July 9, 2024
4:00 p.m.
In Chambers
Council Chambers
99 E. Ramsey Street
Banning, CA 92220
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Agenda Items Only
3. WORKSHOP
3.1 Update and Discussion on the City Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade Project
4. ADJOURNMENT
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL - SPECIAL MEETING (WORKSHOP)
CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA
The following information comprises the agenda for the regular meeting of the Banning City Council, a joint meeting of the City Council and Banning Utility Authority, and the Banning City Council sitting in its capacity as the Banning Successor Agency Board.
Per City Council Resolution 2016-44, matters taken up by the Council before 10 p.m. may be concluded, but no new matters shall be taken up except upon a unanimous vote of the council members present and voting. Such an extension shall only be valid for one hour and each hour thereafter shall require a renewed action for the meeting to continue.
Recommendation: Discussion Only
AFFIDAVIT • DECLARACIÓN JURADA
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED under the laws of the State of California that the above agenda was posted on the City's website (www.banningca.gov) as well as the Bulletin Board at Banning City Hall, located at 99 E Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220, at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting.
__________________________
Caroline Patton, Administrative City Clerk
Secretario adjunto de la ciudad
City Council - Special Meeting (Workshop) Agenda
July 9, 2024
1 PUBLIC NOTICE • NOTICIA PÚBLICA
Meeting Agendas and Notices
Interested in receiving email and/or text notifications of upcoming City Council meetings? Sign up for meeting notifications through the City's website. Pursuant to amended Government Code §54957.5(b), staff reports and other public records related to open session agenda items are available on the City's website (www.banningca.gov/).
Public Comment
Agenda Items
Any member of the public may address this meeting of the City Council on any item appearing on the agenda. A five-minute limitation shall apply to each member of the public and no member of the public shall be permitted to share their time with any other person.
Non-Agenda Items
Any member of the public may address this meeting of the City Council on any item which does not appear on the regular meeting agenda but is of interest to the general public and is an item upon which the City Council may act. A three-minute limitation shall apply to each member of the public and no member shall be permitted to share their time with any other person. No action shall be taken, nor discussion held by the City Council, on any item which does not appear on the agenda, unless the action is otherwise authorized in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (b) of §54954.2 of the Government Code.
Special Assistance/Accessibility Requests
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, any member of the public may request that the agenda and agenda packet be mailed to them. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting (such as translation services), please contact the City Clerk's Office. Advanced notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will allow the city to make arrangements to ensure your accessibility.
¿Necesita servicios de traducción para participar? Contacto Oficina del Secretario de la Ciudad.
CONTACT • CONTACTO
City Clerk's Office | 951-922-3102 | [email protected] 99 East Ramsey Street, Banning, California 92220
City Council - Special Meeting (Workshop) Agenda
July 9, 2024
2 CITY OF BANNING
STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Douglas Schulze, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Art Vela, Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: July 9, 2024
SUBJECT: Update and Discussion on the City Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade Project
RECOMMENDATION:
Discussion Only
BACKGROUND:
Wastewater Treatment Plant
The City of Banning Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), also known as the Water Reclamation Facility, provides for the collection, treatment, and disposal of municipal sewage. The WWTP dates back to 1925 and began to see significant additions beginning in 1950’s and the last major renovation occurring in the early 2000’s. Currently, the WWTP treatment process consists of preliminary, primary, secondary, disinfection (currently not in use), and sludge disposal.
The WWTP has a design treatment capacity of 3.6 million gallons per day (MGD) and typical average daily discharges range from 2.0 MGD to 2.1 MGD into 10 unlined evaporation/percolation ponds. The treated effluent then percolates into the groundwater of the San Gorgonio Hydraulic Unit. Groundwater from this basin is used for municipal and industrial applications.
In 2007, the City contracted Parsons to evaluate treatment technologies for a 1.5 MGD water reclamation facility (WRF) for the production of recycled water. Treatment alternatives investigated included oxidation ditch (OD), conventional activated sludge (CAS), and membrane bioreactor (MBR).
The purpose of the evaluation was to determine the best option to comply with future Title 22 requirements for the beneficial reuse of recycled water. Parsons determined an MBR system was the best treatment option and completed a 90% design package of the WRF. Unfortunately, the project never reached 100% design and was terminated for various reasons. 2016 Regional Water Quality Control Board Order
On June 30, 2016, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region (RWQCB) adopted Board Order R7-2016-0015 (Board Order), which describes the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) and other terms and conditions of operation for the City’s WWTP. The Board Order requires the WWTP to remove constituents that present the greatest risk to groundwater quality such as nitrogen, coliforms, and total dissolved solids (TDS).
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for Nitrate as Nitrogen (TN) is 10 mg/L. Currently, the average TN concentration in the WWTP’s effluent is 29 mg-N/L, well above the future TN limit of 10 mg-N/L specified in the Board Order. 3 As a result, the Board Order required the City to conduct a nitrogen removal analysis and to summarize the findings in a technical report that includes a tentative work plan and time schedule for the installation and implementation of nitrogen removal treatment alternatives. The final technical report (Nitrogen Removal Feasibility Study), attached hereto, was completed and submitted to the RWQCB by the due date of June 30, 2020.
The City has had plans for the development of a Title 22 compliant recycled water source dating back to the early 2000’s and for this reason, the scope of the Nitrogen Removal Feasibility Study was expanded beyond complying with TN limits and included discharge requirements related to the use of recycled water.
Additionally, the Board Order requires that the City submit a plan for capacity improvements to the RWQCB once the WWTP reaches 80% of its design capacity, or 2.88 MGD. 2018 Integrated Master Plan
In 2016 the Public Works Department set out to develop new master plans for the City’s water, wastewater and future recycled water systems, which were previously updated in 2006. The final document resulted in a combined plan titled the Integrated Master Plan (IMP). The objective of the IMP was to develop capital improvement plans that would guide the City in the planning and development of water, wastewater and recycled water system facilities to meet system performance for existing customers as well as to support anticipated demands through the City’s buildout.
The IMP projected that the City would reach 80% capacity by 2025 (although could be later if development slows down) and have a buildout wastewater flow of 6.35 MGD. 2020 UWMP
On June 8, 2021 the City Council approved Resolution 2021-50, adopting the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The UWMP is a planning document with a 20-year planning horizon that assess the water supply and water demand for the City. As part of the assessment all current water supplies and in the future water supplies are include as part of the City’s water supply portfolio, which includes the use of recycled water to supplement potable demands (i.e. irrigation demands) and for groundwater recharge.
Owner Advisor
On December 13, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution 2022-14UA, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to N2W Engineering ("N2W") to provide Owner Advisor ("OA") services for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement project.
N2W has assisted the City in further review of available technologies and confirmed that an MBR system would be the best solution for the City. N2W also prepare a Feasibility Report. Additionally, they prepared to grant applications for the City: (1) Water Recycling Funding Program Planning grant application which led to an award of $300,000 and (2) WaterSMART: Title XVI WIIN Act Water Reclamation and Reuse Program which unfortunately the City did not win.
N2W also assisted in the preparation of a scope of work for a Request for Qualifications that lead to the shortlisting of 3 contractors that are prepared to submit proposals for Phase 1 (Design) of the WWTP Upgrade Project.
JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose of this workshop is to present an update on the project, discuss potential next steps and funding options.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City has paid $594,226 to N2W for the work on the project, of which $300,000 will be reimbursed by the Water Recycling Funding Program Planning grant.
4 N2W has prepared cost estimates indicating projected costs of $76,383,509.
Existing applicable fund balances identified to fund the WWTP Improvement Project include:
- Fund 661 - Water Improvement Fund (Approx. Fund Balance = $3,235,000) - Fund 680 - Wastewater Operation Fund (Approx. Fund Balance = $5,840,000) - Fund 681 - Wastewater Improvement Fund (Approx. Fund Balance = $10,875,000) - Fund 682 – Tertiary Fund (Approx. Fund Balance = $8,001,000) The approved rate schedules included in Ordinance 1587 anticipated debt financing to cover the costs of the WWTP Improvement project. Debt financing options include the issuance of bonds and/or loans from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) and i-Bank.
ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
1. R7-2016-0015.pdf
2. Cost Estimate - 3.6 MGD.pdf
3. Site Plan.pdf
4. CC Resolution No. 2021-050.pdf
5. Banning Final 2020 UWMP.pdf
6. UA Resolution No. 2022-14.pdf
5 CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION
ORDER R7-2016-0015
WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS
FOR
CITY OF BANNING, OWNER
SUEZ WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, OPERATOR
BANNING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
BANNING-RIVERSIDE COUNTY
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region (Colorado River Basin Water Board), finds that:
1. The City of Banning (Owner), 99 East Ramsey Street, Banning, California 92220, and Suez Water Environmental Services, Inc., a Delaware-based business entity (Operator), (collectively or individually referred to as Discharger) submitted an application to update the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for the Banning Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP or Facility). The WWTP is located at 2242 East Charles Street, Banning, California 92220, as shown in Attachment A (Vicinity Map), made part of this Board Order by this reference. Suez Water Environmental Services, Inc. maintains an office at the Facility.
2. The City of Banning owns a wastewater collection, treatment and disposal system which provides sewerage service to the city. The WWTP has a design treatment capacity of 3.6 million gallons-per-day (MGD) and currently discharges approximately 2.07 MGD into 10 unlined evaporation/percolation ponds (ponds).
The Facility is located in Section 14, Township 3 South, Range 1 East, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. The Facility’s Assessor’s Parcel Numbers are 532 180 038/532 180 036; and its latitude and longitude coordinates are
33.915194/33.912134 and 116.852411/116.84164, respectively. The Facility is assigned California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS) number CW208668; Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number 7A330100015, and GeoTracker Global ID number WDR100027202.
3. The wastewater treatment plant currently receives industrial wastewater from several businesses within the City of Banning. The Discharger’s Industrial Waste Program issues Industrial User Discharge Permits to verify that these businesses meet the City of Banning’s local ordinance discharge limits, which were determined to ensure that the wastewater treatment plant is protected and can meet effluent standards.
4. The discharge is currently regulated by Board Order (WDRs) 01-022, adopted on May 9, 2001.
6 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 2 5. Board Order 01-022, required the Discharger to construct a groundwater monitoring system in the vicinity of the unlined ponds. The Board Order also required effluent monitoring for Sulfate, Chloride, Fluoride, Aluminum, and Iron until the groundwater monitoring system was installed and groundwater monitoring was initiated. Board Order 01-022, Monitoring and Reporting Program, states that “As soon as Ground Water monitoring commences, these constituents will not be required in Effluent monitoring.” The groundwater monitoring system was completed in August 2007, and effluent monitoring for Sulfate, Chloride, Fluoride, Aluminum, and Iron were discontinued at that time. These constituents have been removed from the monitoring and reporting program for this Board Order as well as the effluent limitations for Chloride, Aluminum, and Iron.
6. The WDRs are being updated to implement the most current laws and regulations applicable to the discharge.
Wastewater Treatment Facility and Discharge
7. The WWTP consists of preliminary treatment, primary treatment, secondary treatment, solids handling, and disinfection (currently not in use), and the disposal ponds. Untreated wastewater flows to the preliminary treatment system, which consists of a mechanical bar screen, compactor, grit removal system, classifier and cyclone separator. Wastewater from the preliminary treatment system flows to two primary clarifiers and is then pumped to two trickling filters. The effluent from the trickling filters flows to the two secondary clarifiers and then to the chlorine contact chamber, which is currently used as a holding tank for the final effluent water sampling and discharge to the percolation ponds. The disinfection units have not been in use since April 2000.
8. Primary sludge from the two primary clarifiers is pumped to the anaerobic digester for further treatment. Secondary sludge from the secondary clarifiers is pumped to the gravity thickener for thickening and then pumped to three anaerobic digesters for further treatment. Sludge wasting from the digester is pumped to the sludge drying beds. The Discharger produces Class B biosolids, and a private contractor hauls the biosolids offsite to a permitted facility for disposal.
9. The Discharger’s Self-Monitoring Reports (SMRs) from January 2011 through December 2015 characterize the WWTP effluent as follows:
Constituent Units Average Maximum Minimum
Flow MGD 2.071 2.238 1.897
20o C BOD5
1 mg/L2 23 27 19
1 5-day biochemical oxygen demand at 20 degrees Celsius. 7 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 3 Constituent Units Average Maximum Minimum
TSS3 mg/L 21 28 16
pH s.u.4 7.3 7.6 7.1
TDS5 mg/L 426 464 380
Nitrate as N mg/L 22 32 12
Total Nitrogen mg/L 29 49 14
Hydrogeologic Conditions
10. Precipitation in the Banning area averages about 12 inches per year. Annual evapotranspiration rate is approximately 56 inches.
11. A drainage course identified as Smith Creek Flood Control Channel is located along the south side of WWTP.
12. There are no domestic wells within 500 feet of the on-site evaporation/percolation ponds.
13. The evaporation/percolation ponds overlay an aquifer of high quality groundwater.
The Discharger’s SMRs show that the depth to groundwater in the vicinity of the WWTF ranges from about 330 feet (MW1) to 630 feet below ground surface (bgs) (MW3).
14. Water supply to the community is from groundwater production wells located in the San Gorgonio Hydrologic Unit, Banning Hydrologic Subunit. TDS in the water supply averages about 204 mg/L, based on data reported in the City of Banning’s SMRs from January 2011 through December 2015.
15. Regional groundwater flow in the area is generally from the west to the east.
16. The Discharger uses a network of three groundwater monitoring wells, one upgradient and two downgradient, to monitor the impact of wastewater discharge to groundwater in the area of the ponds. The locations of the groundwater monitoring 2 Miligrams per Liter
3 Total Suspended Solids
4 Standard pH units
5 Total Dissolved Solids
8 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 4 wells identified as R-1 (MW1), MP-1 (MW2) and C-6 (MW3) are shown in Attachment C (Monitoring Well Locations), made part of this Board Order by reference. The Discharger’s monitoring reports from January 2011 through December 2015 show the following average water quality data for the groundwater monitoring wells:
Column header
omitted in original Units MW1 (downgradient)
MW2
(downgradient)
MW3
(upgradient)
Depth to Groundwater
feet
below
ground
surface
361 410 629
Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 332 252 219
Total Nitrogen mg/L 4 2 1.1
Nitrate as N mg/L 2 2 1.5
Iron mg/L 34 ND ND
Sulfate mg/L 32 18 15
Chloride mg/L 42 35 13
Aluminum mg/L 20 ND ND
Fluoride mg/L 0.4 0.4 0.6
17. The Discharger reports that the soil in the vicinity of the WWTP, from ground surface to 300 bgs, is sand and gravelly sand containing small rocks and boulders. From a depth of 300 to 600 feet bgs, the soil is mostly sand and gravel with spots of brown clay and layers of fine sand and clay.
Basin Plan, Beneficial Uses, and Regulatory Considerations
18. The Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region of California (Basin Plan), which was adopted on November 17, 1993 and amended on November 13, 2012, designates the beneficial uses of ground and surface waters in this Region, and contains implementation programs and policies to achieve water quality objectives, including narrative objectives for ground water quality, in Chapter 3, section IV, Ground Water Objectives.
9 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 5 19. The discharge is within the San Gorgonio Hydrologic Unit, Banning Subunit. The beneficial uses of groundwater in the San Gorgonio Hydrologic Unit include:
a. Municipal Supply (MUN),
b. Industrial Supply (IND), and
c. Agricultural Supply (AGR).
20. This Order implements numeric and narrative water quality objectives for ground and surface waters established by the Basin Plan. The numeric objectives for groundwater designated for municipal and domestic supply are the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) specified in sections 64431, 64444, and 64678 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), and the bacteriological limits specified in section 64426.1 of Title 22, CCR.
21. It is the policy of the State of California that every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes. This order promotes that policy by requiring discharges to meet maximum contaminant levels designed to protect human health and ensure that water is safe for domestic use.
22. Section 13267 of the California Water Code (CWC) authorizes the Colorado River Basin Water Board to require technical and monitoring reports. The Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) establishes monitoring and reporting requirements to implement federal and state requirements.
23. This Order establishes WDRs pursuant to Division 7, Chapter 4, Article 4, of the CWC for discharges that are not subject to regulation under Clean Water Act (CWA) section 402 (33 U.S.C. section 1342).
24. Pursuant to CWC section 13263(g), the discharge of waste is a privilege, not a right, and adoption of this Order does not create a vested right to continue the discharge.
25. The discharge authorized by this Board Order, and treatment and storage facilities associated with discharges of treated municipal wastewater, except for discharges of residual sludge and solid waste, are exempt from the requirements of the Consolidated Regulations for Treatment, Storage, Processing, or Disposal of Solid Waste, as set forth in Title 27, CCR, Division 2, Subdivision 1. This exemption is based on section 20090(a) of Title 27, which states in relevant part that discharges of domestic sewage or treated effluent are exempt provided that such discharges are regulated by WDRs, or for which WDRs have been waived, and which are consistent with applicable water quality objectives, and treatment or storage facilities associated with municipal WWTP's, provided that residual sludges or solid waste from WWTP’s shall be discharged only in accordance with the applicable Title 27 provisions. All of these Title 27 exemption conditions have been met with these WDRs.
10 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 6 Groundwater Degradation
26. State Water Board Resolution 68-16, “Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality Waters of the State”(Resolution 68-16) states:
“Whenever the existing quality of water is better than the quality established in policies as of the date on which such policies become effective, such existing high quality will be maintained until it has been demonstrated to the State that any change will be consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State, will not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial use of such water and will not result in water quality less than that prescribed in the policies.” Resolution 68-16 further states:
“Any activity which produces or may produce a waste or increased volume or concentration of waste and which discharges or proposes to discharge to existing high quality waters will be required to meet waste discharge requirements which will result in the best practicable treatment or control [BPTC] of the discharge necessary to assure that (a) a pollution or nuisance will not occur and (b) the highest water quality consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State will be maintained.”
27. Some degradation of groundwater from the discharge to the ponds is consistent with Resolution 68-16, provided that the degradation:
a. Is confined to a reasonable area;
b. Is minimized by means of full implementation, regular maintenance, and optimal operation of BPTC measures;
c. Is limited to waste constituents typically encountered in domestic wastewater; and
d. Does not result in the loss of any beneficial use as prescribed in the applicable basin plan, or violation of any water quality objective.
28. The discharge of wastewater from the WWTP, as permitted herein, reflects BPTC.
The controls assure the discharge does not create a condition of pollution or nuisance, and that the highest water quality consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State will be maintained, which is consistent with the anti-degradation provisions of Resolution 68-16. The WWTP incorporates:
a. Technology for secondary treated domestic wastewater; b. Solids handling facilities;
c. An operation and maintenance manual;
11 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 7 d. A City ordinance that is comprised of a comprehensive set of rules and regulations governing the design, construction, maintenance and use of public and private sewer facilities within City jurisdictional limits; e. Staffing to assure proper operation and maintenance; f. A network of groundwater monitoring wells; and
g. A standby emergency power generator of sufficient size to operate the treatment plant and ancillary equipment during periods of loss of commercial power.
Accordingly, the discharge as authorized is consistent with the anti-degradation provisions of Resolution 68-16 and the applicable water quality objectives.
Constituents of Concern
29. Constituents of concern in domestic wastewater effluent that present the greatest risk to groundwater quality are nitrogen, coliforms (pathogen-indicator organisms), and TDS. The WWTP provides substantial removal of soluble organic matter, solids, and some nitrogen treatment.
30. Title 22, CCR section 64431, Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Nitrate plus Nitrite as Nitrogen is 10 mg/L. To account for the fate of transport for the various components of Total Nitrogen, as a conservative value it is assumed that all nitrogen present converts to nitrate/nitrite. The City of Banning’s SMRs report an average of 29 mg/L for Total Nitrogen between January 2011 and December 2015.
Because the concentration of total nitrogen in the effluent is elevated, it is probable that nitrates may reach groundwater in concentrations that exceed the MCL prescribed in Title 22, CCR, section 64431. This Board Order will require that the Discharger conduct a nitrogen removal analysis and provide its findings in a technical report that provides a workplan and time schedule for the installation and implementation of nitrogen removal alternatives.
31. While secondary treatment reduces fecal coliform densities by 90 to 99%, the remaining organisms in effluent are still 105to 106 MPN/100 ml (United States Environmental Protection Agency, Design Manual, Municipal Wastewater Disinfection; October 1986). Given the depth to groundwater, it is not likely that pathogen-indicator bacteria will reach groundwater at densities exceeding those prescribed in Title 22, CCR. Thus, it is not anticipated that groundwater will be degraded by pathogen-indicator bacteria. Furthermore, any degradation by pathogens that might occur will be limited to the area in the vicinity of the ponds and degradation by pathogens should not be significant.
32. The typical incremental addition of dissolved salts from domestic water usage is 150 to 380 mg/L. Domestic water supply to the City of Banning showed an 12 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 8 average of about 200 mg/L during the period of January 2011 to December 2015.
From January 2011 to December 2015 treated wastewater discharged by the City of Banning had an average TDS concentration of approximately 420 mg/L. Thus, the average TDS increase over the domestic water supply for this facility during the same time period was about 220 mg/L. Treated wastewater discharged by the WWTP has a TDS limit of a maximum of 400 mg/L above the domestic source water as regulated by Board Order 01-022. The Colorado River Water Board is responsible for implementing the State Water Resources Control Board’s Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP). To that end, the TDS effluent limit in this Board Order will be reduced to 300 mg/L above the domestic water supply. A regulatory limit of 300 mg/L above the domestic source water reasonably protects present and anticipated beneficial uses of groundwater in the area; therefore, it is not likely that groundwater will exhibit significant degradation by TDS.
Stormwater
33. Federal regulations for storm water discharges were promulgated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency on November 16, 1990, (40 CFR Parts 122, 123, and 124) to implement the Clean Water Act’s storm water program set forth in Clean Water Act section 402(p) (33 U.S.C. section 1342(p).). In relevant part, the regulations require specific categories of facilities that discharge storm water associated with industrial activity to “waters of the United States” to obtain NPDES permits and to require control of such pollutant discharges using Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) and Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT) to prevent and reduce pollutants and any more stringent controls necessary to meet water quality standards. Facilities used in the storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal or domestic sewage, including land dedicated to the disposal of sewage sludge that are within the confines of the facility with a design flow of one million gallons a day or more, or required to have an approved pretreatment program under 40 CFR Part 403, are considered to be engaging in “industrial activity” for purposes of the Clean Water Act’s storm water program. The facility has a design treatment capacity of 3.6 MGD, and is thus subject to the federal regulations for discharges of stormwater associated with industrial activity.
CEQA and Public Participation
34. In accordance with section 15301, Chapter 3, Title 14, CCR, the issuance of these WDRs, which govern the operation of an existing facility involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing, is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, section 21000 et seq.).
35. The Colorado River Basin Water Board has notified the Discharger and all known interested agencies and persons of its intent to draft WDRs for this discharge, and 13 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 9 has provided them with an opportunity for a public meeting and an opportunity to submit comments.
36. The Colorado River Basin Water Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments pertaining to this discharge.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Board Order 01-022 is rescinded upon the effective date of this Order, except for enforcement purposes, and, in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 of the California Water Code, and regulations adopted thereunder, the Discharger shall comply with the following:
A. Effluent Limitations
1. Effluent discharged into the ponds for disposal shall not exceed the following effluent limits:
Constituent Units
30-Day
Arithmetic
Mean
7-Day Arithmetic
Mean Maximum
20o C BOD5 mg/L 30 45 -----
Total Suspended
Solids mg/L 30 45 -----
2. The 30-day average daily dry weather discharge from the WWTP shall not exceed 3.6 MGD.
3. Effluent from the WWTP into the ponds shall not have a pH below 6.0 or above 9.0.
4. The increase in concentration of TDS in the wastewater discharged to the ponds over that contained in the water supply to the community shall not exceed 300 mg/L.
5. The ponds shall be maintained so they will continuously operate in aerobic conditions. The dissolved oxygen content in the upper zone (one foot) of the ponds shall not be less than 1.0 mg/L at all times.
B. Discharge Prohibitions
1. Discharge of waste classified as “hazardous”, as defined in Title 23, CCR, section 2521(a), or “designated”, as defined in California Water Code section 13173, is prohibited.
14 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 10 2. Discharge of treated wastewater at a location other than the designated disposal areas is prohibited.
3. The discharge of any wastewater from the Facility to any surface waters or surface drainage courses is prohibited.
4. Discharge of waste to land not owned or authorized for such use by the Discharger is prohibited.
5. Surfacing or ponding of wastewater outside of the designated disposal locations is prohibited.
6. Bypass, overflow, discharge, or spill of untreated or partially treated waste is prohibited.
C. Discharge Specifications
1. The treatment or disposal of wastes from the WWTP shall not cause pollution or nuisance as defined in sections 13050(I) and 13050(m) of Division 7 of the California Water Code, respectively.
2. A minimum freeboard depth of two feet shall be maintained at all times in each pond.
3. All treatment, storage, and disposal areas shall be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to prevent inundation or washout due to floods with a 100-year return frequency.
4. Ponds shall have sufficient capacity to accommodate allowable wastewater flow, design seasonal precipitation, ancillary inflow, and infiltration during the non-irrigation season. Design seasonal precipitation shall be based on total annual precipitation using a return period of 100 years, distributed monthly in accordance with historical rainfall patterns.
5. The ponds shall be managed to prevent breeding of mosquitoes. In particular:
a. An erosion control program should assure that small coves and irregularities are not created around the perimeter of the water surface.
b. Weeds shall be minimized through control of water depth, harvesting, or herbicides.
c. Dead algae, vegetation, and debris shall not accumulate on the water surface.
15 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 11 6. Public contact with wastewater shall be precluded through such means as fences, signs, and other acceptable alternatives.
7. Objectionable odors originating at this facility shall not be perceivable beyond the limits of the wastewater treatment and disposal area.
8. The ponds shall be maintained and operated so as to maximize infiltration and minimize the increase of salinity in the groundwater.
9. The Discharger shall not accept wastewater in excess of the treatment capacity of the Facility.
D. Specifications
1. Discharge from the WWTP shall not cause groundwater to:
a. Contain constituents in excess of California MCLs, as set forth in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, section 64426.1 for bacteriological constituents; section 64431 for inorganic chemicals; section 64444 for organic chemicals; and section 64678 for determination of exceedances of lead and copper action levels. b. Contain taste or odor-producing substances in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses as a result of human activity.
E. Pretreatment
1. In the event that the facility has an average dry weather flow or treatment capacity of 5 MGD or more and Industrial Users [40 CFR 403.3(h)] are discharging pollutants which could Pass Through [40 CFR 403.3(n)] or Interfere [40 CFR 403.3(i)] with the operation of the wastewater treatment facility or are otherwise subject to National Pretreatment Standards [40 CFR 403.3(j)], (ii) California Code of Regulations, Title 23, section 2233 requires the facility to have and enforce an adequate pretreatment program, or (iii) the Colorado River Basin Water Board or its Executive Officer determines that other circumstances warrant, then:
a. The Discharger shall notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board within 30 days after there are discharges that trigger the pretreatment requirements.
b. The Discharger shall submit a revised Report of Waste Discharge and the pretreatment program for the Board review and approval as soon as possible but not later than one year of the notice of pretreatment requirements.
16 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 12 c. The Discharger shall enforce the federal categorical pretreatment standards on all Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs).
d. The Discharger shall notify the CIU of its discharge effluent limits.
The limits must be as stringent as the pretreatment standards contained in the applicable federal category (40 CFR Part 400-699).
The Discharger may develop more stringent, technically based local limit if it can show cause.
e. The Discharger shall notify the RWQCB if the CIU violates its discharge effluent limits.
2. The Colorado River Basin Water Board retains the right to take legal action against an industrial user and/or the Discharger where a user fails to meet the approved applicable pretreatment standards.
F. Special Provisions
1. Within 12 months of the adoption of this Order, the Discharger shall submit to the Colorado River Basin Water Board office a technical report that includes a copy of the Maintenance and Operations Manual for the WWTP.
2. Within 18 months of the adoption date of this Board Order, the Discharger shall submit for approval by the Colorado River Basin Water Board's Executive Officer, a technical report that is a work plan and time schedule to conduct a study that addresses the practicability of a 10 mg/L total nitrogen effluent limitation and the impact the discharge has on the beneficial uses of the receiving groundwater. The time schedule for the study shall not be longer than four (4) years. A California Professional Engineer (PE), Registered Geologist (RG), Certified Engineering Geologist (CEG), or a Certified Hydro Geologist (CHG) must sign and stamp the technical report.
The report shall, at a minimum, include the following:
a. Evaluation by the Discharger must include information on the following factors relating to the discharge:
i. Description of the municipal entity and facilities.
ii. Description of the quantity and nitrogen concentration of domestic water sources contributing to discharge.
iii. Description of significant nitrogen sources of the municipal wastewater collection system, and identification of entities responsible for each source, if available.
iv. Description of the wastewater discharge, receiving waters, quantity, and nitrogen load.
17 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 13 v. Alternative plans for minimizing nitrogen contribution from the municipal sources. Alternative plans should include:
(A) Description of nitrogen sources and alternative means of control; and
(B) Cost of alternative plans in dollars per ton, of nitrogen removed from discharge.
vi. Description and analyses of potential conventional nitrogen removal treatment technologies for implementation at the WWTP. Analyses shall include cost of implementation in
dollars per ton, of nitrogen removed from discharge.
vii. Such other information pertinent to the study as the permitting authority may deem necessary.
b. In determining what permit conditions shall be required, the permit issuing authority shall consider the following criteria including, but not limited to:
i. The practicability of achieving a 10 mg/L total nitrogen effluent limit.
ii. Where a 10 mg/L effluent limit is not determined to be practicable, the Discharger shall provide the following:
(A) The impact of the proposed nitrogen input of each
alternative on the beneficial uses of the groundwater
in terms of tons per year and concentration;
(B) Costs per ton of nitrogen removed from discharge of each alternative plan;
(C) Capability of minimizing nitrogen discharge;
(D) A proposed value for the practical incremental
increase; and
(E) A justification for the proposed practical incremental increased value.
c. By June 30, 2020, the Discharger shall submit a final technical report that includes the Discharger’s recommendations and conclusions, including a tentative work plan and time schedule for facility plant improvements required to accomplish nitrogen removal and comply with the effluent water quality limit. The report shall be 18 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 14 certified with the signature and stamp of a California licensed professional PE, PG, CEG, or a CHG.
3. Within 24 months of the adoption of this Order, the Discharger shall submit to the Colorado River Basin Water Board a technical report that includes a copy of the City of Banning ordinance that provides a comprehensive set of rules and regulations governing the design, construction, maintenance and use of public and private sewer facilities within the city’s jurisdictional limits.
4. Within 24 months of the adoption of this Order, the Discharger shall submit a technical report that contains:
a. Documents demonstrating the City of Banning’s authority to issue permits for individual and community onsite septic systems; b. The City of Banning’s affirmative statement with regard to submitting a Local Agency Management Program plan in
accordance with the State Water Board’s Water Quality Control Policy for Siting, Design, Operation, and Maintenance of Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems; and,
c. Identification of all areas within the jurisdiction of the City of Banning’s sewer authority that are currently on existing onsite septic systems, and those undeveloped areas planned for septic systems.
G. Standard Provisions
1. The Discharger shall comply with all of the conditions of this Board Order.
Noncompliance is a violation of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (CWC, section 13000 et seq.), and is grounds for enforcement action.
2. The Discharger shall comply with the Electronic Submittal of Information (ESI) requirements by submitting all correspondence and reports required under Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) R7-2016-0015, and future revisions thereto, including groundwater monitoring data and discharge location data (latitude and longitude), correspondence, and pdf monitoring reports to the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ database. Documents that are 2.0 MB or larger should be broken down into smaller electronic files, labelled properly and uploaded into GeoTracker.
3. All technical reports required in conjunction with this Order are required pursuant to Section 13267 of the CWC, and shall include a statement by the Discharger, or an authorized representative of the Discharger, certifying 19 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 15 under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the report is true, complete, and accurate.
4. In accordance with California Business and Professions Code Sections 6735, 7835, and 7835.1, engineering and geologic evaluations and judgments shall be performed by or under the direction of California registered professionals (i.e., civil engineer, engineering geologist, geologist, etc.) competent and proficient in the fields pertinent to the required activities. All technical reports specified herein that contain work plans, that describe the conduct of investigations and studies, or that contain technical conclusions and recommendations concerning engineering and geology shall be prepared by or under the direction of appropriately qualified professionals, even if not explicitly stated. Each technical report submitted by the Discharger shall contain a statement of qualifications of the responsible licensed professionals as well as the professional’s signature and/or stamp of the seal. Additionally, to the extent that preparation of a required technical report involves field activities, field activities shall be conducted under the direct supervision of one or more of these professionals.
5. The Discharger shall not cause degradation of any water supply in accordance with State Water Board Resolution 68-16.
6. Standby power generating facilities shall be available to operate the plant during a commercial power failure.
7. Adequate measures shall be taken to assure that flood or surface drainage waters do not erode or otherwise render portions of the discharge facilities inoperable.
