09-01-2022 James Vaughn - Section 31 — Rancho Mirage City Council, September 1, 2022 (part 3 of 9)

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:86.612 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:9 351.5 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 2,985 Service connection density: 8 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 74.5 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $3,241,740 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):10 $1.34 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $663.06 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Unauthorized consumption
3: Systematic data handling errors
Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

1.009
2020 7/2019 - 6/2020
Coachella Valley Water District ID11 (CA1310011)

0.078
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 86 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

Copyright © 2014, All Rights Reserved.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Coachella Water Authority

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:8 2,127.780 MG/Yr 4 0.00%MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:2,127.780 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:8 1,925.960 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered: 26.597 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:1,952.557 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)175.223 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 5.319 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Systematic data handling errors: 4.815 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:10.134 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:165.088 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:175.223 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:201.820 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:3 119.6 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:3 8,037 Service connection density: 67 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:6 75.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:2 $5,000,000 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $1.50 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):9 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Total annual cost of operating water system
3: Customer metering inaccuracies
Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed 2015 1/2015 - 12/2015
TKE Engineering, Inc. for Coachella Water Authority
*** YOUR SCORE IS: 67 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 2,031.790 MG/Yr 4 0.00%MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:2,031.790 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 1,993.120 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 5.079 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:1,998.199 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)33.591 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 5.079 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 10.016 MG/Yr 0.50%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 4.983 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:20.078 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:13.513 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:33.591 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:38.670 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:6 119.6 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:6 8,126 Service connection density: 68 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 75.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $5,960,000 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):5 $1.50 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):1 $300.00 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses)
3: Customer metering inaccuracies
AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

5.079
2016 1/2016 - 12/2016
Coachella Water Authority

Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 50 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:8 2,221.260 MG/Yr 4 MG/Yr
Water imported: 0.000 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Water exported: 0.000 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:2,221.260 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:8 1,963.970 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered: 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered: 0.000 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered: 27.766 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:1,991.736 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)229.524 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 5.553 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:6 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Systematic data handling errors: 4.910 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:10.463 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:219.061 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:229.524 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:257.290 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:6 119.6 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:6 8,344 Service connection density: 70 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 75.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:7 $6,650,000 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):6 $1.65 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):6 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Customer metering inaccuracies
3: Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses) AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed 100.000
2017 1/2017 - 12/2017
Coachella Water Authority (3310007)

Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 69 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 2,324.669 MG/Yr 3 MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:2,324.669 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 2,240.846 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 5.812 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:2,246.657 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)78.012 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 5.812 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 11.261 MG/Yr 0.50%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 5.602 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:22.674 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:55.337 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:78.012 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:83.823 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:6 119.6 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:8 8,487 Service connection density: 71 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 75.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $6,883,678 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):5 $1.65 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):5 $409.46 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Customer metering inaccuracies
3: Billed metered
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 54 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

5.812
2018 1/2018 - 12/2018
Coachella Water Authority (3310007)

?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 2,216.370 MG/Yr 3 MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:2,216.370 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 2,127.930 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr Pcnt:Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 5.541 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr24061
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:2,133.471 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)82.899 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt:Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 5.541 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 10.693 MG/Yr 0.50%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors:5 5.320 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:21.554 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:61.345 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:82.899 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:88.440 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:9 119.6 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:8 8,235 Service connection density:69 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:2 ft
Average operating pressure:5 55.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $6,936,815 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):5 $1.65 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):5 $409.46 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 54 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

5.541
2019 1/2019 - 12/2019
Coachella Water Authority (CA3310007)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Desert Water Agency

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:9 29,731.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:29,731.000 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:9 26,796.000 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:9 172.000 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered: 371.638 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:27,339.638 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)2,391.363 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 74.328 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:7 1,419.368 acre-ft/yr 5.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors: 66.990 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:1,560.686 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:830.677 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:2,391.363 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:2,935.000 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:9 392.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 22,073 Service connection density: 56 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:8 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:9 $25,084,704 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.50 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):9 $814.57 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Unauthorized consumption
3: Systematic data handling errors
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 84 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed 2015 1/2015 - 12/2015
Desert Water Agency (3310005)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

Copyright © 2014, All Rights Reserved.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 29,931.033 acre-ft/yr 3 acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:29,931.033 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:6 27,386.910 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:3 186.030 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 74.828 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:27,647.768 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)2,283.265 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 74.828 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:4 278.515 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors: 68.467 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:421.809 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:1,861.456 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:2,283.265 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:2,544.123 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:7 411.9 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:6 22,073 Service connection density: 54 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:2 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $25,558,688 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $1.58 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $216.92 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Unbilled metered
3: Customer metering inaccuracies
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 58 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

74.828
2016 1/2016 - 12/2016
Desert Water Agency (3310005)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

Copyright © 2014, All Rights Reserved.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 32,712.023 acre-ft/yr 3 -0.54%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:32,888.635 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:6 28,931.285 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:3 343.128 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:8 110.902 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:29,385.315 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)3,503.320 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 82.222 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:4 295.701 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors: 72.328 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:450.251 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:3,053.069 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:3,503.320 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:3,957.350 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:7 414.1 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:6 25,807 Service connection density: 62 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:3 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $25,428,532 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $1.67 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $235.19 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet
110.902
2017 1/2017 - 12/2017
Desert Water Agency (3310005)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 33,141.858 acre-ft/yr 3 -0.34%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:33,253.590 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 30,042.202 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:3 437.579 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:10 57.393 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:30,537.174 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)2,716.416 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:6 83.134 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:4 307.877 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:4 75.106 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:466.116 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:2,250.300 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:2,716.416 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:3,211.388 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:7 423.9 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 25,527 Service connection density: 60 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 79.1 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $27,935,986 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $1.83 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $255.62 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 60 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score 500.000

11.269
Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

57.393
2018 1/2018 - 12/2018
Desert Water Agency (3310005)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 29,545.666 acre-ft/yr 3 1.43%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:29,128.258 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 28,112.120 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:3 368.224 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:10 71.237 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:28,551.581 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)576.677 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:6 72.821 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:7 229.680 acre-ft/yr 0.80%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:4 70.280 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:372.781 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:203.896 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:576.677 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:1,016.138 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:7 424.7 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 25,508 Service connection density: 60 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 79.7 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $27,896,593 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.02 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $280.56 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Unbilled metered
3: Billed metered
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 62 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score 500.000

11.409
Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

71.237
2019 1/2019 - 12/2019
Desert Water Agency (3310005)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Indio Water Authority

Water Audit Report for:Indio Water Authority
Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR

WATER SUPPLIED
Volume from own sources:7 7,308.910 Million gallons (US)/yr (MG/Yr) Master meter error adjustment (enter positive value):7 118.844 Water imported:n/a MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a MG/Yr
WATER SUPPLIED:7,427.754 MG/Yr
.

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 6,779.170 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:n/a MG/Yr Pcnt:Value:

Unbilled unmetered:92.847 MG/Yr 1.25%24061
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:6,872.017 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)555.737 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt:Value:

Unauthorized consumption:18.569 MG/Yr 0.25%
Customer metering inaccuracies:7 138.350 MG/Yr 2.00%
Systematic data handling errors:7 36.000 MG/Yr
Apparent Losses:192.920
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:362.817 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:555.737 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:648.584 MG/Yr
= Total Water Loss + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:9 325.7 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 21,084 Connection density:65 conn./mile main
Average length of customer service line:9 20.0 ft
Average operating pressure:8 70.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:8 $12,234,251 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):8 $1.17 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $442.97 $/Million gallons

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Financial Indicators
Non-revenue water as percent by volume of Water Supplied:8.7% Non-revenue water as percent by cost of operating system:4.1% Annual cost of Apparent Losses:$301,739
Annual cost of Real Losses:$160,717
Operational Efficiency Indicators
Apparent Losses per service connection per day:25.07 gallons/connection/day Real Losses per service connection per day*:47.15 gallons/connection/day Real Losses per length of main per day*:N/A
Real Losses per service connection per day per psi pressure:0.67 gallons/connection/day/psi Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL):141.13 million gallons/year From Above, Real Losses = Current Annual Real Losses (CARL):362.82 million gallons/year

2.57 * only the most applicable of these two indicators will be calculated WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Master meter error adjustment
3: Billed metered
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Reporting Worksheet 2011
under-registered
7/2010 - 6/2011
<< Enter grading in column 'E'
MG/Yr
Choose this option to
enter a percentage of
billed metered
consumption. This is
NOT a default value
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
*** YOUR SCORE IS: 72 out of 100 ***
Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) [CARL/UARL]:

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed $/100 cubic feet (ccf)
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
? Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Back to Instructions
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of ?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
(pipe length between curbstop and customer
meter or property boundary)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
? Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
For more information, click here to see the Grading Matrix worksheet ?
Copyright © 2010, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved. ?
?
?
?
WAS v4.2
AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 17,614.600 acre-ft/yr 3 0.50%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:17,705.000 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:8 16,529.430 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:10 3.200 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:10 132.700 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 44.263 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:16,709.593 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)995.407 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 44.263 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:4 168.304 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:5 41.324 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:253.890 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:741.517 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:995.407 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:1,172.370 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:10 344.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 22,878 Service connection density: 67 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 72.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $26,423,911 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.41 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $163.65 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Customer metering inaccuracies
3: Unauthorized consumption
Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

44.263
2017 7/2016 - 6/2017
City of Indio/Indio Water Authority (3310020)

-90.400
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 76 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property boundary,
that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 19,228.000 acre-ft/yr 5 -0.50%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:19,323.404 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:8 18,252.000 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:7 1.072 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:8 17.584 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 48.309 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:18,318.965 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)1,004.439 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 48.309 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 184.541 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:5 45.630 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:278.480 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:725.960 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:1,004.439 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:1,070.332 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:10 344.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 23,135 Service connection density: 67 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 71.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $28,280,336 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.42 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $163.65 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

48.309
2017-2018 7/2017 - 6/2018
City of Indio/Indio Water Authority (3310020)

-95.404
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 74 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 19,074.900 acre-ft/yr 5 -0.50%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:19,170.754 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:8 17,789.490 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:7 3.180 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:8 153.980 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 47.927 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:17,994.577 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)1,176.177 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 47.927 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 181.247 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:5 44.474 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:273.648 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:902.529 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:1,176.177 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:1,378.084 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:10 346.1 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:9 23,377 Service connection density: 68 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 71.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $22,841,733 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $1.45 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $198.93 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Customer metering inaccuracies
3: Unauthorized consumption
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 74 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

47.927
2018 - 2019 7/2018 - 6/2019
City of Indio/Indio Water Authority (3310020)

-95.404
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:8 19,422.100 acre-ft/yr 3 -0.30%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr n/a acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:19,480.542 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:9 17,806.000 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:8 3.260 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:10 275.500 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 48.701 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:18,133.461 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)1,347.080 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 48.701 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:4 275.353 acre-ft/yr 1.50%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:5 44.515 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:368.569 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:978.511 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:1,347.080 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:1,671.282 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:10 344.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:10 24,194 Service connection density: 70 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:8 69.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $21,828,275 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.41 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $163.65 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Customer metering inaccuracies
3: Unauthorized consumption
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 78 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

48.701
2020 7/2019 - 6/2020
City of Indio/Indio Water Authority (CA3310020)

-90.400
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Mission Springs Water District

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:8 7,252.000 acre-ft/yr 8 acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr 8 acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr 8 acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:7,252.000 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:8 6,506.000 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:8 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:8 0.000 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:7 90.650 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:6,596.650 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)655.350 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 18.130 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:8 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:8 16.265 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:34.395 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:620.955 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:655.350 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:746.000 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 240.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 12,967 Service connection density: 54 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 65.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:8 $8,792,437 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):8 $2.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $432.00 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Unauthorized consumption
3: Systematic data handling errors
Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed 2015 1/2015 - 12/2015
Mission Springs Water District
*** YOUR SCORE IS: 76 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/1000 gallons (US)

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 7,222.900 acre-ft/yr 3 acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:7,222.900 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 6,503.000 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:8 0.974 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:7 2.090 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:6,506.064 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)716.836 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 18.057 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:5 65.697 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors: 16.258 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:100.011 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:616.825 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:716.836 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:719.900 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 390.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 13,098 Service connection density: 34 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 65.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $9,334,124 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):8 $2.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):5 $432.00 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 67 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

2.090
2016 1/2016 - 12/2016
Mission Springs Water District (3310008)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 7,811.740 acre-ft/yr 4 acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:7,811.740 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 6,912.000 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:8 0.629 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:8 1.464 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:6,914.093 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)897.647 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:5 19.529 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 69.825 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:6 17.280 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:106.634 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:791.013 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:897.647 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:899.740 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 390.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 13,101 Service connection density: 34 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 65.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $9,927,696 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):8 $2.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):6 $432.00 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Billed metered
3: Customer metering inaccuracies
Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

1.464
2017 1/2017 - 12/2017
Mission Springs Water District (3310008)

Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/1000 gallons (US)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 71 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 7,875.220 acre-ft/yr 3 1.25%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:7,777.995 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 6,950.165 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:9 0.962 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:8 3.391 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:6,954.518 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)823.477 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:5 19.445 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 70.213 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:6 17.375 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:107.034 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:716.443 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:823.477 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:827.830 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 282.4 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:8 13,215 Service connection density: 47 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 65.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $10,264,350 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.38 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $600.87 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

3.391
2018 1/2018 - 12/2018
Mission Springs Water District (3310008)

Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 74 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 7,539.140 acre-ft/yr 3 1.00%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:7,464.495 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 6,466.254 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:9 21.800 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:8 3.198 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:6,491.252 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)973.243 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:5 18.661 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 65.536 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:6 16.166 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:100.363 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:872.880 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:973.243 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:998.241 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 303.4 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:8 12,783 Service connection density: 42 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 65.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $10,726,421 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.87 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $590.64 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Billed metered
3: Customer metering inaccuracies
Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 74 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet

3.198
2019 1/2019 - 12/2019
Mission Springs Water District (3310008)

?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 63.620 acre-ft/yr 3 1.00%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:62.990 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 49.150 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:9 0.120 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:8 0.044 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:49.314 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)13.676 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:5 0.157 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 0.498 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:6 0.123 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:0.778 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:12.898 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:13.676 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:13.840 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 7.3 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:8 174 Service connection density: 24 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 60.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $158,036 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.87 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $1,638.27 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

0.044
2019 1/2019 - 12/2019
Mission Springs Water District (3310081)

Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:

Retail costs are less than (or equal to) production costs; please review and correct if necessary $/100 cubic feet (ccf)
Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 74 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:7 89.660 acre-ft/yr 3 1.00%acre-ft/yr Water imported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr acre-ft/yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:88.772 acre-ft/yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:7 73.530 acre-ft/yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 acre-ft/yr
Unbilled metered:9 0.059 acre-ft/yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:8 0.064 acre-ft/yr 1.25%acre-ft/yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:73.653 acre-ft/yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)15.119 acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption:5 0.222 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Customer metering inaccuracies:6 0.743 acre-ft/yr 1.00%acre-ft/yr Systematic data handling errors:6 0.184 acre-ft/yr 0.25%acre-ft/yr Apparent Losses:1.149 acre-ft/yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:13.970 acre-ft/yr WATER LOSSES:15.119 acre-ft/yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:15.242 acre-ft/yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:8 10.4 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:8 256 Service connection density: 25 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:7 60.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $237,053 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $2.87 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):8 $1,743.70 $/acre-ft WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

0.064
2019 1/2019 - 12/2019
Mission Springs Water District (3310078)

?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.
?
?
?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Use Customer Retail Unit Cost to value real losses
?
To select the correct data grading for each input, determine the highest grade where the utility meets or exceeds all criteria for that grade and all grades below it.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:3 1,083.200 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:1,083.200 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 975.800 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 13.540 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr24061
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:989.340 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)93.860 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 2.708 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 30.179 MG/Yr 3.00%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 2.440 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:35.327 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:58.533 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:93.860 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:107.400 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:5 33.5 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 2,514 Service connection density: 75 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $2,026,409 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $0.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):4 $33.61 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION:
1: Volume from own sources
2: Customer metering inaccuracies
3: Billed metered
Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed 2015 1/2015 - 12/2015
Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company (3310051)
*** YOUR SCORE IS: 49 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 2

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:5 1,074.300 MG/Yr 3 MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:1,074.300 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 966.100 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:9 0.427 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered: 13.429 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:979.956 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)94.344 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 2.686 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 29.893 MG/Yr 3.00%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 2.415 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:34.994 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:59.351 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:94.344 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:108.200 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $2,026,409 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $0.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $0.97 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed *** YOUR SCORE IS: 61 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading score of 10 has been applied Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:

Reporting Worksheet
Default option selected for Unbilled unmetered - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed 2016 1/2016 - 12/2016
Myoma Water Company (3310051)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
ORvalue
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:3 1,108.600 MG/Yr 3 MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:1,108.600 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 1,010.600 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:10 20.700 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:10 0.216 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:1,031.516 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)77.084 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 2.772 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 31.896 MG/Yr 3.00%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 2.527 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:37.194 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:39.890 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:77.084 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:98.000 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:5 34.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 2,537 Service connection density: 75 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:6 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $2,330,710 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $0.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):5 $350.05 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

0.216
2017 1/2017 - 12/2017
Myoma Water Company (3310051)
*** YOUR SCORE IS: 54 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
ORvalue
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:3 1,211.900 MG/Yr 3 MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr n/a MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:1,211.900 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:5 1,069.298 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:10 21.900 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:5 1.212 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:1,092.410 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)119.490 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 3.030 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 33.748 MG/Yr 3.00%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 2.673 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:39.451 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:80.039 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:119.490 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:142.602 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:5 34.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 2,550 Service connection density: 75 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:6 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $2,314,890 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $0.97 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):5 $312.65 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

1.212
2018 1/2018 - 12/2018
Myoma Water Company (3310051)
*** YOUR SCORE IS: 53 out of 100 ***
A weighted scale for the components of consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score Default option selected for Systematic data handling errors - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed Based on the information provided, audit accuracy can be improved by addressing the following components:
$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

Default option selected for unauthorized consumption - a grading of 5 is applied but not displayed ?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
ORvalue
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Water Audit Report for:

Reporting Year:

All volumes to be entered as: MILLION GALLONS (US) PER YEAR Master Meter and Supply Error Adjustments
WATER SUPPLIED Pcnt: Value:

Volume from own sources:3 1,177.300 MG/Yr 3 0.00%MG/Yr
Water imported:n/a MG/Yr MG/Yr
Water exported:n/a MG/Yr MG/Yr
Enter negative % or value for under-registration
WATER SUPPLIED:1,177.300 MG/Yr Enter positive % or value for over-registration .

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
Billed metered:4 1,044.610 MG/Yr
Billed unmetered:n/a 0.000 MG/Yr
Unbilled metered:10 44.390 MG/Yr Pcnt: Value:

Unbilled unmetered:10 0.131 MG/Yr 1.25%MG/Yr
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:1,089.131 MG/Yr
WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption)88.169 MG/Yr Apparent Losses Pcnt: Value:

Unauthorized consumption: 2.943 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr
Customer metering inaccuracies:3 33.680 MG/Yr 3.00%MG/Yr Systematic data handling errors: 2.612 MG/Yr 0.25%MG/Yr Apparent Losses:39.235 MG/Yr
Real Losses (Current Annual Real Losses or CARL)
Real Losses = Water Losses - Apparent Losses:48.934 MG/Yr WATER LOSSES:88.169 MG/Yr

NON-REVENUE WATER
NON-REVENUE WATER:132.690 MG/Yr
= Water Losses + Unbilled Metered + Unbilled Unmetered

SYSTEM DATA
Length of mains:5 35.0 miles
Number of active AND inactive service connections:7 2,577 Service connection density: 74 conn./mile main
Yes
Average length of customer service line:ft
Average operating pressure:5 80.0 psi

COST DATA
Total annual cost of operating water system:10 $2,364,469 $/Year Customer retail unit cost (applied to Apparent Losses):9 $1.31 Variable production cost (applied to Real Losses):7 $538.05 $/Million gallons WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY SCORE:

Reporting Worksheet

0.131
2019 1/2019 - 12/2019
Myoma Dunes Water Company (3310051)
?
?
?
?
?
?Click to access definition
?
?
?
?
?
?
Please enter data in the white cells below. Where available, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate your confidence in the accuracy of the input data by grading each component (n/a or 1-10) using the drop-down list to the left of the input cell. Hover the mouse over the cell to obtain a description of the grades ?
?
?
?
?
?
(length of service line, beyond the property
boundary, that is the responsibility of the utility)
Use buttons to select
percentage of water
supplied
OR
value
?Click here:
for help using option
buttons below
?
?
?
?
+
+Click to add a comment
WAS v5.0
+
+
+
+
+
+
American Water Works Association.

AWWA Free Water Audit Software v5.0 Reporting Worksheet 1

Appendix H: Resolutions of
Adoption

Coachella Valley Water District

Coachella Valley Water District
Board of Directors
Resolution No: 2021-19

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ADOPTING THE 2020 COACHELLA VALLEY REGIONAL

URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act requires urban water suppliers providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre- feet of water annually to prepare and adopt, in accordance with prescribed requirements, an urban water management plan every five years;

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act specifies the requirements and procedures for adopting such urban water management plans, including regional urban water management plans;

WHEREAS, the 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) has been prepared at the direction of Coachella Valley Water District (the “District”), Coachella Water Authority, Desert Water Agency, Indio Water Authority, Mission Springs Water District, and Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company in accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act and the Water Conservation Act of 2009, also referred to as SB X7-7;

WHEREAS, in accordance with applicable law, including Water Code section 10642, and Government Code section 6066, a Notice of a Public Hearing regarding the 2020 RUWMP was published within the jurisdiction of the District on June 4, 2021 and June 11, 2021;

WHEREAS, in accordance with applicable law, including but not limited to Water Code section 10642, a public hearing was held on June 22, 2021 at 8:00 AM or soon thereafter, at 75515 Hovley Lane East, Palm Desert, CA 92211 in order to provide members of the public and other interested entities with the opportunity to be heard in connection with proposed adoption of the 2020 RUWMP and issues related thereto;
WHEREAS, pursuant to said public hearing on the 2020 RUWMP, the District, among other things, encouraged the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic members of the community within the District’s service area with regard to the 2020 RUWMP and encouraged community input regarding the 2020 RUWMP;
WHEREAS, Section 10652 of the California Water Code provides that the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) (CEQA) does not apply to the preparation and adoption of the 2020 RUWMP; and

Coachella Valley Water District
Board of Directors
Resolution No: 2021-19

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the District wishes to adopt the 2020 RUWMP and has determined the 2020 RUWMP to be consistent with the Urban Water Management Planning Act and the Water Conservation Act of 2009 and to be an accurate representation of the water resources plan for the District.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the District hereby resolves as follows:

1. All of the above recitals are true;

2. The Board of Directors of the District adopts the 2020 RUWMP, as amended by changes incorporated by the Board of Directors as a result of input received (if any) at the public hearing;

3. District staff is hereby authorized and directed to submit copies of the 2020 RUWMP as required by Urban Water Management Planning Act and to make the 2020 RUWMP available to the public no later than thirty days after filing a copy of the 2020 RUWMP with the Department of Water Resources;

4. The Board of Directors finds and determines that this resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Water Code Section 10652 because CEQA does not apply to the preparation and adoption, including addenda thereto, of an urban water management plan or to the implementation of the actions taken pursuant to such plans. Because this resolution comprises the District’s adoption of the 2020 RUWMP and involves its implementation, no CEQA review is required;

5. Pursuant to CEQA, the Board of Directors directs staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the Riverside County, Imperial County, and San Diego County Clerks within five (5) working days of adoption of this resolution; and

6. The document and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this resolution and the above findings have been based are located at 75515 Hovley Lane East, Palm Desert, CA 92211. The custodian for these records is the Director of Environmental Services.

