Increasing Water Recycling: a Win-Win for Orange County

Recommendations 8

• R1

  Page 18
  Orange County Sanitation District should conduct a study of possible methods of 10 increasing the amount of processed wastewater sent to Orange County Water District, including timelines and noting any barriers that may prevent increasing REPORT flow, and implement the most cost effective method to reduce the amount of 11 imported water to Orange County. (F.1.) (F.2.) (F.7.)
• R2

  Page 18
  Orange County Water District should conduct a study of possible methods of REPORT increasing the amount of processed wastewater and implement the most cost 12 effective method to reduce the amount of imported water to Orange County. (F.2.) (F.3.) (F.7.) REPORT 13
• R3

  Page 18
  South Orange County Wastewater Authority should conduct a study of possible methods of increasing the amount of processed wastewater and implement the most cost effective method to reduce the amount of imported water to Orange REPORT County. (F. 5.) (F. 8.) 14
• R4

  Page 18
  The El Toro Water District, the City of San Clemente, the Santa Margarita Water REPORT District, and the Trabuco Canyon Water District should conduct a study of 15 possible methods of increasing the amount of processed wastewater and implement the most cost effective method to reduce the amount of imported REPORT water to Orange County. (F.6.) 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury REPORT Increasing Water Recycling: A Win-Win for Orange County 1 REPORT REQUIRED RESPONSES 2 The California Penal Code section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, REPORT to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and 3 recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report REPORT (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings 4 and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected REPORT official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to 5 the Board of Supervisors. REPORT Furthermore, California Penal Code section 933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as 6 follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of REPORT the following: 7 (1) The respondent agrees with the finding REPORT 8 (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. REPORT 9 (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: REPORT 10 (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. REPORT (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented 11 in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the REPORT scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be 12 prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when REPORT applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of 13 the Grand Jury report. REPORT (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or 14 is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel REPORT matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the 15 agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those REPORT budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury REPORT Increasing Water Recycling: A Win-Win for Orange County 1 response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the REPORT findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code REPORT section 933.05 are required from: 3 Responses Required: REPORT 1. Responses to Findings F.1., F.2. and Recommendation R.1. are required 4 from the Board of Directors of the Orange County Sanitation District. 2. Responses to Findings F.1., F.3., F.7., and Recommendation R.2. are REPORT required from the Board of Directors of the Orange County Water District. 5 3. Responses to Findings F.5., F.8., and Recommendation R.3. are required from the Board of Directors of the South Orange County Wastewater REPORT Authority. 6 4. Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the Board of Directors of the El Toro Water District. 5. Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the REPORT Mayor of the City of San Clemente. 7 6. Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the Board of Directors of the Santa Margarita Water District. REPORT 7. Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the 8 Board of Directors of the Trabuco Canyon Water District. 8. Response to Finding F.4. is required from the Board of Directors of the Irvine REPORT Ranch Water District. COMMENDATIONS REPORT The 2014-2015 Grand Jury commends the OC Sanitation District and the OC 10 Water District for the partnership they developed to recycle wastewater for the beneficial use of north and central OC residents. Last year’s average of 77 mgpd of recycled REPORT water reduces dependence on more expensive imported water at a time when the 11 amounts of external water supplies are stressed by the State’s prolonged drought. The 2014-2015 Grand Jury commends the Irvine Ranch Water District for the REPORT years of recycling water for landscape irrigation leadership. Last year they recycled over 12 92% of the wastewater they received. REPORT REFERENCES 13 State of water, summer 2013: A call for investing in reliability.[Pamphlet]. (2013). Municipal Water District of Orange County. REPORT Municipal Water District of Orange County (2014). Water rates and charges. Retrieved from http://www.mwdoc.com/pages.php?id_pge=166 REPORT 15 REPORT 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury REPORT Increasing Water Recycling: A Win-Win for Orange County 1 REPORT APPENDIX: 2 GLOSSARY AF. Acre-Foot. The amount of water needed to cover an acre (approximately a football REPORT field) one foot deep, or 325,900 gallons. One acre-foot can support the annual indoor 3 and outdoor needs of between one and two households per year, and, on average, three acre-feet are needed to irrigate one acre of farmland. REPORT Aquifer. A geologic formation of sand, rock and gravel through which water can pass 4 and which can store, transmit, and yield significant quantities of water to wells and springs. REPORT 5 Groundwater. Water that occurs beneath the land surface and fills partially or wholly pore spaces of the alluvium, soil, or rock formation in which it is situated. Does not REPORT include water which is being produced with oil in the production of oil and gas or in a 6 bona fide mining operation. Groundwater basin. A groundwater reservoir defined by all the overlying land surface REPORT and the underlying aquifers that contain water stored in the reservoir. Boundaries of 7 successively deeper aquifers may differ and make it difficult to define the limits of the basin. REPORT 8 Groundwater Replenishment System (GRS). An OCWD/OCSD joint project being developed to provide up to 100,000 acre-feet of reclaimed water annually for groundwater replenishment. Treated wastewater will undergo further treatment at REPORT OCWD-using the same technology as bottled water companies-before it is piped 9 northward along the Santa Ana River to replenish the groundwater basin in the inland part of the county. Visit the GWR System website (http://www.gwrsystem.com). REPORT 10 Imported water. Water that has originated from one hydrologic region and is transferred to another hydrologic region. Metropolitan Water District of Southern REPORT California(MET) imports water from the Colorado River and Northern California. MET’s 11 agency in OC is the Municipal Water District of OC (MWDOC). Potable water. Suitable and safe for drinking. REPORT 12 Primary treated water. First major treatment in a wastewater treatment facility, usually sedimentation removal but not biological oxidation. REPORT Recycling. A type of reuse, usually involving running a supply of water through a closed 13 system again and again. Legislation in 1991 legally equates the term “recycled water” to reclaimed water. REPORT 14 Santa Ana River Basin Aquifer. That portion of the Santa Ana River that is located within OC. REPORT Secondary Treatment. Generally, a level of treatment that produces 85 percent 15 removal efficiencies of biological oxygen demand and suspended solids. Usually carried out through the use of trickling filters or by the activated sludge process. REPORT 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury REPORT Increasing Water Recycling: A Win-Win for Orange County 1 Tertiary treatment. The treatment of wastewater beyond the secondary or biological REPORT stage. Normally implies the removal of nutrients, such as phosphorous and nitrogen, 2 and a high percentage of suspended solids. REPORT Wastewater. Water that has been previously used by municipality/residences, industry 3 or agriculture and has suffered a loss of quality as a result of use. REPORT 4 REPORT 5 REPORT 6 REPORT 7 REPORT 8 REPORT 9 REPORT 10 REPORT 11 REPORT 12 REPORT 13 REPORT 14 REPORT 15 REPORT 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury
• R5

  Page 13
  Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the REPORT Mayor of the City of San Clemente. 7
• R6

  Page 14
  Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the Board of Directors of the Santa Margarita Water District. REPORT
• R7

  Page 14
  Responses to Findings F.6., and Recommendation R.4. are required from the 8 Board of Directors of the Trabuco Canyon Water District.
• R8

  Page 14
  Response to Finding F.4. is required from the Board of Directors of the Irvine REPORT Ranch Water District. 9