8. The WWTP shall be supervised and operated by persons possessing certification of appropriate grade pursuant to section 3680, Chapter 26, Division 3, Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations.
9. The Discharger shall at all times properly operate and maintain all systems and components of collection, treatment and control, installed or used by the Discharger to achieve compliance with this Board Order. Proper operation and maintenance includes effective performance, adequate process controls, and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of backup or auxiliary facilities/systems when necessary to achieve compliance with this Board Order. All systems in service or reserved shall be inspected and maintained on a regular basis. Records of inspections and maintenance shall be retained, and made available to the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer on request.
20 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 16 10. The Discharger shall ensure that all site-operating personnel are familiar with the content of this Board Order, and shall maintain a copy of this Board Order at the site.
11. The Discharger shall allow the Colorado River Basin Water Board, or an authorized representative, upon presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter the premises regulated by this Order, or the place where records are kept under the conditions of this Board Order; b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, records kept under the conditions of this Board Order;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this Order; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of assuring compliance with this Order or as otherwise authorized by the Water Code, any substances or parameters at this location.
12. Disposal of oil and grease, biosolids, screenings, and other solids collected from liquid wastes shall be pursuant to Title 27, and the review and approval of the Colorado River Basin Water Board Executive Officer.
13. Any proposed change in use or disposal of biosolids requires the approval of the Colorado River Basin Water Board Executive Officer, and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrator, who must be notified at least 90 days in advance of the change.
14. Sludge use and disposal shall comply with Federal and State laws and regulations, including permitting requirements, and technical standards in 40 CFR Part 503. If the State and Colorado River Basin Water Boards are delegated the authority to implement 40 CFR Part 503 regulations, this Order may be revised to incorporate appropriate time schedules and technical standards. The Discharger shall comply with the standards and time schedules in 40 CFR part 503, whether or not part of this Order.
15. The Discharger shall provide a plan as to the method, treatment, handling and disposal of sludge that is consistent with all State and Federal laws and regulations and obtain prior written approval from the Colorado River Basin Water Board specifying location and method of disposal, before disposing of treated or untreated sludge, or similar solid waste.
16. The Discharger shall maintain a permanent log of all solids hauled away from the treatment facility for use/disposal elsewhere and shall provide a 21 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 17 summary of the volume, type (screenings, grit, raw sludge, digested sludge), use (agricultural, composting, etc.), and the destination in accordance with the MRP of this Board Order. Sludge that is stockpiled at the treatment facility shall be sampled and analyzed for those constituents listed in the sludge monitoring section of the MRP of this Board Order and as required by Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 503. The results of the analyses shall be submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board as part of the MRP.
17. The Discharger shall provide a report to the Colorado River Basin Water Board when it determines that the plant’s average dry-weather flow rate for any month exceeds 80 percent of the design capacity. The report should indicate what steps, if any, the Discharger intends to take to provide for the expected wastewater treatment capacity necessary when the plant reaches design capacity.
18. Prior to implementing a modification that results in a material change in the quality or quantity of wastewater treated or discharged, or a material change in the location of discharge, the Discharger shall report all pertinent information in writing to the Colorado River Basin Water Board, and obtain revised requirements.
19. Prior to a change in ownership or management of WWTP, the Discharger shall transmit a copy of this Board Order to the succeeding owner/operator, and forward a copy of the transmittal letter to the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
20. The Discharger shall provide adequate notice to the Colorado River Basin Water Board Executive Officer of the following:
a. The introduction of pollutants into any treatment facility described in the Findings of this Board Order from an indirect Discharger which would be subject to section 301 or 306 of the Clean Water Act, if the pollutants were discharged directly;
b. Any substantial change in the volume or character of pollutants introduced into any treatment facility described in the Findings of this Board Order, by an existing or new source; and
c. Any planned physical alteration or addition to the facilities described in this Board Order, or change planned in the Discharger's sludge use or disposal practice, where such alterations, additions, or changes may justify the application of Board Order conditions that are different from or absent in the existing Board Order, including notification of additional disposal 22 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 18 sites not reported during the Board Order application process, or not reported pursuant to an approved land application plan.
21. The Discharger shall report orally, any noncompliance that may endanger human health or the environment. The noncompliance shall be reported immediately to the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer at (760) 346-7491, and the California Office of Emergency Services at (800) 852-7550 as soon as:
a. The Discharger has knowledge of the discharge;
b. Notification is possible, and
c. Notification will not substantially impede cleanup or other emergency measures.
During non-business hours, the Discharger shall leave a message on the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s office voice recorder at the above listed number. Incident information shall be provided orally as soon as possible and within 24 hours from the time the Discharger becomes aware of the incident. A written report shall also be provided within five (5) business days of the time the Discharger becomes aware of the incident.
The written report shall contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of noncompliance, the anticipated time to achieve full compliance, and the steps taken or planned, to reduce, eliminate, and prevent recurrence of the noncompliance. The Discharger shall report all intentional or unintentional spills in excess of one thousand (1,000) gallons occurring within the WWTP or collection system to the Colorado River Basin Water Board office in accordance with the above time limits.
22. The Discharger shall report all instances of noncompliance. Reports of noncompliance shall be submitted with the Discharger's next scheduled SMRs or earlier if requested by the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer, or if required by an applicable standard for sludge use and disposal.
23. By-pass (i.e., the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of the treatment facilities, except diversions designed to meet variable effluent limits) is prohibited. The Colorado River Basin Water Board may take enforcement action against the Discharger for by-pass unless:
a. By-pass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage. Severe property damage means
substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities that causes them to be inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources reasonably expected to occur in 23 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 19 the absence of a by-pass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production; and
There were no feasible alternatives to by-pass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities or retention of untreated waste. This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up equipment was not installed to prevent by-pass occurring during equipment downtime, or preventive maintenance.
b. By-pass is:
i. Required for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation; and
ii. Neither effluent nor receiving water limitations are exceeded; and
iii. The Discharger notifies the Colorado River Basin Water Board ten (10) days in advance.
24. In the event of an unanticipated by-pass, the Discharger shall immediately report the incident to the Colorado River Basin Water Board. During nonbusiness hours, the Discharger shall leave a message on the Colorado River Basin Water Board office voice recorder. A written report shall be provided within five business days the Discharger is aware of the incident.
The written report shall include a description of the by-pass, any noncompliance, the cause, period of noncompliance, anticipated time to achieve full compliance, and steps taken or planned, to reduce, eliminate, and prevent recurrence of the noncompliance.
25. Federal regulations for storm water discharges require specific categories of facilities which discharge storm water associated with industrial activity (storm water) to obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits and to implement Best Conventional Pollutant Technology (BCPT) and Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) to reduce or eliminate industrial storm water pollution.
26. All storm water discharges from this facility must comply with the lawful requirements of municipalities, counties, drainage districts, and other local agencies, regarding discharges of storm water to storm water drain systems or other courses under their jurisdiction.
27. Storm water discharges from the facility shall not cause or threaten to cause pollution or contamination.
24 City of Banning and Suez Water Environmental Company Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Waste Discharge Requirements 20 28. Storm water discharges from the facility shall not contain hazardous substances equal to or in excess of a reportable quantity listed in 40 CFR Part 117 and/or 40 CFR Part 302.
29. The Discharger is the responsible party for the waste discharge requirements and the monitoring and reporting program for the facility. The Discharger shall comply with all conditions of these waste discharge requirements. Violations may result in enforcement actions, including Colorado River Basin Water Board Orders or court orders, requiring corrective action or imposing civil monetary liability, or in modification or revocation of these waste discharge requirements by the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
30. This Board Order does not authorize violation of any federal, state, or local laws or regulations.
31. This Board Order does not convey property rights of any sort, or exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize injury to private property or invasion of personal rights, or infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations.
32. This Board Order may be modified, rescinded, or reissued, for cause. The filing of a request by the Discharger for a Board Order modification, rescission or reissuance, or notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance, does not stay any Board Order condition. Causes for modification include a change in land application plans, or sludge use or disposal practices, and adoption of new regulations by the State or Colorado River Basin Water Board (including revisions to the Basin Plan), or Federal government.
I, Jose L. Angel, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of an Order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region, on June 30, 2016.
_____________Original Signed by________
JOSE L. ANGEL, P.E.
Executive Officer
25 CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION
ATTACHMENT A- VICINITY MAP Board Order r7-2016-0015
CITY OF BANNING, OWNER
SUEZ WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC., OPERATOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Banning – Riverside County
Section 14, T3S, R1E, SBB&M
City of Banning WWTP
26 CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION
ATTACHMENT B- PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM Board Order R7-2016-0015
CITY OF BANNING, OWNER
SUEZ WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC., OPERATOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Banning – Riverside County
27 CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION
ATTACHMENT C- MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS Board Order R7-2016-0015
CITY OF BANNING, OWNER
SUEZ WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC., OPERATOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Banning – Riverside County
28 1
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R7-2016-0015
FOR
CITY OF BANNING, OWNER
SUEZ WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, OPERATOR
BANNING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
BANNING-RIVERSIDE County:
LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Section 14, T3S, R1E, SBB&M
A. Monitoring
1. This Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) describes requirements for monitoring a wastewater system and groundwater quality (when needed).
This MRP is issued pursuant to California Water Code (CWC) section 13267. The Discharger shall not implement any changes to this MRP unless and until a revised MRP is issued by the Executive Officer.
2. Water Code section 13267 states, in part:
“In conducting an investigation specified in subdivision (a), the Colorado River Basin Water Board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region, or any citizen or domiciliary, or political agency or entity of this state who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge, waste outside of its region that could affect the quality of waters within its region shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical or monitoring program reports which the Colorado River Basin Water Board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the Colorado River Basin Water Board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.”
3. Water Code section 13268 states, in part:
“(a) (1) Any person failing or refusing to furnish technical or monitoring program reports as required by subdivision (b) of section 13267, or failing or refusing to furnish a statement of compliance as required by subdivision (b) of section 13399.2, or falsifying any information provided therein, is guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be liable civilly in accordance with subdivision (b). (b) (1) Civil liability may be administratively imposed by a Colorado River Basin Water Board in accordance with Article 2.5 (commencing with section 29 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 13323) of Chapter 5 for a violation of subdivision (a) in an amount which shall not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each day in which the violation occurs.”
4. The Discharger owns and operates the wastewater system that is subject to Board Order R7-2016-0015. The reports are necessary to ensure that the Discharger complies with the Order. Pursuant to Water Code section 13267, the Discharger shall implement the MRP and shall submit the monitoring reports described herein.
5. All samples shall be representative of the volume and nature of the discharge or matrix of material sampled. The time, date, and location of each grab sample shall be recorded on the sample chain of custody form. If composite samples are collected, the basis for sampling (time or flow weighted) shall be approved by Colorado River Basin Water Board staff.
6. Field test instruments (such as those used to test pH, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity) may be used provided that:
a. The user is trained in proper use and maintenance of the instruments;
b. The instruments are field calibrated prior to monitoring events at the frequency recommended by the manufacturer;
c. Instruments are serviced and/or calibrated by the manufacturer at the recommended frequency; and
d. Field calibration reports are submitted as described in the “Reporting” section of this MRP.
7. The collection, preservation and holding times of all samples shall be in accordance with U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) approved procedures. Unless otherwise approved by the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer, all analyses shall be conducted by a laboratory certified by the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water. All analyses shall be conducted in accordance with the latest edition of the “Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for Analysis of Pollutants” (40 CFR Part 136), promulgated by the USEPA.
8. All monitoring instruments and devices used by the Discharger to fulfill the prescribed monitoring program shall be properly maintained and calibrated as necessary to ensure their continued accuracy. In the event that continuous monitoring equipment is out of service for period greater than 24-hours, the Discharger shall obtain representative grab samples each day the equipment is out of service. The Discharger shall correct the cause(s) of failure of the continuous monitoring equipment as soon as practicable. 30 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 The Discharger shall report the period(s) during which the equipment was out of service and if the problem has not been corrected, shall identify the steps which the Discharger is taking or proposes to take to bring the equipment back into service and the schedule for these actions.
9. The Discharger shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this Board Order, and records of all data used to complete the application for this Board Order, for a period of at least five (5) years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be extended by request of the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer at any time. Records of monitoring information shall include:
a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurement(s); b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurement(s); c. The date(s) analyses were performed;
d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or method used; and
f. The results of such analyses.
10. Samples shall be collected at the location specified in the WDRs. If no location is specified, sampling shall be conducted at the most representative sampling point available.
11. Given the monitoring frequency prescribed by MRP R7-2016-0015, if only one sample is available for a given reporting period, compliance with monthly average, or weekly average Discharge Specifications, will be determined from that sample.
12. If the facility is not in operation, or there is no discharge during a required reporting period, the Discharger shall forward a letter to the Colorado River Basin Water Board indicating that there has been no activity during the required reporting period.
Influent Monitoring
13. Influent to the WWTP shall be monitored according to the following schedule:
31 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
20oC BOD5
1 mg/L2 24-Hr.
Composite 2x/Month Monthly
Total Suspended
Solids mg/L 24-Hr. Composite 2x/Month Monthly
Nitrate as N mg/L 24-Hr.
Composite Quarterly Quarterly
Nitrite as N mg/L 24-Hr.
Composite Quarterly Quarterly
Total Nitrogen mg/L 24-Hr.
Composite Quarterly Quarterly
WWTP Effluent Monitoring
14. Effluent from the WWTP into the Evaporation/Percolation Ponds shall be monitored according to the following schedule:
Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
Flow; Total Plant
Effluent into Ponds MGD3 Flow Meter Reading Daily Monthly 20oC BOD5 mg/L 24 Hr.
Composite Weekly Monthly
Total Suspended
Solids mg/L 24 Hr.Composite Weekly Monthly
Nitrate as N mg/L 24 Hr.
Composite 2x/Month Monthly
Nitrite as N mg/L 24 Hr.
Composite 2x/Month Monthly
1 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand at 20 degrees Celsius. 2milligrams per Liter
3 Million Gallons per Day
32 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
Total Nitrogen mg/L 24 Hr.
Composite 2x/Month Monthly
Total Dissolved
Solids mg/L Grab Monthly Monthly
VOCs4 μg/L5 24 Hr.
Composite Annually Annually
Pond Monitoring
15. The ponds shall be monitored according to the following schedule:
Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Sampling
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
Dissolved
Oxygen6 mg/L Composite Weekly Monthly
pH s.u. 7 Grab Weekly Monthly
Freeboard Ft Measurement Weekly Monthly
The ponds shall be observed for vegetation growth, erosion and irregularities to prevent the breeding of mosquitoes. Observations shall be reported with the monthly SMR.
Domestic Water Supply
16. The domestic water supply shall be monitored according to the following schedule:
4 Analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds is to be accomplished using the USEPA test methods 601 and 602 or 624
5 micrograms per liter
6 Dissolved Oxygen shall be monitored at the upper one foot layer of the evaporation/percolation ponds. 7 standard pH units
33 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
Total Dissolved
Solids mg/L Composite Monthly Monthly
Groundwater Monitoring
17. Groundwater shall be sampled in the uppermost 20 feet of the shallow aquifer from the monitoring wells according to the following schedule:
Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
Depth to
Groundwater ft (bgs)8 measurement Quarterly Quarterly
Total Dissolved
Solids mg/L Grab Quarterly Quarterly
Total Nitrogen mg/L Grab Quarterly Quarterly
Nitrate as N mg/L Grab Quarterly Quarterly
Nitrite as N mg/L Grab Quarterly Quarterly
Sulfate mg/L Grab Quarterly Quarterly
Chloride mg/L Grab Quarterly Quarterly
Fecal Coliform MPN/100mL Grab Quarterly Quarterly
VOCs mg/L Grab Annually Annually
Sludge Monitoring
18. Prior to disposal, sludge that is generated at the WWTP shall be sampled and analyzed for the following:
8 feet below ground surface.
34 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 Constituent Units Type of
Sample
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Frequency
Arsenic mg/kg9 Composite Annually Annually
Cadmium mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Chromium mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Copper mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Lead mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Mercury mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Molybdenum mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Nickel mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Selenium mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Zinc mg/kg Composite Annually Annually
Fecal Coliform MPN/gram10 Composite Prior to
Disposal Annually
B. Reporting
1. The Discharger shall inspect and document any operation/maintenance problems by inspecting each unit process. In addition, calibration of flow meters and equipment shall be performed in a timely manner and documented. Operation and Maintenance reports shall be submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board Office annually.
2. The annual Operation and Maintenance report shall include the following:
a. Documentation showing the calibration of flow meters and equipment as performed in a timely manner annually;
b. Modifications and updates to the Operation and Maintenance Manual;
9 milligrams per kilogram
10 Most Probable Number per gram.
35 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 c. Operator certification status update including number of staff and grade certification.
d. Modifications and updates to the City’s waste water ordinance or rules and regulations.
3. The Discharger shall report annually on the quantity, location and method of disposal of all sludge and similar solid materials being produced at the WWTP. If no sludge is disposed of during the year being reported, the Discharger shall state “No Sludge Removed” in the annual monitoring report.
4. The Discharger shall provide the Colorado River Basin Water Board with an annual report describing the pretreatment program activities over the previous twelve-month period. The report shall be transmitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board office no later than January 31 of each year and include:
a. A summary of actions taken by the Discharger which ensures industrial-user compliance;
b. An updated list of industrial users (by SIC categories) which were issued permits, and/or enforcement orders, and a status of compliance for each user; and
c. The name and address of each user that received a revised discharge limit.
5. SMRs shall be certified under penalty of perjury to be true and correct, and shall contain the required information at the frequency designated in this MRP.
6. Each Report must contain an affirmation in writing that states:
“All analyses were conducted at a laboratory certified for such analyses by and in accordance with current USEPA procedures or as specified in this Monitoring and Reporting Program.”
7. Each report shall contain the following completed declaration:
“I certify under the penalty of law that this document, including all attachments and supplemental information, was prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for 36 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 submitting false information, including the possibility of a fine and imprisonment.
Executed on the _______day of _______ at ____________________ ____________________(Signature)
_____________________(Title)”
8. The SMRs, and other information requested by the Colorado River Basin Water Board, shall be signed by a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
9. A duly authorized representative of the Discharger may sign the documents if:
a. The authorization is made in writing by the person described above; b. The authorization specified an individual or person having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated disposal system; and
c. The written authorization is submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer.
10. The Discharger shall attach a cover letter to the SMRs. The information contained in the cover letter shall clearly identify violations of the WDRs; discuss corrective actions taken or planned and the proposed time schedule of corrective actions. Identified violations should include a description of the requirement that was violated and a description of the violation.
11. Daily, weekly, and monthly monitoring shall be included in the monthly monitoring report. Monthly monitoring reports shall be submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board by the 15th day of the following month.
Quarterly monitoring reports shall be submitted by January 15th, April 15th, July 15th and October 15th. Annual monitoring reports shall be submitted by January 31st of the following year.
12. The Discharger shall comply with the Electronic Submittal of Information (ESI) requirements by submitting all correspondence and reports required under Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) R7-2016-0015, and future revisions thereto, including groundwater monitoring data and discharge location data (latitude and longitude), correspondence, and pdf monitoring reports to the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database.
Documents that are 2.0 MB or larger should be broken down into smaller electronic files, labelled properly and uploaded into GeoTracker. 37 City of Banning; Suez Water Environmental Services Board Order R7-2016-0015 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monitoring and Reporting Program 10 Ordered by: ______Original signed by__________
JOSE L. ANGEL, P.E.
Executive Officer
_______ June 30, 2016__________
Date
38 Price/Rate Unit Quantity Recipient Reclamation
Phase 1 Costs: City of Banning WWTP Upgrades
Task 1: CEQA
CEQA (bio, cultural, air quality & IS/MND) $180,000 LS 1.0 $ 135,000 $ 45,000 $ 180,000 Permitting $120,000 LS 1.0 $ 90,000 $ 30,000 $ 120,000
$ 300,000
Task 2: Design
Preliminary Design $1,221,939 % of cost 2.0% $ 916,454 $ 305,485 $1,221,939 Final Design $3,054,848 % of cost 5.0% $ 2,291,136 $ 763,712 $3,054,848 $ 4,276,787
Task 3: Construction
RO system (1.2 MGD) $ 5,044,300 LS 1.0 $ 3,783,225 $ 1,261,075 $ 5,044,300 Brine Drying Beds and Evaporators $ 4,079,300 LS 1.0 $ 3,059,475 $ 1,019,825 $ 4,079,300 MBR Facility (3.6 MGD) $ 46,175,900 LS 1.0 $ 34,631,925 $ 11,543,975 $ 46,175,900 Primary Clarifier $ 1,866,300 LS 1.0 $ 1,399,725 $ 466,575 $ 1,866,300 Chlorine Tank (3.6 MGD) $ 2,148,700 LS 1.0 $ 1,611,525 $ 537,175 $ 2,148,700 Upgrade Ferric Sulfate Feed/Storage System $ 286,200 LS 1.0 $ 214,650 $ 71,550 $ 286,200 Digester Coating $ 444,900 LS 1.0 $ 333,675 $ 111,225 $ 444,900 Replace Piping in Grit Chamber $ 56,000 LS 1.0 $ 42,000 $ 14,000 $ 56,000 Replace TF Center Drives $ 239,650 LS 1.0 $ 179,738 $ 59,913 $ 239,650 Replace East Primary Clarifier Center Drive $ 47,950 LS 1.0 $ 35,963 $ 11,988 $ 47,950 Replace Existing PVC Digester Gas Piping $ 16,000 LS 1.0 $ 12,000 $ 4,000 $ 16,000 Replace Digester Hot Water Boiler $ 169,400 LS 1.0 $ 127,050 $ 42,350 $ 169,400 Replace TF Effluent Distribution Valves (4) $ - LS 1.0 $ - $ - $ - Replace TF Recirculation Pumps (2) $ 59,950 LS 1.0 $ 44,963 $ 14,988 $ 59,950 Replace Grit/Cyclone Unit $ 287,600 LS 1.0 $ 215,700 $ 71,900 $ 287,600 Replace Two Old Grit Pumps $ 174,800 LS 1.0 $ 131,100 $ 43,700 $ 174,800 Recycled Water Laterals $ - LS 1.0 $ - $ - $ -
$ 61,096,950
+30% 79,426,035 $
-10% 55,542,682 $
Task 4: Construction Admin
Construction Management and Inspection $3,665,817 % of cost 6.0% $ 2,749,363 $ 916,454 $ 3,665,817 Environmental Monitoring and Support during Construction $100,000 LS 1.0% $ 75,000 $ 25,000 $ 100,000 $ 3,765,817
Contingency (10% of project cost) $6,943,955 % of cost 10.0% $ 5,207,967 $ 1,735,989 $ 6,943,955 $ 6,943,955
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS: 57,287,631.64 19,095,877.21 $ 76,383,509 Not applicable $ -
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT/ACTIVITY COSTS: $ 76,383,509
+30% 99,298,562 $
-10% 69,439,554 $
OTHER - List any other cost elements necessary for your project; such as extra reporting, or contingencies in a construction contract.
Subtotal
INDIRECT COSTS -
Subtotal
Subtotal
AACE CLASS 3 COST ESTIMATE
AACE CLASS 3 COST ESTIMATE
BUDGET ITEM DESCRIPTION COMPUTATION TOTAL COST
Subtotal
CONTRACTUAL/ CONSTRUCTION - Explain any contracts or sub-Agreements that will be awarded, why needed. Explain contractor qualifications and how the contractor will be selected.
Subtotal
39 40
41 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-50
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 797 ( Water Code Section 10610 et seq.), known as the Urban Water Management Planning Act, during the 1983- 1984 Regular Session, and as amended subsequently, which mandates that every supplier providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually, prepare an Urban Water Management Plan ( UWMP), the primary objective of which is to plan for the conservation and efficient use of water; and
WHEREAS, the City of Banning ( City) is an urban supplier of water providing water; and
WHEREAS, the UWMP shall be periodically reviewed at least once every five years, and that the City shall make any amendments or changes to its plan which are indicated by the review; and
WHEREAS, the UWMP must be adopted after public review and hearing, and filed with the California Department of Water Resources within thirty days of adoption; and WHEREAS, the City has therefore, prepared and circulated for public review a draft UWMP, and a properly noticed public hearing regarding said UWMP was held by the City Council on June 8, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council shall have filed said UWMP with the California Department of Water Resources within 30 days of adoption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Banning as follows:
SECTION 1. The City of Banning is in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Urban Water Management Planning Act.
SECTION 2. The 2020 UWMP is hereby adopted and ordered filed with the City Clerk.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage and adoption thereof.
SECTION 4. The Public Works Director is hereby authorized and directed to file the 2020 UWMP with the California Department of Water Resources within 30 days after adoption of this resolution.
Resolution 2021- 50
42 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of June 2021.
ATTEST:
Caroline Patton, De
City of Banning
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL CONTENT:
Kevin G. Ennis, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
Resolution 2021- 50
Colleen Wallace, Mayor
City of Banning
43 CERTIFICATION:
I, Caroline Patton, Deputy City Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution 2021-50, was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Banning, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 8th day of June 2021 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Hamlin, Happe, Pingree, Sanchez, and Mayor Wallace NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Resolution 2021- 50
Caroline Patton, De
City of Banning
44 2020
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
City of Banning, CA
JOHN
ROBINSON
CONSULTING, INC. 45
2020
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
City of Banning, CA
Public Works Department
99 East Ramsey Street Banning, CA 92220
(951) 922-3130
June, 2021
Prepared by:
West & Associates Engineering, Inc.
78 Anacapa Ct.
Foothill Ranch, CA
(949) 716-7670
[email protected]
John Robinson Consulting, Inc.
1055 E. Colorado Boulevard
Pasadena, CA
(626) 375-9389
[email protected]
46 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Introduction
SECTION Page
1.1 Purpose & Summary ........................................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Coordination .................................................................................................................... 1-4
1.3 DWR Updates for the 2020 UWMPs ................................................................................ 1-6
1.4 Updates to the City’s UWMP ........................................................................................... 1-7
1.5 Format of the 2020 UWMP .............................................................................................. 1-8
1.6 Lay Description................................................................................................................. 1-9 Section 2: Service Area Description
SECTION Page
2.1 City and Water System History ........................................................................................ 2-1
2.2 Current Water Service Area ............................................................................................. 2-2
2.3 Land Use & Economy ....................................................................................................... 2-3
2.4 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 2-8
2.5 Population ..................................................................................................................... 2-10
2.6 Water System ................................................................................................................. 2-11 Section 3: Water Sources & Supplies
SECTION Page
3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Imported Water Sources .................................................................................................. 3-1
3.3 Imported Water Purchases .............................................................................................. 3-6
3.4 Groundwater Sources .................................................................................................... 3-10
3.5 Groundwater Production ............................................................................................... 3-17
3.6 Surface Water ................................................................................................................ 3-20
3.7 Alternate Water Sources ............................................................................................... 3-21
3.8 Transfers or Exchanges .................................................................................................. 3-22
3.9 Planned Supply Projects ................................................................................................ 3-22
3.10 Energy Intensity of Supply ............................................................................................. 3-23 47 TOC - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Section 4: Recycled Water Opportunities
SECTION Page
4.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Wastewater Collection System ........................................................................................ 4-1
4.3 Recycled Water ................................................................................................................ 4-5
4.4 Encouraging and Optimizing Recycled Water Use ........................................................... 4-9 Section 5: Water Quality
SECTION Page
5.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Water Quality Standards.................................................................................................. 5-2
5.3 Quality of Water Sources ................................................................................................. 5-4
5.4 Impacts of Water Quality ................................................................................................. 5-5 Section 6: Water Use
SECTION Page
6.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Recent Water Use Changes ............................................................................................. 6-1
6.3 Current City Water Needs ................................................................................................ 6-2
6.4 Climate Impacts on Water Use ........................................................................................ 6-3
6.5 Water Use ........................................................................................................................ 6-4
6.6 Water Use by Sector ........................................................................................................ 6-5
6.7 Water Conservation Act ................................................................................................... 6-8
6.8 Projected Water Demand .............................................................................................. 6-14 Section 7: Reliability Planning
SECTION Page
7.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 7-1
7.2 Historic Droughts ............................................................................................................. 7-1
7.3 Recent Drought (2011-2017) ........................................................................................... 7-2
7.4 State Water Supply Reliability ......................................................................................... 7-3
7.5 Colorado River Reliability ................................................................................................. 7-7
7.6 City Supply Reliability ....................................................................................................... 7-9
7.7 Ensuring Adequate Supply ............................................................................................. 7-22
7.8 WSCP Supply Augmentation .......................................................................................... 7-22 48 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Section 8: Contingency Planning
SECTION Page
8.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 8-1
8.2 Need for Contingency Plans ............................................................................................. 8-2
8.3 Legal Authority ................................................................................................................ 8-4
8.4 Water Supply Reliability Analysis .................................................................................... 8-4
8.5 Annual Assessments ....................................................................................................... 8-7
8.6 Contingency Plans ........................................................................................................... 8-9
8.7 Disaster Management .................................................................................................... 8-14
8.8 WSCP Enforcement & Evaluation .................................................................................. 8-19
8.9 Fiscal Impacts ................................................................................................................. 8-21
8.10 Three-Year Minimum Supply ........................................................................................ 8-21
8.11 WSCP Adoption and Refinement .................................................................................. 8-22 Section 9: Conservation Measures
SECTION Page
9.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 9-1
9.2 DWR DMMs for 2020 UWMPs ......................................................................................... 9-2
9.3 CalWEP BMPs ................................................................................................................... 9-2
9.4 City Conservation Measures ............................................................................................ 9-3
9.5 Continued Implementation ............................................................................................. 9-7 Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
Appendix L
Appendix M
Appendix N
Appendix O
City Council Resolution Adopting 2020 UWMP
City Council Resolution Adopting 2020 WSCP
UWMP Act
Dept. of Water Resources UWMP Checklist
Dept. of Water Resources UWMP Data Tables
Dept. of Water Resources SBx7-7 Tables
AWWA Water Audits (2015-2020)
Land Use and Planning Element – City General Plan
2013-2021 Housing Element – City General Plan
2019 Consumer Confidence Report (Water Quality Report)
UWMP Notices: 60-Day Notice, 2-Week and 1 Week Notices
Beaumont Basin Judgment
Riverside County Climate Action Plan Update 2019
City of Banning Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Final Transmittals to County and State Library
49 TOC - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
50 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
ACRONYMS
A - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
ACRONYMS
AAC All-American Canal
AF Acre-Feet
AFY Acre-Feet per Year
AMI Automatic Metering Infrastructure
AP Allocation Plan
BCVWD Beaumont Cherry-Valley Water District
BDCP Bay-Delta Conservation Plan
BHMWC Banning Heights Mutual Water Company
BMP Best Management Practice
CDP Census Designated Place
CDPH California Department of Public Health
CFS Cubic Feet per Second
CII Commercial Industrial Institutional
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System City City of Banning
CRA Colorado River Aqueduct
CUWCC California Urban Water Conservation Council
CalWEP California Water Efficiency Partnership
CVP Central Valley Project
CDPH California Department of Public Health
DBPs Disinfection Byproducts
DDW Division of Drinking Water
DMM Demand Management Measure
DOE Department of Energy
DWSAP Drinking Water Source Assessment and Protection
DWR Department of Water Resources
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ETo Evapotranspiration
GPCD Gallons per Capita per Day
GPM Gallons per Minute
HEN High Efficiency Nozzle
HET High Efficiency Toilet
HEW High Efficiency Washer
IPR Indirect Potable Reuse
51 A - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
ACRONYMS
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
IRP Integrated Resources Plan
MAF Million Acre-Feet
MBR Membrane Bioreactor
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
MG Million Gallons
MGD Million Gallons per Day
mg/L Milligrams per Liter
μg/L Micrograms per Liter
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MWA Mohave Water Agency
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
ng/L Nanograms per Liter
NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units
PCA Possible Contaminating Activities
PHG Public Health Goal
PPCPs Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products
QSA Quantification Settlement Agreement
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SB Senate Bill
SBx7-7 Senate Bill x7-7
SGPWA San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency
SWP State Water Project
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TDS Total Dissolved Solid
TOC Total Organic Carbon
ULFT Ultra-Low-Flow Toilet
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
WSAP Water Supply Allocation Plan
WSDM Water Surplus & Drought Management Plan
WSS Watershed Sanitary Survey
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
52 Section 1
Introduction
Since 1983, the State of California requires urban water agencies to prepare Urban Water Management Plans
(UWMPs). The City’s 2020 UWMP is a collaborative
effort involving its own staff, outside agencies, and the general public.
53 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
This is the 2020 Urban Water Management
Plan (“UWMP” or “Plan”) for the City of
Banning (hereinafter “City”). This Plan has
been prepared in compliance with the
Urban Water Management Planning Act
(Act), which was established in 1983 and
has been codified into the California Water
Code sections 10610 through 10657. A copy
of the Act can be found in Appendix C to
this 2020 UWMP.
As part of the Act, the legislature declared
that waters of the state are a limited and
renewable resource subject to ever
increasing demands; that the conservation
and efficient use of urban water supplies
are of statewide concern; that successful
implementation of plans is best
accomplished at the local level; that
conservation and efficient use of water shall
be actively pursued to protect both the
people of the state and their water
resources; that conservation and efficient
use of urban water supplies shall be a
guiding criterion in public decisions; and
that urban water suppliers shall be required
to develop water management plans to
achieve conservation and efficient use.