PASSED and ADOPTED by the Board of Directors, County of Riverside, State of California, on this 22nd day of June, 2021, by the following vote:

AYES: Powell, Nelson, Aguilar, Bianco, Estrada
NOES: None

Coachella Valley Water District
Board of Directors
Resolution No: 2021-20

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ADOPTING THE 2021

WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act requires urban water suppliers providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually to prepare and adopt, in accordance with prescribed requirements, a water shortage contingency plan;

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act specifies the requirements and procedures for adopting such water shortage contingency plans;

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act requires urban water suppliers to conduct an annual water supply and demand assessment (Annual Assessment) each year and to include in their water shortage contingency plans the procedures they will use to conduct the Annual Assessment;

WHEREAS, the procedures used to conduct an Annual Assessment include, but are not limited to, the written decision-making process that an urban water supplier will use each year to determine its water supply reliability;

WHEREAS, the Coachella Valley Water District’s (the “District”) Water Shortage Contingency Plan provides that by June of each year, agency staff will present a completed Annual Assessment for approval by the Board of Directors or by the Board’s authorized designee with expressly delegated authority for approval of Annual Assessment determinations;

WHEREAS, in accordance with applicable law, including Water Code section 10642, and Government Code section 6066, a Notice of a Public Hearing regarding the Water Shortage Contingency Plan was published within the jurisdiction of the District on June 4, 2021 and June 11, 2021;

WHEREAS, pursuant to said public hearing on the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, the District, among other things, encouraged the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic members of the community within the District’s service area with regard to the Water

Coachella Valley Water District
Board of Directors
Resolution No: 2021-20

Shortage Contingency Plan and encouraged community input regarding the Water Shortage Contingency Plan;

WHEREAS, Section 10652 of the California Water Code provides that the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) (CEQA) does not apply to the preparation and adoption of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the District wishes to adopt such Water Shortage Contingency Plan and has determined the Water Shortage Contingency Plan to be consistent with the Urban Water Management Planning Act and to be an accurate representation of the planned actions during shortage conditions for the District.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the District hereby resolves as follows:

1. All of the above recitals are true;

2. The Board of Directors of the District adopts the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, as amended by changes incorporated by the Board of Directors as a result of input received (if any) at the public hearing and expressly authorizes the General Manager of the District to approve the Annual Assessment each year;

3. District staff is hereby authorized and directed to submit copies of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan as required by Urban Water Management Planning Act and to make the Water Shortage Contingency Plan available to the public no later than thirty days after filing a copy of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan with the Department of Water Resources;

4. The Board of Directors finds and determines that this resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Water Code Section 10652 because CEQA does not apply to the preparation and adoption, including addenda thereto, of a Water Shortage Contingency Plan or to the implementation of the actions taken pursuant to such plans. Because this resolution comprises the District’s adoption of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan and involves its implementation, no CEQA review is required;

6. The document and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this resolution and the above findings have been based are located at 75515 Hovley Lane

Coachella Valley Water District
Board of Directors
Resolution No: 2021-21

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ADOPTING APPENDIX L AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE 2015

URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act specifies the requirements and procedures for amending and adopting such urban water management plans;

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Reform Act of 2009, the Delta Plan, and Water Code section 85021, which declares that the State’s policy is to “reduce reliance on the Delta in meeting California’s future water needs through a statewide strategy of investing in improved regional supplies, conservation, and water use efficiency,” urban water suppliers are encouraged by the California Department of Resources (DWR) and the Delta Stewardship Council (DSC) to consider adopting an Addendum to their 2015 urban water management plans to demonstrate consistency with the Delta Plan Policy WR P1 to Reduce Reliance on the Delta Through Improved Regional Water Self-Reliance (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23, § 5003);

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Coachella Valley Water District (the “District”), wishes to adopt Appendix L as an addendum to the District’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and has determined Appendix L to be consistent with the Urban Water Management Planning Act and to include all of the elements described in Delta Plan Policy WR P1, Reduce Reliance on the Delta Through Improved Regional Water Self-Reliance (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 23, § 5003, subd. (c)(1));

WHEREAS, in accordance with applicable law, including Water Code section 10642, and Government Code section 6066, a Notice of a Public Hearing regarding Appendix L as an addendum to the District’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan was published within the jurisdiction of the District on June 4, 2021 and June 11, 2021;

Coachella Valley Water District
Board of Directors
Resolution No: 2021-21

WHEREAS, pursuant to said public hearing on Appendix L as an addendum to the District’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, the District, among other things, encouraged the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic members of the community within the District’s service area with regard to Appendix L as an addendum to the District’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and encouraged community input regarding the Appendix L as an addendum to the District’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the District hereby resolves as follows:

1. All of the above recitals are true;

2. The Board of Directors of the District adopts Appendix L as an addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, as amended by changes incorporated by the Board of Directors as a result of input received (if any) at the public hearing;

3. District staff is hereby authorized and directed to submit copies of Appendix L as an addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan as required by Urban Water Management Planning Act and to make Appendix L as an addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan available to the public no later than thirty days after filing a copy of Appendix L as an addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan with the Department of Water Resources;

4. The Board of Directors finds and determines that this resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Water Code Section 10652 because CEQA does not apply to the preparation and adoption of Appendix L as an addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan or to the implementation of the actions taken pursuant to such plans. Because this resolution comprises the District’s adoption of Appendix L as an addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and involves its implementation, no CEQA review is required;

6. The document and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this resolution and the above findings have been based are located at 75515 Hovley Lane

Coachella Water Authority

Desert Water Agency

RESOLUTION NO. 1260

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
DESERT WATER AGENCY ADOPTING THE 2020 URBAN

WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

WHEREAS, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 797 (Water Code Section 10610 et seq., known as the Urban Water Management Planning Act) during the 1983- 1984 Regular Session, as subsequently amended, which mandates that every supplier providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre feet of water annually, prepare an Urban Water Management Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Urban Water Management Planning Act requires each urban water supplier to update its Urban Water Management Plan at least once every five years on or before December 31, in years ending five and zero; and

WHEREAS, legislation referred to as the Water Conservation Act of 2009 or “SBX7-7” (Water Code, Part 2.55, Section 10608 et seq.), enacted by the California Legislature during the 2009 Extraordinary Session, extended the time by which urban retail water suppliers must adopt their 2015 Urban Water Management Plans until July 1, 2016, and, among other things, established requirements for urban retail water suppliers to prepare interim and urban water use targets for achieving increased water use efficiency by the years 2015 and 2020, in accordance with the goal of SBX7-7 to reduce statewide per capita water use 20 percent by the year 2020; and

WHEREAS, the Desert Water agency (Agency) is an urban retail water supplier for purposes of the Urban Water Management Planning Act and SBX7-7; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act and SBX7-7, the Agency adopted its current Urban Water Management Plan (Plan) in 2016 and must update the Plan no later than July 1, 2021; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with applicable law, including Water Code Sections 10608.26 and 10642, and Government Code Section 6066, a properly noticed public hearing regarding said updated the Plan was conducted by the Board of Directors on June 15, 2021, and the proposed updated Plan was posted on the Agency’s website two (2) weeks before the hearing; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to said public hearing on the Agency’s proposed updated Plan, the Agency, among other things, encouraged the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the Agency’s service area with regard to the preparation of the Plan, allowed community input regarding the Agency’s implementation plan for complying with SBX7-7, considered the economic impacts of the Agency’s implementation plan for complying with SBX7-7, and adopted Method 1 under Water Code Section 10608.20(b) for determining its water use targets; and

Reso. 1260

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, the California Department of Water Resources issued a Guidebook to Assist Urban Water Suppliers to Prepare an Urban Water Management Plan (the “DWR Guidebook”) and Methodologies for Calculating Baseline and Compliance Urban Per Capita Water Use (the “DWR Methodologies”) to provide guidance to urban retail water suppliers for purposes of preparing Urban Water Management Plans, and the Agency utilized the DWR Guidebook and the DWR Methodologies in preparing its updated Plan; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with Water Code Section 10620(e), the Agency has prepared its updated Plan with its own staff, with the assistance of consulting professionals, and in cooperation with other governmental agencies, and has utilized industry standards and the expertise of industry professionals in preparing its updated Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Agency’s Board of Directors has reviewed and considered the purposes and requirements of the Urban Water Management Planning Act and SBX7-7, the contents of the updated Plan, and the documentation contained in the administrative record in support of the updated Plan, and has determined that the factual analyses and conclusions set forth in the updated Plan are supported by substantial evidence.

WHEREAS, DWA’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted as amended by changes agreed upon by participating CV UWMP Agencies as a result of input received (if any) at public hearings and ordered filed with the Secretary of DWA.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Directors of Desert Water Agency as follows:

1. The Agency hereby adopts Target Method 1 under Water Code Section 10608.20(b) for determining its water use targets, and the updated Urban Water Management Plan is hereby adopted and ordered filed with the Secretary of the Board.

2. The General Manager is hereby authorized and directed to include a copy of this Resolution in the Agency’s updated Urban Water Management Plan and, in accordance with Water Code Section 10644(a), to file the updated Urban Water Management Plan with the California Department of Water Resources, the California State Library, and any city or county within which the Agency provides water supplies within thirty (30) days after this date.

3. The General Manager is hereby authorized and directed, in accordance with Water Code Section 10645, to make the updated Urban Water Management Plan available for public review not later than thirty (30) days after filing a copy thereof with the California Department of Water Resources.

4. The General Manager is hereby authorized and directed, in accordance with Water Code Section 10635(b), to provide that portion of the updated Urban Water Management Plan prepared pursuant to Water Code Section 10635(a) to any city or county within which the Agency provides water supplies not later than sixty (60) days after filing a copy thereof with the California Department of Water Resources.

Reso. 1260

Page 3 ends

5. The General Manager is hereby authorized and directed to implement the components of the updated Urban Water Management Plan in accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act and SBX7-7 including, but not limited to, the Agency’s Water Conservation Programs and its water shortage contingency analysis.

6. The General Manager is hereby authorized and directed to recommend to the Board of Directors additional steps necessary or appropriate to effectively carry out the implementation of the updated Urban Water Management Plan.

ADOPTED this 15th day of June 2021.

Kristin Bloomer, President

ATTEST:

Joseph K. Stuart, Secretary-Treasurer

I, Sylvia Baca, Assistant Secretary of the Board of Directors of Desert Water Agency, hereby certify that the following is a true and correct copy of a motion adopted by the Board of Directors of Desert Water Agency at a Regular Meeting of the Board conducted on June 15, 2021:

Director Oygar moved to adopt the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Contingency Plan, Resolution No. 1260 and Ordinance No. 72. After a second by Secretary- Treasurer Stuart, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Ortega, Oygar, Stuart, Cioffi, Bloomer

NOES: None

ABSENT: None

ABSTAIN: None

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )

I, Sylvia Baca, Assistant Secretary of the Board of Directors of Desert Water Agency do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of the minute entry on record in this office.

IN WITNESS THEREOF, dated this 28th day of June, 2021.

___________________________
Sylvia Baca
Assistant Secretary of the Board

Indio Water Authority

Mission Springs Water District

66575 Second Street, Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240 • www.mswd.org • (760) 329-6448

BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING

MINUTES
Monday, June 21, 2021 at 3:00 PM
Via Teleconference – No Live Attendance

CALL TO ORDER
President Wright called the meeting to order at 3:00 PM.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Pledge and invocation were led by President Wright.

ROLL CALL
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: President Nancy Wright, Vice President Russ Martin, Director Randy Duncan, Director Steve Grasha, Director Ivan Sewell
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Lucas, Macy, Wallum, Ceja, Llort, Murphy, Santos, Hoffert, Boyer, Alzammar, Scott
PUBLIC HEARING (MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2021) - RESOLUTION 2021-13 - ADOPTION OF THE 2020 COACHELLA VALLEY REGIONAL URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, ADOPTION OF THE 2021

WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN, AND ADOPTION OF THE APPENDIX L ADDENDUM TO THE 2015 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLANSTAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Board adopted Resolution 2021-13 adopting, filing, and implementing the 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan, adopt 2021 Water Shortage Contingency Plan, and adopt Appendix L Addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan.

President Wright opened the public hearing, secretaries report was given.

Staff Report was given by Victoria Llort. Ms. Llort reviewed the key elements of the plan and the water shortage contingency plan. She noted that individual agency chapter can be found in chapters 4 -9 and how they meet reporting requirements of the UWMP Act. The Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) was reviewed with the Board during the updates given at the April and May Board meetings.

She noted one of the significant differences between the 2015 plan and the 2020 plan, are the response action levels. Since the previous update in May, the following changes have been made to the WSCP, allowing for leak checks and conservation alt. plans for laylight watering, Level 2, removal of prohibition of initial swimming pool filling, however as a result the group changed prohibition of “outdoor watering” to “outdoor water use”, level 6. And lastly moving of prohibition of misting systems from Level 3 to Level 5. The Board will see an update of the WSCP Ordinances and water waste provisions at the July Board meetings. She reviewed other items being amended in the updated plan.

Ms. Llort reviewed the ways the group shared this information with the general community and gave the staff recommendations on action of today’s items.

At this time, the Board opened the floor to public comment:

Russell Betts noted there is much to review but noted that the community of Desert Hot Springs has historically suffered because of a WSCP. He noted that a baseline of conservation is set for the Valley

MSWD Board of Directors Regular Meeting 6/21/2021 Page 2

66575 Second Street, Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240 • www.mswd.org • (760) 329-6448 that everyone needs to meet however the City of Desert Hot Springs has already far exceed th is standard. He noted the baseline should be set at what Desert Hot Springs is already achieving.

Mr. Wallum noted that the community has already met the conservation requirements. Ms. Llort added that as we note the six (6) shortage levels, we see flexibility before these levels are enacted. One of the main reasons for a regional plan was to allow for consistency across the valley.

Seeing no more public comment, President Wright closed the public hearing and called for discussion by the Board.

Director Duncan notes that something about this plan doesn’t sit right with him. He wished that this agenda item was broken into several different parts. He noted the addendum and the shortage levels and commented that he didn’t see any type of public outreach included in the plan. He stated he felt this plan was government overreach and a self-imposed power grab. Ms. Llort noted that she is happy to provide Director Duncan with each of the shortage level(s) public outreach plans but emphasized that this plan does include increased public outreach and education for conservation. Regarding appendix L, she noted that the consultant who help facilitate the plan is on this meeting and can elaborate on that plan. The consultant (Water Systems Consulting) noted that appendix L is a fairly narrow document trying to show that the region as a whole is reducing their reliance on water from the Delta. The idea is that this will help smooth out the approval process for any future projects that could help increase the reliability of that supply. He then noted that the WSCP, the six stages and action were developed to create alignment between the six agencies.

Vice President Martin asked Director Duncan if the changes Director Duncan would like to make are substantial. Director Duncan noted that he doesn’t have any specific changes and that this plan is government overreach.

Director Grasha stated he tends to agree with Director Duncan and felt that this should be two separate documents to act on today. He also asserted that we are not currently in a drought. Ms. Llort noted that the WSCP is part of the Regional Urban Water Management Plan.

Mr. Wallum noted that he wished the Board would have provided this feedback at the previous updates given to the Board over the last six months.

Motion made by Director Grasha, Seconded by Director Sewell.

Voting Yea: President Wright, Vice President Martin, Director Grasha, Director Sewell Voting Nay: Director Duncan

Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company

Appendix I: DWR UWMP
Checklists

Coachella Valley Water District

Coachella Valley Water District
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Chapter 1 10615
A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities.Introduction and Overview Section 1.1 xx
Chapter 1 10630.5
Each plan shall include a simple description of the supplier’s plan including water availability, future requirements, a strategy for meeting needs, and other pertinent information. Additionally, a supplier may also choose to include a simple description at the beginning of each chapter.

Summary Section 1.3
xx Section 2.2 10620(b)
Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.Plan Preparation Section 4.2 xx
Section 2.6 10620(d)(2)
Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 4.2
xx
Section 2.6.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Preparation Section 4.2
x Section 2.6, Section 6.1 10631(h)
Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) - if any - with water use projections from that source.System Supplies Section 4.2 x
Section 2.6 10631(h)
Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.

System Supplies N/A
xx Section 3.1 10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description Section 4.3 xx Section 3.3 10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier. System Description Section 4.3 xx Section 3.4 10631(a) Provide population projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045. System Description Section 4.3 xx Section 3.4.2 10631(a)
Describe other social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.System Description Section 4.3
xx Sections 3.4 and 5.4 10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.System Description and Baselines and Targets Section 4.3
xx Section 3.5 10631(a) Describe the land uses within the service area. System Description Section 4.3 xx Section 4.2 10631(d)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors. System Water Use Section 4.4 xx Section 4.2.4 10631(d)(3)(C) Retail suppliers shall provide data to show the distribution loss standards were met. System Water Use Section 4.4 xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(A)
In projected water use, include estimates of water savings from adopted codes, plans and other policies or laws. System Water Use Section 4.4
xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(B) Provide citations of codes, standards, ordinances, or plans used to make water use projections. System Water Use Section 4.4 x optional Section 4.3.2.4 10631(d)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. System Water Use Section 4.4 x optional
Section 4.4 10631.1(a)
Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.System Water Use Section 4.4
xx Section 4.5 10635(b)
Demands under climate change considerations must be included as part of the drought risk assessment.System Water Use Section 4.4
x
Chapter 5 10608.20(e)
Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets Section 4.5
x Chapter 5 10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their water use target by December 31, 2020. Baselines and Targets Section 4.5 x
Section 5.1 10608.36
Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.Baselines and Targets N/A x
Section 5.2 10608.24(d)(2)
If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

Baselines and Targets Section 4.5
x
Section 5.5 10608.22
Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.

Baselines and Targets Section 4.5
x Section 5.5 and Appendix E 10608.4
Retail suppliers shall report on their compliance in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form in the SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form.Baselines and Targets Section 4.5 xx Sections 6.1 and 6.2 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought.System Supplies Section 4.7 xx
Sections 6.1 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought, including changes in supply due to climate change.

System Supplies Section 4.7
xx Section 6.1 10631(b)(2)
When multiple sources of water supply are identified, describe the management of each supply in relationship to other identified supplies.System Supplies Section 4.6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Coachella Valley Water District
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Section 6.1.1 10631(b)(3) Describe measures taken to acquire and develop planned sources of water. System Supplies Section 4.6 xx Section 6.2.8 10631(b)
Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045.System Supplies Section 4.6 xx Section 6.2 10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier. System Supplies Section 4.6 xx
Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(A)
Indicate whether a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 4.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B)
Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.System Supplies Section 4.6 xx
Section 6.2.2.1 10631(b)(4)(B)
For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as a high or medium priority. Describe efforts by the supplier to coordinate with sustainability or groundwater agencies to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions.

System Supplies Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.2.4 10631(b)(4)(C)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years System Supplies Section 4.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(D)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.System Supplies Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.7 10631(c) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long- term basis. System Supplies Section 4.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(b)
Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(d)
Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 4.6
xx
Section 6.2.5 10633(e)
Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(f)
Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.System Supplies (Recycled Water)Section 4.6
xx Section 6.2.6 10631(g) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply. System Supplies Section 4.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(a)
Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier’s service area with quantified amount of collection and treatment and the disposal methods.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 4.6
xx
Section 6.2.8, Section 6.3.7 10631(f)
Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and for a period of drought lasting 5 consecutive water years.

System Supplies Section 4.6
xx Section 6.4 and Appendix O 10631.2(a)
The UWMP must include energy information, as stated in the code, that a supplier can readily obtain.

System Suppliers, Energy
Intensity Section 4.6
xx Section 7.2 10634
Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx Section 7.2.4 10620(f)
Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(a)
Service Reliability Assessment: Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)
Provide a drought risk assessment as part of information considered in developing the demand management measures and water supply projects.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(1)
Include a description of the data, methodology, and basis for one or more supply shortage conditions that are necessary to conduct a drought risk assessment for a drought period that lasts 5 consecutive years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(2)
Include a determination of the reliability of each source of supply under a variety of water shortage conditions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(3)
Include a comparison of the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use for the drought period.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(4)
Include considerations of the historical drought hydrology, plausible changes on projected supplies and demands under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 4.7

Page 2 of 4 ends

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP
xx Chapter 8 10632(a)(1) Provide the analysis of water supply reliability (from Chapter 7 of Guidebook) in the WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Planning WSCP, Section 1
xx
Section 8.10 10632(a)(10)
Describe reevaluation and improvement procedures for monitoring and evaluation the water shortage contingency plan to ensure risk tolerance is adequate and appropriate water shortage mitigation strategies are implemented.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 2
xx Section 8.2 10632(a)(2)(A)
Provide the written decision-making process and other methods that the supplier will use each year to determine its water reliability.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 2
xx Section 8.2 10632(a)(2)(B)
Provide data and methodology to evaluate the supplier’s water reliability for the current year and one dry year pursuant to factors in the code.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 2
xx
Section 8.3 10632(a)(3)(A)
Define six standard water shortage levels of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 percent shortage and greater than 50 percent shortage. These levels shall be based on supply conditions, including percent reductions in supply, changes in groundwater levels, changes in surface elevation, or other conditions. The shortage levels shall also apply to a catastrophic interruption of supply.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 3
xx Section 8.3 10632(a)(3)(B)
Suppliers with an existing water shortage contingency plan that uses different water shortage levels must cross reference their categories with the six standard categories.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 3
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(A)
Suppliers with water shortage contingency plans that align with the defined shortage levels must specify locally appropriate supply augmentation actions.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(B) Specify locally appropriate demand reduction actions to adequately respond to shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(C) Specify locally appropriate operational changes.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(D)
Specify additional mandatory prohibitions against specific water use practices that are in addition to state-mandated prohibitions are appropriate to local conditions.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(E)
Estimate the extent to which the gap between supplies and demand will be reduced by implementation of the action.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4.6 10632.5 The plan shall include a seismic risk assessment and mitigation plan. Water Shortage Contingency Plan WSCP, Section 4.6 xx Section 8.5 10632(a)(5)(A)
Suppliers must describe that they will inform customers, the public and others regarding any current or predicted water shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
xx
Section 8.5 and 8.6 10632(a)(5)(B)
10632(a)(5)(C)
Suppliers must describe that they will inform customers, the public and others regarding any shortage response actions triggered or anticipated to be triggered and other relevant communications.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
x Section 8.6 10632(a)(6)
Retail supplier must describe how it will ensure compliance with and enforce provisions of the WSCP.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 6
x Section 8.7 10632(a)(7)(A) Describe the legal authority that empowers the supplier to enforce shortage response actions. Water Shortage Contingency Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.7 10632(a)(7)(B)
Provide a statement that the supplier will declare a water shortage emergency Water Code Chapter 3.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.7 10632(a)(7)(C)
Provide a statement that the supplier will coordinate with any city or county within which it provides water for the possible proclamation of a local emergency.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(A)
Describe the potential revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 8
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(B)
Provide a description of mitigation actions needed to address revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 8
x Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(C)
Retail suppliers must describe the cost of compliance with Water Code Chapter 3.3: Excessive Residential Water Use During Drought
Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 8
x
Section 8.9 10632(a)(9)
Retail suppliers must describe the monitoring and reporting requirements and procedures that ensure appropriate data is collected, tracked, and analyzed for purposes of monitoring customer compliance.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 8
x Section 8.11 10632(b)
Analyze and define water features that are artificially supplied with water, including ponds, lakes, waterfalls, and fountains, separately from swimming pools and spas.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 11
xx
Sections 8.12 and 10.4 10635(c)
Provide supporting documentation that Water Shortage Contingency Plan has been, or will be, provided to any city or county within which it provides water, no later than 30 days after the submission of the plan to DWR.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation WSCP, Section 12
xx Section 8.12 10632(c)
Make available the Water Shortage Contingency Plan to customers and any city or county where it provides water within 30 after adopted the plan.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 12
x Sections 9.1 and 9.3 10631(e)(2)
Wholesale suppliers shall describe specific demand management measures listed in code, their distribution system asset management program, and supplier assistance program.Demand Management Measures N/A

Page 3 of 4 ends

Coachella Valley Water District
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
x
Sections 9.2 and 9.3 10631(e)(1)
Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures Section 4.9
x Chapter 10 10608.26(a)
Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets (recommended to discuss compliance).

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx
Section 10.2.1 10621(b)
Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. Reported in Table 10-1.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Section 10.4 10621(f)
Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2020 plan to the department by July 1, 2021.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx
Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan and contingency plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Section 10.2.2 10642
The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Section 10.3.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the plan and contingency plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Section 10.4 10644(a)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx
Section 10.4 10644(a)(1)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2 10644(a)(2)
The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(a)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(b)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its water shortage contingency plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Section 10.6 10621(c)
If supplier is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, include its plan and contingency plan as part of its general rate case filings.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10
xx Section 10.7.2 10644(b)
If revised, submit a copy of the water shortage contingency plan to DWR within 30 days of adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 4.10

Page 4 of 4 ends

Coachella Water Authority

Coachella Water Authority
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Chapter 1 10615
A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities.Introduction and Overview Section 1.1 xx
Chapter 1 10630.5
Each plan shall include a simple description of the supplier’s plan including water availability, future requirements, a strategy for meeting needs, and other pertinent information. Additionally, a supplier may also choose to include a simple description at the beginning of each chapter.

