Managing Regional Water Supplies Are There Better Solutions?

Conclusions 12

• CL1
  No single entity has decision or enforcement power within Santa Barbara County to lead regional planning.
• CL2
  Additional supply sources such as desalination and recycled water are available to localized agencies but there is no concerted effort to develop them regionally.
• CL3
  The South Coast Conduit pipeline system is unable to accommodate peak water demand levels and is susceptible to single point failure.
• CL4
  The Upper Reach Reliability Project portion of the South Coast Conduit pipeline was not completed as originally planned.
• CL5
  Critical pipeline infrastructure, including redundancy, has not been developed throughout southern Santa Barbara County.
• CL6
  Funding under Propositions 50, 84 and 1E has not yet been granted to the County of Santa Barbara for the Cooperating Partners of Santa Barbara County Integrated Regional Water Management’s prioritized list of water supply projects.
• CL7
  The meetings of the Cachuma Operations and Maintenance Board do not adequately reveal to the public the competing and conflicting objectives.
• CL8
  The Tecolote Tunnel is a single point failure location that is in urgent need of maintenance and reinforcement.
• CL9
  None of the Santa Barbara County south coast water purveyors has established capital replacement accounts.
• CL10
  Assist all water agencies throughout the County to secure Federal and State grants that enable these purveyors to generate additional sources and employ more efficient systems for delivery;
• CL11
  Manage the Lake Cachuma water supplies to the south coast and secure the long-term reliable delivery of that water to purveyors;
• CL12
  Set priorities for management for all water resources in the County. The Santa Barbara County Water Agency comes closest to being that independent, impartial, forward- thinking agency capable of achieving these three objectives. The Santa Barbara County Cooperating Partners already recognizes the SBCWA as the lead agency. The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors must aggressively encourage the United States Bureau of Reclamation to designate the Santa Barbara County Water as the agency to manage Lake Cachuma’s water supplies when the Lake Cachuma contract is renewed in 2020. 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 14 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . Finding 1 No single entity has decision or enforcement power within Santa Barbara County to lead regional planning.

Observations 2

• OB1
  Well and Aquifer Recharging When Bradbury Dam is spilling, water is available at no charge to participating water districts. Both Goleta and Carpinteria are heavily dependent upon wells. Goleta derives about 48 percent of its supply from wells, and Carpinteria 71 percent. The City of Santa Barbara has diverse supply sources, of which well water is about 24 percent 4. Increasing Cachuma drafting (drawing down) while it is spilling, and injecting the water into aquifers through the wells, would increase the volume stored there and reduce the probability of seawater intrusion in future dry years. There are, of course, issues associated with reinjection. The most important are:  Water being injected must be treated to drinkable standards before being reinjected.  The well must be returned to the extraction mode to flush out mineral deposits (typically once each week for 24 hours) during the reinjection process.  The reinjection technology is relatively new. Not all wells can accommodate reinjection.  Water extracted during flushing is non-potable and must be discharged to either the storm drain or the sanitary sewer system. These are the primary factors which show that potable reinjection is not an easy answer and has different ramifications for each purveyor. This technique is also costly. The Carpinteria Water District extracts water from five wells, two of which are currently on standby status. All five wells have recharge capability. Carpinteria’s potable reinjection permitting process is underway. The permit application and supporting information are completed, but will not be submitted until Bradbury Dam starts to spill. This is because the permit is only valid for 24 months, so it would be counter-productive to be permitted during a time when there is no water to reinject. 4 Santa Barbara County Public Works Department, (2014, October 14), “Water Supply.” Retrieved from http://cosb.countyofsb.org/pwd/pwwater.aspx?id=3726 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 6 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES Goleta Water District (GWD) owns 11 wells, 9 of which are currently operating. All of these wells have potable reinjection capability. The GWD intends to begin reinjection permitting discussions with the Regional Water Board as provided for under California Water Quality Order # 2012-0010. The City of Santa Barbara operates eight wells, of which four can accommodate reinjection. The other four were drilled about 20 years ago, when reinjection was not yet a proven technology. Only two wells are currently being operated; the other six were shut down on March 1, 2017 to allow the groundwater basin to recharge. The Jury was informed that the City of Santa Barbara has started the permitting process to allow reinjection when Bradbury Dam spills. Because Santa Barbara receives only about a quarter of its supply from groundwater, they are less enthusiastic than some of the other water agencies about exploiting this potential source. The Montecito Water District derives only 14 percent of its supply from groundwater and is heavily dependent on Lake Cachuma. If the Tecolote Tunnel were to fail, Montecito would be disproportionately affected in a negative manner. Montecito owns eight wells, four of which produce potable water. None of the Montecito wells are rechargeable.