The Act requires “every urban water
supplier providing water for municipal
purposes to more than 3,000 customers or
supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of
water annually, to prepare and adopt, in
accordance with prescribed requirements,
an Urban Water Management Plan.”
In accordance with
the Water Code, an
Urban Water
Management Plan
is required to be
updated every five
years.
54 1 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Amendments to
the Act have
added financial
incentives to
UWMPs
These plans must be filed with the
California Department of Water Resources
(DWR) every five (5) years, describing and
evaluating reasonable and practical efficient
water uses, reclamation, and conservation
activities. The Water Code mandates that
each water supplier shall update its plan at
least once every five years on or before July
1, in years ending in six and one.
Figure 1.1: UWMPs are Governed by State Law
The Act has been amended multiple times
since its initial passage in 1983. A summary
of the amendments is provided in Figure
1.2. The intent of the amendments was to
broaden the scope of the UWMPs,
encourage public participation, and add
financial incentives to the UWMPs. A
significant amendment to the Act was a
2009 amendment (Senate Bill SBx7-7)
signed by former Governor
Schwarzenegger. The Senate Bill, also
known as the “Water Conservation Act”
required that per capita water use within an
urban water supplier's service area
decrease by 20 percent by the year 2020 in
order to receive grants or loans
administered by DWR or other state
agencies. Each urban retail water supplier
developed water use “targets” for 2015 and
for 2020. The “target”
date for 2020 just
passed on December 31,
2020. Urban water
suppliers whose 2020
actual water use does
not meet the target requirements
established by this bill are not eligible for
State water grants or loans. This included,
but was not limited to, the following
funding sources:
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Primarily a source for funds to help
correct deficiencies.
Proposition 1
Primarily a source for funds related
to supplies & infrastructure.
Proposition 50
Primarily a source for funds related
to security & treatment technology.
Proposition 84
Primarily a source for funds related
to protection from pollution.
Agencies that submit their UWMPs past the
July 2021 deadline are still technically
eligible for grants or loans, provided that
the UWMP addresses the requirements of
the Act. However, applications for such
funds are subject to legal challenges coming
55 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 1.2: UWMP Act Establishment and Amendment
56 1 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The City's 2020
UWMP is a
collaborative effort
involving its own
staff, outside
agencies, and the
general public.
from competing agencies for the same
funding, if the competing agencies become
aware of the timeframe in which an UWMP
was submitted.
UWMPs are considered to be a foundation
document and a source of information for
Water Supply Assessments (Senate Bill 610)
and Written Verifications of Water Supply
(SB 221). In addition, an UWMP may serve
as a long-range planning document for
water supply, a source of data for
development of a regional water plan, and
a source document for cities and counties
as they prepare their General Plans. These
planning documents are linked, and their
accuracy and usefulness are
interdependent.
One of the primary objectives of the Act is
the assessment of demands and supplies
over a 20-year or a 25-year planning
horizon under normal rainfall conditions, as
well as under various drought conditions.
The Act also requires water shortage
contingency planning and drought response
actions be included in an UWMP. In short,
this Plan is a management tool that
provides a general, long-term framework
for action, rather than a detailed blueprint
for supply and demand management. This
Plan evaluates the City’s supply and demand
projections over a 25-year planning horizon,
and what mix of programs should be
explored for ensuring that such water will
be available. As part of the City's past and
current water conservation policies, the City
is currently implementing many facets of
this plan to achieve its water conservation
goals.
1.2 COORDINATION
The process of preparing and submitting an
UWMP is a transparent process that
requires opportunities for outside-agency
and general public involvement. In
preparing this 2020 Plan, the City has
encouraged broad community participation.
The City notified the agencies that the City
interacts with more
than 60 days in
advance of the City
Council’s adoption of
the Plan. The City has
also made the draft
Plan available at City
Hall and on the City’s
website, leading up to a public hearing on
the Plan. Notices of the public hearing were
published in the local press and on the
City’s website for a two-week period. On
June 8, 2021, the City held a noticed public
hearing to review and accept comments on
the UWMP. Following the public hearing,
the City officially adopted the 2020 Plan
through Council resolution. A copy of the
council resolution adopting this UWMP is
included in Appendix A.
57 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 1.1
Coordination and Public Involvement
Agency
Participated
in Plan
Preparation
Sent 60-
Day Notice
Commented
on Draft
Notified
of Public
Hearing
Attended
Public
Hearing
San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency x x x
Beaumont Cherry Valley Water
District x x
Beaumont Basin Watermaster x x
City of Beaumont x x
Yucaipa Valley Water District x x
High Valleys Water District x x
County of Riverside Planning
Department x x
Various Developers x x
Building Industry Association of
Southern California x x
Cabazon Water District x x
Morongo Band of Mission Indians x x
Banning Heights Mutual Water
Company x x
South Mesa Water Company x x
General Public x
Note: Documents were made available to the public through notices published in the newspaper, online, and at the City Clerk's office for public review.
58 1 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
As required by the Act, the 2020 UWMP is
being prepared by the City and will be
submitted to DWR, the California State
Library, and any city or county within which
it provides water to no later than 30 days
after adoption. The 2020 UWMP has been
made available to the public on the City’s
website and at City Hall during normal
business hours within 30 days of submitting
the 2020 UWMP to DWR.
1.3 DWR UPDATES FOR THE 2020 UWMPS
There have been significant changes to the
Water Code affecting the 2020 UWMPs.
The changes include the following:
Water Reliability Planning: UWMPs
must extend drought planning of
water sources (supplies) for periods of
up to five (5) consecutive dry years
(CWC § 10635 (a)).
Drought Risk Assessment: UWMPs
must assess water supply reliability
over five (5) consecutive dry years
that takes into consideration
demands (CWC § 10635(b)).
Seismic Risk: UWMPs must address
seismic risks in the Contingency
Section in the UWMP, or refer to
local or regional hazard mitigation
plans (CWC § 10632.5 (a) (b) and (c)).
Contingency Plans: Water Shortage
Contingency Plans (WSCPs) must
include six (6) Standard Stages
(CWC § 10632(a)(3)).
Groundwater Supply Projections: If a
Groundwater Sustainability Plan has
been completed by an agency,
groundwater pumping projections in
the UWMP must be consistent with
those Plans (CWC § 10631(A)(B)).
Lay Description: UWMPs must
include a less-technical summary of
water service reliability, challenges,
and strategies which could be read as
a go-to synopsis for new staff, new
governing members, customers, and
the media (CWC § 10630.5).
Energy Intensity: UWMPs must
report on the energy intensity of
water supplies (CWC § 10631.2 (a)).
Land Use: UWMPs must Include
current and projected land uses in
addition to population estimates
(CWC § 10631 (a)).
Water Supply Projects: UWMPs must
include a description of potential
water supply projects that may be
implemented during droughts of up
to five (5) years (CWC § 10631 (f)).
59 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Of the above listed changes to the UWMPs
by DWR, the contingency planning changes
(i.e., changes to the City’s WSCP) are the
most significant updates affecting the 2020
UWMPs. These contingency planning
changes were written into the Water Code
in 2018, in response to the severe drought
of 2012-2017. While overlapping aspects of
the prior law, the new requirements have
several prescriptive elements that a Water
Supplier’s WSCP must include.
In addition to the above, there are several
optional or voluntary categorical and data
reporting changes to the UWMP Act. These
include an optional Planning Tool that
suppliers can use to report and assess water
use and supply in order to better conduct
the Reliability Assessment and Drought Risk
Assessment, a Potable and Non-Potable
Planning Tool, Potable and Non-Potable
Submittal Tables, as well as various optional
data reporting.
1.4 UPDATES TO THE CITY’S UWMP
In addition to required updates described in
the previous section, the City’s 2020 UWMP
has undergone several changes from the
2015 UWMP. A summary of the key
changes to the UWMP are as follows:
New Format: Format of the UWMP has
been changed to include a new look and
new arrangement of sections. The new
arrangement helps the discussion of
certain topics which precede other
topics. See Section 1.5 for the format of
this 2020 UWMP.
DWR & Water Code: A listing of DWRrequired UWMP updates (see previous Section).
City Development Growth: An updated
look at development which took place in
the City since the 2015 UWMP.
Water Sources and Supplies: A broader,
more in-depth discussion of water
sources and supplies.
Recycled Water: An updated look at
recycled water opportunities in the City.
Water Quality: A broader, more indepth discussion of water quality and treatment.
Water Use: Updated information on
recent water use quantities and a
deeper discussion on water use
parameters. Also, an updated look at
SBx7-7 targets.
Supply v Demand: Updated information
on projected supplies vs demands, and a
discussion on recent regional droughts
affecting the City. There is also an
expansion on the discussion of the City’s
source water reliability.
60 1 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Contingency Planning: Updated
information on the City's contingency
plans, including the City’s Ordinances.
Conservation Measures: Updated
information on the City's conservation
measures, which reflect the previous
(2015) changes by DWR.
In addition to the above changes, there are
multiple minor changes. The changes reflect
both those that are required by the Water
Code and those that are voluntarily
included for the benefit of the City.
1.5 FORMAT OF THE 2020 UWMP
The information contained in this 2020
UWMP correspond to the items in the
UWMP Act and other amendments to the
Water Code. The sections of the UWMP are
as follows:
Section 1 - Introduction
This section describes the UWMP Act, the
UWMP preparation and adoption process,
updates to the UWMP, and a lay description
of this entire document.
Section 2 – Service Area Description
This section outlines the history and
development of the City and the City’s
water supply system, a description of its
existing service area, the local climate,
population served, and some basic statistics
on the City’s water distribution system.
Section 3 – Water Sources & Supplies
This section describes the existing water
supplies available to the City, including local
groundwater extracted from the San
Gorgonio Pass Subbasin (SGP Subbasin) of
the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin,
and its five (5) water storage units (also
colloquially termed "basins"), and imported
water from the State Water Project (SWP)
obtained from the San Gorgonio Pass Water
Agency (SGPWA). In addition, this section
discusses potential future water supplies.
Section 4 – Recycled Water Opportunities
This section describes the City’s wastewater
collection by the City and treatment at the
City’s wastewater treatment plant (WWTP),
and the uses and benefits to implementing
a recycled water system. In addition, this
section discusses the future use of recycled
water in the City.
Section 5 – Water Quality
This section discusses the quality of the
City’s potable water supply sources,
including imported, surface, and
groundwater. This section also discusses
drinking water standards and the effect that
water quality has on management
strategies and supply reliability.
61 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Section 6 – Water Use
This section describes past, current and
projected water usage within the City’s
service area. This chapter also discusses the
requirement of the Water Conservation Act
(SBx7-7), including the 2020 Water Use
Targets.
Section 7 – Reliability Planning
This section presents a drought risk
assessment of the City’s water system. The
drought risk assessment is an assessment of
the reliability of the City’s water supplies by
comparing projected future water demands
with expected available water supplies
under three different hydrologic conditions:
normal year; a single dry year; and multiple
dry years. This 2020 Plan concludes that if
projected imported and local supplies are
developed as anticipated, no water
shortages are anticipated in the City’s
service area during the planning period.
Section 8 – Contingency Planning
This section describes the City’s response
plan to water shortages, as well as those
efforts that will be utilized in the event of
water supply interruptions, such as power
outages, earthquakes, or droughts. This
section also describes regional response
efforts to water supply interruptions.
Section 9 – Conservation Measures
This section addresses the City’s compliance
with water conservation measures that
correspond to the seven (7) Demand
Management Measures (DMMs) described
in the 2020 UWMP Guidebook, which were
previously the fourteen (14) DMMs listed in
the Act. The DMMs also correspond to the
current Best Management Practices (BMPs)
from the California Water Efficiency
Partnership (CalWEP).
Appendices
The appendices contain references, specific
documents, and data used to prepare this
2020 Plan.
1.6 LAY DESCRIPTION
To facilitate effective and efficient
management of water supplies, and in
compliance with the UWMP Act and the
Water Conservation Act of 2009, the City
has prepared this 2020 UWMP. This UWMP
includes background information regarding
the City’s history, water system, and water
supplies. This UWMP also analyzes recent
water demands and projects future water
supply capacity and water demands
through 2045. The effects of water quality,
drought, and emergencies on the City’s
water supply reliability are also analyzed.
62 1 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
As indicated by Section 7 of this UWMP, the
City does not expect to have a water supply
shortage through 2045. Furthermore, this
UWMP concludes that the City’s water
supplies, which are obtained entirely from
local groundwater basins, are resilient to
droughts. A basic overview of the City’s
water system can be found in Section 2.
Water quality does do have an occasional
impact on the consistency of groundwater
supplies, but due to the recent ruling by the
State Water Resources Control Board on
Chromium-6, the City’s groundwater quality
is not expected to be affected.
This UWMP recommends that the City
implement water operation management
tools that maximize the use of local
groundwater production and decrease the
need for imported water. This UWMP also
recommends conservation tools that will
enable the City’s residents to conserve
water and maximize water use efficiency.
These are described in Section 9.
If the water consumption rates in the City
decrease as this UWMP projects, the City
can expect to have an adequate water
supply in future years. This is in spite of a
projected population growth over the next
25 years. Finally, this UWMP recommends
that severe droughts or sudden supply
interruptions be addressed by following the
criteria of the Water Shortage Contingency
Plan (WSCP), as described in Section 8 of
this UWMP.
Since UWMPs are due for revision every five
years, this UWMP is projected to be in
effect until the year’s end of 2025. At that
time the City's 2025 UWMP will begin
development and adoption.
63 Section 2
Service Area Description
The City of Banning’s water service area (pictured) serves the entirety of the City’s population, along with small portions of the County outside of the City. The estimated current resident population served by the City’s water system is approximately 31,000 persons.
64 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
2 SERVICE AREA
DESCRIPTION
2.1 CITY AND WATER SYSTEM HISTORY
The City of Banning was incorporated on
February 6, 1913. Currently, the City is a
general-law City per the State of California
Govt Code § 34102. Per the US Census
Bureau, the City qualifies as an “urban area”,
but currently falls under the “urban cluster”
category which is a Census category for small
to mid-size cities. The City operates under a
City Council/City Manager form of
government. The City Council consists of five
(5) Council Members elected to four-year
terms, one of which is appointed mayor by
Council for a one-year term. The City
Manager, who serves on behalf of the City
Council, runs the day-to-day operations of
the City. Under the City Manager’s general
oversight, the City’s Director of Public Works
runs the Public Works Department, which
includes the City’s Water and Sewer Division.
The City’s Water Division performs all
activities related to the water system.
2.1.1 Early Stages
Prior to the City’s incorporation, the Banning
Water Company, which was incorporated in
1884, provided delivery of domestic and
irrigation water to various local customers
within the area. In 1913, the Banning Water
Company began operating as a public utility,
and, in 1967 the City acquired the Banning
Water Company. Later in 1997, the City
purchased the Mountain Water Company,
which had supplied water to its customers in
The City's Water
Service Area
comprises about
16,908 acres or
26.4 square miles.
65 2 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
an unincorporated portion of the County of
Riverside from groundwater wells located
within the City.
2.2 CURRENT WATER SERVICE AREA
The City of Banning is located in the
northwestern portion of Riverside County,
approximately 25 miles east of downtown
Riverside and approximately 30 miles west
of the City of Palm Springs. The City is
bounded by the San Bernardino Mountains
to the north; Cherry Valley to the northwest;
the City of Beaumont to the west and
southwest; unincorporated County area to
the south; the San Jacinto Mountains to the
southeast; and the Morongo Band of
Mission Indians and unincorporated
community of Cabazon to the east. The City’s
total land area is 14,848 acres or 23.2 square
miles.
The City’s water service area comprises 100
percent of the population residing within the
City limits, and a small unincorporated area
of Riverside County. The City's Water Service
Area comprises about 16,908 acres or 26.4
square miles.
The City is a retail agency and within the San
Gorgonio Pass Subbasin portion of the
Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. The
City is a member of the San Gorgonio Pass
Regional Water Alliance (Alliance). The
Alliance was created to identify challenges in
water supply and water quality in the region
and to improve coordination and
communication among local, state, and
federal governments and water purveyors
and other water resource stakeholders in
the San Gorgonio Pass region.
Since the 2015 UWMP, the City has
participated in the following two additional
agreements:
1. San Gorgonio IRWM Regional Water
Management Group, which includes:
City of Banning, Banning Heights
Mutual Water Company, Cabazon
Water District, High Valleys Water
District, RCFCWCD, and the San
Gorgonio Pass Water Agency.
2. San Timoteo Groundwater Sustainability
Agency, which includes: City of
Banning, Beaumont-Cherry Valley
Water District, City of Redlands,
Yucaipa Valley Water District, San
Gorgonio Pass Water Agency.
The City participates in the Beaumont
Management Zone (BMZ) Maximum
Benefits Program, which is under the
oversight of the Santa Ana Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and is
intended to ensure the long-term
sustainability of water quality in the BMZ.
Yucaipa Valley Water District, BeaumontCherry Valley Water District, and City of Beaumont also participate in the program.
66 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
The City also meets bi-monthly with the
Beaumont Basin Watermaster, which is
comprised of a five-member Watermaster
Committee that consists of representatives
from each of the five appropriators, which
include the City of Banning, City of
Beaumont, Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water
District, South Mesa Water Company, and
Yucaipa Valley Water District. This panel
meets to discuss local issues with different
agencies and addresses adjudicated rights
within the Beaumont Basin.
Water Division staff read water meters
monthly for billing purposes, change
damaged water meters in order to keep
accurate accounts of water consumed by
customers, and tracks water purchased from
the SGPWA to ensure proper delivery of
purchased water and related billing. The
City's Water Division staff are certified by the
State of California to operate, maintain, and
repair the water distribution system and the
City’s wells.
The Water Division’s key objectives can be
summarized as the following:
Respond to all water quality
complaints
Flushing mains
Efficiently operate groundwater
facilities
Maintain and make repairs to all
components of the water distribution
system
Comply with Division of Drinking
Water (DDW) regulations, including
laboratory testing
Promote water certification and safety
training
Another component of the Water Division’s
objectives is to lead and/or assist in the
planning, design, and construction of the
water system. This objective involves duties
that occur on an infrequent, as-needed
basis, such as assisting with the preparation
of Master Plans and UWMPs.
2.3 LAND USE & ECONOMY
The City is one of twenty-eight (28)
incorporated cities located in Riverside
County. Riverside County encompasses an
area of 7,206 square miles or 4.6 million
acres, and is bordered on the west by
Orange County, on the north by San
Bernardino County, on the South by San
Diego and Imperial Counties, and on the east
by the Colorado River. Roughly 4% of the
total acreage in unincorporated Riverside
County is irrigated for agricultural purposes,
most of which occurs in the area known as
the Palo Verde Valley. According to a County
Report, nearly 200,000 acres are used for
agriculture in Riverside County, including
67 2 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
acreage in both unincorporated and
incorporated County. Overall, Riverside
County’s agricultural production consists of
more than 120 types of commodities. In
addition, a number of
dairies located in the
County have significant
economic impact. In
fact, according to
County Agricultural
Reports, milk accounts
for the single highest-ranking value at over
$150 million gross. Total combined
agricultural production in Riverside County is
just over $1 billion.
In addition to agricultural and livestock
production, the County has a substantial
manufacturing economy. According to
County estimates, total manufacturing
production in Riverside County is estimated
to be over $10 billion, of which over $1
billion consists of food shipments.
The Riverside County General Plan, updated
October 2017, identifies nineteen (19)
Specific Area Plans within Riverside County.
This includes a mixture of residential,
commercial, industrial, and public facility
development. No specific developments are
identified within the City in the current
version of the County’s Plan because the City
is governed by its own general plan.
2.3.1 City Land Use & Economics
The City includes a mixture of residential
uses and equestrian estates, combined with
more-recent planned residential housing
developments. The community focal point is
actually an extended commercial downtown
stretching along Ramsey Street. Ramsey
Street largely parallels Interstate 10;
consequently, one can find almost any type
of restaurant, bank, or service station here -
a wider variety than one would expect in a
City of this size.
Table 2.1 on the following page provides
some basic statistics on current land use and
economy for Riverside County and the City.
Figure 2.3 in this Section shows the Riverside
County General Plan Land Use Map, which
includes the agricultural, open space, and
community areas.
Riverside County’s
agricultural
component has
aided the growth
of inland empire
communities.
68 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 2.1
Current Land Use & Economic Statistics for Riverside County and City of Banning Land: Total (sq. miles)
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Land Area (sq. miles) 7,206 sq. miles 23 sq. miles
Land Area (acres) 4,611,840 acres 14,720 acres
Land: Irrigated/Agriculture (acres)
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Agricultural Land 263,796 acres 1,200 acres
Land: Developed (acres)
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Developed Land 165,151 acres 428 acres
Population
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Population 2,470,546 31,125
Housing
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Housing Units 857,148 10,991
Median Home Price $350,100 $234,900
Owner Occupancy Rate 66.3% 65.9%
Economy
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Employed (16yrs +) 59.7% 44.5%
Median Household Income $67,005 $42,274
Percent in Poverty 11.3% 20.6%
Economic: Production/Revenue
Item Riverside County City of Banning
Manufacturing $15.1 Billion $72.8 Million
Agriculture/Crops $3.9 Billion N/A*
Retail & Wholesale Sales $43.8 Billion $248.7 Million
69 2 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.3.2 Development in City
The current City General Plan was
comprehensively updated by the twentyeight (28) member General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), which was appointed by
the Banning City Council. The GPAC review
process began in March of 2003 and ended
in January of 2005. At the end of this
process, the GPAC recommended a draft
document to the Planning Commission and
City Council.
The Banning General Plan contains the
following elements, as mandated by
Government Code Section 65302: Land Use,
Traffic & Circulation, Housing, Conservation,
Open Space, Safety and Noise. In addition to
the mandated elements, optional elements
have been included in this General Plan,
including Economic Development and
Cultural Resources. The Banning Land Use
Element identifies that land within the City’s
limits is broken down into six (6) main zones
as shown on Figure 2.4 and as follows:
Residential
Ranch/Agriculture
Ranch/Agriculture Hillside
Rural
Rural Hillside
Very Low, Low, Medium, and High
Density
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Downtown
General
Highway Serving
Professional Office
Industrial
Light and Medium Manufacturing
Mini-Storage
Auto storage and repair
Business Park
Mineral Resources
Public Facilities
Airport
Government
Cemetery
Fire Station
Schools
Hospital
Railroad and Interstate
Open Space and Conservation
Resources Preservation
Parks
Hillside Preservation
Other
Indian jurisdiction
Miscellaneous
The City’s Land Use Element is meant to
promote an orderly pattern of development
in the City, including the City’s ability to
provide water service to the development.
70 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
2.3.3 Recent Developments
The City has experienced very substantial
developments in recent years. Recent or
planned developments are shown on Figure
2.5. Some of these developments are listed
in Table 2.2:
Table 2.2
Recent Developments in City of Banning
(Since 2015 UWMP)
No. Development
1 Banning Distribution Center*
2 Mountain Ave. Baptist School
(Expansion of existing private school
and installation of five modular
building)
3 Inland Behavioral Health Services
4 ESTES Trucking Terminal*
5 West Coast Electric*
6 Cruz Industrial Truck Inc.
7 O'Reilly's Auto Parts*
8 Taco Bell
Tot. Eight (8) Developments
*Pending or Under Construction
2.3.4 Planned Developments
Currently, there are two (2) significant
developments planned within the City's
water service area, as described below. Final
subdivision maps prepared for the two
projects will comply with the provisions of
CA Government Code Section 66473.7.
Atwell (Formerly “Butterfield”)
The Atwell Specific Plan is a master planned
community project that encompasses 1,543
acres and includes approximately 4,900
residential dwelling units, two elementary
schools, two commercial sites, and
community parks and trails. The project will
be constructed in five phases over an
estimated period of 30 years. Figure 2.1
shows some of the developments currently
being constructed.
Figure 2.1: Atwell Development
A project-specific water supply assessment
(WSA), titled Water Supply Assessment for
Atwell Specific Plan, Issued June 2011 with
the Draft EIR, Modified December 2011 by
Section 4.1 of the Final EIR, was prepared to
determine the adequacy of existing and
future water supplies to serve the project.
71 2 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
Atwell, which includes an analysis of water
supply supported by the project specific
WSA cited above, has been approved by City
Council.
Tri Pointe Homes (formerly known as Pardee
Homes), the home builder responsible for
the new development, has stated that
escrow was closed on 83 homes in
2020. They are projecting 392 escrow
closings by year end of 2021, bringing the
total number of closed homes to 475. They
are projecting 316 escrow closings in 2022,
bringing the total number of homes
occupied by new buyers to 791.
Rancho San Gorgonio
The Rancho San Gorgonio Specific Plan
(Rancho San Gorgonio) is a master planned
community project that encompasses
approximately 831 acres and includes up to
3,385 residential dwelling units, almost 49
acres of neighborhood and community
parks, over 160 acres of paseos and open
space, and approximately 81 acres of rightof-way and utility easements. The project is anticipated to be constructed in six phases
over a period of 18 years. This period is likely
to be extended due to varying economic
factors.
A project-specific WSA was prepared for
Rancho San Gorgonio, titled Water Supply
Assessment Rancho San Gorgonio Specific
Plan, by Madole & Associates, Inc. and
Encompass Associates, Inc., in 2015.
The Draft EIR for Rancho San Gorgonio
analyzes water supply supported by the
project-specific WSA cited above. Both the
EIR and WSA have been completed and
approved by the City Council.
2.4 CLIMATE
The City is located within the San Gorgonio
Pass, which is a transitional zone where
coastal climates transition to desert,
resulting in significantly differing landscape
and geology. The climate can best be
characterized by hot, dry summers and
short, mild winters. The region receives an
average annual rainfall of approximately
19.7 inches, most of which takes place
between December and March.
Evapotranspiration (ETo) in the area ranges
from 7.88 inches in July to 1.94 inches in
December.
As the State of California and the Riverside
County region has undergone a several-year
drought, rainfall has been much lower in the
City. Southern California is also expected to
be in a moderate La Nina year for 2021.
Recent ETo and rainfall for the City is listed
in Table 2.3:
72 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 2.3
Recent Climate Characteristics (2021)
CIMIS Station 239 (Hemet)
(cimis.water.ca.gov)
Month
Rainfall
(in)
ETo (in)
Jan (2021) 0.75 2.30
Feb (2021) 0.27 3.15
Mar (2021) 1.41 4.21
Apr (2021) 0.15 6.14
May (2020) 0.03 7.89
Jun (2020) 0.00 7.70
Jul (2020) 0.07 9.16
Aug (2020) 0.00 8.34
Sep (2020) 0.00 6.47
Oct (2020) 0.01 4.65
Nov (2020) 0.26 2.87
Dec (2020) 0.00 2.13
Totals: 2.95 65.01
As noted in the table, rainfall totals for all
months are lower than the normal levels.
2.4.1 Climate Change
The DWR Guidebook requires water
suppliers to include a discussion of climate
change in their UWMPs, specifically with
regard to Drought Risk Assessments (DRA).
Section 7 of this UWMP provides an
overview of droughts. The Riverside County
2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update was
prepared to meet the goals and objectives of
Assembly Bill No. 32 (AB 32) and to refine the
County's efforts to meet greenhouse gas
(GHG) reduction strategies, through 2050.
The 2019 CAP Update builds upon the GHG
reduction strategies in the 2015 Climate
Action Plan. The CAP is a single document
that provides a framework for assessing
greenhouse gas emissions, establishes an
emissions reduction target, and outlines
strategies to meet these goals.
The California Adaptive Planning Guide
(2012) projects possible temperature
increases throughout the South Coast
region. By 2050, average temperatures in
the Colorado River hydrologic region could
increase by nearly 5˚F. The annual number of
extreme heat days (with temperatures of
more than 105˚F) could increase by 2050.
Similarly, precipitation could decline by a
few inches per year by 2050. The County’s
CAP mentioned above lists seven (7) steps
for implementing the GHG emissionreduction strategies. Among the 7 steps listed in the CAP is water conservation. Due
to the City’s reliance on groundwater, the
City is not significantly impacted by
temperature changes or droughts compared
to agencies relying on surface water. Section
7 provides greater detail of droughts and
their impact on the City’s supplies.
73 2 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.5 POPULATION
According to the most recent population
figures from the California Department of
Finance (DOF), the current 2020 resident
population of the City is approximately
31,125 persons. Since the City's water
service area comprises 100 percent of the
population residing within the City limits, the
total current resident population served by
the City’s water system is approximately
31,125 persons, too. This is approximately
500 persons more than the population total
in 2015. The City is currently experiencing a
peak population, based on DoF estimates.
Table 2.4 below lists the City’s recent and
current (2020) populations:
Table 2.4
City of Banning Current Population
Year Service Area
Population
2015 30,542
2016 30,769
2017 30,981
2018 31,091
2019 31,142
2020 31,125
Since the City is a commercial and
government-services center for the region,
daytime population estimates may be
somewhat higher than the City's resident
population.
2.5.1 Population Projections
The SCAG periodically forecasts population
growth for incorporated and unincorporated
areas within Southern California. In its latest
forecast prepared in 2020, SCAG forecasted
a 2045 population for the City at 41,500. Two
(2) proposed developments, Atwell and
Rancho San Gorgonio (totaling 8,300
connections) will be added to the SCAG
estimate for 2045. Three (3) persons per
connection multiplied by 8,300 connections
(totaling 24,900 persons) amounts to 66,400
persons for 2045. This amounts to a growth
of 1,411 persons per year for 25 years to
2045. Population projections for 2045, and
every five-year increment from 2020 until
then is shown in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5
Population Projections
Year Service Area
Population
2025 38,180
2030 45,235
2035 52,290
2040 59,345
2045 66,400
As the City continues to grow both in size
and significance, the City may likely
experience periodic spikes in the number of
daytime or short-term residents (due to
schools or daytime commercial jobs).
74 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 11
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
2.6 WATER SYSTEM
A basic overview of the City’s water system
is provided herein. More information on the
City’s water sources, water treatment, and
water demands can be found in Sections 3
through 6 of this report. As this report is
more of a water-resource-management
planning document, it does not provide a
great degree of technical or engineering
detail on water system components.
2.6.1 City Water System Overview
Overall, the City’s water system consists of
the following components:
Imported Water (used to recharge the
City's storage account in the Beaumont
Basin)
Groundwater supply wells with on-site
water treatment facilities
Water distribution pipeline network
Water storage facilities
Booster stations
Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) stations
Emergency interconnections
2.6.2 Imported Water
The City purchases State Water Project
(SWP) non-potable water from the San
Gorgonio Pass Water Agency (SGPWA) a
State Water Contractor, that is used to
recharge the Beaumont Basin. The recharge
points have changed since the 2015 UWMP.
Some used to be located at BeaumontCherry Valley Water District (BCVWD) owned percolation ponds, but now they are
being recharged entirely at SGPWA recharge
facilities.
Two Interconnect facilities with BCVWD are
being planned within the Atwell
development. One of which will soon start
construction on Meadowline Way, but will
not be online until 2022. The second is the
Starlight interconnect. These interconnect
facilities are for use of co-owned wells,
which happen to be in the Beaumont Basin,
but are not necessarily just in the “imported”
water category. While there are still
appropriative rights available, the water can
be considered a mix of local groundwater
and imported water that was recharged into
the Beaumont Basin.
The City and BCVWD jointly own and operate
three groundwater wells, Wells 24, 25, and
26, in accordance with an agreement
between the two parties, dated December
23, 2003. These wells produce water from
the Beaumont Basin, and can collectively
supply roughly 3,400 gpm. This supply is
considered a groundwater supply rather
than an imported supply. The City does not
have any direct imported water connections.
75 2 - 12 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.6.3 Groundwater
The City’s potable water system is entirely
supplied by groundwater from 19 drinking
groundwater wells and 1 non-potable
groundwater well. The City lost Well M-12
but is currently looking into redrilling. Tri
Pointe Homes, a land developer, plans to
dedicate a piece of land where the City will
design/construct Well C-8, which would take
the count to 21 total wells. The groundwater
wells are spread out throughout the City, in
five (5) basins (also colloquially termed "
storage units"): Beaumont, West Banning
(formerly known as the Banning Basin),
Cabazon (formerly known as the East
Banning Basin), Banning Bench, and the
Banning Water Canyon. These basins are
described in Section 3.
Localized water treatment varies by well
site, but can include sand separation and
disinfection through chemical addition. The
water treatment facilities at the City’s
groundwater wells consists of the following:
Well 1: Liquid hypochlorite system
Well 3: Liquid hypochlorite system
Well C-5: Liquid hypochlorite system
Well C-6: Liquid hypochlorite system
Wells M-3 and M-11: A sand separator
and liquid hypochlorite system
Currently, all wells use liquid sodium
hypochlorite and none of the sand
separators are being used.