Summary Section 1.3
xx Section 2.2 10620(b)
Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.Plan Preparation Section 5.2 xx
Section 2.6 10620(d)(2)
Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 5.2
xx
Section 2.6.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Preparation Section 5.2
x Section 2.6, Section 6.1 10631(h)
Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) - if any - with water use projections from that source.System Supplies Section 5.2 x
Section 2.6 10631(h)
Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.

System Supplies N/A
xx Section 3.1 10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description Section 5.3 xx Section 3.3 10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier. System Description Section 5.3 xx Section 3.4 10631(a) Provide population projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045. System Description Section 5.3 xx Section 3.4.2 10631(a)
Describe other social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.System Description Section 5.3
xx Sections 3.4 and 5.4 10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.System Description and Baselines and Targets Section 5.3
xx Section 3.5 10631(a) Describe the land uses within the service area. System Description Section 5.3 xx Section 4.2 10631(d)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors. System Water Use Section 5.4 xx Section 4.2.4 10631(d)(3)(C) Retail suppliers shall provide data to show the distribution loss standards were met. System Water Use Section 5.4 xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(A)
In projected water use, include estimates of water savings from adopted codes, plans and other policies or laws. System Water Use Section 5.4
xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(B) Provide citations of codes, standards, ordinances, or plans used to make water use projections. System Water Use Section 5.4 x optional Section 4.3.2.4 10631(d)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. System Water Use Section 5.4 x optional
Section 4.4 10631.1(a)
Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.System Water Use Section 5.4
xx Section 4.5 10635(b)
Demands under climate change considerations must be included as part of the drought risk assessment.System Water Use Section 5.4
x
Chapter 5 10608.20(e)
Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets Section 5.5
x Chapter 5 10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their water use target by December 31, 2020. Baselines and Targets Section 5.5 x
Section 5.1 10608.36
Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.Baselines and Targets N/A x
Section 5.2 10608.24(d)(2)
If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

Baselines and Targets Section 5.5
x
Section 5.5 10608.22
Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.

Baselines and Targets Section 5.5
x Section 5.5 and Appendix E 10608.4
Retail suppliers shall report on their compliance in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form in the SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form.Baselines and Targets Section 5.5 xx Sections 6.1 and 6.2 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought.System Supplies Section 5.7 xx
Sections 6.1 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought, including changes in supply due to climate change.

System Supplies Section 5.7
xx Section 6.1 10631(b)(2)
When multiple sources of water supply are identified, describe the management of each supply in relationship to other identified supplies.System Supplies Section 5.6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Coachella Water Authority
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Section 6.1.1 10631(b)(3) Describe measures taken to acquire and develop planned sources of water. System Supplies Section 5.6 xx Section 6.2.8 10631(b)
Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045.System Supplies Section 5.6 xx Section 6.2 10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier. System Supplies Section 5.6 xx
Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(A)
Indicate whether a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 5.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B)
Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.System Supplies Section 5.6 xx
Section 6.2.2.1 10631(b)(4)(B)
For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as a high or medium priority. Describe efforts by the supplier to coordinate with sustainability or groundwater agencies to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions.

System Supplies Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.2.4 10631(b)(4)(C)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years System Supplies Section 5.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(D)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.System Supplies Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.7 10631(c) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long- term basis. System Supplies Section 5.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(b)
Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(d)
Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 5.6
xx
Section 6.2.5 10633(e)
Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(f)
Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.System Supplies (Recycled Water)Section 5.6
xx Section 6.2.6 10631(g) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply. System Supplies Section 5.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(a)
Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier’s service area with quantified amount of collection and treatment and the disposal methods.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 5.6
xx
Section 6.2.8, Section 6.3.7 10631(f)
Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and for a period of drought lasting 5 consecutive water years.

System Supplies Section 5.6
xx Section 6.4 and Appendix O 10631.2(a)
The UWMP must include energy information, as stated in the code, that a supplier can readily obtain.

System Suppliers, Energy
Intensity Section 5.6
xx Section 7.2 10634
Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx Section 7.2.4 10620(f)
Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(a)
Service Reliability Assessment: Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)
Provide a drought risk assessment as part of information considered in developing the demand management measures and water supply projects.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(1)
Include a description of the data, methodology, and basis for one or more supply shortage conditions that are necessary to conduct a drought risk assessment for a drought period that lasts 5 consecutive years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(2)
Include a determination of the reliability of each source of supply under a variety of water shortage conditions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(3)
Include a comparison of the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use for the drought period.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(4)
Include considerations of the historical drought hydrology, plausible changes on projected supplies and demands under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 5.7

Page 2 of 4 ends

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(B) Specify locally appropriate demand reduction actions to adequately respond to shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(C) Specify locally appropriate operational changes.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(E)
Estimate the extent to which the gap between supplies and demand will be reduced by implementation of the action.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
x Section 8.6 10632(a)(6)
Retail supplier must describe how it will ensure compliance with and enforce provisions of the WSCP.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(A)
Describe the potential revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Coachella Water Authority
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
x
Sections 9.2 and 9.3 10631(e)(1)
Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures Section 5.9
x Chapter 10 10608.26(a)
Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets (recommended to discuss compliance).

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx
Section 10.2.1 10621(b)
Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. Reported in Table 10-1.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Section 10.4 10621(f)
Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2020 plan to the department by July 1, 2021.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx
Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan and contingency plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Section 10.2.2 10642
The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Section 10.3.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the plan and contingency plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Section 10.4 10644(a)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx
Section 10.4 10644(a)(1)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2 10644(a)(2)
The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(a)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(b)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its water shortage contingency plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Section 10.6 10621(c)
If supplier is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, include its plan and contingency plan as part of its general rate case filings.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10
xx Section 10.7.2 10644(b)
If revised, submit a copy of the water shortage contingency plan to DWR within 30 days of adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 5.10

Page 4 of 4 ends

Desert Water Agency

Desert Water Agency
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Chapter 1 10615
A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities.Introduction and Overview Section 1.1 xx
Chapter 1 10630.5
Each plan shall include a simple description of the supplier’s plan including water availability, future requirements, a strategy for meeting needs, and other pertinent information. Additionally, a supplier may also choose to include a simple description at the beginning of each chapter.

Summary Section 1.3
xx Section 2.2 10620(b)
Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.Plan Preparation Section 6.2 xx
Section 2.6 10620(d)(2)
Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 6.2
xx
Section 2.6.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Preparation Section 6.2
x Section 2.6, Section 6.1 10631(h)
Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) - if any - with water use projections from that source.System Supplies Section 6.2 x
Section 2.6 10631(h)
Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.

System Supplies N/A
xx Section 3.1 10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description Section 6.3 xx Section 3.3 10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier. System Description Section 6.3 xx Section 3.4 10631(a) Provide population projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045. System Description Section 6.3 xx Section 3.4.2 10631(a)
Describe other social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.System Description Section 6.3
xx Sections 3.4 and 5.4 10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.System Description and Baselines and Targets Section 6.3
xx Section 3.5 10631(a) Describe the land uses within the service area. System Description Section 6.3 xx Section 4.2 10631(d)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors. System Water Use Section 6.4 xx Section 4.2.4 10631(d)(3)(C) Retail suppliers shall provide data to show the distribution loss standards were met. System Water Use Section 6.4 xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(A)
In projected water use, include estimates of water savings from adopted codes, plans and other policies or laws. System Water Use Section 6.4
xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(B) Provide citations of codes, standards, ordinances, or plans used to make water use projections. System Water Use Section 6.4 x optional Section 4.3.2.4 10631(d)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. System Water Use Section 6.4 x optional
Section 4.4 10631.1(a)
Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.System Water Use Section 6.4
xx Section 4.5 10635(b)
Demands under climate change considerations must be included as part of the drought risk assessment.System Water Use Section 6.4
x
Chapter 5 10608.20(e)
Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets Section 6.5
x Chapter 5 10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their water use target by December 31, 2020. Baselines and Targets Section 6.5 x
Section 5.1 10608.36
Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.Baselines and Targets N/A x
Section 5.2 10608.24(d)(2)
If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

Baselines and Targets Section 6.5
x
Section 5.5 10608.22
Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.

Baselines and Targets Section 6.5
x Section 5.5 and Appendix E 10608.4
Retail suppliers shall report on their compliance in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form in the SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form.Baselines and Targets Section 6.5 xx Sections 6.1 and 6.2 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought.System Supplies Section 6.7 xx
Sections 6.1 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought, including changes in supply due to climate change.

System Supplies Section 6.7
xx Section 6.1 10631(b)(2)
When multiple sources of water supply are identified, describe the management of each supply in relationship to other identified supplies.System Supplies Section 6.6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Desert Water Agency
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Section 6.1.1 10631(b)(3) Describe measures taken to acquire and develop planned sources of water. System Supplies Section 6.6 xx Section 6.2.8 10631(b)
Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045.System Supplies Section 6.6 xx Section 6.2 10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier. System Supplies Section 6.6 xx
Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(A)
Indicate whether a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 6.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B)
Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.System Supplies Section 6.6 xx
Section 6.2.2.1 10631(b)(4)(B)
For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as a high or medium priority. Describe efforts by the supplier to coordinate with sustainability or groundwater agencies to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions.

System Supplies Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.2.4 10631(b)(4)(C)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years System Supplies Section 6.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(D)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.System Supplies Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.7 10631(c) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long- term basis. System Supplies Section 6.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(b)
Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(d)
Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 6.6
xx
Section 6.2.5 10633(e)
Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(f)
Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.System Supplies (Recycled Water)Section 6.6
xx Section 6.2.6 10631(g) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply. System Supplies Section 6.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(a)
Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier’s service area with quantified amount of collection and treatment and the disposal methods.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 6.6
xx
Section 6.2.8, Section 6.3.7 10631(f)
Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and for a period of drought lasting 5 consecutive water years.

System Supplies Section 6.6
xx Section 6.4 and Appendix O 10631.2(a)
The UWMP must include energy information, as stated in the code, that a supplier can readily obtain.

System Suppliers, Energy
Intensity Section 6.6
xx Section 7.2 10634
Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx Section 7.2.4 10620(f)
Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(a)
Service Reliability Assessment: Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)
Provide a drought risk assessment as part of information considered in developing the demand management measures and water supply projects.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(1)
Include a description of the data, methodology, and basis for one or more supply shortage conditions that are necessary to conduct a drought risk assessment for a drought period that lasts 5 consecutive years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(2)
Include a determination of the reliability of each source of supply under a variety of water shortage conditions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(3)
Include a comparison of the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use for the drought period.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(4)
Include considerations of the historical drought hydrology, plausible changes on projected supplies and demands under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 6.7

Page 2 of 4 ends

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(B) Specify locally appropriate demand reduction actions to adequately respond to shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(C) Specify locally appropriate operational changes.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(E)
Estimate the extent to which the gap between supplies and demand will be reduced by implementation of the action.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
x Section 8.6 10632(a)(6)
Retail supplier must describe how it will ensure compliance with and enforce provisions of the WSCP.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(A)
Describe the potential revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Desert Water Agency
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
x
Sections 9.2 and 9.3 10631(e)(1)
Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures Section 6.9
x Chapter 10 10608.26(a)
Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets (recommended to discuss compliance).

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx
Section 10.2.1 10621(b)
Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. Reported in Table 10-1.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Section 10.4 10621(f)
Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2020 plan to the department by July 1, 2021.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx
Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan and contingency plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Section 10.2.2 10642
The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Section 10.3.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the plan and contingency plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Section 10.4 10644(a)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx
Section 10.4 10644(a)(1)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2 10644(a)(2)
The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(a)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(b)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its water shortage contingency plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Section 10.6 10621(c)
If supplier is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, include its plan and contingency plan as part of its general rate case filings.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10
xx Section 10.7.2 10644(b)
If revised, submit a copy of the water shortage contingency plan to DWR within 30 days of adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 6.10

Page 4 of 4 ends

Indio Water Authority

Indio Water Authority
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Chapter 1 10615
A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities.Introduction and Overview Section 1.1 xx
Chapter 1 10630.5
Each plan shall include a simple description of the supplier’s plan including water availability, future requirements, a strategy for meeting needs, and other pertinent information. Additionally, a supplier may also choose to include a simple description at the beginning of each chapter.

Summary Section 1.3
xx Section 2.2 10620(b)
Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.Plan Preparation Section 7.2 xx
Section 2.6 10620(d)(2)
Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 7.2
xx
Section 2.6.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Preparation Section 7.2
x Section 2.6, Section 6.1 10631(h)
Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) - if any - with water use projections from that source.System Supplies Section 7.2 x
Section 2.6 10631(h)
Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.

System Supplies N/A
xx Section 3.1 10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description Section 7.3 xx Section 3.3 10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier. System Description Section 7.3 xx Section 3.4 10631(a) Provide population projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045. System Description Section 7.3 xx Section 3.4.2 10631(a)
Describe other social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.System Description Section 7.3
xx Sections 3.4 and 5.4 10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.System Description and Baselines and Targets Section 7.3
xx Section 3.5 10631(a) Describe the land uses within the service area. System Description Section 7.3 xx Section 4.2 10631(d)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors. System Water Use Section 7.4 xx Section 4.2.4 10631(d)(3)(C) Retail suppliers shall provide data to show the distribution loss standards were met. System Water Use Section 7.4 xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(A)
In projected water use, include estimates of water savings from adopted codes, plans and other policies or laws. System Water Use Section 7.4
xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(B) Provide citations of codes, standards, ordinances, or plans used to make water use projections. System Water Use Section 7.4 x optional Section 4.3.2.4 10631(d)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. System Water Use Section 7.4 x optional
Section 4.4 10631.1(a)
Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.System Water Use Section 7.4
xx Section 4.5 10635(b)
Demands under climate change considerations must be included as part of the drought risk assessment.System Water Use Section 7.4
x
Chapter 5 10608.20(e)
Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets Section 7.5
x Chapter 5 10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their water use target by December 31, 2020. Baselines and Targets Section 7.5 x
Section 5.1 10608.36
Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.Baselines and Targets N/A x
Section 5.2 10608.24(d)(2)
If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

Baselines and Targets Section 7.5
x
Section 5.5 10608.22
Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.

Baselines and Targets Section 7.5
x Section 5.5 and Appendix E 10608.4
Retail suppliers shall report on their compliance in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form in the SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form.Baselines and Targets Section 7.5 xx Sections 6.1 and 6.2 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought.System Supplies Section 7.7 xx
Sections 6.1 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought, including changes in supply due to climate change.

System Supplies Section 7.7
xx Section 6.1 10631(b)(2)
When multiple sources of water supply are identified, describe the management of each supply in relationship to other identified supplies.System Supplies Section 7.6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Indio Water Authority
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Section 6.1.1 10631(b)(3) Describe measures taken to acquire and develop planned sources of water. System Supplies Section 7.6 xx Section 6.2.8 10631(b)
Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045.System Supplies Section 7.6 xx Section 6.2 10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier. System Supplies Section 7.6 xx
Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(A)
Indicate whether a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 7.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B)
Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.System Supplies Section 7.6 xx
Section 6.2.2.1 10631(b)(4)(B)
For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as a high or medium priority. Describe efforts by the supplier to coordinate with sustainability or groundwater agencies to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions.

System Supplies Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.2.4 10631(b)(4)(C)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years System Supplies Section 7.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(D)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.System Supplies Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.7 10631(c) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long- term basis. System Supplies Section 7.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(b)
Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(d)
Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 7.6
xx
Section 6.2.5 10633(e)
Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(f)
Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.System Supplies (Recycled Water)Section 7.6
xx Section 6.2.6 10631(g) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply. System Supplies Section 7.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(a)
Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier’s service area with quantified amount of collection and treatment and the disposal methods.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 7.6
xx
Section 6.2.8, Section 6.3.7 10631(f)
Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and for a period of drought lasting 5 consecutive water years.

System Supplies Section 7.6
xx Section 6.4 and Appendix O 10631.2(a)
The UWMP must include energy information, as stated in the code, that a supplier can readily obtain.

System Suppliers, Energy
Intensity Section 7.6
xx Section 7.2 10634
Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx Section 7.2.4 10620(f)
Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(a)
Service Reliability Assessment: Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)
Provide a drought risk assessment as part of information considered in developing the demand management measures and water supply projects.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(1)
Include a description of the data, methodology, and basis for one or more supply shortage conditions that are necessary to conduct a drought risk assessment for a drought period that lasts 5 consecutive years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(2)
Include a determination of the reliability of each source of supply under a variety of water shortage conditions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(3)
Include a comparison of the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use for the drought period.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(4)
Include considerations of the historical drought hydrology, plausible changes on projected supplies and demands under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 7.7

Page 2 of 4 ends

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(B) Specify locally appropriate demand reduction actions to adequately respond to shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(C) Specify locally appropriate operational changes.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(E)
Estimate the extent to which the gap between supplies and demand will be reduced by implementation of the action.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
x Section 8.6 10632(a)(6)
Retail supplier must describe how it will ensure compliance with and enforce provisions of the WSCP.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(A)
Describe the potential revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Indio Water Authority
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
x
Sections 9.2 and 9.3 10631(e)(1)
Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures Section 7.9
x Chapter 10 10608.26(a)
Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets (recommended to discuss compliance).

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx
Section 10.2.1 10621(b)
Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. Reported in Table 10-1.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Section 10.4 10621(f)
Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2020 plan to the department by July 1, 2021.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx
Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan and contingency plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Section 10.2.2 10642
The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Section 10.3.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the plan and contingency plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Section 10.4 10644(a)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx
Section 10.4 10644(a)(1)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2 10644(a)(2)
The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(a)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(b)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its water shortage contingency plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Section 10.6 10621(c)
If supplier is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, include its plan and contingency plan as part of its general rate case filings.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10
xx Section 10.7.2 10644(b)
If revised, submit a copy of the water shortage contingency plan to DWR within 30 days of adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 7.10

Page 4 of 4 ends

Mission Springs Water District

Mission Springs Water District
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Chapter 1 10615
A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities.Introduction and Overview Section 1.1 xx
Chapter 1 10630.5
Each plan shall include a simple description of the supplier’s plan including water availability, future requirements, a strategy for meeting needs, and other pertinent information. Additionally, a supplier may also choose to include a simple description at the beginning of each chapter.

Summary Section 1.3
xx Section 2.2 10620(b)
Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.Plan Preparation Section 8.2 xx
Section 2.6 10620(d)(2)
Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 8.2
xx
Section 2.6.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Preparation Section 8.2
x Section 2.6, Section 6.1 10631(h)
Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) - if any - with water use projections from that source.System Supplies Section 8.2 x
Section 2.6 10631(h)
Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.

System Supplies N/A
xx Section 3.1 10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description Section 8.3 xx Section 3.3 10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier. System Description Section 8.3 xx Section 3.4 10631(a) Provide population projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045. System Description Section 8.3 xx Section 3.4.2 10631(a)
Describe other social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.System Description Section 8.3
xx Sections 3.4 and 5.4 10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.System Description and Baselines and Targets Section 8.3
xx Section 3.5 10631(a) Describe the land uses within the service area. System Description Section 8.3 xx Section 4.2 10631(d)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors. System Water Use Section 8.4 xx Section 4.2.4 10631(d)(3)(C) Retail suppliers shall provide data to show the distribution loss standards were met. System Water Use Section 8.4 xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(A)
In projected water use, include estimates of water savings from adopted codes, plans and other policies or laws. System Water Use Section 8.4
xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(B) Provide citations of codes, standards, ordinances, or plans used to make water use projections. System Water Use Section 8.4 x optional Section 4.3.2.4 10631(d)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. System Water Use Section 8.4 x optional
Section 4.4 10631.1(a)
Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.System Water Use Section 8.4
xx Section 4.5 10635(b)
Demands under climate change considerations must be included as part of the drought risk assessment.System Water Use Section 8.4
x
Chapter 5 10608.20(e)
Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets Section 8.5
x Chapter 5 10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their water use target by December 31, 2020. Baselines and Targets Section 8.5 x
Section 5.1 10608.36
Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.Baselines and Targets N/A x
Section 5.2 10608.24(d)(2)
If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

Baselines and Targets Section 8.5
x
Section 5.5 10608.22
Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.

Baselines and Targets Section 8.5
x Section 5.5 and Appendix E 10608.4
Retail suppliers shall report on their compliance in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form in the SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form.Baselines and Targets Section 8.5 xx Sections 6.1 and 6.2 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought.System Supplies Section 8.7 xx
Sections 6.1 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought, including changes in supply due to climate change.

System Supplies Section 8.7
xx Section 6.1 10631(b)(2)
When multiple sources of water supply are identified, describe the management of each supply in relationship to other identified supplies.System Supplies Section 8.6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Mission Springs Water District
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Section 6.1.1 10631(b)(3) Describe measures taken to acquire and develop planned sources of water. System Supplies Section 8.6 xx Section 6.2.8 10631(b)
Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045.System Supplies Section 8.6 xx Section 6.2 10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier. System Supplies Section 8.6 xx
Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(A)
Indicate whether a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 8.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B)
Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.System Supplies Section 8.6 xx
Section 6.2.2.1 10631(b)(4)(B)
For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as a high or medium priority. Describe efforts by the supplier to coordinate with sustainability or groundwater agencies to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions.

System Supplies Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.2.4 10631(b)(4)(C)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years System Supplies Section 8.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(D)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.System Supplies Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.7 10631(c) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long- term basis. System Supplies Section 8.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(b)
Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(d)
Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 8.6
xx
Section 6.2.5 10633(e)
Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(f)
Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.System Supplies (Recycled Water)Section 8.6
xx Section 6.2.6 10631(g) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply. System Supplies Section 8.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(a)
Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier’s service area with quantified amount of collection and treatment and the disposal methods.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 8.6
xx
Section 6.2.8, Section 6.3.7 10631(f)
Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and for a period of drought lasting 5 consecutive water years.

System Supplies Section 8.6
xx Section 6.4 and Appendix O 10631.2(a)
The UWMP must include energy information, as stated in the code, that a supplier can readily obtain.

System Suppliers, Energy
Intensity Section 8.6
xx Section 7.2 10634
Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx Section 7.2.4 10620(f)
Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(a)
Service Reliability Assessment: Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)
Provide a drought risk assessment as part of information considered in developing the demand management measures and water supply projects.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(1)
Include a description of the data, methodology, and basis for one or more supply shortage conditions that are necessary to conduct a drought risk assessment for a drought period that lasts 5 consecutive years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(2)
Include a determination of the reliability of each source of supply under a variety of water shortage conditions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(3)
Include a comparison of the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use for the drought period.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(4)
Include considerations of the historical drought hydrology, plausible changes on projected supplies and demands under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 8.7

Page 2 of 4 ends

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(B) Specify locally appropriate demand reduction actions to adequately respond to shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(C) Specify locally appropriate operational changes.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(E)
Estimate the extent to which the gap between supplies and demand will be reduced by implementation of the action.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
x Section 8.6 10632(a)(6)
Retail supplier must describe how it will ensure compliance with and enforce provisions of the WSCP.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(A)
Describe the potential revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Mission Springs Water District
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
x
Sections 9.2 and 9.3 10631(e)(1)
Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures Section 8.9
x Chapter 10 10608.26(a)
Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets (recommended to discuss compliance).

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx
Section 10.2.1 10621(b)
Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. Reported in Table 10-1.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Section 10.4 10621(f)
Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2020 plan to the department by July 1, 2021.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx
Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan and contingency plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Section 10.2.2 10642
The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Section 10.3.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the plan and contingency plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Section 10.4 10644(a)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx
Section 10.4 10644(a)(1)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2 10644(a)(2)
The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(a)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(b)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its water shortage contingency plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Section 10.6 10621(c)
If supplier is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, include its plan and contingency plan as part of its general rate case filings.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10
xx Section 10.7.2 10644(b)
If revised, submit a copy of the water shortage contingency plan to DWR within 30 days of adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 8.10

Page 4 of 4 ends

Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company

Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Chapter 1 10615
A plan shall describe and evaluate sources of supply, reasonable and practical efficient uses, reclamation and demand management activities.Introduction and Overview Section 1.1 xx
Chapter 1 10630.5
Each plan shall include a simple description of the supplier’s plan including water availability, future requirements, a strategy for meeting needs, and other pertinent information. Additionally, a supplier may also choose to include a simple description at the beginning of each chapter.