• OB2
  Increase Lake Cachuma Useful Storage Capacity: Storage capacity of Lake Cachuma and all of the other reservoirs along the Santa Ynez River, Gibraltar Reservoir, and Jamison Reservoir, has been steadily diminishing over time due to siltation. The feasibility of removing the silt during periods when water levels are low has been investigated several times. The conclusion was the same each time. The number of trucks required was so large, and the time required would be so long, along with environmental concerns, that this approach is not feasible. This does not mean, however, that nothing can be done to increase the amount of stored water. Prudent management indicates that Cachuma should be drafted (drawn down) heavily during the year after the dam spills. This action would lower the lake level, thereby allowing it to accept more inflow, increasing capacity during wet years for future dry years. There is, of course, a potential downside as well; in the final years of a prolonged drought, such as the County just experienced, available supply from the lake could be reduced. Nevertheless, it appears that there are significant potential advantages in increasing drafting from Lake Cachuma while it is spilling and during the following year. The Jury learned that all of the water purveyors contacted are aware of this fact and are prepared to take the necessary steps to do so. 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 7 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES Resource Management Strategies The Santa Barbara County Integrated Regional Water Management Cooperating Partners (see Appendix D), comprises 35 city and County public works, water delivery and processing agencies, was established to satisfy the mandate of Proposition 50 for a more regionally oriented approach to water management issues. They issued a preliminary Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) in 2007, which was updated in 20135. Following are some examples that were designated as local Resource Management Strategies (RMS) in that plan: Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage Using and managing groundwater supplies to ensure sustainable groundwater yields while maintaining groundwater-dependent beneficial uses, including coordinating management of groundwater and surface water supplies (conjunctive use). System reoperation was selected as a RMS by the IRWM Region. The Region is reliant on groundwater as a major source of water supply. The Region selected several groundwater management strategies that collectively will increase the supply of groundwater. For example, the City of Santa Maria uses treated wastewater to help recharge groundwater supplies. Those strategies include: Conjunctive Use and Groundwater Management, Efficiency and Conservation Measures, Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer Remediation, Prevention of Contamination and Salt Water Intrusion, and Recharge Area Protection. Desalination Developing potable water supplies through desalination of seawater, including disposal of waste brine. Desalination was selected as a RMS by the IRWM Region. The City of Santa Barbara owns a desalination facility that was just brought into operation. The relatively high cost of desalination makes the desalination plant the last supply option to be used during drought periods. Recycled Municipal Water Recycled Municipal Water was selected as a RMS by the IRWM Region. The Region currently produces 4,177 AF per year6 of recycled water and plans on expanding production to 7,035 AF per year by 2035. Recycled water is distributed by Goleta Water District, the City of Santa Barbara, and Laguna County Sanitation District. The City of Lompoc also has a regional Reclamation Plant for treatment and disposal. The use of recycled water has the added benefit of reducing wastewater discharge into the ocean, which is a highly valued outcome in the Region. 5 Santa Barbara County Water Resources Division, (2013), “2013 Final IRWM Plan.” Retrieved from http://cosb.countyofsb.org/irwmp/irwmp.aspx?id=42010 6 Average use of water in a Santa Barbara household is 0.5 AF per year. 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 8 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES The Best Way to Manage a Regional Surface Water Supply System Day-to-day operation of the Cachuma Project is currently the responsibility of the Cachuma Operation and Maintenance Board (COMB). COMB is a Joint Powers Agency (JPA). It was formed with five members, identified as Cooperating Member Units (CMU) in Figure 4 found on page 12, consisting of Santa Ynez Improvement District 1 (ID1), Goleta Water District (GWD), Santa Barbara City (SBC) Montecito Water District (MWD) and Carpinteria Valley Water District (CVWD). GWD and SBC are larger than the other three districts. Therefore, GWD and SBC have two votes each and the remaining three districts have one vote for all matters before the COMB Board. Additionally, any project that will cost a million dollars or more requires a unanimous vote by the COMB Board, and ratification by the Boards of Directors of all the CMUs. ID1 unilaterally terminated their relationship with COMB last year after a dispute over finances and management of the Fish Management Plan. Whether the ID1 actually has the authority to do so has not been determined. COMB is charged with operating and maintaining the infrastructure of surface water delivery from the North Portal, located at Lake Cachuma (where water enters the Tecolote Tunnel); the Tecolote Tunnel, and the South Coast Conduit (SCC), which is a single 26 mile pipe line from the South Portal near Glen Annie in Goleta, to Carpinteria. The SCC supplies water to GWD, SBC, MWD, and CVWD. During good rain years Lake Cachuma provides 80 percent of the water to the four south coast water districts. COMB does not maintain the Bradbury Dam. That function is performed by the United States Bureau of Reclamation, which also owns the Dam. The COMB Board