2.6.4 Distribution System
The City distributes water to residential,
commercial, and other customers through
approximately 10,754 service connections
using a 168-mile network of distribution
mains averaging 8 inches in size. The
majority of the current distribution pipes
were installed between 1981 to 1990. The
water system consists of six (6) pressure
zones that provide modified pressure to
customers. The water service area is shown
in Figures 2.2 at end of this Section.
2.6.5 Water Storage
For storage needs, the City maintains
operating reservoirs with a combined
storage capacity of 19.55 million gallons
(MG) amongst nine (9) reservoirs. These
reservoirs consist of the following:
San Gorgonio Reservoirs 1, 2 and 3:
Welded steel storage tanks, a belowgrade valve vault, and the Foothill East PRV station within a security fence.
Sunset Reservoirs: Two (2) welded
steel storage tanks.
Mountain Reservoir & Booster: One (1)
welded steel tank, three (3) booster
76 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 13
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
pumps, and three (3) hydropneumatics
tanks.
Southwest Reservoir: A prestressed
concrete tank that is partially buried,
an irrigation pump, and a few electrical
boxes. It is located inside the Sun Lakes
Country Club. The tank was installed
around 2003.
High Valley Reservoir: A galvanized
bolted steel tank within a security
fence.
Brinton Reservoir: The largest of the
City’s tanks, has an aboveground
storage capacity of 24.6 AF.
2.6.6 Booster Stations
The City of Banning maintains and operates
two (2) booster stations throughout its
service area. The first Booster station is
located at Well C2. The second is located at
the Mountain Reservoir.
2.6.7 PRV Stations
The City maintains and operates six (6)
Pressure Reducing Valve Stations
throughout its service area. These PRV
stations include the following:
Sun Lakes PRV station: From the
Foothill West Zone to the Main Zone.
Foothill East PRV station: From the
Canyon Wells Zone to the Foothill East
Zone.
Well 1 PRV: From the Canyon Wells
Zone to the Main Zone.
Mountain South PRV: From the Main
Zone to the Mountain South Zone.
San Gorgonio & Lincoln PRV: From the
Main Zone to the Lower I Zone.
Hargrave & John St PRV station: From
the Main Zone to the Lower I Zone.
2.6.8 Emergency Interconnections
The City’s water system includes one
emergency connection, a 12-inch emergency
interconnection with BCVWD at the western
boundary of the City's service area, at the
intersection of Sun Lakes Blvd & Highland
Springs Ave. The interconnect was used in
the summer of 2020 to meet demands with
a comfortable margin. Before this year, the
interconnect had not been used since 2008.
Four wells were down during the summer of
2020 for rehab, and due to fires, another
well went down. This interconnect was used
to supplement the loss from these wells.
Three (3) of the four wells are about to go
back online, but M-12 is no longer
operational.
77 2 - 14 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 2.2: City of Banning Water Service Area
78 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 15
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 2.3: Riverside County General Plan Land Use Map (from Riverside County Official Website) Note: The City of Banning is within
The Pass Area Plan Boundary.
City of Banning
79 2 - 16 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 2.4: City of Banning Zoning Map
80 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2 - 17
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 2.5: City of Banning: Known Developments
81 2 - 18 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 2: SERVICE AREA DESCRIPTION
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
82 Section 3
Water Sources & Supplies
The City’s Source of Water Supply is Groundwater Pumped from Five (5) Local Groundwater Basins. The City also Uses Imported Water to Recharge the Groundwater Basins.
83 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n 3
WATER SOURCES
& SUPPLIES
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This section describes the current and
projected potable water resources available
to the City over a 25-year period. The City
currently uses potable water and nonpotable water to meet the water needs of its service area. The City’s water is obtained
entirely from local groundwater basins
through nineteen (19) potable groundwater
wells, one (1) non-potable groundwater
well, and three (3) co-owned wells with the
Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District
(BCVWD). The City also has access to
imported water from the San Gorgonio Pass
Water Agency (SGPWA) and surface water
from the Whitewater River. Both imported
water and surface water are used to
recharge the groundwater aquifers.
This Section describes the current and
projected water resources available to the
City over a 25-year period (through 2045).
This Section also provides some background
information on the overall water supplies
available to the region.
3.2 IMPORTED WATER SOURCES
3.2.1 Bay Delta
The City has access to imported water from
the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta in
Northern California through SGPWA. The
Bay Delta water system provides Southern
California agencies with over 1 million acrefeet (MAF) of water annually.
The City's water
supply consists of
local groundwater
sources and
imported water
used to recharge
such sources.
84 3 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 3.1: Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta
85 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
The State Water
Project or "SWP" is
a result of decades
of planning and
construction
dating back to the
1940s.
The “Delta” is located at the confluence of
the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers east
of the San Francisco Bay and is the West
Coast's largest estuary. The Delta supplies
Southern California with over 1 MAF of
water annually which has been significantly
reduced in recent years.
Figure 3.2: Bay Delta
The Delta is often considered the nexus of
California's statewide water system. About
half the total river flow in the State passes
through this region, from which water is
exported to the San Joaquin Valley,
Southern California and portions of the Bay
area to supply some 1,130,000 acres of
farmland and 23 million people in central
and Southern California. The Delta provides
an estimated 7 million acre-feet (MAF) of
water per year, of which about 100,000 AF
are exported to the San Francisco Bay Area,
1.7 MAF are used locally, and over 5 MAF
are exported to the San Joaquin Valley,
coastal Central and Southern California via
the State Water Project.
3.2.2 State Water Project (Aqueduct)
The California State Water Project is a water
storage and delivery system of reservoirs,
aqueducts, power-plants and pumping
plants. Its main purpose is to store water
and distribute it to 29 urban and
agricultural water suppliers in Northern
California, the San Francisco Bay Area, the
San Joaquin Valley, the Central Coast, and
Southern California. Of the contracted
water supply, 70 percent goes to urban
users and 30 percent goes to agriculture.
In 1947, the California State Legislature
funded a water resources investigation that
led to the development of the SWP. This
investigation resulted in the publication of
the California Water Plan, which presented
preliminary plans to
meet the State’s
ultimate water needs,
including those facility
works required for
transferring surplus
water from northern
California to southern
California. Financing
for the construction of SWP facilities was
authorized in 1959, when the State
Legislature enacted the California Water
Resources Development Act (known as the
Burns-Porter Act). The Burns-Porter Act,
formally known as the California Water
Resources Development Bond Act, was placed
86 3 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 3.3: Aqueduct Systems in California
87 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 3.4: State Water Project
on the November 1960 ballot. Also known
as Proposition One, the initial works
included Oroville Dam and Lake Oroville,
B.F. Sisk Dam (also known as San Luis Dam)
and San Luis Reservoir, the South Bay
Aqueduct, the North Bay Aqueduct, and the
California Aqueduct. Construction on the
Oroville site actually began even before
the passage of the Burns-Porter Act. A $25
million emergency appropriation was
passed in 1957 after a record late 1955-
early 1956 flood, which devastated
Northern and Central California. Statewide,
64 deaths were recorded, most in Sutter
County and Yuba City, and more than $200
million of property damage.
The first SWP water deliveries were made in
1962, two years after construction began
The State of California Department of
Water Resources (DWR) and MWD signed
the first water supply contract in 1960.
Today 29 agencies have long-term water
supply contracts with DWR. The service
areas of these long-term water supply
contractors vary widely in size, location,
climate, and population. The contractors’
uses for SWP water also differ. In the San
Joaquin Valley, SWP water is used primarily
for agriculture. In Southern California, SWP
water is used primarily for urban and
industrial needs.
88 3 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
DWR allocates
water to 29 SWP
contractors on an
annual basis,
including the San
Gorgonio Pass
Water Agency.
Today, the SWP includes 34 storage
facilities, reservoirs and lakes; 20 pumping
plants; 4 pumping-generating plants; 5
hydroelectric power plants; and about 701
miles of open canals and pipelines. The SWP
is owned and managed by the Department
of Water Resources (DWR).
3.3 IMPORTED WATER PURCHASES
In the early 1960s, DWR began entering into
individual SWP Water Supply Contracts with
urban and agricultural public water supply
agencies located throughout northern,
central, and southern California for SWP
water supplies. The San Gorgonio Pass
Water Agency (SGPWA)
is one of 29 agencies
in the State that have
a SWP Water Supply
Contract with DWR.
These agencies receive
an allocation from the
SWP each year.
SGPWA also acquires
water supplies through contracts with other
agencies and annual water transfers and
exchanges. SGPWA annually acquires Yuba
Accord water as well as water under the
Nickel Agreement. SGPWA may also acquire
water through an agreement with SBVMWD
as well as annual transfers and exchanges
with other SWP contractors.
Currently, as a wholesale agency, SGPWA
distributes imported SWP water to three (3)
member agencies:
City of Banning
BCVWD
Yucaipa Valley Water District
Nine retail purveyors, including the three
listed above, provide water services to most
residents and businesses within the SGPWA
service area and all nine retailers supply
water to their customers from local
groundwater. Banning Heights is the only
agency that does not provide water from
local groundwater; their primary source is
surface water. The SGPWA Service Area
Boundary is shown below in Figure 3.6. The
remaining retail purveyors include the
following:
South Mesa Water Company
Cabazon Water District
Banning Heights Mutual Water
High Valleys Water District
Mission Springs Water District
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
SGPWA delivers its SWP supplies through
the East Branch to use within the local
groundwater basins. Efforts to increase the
89 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 3.5: SGPWA Service Area
City of Banning
90 3 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
conveyance capacity of the East Branch
extension to 48 cubic feet per second (CFS)
were completed in 2017. Past SWP deliveries
to SGPWA are shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1
SWP Deliveries to SGPWA (2003 to 2015)
Year Purchases
(AF)
2003 116
2004 814
2005 687
2006 4,420
2007 4,815
2008 4,905
2009 5,792
2010 6,840
2011 10,503
2012 10,924
2013 7,068
2014 5,175
2015 3,478
2016 9,616
2017 11,246
2018 5,548
Average: 5,479
Source: DWR – Final SWP Delivery Capability Report (2019) & 2014 San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency Report on Water
Conditions; 2015 data provided by SGPWA.
SWP supplies delivered to the SGPWA
service area are not treated prior to
reaching the recharge facilities, except for
water delivered to YVWD. The imported
water YVWD receives is treated at the
Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Filtration
Facility (YVRWFF), with a capacity of 12
million gallons per day (MGD).
As stated in Section 2, the recharge points
into the Beaumont Basin have changed
since the 2015 UWMP. Previously,
quantities of SWP water purchased were
recharged to the Beaumont Basin at
BCVWD's Noble Creek spreading facility,
which is located in the vicinity of Beaumont
Avenue and Cherry Valley Boulevard. The
SWP water is now recharged at the SGPWA
owned and operated Brookside Recharge
Facility, which was completed in 2017, and
enables SGPWA to import more water in
wet years when available and to store it in
the local groundwater basin. The new
facility consists of five large ponds, a
pipeline connecting the ponds to the East
Branch Extension of the SWP as well as a
new connection to said East Branch
Extension. The new facility, shown in Figure
3.6 on the following page, is located
adjacent to the existing Noble Creek
spreading facility, at Beaumont Avenue and
Brookside Avenue. The concrete lined
Noble Creek separates the two facilities.
Table 3.2 presents the City's recent
imported water purchases from SGPWA for
years 2015 to 2020 and compares them to
years 2010 to 2015.
91 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 3.6: Brookside Recharge Facility
92 3 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 3.2
Imported Water Supply 2015 to 2020
(Purchases of SWP water from SGPWA)
Year Purchases
(AF)
2015 686
2016 1,477
2017 1,350
2018 500
2019 250
2020 250
Average: 752
2010-2015 Avg.
(2015 UWMP) 847
Although the City purchases imported
water, this water is used solely for recharge
of the Beaumont Basin. None of the water
purchased is supplied directly to the City’s
customers. The amount of imported water
available to the City for groundwater
recharge is dependent on SGPWA’s
available supply from the SWP. According to
the water supply contract between DWR
and the SGPWA, SGPWA’s maximum annual
entitlement from the SWP is 17,300 AFY.
Under shortage conditions, SGPWA could
limit volumes by implementing SGPWA’s
Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP).
The SGPWA also has a financial plan in place
to obtain additional supplies necessary to
meet projected demands within its service
area. Sources include the dry-year water
purchase program, exchanges with the
Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency
(CLAWA), and other supplemental water as
available. The SGPWA is expected to
purchase additional supplies by 2020 to
meet demands.
3.4 GROUNDWATER SOURCES
The City is within the boundaries of the
Coachella Valley Hydrologic Unit, which
encompasses several groundwater basins,
including the Coachella Valley Groundwater
Basin (Basin), within which the City is
located. The Basin is underlain by several
large subbasins, the boundaries of which
are mostly defined by fault lines that restrict
the lateral flow of water. The Basin extends
from Banning easterly to the Salton Sea.
The City is underlain by the San Gorgonio
Pass Subbasin (SGP Subbasin) portion of the
Basin per Figure 3.7 on the following page.
The SGP Subbasin is divided into water
storage units (also colloquially termed
"basins"), as depicted in Figure 3.8. The City
extracts groundwater from the West
Banning Storage Unit (formerly known as
the Banning Storage Unit), the Banning
Bench Storage Unit, the Cabazon Storage
Unit (formerly known as the East Banning
Storage Unit), the Beaumont Storage Unit,
and the Banning Water Canyon Storage
Unit, as shown in DWR Submittal Table 6-1
in Appendix E. The storage unit boundaries
have been defined in a 2006 USGS report
93 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 11
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 3.7: San Gorgonio Pass Groundwater Basin
City Boundaries
94 3 - 12 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
on Groundwater Hydrology, in the San
Gorgonio Pass Area (Scientific Investigations
Report 2006-5026), prepared by USGS in
cooperation with the SGPWA, dated 2006.
Since this report, DWR, SGPWA, and the
City have refined the details of these
storage units.
Groundwater recharge in the area results
from precipitation infiltrating into the
ground within the surface water
catchments and particularly in the canyons
north of the City. An additional source of
recharge is subsurface inflow (also referred
to as underflow) from storage unit to
storage unit, infiltration of Whitewater
River diversions in the Banning Water
Canyon, and from percolation of treated
wastewater into the Cabazon Storage Unit.
The Banning Water Canyon area receives
water from the percolation of canyon flows
through the gravelly soils of the canyon
bottom. The San Gorgonio River running
southerly through the Banning Water
Canyon provides intake areas for
distributing water to spreading ditches that
interconnect with spreading ponds located
approximately one mile north of the
Banning Bench to enhance percolation.
A hydrogeological study was conducted by
Geoscience to determine the maximum
perennial yield of the groundwater storage
units in the vicinity and to determine the
anticipated future available water supply
from the Beaumont Storage Unit, West
Banning Storage Unit, Banning Bench
Storage Unit, Cabazon Storage Unit, and
Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit. The
findings of the study are set forth in the
report by Geoscience, titled Maximum
Perennial Yield Estimates for the Banning
and Cabazon Storage Units, and Available
Water Supply from the Beaumont Basin,
dated March 29, 2011 (herein referred to as
the Geoscience Report). The individual
basin safe yields and projected groundwater
production (from each basin) are included
in Table 3.4 of this Section and in Appendix
E as DWR Submittal Table 6-9 (Projected
Water Supplies).
3.4.1 Beaumont Basin (Storage Unit)
The Beaumont Storage Unit (also referred
to as the Beaumont Basin) is located
primarily in the City of Beaumont, with
some portions located within Banning,
Calimesa, and Cherry Valley, as depicted in
Figure 3.8. The Beaumont Storage Unit
covers approximately 12,480 acres (19.5
square miles). The City operates four (4)
groundwater production wells, namely
Wells C2, C3, C4, and M3, within the
Beaumont Basin. The City also maintains an
additional, non-operating well in the
Beaumont Basin (Well M9). The 4 active
wells have a combined nominal capacity of
4,650 gallons per minute (gpm). The City
also co-owns with BCVWD three additional
95 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 13
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 3.8: Groundwater Basins in the City (Subbasins of San Gorgonio Pass Basin) City Boundaries
96 3 - 14 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Beaumont
Basin is the only
adjudicated
storage unit within
the San Gorgonio
Pass Basin
groundwater production wells (Wells 24,
25, and 26), with a combined nominal
capacity of 6,800 gpm, of which half is
allotted to the City. Therefore, the City's
total nominal pumping capacity in the
Beaumont Basin is 8,050 gpm. The
forementioned Wells in the Beaumont
Basin are shown in Figure 3.9.
The Beaumont Basin is an adjudicated basin
pursuant to the Stipulation for Entry of
Judgment Adjudicating Groundwater Rights
in the Beaumont Basin (the Judgment), a
copy of which is
included in Appendix L
of this Plan. Pursuant
to the Judgment, the
Court appointed a fivemember Watermaster
Committee, consisting
of members from each
of the five member agencies, which include
the Cities of Banning and Beaumont,
Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District,
South Mesa Water Company, and Yucaipa
Valley Water District.
The safe yield of the Beaumont Basin was
initially established at 8,650 AF/yr, to be
distributed among the appropriators. The
safe yield is to be reevaluated at least once
every ten years. Based on the 2013
Reevaluation of the Beaumont Basin Safe
Yield, dated April 3, 2015, the safe yield was
determined to be 6,700 AF/yr.
Based on a description of the Judgment
included in the Beaumont Basin
Watermaster 2019 Annual Report Draft,
dated December 2020 (referred to herein as
the 2019 Watermaster Report), a controlled
overdraft (also referred to as temporary
surplus) was created to allow the
appropriators to extract from the
Beaumont Basin, during the first ten years
after adoption of the Judgment, a maximum
of 16,000 AF/yr. The temporary surplus
was divided among the appropriators, with
City of Banning receiving 31.43 percent (or
5,029 AF/yr).
After the first 10 years of operation ended
in 2014, appropriators no longer receive the
temporary surplus and are permitted to
extract only the amount each has in storage
or credited to them. At the end of calendar
year 2019, the City had approximately
51,917.9 AF in its storage account, based on
the 2019 Watermaster Report. City of
Banning is permitted to store up to 80,000
AF in the Beaumont Basin.
On an annual basis, the Watermaster
determines the amount of groundwater to
which each producer is entitled from the
Beaumont Basin without incurring a
replenishment obligation. City of Banning is
entitled to 31.43% of the unused production
in the Beaumont Basin. Quantities to which
the City is entitled but does not pump can
be credited to the City's storage account.
97 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 15
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 3.9: Well Locations in the Beaumont Basin
98 3 - 16 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 3.10: Spreading Grounds at WWTP
3.4.2 West Banning Storage
The West Banning Storage Unit lies south of
the Banning Bench Storage Unit and east of
the Beaumont Storage Unit, as depicted on
Figure 3.8. The total surface area of the
West Banning Storage Unit is approximately
2,489 acres (3.9 square miles). The area is
underlain by alluvial sediments, with
bedrock occurring to the north in the San
Bernardino Mountains. The City currently
operates four (4) groundwater production
wells within the West Banning Storage Unit,
namely C5, M7, M10, and M11. The City lost
Well M-12 within the basin, due to a cavein, but is currently looking into redrilling.
3.4.3 Cabazon Storage Unit
The Cabazon Storage Unit is located near
the eastern boundary of the City, southeast
of the West Banning Storage Unit and the
Banning Bench Storage Unit, as depicted on
Figure 3.8. The Cabazon Storage Unit
encompasses a surface area of
approximately 17,215 acres (26.9 square
miles). The City currently operates one (1)
groundwater production well in the
Cabazon Storage Unit, namely Well C6, with
a nominal pumping capacity of 900 gpm.
Additional groundwater can be produced
from the Cabazon Storage Unit. A water
balance prepared for the Cabazon Storage
Unit, as described in the Geoscience Report,
determined that a positive change in
storage has occurred as a result of inflow
and outflow factors, including effluent from
the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
percolated from the adjacent spreading
grounds (Figure 3.10 above). Therefore,
future projections of available water from
99 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 17
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
the Cabazon Storage Unit assume that all
inflow and outflow values remain the same,
with the exception of treated wastewater
applied to the basin.
For purposes of projecting Cabazon water
supplies into the future, inflow of recycled
water increases in time to account for the
increase of wastewater generated by an
increase in population over time, and this
recycled water will be percolated into the
Cabazon Storage Unit. Once the Phase I
expansion of the WWTP is completed,
approximately 1,680 AF/yr of recycled
water will be used for irrigation purposes
and will no longer be applied to the
Cabazon Storage Unit for direct percolation.
Well NP-1 is an offline non-potable well that
is near the City’s WWTP. It was drilled more
than 20 years ago, but was never equipped
to produce groundwater. There are plans to
equip it in the near future and use it prior to
the completion of the WWTP expansion.
Once the Title 22 improvements at the
WWTP are completed, Well NP-1 will serve
as a backup and will be used sparingly to
help the City meet peak irrigation demands.
3.4.4 Banning Bench Storage Unit
The Banning Bench Storage Unit is located
to the north of the West Banning Storage
Unit, as shown in Figure 3.8. The total
surface area of the Banning Bench Storage
Unit is approximately 3,573 acres (5.9
square miles). The City currently operates
three (3) groundwater production wells
within the Banning Bench Storage Unit,
namely Wells 1, 2, and 3, with a combined
nominal pumping capacity of 3,650 gpm.
3.4.5 Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit
The Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit is
located north of the Banning Bench Storage
Unit, as depicted in Figure 3.8. The total
surface area of the Banning Water Canyon
Storage Unit is approximately 1,058 acres
(1.7 square miles). The canyon bottom
comprises alluvium, and the canyon sides
are bedrock. The City currently operates
eight (8) groundwater production wells
within the Banning Water Canyon Storage
Unit, namely Wells 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and
12, with a combined nominal pumping
capacity of 8,600 gpm.
Additional recharge occurs in the Banning
Water Canyon Storage Unit through the
diversion of Whitewater River drainage into
Banning Water Canyon. The diverted water
flows along steep mountain slopes for
approximately 14 miles in a mostly concrete
lined conveyance system known as the
Whitewater Flume. The Whitewater Flume
is described in more detail in Section 3.6.
3.5 GROUNDWATER PRODUCTION
All wells within the City’s service area are
equipped with a flowmeter to measure
water production. Water production is
100
3 - 18 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
recorded monthly by City water staff and
reported annually to DWR. Over the past
five years of operation, groundwater
extraction has averaged 7,513 AFY. Table
3.3 displays the City's groundwater supplies
for years 2015 to 2020.
Table 3.3
Groundwater-Production
Year Production (AF)
2015 6,723
2016 7,035
2017 7,576
2018 7,924
2019 7,226
2020 8,596
Average 7,513
2010-2015 Avg.
(2015 UWMP) 8,246
Due to the City's increase in population
since 2015, the rebounding effects of the
mandatory declaration period, and an
abnormally dry 2020, groundwater
pumping has increased.
3.5.1 Projected Groundwater Supplies
Currently, the City does not utilize the
entire capacity of all of its storage units
(subbasins). The maximum annual amount
pumped by the City in the past 10 years is
just under 9,000 AF. Due to the projected
developments, the City expects pumping to
increase by 25% within 10 years and over
50% by the end of this UWMP planning
period (2045). The pumping capacity of the
City’s twenty-three (23) wells, including the
City’s co-owned wells with BCVWD, is just
over 14,000 AFY. However, this mechanical
pumping capacity is actually limited to the
safe yields and/or the adjudicated rights of
the subbasins. As noted, in some of the
subbasins, the City does not maximize
groundwater resources (i.e. Cabazon Unit).
Therefore, the City will be establishing new
groundwater resources to meet projected
demands. In the interim, the City will need
to supplement their current allowable
pumping capacity by dipping into their
Beaumont Basin storage account while the
City locates and drills new wells. This will
create new resources or establish
redundancy in existing resources in order to
meet water demands under built-out
conditions. Table 3.4 below shows the City’s
projected water supplies and available
volumes. These values are also reflected in
DWR Submittal Table 6.9 in Appendix E.
101
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 19
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 3.4
Projected Water Supply Availability (AF)
Year 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Basin Projected
(Available)
Projected
(Available)
Projected
(Available)
Projected
(Available)
Projected
(Available)
Beaumont Basin
1,491 1,267 1,077 916 778
(6,700) (6,700) (6,700) (6,700) (6,700)
West Banning Basin
1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430
(1,430) (1,430) (1,430) (1,430) (1,430)
Cabazon Basin
853 960 1,054 1,136 1,208
--- --- --- --- ---
Banning Bench
1,055 1,187 1,304 1,330 1,330
(1,330) (1,330) (1,330) (1,330) (1,330)
Banning Water Canyon
3,679 3,730 3,730 3,730 3,730
(3,730) (3,730) (3,730) (3,730) (3,730)
Imported Recharge 250 500 1,000 1,750 2,500
WWTP Recharge
(Recycled Water) 1,067 1,107 2,491 2,491 2,491
Additional Supply from Storage 999 2,126 3,156 4,128 4,991 Total Available Supply 63,098 59,351 51,220 40,439 28,551 Total Net Storage 47,169 43,422 35,291 24,510 12,622
Note: See notes under Table 7.1 and notes under DWR Submittal Table 6.9 in Appendix E for a detailed explanation of the volumes above.
102
3 - 20 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
To offset dependency on the groundwater
supplies listed above, the City intends to
begin using recycled water within the next
10 years, as described in Section 4.
The City will also continue to benefit
indirectly from regional conservation efforts
and also through SGPWA’s efforts to
augment its supplies and improve reservoir
storage capacities. Section 7 discusses
reliability issues and compares the City's
projected water supply availability to
projected demands for normal, dry, and
multiple dry years through 2045.
3.6 SURFACE WATER
The Whitewater Flume was built to provide
water and power to the City and Banning
Heights Mutual Water Company (BHWMC).
BHWMC utilizes approximately 1,000 AF/yr
of the Whitewater River diversions in the
Flume (Figures 3.11 and 3.12), and the
remainder of the diverted water flows into
the San Gorgonio River below the Banning
Heights Mutual Water Company (BHMWC)
extraction point. A portion of the natural
runoff and the Whitewater River diversions
are diverted into spreading ponds located
approximately one mile north of the
Banning Bench in order to increase
groundwater recharge.
Since 1913, surface water from the
Whitewater River has been diverted into
the Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit,
with an average of 1,500 AF/yr diverted into
Banning Water Canyon since 1961. The
water flowed within the Whitewater Flume
(mentioned above in Section 3.4.5 Banning
Water Canyon Storage Unit), and then
through two hydroelectric power plants.
Figure 3.11: Whitewater Flume System
Due to damage along sections of the
Whitewater Flume, surface flow is being
diverted into Burnt Canyon to the north,
and then back to the Whitewater Flume
upstream of Powerhouse No. 1, where it
continues downstream through
Powerhouse No. 2 to an above ground
reservoir operated by Banning Heights
Mutual Water Company (BHMWC). The
remaining water flows to the San Gorgonio
River, where it recharges the Banning
Water Canyon Storage Unit.
In June of 2010, Southern California Edison
(SCE), the City of Banning, BHMWC and the
SGPWA entered into an “Agreement for
103
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 21
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Transfer of San Gorgonio Hydroelectric
Project No. 344 Water Conveyance Facilities”
which determined that SCE would restore
and repair the facilities and transfer
ownership to the City and BHMWC.
Figure 3.12: Whitewater Flume System
In average years the Whitewater Flume
provides direct water use to the Banning
Heights Mutual Water Company, and the
rest goes to recharging the groundwater
basins, which the City can then pump from
as groundwater. A lot of recharged water is
received during the Spring.
The Apple Fire of 2020 encompassed the
entire Whitewater Flume structure. As of
April 2021, the Whitewater Flume remains
damaged and unable to deliver water to
BHMWC and the City of Banning. SCE,
BHMWC, and the City are working together
to get the system back in operation as
quickly as possible. Southern California
Edison currently owns the Whitewater
Flume system.
The City of Banning plans to conserve
stormwater flows from tributary creeks
within its service area by allowing water to
percolate into the ground. A preliminary
evaluation by the City indicated that a
portion of stormwater flows from creeks in
the area could be conserved as "new" water
to meet future needs. The Atwell
Development (previously known as
Butterfield) includes design features that
are estimated to capture and recharge
approximately 1,370 AF/yr of stormwater
flows from Smith Creek. The Rancho San
Gorgonio Specific Plan includes design
features that are estimated to capture and
recharge approximately 199 AF/yr of
stormwater at full buildout.
3.7 ALTERNATE WATER SOURCES
This section provides an overview of
alternative water sources (non-potable
supplemental supplies) and their potential
uses. Alternative water sources include
recycled water or greywater. A more
detailed look into recycled stormwater is
found in Section 4.
3.7.1 Greywater
Greywater systems have been used in
California to provide a source of water
supply for subsurface irrigation and also as
104
3 - 22 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
a means to reduce overall water use.
Greywater consists of water discharged
from sinks, bathtubs, dishwashers, and
washing machines. Greywater systems
consist of an underground tank and
pumping system. Greywater is currently
legal for subsurface irrigation in the State of
California; however, strict regulations and
high installation costs have impeded
installation of professional greywater
systems and have the unintended
consequence of undocumented and
noncompliant use of greywater. An
example of a Greywater System is shown
below in Figure 3.13.
Figure 3.13: Greywater System
The City does not currently have a formal
program in place to support greywater use.
However, the promotion of greywater
systems as a means to reduce the City's
overall water use is not recommended since
the use of greywater is currently limited to
subsurface irrigation and therefore the
overall service area-wide reduction in water
use (in AF) would be minimal at best.
Additionally, any water diverted to
greywater systems would no longer be
available to be treated into recycled water.
3.8 TRANSFERS OR EXCHANGES
The City’s rights to annual groundwater
extraction are shown on DWR Submittal
Table 6-9 of Appendix E. In light of pending
housing growth, this table indicates that
preservation of the City’s groundwater
supplies is imperative for the City. Thus, the
leasing of groundwater rights is not feasible
for the City. Other than the sale of water to
High Valleys Water District, and occasionally
to BHMWC, the City is not planning to enter
into any groundwater transfer or exchange
opportunities with other agencies.
The City has one 12-inch interconnection
with BCVWD that is capable of transferring
water to the City during emergencies. The
emergency connection is located at the
intersection of Sun Lakes Blvd. & Highland
Springs Ave. During the summer of 2020 the
City took water from BCVWD through this
interconnection because four (4) wells were
out of operation. Before this year, the
interconnect had not been used since 2008.
3.9 PLANNED SUPPLY PROJECTS
The City continually reviews practices that
will provide its customers with adequate
and reliable supplies. Trained staff
continues to ensure the water quality is
105
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
3 - 23
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
safe and the water supply will meet present
and future needs in an environmentally and
economically responsible manner. The City
coordinates its long-term water shortage
planning with SGPWA and other local
agencies through the development of their
respective UWMPs. The City also meets bimonthly with the San Gorgonio Pass Regional Water Alliance, which is comprised
of thirteen (13) local water purveyors, to
discuss local issues with different agencies.
Any new City water supply projects will be
to add, replace, or upgrade wells to support
population growth and new development.
The projects that have been identified to
improve the City’s water supply reliability
and enhance the operations of the City's
facilities include replacement of water
meters, fire hydrants, valves, and pipelines.
3.10 ENERGY INTENSITY OF SUPPLY
According to the City’s groundwater
production figures shown in Table 3.3, the
City pumped an average for 5,100 gpm per
day in 2020. With an average well capacity
of 800 gpm, this means that the well
motors ran for a cumulative of six (6) hours
each day. With an average horsepower of
80 HP per well, the City uses about 360
kilowatts hours (kWh) per day per operating
well, or about 130,000 kWh each year. The
typical industrial energy cost in the City is
about $0.10 per kWh. Thus, the typical
annual energy costs to run one of the City’s
groundwater well motors (one motor) is
shown in Table 3.5 below:
Table 3.5
Annual Energy Costs to Run Well Motor in City
Kilowatt-Hours
(kWh)
Cost ($) per
kWh
Total Cost
($)
130,000 $0.10 $13,000
The costs shown in Table 3.5 above only
include energy costs to run the motors of
the wells. The costs do not include smaller
miscellaneous costs such as lighting, control
valves, and instrumentation. However,
since the motor is the most significant
component of the total energy costs, these
costs shown in Table 3.5 provide a rough
idea of what is required to operate the
City’s groundwater wells each year.
Since the City relies on groundwater for
their supplies, the City cannot offset the
energy costs required to run the City’s
water system. In addition, imported water
costs from a wholesaler are significantly
greater than the total production costs of
groundwater, which include not only the
energy costs shown above, but also
additional costs of treatment and
distribution. For any water agency that can
produce water locally, it is more
economically feasible to produce local
water than to purchase imported water.
Thus, the City plans to continue to pump
groundwater.
106
3 - 24 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 3: WATER SOURCES & SUPPLIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
107
Section 4
Recycled Water Opportunities
The City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant (Pictured Below), Treats the City’s Wastewater. The Treated Discharge is Used to Replenish the City’s Groundwater Basins.