Summary Section 1.3
xx Section 2.2 10620(b)
Every person that becomes an urban water supplier shall adopt an urban water management plan within one year after it has become an urban water supplier.Plan Preparation Section 9.2 xx
Section 2.6 10620(d)(2)
Coordinate the preparation of its plan with other appropriate agencies in the area, including other water suppliers that share a common source, water management agencies, and relevant public agencies, to the extent practicable.

Plan Preparation Section 9.2
xx
Section 2.6.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the water supplier has encouraged active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the service area prior to and during the preparation of the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Preparation Section 9.2
x Section 2.6, Section 6.1 10631(h)
Retail suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their wholesale supplier(s) - if any - with water use projections from that source.System Supplies Section 9.2 x
Section 2.6 10631(h)
Wholesale suppliers will include documentation that they have provided their urban water suppliers with identification and quantification of the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale to the urban supplier during various water year types.

System Supplies N/A
xx Section 3.1 10631(a) Describe the water supplier service area. System Description Section 9.3 xx Section 3.3 10631(a) Describe the climate of the service area of the supplier. System Description Section 9.3 xx Section 3.4 10631(a) Provide population projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045. System Description Section 9.3 xx Section 3.4.2 10631(a)
Describe other social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning.System Description Section 9.3
xx Sections 3.4 and 5.4 10631(a) Indicate the current population of the service area.System Description and Baselines and Targets Section 9.3
xx Section 3.5 10631(a) Describe the land uses within the service area. System Description Section 9.3 xx Section 4.2 10631(d)(1) Quantify past, current, and projected water use, identifying the uses among water use sectors. System Water Use Section 9.4 xx Section 4.2.4 10631(d)(3)(C) Retail suppliers shall provide data to show the distribution loss standards were met. System Water Use Section 9.4 xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(A)
In projected water use, include estimates of water savings from adopted codes, plans and other policies or laws. System Water Use Section 9.4
xx Section 4.2.6 10631(d)(4)(B) Provide citations of codes, standards, ordinances, or plans used to make water use projections. System Water Use Section 9.4 x optional Section 4.3.2.4 10631(d)(3)(A) Report the distribution system water loss for each of the 5 years preceding the plan update. System Water Use Section 9.4 x optional
Section 4.4 10631.1(a)
Include projected water use needed for lower income housing projected in the service area of the supplier.System Water Use Section 9.4
xx Section 4.5 10635(b)
Demands under climate change considerations must be included as part of the drought risk assessment.System Water Use Section 9.4
x
Chapter 5 10608.20(e)
Retail suppliers shall provide baseline daily per capita water use, urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use, along with the bases for determining those estimates, including references to supporting data.

Baselines and Targets Section 9.5
x Chapter 5 10608.24(a) Retail suppliers shall meet their water use target by December 31, 2020. Baselines and Targets Section 9.5 x
Section 5.1 10608.36
Wholesale suppliers shall include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies to help their retail water suppliers achieve targeted water use reductions.Baselines and Targets N/A x
Section 5.2 10608.24(d)(2)
If the retail supplier adjusts its compliance GPCD using weather normalization, economic adjustment, or extraordinary events, it shall provide the basis for, and data supporting the adjustment.

Baselines and Targets Section 9.5
x
Section 5.5 10608.22
Retail suppliers’ per capita daily water use reduction shall be no less than 5 percent of base daily per capita water use of the 5 year baseline. This does not apply if the suppliers base GPCD is at or below 100.

Baselines and Targets Section 9.5
x Section 5.5 and Appendix E 10608.4
Retail suppliers shall report on their compliance in meeting their water use targets. The data shall be reported using a standardized form in the SBX7-7 2020 Compliance Form.Baselines and Targets Section 9.5 xx Sections 6.1 and 6.2 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought.System Supplies Section 9.7 xx
Sections 6.1 10631(b)(1)
Provide a discussion of anticipated supply availability under a normal, single dry year, and a drought lasting five years, as well as more frequent and severe periods of drought, including changes in supply due to climate change.

System Supplies Section 9.7
xx Section 6.1 10631(b)(2)
When multiple sources of water supply are identified, describe the management of each supply in relationship to other identified supplies.System Supplies Section 9.6

Page 1 of 4 ends

Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
xx Section 6.1.1 10631(b)(3) Describe measures taken to acquire and develop planned sources of water. System Supplies Section 9.6 xx Section 6.2.8 10631(b)
Identify and quantify the existing and planned sources of water available for 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040 and optionally 2045.System Supplies Section 9.6 xx Section 6.2 10631(b) Indicate whether groundwater is an existing or planned source of water available to the supplier. System Supplies Section 9.6 xx
Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(A)
Indicate whether a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan has been adopted by the water supplier or if there is any other specific authorization for groundwater management. Include a copy of the plan or authorization.

System Supplies Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B) Describe the groundwater basin. System Supplies Section 9.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(B)
Indicate if the basin has been adjudicated and include a copy of the court order or decree and a description of the amount of water the supplier has the legal right to pump.System Supplies Section 9.6 xx
Section 6.2.2.1 10631(b)(4)(B)
For unadjudicated basins, indicate whether or not the department has identified the basin as a high or medium priority. Describe efforts by the supplier to coordinate with sustainability or groundwater agencies to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions.

System Supplies Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.2.4 10631(b)(4)(C)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the location, amount, and sufficiency of groundwater pumped by the urban water supplier for the past five years System Supplies Section 9.6 xx Section 6.2.2 10631(b)(4)(D)
Provide a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped.System Supplies Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.7 10631(c) Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long- term basis. System Supplies Section 9.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(b)
Describe the quantity of treated wastewater that meets recycled water standards, is being discharged, and is otherwise available for use in a recycled water project.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(c) Describe the recycled water currently being used in the supplier's service area.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(d)
Describe and quantify the potential uses of recycled water and provide a determination of the technical and economic feasibility of those uses.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 9.6
xx
Section 6.2.5 10633(e)
Describe the projected use of recycled water within the supplier's service area at the end of 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, and a description of the actual use of recycled water in comparison to uses previously projected.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(f)
Describe the actions which may be taken to encourage the use of recycled water and the projected results of these actions in terms of acre-feet of recycled water used per year.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.5 10633(g) Provide a plan for optimizing the use of recycled water in the supplier's service area.System Supplies (Recycled Water)Section 9.6
xx Section 6.2.6 10631(g) Describe desalinated water project opportunities for long-term supply. System Supplies Section 9.6 xx Section 6.2.5 10633(a)
Describe the wastewater collection and treatment systems in the supplier’s service area with quantified amount of collection and treatment and the disposal methods.

System Supplies (Recycled
Water)Section 9.6
xx
Section 6.2.8, Section 6.3.7 10631(f)
Describe the expected future water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken by the water supplier to address water supply reliability in average, single-dry, and for a period of drought lasting 5 consecutive water years.

System Supplies Section 9.6
xx Section 6.4 and Appendix O 10631.2(a)
The UWMP must include energy information, as stated in the code, that a supplier can readily obtain.

System Suppliers, Energy
Intensity Section 9.6
xx Section 7.2 10634
Provide information on the quality of existing sources of water available to the supplier and the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx Section 7.2.4 10620(f)
Describe water management tools and options to maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(a)
Service Reliability Assessment: Assess the water supply reliability during normal, dry, and a drought lasting five consecutive water years by comparing the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over the next 20 years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)
Provide a drought risk assessment as part of information considered in developing the demand management measures and water supply projects.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(1)
Include a description of the data, methodology, and basis for one or more supply shortage conditions that are necessary to conduct a drought risk assessment for a drought period that lasts 5 consecutive years.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(2)
Include a determination of the reliability of each source of supply under a variety of water shortage conditions.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx Section 7.3 10635(b)(3)
Include a comparison of the total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the total projected water use for the drought period.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7
xx
Section 7.3 10635(b)(4)
Include considerations of the historical drought hydrology, plausible changes on projected supplies and demands under climate change conditions, anticipated regulatory changes, and other locally applicable criteria.

Water Supply Reliability
Assessment Section 9.7

Page 2 of 4 ends

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(B) Specify locally appropriate demand reduction actions to adequately respond to shortages.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(C) Specify locally appropriate operational changes.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 4
xx Section 8.4 10632(a)(4)(E)
Estimate the extent to which the gap between supplies and demand will be reduced by implementation of the action.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 5
x Section 8.6 10632(a)(6)
Retail supplier must describe how it will ensure compliance with and enforce provisions of the WSCP.

Water Shortage Contingency
Planning WSCP, Section 7
xx Section 8.8 10632(a)(8)(A)
Describe the potential revenue reductions and expense increases associated with activated shortage response actions.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company
Retail Wholesale
2020 Guidebook Location Water Code Section Summary as Applies to UWMP Subject 2020 UWMP Location (Optional
Column for Agency Review Use)
x
Sections 9.2 and 9.3 10631(e)(1)
Retail suppliers shall provide a description of the nature and extent of each demand management measure implemented over the past five years. The description will address specific measures listed in code.

Demand Management Measures Section 9.9
x Chapter 10 10608.26(a)
Retail suppliers shall conduct a public hearing to discuss adoption, implementation, and economic impact of water use targets (recommended to discuss compliance).

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx
Section 10.2.1 10621(b)
Notify, at least 60 days prior to the public hearing, any city or county within which the supplier provides water that the urban water supplier will be reviewing the plan and considering amendments or changes to the plan. Reported in Table 10-1.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Section 10.4 10621(f)
Each urban water supplier shall update and submit its 2020 plan to the department by July 1, 2021.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx
Sections 10.2.2, 10.3, and 10.5 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier made the plan and contingency plan available for public inspection, published notice of the public hearing, and held a public hearing about the plan and contingency plan.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Section 10.2.2 10642
The water supplier is to provide the time and place of the hearing to any city or county within which the supplier provides water.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Section 10.3.2 10642
Provide supporting documentation that the plan and contingency plan has been adopted as prepared or modified.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Section 10.4 10644(a)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to the California State Library.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx
Section 10.4 10644(a)(1)
Provide supporting documentation that the urban water supplier has submitted this UWMP to any city or county within which the supplier provides water no later than 30 days after adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Sections 10.4.1 and 10.4.2 10644(a)(2)
The plan, or amendments to the plan, submitted to the department shall be submitted electronically.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(a)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx
Section 10.5 10645(b)
Provide supporting documentation that, not later than 30 days after filing a copy of its water shortage contingency plan with the department, the supplier has or will make the plan available for public review during normal business hours.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Section 10.6 10621(c)
If supplier is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, include its plan and contingency plan as part of its general rate case filings.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10
xx Section 10.7.2 10644(b)
If revised, submit a copy of the water shortage contingency plan to DWR within 30 days of adoption.

Plan Adoption, Submittal, and
Implementation Section 9.10

Page 4 of 4 ends

1 Water Supply Assessment Fact Sheet
(Updated: March 22, 2022)

Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is a special district established in 1918 by the California state legislature to protect the Coachella Valley’s water resources and build a canal to supplement the local groundwater basin with imported Colorado River Water. CVWD policies are regulated by several state and federal agencies including the State Water Resources Control Board, California Department of Public Health, and the California Environmental Protection Agency. The CVWD Board of Directors may enact and enforce ordinances, and pass resolutions necessary for the operation of CVWD’s business.

When a new development or project is approved, the public may have questions regarding who approved what, how, and why. This document clarifies CVWD’s role in land use planning within its service area.

1. Who approves land use zoning and development?
Land use and zoning regulations are vested in cities and counties by way of their general police power to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of their residents. As a special district, CVWD does not have the police power to make, change, or affect land use decisions made by the cities or counties within CVWD’s service area.

2. What, if any, is CVWD’s role in land use planning?
For projects that are subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) within CVWD’s service area, the city or county as the lead agency will identify CVWD as the “public water system” that will supply water for the proposed project. If the project meets certain size or water use criteria, the lead agency will request a Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV) to incorporate into the environmental review documents required by CEQA. Once CVWD receives the request, CVWD must provide the WSA/WSV to the lead agency within 90 days.

3. What is a Water Supply Assessment/Water Supply Verification (WSA/WSV)? To foster better communication and more closely link land use decision-making and water supply availability, Senate Bill (SB) 610 and SB 221 were enacted into law in 2001.

Water Supply Assessment (SB 610):

The purpose of a WSA is to determine whether the public water system’s total projected water supplies available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry water years during a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to the public water system’s existing and planned future uses. The WSA is incorporated into the proposed project’s environmental review documents, pursuant to CEQA.

Water Supply Verification (SB 221):

SB 221 establishes the relationship between the WSA and project approval under the Subdivision Map Act. The public water system must provide a written verification of sufficient water supply (Water Supply Verification) prior to the approval of a new subdivision.

4. Does CVWD have authority to deny water to a project for wasteful or inefficient water use? CVWD as a special district has no authority over land use decisions. The WSA/WSV is an informational document that state law requires CVWD to provide when a qualifying project is being proposed within

2 CVWD’s service area. The information in the WSA/WSV is defined by state law and does not recommend or advocate any position on whether the city or county should approve or deny a project.

If, because of its assessment, the public water system concludes that its water supplies are, or will be, insufficient, the public water system is required to provide to the city or county its plans for acquiring additional water supplies, setting forth the measures that are being undertaken to acquire and develop those water supplies.

5. How does CVWD calculate future supply and demand?
Future water supply and demand projections within CVWD’s boundary are periodically evaluated in CVWD’s long-term water management plans like the 2022 Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update and 2022 Mission Creek Alternative Plan Update (collectively, 2022 Alternative Plan Updates). Municipal water demand projections were also included in the 2020 Coachella Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan. The demand projections are based on the regional growth forecasts including population, households, and employment that incorporate city and county general plans.

Similarly, these documents evaluate current and future supply outlooks for all sources. CVWD has a diverse supply portfolio which includes local groundwater, Colorado River water, State Water Project (SWP) water, and recycled water. Plans include investments in developing new sources of supply like additional recycled water and participating in the Delta Conveyance Project to modernize the aging SWP infrastructure and protect the reliability of SWP water deliveries.

6. Does a WSA/WSV consider the sustainability of the aquifer? A WSA/WSV determines whether CVWD’s total projected water supplies will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. CVWD participates in Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Planning and Urban Water Management Planning (UWMP), which both consider the long-term sustainability of the local groundwater basin. SGMA requires that these plans be evaluated and updated every five years. If SGMA or UWMP inform CVWD that either subbasins’ extraction could exceed the inflow of water to the basin (overdraft), CVWD would develop water supply projects and conservation goals to correct overdraft and protect the sustainability of the aquifer.

7. How does CVWD consider the long-term reliability of imported water supplies? The 2022 Alternative Plan Updates considered impacts of reduced local and imported supplies from more frequent droughts to help plan for these impacts. Specifically, the 2022 Alternative Plans included an evaluation of reduced reliability of both State Water Project and Colorado River Water.

8. How is the expected water use of large development projects calculated? A WSA/WSV must determine the water demand required by the project. This is based on the size and type of land uses proposed for the project (e.g. residential, commercial/industrial, recreational uses). Indoor residential water demand is based on performance standards as provided in the California Water Code (CWC). Indoor commercial and industrial demand is based on the American Water Works Association Research Foundations Commercial and Industrial End Uses of Water report. Projected outdoor water usage is calculated using the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) equation from CVWD’s Landscape and Irrigation Design Ordinance.

2022 INDIO SUBBASIN

WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
Alternative Plan
Volume 2: Alternative Plan
Prepared for: Indio Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies http://www.indiosubbasinsgma.org/
Adopted | December 2021
1:

This page intentionally left blank.

The Indio Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) appreciate and acknowledge the funding contribution from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). Funding for this Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update has been provided in part by the California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018 (Proposition 68).

Indio Subbasin GSA s

Coachella Valley Water District, Coachella Water Authority, Desert Water Agency, and Indio Water Authority compose the Indio Subbasin GSAs.

Indio Subbasin Consulting Team

Todd Groundwater and Woodard & Curran, assisted by Graham Fogg and Associates and David J. Ringel Consulting Engineer, compose the consulting technical team for the Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update.

December

This page intentionally left blank.

December

This page intentionally left blank.

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1 TODD/W&C

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. ES-1 ES.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.2 Plan Area .......................................................................................................................... ES-2 ES.3 Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model ...................................................................................... ES-3 ES.4 Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................................... ES-3 ES.5 Demand Projections .......................................................................................................... ES-6 ES.6 Water Supply .................................................................................................................... ES-7 ES.7 Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios ................................................................................. ES-9 ES.8 Regulatory and Policy Issues ........................................................................................... ES-12 ES.9 Sustainable Management ................................................................................................ ES-14 ES.10 Monitoring Program ....................................................................................................... ES-16 ES.11 Projects and Management Actions .................................................................................. ES-18 ES.12 Plan Evaluation and Implementation ............................................................................... ES-18

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Background for Alternative Plan Update ..............................................................................1-2

1.1.1 Indio Subbasin ....................................................................................................................... 1-2

1.1.2 Historical Water Management Planning............................................................................... 1-4

1.1.3 2002 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan ................................................................. 1-5

1.1.4 2010 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan Update..................................................... 1-5

1.1.5 SGMA and Alternative Plan Development ............................................................................ 1-7

1.1.6 Approach to Alternative Plan Update ................................................................................... 1-8

1.2 Plan Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................................1-8

1.3 GSA Governance .................................................................................................................1-9

1.4 Relationship to Other Planning Efforts ............................................................................... 1-10

1.4.1 Mission Creek Subbasin Alternative Plan Update .............................................................. 1-10

1.4.2 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan ........................................ 1-11

1.4.3 Urban Water Management Plan ......................................................................................... 1-11

1.4.4 Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ........................................... 1-12

1.4.5 Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan ....................................................... 1-12

1.5 Notice and Communication ............................................................................................... 1-12

1.5.1 Participating Agencies and Coordination ........................................................................... 1-13

1.5.2 GSAs Decision Making Process ........................................................................................... 1-13

1.5.3 Stakeholder Involvement .................................................................................................... 1-13

1.5.4 Public Workshops ............................................................................................................... 1-15

1.5.5 SGMA Tribal Workgroup ..................................................................................................... 1-15

1.5.6 List of Public Meetings Where the Alternative Plan Update was Discussed ...................... 1-16

1.5.7 Comments Received and Response Summary.................................................................... 1-17

1.6 Plan Update Adoption ....................................................................................................... 1-18

Chapter 2: Plan Area ....................................................................................................................2-1

2.1 Geographic Area .................................................................................................................2-1

2.2 Water Management and Land Use Planning Agencies ..........................................................2-4

2.2.1 Water Agencies ..................................................................................................................... 2-4

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2 TODD/W&C

2.2.2 Local Agencies: Cities and Counties ...................................................................................... 2-5

2.2.3 State and Federal Agencies ................................................................................................... 2-6

2.2.4 Tribal Governments .............................................................................................................. 2-6

2.3 Water Resources Management ...........................................................................................2-9

2.4 Water Sources .................................................................................................................. 2-11

2.4.1 Local Groundwater ............................................................................................................. 2-11

2.4.2 Colorado River Water ......................................................................................................... 2-12

2.4.3 State Water Project ............................................................................................................ 2-12

2.4.4 Surface Water ..................................................................................................................... 2-13

2.4.5 Recycled Water ................................................................................................................... 2-13

2.5 Land Use Planning ............................................................................................................. 2-14

2.6 Disadvantaged Communities ............................................................................................. 2-18

2.7 Water Use Sectors ............................................................................................................ 2-20

2.8 Water Resources Monitoring ............................................................................................. 2-22

2.8.1 Climate ................................................................................................................................ 2-22

2.8.2 Streamflow .......................................................................................................................... 2-22

2.8.3 Subsidence .......................................................................................................................... 2-22

2.8.4 Groundwater Elevations ..................................................................................................... 2-22

2.8.5 Surface Water and Groundwater Quality ........................................................................... 2-26

2.8.6 Groundwater Pumping ....................................................................................................... 2-26

2.8.7 Drain Flows ......................................................................................................................... 2-27

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model ................................................................................3-1

3.1 Physical Setting ...................................................................................................................3-1

3.2 Geologic Setting ..................................................................................................................3-1

3.2.1 Garnet Hill Subarea ............................................................................................................... 3-4

3.2.2 Palm Springs Subarea ........................................................................................................... 3-4

3.2.3 Thermal Subarea ................................................................................................................... 3-6

3.2.4 Thousand Palms Subarea ...................................................................................................... 3-9

3.2.5 Oasis Subarea ........................................................................................................................ 3-9

3.3 Faults .................................................................................................................................3-9

3.4 Recharge and Discharge Areas ........................................................................................... 3-10

3.4.1 Groundwater Inflows .......................................................................................................... 3-10

3.4.2 Groundwater Outflows ....................................................................................................... 3-11

3.5 Hydrogeologic Cross Sections ............................................................................................ 3-12

3.5.1 Longitudinal Cross Sections ................................................................................................ 3-12

3.5.2 Perpendicular Cross Sections .............................................................................................. 3-18

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions ...........................................................4-1

4.1 Groundwater Elevations ......................................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 Groundwater Elevations, Flow, and Trends.......................................................................... 4-1

4.1.2 Vertical Groundwater Gradients (Artesian Conditions)........................................................ 4-7

4.1.3 Groundwater Occurrence (Depth to Water) ........................................................................ 4-7

4.1.4 Groundwater Elevation Change ............................................................................................ 4-7

4.2 Changes in Groundwater Storage ...................................................................................... 4-11

4.3 Land Subsidence and Potential for Subsidence ................................................................... 4-14

4.4 Groundwater Quality ........................................................................................................ 4-16

4.4.1 Constituents of Concern ..................................................................................................... 4-16

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3 TODD/W&C

4.4.2 Data Sources for Water Quality Mapping ........................................................................... 4-16

4.4.3 Plan View Concentration Maps .......................................................................................... 4-17

4.4.4 Water Quality Cross Sections .............................................................................................. 4-26

4.4.5 Time-Concentration Plots for TDS and Nitrate ................................................................... 4-26

4.4.6 Total Dissolved Solids.......................................................................................................... 4-44

4.4.7 Nitrate ................................................................................................................................. 4-45

4.4.8 Arsenic ................................................................................................................................ 4-47

4.4.9 Chromium-6 ........................................................................................................................ 4-48

4.4.10 Uranium .............................................................................................................................. 4-49

4.4.11 Fluoride ............................................................................................................................... 4-49

4.4.12 Perchlorate ......................................................................................................................... 4-50

4.4.13 Dibromochloropropane ...................................................................................................... 4-50

4.5 Seawater Intrusion ............................................................................................................ 4-50

4.6 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems ................................................................................ 4-51

Chapter 5: Demand Projections ....................................................................................................5-1

5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................5-1

5.2 Factors Affecting Future Water Demands ............................................................................5-1

5.3 Municipal Demands ............................................................................................................5-2

5.3.1 Municipal Demand Methodology ......................................................................................... 5-2

5.3.2 SCAG Regional Growth Forecast ........................................................................................... 5-5

5.3.3 SCAG Land Use Inventories ................................................................................................. 5-10

5.3.4 Housing Unit Projections .................................................................................................... 5-14

5.3.5 Employment Projection ...................................................................................................... 5-21

5.3.6 Unit Demand Factors .......................................................................................................... 5-22

5.3.7 Baseline Forecast ................................................................................................................ 5-28

5.3.8 Water Loss .......................................................................................................................... 5-28

5.3.9 Adjustment Factors ............................................................................................................. 5-29

5.3.10 Water Demands on Tribal/Reservation Lands .................................................................... 5-33

5.3.11 Final Municipal Demand Forecast ...................................................................................... 5-33

5.4 Agricultural Demands........................................................................................................ 5-36

5.5 Agricultural Land Conversion ............................................................................................. 5-37

5.5.1 Agricultural Demand Factors .............................................................................................. 5-40

5.5.2 Agricultural Conservation ................................................................................................... 5-40

5.5.3 Final Agricultural Demand Projections ............................................................................... 5-41

5.6 Golf Demand .................................................................................................................... 5-42

5.6.1 Golf Conservation ............................................................................................................... 5-43

5.6.2 Final Golf Industry Demand Projections ............................................................................. 5-44

5.7 Other Demands ................................................................................................................ 5-44

5.7.1 Final Other Demand Projections ......................................................................................... 5-46

5.8 Total Water Demands ....................................................................................................... 5-46

Chapter 6: Water Supply ..............................................................................................................6-1

6.1 Overview of Water Supply ..................................................................................................6-1

