Corona City Council
June 17, 2026

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-16
Figure 4.5 – City of Corona’s Reclaimed Water Use (2018) Data sourced from City’s 2018 Reclaimed Water Master Plan

4.7. DEMAND VARIABILITY
Water demand fluctuates daily and seasonally, with peak usage typically occurring during early morning and evening hours and increasing significantly in summer months due to higher irrigation and cooling needs. Characterization of the City’s diurnal and seasonal demand variation is necessary to calibrate the hydraulic model discussed in Sections 6 and 7.

Reference Year
This Master Plan uses 2024 as the reference year to analyze the City’s water demand. Hourly demands were calculated using tank level and flow data recorded by Corona’s SCADA system.

Existing System Demands and Peaking Factors
Identifying average day, maximum day, and peak hour demands is valuable for operating a reliable water system, as these benchmarks ensure adequate capacity for routine use, seasonal fluctuations, and shortterm surges without compromising service or system integrity. Peaking factors further characterize existing demand data.

Existing Maximum Day Demand (MDD) Peaking Factor was determined by dividing the observed MDD by existing Average Day Demand (ADD).

Santa Ana River
Discharge
13%
Reclaimed Water System
Demands
18%
Percolation Pond
Discharge
69%

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-17
Peak Hour Demand (PHD) Peaking Factor was determined by dividing the observed maximum hourly demand by the average hourly demand (ADD/24).

4.7.2.1. Average Day Demand
The existing Average Day Demand (ADD) was established by using the City’s 2024 meter read-data and calculating the demand per land use and pressure zone, as explained in Section 4.2. The calculated ADD is 24.03 MGD.

4.7.2.2. Maximum Day Demand
The Maximum Day Demand (MDD) is the highest single-day production recorded during the reference year. The MDD, based on SCADA data, occurred on September 3, 2024, with a total system demand of

41.2 MGD. Figure 4.6 presents the diurnal curve observed on the maximum day.

The Existing MDD Peaking Factor is 1.7. A more conservative MDD Peaking Factor of 1.8 is recommended.

The City has historically used an MDD peaking factor of 1.8, and this value is retained for consistency.

4.7.2.3. Peak Hour Demand
According to SCADA data, the PHD of 68.4 MGD occurred on September 9, 2024. The Existing PHD Peaking Factor is 2.8.

For planning purposes, it is recommended to use a more conservative peaking factor than the value derived from SCADA data. The PHD should be calculated with a peaking factor of 3.0 (PHD = 3 x ADD).

Table 4.10 – Existing Demand and Peaking Factors
Load Demand Existing Demand
(MGD) Peaking Factors Existing Factor
Average Day Demand 24.0 - -
Maximum Day Demand 41.2 1.8 1.7
Peak Hour Demand 68.4 3.0 2.8

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-18
Figure 4.6 – Diurnal Curve During the Maximum Day Demand (September 3, 2024)

4.8. EXISTING AREA-BASED DEMAND FACTORS
Demand factors are used for planning future expansion of the water system, and to determine the existing system would have the capacity needed for a new development. This section presents the demand factors and the method that was used for their development. Please refer to Section 4.9. for more information on demand projections.

Methodology
For this Master Plan, demand factors were determined based on land use type and average meter connection demand, providing values on both a per-acre and per-connection basis for each land use category.

Area-Based Demand Factors
The area-based demand factor uses demand data presented in Table 4.2, land use categories, and total acreage of each land use category. A GIS spatial analysis tool calculated the area (in acres) served by each land use category. The demand (in gpd) was divided by the land use area (in acres) or the total dwelling units (DU), to produce a gpd/acre or gpd/DU demand factor shown in Table 4.11.

Single Family Residential (SFR) assumed 1 (one) meter per dwelling unit (DU). However, Multi-Family Residential, in some cases, used 1 (one) meter for multiple dwelling units, and therefore demand per acreage was used for MFRs unit factor.

0.0 0.5

1.0 1.5

2.0 2.5

3.0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM Peaking Factor
Time
Diurnal Curve During MDD MDD Peaking Factor (ADD x 1.7)

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-19
Table 4.11 – Demand Factors for City of Corona and Sphere of Influence Abbreviation Description
2024
Demand
Factor
Units
(GPD/Acre
or GPD/DU)
C Commercial 1,880 GPD/Acre
CP Commercial/Professional 2,230 GPD/Acre
FC Flood Control N/A N/A
GI General Industrial 850 GPD/Acre
I Institutional 660 GPD/Acre
LI Light Industrial 920 GPD/Acre
AG Agriculture 370 GPD/Acre
R/R Rural Residential 1,720 GPD/du
E Estate Residential 930 GPD/du
LDR Low Density Residential 480 GPD/du
LMDR Low Medium Density Residential 380 GPD/du
MDR Medium Density Residential 300 GPD/du
HDR High Density Residential 200 GPD/du
MFR Multi-Family Residential 4,050
[1] GPD/Acre
MFR-MH Multi-Family Residential-Mobile Homes 1,910 [1] GPD/Acre OS-P Open Space-Park 1,000 GPD/Acre
OS-R Open Space-Recreational 1,000 GPD/Acre
QP Quasi-Public 1,000 GPD/Acre
ROW Right of Way N/A N/A
VA Vacant N/A N/A
VC Vacant Commercial N/A N/A
VI Vacant Industrial N/A N/A
VR Vacant Residential N/A N/A
Other Primarily areas under development N/A N/A
VLDR (SOI) Very Low Density Residential 580 GPD/du
LDR (SOI) Low Density Residential 850 GPD/du
MDR (SOI) Medium Density Residential 390 GPD/du
HDR (SOI) High Density Residential 420 GPD/du
CR (SOI) Commercial Retail 770 GPD/Acre
LI (SOI) Light Industrial 190 GPD/Acre
BP (SOI) Business Park 260 GPD/Acre
RR (SOI) Rural Residential 690 GPD/Acre
RM (SOI) Rural Mountainous 160 GPD/Acre
OS-MIN (SOI) Conservation 330 GPD/Acre
OS-R (SOI) Open Space Recreation 1,000 GPD/Acre
RC-EDR (SOI) Rural Community-Estate Density Residential 1,100 GPD/du RC-VLDR (SOI) Rural Community-Very Low Density
Residential 770 GPD/du
RC-LDR (SOI) Rural Community-Low Density Residential 460 GPD/du Other (SOI) Primarily areas under development N/A N/A
[1] MFR and MFR-MH demand factors were calculated using GPD/Acre because an accurate dwelling unit count was unable to be obtained using the meter read-data.

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-20

4.9. DEMAND PROJECTION
This Master Plan does not use existing peaking factors calculated in Section 4.7.2. to calculate future ADD, MDD, and PHD. Future ADD, MDD, and PHD are estimated using the area-based demand factors calculated in Section 4.8.2. and the assumption that the City will be built out completely by the year 2040.

Methodology
Demand projections are used to evaluate future demands on the City of Corona’s water system. The demand projections are based on future planned or anticipated growth, and the area-based demand factors developed in Section 4.8. Future growth is expected to increase the demands placed on the City's water system. The projections evaluated in this Master Plan are based on expected acreage of development in the City over the next 16 years, assuming full buildout by 2040.

It is important to recognize that these projections are estimates based on historical trends and current conditions and are subject to change. Factors that may influence future demand include City and Statemandated water conservation measures, conversion of potable water meters to reclaimed water for irrigation, changes in land use designations, climate variability, economic conditions, and emerging technologies. Accordingly, the demand projections presented in this Master Plan should be viewed as planning-level estimates that will require periodic updates as conditions evolve.

Demand Associated with Infill and Densification
Most infill and densification within the City are expected to occur in the City's outer regions and the City's sphere of influence of Coronita, El Cerrito, and the northern part of Temescal Valley. Demand associated with future infill and densification is evaluated at a planning level. Developers will determine connection points and site-specific system sizing through project-level studies.

Demand Projection
Future demand projections were developed for the City of Corona using the area-based demand factors outlined in Section 4.8.2 and the anticipated acreage for each land use category through 2040. These projections assume that land use designations established by the City will be fully developed by 2040 and the land use designation will not change. Any modifications to land use designation within the service area would affect these estimates. Table 4.11 does not include demands for Home Gardens or the City of Norco. This Master Plan assumes that the City of Corona will not supply more water to Home Gardens or the City of Norco than the City of Corona currently supplies in 2024.

Table 4.12 summarizes projection demands, and based on this approach, the total Average Day Demand (ADD) in 2040 is projected to be 32.42 MGD.

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-21
Table 4.12 – 2040 Average Demand Based on Demand Factors (City and SOI COMBINED) Abbreviation Description
2024 2040 (Buildout)
Area
(Acres) DU MGD Area (Acres) DU MGD
C Commercial 883 - 1.66 2,271 - 4.27
CP Commercial/Professional 114 - 0.25 131 - 0.29
FC Flood Control 818 - 0.06 N/A - N/A
GI General Industrial 953 - 0.81 2,359 - 2.01
I Institutional 643 - 0.42 734 - 0.48
LI Light Industrial 897 - 0.82 1,051 - 0.97
AG Agriculture 320 - 0.12 379 - 0.14
R/R Rural Residential 414 251 0.43 875 592 1.02
E Estate Residential 1,122 2,241 2.07 1,599 3,193 2.97
LDR Low Density Residential 3,759 18,437 8.67 4,021 19,724 9.47 LMDR Low Medium Density Residential 882 5,950 2.25 900 6,070 2.31 MDR Medium Density Residential 592 5,692 1.71 639 6,141 1.84 HDR High Density Residential 95 1,872 0.37 155 3,067 0.61 MFR Multi-Family Residential 643 - 2.61 800 - 3.24
MFR-MH Multi-Family Residential-Mobile
Homes 64 - 0.12 98 - 0.19
OS-P Open Space-Park 113 - 0.11 200 - 0.20
OS-R Open Space-Recreational 389 - 0.12 389 - 0.39
QP Quasi-Public 96 - 0.08 127 - 0.13
ROW Right of Way 33 - 0.02 N/A - N/A
VA Vacant 9 - 0.01 N/A - N/A
VC Vacant Commercial 9 - 0.04 N/A - N/A
VI Vacant Industrial 4 - 0.00 N/A - N/A
VR Vacant Residential 227 - 0.06 N/A - N/A
Other Primarily areas under development 19 - 0.00 N/A - N/A VLDR (SOI) Very Low Density Residential 56 93 0.05 61 101 0.06 LDR (SOI) Low Density Residential 43 47 0.04 99 351 0.30 MDR (SOI) Medium Density Residential 154 668 0.26 161 696 0.27 HDR (SOI) High Density Residential 20 98 0.04 20 73 0.04 CR (SOI) Commercial Retail 58 - 0.04 73 - 0.06
LI (SOI) Light Industrial 188 - 0.04 188 - 0.04
BP (SOI) Business Park 9 - 0.00 26 - 0.01
RR (SOI) Rural Residential 2 - 0.00 3 - 0.00
RM (SOI) Rural Mountainous 110 - 0.02 110 - 0.02
OS-MIN (SOI) Conservation 165 - 0.05 165 - 0.05
OS-R (SOI) Open Space - Recreation - - - 266 - 0.27
RC-EDR (SOI) Rural Community-Estate Density
Residential 75 23 0.03 126 38 0.04
RC-VLDR (SOI) Rural Community-Very Low Density
Residential 199 214 0.16 263 282 0.22
RC-LDR (SOI) Rural Community-Low Density
Residential 458 1,035 0.47 489 1,107 0.51
Other (SOI) Primarily areas under development 5 - 0.01 N/A - N/A Totals (MGD) 24.03 32.42
Note: Values shown may not agree with calculated values due to rounding. 2040 land use areas include developed land uses only, while 2040 land use areas reflect buildout conditions.

City of Corona Section 4 – Water Use
Potable Water Master Plan
4-22
Future Demands
The future demands can be projected assuming full City build out by 2040. The existing demand from reference year 2024 is known from water meter data, and the demand for 2040 was calculated using areabased demand factors with the assumption the City will be built out. The demand in intermediate years between 2024 and 2040 was interpolated assuming annual demand will increase at a constant linear rate.

Table 4.13 shows the expected future water demand at ADD, MDD, and PHD system demands.

Table 4.13 – Future Water Use and Demands (MGD)
Year 2025 2030 2035 2040
ADD 24.55 27.18 29.80 32.42
MDD [1] 44.20 48.92 53.64 58.36
PHD [2] 73.66 81.53 89.39 97.26
[1] The MDD peaking factor used is 1.8 multiplied by the ADD. [2] The PHD peaking factor used is 3.0 multiplied by the ADD.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-1
SECTION 5 - SERVICE CRITERIA

5.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
This section establishes the service criteria that form the basis for evaluating the performance of the City’s potable water system. These criteria define expectations for system pressures, storage capacity, supply reliability, and operational performance. They are developed from American Water Works Association (AWWA) design and operational standards, California Department of Water Resources (DWR) guidance, California Waterworks Standards (Title 22), and the City’s historical operating experience.

The criteria are used in the hydraulic model, assessment of the existing system, and planning of future improvements. Requirements related to supply, storage, water quality, system reliability, and fire protection are described in the subsections that follow. Recommendations for system improvements identified through application of these criteria are presented in Section 9, Master Plan Improvements.

5.2. DESIGN CRITERIA
The City’s potable water system must be capable of reliably meeting customer demand under Average Day Demand (ADD), Maximum Day Demand (MDD), Peak Hour Demand (PHD), and fire-flow conditions.

Consistent with AWWA M31 and DWR reliability guidance, the total available supply, including imported water, groundwater, and storage, must meet or exceed the Maximum Day Demand (MDD) at all times.

The City meets MDD requirements through a combination of:
• Imported water from Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) • Local groundwater production
• Operational and emergency storage in the distribution system • Blending and transmission capacity across pressure zones Storage plays a critical role in reliable system performance. Storage reservoirs are required to:
• Balance hourly fluctuations in system demand
• Provide available volume for required fire-flow events • Supply emergency storage during a temporary loss of a major supply source • Maintain system pressures during peak-hour operation
Detailed criteria for pressures, storage volumes, fire flows, supply reliability, and hydraulic modeling assumptions are provided in the subsections that follow.

5.2.1. Wells
New potable water wells should be designed in accordance with California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 74, AWWA standards, and California Division of Drinking Water (DDW) requirements.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-2
Well casings must be sized and constructed in accordance with California DWR Bulletin 74, AWWA A100, and DDW Waterworks Standards. Bulletin 74 recommends that well casings be large enough to accommodate the pump, column pipe, and appurtenances while maintaining sufficient annular space for proper placement of the gravel pack and sanitary seal. Casings should be designed to ensure that upward water velocity inside the casing does not exceed 0.1 feet per second at maximum pumping rates to reduce turbulence, minimize entrained gas, and extend both pump and well life.

Casing material selection should consider site-specific geologic and chemical conditions. Bulletin 74 allows the use of carbon steel, stainless steel, or PVC for appropriate portions of the well, although stainless steel is generally required by the City in corrosive formations or areas where long service life is required. Wall thickness must be adequate to withstand external formation pressure, corrosion, and long-term structural loads. Joints must be watertight and meet structural integrity requirements to prevent cross-flow between zones and protect water quality.

Well screens should be designed to match the transmissive water-bearing zones identified during well siting and test drilling. Under Bulletin 74 guidance, screens must:
• Provide adequate open area to minimize entrance velocity (typically <0.1 ft/s) • Be constructed of materials resistant to corrosion and incrustation • Maintain structural stability under anticipated formation loads • Utilize slot sizing based on sieve analyses of formation samples • Be positioned only within productive aquifer intervals to exclude fine material Gravel pack design is also governed by Bulletin 74 requirements. Gravel must be clean, well-graded, and compatible with formation grain size to prevent migration of fine particles. The pack should fully envelope the screen and be emplaced in a controlled manner to avoid bridging or segregation. A proper gravel pack is essential for maintaining yield and minimizing sediment.

Above the gravel pack, the well must incorporate a sanitary seal, typically neat cement or bentonite, extending to the ground surface to prevent surface water intrusion and contamination from shallow zones. Vent piping, casing heads, well pads, and surface completions must also comply with Bulletin 74 construction details.

It should be emphasized that these elements do not represent the full list of regulatory or engineering requirements for new potable production wells. Final well design must comply with:
• All applicable provisions of DWR Bulletin 74-81 and 74-90 • AWWA A100 well design and construction standards
• California Code of Regulations, Title 22
• County Environmental Health requirements
• DDW Source Water Assessment and permitting criteria
• City of Corona design requirements

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-3
• Industry best practices for groundwater extraction and wellhead protection These standards collectively ensure that new wells provide reliable long-term production, maintain drinking-water quality, and protect groundwater resources from contamination and cross-connection hazards.

Permitting of new wells requires completion of a Source Water Assessment for the proposed well location.

This assessment includes evaluation of:
• Site characteristics and hydrogeologic conditions
• Well construction design and materials
• Nearby Possible Contaminating Activities (PCAs) and potential contaminant pathways The inventory of PCAs must be reviewed for both existing and new wells to identify vulnerable areas and ensure compliance with DDW drinking-water source protection standards. This process helps prevent the siting of potable wells near incompatible land uses and supports long-term protection of public health.

A monitoring and test-well phase should be conducted before final well construction. Installing and operating a test or monitoring well early in the design process verifies that the site has adequate groundwater quality and sustainable capacity. Assessment of test well performance also provides insight into site-specific vulnerabilities, informs final well design (screen intervals, casing materials, pump sizing), and supports completion of the source-water evaluation required for DDW permitting.

5.2.2. Tank Storage
The City’s storage criteria are based on the combined requirements for operational storage, fire suppression storage, and terminal (or emergency) storage, consistent with AWWA M31, AWWA G200, and California DWR system reliability guidance.

These components ensure that the distribution system can meet daily fluctuations in demand, provide adequate fire flow, and maintain service during outages or supply interruptions. The total existing storage capacity for the City is approximately 44.9 million gallons (MG) distributed across multiple pressure zones.

Although the system has 47.9 MG of total tank volume, the Border Tank is excluded from the storage calculations because of the mismatch between the tank HGL and the zone HGL, as described in Section

2.2.4. Due to this elevation difference, the Border Tank cannot reliably feed the zone under normal operating conditions and therefore does not contribute to usable storage. Table 5.1 summarizes the required and existing storage volumes for each pressure zone and identifies any deficits or surpluses.

Operational storage represents the volume required to manage normal diurnal fluctuations between low nighttime demand and higher daytime consumption. This storage supports efficient operation of supply facilities, maintains stable pressures, and prevents excessive pump cycling. Operational storage volumes are typically determined as a percentage of Maximum Day Demand (MDD) and reflect system-wide diurnal demand patterns.

Operational storage calculations include hydrant meter use; however, operational storage is not intended to accommodate temporary construction or maintenance-related water demands. Because the specific

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-4
locations of the hydrant meters were not provided and most of the usage came from a single “floater” meter used for maintenance and inspection activities throughout the City, the total hydrant demand was aggregated and evenly distributed across all zones for operational storage calculations.

Fire suppression storage is the volume required to sustain the necessary fire flow rate and duration established by the California Fire Code and local fire authority requirements. Required fire flows can range from 1,000 gpm to more than 4,000 gpm depending on land use, occupancy type, and building density.

Fire storage must be available simultaneously with Maximum Day Demand (MDD) and without allowing system pressure to fall below 20 psi.

Terminal storage is the volume reserved to ensure that a tank is never completely emptied during normal or peak operating conditions. For planning purposes, the City maintains a minimum 10% of total tank capacity as terminal storage. This volume is not intended to be used for operational, fire, or emergency supply. It provides hydraulic stability, prevents air entrainment, maintains minimum pressures at the tank outlet. Terminal storage serves as a physical buffer to maintain reliable service and prevent tanks from being drawn down to levels that could compromise system performance.

Table 5.1 consolidates these storage components by pressure zone and compares them to the existing storage volumes. The City’s total required storage across all pressure zones is 32.44 MG, while the existing tank capacity is 44.9 MG, resulting in an overall surplus of 12.46 MG. Each zone has sufficient water storage, even when hydrant meter demand is included.

Table 5.1 – Storage Volume by Zone
Pressure
Zones
Existing
Tank Storage
(MG)
Terminal
Storage
(MG)
Operational
Storage (MG)
Fire Flow
(MG)
Storage
Needed (MG)
Storage
Surplus
(MG)
725 1.5 0.15 0.35 0.84 1.34 0.16
905 10.5 1.05 7.76 0.84 9.65 0.85
1020 [1] 6 0.6 1.38 0.72 2.70 3.30
1060 8 0.8 4.19 0.84 5.83 2.17
1220 9.7 0.97 5.11 0.72 6.80 2.90
1380 6.7 0.67 2.66 0.72 4.05 2.65
1640 2.5 0.25 1.10 0.72 2.07 0.43
Total 44.9 4.49 22.55 5.4 32.44 12.46
Note: For detailed information on the location, capacity, and material of the tanks within each pressure zone, please refer to Section 2.4.1 of this master plan.
[1] Border tank is not included in storage volume calculations because of the mismatch between the tank HGL and the Zone HGL.

The City’s pressure zones shown in Table 5.1 are organized according to the hydraulic grade lines (HGLs) of the existing storage tanks. Table 5.2 provides additional detail regarding each zone, including the associated tanks and any subzones that operate at modified HGLs within the larger pressure zone.

Based on the storage criteria summarized in Table 5.1, Zone 905 is one of the largest storage zones in the City, with a total of 10.5 MG of existing storage compared to 9.65 MG of required storage, resulting in a

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-5
storage surplus of 1.36 MG. Zone 1020 has a surplus as well, with 3.34 MG of storage above the minimum requirement.

Table 5.2 – Zone Details
Pressure
Zones
Alias Tanks within Zone Subzones
725 Zone 1 Green River Tank -
905 Zone 2 Mangular Tank, R-3 Tank, Cresta Verde Tank Subzones 780 and 820 1020 -
Yuma Tank, Mangular Tank, R-3 Tank, Cresta
Verde Tank
Subzones 1130 and 1235
1060 Zone 3
Lester Tank #1, Lester Tank #2, SDO Tank, Border
Tank [1]
Subzones 920, 960, 1220 and
1315
1220 Zone 4
Hayden Tank, Keith Tank, Upper & Main Tank,
ADV Tank, Glen Ivy Tank
Subzones 1045, 1060, 1136 [2],
1220 and 1310
1380 Zone 5 Eagle Glen Tank, Gilbert Tank Subzone 1250
1640 Zone 6 Jameson Tank Subzone 1480
[1] Border tank has an HGL of 1020 but is connected to Zone 1060. [2] Zone 1136 is included with Zone 1220 because the Glen Ivy Tank is currently out of service, and the 1220 Zone directly serves this zone.

5.2.2.1. Operational Storage Recommendations
Operational storage is the volume of water required to meet normal fluctuations in system demand throughout the day. It provides a buffer between low nighttime demand and higher daytime consumption, stabilizes system pressures, and reduces excessive pump cycling.

Based on industry practice and consistent with AWWA M31, the City defines operational storage as 50 percent of the Maximum Day Demand (MDD) for each pressure zone. As summarized in Table 5.3, the total recommended operational storage for the City is 22.55 MG.

The MDD values used in Table 5.3 are based on meter-billing data from the 2024 calendar year, using a peaking factor of 1.8 (MDD = 1.8 × ADD), consistent with previous Water Master Plan assumptions. Only pressure zones with existing storage tanks are shown in the table.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-6
Table 5.3 – Operational Storage
Pressure Zone
Average Day Demand
(MG)
Maximum Day Demand
(MG)
Recommended
Operational Storage
(MG) [1]
725 0.39 0.69 0.35
905 8.62 15.51 7.76
1020 1.53 2.76 1.38
1060 4.66 8.39 4.19
1220 5.67 10.21 5.11
1380 2.96 5.32 2.66
1640 1.22 2.19 1.10
Total 25.05 45.07 22.55
Note: Please refer to Section 4.3 for detailed information on water demands. [1] Recommended Operational Storage is 50% of the MDD. The MDD was calculated using a peaking factor of 1.8 (MDD = 1.8* ADD). The peaking factor was taken from Section 4.7.2 of this master plan.

5.2.2.2. Fire Suppression Storage
Fire suppression storage represents the volume of water needed to sustain the required fire flow for the required duration while the system continues to meet peak-hour demands. The fire-flow requirements for each land-use category are shown in Table 5.4. These storage volumes are derived from the applicable fire flow rates and durations established by the California Fire Code and local fire authority requirements.

Fire storage requirements for typical land use are as follows:
• Single-Family Residential: 0.18 MG
• Multi-Family Residential: 0.30 MG
• Schools/Commercial: 0.72 MG
• Industrial: 0.84 MG
Each pressure zone must maintain a minimum fire-suppression storage volume equal to the highest fireflow requirement associated with the land use within that zone.

Table 5.4 – Fire Suppression Storage
Land Use
Fire Suppression
Storage (MG) [1]
Single Family Residential 0.18
Multi-Family Residential 0.30
Schools/Commercial 0.72
Industrial 0.84
[1] Fire Suppression Storage is derived from the required fire flow and duration. For a description of the required fire flow, duration, and residual pressure criteria refer to

5.2.7. Fire Suppression.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-7

5.2.2.3. Emergency System Storage
Emergency system storage is the volume of water required to supply the system during an interruption of the primary water supply. Interruptions may result from pipeline failures, outages, treatment-plant shutdowns, imported water disruptions, or natural disasters.

The City uses an emergency-storage criterion of seven (7) times the Average Day Demand (ADD) for the system. This seven-day period corresponds to DWR’s planning guidance and reflects the assumption that most outages can be resolved or mitigated within one week. Using this criterion, the total recommended emergency system storage for the City is approximately 175 million gallons (MG).

The City currently maintains 44.9 MG of existing tank storage, which satisfies a portion of the total requirement. To meet the remaining emergency storage needs, groundwater production would supply the additional volume. Based on pump-capacity testing (Section 3.3.2.4), the City can produce approximately 17.8 MGD from active groundwater wells. Over a seven-day period, this equates to 124.6 MG. When combined with existing tank storage, this provides approximately 170 MG of emergency supply, equivalent to approximately 6.8 times the ADD, with ADD inclusive of hydrant meter demands.

This capacity demonstrates that groundwater sources can reliably meet emergency demand during interruptions of imported water delivery. In addition, the City maintains emergency interconnections with the City of Riverside and the Temescal Valley Water District, providing supplemental redundancy and resilience.

5.2.3. Booster Pump Stations
Booster pump stations are required to deliver the Maximum Day Demand (MDD) to the service area they supply. For pressure subzones served exclusively by a booster pump station, the station must be capable of supplying MDD plus fire flow to ensure adequate pressure and flow during fire-flow events. Each station should include appropriate fire-flow pumping capability and, where applicable, a hydro-pneumatic tank to supply small demands, reduce pump cycle time, and to stabilize pressures during transient conditions when needed.

5.2.3.1. Pump Station Configuration
To meet the City’s reliability requirements, all booster stations must include a standby pump with a capacity equal to the largest duty pump. This ensures uninterrupted operation if the lead pump is offline, undergoing maintenance, or requires replacement because these activities can result in extended downtime.

Pump stations should also be equipped with aboveground suction and discharge connections that allow the entire facility to be bypassed with temporary, portable pumping equipment. This feature provides operational flexibility and ensures that water service to the zone can be maintained during emergencies or extended maintenance periods.

5.2.3.2. Pump Station Details
Pump stations must be equipped with modern pump controllers, flow meters, suction and discharge pressure gauges, motor-protection equipment, isolation valves, and telemetry systems. Telemetry must

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-8
provide continuous monitoring of station status, alarms, pump performance, and operational conditions, with notification routed to staff through the City’s SCADA system. All mechanical and electrical equipment should be selected and installed in accordance with AWWA and industry best practices for reliability, maintainability, and energy efficiency.

5.2.3.3. Pump Station Fireproofing
Pump stations must be constructed with fire-resistant materials and designed to minimize vulnerability during a fire event. In non-urban or high-risk wildfire areas, pump stations should also be equipped with peripheral sprinkler systems and other protective features as required by the local fire authority. Highrisk areas may also require a site-specific risk analysis and mitigation measures that may include fuel modification or heat-deflecting site walls. The electrical service should be installed underground where feasible to reduce fire exposure and improve reliability.

5.2.3.4. Pump Station Backup Power
To maintain operation during power outages, booster pump stations must be equipped with a standby generator sized to operate all essential pumps and controls. Automatic transfer switches (ATS) are required to ensure that power is restored without manual intervention, enabling the pump station to remain in continuous service during electrical disruptions. Backup power facilities should comply with local air-quality regulations, NFPA standards, City requirements, and AWWA G200 reliability guidelines.

5.2.4. Pressure Reducing Stations (PRS)
Pressure-reducing stations regulate the flow of water between pressure zones to maintain stable hydraulic grade lines and protect the distribution system from excessive pressure. PRS facilities ensure that flows transfer reliably between higher and lower zones under varying demand conditions. Criteria for PRS capacity, configuration, and operation are provided in the following subsections.

5.2.4.1. PRS Capacity
Pressure-reducing stations shall be designed with sufficient valving and hydraulic capacity to deliver the full range of anticipated demands within the receiving pressure zone, up to and including Maximum Day Demand (MDD) and associated fire-flow requirements. Flow control and pressure reduction must remain stable under low, moderate, and high-flow conditions.

5.2.4.2. PRS Details
PRS facilities should include multiple pressure-reducing valves (typically a high-flow and a low-flow PRV) to maintain accurate pressure control across a broad range of operational conditions. Each PRV station should incorporate a pressure relief valve or similar overpressure protection at the downstream end of the valve station. This feature prevents excessive pressures in the receiving zone if a PRV fails in the open position or malfunctions.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-9
Each PRS must be equipped with:
• Flow meters on each reducing valve
• Pressure gauges upstream and downstream
• Isolation valves
• Telemetry for real-time monitoring
• SCADA integration for alarm notifications and status reporting PRS facilities must be designed to allow safe and reliable maintenance access and must comply with AWWA and DDW guidelines for pressure-zone management.

5.2.5. System Pressures
The City’s potable water distribution system must deliver stable and reliable pressures under all operating conditions. Pressure requirements are based on California Waterworks Standards, AWWA design guidance, and City operational experience.

For the existing system, the City will maintain:
• Minimum static pressure: 50 psi
• Preferred static pressure range: 60–120 psi
Future developments will be required to maintain:
• Minimum static pressure: 60 psi
• Preferred static pressure range: 60–120 psi
• For multi-story buildings, a minimum pressure of 60 psi must be maintained at the building, and a minimum pressure of 25 psi is required at the top floor. • When static pressures exceed 80 psi, a pressure regulator must be installed at the property in accordance with plumbing code requirements.

Pressure outside this range may require additional infrastructure such as PRVs, pumping improvements, or private booster systems for individual properties. Developers are responsible for installing private booster pumps where needed to meet minimum building pressures.

Residual system pressures must meet the following minimums at the condition specified:
• Peak Hour Demand (PHD): 40 psi minimum
• MDD + Fire Flow: 20 psi minimum
To achieve adequate fire-flow performance, hydrants must maintain at least 20 psi residual pressure during MDD plus fire-flow events.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-10
All new water mains and service connections shall satisfy the following pressure requirements. The City’s water distribution system is sized to provide the following pressure requirements during different demand conditions as summarized in Table 5.5, which presents both existing and future development criteria.

Table 5.5 – Potable Distribution System Pressure Requirements Pressure Required (psi)
Condition Existing System Future Development
Minimum Static Pressure Allowed 50 60
Maximum Static Pressure Allowed [1] 120 120
Minimum Residual Pressure for PHD 40 60
Minimum Residual Pressure for MDD plus Fire Flow 20 20
[1] Pressure Zones 1380, 1480, and 1640 may have static pressure ranges that exceed the maximum static pressure listed in the table above.

Maximum distribution system pressures shall be based on static operating conditions. In accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code, individual pressure valves shall be installed on all services where the static pressure exceeds 80 psi. Pressure regulators shall be installed and maintained by property owner.

5.2.6. Transmission and Distribution Pipelines
Transmission and distribution pipelines must be designed to reliably convey water throughout the service area and maintain adequate pressure, flow, and water quality. Pipelines should be looped wherever feasible to improve system reliability and reduce water age. Each service area should have a minimum of two points of connection to support redundancy and hydraulic flexibility.

5.2.6.1. Pipe Velocity
To minimize the risk of pipeline wear, reduce transient pressures, and reduce the risk of internal deterioration, pipe velocities shall not exceed the limits shown in Table 5.6. These velocity thresholds are consistent with AWWA recommendations for distribution systems.

Table 5.6 – Potable Distribution System Velocity Requirements Maximum Velocity Required (fps)
Condition Feet per Second (fps)
Peak Hour Demand (PHD) 5
Maximum Day Demand (MDD) plus Fire Flow 12

5.2.6.2. Pipeline Redundancy and Looping
New developments must provide at least two independent points of connection to the distribution system to maintain hydraulic reliability and redundancy. Looping improves operational flexibility, reduces customer outages during pipeline breaks or maintenance, and mitigates water quality degradation by reducing stagnant water and sediment accumulation. Dead-end mains should be avoided whenever possible. Where unavoidable, dead-end pipelines shall be incorporated into flushing programs to maintain adequate chlorine residual and water quality.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-11

5.2.6.3. Required Pipeline Spacing
Separation between potable water pipelines and pipelines conveying wastewater, recycled water, or other hazardous fluids shall meet the requirements of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 16, Article 4.