108
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
4 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n 4
RECYCLED WATER
OPPORTUNITIES
4.1 OVERVIEW
"Recycled" or "reclaimed" water is defined
as wastewater purified through primary,
secondary, and tertiary treatment. Recycled
water is acceptable for irrigation and some
industrial processes. The Southern
California region discharges nearly 2 billion
gallons of treated wastewater per day. The
treated wastewater is discharged either to
the ocean or to permitted areas such as
percolation ponds. Recycled water is
considered a reliable and drought-proof
water source that reduces reliance on
imported water. Recycled water will
continue to be a critical part of the
California water picture because of
likelihood of drought. As technological
advancements continue to reduce
treatment costs and as legislation expands
the use of recycled water, more reuse
opportunities should develop.
This Section describes the City’s existing
wastewater collection and treatment
system, and identifies existing and future
recycled water opportunities available to
the City. The section also includes estimates
of recycled water supply through 2045.
4.2 WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
City of Banning provides sewer service to
the area within City limits and to
unincorporated areas of Riverside County
that surround the southeast portion of the
Recycled water use
has increased overall
water supply
reliability for agencies
that have
implemented the
necessary upgrades.
109
4 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
City, as shown in Figure 4.1. The City of
Banning is responsible for the collection,
conveyance, treatment, and disposal of
wastewater generated within its service
area, as depicted in Figure 4.2. Municipal
wastewater in the City’s service area is
generated from residential, commercial,
and institutional sewer discharges. The City
does not currently have any major industrial
sewer discharges (i.e. brine). However,
there are some cannabis cultivation
facilities that will be operational within the
next two years, which will need to be
monitored and regulated.
The City’s wastewater collection system
drains primarily from west to east. The
wastewater discharged from the City is
collected from a network of 112 miles of
gravity sewer mains. The local collector
sewers discharge into larger sewer trunk
mains along Westward Avenue and Porter
Street. The trunk mains then carry the
wastewater along an unpaved access road
to the Banning Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP), located in the southeast corner of
the City (see Figure 4.3). The WWTP has a
current capacity of 3.6 MGD and is designed
to treat wastewater to secondary standards.
Primary and secondary treatment consists of
the following processes: headworks,
screening, grit removal, primary clarification,
filtration, and secondary clarification. The
secondary-treated wastewater is discharged
to percolation ponds which recharges the
Cabazon Groundwater Basin (Storage Unit).
This recharge is provided only through
surface percolation, and no injection wells
are used by the City.
4.2.1 Wastewater Flows
The quantities of wastewater generated are
proportional to the City’ population and the
water used by its residents. The wastewater
flows are metered at the influent point to
the WWTP. Total wastewater collected in
the City over the past five (5) years is shown
in Table 4.1 below.
Table 4.1
Wastewater Flows Collected in City
Year Wastewater
(AF)
Wastewater
(MG)
2020 2,185 712
2019 2,234 728
2018 2,259 736
2017 2,216 722
2016 2,179 710
Avg: 2,215 722
Due to projected housing developments
within the City’s service area, wastewater
flows are expected to significantly change
110
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
4 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 4.1: City of Banning Wastewater Service Area (with Additional Shaded Planning Areas) City WWTP
See Figure 4.3
111
4 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 4.2: Schematic of City of Banning Existing Wastewater Collection and Treatment System Sewer Laterals
Serving individual properties, the
sewer laterals collect the flows from
underground plumbing.
Collector Sewers
Collector sewers or sewer main lines,
collect the flows from the sewer
laterals and carry the flows by gravity
to downstream sewers.
"Trunk" Sewers
Larger sewers collect all of the sewer
flows from different parts of the City
and carry it to the Treatment Plant.
Treatment
Filter out solids by settling in clarifiers.
Removed solids (sludge) are allowed
to digest and dry for use in various
applications.
Discharge to Percolation
Ponds
Treated wastewater is discharged to
percolation ponds.
112
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
4 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
over this UWMP planning period (2045).
The City anticipates that future wastewater
flows can be estimated using the projected
demands shown in Section 6 multiplied by
an increasing return rate from 25 percent
(0.25) to 50 percent (0.50). Table 4.2 below
shows the projected wastewater flows:
Table 4.2
Projected Wastewater Flows Collected in City
Year Flows (AF) Flows (MG)
2025 2,852 929
2030 3,745 1,220
2035 4,700 1,532
2040 5,702 1,858
2045 6,734 2,194
The estimated 25 percent return rate was
generated from the fact that the existing
low-density residential customer base in
the City uses much of the water for outdoor
irrigation. Typical urban areas have return
rates ranging from 75 percent to 90
percent. The projected 50 percent return
rate by 2045 is higher than the City’s
current return rate, since newer
developments described in Section 2 should
have higher return rates. As the City’s
population is expected to nearly double
through these developments, the return
rates from the newer developments should
offset the return rates from the existing
developments, resulting in an estimated
aggregate return rate of 0.50 by 2045.
4.3 RECYCLED WATER
As mentioned in the previous section, the
Banning WWTP is the only wastewater
treatment facility for the City. The WWTP
currently provides only secondary
treatment, and the treated wastewater
does not meet Title 22 Standards. Further,
the City does not use any recycled water
produced by any other neighboring
agencies. Thus, no wastewater has been
“recycled” (re-used) within the City’s
service area over the past five years, as
Table 4.3 indicates:
Table 4.3
Recycled Water Produced and/or Used in City
Year Recycled Water
Produced or Used (AF)
2020 0
2019 0
2018 0
2017 0
2016 0
The amounts indicated in Table 4.3 above
coincide with the projections in the City’s
2015 UWMP. That is, the 2015 UWMP did
not project any recycled water use through
the year 2020.
4.3.1 Projected Recycled Water Use
According to the City’s 2018 Integrated
Master Plan, the City has plans to upgrade
113
4 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
the existing WWTP treatment to meet
tertiary treatment standards and facilitate
infrastructure to supply recycled water. The
design of the upgraded WWTP will allow for
expansion of the treatment capacity when
it becomes necessary. This proposed
expansion described in the 2018 Integrated
Master Plan (IMP) is also in accordance with
the City’s 2006 Recycled Water Master Plan.
The proposed WWTP upgrade is projected
to enhance secondary treatment and add
tertiary treatment in the form of cloth
filters in the near-term (2025) and
construction of a recycled water
distribution system. Facilities to be
constructed would include recycled water
pipelines to transport recycled water to the
recycled water customers. Upon
completion of the upgrades, approximately
2,700 AFY of recycled water would be
available to recycled water customers.
Assuming that the improvements would be
completed by year 2025, projected recycled
water use would be as shown in Table 4.4:
Table 4.4
Projected Recycled Water Production and/or Use
Year Recycled Water
Production/Use (AF)
2025 2,700
2030 2,700
2035 2,700
2040 2,700
2045 2,700
The projected quantities shown in Table 4.4
above are based on a “Phase I” capacity
expansion to the WWTP. The 2018 IMP
projected up to 5,760 AFY of recycled water
production capacity by 2040. However, the
2018 IMP identified only 2,530 AFY of
recycled water demand (including the
proposed housing developments). Thus, for
conservative planning purposes, the
projected recycled water production for this
2020 UWMP planning period (through the
year 2045), is 2,700 AFY. The 2018 IMP
describes the City’s potential recycled water
customers and service area in Figure 4.4.
114
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
4 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 4.3: City of Banning WWTP and Percolation Ponds
115
4 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Since the Sun
Lakes Golf Course
provides the City
with existing
recycled water
demand, other
potential users can
“tap in” to the
proposed recycled
water pipeline.
4.3.2 Potential Recycled Water Use
From an engineering standpoint, there are
no physical barriers or constraints which
would cause the construction of recycled
water facilities to be unfeasible. The City is
relatively flat within the vicinity of potential
recycled water customers. The City
currently serves one customer (Sun Lakes
Golf Course) with
non‐potable water
from Well M7 and
Well M12. Typical
annual demand for
the Sun Lakes Golf
Course is 850 AFY or
0.8 MGD. Since the
Sun Lakes Golf Course
is located on the
westerly end of the
City, once the City constructs recycled
water pipelines to reach the Sun Lakes Golf
Course, other potential customers would be
within proximity to receive recycled water.
Therefore, construction of recycled water
facilities would prove feasible if the funding
for recycled water improvements and
pipeline infrastructure was covered, at least
in-part, by developers, and an agreement
was in place for the use of recycled water.
The City would then be able to provide
recycled water to its customers.
The City’s previous 2006 Recycled Water
Master Plan identified potential customers
across the Interstate 10 Freeway. However,
the 2018 IMP indicated that these potential
customers were not feasible, due to the
difficulty with crossing the 10 Freeway and
the railroad tracks, and since there are
other potential customers south of the 10
Freeway. The potential recycled water
customers are listed in Table 4.5 below:
Table 4.5
Potential Recycled Water Users
Customer Recycled Water
Demand (AF)
Existing Customers
Sun Lakes Golf Course 850
Banning High School 175
Dysart Park 87
Lions Park 79
Projected Developments
Atwell Development 864
Rancho San Gorgonio
Development 217
Five Bridges Development 223
Neighborhood Park 35
Total 2,530
As noted by Table 4.5 above, the exception
to maintaining only recycled water users
below the 10 Freeway would be the Atwell
Development (previously known as
Butterfield), since this is a relatively large
development. In addition, it would be
within about a 1-mile distance from the Sun
Lakes Golf Course. Assuming the Sun Lakes
Golf Course is provided recycled water
116
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
4 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
service prior to completion of the Atwell
Development, the pipeline can be extended
to feed the Atwell Development due to the
proximity of the pipeline. A recycled water
line to the Atwell development may be
constructed in the future, but the City does
not currently have plans to fund or
construct such a project, as reflected in the
2018 Integrated Master Plan.
4.3.3 Recycled Water Alternatives
For the Atwell Development, the City had
considered construction of a satellite
wastewater treatment facility, but has since
moved away from this idea. Instead, Atwell
will send all of its sewer discharge to the
City's WWTP. However, the City is exploring
the option of using excess recycled water
(whatever is not used for irrigation) to
recharge the West Banning Basin. This
would allow the City to make full use of its
upgraded treatment capacity.
4.4 ENCOURAGING AND OPTIMIZING
RECYCLED WATER USE
Currently, there are no methods in place to
encourage the use of recycled water, since
recycled water infrastructure has not yet
been constructed as of this UWMP. Once
the City has the capacity to provide recycle
water, then they would consider incentives
to encourage and optimize recycled water
use. This may include:
Outreach to general public
Outreach to potential recycled
water customers
Monitoring, enforcement and
training for recycled water use
Temporary financial incentives, such
as free service for the first month
The exact methods will be developed as the
City’s recycled water system expands. If the
City applies for outside funding to construct
recycled water infrastructure, the City will
need to also secure funding specifically for
the purpose of actively promoting recycled
water use.
117
4 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 4: RECYCLED WATER OPPORTUNITIES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 4.4: City of Banning Potential Recycled Water Customers 118
Section 5
Water Quality
The City of Banning tests all groundwater pumped from
its twenty wells to ensure high quality water for the
City’s customers.
119
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 5: WATER QUALITY
5 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
5 WATER QUALITY
5.1 OVERVIEW
The quality of a natural body of water varies
over time. During periods of intense rainfall
or snowmelt, tributaries for surface water
can change, resulting in new constituents or
diluting existing constituents in the
receiving waters. Conversely, during times
of drought, contaminants may increase in
concentration without additional flows
available to dilute the concentration
contaminants. As groundwater levels rise
and fall, groundwater will pass through
different layers of rock and sediment and
will absorb different constituents from
those strata. Likewise, groundwater wells
that have not been utilized over long
periods of time can see water quality issues
resulting from stagnant water. In summary,
the quality of water changes over the
course of a time and location, and these
variables must be recognized by water
agencies. For these reasons, City of Banning
monitors its wells for water quality as
required by State and Federal regulations.
This Section provides a general description
of the City’s water sources, water quality
monitoring and reporting, and water
treatment. Groundwater, local surface
water, and imported (recharge) water are
discussed in this Section. A discussion of
potential water quality impacts on the
reliability of supplies is also provided.
The Banning
Whitewater Flume
(pictured) collects
surface water for
groundwater
recharge for the
Banning Canyon
storage unit.
120
5 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 5: WATER QUALITY
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
As part of Federal
EPA standards,
water agencies are
required to
prepare annual
water quality
reports.
In 2014, the
State’s drinking
water program
was transferred
from the Health
Department to the
State Water
Resources Control
Board.
5.2 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
5.2.1 Federal Regulations
In 1974, Congress passed the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) to protect public health
by regulating the nation's municipal
drinking water supply. As part of the SDWA,
powers were given to the Federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
regulate drinking
water. The 1996
amendment to the
SDWA required
monitoring of new
types of contaminants.
Since the 1996
amendment to the
SDWA, the EPA has
identified over 90 contaminants in its
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations (NPDWR) or (“primary
standards”). The main categories that the
EPA identified include biological
microorganisms, disinfectants, disinfection
byproducts, inorganic chemicals, organic
chemicals, and radionuclides. As required
by the SDWA, water agencies must provide
an annual Water Quality Report to its
customers.
5.2.2 State Regulations
Water quality regulations have changed
since the SDWA was enacted in 1974.
Several state, regional and county agencies
have jurisdiction and responsibility for
monitoring water quality. The actual
regulations governing water quality have
also changed over the years. This is the
result of the discovery of new
contaminants, changes in the
understanding of the health effects of
previously known as
well as new
contaminants,
development of new
analytical technology,
and the introduction
of new treatment
technology. All water
purveyors are subject
to the drinking water
standards set by the
Federal EPA and the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB). The California
Department of Public Health (CDPH)
previously oversaw the State's drinking
water program and the environmental lab
accreditation program. As of July 2014,
those programs were transferred to the
SWRCB. Under the SWRCB, the Division of
Drinking Water (DDW) regulates public
drinking water systems, including setting
maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and
regulating the operation of water systems.
In addition to the SWRCB, several regional
and county agencies have jurisdiction and
responsibility for monitoring water quality,
and contaminant sites.
121
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 5: WATER QUALITY
5 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
5.2.3 State Drinking Water Standards
The State of California has established two
(2) main types of drinking water standards:
1. Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)
2. Public Health Goal (PHG)
MCLs are the drinking water standards to
be met by public water systems. The levels
set by the State consider a contaminant’s
health risk, detectability, treatability, and
costs of treatment. MCLs are further broken
down into two (2) types:
1. Primary MCL – Health Related
2. Secondary MCL – Taste & Odor
Secondary MCLs are not federally
enforceable according to the most recent
SDWA amendments. However, they are
regulated by the State of California. DDW
publishes a list of Secondary MCLs, which
include Copper, Iron, and Zinc.
PHGs are established by the Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
(OEHHA). They are concentrations of
drinking water contaminants that pose no
significant health risk if consumed for a
lifetime, provided risk levels are not
exceeded. Public water systems sometimes
use PHGs to provide information about
drinking water contaminants in their annual
water quality reports. PHGs are not
regulatory standards. However, state law
requires the California State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to set
drinking water standards for chemical
contaminants as close to the corresponding
PHG as is economically and technologically
feasible.
5.2.4 City Standards
The main sources of the City's water supply,
as mentioned in Section 3, are groundwater
pumped from one of five (5) subbasins of
the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin,
and surface water (for groundwater
recharge) from the State Water Project
(SWP) through the San Gorgonio Pass
Water Agency. The City provides on-site
“wellhead” treatment and tests samples of
water in its wells on a regular basis.
To ensure the quality of its water, the City
monitors for a number of threats to
drinking water, including: microbial
contaminants, inorganic contaminants,
pesticides & herbicides, organic chemical
contaminants, and other contaminants. The
City’s Annual Water Quality Report (also
known as “Consumer Confidence Report”)
filed with the DDW identifies regulated
substances (Primary MCLs), secondary
substances (Secondary MCLs), and
unregulated substances (PHGs). The City
identifies all detected constituents and the
concentrations of contaminants when
preparing the report.
122
5 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 5: WATER QUALITY
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
In 2017, the
SWRCB reversed
the requirements
for hexavalent
chromium back to
50 ppb.
5.3 QUALITY OF WATER SOURCES
5.3.1 Groundwater
Groundwater underlying the City's water
service area has historically been of high
quality. According to DWR’s Groundwater
Bulletin 118 (California’s Groundwater),
water quality in the Coachella Valley basin is
characterized as predominantly calciumsodium bicarbonate type (DWR 1987). Total dissolved solids (TDS) content for selected
samples from municipal wells ranged from
100 to 200 mg/L. In the City’s most recent
Annual Water Quality Report (2019), the
average level of TDS detected in the City's
drinking water 209 mg/L. The secondary
maximum contaminant level (MCL) range
for TDS concentrations in drinking water is
500-1,000 mg/L.
As of the 2015 UWMP, California had
previously established a maximum
contaminant level (MCL) of 10 parts per
billion (ppb) for hexavalent chromium (Cr6),
which took effect on July 1, 2014. This
concentration can be described as one drop
in an Olympic-size swimming pool. Prior to
this, Cr6 was regulated under California's
total chromium MCL of 50-ppb. The Federal
Standard is currently set at 100-ppb. Based
on monitoring results, the City had detected
Cr6 at concentrations exceeding the new
MCL in water produced by seven (7) of its
twenty-one (21) operational groundwater
production wells (Wells C2, C3, C4, C6, M10,
M11, and M12). Average concentrations
over a three-year period from these wells
ranged from 9.8-pbb to 21.2-ppb. In May
2017, a California Superior Court judge
ruled that the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) must withdraw the
10-ppb Chromium-6
standard and that it
must be reevaluated
based on economic
feasibility. In August
2017, the SWRCB
voted to remove the
10-ppb standard and
revert back to the previous 50 ppb
standard. As a result, the City is now in
compliance with Federal and State drinking
water standards related to hexavalent
chromium. Besides an occasional detection
of constituents above the Secondary MCLs
or PHGs, City of Banning's drinking water is
of high quality.
The SWRCB is currently evaluating treatment
technologies and cost estimates for
Chromium-6 removal. Publication of a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is projected
for late spring or early summer 2021.
5.3.2 Imported Water
SWP water imported from SGPWA
originates from the Bay Delta and some
additional downstream California regions.
The SWP contains specific contaminants
123
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 5: WATER QUALITY
5 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Abandoned
private wells can
pose a water
quality concern if
left unaddressed.
which are characteristic of those areas.
Although SWP water meets or exceeds
applicable standards, there is concern that
some constituents are approaching
threshold levels. A few of the main
concerns over recent years have been total
organic carbon (TOC) and bromide,
nutrients, and arsenic. These constituents
have not been detected at high levels by
the City, but they are constituents to be
monitored by the City. This will help the City
prepare for future intakes from SGPWA
should SWP water quality begin to influence
the City’s groundwater to a greater degree.
5.4 IMPACTS OF WATER QUALITY
The quality of water dictates the
management strategies a water supplier
will implement, including, but not limited
to, the selection of water sources,
treatment alternatives, blending options,
and modifications to existing treatment
facilities. A direct result of the degradation
of a water source, including groundwater, is
the need to install wellhead treatment
before consumption. That is, the poorer the
quality of the source water, the greater the
need (and cost) for treatment. This can also
decrease water supply reliability.
5.4.1 Impacts of Abandoned Wells
The presence of abandoned groundwater
wells represents a potential hazard to the
quality of groundwater aquifers. Abandoned
and improperly destroyed wells can act as
conduits for contaminants to reach drinking
water supplies. It is vital for the long-term
protection of the basin that abandoned
wells be located and destroyed. While it is
the landowner’s responsibility to destroy an
abandoned well, local water agencies
should be proactive about making sure that
abandoned wells are in fact destroyed. The
destruction of abandoned groundwater
wells should be performed in accordance
with state standards.
California Water Code
Section 13750.5
requires that those
responsible for the
destruction of water
wells possess a C-57
Water Well Contractor’s License. Whenever
a water well is destroyed, a report of
completion must be filed with the California
DWR within 60 days of the completion of
the work. DDW and Riverside County
(County) are responsible for permitting and
inspecting construction and destruction of
wells.
The City’s policy for all functional and
abandoned wells is to establish a “well site
control zone”, the area immediately
surrounding the well alternatively referred
to as the “wellhead”. The purpose of this
zone is to provide protection from
vandalism, tampering, or other threats at
124
5 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 5: WATER QUALITY
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
the well site. The size of this zone can be
determined by using a simple radius, or an
equivalent area. The well site control zone
should be managed to reduce the possibility
of surface flows reaching the wellhead and
traveling down the unprotected casing.
SWRCB-DDW regulations recommend a
minimum radius of 50 feet for well site
control zones for all public water systems in
the state. The requirement applies to
abandoned wells as well as functional
activities that could potentially lead to
“source water contamination” according to
EPA regulations. (IWRP, 2007).
5.4.2 Groundwater Contamination Response
Currently, the City has a Water Shortage
Contingency Plan (WSCP), Hazard
Mitigation Plan (HMP), and an Emergency
Operations Plan (EOP) in place to deal with
the effects of potential groundwater
contamination that reduces supplies. This
information is provided in Section 8.
5.4.3 DDW Sanitary Surveys
A Watershed Sanitary Survey is a document
that examines the potential sources of
contaminants in a watershed and includes
recommendations for managing these
effects. Per DDW guidelines, the Watershed
Sanitary Surveys are supposed to be
updated every five years. In the City’s case,
the City does not use any surface water
directly, so the City does not prepare
Watershed Sanitary Surveys. However, the
City is still subject to periodic inspections by
DDW staff every three years. The Sanitary
Survey Inspection conducted by DDW
includes evaluation of the following:
1. Water Sources
2. Treatment
3. Distribution System
4. Finished Water Storage
5. Pumping Facilities
6. Monitoring & Reporting
7. System Management/Operation
8. Operator Compliance
The City’s previous Sanitary Survey
Inspection occurred in February, 2021.
5.4.4 Impacts on Management & Reliability
As a result of the City’s water quality
policies, the City has not experienced any
water quality issues that would affect water
supplies. Groundwater in the basin has
been of high quality. The City’s 2019 Annual
Water Quality Report is provided in the
Appendix of this UWMP. The City does not
anticipate any significant impacts to water
supply reliability due to water quality
issues, with the only possible exception
being an updated MCL on Chromium-6.
125
Section 6
Water Use
The residential sector accounts for about two-thirds of total water use in the City. Landscape accounts have the highest rate of usage per connection.
126
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
6 WATER USE
6.1 OVERVIEW
As a developing City, water consumption is
subject to significant change from year to
year. Further, water use within the City’s
service area is also variable over the course
of a given month or climate conditions. This
section explores the water usage trends
within the City and quantifies total water
usage per customer type. In addition, the
provisions of Senate Bill x7-7 (Water
Conservation Act) are explored in detail.
6.2 RECENT WATER USE CHANGES
As a result of the Coronavirus Disease 2019
(COVID-19) Pandemic, Commercial and
Institutional water use has declined. On
March 19, 2020, an Executive Order
and Public Health Order directed all
Californians to stay home, except to go to
an essential job or to shop for essential
needs. It was then modified on May 4,
2020. The Regional Stay Home Order,
announced December 3, 2020, triggered
additional restrictions after a region was
announced to have less than 15% ICU
availability. It prohibited private gatherings
of any size, closed sector operations except
for critical infrastructure and retail, and
required 100% masking (with certain
exceptions as indicated in guidance for use
of face coverings) and physical distancing.
The Regional Stay Home Order was lifted
January 25, 2021. During his 2021 State of
the State Address Governor Gavin Newsom
Water use within
the City’s service
area includes
residential indoor
use, commercial
use, and landscape
irrigation use.
127
6 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Covid-19
Pandemic has
impacted water
use in the
residential and
commercial
sectors.
reported that California has administered
nearly eleven (11) million doses of the
vaccine, and that the State was well on its
way to seeing an end to this pandemic.
The State Water Resources Control Board –
Division of Drinking Water (DDW) has
stated that the public water systems (PWS)
operations are designated as essential
functions and staff and suppliers are not
restricted by any current orders. This has
allowed for water system operators and
maintenance workers to successfully keep
the PWS providing safe and clean drinking
water to their customers.
The full extent of impacts of the coronavirus
pandemic on the water sector are still
emerging, but one area that has come to
the forefront is the effect on municipal
water demand. Available data indicate that
residential water
demand has increased
while non-residential
demand has decreased.
In San Francisco,
California, residential
demand increased by
ten (10) percent, while
non-residential demand
declined by 32 percent. Residential
communities have experienced either
modest increases or the smallest
decreases. Utilities where total water use
has declined during the coronavirus
pandemic will see a drop in revenue.
Moreover, as businesses reopen and
implement hygiene and disinfection
practices and as temperatures rise, water
use may rise dramatically. Such rapid and
dramatic changes in water use can
exacerbate existing and reveal new system
weaknesses.
6.3 CURRENT CITY WATER NEEDS
Prior to incorporation, the City of Banning
served as a stagecoach and railroad stop
between the Arizona territories and Los
Angeles. In 1913 when the City was
incorporated, the City's population was
under 10,000 persons. In recent decades,
City has grown at an average of about 400
persons per year.
Since 2015, the City's population has
increased by about 120 persons annually.
However, as noted in Section 2, there are
several new developments that will bring
the population growth to an average of
1,411 persons per year for the next 25 years
(to 2045). By 2045, the City will be
approaching ultimate "built-out" conditions
with remaining expected future water
demands primarily attributable to possible
land use changes in residential densities
and in-fill land development projects. As a
result of the City’s local groundwater
sources and imported recharge capacity
from SGPWA, the City is in a position of
128
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
providing a reliable source of quality water
for the built-out conditions.
The City's water use over the past 10 years
has been consistent and recent total water
consumption reported for calendar year
2020 is slightly less than total water
consumption reported for 2010. Since the
City is zoned mainly for residential use and
most of the residential water consumption
in the City is used for non-personal
purposes (i.e., irrigation, car washing, etc.),
the City has a significant number of
residential lots which require consistent
irrigation to maintain landscapes. Of the
water used for personal purposes, most of
the water consumed is attributable to toilet
flushing and clothes washing.
In the commercial and institutional sector,
water needs vary as customers range from
restaurants to offices and from retail stores
to schools. Office buildings and retail stores
require significantly less water than
restaurants and schools and are not usually
the key focus of water conservation efforts.
To maintain civic pride and a sense of
community, City parks (Figure 6.1) and
other City right of ways (medians, etc.)
require consistent irrigation. To prevent
water waste the City follows an irrigation
schedule that limits the length of irrigation
to avoid overspray runoff and also
evapotranspiration from daytime watering.
Figure 6.1: Banning Park
Overall water use characteristics within the
City's water service area reflect slightly
higher than average regional water use
characteristics within Southern California.
As a result of the City’s water needs, the
City has passed a conservation ordinance
similar to other agencies which limits or
restricts non-personal water use during
periods of drought. This will help conserve
water use for the more important health
and safety needs of its customers. The City's
Conservation Ordinance is discussed in
greater detail in Section 8.
6.4 CLIMATE IMPACTS ON WATER USE
California faces changes in water use habits
due to a variety of issues including
population growth, regulatory restrictions
and climate change (including the recent
severe drought of 2011-2016). More
specifically, weather unpredictability (more
extreme drought and flood events) poses
additional challenges to water agencies, not
only due to impacts on water supplies but
also due to impacts on water demands.
129
6 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
During and since the preparation of the
2015 UWMP, there have been local and
statewide influences on water use in the
City. In January of 2014, former Governor
Brown declared a state of emergency and
directed state officials to take all necessary
actions to prepare for water shortages. As
the drought prolonged into 2015, former
Governor Brown gave an executive order in
April 2015, as shown in Figure 6.2, which
mandated a statewide 25% reduction in
water use, with each agency assigned
specific target reductions.
Figure 6.2: Executive Order B-29-15 (2015)
Changes in water usage habits have a
special concern for the State due to the
inter-dependence of many agencies for the
transfer and use of water. For instance,
some agencies are unable to produce water
locally and thus entirely dependent on
imported water sources, while others are
able to produce all water locally (i.e.
groundwater). Further, some agencies are
able to reduce demands with minimal
economic impacts (only water sales
revenues), while other agencies will suffer
economically (i.e. agricultural & industrial
users) if required by State or local agencies
to reduce water consumption. Thus, the
State will likely face challenges in the near
future to find the correct balance of water
supply allocations to meet demands under
various weather conditions. For SWP water
rights holders, this is an all-too critical issue.
6.4.1 California Water Plan Update 2018
DWR’s California Water Plan Update 2018
focuses on sustaining water resources and
mitigating harm to the environment. This
update presents a vision where all
Californians benefit from such desirable
conditions as reduced flood risk, more
reliable water supplies, reduced
groundwater depletion, and greater habitat
and species resiliency-all for a more
sustainable future. Some challenges to
sustainability include communities located
in floodplains, inadequate access to
sanitation, ecosystem decline, groundwater
overdraft, wildfires, and the exacerbating of
these challenges by climate change.
6.5 WATER USE
Due to increases in water use efficiency and
the lingering effects of the mandatory
declaration period, overall water use within
the City’s service area in recent years has
decreased mildly. Annual water
consumption from 2016 to 2020 listed in
130
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
the Table 6.1 below ranged from a high of
8,325 AF in 2020 to a low of 6,712 AF in
2016, with an average of 7,648 AF. Water
consumption since 2015 has been
consistent, with a moderate spike in 2020.
Table 6.1
City Recent Water Use
Year
Total
Consumption
(AF)
Per Capita
(GPCD)
2020 8,369 240
2019 7,297 209
2018 7,927 228
2017 7,381 213
2016 6,997 203
Average (last 5 years): 219
Average (last 10 years): 234
2020 Water Use Target: 252
As indicated by Table 6.1 above, the City
has already reached their 2020 water use
reduction target. Furthermore, the table
above indicates that the City’s water use in
recent years has been low due to water
conservation.
6.6 WATER USE BY SECTOR
6.6.1 Service Connections/Accounts
The City maintains records of water
consumption and bills its customers on a
monthly basis for its water service. The City
maintains approximately 10,754 service
accounts with a mixture of residential,
commercial, institutional, and industrial
customers. The City includes both singlefamily and multi-family accounts under a residential sector; however, for billing
purposes, the City does separate water use
by single-family and multi-family. As of
2020, the current breakdown of accounts is
shown in Table 6.2:
Table 6.2
Number of Service Connections (2020)
Sector Service
Accounts
Residential 9,845
Commercial 811
Industrial 54
Institutional/Governmental 35
Landscape Irrigation 9
Other 0
Total Connections: 10,754
About 92 percent of the total service
connections are residential (single or multifamily), since the City consists primarily of residential properties. Commercial and
institutional accounts comprise about 6
percent of the total accounts. Landscape
and "other" accounts comprise less than 1
percent of the City's metered connections.
The total number of accounts does not
necessarily represent the total number of
actual service connections tapped into the
131
6 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 6.3: Sun Lakes Country Club
City's distribution mains. The total number
of accounts varies on a monthly basis based
on occupancy of a dwelling unit or
commercial property.
In addition to the customer types listed in
Table 6.2, the City also provides water to
two (2) agencies, including the High Valleys
Water District and the Sun Lakes Country
Club (shown in Figure 6.3). The total
combined water use of these two agencies
has been about 900 AF/year. However, the
City does not account for these two
agencies in their demand data since water
is considered to be a inter-agency transfer.
Also, the water used by Sun Lakes Country
Club is considered non-potable and
therefore not counted in this section of the
UWMP.
6.6.2 Recent Water Use by Sector
The City records water use per service
connection only and bills customers based
on a single water rate structure. Water
sales data is compiled by City water staff
and recorded on the DWR Form No. 38
(Public Water System Statistics) and
submitted to DWR annually. The total water
consumption by customer type since 2015
is shown on Table 6.3 below. As noted by
the table, Single-Family Residential
132
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 6.3
Recent Water Use by Sector (AF)
Sector 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Single Family Residential 3,370 3,728 3,775 3,438 3,966 Multi-Family Residential 69 76 77 70 81
Commercial 1,686 1,792 1,944 2,021 1,992
Industrial 94 102 101 95 172
Institutional/Governmental 58 64 58 28 23
Landscape Irrigation
(Potable) 539 579 562 505 559
Landscape Irrigation
(Non-Potable) 285 306 297 267 301
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total Water Sales: 6,100 6,648 6,816 6,425 7,094
Unaccounted for Water 897 733 1,111 872 1,275
Total Water Consumption
(Total Supply into System): 6,997 7,381 7,927 7,297 8,369 Figure 6.4: Current Water Demand by Sector (2020)
Single Family
47.4%
Multi-Family 1.0%
Commercial
23.8%
Industrial
2.1%
Institutional
0.3%
Landscape
(Non-Potable)
3.6%
Landscape
(Potable)
6.7% Loss
15.2%
133
6 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
accounts are the highest consuming sector
in the City since most of the City is zoned
for single-family accounts (with higher
densities for multi-family accounts). Figure
6.4 also shows the Current Water Demand
by Sector (2020). As indicated by Table 6.3,
the City's unaccounted for water ranged
from 733 to 1,275 AF, which on average is
about 13 percent of the total water supply
into the City's distribution system.
Unaccounted for water consists of routine
flushing, unmetered use, and water losses.