6.2 Local Groundwater .............................................................................................................6-1

6.2.1 Uses of Groundwater ............................................................................................................ 6-1

6.2.2 Groundwater Supply ............................................................................................................. 6-2

6.2.3 Groundwater Storage ........................................................................................................... 6-4

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4 TODD/W&C

6.3 Surface Water .....................................................................................................................6-5

6.3.1 Use of Surface Water Supply ................................................................................................ 6-6

6.4 Colorado River Water ..........................................................................................................6-7

6.4.1 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) .............................................................. 6-8

6.4.2 Colorado River Water Consumptive Use .............................................................................. 6-9

6.4.3 Supply Reliability ................................................................................................................. 6-11

6.4.4 Use of Colorado River Water .............................................................................................. 6-13

6.5 SWP Exchange Water ........................................................................................................ 6-13

6.5.1 SWP Table A Amounts ........................................................................................................ 6-14

6.5.2 Other SWP Water Types ..................................................................................................... 6-15

6.5.3 Advance Deliveries .............................................................................................................. 6-16

6.5.4 Supply Reliability ................................................................................................................. 6-17

6.5.5 Delta Conveyance Facility ................................................................................................... 6-20

6.5.6 Lake Perris Dam Seepage Recovery Project ....................................................................... 6-22

6.5.7 Sites Reservoir Project ........................................................................................................ 6-22

6.5.8 SWP Delivery to Subbasins ................................................................................................. 6-23

6.5.9 Use of SWP Exchange Water .............................................................................................. 6-24

6.6 Recycled Water ................................................................................................................. 6-25

6.6.1 MSWD Regional WRF .......................................................................................................... 6-26

6.6.2 Palm Springs WWTP/DWA WRP ......................................................................................... 6-26

6.6.3 CVWD WRP-10 .................................................................................................................... 6-26

6.6.4 CVWD WRP-7 ...................................................................................................................... 6-27

6.6.5 CVWD WRP-4 ...................................................................................................................... 6-27

6.6.6 Valley Sanitary District WWTP ............................................................................................ 6-28

6.6.7 Coachella Sanitary District WWTP ...................................................................................... 6-28

6.7 Planned Water Reuse ........................................................................................................ 6-29

6.7.1 Use of Recycled Water ........................................................................................................ 6-30

6.8 Other Supplies .................................................................................................................. 6-30

6.8.1 Rosedale-Rio Bravo ............................................................................................................. 6-30

6.9 Supply Risks and Uncertainties .......................................................................................... 6-31

6.9.1 Colorado River .................................................................................................................... 6-31

6.9.2 SWP Exchange ..................................................................................................................... 6-31

6.9.3 Surface Water ..................................................................................................................... 6-32

6.9.4 Recycled Water ................................................................................................................... 6-32

6.10 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 6-33

Chapter 7: Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios ...........................................................................7-1

7.1 MODFLOW Model Description ............................................................................................7-1

7.1.1 Previous Versions of the Indio Subbasin MODFLOW Model ................................................ 7-1

7.1.2 Changes Made to Model for Alternative Plan Update ......................................................... 7-2

7.2 Model Input and Construction .............................................................................................7-3

7.2.1 MODFLOW Code and Input Packages ................................................................................... 7-3

7.2.2 Model Grid and Layers .......................................................................................................... 7-5

7.2.3 Aquifer Properties and Horizontal Flow Barrier ................................................................... 7-5

7.2.4 Initial Conditions ................................................................................................................. 7-10

7.2.5 Inflows ................................................................................................................................. 7-10

7.2.6 Outflows .............................................................................................................................. 7-21

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 5 TODD/W&C

7.3 Model Update Process and Results .................................................................................... 7-26

7.3.1 Historical Model Calibration Results ................................................................................... 7-26

7.3.2 1997-2019 Model Update Process ..................................................................................... 7-28

7.3.3 Water Level Calibration Results .......................................................................................... 7-28

7.3.4 Drain Flow Calibration Results ............................................................................................ 7-37

7.4 Water Budget ................................................................................................................... 7-37

7.4.1 1997-2019 Water Budget ................................................................................................... 7-37

7.5 Plan Scenarios................................................................................................................... 7-43

7.5.1 Climate Change ................................................................................................................... 7-43

7.5.2 Baseline (No New Projects)................................................................................................. 7-44

7.5.3 Baseline with Climate Change ............................................................................................ 7-48

7.5.4 5-Year Plan with Climate Change ........................................................................................ 7-52

7.5.5 Future Projects with Climate Change ................................................................................. 7-54

7.5.6 Expanded Agriculture with Climate Change ....................................................................... 7-57

7.6 Scenario Implementation .................................................................................................. 7-60

7.6.1 Inflows ................................................................................................................................. 7-60

7.6.2 Outflows .............................................................................................................................. 7-64

7.6.3 Other Predictive Model Inputs ........................................................................................... 7-65

7.7 Results .............................................................................................................................. 7-65

7.7.1 Baseline Scenarios - Impact of Climate Change .................................................................. 7-66

7.7.2 Climate Change Scenarios – Baseline and with Projects .................................................... 7-75

7.8 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 7-89

Chapter 8: Regulatory and Policy Issues ........................................................................................8-1

8.1 Water Quality Policies and Planning ....................................................................................8-1

8.1.1 Basin Plan .............................................................................................................................. 8-1

8.1.2 Antidegradation Policy .......................................................................................................... 8-5

8.1.3 Recycled Water Policy ........................................................................................................... 8-5

8.1.4 Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan ......................................................... 8-6

8.1.5 Salinity Management ............................................................................................................ 8-8

8.1.6 Agricultural Drainage Discharge Regulations ..................................................................... 8-10

8.2 Groundwater Quality ........................................................................................................ 8-11

8.2.1 Salinity ................................................................................................................................. 8-11

8.2.2 Arsenic ................................................................................................................................ 8-12

8.2.3 Perchlorate ......................................................................................................................... 8-12

8.2.4 Chromium-6 ........................................................................................................................ 8-13

8.2.5 Uranium .............................................................................................................................. 8-13

8.2.6 Nitrate ................................................................................................................................. 8-14

8.2.7 PFAS .................................................................................................................................... 8-14

8.3 Salton Sea Restoration ...................................................................................................... 8-14

8.4 Small Water Systems ........................................................................................................ 8-16

8.4.1 Groundwater Supply Issues ................................................................................................ 8-16

8.4.2 Groundwater Quality Issues ............................................................................................... 8-16

8.4.3 Small Water System Consolidations ................................................................................... 8-17

8.5 Climate Change ................................................................................................................. 8-18

8.5.1 Colorado River Basin ........................................................................................................... 8-18

8.5.2 State Water Project ............................................................................................................ 8-19

8.5.3 Plan Area Supplies and Demands ....................................................................................... 8-19

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 6 TODD/W&C

8.6 State Water Conservation ................................................................................................. 8-20

8.7 Subsidence ....................................................................................................................... 8-21

8.8 Other Issues ...................................................................................................................... 8-22

8.8.1 Invasive Species .................................................................................................................. 8-22

8.8.2 Seismic Response ................................................................................................................ 8-22

Chapter 9: Sustainable Management ............................................................................................9-1

9.1 Sustainability Indicators and Criteria ...................................................................................9-1

9.2 Sustainability Goal and Approach ........................................................................................9-2

9.3 Quantitative Criteria for Groundwater Levels ......................................................................9-4

9.3.1 Description of Undesirable Results ....................................................................................... 9-5

9.3.2 Potential Causes and Effects of Undesirable Results ............................................................ 9-5

9.3.3 Sustainability Criteria for Groundwater Levels ..................................................................... 9-6

9.4 Quantitative Criteria for Groundwater Storage .................................................................. 9-13

9.4.1 Description, Causes, and Effects of Undesirable Results .................................................... 9-13

9.4.2 Sustainability Criteria for Groundwater Storage ................................................................ 9-13

9.5 Quantitative Criteria for Land Subsidence .......................................................................... 9-14

9.5.1 Description, Causes, and Effects of Undesirable Results .................................................... 9-14

9.5.2 Sustainability Criteria for Land Subsidence ........................................................................ 9-14

9.6 Interconnected Surface Water and Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems .......................... 9-15

9.6.1 Background on Indio Subbasin GDEs .................................................................................. 9-15

9.6.2 Identification of GDEs ......................................................................................................... 9-16

9.7 Water Quality Constituents of Concern .............................................................................. 9-19

9.7.1 Description, Causes, and Effects of Undesirable Results .................................................... 9-19

9.7.2 Evaluation of Sustainability................................................................................................. 9-20

9.8 Water Quality Management .............................................................................................. 9-21

9.8.1 Description, Causes, and Effects of Undesirable Results .................................................... 9-21

9.8.2 Salt and Nutrient Management Plan .................................................................................. 9-22

9.8.3 Continuing Studies of Salinity in Groundwater ................................................................... 9-23

9.9 Drain Flow Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 9-25

9.10 Seawater intrusion ............................................................................................................ 9-26

9.10.1 Background on Monitoring and Management for Seawater Intrusion .............................. 9-26

9.10.2 Water Balance and Inflow from Salton Sea ........................................................................ 9-27

9.10.3 Groundwater Elevations and Salton Sea Inflow ................................................................. 9-27

Chapter 10: Monitoring Program .................................................................................................. 10-1

10.1 Description of Monitoring Network ................................................................................... 10-1

10.1.1 Groundwater Levels ............................................................................................................ 10-6

10.1.2 Groundwater Production .................................................................................................... 10-8

10.1.3 Subsidence .......................................................................................................................... 10-8

10.1.4 Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 10-9

10.1.5 Seawater Intrusion ............................................................................................................ 10-11

10.2 Field Methods for Monitoring Well Data .......................................................................... 10-12

10.2.1 Protocols for Data Collection and Monitoring .................................................................. 10-12

10.2.2 Field Methods for Groundwater Elevation Monitoring .................................................... 10-13

10.2.3 Field Methods for Groundwater Quality Monitoring ....................................................... 10-13

10.3 Data Management System (DMS) .................................................................................... 10-14

10.4 Assessment and Improvement of Monitoring Program .................................................... 10-15

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 7 TODD/W&C
Chapter 11: Projects and Management Actions ............................................................................. 11-1

11.1 Project Selection and Implementation ............................................................................... 11-1

11.1.1 Adaptive Management ....................................................................................................... 11-1

11.1.2 Project Identification .......................................................................................................... 11-3

11.1.3 Project Implementation ...................................................................................................... 11-3

11.2 List of Projects and Management Actions .......................................................................... 11-3

11.3 Water Conservation .......................................................................................................... 11-5

11.3.1 California Water Conservation Laws and Policies............................................................... 11-5

11.4 Water Supply Development ............................................................................................ 11-13

11.4.1 Surface Water ................................................................................................................... 11-13

11.4.2 SWP Water ........................................................................................................................ 11-13

11.4.3 Potable Reuse ................................................................................................................... 11-15

11.5 Source Substitution and Replenishment .......................................................................... 11-16

11.5.1 Colorado River Water – Non-Potable Water (NPW) Deliveries ........................................ 11-16

11.5.2 Direct Deliveries – Recycled Water ................................................................................... 11-18

11.5.3 Groundwater Replenishment ........................................................................................... 11-20

11.6 Water Quality Protection ................................................................................................ 11-22

11.6.1 Water Quality Programs and Policies ............................................................................... 11-22

11.6.2 Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (CV-SNMP) .................................. 11-25

11.7 Deferred Projects ............................................................................................................ 11-27

11.8 PMA Implementation ...................................................................................................... 11-28

Chapter 12: Plan Evaluation and Implementation .......................................................................... 12-1

12.1 Plan Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 12-1

12.1.1 GSA Priorities ...................................................................................................................... 12-1

12.1.2 Water Supply Evaluation .................................................................................................... 12-2

12.2 Plan Implementation ........................................................................................................ 12-8

12.2.1 GSA Program Management ................................................................................................ 12-8

12.2.2 Monitoring Programs .......................................................................................................... 12-9

12.2.3 Tribal Coordination ........................................................................................................... 12-11

12.2.4 Stakeholder Outreach ....................................................................................................... 12-11

12.2.5 Annual Reports ................................................................................................................. 12-12

12.2.6 5-year Plan Update ........................................................................................................... 12-13

12.2.7 Monitoring Network Improvements ................................................................................ 12-14

12.2.8 Refine Subbasin Characterization ..................................................................................... 12-15

12.2.9 Pursue Funding Opportunities .......................................................................................... 12-16

12.2.10 Implement PMAs .............................................................................................................. 12-19

12.3 Implementation Timeline ................................................................................................ 12-19

12.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 12-21

Chapter 13: References ................................................................................................................ 13-1

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 8 TODD/W&C

TABLES PAGE
Table 1-1. Indio Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies ............................................................ 1-10 Table 1-2. Public Meetings on the Alternative Plan Update .................................................................... 1-16 Table 2-1. Tribal/Reservation Lands within Plan Area ............................................................................... 2-6 Table 2-2. Land Use Planning Agencies .................................................................................................... 2-14 Table 5-1. Socioeconomic Growth Forecast for GSAs Within Plan Area ................................................... 5-8 Table 5-2. Total Plan Area Population with Seasonal Residents ................................................................ 5-9 Table 5-3. Land Available for Future Development (Acres) ..................................................................... 5-11 Table 5-4. Projected Buildout of Residential Land Uses (Housing Units) ................................................ 5-13 Table 5-5. DOF Vacancy Rates for Plan Area Cities (2016) ...................................................................... 5-15 Table 5-6. ACS Vacancy Rates for Unincorporated Areas (2014–2018) .................................................. 5-16 Table 5-7. Housing Unit Type for Plan Area Cities (2016) ........................................................................ 5-17 Table 5-8. Housing Unit Type for Unincorporated Areas (2014–2018) ................................................... 5-17 Table 5-9. New Units in Plan Area by Housing Type ................................................................................ 5-19 Table 5-10. Housing Units by Type for the Plan Area .............................................................................. 5-20 Table 5-11. Baseline and Forecast Employees by GSAs ........................................................................... 5-22 Table 5-12. Baseline Domestic Water Use for Plan Area GSAs (Acre-Feet per Year) .............................. 5-22 Table 5-13. Non-Domestic Water for Landscape Use (Acre-Feet) ........................................................... 5-24 Table 5-14. Variables Used in Unit Factors Calculation ........................................................................... 5-24 Table 5-15. Baseline Unit Factor Calculations .......................................................................................... 5-25 Table 5-16. CVWD Single-Family Demand Factors by City ....................................................................... 5-26 Table 5-17. Baseline Unit Factor Calculations for Private Wells and Other Water Systems ................... 5-26 Table 5-18. Outdoor Water Use Percentages for GSAs ........................................................................... 5-28 Table 5-19. Municipal Demand Forecast for the Plan Area (acre-feet) ................................................... 5-28 Table 5-20. Water Loss Reporting by Water Provider (3-Year Average) ................................................. 5-29 Table 5-21. Water Loss Projection for Plan Area (AFY) ............................................................................ 5-29 Table 5-22. State and Federal Plumbing Codes ....................................................................................... 5-30 Table 5-23. Parameters Used in Indoor Water Savings Fixtures ............................................................. 5-31 Table 5-24. Parameters Used in Indoor Water Savings Fixtures ............................................................. 5-31 Table 5-25. Indoor Passive Savings in the Plan Area (Acre-Feet)............................................................. 5-32 Table 5-26. Outdoor Passive Water Savings Within the Plan Area (Acre-Feet) ....................................... 5-33 Table 5-27. Municipal Demand Forecast for the Plan Area (Acre-Feet) .................................................. 5-34 Table 5-28. Total Municipal Demand Forecast for GSA Areas (Acre-Feet) .............................................. 5-35 Table 5-29. Agricultural Acres by Geographic Unit (Acres) ...................................................................... 5-38 Table 5-30. Conversion of Agricultural to Urban by Geographic Unit (Acres) ......................................... 5-38 Table 5-31. Agricultural Demand Factors (Based on 2015–2019 Average) ............................................. 5-40 Table 5-32. Projected Agricultural Water Demand (AFY) ........................................................................ 5-41 Table 5-33. Golf Course Demand Projection (AFY) .................................................................................. 5-44 Table 5-34. Other Demand Projection (AFY)............................................................................................ 5-46 Table 5-35. Total Projected Water Demands in Plan Area (AFY) ............................................................. 5-46 Table 6-1. Indio Subbasin Groundwater Balance (2000-2009 and 2010-2019) ......................................... 6-3 Table 6-2. Indio Subbasin Groundwater Storage Capacity ........................................................................ 6-4 Table 6-3. Colorado River Water Entitlements (AFY) ............................................................................... 6-10 Table 6-4. SWP Table A Amounts (AFY) ................................................................................................... 6-15 Table 6-5. Historical SWP Table A Allocations, CVWD and DWA (2002-2021) ........................................ 6-18 Table 6-6. Estimated Average, Wet-, and Dry-Period Deliveries of SWP Table A Water ........................ 6-20

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 9 TODD/W&C
Table 6-7. DCF Supply Amounts ............................................................................................................... 6-22 Table 6-8. Lake Perris Seepage Recovery Amounts ................................................................................. 6-22 Table 6-9. Sites Reservoir Supply Amounts ............................................................................................. 6-23 Table 6-10. Forecast Split of SWP Delivery to WWR-GRF and MC-GRF Based on Production ................ 6-23 Table 6-11. Forecast of SWP Table A Supplies to WWR-GRF and MC-GRF ............................................. 6-24 Table 6-12. Projected Wastewater Flow in Plan Area (AFY) .................................................................... 6-25 Table 6-13. Recycled Water Supply Based on 2018-2019 Wastewater Flows (AFY) .............................. 6-25 Table 6-14. Planned Water Reuse at WRPs with Tertiary Capacity (AFY)................................................ 6-29 Table 6-15. Projected Wastewater Remaining for Future Reuse (AFY) ................................................... 6-29 Table 6-16. Summary of Projected Non-Groundwater Supplies (AFY) .................................................... 6-34 Table 7-1. Model Calibration Summary Statistics 1997 – 2019 ............................................................... 7-29 Table 7-2. Baseline (No New Projects) Scenario - Modeled Deliveries for Direct Use (AFY) ................... 7-45 Table 7-3. Baseline (No New Projects) Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Replenishment (AFY) .......... 7-45 Table 7-4. Baseline with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Direct Use (AFY) .............. 7-49 Table 7-5. Baseline with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Replenishment (AFY) ...... 7-49 Table 7-6. 5-Year Plan with Climate Change Supply Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Direct Use (AFY) ............................................................................................................................................ 7-52 Table 7-7. 5-Year Plan with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Replenishment (AFY) ............................................................................................................................................ 7-52 Table 7-8. Future Projects with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Direct Use (AFY) ............................................................................................................................................ 7-55 Table 7-9. Future Projects with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Replenishment (AFY) ................................................................................................................... 7-55 Table 7-10. Expanded Agriculture with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Direct Use (AFY) ..................................................................................................................................... 7-58 Table 7-11. Expanded Agriculture with Climate Change Scenario – Modeled Deliveries for Replenishment (AFY) ................................................................................................................... 7-58 Table 7-12. Simulated Inflows and Outflows, 25-Year Average (2020-2045) (AFY) ................................ 7-61 Table 8-1. Approved TMDLs for the CVSC.................................................................................................. 8-2 Table 8-2. TMDLs Under Development for CVSC ....................................................................................... 8-3 Table 8-3. TMDLs Under Development for the Salton Sea Watershed ..................................................... 8-3 Table 9-1. Key Well Network for Groundwater Levels .............................................................................. 9-7 Table 9-2. Criteria for Selection of Key Wells for Groundwater Level Monitoring .................................. 9-10 Table 10-1. Summary of the Monitoring Network .................................................................................. 10-2 Table 10-2. Summary of Salton Sea Nested Monitoring Wells .............................................................. 10-12 Table 11-1. Conservation Program Summary .......................................................................................... 11-7 Table 11-2. Water Shortage Contingency Plan Levels ............................................................................. 11-8 Table 12-1. Demand Forecast with Supply Buffer (AFY) ........................................................................ 12-3 Table 12-2. Comparison of Planned Supplies Under Plan Scenarios, 2045 (AFY) ................................... 12-4 Table 12-3. Potential Funding Sources for 2022 Alternative Plan Implementation .............................. 12-17 Table 12-4. Alternative Plan Update Implementation Timeline ............................................................ 12-20

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 10 TODD/W&C

LIST OF FIGURES PAGE
Figure ES-1. Plan Area .............................................................................................................................. ES-2 Figure ES 2: Cumulative Change in Groundwater Storage since 1970 .................................................... ES-4 Figure ES-3: TDS Concentration Map ....................................................................................................... ES-5 Figure ES-4: Total Projected Water Demands in Plan Area (AFY) ............................................................ ES-7 Figure ES-5: Indio Subbasin Supply Forecast Projected Future Supplies with Climate Change (AFY) ..... ES-9 Figure ES-6: Model Inflows and Outflows by Scenario .......................................................................... ES-10 Figure ES-7: Cumulative Change in Storage for Baseline and Baseline with Climate Change ............... ES-11 Figure ES-8: Cumulative Change in Storage for Future Scenarios ......................................................... ES-12 Figure ES-9: Key Wells ............................................................................................................................ ES-15 Figure ES-10: Categorized Projects and Management Actions .............................................................. ES-18 Figure 1-1. Groundwater Basins ................................................................................................................ 1-3 Figure 2-1. Plan Area .................................................................................................................................. 2-2 Figure 2-2. Cities and Unincorporated Areas ............................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-3. Federal, State, and Local Government Land ............................................................................ 2-7 Figure 2-4. Tribal/Reservation Lands ......................................................................................................... 2-8 Figure 2-5. Water and Wastewater Facilities ........................................................................................... 2-10 Figure 2-6. Land Use Map ........................................................................................................................ 2-17 Figure 2-7. Disadvantaged Communities and Economically Disadvantaged Areas ................................. 2-19 Figure 2-8. Small Water System Wells ..................................................................................................... 2-21 Figure 2-9. Climate and Streamflow Monitoring Stations ....................................................................... 2-23 Figure 2-10. USGS GPS Stations and Wells used for Subsidence Monitoring .......................................... 2-24 Figure 2-11. Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Well Locations ............................................................ 2-25 Figure 2-12. Wells with Water Quality Data Used for Alternative Plan Update ...................................... 2-28 Figure 2-13. Water Year 2018–2019 Groundwater Production............................................................... 2-29 Figure 3-1. Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin and Subbasins ............................................................... 3-2 Figure 3-2. Groundwater Subareas of the Indio Subbasin ......................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3-3. Geologic Map ........................................................................................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-4. Generalized Stratigraphic Column Thermal Subarea .............................................................. 3-7 Figure 3-5. Approximate Extent of Shallow Semi-Perched Aquifer in the Thermal Subarea .................... 3-8 Figure 3-6. Cross Section Locations ......................................................................................................... 3-14 Figure 3-7. Cross Section A to A’ .............................................................................................................. 3-15 Figure 3-8. Cross Section A’ to A’’ ............................................................................................................ 3-16 Figure 3-9. Cross Section A’’ to A’’’ .......................................................................................................... 3-17 Figure 3-10. Cross Section B to B’ ............................................................................................................ 3-20 Figure 3-11. Cross Section C to C' ............................................................................................................ 3-21 Figure 3-12. Cross Section D to D’ ............................................................................................................ 3-22 Figure 3-13. Cross Section E to E’ ............................................................................................................. 3-23 Figure 4-1. Indio Subbasin Groundwater Elevation Contours WY 2018-2019 ........................................... 4-2 Figure 4-2. Wells with Long-Term Hydrographs ........................................................................................ 4-4 Figure 4-3. Water Level Hydrographs West Valley .................................................................................... 4-5 Figure 4-4. Water Level Hydrographs East Valley ...................................................................................... 4-6 Figure 4-5. Water Level Hydrographs Artesian Wells ................................................................................ 4-8 Figure 4-6. Depth to Water Contours ....................................................................................................... 4-9 Figure 4-7. Ten-Year Change in Groundwater Elevation (WY 2008-09 to WY 2018-19) ........................ 4-10 Figure 4-8. Historical Change in Groundwater Storage in Indio Subbasin .............................................. 4-12