Current horizontal and vertical separation requirements include:
• Potable water mains must be located at least 10 feet horizontally from sanitary sewer, recycled water, or other hazardous pipelines.
• When crossing, potable water mains must maintain at least 1 foot of vertical separation above the non-potable pipeline.
• Crossings must be constructed at a minimum 45-degree angle and shall avoid fittings (tees, valves, or tap assemblies) for at least 8 horizontal feet on either side of the crossing, as required by Title

22. Current exceptions to Title 22 requirements include:
• The City may grant an exception to the spacing requirements when strict compliance is not feasible. Title 22 allows exceptions if the following conditions are satisfied:
• The pipeline being replaced is less than 1,320 feet in length. • The new pipeline diameter is within 6 inches of the existing pipeline diameter. • The new pipeline is installed using methods that minimize contamination risk, including but not limited to:
o Sleeving the newly installed main, or
o Using upgraded piping materials that provide equivalent protective measures.

Any exceptions must be applied exactly as permitted under Section §64572 of Title 22 and must be approved by the California Water Board prior to construction.

5.2.6.4. Pipeline Sizing
The minimum diameter for new distribution mains shall be 8 inches, consistent with AWWA distribution standards and the City’s hydraulic performance requirements. Larger diameters may be required in transmission corridors or where needed to meet future fire flow, MDD, or system development demands.

5.2.7. Fire Suppression
Fire flow requirements support public fire protection and ensure the distribution system can deliver adequate water during fire emergencies. The City’s required fire flows and hydrant spacing criteria are summarized in Table 5.7. These criteria are consistent with the California Fire Code and may be subject to adjustment based on local Fire Department requirements.

A note is provided for industrial facilities because their required fire flow varies depending on specific building size, construction type, and hazard classification. When an industrial development requires a flow

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-12
exceeding 3,500 gpm, the higher fire-flow value shall be used. If the required fire flow is less than 3,500 gpm, a minimum of 3,500 gpm shall be used.

Table 5.7 – Fire Flow Requirements and Fire Hydrant Location Criteria Land Use
Required
Fire Flow
(gpm)
Duration
(hrs)
Residual
Pressure (psi)
Average Spacing
Between
Hydrants [2](ft)
Single Family Residential 1,500 2 20 300
Multi-Family Residential 2,500 2 20 250
Schools 3,000 4 20 250
Commercial 3,000 4 20 250
Industrial [1] 3,500 4 20 250
[1] Industrial building fire flow shall be determined by a qualified fire suppression company and submitted to the City for approval. If the calculated fire flow exceeds 3,500 gallons per minute (gpm), the greater value shall be utilized. If the required fire flow is less than 3,500 gpm, a minimum of 3,500 gpm shall be used.
[2] Unless otherwise approved by the City of Corona Fire Department.

5.2.7.1. Fire Department Requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) An Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) is a secondary housing unit located on the same parcel as a primary residential structure and includes complete independent living facilities. For fire-flow purposes, ADUs associated with one- or two-family homes fall under the Single-Family Residential land-use category. If the total number of dwellings on the parcel becomes three (3) or more, the Fire Department classifies the development as Multi-Family Residential.

Additional requirements include:
• ADUs located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) must comply with full firehardening and vegetation-management requirements under the CFC and local ordinances. • An ADU must be located within 150 feet of a fire access road with all portions of exterior walls accessible from the access road. The fire access road shall be:
o at least 20 feet wide,
o paved with concrete or asphalt, and
o with slopes not exceeding 10 percent.

5.2.7.2. ADU Fire Sprinkler Requirements
Newly constructed ADUs must comply with the California Residential Code (CRC), which requires an automatic residential fire sprinkler system whenever the primary residence is required to be sprinklered.

If the primary unit requires sprinklers, the ADU must also be protected, regardless of ADU size.

Fire sprinklers are not required for an ADU when:
• The ADU is 1,200 square feet or less, and
• The ADU would not otherwise require sprinklers under CRC Section R313, and

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-13
• The primary residence is not required to install a sprinkler system.

Fire sprinkler systems must be designed and installed per the following standards:
• NFPA 13 – Installation of Sprinkler Systems
• NFPA 13D – Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One- and Two-Family Dwellings and Manufactured Homes
• NFPA 13R – Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Low-Rise Residential Occupancies

5.2.7.3. JADU Fire Sprinkler Requirements
A Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) is located within the existing footprint of a residence. Fire sprinklers are not required for a JADU unless fire sprinklers are installed, or required to be installed, in the primary residence.

5.2.8. Summary of Design Criteria
Table 5.8 provides a summarized list of all design criteria presented in Section 5. These criteria reflect a combination of:
• California Fire Code (CFC)
• California Residential Code (CRC)
• NFPA Standards (NFPA 13, 13D, 13R)
• AWWA distribution system guidelines
• City of Corona Fire Department requirements
• City of Corona Department of Water and Power (DWP) Design Policy (November 2012) • Industry standard practices and City standards

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-14
Table 5.8 – Summary of Design Criteria
Focus Design Criteria
Total Supply
Maximum Day Demand (MDD) The total supply to the system is equal to the total demand, defined as MDD.

Average Day Demand (ADD) The average day demand is determined using the demand factors specified in Table

4.8 located in Section 4 - Water Use. These demand factors are provided on a peracre and per-connection basis, tailored to specific land use types.

Storage
Tank Capacity Sum of Operational, Fire, and Terminal Storage Operational Storage 50% of Maximum Day Demand (MDD)
Fire Suppression Storage Each pressure zone shall contain fire suppression storage at least equal to the highest fire flow storage volume required in the zone based on actual land use in the zone. Refer to Table 5.7 to calculate the highest fire demand in the Zone.

Terminal Storage 10% of Tank Capacity
Emergency System Storage 7 days of ADD (7 times ADD)
Booster Pump Station
Pump Station Capacity Pump Stations must supply maximum day demand (MDD). Note: The booster pump stations must supply MDD plus fire flow in subzones served exclusively by a hydropneumatic booster pump station.

Pump Station Configuration At least one duty and one standby pump in parallel. The standby pump must be of the same size as the largest duty pump to maintain operations in the event the duty pump is offline.

Pump Station Details Pump stations should be equipped with modern pump controllers, flow meters, suction and discharge pressure gauges, proper isolation valves, and telemetry equipment to control operations through SCADA.

Pump Station Fireproofing Pump stations should be constructed of fireproof materials and provided with peripheral sprinkler systems.

Pump Station Backup Power They are equipped with a standby generators and automatic transfer switches to operate during power outages.

Pressure Reducing Station (PRS)
PRS Capacity Should deliver the entire range of demands and fire flows PRS Details PRS should be constructed with a pressure relief valve to preclude excessive pressures in the service area. Each PRS should be equipped with flow meters and telemetry equipment to control operation through SCADA. Each PRS should have two pressure reducing valves (sized typically for high and low flows per service area).

Pipe Size and Velocity
Minimum Pipe Size 8-inch (12-inch where required by the City’s DWP Design Policy) Maximum Pipe Velocities PHD 5 fps
Maximum Pipe Velocities MDD + Fire
Flow
12 fps

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-15
Table 5.8 – Summary of Design Criteria
Focus Design Criteria
System Pressures
Minimum Static Pressure Existing System: 50 psi
Future System: 60 psi
Maximum Static Pressure 120 psi
Preferred Static Pressure 60 psi – 120 psi
Minimum Residual Pressure Existing System: 40 psi during PHD Future System: 60 psi during PHD
Existing & Future System: 20 psi during MDD + Fire Flow Energy Conservation SCE operates Time-of-Use (TOU) rate schedules with evening on-peak periods (typically a 5-hour peak demand window between 4 PM and 9 PM or a 3-hour peak demand window between 5 PM and 8 PM). Pumping should be scheduled outside of the on-peak periods defined in the current SCE schedule, when practical.

Water Quality
Blending Blending stations are used to meet regulatory limits and internal targets for constituents identified in Section 8 (Water Quality).

Fire Flow Requirements
Single Family Residential 1,500 gpm for 2 hours with 20 psi residual pressure at a fire hydrant. The average spacing between hydrants is 300 ft.
[1]
Multi-Family Residential 2,500 gpm for 2 hours with 20 psi residual pressure at a fire hydrant. The average spacing between hydrants is 250 ft. [1]
Schools/Commercial 3,000 gpm for 4 hours with 20 psi residual pressure at a fire hydrant. The average spacing between hydrants is 250 ft. [1]
Industrial Min. 3,500 gpm for 4 hours with 20 psi residual pressure at a fire hydrant. If building Needed Fire Flow (NFF) is more than 3,500 gpm, then use NFF. The average spacing between hydrants is 250 ft. [1]
[1] Hydrant spacing shall apply as listed unless otherwise approved by the City of Corona Fire Department.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-16

5.3. UNINCORPORATED AREAS DESIGN CRITERIA
The unincorporated communities within the City’s service boundary, El Cerrito, Temescal Valley, Coronita, and Home Gardens, are under the jurisdiction of Riverside County for planning and fire protection standards. Design criteria for water system improvements in these areas shall follow Riverside County standards, including fire flow requirements established by Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) and infrastructure requirements outlined in applicable County ordinances and development guidelines.

5.3.1. Fire Flow Requirements for Unincorporated Areas
Fire flow requirements for unincorporated areas are governed by the Riverside County Fire Department, which follows the California Fire Code with local amendments. To obtain the most current fire flow requirements and hydrant spacing criteria, designers shall refer directly to the Riverside County Fire Department’s published standards and the most recent County Fire Ordinance, available on the RCFD website.

5.4. PLANNING CRITERIA

5.4.1. Methodology
The planning criteria in this section provide guidance for evaluating the repair, replacement, and longterm reinvestment needs of City water system facilities. These criteria support the development of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by identifying the expected service life, condition, and performance trends of key infrastructure components. The criteria will be used to prioritize projects based on asset age, remaining useful life, operational risk, and the criticality of each facility to overall system reliability.

5.4.2. Average Service Life
The average service life for water system facilities is summarized in Table 5.9. These values are based on recommendations from the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and typical servicelife guidance from industry sources, including AWWA manuals and standards. Table 5.10 presents the average service life specifically for pipelines, based on AWWA recommendations. Understanding the typical lifespan of each facility type allows the City to forecast repair and replacement needs, identify assets at risk of failure, and plan for timely reinvestment. Replacing or rehabilitating facilities before the end of their service life is essential for maintaining the reliability, performance, and regulatory compliance of the City’s water system.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-17
Table 5.9 – Average Service Life of Facilities
Equipment Average Service Life (Years)
Source of Supply
Wells 60 – 70
Well Casing (carbon steel) 30
Well Transmission Mains (steel) 35 – 40
Pump Stations
Pumping Equipment 10 – 15
Structures 30 – 60
Treatment Plants
Chlorination Equipment 10 – 15
Equipment 10 – 15
Structures 30 – 60
Transmission/Distribution
Structures (well maintained) 70
Structures (poorly maintained) 40
Steel Tanks (with recoating cycles) 60
Concrete Tanks 100
Steel Tank Coatings 20
Transmission and Main Distribution Pipes 35 – 40
Service Laterals 30 – 50
Valves 30
Backflow Prevention Assemblies 35 – 40
Blow-offs 35 – 40
Meters 10 – 15
Hydrants 40 – 60
General
Structures 30 – 40
Electrical Systems 7 – 10
Equipment 10 – 15
Transportation Equipment 10
Computers 5
Lab/Monitoring Equipment 5 – 7
Tools and Shop Equipment 10 – 15
Mechanical Equipment 25
Electrical Equipment 15
Communication Equipment 10
Note: Information from California State Water Resources Control Board’s Typical Equipment Life Expectancy Table.

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-18
Table 5.10 – Average Service Life of Pipelines
Abbreviation Material Service Life
AC LSL Asbestos Concrete Pipe (Long Service Life) 105
AC SSL Asbestos Concrete Pipe (Short Service Life) 75
CIP Cast Iron Pipe 75
CMLC Cement Mortar Lined and Coated 100
CMLDIP Cement Mortar Lined Ductile Iron Pipe 100
CMLSTL Cement Mortar Lined Steel Pipe 100
CON Concrete 100
COP Copper 50
DIP Ductile Iron Pipe 100
HDPE High Density Polyethylene 50
DIP LSL Ductile Iron Pipe (Long Service Life) 110
DIP SSL Ductile Iron Pipe (Short Service Life) 60
OTH Other 40
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride 100
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe 100
SP Steel Pipe 50
CEM Cement Pipe 75
GP Galvanized Pipe 50
PEP Polyethylene Pipe 100
CML-TW Cement Mortar Lined Pipe 75

5.4.3. Performance Indicators
Performance indicators are used to assess the condition, reliability, and effectiveness of the City’s water system assets. These indicators include routine maintenance findings, structural condition, corrosion activity, main breaks, leaks, and other reliability concerns observed during system operations. Tracking these indicators over time provides the basis for identifying infrastructure in need of rehabilitation, replacement, or enhanced maintenance.

5.4.4. Distribution System Maintenance Program
A comprehensive distribution system maintenance program is essential for preserving the integrity of the City’s water infrastructure and extending the useful life of its assets. Routine maintenance activities include valve and hydrant exercising, system flushing, leak detection, and the targeted replacement of deteriorated pipeline segments and associated appurtenances. These activities support reliable system performance, protect water quality, and reduce the risk of unexpected failures.

5.4.4.1. Flushing
Sediment, biofilm, and other deposits can accumulate within pipelines over time, reducing water quality and potentially affecting system performance. Routine flushing removes accumulated debris, restores disinfectant residuals, and helps maintain clarity and taste. Flushing must also accompany new pipeline

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-19
disinfection procedures before a pipeline is placed into service, in accordance with state regulatory requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title 22).

5.4.4.2. Exercising and Servicing of Valves and Hydrants Valves and hydrants must be exercised and inspected on a routine basis to ensure proper operation during both normal and emergency conditions. Regular exercising prevents seizing, verifies operability, and identifies components in need of repair or replacement. This program is critical to maintaining system reliability, ensuring adequate fire protection, and supporting effective system isolation during repairs or outages.

5.4.4.3. Leak Detection
The Utilities Maintenance Division performs leak detection activities on an as-needed basis and in response to observed or suspected leaks. Leak detection may involve acoustic monitoring, pressure zone evaluations, or targeted surveys. Early identification of leaks helps reduce water loss, prevent damage to surrounding infrastructure, and identify areas where aging pipelines may require replacement.

5.4.4.4. Water Main Replacement and Repair
Water meters, service laterals, and pipelines require periodic replacement as they reach the end of their service life or exhibit recurring failures. Damaged pipelines may be repaired using sleeves, clamps, or replacement of the affected segment, depending on the severity and cause of the failure. Decisions regarding repair versus replacement consider the pipeline’s age, material, history of breaks, corrosion conditions, hydraulic importance, and its criticality within the distribution system. Proactive replacement of aging or high-risk segments reduces long-term maintenance costs and improves overall system reliability.

5.5. CRITERIA FOR USING RECLAIMED WATER FOR FUTURE POTABLE REUSE The criteria in this section outline planning considerations for potential future potable reuse. At present, the City uses recycled water for non-potable uses. As statewide regulations continue to evolve, the City may incorporate future potable reuse options into long-term supply planning.

5.5.1. Methodology
Potable reuse in California is regulated primarily by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), including both the Division of Drinking Water (DDW) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). These agencies jointly develop and enforce criteria for the treatment, monitoring, permitting, and operation of potable reuse facilities.

The criteria for potable reuse must align with those for the potable water system, including requirements for water quality, pressure, velocities, pipeline condition, pumping systems, and facility age. Potable reuse projects must comply with:
• California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22 – Water Recycling Criteria • Direct Potable Reuse Regulations (effective December 2023)

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-20
• NPDES permitting for systems that include surface-water augmentation • DDW water treatment standards for safe, reliable drinking water Before a permit is issued, DDW requires the applicant to demonstrate compliance with all treatment, water-quality, pathogen-reduction, and monitoring criteria. RWQCB review ensures protection of groundwater and surface waters where applicable. These combined requirements ensure that potable reuse water meets all drinking water standards before it enters the public distribution system.

5.5.2. Direct Use
In December 2023 the State Water Resources Control Board unanimously adopted California’s first uniform regulations for Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) under Title 22, which become effective October 1, 2024. These regulations establish the stringent multi-barrier treatment, monitoring, operator certification, source-control, and real-time process-control requirements necessary for recycling wastewater directly into a public drinking-water system or upstream of one. For the City of Corona, the new DPR framework presents a potential long-term opportunity to diversify and enhance water supply reliability by enabling highly purified recycled water to be counted as a legitimate potable source. At the same time, the regulatory, capital, and operational-oversight commitments are significant; moving toward DPR would require updates to the City’s supply planning, facilities strategy, and stakeholder communication to ensure regulatory compliance, public acceptance, and cost-effectiveness.

These DPR regulations govern the direct introduction of highly treated recycled water:
• Either directly into a potable water distribution system, or • Upstream of a drinking water treatment plant (raw water augmentation) DPR requires multiple, independent treatment barriers to achieve the necessary pathogen log-reduction values (LRVs) and contaminant removal. These include, depending on project type:
• Microfiltration or ultrafiltration
• Reverse osmosis (RO)
• Ultraviolet advanced oxidation processes (UV-AOP)
• Advanced disinfection
• Real-time monitoring and fail-safe shutdown systems
• Continuous integrity verification for pressure-driven membranes Continuous monitoring for pathogens, regulated contaminants, and indicator chemicals is required to demonstrate treatment performance. DPR facilities must also prepare:
• Operations plans
• Source control programs
• Consumer Confidence Reports

City of Corona Section 5 – Service Criteria
Potable Water Master Plan
5-21
• Emergency and response plans for treatment failures
These requirements ensure that DPR water meets or exceeds all primary drinking water standards at all times. DPR diversifies the water supply and enhances long-term independence from imported sources.

5.5.3. Indirect Use
California’s Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) regulations fall under the Title 22 Water Recycling Criteria and involve introducing treated recycled water into an environmental buffer before it enters the potable supply. Environmental buffers can include:
• Groundwater replenishment (GWR)
• Surface water augmentation (reservoirs, lakes)
IPR relies on the environmental buffer to provide retention time, dilution, and additional environmental barriers, which distinguish it from DPR and add an additional layer of protection. As with DPR, IPR must follow strict Title 22 treatment requirements, which typically include:
• Reverse osmosis
• UV-AOP
• Multi-stage disinfection
• Continuous online monitoring

5.5.3.1. Use of Reclaimed Water in the City of Corona
The City currently uses recycled water for non-potable uses. A portion of recycled water is conveyed to the Cota percolation ponds, where it can percolate to recharge the Temescal Subbasin.

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-1
SECTION 6 - HYDRAULIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND EXISTING

SYSTEM ANALYSIS

6.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Section 6 discusses the development, calibration, and application of the City of Corona’s hydraulic model used to evaluate the City’s existing potable water system. The hydraulic model provides a representation of the City’s pipelines, storage facilities, pump stations, valves, and supply sources, allowing for a detailed assessment of how the system operates under a range of conditions. The calibrated hydraulic model serves as a key planning tool for identifying hydraulic deficiencies within the existing potable water system- based on the pressure, velocity, and fire flow limitations using service criteria documented in Section 5. Projects identified based on hydraulic deficiencies within the existing system (Section 6) and the future system (Section 7) are incorporated into Master Plan Improvements in Section 9.

6.2. HYDRAULIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT

6.2.1. Hydraulic Model Formulation Steps
A detailed hydraulic model is a valuable tool used to analyze the complex operation of the City’s water system. The general steps of hydraulic model formulation are:

1. Inputting the system’s physical data in GIS format.

2. Obtaining meter data to set boundary conditions in the model.

3. Translating the physical data into a network of nodes and links.

4. Inputting accurate water demands.

5. Calibrating the model to simulate actual field conditions and system performance.

6. Performing model runs based on current and future system conditions to analyze performance.

For the City, a new hydraulic model was developed using Innovyze InfoWater modeling software.

6.2.2. Physical Data Inputs
The physical data required for the hydraulic model includes a geographic network of pipes, nodes, tanks, pump stations, valves, and supply sources that would represent the City’s potable water system. This network defines the connectivity of system components used to hydraulically link the model. • Junctions: Locations where pipe size changes, pipe intersections, or critical hydraulic information (low/high points and demand) occur.
• Pipes: Transmission and distribution system piping with information including the pipe diameter, length, material, and associated roughness coefficient. The roughness coefficient function, known as the Hazen-Williams “C” factor (when the Hazen-Williams head loss formula is used), estimates friction losses in the system. The “C” factor is assigned based on the diameter, material, and, when

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-2
known, pipe age. However, “C” factors are subjective and based on industry best practices and operations input.
• Storage Tanks: Distribution system storage reservoirs with information representing base elevation, minimum and maximum water levels, initial water level, and type of storage. • Pumps: Pumps are represented as nodes with information on pumping parameters (flow and head), diameter, and elevation.
• Reservoirs: Reservoirs are used to represent where flow enters the system, such as wells or wholesale connections. Input parameters include a flow rate (steady or variable curve), elevation.

These locations usually include at least one control valve. • Valves: Specialty system valves, such as pressure-reducing/sustaining, flow-control, and altitude valves are included with diameter and type. Some valves require set points (pressure or tank level) and/or curves. Common system valves, such as gate valves, are not typically included in the model.

6.2.3. Initial Boundary Conditions
Initial hydraulic boundary conditions must be entered into the model database. The initial water level for tanks and the initial open/closed setting for control valves and pumps are of particular importance. City water supply sources, such as pumps from groundwater wells, can be modeled as varied or constant supplies into the water system. Accurate representation of boundary conditions is critical to the successful calibration of the model.

6.2.4. Water Demand Data
Determining accurate water demands is crucial to developing an accurate hydraulic model. Metered demands, water supplies, pumped flows, and changes in tank volumes are reviewed over a given period to determine daily demand patterns. Annual consumption by metered account provides a spatial distribution of demand and average system usage. Typically, nodes along transmission mains and those near critical facilities (tanks, wells, pumps, valves) are excluded from demand allocation.

6.2.5. System Operations Integration
Node elevations were updated using current topographic layers in GIS. As-built information was used to update the model to match existing conditions where necessary. Storage tanks were annotated with ground elevation, diameter, and height. Operational settings in the model were verified during workshops with City Operations staff and through a detailed review of SCADA operational data. These settings were updated in the hydraulic model. The locations of normally closed valves were also confirmed and identified in the model using a combination of operator input and atlas maps review.

The current operational status and functionality for the City‘s pressure-reducing stations (PRS) were obtained from staff and updated in the hydraulic model. Settings provided by City staff represent typical conditions and may vary depending on the season,system demands, and storage conditions. For example,

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-3
operations staff may change the settings to allow more water into a particular part of the system to fill a tank or less water to turn over the tank.

6.3. HYDRAULIC MODEL HISTORY
At the time this Potable Water Master Plan commenced, a fully updated hydraulic model for the potable water system was not yet in place. City staff initiated the development of a new hydraulic model, specifically gathering the physical data inputs to the model from the City’s GIS database. The City provided a preliminary GIS database to the MBI team to finalize, calibrate, and apply for system analysis.

6.4. HYDRAULIC MODEL CALIBRATION
Achieving a high level of model calibration is necessary to ensure that simulated system behavior aligns with real‑world operating conditions. A properly calibrated model provides the confidence needed to make planning decisions and provides a planning tool to guide operational decisions.

6.4.1. Calibration Approach
“Macro”-level calibration procedures use continuous monitoring to obtain data points to simulate system operations over an extended period. Actual tank levels, field pressures, and flow over time can be obtained using SCADA records or by placing monitoring equipment in the system. For this model, SCADA data for a one-month period was provided for model calibration.

The hydraulic model was calibrated for an extended period simulation (EPS). EPS calibration was performed to ensure the model accurately reflected how the overall system operated over time regarding transmission mains, pumps, tanks, and treatment plant operations under normal operating conditions.

Precise duplication of the data recorded at all locations within the water distribution system during extended period calibration is unrealistic due to many factors influencing the results. Model calibration aims to minimize the discrepancies between the SCADA and the model simulations and create a “best fit” at as many locations as possible. Some discrepancies between the SCADA and model simulations are expected; however, limits to allowable discrepancies must be made to ensure the calibrated model accurately represents the existing water distribution system. Based upon the size and number of facilities in the developed model, the desired accuracies of the extended period calibration for the hydraulic model are:

1. A minimum simulation duration of 24 hours.

2. Tank levels within 2 feet between field data and model simulations at least 80% of the time.

3. Tank levels within 5 feet between field data and model simulations for the entire time.

Extended period simulations were performed on the City’s water system using the diurnal demand curves presented in Figure 6.1. The SCADA points used to generate these curves generally yielded trending patterns in the model comparable to the field data collected. Tank and pump station trending graphs resulting from the extended period calibration are included in Appendix I.

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-4
Figure 6.1 – Time of Day Demand Curve

6.4.2. Evaluating Calibration
Hydraulic model calibration is an iterative process of refining data and evaluating whether the hydraulic model captures the key operational characteristics of the potable water system. Graphical representations of Pressure Zone 1380 tank levels and pump station operations are included in Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3, respectively, to demonstrate examples of the calibration process. Similar graphical representations were reviewed for various locations within other pressure zones.

It is important to note that some localized differences between modeled and field data points are expected. In complex potable water systems where looping and connectivity allows for numerous flow pathways, achieving an exact one‑to‑one alignment with every field data point is unlikely. However, the graphical representations offer valuable insight into how well the hydraulic model is calibrated to the existing system conditions. Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3 demonstrate how closely the model tracks actual field‑observed levels and operational patterns.

Based on the information presented in Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3 and similar graphical representations in other zones (which are contained in Appendix I), the calibrated model successfully reproduces the behaviors of the system and closely reflects the SCADA‑recorded conditions over the calibration period.

The model captures the major system trends and indicating a high degree of calibration.

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-5
Figure 6.2 – Calibration Results for the 1380 Zone Tanks For the City’s complex system, storage tanks are not controlled solely by tank level, but rather by system performance on a daily or even hourly basis. Therefore, setting model controls to a consistent level in this case was not practical. As shown in Figure 6.2, the two tanks in the 1380 Zone fill and drain at different levels and times throughout the 48-hour period. However, the model is able to mimic field conditions considerably well, achieving a reasonably-high level of calibration accuracy.

Similarly, limitations within the hydraulic model software cannot accurately simulate soft starts, stops, and delays for pumps. This is depicted in Figure 6.3 for the Sierra Bella PS. 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
0 12 24 36 48
Level, ft
Time of Day
1380 Zone
SCADA - Eagle Glen MODEL - Eagle Glen
SCADA - Gilbert MODEL - Gilbert

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-6
Figure 6.3 – Calibration Results for the 1380 Zone Pump Stations

6.4.3. Hydraulic Model Calibration Results Summary
Based on the information presented in Section 6.4.2. , the calibrated model reproduces the key operational behaviors of the system and closely aligns with the actual field conditions recorded by SCADA over the calibration period. The model accurately reflects overall system trends including tank filling and drawdown patterns, pump station operation sequences, and system pressure responses. It is important to note that some localized differences between modeled and observed data are expected due to operational variability, field measurement limitations, and the precision of the demand curves.

The difference between field measured storage tank levels and hydraulically modeled tank levels is a common parameter used to assess the accuracy of calibration. A guideline for assessing hydraulic model calibration is less than two (2) foot difference between field measured and hydraulically modeled tank levels 80 percent of the time, and less than five (5) foot difference 100% of the time. However, further refinement of the model must be balanced with the practical limitations of available data, staff effort, and project resources, recognizing that beyond a certain point, additional calibration effort yields diminishing improvements in accuracy relative to the cost and effort required.

Table 6.1 summarizes that the hydraulic model is close to these guidelines throughout the entire potable water system. The primary locations where the City’s hydraulic model sees larger differences between field measured tank levels and hydraulically modeled tanks levels are near the Garretson and Mangular Sites and blending facilities due to the complexity of these sites, which is rather common for such models. 0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 12 24 36 48
Flow, gpm
Time of Day
1380 Zone
SCADA - Lester 5PS MODEL - Lester 5 PS
SCADA - Sierra Bella PS MODEL - Sierra Bella PS

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-7
The iterative nature of these models reached a point where further refinement of the hydraulic model is not beneficial to achieve minimal calibration increases.

Table 6.1: Model Calibration Accuracy
Parameter
Allowable
Deviation
Guideline Level Achieved
Tank level Differential between
field and model
2 feet 80% 65%
Tank Level Differential
between field and model
5 feet 100% 95%

6.5. EXISTING WATER DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
The calibrated hydraulic model was used to analyze the existing potable water system to determine areas of hydraulic deficiency based on City planning criteria as identified in Section 5. System operating conditions were obtained for the maximum day demand (MDD) and used in the calibrated hydraulic model. Potable water system pressure, pipeline capacity, and fire flow capabilities were evaluated based on planning criteria and are presented in the following sections.

6.5.1. System Pressures Analysis
The calibrated hydraulic model was reviewed to identify areas of low pressure. Low pressures tend to occur during high demand periods, tank low water levels, and/or fire flow events. In addition, low pressures tend to occur near tanks and pump station and valve facility suctions and are typically ignored if no services (demand) are in the area. Demand nodes that occur at high points may experience low pressures, but these are not typically addressed by facility improvements.

The City’s water system as modeled exhibits excellent pressure contours throughout. As expected, there are small areas around tanks and suction sides of pump stations and valving facilities, as well as at high points, where pressures are less than 40 psi. However, none of these areas are cause for improvements.

6.5.2. Pipeline Capacity Analysis
Velocity is a key component of pipeline capacity because it reflects how efficiently a pipe can convey flow under high‑demand conditions; as flow approaches the pipe’s hydraulic capacity, velocities increase, making velocity exceedances a practical indicator that the pipe is operating beyond its intended capacity.

Pipelines were evaluated during peak hour demand and maximum day demand plus fire conditions to identify velocities that exceed the 5 feet per second (fps) and 12 fps criteria explained in Section 5.

6.5.2.1. Peak Hour Conditions
The peak hour condition revealed that the system generally exhibits velocities less than the maximum 5 fps criteria, with exception of Project 1060-1. Similar to the low-pressure criteria, there are areas where high velocities are expected to occur, such as pump station and valving station suction and discharge piping, which is typically sized smaller than the transmission main feeding the station. These areas are typically not of concern.

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-8
• Project 1060-1: During peak hour demands, the 14-inch main in Border Avenue between Carolwood Drive to the north and Ontario Avenue to the south exceeds the maximum 5 fps. The total length of this section is 1,000 LF and extends north from the existing 24-inch main in Border Avenue. The maximum velocity during the calibration MDD event was less than 8.5 fps. This pipeline was constructed in 1965 and is considered a low-priority project at this time. This segment will be further analyzed as part of the ultimate system analysis in Section 7.

Figure 6.4 – Project 1060-1

6.5.2.2. Maximum Day Demand Plus Fire Flow Conditions
The MDD plus fire flow condition revealed known conditions:
• minimum pipe diameter of 8-inches for a single-family fire. • areas of dead-end residential services up to a hydrant that are 4- and 6-inches in diameter, necessitating upsizing of these mains.

However, these are generally considered lower-priority projects and should be scheduled in conjunction with condition replacement, maintenance, and/or paving schedules as the City deems necessary. These areas are discussed in more detail in Section 9. The specific projects identified through the pipeline capacity analysis based on MDD plus fire flow conditions are presented hereafter:

Border BPS

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-9
• Project 725-1 (725FireFlow1): Industrial fire flow results in a velocity in the 10-inch main in excess of 12 fps. Maximum fire flow with existing piping is 2,925 gpm. Upsize the existing 10-inch main along the easterly border of the project OR complete 10-inch loop to the west to connect to the existing 16-inch main in Green River Dr.

Figure 6.5 – Project 725-1
• Project 1220-2 (1220FireFlow1): Industrial fire flow results in a velocity in the 6-inch main in excess of 12 fps. Maximum fire flow with existing piping is 2,300 gpm. Upsize the existing 6-inch to 8-inch minimum; however, the City Department of Water and Power (DWP) Design Policy (Nov 2012) requires a 12-inch minimum in industrial areas and in areas with fire flow greater than 1,500 gpm.

Figure 6.6 – Project 1220-2
10”
10”
Ex 10” main to be
upsized to 12”
Alt. 10” loop
connection
Dominguez
Ranch PRS
Green River DrDominguez Ranch Rd
Ex 6” main to be
upsized to 8”

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-10
• Project 1220-3 (1220FireFlow2): Residential fire flow results in a velocity in the 6-inch main in excess of 12 fps. Maximum fire flow with existing piping is 1,050 gpm. Upsize the existing 6-inch to 8-inch minimum to meet residential fire flow requirements.

Figure 6.7 – Project 1220-3

6.5.3. Pumping System Analysis
The City’s existing potable water distribution system includes multiple booster pump stations operating within interconnected pressure zones supported by storage facilities and pressure- and flow-regulating valves. System operations allow water to move through different pathways depending on system demands, storage levels, and control settings.

This analysis evaluates existing booster pump capacity by comparing pumping capacity to the MDD of the pressure zone(s) served by the pump station. Because pressure zones are interconnected and multiple supply and transfer pathways exist, flow distribution among individual pump stations varies with system operating conditions. Accordingly, this analysis provides a systemwide overview. Table 6.2 indicates that, in general, booster station capacity appears sufficient when compared with existing maximum day demands, recognizing that pump operation varies based on operational configuration and real-time system conditions.
8”
6”
6”
2 2””
2”
2”
2” Grandview St Consul Ave
Diplomat Ave
2”
Ex 6” main to be
upsized to 8”

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-11
Table 6.2: Existing Pumping System Analysis
Pump Station
Name
From
Zone
To
Zone
Pump
No.