Although water losses have cost impacts on
water agencies, they cannot be prevented
entirely. Instead, effort is given to
controlling the quantity of water losses (to a
cost-effective extent) in order to reduce the
cost impact of water losses on water
operations. For this reason, the City has
prepared water loss audits using AWWA
software. The water audits for 2016 to 2019
are provided in the Appendix of this UWMP.
The 2019 Audit shows that the City’s
Leakage Index (the ratio of real loss to
unavoidable loss) was 1.16, which is an
excellent score for water agencies.
6.7 WATER CONSERVATION ACT
6.7.1 Act Background (SBx7-7)
Due to reductions of water in the San
Joaquin Delta, the Legislature drafted the
Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SBx7-7) to
protect statewide water sources. The
legislation called for a 20 percent reduction
in water use in California by the year 2020.
The legislation amended the water code to
call for 2020 and 2015 water use targets in
the 2010 UWMPs, updates or revisions to
these targets in the 2015 UWMPs and
allows the Department of Water Resources
(DWR) to enforce compliance to the new
water use standards. Beginning in 2016,
failure to comply with interim and final
targets will make the City ineligible for
grants and loans from the State needed to
attain water self-sufficiency by 2020.
In addition to an overall statewide 20
percent water use reduction, the objective
of SBx7-7 is to reduce water use within each
hydrologic region in accordance with the
agricultural and urban water needs of each
region. Currently, the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) recognizes ten (10)
separate hydrologic regions in California as
shown in Figure 6.5. Each hydrologic region
has been established for planning purposes
and corresponds to the State's major
drainage areas. The City of Banning is in the
Colorado River Hydrologic Region (HR),
which includes most of Riverside County,
San Bernardino County. The Colorado River
HR is shown in Figure 6.6.
Per capita water use, measured in gallons
per capita per day (GPCD), in the Colorado
River HR varies between different water
agencies depending on the geographic and
134
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 6.5: California's 2020 Water Conservation Goals
135
6 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 6.6: Colorado River Hydrologic Region
136
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 11
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
economic conditions of the agency’s service
area. The Colorado River HR has an overall
baseline per capita water use of 346 GPCD
and DWR has established a regional target
of 211 GPCD for the region as a compliance
target to satisfy SBx7-7 legislation.
The Methodologies guidebook made
provisions that allowed a water supplier to
meet the target requirements by achieving
one of four (4) different targets, provided
that the water supplier's baseline water use
was low enough relative to the region
within which it supplies water. For most
agencies, the two most common options
are 1) 20% reduction or 2) 5% reduction
from the Hydrologic Region.
Exempt Agencies
If an agency has a baseline per capita water
use of 100 GPCD or less, that agency will
not have to adhere to any reduction targets
as that agency is already considered water
efficient. In such a case, that agency must
document in subsequent UWMPs that its
water usage is still under 100 GPCD.
6.7.2 SBx7-7 Baseline & Target
The basic procedure for determining the
applicable water reduction target is
illustrated by Figures 6.7 and 6.8 on the
following page. The City previously
established water use targets for 2015 and
2020. DWR provided guidelines for
determining these targets in its
Methodologies guidebook for the 2010 and
2015 UWMPs. In the 2010 and 2015
UWMPs, the City's baseline water use and
targets were determined based on the
procedures shown in Figures 6.7 and 6.8.
If an agency's 10-year baseline is slightly
higher than the Hydrologic Region's target,
that agency still must achieve a five percent
reduction from its 5-year baseline. If an
agency has a per capita water use of 100
GPCD or less, that agency will not have to
adhere to any reduction targets as that
agency is already considered water
efficient.
Since the City does not use recycled water,
a 10-year instead of a 15-year rolling
average baseline was previously calculated.
The City’s baseline water use is 315 GPCD,
which was obtained from the 10-year
period January 1, 2001 to December 31,
2010.
Table 6.4 shows historic (2001 to 2010)
water use and provides the base period
water use per year used to calculate the
baseline water use for the City. The data
was used to calculate the 10-year and 5-
year baselines. Moreover, regardless of the
compliance method adopted by the City, it
will need to meet the minimum water use
target of 5 percent reduction from a 5-year
baseline as calculated.
137
6 - 12 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 6.7: Procedure for Determining Baseline Per Capita Water Use Figure 6.8: Procedure for Determining Target Per Capita Water Use 4 Complie
Water Use
Rates over 10
Years
3 Water Use /
Population
= Rate
2 Potable
Water Use
1 Service Area
Population
5 Select
Target
4 ...Calculate
95%
Reduction
Target
3 If < 95%
Hydrologic
Region...
2 Compare to
95%
Hydrologic
Region
1 Set 80%
Reduction
Target
138
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 13
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 6.4
City of Banning Water Use (GPCPD)
Year
Total
Water Use
(AF)
Population
Per
Capita
(GPCD)
2010 8,485 29,603 256
2009 9,259 28,751 287
2008 9,606 28,551 300
2007 10,245 28,193 324
2006 10,245 28,234 324
2005 9,427 28,250 298
2004 10,424 28,055 332
2003 10,043 27,608 324
2002 9,808 25,662 341
2001 10,032 24,639 363
10-yr. Baseline (2001-2010)
(SB7: 10608.20) 315
5-yr. Baseline (2006-2010)
(SB7: 10608.22) 298
Colorado River HR: 346
As shown in Table 6.4 above, the City's 10-
yr and 5-yr baselines were determined to
be 315 GPCD and 298 GPCD, respectively.
The City's baseline water use was then
compared to the regional compliance target
to determine the applicable reduction
amounts per the SBx7-7 additions to the
water code. The legal stipulations
applicable to the City and the required
target to be enforced by DWR are shown in
Table 6.5:
Table 6.5
City of Banning
SBx7-7 2020 Water Use Targets (GPCD)
Min.
Reduction
Requirement
(10608.22)
20% Target
(10608.20)
(b)(1)
5% Reduction
from Regional
Target
(10608.20)
(b)(3)
283 252 200
2020 Per Capita Target: 252
Interim (2015) Target: 284
The selected SBx7-7 target is 252 GPCD
(20% from its 10-year baseline) because this
amount is greater than 200 GPCD (5%
reduction from the Colorado River HR's
target). Since the City's minimum reduction
requirement of 283 GPCD is greater than
the regional target of 211 GPCD, the City
must select Method 1 (252 GPCD) as its
2020 water use target. Therefore, the City's
compliance target for 2020 per capita water
consumption was 252 GPCD in accordance
with Section 10608.22 of the Code.
6.7.3 SBx7-7 Target Compliance
Although the requirements of SBx7-7
seemed stringent, it is noteworthy to
mention that the City has seen an increase
in water efficiency since the baseline years
of 2001 to 2010. This is due in part to State
legislation, stricter conservation measures,
saturation of water-saving plumbing
139
6 - 14 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
fixtures, and overall water conservation
awareness. As indicated by Table 6.1, the
City’s consumption rate for 2020 is 240
GPCD. Thus, the City has achieved its final
2020 target. The City can maintain its
consumption rates below the SBx7-7 target
by continuing to focus on water
conservation.
6.8 PROJECTED WATER DEMAND
Future water use projections must consider
significant factors on water demand, such
as development and/or redevelopment,
and climate patterns, among other less
significant factors that affect water
demand. Although redevelopment is
expected to be an ongoing process, it is not
expected to significantly impact water use
since the City will experience significant
development over the next 25 years.
Climate conditions will continue to be a
major influence on demand as drought
conditions will increase demand at a time
when these supplies are limited.
6.8.1 Passive Savings
The City should experience modest
increases in its water consumption in spite
of significant population increases through
2045. This is due to “passive savings”. That
is, over time homes will be equipped with
water-saving fixtures and landscapes. Also,
over time, residents will become more
aware of water conservation and Cityspecific policies such as limitations on landscape irrigation and car washing. This
“passive savings” will help offset new water
demands stemming from anticipated
population growth in the City.
For the sake of future water demand
projections in this UWMP, this “passive
savings” is taken into consideration by
analyzing the declines in water
consumption rates. Beginning with a
consumption rate of 234 GPCD (average of
the past 10 years), the rate of decline in
GPCD is projected to be 1% annually. It is
practical to assume that water use
efficiency will continue to increase through
water code changes over the next couple of
decades.
6.8.2 Low-Income Water Demands
Senate Bill 1087 and Water Code Section
10631.1 require that water use projections
of a UWMP include the projected water use
for single-family and multi-family residential
housing for lower income households as
identified in the housing element of any
city, county, or city and county in the
service area of the supplier. The City has a
civic and legal responsibility to provide for
the water-related health and safety of the
community. One of the City's objectives is
to provide its customers with an adequate
and reliable supply of high-quality water to
meet present and future needs in an
environmentally and economically
140
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
6 - 15
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
responsible manner. Water use priority
does not differ based on income level, but is
classified by the type of use.
The residential sector projections include
projected low-income housing in
accordance with the City’s Housing Element
(http://banning.ca.us/428/Housing-Element).
projecting a total of 1,163 additional lowincome housing units to meet the City’s Housing Needs Assessment. With an
estimated 2.5 persons per unit (or about 0.6
AFY per unit), the City will need an
additional 717 AF of water per year to
supply water to these projected lower
income housing units. These low-income
water demands are included in future
projections for single family and multifamily homes listed in Table 6.6 below.
6.8.3 Projected Water Use by Sector
For planning purposes, the City's projected
water use for 2025-2045 is broken down by
sector in Table 6.6. The estimates per
sector are based on the ratios of the sectors
shown in Table 6.3 and Figure 6.4. Figure
6.9 on the following page also shows the
Projected Water Demand by Sector (in 2045).
Table 6.6
Projected Water Demand by Sector
Sector 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Water Service Area Population 38,180 45,235 52,290 59,345 66,400 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1.0% Annual Passive Savings 222 211 201 191 181 Demands
Single Family Residential 4,505 5,071 5,569 6,004 6,382 Multi-Family Residential 92 103 114 123 130
Commercial 2,263 2,548 2,798 3,016 3,206
Industrial 195 220 241 260 276
Institutional/Governmental 26 29 32 35 37
Landscape Irrigation (Potable)* 635 715 785 846 900
Landscape Irrigation ((Non-Potable) 342 385 423 456 484 Total Water Sales: 8,059 9,070 9,961 10,739 11,415
Unaccounted for Water 1,448 1,630 1,790 1,930 2,052
Total Water Consumption
(Total Supply into System): 9,507 10,701 11,751 12,670 13,467 Note: Some projected potable landscape irrigation demands may be switched to the “non-potable” category when recycled water is available 141
6 - 16 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 6: WATER USE
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 6.9: Projected Water Demand by Sector (in 2045)
Single Family
6,382 AF
Multi-Family 130 AF
Commercial
3,206 AF
Industrial
276 AF
Institutional
37 AF
Landscape
(Non-Potable)
484 AF
Landscape
(Potable)
900 AF
Loss
2,052 AF
142
Section 7
Reliability Planning
Former Gov. Schwarzenegger’s signing of the 2009
Water Conservation Act enforced mandatory
conservation of up to 20% by 2020 that applies to Urban Water Management Plans. Severe droughts, including
the most recent State drought, highlights the need for
strong water supply management and storage, including
the City’s San Gorgonio Tanks 1, 2, & 3 (shown below).
143
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
7 RELIABILITY
PLANNING
7.1 OVERVIEW
Drought conditions continue to be a critical
issue for Southern California's water supply.
The current drought of 2020-2021 is
impacting deliveries of imported water to
Southern California cities. The documented
deliveries of water from the State Water
Project (SWP) for Water Year 2020 (October
1 st 2019 to September 30 2020) indicate
that the volume of water delivered to SWP
Contractors was the lowest since Water
Year 2015. Therefore, it is important that
agencies manage water consumption and
reduce reliance on imported water through
local groundwater and surface water
supplies. Water agencies should prepare for
prolonged droughts for up to five (5) years
to ensure a reliable supply of water.
This section discusses local and regional
efforts to ensure a reliable supply of water.
This section also compares projected supply
to projected demand over a 25-year
planning period (through 2045) for various
climate scenarios. Demand and supply
projections are provided in Tables 7.1 - 7.7.
7.2 HISTORIC DROUGHTS
Climate data has been recorded in
California since 1858. Since then, California
has experienced several periods of severe
drought, including: 1928-34, 1976-77 and
1987-91, 2007-2009, and most recently in
The City’s three
San Gorgonio
tanks (pictured)
store up to 5.6 MG
(14 AF) of water
for the City.
144
7 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2011-2017. In addition to these, California
has also experienced several periods of less
severe drought. Among the aforementioned
droughts, the year 1977 is still considered
to be the driest year of record in the Four
Rivers Basin by DWR (these rivers flow into
the Sacramento Delta and are the source of
water for the State Water Project).
In 1983, as a result of previous droughts,
the State legislature enacted the UWMP
Act, which requires the preparation of an
UWMP. Several subsequent amendments
have been made to the Act to ensure such
items as public coordination, recycled
water, and contingency response plans are
included in UWMPs.
In 1991, as a result of the 1987-1991
drought, over 100 water agencies and
environmental groups came together to
form the California Urban Water
Conservation Council (CUWCC) to manage
the impacts of drought and promote water
conservation. In January 2018, the CUWCC
became the California Water Efficiency
Partnership (CalWEP), and consists of over
200 water agencies and private companies.
CalWEP assists its member agencies with
public policy, research, and education tools.
As a result of the drought of 2007-2009,
Governor Schwarzenegger signed the Water
Conservation Act of 2009 (SBx7-7), which is
perhaps the strongest piece of legislation to
date on water conservation, requiring
mandatory water conservation up to 20
percent by 2020.
At the local level, water agencies have
enacted their own ordinances to deal with
the impacts of droughts. Section 13.16 of
the City’s Municipal Code deals with Water
Conservation. Since then, the City has
applied the water use prohibitions of the
City’s code in response to the recent
drought of 2011-2017. More on the City’s
code and ordinances can be found in
Section 8.
7.3 RECENT DROUGHT (2011-2017)
A significant and prolonged drought hit the
state of California in 2011-2017. The
drought depleted reservoir levels all across
the state, as reflected by Figure 7.1 on the
following page. In January of 2014, former
Governor Brown declared a state of
emergency and directed state officials to
take all necessary actions to prepare for
water shortages. As the drought prolonged
into 2015, former Governor Brown gave an
executive order in April 2015 which
mandated a statewide 25% reduction in
water use.
In January of 2016, DWR and the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation finalized the 2016
Drought Contingency Plan that outlined State
145
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 7.1: Lake Oroville During Recent State Drought of 2011-2017 Water Project and Central Valley Project
operations for February 2016 to November
2016. The plan was developed in
coordination with staff from State and
Federal agencies. One of the key purposes
of the plan was to communicate goals for
water management and the potential
operations needed to achieve those goals
for water resources stakeholders and the
public. The plan was updated in 2020 to
reflect the dry conditions of 2019-2020.
Although the recent droughts have more
significantly impacted northern and centralvalley agencies that use SWP water for agriculture, the City is indirectly impacted
by the recent drought conditions on
Northern California Waters since this water
source is the majority source of water
imported from the San Gorgonio Pass
Water Agency (SGPWA).
To date, California agencies have reduced
water use by about 25 percent since the
emergency conservation regulations took
effect in June of 2015. This continues to
meet former Governor Brown's 25 percent
mandate, despite a decline in the statewide
water-savings in the recent year (2020).
7.4 STATE WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY
As a result of continued drought challenges
to the State’s water supplies, SWP
Contractors understand the unpredictability
of imported water allocations from the SWP.
146
7 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 7.2: Lake Oroville at End of State Drought (Feb 2017) With participation of the SWP Contractors,
DWR strives to meet the water needs of
Southern California by developing new
projects to increase the capacity of its
supplies while encouraging its member
agencies to develop local supply projects to
meet the needs of its customers. Also, DWR
is committed to developing and maintaining
high-capacity storage reservoirs, including
both those which are DWR-owned and
Contractor-owned (such as Diamond Valley
Lake, an MWD-owned reservoir -the largest
in Southern California), to meet the needs
during times of drought and emergency.
The large reservoirs help to avoid the
repercussions of reduced supplies not only
from the SWP but also the Colorado River
Aqueduct (CRA). Throughout the Southern
California Region, a total of three (3) DWRowned reservoirs, nine (9) MWD-owned reservoirs, and twenty-four (24) SDCWA
reservoirs contain up to 2.2 million acrefeet (MAF) of water storage.
7.4.1 State Water Project (SWP) Reliability
As a SWP contractor, SGPWA has a “Table
A” allocation of up to 17,300 AFY (per year).
Since SGPWA began receiving SWP water,
however, the average amount of water
received each year is roughly 58% of the full
Table A amount. On an annual basis, each
of the 29 SWP Contractors request amounts
147
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 7.3: California State Reservoir Levels (June 2021) 148
7 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 7.4: SWP Table A Deliveries
149
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
SWP supplies are
typically less than
the maximum
“Table A” amounts
requested by the
Contractors each
year.
of SWP water based on their anticipated
yearly demand. Each SWP contractor’s
Water Supply Contract contains a “Table A”
amount that identifies the maximum
amount of water that a contractor may
request. However, the amount of SWP
water actually allocated to contractors each
year is dependent on a number of factors
that can vary
significantly from year
to year. The
availability of SWP
supplies is generally
less than their full
Table A amounts in
many years and can
be significantly less in
very dry years. After receiving the requests,
DWR assesses the amount of water supply
available based on precipitation, snow pack
on Northern California watersheds, volume
of water in storage, projected carry over
storage, and Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay
Delta regulatory requirements. For
example, according to the State Water
Project Delivery Reliability Report 2019, the
total SWP annual delivery of water to
contractors ranged from a low of 477
thousand acre-feet (TAF) in 2014 to a high
of 3.4 million acre-feet (MAF) in 2017.
Due to the uncertainty in water supply,
contractors are not typically guaranteed
their full Table A amount, but instead a
percentage of that amount based on
available supply. For instance, the current
DWR Notice to Contractors 20-06
(December 2020) indicates that the initial
allocation is set at 10%, which is down from
the Contactor’s request for a 15% initial
allocation. For SGPWA, the initial allocation
for this year is set at 1,730 AF.
The reliability of the SWP impacts the
Contractors ability to plan for future growth
and supply. SWP Contractors can seek out
other local supply sources or transfer
agreements (such as transfers with
Colorado River rights holders). Although not
directly important for the City, matters
involving the SWP do impact the City
indirectly.
7.5 COLORADO RIVER RELIABILITY
Water supply from the Colorado River
continues to be a critical issue for Southern
California as many agencies compete for
both State Water Project water and
Colorado River water. The Lower Colorado
River Basin has been suffering from its own
drought (in addition to the droughts across
California). Average flows in the lower basin
from 2000 to 2018 have averaged 12.4
million acre-feet per year (MAFY), down
from the historical average of about 15
MAFY. Recent data indicates that total
Colorado River Basin storage (primarily Lake
Powell and Lake Mead) was 29 MAF at the
beginning of water year 2021. This was a
decrease of about 2.8 MAF of total storage
150
7 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 7.5: Colorado River Basin
151
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Colorado River
conditions have an
indirect impact on
the City since some
SWP Contractors
also have rights to
the CRA (such as
MWD and CVWD)
that was in the system at the beginning of
water year 2020 (about 32 MAF). Both of
these volumes are just half of the capacity
of the system (about 60 MAF).
As a result of the ongoing drought in the
lower basin, in 2014, the Secretary of the
Interior tasked the Colorado River Basin
States with developing drought contingency
plans. As part of this process, the Lower
Basin States (California, Arizona, and
Nevada) signed a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)
which sought to
ensure an additional
3.0 MAF of water
would be preserved in
Lake Mead through
2019. As for California
parties, the needs of
the Colorado River
water users, including
MWD, will continue to be met due to the
security provided by the Law of the River as
well as effective implementation of
conservation and transfer agreements.
7.5.1 Competition for Water Rights
For Colorado River rights holders, the “Law
of the River” is essentially a compilation of
numerous compacts, state and federal laws,
court decisions and decrees, contracts, and
regulatory guidelines which define rights to
water from the Colorado River. These
documents apportion the water and
regulate the use and management of the
Colorado River among the seven basin
states and Mexico. A brief listing of these
compacts and acts include:
Colorado River Compact (1922)
Boulder-Canyon Project Act (1928)
CA Seven Party Agreement (1931)
Arizona v. California (1964)
CO River Basin Project Act (1968)
Arizona v. California (1979)
Quantification Settlement
Agreement (2003)
Per the 2003 Quantification Settlement
Agreement (QSA), California's allocation has
been confirmed at 4.4 MAF per year, with
MWD maintaining just over 1 MAF in rights.
Likewise, the Coachella Valley Water
District (CVWD) holds rights to the CRA. As
SWP contractors, MWD’s and CVWD’s
extractions from the CRA impact their
annual requests for SWP Table A amounts.
7.6 CITY SUPPLY RELIABILITY
Since the City imports State Water Project
(SWP) water to replenish groundwater
supplies, reliability of the SWP has a direct
impact on the City. As shown on the
previous pages, the SWP is not able to
consistently fulfill SWP Contractor’s Table A
requests during droughts. As mentioned in
the 2015 UWMP, the reliability of the SWP
152
7 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
was estimated to be about 58%. The 2019
SWP Delivery Capability Report (published
in August 2020), estimated a SWP reliability
of 58%. This was down from 62% in 2017.
The reliability of water from the CRA has a
lesser, indirect impact on the City, not only
due to the annual Table A allocations, but
also resulting from potential transfer and
exchange agreements between SWP
contractors (including SGPWA). During
droughts in the Colorado River basin, SWP
contractors that also use water from the
Colorado River may rely more on the SWP.
Figure 7.6: Suspended Pipe (Whitewater Flume System)
The City's groundwater is not subject to
short-term water shortages resulting from
temporary dry weather conditions. Further,
as part of the Beaumont Basin adjudication,
the City has the option of storing up to
80,000 acre-feet of water in the Beaumont
Basin. At the end of calendar year 2020, the
City of Banning had approximately 50,916
AF of groundwater available in the
Beaumont Basin Storage Account, which is
utilized as a buffer to make up for dry
weather conditions and will be used in
future years to meet demands that exceed
local safe yields.
7.6.1 Drought Risk Assessment
The drought risk assessment is an
assessment of the reliability of the City’s
water supplies by comparing projected
future water demands with expected
available water supplies under three
different hydrologic conditions: normal
year; a single dry year; and multiple dry
years. Future supply and demand
conditions can be determined from the
following data:
Population forecasts
Water supply capacity
Recent water use trends
The data listed above has been provided in
the previous sections of this UWMP.
Basis for Projected Demands
To project future demands, it will be
assumed that total demand will change
annually based on changes in population
multiplied by the individual demand perperson (also known as the “per-capita” consumption rate -see Section 6). The percapita rates used in the future projections will be based on actual water use data from
the recent past. In particular, the City’s
averages for the last ten (10) years will be
153
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 11
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
used as the basis to project demands
through the year 2045. To project demands
and supplies, the following is assumed:
Starting consumption rate of 234 gallons
per capita per day (GPCD). This is based
on the average consumption of the City
in the last 10 years (see Table 6.1)
Decreasing consumption rate from 2021
onward with a passive savings of 1.0%
annually (i.e. 232 GPCD in 2021).
Although a constant consumption rate
provides a more conservative approach, the
decreasing consumption rate scenario
provides a more realistic picture for
planning purposes since it considers gradual
improvements in water-use efficiency. In the
past 20 years for instance, the City has seen
a 6% annual decrease in water use. For
drought-time demands, it is expected that
there will be a small degree of increase due
to the lack of rainfall on landscapes. To
project demands during single and multiple
(five) year drought periods, the following
increase factors were assumed:
Dry Year: 5%
Multiple Dry Years: 5%, 8%, and 2%
Although the 2015 UWMP did not assume
increases in demand during dry years, the
increase factors listed above are reasonable
for the purposes of demand and supply
projections since the City has seen increases
in demands prior to the 2014 Emergency
Declaration and 2015 Executive Order.
Basis for Projected Supplies
To project future supplies, the City can
expect groundwater supplies to be based
on the combined capacity of its
groundwater wells, with a maximum safe
yield for each subbasin. The City’s
groundwater basins have a combined safe
yield capacity of roughly 9,200 AFY. Further,
as part of the Beaumont Basin adjudication,
the City has the option of storing up to
80,000 AF of water in the Beaumont Basin.
Although the City can pump up to the safe
yield limits, for conservative planning
purposes, projected groundwater supplies
will be based off the average (proportion)
of supplies used by the City in the past 10
years. That is, based on water demands.
Due to the lack of development, demands
have been relatively flat for the past 10
years. As demands increase, the City's
production will increase up to the City's safe
yield. This will also be limited to actual
production capacity. During times when
local safe yields are exceeded, the City will
pump from its storage account in the
Beaumont Basin, which will be recharged by
various sources. This will allow the City to
continually rely on groundwater pumping to
meet increased demands.
154
7 - 12 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Water
recharged in the
Beaumont Basin
is credited in the
City’s storage
account.
Tabular Comparisons
Tables 7.1 to 7.7, shown on the following
pages, provide an analysis of the City’s
supply and demand projections to the year
2045. Figure 7.9 shows a visual pie-chart for
the Normal Water Year 2045. The data
compiled in these Tables reflects the data
presented in the standard DWR Data Table
6.9 in Appendix E.
Figure 7.7: River Along the Beaumont Basin
Reasonably available volume per Basin is
calculated as the total projected water use
in Acre-Feet (AF) multiplied by average
percentage of total production over last ten
years. The City of Banning will pull the
differential amounts between the Projected
reasonably available volume and safe yield
from the Beaumont Basin Storage Account.
For example, it is projected that the City will
pull 1,740 AF from the West Banning Basin
in 2025, but the Safe Yield is only 1,430 AF.
Therefore, the City will only pull 1,430 AF
from the West Banning Basin and will rely
on pulling the remaining 310 AF (1,740-
1,430 AF) from the Beaumont Basin Storage
Account.
Water recharged (e.g. imported water,
storm water, return flows, etc.) in the
Beaumont Basin will also be credited in the
City’s storage account, allowing for the
Reasonably Available Volume to increase.
The City also anticipates
that it would recharge
more water during wet
years. Per the Beaumont
Basin Watermaster 2019
Consolidated Annual
Report and Engineering
Report, the Beaumont
Basin Safe Yield of the
basin was reevaluated in 2013. The
Beaumont Basin Watermaster Committee
re-determined the Safe Yield of the
Beaumont Basin to be 6,700 (AF/YR). The
Safe Yield will be reevaluated again in 2023.
The amount of unused safe yield not
produced in the Beaumont Basin by the
Overlying Water Right holders is issued to
the retail agencies, with the City of Banning
receiving 31.43% of the unused safe yield.
1,491 AF was used as the safe yield value in
2025, because this is the amount of Unused
Overlying Water from the Beaumont Basin
that will be allocated to the City of Banning
in 2024 (2019 Beaumont Watermaster
Annual Report) and is projected to decrease
by 15% every five years from then on.
155
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 13
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
For the Banning Bench Basin and Banning
Water Canyon Basin it is assumed the most
conservative safe yield value from Table 4-1
of the Geoscience Support Services, Inc.
2019 Technical Memorandum (shown in
Figure 7.8 below). The West Banning Basin
safe yield value was determined from the
same table, but the 2019 updated value
determined by the Zero Net Draft was used
because it was closer to the actual
operating amount for the City.
Historically, large storm events have
significantly recharged the Cabazon Basin.
Current water levels within the Cabazon
Basin are declining, and only by assuming
that a future large storm event will occur
can any safe yield be determined. The Cabazon
Basin's steady declining water levels are not
a result of anthropogenic actions but just
the natural process of draining and filling of
the basin, which is on a multi-decadal cycle.
Based on the data contained in these
tables, the City can expect to meet future
demands for all climate conditions through
2045. The surplus in available supply for the
City indicates that the City can focus its
efforts more on water conservation as
opposed to new water supply projects.
Figure 7.8: Table 4-1 of the Geoscience Support Services, Inc. 2019 Technical Memorandum The following is noted in DWR’s standard Table 6.9, and repeated here for clarity:
156
7 - 14 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 7.1
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Normal Water Year (AF)
Water Sources 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Population
Water Service Area Population 38,180 45,235 52,290 59,345 66,400 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings
222 211 201 191 181
Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,508 8,574 8,595 8,542 8,476 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 999 2,126 3,156 4,128 4,991
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 9,507 10,700 11,751 12,670 13,467 Total Available Supply4 56,358 52,388 44,066 33,124 21,098 Demand
Total Estimated Demand1 9,507 10,701 11,751 12,670 13,467 Compare to Avg. Demand for
Previous 10 Yrs. (7,985 AF) 119% 134% 147% 159% 169%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference) 0 0 0 0 0
Supply/Demand (%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 46,851 41,687 32,315 20,454 7,631 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population.
a. Average consumption rate of last 10 years = 234 gallons per capita per day. b. Consumption rate in 2001: 363 gpcd.
c. Consumption rate in 2020: 240 gpcd.
d. Approximate “passive” savings over past 20 years: 6 gpcd per year. e. Projected “passive” savings: 1 gpcd per year = 181 gpcd by 2045.
2. The data compiled in these Tables reflects the data presented in the standard DWR Data Table 6.9.
3. The Beaumont Basin Storage Account currently (at end of 2020) contains approximately 50,916 AF of groundwater.
4. Total Available Supply = [Safe Yield for each Basin (Beaumont Basin’s reasonably available volume for that year; Cabazon Basin’s maximum reasonably available volume, which takes place in 2045) + Beaumont Basin Storage Account]. a. Imported water purchased from SGPWA is recharged into the Beaumont Basin, and will be credited to the City in their storage account, allowing for the Reasonably Available Volume to increase. The projections for Imported water purchased is based on the City’s recent purchases from SGPWA:
i. Low of 250 AF in 2025
ii. High of 2,500 AF in 2045
157
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 15
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 7.2
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Single Dry Year (AF)
Water Sources 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Population
Water Service Area Population 38,180 45,235 52,290 59,345 66,400 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings
222 211 201 191 181
Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,508 8,574 8,595 8,542 8,476 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 1,461 2,652 3,767 4,790 5,659
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 9,969 11,226 12,362 13,332 14,135 Total Available Supply4 56,344 52,360 43,774 32,068 18,528 Normal Year Supply 9,507 10,700 11,751 12,670 13,467
% of Normal Year 105% 105% 105% 105% 105%
Demand
Total Dry Demand1 9,969 11,226 12,362 13,332 14,135
Normal Year Demand 9,494 10,691 11,773 12,697 13,462
% of Normal Year 105% 105% 105% 105% 105%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference)5 0 0 0 0 0
Supply/Demand (%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 46,375 41,134 31,412 18,736 4,393 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population x Single Dry Year Increase of 105%.
4. Imported water purchased from SGPWA and recharged into the Beaumont Basin during a Single Dry Year will be 236 AF.
5. A net-zero Supply-Demand (Difference) reveals that an additional amount of groundwater will be taken out of the Beaumont Basin Storage Account to meet the Total Dry Demand, on top of the Normal Water Year amount. A positive difference will be added to the Available Leftover Supply Capacity (Total Available Supply - Total Dry Demand + Difference) of subsequent years, as a surplus of water that was not pumped due to a low Total Dry Demand. For all cases there is more than enough in storage, as shown by the Available Leftover Supply Capacity.
6. All other items derived in similitude to Table 7.1.
158
7 - 16 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 7.3
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Multiple Dry Years (2021-2025) (AF)
Water Sources 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Population
Water Service Area Population 32,536 33,947 35,358 36,769 38,180 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings
232 229 227 225 222
Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,508 8,508 8,508 8,508 8,508 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 999 999 999 999 1,176
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 9,507 9,507 9,507 9,507 9,684
Total Available Supply4 60,105 60,759 59,996 59,233 59,179 Normal Year Supply 9,507 9,507 9,507 9,507 9,507
% of Normal Year 100% 100% 100% 100% 102%
Demand
Total Dry Demand1 8,865 9,419 9,172 9,443 9,684
Normal Year Demand 8,443 8,721 8,993 9,258 9,494
% of Normal Year 105% 108% 102% 102% 102%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference)5 642 88 335 64 0
Supply/Demand (%) 107% 101% 104% 101% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 51,240 51,982 50,912 50,124 49,559 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population x Multiple Dry Year Increases of 105%, 108%, and 102%.
4. Imported water purchased from SGPWA and recharged into the Beaumont Basin during Multiple Dry Years will be as follows:
a. Dry Year 1: 1,653 AF
b. Dry Year 2: 236 AF
c. Dry Year 3: 236 AF
d. Dry Year 4: 945 AF
e. Dry Year 5: 1,653 AF
5. A net-zero Supply-Demand (Difference) reveals that an additional amount of groundwater will be taken out of the Beaumont Basin Storage Account to meet the Total Dry Demand, on top of the Normal Water Year amount. A positive difference will be added to the Available Leftover Supply Capacity (Total Available Supply - Total Dry Demand + Difference) of subsequent years, as a surplus of water that was not pumped due to a low Total Dry Demand. For all cases there is more than enough in storage, as shown by the Available Leftover Supply Capacity.