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 11 TODD/W&C Figure 4-9. Cumulative Change in Groundwater Storage since 1970 ..................................................... 4-13 Figure 4-10. Subsidence Map, 2014-2017 .............................................................................................. 4-15 Figure 4-11. TDS Concentration Map ...................................................................................................... 4-18 Figure 4-12. Nitrate as NO3 Concentration Map .................................................................................... 4-19 Figure 4-13. Arsenic Concentration Map ................................................................................................ 4-20 Figure 4-14. Chromium-6 Concentration Map ........................................................................................ 4-21 Figure 4-15. Uranium Concentration Map .............................................................................................. 4-22 Figure 4-16. Fluoride Concentration Map ............................................................................................... 4-23 Figure 4-17. Perchlorate Concentration Map ......................................................................................... 4-24 Figure 4-18. DBCP Concentration Map ................................................................................................... 4-25 Figure 4-19. Water Quality Cross Section Location ................................................................................ 4-27 Figure 4-20. Cross Section A-A’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ........................... 4-28 Figure 4-21. Cross Section B-B’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ........................... 4-29 Figure 4-22. Cross Section C-C’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ........................... 4-30 Figure 4-23. Cross Section D-D’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ........................... 4-31 Figure 4-24. Cross Section E-E’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ............................ 4-32 Figure 4-25. Cross Section F-F’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ............................ 4-33 Figure 4-26. Cross Section G-G’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 .......................... 4-34 Figure 4-27. Cross Section H-H’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ........................... 4-35 Figure 4-28. Cross Section I-I’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 .............................. 4-36 Figure 4-29. Cross Section J-J’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ............................. 4-37 Figure 4-30. Cross Section K-K’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ........................... 4-38 Figure 4-31. Cross Section L-L’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ............................ 4-39 Figure 4-32. Cross Section M-M’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 ......................... 4-40 Figure 4-33. Cross Section N-N’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6 .......................... 4-41 Figure 4-34. TDS Time-Concentration Plots ............................................................................................ 4-42 Figure 4-35. Nitrate as NO3 Time-Concentration Plots .......................................................................... 4-43 Figure 4-36. GDE Assessment ................................................................................................................. 4-54 Figure 5-1. Jurisdictions within Plan Area .................................................................................................. 5-4 Figure 5-2. TAZ Based Population Projections for Plan Area ..................................................................... 5-7 Figure 5-3. Socioeconomic Growth Forecast for Plan Area ....................................................................... 5-9 Figure 5-4. Parcels Planned for Development by Current Land Use........................................................ 5-12 Figure 5-5. New Housing Units by Type (2000–2020) ............................................................................. 5-18 Figure 5-6. Housing Units by Type for Plan Area ..................................................................................... 5-21 Figure 5-7. Baseline Water Use by GSA (Acre-Feet per Month) .............................................................. 5-23 Figure 5-8. Indoor Water Use Estimation ................................................................................................ 5-27 Figure 5-9. Municipal Demand Forecast for Plan Area ............................................................................ 5-34 Figure 5-10. Municipal Demand Forecast for GSA Areas ......................................................................... 5-36 Figure 5-11. Agricultural Water Use, 2010–2019 (AFY) ........................................................................... 5-37 Figure 5-12. Developable Agricultural Lands ........................................................................................... 5-39 Figure 5-13. Golf Course Water Use, 2010–2019 (AFY) ........................................................................... 5-43 Figure 5-14. Other Water Use, 2010–2019 (AFY) .................................................................................... 5-45 Figure 5-15. Total Projected Water Demands in Plan Area (AFY) ............................................................ 5-47 Figure 6-1. Total Watershed Runoff for Indio Subbasin, 1970–2019 (AFY) ............................................... 6-5 Figure 6-2. Colorado River Water Supply Projections.............................................................................. 6-11 Figure 6-3. Advance Delivery Account Year-End Balance ........................................................................ 6-16 Figure 6-4. 20-Year Table A Allocation History, CVWD and DWA ............................................................ 6-19 Figure 6-5. Delta Conveyance Facility – Proposed Corridor Options ....................................................... 6-21

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 12 TODD/W&C Figure 6-6. Projected Future Supplies with Historical Hydrology ............................................................ 6-36 Figure 6-7. Projected Future Supplies with Climate Change Hydrology .................................................. 6-37 Figure 7-1. Model Area and Boundaries .................................................................................................... 7-4 Figure 7-2. Base of Model Layer Elevations ............................................................................................... 7-6 Figure 7-3. Model Layer Hydraulic Conductivities ..................................................................................... 7-8 Figure 7-4. Model Layer Storage Properties .............................................................................................. 7-9 Figure 7-5. Model Initial Conditions 1997 ................................................................................................ 7-11 Figure 7-6. Model Recharge Sources ....................................................................................................... 7-12 Figure 7-7. Subsurface Inflow from Mission Creek/Desert Hot Springs and San Gorgonio, 1997- 2019 ............................................................................................................................................ 7-13 Figure 7-8. Inflow by Source 1997-2019 .................................................................................................. 7-15 Figure 7-9. Location of Production Wells Known to be Active, 1997-2019 ............................................. 7-22 Figure 7-10. Groundwater Production, 1997-2019 ................................................................................. 7-23 Figure 7-11. Salton Sea Elevations, 1997-2019 ........................................................................................ 7-25 Figure 7-12. Model Calibration Hydrographs, 1936-2008 ....................................................................... 7-27 Figure 7-13. Simulated Shallow and Deep Groundwater Elevations, 2010 ............................................. 7-30 Figure 7-14. Simulated Shallow and Deep Groundwater Elevations, 2020 ............................................. 7-31 Figure 7-15. Shallow and Deep Model Calibration Wells ........................................................................ 7-33 Figure 7-16. Model Calibration Hydrographs, West Valley 1997-2019 ................................................... 7-34 Figure 7-17. Model Calibration Hydrographs, East Valley 1997-2019 ..................................................... 7-35 Figure 7-18. Simulated vs. Measured Drain Flows, 1997-2019 ............................................................... 7-38 Figure 7-19. Annual Model Water Budget, 1997-2019 ............................................................................ 7-39 Figure 7-20. Simulated Salton Sea Inflows and Outflows, 1997-2019 ..................................................... 7-40 Figure 7-21. Simulated Change in Storage, 1997-2019 ........................................................................... 7-42 Figure 7-22. Baseline (No New Projects) Supply and Demand Flow Chart, 2045 .................................... 7-46 Figure 7-23. Baseline (No New Projects) with Climate Change Supply and Demand Flow Chart, 2045 ............................................................................................................................................ 7-50 Figure 7-24. 5-Year Plan with Climate Change Supply and Demand Flow Chart, 2045 .......................... 7-53 Figure 7-25. Future Projects with Climate Change Supply and Demand Flow Chart, 2045 .................... 7-56 Figure 7-26. Expanded Agriculture with Climate Change Supply and Demand Flow Chart, 2045.......... 7-59 Figure 7-27. Model Inflows and Outflows by Scenario ............................................................................ 7-62 Figure 7-28. Annual Model Water Budget for Baseline with Climate Change ........................................ 7-67 Figure 7-29. Cumulative Change in Storage for Baseline and Baseline with Climate Change ................. 7-68 Figure 7-30. Model Baseline Scenario Hydrographs, West Valley 2020-2069 ........................................ 7-70 Figure 7-31. Model Baseline Scenario Hydrographs, East Valley 2020-2069 ......................................... 7-71 Figure 7-32. Change in Groundwater Levels, 2009-2045 Baseline Scenario .......................................... 7-73 Figure 7-33. Change in Groundwater Levels, 2009-2045, Baseline Scenario with Climate Change ....... 7-74 Figure 7-34. Total Model Inflow for Future Scenarios ............................................................................ 7-77 Figure 7-35. Simulated Pumping for Future Scenarios ........................................................................... 7-78 Figure 7-36. Cumulative Change in Storage for Future Scenarios .......................................................... 7-79 Figure 7-37. Simulated Drain Flow for Future Scenarios ........................................................................ 7-80 Figure 7-38. Simulated Salton Sea Net Outflow for Future Scenarios .................................................... 7-82 Figure 7-39. Model Future Scenario Hydrographs, West Valley 2020-2069 .......................................... 7-83 Figure 7-40. Model Future Scenario Hydrographs, East Valley 2020-2069 ............................................ 7-84 Figure 7-41. Change in Groundwater Levels, 2009-2045, 5-Year Plan Projects Scenario with Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 7-86 Figure 7-42. Change in Groundwater Levels, 2009-2045, Future Projects Scenario with Climate Change ........................................................................................................................................ 7-87

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 13 TODD/W&C Figure 7-43. Change in Groundwater Levels, 2009-2045, Expanded Agriculture Scenario with Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 7-88 Figure 8-1. Flow Weighted Average Annual Salt Concentrations at Numeric Criteria Stations ................ 8-9 Figure 9-1. Selected Key Wells for Groundwater Level Monitoring ......................................................... 9-9 Figure 9-2. Aerial Imagery showing Salton Sea Recession ....................................................................... 9-18 Figure 11-1. Adaptive Management Cycle for PMA Implementation ..................................................... 11-2 Figure 11-2. Categorized Projects and Management Actions ................................................................. 11-4 Figure 12-1. Comparison of Planned Supplies and Demands Under Plan Scenarios, 2045 ..................... 12-6 Figure 12-2. Model Inflows and Outflows by Scenario ............................................................................ 12-7 Figure 12-3. Alternative Plan Implementation ....................................................................................... 12-8

Table of Contents FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 14 TODD/W&C

LIST OF APPENDICES
1-A Alternative Plan Assessment, Evaluation of Existing Model and Recommendations 1-B 2022 Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan Communications Plan 1-C Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Governance of the Indio Sub-Basin Under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
1-D SGMA Tribal Workgroup and Public Workshop Meeting Agendas and Summaries 1-E Public Comments Received and Response to Public Comments 1-F Public Hearing Comment and Support Letters
1-G Adoption Resolutions
2-A Workplan to Develop the Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan and Groundwater Monitoring Workplan
4-A Groundwater Level Monitoring Well Hydrographs
4-B Indio Subbasin Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems Study 5-A Municipal Water Demand Projection for 2022 Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan 7-A 1997-2019 Observed vs. Simulated Groundwater Elevation Hydrographs 7-B Additional Future Plan Scenarios
7-C Additional Future Scenario Water Budgets and Model Simulations 9-A Key Well Groundwater Level Hydrographs with Minimum Thresholds

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1 TODD/W&C

MASTER ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS LIST
Term Definition
˚F degrees Fahrenheit
µg/L micrograms per liter
2010 CVWMP 2010 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan
2018 Coachella Valley
IRWM/SWR Plan
2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management & Stormwater Resources (IRWM/SWR) Plan Update
AB Assembly Bill
ACS American Community Survey
ACWA Agua Caliente Water Authority
AD Assessment District
AF acre-feet
AFY acre-feet per year
Alternative Plan
Update
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update: Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Alternative Plan
AOB area of benefit
AOP Annual Operating Plan
ASR aquifer storage and recovery
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AWAG Agricultural Water Advisory Group
AWMP Agricultural Water Management Plan
Basin Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin
Basin Plan Water Quality Control Plan for Plan for the Colorado River Basin—Region 7 BDCP Bay-Delta Conservation Plan
bgs below ground surface
BLM U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management BMP best management practice
BMWD Berrenda Mesa Water District
BPO basin plan objective
BPTC best practicable treatment or control
Bulletin 118 California’s Groundwater: Bulletin 118—Update 2003 BWD Borrego Water District
C2VSIM California Central Valley Groundwater-Surface Water Simulation Model CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CalWARN California Water and Wastewater Agency Response Network CalWEP California Water Efficiency Partnership
Canal Coachella Canal
CAP Central Arizona Project
CARB California Air Resources Board
CAS California Climate Adaptation Strategy
CASGEM Program California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
CAT Climate Action Team
CCLP Coachella Canal Lining Project
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDC California Department of Conservation
CDFG California Department of Fish and Game
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDPH California Department of Public Health
CDPs census-designated plates
CEC California Energy Commission
Census Bureau U.S. Census Bureau
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERES California Environmental Resources Evaluation System Cfs Cubic feet per second
Chromium-6 Hexavalent chromium
CIB capital improvement budget
CII commercial, industrial and institutional
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System CIPs Capital improvement projects
CMP Consolidated Monitoring Program
CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CO2e CO2 equivalents
COCs constituents of concern
COD College of the Desert
COVID-19 coronavirus disease 2019
CPUC California Public Utility Commission
CRA Colorado River Aqueduct
CRLA California Rural Legal Assistance Inc.

CRW Colorado River Water
CSD Coachella Sanitation District
CUWCC California Urban Water Conservation Council
CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVCC Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
CVILC Coachella Valley Irrigated Lands Coalition
CVIRWMP Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan CVMSHCP Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan CVRWMG Coachella Valley Regional Water Management Group CVSC Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel
CV-SNAP Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan CVWD Coachella Valley Water District
CVWMP Coachella Valley Water Management Plan
CVWMR Coachella Valley Water Management Region

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
CWA Coachella Water Authority
CWC California Water Code
CWP California Water Plan
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
CY calendar year
DAC disadvantaged community
DACE Desert Alliance for Community Empowerment
DACI Disadvantaged Communities Infrastructure
DBCP dibromochloropropane
DCF Delta Conveyance Facility
DCP Drought Contingency Plan
DDW California State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water DEH Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta
DEM digital elevation model
DLR detection limit for purposes of reporting
DMM Demand Management Measures
DMS Data Management System
DOF California Department of Finance
DPR Delivery Reliability Report
DWA Desert Water Agency
DWR California Department of Water Resources
East AOB East Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit ECVWSP East Coachella Valley Water Supply Project
EDA Economic Development Agency
EDA economically disadvantaged community
EDC Endocrine Disrupting Compound
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EJ environmental justice
EJCW Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
EO Executive Order
EOP Emergency Operations Plan
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERP Emergency Response Plan
ESA Endangered Species Act
ET evapotranspiration
ETAF evapotranspiration adjustment factor
ETc ET of a crop
ETo reference evapotranspiration
EVRA East Valley Reclamation Authority

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
feet bgs feet below ground surface
feet msl feet above mean sea level
FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FY fiscal year
GAMA Program Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Garnet Hill WMP Mission Creek/Garnet Hill Water Management Plan GDE groundwater-dependent ecosystem
GHB general head boundary
GHG greenhouse gas
GIPSY-OASIS GNSS-Inferred Positioning System and Orbit Analysis Simulation Software GIS geographic information system
GLC Glorious Lands Company
GMS Groundwater Modeling System
gpcd gallons per capita per day
gpd gallons per day
gpd/conn gallons per day per connection
gphud gallons per housing unit per day
GPS global positioning system
GRF groundwater replenishment facility
GRP Groundwater Replenishment Program
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
GWMP Groundwater Management Plan
HCF hundreds of cubic feet
HCM hydrogeologic conceptual model
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HFB horizontal flow barrier
HOA homeowners’ association
I-Bank California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank IBWC International Boundary and Water Commission
IC/ID illicit connection/illicit discharge
ICS intentionally created surplus
ID Improvement District
ID-1 Improvement District 1 (Reclamation)
IID Imperial Irrigation District
ILRP Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program
Indio Subbasin GSAs Groundwater Sustainability Agencies created by the Coachella Valley Water District, the Coachella Water Authority, the Desert Water Authority, and the Indio Water Authority, respectively
InSAR interferometric synthetic aperture radar
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IPR indirect potable reuse

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 5 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
IRWM integrated regional water management
IRWMP Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
IWA Indio Water Authority
IWFM Integrated Water Flow Model
IWRIS Integrated Water Resources Information System
K conductivity
Kv vertical conductivity
Landscape Ordinance Ordinance No. 1302.4: An Ordinance of the Coachella Valley Water District Establishing Landscape and Irrigation System Design Criteria
LC local concern
LCP Landscaper Certification Program
LID low impact development
LOS level of service
MAR managed aquifer recharge
MC AOB Mission Creek Subbasin Area of Benefit
MCGH WMP Mission Creek-Garnet Hill Water Management Plan MC-GRF Mission Creek Groundwater Replenishment Facility MCL maximum contaminant level
MDWC Myoma Dunes Water Company
MG million gallons
mg/L milligrams per liter
mgd million gallons per day
MHI median household income
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
MO Measurable Objective
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MP Mile Post
MS4 municipal separate storm sewer system
msl mean sea level
MSWD Mission Springs Water District
MT Minimum Threshold
MVP Mid-Valley Pipeline
MWA Mojave Water Agency
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
MWELO Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NCCAG Natural Communities Commonly Associated with Groundwater NCCPA California Natural Communities Conservation Planning Act NCDC National Climatic Data Center
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NIMS National Incident Management System
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 6 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPW non-potable water
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
O&M operations and maintenance
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OPR California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research OWTS Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
pCi/L picocuries per liter
PD-GRF Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility
PEIR Programmatic Environmental Impact Report
PFAS per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance
PFOA perfluorooctanoic acid
PFOS perfluorooctane sulfonate
PHG public health goal
Plan Area Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan Area
PMAs projects and management actions
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
PPR Present Perfected Rights
ppt parts per trillion
Proposition 1 Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 Proposition 84 Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006
PVID Palo Verde Irrigation District
QSA Quantification Settlement Agreement
RAC replenishment assessment charges
RAP region acceptance process
RCAC Rural Community Assistance Corporation
RCFCWCD Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District RCOA Riverside County Operational Area
RCP-06 Riverside County Projections 2006
RECI water contract recreation
RECII water non-contact recreation
Region Coachella Valley Water Management Region
Regional Program Regional Water Conservation Program
RMS resource management strategies
RO reverse osmosis
Rosedale Rosedale Rio Bravo Water Storage District
RTP regional transportation plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 7 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
SB Senate Bill
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCSD Salton Community Services District
SDAC severely disadvantaged community
SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System
SEMS California Standardized Emergency Management System SGM Sustainable Groundwater Management
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SGPWA San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency
SGWP Sustainable Groundwater Planning Grant Program
SMCL Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level
SNMP Salt and Nutrient Management Plan
SOI sphere of influence
SPEIR Subsequent Programmatic Environmental Impact Report SRWS self-regenerating water softeners
Ss specific storage
SS/TS source of supply/treatment study
SSA Salton Sea Authority
SSMP Salton Sea Management Plan
SWAMP Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program
SWMP Stormwater Management Plan
SWN State Well Number
SWP State Water Project
SWQIS California Statewide Water Quality Information System SWR stormwater resources
SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board
SWS small water system
Sy specific yield
T transmissivity
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TAG Technical Advisory Group
TAZ transportation analysis zones
TDML total maximum daily load
TDS total dissolved solids
TEL-GRF Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, formerly the Dike 4 Recharge Facility
TM technical memorandum
TMDL total maximum daily load
TRS Township range section
TSS Technical Support Services
Tulare Lake Tulare Lake Water Storage District
ULFT ultra low flow toilet

Master Acronyms and Abbreviations List FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 8 TODD/W&C
Term Definition
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFS U.S. Forest Service
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
Valley Coachella Valley Water Management Region
VSD Valley Sanitary District
WARM Salton Sea’s Warm Freshwater Habitat
WDL Water Data Library
WDR Waste Discharge Requirements
West AOB West Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit WET-CAT Climate Action Team, Water-Energy Group
WIIN Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
WMP Water Management Plan
WMWC Whitewater Mutual Water Company
Workplan SNMP Development Workplan
WQO water quality objective
WRCOG Western Riverside Council of Governments
WRF Water Reclamation Facility
WRFP Water Recycling Funding Program
WRP Water Reclamation Plant
WRSC Whitewater River Stormwater Channel
WSA Water Supply Assessment
WSV Water Supply Verification
WUE water use efficiency
WWR-GRF Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment Facility WWTP wastewater treatment plan
WY water year

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-1 TODD/W&C

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 Introduction
Groundwater is a critical resource for the sustainability of Coachella Valley communities, agriculture, economic activities, environmental benefits, and other beneficial uses. The Indio Subbasin (one of four subbasins of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin) provides groundwater supply and a vast groundwater storage capacity with the natural ability to convey water—through groundwater flow— from areas of recharge to wells where water is pumped. Since the early 1900s, the Indio Subbasin has been actively managed to address increasing water demands (with pumping for agricultural, urban, and rural demands), beginning with capture of local stormwater to supplement the limited natural groundwater replenishment and later implementing water importation (since 1949) and source substitution projects. This has been a dynamic process with periods of groundwater depletion followed by recovery. Groundwater levels and storage reached historical lows in about 2009, but this overdraft has been stopped and increased groundwater storage has resulted from active water management planning and projects. In addition, local agencies have recognized the multi-faceted nature of groundwater issues (including subsidence, water quality, seawater intrusion, and potential impacts on environmental uses) and have developed relevant management plans, programs, and projects, including the 2002 Coachella Valley Final Water Management Plan (2002 CVWMP) for the Indio Subbasin (Coachella Valley Water District [CVWD], 2002a) and the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan 2010 Update (2010 CVWMP Update) (CVWD, 2012a).

In 2014, the California Legislature enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to provide a framework for sustainable groundwater management. To implement SGMA in the Indio Subbasin, four local water agencies formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs): CVWD, Coachella Water Authority (CWA), Desert Water Agency (DWA), and Indio Water Authority (IWA). In 2016, the Indio Subbasin GSAs entered into a Memorandum of Understanding for collaborative management of the Indio Subbasin under SGMA.

On December 29, 2016, the Indio Subbasin GSAs submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) the 2010 CVWMP (CVWD, 2012a), accompanied by a Bridge Document (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2016), as an Alternative Plan to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Indio Subbasin. On July 17, 2019, DWR approved the 2010 CVWMP Update as an Alternative Plan. In compliance with SGMA, the GSAs have prepared Annual Reports which can be found on the program website ( www.IndioSubbasinSGMA.org) . SGMA also requires plan updates every 5 years; this Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update (Alternative Plan Update) fulfills that requirement.

The GSAs conducted extensive stakeholder coordination and public involvement during the development of the Alternative Plan Update to seek input from property owners/residents, disadvantaged communities, agricultural interests, and environmental interests. Development of the Alternative Plan Update was also guided by the SGMA Tribal Workgroup, which included representatives from the following five Native American Tribes: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-2 TODD/W&C ES.2 Plan Area
The Indio Subbasin is one of four subbasins that compose the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (Basin). The Plan Area is based on the Indio Subbasin and the areas served by, or expected to be served by, groundwater from the Subbasin, as shown in Figure ES-1. This includes areas to the east of the Subbasin within the spheres of influence of the cities of Indio and Coachella that account for several proposed large developments, and areas along the western and eastern shores of the Salton Sea that are in CVWD’s domestic service area and receive groundwater from CVWD. Undeveloped mountainous terrain and conservation areas in CVWD’s and DWA’s boundaries are not included in the Plan Area as they do not receive water from the Indio Subbasin. The Indio Subbasin is geographically divided into West Valley and East Valley.

The Indio Subbasin underlies
the incorporated areas of nine
cities as well as unincorporated
areas in portions of Riverside, San
Diego, and Imperial Counties.

Large tracts of land in the Plan
Area are owned and managed by
state and federal governments.

Five Tribal/Reservation areas for
Native American tribes are also
located within the Indio
Subbasin. The major water
agencies in the Plan Area are
CVWD, CWA, DWA, and IWA.

Mission Springs Water District
(MSWD) and Myoma Dunes
Water Company (MDWC) also
serve smaller portions of the
Indio Subbasin.

Local water resources
management began with early
(19th Century) agricultural
development in the region, which
was initially based on
groundwater supply. However,
local groundwater supply proved
insufficient for irrigation and
subsequent urban water
demand, leading agencies to
acquire and import surface water supplies. The Plan Area currently relies on a combination of local groundwater, Colorado River water, State Water Project (SWP) exchange water, local surface water, and recycled water to meet demands for four predominant water user groups: municipal, agriculture, golf, and other (e.g., fish farms, duck clubs, polo, etc.).

Figure ES-1: Plan Area

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-3 TODD/W&C ES.3 Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model
The Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (Basin) encompasses more than 800 square miles and extends from the San Gorgonio Pass in the San Bernardino Mountains to the northern shore of the Salton Sea.

The Basin is composed of the San Gorgonio Pass, Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, and Indio Subbasins. The boundary between the San Gorgonio Pass and Indio Subbasins is a bedrock constriction and divide; otherwise, the boundaries between the Subbasins are generally defined by faults that represent barriers to the lateral movement of groundwater.

The Indio Subbasin is bounded on its northern, northwestern, southwestern, and southern margins by uplifted bedrock; subbasin sedimentary fill consists of thick sand and gravel sedimentary sequences eroded from the surrounding mountains. Sedimentary infill in the Indio Subbasin thickens from north to south, and depending on location within the Subbasin, is at least several thousand and as much as 12,000 feet thick. The upper approximately 2,000 feet constitute the aquifer system that is the primary source of groundwater supply.