meets regularly once a month at 2:00 p.m. on the fourth Monday of each month. The meetings are noticed, agendas posted, and open to the public as required by the Brown Act. Unfortunately, because of the meeting time, members of the public that have regular jobs are often unable to attend. The meetings are audio taped and available to the public. However, the recording quality is poor, much detail is lost, and it is difficult to determine who is speaking. It would help the public to understand the unique facets of the COMB’s management challenges if the meetings were televised for live broadcast and posted on the COMB website. The 2015-16 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury wrote a report titled, Lake Cachuma, Protecting a Valuable Resource. Recommendation 8 for the member units of COMB was: “That the member units, in conjunction with the Santa Barbara County Water Agency, create consistent policies and procedures that govern conservation efforts especially during times of a severe drought and that these are documented in the subcontracts between the Santa Barbara County Water Agency and the member units.” All member units responded similarly to this recommendation. Basically, the responses all stated that each water district was unique. Their water sources, needs, conservation policies and interests are different. Therefore, they could not be governed by one set of guidelines that applied to all of the member units. This uniqueness of interests makes the governance of COMB challenging. Smaller projects, less than $1,000,000, require a simple majority. Larger projects require a unanimous vote. As an example, last year the issue of moving the barge in Lake Cachuma, which pumps water to the North Portal of the Tecolote Tunnel when the Lake water level drops, came to COMB Directors. One member, ID1, who 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 9 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES was not benefited by the use of the barge, voted against the motion because ID1 was worried that the other CMUs would “steal” its water in the Lake. If not for some last minute legal maneuvers, the barge would not have moved. Without moving the barge, GWD, SBC, MWD, and CVWD would not have received any water during the past year from the State Water project. Water in Lake Cachuma is not just rainwater or fed by the river and upper dam systems. It includes State Water; the Semitropic Water Storage District Groundwater Banking Program, located in Kern County (the Montecito Water District is the only Partner in this Program in Santa Barbara County), or any purchased from California delta rice farmers; and water stored at San Luis Reservoir in Monterey County. All are delivered through the State Water Pipeline. These are water sources for the four south coast water districts which require passage into Lake Cachuma then through the Tecolote Tunnel and to the South Coast Conduit for transport to the respective districts. Additional water sources are the wells managed by the four south coast purveyors. The well systems used by three of the four CMUs are expected to last about five years before being exhausted if pumping continues at the current flow rate. Recharging wells will also be severely limited, should the Tunnel or the South Coast Conduit fail to function and no Lake water is delivered. A failure of the Tunnel or the South Coast Conduit would shut down the supply of water from Lake Cachuma. No redundant (parallel) pipeline exists to convey water supplied through the Tecolote Tunnel or the SCC. One should be considered. Any repair of the existing line would not be easily accomplished: “When a section of the pipeline needs to be isolated for emergencies or repair there is no easy fix. In addition, dewatering a section of the Conduit is a lengthy process, greatly reducing its operational flexibility and reliability. Due to the age and material from which it is constructed, the pipe is inherently difficult to repair or modify.”7 The need for system redundancy has been studied several times throughout the years. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has a suitable easement, running the length of the SCC, which could be utilized for an additional pipeline or expansion of the existing pipe. Eventually a segmented plan was proffered and a second pipeline was initiated when the Modified Upper Reach Reliability Project began: “The purpose of the project is to increase the operational flexibility, reliability, and capacity of the Conduit, between the South Portal of Tecolote Tunnel and Corona Del Mar Water Treatment Plant. The increase in operational flexibility, reliability, and capacity are intended to accommodate peak demand levels and to allow maintenance of the pipeline.”8 The project was funded by Proposition 50 (Water Quality Supply and Safe Drinking Water Projects Act), which required a portion of matching funds from the CMUs. This was to be the first leg of a redundant system. However, Carpinteria Valley Water District did not feel the project was to its benefit and refused to contribute any more funds. The project was defunded and truncated prior to completion. The pipe does connect to the aged SCC but only extends part way to the Corona del Mar Treatment plant and accomplishes little of the original desired outcome. 