⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 7 findings
F1
The County has done an effective job of managing groundwater resources to date. However, there is no contingency plan in place that details the steps to 17 be taken in case the drought continues and groundwater supplies are further depleted.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
By December 31, 2015, the Napa County Public Works Department to develop a contingency plan, approved by the Board of Supervisors, that lays out the major steps to be taken in the event of severe drought conditions.
F2
Despite the continuing drought and some evidence that aquifers on the Valley floor may not be fully recharging, there appears to be sufficient groundwater available on the Valley floor at this time.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
By June 30, 2016, the Napa County Public Works Department to require major groundwater users to meter and report their water usage on a quarterly basis to ensure all well owners are following prescribed usage rates.
F3
Groundwater is less plentiful on the county’s hillsides, and each parcel must be studied independently. There have been a number of reports of existing wells drying up, and finding water for new wells is often difficult.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
By June 30, 2016, the Napa County Public Works Department to adopt policies to encourage all other groundwater users to meter and monitor their well water usage. RECOMMENDATIONS – RECYCLED WATER 18
F4
The County cannot enforce their usage restrictions effectively because they do not monitor usage of groundwater or enforce limits on groundwater extraction. FINDINGS – RECYCLED WATER
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
NSD to immediately begin exploring additional opportunities to expand their wastewater storage and infrastructure capacity through funds that may be available from the passage of California Proposition 1, the $7.1 Billion “Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014.”
F5
The lack of adequate storage capacity and the need for additional infrastructure prevent NSD from maximizing the amount of recycled water that could be processed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
By June 30, 2016, NSD and the City of Napa Water Department to begin negotiations to extend the current agreement that requires NSD to reimburse the Water Department for lost revenue when a city water customer converts to recycled water.
F6
There have been no discussions to date to renew the agreement between NSD and the City of Napa Water Department, expiring in 2017, requiring NSD to reimburse the city one year’s revenue for every customer converted from city water to recycled water.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
By December 31, 2015, that NSD and the City of Napa Water Department to begin working with local officials, lobbying groups, and trade associations to persuade the State to fund the conversion of Napa State Hospital to recycled water for their irrigation purposes.
F7
Napa State Hospital could cut their potable water usage substantially if they converted their irrigation system to recycled water.
No recommendations for this finding
No Responses Found 3
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Napa
City
Napa County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office
Napa Sanitation District
Special District