Capacity
(gpm)
Firm Zone
Capacity
(gpm)
Zones
Included
ADD
(gpm)
MDD
(gpm)
Surplus /
(Deficit)
Cresta Verde 905 1020
1 1,350
2,700
1020,
1130,
1235
2 1,350 964 1,734 966
3 1,350
Green River 725 1060 1 850
19,850
1045,
1060,
1220,
1250,
1310,
1315,
1380,
1480,
1640
9,578 17,240 2,610
Garretson Zone 3 905 1060
1 2,500
2 2,500
3 2,500
4 2,500
5 2,500
6 2,500
Serfas Club 905 1060
1 1,500
2 -
Mangular 905 1060
1 2,500
2 2,500
Mangular 905 1220
1 1,250
2 1,250
3 1,250
Garretson Zone 4 905 1220
1 1,250
2 1,250
3 1,250
Border 1060 1220
1 400
2 1,200
3 900
Chase 1060 1220
1 800
2 800
3 900
4 1,500
Lester Zone 4 1060 1220
1 1,600
2 1,600
3 1,600
4 1,600
Lester Zone 5 1060 1380
1 1,365
8,560
1250,
1380,
1480,
1640
2,698 4,856 3,704
2 1,365
3 1,365
4 1,365
Eagle Glen Zone 5 1220 1380
1 800
2 800
Sierra Bella 1060 1380
1 1,500
2 1,500

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-12
Table 6.2: Existing Pumping System Analysis
Pump Station
Name
From
Zone
To
Zone
Pump
No.

Capacity
(gpm)
Firm Zone
Capacity
(gpm)
Zones
Included
ADD
(gpm)
MDD
(gpm)
Surplus /
(Deficit)
Eagle Glen Zone 6 1380 1640
1 230
2,946
1640,
1480
746 1,342 1,604
2 236
3 230
Payette 1380 1640
1 750
2 750
3 750
4 750
[1] Largest pump per zone is assumed to be out of service.

6.6. SUMMARY OF EXISTING SYSTEM HYDRAULIC DEFICIENCIES
Due to the highly gridded, looped, and efficient potable water system, only five (5) projects were identified as hydraulically deficient within the existing system. These projects are summarized in Table 6.3. • Hydraulically Deficient Pipes- Hydraulic deficiencies were identified by the hydraulic model based on high velocities, low pressures, inadequate fire flows, and high velocities during fire flows. These deficiencies are identified and summarized into specific projects in Sections 6 and 7. Cutsheets for the projects are included in Appendix K.

Additional system deficiencies were identified and included in Appendix L. • Size-Deficient Pipes- The City Department of Water and Power (DWP) Design Policy (Nov 2012), Section B.6 requires minimum pipeline sizes, as discussed in Section 5.2.6.4. Not all pipelines under 8-inches are considered size-deficient (see Dead-End Pipelines discussion). Appendix L includes figures and tables identifying size-deficient pipes which were determined based on City design standards independent of hydraulic modeling results. The identified pipelines include dead-end mains less than 8-inches that serve hydrants and are therefore expected to meet the minimum size criteria. Section 9 discusses recommendations for upsizing size-deficient pipes in accordance with City design standards.
• Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life- Pipeline material affects typical service life of pipelines.

Appendix L includes figures and tables identifying pipelines that have exceeded, or will exceed, their typical service life by the end of the 2040 planning period. The identification of pipelines beyond their typical service life is independent of hydraulic modeling results.

Reference-Only (Not Recommended for Improvement): Dead-End Pipelines (Non-deficient) Dead-end pipelines less than 8-inches in diameter are not always characterized as size-deficient.

Specifically, Appendix M summarizes pipelines less than 8 -inches in diameter that extend past the last fire hydrant on a main and primarily serve residential connections. These dead-end mains function as service extensions and are not recommended for upsizing. These dead-end pipelines (non-deficient) are provided for reference only.

City of Corona Section 6 – Hydraulic Model Development and Existing System Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
6-13
Table 6.3 – Existing System Hydraulically Deficient Pipes Zone Project
No.
(Existing
Diameter)
Proposed
Diameter
Location Length
(LF) Hydraulic Deficiency Deficiency Priority
Pavement
Rehab
Zone
Comments
725 725-1
(10")
12"
Green River Road at
Dominguez Ranch 290 Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing System Low 9 Industrial fire flow of 3,500
gpm required. Max Flow
available existing is 2,925 gpm.
905 905-4
(12")
16"
Small segment in
Railroad St east of Alcoa
Cir
21 Fire Velocity > 12 fps
Existing
System Low 4
Small reduced diameter
section of pipe
(10")
16"
Alcoa Cir north of
Railroad up to Alcoa PRS 1,025 Fire Velocity > 12 fps
Major feed to Alcoa PRS, but
flow could be offset by other
stations to limit velocity.
1060 1060-1
(14")
16"
Border Ave between
Ontario Ave and
Carolwood Dr
994 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 5.6 fps)
Existing
System Low 5
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
1220
1220-2
(6")
12"
[1]
400' South of Magnolia
Ave and S Main Street 380 Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing System Med 10 Industrial fire flow of 3,500
gpm required. Max Flow
available existing is 2,300 gpm.
1220-3
(6")
8"
Grandview St between
Consul Ave and
Diplomat Ave
380 Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing
System Med 2
Single family residential fire
flow 1,500 gpm required. Max
Flow available existing is 1,050
gpm.
[1] Based on the existing system hydraulic model, Project 1220-2 proposed diameter would be 8-inch to achieve fire flow criteria of <12 fps velocity. However, City Department of Water and Power (DWP) Design Policy (Nov. 2012) B.6 requires 12-inch diameter for industrial projects and where fire flows are greater than 1,500 gpm.

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-1
SECTION 7 - FUTURE SYSTEM MODELING AND ANALYSIS

7.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Section 7 evaluates the performance of the City of Corona’s potable water system under projected 2040 buildout conditions using the hydraulic modeling framework (Section 6) and service criteria documented in Section 5. The future system analyses were conducted by adding the projected water demands at their anticipated model nodes and zones. Initially, the model does not include system improvements identified as part of the existing system deficiencies in order to determine if the same project would be identified as hydraulically deficient. Using the hydraulic model under various operating conditions, this section assesses the adequacy of future water supply, storage, pumping capacity, and conveyance under maximum day and peak hour operating conditions, providing a system-wide understanding of how the distribution network will perform as demands increase. Projectsidentified based on hydraulic deficiencies within the existing system (Section 6) and the future system (Section 7) are incorporated into Master Plan Improvements in Section 9.

7.2. FUTURE HYDRAULIC MODEL
The hydraulic model for the future system was developed using the existing system calibrated hydraulic model and incorporating the existing system hydraulically deficient projects identified in Section 6 as a baseline. Hydraulically deficient projects identified in Section 6 were also evaluated under future demand conditions to confirm that the proposed pipe diameter provides sufficient capacity for both existing and future project needs.

The future model does not include upsizing all legacy undersized pipelines to meet minimum diameter City standards as outlined in the City’s DWP Design Policy (2012). Even though Section 9 identifies specific legacy undersized pipelines as size-deficient, complete replacement of size-deficient pipelines represents a significant capital expenditure that may not be completed within the planning period. Therefore, retaining existing pipe diameters within the future hydraulic model results in a more conservative representation of the future system performance.

Water demands were assigned as follows:
• Within existing system and SOI. Water demands were assigned based on future demands as discussed in Section 4.
• Future development, including residential subdivisions, within the City and in the SOI that have conceptual plans. Projected water demands for future development were incorporated into the hydraulic model by assigning flows at the anticipated points of connection to the existing transmission system. These demands were applied directly to the model at representative nodes within the appropriate pressure zones. New transmission mains to specifically serve future development areas were not sized as part of this model. This approach ensures that the existing system’s ability to support new development is appropriately assessed without defining or designing the off‑site transmission facilities required to serve those areas.

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-2
• On the northeastern side of the City where conceptual plans have not been developed at the time of this Master Plan. Water demands were assigned based on future land use designation as described in Section 4.

7.3. FUTURE POTABLE WATER SYSTEM ANALYSIS

7.3.1. Water Supply Analysis
As previously described in Section 3, the City’s water supply is provided through a combination of groundwater production from local wells and imported water supplies. The future system analysis evaluates water supply under projected 2040 buildout demand. Both groundwater and imported water supplies are included in the evaluation to provide an understanding of how the overall water system supports future demand conditions based on the currently available supply sources.

Demands for 2024 and the 2040 maximum day demand (MDD) projections were compared to the currently available supply sources using both design capacity and actual capacity. The maximum day demand values are calculated using the average day demand values in Table 4.10 and using the peaking factor calculated in Section 4.7. The actual capacity is the capacity of the groundwater wells based on SCE pump test information. Based on the currently available supply, the City has sufficient supply sources to meet maximum day demands in buildout conditions. These supply sources do not include supply from the Arlington Desalter, which is used to offset peak summer demand conditions. The results are shown in Table 7.1. The available supply sources, including design and actual capacity values, are shown in Table

7.2. Based on this analysis, the City has adequate capacity to meet the City’s projected demands through 2040 with the current supply sources.

Table 7.1 – 2040 Water Supply Analysis
Demand Scenario Demand (MGD) Available Supply (MGD)
2024 Max Day Demand 43.2 65.7
2040 Max Day Demand 58.4 65.7

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-3
Table 7.2 – 2040 Water Supply Analysis
Water Source Design Capacity
(GPM)
Actual
Capacity
(GPM)
Notes
Groundwater
BedfordColdwater
Basin
Well No. 3 1060 564 Standby
Well No. 20 2,500 0 Inactive
Well No. 21 2,250 1,138 Standby
Subtotal (GPM) 5,810 1,702
Subtotal (MGD) 8.4 2.5
Temescal
Basin
Well No. 7A 1,000 741 Active
Well No. 8A 1,650 656 Active
Well No. 9A 1,500 706 Active
Well No. 11A 700 524 Active
Well No. 12A 1,100 517 Active
Well No. 13 1,000 0 Inactive
Well No. 14 1,000 726 Active
Well No.15 1,100 524 Active
Well No. 17A 1,400 1,127 Active
Well No. 19 2,100 477 Active
Well No. 22 3,500 1,421 Active
Well No. 25 3,500 1,210 Active
Well No. 26 1,000 273 Active
Well No. 27 500 500 Active
Well No. 28 2,000 670 Active
Well No. 29 640 640 Active
Well No. 31 907 907 Active
Well No. 33 665 665 Active
Subtotal (GPM) 25,262 12,284
Subtotal (MGD) 36.4 17.7
Imported
Water
MWD
Colorado
River
WR – 19 (MGD) 30.0 30.0 Lester TWP
WR – 33 (MGD) 9.1 9.1 Sierra Del Oro WTP
Subtotal (MGD) 39.1 39.1
MWD State
Water Project WR - 24 (MGD) 6.5 6.5 Mill's Connection
WMWD Arlington Desalter
(MGD) 0 0 Peaking Supply
Other
Riverside
Connection 0 0
Emergency
Connection
TVWD
Connection 0 0
Emergency
Connection
Total (MGD) 90.3 65.7

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-4

7.3.2. Storage Analysis
Storage capacity is evaluated against projected 2040 buildout demands using the storage calculation methodology and criteria described in Section 5.2.2. The analysis considers operational, fire flow, and terminal storage requirements by zone and compares these requirements to available storage volumes under future conditions. The results of the future storage analysis are summarized in Table 7.3.

Table 7.3 – 2040 Storage Analysis
Pressure
Zones
2040
Tank Storage
(MG)
Terminal
Storage
(MG)
Operational
Storage (MG)
Fire Flow
(MG)
Storage
Needed (MG)
Storage
Surplus /
(Deficit)
(MG)
725 1.5 0.15 0.43 0.84 1.42 0.08
905 10.5 1.05 9.21 0.84 11.10 (0.6)
1020 [1] 6 0.6 1.43 0.72 2.75 3.25
1060 8 0.8 7.42 0.84 9.06 (1.06)
1220 9.7 0.97 6.11 0.72 7.80 1.90
1380 [2] 9.2 0.92 2.96 0.72 4.60 4.60
1640 2.5 0.25 1.34 0.72 2.31 0.19
New 1560 [3] 0.6 0.06 0.25 0.3 0.61 (0.01)
Total 48.0 4.8 29.2 5.7 39.7 8.3
[1] Border tank is not included in storage volume calculations because of the mismatch between the tank HGL and the Zone HGL.
[2] Future 1380 Tank is included in the storage volume calculations. The proposed storage volume for the future 1380 Tank is 2.5 MG.
[3] Future 1560 Tank to serve a new zone 1560 is included in the storage volume calculations.

Individual tank sizing is evaluated based on projected water demands for 2040 buildout. However, the timing of storage improvements should coincide with future improvements and development-driven demand increases that will increase storage requirements of the system.

The storage deficit is anticipated to be mitigated by facilities proposed by the developer, as identified in their specific planning studies, once the development occurs.

7.3.3. Pumping System Analysis
The City’s potable water distribution system consists of ten primary pressure zones (22 total pressure zones), each supplied by one or more direct sources, including groundwater wells, treatment facilities, and imported supplies. In addition, booster pump stations and pressure-reducing valves provide interconnections that allow water to move between zones through multiple potential flow paths depending on system operating conditions.

Due to this interconnected configuration, booster pump stations were not evaluated by direct comparison of pumping capacity to the maximum day demand of an individual pressure zone. Under normal and peak demand conditions, water may enter or leave a zone through a combination of direct supply, pumped transfers, and pressure-regulated connections. As a result, a simple capacity-to-demand comparison does not reliably indicate whether a booster station provides adequate support to the system.

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-5
Instead, booster pump stations were evaluated using the hydraulic model, which reflects actual system topology, operational controls, and available supply pathways. A booster pump station was considered capacity-deficient only when hydraulic modeling indicated operational limitations, including one or more of the following conditions under maximum demand scenarios:
• Storage tanks supplied by the booster station were unable to refill or maintain minimum operating levels.
• Booster pumps were required to operate continuously with no recovery period. • System pressures could not be maintained within acceptable ranges. • Other abnormal operational indicators were observed in the model that would limit system reliability or operational flexibility.

This model-based approach aligns with standard water system planning practice by evaluating booster pump performance based on observed system behavior, rather than isolated capacity metrics. Booster stations did not exhibit operational deficiencies in the hydraulic model and were considered to provide adequate support under projected buildout demand conditions.

The only instances where a traditional booster station analysis works are for the 1380 and 1640 zones and the subzones they serve as these areas are not directly connected to a supply source. Table 7.4 below demonstrates the booster station analysis and shows that the booster stations have ample capacity to lift water into the higher zones.

Table 7.4 – 2040 Booster Pump Station Analysis
Pump Station
Name
From
Zone
To
Zone
Pump
No.

Capacity
(gpm)
Firm
Zone
Capacity
(gpm)
Zones
Included
ADD
(gpm)
MDD
(gpm)
Surplus /
(Deficit)
Lester Zone 5 1060 1380
1 1,365
8,560
1250,
1380,
1480,
1640
3,411 6,139 2,421
2 1,365
3 1,365
4 1,365
Eagle Glen Zone 5 1220 1380
1 800
2 800
Sierra Bella 1060 1380
1 1,500
2 1,500
Eagle Glen Zone 6 1380 1640
1 230
2,946
1640,
1480
997 1,795 1,151
2 236
3 230
Payette 1380 1640
1 750
2 750
3 750
4 750

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-6

7.3.4. Pipeline Capacity Analysis
Velocity is a key component of pipeline capacity because it reflects how efficiently a pipe can convey flow under high‑demand conditions; as flow approaches the pipe’s hydraulic capacity, velocities increase, making velocity exceedances a practical indicator that the pipe is operating beyond its intended capacity.

Pipelines were evaluated during peak hour demand and maximum day demand plus fire conditions to identify velocitiesthat exceed the 5 feet per second (fps) and 12 fps criteria explained in Section 5. Specific velocities for each project are summarized in Table 7.5. • Project 905-1: Project 905-1 is identified as the existing 12-inch main in Smith Avenue and 10th Street between Border Avenue and the 24-inch transmission main connection to the east. This segment exhibits velocities higher than the 5 fps criteria and is a low-priority project.

Figure 7.1 – Project 905-1

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-7
• Projects 905-2 and 905-3: Project 905-2 is identified as the existing 12-inch main in Radio Road north of Quarry Road. This segment exhibits velocities slightly higher than the 5 fps criteria during peak hour demands ultimately and is as a low-priority project. Similarly, the segment of 12-inch main E 6th Ave (905-3) between Radio Road and Compton Avenue is also slightly higher than 5 fps and is a low-priority project.

Figure 7.2 – Projects 905-2 and 905-3

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-8
• Projects 905-4 and 780-1: Project 905-4 is identified as the existing 10-inch and 12-inch mains in Railroad Street and Alcoa Circle up to the Alcoa PRS. Project 780-1 includes the existing 10-inch and 12-inch mains from the Alcoa PRS north to Rincon Street. These segments exhibit velocities higher than the 5 fps criteria during peak hour demands ultimately but also exceed the 12 fps MDD plus fire flow velocity criteria. These projects are currently identified as low priority as service to the lower zone could be fed through combination of other PRS facilities until such time that these pipelines could be improved.

Figure 7.3 – Projects 905-4 and 708-1

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-9
• Projects 1060-1 and 1060-2: Project 1060-1 was identified in Section 6 as an existing system deficiency. The 14-inch main in Border Avenue between Ontario Avenue and Carolwood Drive exhibits velocities slightly higher than the 5 fps criteria, making it a low-priority project. Ultimate demand conditions also indicate that a section of piping (1060-2) in Kroonen Drive between Newton Drive and Peeler Street is also marginally over 5 fps and is also a low-priority project.

Figure 7.4 – Projects 1060-1 and 1060-2

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-10
• Project 1380-1: This is medium priority project located in Upper Drive from Amber Glen Dr to Peregrin Dr. Ultimate velocities in this main are 6.8 fps under ultimate-demand, which exceeds the 5 fps criteria.

Figure 7.5 – Project 1380-1
• Project 1220-1: This is a low priority project due to the freeway-crossing aspect, located between Bedford Canyon Road and Tuscany Drive. Velocities in the existing 12-inch segment under the freeway are approximately 8.6 fps under ultimate demands, which exceeds the 5 fps criteria.

Figure 7.6 – Project 1220-1

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-11

7.4. SUMMARY OF FUTURE (BUILDOUT) HYDRAULIC DEFICIENCIES Due to the highly gridded, looped, and efficient potable water system, only eight (8) projects were identified as hydraulically deficient for the future system at buildout (2040).

For the majority of projects identified in Section 7, the velocity under peak hour demands is marginally above the 5 fps threshold as shown below in Table 7.5. A low priority was placed on these projects. If the City moves forward with these projects, the projects should coincide with street paving activities, where possible.

City of Corona Section 7 – Future System Modeling and Analysis Potable Water Master Plan
7-12
Table 7.5 – Future System Hydraulically Deficient Pipes (Buildout Conditions: 2040) Zone Project
No.
(Existing
Diameter)
Proposed
Diameter
Location
Length
(LF)
Hydraulic Deficiency Deficiency Priority
Pavement
Rehab
Zone
Comments
905
905-1
(12")
16"
Smith Ave between
Sherman Ave and Border
Ave connection to
existing 24" main
622 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 5.5 - 6.9 fps)
Future
System Low 5
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
905-2
(12")
14"
Radio Rd south of
Quarry St 233 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 5.1 fps)
Future
System Low 7
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
905-3
(12")
14"
6th Ave between Radio
Rd and Compton Ave 1,052 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 6.1 fps) Future
System Low 7
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
905-4
(12")
16"
Small segment in
Railroad St east of Alcoa
Cir
21 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 5.8 fps)
Future
System
Low
4 Small reduced diameter
section of pipe
Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing
System
(10")
16"
Alcoa Cir north of
Railroad up to Alcoa PRS 1,025
Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 12.0 fps)
Future
System
Low
Major feed to Alcoa PRS, but
flow could be offset by other
Fire Velocity > 12 fps stations to limit velocity. Existing System
(Sub
zone)
780
780-1
(10")
16"
Alcoa Cir north of PRS to
Rincon St 1,094 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 12.0 fps)
Future
System Low
4 Major feed from Alcoa PRS, but
flow could be offset by other
stations to limit velocity.
(10")
12"
Segment in Rincon St
west of Alcoa Cir 14 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 6.9 fps) Future
System Low Small reduced diameter
section of pipe
1060 1060-2
(8")
10"
Kroonen Dr between
Newton Ln and Peeler St 380 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 5.3 fps) Future
System Low 5
Distribution main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
1220 1220-1
(12")
16"
I-15 crossing between
Bedford Canyon Road
and Tuscany St
1,644 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 6.1 - 8.6 fps)
Future
System Low 10 This is a major freeway
crossing
1380 1380-1
(16")
20"
Upper Dr from Orange
Crest St to Peregrin Dr 938 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 6.8 fps) Future
System Med 6
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-1
SECTION 8 - WATER QUALITY

8.1. METHODOLOGY
The City of Corona Utilities Department is committed to providing safe, reliable drinking water by maintaining compliance with all applicable water quality standards established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Routine water quality monitoring and assessments are conducted to evaluate clarity, organic and inorganic constituents, and other regulated parameters. The results of these assessments are summarized annually in the City’s Consumer Confidence Report (CCR), which provides transparency and ensures ongoing compliance with state and federal drinking water regulations.

8.2. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
The U.S. EPA and the State of California have established enforceable standards for a wide range of drinking water contaminants. These standards are published under primary and secondary drinking water regulations and codified within the California Code of Regulations. In addition, the City participates in the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR) program administered by the EPA, which identifies and tracks emerging contaminants that do not yet have health-based regulatory limits under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). This proactive monitoring supports early detection and data collection for potential future regulation of emerging contaminants.

8.2.1. Primary Drinking Water Standards
Primary drinking water standards are legally enforceable limits designed to protect public health. The EPA and SWRCB have determined that the consumption of water with contaminates exceeding these standards may result in adverse health effects. Specific contaminants of concern to the City of Corona are located within the Temescal and Bedford–Coldwater subbasins and are monitored in accordance with these standards.

Table 8.1 lists the primary contaminants of concern and compares the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) established by the U.S. EPA and the State of California. These values are also reported annually in the City’s CCR.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-2
Table 8.1 – Primary Drinking Water Contaminants of Concern Contaminant
U.S. EPA California

MCL MCL
Clarity
Turbidity (Unfiltered) TT 5
Microbiological Contaminant
Total Coliform Bacteria 5% 5%
Fecal Coliform and E. Coli [1] 0 0
Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) TT TT
Radioactive Contaminant
Gross Alpha Particle Activity 15 pCi/L 15 pCi/L
Uranium 30 µg/l 20 pCi/L
Inorganic Contaminant
Arsenic 0.010 mg/L 0.010 mg/L
Barium 2 mg/L 1 mg/L
Fluoride 4 mg/L 2 mg/L
Chromium (hexavalent) N/A 10 µg/L
Nitrate (as Nitrogen) 10 mg/L (as N) 45 mg/L (as NO3)
Perchlorate N/A 6 µg/L
Synthetic Organic Contaminants
123-TCP – 123-Trichloropropane N/A 5 ppt
Volatile Organic Contaminants
PCE – Tetrachloroethylene 5 µg/L 5 µg/L
TCE – Trichloroethylene 5 µg/L 5 µg/L
[1] U.S. EPA and California drinking water regulations regulate E.Coli. Fecal coliform has no MCL and appears in the contaminant name for consistency with the Consumer Confidence Report terminology.

Note: Abbreviations used in this table are defined in the list of abbreviations at the end of Section 8.

Tables 8.2 through 8.8 summarize the primary water quality contaminants detected within the City’s potable water system. The data are based on results reported in the City of Corona’s 2025 Consumer Confidence Report for Calendar Year 2024.

These tables categorize the monitored constituents into six key groups: clarity, microbiological contaminants, radioactive contaminants, inorganic contaminants, synthetic organic contaminants, and volatile organic contaminants. Together, they provide a comprehensive overview of water quality parameters used to evaluate compliance with state and federal drinking water standards.

Table 8.2 presents the turbidity levels measured within the City’s treated water supply. Turbidity is an indicator of water clarity and treatment effectiveness, reflecting the concentration of suspended particles that can interfere with disinfection and aesthetic quality. For combined filter effluent water, turbidity must remain at or below 0.3 NTU in at least 95 percent of all monthly measurements. This performance criterion serves as an indicator that the treatment processes are operating correctly, and consistently produce clear, particle-free water.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-3
Table 8.2 – Primary Standards: Clarity
Parameter Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
Water Source
Combined Filter
Effluent Turbidity
% 95 [1]
NA -
% < 0.3 100% Metropolitan Water District Henry J.

NTU TT 0.3 Highest 0.08 Mills Water Treatment Plant
Combined Filter
Effluent Turbidity
% 95 [1]
NA -
% < 0.3 100% City of Corona, Lester & Sierra Del
NTU TT 0.3 Highest 0.05 Oro Water Treatment Facilities
[1] The turbidity level of the filtered water shall be less than or equal to 0.3 NTU in 95% of the measurements taken each month and shall not exceed 1 NTU at any time.

Table 8.3 presents the primary microbiological contaminants detected in the City’s water system. These contaminants are typically microorganisms that occur naturally in the environment or originate from human and animal fecal sources. Their presence serves as an indicator of potential contamination and the effectiveness of the treatment and disinfection processes.

Routine monitoring is conducted throughout the distribution system to verify the absence of total coliform bacteria, E. coli, and other microbiological indicators. Treatment and disinfection processes are designed to remove or inactivate these organisms from the water supply.

Table 8.3 – Primary Standards: Microbiological Contaminants Parameter Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
Regulated in Distribution System
Total Coliform
Bacteria [1]
% 5.0 [3] (0) - - Highest % of positive samples
collected in any one month = 0%
Fecal Coliform and
E. Coli [1]
[4] [4] (0) - - Total number of positive samples
collected in 2024 = 0
Total Coliform
Bacteria [2]
% TT [5]- - - Highest % of positive samples
collected in any one month = 0%
Fecal Coliform and
E. Coli [2]
[6] [6] (0) - - Total number of positive samples
collected in 2024 = 0
Heterotrophic
Plate Count (HPC)
CFU/mL TT NA NA Range Distribution System Wide: ND-969
Average Distribution System Wide: 25
[1] State Total Coliform Rule
[2] Federal Total Coliform Rule
[3] Total coliform MCLs: No more than 5.0% of the monthly samples may be total coliform positive. [4] E. coli MCL: The occurrence of two consecutive total coliform-positive samples, one of which contains E. coli, constitutes an acute MCL violation.
[5] Total coliform TT trigger, Level 1 assessments, and total coliform TT violations: More than 5.0% of total coliformpositive samples in a month trigger Level 1 assessment. Failure to conduct assessments and correct findings within 30 days is a total coliform violation. No triggers, Level 1 assessments, or violations occurred. [6] E. coli MCL and Level 2 TT triggers for assessments: Routine and repeat samples are total coliform-positive, and either sample is E. coli-positive, or the system fails to collect all repeat samples following an E. coli-positive sample or fails to test for E. coli when the repeat sample is total coliform-positive.

Table 8.4 summarizes the radioactive contaminants monitored within the City’s water sources. These constituents generally occur due to the natural erosion of mineral deposits; however, localized mining activities in surrounding areas may also contribute to elevated concentrations. Parameters such as Gross Alpha Particle Activity and Uranium are tracked to confirm compliance with state and federal standards and to safeguard long-term public health.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-4
Table 8.4 – Primary Standards: Radioactive Contaminants Parameter Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater
Gross Alpha
Particle Activity
pCi/L 15 (0) 3 Range ND ND – 3.2 ND – 7.5
Average ND 3.84
Uranium pCi/L 20 0.43 1 Range ND 2.8 – 3.1 ND – 16.8
Average 2.9 4.71
Table 8.5 summarizes the inorganic contaminants detected within the City’s water supply. These constituents may originate from natural geological sources; however, in most cases, elevated concentrations result from surface runoff or discharges associated with industrial and agricultural activities. Groundwater in select areas of the City has exhibited elevated levels of nitrate and perchlorate.

Ongoing monitoring, treatment and blending ensures that these parameters are within the Maximum Contaminant Levels established by state and federal regulations in the treated water system.

Table 8.5 – Primary Standards: Inorganic Contaminants
Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater
Treated
Average
System
Water
Arsenic ug/L 10 0.004 2 Range ND 2 ND – 6.5 ND - 2
Average ND ND
Barium mg/L 1 2 0.1 Range ND 0.13 ND – 0.13 ND – 0.13
Average ND ND
Chromium
(hexavalent)
ug/L 10 0.02 0.1 Range ND ND ND-8.2 ND
Average ND
Fluoride mg/L 2.0 1 0.1 Range 0.6-0.9 0.3-0.4 0.26-2.0 ND - 0.78 Average 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.22
Nitrate (as
Nitrogen)
mg/L 10
(as N)
10 (as N)

0.4 Range 0.6 ND ND - 20 ND – 5.9
Average 9.5 2.3
Perchlorate ug/L 6 1 1 Range ND ND ND – 9.4 ND – 2.9
Average 3.3 ND

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-5
Table 8.6 presents the synthetic organic contaminants, which include manmade compounds used in agricultural and industrial applications. These substances often originate from pesticides and solvents, and migrate into groundwater through runoff, infiltration, or improper disposal. The City conducts routine sampling, treatment, blending and analysis to ensure that synthetic organic contaminants remain below regulatory thresholds, maintaining compliance with applicable drinking water standards.

Table 8.6 – Primary Standards: Synthetic Organic Contaminants & Pesticides/PCBs Parameter Units State
MCL PHG State DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater
Treated
Average
System
Water
123-TCP [1] ug/L 0.005 0.0007 0.005 Range ND ND ND – 0.02 ND Average ND
[1] 123-TCP – 1,2,3-Trichloropropane
Table 8.7 summarizes the volatile organic contaminants (VOCs) detected within the City’s water system.

These compounds are typically associated with household, commercial, and industrial discharges and can enter groundwater through spills, improper disposal, or infiltration from contaminated soils. Routine sampling ensures VOC levels remain below state and federal Maximum Contaminant Levels, confirming that the City’s treated water continues to meet regulatory requirements for safe consumption.

Table 8.7 – Primary Standards: Volatile Organic Contaminants Parameter Units State
MCL PHG State DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater
Treated
Average
System
Water
PCE [1] ug/L 5 0.06 0.5 Range ND ND ND - 1 ND
Average ND
TCE [2] ug/L 5 1.7 0.5 Range ND ND ND – 1.1 ND
Average ND
[1] PCE – Tetrachloroethylene
[2] TCE – Trichloroethylene
Table 8.8 presents the results of the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) monitoring program, based on samples collected from 53 residential taps within the City’s distribution system. The LCR establishes Action Levels (ALs) to minimize the presence of lead and copper leached from household plumbing materials. Action levels are set at 15 parts per billion (ppb) for lead and 1.3 parts per million (ppm) for copper, evaluated using the 90th percentile of collected samples. The City conducts this testing on a three-year cycle, in accordance with regulatory requirements, to verify compliance and protection of public health.

Table 8.8 – Lead and Copper Rule Monitoring
Parameter Units State
MCL
PHG State
DLR
Date
Sampled
90th
Percentile
No. Sites
Sampled
No. Sites
Exceeding
AL
Lead ppb AL=15 0.2 5 2023 5 53 3
Copper ppm AL=1.3 0.3 0.05 2023 0.17 53 0

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-6
Table 8.9 identifies the primary standards parameters and their corresponding sources of occurrence within the environment. The table outlines the principal origins of each contaminant detected or monitored in the City’s water supply, as reported in the CCR. These sources include both natural processes, such as erosion of mineral deposits, and anthropogenic activities, including industrial discharges, agricultural runoff, and plumbing system corrosion. Understanding these sources helps guide the City’s water quality management strategies and supports continued protection of public health and regulatory compliance.

Table 8.9 – Primary Standards: Major Sources in Drinking Water Parameter Major Sources in Drinking Water
Microbiological Contaminants
Total Coliform Bacteria Naturally present in the environment Fecal Coliform and E. Coli Human and animal fecal waste Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) Naturally present in the environment.

Radioactive Contaminants
Gross Alpha Particle Activity Erosion of natural deposits Uranium Erosion of natural deposits
Inorganic Contaminants
Arsenic Erosion of natural deposits; runoff from orchards; glass and electronics production wastes
Barium Discharges of oil drilling wastes and from metal refineries; erosion of natural deposits
Chromium (hexavalent) Erosion of natural deposits; transformation of naturally occurring trivalent chromium to hexavalent chromium by natural processes and human activities such as discharges from electroplating factories, leather tanneries, wood preservation, chemical synthesis, refractory production, and textile manufacturing facilities.

Fluoride Erosion of natural deposits; water additive that promotes strong teeth; discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories
Nitrate (as Nitrogen) Runoff and leaching from fertilizer use; leaching from septic tanks and sewage; erosion of natural deposits
Perchlorate Perchlorate is an inorganic chemical used in solid rocket propellant, fireworks, explosives, flares, matches, and a variety of industries. It usually gets into drinking water as a result of environmental contamination from historic aerospace or other industrial operations that used or use, store, or dispose of perchlorate and its salts.

Synthetic Organic Contaminants & Pesticides/ PCBs
1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) Discharge from industrial and agricultural chemical factories; leaching from hazardous waste sites; used as cleaning and maintenance solvent, paint and varnish remover, and cleaning and degreasing agent; byproduct during the production of other compounds and pesticides.

Volatile Organic Contaminants
Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) Discharge from factories, dry cleaners, and auto shops (metal degreaser) Trichloroethylene (TCE) Discharge from metal degreasing sites and other factories Other Contaminants
Lead Primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing
Copper Primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-7

8.2.2. Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Secondary drinking water standards are non-enforceable guidelines established to address the aesthetic qualities of drinking water. Specifically, this includes taste, color, and odor. These parameters do not pose direct health risks but are important for maintaining customer confidence in the quality and safety of the water supply. Exceeding a secondary standard may cause water to appear cloudy or discolored, or to develop an unpleasant taste or odor, even though it remains safe for consumption. Adhering to these standards ensures that the City continues to provide water that meets both regulatory expectations and community satisfaction.

The contaminants regulated under secondary standards, along with their respective Maximum Contaminant Levels established by the U.S. EPA and the State of California, are listed in Table 8.10.