6. All other items derived in similitude to Table 7.1.
159
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 17
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 7.4
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Multiple Dry Years (2026-2030) (AF)
Water Sources 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Population
Water Service Area Population 39,591 41,002 42,413 43,824 45,235 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings 220 218 215 213 211 Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,521 8,534 8,548 8,561 8,574 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 1,713 2,259 1,890 2,117 2,337
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 10,234 10,793 10,438 10,678 10,911 Total Available Supply4 56,358 56,298 54,275 52,621 51,449 Normal Year Supply 10,045 10,334 10,623 10,912 11,200
% of Normal Year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Demand
Total Dry Demand1 10,234 10,793 10,438 10,678 10,911
Normal Year Demand 9,747 9,993 10,234 10,468 10,697
% of Normal Year 105% 108% 102% 102% 102%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference)5 0 0 0 0 0
Supply/Demand (%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 46,124 45,505 43,837 41,943 40,538 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population x Multiple Dry Year Increases of 105%, 108%, and 102%
4. Imported water purchased from SGPWA and recharged into the Beaumont Basin during Multiple Dry Years will be as follows:
a. Dry Year 1: 1,653 AF
b. Dry Year 2: 236 AF
c. Dry Year 3: 236 AF
d. Dry Year 4: 945 AF
e. Dry Year 5: 1,653 AF
5. A net-zero Supply-Demand (Difference) reveals that an additional amount of groundwater will be taken out of the Beaumont Basin Storage Account to meet the Total Dry Demand, on top of the Normal Water Year amount. A positive difference will be added to the Available Leftover Supply Capacity (Total Available Supply - Total Dry Demand + Difference) of subsequent years, as a surplus of water that was not pumped due to a low Total Dry Demand. For all cases there is more than enough in storage, as shown by the Available Leftover Supply Capacity.
6. All other items derived in similitude to Table 7.1.
160
7 - 18 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 7.5
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Multiple Dry Years (2031-2035) (AF)
Water Sources 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Population
Water Service Area Population 46,646 48,057 49,468 50,879 52,290 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings 209 207 205 203 201 Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,578 8,582 8,587 8,591 8,595 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 2,889 3,448 2,991 3,198 3,400
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 11,467 12,030 11,578 11,789 11,995 Total Available Supply4 52,388 51,152 47,941 45,186 42,932 Normal Year Supply 11,510 11,820 12,131 12,441 12,751
% of Normal Year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Demand
Total Dry Demand1 11,467 12,030 11,578 11,789 11,995
Normal Year Demand 10,921 11,139 11,351 11,558 11,760
% of Normal Year 105% 108% 102% 102% 102%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference)5 0 0 0 0 0
Supply/Demand (%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 40,921 39,123 36,363 33,396 30,937 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population x Multiple Dry Year Increases of 105%, 108%, and 102%.
4. Imported water purchased from SGPWA and recharged into the Beaumont Basin during Multiple Dry Years will be as follows:
a. Dry Year 1: 1,653 AF
b. Dry Year 2: 236 AF
c. Dry Year 3: 236 AF
d. Dry Year 4: 945 AF
e. Dry Year 5: 1,653 AF
5. A net-zero Supply-Demand (Difference) reveals that an additional amount of groundwater will be taken out of the Beaumont Basin Storage Account to meet the Total Dry Demand, on top of the Normal Water Year amount. A positive difference will be added to the Available Leftover Supply Capacity (Total Available Supply - Total Dry Demand + Difference) of subsequent years, as a surplus of water that was not pumped due to a low Total Dry Demand. For all cases there is more than enough in storage, as shown by the Available Leftover Supply Capacity.
6. All other items derived in similitude to Table 7.1.
161
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 19
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 7.6
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Multiple Dry Years (2036-2040) (AF)
Water Sources 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040
Population
Water Service Area Population 53,701 55,112 56,523 57,934 59,345 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings
199 197 195 193 191
Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,584 8,574 8,563 8,553 8,542 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 3,970 4,546 4,018 4,213 4,404
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 12,554 13,120 12,581 12,766 12,946 Total Available Supply4 44,066 41,749 37,439 33,658 30,390 Normal Year Supply 13,084 13,419 13,752 14,087 14,420
% of Normal Year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Demand
Total Dry Demand1 12,554 13,120 12,581 12,766 12,946
Normal Year Demand 11,956 12,148 12,334 12,516 12,692
% of Normal Year 105% 108% 102% 102% 102%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference)5 0 0 0 0 0
Supply/Demand (%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 31,512 28,629 24,859 20,892 17,443 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population x Multiple Dry Year Increases of 105%, 108%, and 102%.
4. Imported water purchased from SGPWA and recharged into the Beaumont Basin during Multiple Dry Years will be as follows:
a. Dry Year 1: 1,653 AF
b. Dry Year 2: 236 AF
c. Dry Year 3: 236 AF
d. Dry Year 4: 945 AF
e. Dry Year 5: 1,653 AF
5. A net-zero Supply-Demand (Difference) reveals that an additional amount of groundwater will be taken out of the Beaumont Basin Storage Account to meet the Total Dry Demand, on top of the Normal Water Year amount. A positive difference will be added to the Available Leftover Supply Capacity (Total Available Supply - Total Dry Demand + Difference) of subsequent years, as a surplus of water that was not pumped due to a low Total Dry Demand. For all cases there is more than enough in storage, as shown by the Available Leftover Supply Capacity.
6. All other items derived in similitude to Table 7.1.
162
7 - 20 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 7.7
City of Banning Water Supply Availability & Demand Projections Multiple Dry Years (2041-2045) (AF)
Water Sources 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045
Population
Water Service Area Population 60,756 62,167 63,578 64,989 66,400 Consumption Rate (GPCD)
Including 1% Annual Passive Savings 189 187 185 183 181 Supply
Groundwater Pumped (Total) 8,529 8,516 8,502 8,489 8,476 Pumped from Beaumont Basin Storage
Account3 4,978 5,558 4,956 5,130 5,256
Total Anticipated Use of Supplies
(Estimated Production) 13,507 14,074 13,458 13,619 13,732 Total Available Supply4 33,124 29,799 24,477 19,757 15,573 Normal Year Supply 14,730 15,039 15,348 15,657 15,967
% of Normal Year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Demand
Total Dry Demand1 13,507 14,074 13,458 13,619 13,732
Normal Year Demand 12,864 13,031 13,194 13,352 13,462
% of Normal Year 105% 108% 102% 102% 102%
Supply/Demand Comparison
Supply-Demand (Difference)5 0 0 0 0 0
Supply/Demand (%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Available Leftover Supply Capacity 19,617 15,725 11,019 6,139 1,841 Footnotes (see number references in table above):
1. Total Demand = Consumption Rate x Population x Multiple Dry Year Increases of 105%, 108%, and 102%.
4. Imported water purchased from SGPWA and recharged into the Beaumont Basin during Multiple Dry Years will be as follows:
a. Dry Year 1: 1,653 AF
b. Dry Year 2: 236 AF
c. Dry Year 3: 236 AF
d. Dry Year 4: 945 AF
e. Dry Year 5: 1,653 AF
5. A net-zero Supply-Demand (Difference) reveals that an additional amount of groundwater will be taken out of the Beaumont Basin Storage Account to meet the Total Dry Demand, on top of the Normal Water Year amount. A positive difference will be added to the Available Leftover Supply Capacity (Total Available Supply - Total Dry Demand + Difference) of subsequent years, as a surplus of water that was not pumped due to a low Total Dry Demand. For all cases there is more than enough in storage, as shown by the Available Leftover Supply Capacity.
6. All other items derived in similitude to Table 7.1.
163
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
7 - 21
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 7.9: Projected Supply v. Demand Scenario: Normal Water Year 2045 Grounwater
Pumped (Total)
(8,476 AF)
Pumped from
Beaumont Basin
Storage Account
(4,991 AF)
Total Demand
(13,467 AF)
SAN GORGONIO TANK
WELL C6
WATER DEMANDS GROUNDWATER STORAGE
164
7 - 22 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 7: RELIABILITY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 7.10: Whitewater River Near City of Banning
7.7 ENSURING ADEQUATE SUPPLY
As indicated by the tables on the following
pages, the City does not expect to have a
water supply shortage through 2045. To be
clear, although the tables show that local
groundwater pumping will not be sufficient
for certain years (during dry years through
2032), the City has additional groundwater
supplies available based on the safe yield of
the subbasins and the City’s storage
account. Furthermore, the City’s subbasin
safe yield and storage account volumes are
not expected to be affected during
droughts lasting up to five years. Finally,
droughts will be addressed by following the
criteria of the City's Water Shortage
Contingency Plan (WSCP) along with
implementation of the regional contingency
plans. These programs are discussed in
Section 8. For these reasons, the City is
confident that water supplies are adequate
to meet demands for all weather conditions
through 2045.
7.8 WSCP SUPPLY AUGMENTATION
Although the City does not expect to have a
water supply shortage through 2045, as
indicated by Tables 7.1 to 7.7, severe and
extent droughts may cause the WSCP to be
enacted. The City will rely on the
implementation of the WSCP to augment
the City’s reduced supply during
consecutively dry years. The WSCP supply
augmentation benefits during a five-year
drought are shown in standard DWR Table
7-5 in Appendix E.
165
Section 8
Contingency Planning
Diesel-powered pumps, such as the one pictured
below, can provide a backup supply of water in the
event that water wells or booster station pumps are
out of service.
166
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
8 CONTINGENCY
PLANNING
8.1 INTRODUCTION
In addition to prolonged droughts that can
gradually decrease water supplies, water
supplies may be interrupted in a number of
sudden, catastrophic ways. Sudden
catastrophes may include earthquakes,
power outages, pumping equipment
failures, or spikes in groundwater
contaminants that cannot be remedied
expeditiously. Water shortages can also be
a result of intentional or accidental
manmade catastrophes, such as acts of
terrorism or chemical spills into nearby
canals or groundwater spreading grounds. It
is important that the City has a plan in place
to manage its water system during short or
long-term water shortages. Long term,
water shortages can be addressed through
conservation and supply augmentation.
Short term, water shortages are best
handled though a “Contingency Plan”. A
Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) is
a required component of the City’s UWMP,
which provides guidance on stages of action
to be undertaken by the City in response to
water supply shortages. A WSCP is an
independent document that is incorporated
into the City’s UWMP.
This Section serves as the City’s WSCP. The
City's response to water shortages will be a
coordinated effort between its own staff
and other local and regional water agencies
Diesel-powered
pumps can provide
emergency water
supplies during
sudden
catastrophes.
167
8 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 8.1: Lake Oroville Failure (February 2017)
During a water shortage emergency, the
City will activate this WSCP, which coincides
with Section 13.16.020 of the City’s
Municipal Code. The intent of the plan is to
reduce the effect of shortages on the City’s
customers. In compliance with the Water
Code requirements, this plan imposes a 50
percent reduction in the total water supply.
8.2 NEED FOR CONTINGENCY PLANS
The recent drought of 2011-2017
significantly depleted the State’s supply of
water and posed a challenge to many
agencies throughout the State. Following
the drought, the State experienced a wet
winter in 2017. This resulted in flooding in
parts of the State. Several dams overflowed
and caused the evacuation of thousands of
residents. The most visible example of dam
failures was the failure of the Oroville Dam
in February of 2017. Structural failure of the
Oroville Dam spillway resulted in heavy
flooding, damage to farmland, and the
evacuation of nearly 200,000 residents. As a
result of the crisis, the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) prepared a Lake Oroville
Flood Season Operations Plan in order to
operate the reservoir during construction of
the repairs. The failure of the reservoir
highlighted the need for improvements to
regional and local contingency plans.
168
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
8.2.1 Recent State Water Code Amendments
As a result of the recent drought and
flooding in the State, the following changes
were made to the Water Code in 2018
which affect WSCPs:
CWC § 10632 (a)(1): WSCPs must
include attributes of its Water Supply
Reliability Analysis, or reliability of
water supplies under five consecutive
drought years.
CWC § 10632 (a)(3)(A): WSCPs must
include six (6) Standard Stages,
including a shortage of greater than
50 percent of “normal” water supply.
CWC § 10632 (a)(4): WSCPs must
include shortage response actions,
and the extent of which the action will
address the shortage, based on the
severity level of the shortage.
CWC § 10632 (a)(2): WSCPs must
include a plan for preparing annual
water supply and demand assessments.
CWC § 10632.5 (a)(5): WSCPs must
include communication protocols to
inform customers and the general
public of current or predicted water
shortages stages.
CWC § 10632.5 (a)(9): WSCPs must
include monitoring and reporting
procedures to assure the agencies’
ability to monitor customer compliance
and report data to the State/DWR.
CWC § 10632.5 (a)(10): WSCPs must
include a procedure for evaluation of
the WSCP and an outline or procedure
to adjust the UWMP in subsequent
cycles (i.e. 2025).
The water code changes listed above were
added to the Water Code in 2018. In
addition, the following measures were
taken in recent years that affect WSCPs:
In 2014, the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) issued
Resolution 2014-0038, which aims to
enhance customer awareness of their
personal water use and establish
incentives to reduce demand, such as
tiered or drought rate structures.
In 2015, Gov. Brown issued Executive
Order B-29-15, which calls for a
temporary reduction in statewide
water use by up to 25 percent.
The SWRCB extended Executive Order B-29-
15 in February of 2017. In April 2017, the
SWRCB rescinded the mandatory
conservation requirements of the Oder. The
action was in response to the ending the
drought state of emergency and transitioning
to a permanent framework for making
water conservation a California way of life.
169
8 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.3 LEGAL AUTHORITY
As indicated by Sections 8.1 and 8.2, the
City has the legal obligation to prepare and
implement a WSCP during times of drought
or sudden supply interruptions. Response
to water shortages is also codified into City
Municipal Code (Section 13.16, “Water
Conservation”). Section 8.6.5 and Tables
8.8 and 8.9 of this WSCP include a listing of
shortage response actions per CWC § 10632
(a)(3)(A), including the means by which the
City will declare a water shortage and
authorize response actions. The remaining
Sections of this WSCP describe the City’s
response actions in greater detail.
8.4 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
In general, groundwater is a droughtresistant source of supply. The City also maintains a current storage of 50,000 AF in
the Beaumont Basin. For this reason, the
City’s UWMP does not anticipate a water
supply shortage due to drought conditions
through 2045. To mitigate loss of storage,
the City can implement the provisions of
this WSCP. The results of the City’s Drought
Risk Assessment (DRA) are shown in Figure
8.2 and Table 8.1 on the following page
(also Appendix E, Table 7-5).
Due to the number of groundwater wells in
the City’s water system, the City has
redundancy in the event of water quality
impairments with a particular well. Figure
8.3 shows a general procedure that the City
may take if any wells are detected to have
water quality concerns. If necessary, the
City has the ability to increase pumping
from other wells to account for loss of
production. The City may also construct
additional wells over the course of this
UWMP planning period (2045), to improve
operational flexibility and redundancy.
Therefore, the City does not anticipate any
significant impacts to water supply
reliability as a result of water quality.
Other events which may create a water
shortage condition are discussed in Section
8.7 of this WSCP. These events may include,
but not be limited to:
Regional Power Outage
Earthquake
Terrorism Incident
If any of the above events occur, the City
will work in conjunction with the County of
Riverside (County) and the neighboring
agencies listed in Section 8.7 (Page 8-15) to
address the effects of potential water
shortages. Section 8.7 of this WSCP
provides a brief overview of the City’s
response actions to these types of
emergencies. Regional response actions are
also outlined in Regional Planning
documents on the County’s website, and as
referenced in this WSCP.
170
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 8.2: Drought Risk Assessment (Next Five Years). Numbers Shown for Next Year (2022)* Table 8.1
Drought Risk Assessment (Next Five Years)*
Year
Total Dry-Year
Water Use
(AF)
Total Dry-Year
Supply
(AF)
Difference
(AF)
WSCP
Net Benefit
(AF)
Potential
Difference
(AF)
2021 8,865 9,507 642 887 1,529
2022 9,419 9,507 88 942 1,030
2023 9,172 9,507 335 917 1,252
2024 9,443 9,507 64 944 1,008
2025 9,684 9,684 0 968 968
*Note: The results shown in Figure 8.2 and Table 8.1 above provide a conservative result with only a small amount of storage water supplied. The City has additional storage capacity to which it may dip into during the next five (5) years to “close the gap” if necessary. See Table 7.3 of the City’s UWMP for additional leftover supply capacity.
Projected
Pumping
(9,507 AF)
Demands
(9,419 AF)
Surplus
(88 AF)
171
8 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Routine
Water Quality Test
Wellhead Sampling
Detection of Constituents
Above MCL
Determine Type of Constituent and
Identify Source
Temporarily
Shut Down Well
Short-Term Duration
(Days or Weeks)
Flush & Test Well
Determine if Flushing is Sufficient or
if Aquifer Zones Need to be Isolated
Determine if Well Needs
Rehab or
Well-Head Treatment
OR Determine if Depth of Well Pump
Intake Needs to be Adjusted to Avoid
Aquifer Zones of High Concentration
No
Flusing in Previous Step
Was Sufficient.
Water Quality is Good.
Return Well to Service
Yes
Keep Well Shut-Down
While Improvements
are Constructed
(Typically Months-Long)
Construct
Improvements
Or Remove Well Pump
and Adjust Depth of
Pump Intake
Re-Active Well
Once Construction
is Complete
End Result is
Fully Operational
System
Increase Pumping
from Other Wells in the Interim
Until Well is Restored to Service
Figure 8.3: Basic Overview of
Water Quality Contamination
Response for City Wells
172
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
8.5 ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS
Agencies typically prepare Water Supply
Assessments (WSAs) when housing
developments are proposed by developers.
WSAs provide an estimated of available
supplies for a proposed development in
order to confirm the possibility of serving
water to a particular development. Over the
next few decades, the City’s water service
area population will nearly double due to
housing development. Thus, the City will
need to refine its procedure for developing
WSAs and for assessing water demands in
its service area.
Similar to a development-driven WSA, a
system-wide assessment of supplies and
demands will be required of all water
agencies in the State. According to CWC §
10632 (a)(2), the City will be required to
prepare an “Annual Assessment” of
supplies and demands, including an Annual
Water Shortage Assessment Report, by July
1 st of each year. At this time, DWR requires
that the City include a guideline for
preparation of an Annual Assessment in this
WSCP.
8.5.1 Decision Making Process
The City’s Annual Assessment will be based
on metered data from active wells and from
customer meters. These figures are
available to the City on a monthly basis, or
more frequently if the City desires. The City
can also rely on quarterly or annual reports.
With AMI technology, the City can adjust to
changing conditions (such as rainfall) and
can adjust its reporting leading up to the
submittal of the Annual Assessments. As of
next year (2022), City staff will review water
production data and water consumption
data starting in January, with the intent to
prepare an Annual Water Shortage
Assessment Report to the City Council by
May each year. The Final Report can then
be submitted to DWR by July 1 of each year.
8.5.2 Key Data Inputs
The Annual Assessment will be based on
the forecasted demands and estimated
water supply availability, including any
known infrastructure constraints. The
Annual Assessment will also consider
weather, population growth, and other
influencing factors, such as state or local
policies that will impact water demands, or
regulations affecting water supplies.
The following data are typically available
to City staff and can be relied on when
preparing the Annual Assessments:
1. Estimated dry-year demand without
any conservation measures. Dry-year
demands will be determined by
adding an increase factor of 5% to
normal demands.
173
8 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2. Estimated total water supply
availability under dry-year scenarios.
The water supply available will be
based on what is available to the City,
regardless of pumping capacity.
Groundwater supplies can be
estimated from annual WRD Basin
Reports prepared under the 2014
Sustainable Groundwater Management
Act (SGMA) and from local
groundwater level monitoring by
WRD.
3. Estimated capacity of water
production infrastructure. Any known
or forecasted issues affecting the
City’s water production infrastructure
can be considered, such as:
o Mechanical or electrical issues
with groundwater well pumps.
o Possible power outages for
operation and maintenance
o New construction and repairs
The potential constraints on supply capacity
listed under Item 3 above are subject to
change from year to year. As such, the City
should inspect its water system for the
condition of its groundwater wells before
making a determination on potential
restrictions in groundwater supplies. In
addition, the City should coordinate with
the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency
(SGPWA) and/or DWR to determine the
projected imported water allocations from
the State Water Project (SWP). This is an
important step in the preparation of a water
supply assessment since imported water
provides recharge to local groundwater
spreading grounds in the Beaumont Basin.
8.5.3 Current Forecast
In general, the total available water supply
for the City will be based on either the
capacity of its wells or pumping rights (safe
yields), whichever is more restrictive. At this
time (2021), the total groundwater pumping
safe yield is roughly 9,000 AFY. This is based
on the most-recent reports prepared on the
City’s groundwater basins. The actual
supply into the City’s water system will be
based on the projected demands. Table 8.1
provides the projected supply capacity
volumes along with the projected water
demands (9,419 AF in 2022). The projected
supplies in other years shown in Table 8.1
likewise exceed the City’s total safe yield.
To compensate for exceeding the safe
yield(s) of the individual basins, the City
anticipates dipping into its storage account
of the Beaumont Basin, and passively or
actively recharging the basin(s) during wet
years. This is described in further detail in
Sections 3 and 7 of the UWMP.
174
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 9
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
8.6 CONTINGENCY PLANS
Currently the City relies entirely on local
groundwater to meet its demand. The City’s
purchase of imported water (i.e. State
Project Water (SWP), private contracts,
Yuba Water) from the San Gorgonio Pass
Water Agency (SGPWA) is used only to
recharge the City's storage account in the
Beaumont Basin. In the short term, the
City's groundwater supplies can be pumped
as needed, within the safe yields, to meet
demands. In the long term, the supply from
SGPWA can be used as a supplementary
source if demands exceed local supplies.
Thus, only in the long-term shortage
scenario will the reliability of the City’s
water supply be affected by (i.e. contingent
upon) the actions of the SWP Contractors.
8.6.1 City Contingency Plan
Since the drought period of the early 1990s,
the City has implemented a water
conservation plan to reduce water use
during shortages. The “Water Conservation
Plan” was originally adopted as Section
13.16 of the City’s Municipal Code. The Plan
is currently being updated to provide the
City with the authority and guidance to
implement a phased approach depending
on the severity of a water shortage. In the
event of a water shortage, the City Council
will implement the appropriate water
conservation phase by resolution.
The objectives of the response plan are to:
1. Prioritize essential uses of water
2. Maximize local municipal water supplies
3. Eliminate water waste city-wide
4. Minimize adverse financial effects
Regarding Objective No. 1, priorities for use
of available potable water during shortages
are based partly on California Water Code,
Sections 350-358. Water allocations are
established for all customers according to
the following ranking system:
1. First Priority: Minimum health and safety
allocations for interior residential needs
2. Second Priority: Commercial, industrial,
institutional/governmental operations
3. Third Priority: Existing landscaping
4. Fourth Priority: New customers,
proposed projects, etc.
Regarding the 1st Priority specified above,
as noted in Section 6 of the City’s UWMP,
about 90% of the City’s water service
connections consist of residential accounts.
As a result, the City can use its population
estimates to assess water use needs during
a shortage.
175
8 - 10 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.6.2 Health & Safety (1st Priority)
In 2018, the State adopted Assembly Bill
1668, which amends Section 10608.20 of
the Water Code to stipulate an indoor
water use standard of 55 gallons per capita
per day. The City is obligated to determine
the minimum health and safety water
needs for its residents. To assess the
minimum amount of water that should be
available (1st Priority Level), the amount of
personal hygiene household water use must
be quantified. Based on common indoor
residential water use in the United States,
health and safety water use is estimated to
be as shown in Table 8.2 below:
Table 8.2
Health & Safety Personal Use (gal/day)
Item Regular Voluntary
Conservation
Toilet 14 10.5
Shower 15 12
Washer 12 11
Kitchen 4 3
Other 4 4
Total 49 gal 40.5 gal
Since the City has a population of about
30,000 residents, at a rate of 40 GPCD, the
City will need up to 3.7 AF (1.2 MG) per day
to provide for the health and safety of its
residents (if conservation is voluntary).
Since the City’s above-ground storage has a
total (combined) capacity of nearly 20 MG,
the City can provide for about one week of
water supply to its residents. However, the
ability to meet the most basic water needs
of its residents during a severe shortage
may be difficult unless the City’s citizens are
aware of the water supply shortage. Thus,
public outreach must be a top priority for
the City during a water shortage.
8.6.3 Stages of Action
The City’s Annual Assessments prepared
under Section 8.5 can be used to predict
shortages. The City’s WSCP imposes six (6)
stages of response actions based on the
severity of the City’s water supply shortage.
The stages are based on DWR’s established
criteria as shown in Table 8.3 below:
Table 8.3
Water Shortage Stages & Reduction Targets
Shortage
Stage
Restriction
Type
Water Supply
Reduction
Target
I Mandatory 10%
II Mandatory 20%
III Mandatory 30%
IV Mandatory 40%
V Mandatory 50%
VI Mandatory >50%
To lessen confusion on City customers, the
first four stages (Stages 1 to 4) regulate
customer responses to shortages, while the
latter two stages (Stages 5 to 6) regulate
City water staff response efforts.
176
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 11
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
The Banning City Council will formally
declare the stage of the water shortage,
following a public hearing, upon
determination from City water staff that a
water shortage exists and the WSCP should
be implemented. Following Council
declaration of a shortage stage, the WSCP
will become effective no sooner than the
first billing period on or after the date of
publication of the Council Resolution.
Figure 8.4: City Council Can Declare Shortage Stages
The WSCP will remain in effect until Council
declares the water shortage emergency has
ended. Alternatively, Council may also
change the water shortage stage as
appropriate. However, Council will not
impose mandatory measures without first
conducting a duly-noticed public hearing
pursuant to CWC § 350 or § 375.
8.6.4 Communication Protocols
A common understanding of the water
supply situation is essential for the WSCP to
be effective. During a water shortage, the
City will be able to allocate staffing and
resources to inform its customers of the
Council-declared water shortage. In
particular, the City will inform its water
service customers of the following:
Water Shortage Stage
Water Use Prohibitions
City Water Staff Response Actions
The communication protocol will be in place
prior to formal declaration of a water
supply shortage. The frequency and extent
of coordination will be based on the
shortage severity. The City will use the
following resources to communicate with
its customers:
City Website
Social Media (i.e. Twitter/Facebook)
Bill Inserts/Postcard Notices
Billboard or Digital Message Boards
Advertisements (Radio & Print)
The goal of the communication efforts will
be to raise awareness of the drought and to
motivate customers to conserve water. The
City should also prepare customers for
possible increases in water shortage severity.
Finally, as mentioned under Priority 1 in
Section 8.6, the key goal of communication
is to promote available water resources,
provide specialized outreach for impacted
industries, including instructions on how to
receive bottled water, and how to
participate in public hearings with City staff.
177
8 - 12 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 8.5: City Water Shortage Contingency Plan
City of Banning
Water Shortage Contingency Policies
Chaper 13.16.020
City Municipal Code
Stage 1 Water Shortage (10%)
Mandatory Conservation Measures.
Warnings Issued
Stage 2 Water Shortage (20%)
Mandatory Conservation Measures.
Penalities Enforced
Stage 3 Water Shortage (30%)
Mandatory and Restrictive
Conservation Measures.
Penalities Enforced.
Stage 4 Water Shortage (40%)
Mandatory and Restrictive
Conservation Measures.
Penalities Enforced.
Stage 5 Water Shortage (50%)
Health & Sanitation Water Use Only
City Water Staff Actions
Stage 6 Water Shortage (>50%)
Health & Sanitation Water Use Only.
City Water Staff Actions
New CA Water Code
Requirements
Water Code § 10632(a)(3)
Stage I (10%)
Stage II (20%)
Stage III (30%)
Stage IV (40%)
Stage VI (>50%)
Stage V (50%)
EXISTING
CITY
POLICIES*
NEW
CITY
POLICIES
178
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 13
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
8.6.5 Limitations/Prohibitions
Per Section 13.16 of the City’s Municipal
Code, prohibitions on water use, include,
but are not limited to, the following:
1. Irrigation runoff
2. Landscape irrigation for more than 15
minutes (except drip irrigation)
3. Irrigation on rainy days or within
specified hours of a rain event
4. Failure to repair leaks in a timely
manner
5. Washing of automobiles without a
bucket or hand-held hose equipped
with a positive shutoff nozzle
6. Restaurants serving water to their
customers, except when specifically
requested by their customers
7. Operating a decorative water fountain
without re-circulated water
8. Operating a commercial car wash
without re-circulated water
9. Hotels, motels and other commercial
lodging establishments shall not launder
towels and linens daily, except when
specifically requested by their customer
Additional prohibitions may also be
enforced, depending on the declared stage
shown in Table 8.2. Moreover, the
prohibitions listed above may also be
adjusted depending on the severity of the
declared stage, or until the shortage is
rescinded by City Council.
8.6.6 Penalties for Non-Compliance
Per City Code 13.16.020:
“Civil proceedings for violation. In addition
to criminal penalties, violators of the
mandatory provisions of this section shall be
subject to civil action initiated by the City”
1. First violation. For a first violation, the
city shall issue a written notice of
violation to the water user violating
the provisions of this chapter
2. Second violation: 25 percent
surcharge
3. Third violation: 50 percent surcharge;
installation of flow restrictor
4. Subsequent violations:
Discontinuance of service
The penalties listed above may be waived if
a customer completes an application for
exception permit. Hardship, safety, or
health conditions are among the reasons
granted for the exception.
179
8 - 14 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The City’s LHMP &
EOP provide
guidance for the
City in dealing
with local
disasters.
8.7 DISASTER MANAGEMENT
During a water shortage, the City has the
following tools available to restrict water
use to health and safety uses only:
Expanding public outreach
More frequent meter readings
Fines and penalties
Flow-restriction devices
Moratorium on service connections
The City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
(LHMP) in Appendix N, prepared in May of
2017, addresses the planned response to
extraordinary emergencies associated with
natural disasters, including seismic risks.
Other City planning tools, such as the City’s
Emergency Operations
Plan (EOP), updated in
2012, provides for the
most effective and
economical allocation
of resources for the
maximum benefit and
protection of life,
property, and the environment during an
emergency. The EOP supersedes the City’s
prior Multi-Hazard Functional Planning
Guidance document that was prepared in
1996. These documents provide the City
with: 1) An Emergency Plan; 2) Functional
Annexes that describe the emergency
response organization; and a 3) Listing of
operational data such as resources, key
personnel, and essential facilities and
contacts. During a disaster, the City’s water
department staff will maintain water
operations as follows:
All on-duty personnel will remain on
duty until relieved of duty
Off-duty personnel will be expected
to return to work or be “on-call”
While in a disaster mode, working
shifts will be 12 hours
In the event that any portions of the City’s
water system are without water, the City’s
water department staff will act as a “field
response unit” under the City’s EOP in order
to begin “Response Phase” and “Recovery
Phase” activities, including:
Assess impact of incident
Communication with adjacent water
agencies
Identify need for and prioritize
locations for water distribution
Provide for water quality assurance or
prepare notices for water quality
Evaluate, plan, and implement actions
to acquire and distribute water
180
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 15
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Determine the need to staff a water
task group and to secure resources
Provide informational status to nearby
water agencies, including:
o SGPWA
o BCVWD
o Cabazon Water District
o Yucaipa Valley Water District
o Morongo Band of Mission Indians
o Banning Heights Mutual Water
o High Valleys Water District
Provide information to media as
appropriate
This WSCP provides a general guide of City
response actions to catastrophes. Other
planning documents, including the City’s
LHMP, provide additional details which
supplement this UWMP.
8.7.1 Seismic Risk and Emergency Backup
According to the maps provided on the
California Office of Emergency Services’
online planning tool (My Plan) and the
California Geological Survey’s online
earthquake hazards zone application (EQ
Zapp), several faults, including the Banning
Fault and portions of the San Gorgonio
Fault Zone, are present within the City's
sphere of influence. The known fault lines
are shown in Figure 8.6.
An earthquake has the potential to damage
to drinking water and wastewater utilities.
Impacts to the City’s water system may
include, but not be limited to:
Damage to wells/well houses
Water tank damage or collapse
Damage to water distribution system
Damage to distribution lines due to shifting
ground and soil liquefaction can result in
potential water loss, water service
interruptions, low pressure, contamination
and sinkholes and/or large pools of water
throughout the service area. For these
reasons, earthquakes can potentially
restrict water supplies for a longer period of
time than a power outage or man-made
catastrophe. In the event that an
earthquake damages portions of the City’s
pumping or distribution system, the City
can provide temporary drinking water to
customers through potable water trucks as
noted in Section 8.7.2.
Even if an earthquake does not result in
damage to water production or distribution
facilities, an earthquake could result in a
power outage or damage to the water
system facilities. The City’s water
operations staff will be on standby alert
during an emergency to respond promptly
to water supply interruptions. The City’s
water operations staff will work with SCE to
restore power to water supply facilities.