Sources of inflow to the Indio Subbasin include infiltration of natural inflows through mountain-front and stream channel recharge, subsurface inflows, artificial recharge of imported water, wastewater percolation, and return flows from municipal/domestic use, agriculture, golf courses, and other sources.

From 2000 to 2019, combined return flows have represented the largest source of recharge in the Subbasin, followed by imported water replenishment and natural watershed runoff and stream channel recharge. Indio Subbasin groundwater outflows include groundwater pumping, subsurface and drain flows to Salton Sea, and evapotranspiration. Groundwater pumping is the largest component of outflow from the Indio Subbasin.

Seven hydrogeologic cross sections were developed to illustrate hydrogeologic conditions across the Indio Subbasin. Overall, the longitudinal cross sections document a down-valley progression of alluvial sediment from predominantly sand and gravel to increasing fine sands with clay lenses and then to clay- dominated sediments at the Salton Sea. The perpendicular cross sections document the relatively narrow, bedrock or fault-bounded character of the Indio Subbasin in the northwest, the substantial thickness of the subbasin that occurs along the eastern margin of the Indio Subbasin or along the subbasin axis, and the coarse-grained sediments along the western mountain front and limit of regional clay to the west.

ES.4 Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater conditions are described with reference to the six sustainability indicators identified in SGMA: groundwater levels, groundwater storage, potential subsidence, groundwater quality, seawater intrusion, and interconnected surface water and groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs).

Regional groundwater flows are in a northwest-to-southeast direction through the Indio Subbasin. In Water Year (WY) 2018-2019, groundwater elevations ranged from greater than 1,100 feet msl near the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin in the northwest to approximately -220 feet msl in the southeast along the northern shoreline of the Salton Sea. Average depth to water contours for the Indio Subbasin for WY 2018-19 show that greatest depths to water are observed in the northwestern portion of the basin (generally greater than 200 feet). Depths to groundwater generally decrease to about 100 to 250 feet in the mid-subbasin area and then to zero or above the ground surface in artesian wells near the Salton Sea. Long-term historical hydrographs depict the groundwater level response to historical pumping and

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-4 TODD/W&C water management activities identified and implemented in the 2002 CVWMP and 2010 CVWMP Update. Collectively, the hydrographs illustrate the effectiveness of groundwater replenishment, source substitution, and conservation programs under varying climatic and water use conditions.

Figure ES-2 shows the cumulative change in storage for the Indio Subbasin since 1970. Since 2009, the Indio Subbasin has recovered approximately 840,000 acre-feet (AF) of groundwater in storage, or about 45 percent of the cumulative depletion observed from 1970 to 2009.

Figure ES-2: Cumulative Change in Groundwater Storage since 1970

Land subsidence is the differential lowering of the ground surface, which can damage structures and facilities. This may be caused by regional tectonism or by declines in groundwater elevations due to pumping. Land subsidence, resulting from aquifer system compaction and groundwater level declines, has been a concern in the Coachella Valley since the mid-1990s and has been investigated since 1996 through an on-going cooperative program between CVWD and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) (Sneed and Brandt, 2020). Analysis of data collected from 1995 to 2017 by the USGS indicates that as much as 2.0 feet of land subsidence occurred in the Indio Subbasin from 1995 to 2010 near Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and La Quinta (Sneed and Brandt, 2020). Since 2010, groundwater levels have stabilized or increased, and although a few areas continued to subside (albeit at a slower rate), most areas stopped subsiding from 2010 to 2017 and some even uplifted.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-5 TODD/W&C Groundwater quality is
documented in the Indio
Subbasin focusing on eight
water quality constituents,
including total dissolved solids
(TDS), nitrate, arsenic,
chromium-6, uranium,
fluoride, perchlorate, and
DBCP. Each of these is
summarized in terms of
sources and maps showing
spatial distribution (see Figure
ES-3). In addition,
concentrations with depth are
shown in 14 vertical cross-
sections for TDS, nitrate,
arsenic, and chromium-6;
concentrations of these
constituents vary with depth.

Time-concentration plots are
shown for TDS and nitrate.

The primary (i.e., health-
based) maximum contaminant
levels (MCLs) are stated for
each constituent with the
exception of TDS, which is
regulated by a range of
Consumer Acceptance
Contaminant Levels that are
based on aesthetics (e.g., taste). While concentrations of nitrate, arsenic, or fluoride may exceed MCLs in some small water systems, County and GSA programs have been implemented to help provide better water quality. All four GSAs provide drinking water supplies that meet all state and federal health standards.

Elevated TDS and nitrate concentrations are linked to current and historical water and wastewater management, agricultural activity, urban land use, septic systems, and natural conditions. In the Indio Subbasin, arsenic, chromium-6, uranium, and fluoride are naturally occurring and show variable distribution. DBCP is a soil fumigant historically used in agriculture that has persisted in a few wells.

Perchlorate has industrial, fertilizer, and natural sources with highly localized detections at low concentrations. Cross-sections showing the vertical distribution of TDS indicate that concentrations generally are less than 500 mg/L, lowest concentrations occur in deep wells in the central Indio Subbasin, and highest concentrations found near the Salton Sea. The time-concentration plots indicate increases in TDS concentrations since 1990, with lower rates of increase generally in deeper zones as well as in the central and eastern Thermal Subarea. With regard to nitrate, time-concentration plots Figure ES-3: TDS Concentration Map

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-6 TODD/W&C show significant variability in shallow nitrate concentrations and local increases in nitrate concentrations, mostly in the western areas where concentrations are already elevated in shallow wells.

The Indio Subbasin is potentially vulnerable to saltwater intrusion from the Salton Sea. Potential saltwater intrusion is monitored through two sets of nested monitoring wells. Results from these monitoring wells do not suggest current groundwater degradation due to saltwater intrusion.

GDEs are defined as “ecological communities or species that depend on groundwater emerging from aquifers or on groundwater occurring near the ground surface.” As part of this Alternative Plan Update, potential GDEs were evaluated using a desk-top survey and field visits. Surface water connected to groundwater is generally not present in the West Valley because groundwater levels are much lower than the ground surface. Probable GDEs were identified in three upper canyon areas of the San Jacinto Mountains associated with springs, seeps, and stream channels that convey snowmelt from the San Jacinto mountain front. Probable non-GDEs include dry upland areas, cultivated and/or flooded agricultural land, obvious human-made ponds, lakes, and other features, channelized drains, and areas with no other indicators of groundwater presence near the surface. The mapping also identified Playa Wetland areas along the Salton Sea exposed seabed (playa). These wetlands occur generally downstream of stream, agricultural drain, or stormwater channel outlets. The recession of the Salton Sea is exposing thousands of acres of playa each year and water from irrigation ditches and other drainages that previously flowed directly into waters of the Sea now spreads out on the exposed playa of the Sea where new vegetation and wetlands now exist.

ES.5 Demand Projections
To provide an adequate long-range forecast of future water demands, this Alternative Plan Update uses a 25-year planning period from 2020 through 2045. This planning is subject to uncertainties and changes that could affect future water demands, including revised growth forecasts, conversions of agricultural lands to urban uses, development on Tribal lands, and long-term conservation regulations. Projected water demands are broken into four major categories: municipal, agricultural, golf, and other.

Total municipal demand for the Plan Area is 235,148 acre-feet (AF) in 2045, which is an increase of 71,143 AF from the 2016 baseline (i.e., 43 percent). The forecast assumes a population increase from 402,392 in 2016 to 616,048 in 2045, primarily in the cities of Coachella and Indio. The forecast also assumes 57,773 parcels planned for development, as well as 125,232 new housing units by 2045, corresponding with increased residential and landscape water demands. The projection anticipates 68,149 new jobs by 2045, corresponding with increased future commercial, industrial and institutional (CII) water demands. The forecast accounts for water loss and includes adjustment factors for indoor passive conservation and outdoor water use savings.

Total agricultural demand in the Plan Area is projected to decline from 295,150 AF in the 2016 baseline to 280,243 AF in 2045 (i.e., 5 percent). The forecast assumes that by 2045, 5,973 acres of agricultural land will be converted for urban land uses, and that 950 acres will be converted from idle to cropped in the East Valley. As part of the scenario modeling, this Alternative Plan Update also considered the potential for increased agricultural demand within the Plan Area as conditions in California change (see Chapter 7, Numerical Modeling and Plan Scenarios).

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-7 TODD/W&C Total golf industry demand is estimated to increase from 105,300 AF in 2020 to 107,625 AF by 2035 (i.e., 2 percent). The forecast assumes three future golf courses approximately 150 acres in size.

Total other demand, historically composed of water demands from fish farm and duck clubs, polo/turf irrigation and environmental water, is estimated to increase from 18,893 AF in 2020 to 21,593 AF by 2045 (i.e., 14 percent). The forecast assumes several new recreational lakes and surf parks, along with potential water use by the Salton Sea Restoration North Shore pilot project.

Figure ES-4 presents the updated water demand projections for the Plan Area. Total water demand projected for 2045 is approximately 644,610 AF. Projected water demand for 2045 is about 240,800 AF lower than the 885,400 AF originally projected in the 2010 CVWMP Update. This reduction is a direct result of reduced sociodemographic growth projections, along with conservation savings over the last decade, which are assumed to continue into the future.

Figure ES-4: Total Projected Water Demands in Plan Area (AFY)

ES.6 Water Supply
The Planning Area relies on a combination of local groundwater, Colorado River water, SWP exchange water, surface water, and recycled water to meet water demands.

Groundwater from the Indio Subbasin has been an important source of municipal, rural, and agricultural water supply to the Plan Area. Groundwater levels and storage are presented in Chapter 4, Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions and the water budget for the Indio Subbasin is summarized in Chapter 7, Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios for each planning scenario.

Natural surface water flow in the Coachella Valley occurs as a result of precipitation, precipitation runoff, and stream flow originating from the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains, with lesser

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-8 TODD/W&C amounts from the Santa Rosa Mountains. This watershed runoff is diverted for direct use, percolates into the streambeds, or is captured in mountain-front debris basins where it recharges the groundwater basin. The 50-year hydrologic period from 1970 to 2019 had an annual average watershed runoff of 52,506 AFY, with approximately 43,319 AFY in natural infiltration. Runoff during the 25-year period from 1995 to 2019 was below average, with 38,196 AFY in watershed runoff and 29,204 AFY in natural infiltration.

Colorado River (Canal) water has been a significant water supply source for the Indio Subbasin since the Coachella Canal was completed in 1949. CVWD is the only agency in the Indio Subbasin that receives Colorado River water allocations. Total available Colorado River deliveries will increase to 464,000 AF in 2045, with delivery of 436,050 AF after conveyance losses. This includes base entitlement from the 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA), 1988 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD)/IID Approval Agreement, IID/CVWD First Transfer, IID/CVWD Second Transfer, Coachella Canal Lining, Indian Present Perfected Rights Transfer, and QSA SWP Transfer with MWD. Colorado River supplies face a number of challenges to long-term reliability including the extended Colorado River Basin drought and shortage sharing agreements, endangered species and habitat protection, and climate change.

SWP exchange water has been an important component of the region’s water supply mix. In 1962 and 1963, DWA and CVWD, respectively, entered contracts with the State of California that defined a Table A allocation (i.e., the maximum annual amount of water each contractor can receive excluding certain interruptible deliveries). Table A deliveries vary annually based on factors including hydrology, reservoir storage, and environmental requirements for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta). DWA and CVWD currently have a combined maximum annual SWP Table A amount of 194,100 AFY. In 2008, CVWD and DWA entered into separate agreements with DWR for the purchase and conveyance of supplemental SWP water under the Yuba River Accord Dry Year Water Purchase Program (Yuba Accord).

Over the 10-year period from 2010-2019, the average annual amount of Yuba Accord water purchased by the GSAs was 651 AFY. In 2012, CVWD also entered into an agreement with Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District (Rosedale Rio-Bravo) that provides a total of 252,500 AF to CVWD through 2035.

The balance of Rosedale Rio-Bravo water due to CVWD from 2020 to 2035 is 169,000 AFY, or an annual average of 10,563 AFY.

Since 2007, SWP deliveries have averaged only 45 percent of Table A amounts. The Delta Conveyance Facility (DCF) is a DWR project that would improve SWP reliability and result in increased deliveries in the future. CVWD and DWA have approved a 2-year agreement to advance their share of funding for DCF planning and design costs. MWD, DWR, CVWD and DWA have also begun planning for the Lake Perris Seepage Recovery Project, which is anticipated to deliver 2,752 AFY to DWA and CVWD starting in 2023. CVWD and DWA have also entered into agreements with the Sites Reservoir Authority for the purpose of obtaining 10,000 AFY and 6,500 AFY, respectively, from the Sites Reservoir Project.

There are currently eight wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) or water reclamation plants (WRPs) within the Plan Area, with a ninth in construction by MSWD. CVWD and DWA currently deliver recycled water from three WRPs for irrigation of golf courses, large landscaped areas, and various other irrigation uses. Forecasted recycled water deliveries from the three WRPs are anticipated to increase from 13,398 AF in 2020 to 20,213 AF in 2045 with additional projects in the planning phases.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-9 TODD/W&C A summary of future projected supplies is illustrated in Figure ES-5. This summary shows available imported and local surface water supplies and does not include the groundwater supply; the available groundwater supply will vary under different management conditions and is quantified with simulations using the numerical model (see Chapter 7, Numerical Modeling and Plan Scenarios).

Figure ES-5: Indio Subbasin Supply Forecast Projected Future Supplies with Climate Change (AFY)

ES.7 Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios
The Indio Subbasin numerical groundwater flow model and associated water budget were used to assess groundwater conditions and future sustainability. The groundwater flow model, originally developed in the mid-1990s and subsequently extended for the 2002 CVWMP and 2010 CVWMP Update, was updated for this Alternative Plan Update with inflow and outflow data through 2019. Other improvements included updated Salton Sea elevations, more accurate land surface elevations and Salton Sea bathymetry, updated information on Garnet Hill subarea, and updated subsurface inflow boundary conditions from adjacent subbasins. The updated model was applied to simulation of transient three-dimensional groundwater flow within and between the shallow and deep aquifer zones. It accounts for specific Subbasin inflows and outflows, and potential flow to and from the Salton Sea.

The model assumes that the Indio Subbasin is recharged through a combination of subsurface inflow from the San Gorgonio Pass and Mission Creek Subbasins, mountain front and stream channel recharge, replenishment of imported water, wastewater percolation, and return flows from municipal/domestic, agricultural, and golf course irrigation, and from septic systems. Outflows include groundwater production from agricultural, municipal, golf course, and other pumping wells; drain flows; evapotranspiration; and groundwater outflows to the Salton Sea.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-10 TODD/W&C The updated Indio Subbasin model meets qualitative and quantitative calibration goals. As documented with groundwater level hydrographs, the simulations of shallow and deep aquifer water level trends throughout the Subbasin are consistent with observed groundwater conditions. Simulated groundwater elevation contour maps for shallow and deep aquifers are well matched with measured levels. Model- simulated agricultural drain flow also generally matched measured drain flow. The groundwater flow model is well calibrated with observed groundwater elevation and drain flow trends for both the historical and updated periods.

Scenarios for the Alternative Plan Update were developed, including baseline scenarios and future Plan scenarios addressing potential future water supply conditions, changes in land use, and implementation of water management projects including source substitution and new water supply projects. Except for the Baseline scenario, climate change conditions were assumed for all Plan scenarios, reflecting that the Indio GSAs are committed to achieving sustainability under changing climate conditions.

Each scenario was simulated over a 50-year period consistent with SGMA requirements. However, the planning assumptions were only projected for the first 25 years to the 2045 planning horizon.

Thereafter, growth and supply assumptions were assumed to continue at the same rate for the second 25 years of the simulation. While extending beyond foreseeable land use and water resource planning projections, the second 25-year projections allow long-term evaluation of water supply and demand conditions, effectively testing Indio Subbasin sustainability under long-term hydrologic variability over 50 years.

Figure ES-6 illustrates the five scenarios in terms of the subbasin water budgets for each scenario including the average inflows (upper portion of graph) and average outflows (lower portion) over the planning period 2020-2045. As shown, all scenarios except Baseline account for climate change (indicated by CC).

Figure ES-6: Model Inflows and Outflows by Scenario

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-11 TODD/W&C To simulate the range of possible future conditions, two different hydrological cycles were used and applied to the Plan scenarios. For the Baseline scenario, the observed hydrology for the Whitewater River watershed from 1970 to 2019 was used. Future climate change is simulated similar to the observed conditions over the last 25 years, a period marked with recurring drought and below average rainfall. While all scenarios assume 45 percent reliability of SWP supplies, the climate change scenarios assume an additional 1.5 percent reduction in SWP reliability by year 2045. Further, given the tendency for recurring drought in climate change conditions, those scenarios assume CVWD will contribute water to California’s Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan allotment for Colorado River water.

Modeling results are presented first with a comparison of the Baseline scenario and the Baseline with Climate Change scenario. Results are shown in terms of the respective water balances, cumulative change in storage, hydrographs at twelve wells across the subbasin, and groundwater level change maps. Modeling results are then presented for all four Plan scenarios with climate change. Results of these scenarios are shown together to allow comparison in terms of model inflows, simulated pumping, simulated drain flow, simulated net outflow to Salton Sea, hydrographs, and maps showing change in groundwater levels.

Simulation of the Baseline and Baseline with Climate Change scenarios allows direct evaluation of the effect of simulated climate change on groundwater storage. As indicated in Figure ES-7, a net increase in Subbasin-wide groundwater storage is predicted for the Baseline scenario, while a net decrease in Subbasin storage is predicted for Baseline with Climate Change. This indicates that implementation of no new projects is not sustainable with climate change as simulated with recent hydrologic conditions projected into the future.

Figure ES-7: Cumulative Change in Storage for Baseline and Baseline with Climate Change

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-12 TODD/W&C Simulation of the other three scenarios allows assessment of the effects of various water supply projects packaged as follows: 5-Year Plan with Climate Change, Future Projects with Climate Change, and Expanded Agriculture with Climate Change. As illustrated in Figure ES-8, while the Baseline with Climate Change scenario results in net groundwater storage decline, the three other scenarios show a net increase in storage at the end of the 25-year planning horizon (in 2045) and continuing stability through the end of the modeling timeframe. Simulation of the 5-Year Plan with Climate Change scenario shows that already-planned projects and management actions can maintain the water balance, even with climate change. The Future Projects with Climate Change scenario acknowledges the uncertainties that exist with regard to future water supplies, water demands, and other circumstances. This scenario also results in a stable Subbasin water balance.

In addition, all three scenarios of climate change with projects indicate increased net outflow to drains.

All four climate change scenarios show a net outflow to the Salton Sea, indicating no seawater intrusion.

Figure ES-8: Cumulative Change in Storage for Future Scenarios

ES.8 Regulatory and Policy Issues
Implementation of the Alternative Plan Update could be affected by regulatory policy and planning issues. While these issues may represent challenges, the GSAs have identified potential solutions, and considered opportunities. The 2010 CVWMP Update described emerging issues and these are updated in the Alternative Plan Update, with some topics (e.g., subsidence) described in detail in terms of current conditions, sustainable management, and implementation of projects and management actions.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-13 TODD/W&C Regulatory policies include water quality policies and planning regarding the Colorado River Basin Plan, anti-degradation policy, recycled water policy, Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (CV- SNMP), salinity management, and agricultural discharge requirements. Policies and regulations of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) are updated as part of the regular review by the GSAs.

The Alternative Plan Update addresses water quality constituents including salinity, arsenic, perchlorate, chromium-6, uranium, and nitrate, and also introduces the potential occurrence and adverse effects on water supply of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAs), a group of human-made chemicals that are persistent in the environment and human body, with potential adverse health effects. Occurrence in Indio Subbasin of these constituents is summarized, along with monitoring and management actions to protect drinking water supplies. The GSAs continue to track the specific water quality issues, including the evolving regulations of emerging contaminants.

Planning is underway for Salton Sea stabilization and restoration. Once known for its recreational uses, the Salton Sea has shrunk in size and deteriorated in water quality, leading to loss of the fishery and in recent years, mass die-offs of birds and fish, raising concerns about these beneficial uses. The potential for seawater intrusion into Subbasin aquifers has diminished as Subbasin groundwater levels have increased and as the Salton Sea levels have declined and the sea has retreated. State and Federal legislation has been passed to stabilize Salton Sea levels and support Salton Sea restoration.

In addition, the Alternative Plan Update addresses additional policy issues regarding availability of suitable water supply for small community water systems. Small water systems, often serving disadvantaged communities, may face challenges in providing safe, accessible, and affordable water because they may not have adequate resources to support maintenance, operation, and treatment costs. In response to these water supply issues, the GSAs with multiple small water systems in their respective jurisdictions have completed and continue to work on consolidating communities to a municipal water system to provide a reliable water supply source.

Climate change is another issue that has the potential to affect the availability of imported water supply and to affect water supply and water demand in the Plan Area. Colorado River supplies may be affected by the Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan implemented as part of the Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan Authorization Act passed in 2019 to keep Lake Mead above critically low levels.

Similarly, the supply availability and reliability of SWP is forecasted to decrease due to climate change.

Climate change effects on Plan Area water supplies are addressed in the Alternative Plan Update with projected scenarios for numerical model simulation.

This Alternative Plan Update also addresses changes in water conservation. The Water Conservation Act of 2009 required urban water suppliers to increase their water use efficiency. All six suppliers in the Plan Area exceeded the per capita water use reduction of 20 percent by 2020. Subsequently in 2018, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1668 and Senate Bill 606, which together lay out a new long- term water conservation framework that affects both urban and agricultural water providers. Urban water conservation is being promoted by local agencies to enhance cost-effectiveness and to prepare for water shortages, including drought.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-14 TODD/W&C ES.9 Sustainable Management
The 2010 CVWMP Update developed an overarching goal for the Valley “to reliably meet current and future water demands in a cost-effective and sustainable manner.” This Alternative Plan Update continues to be guided by that goal with updated objectives as follows:
• Meet current and future water demands with a 10 percent supply buffer • Avoid chronic groundwater overdraft
• Manage and protect water quality
• Collaborate with tribes and state and federal agencies on shared objectives • Manage future costs
• Minimize adverse environmental impacts
• Reduce vulnerability to climate change and drought impacts.

The Alternative Plan Update incorporates a comprehensive approach to local groundwater management. Acknowledged as functionally equivalent to a GSP, it utilizes SGMA sustainability indicators and criteria as needed. SGMA provides a consistent, state-wide definition of sustainable management as the use and management of groundwater in a manner that can be maintained without causing undesirable results. Undesirable results are defined as significant and unreasonable effects caused by groundwater conditions occurring throughout a basin. Indicators of undesirable results include chronic lowering of groundwater levels, reduction of groundwater storage, seawater intrusion, land subsidence, degraded water quality, and depletions of interconnected surface water with adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water.

SGMA also provides quantitative measures that support demonstration of sustainability. These include the Minimum Threshold (MT), a numeric value used to define undesirable results for each sustainability indicator, and the Measurable Objective (MO), a specific, quantifiable goal to track the performance of sustainable management. This Alternative Plan Update provides quantitative MTs for groundwater levels, based on groundwater level monitoring data showing that chronic groundwater declines occurred until about 2009. The potential undesirable impacts on wells (especially shallow domestic wells) are discussed. No reports are known of wells adversely affected by low groundwater levels historically, including the years around 2009.

The Key Wells shown in Figure ES-9 are representative of local groundwater elevation conditions and are appropriate for monitoring groundwater levels relative to MTs. MTs are defined at each Key Well by historical groundwater low levels. Undesirable results are indicated when groundwater levels are below the MT for five consecutive same-season monitoring events, in 25 percent or more of the Key Wells in the Indio Subbasin. The MO is to maintain groundwater levels above the groundwater level MTs within the historical operating range.

Groundwater storage is the volume of water in the basin. The undesirable result associated with reduction in groundwater storage would be an insufficient supply to support beneficial uses during shortage and droughts. Groundwater levels and storage are directly related, as demonstrated by comparison of groundwater level and storage trends, which reveal similar patterns of historical overdraft, recovery, and response to different water year types including drought. As such, the groundwater level MTs will be used as proxy for storage MTs.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-15 TODD/W&C Land subsidence, the
differential lowering of the
ground surface, can damage
structures and hinder surface
water drainage. The land
subsidence experienced
historically in Indio Subbasin
has been caused by declines
in groundwater elevations
due to an imbalance of
pumping over recharge. As
such, the groundwater level
MTs will also be used as
proxy for subsidence MTs.