Reported concentrations are based on the City’s 2025 CCR.

During the 2024 monitoring period, aluminum exceeded the individual secondary MCL but remained within compliance when evaluated under the maximum running annual average (Max RAA). All other constituents were measured below their respective secondary standard limits.

Table 8.11 summarizes the likely sources of contamination for each secondary drinking water standard as reported in the City’s CCR.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-8
Table 8.10 – Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Parameter Unit
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater
Treated
Average
System
Water
Aluminum ug/L 200 600 50 Range ND - 110 ND ND ND - 230
Max RAA
[1]
ND 120
Chloride mg/L 500 NA NA Range 41-67 108 110-210 16-120
Average 54 - 162 71
Color units 15 NA (1) Range 1-2 3 ND-3 -
Average 2 ND
Corrosivity AI NA NA NA Range 12.2-12.3 - 12-13 10-12
Average 12.2 13 12
Foaming Agents
– MBAS [2]
ug/L 500 NA (50) Range ND ND ND - 120 ND
Average 36
Manganese ug/L 50 NL=
500
(5) Range ND ND ND - 580 ND
Average 49
Odor Threshold Units 3 NA 1 Range 1 5 ND - 2 ND - 1
Average ND ND
Specific
Conductance
uS/
cm
1,600 NA NA Range 317-466 1,040-
1,050
1,011-1,180 115-3,037
Average 392 1,050 1,374 655
Sulfate mg/L 500 NA 0.5 Range 21-47 231-240 140-260 3.0-240 Average 34 236 197 127
Total Dissolved
Solids
mg/L 1,000 NA NA Range 178-263 663-696 610-1,200 64-700 Average 220 680 872 408
Turbidity NTU 5 NA 0.1 Range ND 0.6-1.3 0.1-0.55 0.15-0.2 Average 0.9 0.18 0.17
[1] RAA – Running annual average
[2] MBAS – Methylene Blue Active Substances
Note: Abbreviations used in this table are defined in the list of abbreviations at the end of Section 8.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-9
Table 8.11 – Secondary Standards: Major Sources in Drinking Water Parameter Major Sources in Drinking Water
Aluminum Erosion of natural deposits; residual from some surface water treatment processes
Chloride Runoff/leaching from natural deposits; seawater influence Color Naturally-occurring organic materials
Corrosivity Elemental balance in water; is affected by temperature and other factors Foaming Agents - MBAS Municipal and industrial waste discharges Manganese Leaching from natural deposits
Odor Threshold Naturally occurring organic materials
Specific Conductance Substances that form ions when in water; seawater influence Sulfate Runoff/leaching from natural deposits; industrial wastes Total Dissolved Solids Runoff/leaching from natural deposits Turbidity Soil Runoff

8.2.3. Unregulated Contaminants
Unregulated contaminants are substances that currently lack established Maximum Contaminant Levels under federal or state drinking water regulations. Although these constituents are not subject to mandatory treatment requirements, their presence in drinking water is monitored to support the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of California in assessing potential risks and determining whether regulatory standards may be warranted in the future.

Monitoring and reporting of unregulated contaminants enhance the understanding of emerging water quality issues and help protect public health by providing early data on substances that could become regulated.

Table 8.12 lists the unregulated contaminants detected in the City’s water supply that are routinely monitored and reported through the City’s sampling program.

Table 8.13 summarizes the potential health implications and other relevant information associated with these constituents.

Table 8.12 – Unregulated Contaminants with no MCLs
Parameter Units State
MCL
PHG State
DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater Treated
Average
System
Water
Boron mg/L NL=1 NA 0.1 Range 0.13 0.15 0.29-3.4 0.11-0.41 Average 1.33 0.24
Vanadium ug/L NL=50 NA 3 Range ND ND ND-19 ND-3.9
Average 6.39 ND

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-10
Table 8.13 – Unregulated Contaminants with no MCL: Health Effects Parameter Health Effects
Boron Boron exposures resulted in decreased fetal weight (developmental effects) in newborn rats.

Vanadium Vanadium exposures resulted in developmental and reproductive effects in rats.

Table 8.14 summarizes the unregulated contaminants that the City has monitored and reported in compliance with the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR), administered by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The UCMR program requires public water systems to sample for a defined list of emerging contaminants that do not yet have established regulatory limits. The purpose of this program is to collect nationwide occurrence data that can inform the EPA’s evaluation of potential health impacts and guide decisions on whether future regulatory standards should be adopted.

By participating in the UCMR program, the City contributes to a broader national effort to improve understanding of unregulated contaminants and to ensure that future drinking water standards are supported by reliable, science-based data.

Table 8.14 – Federal Unregulated Contaminants Monitoring Rule Parameter Units State
MCL PHG State DLR
Range
Average
Distribution
System
Haloactic Acid (HAA) Group
HAA5 ug/L NA NA NA Range ND-15.8
Average 5.9
HAA6Br ug/L NA NA NA Range ND-17.3
Average 6.1
HAA9 ug/L NA NA NA Range ND-28
Average 10.2
Total Organic Carbon ug/L NA NA NA Range ND-2,600
Average 1,925
Bromide ug/L NA NA NA Range ND-32
Average 15.3
Metals and Metalloids Group
Manganese ug/L NA NA NA Range ND-62
Average 2
Lithium by ICP
Lithium ug/L NA NA 9 Range ND-55.1
Average 16
EPA 533
PFBA ug/L NA NA 0.005 Range ND-0.0076
Average ND
PFHxA ug/L NA NA 0.003 Range ND-0.0038
Average ND
PFHxS ug/L NA NA 0.003 Range ND-0.0033
Average ND
PFPeA ug/L NA NA 0.003 Range ND-0.0061
Average ND

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-11
Table 8.15 summarizes additional water quality parameters that are routinely monitored and reported by the City. While these constituents are not regulated by enforceable drinking water standards, they are important indicators of overall water chemistry and usability.

Parameters such as alkalinity, hardness, pH, and mineral content influence both aesthetic quality and operational considerations, including corrosion control, scaling potential, and treatment optimization.

Regular monitoring of these parameters allows the City to maintain balanced water chemistry throughout the distribution system and to ensure compatibility between imported, treated, and groundwater supplies.

Table 8.15 – Other Parameters
Parameter Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Ground
water
Treated
Average
System
Water
Alkalinity mg/L NA NA (1) Range 68-71 123-128 120-390 16-130 Average 70 126 230 79
Bicarbonate mg/L NA NA NA Range - - 120-390 14-130
Average 230 78
Calcium mg/L NA NA (0.1) Range 15-22 72-75 55-170 1.6-83 Average 18 74 118 43
Hardness mg/L NA NA (1) Range 68-99 291-296 200-590 5.5-320 Average 84 294 419 171
Magnesium mg/L NA NA (0.01) Range 8.4-11 28-29 15-45 0.37-30 Average 9.7 28 30 15
pH pH
units
NA NA NA Range 8.7-8.8 8.1-8.2 7.7-8.0 7.4-10.2
Average 8.7 8.1 7.9 7.5
Potassium mg/L NA NA (0.2) Range 1.9-3.1 5.4 1.9-14 ND-6 Average 2.5 5.4 3.3
Sodium mg/L NA NA (1) Range 35-54 104-108 54-180 21-110 Average 44 106 118 67
Table 8.16 summarizes the Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) monitored and reported by the City. PFAS are a class of synthetic organic compounds widely used in industrial and consumer products for their resistance to heat, water, and oil. Although these substances are not currently regulated under federal or state drinking water standards, they are monitored under precautionary Notification Levels (NLs) established by the State of California.

Notification Levels represent concentration thresholds for unregulated contaminants that do not pose an immediate health risk but warrant communication to governing agencies and the public when detected.

Monitoring PFAS supports ongoing statewide and national efforts to evaluate potential health impacts and to assess whether formal Maximum Contaminant Levels should be developed in the future.

Table 8.17 summarizes the potential health effects associated with these PFAS compounds and provides context for their environmental occurrence and monitoring significance.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-12
Table 8.16 – Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) with Notification Levels, Analyzed by EPA Methods 533 and 537.1
Parameter Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average
State
Project
Water
Colorado
River
Water
Groundwater
Treated
Average
System
Water
Perfluorobutane Sulfonic
(PFBS)
ng/L NL=500 NA NA Range ND ND ND-52 ND-2.2
Average 20 ND
Perfluorohexane Sulfonic
Acid (PFHxS)
ng/L NL=3 NA NA Range ND ND ND-68 ND
Average 22
Perfluorooctanoic Acid
(PFOA)
ng/L NL=5.1 0.007 4 Range ND ND ND-300 ND-4.3
Average 80 ND
Perfluorooctanesulfonate
(PFOS)
ng/L NL=6.5 1 4 Range ND ND ND-330 ND-4.2
Average 93 ND
Table 8.17 – Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS): Health Effects Parameter Health Effects
Perfluorobutane Sulfonic
(PFBS)
Perfluorobutane sulfonic acid exposures resulted in decreased thyroid hormone in pregnant female mice.

Perfluorohexane Sulfonic
Acid (PFHxS)
Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid exposures resulted in decreased total thyroid hormone in male rats.

Perfluorooctanoic Acid
(PFOA)
Perfluorooctanoic acid exposures resulted in increased liver weight in laboratory animals.

Perfluorooctanesulfonate
Acid (PFOS)
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid exposures resulted in immune suppression, specifically, a decrease in antibody response to an exogenous antigen challenge.

8.2.4. Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
The Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR), established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), regulates the allowable levels of byproducts formed during the drinking water disinfection process. When disinfectants, such as chlorine, react with naturally occurring organic matter in source water, they can form chemical byproducts that may pose potential health risks with long-term exposure. The EPA developed the DBPR to balance effective microbial disinfection with the minimization of disinfection byproducts (DBPs), thereby reducing public health risks while maintaining microbial safety.

Table 8.18 lists the primary disinfectants and disinfection byproducts of concern, including their corresponding Maximum Contaminant Levels established by both the U.S. EPA and the State of California.

These constituents are also reported annually in the City’s CCR to ensure transparency and continued compliance with federal and state drinking water standards.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-13
Table 8.18 – Disinfection Byproducts of Concern
Contaminant
U.S. EPA California

MCL MCL
Disinfection Byproducts
TTHMs – Total Trihalomethanes 0.080 mg/L 0.080 mg/L
HAA5 – Halo acetic acids 0.060 mg/L 0.060 mg/L
Bromate 0.010 mg/L 0.010 mg/L
Disinfectants
Chloramines (as Cl2) MRDL=4.0 4.0 (as Cl2)
TOC – Control of DBP precursors TT TT
Table 8.19 summarizes the disinfection byproducts, disinfectant residuals, and precursor parameters that are routinely monitored by the City in accordance with the Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule.

The data are evaluated using Locational Running Annual Averages (LRAAs) to ensure compliance with established Maximum Contaminant Levels and Maximum Residual Disinfectant Levels (MRDLs).

Table 8.19 – Disinfection Byproducts, Disinfectant Residuals, and Disinfection Byproduct Precursors Federal Rule
Parameter Units
State
MCL
PHG
State
DLR
Range
Average/LRAA/RAA [1][2]
Distribution
System Wide
Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) ug/L 80 NA 1 Range ND-34
LRAA 29.3
Halo acetic Acids (HAA5) ug/L 60 NA 1 Range ND-11
LRAA 9.7
Bromate (Mills - WR-24 Conn.) ug/L 10 0.1 1 Range ND-19 Max RAA 7.9
Chloramines mg/L 4 as
Cl2
4 as
Cl2
NA Range 1.21-2.8
Max RAA 2.0
Control of DBP precursors (TOC) mg/L TT NA 0.3 Range 2.2-2.7 Average 2.4
[1] LRAA – Locational Running Annual Average
[2] RAA – Running Annual Average
Table 8.20 outlines the major sources and potential health effects of these byproducts. Long-term exposure to concentrations exceeding the MCLs may increase the risk of liver, kidney, or nervous-system effects, and in some cases, elevated cancer risk. Short-term overexposure to disinfectants such as chloramines may cause eye or respiratory irritation and stomach discomfort. The City’s monitoring results show levels remain below regulatory limits, demonstrating continued compliance with both state and federal drinking-water standards.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-14
Table 8.20 – Disinfection Byproducts: Sources and Health Effects Parameter Major Sources in
Drinking Water
Health Effects
Total Trihalomethanes
(TTHMs)
Byproduct of
drinking water
disinfection
Long-term consumption of water containing trihalomethanes in excess of the MCL may cause liver, kidney, or central nervous system problems, and may increase cancer risk.

Haloacetic
Acids (HAA5)
Byproduct of
drinking water
disinfection
Long-term consumption of water containing haloacetic acids in excess of the MCL may increase cancer risk.

Bromate (Mills - WR-24
Conn.

Byproduct of
drinking water
disinfection
Long-term consumption of water containing bromate in excess of the MCL may increase cancer risk.

Chloramines Drinking water
disinfectant
added for
treatment
Some people who use water containing chloramines in excess of the MRDL could experience irritating effects to the eyes and nose.

Some people who drink water containing chloramines in excess of the MRDL could experience stomach discomfort or anemia.

Control of
DBP precursors (TOC)
Various natural
and manmade
sources
Total organic carbon (TOC) itself has no health effects. However, total organic carbon provides a medium for the formation of disinfection byproducts. These byproducts include
trihalomethanes (THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs). Drinking water containing these byproducts in excess of the MCL may lead to adverse health effects, liver or kidney problems, or nervous system effects, and may lead to an increased risk of cancer.

8.3. GROUNDWATER QUALITY

8.3.1. Nitrate
The State of California has established a Maximum Contaminant Level of 45 mg/L as nitrate, approximately equivalent to the U.S. EPA MCL of 10 mg/L as nitrogen. To maintain a safety margin below the regulatory limit, the City of Corona has adopted an internal goal of not exceeding 38 mg/L as nitrate within the water distribution system.

According to the City’s Water Operations Blending Program Technical Report/Operations Plan dated February 2020 (2020 Blending Report), nitrate concentrations in the City’s groundwater sources range from 18 to 99 mg/L. Two wells, Wells 13 and 20, were inactive and four wells, Wells 3, 21, 26, and 29 were standby when the blending report was prepared and therefore have no associated nitrate data. Of the wells active when the blending report was prepared, six exhibited nitrate concentrations below the State MCL, including Wells 11A, 15, 17A, 27, 28, and 31. Among these wells, Wells 15, 28, and 31 also met the City’s more stringent internal nitrate goal of 38 mg/L. The remaining wells, Wells 7A, 8A, 9A, 12A, 14, 19, 22, 25, and 33, exceeded the State MCL.

As of 2024, Wells 26 and 29 have been reactivated. Nitrate levels from Well 26 are below the State MCL, while Well 29 remains below the 45 mg/L limit but above the City’s target concentration of 38 mg/L.

Groundwater pumped from the Temescal Subbasin is treated at the Temescal Desalter and/or blended at the Garretson and Mangular Tanks with imported water from the Western Municipal Water District (WMWD), Temescal Desalter effluent, and Lester effluent. The blended product at the Garretson Tank has an average nitrate concentration of approximately 30 mg/L, which is below State MCL of 45 mg/L.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-15

8.3.2. Turbidity
According to the City of Corona’s 2025 CCR, turbidity levels in the City’s raw groundwater range from 0.1 to 0.55 NTU. Turbidity, a measure of water clarity, reflects the presence of suspended particles and serves primarily as an indicator of treatment performance rather than a direct health concern. Regulatory requirements specify that the combined filter effluent turbidity must not exceed 0.3 NTU in at least 95 percent of monthly measurements, and must never exceed 1 NTU at any time. These criteria apply to the treatment process and are used to verify effective filtration. The averages and ranges of turbidity shown in Table 8.10 correspond to treatment plant effluent data collected during the reporting period.

For water distributed to customers, the State of California secondary MCL for turbidity, which serves as an aesthetic standard rather than a health-based limit, is 5 NTU. The City’s groundwater consistently remains well below this threshold, indicating effective treatment and stable water quality across the distribution system.

8.3.3. Perchlorate
Based on the City’s 2020 Water Operations Blending Report, perchlorate was detected in 10 of the 21 active wells maintained by the City of Corona. Six of these wells, Wells 9A, 12A, 14, 19, 25, and 33, recorded concentrations above the State of California’s MCL of 6 µg/L, with measured values ranging from

6.4 to 10 µg/L.

Water produced from Wells 9A, 19, and 25 is treated at the Temescal Desalter, while water from other affected wells is blended with lower-concentration sources to maintain perchlorate levels below 4 µg/L.

Through this combined strategy of targeted treatment and blending, the City ensures that all groundwater supplied to the distribution system remains in full compliance with State regulatory limits for perchlorate.

8.3.4. Trichloro propane (1,2,3-TCP)
The State of California has established a MCL of 5 parts per trillion (ppt) for 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP).

To ensure a margin of safety, the City of Corona maintains an internal target of 3 ppt or less to provide the highest quality drinking water to all service areas.

According to the 2020 Water Operations Blending Report, four of the City’s 21 wells, Wells 7A, 8A, 17A, and 25, have recorded concentrations above the State MCL, ranging from 5.37 ppt to 25.8 ppt.

Additionally, recent data available for Well 33 from 2023 through 2025 show 1,2,3-TCP concentrations above the State MCL, ranging from 9 ppt to 20 ppt.

Wells 8A, 17A, and 33 receive treatment at the Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) Water Treatment Plant.

Well 25 receives treatment at the Temescal Desalter, while Well 7A is either routed through the CW19 valve or blended at the Garretson Blend Station.

These combined treatment approaches and blending processes achieve finished water concentrations below 3 ppt, keeping the City’s supply in compliance with State standards.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-16

8.3.5. Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Based on the City’s 2025 CCR, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) concentrations in the City’s groundwater supply range from 610 to 1,200 mg/L.

TDS affects the taste, odor, and aesthetic quality of drinking water. Elevated TDS may influence corrosion and scaling tendencies within the distribution system.

Although there is no primary health-based limit for TDS, there are secondary maximum contaminant level goals set by the EPA and the State of California that recommend maintaining concentrations below 500 mg/L is to preserve water quality and minimize aesthetic impacts. The City continues to monitor and manage blending operations to reduce TDS levels wherever feasible.

8.3.6. Manganese
Manganese is classified as a secondary drinking water standard by both the U.S. EPA and the State of California, with an MCL of 0.05 mg/L established primarily for aesthetic concerns such as discoloration and staining.

According to the 2020 Blending Report, Well 28 recorded a manganese level of 0.062 mg/L. Historically, Well 29 has shown manganese levels between 0.29 and 0.32 mg/L, but it was inactive during the most recent monitoring period presented in the report. When operational, groundwater from Wells 28 and 29 is treated at the Temescal Desalter, producing finished water with a maximum manganese level below

0.02 mg/L.

8.3.7. Perfluorooctane sulfonic Acid (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) In 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established Maximum Contaminant Levels for PFOS and PFOA at 4.0 parts per trillion (ppt) each. While these federal standards are now in effect, water systems are not required to achieve full compliance until 2031, allowing time for treatment system upgrades and operational planning.

The State of California has also set Notification Levels (NLs) of 6.5 ppt for PFOS and 5.1 ppt for PFOA, along with Response Levels (RLs) of 40 ppt for PFOS and 10 ppt for PFOA. Exceeding an RL requires utilities to take action, such as removing the source from service or providing treatment.

Based on the 2020 Blending Report, PFOS was detected in 11 of the City’s wells, with 7 wells exceeding the response level of 40 ppt. Specifically, Wells 7A, 8A, 9A, 17A, 19, 22, and 25 recorded concentrations above the RL, ranging from 102 to 240 ppt. The remaining four wells measured PFOS concentrations between 50 and 80 ppt.

PFOA was detected in 12 wells, with 8 wells exceeding the RL of 10 ppt. These include Wells 7A, 8A, 9A, 11A, 17A, 19, 22, 25, and 31.

Groundwater from affected wells is treated at the Temescal Desalter. Following treatment and blending with Temescal Desalter, Lester, and Sierra Del Oro (SDO) effluents at the Mangular and Garretson Tank, the finished water consistently meets targets with PFOS and PFOA levels below 10 ppt. This blending strategy ensures all distributed water remains well below both State and federal regulatory thresholds.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-17

8.4. IMPORTED WATER QUALITY
The City of Corona supplements its local groundwater supplies with both treated and untreated imported water purchased from the Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) to meet system demand. WMWD obtains this water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), which sources its supply from the Colorado River and the State Water Project.

Approximately 91 percent of the City’s imported water is untreated and delivered to the Lester and SDO water treatment plants. Raw water imported from the Colorado River typically exhibits elevated turbidity, total dissolved solids (TDS), metals, microbial constituents, and other impurities that require treatment prior to distribution. Following treatment, the finished effluent is blended with the City’s treated and untreated groundwater to create a compliant blended supply that meets all State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and U.S. EPA drinking water standards.

8.5. BLENDING
The City of Corona operates several treatment and blending facilities designed to optimize water quality and maintain nitrate, PFAS and 1,2,3 TCP concentrations below the Maximum Contaminant Level. Lowerconcentration water is blended with higher-concentration groundwater sources to produce a consistent supply that meets all state and federal regulatory standards.

The City currently operates five (5) blending facilities, summarized below:

1. Lester Tank #1 – Blends water from the Garretson Tank with effluent from the Lester Treatment Plant and Mills Zone 3 (WR-24) water. The blended water is sent to Lester Tank #2.

2. Lester 1220 Pump Station – Blends Lester Tank #1 effluent with Mills 1220 Zone (WR-24) water.

3. Lester 1380 Pump Station – Blends Lester Tank #1 effluent with Mills 1380 Zone (WR-24) water.

4. Garretson Tank – Blends Temescal Desalter effluent with 1060 Zone water and potential groundwater contributions from Wells 7A, 13, 8A, 17A, 32, and 33.

5. Mangular Tank – Blends 1060 Zone water with potential groundwater contributions from Wells 11A, 12A, 14, 15, and 27.

A detailed description of each blending facility is provided in the City of Corona Utilities Department Water Operations Blending Program/Operational Plan (February 2020), included as Appendix A. Refer to Figure

2.1 in this Master Plan for the Existing Water System Hydraulic Schematic showing blending interconnections and operational zones.

8.6. WATER AGE
Water age affects water quality within the distribution system. The City address these impacts through operational practices such as storage tank cycling, active mixing and routine system flushing.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-18

8.6.1. Tank Turnover
The City monitors water storage tank cycling to ensure each zone is efficiently and effectively cycled. In addition, the City has installed mixers in each of its existing water storage tanks. The PAX Water Mixer from PAX Water Technologies is a powerful active mixing system that circulates the entire tank volume which eliminates thermal stratification, improves disinfectant residual levels, lowers disinfection byproducts and nitrifying bacteria, and protects the tank from corrosion. The mixer prevents stagnant water which reduces variability in water taste and odor and lowers surface water temperature to combat the potential of biofilm growth.

8.6.2. Flushing
Hydrant flushing is an essential maintenance practice that preserves water quality throughout the City’s distribution network. Flushing removes stagnant water, accumulated sediments, and excess disinfectant byproducts from dead-end mains while restoring chlorine residuals.

The City conducts flushing programs on weekly, biweekly, monthly, quarterly, and annual schedules, based on water-quality monitoring results and operational priorities. Under routine conditions, one location is flushed twice each week, one location weekly, eighteen locations monthly, fourteen locations quarterly, and approximately 106 locations annually. These locations are distributed as follows:
• Pressure Zone 1: 4 locations
• Pressure Zone 2: 30 locations
• Pressure Zone 3: 12 locations
• Pressure Zone 4: 19 locations
• Pressure Zone 5: 10 locations
• Hydro-Zone: 6 locations
• Water Truck Zone: 12 locations
The biweekly and weekly flushing locations are shown in Figure 8.1, with biweekly and weekly flushing data summarized in Table 8.21. Monthly flushing data are summarized in Table 8.22 and mapped in Figure