181
8 - 16 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 8.6: Fault Zones Near the City
In the interim, the City’s Wells 8, 9, 10, C-2,
and C-4 have an emergency power source
available to continue to operate when the
power fails. Wells 1, 3, 4, and 5 do not have
an emergency power supply, but they have
the ability to provide water during an
emergency. Table 8.4 summarizes the City's
wells with emergency power source and
anticipated capacity during auxiliary
backup. The total water available from the
use of these nine wells is 7,110 gpm (31.4
AF/day), based on City of Banning dry-year
capacities, City of Banning Public Works
(2011). These quantities would be sufficient
to meet the maximum day demand of
approximately 30 AF/day. If however
additional water supply capacity is needed,
portable generators can be obtained to
operate other remaining wells and booster
stations.
It should be noted that the backup systems
for Wells 8, 9, and 10 require manual turn
on. Additionally, Wells 1 and 3 are equipped
with both electric pumps and Pelton
wheels, and Wells 4 and 5 are equipped
with only a Pelton wheel pump (see Figure
8.7), which also allows these wells to
provide water in the event of an
emergency. Pelton wheel pumps allow
these wells to be operated by a hydraulicdriven pump using existing water under pressure in the distribution system.
Active Faults
City of Banning
182
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 17
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 8.4
Wells with Emergency Generators and Backup Systems
Well Location
Total Capacity
Remarks
GPM AF/Day
1 Banning Bench Storage Unit 950 4.2 Pelton Wheel
3 Banning Bench Storage Unit 660 2.9 Pelton Wheel
4 Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit 600 2.7 Pelton Wheel 5 Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit 550 2.4 Pelton Wheel 8 Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit 1,000 4.4 Backup Portable Generator 9 Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit 1,000 4.4 Backup Portable Generator 10 Banning Water Canyon Storage Unit 600 2.7 Diesel Engine Drive C-2 Beaumont Basin 650 2.9 Generator
C-4 Beaumont Basin 1,100 4.9 Generator
Total 7,110 31.4
Table 8.5
Available Emergency Reservoir Storage
Available Reservoirs Total Aboveground Storage
(MG)
Total Aboveground Storage
(AF)
Brinton Reservoir 8.0 24.6
C2 Tank 0.22 0.7
C3 Tank 0.06 0.2
C4 Tank 0.05 0.2
C5 Tank 0.05 0.2
Mountain Tank 0.25 0.77
Well 1 Receiving 0.024 0.1
San Gorgonio Reservoir No. 1 2.60 8.0
San Gorgonio Reservoir No. 2 2.00 6.1
San Gorgonio Reservoir No. 3 1.00 3.1
Southwest Reservoir 1.50 4.5
Sunset Reservoir No. 1 2.1 6.4
Sunset Reservoir No. 2 2.1 6.4
Total 19.95 61.2
183
8 - 18 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Figure 8.7: Pelton Wheel Pump
8.7.2 Emergency Water Supply
If necessary, additional water is available in
the City’s storage tanks, as listed in Table
8.5 on the preceding page. The total water
storage capacity is approximately 61.2 AF.
Combined with a total backup pumping
capacity of 31.4 AF/day (Table 8.4 wells
with emergency power), the combined
emergency supply from production wells
and aboveground storage reservoirs/tanks
is approximately 93 AF.
In addition to the City’s own sources, the
City has a 12-inch emergency interconnection
with the Beaumont Cherry Valley Water
District (BCVWD) at the western boundary of
the City's service area, located at the
intersection of Highland Springs Avenue and
Sun Lakes Boulevard. In the event of
damage to any of the City’s wells, water
could be supplied from BCVWD until the
well(s) are back online.
If an earthquake renders the adjacent
agencies unable to provide emergency
water to the City, the City can obtain
emergency water through portable means.
This would involve vehicles equipped with
potable water tanks. The City would have to
obtain potable water trucks from nearby
suppliers.
184
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 19
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
The California Department of Public Health
maintains a list of Licensed Water Haulers
that includes Riverside County. According to
the most recent data provided by the State,
the closest supplier of potable water tanks
and trucks in Riverside County is Mack’s
Water Trucks® of Temecula, located about
45 miles from the City. In San Bernardino
County, there is T&B Water Trucks® of
Rialto, located about 35 miles from the City.
Figure 8.8: Potable Water Tank Trailer
The City can also consider purchasing large
tanks (500 gallons or more), and securing
them to the back of City trucks. This will
allow the City to distribute water to
customers during an emergency.
8.7.3 Additional Aid
Additional emergency services in the State
of California include the Master Mutual Aid
Agreement and the California Water Agency
Response Network (CalWARN). The Master
Mutual Aid Agreement includes all public
agencies that have signed the agreement
and is planned out of the California Office of
Emergency Services. CalWARN includes all
public agencies that have signed the
agreement to WARN and provides mutual
aid assistance. CalWARN provides member
utilities with:
Mutual assistance agreement and
process for sharing emergency
resources
Resources to respond and recover
more quickly from a disaster
Mutual assistance program
consistent with other statewide
mutual aid programs and the
Standardized Emergency
Management System (SEMS) and
the National Incident Management
System (NIMS)
In addition to CalWARN, the City of Banning
also has a mutual aid agreement in place
with the Morongo Band of Mission Indians,
who own and operate their own Water
System and Fire Department.
8.8 WSCP ENFORCEMENT & EVALUATION
To properly assess the effectiveness of this
WSCP, the City will need to monitor
metered consumption and production. The
City will also need to track its billing system
to see if fines for violations of water-use
prohibitions have been issued.
185
8 - 20 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.8.1 Monitoring
Using the City’s water billing records, the
City will be able to identify not only the
conserved volumes, but also the customers
which are in violation of the provisions of
this chapter. In particular, the City can
review data from the following sources:
Production Meters: Provides an
account of daily water production
Customer Meters: Provides an
account of monthly consumption
With AMI/AMR meter technology, if the
City desires to determine irrigation
violations, the City can monitor meters
which will allow the City to view
consumption on a daily or hourly basis.
In addition to monitoring customer use, the
City also has the ability to monitor
production volumes to determine if the well
supplies have been reduced. Under normal
conditions, potable water production
figures are recorded daily. Weekly and
monthly reports are prepared and
monitored. This data will be used as a
baseline to measure the effectiveness of
any water shortage contingency stage that
may be implemented.
During rationing conditions, the water
budget will be monitored on a weekly, daily,
or hourly basis depending on the severity of
the drought. During a disaster shortage,
production figures will be monitored on an
ongoing basis. The City’s Supervisory
Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
system will warn of any critical conditions
instantly. In addition, manual meter
readings will be performed more frequently
than the normal monthly schedule.
8.8.2 Enforcement
During shortage conditions, the City can
implement water-waste patrols, or increase
the frequency of existing water waste
patrols. If City staff are unable to conduct
additional water waste patrols, the City can
contract with outside support to conduct
water waste patrols. However, contracting
with an outside firm would incur additional
costs at a time when revenue is impacted. If
violations are observed, fines/penalties per
Section 8.6.6 can be applied.
8.8.3 Reporting
During a declared water shortage, City
water staff will report water production and
consumption figures to City Council on a
monthly basis. Pending regulations from the
SWRCB will also require the City to report
data to SWRCB on a monthly basis. Thus,
during a declared shortage of the WSCP,
City staff will report water production and
consumption figures to both City Council
and the SWRCB on a monthly basis.
186
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 21
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
8.9 FISCAL IMPACTS
8.9.1 Impacts to Revenue
Based on the City's total water revenue and
operating expenses, demand reductions will
likely result in negative net cash provided
by operating activities. Table 8.6 below lists
the current residential water rates:
Table 8.6
Current Residential Water Rates
Account Pricing (per HCF)
Tier 1 (0-12 HCF) $2.01
Tier 2 (13-25 HCF) $2.56
Tier 3 (26+ HCF) $2.88
Based on the rates shown, a 50% decrease
in residential use (about 2,500 AF or
327,000 HCF) would result in:
$180,000 in lost revenue per month
$2.2 million annual lost revenue
The City has fixed base charges currently in
the rate structure that generates some
revenue even if no water is used. These
rates range from $22.88 per month for a
5/8-inch meter to $949.39 per month for an
8-inch meter. Most residential customers
use a 3/4-inch meter, which has a rate of
$22.88 per month. The base rates allow the
City to not be impacted by revenue losses
during water shortages. The following
actions could take place under such
circumstances:
Implement a conservation surcharge
Delay capital improvement projects
Consider temporary increase of
water rates to meet operation and
maintenance costs
A combination of the measures outlined
above may be used to offset or diminish the
effects of lost revenues. However, any
increases in the City’s water rates would
require a Prop 218 process to implement
the rates. For this reason, the City is
planning on including the implementation
of temporary rate increases (and temporary
fees & surcharges) in its upcoming rate study.
8.9.2 Impacts to Reserve Funds
The City carries reserves in the water
system accounts, to fund for needed
improvements to its water system. The
balance of reserves for the City is
maintained primarily for facility repair and
replacement. Under a shortage crisis, some
flexibility would exist to dip into these
reserves to help offset loss of revenue.
8.10 THREE-YEAR MINIMUM SUPPLY
The City’s groundwater supplies are mostly
resilient to droughts. However, recharge
187
8 - 22 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
water from SGPWA is subject to restrictions
by DWR. Nevertheless, the City has
anticipated a minimally reliable volume of
water from SGPWA. This is reflected in
Section 7 of the UWMP. Table 8.7 below
displays the minimum water supply
available to the City based on a drought
period over the next three years:
Table 8.7
Three-Year Minimum Supply (AF)
Category 2021 2022 2023
Supply 9,507 9,507 9,507
Dry Demand 8,865 9,419 9,172
Difference 642 88 335
Based on the above analysis, the City’s
water supply will be reliable over the next
(3) years. However, if dry demands increase
more than expected during a given year,
the City can pump additional water from its
groundwater storage account during these
years while it develops its well system to
maximize its safe yield of the basins.
It is important to note that the 3-year
minimum supplies shown in Table 8.7above
are worst-case drought scenarios. This does
not take into consideration catastrophic
interruptions to local or imported supplies,
or emergency power outages. Such
catastrophic scenarios may limit supplies to
a greater degree.
8.11 WSCP ADOPTION AND REFINEMENT
8.11.1 Council Resolution
On June 8, 2021, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2021-51 (included in
Appendix B) approving this WSCP. The City
will be updating Section 13.16 of the City’s
municipal code in the following weeks to
coincide with this WSCP. Tables 8.8 & 8.9
on the following pages provide a summary
of the prohibitions and City response
actions to the water shortage stages listed
in Table 8.3 on Page 8-10.
8.11.2 WSCP Refinement Procedures
The City intends to update and refine this
WSCP as necessary. The WSCP can be
updated in one of the following ways:
Cyclical Updates
Data-Driven Updates
Externally-Driven Updates
The following is a guideline for how the City
will update this WSCP:
Cyclical Updates
The cyclical updates will be handled by City
staff internally with the assistance of an
outside engineering consultant. Once the
WSCP is implemented, the City will
document the effectiveness of the
customer water use prohibitions listed in
188
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 23
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Figure 8.9: High Valleys Tank
Tables 8.8 and the City water staff response
actions listed in Table 8.9. The effectiveness
will be evaluated using the methodologies
described in Section 8.8. The WSCP
effectiveness will be documented over the
course of five (5) years, until the next
UWMP update. It is the City’s intent to
update the WSCP every 5 years, alongside
the City’s UWMP. The City will conduct an
internal review of the WSCP prior to
releasing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
the UWMP and WSCP. The RFP process will
provide the City with an opportunity to
revise the WSCP as-needed.
Data-Driven Updates
Data-driven updates to the WSCP will likely
occur mid-cycle or at some point between
the 5-year cycle. The data-driven updates
can be prepared entirely by City staff
(internally) due to the urgency of such
updates. For example, if the City finds that
the fines/penalties covered under Section
8.6.6 are not effective at reducing overall
demand, the City may increase the fines
through an amendment to Section 13.16 of
the City Municipal Code, and revise Section
8.6.6 (Code Section 13.16.020) to reflect
the new fines. Other items of this WSCP can
be updated in a similar manner.
Externally-Driven Updates
Conversely, if the fines are found by the
City’s customers to be too punitive, and
Council is petitioned to reduce the fines,
the City can adjust Section 13.16 of the City
189
8 - 24 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Municipal Code, and revise Section 8.6.6
herein to reflect the new fines. Other items
of this WSCP can be updated in like manner.
8.11.3 WSCP Re-Adoption
Once the WSCP is revised, the City Council
will be required to re-adopt the revised
WSCP. This will require a public hearing to
receive public comments on the WSCP. The
revised WSCP will replace the former WSCP,
and will then remain effective until the City
elects to update the WSCP
Perhaps the most critical task in the City’s
response to shutdowns in water is the
distribution of water to customers. As
noted in the caption to the cover of this
Section, portable pumps and water trucks
can be used to distribute water to
customers. Due to the time and planning
involved in procuring these types of
vehicles, this task is identified only in the
most severe type of shortage (Stage VI).
190
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 25
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 8.8
City Code Prohibitions on Water Use During Water Shortages Stage Prohibition/Restriction Penalty
Stage 1
(<10%)
No Irrigation between 10 am to 8 pm
No Person Shall Operate a Decorative Water Feature (Fountains, Ponds, etc.) that Does Not have a Recirculating System
All Landscape Irrigation Limitted to No More than Three (3) Days per Week All Landscape Irrigation Limited to No More than 15 minutes per Station per Watering Day
Repair or Isolate Leaks within 72 Hours of Notification by the City No Washing Sidewalks and Driveways with Water
Car Washing Only with Bucket or a Hose with Shutoff Valve or Nozzle Excess Irrigation Runoff is Prohibited
No Landscape Irrigation During or Within 48 hours of a Rain Event Restaurants to Serve Water Only Upon Request
Restaurants to Wash Kitchen and Dining Room with Bucket or Specialized Water Broom Only
Hotels/Motels to Provide Customer Option of Daily Laundry Automobile Wash Business Must Use Water Recycling Systems Yes
Stage 2
(10% to 20%)
All landscape irrigation limited to no more than 2 days per week from June 1 to October 31 and no more than once per week from Nov 1 to May 31 All landscape irrigation limited to no more than 10 minutes per station per watering day
No filling or refilling of ornamental lakes or ponds, except to sustain aquatic life Repair or isolate leaks within 48 hours of notification by the city Pools or spas to have a cover to prevent evaporation
Cease all operation of decorative water features (fountains, ponds, etc.) No landscape irrigation during or withing 72 hours of a rain event Commercial nurseries shall use water during the hours from midnight to 6am Commercial landowners to allow tenants the option of replacing lawns & landscapes Yes
Stage 3
(20% to 30%)
All landscape irrigation limited to no more than 2 days per week from June 1 to Oct 31 and no more than once per week from Nov 2 to May 31
All landscape irrigation limited to no more than 10 minutes per station per watering day
Repair or isolate leaks within 24 hours of notification by the city Car washing limited to only automobile washes that use water recycling systems No landscape irrigation during or within 1 week of a rain event Restaurants to wash dining room once daily (after close of business) and only with bucket or specialized water broom
Restaurants to pre-soak dishes
Restaurants to install solenoid valve for sinks with garbage disposals No commercial window washing
Yes
191
8 - 26 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 8.8
City Code Prohibitions on Water Use During Water Shortages Stage Prohibition/Restriction Penalty
Stage 3
(20% to 30%)
Apartment buildings to certify low-flow fixtures (showerheads and faucets) are installed prior to leasing apartments
Commercial buildings and restaurants to replace/install waterless urinals Commercial buildings and restaurants to replace/install low-flow toilets Hotels/Motels to wash laundry only after change of customer Yes
Stage 4
(30% to 40%)
Cease all irrigation except by reclaimed water or except for crops or horticulture (nurseries) for fire or erosion maintenance
No Refilling of Pools or Spas
Commercial Landscape to be Replaced with CA-Friendly Landscape Yes
Stages 5 & 6
(50% or more)
N/A (Same Requirements as Stages 1 to 4 Above)
This Stage Involves Only Operational/Management Response Actions Yes
192
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
8 - 27
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Table 8.9
City Water Department Response Actions
Stage City Water Department Response Action Additional Info Stage 1
(<10%) Begin an Enhanced Public Awareness Campaign Increased Expense for City Use Financial Reserve Funds
Stage 2
(10% to 20%)
No Filling or Refilling of Municipal Ornamental Lakes or Ponds, Except as Necessary to Sustain Aquatic Life
Reduced Flushing Frequency
Notify customers immediately of suspected leaks in
their plumbing
Increased Expense for City
Use Financial Reserve Funds
Stage 3
(20% to 30%)
Increase Groundwater Pumping
No statements of immediate ability to serve or
provide potable water service
Establish a water allocation for certain properties
Repair or Isolate Water Main Leaks within 24 Hours
Provide Letters to Certain Properties for Allocations
Established in Stage 3 Informing Reduction of 10% in
Allocation of Tiered Rate
Elimination of Specific Municipal Uses such as Hydrant
Flushing, Street Cleaning, and Water-Based Recreation
Increased Expense for City
Use Financial Reserve Funds
Stage 4
(30% to 40%)
Rate Increase Study to Mitigate Loss of Revenue
No new potable water service
No new temporary meter or permanent meters
Will serve letters, certificates, or letter of availability water service area
Prop 218 process to implement rates increases
Increase Frequency of Meter Readings to Twice
Monthly in Order to Allow Staff and Customers to
Track Progress
Implement Water Waste Patrols (Once Monthly)
Coordinate with Adjacent Agencies to Receive
Emergency Water via Emergency Interconnections
Defer Flushing of Mains Until Maximum Allowable
Time for Quality/Safety
Coordinate with Manufacturers and/or Governing
Agencies to Receive Fleet of Potable Water Trucks
Increased Expense for City
Use Financial Reserve Funds
Defer Capital Projects
Stage 5
(40% to 50%))
Systemwide Rate Increase to Achieve Necessary
Reduction and to Mitigate Loss of Revenue
Issue water quality notices (if necessary) in case
additional pumping creates water quality issues
Coordinate with adjacent agencies to prepare for
possible need of emergency water when/if
conditions worsen
Increased Expense for City
Use Financial Reserve Funds
Defer Capital Projects
193
8 - 28 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 8: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table 8.9
City Water Department Response Actions
Stage City Water Department Response Action Additional Info Notices on Government Access Channel (TV)
Hand-Post Drought Notices on all Customer Properties
(Residential Homes & Commercial Buildings)
Stage 6
(>50%)
Mobilize Potable Water Trucks
Decrease Pressure in Water Mains
Increased Expense for City
Use Financial Reserve Funds
Defer Capital Projects
194
Section 9
Conservation Measures
The City’s ordinances, adopted by Council, have strict
provisions which encourage the efficient use of water while penalizing wasteful use. The City’s water staff are also committed to water use efficiency through the use of
management practices and customer assistance programs.
195
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
9 - 1
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
S
e
c
tio
n
9 CONSERVATION
MEASURES
9.1 OVERVIEW
As a result of seasonal droughts and
continued urban development, water
conservation is important to California’s
sustainability. To help conserve California's
water resources, several public water
agencies came together to form the
California Urban Water Conservation
Council (CUWCC). The CUWCC was officially
formed in 1991 when the agencies signed a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on
urban water conservation. In January 2018,
the CUWCC became the California Water
Efficiency Partnership (CalWEP). Currently,
over 200 water agencies are members of
CalWEP. The main focus of CalWEP is to
assist its member agencies with public
policy, research, and education tools.
Regarding the UWMPs, CalWEP works with
DWR in order to help form BMP/DMM
policies contained in the UWMPs.
The CUWCC MOU established 14 Best
Management Practices (BMPs) which were
defined roughly as policies, programs,
practices, rules, regulations, or ordinances
that resulted in a more efficient use or
conservation of water. The BMPs were
equivalent to the 14 Demand Management
Measures (DMMs) defined in the UWMP
Act, until 2015. As of the 2015 UWMPs, the
Department of Water Resources (DWR)
streamlined the 14 DMMs into six (6)
generalized categories, with an additional
seventh (7th) optional category. The 2020
Conservation
measures, including
those aimed at leak
detection and
excessive runoff
(pictured) are an
essential part of the
City's policies.
196
9 - 2 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
UWMP Guidebook continues the same
DMM categories for the 2020 UWMPs.
The City acknowledges that efficient water
use is the foundation of its current and
future water planning and operations
policies. The City implements water
conservation through a combination of
programs, resources, and policies.
9.2 DWR DMMs FOR 2020 UWMPs
The DMMs are intended to reduce longterm urban demands from what they would have been without their implementation.
The DMMs are in addition to programs
which may be instituted during occasional
water supply shortages.
i. Water Waste Prevention Ordinances
ii. Metering
iii. Conservation Pricing
iv. Public Education & Outreach
v. Programs to Assess and Manage
Distribution System Real Loss
vi. Water Conservation Program
Coordination and Staffing Support
vii. Other Demand Management
Measures that have a significant
impact on water use
As with previous UWMPs, agencies that are
members of CalWEP can submit the BMP
annual reports in lieu of providing a
description of each DMM in the UWMP.
9.3 CalWEP BMPs
An active member of the CalWEP is one that
has signed the MOU and implements the
water conservation measures stipulated by
the CalWEP (Figure 9.1). According to
CalWEP, an agency “implements” a
conservation measure by achieving and
maintaining the level of activity called for in
each BMP's definition, as described in the
MOU. This requires a minimum level of
staffing and funding efforts. To document
the implementation of a BMP, an agency is
required to submit annual BMP reports to
CalWEP that document the implementation
of each BMP.
Figure 9.1: CUWCC became CalWEP in January 2018
The City is not currently a member of
CalWEP. However, the City is implementing
the same conservation measures as
described in the previous sub-section.
197
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
9 - 3
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
9.4 CITY CONSERVATION MEASURES
The City of Banning is committed to
implementing water conservation programs
and encourages its customers to conserve
water whenever possible. The CalWEP
BMPs are broad measures aimed at
reducing water use either directly (rebates
and fixture changes), or indirectly (through
awareness). As a smaller, low-density
community surrounded by miles of open
space, the City is unique compared to many
of the other urban, “built-out” member
agencies. As such, the City’s conservation
efforts are tailored to address the
characteristics of their specific community.
Over the past several years, the City has
focused primarily on public information
efforts, irrigation and landscape limitations,
and reducing water losses/waste. The City
has focused less on rebates and retrofits as
water efficient appliance and fixtures have
saturated the market over the past few
decades. Nevertheless, the City is
committed to using “good faith effort” to
implement all of the BMPs as described in
this section.
DMM No. 1 Water Waste Prevention
Ordinances
City Ordinance No. 1039 was adopted by
the City Council in 1991, prohibiting the
waste of water. Ordinance No. 1039
describes actions that are considered a
waste of water and the subsequent
penalties if a violation were to occur. In
1998, this Ordinance was incorporated into
City Ordinance No. 1231.
In 2006, Assembly Bill No. 1881 was passed,
requiring local agencies, beginning January
1, 2010, to adopt a model water efficiency
landscape ordinance that is at least as
effective as the State's model water
efficiency landscape ordinance. The City
Council adopted Resolution No. 2010-06 on
January 26, 2010 to meet this requirement.
Figure 9.2: Water Waste
Most recently, the City adopted Ordinance
No. 1489 pertaining to drought water
conservation. This ordinance sets forth
mandatory prohibitions and additional
restrictions on water use during drought
conditions to comply with the executive
orders issued by former Gov. Brown related
to the declared drought emergency and
with the emergency water conservation
regulations promulgated by the State Water
Resources Control Board. This resolution
was codified into Section 13.16 of the City’s
198
9 - 4 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Municipal Code. This section establishes a
“Water Shortage Contingency Plan” which
stipulates specific prohibition on water use,
with penalties for non-compliance.
DMM No. 2: Metering
All of the City's water service connections,
for all customer sectors, are metered. The
City has investigated the feasibility of
separately metering each of the multifamily dwelling units in its Water Service Area; however, it was determined that
doing so was not feasible. The City has also
installed dedicated landscape irrigation
meters for Sun Lakes Country Club,
Caltrans, the City park system, and City
school district facilities. New non-residential
developments are also now required to
have a separate water meter dedicated for
landscape use. The City will continue to
meter all new water service connections.
The City previously debated transitioning to
either a fixed base or drive-by Automatic
Meter Read (AMR) system that allows the
City to monitor each individual customer
account for water conservation. The fixed
base system, often referred to as Advanced
Metering Infrastructure (AMI), involves
placing antennas throughout the City that
collect data from the water meters at set
intervals. The data is then transferred to a
desktop computer. The data is used for
individual users for billing purposes or for
alerting the City if a set water use threshold
has been exceeded, signaling a possible leak
on the property. If this condition arises, the
owner of the property would be notified by
either email or a phone call.
Figure 9.3: AMI-Style Water Meter
The drive-by system is similar to the fixed
base system, but instead of using a network
of antennas, meter readings are picked up
by driving by the meters with specially
equipped vehicles and then downloading
the readings after returning to the office.
This delays the ability to collect the
information immediately and be able to
alert the customer of possible leaks within
the shortest amount of time. The
implementation of either AMR system
would facilitate the review of water records
and evaluation of the effectiveness of
conservation programs.
As of this 2020 UWMP, the City is in the
process of installing new “Zenner” brand
Stealth AMI meters. Meters smaller than 4
inches will be of the “multi-jet” design.
199
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
9 - 5
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
Meters 4 inches and larger will be ultrasonic
meters. The City’s AMI program is just
finishing its 1st year, and is expected to be
completed by January 2022. All work has
been done in-house, with the exception of
software programming to integrate the AMI
and Billing Systems.
DMM No. 3: Conservation Pricing
The City has a three-tiered increasing rate
structure that applies to all customers. The
City’s current water rates (as of July 2020),
are shown in Table 9.1 below:
Table 9.1
City of Banning Current Water Rates
Tier Pricing (per HCF)
Tier 1 (0-12 HCF) $2.01
Tier 2 (13-25 HCF) $2.56
Tier 3 (26+ HCF) $2.88
The new rate structure was established as
part of a Water Rate Study completed in
2018. The measure of effectiveness of the
rate structure, in terms of acting as a
catalyst for water conservation, will be
assessed based on decreases in the total
amount of consumption, since the charges
are based on total consumption rates.
DMM No. 4: Public Education & Outreach
The City has initiated several water
conservation programs to educate its water
service customers in regards to various
approaches to conserve water. At City Hall,
water conservation pamphlets are
displayed year-round as well as at public
City-wide events. Public Works Department
staff plan to visit school classrooms and
make presentations on water conservation
and distribute brochures with additional
conservation information. The Public
Works Superintendent is in continuous
contact with the staff of Sun Lakes Country
Club golf course to manage water more
efficiently. The City will continue to expand
public education on water resources.
Additionally, the City makes an effort to
have Public Works staff visit local schools to
make presentations on water conditions in
the San Gorgonio Pass area, emphasizing
the value of water and water conservation.
Educational brochures are also made
available to the students.
DMM No. 5: Programs to Assess and
Manage Distribution System Real Loss
The City’s surveillance of its water system
to detect leaks is an on-going operation.
The City recognizes the urgency of repairing
leaks and responds to any leak in an
expedient manner. Field employees are
trained in detecting leaks and signs of
unauthorized uses of water. In addition, the
customer billing system flags high or
unusual water bills, which are then
200
9 - 6 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
investigated for possible leaks in customer’s
piping. When a leak is first noticed, the
pipeline is inspected and promptly repaired.
The City has prepared water audits since
the 2015 UWMP. The audits were prepared
in accordance with CWC Section
10631(e)(3), using methods and a
worksheet developed by the American
Water Works Association (AWWA). The
AWWA audit worksheets require a detailed
approach to separate apparent water losses
from overall water loss totals to reveal the
actual “Real Losses” as well as the “NonRevenue Water”. The AWWA audit defines the following:
Water Losses: Water supplied minus
authorized (metered) consumption
Apparent Losses: Unauthorized or unmetered consumption and inaccuracies or errors
Real Losses: Water losses minus
apparent losses, equaling the actual
volume of water lost through leaks,
breaks, etc.
Non-Revenue Water: Real water losses
plus apparent losses plus unbilled
metered and unbilled unmetered
consumption
Based on the results of the 2016-2020
water audits, copies of which are included
in the Appendix, the City's water system
losses are shown in Table 9.2 below.
Table 9.2
Distribution System Losses (AF)
Year Loss (AF) Percent of
Total
2016 897 13.5%
2017 734 11.3%
2018 1,108 15.7%
2019 871 12.8%
2020 1,275 15.2%
The results of the last few audits indicate
that the City has made improvements on
testing, repairs, and record keeping. In
addition, the City has recently replaced
older, leaky water mains. The City has also
purchased a meter test bench to enable the
City to test meters in-house.
DMM No. 6: Water Conservation Program
Coordination and Staffing Support
The City's Superintendent of Water &
Wastewater serves as a part-time water
conservation coordinator. The City's Public
Works staff also assists with coordinating
conservation efforts and providing public
information about water conservation.
Should the need arise, the City will
designate the following full-time positions:
water conservation coordinator, additional
staff support, or both.
201
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
9 - 7
URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2020
DMM No. 7: Other Demand Management
Measures
In addition to the DMMs described above,
the City posts water conservation tips and
other information on its website,
www.banningca.gov. Although the Website
page may be updated, the following URL
currently provides such tips and
information: Making Water Conversation a
Way of Life | Banning, CA - Official Website.
The City provides additional conservation
information and answers questions from its
customers upon request. The City has
developed a hotline for customer use in
reporting leaks, overwatering, and other
misuse of water.
9.5 CONTINUED IMPLEMENTATION
As described in Chapter 6 herein, the City's
per capita water use in 2020 was 247 GPCD,
which demonstrates that the City has met
its 2020 urban water use target of 252
GPCD. Although the City has met its target
year water use, the City plans to continue
its conservation efforts described herein for
at least the next five years. The City will
continue to track all program activities.
Program effectiveness and per capita water
use will be monitored through the billing
system. For example, the City can measure
impacts of infrastructure, repairs and
replacements, including leaky mains, by
comparing apparent water losses from the
previous month. For this reason, the City
will continue to develop its AMI system as a
tool to measure effectiveness of all the
DMMs.
202
9 - 8 2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
SECTION 9: CONSERVATION MEASURES
2020 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
203
APPENDICES A – O
204
Appendix A: Council Resolution Adopting 2020 UWMP
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
205
Appendix B: Council Resolution Adopting 2020 WSCP
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
206
Appendix C: UWMP Act
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
207
Appendix D: Dept. of Water Resources UWMP Checklist
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
208
Appendix E: Dept. of Water Resources UWMP Data Tables
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
209
Appendix F: Dept. of Water Resources SBx7-7 Tables
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
210
Appendix G: AWWA Water Audits (2015-2020)
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
211
Appendix H: Land Use and Planning Element
City General Plan
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
212
Appendix I:
2013-2021 Housing Element – City General Plan
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
213
Appendix J: 2019 Consumer Confidence Report
(Water Quality Report)
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
214
Appendix K: UWMP Notices: 60-Day, 2-Week, & 1-Week
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
215
Appendix L: Beaumont Basin Judgment
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
216
Appendix M: Riverside County Climate Action Plan
Update 2019
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
217
Appendix N: 2017 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
218
Appendix O: Final Transmittals to County and State Library City of Banning 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
219
JOHN
ROBINSON
CONSULTING, INC.
220
RESOLUTION 2022-14 UA
A RESOLUTION OF THE UTILITY AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO N2W
ENGINEERING TO PROVIDE OWNER ADVISOR SERVICES AND PRELIMINARY
ENGINEERING FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $ 1,576,430
WHEREAS, the City of Banning owns and operates a wastewater treatment plant WWTP) also knows as the Water Reclamation Facility which includes a current treatment process consisting of preliminary, primary, secondary, disinfection and sludge disposal; and
WHEREAS, the WWTP has a design treatment capacity of 3.6 million gallons per day (MGD) and typical average daily discharges ranging from 2.0 MGD to 2.1 MGD into 10 unlined evaporation/percolation ponds; and
WHEREAS, the City has recognized a need to construct major improvements to the WWTP in order to comply with California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region ( RWQCB) Board Order R?-2016-0015; to increase treatment capacity to support increasing demands; and to enhance the City's water supply portfolio by developing a recycled water supply; and WHEREAS, due to staff resources the City desires to hire an Owner Advisor to manage the WWTP improvement project as it progresses through the various phases (i.e. planning, environmental, design and construction); and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 2022 the City released a request for qualifications ( RFQ) and received one submittal from N2W Engineering. Based on the qualifications of N2W Engineering and the results of an interview conducted by City staff, it has been determined that N2W Engineering has the qualifications and experience to successfully complete the scope of services as the City's Owner Advisor on the WWTP improvement project; and WHEREAS, the Professional Services Agreement with N2W Engineering to provide Owner Advisor services for the WWTP Improvement project is in an amount of not-to-exceed" $ 1,576,430; and
WHEREAS, appropriations in the amount of $460,000 from Fund 680 (Wastewater Operations) and $ 756,430 from Fund 681 ( Wastewater Capital Facility) are required to fund the Professional Services Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Banning Utility Authority of the City of Banning as follows:
Resolution 2022- 14 UA