacement requirements, the total replacement requirement is 12,487 AFY.

 

Based on the analysis described above, it is recommended that the yield from any project that is proposed to satisfy the existing water demands within the District should be sized to provide approximately 12,500 AFY of replacement water.  This quantity, coupled with Cal-Am’s legal supplies in the Carmel River Basin and Seaside Groundwater Basin, should be sufficient to serve existing customer demand in Cal-Am’s systems within the District and provide the necessary amount of replacement water for non Cal-Am producers in the Seaside Groundwater Basin.

 

In closing, it should be noted that while the replacement requirement (12,500 AFY) recommended in this technical memorandum to meet existing water needs is within 770 AFY or 7% of the replacement requirement proposed by Cal-Am in their application to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) to build, own, and operate the proposed CWP (11,730 AFY), the derivation of the replacement requirement recommended in this technical memorandum is significantly different and represents current conditions and constraints.  Specifically, the recommended requirement provides 2,232 AFY less water for legalizing unlawful diversions by Cal-Am from the Carmel River (10,730 AFY – 8,498 AFY = 2,232 AFY) consistent with reduced customer demand in Cal-Am’s main distribution system during the recent period of analysis compared to the earlier period that was used by the SWRCB to illustrate the extent of Cal-Am’s unlawful diversions based on average historical conditions between 1979 and 1988.  Conversely, the recommended requirement provides 2,227 AFY more water for balancing existing Cal-Am and non Cal-Am production from the Seaside Groundwater Basin with the natural safe yield of the Seaside Basin than proposed by Cal-Am to address overdraft conditions in the Seaside Basin (3,227 AFY – 1,000 AFY = 2,227 AFY).  Lastly, the recommended requirement includes 762 AFY more water to replace a portion of Cal-Am’s recognized right to store Carmel River water in Los Padres Reservoir.  This portion, which represents the storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir that is estimated to have been lost to sedimentation between 1984 and 2006, was not considered in Cal-Am’s CWP application.       

 

 

U:\Darby\wp\techmemo\2006_02_demand_oct06.doc

Draft 2, November 1, 2006

 



[1] Cal-Am’s “main distribution system” in the Monterey Peninsula area refers to Cal-Am’s largest water distribution system in its Monterey Division.  The service area for Cal-Am’s main system encompasses approximately 44 square miles and includes the cities of Carmel-by-the Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Sand City, Seaside, and Pacific Grove, and portions of unincorporated Monterey County in the Carmel Valley, Del Monte Forest, and Carmel Highland areas.  Cal-Am produces water from the Carmel River, the Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer, and the Coastal Subareas of the Seaside Groundwater Basin to serve customers in its main system. In 2005, Cal-Am served approximately 37,400 active connections in its main distribution system.      

[2] There are approximately 40 parcels within the service area of the main Cal-Am distribution system in the Yankee Point area that are outside the District boundaries. 

[3] A Water Year runs from October 1 through September 30 of the following calendar year.  For example, Water Year 1996 began on October 1, 1995, and ended on September 30, 1996.

[4] A month is classified as “wet” if the unimpaired flow at the San Clemente Dam site in that month is equal to or greater than the 75% exceedence flow value.  Similarly, a month is classified as “normal” if the unimpaired flow at the San Clemente Dam site is between the 75% and 25% exceedence flow values for the specified month.  The month is classified as “dry” if the unimpaired flow at the San Clemente Dam site is between the 25% and 12.5% exceedence flow values.  Finally, the month is classified as “critically-dry” if the unimpaired flow at the San Clemente Dam site in that month is less than the 12.5% exceedence flow value. 

[5] “Wet” conditions are represented by “1”, “normal” conditions by “2”, “dry” conditions by “3”, and “critically-dry” conditions by “4”.

[6] In the Seaside Basin adjudication decision, two types of “allocations” were defined for the various producers in the basin.  The first type, i.e., “Alternative Production Allocation”, referred to a fixed amount of water that could be pumped by each “Alternative Producer” from the basin each year. This first type is analogous to an “overlying” groundwater right. The second type, i.e., “Standard Production Allocation”, referred to the amount of water that a “Standard Producer” could pump each year, calculated as a percentage of the safe yield of the basin available after subtracting the Alternative Producers’ allocations.  This second type is analogous to an “appropriative” groundwater right. 

 

In California, overlying rights allow property owners to pump water from beneath their properties for use on their overlying properties. In contrast, appropriative rights allow producers to use groundwater produced from the basin on non-overlying properties or for municipal supply, which is not considered an overlying use. Overlying rights are considered prior and paramount to appropriative rights.  Usually, appropriators can only pump the amount of groundwater in the basin that is surplus to the cumulative production of the overlying producers.         

 

The “Alternative Producers” in the Laguna Seca Subarea include Pasadera Country Club, Laguna Seca Golf Ranch, York School, and Laguna Seca County Park.

[7] Letter report from Richard M. Bloyd, USGS District Chief, to Bruce Buel, MPWMD General Manager, regarding sediment deposition studies at Los Padres Reservoir in 1977, 1978, and 1980, dated February 10, 1981.