8.2. Quarterly flushing data are summarized in Table 8.23 and illustrated in Figure 8.3. Annual flushing locations are provided in Figure 8.4 and summarized in Table 8.24.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-19
Figure 8.1 – Weekly Water Quality Flushing Locations
Table 8.21 – Weekly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
TIME
(Mins) GPM Cl2 Residual (Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
Temescal 1/1/2025 12:45 31,500 90 350 1.22 1.57 0.00 22% 0.04 Y Temescal 1/3/2025 0:00 37,500 75 500 1.07 1.86 0.00 42% 0.07 Y Green River 1/5/2025 4:30 40,000 80 500 0.75 1.63 0.00 54% 0.02 Y Temescal 1/7/2025 13:00 12,250 35 350 1.56 1.64 0.00 5% 0.03 Y Temescal 1/10/2025 3:30 34,000 68 500 1.32 1.96 0.00 33% 0.05 Y Green River 1/13/2025 4:25 31,500 90 350 0.41 1.77 0.00 77% 0.03 Y Temescal 1/17/2025 4:05 37,500 75 500 0.88 1.71 0.00 49% 0.04 Y Temescal 1/21/2025 10:54 38,000 76 500 1.11 1.67 0.00 34% 0.02 Y Green River 1/20/2025 4:20 45,000 90 500 0.17 1.87 0.00 91% 0.03 Y Temescal 1/23/2025 10:05 35,000 70 500 1.05 1.67 0.00 37% 0.02 Y Temescal 1/26/2025 14:10 40,000 80 500 1.18 1.45 0.00 19% 0.05 Y Green River 1/27/2025 3:35 35,000 70 500 0.16 1.72 0.00 91% 0.02 Y Temescal 1/31/2025 2:45 32,500 65 500 1.13 1.28 0.00 12% 0.05 Y Temescal 2/4/2025 11:00 35,000 70 500 1.06 1.33 0.00 20% 0.01 Y Green River 1/3/2025 3:50 45,000 90 500 0.56 1.55 0.00 64% 0.02 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-20
Table 8.21 – Weekly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
TIME
(Mins) GPM Cl2 Residual (Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
Temescal 2/9/2025 0:00 40,000 80 500 1.08 1.52 0.00 29% 0.05 Y Temescal 2/13/2025 12:00 36,500 73 500 1.22 1.35 0.00 10% 0.04 Y Green River 1/10/2025 4:50 45,000 90 500 0.10 1.48 0.00 93% 0.04 Y Temescal 2/15/2025 12:45 42,500 85 500 0.82 1.28 0.00 36% 0.06 Y Temescal 2/16/2025 13:55 22,500 45 500 0.71 1.26 0.00 44% 0.04 Y Green River 2/17/2025 3:50 45,000 90 500 0.56 1.42 0.00 61% 0.04 Y Temescal 2/19/2025 13:20 32,500 65 500 0.86 1.17 0.00 26% 0.05 Y Temescal 2/21/2025 9:25 22,500 45 500 1.25 1.25 0.00 0% 0.04 Y Green River 2/23/2025 6:10 45,000 90 500 0.52 1.42 0.00 63% 0.01 Y Temescal 2/25/2025 14:15 60,000 120 500 0.90 1.44 0.00 38% 0.05 Y Temescal 2/26/2025 9:20 22,500 45 500 1.38 1.42 0.00 3% 0.04 Y Green River 3/3/2025 4:05 45,000 90 500 0.06 1.41 0.00 96% 0.04 Y Temescal 3/2/2025 12:20 60,000 120 500 0.78 1.19 0.00 34% 0.04 Y Temescal 3/8/2025 16:25 47,500 95 500 0.68 1.29 0.00 47% 0.03 Y Green River 3/10/2025 4:16 45,000 90 500 0.39 1.41 0.00 72% 0.03 Y Temescal 3/9/2025 15:20 62,500 125 500 1.20 1.51 0.00 21% 0.05 Y Temescal 3/13/2025 14:20 30,000 60 500 1.01 1.12 0.00 10% 0.02 Y Green River 3/16/2025 21:30 45,000 90 500 0.07 1.60 0.00 96% 0.03 Y Temescal 3/23/2025 11:15 57,500 115 300 0.93 1.52 0.00 39% 0.04 Y Temescal 3/27/2025 12:30 42,500 85 500 1.01 1.48 0.00 32% 0.02 Y Green River 3/24/2025 4:00 45,000 90 500 0.67 1.34 0.00 50% 0.02 Y Temescal 3/29/2025 10:30 40,000 80 500 1.05 1.57 0.00 33% 0.06 Y Temescal 4/1/2025 15:20 22,500 45 500 1.13 1.28 0.00 12% -- Y Green River 3/31/2025 4:00 45,000 90 500 0.07 1.63 0.00 96% 0.03 Y Temescal 4/4/2025 13:15 43,500 87 500 0.77 1.43 0.00 46% 0.05 Y Temescal 4/6/2025 10:50 67,500 135 500 1.42 1.70 0.00 16% 0.02 Y Green River 4/7/2025 3:40 45,000 90 500 0.69 1.53 0.00 55% 0.04 Y Temescal 4/9/2025 13:25 12,000 60 200 1.35 1.39 0.00 3% 0.02 Y Temescal 4/11/2025 15:45 47,500 95 500 0.99 1.65 0.00 40% 0.06 Y Green River 4/14/2025 4:00 45,000 90 500 0.08 1.37 0.00 94% 0.04 Y Temescal 4/13/2025 11:15 45,000 90 500 1.40 1.74 0.00 20% 0.03 Y Temescal 4/18/2025 8:40 30,000 60 500 1.16 1.28 0.00 9% 0.06 Y Green River 4/21/2025 3:45 45,000 90 500 0.13 1.44 0.00 91% 0.03 Y Temescal 4/23/2025 12:45 30,000 60 500 1.14 1.22 0.00 7% 0.04 Y Temescal 4/26/2025 13:10 47,500 95 500 1.05 1.35 0.00 22% 0.02 Y Green River 4/28/2025 3:50 45,000 90 500 0.12 1.42 0.00 92% 0.02 Y Temescal 4/30/2025 11:15 60,000 120 500 0.96 0.97 0.00 1% 0.02 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-21
Table 8.21 – Weekly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
TIME
(Mins) GPM Cl2 Residual (Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
Temescal 5/2/2025 11:40 60,000 120 500 0.78 1.49 0.00 48% 0.06 Y Green River 5/4/2025 4:00 36,000 90 400 0.10 1.12 0.00 91% 0.02 Y Temescal 5/8/2025 11:20 60,000 120 500 0.68 1.35 0.00 50% 0.04 Y Temescal 5/10/2025 10:20 50,000 100 500 0.86 1.39 0.00 38% 0.06 Y Green River 5/12/2025 3:50 47,500 95 500 0.06 1.11 0.00 95% 0.01 Y Temescal 5/15/2025 10:50 N/A N/A 500 0.68 1.17 0.00 42% 0.02 Y Temescal 5/17/2025 11:00 35,574 98 363 0.81 1.28 0.00 37% 0.05 Y Green River 5/19/2025 4:00 42,500 85 500 0.09 1.15 0.00 92% 0.05 Y Temescal 5/23/2025 11:50 57,500 115 500 0.92 1.30 0.00 29% 0.03 Y Temescal 5/25/2025 11:15 55,000 110 500 0.85 1.40 0.00 39% 0.05 Y Green River 5/26/2025 3:50 48,000 120 400 0.10 1.29 0.00 92% 0.02 Y Temescal 5/28/2025 2:55 45,000 90 300 1.23 1.39 0.00 12% 0.01 Y Temescal 5/30/2025 11:45 55,000 110 500 0.89 1.43 0.00 38% 0.06 Y Green River 6/2/2025 4:00 37,500 75 500 0.07 1.15 0.00 94% 0.03 Y Temescal 6/4/2025 0:00 60,000 120 500 0.53 0.61 0.00 13% 0.06 Y Temescal 6/6/2025 11:30 60,000 120 500 0.65 1.44 0.00 55% 0.05 Y Green River 6/9/2025 0:00 40,000 80 500 0.17 1.22 0.00 86% 0.03 Y Temescal 6/11/2025 13:05 57,500 115 500 0.58 1.31 0.00 56% 0.02 Y Temescal 6/13/2025 10:25 57,500 115 500 0.46 1.43 0.00 68% 0.03 Y Green River 6/16/2025 3:50 34,000 85 400 0.06 1.45 0.00 96% 0.01 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-22
Figure 8.2 – Monthly Water Quality Flushing Locations
Table 8.22 – Monthly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
2550 SAN
GABRIEL 1/9/2025 14:49 1,272 7 182 0.07 2.44 0.00 97% 0.03 Y 2003 AVIATION
DR 1/7/2025 11:50 23,487 65 361 0.07 1.51 0.00 95% 0.01 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 1/2/2025 9:48 2,768 10 277 0.17 1.89 0.00 91% 0.03 Y 2121 MOUNTAIN
VIEW 1/7/2025 11:11 524 6 87 0.73 1.85 0.00 61% 0.03 Y
815 SHERMAN 1/11/2025 15:30 898 11 82 0.09 1.93 0.00 95% 0.03 Y 1020 RAILROAD
ST 1/15/2025 8:40 2,020 7 289 0.29 1.91 0.00 85% 0.04 Y 260 W FOOTHILL
PKY 1/2/2025 16:05 3,890 11 354 0.15 1.79 0.00 92% 0.02 Y 650 E HARRISON
ST 1/5/2025 23:05 2,468 13 190 0.42 2.22 0.00 81% 0.03 Y 842 EL SOBRANTE 1/3/2025 11:05 1,496 8 187 0.55 2.11 0.00 74% 0.04 Y 1187 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1/6/2025 16:41 1,870 8 234 1.63 2.13 0.00 23% 0.04 Y 3584 NELSON ST. 1/2/2025 15:28 4,488 12 374 0.12 1.87 0.00 94% 0.03 Y 1070 AQUINO
CIRCLE 1/11/2025 2:36 1,646 9 183 0.41 2.36 0.00 83% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-23
Table 8.22 – Monthly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
18648 STATE ST 1/12/2025 14:12 1,197 5 239 0.17 2.46 0.00 93% 0.04 Y 8540 CAJALCO RD 1/7/2025 15:10 4,264 11 388 1.85 2.03 0.00 9% 0.04 Y Desalter B.O. 1 -
#3315 2/2/2025 17:10 224 10 22 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 2 -
#3317 2/2/2025 17:35 524 10 52 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 4 2/2/2025 18:00 2,094 20 105 -- -- -- -- -- Y 2550 SAN
GABRIEL 2/14/2025 12:20 2,394 13 184 0.24 2.10 0.00 89% 0.01 Y 2003 AVIATION
DR 2/5/2025 15:20 43,085 95 454 0.04 1.40 0.00 97% 0.02 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 2/18/2025 4:14 1,870 7 267 0.04 1.41 0.00 97% 0.02 Y 2121 MOUNTAIN
VIEW 2/25/2025 13:20 8,602 45 191 1.02 1.65 0.00 38% 0.03 Y 815 SHERMAN 2/14/2025 14:30 449 2 224 0.66 1.79 0.00 63% 0.04 Y 1020 RAILROAD
ST 2/14/2025 14:45 1,421 4 355 0.97 1.99 0.00 51% 0.02 Y 260 W FOOTHILL
PKY 2/14/2025 14:15 748 3 249 0.33 2.00 0.00 84% 0.03 Y 650 E HARRISON
ST 2/14/2025 16:45 1,795 10 180 0.21 1.90 0.00 89% 0.02 Y 842 EL SOBRANTE 2/9/2025 16:25 4,787 20 239 0.80 1.71 0.00 53% 0.03 Y 1187 MAGNOLIA
AVE 2/12/2025 23:38 2,842 10 284 1.54 1.94 0.00 21% 0.04 Y 3584 NELSON ST. 2/1/2025 12:00 3,964 10 396 0.04 1.56 0.00 97% 0.02 Y 1070 AQUINO
CIRCLE 2/14/2025 10:03 4,338 20 217 0.88 1.57 0.00 44% 0.03 Y 18648 STATE ST 2/18/2025 10:35 3,441 15 229 1.54 2.16 0.00 29% 0.04 Y 8540 CAJALCO RD 2/14/2025 12:45 8,228 25 329 1.68 1.80 0.00 7% 0.03 Y Desalter B.O. 1 -
#3315 2/26/2025 16:00 150 10 15 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 2 -
#3317 2/26/2025 16:25 823 10 82 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 4 2/26/2025 16:50 299 11 27 -- -- -- -- -- Y 2550 SAN
GABRIEL 3/26/2025 10:25 3,815 20 191 0.28 2.16 0.00 87% 0.05 Y 2003 AVIATION
DR 3/11/2025 12:00 34,707 90 386 0.05 0.97 0.00 95% 0.04 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 3/15/2025 12:25 3,665 10 367 0.06 1.90 0.00 97% 0.03 Y 2121 MOUNTAIN
VIEW 3/21/2025 15:30 598 2 299 1.41 1.99 0.00 29% 0.05 Y 815 SHERMAN 3/15/2025 16:00 374 2 187 0.06 2.30 0.00 97% 0.05 Y 1020 RAILROAD
ST 3/14/2025 14:20 1,197 4 299 1.15 1.40 0.00 18% 0.04 Y 260 W FOOTHILL
PKY 3/14/2025 13:50 598 2 299 0.36 2.30 0.00 84% 0.05 Y 650 E HARRISON
ST 3/19/2025 15:30 1,272 4 318 0.23 1.83 0.00 87% 0.03 Y 842 EL SOBRANTE 3/2/2025 16:10 4,712 35 135 0.77 1.80 0.00 57% 0.04 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-24
Table 8.22 – Monthly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
1187 MAGNOLIA
AVE 3/3/2025 22:45 1,571 6 262 1.34 1.96 0.00 32% 0.03 Y 3584 NELSON ST. 3/14/2025 13:25 1,197 4 299 0.03 1.63 0.00 98% 0.03 Y 1070 AQUINO
CIRCLE 3/19/2025 15:50 2,319 7 331 0.53 1.68 0.00 68% 0.04 Y 18648 STATE ST 3/23/2025 14:05 1,272 5 254 2.00 2.18 0.00 8% 0.03 Y 8540 CAJALCO RD 3/25/2025 15:45 2,394 10 239 0.22 1.94 0.00 89% 0.06 Y 3097 BONNYVIEW
Cir 3/4/2025 8:55 1,646 12 137 1.29 1.70 0.00 24% 0.05 Y Desalter B.O. 1 -
#3315 3/24/2025 10:25 299 20 15 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 2 -
#3317 3/24/2025 11:05 1,272 10 127 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 4 3/24/2025 11:30 4,264 20 213 -- -- -- -- -- Y 2550 SAN
GABRIEL 4/3/2025 15:40 2,169 8 271 0.06 2.17 0.00 97% 0.04 Y 2003 AVIATION
DR 4/2/2025 9:45 18,999 45 422 0.15 1.88 0.00 92% 0.02 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 4/9/2025 11:34 2,468 11 224 0.04 1.88 0.00 98% 0.04 Y 2121 MOUNTAIN
VIEW 4/7/2025 16:05 4,862 25 194 0.49 2.01 0.00 76% 0.03 Y 815 SHERMAN 4/2/2025 15:20 374 1 374 0.17 2.20 0.00 92% 0.02 Y 1020 RAILROAD
ST 4/2/2025 12:30 1,646 4 411 0.29 1.78 0.00 84% 0.03 Y 260 W FOOTHILL
PKY 4/2/2025 12:00 823 2 411 0.06 2.04 0.00 97% 0.05 Y
650 E HARRISON
ST 4/4/2025 13:00 1,945 12 162 0.02 2.38 0.01 99% 0.03 Y 842 EL SOBRANTE 4/2/2025 10:05 3,740 18 208 0.83 1.96 0.00 58% 0.05 Y 1187 MAGNOLIA
AVE 4/2/2025 16:00 1,197 4 299 1.18 2.20 0.00 46% 0.02 Y 3584 NELSON ST. 4/2/2025 11:40 2,244 5 449 0.01 2.07 0.00 100% 0.05 Y 1070 AQUINO
CIRCLE 4/2/2025 11:10 5,311 27 197 0.29 1.77 0.00 84% 0.01 Y 18648 STATE ST 4/8/2025 13:10 3,067 15 204 2.08 2.20 0.00 5% 0.07 Y 8540 CAJALCO RD 4/8/2025 13:40 3,516 20 176 0.42 2.07 0.00 80% 0.04 y 3097 BONNYVIEW
Cir 4/6/2025 17:00 4,488 25 180 0.18 2.11 0.00 91% 0.04 Y Desalter B.O. 1 -
#3315 4/14/2025 16:05 500 10 50 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 2 -
#3317 4/14/2025 16:35 1,500 10 150 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 4 4/14/2025 17:05 3,000 15 200 -- -- -- -- -- Y 2550 SAN
GABRIEL 5/8/2025 17:10 3,815 20 191 0.19 1.79 0.00 89% 0.02 Y 2003 AVIATION
DR 5/1/2025 10:25 17,653 55 200 0.04 1.19 0.00 97% 0.03 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 5/9/2025 14:19 10,173 24 424 0.27 1.80 0.00 85% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-25
Table 8.22 – Monthly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
2121 MOUNTAIN
VIEW 5/9/2025 11:30 2,842 11 258 0.03 1.46 0.00 98% 0.02 Y 815 SHERMAN 5/8/2025 11:40 299 1 299 0.12 1.43 0.00 92% 0.05 Y 1020 RAILROAD
ST 5/2/2025 15:50 1,646 5 329 0.17 1.80 0.00 91% 0.03 Y 260 W FOOTHILL
PKY 5/2/2025 14:00 1,122 3 374 0.16 1.62 0.00 90% 0.05 Y 650 E HARRISON
ST 5/2/2025 15:25 1,496 6 249 0.11 1.82 0.00 94% 0.05 Y 842 EL SOBRANTE 5/8/2025 15:10 1,646 5 329 0.17 2.00 0.00 92% 0.04 Y 1187 MAGNOLIA
AVE 5/8/2025 15:30 898 3 299 0.17 2.11 0.00 92% 0.02 Y
3584 NELSON ST. 5/2/2025 14:30 1,945 5 389 0.12 1.81 0.00 93% 0.02 Y 1070 AQUINO
CIRCLE 5/8/2025 11:05 2,543 7 363 0.16 1.44 0.00 89% 0.03 Y 18648 STATE ST 5/5/2025 11:15 5,086 20 254 0.86 2.19 0.00 61% 0.03 Y 8540 CAJALCO RD 5/5/2025 11:55 3,516 20 176 1.66 1.93 0.00 14% 0.02 Y 3097 BONNYVIEW
Cir 5/8/2025 14:40 823 2 411 0.27 1.42 0.00 81% 0.05 Y
Desalter B.O. 1 -
#3315 5/24/2025 9:00 4,712 10 471 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 2 -
#3317 5/24/2025 9:35 1,047 10 105 -- -- -- -- -- Y
Desalter B.O. 4 5/24/2025 8:55 1,000 8 125 -- -- -- -- -- Y 2550 SAN
GABRIEL 6/9/2025 17:15 2,468 15 200 2.08 2.16 0.00 4% 0 Y 2003 AVIATION
DR 6/5/2025 13:15 18,999 55 345 0.02 1.22 0.00 98% 0.03 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 6/13/2025 13:15 5,760 15 384 0.02 1.94 0.00 99% 0.03 Y 2121 MOUNTAIN
VIEW 0 - -
815 SHERMAN 6/6/2025 15:50 374 1 374 0.08 1.65 0.00 95% 0.03 Y 1020 RAILROAD
ST 6/6/2025 14:50 1,720 5 344 0.19 1.85 0.00 90% 0.02 Y 260 W FOOTHILL
PKY 6/1/2025 8:55 3,366 10 337 0.03 1.50 0.00 98% 0.02 Y 650 E HARRISON
ST 6/6/2025 15:10 1,870 5 374 0.03 1.63 0.00 98% 0.05 Y 842 EL SOBRANTE 6/11/2025 10:25 2,319 8 290 0.03 1.85 0.00 98% 0.01 Y 1187 MAGNOLIA
AVE 6/12/2025 13:25 598 2 299 0.19 2.02 0.00 91% 0.02 Y 3584 NELSON ST. 6/6/2025 17:25 4,488 19 236 0.07 1.83 0.00 96% 0.02 Y 1070 AQUINO
CIRCLE 6/11/2025 11:25 4,189 15 279 0.07 1.49 0.00 95% 0.02 Y 18648 STATE ST 6/12/2025 13:50 150 1 150 0.82 2.01 0.00 59% 0.04 Y 8540 CAJALCO RD 6/12/2025 14:15 1,272 3 424 0.04 1.39 0.00 97% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-26
Figure 8.3 – Quarterly Water Quality Flushing Locations Table 8.23 – Quarterly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
CL2
Residual
(Before)
CL2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

CL2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
345 ADAMS
CI 2/19/2025 13:40 2,394 6 399 0.30 1.71 0.00 82% 0.02 Y 4000 S MAIN
ST 1/2/2025 16:26 1,945 10 195 1.98 2.04 0.00 3% 0.02 Y 827 RIVER RD 2/19/2025 14:05 748 2 374 0.26 1.66 0.00 84% 0.04 Y 3795 TRINITY
CI 1/17/2025 11:45 2,094 8 262 0.55 2.01 0.00 73% 0.03 Y 2584

AVENIDA DEL
VISTA 1/11/2025 10:45 2,094 14 150 0.25 1.97 0.00 87% 0.01 Y 215 N SMITH
AVE 2/24/2025 16:30 12,791 45 200 0.11 1.46 0.00 92% 0.03 Y 2214 VESPER
CI 1/17/2025 10:53 2,842 10 284 0.40 2.07 0.00 81% 0.04 Y CASPER CI 1/4/2025 14:50 3,441 11 312 0.19 1.73 0.00 89% 0.02 Y 2215
LAKESIDE DR 2/19/2025 14:50 673 2 337 1.45 1.45 0.00 0% 0.02 Y 2365
MILLCREEK PL 1/2/2025 14:49 823 5 165 1.90 2.38 0.00 20% 0.03 Y 2950
PEMBROKE CI 2/19/2025 14:30 2,543 5 509 1.47 1.45 0.00 -1% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-27
Table 8.23 – Quarterly Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
CL2
Residual
(Before)
CL2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

CL2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
2320 RICHEY
ST 1/2/2025 14:26 1,496 10 150 2.40 2.40 0.00 0% 0.03 Y 1764
SANDTRAP DR 2/16/2025 15:15 3,740 15 200 1.27 1.74 0.00 27% 0.02 Y 4657 VALLEY
GLEN DR 1/11/2025 10:25 1,571 14 112 0.50 1.81 0.00 72% 0.04 Y 345 ADAMS
CI 5/16 11:55 5,610 27 207 0.23 1.47 0.00 84% 0.04 Y
4000 S MAIN
ST 4/4 15:45 3,964 22 180 0.88 2.05 0.00 57% 0.04 Y
827 RIVER RD 4/8 11:30 1,272 10 200 0.20 2.06 0.00 90% Y 3795 TRINITY
CI 4/5 13:20 1,945 12 162 0.85 2.28 0.00 63% 0.04 Y
2584

AVENIDA DEL
VISTA 5/16 16:10 1,720 8 215 0.07 1.36 0.00 95% 0.03 Y
215 N SMITH
AVE 4/15 10:10 3,964 20 200 0.10 1.85 0.00 95% 0.02 Y
2214 VESPER
CI 4/15 12:05 1,346 6 200 1.75 2.01 0.00 13% 0.02 Y
CASPER CI 4/16 13:35 449 2 225 1.67 1.65 0.00 -1% 0.04 Y 2215
LAKESIDE DR 4/17 14:30 4,488 20 200 0.00 1.69 0.00 100% 0.04 Y 2365
MILLCREEK PL 4/22 10:30 3,665 20 200 0.06 1.68 0.00 96% 0.04 Y 2950
PEMBROKE CI 4/17 11:20 2,992 10 299 1.10 1.78 0.00 38% 0.04 Y 2320 RICHEY
ST 4/17 15:10 3,516 20 200 1.61 1.67 0.00 4% 0.05 Y
1764
SANDTRAP DR 4/8 14:15 4,862 20 200 1.20 2.09 0.00 43% 0.03 Y 4657 VALLEY
GLEN DR 4/15 15:25 7,704 45 250 1.32 1.47 0.00 10% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-28
Figure 8.4 – Annual Water Quality Flushing Locations
Table 8.24 – Annual Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
1820
RAILROAD ST 1/2/2025 9:00 3,740 12.00 311.67 0.22 1.70 0.00 87% 0.02 Y 1368

OLEANDER
CIR 1/4/2025 12:19 748 6.00 124.67 0.26 2.18 0.00 88% 0.03 Y 1278 CANYON
CIR 1/2/2025 10:20 2,394 9.00 265.96 0.37 2.18 0.00 83% 0.02 Y 1296 DALE CIR 1/4/2025 10:31 898 6.00 149.6 1.66 2.08 0.00 -25% 0.04 Y 155 AUTO
CENTER DR 3/15/2025 12:25 3,665 10 366.52 0.06 1.90 0.00 97% 0.03 y 1380 W SIXTH
ST 3/19/2025 0:00 1,945 13 149.6 1.01 1.81 0.00 44% 0.04 y 1001 ALTA
LOMA DR 3/14/2025 14:10 3,815 15 254.32 1.68 1.84 0.00 9% 0 y 1662 MELODY
Cir 4/10/2025 11:40 2,169 13 166.86 1.75 1.97 0 11% 0.03 Y 482 RIO CT 2/26/2025 13:30 224 1 224.4 1.86 1.88 0.00 1% 0.02 Y WILLOW
CREEK DR 3/29/2025 13:48 898 7 128.23 2.12 2.18 0.00 3% 0.03 Y 107 N
SHERIDAN ST 2/26/2025 13:55 1,047 3 349.07 1.86 1.82 0.00 -2% 0.03 Y 104 N BELLE
AV 2/26/2025 14:05 898 2 448.8 1.89 1.90 0.00 1% 0.02 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-29
Table 8.24 – Annual Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
716 N MAIN
ST 2/26/2025 14:20 1,870 5 374 2.02 1.99 0.00 -2% 0.05 Y 391 N MAIN
ST 2/26/2025 14:30 1,870 5 374 0.35 1.64 0.00 79% 0.03 Y 355 E RINCON
ST 2/26/2025 14:45 449 2 224.4 0.50 2.00 0.00 75% 0.02 Y 133

WASHBURN
Cir 3/29/2025 13:10 1,496 10 149.6 0.60 2.30 0.00 74% 0.03 y 235 N JOY ST 2/26/2025 15:00 224 1 224.4 1.74 2.13 0.00 18% 0.04 Y 103 N
VICTORIA AV 2/26/2025 15:10 898 3 299.2 1.99 2.07 0.00 4% 0.03 Y 1011 S
VICTORIA AV 4/10/2025 12:10 2,992 15 199.47 0.03 2.12 0.00 99% 0.04 Y 690 TAMPICO
Cir 4/21/2025 16:35 2,244 10 224.4 1.94 2.04 0.00 5% 0.05 Y 650 E
HARRISON ST 4/29/2025 8:40 6,807 30 226.89 0.05 1.96 0.00 97% 0.03 Y 1250 WEBB
Cir 1/17/2025 14:24 2,468 8 308.55 0.32 1.98 0.00 84% 0.03 Y 1201 E 6TH ST 4/10/2025 12:50 13,314 50 266.29 0.75 2.32 0.00 68% 0.04 Y 914 PINE ST 4/23/2025 11:30 1,945 10 194.48 1.53 2.05 0.00 25% 0.05 Y 100 RADIO RD 1/17/2025 14:07 2,468 9 274.27 0.45 2.11 0.00 79% 0.02 Y 955

MONTECITO
DRIVE 3/27/2025 13:45 598 2 299.2 1.80 1.86 0.00 3% 0.03 Y 1095

MONTECITO
DR 3/27/2025 13:30 823 2 411.4 1.81 1.99 0.00 9% 0.04 Y 2399

MARYHELEN
ST 3/27/2025 14:20 524 2 261.8 0.14 1.52 0.00 91% 0.02 Y 641 JORDAN
CT 3/27/2025 14:05 900 3 300 2.20 2.15 0.00 -2% 0.04 Y
1709
SHERBORN ST 3/27/2025 14:40 524 2 261.8 1.38 1.52 0.00 9% 0.03 Y 191 N
MCKINLEY ST 3/27/2025 15:45 4,189 10 418.88 0.10 2.36 0.00 96% 0.03 Y 3099

MANCHESTER
Cir 3/27/2025 15:20 299 1 299.2 1.38 1.40 0.00 1% 0.05 Y 3099

HAMPSHIRE
Cir 3/27/2025 15:25 598 2 299.2 1.56 1.62 0.00 4% 0.04 Y 431

SCARBOROUG
H Cir 3/27/2025 15:35 449 2 224.4 1.57 1.59 0.00 1% 0.03 Y 2802 GREEN

RIVER RD
#101 4/11/2025 12:11 3,067 20 153.34 0.08 2.07 0.00 96% 0.03 Y 2140 W
ONTARIO AV 1/5/2025 12:12 1,646 15 109.77 1.03 2.02 0.00 49% 0.04 Y 880 Robles Pl 1/5/2025 11:38 2,768 15 184.50 1.83 1.97 0.00 7% 0.04 Y 889 Live Oak
Pl 4/11/2025 12:59 3,815 14 272.49 1.58 1.65 0.00 4% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-30
Table 8.24 – Annual Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
987

MONTAGUE
Cir 4/10/2025 13:58 5,161 14 368.66 1.61 1.72 0.00 6% 0.01 Y 1890 AZTEC
LN 4/18/2025 14:30 673 3 224.4 1.90 2.04 0.00 7% 0.04 Y 1225 DON
LUIS Cir 4/20/2025 16:15 3,516 20 175.78 0.73 2.19 0.00 67% 0.03 Y 1998
ATHERTON Cir 4/4/2025 12:23 2,169 12 180.77 1.44 2.40 0.01 40% 0.03 Y 792

SAMANTHA
Cir 4/4/2025 12:00 898 5 179.52 1.76 1.96 0.01 10% 0.03 Y 19108 Lyle Av 4/18/2025 13:45 75 1 74.8 1.80 1.84 0.00 2% 0.05 Y 3080

DARTMOUTH
ST 4/17/2025 11:40 3,665 17 215.6 0.86 1.93 0.00 55% 0.02 Y 609 BALBOA
DR 4/4/2025 11:31 1,870 9 207.78 1.75 1.94 0.01 10% 0.02 Y 1716 COPLEN
Cir 2/26/2025 10:00 6,657 25 266 1.56 1.82 0.00 14% 0.03 Y 2390

INDEPENDEN
CE Cir 4/16/2025 12:00 1,720 10 172 1.30 1.80 0.00 28% 0.04 Y 2924 CAPE DR 3/3/2025 16:30 6,134 30 204 1.22 1.65 0.00 26% 0.02 Y 1451 TUDOR
Cir 3/3/2025 17:20 6,882 30 229 1.25 1.59 0.00 21% 0.03 Y 2970

GLENWOOD
Cir 3/4/2025 11:55 4,937 20 247 1.50 1.73 0.00 13% 0.03 Y 1471

MEADOWCRE
ST Cir 3/4/2025 14:15 7,779 35 222 0.93 1.62 0.00 43% 0.04 Y Funston Way 3/4/2025 15:05 4,264 20 213 1.45 1.69 0.00 14% 0.04 Y 1443 Burnette
Cir 4/14/2025 16:30 3,516 20 176 1.24 1.91 0.00 35% 0.02 Y 1341 STEEPLE
CHASE Cir 3/26/2025 17:15 1,421 11 129 1.25 1.85 0.00 32% 0.04 Y 1144
SINSONTE Cir 4/14/2025 17:05 4,189 20 209 0.58 1.78 0.00 67% 0.04 Y 2930
RIMROCK Cir 4/12/2025 14:30 3,590 16 224 1.12 1.71 0.00 35% 0.02 Y 2884

PLUMWOOD
Cir 3/4/2025 15:55 7,480 31 241 0.25 2.38 0.00 89% 0.01 Y 2860

OLIVEWOOD
Cir 3/4/2025 15:20 4,039 24 168 0.29 1.94 0.00 85% 0.03 Y 291 SABINA
PEAK Cir 3/26/2025 12:00 1,945 15 130 1.74 1.97 0.00 12% 0.04 Y 2391 FARGO
Cir 3/4/2025 14:30 3,665 15 244 1.43 1.67 0.00 14% 0.01 Y 2880

CALIFORNIA
AV 2/26/2025 15:30 1,795 12 150 0.05 1.88 0.00 97% 0.03 Y 3650 NELSON
ST 1/7/2025 0:00 4,862 16 304 1.42 2.04 0.00 30% 0.04 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-31
Table 8.24 – Annual Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
3979

CAMELBACK
Cir 2/26/2025 10:35 7,929 35 227 0.92 1.56 0.00 41% 0.03 Y 4164 FOREST

HIGHLANDS
Cir 3/4/2025 13:50 3,142 19 165 0.70 1.59 0.00 56% 0.05 Y 3013

BONNYVIEW
Cir 3/2/2025 16:05 6,508 30 216.92 1.25 1.70 0.00 26% 0.03 Y 1450 TRUDY
WY 3/2/2025 17:00 5,909 30 196.97 0.42 1.56 0.00 73% 0.03 Y 3795 TRINITY
CI 3/2/2025 17:45 3,216 15 214.44 1.48 1.64 0.00 7% 0.02 Y 3765

SAWTOOTH
Cir 3/23/2025 16:20 6,582 25 263.30 0.76 1.85 0.00 59% 0.04 Y 3780 Wallowa
Cir 3/2/2025 17:30 3,216 12 268.03 0.87 1.45 0.00 40% 0.02 Y 3820
PEREGRIN Cir 3/25/2025 17:15 1,720 7 245.77 1.75 1.93 0.00 9% 0.03 Y 1443

CHERRYWOO
D Cir 3/26/2025 10:10 3,665 20 183.26 0.02 1.90 0.00 99% 0.05 Y 3505

SUNMEADOW
Cir 3/26/2025 10:45 2,543 10 254.32 1.90 1.96 0.00 3% 0.02 Y 4165

CHANTICLEER
Cir 3/26/2025 11:10 6,657 25 266.29 0.85 1.87 0.00 55% 0.07 Y 4293

SOTOGRANDE
Cir 3/26/2025 11:45 3,890 15 259.31 1.83 1.93 0.00 5% 0.05 Y 135 CUSTER
Cir 1/17/2025 4:52 4,488 15 299.2 0.51 1.85 0.00 72% 0.03 Y 4000 S MAIN
ST 2/14/2025 12:20 5,685 25 227 1.35 1.70 0.00 21% 0.04 Y 405

CLEVELAND
WY 1/18/2025 11:22 2,543 10 254.32 0.25 1.89 0.00 87% 0.02 Y 4150 ROBBY
Cir 1/22/2025 15:56 1,496 7 213.71 0.32 1.86 0.00 83% 0.04 Y 3780 HURON
Cir 4/15/2025 11:25 3,216 15 214.43 1.91 2.05 0.00 7% 0.06 Y 1032

STOWELL
RANCH Cir 1/23/2025 11:32 3,366 10 336.6 0.29 1.91 0.00 85% 0.04 Y 1155 SANDRA
Cir 1/23/2025 11:56 3,740 12 311.67 0.27 1.86 0.00 85% 0.03 Y 4280 PRAIRIE
Cir 2/26/2025 14:00 8,303 40 207.57 1.16 1.58 0.00 27% 0.05 Y 3966
ASHWOOD Cir 4/15/2025 12:10 7,630 40 190.74 0.26 1.90 0.00 86% 0.03 Y 1377
VERSANTE Cir 1/28/2025 16:30 972 6 162.07 1.59 1.70 0.00 6% 0.03 Y 4380

MAIDSTONE
Cir 1/22/2025 13:22 1,945 10 194.48 0.26 1.85 0.00 86% 0.03 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-32
Table 8.24 – Annual Low Chlorine
Location Date Time Total
Gallons
Time
(Mins) GPM
Cl2
Residual
(Before)
Cl2
Residual
(After)
Disch.

Cl2
%
Difference FCL2
Disch.

NTU
Below
100
(Y/N)
4390
ROSERIDGE CT 1/22/2025 12:41 2,394 10 239.36 0.82 1.89 0.00 57% 0.04 Y 4539 BIRDIE
Cir 3/29/2025 12:50 3,516 18 195 1.28 1.70 0.00 25% 0.03 Y 4555

EDGEWATER
Cir 3/29/2025 13:15 3,142 12 261.8 0.88 1.76 0.00 50% 0.03 Y 11759
CHADWICK RD 5/19/2025 14:38 1,945 10 194.48 1.01 1.18 0.00 14% 0.03 Y 4710 GREEN
RIVER 5/13/2025 11:53 3,890 15 259.31 0.91 1.10 0.00 17% 0.02 Y 2985 HIDDEN
HILLS Cir 5/10/2025 9:10 1,047 6 174.53 0.38 1.56 0.00 76% 0.02 Y 1070 AQUINO
Cir 5/11/2025 14:37 823 11 74.8 1.15 1.39 0.00 17% 0.01 Y 2891
WOLFSON Cir 5/21/2025 11:16 4,862 12 405.17 1.75 1.87 0.00 6% 0.04 Y

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-33

KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS
The abbreviations used in this section are referenced from the 2025 Consumer Confidence Report. 1,2,3-TCP 1,2,3-Trichloropropane
AI Agressiveness Index
CCR Consumer Confidence Report
CFU/mL Colony-Forming Units per Milliliter
DBP Disinfection Byproducts
DBPR Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
DDW Division of Drinking Water (State Resources Control Board) DLR Detection Limits for purposes of Reporting
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
LRAA Locational Running Annual Average
MBAS Methylene Blue Active Substances
MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal Mentioned
MGD Million Gallons per Day
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
N Nitrogen
NA Not Applicable
ND Not Detected
NL Notification Level
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units
pCi/L PicoCuries per liter
PFAS Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
PFOA Perfluorooctanoic Acid
PFOS Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid
ppt Parts per trillion
RL Response Level
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
TOC Total Organic Carbon

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-34
UCMR Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule
WMWD Western Municipal Water District
μg/L Micrograms per liter or parts per billion (ppb)
mg/L Milligrams per liter or parts per million (ppm)
ng/L Nanograms per liter or parts per trillion (ng/L)
RAA Running Annual Average TOC Total Organic Carbon
μS/cm microSiemen per centimeter; or micromho per centimeter (µmho/cm)

EXTENDED ABBREVIATIONS
The abbreviations used in this section are referenced from the 2025 Consumer Confidence Report.

Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL): The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water.

Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHGs (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible.

Secondary MCLs are set to protect the odor, taste and appearance of drinking water.

Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG): The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL): The highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants.

Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG): The level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.

Notification Level (NL) and Response Level (RL): Advisory levels established by the California State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water (DDW) for contaminants that do not have enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). A Notification Level (NL) represents a concentration at which a contaminant does not pose a significant health risk but warrants communication to governing agencies and the public when detected. A Response Level (RL) identifies the concentration at which water systems are recommended to take corrective action, such as removing the source from service, providing treatment, or notifying consumers.

Public Health Goal (PHG): The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. PHGs are set by the California Environmental Protection Agency.

Primary Drinking Water Standard (PDWS): MCLs and MRDLs for contaminants that affect health along with their monitoring and reporting requirements, and water treatment requirements.

Regulatory Action Level (AL): The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow.

City of Corona Section 8 – Water Quality
Potable Water Master Plan
8-35
Treatment Technique (TT): A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-1
SECTION 9 - MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS

9.1. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
This section recommends improvements based on this Master Plan and identified through technical analysis. Future inclusion of Recommended Improvements in the City’s Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) is determined through the City’s prioritization and funding process.

Recommended Improvements are based on a risk assessment that evaluated the likelihood of a facility failure and the potential consequences of a failure. The primary factors considered were the age of the facility, and the results of the existing and future system analysis described in Section 6 and Section 7.

Recommended Improvements also considered observations made during the condition assessment of the water treatment facilities; the evaluation of the City’s wells and booster pump stations based on SCE efficiency tests; outcomes of the remaining service life analysis.

9.1.1. Recommended Improvements
The Recommended Improvements included in this section are the result of this Master Plan effort and were identified independently of the City’s CIP. Where this master plan identifies improvements that are also included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-FY2035 at the time of the adoption of this Master Plan, those projects are denoted with (Existing CIP).

This section presents all costs in 2026 dollars. The planning period for Recommended Improvements is 2026-2040. This section identifies water system improvements based on the following criteria:
• Remaining service life analysis of water system infrastructure as summarized in Section 2. • Water system deficiencies identified in Sections 2, 6, and 7.

9.1.2. Capital Improvement Plan
The City’s CIP serves as a long-term planning tool that enables the City to strategically prioritize and fund infrastructure projects aligned with the City's Strategic Plan, specifically Goal 3: Sound Infrastructure. As part of the City’s CIP, the City scores and prioritizes capital improvement projects using the following prioritization criteria: risk to health and safety, regulatory/mandated requirement, condition and longevity of asset, improves service delivery, funding availability/grant funded, project readiness, contributes to financial well-being of City, improves quality of life, fulfills a strategic plan goal, sustainability and resource conservation, coordination of multiple improvements, and master plan implementation. Current capital improvement projects are included in the City’s Adopted Capital Improvement Plan FY 2026- FY2035. The CIP informs the City’s Adopted Annual Budget for the current FY, and the Adopted Annual Budget can also include projects based on necessity which were not previously identified in the CIP.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-2

9.2. PROJECT PRIORITIES
The Recommended Improvements prioritize projects based on the outcome of a risk-based analysis. Each facility was evaluated using a risk-based analysis that considered the likelihood of failure based on the deficiencies found, and the consequence of failure of that specific facility. Facilities that were determined to have both a high probability of failure, and a high consequence of failure, were assigned a higher priority. It is important to note that a failure can include a physical break or rupture of the asset, or a failure to meet the required level of service because the asset is undersized. Project priority reflects relative system risk and operational need, not project cost or scale.

To catalog the assets owned by the City, the existing facility data in Section 2, was used to assemble the asset list for the treatment facilities, wells, booster pumps, tanks, pressure-reducing stations, and other related facilities. Asset registers were created for each asset in the list. These registers contain data that was used to evaluate the likelihood of failure and the cost of failure for each asset. This asset list and the corresponding asset registers were used to perform the risk-analysis and ultimately determine a need for the improvement and to assign a priority in the CIP.

The risk-based analysis used to determine the priority of each Recommended Improvement.

9.3. RISK-BASED ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The risk-based analysis used was based on the intersection between the consequence of failure (CoF) and likelihood of failure (LoF). The CoF is used to evaluate the consequences, or impacts, which could affect the City, the water service users, or the public health and safety if a failure of that facility were to occur.

The LoF is used to evaluate the probability of a particular asset failing based on known information. Both the LoF and CoF are assigned a value between 1 (low) to 5 (high). A low LoF score indicates that the facility is not likely to fail, while a high LoF indicates the facility is likely to fail or has already failed. A low CoF score indicates that relatively little to no interruption of service or public safety threat would occur if the facility were to fail. Based on the intersection of the LoF and CoF, facilities fall within a low-risk, mediumrisk, or high-risk zone. The zones are shown graphically in Figure 9.1.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-3
Figure 9.1 – Likelihood and Consequence of Failure Score Zones The most critical assets have both a high LoF and a high CoF, shown in the red area in the figure above.

These represent facilities that have a high probability of failing (or have already failed) and have the most risk to the City, water users, or the public, and are therefore considered critical assets that need immediate attention. These facilities are identified by a high risk-score and are assigned the highest priority in the CIP. The next group of risk-based assets falls into the medium-risk zone. A medium-risk asset could be recommended for partial replacement and/or refurbishment in the next planning period.