7 United States Bureau of Reclamation, (2010, November) “South Coast Conduit Modified Upper Reach Reliability Project.” .” Retrieved from https://www.google.com/search?q=footnote+website&rlz=1C1QJDB_enUS639US650&oq=foo&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j6 9i59j35i39j0l3.5786j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=footnote+website+apa. 8 ibid 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 10 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES A second pipeline is needed to ensure uninterrupted provision of water to all consumers on the south coast through their various water purveyors. Are there other management alternatives that should be investigated? The Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA) was formed to design, construct and operate the facilities needed to bring SWP water to the agencies that contracted to receive that water as a supplemental source. Since the SWP is considered an interruptible supply, all CCWA participants have other sources of water. There are 12 CCWA project participants in Santa Barbara County. They are discussed in Appendix C. The Jury is not aware of any current plans to expand the charter of CCWA to include the management and/or distribution of recycled water or local groundwater. Since its establishment, the Santa Barbara County Cooperating Partners (Partners) has been very successful in attracting grants from Proposition 50 and Proposition 84 (the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006). Through calendar year 2013, more than $30 million was obtained. Proposition 84 stipulates that $52 million must be awarded to the Central Coast Region (which includes Santa Barbara County). The Central Coast Region is also included in Proposition 1-E (The Disaster Preparedness and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2006), which totaled $800 million statewide. Matching funds of 50 percent are required of project proponents in order to obtain Proposition 1-E funding. The Jury finds that the management structure of the Partners is not suitable to operate as the lead management agency. The Santa Barbara County Water Agency (SBCWA) has been functioning as the Lead Agency (Program Manager) of the Integrated Regional Water Management Program since its inception. The SBCWA has the technical expertise to set priorities and manage overall water resources, but not the mandate. The County usually acts as the grantee with the State for grant contracts, utilizing sub-grant agreements with Partners which is successful in receiving funding for its nominated projects. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has expressed the desire that the new contract in 2020 remain with the County and that the Integrated Water Management Plan designate the SBCWA as “single contracting entity” for this contract. Figure 4 shows the interrelationships between the various County water purveyors, regulatory agencies, and constituent groups associated with managing the south coast surface water supply. 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 11 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES Figure 4 – Surface Water Management and Operation Structure in Santa Barbara County During a December 2016 meeting sponsored by the Governor’s Drought Task Force, the California Office of Emergency Management (OEM) indicated that state funding could be made available for water distribution system improvements IF there is greater cooperation and coordination between the water purveyors within the County.9 It is unclear whether these would be Proposition 50 funds, Proposition 84 funds, or funding from some other source. This action appears to be a recognition by the State that the present water management system is problematic. The meeting purpose was to begin development of a prioritized list of water projects for State funding. The OEM established an “Action Working Group” and directed them to prepare a proposal that the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors (BOS) could submit to the State to implement the highest priority items for funding. This proposal was presented to the BOS on February 11, 2017. The recommended project list included seven items, as follows: 9 See Board of Supervisors Agenda Letter 4/11/2017 and attachments 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 12 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES “Additional Water Supplies  Reacquisition of Suspended Table “A” Water[10]  Recommissioning and Expansion of Regional Desalination Facility  Water Reuse – Goleta  Water Reuse – Carpinteria Protection of Existing Resources  Treatment Facilities for Removal of Hexavalent Chromium from Groundwater  Temporary Emergency Pumping System at Lake Cachuma  Interagency Intertie Project Between Goleta and Santa Barbara” The Jury was told by every person interviewed that no budget or plan currently exists for major repairs to our 70-year-old surface water distribution system within the south coast and some segments are older, some are newer. Critical for the more effective operation of Lake Cachuma and its water distribution system is who will manage and operate it under the new contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Neither COMB, CCWA nor the SBCWA currently have authority over the independent water purveyors on the south coast. Chapter 2 of the IRWMP designates the SBCWA as the Lead Agency (Project Manager). It also designated the SBCWA as the “single eligible contracting entity” for the new contract with the USBR. However, the SBCWA does not appear to have any enforcement and/or prioritization authority. According to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) executed in 2006, the key IRWMP implementation organization is the Cooperating Partners Steering Committee. Decisions are made by majority vote of the Cooperating Partners participating in the meeting, with each signatory of the MOU having one vote. In summary, the Jury found there are several steps that can be taken to improve the efficiency of the water distribution system. The Resource Management Strategy listing in the IRWMP is a good first step. Regarding water supply governance and recognition of the need for a more regional emphasis, the IRWMP group led by the SBCWA appears to be the logical management entity, if the SBCWA acts more proactively than it has in the past. 10 An annual fixed percentage of State Water allocated to each member unit of COMB. 2016-17 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 13 MANAGING REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIES

No Responses Found 7

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.