They are assigned a lower priority in the CIP. And finally, recommendations for low-risk assets may include continuation of current operation for the remaining service life and will be assigned the lowest priority when included in the CIP.

The scores assigned for CoF and LoF are subjective, and the basis of the scoring varies based on the facility type. The facility deficiencies may include hydraulic deficiencies, age, material reliability, and other factors that may vary for each individual facility. Each facility is discussed in detail below. Please refer to Appendix G for an in-depth review of the condition assessment.

Each of the following subsections apply the same risk-based methodology to each major asset class within the City’s potable water system. The risk-based analysis described above establishes a consistent, transparent framework for prioritizing capital improvements across all major asset classes. These results were used to define the CIP project categories and candidate projects described in Section 9.4.

9.3.1. Storage Tank Risk Analysis
The risk analysis of the storage tanks was determined solely on the age of the facilities. These facilities should be inspected every three to five years to determine if the facility is in need of rehabilitation work or replacement. The risk analysis for the storage tanks is based on typical service life analysis.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-4
The typical service life for a steel tank is 50 years. However, a steel tank could last longer if inspected, maintained, and periodically recoated, and if no external forces damage the tank. Concrete tanks have an expected service life of 100 years if properly inspected and maintained, and no external forces damage the tank. Unless an inspection finds damage, none of the City’s concrete tanks will be considered a high risk of failure.

9.3.2. Water Treatment Plant Risk Analysis
Risk analysis for the City’s Water Treatment Plants (WTPs) was based on visual inspection during a site visit on October 14, 2021 as documented in Appendix F. The treatment plants were assigned a medium priority, as none of the recommended upgrades/replacements are critical to WTP operation. While the assigned risk priority is based on observed site conditions from the 2021 inspection, Figure 9.2 is provided for reference to present the approximate age of the City’s WTPs.

Figure 9.2 – Age of Water Treatment Plants in 2026
60 38
24 7
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
Lester WTP Sierra Del Oro WTP Temescal Desalter Granular Activated Carbon WTP Age (Years)

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-5

9.3.3. Pressure Reducing Station Risk Analysis
The risk analysis of the pressure reducing stations (PRS) was also determined solely on the age of the facilities. Typically, a pressure-reducing station will have a typicalservice life of 35 years. Figure 9.3 shows the age of the City’s PRS in 2026. Most of the City’s PRS have 10 to 20 years remaining in their expected service life. One (1) PRS has unknown installation data. Therefore, it was assumed this station will be assigned a higher risk.

Figure 9.3 – Age of Pressure Reducing Stations in 2026

9.3.4. Groundwater Production Well Risk Analysis
The facility age and the current mechanical pumping efficiency were used to assign the LoF score to groundwater production wells. Facilities have an anticipated typical service life and are more likely to fail as they reach and exceed that anticipated typical service life. The efficiency of the City’s well pumps was selected because it can generally predict the likelihood of mechanical and/or electrical equipment failures.

Low efficiencies are indicative of aged and worn equipment that is more likely to fail. The pumping efficiency was determined by reviewing the SoCal Edison (SCE) efficiency tests. Pumps operating between 50% and 60% efficiency are an acceptable efficiency range but indicate that mechanical and electrical equipment may degrade and should be considered for replacement or rehabilitation. Any pumps operating below 50% efficiency require replacement of the mechanical and electrical equipment.

In addition to the electrical and mechanical equipment, the groundwater wells also consist of subsurface components of a borehole and the below grade casing. The type of casing material used typically determines the typical service life of the below grade improvements. The City used carbon steel casings until the late 1990s, and after the late 1990’s used stainless steel casings. Low-carbon steel wells are expected to last 25 years, while stainless steel wells have a typical service life of 75 years. Figure 9.4 displays a comparison of well-material and age.
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
Age (Years)
PRS Service Life

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-6
Figure 9.4 – Age and Material of Wells in 2026
To calculate the LoF, a weighted average of efficiency and age was used, with efficiency accounting for 80% and age accounting for 20% of the score. Age was given a lower weighted value since the efficiency shows the active performance of the wells. However, when the City’s carbon steel wells are scheduled for rehabilitation, a thorough inspection of the City’s boring holes will be required to determine if the well requires redrilling or relocation. The total well production capacity was used to determine The CoF, since wells with greater capacity will affect the City’s overall production capacity. The scoring used for the groundwater wells is shown in Table 9.1.

Table 9.1– Likelihood and Consequence of Failure Scoring for Wells Item 1 (Low) 2 (Low-Medium) 3 (Medium) 4 (Medium-High) 5 (High) LoF
Efficiency
Range
Greater than
70%
60%-70% 50%-60% 40%-50%
Less than
40%
Remaining
Service Life
Range
Greater than
30 years
remaining
20-30 years
remaining
10-20 years
remaining
0-10 years
remaining
Exceeds
Service Life
CoF
Less than 250
gpm
250 gpm to 500
gpm
500 gpm to
1000 gpm
1000 gpm to 2000
gpm
Greater than
2000 gpm
91 90
80 77
74 73
46 44
39 36
28 28 28 27 27
24 24 24 23
18 18
12 8
7 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
35 40
45 50
55 60
65 70
75 80
85 90
95 Age (Years)
Stainless Steel
Carbon Steel
Inactive Well
Stainless Steel
Typical Service Life
High Strength Low Alloy Steel
Low Carbon Steel Page 1391 of 3356
City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-7

9.3.5. Pump Station Risk Analysis
Similar to groundwater wells, the facility age and the current mechanical pumping efficiency were used to assign the LoF score to booster pump station facilities. To calculate the LoF, a weighted average of efficiency and age was used, with efficiency accounting for 80% and age accounting for 20% of the score.

Figure 9.5 shows the average age of each pump station and the expected service life.

Figure 9.5 – Age and Material of Pump Stations in 2026
For the LoF analysis performed for the booster pump stations, it was assumed that if there were mechanical and electrical equipment replacement performed at a given station, all booster pumps within the facility were replaced with new equipment. For this reason, the LoF analysis did not analyze individual pumps or other individual equipment for failures. The average efficiency of all the booster pumps within a pump station was used as a basis.

The capacity of the pumps was used to assign a CoF for each facility. For this risk analysis, the capacity was determined using the sum total of the pumping horsepower. The CoF was assumed to be greater for a larger total horsepower. Therefore, a facility with higher pumping horsepower was assigned a higher CoF score. The scoring used for the booster pump stations is shown in Table 9.2. 57 52
41 40 39 38
36 35 35 35
29 27 27 27
25 23 22
20 20
10 6 6
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 Age (Years)
Equipment Useful Life
Structure Useful Life

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-8
Table 9.2 – Likelihood and Consequence of Failure Scoring for Pumps

9.3.6. Pipeline Risk Analysis
The risk-analysis approach for pipelines utilized several factors for determining risk scores. The LoF score was based on the remaining service life of the pipe and also considered any hydraulic deficiencies that were predicted by the system model presented in Section 6 and 7.

The remaining service life was estimated based on pipe age and material type, considering the expected life of the specific material. The typical service life for pipelines can vary from 40 to 100 years, depending on the material. Approximately one third of the City’s pipelines are constructed from asbestos concrete pipe (ACP) material. Asbestos concrete pipe was widely utilized in the mid-20th century and is no longer favored due to health effects from damaged asbestos pipes (associated with cutting, repair, and removal of pipe material.) Selection of specific replacement pipe materials will be determined during detailed project design.

For pipelines, the remaining service life analysis considers the age and material of the pipeline to estimate the typical service life for specific pipe material. For pipelines, the end of the service life is the age when pipe material could be expected to weaken, crack, or rupture. Pipes can be utilized beyond their expected service life if they are assessed to remain intact with no leaks. It is recommended that once a pipeline reaches the end of its service life, pipeline condition be evaluated through CCTV inspection, pressure testing, and leak detection measures as identified by the City. If significant damage or degradation is found, pipeline replacement is recommended to maintain the integrity of the distribution system. The typical service life for each pipeline material within the City’s distribution system is shown in Table 9.3.

Item
1 (Low) 2 (Low-Medium)
3 (Medium)
4 (Medium-High) 5 (High)
LoF
Efficiency
Range
Greater than
70%
60%-70% 50%-60% 40%-50% Less than
40%
Remaining
Service Life
Range
greater than
30 years
remaining
20-30 years
remaining
10-20
years
remaining
0-10 years
remaining
Exceeds
Service Life
CoF Less than 50
HP
50 HP to 75 HP
75 HP to
100 HP
100 HP to 200 HP Greater than
200 HP

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-9
Table 9.3 –Pipeline Typical Service Life based on 2021 GIS Data Abv. Material
Service
Life
Length
(miles)
AC Asbestos Cement Pipe 70 219.94
CAS Cast Iron Pipe 50 0.01
CEM Cement Pipe 75 1.60
CIPP Relined Pipes 100 10.43
CMLC Cement Mortar Lined and Coated Steel Pipe 100 56.82 CML-TW Cement Mortar Lined and Tape Wrapped Steel Pipe 75 0.73 COP Copper Pipe 50 0.13
DIP Ductile Iron Pipe 100 57.75
GP Galvanized Pipe 50 0.03
PEP Polyethylene Pipe 75 0.17
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe 70 279.16
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe 100 0.00
SP Steel Pipe 50 40.98
TOTAL 667.75
Figure 9.6 shows the quantity of pipeline in miles of pipeline and the remaining service life in 5-year increments. The figure also indicates the type of pipe material. As of 2026, approximately 16 miles of water pipelines have exceeded their service life, and approximately 118 miles are projected to reach the end of their service life within the next 20 years. These pipelines beyond typical service life are further discussed in Section 9.6.1.

Figure 9.6 – Remaining Pipe Service Life
In addition to age, the hydraulic capacity of the pipelines was also considered. If minor hydraulic issues (e.g. insufficient capacity, etc.) were identified, the pipeline was assigned a minimum score of 2. If critical hydraulic issues were identified, the pipeline was assigned a score of 5. Although a hydraulic issue does 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Length (miles)
AC PVC CMLC DIP SP Other

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-10
not necessarily predict a break failure, it does indicate the pipeline can jeopardize the level of service required for the City’s water users.

The CoF score is based on several factors, the most predominant was the pipe classification (distribution/transmission). Transmission lines were given a higher score because a broken transmission line would have a greater effect on the City’s distribution system. Another factor considered for the CoF was the expected cost of a failure. Since cost of failure is directly related to the length of the pipe, the pipe length was used as a surrogate for pipeline cost. Finally, the material of the pipe was considered, more specifically if the pipe was an AC pipeline.

Since both the LoF and CoF are based on several factors, the summation of the factors was considered to determine the LoF and CoF score. Unlike the well, and booster pumps, this causes the maximum score for each factor to rise to 13 and 10 respectively. These factors were multiplied to create a risk-based score that determined an order of priority.

Table 9.4 – Likelihood of Failure Scoring of Pipelines
Item 1 2 3 4 5
LoF
Age (Remaining
Years)
Over 50 20-50 10-20 0-5 Over service
life
Model
N/A Minor
issues
N/A N/A Critical
Issues
Diameter (in)
N/A N/A Less Than 8-
in

N/A N/A
CoF
Pipeline Type Distribution N/A Transmission N/A N/A
Length (Miles)
Less than

0.1 0.1 to 0.25 0.25 to 0.50 0.5 to 1.0 Over 1.0
Material N/A ACP N/A N/A N/A

9.4. BASIS OF PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINIONS
The opinion of probable costs (cost opinion) for each project serves to establish an order of magnitude cost for each Recommended Improvement. The cost opinion utilizes estimated construction opinion and assigns percentage of the estimated construction opinion to estimate other factors. Table 9.5 shows the cost opinion elements of the water system improvements. In subsequent cost opinion tables for specific Recommended Improvements, values are rounded to the nearest $1,000 increment.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-11
Table 9.5 – Summary of Elements Used to Estimate Recommended Improvement Costs Pipelines WTPs Tanks Wells
Booster
Pump
Stations
Pressure
Reducing
Stations
Estimated Construction Opinion
Planning 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
Design 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10%
Construction Management, Inspection,
and Materials Testing
15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%
Contingency 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%
City Administrative and Legal Costs 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
• Planning and Design. Planning will account for 5% of the estimated construction opinion, and design will account for 10% of the estimated construction opinion. • Construction Management, Inspection, and Materials Testing. Construction management, inspection, and materials testing will account for 15% of the estimated construction opinion. • Construction Contingency. Many of the Recommended Improvements will be the replacement or rehabilitation of existing equipment which tends to be more complex than new construction on previously undeveloped areas, thus contingency will account for 25% of the estimated construction opinion.
• City Administrative and Legal Costs. Legal and administrative costs will account for 5% the estimated construction opinion.
• Property Acquisition. Generally, the identified improvement projects occur at existing water system infrastructure and are located within City right-of-way (ROW); therefore, generally no property acquisition is expected. If an identified project is planned outside of the City’s ROW, property acquisition costs must be identified on a project-by-project basis.

9.5. CONSTRUCTION OPINION ASSUMPTIONS
All cost opinions and construction cost opinions are shown in 2026 dollar values, and costs should be escalated to reflect inflation to the CIP budget year when the Recommended Improvement is adopted into the CIP.

9.5.1. Pipeline Cost Opinion
Pipeline installation costs opinions were generated using recent contract award values for water distribution main replacement costs within Riverside County. The costs are based on parallel replacement of a water mains, and including appurtenances, maintenance of services, traffic control, and other typical requirements for the construction of a complete water main replacement project. Extensive repaving is not included; with the assumption the replacements will be coordinated by the City with the pavement replacement program. Economies of Scale are present in pipeline construction projects, and projects with less than 1,000 linear feet will have escalating unit costs.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-12
Table 9.6 – Basis for Pipeline Construction Cost Opinion Item
Unit 2026
Cost
8-inch pipeline Per Linear Foot $390
12-inch pipeline Per Linear Foot $420
16 to 24-inch pipeline Per Linear Foot $480
>24-inch pipeline Per Linear Foot $520
12-inch PRV Per valve $70,000
Connection to New Meter Per Meter $3,500
Connection to Existing Meter Per Meter $5,000

9.5.2. Facilities Cost Opinion
An order of magnitude construction cost opinion for water facilities, water system infrastructure other than pipelines, is considered to be a Class 5 Construction Cost Opinion as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE International) Recommended Practice No. 18R-97. The construction cost opinion makes use of quantity estimates; industry cost estimating tables; vendor, supplier, or manufacturer quotations; actual construction costs of past projects; and recent contract bid award data in the development of the cost opinion.

Table 9.7 – Basis for Facilities and Infrastructure Construction Cost Opinion Water Infrastructure Conditions
2026
Cost Opinion
Well Newly drilled well, 300 ft deep
Equipment for new well
$3.0 million
$1.0 million
Tank New 2.5 MG pre-stressed concrete tank
Recoating welded steel tank
$11.5 million
$600,000/per MG
Booster Pump
Station
Construction of new booster pump station
Rehabilitation of existing booster pump station
~$4 million
$75k - $2.0 million
Pressure Reducing
Stations
Pressure reducing station rehabilitation $120,000
Flow Control Valves New flow control station $1.0-$1.5 million

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-13
Table 9.8 defines the various cost opinion classes defined by AACE International.

Table 9.8 - Summary of Construction Cost Classes
COST

OPINION
Primary
Characteristic Secondary Characteristic
Level of Project
Definition
Expressed as %
of Complete
Definition
End Usage Methodology Expected
Accuracy Range Preparation Effort
Expressed as %
of Complete
Definition
Typical Purpose
of Cost Opinion
Typical Estimating
Method
Typical Variation
in Low and High
ranges (a)
Typical Degree of
effort relative To
Least Cost Index of
1(b)
Class 5 0% to 2% Concept
Screening
Capacity Factored.

Parametric Models.

Judgment or Analogy
L: -20% to -50%
H: +30% to
+100%
1 Class 4 1% to 15% Study or
Feasibility
Equipment Factored
or Parametric Model
L: -15% to -30%
H: +20% to +50% 2 to 4
Class 3 10% to 40%
Budget
Authorization,
or Control
Semi-Detailed Unit
Costs with Assembly
Level Line Items
L: -10% to -20%
H: +10% to +30% 3 to 10
Class 2 30% to 70% Control or Bid/
Tender
Detailed Unit Cost
with Forced Detailed
Take- Off
L: -5% to -15%
H: +5% to +20% 4 to 20
Class 1 50% to 100% Check Estimate
or Bid/Tender
Detailed Unit Cost
with Detailed Take-Off
L: -3% to -10%
H: +3% to +15% 5 to 100
(a) The state of process technology and availability of applicable reference cost data affect the range markedly. The +/- value represents typical percentage variation of actual costs from the cost estimate after application of contingency (typically at a 50% level of confidence) for given scope.
(b) If the range index value of "1" represents 0.005% of project costs, then an index value of 100 represents 0.5%. Estimate preparation effort is highly dependent upon the size of the Project and the quality of estimating data and tools.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-14

9.6. W1: WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Category W1 includes Recommended Improvements identified for the water pipelines.

Basis for Improvements. The City has approximately 675 miles of pipelines, over 45,000 meters, and numerous blowoff valves, air relief valves, and backflow prevention valves. Water distribution system infrastructure naturally deteriorates over time due to age, material fatigue, corrosion, and operational stress. As components age, the risk of leaks, failures, and service disruptions increases, which can compromise system reliability and water quality.
• Pipelines need to be replaced when the pipeline does not meet the level of service required by City standards outlined in Section 5, specifically undersized pipelines, or when pipelines reach the end of their service life. Associated valves should be replaced when pipelines are replaced. • Maintaining functional water meters promotes reliable and accurate water usage data.

The W1 Recommended Improvements are:
• Systematic Water Distribution System Replacement Considering Identified Deficiencies • Water Meter Replacements (AMI Meter Replacements (Existing CIP) and Systematic Meter Replacement Program)
• SCADA Improvements

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-15

9.6.1. W1-1: Systematic Water Pipeline Replacement Considering Identified Deficiencies Location: Various locations
Cost Opinion (2026): See Table 9.10
Priority: Low to Medium
Overview: Since pipeline infrastructure continues to age and deteriorate over time, systematic pipeline replacement must be a continuous and ongoing process to maintain system reliability and to meet current and future water demands. The ongoing process requires prioritization, planning, and construction. In addition to systematic replacement, the water system also contains known hydraulic deficiencies and known pipe diameter deficiencies (specifically pipelines less than 8-inches in diameter).

To implement systematic water pipeline replacement, the City could consider replacing a percentage of pipeline each year. There are various factors that the City can consider when determining how to prioritize its pipeline replacement. Some factors include:
• Known hydraulic deficiencies (identified in Sections 6 and 7, Table 9.9, and Appendix K). • Size-deficient pipes (areas of concern documented in Section 2.7.7 and Appendix L). • Typical service life of pipeline (considering pipe material and age of pipeline and documented in Appendix L).
• Scheduled projects in the vicinity including street paving or pavement maintenance and other utility projects.
• Break history, regardless of material and age.

Generally, prioritizing pipeline replacement involves evaluating multiple factors- individually and in combination- to determine the most effective sequence of projects. For instance, older asbestos cement pipeline, which have shown an increasing number of breaks, may be elevated in priority. Additionally, when a street overlaying an aging asbestos cement pipeline is scheduled for pavement rehabilitation, the timing of that pavement project may guide the scheduling of the corresponding pipeline replacement to minimize repeated disturbance and traffic interruptions and to minimize the risk of vibrations resulting from construction equipment.

W1-1 summarizes the following information to assist the City with its pipeline prioritization. • Hydraulically Deficient Pipes- Sections 6 and 7 summarize hydraulic deficiencies identified by the hydraulic model based on high velocities, low pressures, inadequate fire flows, and high velocities during fire flows. Table 9.9 groups all hydraulic deficiencies identified by the hydraulic model into Recommended Improvement projects by pressure zone, and Appendix K includes cut sheets of projects identified in Table 9.9.
• Size-Deficient Pipes- Appendix L includes figures and tables identifying size-deficient pipes (pipelines less than 8-inches in diameter that do not meet the City’s minimum distribution main size criteria discussed in Section 5.2.6.4). These pipelines were identified based on system design standards in the City Department of Water and Power (DWP) Design Policy (Nov 2012), Section B.6, independent of hydraulic modeling results. The identified pipelines include dead-end mains

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-16
less than 8-inches that serve hydrants and are therefore expected to meet the minimum 8-inch main size criteria.
o The size-deficient pipes included in Appendix L are recommended for upsizing to 8-inches. o The City’s DWP Design Policy (Nov 2012), Section B.6 requires 12-inch diameter minimum pipeline size under specific scenarios associated with commercial, industrial, and multifamily projects and where fire flows are greater than 1,500 gpm, but the Design Policy also allows for approval of exceptions to the minimum pipeline size for looped conditions which do not exceed maximum velocity (under fire flow and max day flow scenarios). Because replacing all size‑deficient pipelines represents a substantial capital investment that is unlikely to be completed system‑wide during the planning period—and because the interconnected distribution system generally meets City criteria aside from the hydraulically-deficient pipes identified in Table 9.9 and Appendix K — final pipe sizing should be confirmed during project development. Actual system conditions, development patterns, land use, and fire-flow needs at the time of project planning may differ from conditions identified in this Master Plan, and pipe sizing should reflect those projectspecific requirements. • Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life- Appendix L includes figures and tables identifying pipelines beyond typical service life (pipelines that have exceeded their typical service life or will exceed their typical service life by the end of the planning period, 2040). Table 9.3 summarizes typical services life based on the pipeline material and age of the pipeline and can help the City understand remaining service life.

Extensive tables detailing size-deficient pipes and pipelines beyond their typical service life are included in Appendix L, and the Estimated Construction Opinion and 2026 Cost Opinion are summarized by pressure zone in Table 9.10.

Reference-Only (Not Recommended for Improvement): Dead-End Pipelines (Non-deficient) Dead-end pipelines less than 8-inches in diameter are not always characterized as size-deficient.

Specifically, Appendix M summarizes pipelines less than 8 -inches in diameter that extend past the last fire hydrant on a main and primarily serve residential connections. These dead-end mains function as service extensions and are not recommended for upsizing improvements. These dead-end pipelines (nondeficient) and are provided for reference only; they are not included in Table 9.10 or as Recommended Improvements.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-17
Table 9.9 –Hydraulically Deficient Pipes
Zone Project
No.
(Existing
Diameter)
Proposed
Diameter
Location Length
(LF) Hydraulic Deficiency Deficiency Priority
Pavement
Rehab
Zone
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Comments
725 725-1
(10")
12"
Green River Road at
Dominguez Ranch 290 Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing System Low 9 $609,000 Industrial fire flow of 3,500
gpm required. Max Flow
available existing is 2,925 gpm.
905
905-1
(12")
16"
Smith Ave between
Sherman Ave and Border
Ave connection to
existing 24" main
622 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 5.5 - 6.9 fps)
Future
System Low 5 $448,000
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
905-2
(12")
14"
Radio Rd south of
Quarry St 233 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 5.1 fps)
Future
System Low 7 $147,000
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
905-3
(12")
14"
6th Ave between Radio
Rd and Compton Ave 1,052 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 6.1 fps) Future
System Low 7 $443,000
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
905-4
(12")
16"
Small segment in
Railroad St east of Alcoa
Cir
21 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 5.8 fps)
Future
System
Low
4 $51,000 Small reduced diameter
section of pipe
Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing
System
(10")
16"
Alcoa Cir north of
Railroad up to Alcoa PRS 1,025
Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 12.0 fps)
Future
System
Low $431,000
Major feed to Alcoa PRS, but
flow could be offset by other
Fire Velocity > 12 fps stations to limit velocity. Existing System
(Sub
zone)
780
780-1
(10")
16"
Alcoa Cir north of PRS to
Rincon St 1,094 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 12.0 fps)
Future
System Low
4 $526,000
Major feed from Alcoa PRS, but
flow could be offset by other
stations to limit velocity.
(10")
12"
Segment in Rincon St
west of Alcoa Cir 14 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 6.9 fps) Future
System Low $30,000 Small reduced diameter
section of pipe
1060
1060-1
(14")
16"
Border Ave between
Ontario Ave and
Carolwood Dr
994 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 5.6 fps)
Existing
System Low
5 $478,000
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
1060-2
(8")
10"
Kroonen Dr between
Newton Ln and Peeler St 380 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 5.3 fps) Future
System Low $223,000
Distribution main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-18
Table 9.9 –Hydraulically Deficient Pipes
Zone Project
No.
(Existing
Diameter)
Proposed
Diameter
Location Length
(LF) Hydraulic Deficiency Deficiency Priority
Pavement
Rehab
Zone
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Comments
1220
1220-1
(12")
16"
I-15 crossing between
Bedford Canyon Road
and Tuscany St
1,644 Velocity > 5 fps
(Ultimate 6.1 - 8.6 fps)
Future
System Low 10 $2,368,000 This is a major freeway
crossing
1220-2
(6")
12"
[1]
400' South of Magnolia
Ave and S Main Street 380 Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing System Med 10 $160,000 Industrial fire flow of 3,500
gpm required. Max Flow
available existing is 2,300 gpm.
1220-3
(6")
8"
Grandview St between
Consul Ave and
Diplomat Ave
380 Fire Velocity > 12 fps Existing
System Med 2 $149,000
Single family residential fire
flow 1,500 gpm required. Max
Flow available existing is 1,050
gpm.
1380 1380-1
(16")
20"
Upper Dr from Orange
Crest St to Peregrin Dr 938 Velocity > 5 fps(Ultimate 6.8 fps) Future
System Med 6 $451,000
Transmission main, marginally
above criteria at ultimate
buildout
[1] Based on the existing system hydraulic model, Project 1220-2 proposed diameter would be 8” to achieve fire flow criteria of <12 fps velocity. However, City Department of Water and Power (DWP) Design Policy (Nov. 2012) B.6 requires 12” diameter for industrial projects and where fire flows are greater than 1,500 gpm.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-19
Table 9.10 – Systematic Water Pipeline Replacements 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Zone 725 (Zone 1)
Project 725-1 $609,000 $30,450 $60,900 $91,350 $152,250 $30,450 $974,000 Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) $1,345,000 $67,250 $134,500 $201,750 $336,250 $67,250 $2,152,000 Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $2,132,000 $106,600 $213,200 $319,800 $533,000 $106,600 $3,411,000 Zone 905 (Zone 2)
Project 905-1 $448,000 $22,400 $44,800 $67,200 $112,000 $22,400 $717,000 Project 905-2 $147,000 $7,350 $14,700 $22,050 $36,750 $7,350 $235,000 Project 905-3 $443,000 $22,150 $44,300 $66,450 $110,750 $22,150 $709,000 Project 905-4 $482,000 $24,100 $48,200 $72,300 $120,500 $24,100 $771,000 Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) $65,118,000 $3,255,900 $6,511,800 $9,767,700 $16,279,500 $3,255,900 $104,189,000 Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) $8,059,400 $402,970 $805,940 $1,208,910 $2,014,850 $402,970 $12,895,000 Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $58,008,000 $2,900,400 $5,800,800 $8,701,200 $14,502,000 $2,900,400 $92,813,000 Zone 905: Subzone 780
Project 780-1 $556,000 $27,800 $55,600 $83,400 $139,000 $27,800 $890,000 Subzone 780- Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in
Diameter) $8,992,000 $449,600 $899,200 $1,348,800 $2,248,000 $449,600 $14,387,000 Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $3,901,000 $195,050 $390,100 $585,150 $975,250 $195,050 $6,242,000 Zone 1020
Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) $1,613,000 $80,650 $161,300 $241,950 $403,250 $80,650 $2,581,000 Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $12,541,000 $627,050 $1,254,100 $1,881,150 $3,135,250 $627,050 $20,066,000 Zone 1060 (Zone 3)
Project 1060-1 $478,000 $23,900 $47,800 $71,700 $119,500 $23,900 $765,000 Project 1060-2 $223,000 $11,150 $22,300 $33,450 $55,750 $11,150 $357,000 Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) $63,812,000 $3,190,600 $6,381,200 $9,571,800 $15,953,000 $3,190,600 $102,099,000 Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) $650,000 $32,500 $65,000 $97,500 $162,500 $32,500 $1,040,000 Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $26,352,000 $1,317,600 $2,635,200 $3,952,800 $6,588,000 $1,317,600 $42,163,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-20
Table 9.10 – Systematic Water Pipeline Replacements 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Zone 1060: Subzone 920
Subzone 920- Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in
Diameter) $119,000 $5,950 $11,900 $17,850 $29,750 $5,950 $190,000 Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $1,233,000 $61,650 $123,300 $184,950 $308,250 $61,650 $1,973,000 Zone 1136
Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) $1,206,000 $60,300 $120,600 $180,900 $301,500 $60,300 $1,930,000 Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life None
Zone 1220 (Zone 4)
Project 1220-1 $2,368,000 $118,400 $236,800 $355,200 $592,000 $118,400 $3,789,000 Project 1220-2 $149,000 $7,450 $14,900 $22,350 $37,250 $7,450 $238,000 Project 1220-3 $160,000 $8,000 $16,000 $24,000 $40,000 $8,000 $256,000 Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) $33,677,000 $1,683,850 $3,367,700 $5,051,550 $8,419,250 $1,683,850 $53,883,000 Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life $15,735,000 $786,750 $1,573,500 $2,360,250 $3,933,750 $786,750 $25,176,000 Zone 1220: Subzone 1045
Subzone 1045- Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in
Diameter) $276,000 $13,800 $27,600 $41,400 $69,000 $13,800 $442,000 Subzone 1045- Size Deficient (Under 4-in
Diameter) None
Zone 1320
Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) None
Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life None
Zone 1380 (Zone 5)
Project 1380-1 $451,000 $22,550 $45,100 $67,650 $112,750 $22,550 $722,000 Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) None
Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life None

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-21
Table 9.10 – Systematic Water Pipeline Replacements 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Zone 1640 (Zone 6)
Size Deficient (4.0 to Under 8-in Diameter) None
Size Deficient (Under 4-in Diameter) None
Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life None

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-22

9.6.2. W1-2: Water Meter Replacements
Water Meter Replacement within the Master Plan planning period (2026 to 2040) includes both the City’s ongoing Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Project and Systematic Meter Replacement.

Both the AMI and Annual Systematic Meter Replacement are discussed in W1-2.

Location: Throughout City
AMI Project (Existing CIP)
Total Project Cost: $22,500,000 (City funded: $20,500,000|Grant funded: $2,000,000)
Schedule: March 19, 2025 to March 31, 2027
Systematic Meter
Replacement
Total Project Cost: See Table 9.13
Priority: Medium
Overview: The AMI Project is currently underway to retrofit or replace meters throughout the City between March 2025 and March 2027. A total of 47,573 meters will be upgraded, of which 25,112 will be replaced and 22,461 will be retrofitted. In the AMI Project, older meter bodies are fully replaced, while meter bodies less than eight years old are retrofitted with AMI communication modules. The AMI project is expected to be completed by March 2027 and represents a one-time, accelerated system upgrade.

Table 9.11 summarizes the AMI Project based on June 2025 data provided by the City.

Table 9.11 – AMI Project Summary
Meter Size Number of Meters
Replacement Retrofit
5/8" 4,656 2,237
3/4" 14,222 14,794
1" 4,305 3,557
1-1/2” 735 754
2" 1,089 1,027
3" 34 52
4" 17 26
6" 18 12
8" 36 -
10" - 2
Total
25,112 22,461
47,573
While AMI Project modernizes meter communications, it does not eliminate the need for systematic meter replacement. Following completion of AMI Project, the City plans to resume a long-term systematic meter replacement program, initially prioritizing retrofitted meter bodies once they exceed 10 years of age. Given the anticipated 10-to-15-year service life of water meters, replacing a portion of the system annually is necessary to maintain system reliability.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-23
Table 9.12 shows the sizes and number of meters retrofitted during the AMI Project. Assuming all meters retrofitted during the AMI Project will be replaced prior to the end of the planning period (2040), 22,461 meters would need to be replaced. The estimated cost per meter is based on 2026 dollars and does not include cost escalation for installing in future years. These estimated meter costs should not be compared against the City’s current service fee schedule for new service connections.

Table 9.12 – Water Meter Count and Estimated Cost to Replace Meter Size Number of Meters
Estimated Cost Per
Meter (2026)
5/8" 2,237 $660
3/4" 14,794 $720
1" 3,557 $830
1-1/2” 754 $1,960
2" 1,027 $2,300
3" 52 $830
4" 26 $830
6" 12 $830
8" - $830
10” 2 $950
Total 22,461
Table 9.13 shows AMI Project and Systematic Meter Replacement 2026 Cost Opinion. Rounded total for systematic meter replacement assumes all 22,461 meters are replaced during the planning period but presents 2026 dollar value.

Table 9.13 – Systematic Meter Replacement 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%) Design (10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded Total
(2026)
AMI Project
(Existing CIP)
$22,500,000
Meter
Replacement
$19,000,000 $950,000 $1,900,000 $2,850,000 $4,750,000 $950,000 $30,400,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-24

9.6.3. W1-3: SCADA Improvements
Location: Throughout City
Cost Opinion (2026): Not Applicable
Overview: SCADA systems are expected to need upgrades and improvements every 15-20 years. The City’s current SCADA system has recently been upgraded and is not expected to need improvements until 2038 or later.

Operational Considerations:

The City provided the SCADA operations upgrades included in Table 9.14; however, the estimated construction opinion is not included in the Recommended Improvements cost opinion summary since these are operational and maintenance improvements and not Recommended Improvements.

Table 9.14 – City Provided SCADA Operations Improvements Improvement Estimated Construction Opinion

1. ADV WST $82,500

2. Aquino BS $93,500

3. Cresta Verde BS $93,500

4. Temescal Desalter Treatment Plant $550,000

5. EG Zone 6 BS $93,500

6. EG WST $82,500

7. Garretson Blend Station $121,000

8. Gilbert Potable WST $82,500

9. Glen Ivy WST NA- Inactive

10. Green River Comms $82,500

11. Harlan Hill BS $93,500

12. Hayden WST $82,500

13. Home Gardens WST $82,500

14. Kraft Ranch BS $93,500

15. Lester Zone 4 BS $93,500

16. Lester Zone 5 BS $93,500

17. Mabey Canyon BS $93,500

18. Main St WST $82,500

19. Montana Ranch BS $93,500

20. Mountain Gate FCS $82,500

21. Serfas Club BS $82,500

22. Yuma WST $82,500

23. Well 3 – Glen Ivy $110,000

24. Well 8 $110,000

25. Well 13 NA- Inactive

26. Well 14 $110,000

27. Well 15 $110,000.00 $110,000

28. Well 20 – Glen Ivy $110,000

29. Well 21 – Glen Ivy $110,000

30. Well 27 – Out of service NA- Inactive

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-25

9.7. W2 WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
Category W2 includes Recommended Improvements identified for the water treatment plants (WTPs).

Basis for Improvements. A site visit of each WTP was conducted in October 2021 and documented in Appendix F. The Recommended Improvements in category W2 come from the October 2021 site visit and subsequent conditions assessment.

The W2 Recommended Improvements are:
• Temescal Desalter WTP Improvements
o Replacement of Programmable Logic Control (PLC) and Control Logic • Lester WTP Improvements
o Blending Facility Relocation of Chlorine Injection
o Surge Basin Upgrades
• Sierra Del Oro WTP Improvements
o Sedimentation Basin Shade Cover (Existing CIP)
• Glen Ivy Well Treatment Improvements
o Process Improvements

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-26

9.7.1. W2-1: Temescal Desalter Water Treatment Plant Improvements Location: 745 Corporation Yard Way
Cost Opinion (2026): Not Applicable
Priority: Medium
Overview: No Recommended Improvements are identified for the Temescal Desalter.

Maintenance (not included):
• As documented in W1-3: SCADA Improvements, a PLC Replacement for the Temescal Desalter WTP is planned maintenance (Table 9.14 – Line 4).
• Reverse Osmosis (RO) membranes are recommended for replacement approximately every five years. Because the City considers RO Membrane Replacements as maintenance costs, they are not listed in the City’s CIP.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-27

9.7.2. W2-2: Lester Water Treatment Plant Improvements
Location: 2970 Rimpau Ave
Cost Opinion (2026): $5,520,000
Priority: Medium
Overview:
• Surge Basin Upgrades: The existing surge basin is insufficient, and a larger surge basin is needed.

This would also include replacing the existing effluent pumps with new VFD-driven vertical turbines or submersible pumps.

Table 9.15 –Lester WTP Improvements 2026 Cost Opinion
Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Surge Basin
Upgrades $3,450,000 $172,500 $345,000 $517,500 $862,500 $172,500 $5,520,000 Maintenance (not included in Table 9.15):
• W1-3: SCADA Improvements documents SCADA improvements applicable to the Lester.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-28

9.7.3. W2-3: Sierra Del Oro Water Treatment Plant Improvements (Existing CIP) Location: 2940 Wilderness Circle
Cost Opinion (2026): $1,840,000
Priority: Medium
Overview: The preliminary field analysis to the Sierra Del Oro WTP revealed a few improvements necessary to maintain the treatment plant’s reliability. These include the following:
• Sedimentation Basin Shade Cover: The sedimentation basin needs a shade cover to prevent UV degradation of chlorine residual within the basin.

Table 9.16 –Sierra Del Oro WTP Improvements 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Sedimentation
Basin Shade
Cover
(Existing CIP)
$1,150,000 $57,500 $115,000 $172,500 $287,500 $57,500 $1,840,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-29

9.7.4. W2-4: Glen Ivy Well Treatment Improvements
Location: 3745 Temescal Canyon Road
Cost Opinion (2026): $6,373,000
Priority: Medium
Overview: Due to water quality issues, the Glen Ivy wells in Pressure Zone 1136 that serve the Glen Ivy tank and the future Glen Ivy Well Treatment are offline. Design of the Glen Ivy Well Treatment Improvements, including cartridge filters, disinfection by CT, and subsequent chloramination, has been completed. This project will result in the installation of the disinfection equipment and construction of related improvements. When construction of the Glen Ivy Well Treatment improvements is complete, the Glen Ivy wells can be brought back online.

The Glen Ivy Well Treatment Improvements have been designed. The City provided the estimated construction opinion.

Table 9.17 –Glen Ivy Well Treatment Improvements 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement Planning Design Construction
Management
Contingency
(10%)
Legal/
Administration
Engineer’s Estimate
(2026)
Disinfection
System
Improvements
Complete Complete Unspecified $637,300 Unspecified $6,373,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-30

9.8. W3 STORAGE TANK IMPROVEMENTS
Category W3 includes Recommended Improvements identified for the storage tanks.

Basis for Improvements. The City has both welded steel and concrete storage tanks. As discussed in Section 2.7.4, welded steel tanks have a typical service life of 50 years, and concrete tanks have a typical service life of 100 years. There are plans to construct new tanks to serve areas scheduled for development. • Based on installation year of each concrete tank, no concrete tanks are expected to exceed their anticipated service life by 2040.
• Based on the installation year of each welded steel tank, 4 of the 5 welded steel tanks are expected to exceed their anticipated service life by 2040. However, regular recoating can extend the service life of these tanks. Therefore, the Recommended Improvement is the recoating of welded steel tanks at 20-year intervals.

Routine inspection, cleaning, and recoating can prolong the service life of tanks and should be prioritized as part of a maintenance budget. The welded steel tanks require complete recoating every 20 years to prevent corrosion, protect water quality, and prolong tank service life. Every 5 years, the welded steel tanks should be dewatered, inspected, and repair any minor coating defects. The City could schedule rehabilitation, assuming one tank per year.

Concrete tanks typically do not require the same level of maintenance as is required for the welded steel tanks; however, periodic inspection and scheduling necessary repairs can prolong the service life of concrete tanks.

The W3 Recommended Improvements are:
• Welded Steel Storage Tank Recoating
• Pressure Zone 1380 Improvements

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-31

9.8.1. W3-1: Welded Steel Storage Tank Recoating
Location: Hayden Tank, Avenida Del Vista Tank, Green River Tank, Eagle Glen Tank Cost Opinion (2026): $7,410,000
Priority: High
Overview: Four (4) welded steel tanks are scheduled to reach the end of their anticipated service life before 2040; however, recoating every 20-years is likely to extend the service life of a welded steel tank.

Recoating is recommended for four of the five welded steel tanks, which are listed in Table 9.18.

Table 9.18 –Storage Tank Recoating 2026 Cost Opinion
Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Hayden $1,104,000 $55,200 $110,400 $165,600 $276,000 $55,200 $1,770,000 Avenida Del
Vista $1,104,000 $55,200 $110,400 $165,600 $276,000 $55,200 $1,770,000 Green River $1,035,000 $51,750 $103,500 $155,250 $258,750 $51,750 $1,660,000 Eagle Glen $1,380,000 $69,000 $138,000 $207,000 $345,000 $69,000 $2,210,000 Total $4,623,000 $231,150 $462,300 $693,450 $1,155,750 $231,150 $7,410,000 Table 9.19 – Welded Steel Storage Tank Potential End of Service Life Tank Name Volume
(MG) Installation Year Potential End of Service Life Year Hayden 1.6 1970 2020
Glen Ivy (Taken out of service and
scheduled for demolition)

0.5 1977 2027
Avenida Del Vista 1.6 1977 2027
Green River 1.5 1984 2034
Maintenance (not included in Table 9.18):

Recoating does not account for necessary tank repairs identified during maintenance inspections. It is recommended that the City plan for routine inspection of all storage tanks and determine if additional upgrades are required to meet current seismic design and AWWA standards and CalOSHA requirements.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-32

9.8.2. W3-2: Pressure Zone 1380 Improvements
Location: South of Foothill Parkway
Cost Opinion (2026): $31,240,000
Priority: Medium
Overview: The Pressure Zone 1380 Improvement will require the construction of a potable water tank, booster pump station, and associated pipelines to service the new developments in Pressure Zone 1380 located south of the Foothill Parkway. The improvements will include a 2.5 MG capacity pre-stressed tank, distribution pipelines and the booster pump station. W3-2 is expected to be phased with design and construction occurring over multiple years. Although this project is identified as a Recommended Improvement, it is anticipated that this will be provided in full or in part by the future developer and may not be included as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.

Table 9.20 – Pressure Zone 1380 New BPS and Pipeline 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
New Storage
Tank (Zone
1380)
$11,500,000 $575,000 $1,150,000 $1,725,000 $2,875,000 $575,000 $18,400,000 New BPS
(Zone 1380) $4,025,000 $201,250 $402,500 $603,750 $1,006,250 $201,250 $6,440,000 Distribution
Pipeline $4,000,000 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $1,000,000 $200,000 $6,400,000 Total $19,525,000 $976,250 $1,952,500 $2,928,750 $4,881,250 $976,250 $31,240,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-33

9.9. W4 WELL IMPROVEMENTS
Category W4 includes Recommended Improvements identified for the City’s wells.

Basis for Improvements. As discussed in Section 2.7.2, the age and material of a well casing is predictive of the typical service life, and pump efficiency testing efficiency is a predictive indicator of the likelihood of mechanical and/or electrical equipment failures at production wells. • The typical service life of carbon steel wells (installed prior to 1990) is 25 years, and the typical service life of stainless steel well casings is 75 years (installed after 1991). • Pumps wear as they age, and the wear results in decreasing efficiency. Pumps operating between 50% and 60% efficiency are an acceptable efficiency range but indicate that mechanical and electrical equipment may degrade and should be considered for replacement or rehabilitation.

The typical service life of well pump equipment is 20 years. • When water quality samples from a well show pollutant concentrations above Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), improvements may be required to restore water quality and maintain compliance with state and federal drinking water regulations.

Evaluating well casing age and material, pump efficiency, and water quality compliance is essential for identifying improvements that preserve reliable production capacity and ensure the City can continue meeting water system demands.

The W4 Recommended Improvements are:
• Groundwater Well Equipment

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-34

9.9.1. W4-1: Systematic Groundwater Well Equipment Pumping Equipment Rehabilitation
Location: Throughout City
Cost Opinion (2026): $22,700,000
Priority: Medium
Overview: Given the 20-year typical service life of pumping equipment, it is recommended that all groundwater wells within the system be considered for rehabilitation prior to 2040. (Due to recent rehabilitation of wells 14, 29, and 31, these wells may not need rehabilitation prior to 2040). When many category components, in this case PRSs, are considered for cyclic improvements, the improvements are categorized as “systematic”.

Table 9.21 – Well Rehabilitation 2026 Cost Opinion
Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded Total
(2026)
Well No. 29 Recently rehabilitated
Well No. 21 $1,251,000 $62,550 $125,100 $187,650 $312,750 $62,550 $2,000,000 Well No. 25 $863,000 $43,150 $86,300 $129,450 $215,750 $43,150 $1,380,000 Well No. 22 $1,639,000 $81,950 $163,900 $245,850 $409,750 $81,950 $2,620,000 Well No. 19 $604,000 $30,200 $60,400 $90,600 $151,000 $30,200 $970,000 Well No. 3 $690,000 $34,500 $69,000 $103,500 $172,500 $34,500 $1,100,000 Well No. 13 $389,000 $19,450 $38,900 $58,350 $97,250 $19,450 $620,000 Well No. 33 $863,000 $43,150 $86,300 $129,450 $215,750 $43,150 $1,380,000 Well No. 31 Recently rehabilitated
Well No. 17A $776,000 $38,800 $77,600 $116,400 $194,000 $38,800 $1,240,000 Well No. 7A $604,000 $30,200 $60,400 $90,600 $151,000 $30,200 $970,000 Well No. 9A $949,000 $47,450 $94,900 $142,350 $237,250 $47,450 $1,520,000 Well No. 8A $1,208,000 $60,400 $120,800 $181,200 $302,000 $60,400 $1,930,000 Well No. 28 $1,466,000 $73,300 $146,600 $219,900 $366,500 $73,300 $2,350,000 Well No. 26 $259,000 $12,950 $25,900 $38,850 $64,750 $12,950 $410,000 Well No. 20 $302,000 $15,100 $30,200 $45,300 $75,500 $15,100 $480,000 Well No. 11A $518,000 $25,900 $51,800 $77,700 $129,500 $25,900 $830,000 Well No. 12A $518,000 $25,900 $51,800 $77,700 $129,500 $25,900 $830,000 Well No. 27 $431,000 $21,550 $43,100 $64,650 $107,750 $21,550 $690,000 Well No. 14 In construction for rehabilitation in 2026
Well No. 15 $863,000 $43,150 $86,300 $129,450 $215,750 $43,150 $1,380,000 Total $14,193,000 $709,650 $1,419,300 $2,128,950 $3,548,250 $709,650 $22,700,000 Prioritization of groundwater well replacements could be selected based on pump efficiency or the potential end of service life year. Table 9.22 provides data that can help with prioritization. The efficiency is based on the SCE tests provided by the City. The Glen Ivy Wells discussed in W2-4 are not included in W4-1. Well 15 is scheduled for relocation. Wells 29 and 31 have recently been rehabilitated.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-35
Table 9.22 – Groundwater Well Pumping Equipment Rehabilitation Prioritization Booster Pump Sation Name Average
Efficiency
Year Installed
or
Rehabilitated
Potential End of
Service Life
Pumping
Equipment (Year)
Well No. 21 48.7 1998 2018
Well No. 33 51.7 2016 2036
Well No. 8A 51.7 2011 2031
Well No. 26 53.2 1999 2019
Well No. 9A 53.9 2002 2022
Well No. 28 55.8 2011 2031
Well No. 22 56.5 1998 2018
Well No. 20 58.9 1998 2018
Well No. 19 59.5 1990 2010
Well No. 12A 62.5 2007 2027
Well No. 13 63.3 1952 1972
Well No. 27 65.2 2007 2000
Well No. 25 66.6 2011 2031
Well No. 11A 67.7 1953 1973
Well No. 3 68.6 1935 1955
Well No. 17A 69.6 2010 2030
Well No. 7A 71.8 2020 2040
Well No. 15 72.0 2005 2025
Maintenance (not included in Table 9.21):Inspection of Wells 3, 11A, 12A, 17A, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, and 29 prior to rehabilitation may inform the condition of the wells to determine if any casings are inadequate. If casings are inadequate due to age, the wells may need to be evaluated for re-drilling.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-36

9.9.2. W4-2 New Well 34
Location: TBD
Cost Opinion (2026): $5,310,000
Priority: Low
Overview: Well 34 is expected to be drilled and equipped. Note that the planning, design, and construction management costs represent smaller percentages than typical projects.

Table 9.23 – New Well 2026 Cost Opinion
Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(2%)
Design
(0%)
Construction
Management
(5%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Well 34
Drilling and
Equipping
$3,875,000 $77,500 - $193,750 $968,750 $193,750 $5,310,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-37

9.10. W5 BOOSTER PUMP STATION (BPS) IMPROVEMENTS
Category W5 includes Recommended Improvements identified for the booster pump stations (BPS).

Basis for Improvements. As discussed in Section 2.7.5, the age of the pump is predictive of the typical service life, and pump efficiency testing efficiency is a predictive indicator of the likelihood of mechanical and/or electrical equipment failures at production wells. • Pumps wear as they age, which results in decreasing efficiency. Pumps operating between 50% and 60% efficiency are an acceptable efficiency range but indicate that mechanical and electrical equipment may degrade and should be considered for replacement or rehabilitation. Typical service life of well pump equipment is 20 years.

Evaluating pump efficiency and pump age is essential for identifying improvements that preserve the City’s capacity to meet distribution system pressures.

The W5 Recommended Improvements are:
• Systematic Booster Pump Station Rehabilitation

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-38

9.10.1. W5-1: Systematic Booster Pump Station (BPS) Rehabilitation Location: Throughout City
Cost Opinion (2026): $47,240,000
Priority: Medium
Overview: Given the 20-year typical service life of pumping equipment, it is recommended that all BPSs within the system be considered for rehabilitation prior to 2040. Rehabilitation cost opinions for each BPS depend on the type of mechanical improvements anticipated, the number and size of pumps, and civil and coating improvements.

Table 9.24 – Systematic Booster Pump Station Equipment Rehabilitation 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Green River $625,000 $31,250 $62,500 $93,750 $156,250 $31,250 $1,000,000 Cresta Verde $1,201,000 $60,050 $120,100 $180,150 $300,250 $60,050 $1,920,000 Garretson
Zone 3 $6,003,000 $300,150 $600,300 $900,450 $1,500,750 $300,150 $9,600,000 Serfas Club $1,501,000 $75,050 $150,100 $225,150 $375,250 $75,050 $2,400,000 Mangular Rehabilitation in 2021
Garretson
Zone 4 $2,251,000 $112,550 $225,100 $337,650 $562,750 $112,550 $3,600,000 Morita $1,001,000 $50,050 $100,100 $150,150 $250,250 $50,050 $1,600,000 Aquino $75,000 $3,750 $7,500 $11,250 $18,750 $3,750 $120,000 Border $1,026,000 $51,300 $102,600 $153,900 $256,500 $51,300 $1,640,000 Chase $1,526,000 $76,300 $152,600 $228,900 $381,500 $76,300 $2,440,000 Lester Zone 4 $2,001,000 $100,050 $200,100 $300,150 $500,250 $100,050 $3,200,000 Montana
Ranch $750,000 $37,500 $75,000 $112,500 $187,500 $37,500 $1,200,000 Kraft Ranch $1,126,000 $56,300 $112,600 $168,900 $281,500 $56,300 $1,800,000 Lester Zone 5 $4,002,000 $200,100 $400,200 $600,300 $1,000,500 $200,100 $6,400,000 Eagle Glen
Zone 5 $600,000 $30,000 $60,000 $90,000 $150,000 $30,000 $960,000 Harlan Hills $475,000 $23,750 $47,500 $71,250 $118,750 $23,750 $760,000 Mabey
Canyon $750,000 $37,500 $75,000 $112,500 $187,500 $37,500 $1,200,000 Eagle Glen
Zone 6 2 $1,126,000 $56,300 $112,600 $168,900 $281,500 $56,300 $1,800,000 Payette $1,501,000 $75,050 $150,100 $225,150 $375,250 $75,050 $2,400,000 Sierra Bella $2,001,000 $100,050 $200,100 $300,150 $500,250 $100,050 $3,200,000 Total $29,541,000 $1,477,050 $2,954,100 $4,431,150 $7,385,250 $1,477,050 $47,240,000

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-39
Prioritization of BPS replacements could be selected based on pump efficiency or the potential end of service life year. Table 9.25 provides data that can assist with prioritization.

Table 9.25 – Systematic Booster Station Equipment Rehabilitation Prioritization Booster Pump Sation Name Average
Efficiency
Year Installed
or
Rehabilitated
Potential End of
Service Life
Pumping
Equipment (Year)
Eagle Glen Zone 5 47.40% 2018 2038
Aquino 48.30% 1990 2010
Montana Ranch 61.60% 2013 2033
Chase 62.80% 2014 2034
Cresta Verde 62.80% 2016 2036
Harlan Hills 63.80% 2000 2020
Eagle Glen Zone 6 64.40% 2012 2032
Lester Zone 5 65.10% 1995 2015
Border 65.50% 2024 2044
Lester Zone 4 66.00% 2004 2024
Green River 66.50% 1989 2009
Garretson Zone 4 67.60% 2009 2029
Serfas Club 68.90% 2022 2042
Payette 69.00% 2021 2041
Garretson Zone 3 70.00% 2009 2029
Morita 72.30% 2015 2035
Kraft Ranch 72.40% 2003 2023
Mabey Canyon 74.40% 2016 2036
Sierra Bella Unspecified 2017 2037

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-40

9.11. W6 PRESSURE REDUCING STATION (PRS) IMPROVEMENTS
Category W6 includes Recommended Improvements identified for the pressure reducing stations (PRSs).

Basis for Improvements. PRSs reduce pressure from higher zones to lower zones within the City's distribution system. There are no known PRS deficiencies within the existing system. As discussed in Section 2.7.6, the age of the PRS is predictive of the typical service life. Typical service life for most PRSs is 35 years.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-41

9.11.1. W6-1: Systematic Pressure Reducing Stations (PRS) Rehabilitation Location: Throughout City
Cost Opinion (2026): $3,264,000
Priority: Low
Overview: Given the 35-year typical service life of PRSs, it is recommended that 17 of the PRSs within the system be considered for rehabilitation prior to 2040. When many category components, in this case PRSs, are considered for cyclic improvements, the improvements are categorized as “systematic”. PRS service life can be extended based on proactive maintenance. Thirteen (13) PRSs will not reach their 35-year typical service life by 2040.

One (1) PRSs that has an unknown installation date will be assumed to have reached the end of its service life.

Table 9.26 – Systematic PRS Rehabilitation 2026 Cost Opinion Improvement
Estimated
Construction
Opinion
Planning
(5%)
Design
(10%)
Construction
Management
(15%)
Contingency
(25%)
Legal/
Administration
(5%)
Rounded
Total
(2026)
Green River $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Eagle Glen $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Harrington $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 El Cerrito $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Yorba $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 North Smith $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Kalus $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Dominguez
Ranch $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Auto Center
Drive $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 South Smith $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Mt. Serenata $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Ridgeline $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Liberty $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 White
Mountain $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 San Ponte $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 West
Temescal
Canyon
$120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 East Temescal
Canyon $120,000 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $30,000 $6,000 $192,000 Total $2,040,000 $102,000 $204,000 $306,000 $510,000 $102,000 $3,264,000 Prioritization of PRS rehabilitation could be selected based on potential end of service life year. Table 9.27 provides data that can help with prioritization. Since many PRS were installed between 2002 and 2005, consideration could be given to phasing prior to end of service life to reduce the number of PRS rehabilitated in one year or numerous PRSs could be grouped as one improvement and replaced as part of a single capital improvement project.

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-42
Table 9.27 – Systematic Pressure Reducing Station Rehabilitation Prioritization Pressure Reducing Station Name Year Installed
Potential End of
Service Life
(Year)
Main & Olive Unknown -
Green River 1987 2022
Eagle Glen 1999 2034
Harrington 2001 2036
El Cerrito 2001 2036
Yorba 2002 2037
North Smith 2003 2038
Kalus 2003 2038
Dominguez Ranch 2003 2038
Auto Center Drive 2003 2038
South Smith 2003 2038
Mt. Serenata 2003 2038
Ridgeline 2003 2038
Liberty 2003 2038
White Mountain 2003 2038
San Ponte 2005 2040
West Temescal Canyon 2005 2040
East Temescal Canyon 2005 2040
PRS with Service Lives that are Expected to Extend beyond 2040:

Orange Heights 2006 2041
Sonrisa 2010 2045
ADV 2011 2046
Magnolia 2011 2046
Yuma Village Loop 2011 2046
Alcoa 2011 2046
Freedom 2011 2046
Cajalco 2011 2046
Mountain Gate 2011 2046
Hummingbird 2013 2048
Arcadia 2014 2049
Sierra Bella (West) 2016 2051
Sierra Bella (East) 2016 2051

City of Corona Section 9 – Master Plan Improvements
Potable Water Master Plan
9-43

9.12. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS COST OPINION SUMMARY
Table 9.28 lists all Recommended Improvements detailed in previous sections in 2026-dollar values.

Improvements with “Not Applicable” 2026 Cost Opinions reference maintenance projects described in Section 9.

Table 9.28 – Recommended Improvements Cost Opinion Summary Improvement No. Improvement Description 2026 Cost Opinion W1: Water Distribution System Improvements
W1-1 Systematic Water Distribution System Replacement Considering Deficiencies See Table 9.10 W1-2 Systematic Meter Replacement See Table 9.13
W1-3 SCADA Improvements Not Applicable
W2: Treatment Plant Improvements
W2-1 Temescal Desalter WTP Improvements Not Applicable
W2-2 Lester WTP Improvements $5,520,000
W2-3 Sierra Del Oro WTP Improvements (Existing CIP) $1,840,000 W2-4 Glen Ivy Well Treatment Improvements $6,373,000
W2 Subtotal $13,733,000
W3: Storage Tank Improvements
W3-1 Welded Steel Storage Tank Recoating $7,410,000
W3-2 Pressure Zone 1380 Improvements $31,240,000
W3 Subtotal $38,650,000
W4: Well Improvements
W4-1 Systematic Groundwater Well Pumping Equipment Rehabilitation $22,700,000 W4-2 New Well 34 $5,310,000
W4 Subtotal $28,010,000
W5: Booster Pump Station Improvements
W5-1 Systematic Booster Pump Station Rehabilitation $47,240,000 W5 Subtotal $47,240,000
W6: Pressure Reducing Station Improvements
W6-1 Systematic PRS Station Rehabilitation $3,264,000
W6 Subtotal $3,264,000

City of Corona
Potable Water Master Plan

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Blending Program Technical Report/Opera ons Plan Appendix B – Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) Resolution No. 3166 Appendix C – Well Pump Efficiency Tests (SCE)
Appendix D – Corona’s Water Production Data
Appendix E – Water Audits
Appendix F – Site Visit Conditional Assessment
Appendix G – City of Corona’s Inventory
Appendix H – Deficient Pipelines within Areas of Concern Appendix I – Existing Model Calibration Curves
Appendix J – Planned Near-Term Developments
Appendix K – Hydraulically Deficient Pipe Project Cut Sheets Appendix L – Size Deficient Pipes and Pipelines Beyond Typical Service Life Appendix M – Undersized Dead-End Mains (Non-Deficient)

Appendix A
Blending Program Technical
Report/Operations Plan

 










 





 

 
 




 







!"!" 


 

 











 


 !"#"$%&%#'(')*+'*)% 


  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


34
 56789:;8< 
56789:;8 =879:>7?: 56789:;8@A89B7 CD<:8DEF:D;? 56789:;8@A89B7 GH;?7@I7JJ@ KF<:D?L>;?
MNNO =M
OMNO CP QRM3SONTU
PV3 QRM3SPMNU3NNV IH9<7WDXH7J;::D N3MTO =M NNN

 CM U

OT QRM3S
YOUYMRM Z;E78:C9[D< 3TTOO =P T33O CP QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SVNYU
N
Y C;>D?DX\F?9
MRTV =P
VY
T CP QRM3SRYNURYOR C9?D7J\FB]D^ NYY
Y =P NYN
RCP QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SMPMUY3ON C9[DB_J9?:;? N33TM =N
RTPO CP     QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SVNYUN3
N A988`_F7JJ N
MP
 =P NMRPY CM QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3S
PYUTVTM G9EJ;a98; N
PMY =
 NVNNM CN QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SPMNU
YVM _8D9?W;89?9 NP
RT =
 P3YYN CN QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SVNYUYYNO \9?B;?b;8:H7` NOYNN =
 PNM
T C
 QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SVNYUY3PR C787cd<eFD[7J P3Y
Y =
 POMYY CN QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SVNYU
PR3 Z`9?f9J[78B7 NTRTO =
 PN
MV CN QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SPN
URR
Y K9X;Eg;F<: P3M
M =
 PRMTR C
 QRM3SONTU

NP QRM3SMNVUY3YN \;87?h;K989>DJJ; NVORM =
 POO
M C
 QRM3SNNRUT3OY IH9BI;J7>9? NPYTT =N 3P3NO CN VNNUP3OO         C9`iHDj:YOkYY:;3RkYYH;F8<li]D?^iHDj:3RkYY:;YOkYYH;F8<l8;:9:D?^7[78`3
]77c<4 34N 56789:;8Z7<6;?<DEDJD:D7< mnopqrstuvoqwxnyzs =H7<HDj:;6789:;8]DJJE787<6;?<DEJ7j;8>9D?:9D?D?^<FjjDXD7?:jJ;]<:;>77::H7<`<:7> B7>9?B9?B9B{F<:D?^:H7EJ7?BD?^<:879><:;?;:7|X77B:H7>9|D>F>?D:89:7 X;?X7?:89:D;?;jNVU>^}\4=;:H9:7?Bl:H7;6789:;8]DJJB9DJ`9XX;>6JD<Hk 34 Z7[D7]:H7687[D;F<B9`~<68;BFX:D;?j8;>79XHEJ7?BD?^<;F8X74
4 6B9:7:H7<6879B<H77:<]D:H:H7J9:7<:J9E;89:;8`87<FJ:<4 N4 I9JXFJ9:7:H7]7D^H:7B9[789^7X;?X7?:89:D;?9:79XHEJ7?BD?^<:9:D;?4 P4 Z76;8:9?`D?XDB7?:<;j:98^7:7|X77B9?X7:;<F678[D<D;?9?B9B{F<::H7jJ;]< 9XX;8BD?^J`4 M4 Z7<6;?B:;iILCL9J98><4 T4 Z7[D7]:H787<78[;D8<:;89^77jj7X:<9?B<:98:}<:;6]7JJ<D?X;?{F?X:D;?]D:HEJ7?B jJ;]<:;>77:<`<:7>B7>9?B4 O4 €?[7<:D^9:7}876;8:9?`<D^?DjDX9?:B7698:F87<j8;>?;8>9J;6789:D;?<4 V4 €?[7<:D^9:7}876;8:9?`X;?:89BDX:;8`iILCLD?BDX9:D;?<4 R4 Z76;8:7eFD6>7?:>9JjF?X:D;?<:;:H7W9D?:7?9?X7C7698:>7?:4 Page 1433 of 3356
  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


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`MSTFGFOMGSHMNFGSTFDVFEHSDEWOJJQGFHJJKFHMGSDOKKFROHSFJPZFEOUPHMPHJHEK OMRONHSODMG\RFSFEKOMFSTHSWTFSTFESTFMOSEHSFNDMNFMSEHSODMFaNFFRFRSTFSHELFS\HMR HRbQGSUJDWGHNNDEROMLJPX  cVFEHSDEGHMRdDEGHKVJOMLSFNTMONOHMGHEFEFeQOEFRSDNDJJFNSMOSEHSFGHKVJFGSDRFSFEKOMF NDKVJOHMNFWOSTSTFMOSEHSFfg]RQEOMLFKFELFMNOFGX`SWOJJIFMFNFGGHEPSDLDSDSTF IJFMROMLGSHSODMGSDZFEOUPUJDWdMOSEHSFOMRONHSODMGX`USTFEFOGHMPRDQISHIDQSSTFNEFROIOJOSP DUSTFOMRONHSODMGDESTFSHELFSNDMNFMSEHSODMNHMMDSIFHNTOFZFR\hi3j;kilh;m<nj;hi3; op3jm;khqhr<jX`UHIJFMRGSHSODMOGGTQSRDWMRQFSDTOLTMOSEHSFFaNFFROMLSTFfg]\ STFMSTFgOSPWOJJRFSFEKOMFOUSTFWHSFEEFKHOMOMLOMSTFROGSEOIQSODMKHOMGKFFSGGSHMRHERG sQGOMLSTFUOFJRSFGSKFSTDRGJDNHSFROM^VVFMROatuHMRUJQGTDQSSTFWHSFEEFKHOMOMLOM STFROGSEOIQSODMJOMFGOUOSRDFGMDSKFFSGSHMRHERGVEODESDHNSOZHSOMLSTFIJFMRGSHSODMXCDE MFNFGGHEPZHJZFGSDOGDJHSFDENTHMLFUJDW\GFF^VVFMROavHMREFUFESDGPGSFKHSJHG HMRdDEwx`YyGUDEHVHESONQJHEIJFMRGSHSODMX  ^RROSODMHJFKFELFMNPEFGVDMGFOGOMNJQRFROMSTFgOSPyGz{|"}~  RHSFRYFNFKIFE€\‚‚ƒSTHSRFGNEOIFGVEDNFRQEFGUDEIDSTSFEEDEOGSHMRMHSQEHJROGHGSFEG HGSTFPVFESHOMSDSTFWHSFESEFHSKFMSHMRROGSEOIQSODMGPGSFKX „ †;‡>9@ˆ@?:;>8‰;Š6A95BB;k‹44>6:; o>9Œ76A‹8‰; Page 1434 of 3356
  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


3456789:;6:<:=>?6:<:=>@A<>BC78CD<:E=AB>85<;<:F84<55F>G:<H>C7=CI 6:JAB>85<KL5A;:<AK>=A35F5CM>JNOJJ4>P5C:F5=78<>85M:=8>F7=>87:=;<:F 47C8:<7M>D<7MEJ8E<>J>M87P7875CN34535F5CM>JL>C7=4>C84547D45C8=78<>85 M:=M5=8<>87:=K<>=D7=D:P5<QRRSFDTUN VWXYZ[\] U=:<A5<8:EC5847C:845<B7C5^:8>HJ5D<:E=AB>85<>=AF558845=78<>85_6`K 6:<:=>EC5C>=EFH5<:;8<5>8F5=8>=AHJ5=A7=D;>M7J7875CN`5C85<a3b>=Ac75<<> d5Je<:a3b8<5>86:J:<>A:f7P5<B>85<;:<:=5J:B=78<>85C:E<M5N34535F5CM>J d5C>J85<<5F:P5C=78<>85C>=A3:8>Jd7CC:JP5Ac:J7AC?3dc@KCE^^J75C>J:B=78<>85 C:E<M5>=A45J^CJ:B5<845C>J87=845H>C7=N345<5><5>;5B35F5CM>JL>C7=B5JJC 84>84>P5M:=M5=8<>87:=CJ:B5=:ED48:H5HJ5=A7=DC:E<M5CN345C5J:B=78<>85 C:E<M5C><5HJ5=A5AB78484547D45<=78<>85B5JJC>8C5P5<>JJ:M>87:=C84<:ED4:E8845 67898:^<:P7A5>C>;5K<5J7>HJ5CE^^J9:;B>85<84>8F558C845c8>85a>85<f5C:E<M5C 6:=8<:JL:><A?caf6L@C8>=A><ACN gh\Xhi\j] e;845kQ:^5<>87=DB5JJC7=6:<:=>K:=J9C7lF558845A<7=m7=DB>85<C8>=A><A;:< =78<>85B784:E88<5>8F5=8N345<5><5>=:845<;7P5B5JJC84>84:P5<><:E=A845_6` >=AC:F587F5C><5J:B5=:ED48:5=85<845C9C85FB784:E88<5>8F5=8N345H>J>=M5 7C>JB>9C>H:P5845_6`>=A<5nE7<5CHJ5=A7=D8::^5<>85No5=5<>JJ9845B5JJC><5 :^5<>85A>8;7l5AC^55AC>=A><5C8><85A>=AC8:^^5A8:F558845P><97=DA5F>=A7= 845A7C8<7HE87:=C9C85FN345J:B=78<>85C:E<M5C><5>AGEC85A8:HJ5=A845=78<>85 M:=M5=8<>87:=A:B=8:H5J:B845F>l7FEFM:=M5=8<>87:=:;pqSFDTUNa57D485AS >P5<>D5M>JMEJ>87:=CKH>C5A:=845J>C8<5^:<85AJ>H:<>8:<9<5CEJ8C:;845C:E<M5 B>85<CK><5^5<;:<F5A>=A845J:B=78<>85C:E<M5;J:B7C>AGEC85AH5;:<5>B5JJ7C C8><85AN3458:8>J^<:AEM87:=;<:F>JJC:E<M5C><5EC5A7=M>JMEJ>87:=C8:A5F:=C8<>85 M:F^J7>=M5H5J:B845F>l7FEF:=>A>7J9H>C7CN345HJ5=A5A;J:BC><5C>F^J5A :=M5>B55m8:M:=;7<F845P>J7A789:;845M>JMEJ>87:=CN6:=87=E:ECJ9F:=78:<7=D =78<>85>=>J9r5<C><5:^5<>85A>8>JJ:;845HJ5=A7=DC8>87:=CN345c6OdOC9C85F 4>CH55=F:A7;75A8:>JJ:B8<5=A7=D>=A>J><FM>^>H7J789N Page 1435 of 3356
  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


3 4565789:3;579:<5=3>:5?@3 ABCACDCEFGHICEGHJCKKCFCLMCELJEKGNNGJCKEOPPHQRKSDGTODUCKSRESOKFCEV WSDCSRJBCPKLDGKQESOKFCEGKCXCHHEYZ[\\[\
[\][\^[\Y[GT_`aVXCHHaY[ bSDDSTXCHHcHSNdGHMCaYeGPSKJLSTSRRHSNRKSDXCHHEfZ[^Z[a`GT_afZgGT_ bSDDSTXCHHcHSNdGHMC\\eGPSKJLSTSRRHSNRKSDXCHHEaaZ[a\Z[ah[a
GT_\fg GKCFSTTCFJLSTEJBGJFGTUCMGHMC_JSJBCICEGHJCKKGNNGJCKHLTCSKJSJBCNCHH FSHHCFJSKHLTCERSKROKJBCKUHCT_LTiJKCGJDCTJVXCHH\`FGTUCMGHMC_JSJBCICEGHJCK KGNNGJCKHLTCSKJSJBCICEGHJCKPKS_OFJHLTCVWjkaKCPKCECTJEJBCPKS_OFJNGJCK HCGMLTiJBCACDCEFGHICEGHJCKVWjk\KCPKCECTJEICEGHJCKPKS_OFJNGJCKJBGJBGE UCCTUHCT_C__SNTEJKCGDNLJBXCHH\`V l9==5<7m?3>:5?@3 nGKKCJESTjHCT_WJGJLSTBGEJBCGULHLJQJSUHCT_JBKCCEJKCGDESRNGJCK[JBCICEGHJCK oKS_OFJWjk\[DGEEUGHGTFCSRfZ[^Z[a`GT_afZ[GT_pCEJCKjHCT_Wjk]JSDGqC STCUHCT_C_PKS_OFJRHSNNBLFBCTJCKEJBC\krnnGKKCJESTsCECKMSLKVABLEUHCT_C_ NGJCKFGTUCPODPC_SOJJS`_LRRCKCTJtSTCEVnGKKCJESTuSTC`NBLFBCLJBCKPODPE JSpCEJCKjHCT_eWjk]gRSKROKJBCKUHCT_LTiSKLE_KSPPC_LTJSJBCuSTC\ JKGTEDLEELSTHLTCHSFGJC_STnGKKCJESTZMCTOCKCPKCECTJC_UQWjka`VnGKKCJEST uSTChPODPENGJCKLTJSJBCuSTCh_LEJKLUOJLSTEQEJCDHSFGJC_STrGiTSHLG ZMCTOCKCPKCECTJC_UQWjkahV v57<5=3wm?53x3>:5?@3 pCEJCKuSTC`UHCT_EKCDGLTLTiNGJCKRKSDCLJBCKnGKKCJESTjHCT_Wjka`NLJB pCEJCKAKCGJDCTJoHGTJCRRHOCTJGT_rLHHEuSTC`kXsk\hESOKFCNGJCKVABCEC NGJCKEUHCT_LTJBCRLTLEBC_KCECKMSLK[pCEJCKy\sCECKMSLKVZJJBLEPSLTJLJCTJCKE uSTC`ILEJKLUOJLSTWQEJCDVXCHHE`[\zGT_\aDCCJOPNLJBJBLENGJCKLTJBC _LEJKLUOJLSTEQEJCDGJ{TJGKLSZMCUCBLT_ZHUCKJESTEEBSPPLTiFCTJCK[KCPKCECTJC_ UQWjk]V 

  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


34564789:;48<8=>4;?8 @ABCADEFGAHIJAGKBEFGALKMBCDMNOCMFGPQCADRIS
TDFU@ABCADVABADWFMDXYWMQ CZA@ABCADEFGAHIFFBCADRCQCMFGQGKNJAGKBMCKFPGBCDAQUFTCZANFFBCADBPMCZ [MJJBEFGAHS\VS]HBFOD^APQCAD_DA`DABAGCAKNaRISbc 34564789:;48d8=>4;?8 @ABCADEFGAeNJAGKBEFGALKMBCDMNOCMFGPQCADRIS
TDFU@ABCADVABADWFMDXYWMQ CZA@ABCADEFGAeIFFBCADRCQCMFGQGKNJAGKBMCMGCZAKMB^ZQDfA`M`AFTCZANFFBCADB PMCZ[MJJBEFGAeS\VS]HBFOD^APQCAD_DA`DABAGCAKNaRISgc hi;jk>i78=>4;?8 [QGfOJQDIJAGKZQBCPFNJAGKBFOD^AB_@ABCADIJAGKRIS
FDRlmIJAGKRISYec lA`AGKMGfZFPCZABMCAMBWQJWAK_FGAFTCZABAJFPGMCDQCANJAGKPQCADBPMJJNJAGK PMCZZMfZGMCDQCANJAGKPAJJPQCADTDFU\AJJBYYn_Y]n_YH_YeQGK]b_MGCZA`M`AJMGA MGTDFGCFT[QGfOJQDVABADWFMDQGKCZAGAGCADCZACF``FDCMFGFTCZA]S[o[QGfOJQD VABADWFMDcpZMBDABADWFMDZQBQNFCCFUFOCJAC`M`ACZQCfFABCFEFGA]CDQGBUMBBMFG JMGAJF^QCAKQCCZAPABCBMKAFTCZABCFDU^ZQGGAJGAQDYqCZRCDAAC_DA`DABAGCAKNa RISYqcpZMBBMCA^QGQJBF`OU`CZMBNJAGKAK`DFKO^CMGCFCZAEFGALCDQGBUMBBMFG JMGAAMCZADPABCCFPQDKRlmFDAQBCCFPQDK@ABCADKA`AGKMGfFGWQJWMGfc r;647s6t48u46v44;8wxy8zxy8{|y8{wx86:8}4>>8{~87i;5€t55t:;83t;48 nWQJWA^FGCDFJJAKMGCADSCMA^FGGA^CMGf\AJJFJJA^CFDbn_gn_YLQGKYbnCF\AJJ FJJA^CFDY‚c ƒ:7:;i8„8}45647;8 7:€4;i?48†:;;4†6t:;8 pZMBMGCADSCMAPMJJQJJFPCZAA‡^ZQGfAFTPQCADNACPAAGCZA\ABCADG[OGM^M`QJ\QCAD lMBCDM^CnDJMGfCFGlABQJCAD`DFKO^CJMGAJF^QCAKFGˆDFUAGQKAnWACFCZAMCaFT FDFGQEFGA]lMBCDMNOCMFGRaBCAUQJBFJF^QCAKFGˆDFUAGQKAnWA_DA`DABAGCAKNa \ABCADGBSnDJMGfCFGlABQJCADBFOD^APQCADcnCCMUAB_FDFGQPMJJKAJMWADEFGAL PQCADJF^QCAKFGˆDFUAGQKAnWACF\ABCADG‰BnDJMGfCFGlABQJCAD`DFKO^CJMGA_ DA`DABAGCAKNa@ABCADIJAGKRIS
c 8

  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


3 4567389:;3<=>3?@AB9>CD3E:D96FD>638G9>63 HIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXIPUYJZPMJQHQJPM[JUMO\PUMQJXJL]J^_PMJQ`QT[^TaQXJ ZJ\\^b
cdecdPUfgghc\\_J\\^IP]JMIJPiL\LMNMTiJ]P\]JfMTiNjP^^PQTaUfMIJ j\PUML`UJJfJfhkklmQJjQJ^JUM^MIJMQJPMJf_PMJQPMSTUVWXIPUYJO\PUMhknlbo QJjQJ^JUM^MIJi\JUfJfjQTfaXM_PMJQ\JP]LUYMIJSTUVWXIPUYJO\PUMhc\\knlbo J``\aJUM_PMJQQJXJL]J^PffLMLTUP\MQJPM[JUMJLMIJQiNQJ]JQ^JT^[T^L^PMknlbTQ i\JUfLUYPMknlbgpknlbmh  qrs3 tDu5C>34:56D:59 ghb vPWL[a[ZPMJQwaP\LMN`TQxLMQPMJ HIJ[PWL[a[ULMQPMJXTUXJUMQPMLTUL^gel[YpSh c\\Pfya^M[JUM^MTMIJi\JUfLUY^MPMLTU^_L\\LUX\afJXP\Xa\PMLUYMIJUJXJ^^PQN\T_ ULMQPMJi\JUf_PMJQ`\T_hKPQJ[a^MiJMPRJUMTLU^aQJMIPMMIJULMQPMJXTUXJUMQPMLTU LUfLXPMJfiNMIJPUP\NzJQfTJ^UTMJWXJJfMIJ[PWL[a[\J]J\hnJYLUMIJPfya^M[JUM iJ\T_MIJ[PWL[a[PUfMIJUTjML[LzJ^aXIMIPMMIJjJPR^T`MIJMQJUf^faJMT`\T_ ]PQLPMLTU^fTUTMJWXJJfgel[Yp\h gh{ ka[[PQNT`VWL^MLUYZJ\\^ kJJcjjJUfLWc`TQKLMNT`KTQTUP|^ka[[PQNT`VWL^MLUYZJ\\^h

  











!"#$
%&'('()
"*+,
-
./0,


12+


343 56789:6;<8=:6>97?876@8=A?87A?BC6DE:7D   

 F
G+H
IJ,++K

,L,1M+NO.P+Q RSTUVV WXYYZ[[ \W]^[_`YYZ[ ab[ cdef[ g[ hi[ ji[ ki[ lli[ lm[ lg[ ln[ lf[ lhi[ lk[ mm[ mf[ mh[ mj[ mk[ gl[ gg[ ccel[ cceg[ ccen[ opqrs[ dXtq[ uvwvxyuwV VV z{V z|V }~V {yV |uV VV |{V x{V ~wV V {|V uV ~wV xxV VV ~V VV u}V {€wV zyV ~yV uvxxvxyuwV VV zzV zV }~V ~wV |uV VV |{V x{V ~V V {|V |wV ~wV xxV VV ~}V VV u|V xV {yV ~yV xv}vxyuwV VV z~V z}V }~V ~V |uV VV |{V x{V ~}V zV {zV |{V ~V uwV VV ~uV VV ~uV x€V zyV ~yV xvu~vxyuwV VV zuV zV VV ~}V }wV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV ~yV VV z{V VV xvu{vxyuwV VV VV VV }xV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV xV VV VV VV xvxuvxyuwV VV zzV }yV }uV ~}V |yV VV |{V x{V ~V |V {}V |{V VV uV VV xwV VV ~yV ~€xV z{V ~yV xvx}vxyuwV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV wuV VV VV VV ~uV ~v}vxyuwV VV z|V VV }xV ~|V |uV VV |zV xzV {yV wV {|V |uV VV xyV VV xV wzV xV x€uV VV xV ~vuzvxyuwV VV VV }uV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV ~vxyvxyuwV VV z}V }{V }xV ~}V |~V VV |{V x}V ~V wyV {|V }}V VV x~V VV xV w}V ~~V ~€zV VV ~uV {v~vxyuwV VV z~V }{V zwV ~~V |uV VV |~V x}V {uV |V {}V zV VV x~V VV x}V w{V ~xV ~€uV VV xwV {vu|vxyuwV VV z|V }{V zV ~~V |{V VV |{V xV {xV {V {zV z~V VV x{V VV xzV wwV x~V ~€|V {}V xwV zvuvxyuwV VV zzV }zV zwV ~~V VV VV VV VV {~V }V {{V zuV VV xuV VV xzV wzV uzV {€zV VV ~yV zvxvxyuwV VV VV VV VV VV |xV VV |zV xV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV VV {~V VV

  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


 


 3
4+5
6*+,
-
.7

18

,9,1:+;<.=+>
?@ABCD EFAGFHIJKL MFBN OPQRSTPUV WUXYZ[T \R]V^_` abcdVeXTRSV WUXY fgThVijghV ^_`VkXl[h abcdV fPPmSnV ^_`V\R]V UPQZSTQ ?oM pqrs ?oM pqrs pqrs KrKrtuKL Kuvwxy tw Kuvwxy tw KrtrtuKL KuvwxL tw KuvwxL tw KrxrtuKL Kuvwxy tw Kuvwxy tw KrwrtuKL Kuvwxw tw Kuvwxw tw tw KrzrtuKL Kuvwxy tw Kuvwxy tw Kr{rtuKL Kuvwwt tw Kuvwwt tw KryrtuKL Kuvwxy tw Kuvwxy tw KrLrtuKL KuvxKx tw KuvxKx tw Kr|rtuKL |v|u{ tw |v|u{ tw tw KrKurtuKL Kuvw{K tw Kuvw{K tw KrKKrtuKL Kuvwzx tw Kuvwzx tw KrKtrtuKL Kuvww| tw Kuvww| tw KrKxrtuKL Kuvww| tw Kuvww| tw KrKwrtuKL Kuvwzw tw Kuvwzw tw KrKzrtuKL Kuvx| tw Kuvx| tw KrK{rtuKL KuvwxL tw KuvwxL tw KrKyrtuKL KuvwwK tw KuvwwK tw tw KrKLrtuKL Kuvwzy tw Kuvwzy tw KrK|rtuKL Kuvw{K tw Kuvw{K tw KrturtuKL Kuvw{K tw Kuvw{K tw KrtKrtuKL Kuvw{K tw Kuvw{K tw KrttrtuKL Kuvw{K tw Kuvw{K tw KrtxrtuKL Kuvw{K tx Kuvw{K tx tw KrtwrtuKL |vwLL tx |vwLL tx KrtzrtuKL Kuvww| tw Kuvww| tw Krt{rtuKL Kuvww{ tw Kuvww{ tw KrtyrtuKL Kuvwwz tw Kuvwwz tw KrtLrtuKL Kuvwwz tw Kuvwwz tw Krt|rtuKL Kuvwwt tw Kuvwwt tw KrxurtuKL Kuvwwz tw Kuvwwz tw t| KrxKrtuKL Kuvwwz tw Kuvwwz tw }FqN~~K kTnVX€VkXUXlR fRTPUVWUXYZ[TXlVcV^TURTPVbSPlYlgVP[XUY VVVOPQRSTPUVWUXYZ[TVbSPlY

 


 



!



!
 "# $ % &' ()()*#  +,-
.
/01-


23,


456789:849;9<=8 >=6?;8@;9ABC659<8D8E56;=6?8FG?<A5<H8I?C9;A8 888J?K=G6?;8@;9ABC68FG?<A8 8 LMNOPQR STNUTVWXYZR [TO\R J?K=G6?;8 @;9ABC68 ]=^8 E_`8 aFDb8 c96=G8 @;9A8 >H6d8efHd8 E_`8 49<Cd8 aFDb8>??gG78 E_`8]=^8 ;?KBG6K8 RR Lh[R ijklR Lh[R ijklR ijklR YkYkmnYZR YnopqrR mpR YnopqrR mpR RR YkmkmnYZR YnopqZR mpR YnopqZR mpR RR YkqkmnYZR YnopqrR mpR YnopqrR mpR RR YkpkmnYZR YnopqpR mpR YnopqpR mpR mpR YkskmnYZR YnopqrR mpR YnopqrR mpR RR YktkmnYZR YnoppmR mpR YnoppmR mpR RR YkrkmnYZR YnopqrR mpR YnopqrR mpR RR YkZkmnYZR YnoqYqR mpR YnoqYqR mpR RR YkukmnYZR uountR mpR uountR mpR mpR YkYnkmnYZR YnoptYR mpR YnoptYR mpR RR YkYYkmnYZR YnopsqR mpR YnopsqR mpR RR YkYmkmnYZR YnoppuR mpR YnoppuR mpR RR YkYqkmnYZR YnoppuR mpR YnoppuR mpR RR YkYpkmnYZR YnopspR mpR YnopspR mpR RR YkYskmnYZR YnoquR mpR YnoquR mpR RR YkYtkmnYZR YnopqZR mpR YnopqZR mpR RR YkYrkmnYZR YnoppYR mpR YnoppYR mpR mpR YkYZkmnYZR YnopsrR mpR YnopsrR mpR RR YkYukmnYZR YnoptYR mpR YnoptYR mpR RR YkmnkmnYZR YnoptYR mpR YnoptYR mpR RR YkmYkmnYZR YnoptYR mpR YnoptYR mpR RR YkmmkmnYZR YnoptYR mpR YnoptYR mpR RR YkmqkmnYZR YnoptYR mqR YnoptYR mqR mpR YkmpkmnYZR uopZZR mqR uopZZR mqR RR YkmskmnYZR YnoppuR mpR YnoppuR mpR RR YkmtkmnYZR YnopptR mpR YnopptR mpR RR YkmrkmnYZR YnoppsR mpR YnoppsR mpR RR YkmZkmnYZR YnoppsR mpR YnoppsR mpR RR YkmukmnYZR YnoppmR mpR YnoppmR mpR RR 

  











!"#$
%&'('()
"  *+,
-
./0,


12+


 


 3
4+5
6*+,
-
.7

18

,9,1:+;<.=+>

:,-
?@ABCD EFAGFHIJKL MFBN OPQQR ST UVWR XYZ OPQQR [T UVWR XYZ OPQQR \Z UVWR XYZ OPQQR \ST UVWR XYZ]^_PR`RaVbcR d^cVQRef^g OhciRTjhiR XYZRk^_li ?mM nopq ?mM nopq ?mM nopq?mM nopq ?mM nopq KpKprsKLKtuuK vK KtwuL vu stsss xr stLuu uy utszz yx KprprsKLKtuzr vK Ktwu vu stsss xr stLuz uy utsKy yx KpzprsKLKtuuK vK Ktwux vu stsss xr stLzy uy utsry yx KpuprsKLKtuzr vK Ktwuv vu stsss xr Ktsw uy utruL yL KpyprsKLKtuuK vK Ktwuz vu stsss xr Ktrvu uy utuuL yL KpvprsKLKtuuK vK Ktwzx vu stsss xr Ktrzx uy utuKx yL KpwprsKLKtzsr vK Ktwu vu stsss xr KtKzy uy utKww yL KpLprsKLKtKzK vK Ktwuv vu stsss xr KtKrw uy utssu yL KpxprsKLKtzsK vK KtwuL vu stsss xr KtKKK uy utKv yL KpKsprsKLKtuzK vK KtvwL vu stsss xr KtKLw uy utrxv yL KpKKprsKLKtuur yx Ktwuz vz stsss xr KtrLz uz utuvL yv KpKrprsKLKtuuK yx Ktwur vz stsss xr Ktrur uz utury yv KpKzprsKLKtKuK yx Ktwzw vz stsss xr stxLx uz ztLvw yw KpKuprsKLKtKyr yx KtwyK vz stsss xr stxxK uz ztLxu yw KpKyprsKLKtKyK yx Ktwux vz stsss xr stxLL uz ztLLL yw KpKvprsKLKtzuK yx Ktwux vz stsss xr KtsLw uz utKww yw KpKwprsKLKtuuK yx Ktwsx vz stsss xr KtKrv uz utrwv yv KpKLprsKLKtuzr yx Ktwu vz stsss xr KtKrK uz utrxz yv KpKxprsKLKtuuK yx Ktwzv vz stsss xr KtKsK uz utrwL yw KprsprsKLKtuur yx Ktwyr vz stsss xr stxxy uz utKLx yw KprKprsKLKtuzK yx Ktwyw vz stsss xr stxxv uz utKLu yw KprrprsKLKtuuK yx Ktwuw vz stsss xr stxxz uz utKLK yw KprzprsKLKtuzr yx Ktwzx vz stsss xr stxLx uz utKv yw KpruprsKLKtszK yx Ktruv vz stsss xr stwKy uz rtxxr yw KpryprsKLKtuuK vs Ktwu vy stsss xr stxx uK utKwK yL KprvprsKLKtuzr vs Ktsvu vy stsss xr KtKsK uK ztyxw yv KprwprsKLKtuuK vs Ktwyu vy stsss xr stxx uK utKLy yL KprLprsKLKtuzK vs Ktwux vy stsss xr KtswL uK utryL yw KprxprsKLKtuur vs Ktwuy vy stsss xr Ktrwx uK utuvv yw KpzsprsKLKtuuK vs Ktwu vy stsss xr KtrL uK utuvK yv KpzKprsKLKtuzr vs Ktwur vy stsss xr Ktruu uK utuKL yw {FoN|r OVcPfRef^g}lc~^_RRX~cfVcPR€QP_g~_hRPl^fg k~c‚R^ƒRk^f^_V ]^_PR`RaVbcROPQQbR€QP_g 


 


 



!



!
 "# $ % &' ()()*#  +,-
.
/01-


23,





 4
5,6
7+,-
.
/8

29

-:-2;,<=/>,?

;-.

@ABCDE FGBHGIJKLM NGCO PQRSTUQVW XTYZWUYW [SVVQURY\ ]U^W _`aW bcd ]QTTW eYTTQfUYVW]U^W _`aW bcd gQRUQVW hijk hijkW gSlW bcd mY\QWdW iYYRUQV]U^W _`aW bcd mY\QWnWXTYZW hUSUoY\ hijpdWgSlW bcd @qN rstu @qN rstu @qN rstu @qN rstu @qN rstu LtLtvwLM Lwxvyz v{ vxvLv |z wxwM{ L} zx~|M yw {xz~~ LtvtvwLM LwxvwL v{ vxLz{ |z wxwww L} Lwx{w} yw }xw}z LtytvwLM LwxvLv v{ vxvL{ |z wxwww L} zxzy yw }xwwM Lt{tvwLM LwxLMM v{ vxL}y |M wxwww vz zxM{~ yw |xzz{ yw Lt|tvwLM LwxvLv v{ vxL|y |M wxwww vz Mx}{z yw ~x|M~ Lt~tvwLM Lwxvyy v{ vxLy{ |M wxwww vz Mxz{ yw }xwwy Lt}tvwLM Lwxvy| v{ Lx}zz |M wxwww vz MxMy} vz }x~v{ LtMtvwLM Lwxw}M v{ Lxywz |M wxwww vz LwxwMv vM }xvyv LtztvwLM zx~zz v{ Lx~LL |M wxwLz v} zx{{y vz MxL{z vz LtLwtvwLM Lwxv}~ v{ Lx~~| |M wxwww v} zxM~} vz zxzyw LtLLtvwLM Lwxv~} v{ LxMv} |~ wxwww v} zx{wv vz }xMyw LtLvtvwLM Lwxv{{ v{ LxMLz |~ wxwww v} }xzML vz }x|Ly LtLytvwLM LwxvvM v{ Lxv|M |} wxwww v} }x|v{ vM MxL{| LtL{tvwLM Lwxvy v{ Lxv|M |} wxwww v} }x}}z vM Mxwv} LtL|tvwLM LwxL}M v{ LxL~{ |} wxwww v} Mxy{v v} |x{~M LtL~tvwLM LwxvwL v{ Lx~~v |} wxwww v} MxMy{ vz {xv~M LtL}tvwLM Lwxvv{ v{ Lx}~M |~ wxwww vz zxz|{ vz }x|z{ vz LtLMtvwLM Lwxv{{ v{ LxMwz |~ wxwww vz zxyL} vz |xM{L LtLztvwLM Lwxv~w v{ Lx}zy |} wxwww vz zx~}y vz ~xMLz LtvwtvwLM Lwxv{M v{ Lx~~} |} wxwww vz Mx|wz vz }xy~} LtvLtvwLM Lwxv{y v{ Lx~~{ |} wxwww vz Mx}vL vz ~xvzv LtvvtvwLM Lwxv}{ v{ Lx~}L |} wxww| vz Mx}Ly vz ~xz}y LtvytvwLM Lwxv~w vy Lx~}v |} wxwww v} zx~|} vM }xvvy vM Ltv{tvwLM zxv~z vy LxvL{ |} wxwww v} }x{~~ v} |x}{L Ltv|tvwLM Lwxvy| v{ Lx~}M |M wxwww v} Mx}}M vz }xz}w Ltv~tvwLM LwxvL} v{ Lxwy~ |~ wxwww v} Mx~zz v} }x~zz Ltv}tvwLM LwxvLy v{ Lx~M~ |M wxwww v} zxyzv vz ~x}{w LtvMtvwLM Lwxvyv v{ Lx}}z |} wxwww v} zx{yL vz |xLMM LtvztvwLM LwxvvL v{ Lxz|z |} wxwww v} LwxzMz vz ~xLMM LtywtvwLM LwxLzy v{ Lxz|{ |~ wxwww vz zxzM{ vz }xwLy yw LtyLtvwLM Lwxvv{ v{ Lxz| |} wxw~w vz zxL{z vz }x}yM GsO€y eoUWY‚WeYVY\S ]SUQVWƒVY^„fUoY\WjWboUVSUQWiTQ\^o\aW
QfYV^ hijpd


 


 



!



!
 "# $ % &' ()()*#  +,-
.
/01-


23,





 4
5,6
7+,-
.
/8

29

-:-2;,<=/>,?

;-. @ABCDEFGBHGIJKLM NGCO PQRSTUQVW XTYZWUYW [SVVQURY\ ]U^W _`aW bcd ]QTTW eYTTQfUYVW]U^W _`aW bcd gQRUQVW hijk hijkW gSlW bcd mY\QWnW iYYRUQV ]U^W _`aW bcd hijonWgSlW bcd @pN qrst @pN qrst @pN qrst @pN qrst qrst LsLsuvLM Lvwuxy uz uwuLu {y vwvMz L| LwyMM xv LsusuvLM LvwuvL uz uwLyz {y vwvvv L| vwM}L xv LsxsuvLM LvwuLu uz uwuLz {y vwvvv L| vwx}y xv LszsuvLM LvwLMM uz uwL|x {M vwvvv uy vwLu xv LM Ls{suvLM LvwuLu uz uwL{x {M vwvvv uy LwvLy xv Ls}suvLM Lvwuxx uz uwLxz {M vwvvv uy Lw{zM xv Ls|suvLM Lvwux{ uz Lw|yy {M vwvvv uy Lw{z uy LsMsuvLM Lvwv|M uz Lwxvy {M vwvvv uy vwLxx uM LsysuvLM yw}yy uz Lw}LL {M vwvLy u| vw|yx uy xv LsLvsuvLM Lvwu|} uz Lw}}{ {M vwvvv u| LwxLL uy LsLLsuvLM Lvwu}| uz LwMu| {} vwvvv u| vwyuM uy LsLusuvLM Lvwuzz uz LwMLy {} vwvvv u| uw{} uy LsLxsuvLM LvwuuM uz Lwu{M {| vwvvv u| uw}}M uM LsLzsuvLM Lvwux uz Lwu{M {| vwvvv u| uwxx} uM LsL{suvLM LvwL|M uz LwL}z {| vwvvv u| uwu{u u| LsL}suvLM LvwuvL uz Lw}}u {| vwvvv u| LwMy| uy LsL|suvLM Lvwuuz uz Lw|}M {} vwvvv uy LwvL{ uy uy LsLMsuvLM Lvwuzz uz LwMvy {} vwvvv uy uwxMu uy LsLysuvLM Lvwu}v uz Lw|yx {| vwvvv uy Lwv|| uy LsuvsuvLM LvwuzM uz Lw}}| {| vwvvv uy uwuu uy LsuLsuvLM Lvwuzx uz Lw}}z {| vwvvv uy uwuzz uy LsuusuvLM Lvwu|z uz Lw}|L {| vwvv{ uy Lwz{{ uy LsuxsuvLM Lvwu}v ux Lw}|u {| vwvvv u| Lwu{{ uM uM LsuzsuvLM ywu}y ux LwuLz {| vwvvv u| LwLuu u| Lsu{suvLM Lvwux{ uz Lw}|M {M vwvvv u| LwyLz uy Lsu}suvLM LvwuL| uz Lwvx} {} vwvvv u| uwuMM u| Lsu|suvLM LvwuLx uz Lw}M} {M vwvvv u| LwM{y uy LsuMsuvLM Lvwuxu uz Lw||y {| vwvvv u| vw|x} uy LsuysuvLM LvwuuL uz Lwy{y {| vwvvv u| vwx|L uy LsxvsuvLM LvwLyx uz Lwy{z {} vwvvv uy vwvvz uy Ly LsxLsuvLM Lvwuuz uz Lwy{ {| vwv}v uy Lw}}{ uy ~GrOz e€UWY‚WeYVY\S ]SUQVWƒVY^„fU€Y\WjWb€UVSUQWiTQ\^€\aW
QfYV^ hijon


 


 



!



!
 "# $ % &' ()()*#  +,-
.
/01-


23,





 4
5,6
7+,-
.
/8

29

-:-2;,<=/>,?

;-. @ABCDE FGCH IJKKLM NOPL QRMIJKKLST NOPL QRMIJKKL SU NOPL QRM VWXJLML YWWZ[J\L ]Y^UM I[_L `abL QRM cdKKZL eWL VWXJLM NOPL QRMIf^Ug NOPL QRM NJZ[J\L VWXJLML eW[OKL chi NJZ[J\LVWXJL MLIJdbj[J_L `aJ\ObJL QRM ]Y^kL IJJlKmL NOPLQRM @nF opqr @nF opqr@nFopqr @nF opqr@nF opqr@nF opqr @nF opqr opqr sqsqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{| ss {wz}v ~u uwuuu vw} uwuuu u ssw~}} t| sqtqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt sw|uu ss suwu| ~u uwuuu vw} uwuuu u stwsu| t| sq~qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt sw|uu ss {w{~ ~u uwuuu vw} uwuuu u sswz~ t| sqqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swzv| ss {wvz ~u uwuuu vw} uwuuu u ssw}~~ t| t{ sq}qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swzv} ss vw|{ ~u uwuuu vw} uwuuu u suw~ t| sqzqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swt}t ss vw{ ~u sw}zs vw} uwuuu u ssw|}~ t} sq|qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss vwv~| t{ swz}v vw} uwuuu u suw{} tz sqvqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuus ss suwuvt tv uw~~s vw} uwuuu u suws t| sq{qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss {w~ t{ uws{t vw} uwuuu u {wz~} tv t| sqsuqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuus ss {wvz| t{ uwuuu vw} uwuuu u {wvzv t{ sqssqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss {wut t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u {wut t{ sqstqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss |w{vs t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u |w{vs t{ sqs~qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss |w}t tv uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u |w}t tv sqsqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss |w||{ tv uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u |w||{ tv sqs}qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uwuuu ss vw~t t| uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u vw~t t| sqszqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt uw{s ss vwv~ t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u {w|v t| sqs|qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{} ss {w{} t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u sswz{ tz t{ sqsvqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{z ss {w~s| t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u sswus~ tz sqs{qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{z ss {wz|~ t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u ssw~z{ tz sqtuqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{u ss vw}u{ t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u suws{{ tz sqtsqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{ ss vw|ts t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u suws} tz sqttqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{| ss vw|s~ t{ uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u suws tz sqt~qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{z ss {wz}| tv uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u ssw~}~ t} t| sqtqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{| ss |wzz t| uwuuu ~wt uwuuu u {wsz~ t sqt}qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt sw}uz ss vw||v t{ uwuuu z uwuuu u suwtv tz sqtzqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swzv ss vwz{{ t| uwuuu z uwuuu u suw~v~ t sqt|qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swzv{ ss {w~{t t{ uwuuu z uwuuu u sswuvs tz sqtvqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt swz{~ ss {w~s t{ uwuuu z uwuuu u sswst tz sqt{qtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt sw|}v ss suw{v{ t{ uwuuu z uwuuu u stw|| t| sq~uqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt sw|zs ss {w{v t{ uwuuu z uwuuu u ssw|} tz t{ sq~sqtusvuwuuu sv xxy tt sw|}| ss {ws{ t{ swvu z uwuuu u stw~vz t €GpH} ‚d[mLWƒL‚W\WXO IO[J\L„\W_
†[dWXL^LQd[\O[JLYKJX_dXbLfJ†W\_ ]Y^kLNJZ[J\LYKJX_ ‡GBˆG‰Š‹sv