As shown in the Alternative
Plan Update, interconnected
surface water generally is not
present in the West Valley
because groundwater levels
are much lower than the
ground surface. In the East
Valley, a shallow semi-
perched aquifer zone is
present and potential GDEs
may occur in this area along
with non-GDE vegetation
around agricultural fields and
along drainage channels.

Evapotranspiration from such
vegetation is included in the
numerical model.

Throughout the Alternative Plan process, the GSAs have addressed groundwater sustainability in terms of water quality, with maintenance of an extensive water quality monitoring program and implementation of applicable management responses. Specific topics addressed in the Alternative Plan Update include selected water quality constituents of concern, the CV-SNMP, drain flows that represent salt outflow from the Subbasin, and seawater intrusion. Specific water quality constituents (including fluoride, arsenic, chromium-6, DBCP, TDS, nitrate, uranium, and perchlorate) are discussed in terms of sources, occurrence in the Indio Subbasin, and GSA actions to assist small water systems that are adversely affected.

In 2020, work to update the Salt and Nutrient Management Plan for the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (CV-SNMP) was initiated by the CV-SNMP agencies (including CVWD, CWA and Coachella Sanitary District, DWA, IWA, Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company, VSD, MSWD, and City of Palm Springs) working in cooperation with RWQCB staff. This has involved preparing a Groundwater Monitoring Figure ES-9: Key Wells

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-16 TODD/W&C Workplan, which was approved by the RWQCB in early 2021, and a SNMP Development Workplan with implementation scheduled to begin in early 2022. The CV-SNMP update and Alternative Plan Update are coordinated efforts. Elements of this Alternative Plan Update specifically supporting the CV-SNMP include (but are not limited to) organization of water quality data into a database; evaluation of the sources, and trends for TDS and nitrate; improvement of the monitoring program relative to TDS and nitrate; and identification of projects and actions relevant to water quality management. Additional study of salinity in groundwater—including analysis of the rate and level of increased salt contents in groundwater due to Colorado River importation—will be achieved in large part by the CV-SNMP update.

An extensive agricultural drainage system (both subsurface tile drainage systems and surface drains) was installed in the East Valley to control high water table conditions, to intercept poor quality shallow groundwater, and to convey the water to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC) and Salton Sea. Drain flows are measured at 27 drains and the CVSC, and also have been simulated using the numerical model. Relatively large drain flows are beneficial because they are a response to higher groundwater levels which are protective of the deep aquifer and because they promote export of salt from the Subbasin. The GSAs have defined a specific, potential undesirable result, which is degradation of water quality in the deep Principal Aquifer due to downward migration of water with elevated TDS levels found in shallow groundwater zones. High groundwater levels in the deep zone have a direct relationship with good water quality at depth, and accordingly, the GSAs are considering groundwater levels as an appropriate proxy. A drain flow study to document drain flow, groundwater level, and water quality relationships is planned as part of Alternative Plan implementation.

Seawater intrusion from the Salton Sea has been emphasized as a potentially substantial and irreversible consequence of overdraft. However, groundwater quality monitoring data (including chloride concentrations), show no evidence that seawater intrusion is occurring in the Subbasin. This Alternative Plan Update shows modeled groundwater elevations near the Salton Sea, demonstrates the consistency of simulated levels with recent measured groundwater levels, and indicates minimal risk of saltwater intrusion. Moreover, modeling indicates a net outflow of groundwater to the Salton Sea, indicating no seawater intrusion. The Alternative Plan includes analysis of groundwater level data, modeling of groundwater storage change, and regular monitoring of groundwater quality data to detect seawater intrusion potential.

ES.10 Monitoring Program
The Indio Subbasin has been extensively monitored by the GSAs for decades, guided by the primary objective to evaluate the effectiveness of water management programs and projects and to modify actions and plans based on factual data. This Alternative Plan Update continues and builds on the existing monitoring programs. Chapter 10 includes description of the monitoring network, methods and protocols for data collection, and development and maintenance of the data management system (DMS). The monitoring program has been assessed with reference to the sustainability goal and objectives, data gaps have been reviewed, and improvements have been identified for implementation.

The monitoring program includes the following networks: climate, streamflow, subsidence, groundwater elevations, surface and groundwater quality, pumping, and drain flow.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-17 TODD/W&C Climate data are available from DWR’s California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) for four active CIMIS stations and for the 12 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District precipitation monitoring stations. Data are used to support groundwater conditions characterization and evaluation of irrigation water demands (agricultural and golf course).

Streamflow is measured by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) at 19 locations within the Indio Subbasin. Surface water diversions by DWA from Snow, Falls, Whitewater, and Chino watersheds are measured by DWA. Streamflow data are compiled annually to support tracking of basin conditions as part of the Indio Subbasin Annual Reports.

Subsidence is documented in a recently completed comprehensive USGS report of findings (Sneed and Brandt, 2020). The USGS, in cooperation with the GSAs, continues to study land subsidence in the Coachella Valley through the USGS land-subsidence monitoring network, which currently includes 24 stations. InSAR (Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar) data are also available that use radar images from satellites to provide broad spatial mapping of vertical displacement of the land surface.

Groundwater Elevations are available for selected wells in the Indio Subbasin dating back to 1910. Over 345 wells are currently monitored by the GSAs as part of their respective groundwater level monitoring programs. The data are used to characterize Subbasin conditions, evaluate pumping and recharge operations, and support groundwater modeling and model calibration. As part of this Alternative Plan Update, 57 Key Wells were selected to assess sustainability in the Indio Subbasin.

Surface Water and Groundwater Quality monitoring is performed by multiple agencies in the Plan Area.

For example, water purveyors are required by State law to monitor and report the quality of their water sources. These data are publicly available on the SWRCB’s Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program (GAMA) website. In addition, Tribes monitor the quality of their wells and maintain records; not all these data are publicly available.

Groundwater Pumping is recognized as critical to Subbasin management. Accordingly, Division 2 Part 5 of the California Water Code requires each person (i.e., well owner/operator) within the counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Ventura extracting more than 25 AFY of groundwater to file a “Notice of Extraction and Diversion of Water” with the SWRCB. In addition, the enabling legislation of CVWD and DWA respectively require that all production subject to replenishment assessment be reported monthly. The reporting threshold for pumpers (designated minimal producers) within the CVWD boundary is 25 AFY, while the threshold for DWA is 10 AFY; 550 wells are metered.

Drain Flows and the CVSC receive intercepted shallow groundwater from agricultural areas and convey the flow to the Salton Sea. A USGS gage station measures flow in the lower CVSC near the Salton Sea, while CVWD measures drain flows at 27 sites on a monthly basis. The CVSC and drain system also receive flows from CVWD’s irrigation system in excess of requested deliveries (regulatory water), treated wastewater, and fish farm effluent. The drain flow data are used in tracking groundwater outflow and in calibrating the numerical groundwater flow model.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-18 TODD/W&C ES.11 Projects and Management Actions
A variety of projects and management actions (PMAs) are planned for implementation over the planning horizon (to 2045) to achieve sustainability in the Subbasin. Projects were identified by the GSAs through a several-month process involving the GSAs, the general public, and interested stakeholders. Project information was compiled into a draft list that was discussed and presented during the SGMA Tribal Workgroup and Public Workshops held on March 3, 2020. The project selection process included review and input from the GSAs and stakeholders, which was used to refine the project list for inclusion in the Plan. This project list was created based on priorities identified by the GSAs and stakeholders.

The Alternative Plan Update includes a final list, shown in Figure ES-10, of 30 possible PMAs representing a wide variety of activities by the four GSAs. Projects are classified into four categories based on project benefits: water conservation, water supply development, source substitution and replenishment, and water quality protection.

Figure ES-10: Categorized Projects and Management Actions

ES.12 Plan Evaluation and Implementation
This Alternative Plan Update describes the planning process for achieving a reliable and sustainable water supply. Using an adaptive management process, the GSAs can adjust project implementation if monitoring shows that water demands and supplies are higher or lower than projected or if tracking of groundwater levels indicates that undesirable results (including storage depletion and subsidence) could occur in the foreseeable future.

While overdraft has been reversed in terms of chronic groundwater level declines, storage depletion, subsidence, and seawater intrusion, the GSAs still face uncertainties in terms of forecasted demands and water supply availability. Accordingly, the Alternative Plan Update has focused on securing water

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-19 TODD/W&C reliability and resilience, namely the ability to provide consistent water supply and to respond to changing future conditions. Water supply reliability in the Indio Subbasin is the GSAs’ ability to consistently provide adequate water supply to meet projected demands, both for groundwater replenishment and direct delivery, while sustainably managing the Subbasin. To maintain water reliability and resilience through the planning horizon, the GSAs established the following priorities (in no particular order) for use in selection of PMAs:
• Fully use available Colorado River water supplies
• Support improvement of the long-term reliability of SWP supplies, including participation in the Delta Conveyance Facility (DCF)
• Continue developing recycled water as a reliable local water supply • Implement source substitution and replenishment for resilience in response to changing conditions and for maintenance of long-term groundwater supply reliability • Increase water-use efficiency across all sectors
• Participate in development of the Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (CV- SNMP) to address salt and nutrient management in the Indio Subbasin.

The Indio Subbasin GSAs are working collaboratively to implement the Alternative Plan Update and ensure the sustainability of the Indio Subbasin. This includes implementing PMAs as well as ongoing Plan implementation and administrative activities. Alternative Plan implementation includes the program management, tribal coordination, public outreach, ongoing data collection and monitoring, monitoring network improvements, and funding activities necessary to implement this Plan. Chapter 12 summarizes the timeline for each of these implementation activities.

GSA operations and Plan implementation will incur costs, which will require funding by the GSAs. The activities associated with Subbasin-wide management and Plan implementation will be borne by the four GSAs. Some activities (such as the Annual Reports and 5-Year Plan Updates) will be funded under the cost-sharing arrangement established by the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2016, along with multiple supplements. Other management activities will be funded by individual GSAs or through other cost-sharing agreements or amendment to the MOU. Projects will be administered by the GSA project proponents. GSAs may elect to implement projects individually or jointly with one or more GSAs.

The overarching goal of the Alternative Plan Update is to reliably meet current and future water demands in a cost-effective and sustainable manner. Implementation of the original 2002 CVWMP and 2010 CVWMP Update has achieved that overarching goal. With the passage of SGMA in 2014, the GSAs are addressing the sustainability indicators established in the legislation. This Alternative Plan Update establishes the groundwater conditions and hydrogeological conceptual model for the Indio Subbasin, forecasts water demands through the planning horizon, describes water supplies available to the GSAs, defines sustainable management for this region, presents water management projects and programs to ensure Subbasin sustainability, and models the simulated conditions that would result from implementation of those project portfolios. This planning process has demonstrated that with the proposed projects identified in this Plan, and despite anticipated climate changes, the Indio GSAs are able to meet forecasted demands under a variety of conditions and maintain the Indio Subbasin in balance, even increasing groundwater storage over time. Subsidence and saltwater intrusion have been stopped and are not anticipated to occur during Plan implementation.

Executive Summary FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update ES-20 TODD/W&C

This page intentionally left blank.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-1 TODD/W&C CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Groundwater is a critical resource for the sustainability of Coachella Valley communities, agriculture, economic activities, environmental benefits, and other beneficial uses. The Indio Subbasin (one of four subbasins of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin) provides groundwater supply and a vast groundwater storage capacity with the natural ability to convey water—through groundwater flow—from areas of recharge to wells where water is pumped. Since the early 1900s, the Indio Subbasin has been actively managed to address increasing water demands (with pumping for agricultural, urban, and rural demands), beginning with capture of local stormwater to supplement the limited natural groundwater replenishment and later implementing water importation (since 1949) and source substitution projects.

This has been a dynamic process with periods of groundwater depletion followed by recovery.

Groundwater levels and storage reached historical lows in about 2009, but this overdraft has been stopped and replaced with increased groundwater storage as a result of active water management planning and projects. In addition, local agencies have recognized the multi-faceted nature of groundwater issues (including subsidence, water quality, seawater intrusion, and potential impacts on environmental uses) and have developed relevant management plans, programs, and projects, including the 2002 Coachella Valley Final Water Management Plan (2002 CVWMP) for the Indio Subbasin (Coachella Valley Water District [CVWD], 2002a) and the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan 2010 Update (2010 CVWMP Update) (CVWD, 2012a).

In 2014, the California Legislature enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to provide a framework for sustainable groundwater management. SGMA defines sustainable management as the use and management of groundwater in a manner that can be maintained without causing overdraft or undesirable results, defined in terms of chronic lowering of groundwater levels, depletion of groundwater storage, seawater intrusion, land subsidence, degraded water quality, and depletion of interconnected surface water with adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water.

SGMA promotes local management of groundwater resources in basins that it has designated as high or medium priority. DWR designated Indio Subbasin as a medium-priority basin. Lower priority basins are not required to comply with SGMA. To implement SGMA, local authorities have formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage the high- and medium-priority basins and to develop, submit, and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) to manage local groundwater for long-term sustainability. For basins—such as Indio Subbasin—with established groundwater management, GSAs were empowered to submit Alternative Plans for GSP compliance.

Four local water agencies—Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Coachella Water Authority (CWA), Desert Water Agency (DWA), and Indio Water Authority (IWA)—manage groundwater in the Indio Subbasin in compliance with SGMA. These agencies have been designated as Exclusive GSAs over their respective areas and are referred to as the Indio Subbasin GSAs.

On December 29, 2016, the Indio Subbasin GSAs submitted to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) the 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD, 2012a), accompanied by a Bridge Document (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2016), as an Alternative Plan to a GSP for the Indio Subbasin. The following additional documents were submitted as part of the Alternative Plan to document the ongoing commitment of the Indio Subbasin GSAs to continued assessment of plan assumptions, associated environmental impacts, and implementation status.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-2 TODD/W&C • Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) CVWMP and State Water Project (SWP) Entitlement Transfer (CVWD, 2002b)
• Subsequent Program EIR for the 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD, 2012b) • 2014 Status Report on the 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD and MWH, 2014) • Annual Engineer’s Reports on Water Supply and Replenishment Assessment for the Mission Creek Subbasin Area of Benefit, West Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit, and East Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit (CVWD)
• Annual Engineer’s Reports Groundwater Replenishment and Assessment Program for the Whitewater River, Mission Creek, and Garnet Hill Subbasins (DWA) On July 17, 2019, DWR approved the 2010 CVWMP Update as an Alternative Plan. In compliance with SGMA, the GSAs have prepared Annual Reports,1 which can be found on the program website ( www.IndioSubbasinSGMA.org) . SGMA also requires plan updates every 5 years; this Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update (Alternative Plan Update) fulfills that requirement.

1.1 Background for Alternative Plan Update

1.1.1 Indio Subbasin
The Indio Subbasin is one of four subbasins of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (Figure 1-1). The three neighboring subbasins include the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin to the west, Mission Creek Subbasin to the north, and Desert Hot Springs Subbasin to the north/northeast. DWR designated the Indio Subbasin as medium priority, as it did the Mission Creek Subbasin and the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin. DWR designated the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin as very low priority.

The Indio Subbasin, encompassing 525 square miles of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, is bounded on its northern, northwestern, and southwestern margins by uplifted bedrock and on the south by the Salton Sea. The Indio Subbasin is filled with sediments, deposited mostly by the Whitewater River and its tributaries, that include mostly sand and gravel sequences on the north with increasingly thick layers of silt and clay on the south. These sediments are as much as 12,000 feet in thickness with the upper 2,000 feet representing substantial groundwater storage and the primary source of groundwater supply.

Situated in an arid area with limited sources of natural recharge, the groundwater basin currently receives most of its inflow from groundwater replenishment facilities and from agricultural and urban return flows.

Groundwater flow generally is from northwest to southeast. Discharge from the Indio Subbasin occurs mostly through pumping wells, evapotranspiration (ET), outflows from agricultural drainage facilities to the Salton Sea, and subsurface groundwater outflows to the Salton Sea. Groundwater historically has been and currently is used for multiple beneficial uses including agricultural, rural domestic, municipal, golf course, and environmental purposes.

1 Each Annual Report is submitted to DWR by April 1 and documents conditions for the preceding year. For example, the first annual report submitted April 1, 2018, documented conditions for water year (WY) 2016-17.

Subsequent annual reports in 2019, 2020, and 2021 have documented conditions for WY 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20, respectively.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-3 TODD/W&C Figure 1-1. Groundwater Basins

FINAL

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-4 TODD/W&C

1.1.2 Historical Water Management Planning
The Coachella Valley has a long history of
agricultural and resort-oriented municipal
development, in which the groundwater
resources of the Indio Subbasin have played a
central role. While natural recharge in this arid
area is limited, the groundwater basin
provides vast groundwater storage capacity
and the natural ability to convey water—
through groundwater flow—from areas of
recharge to production wells.

Since the early 1900s, local water
management has addressed increasing water
demands (agricultural, urban, and rural) by
supplementing the limited natural recharge
with multiple projects. These have involved
conducting replenishment operations along the Whitewater River (since 1918), importing Colorado River water (1949), contracting for State Water Project (SWP) supplies (1962/1963), implementing water recycling, instituting water conservation, and other activities. Throughout the history of developing water supplies to meet demands, the groundwater basin has provided groundwater from storage for periods when demands have exceeded available supplies. In general, groundwater levels (and storage) declined until Colorado River water import in 1949 provided a substitute for groundwater pumping for agriculture in the East Valley and groundwater levels subsequently increased. In 1973, artificial recharge of imported water from the Colorado River Aqueduct (SWP exchange water) began at the Whitewater River Groundwater Replenishment Facility (WWR-GRF), helping to increase and stabilize groundwater levels.

However, the period from the early 1980s to
the late 2000s was characterized by increased
municipal development leading to chronic
groundwater level declines, groundwater
storage depletion, and demand exceeding
available supply. Groundwater in storage in
the Indio Subbasin reached its minimum in
2009, coinciding with historical groundwater
level lows throughout much of the Subbasin.

Groundwater levels have since increased or at
least stabilized. This reflects the cumulative
effect of active water management planning
and projects, as described in the next section.

Early development in Coachella Valley included
agricultural, urban, and rural land uses.

Construction of the Coachella Canal began
in the 1930s.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-5 TODD/W&C

1.1.3 2002 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan
The 2002 CVWMP (CVWD, 2002a) and the 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD, 2012a) have been critical to addressing overdraft in the Indio Subbasin. These plans were based on the 1992 Groundwater Management Planning Act (now superseded by SGMA).

CVWD began development of the 2002 CVWMP (CVWD, 2002a) in 1994 with the general goal of providing adequate quantities of safe, high-quality water at the lowest cost to local water users. The 2002 CVWMP identified the groundwater overdraft that had occurred and the threat of continued overdraft, based on projections of growth and water demand. The primary objective was to eliminate overdraft and associated adverse impacts including basin storage depletion, declining groundwater levels, subsidence, and water quality degradation. Additional objectives were to maximize conjunctive use opportunities, to minimize adverse economic impacts to water users, and to minimize environmental impacts. These objectives were used as criteria to evaluate four alternatives and select a preferred alternative. The selected alternative, which was subsequently implemented, involved a combination of water conservation (municipal, agricultural, and golf course), increased water importation, increased groundwater recharge including new facilities, and source substitution, which is the delivery of an alternate surface water supply in lieu of pumping groundwater.

1.1.4 2010 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan Update The 2010 CVWMP Update was prepared to respond to changes affecting water supplies, water demands, and evolving federal and state laws and regulations. Significant changes perceived at the time included local population growth and land use changes, and external factors including fluctuations in SWP allocation due to Bay-Delta restrictions, uncertainty of future Colorado River supplies as the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) was negotiated and litigated, and climate change affecting not only local water demand, but also supplies from the Sierra Nevada and Colorado River watershed.

The 2010 CVWMP Update objectives were stated as follows:

1. Meet current and future water demands with a 10
percent supply buffer.

2. Eliminate long-term groundwater overdraft.

3. Manage and protect water quality.

4. Comply with state and federal laws and regulations.

5. Manage future costs.

6. Minimize adverse environmental impacts.

Each objective was defined to contribute to improved water supply reliability for the Coachella Valley by ensuring adequate supplies to meet current and future demands, eliminating the long-term depletion of groundwater storage, and protecting basin water quality. Accordingly, the 2010 CVWMP Update addressed future land use development, potential reductions in imported water supply reliability, climate change, water quality issues and changing regulations, subsidence, water conservation, and other issues. It also included an update and application of a numerical groundwater flow model. Most 2010 Coachella Valley Water
Management Plan Update

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-6 TODD/W&C importantly, it described projects and management actions for implementation. Environmental review of projects was provided in the Subsequent Program EIR for the 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD, 2012b).

To initiate this Alternative Plan Update, the 2010 CVWMP Update was reviewed in terms of its water demand projections relative to actual demands between 2010 and 2019, water supply projections relative to actual supply, status of implementation, and suitability of the numerical model for additional update and improvement (see Todd Groundwater and Woodard & Curran, 2020 in Appendix 1-A). Key findings concerning water demand and supply include the following:
• The 2010 CVWMP Update projected a 40 percent growth in population from 2010 to 2020, reflecting trends at the time. Actual population within a similar timeframe (2010-2019) was only 10 percent.
• Since the 2010 CVWMP Update, actual demands (for urban, golf course, agricultural and other uses) have been on average 150,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) lower than projected. • Since the 2010 CVWMP Update, actual supplies served to users have been lower than projected due to lower water demands throughout the region. Simply put, more groundwater has been put into or remained in storage.

Implementation of projects described in the 2010 CVWMP Update included the following:
• Water conservation: The GSAs implemented water conservation programs for both large irrigation customers and residential customers.
• New supply development: As part of the QSA, CVWD’s Colorado River allocation through the Coachella Canal will increase to 424,000 AFY by 2026 and remain at that level until 2047, decreasing to 421,000 AFY until 2077, when the agreement terminates. This allocation is supplemented with 35,000 AFY secured by CVWD as a SWP transfer from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). CVWD and DWA have actively participated in statewide programs to improve the long-term reliability of SWP supply and to secure additional supplies. • Source substitution: Golf courses connected to the Coachella Canal distribution system in the East Valley now meet most of their total water use with Coachella Canal water. Improvements continue to the Mid Valley Pipeline, which helps deliver non-potable water (including Coachella Canal water and recycled water) to West Valley golf courses. • Groundwater recharge: WWR-GRF and Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility (TEL- GRF) continue to replenish the Indio Subbasin with SWP exchange water and Colorado River water. In 2019, Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility (PD--GRF) began replenishing the mid-valley area of the basin with Colorado River supplies. • Water quality protection: The Indio Subbasin GSAs and other local agencies are developing an updated Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP). GSAs have implemented additional water quality programs including operating wellhead treatment facilities to address elevated arsenic in local wells and implementing well abandonment policies.

Evaluation of the model in terms of additional update and improvement indicated the following:
• The original 1936-1999 regional model was well calibrated to measure groundwater elevation and water budget trends across the basin.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-7 TODD/W&C • Reassessment of the 2010 CVWMP Update model regarding its simulation of measured data for the period 1997-2019 indicated that the model accurately reproduces actual groundwater elevations and trends.

Evaluation of the 2010 model indicated that most of the model recharge and discharge input data for the period 1997-2008 should be retained, and the simulation period 2009-2019 was updated with actual data and improved estimates. This Alternative Plan Update included update of model inputs and model performance reassessment prior to conducting predictive management scenario simulations.

1.1.5 SGMA and Alternative Plan Development
SGMA affords GSAs a 20-year timeframe to implement a GSP or Alternative Plan. SGMA confirms existing authorities and powers of GSAs and provides tools for GSAs to monitor and manage groundwater levels and quality, land subsidence, and changes in surface water flow or quality affecting groundwater levels or quality. SGMA also establishes authority for GSAs to require well registration and reporting of annual groundwater extractions and surface water diversions for subsurface storage. Additionally, GSAs have authority to impose limits on groundwater extractions from individual wells, assess fees to implement local GSPs (and Alternative Plans), and request revisions of basin boundaries and create new subbasins.

As stated in SGMA (§10728.6), CEQA is not applicable to Plan preparation and adoption. However, it is applicable to a project that would be implemented as an action pursuant to this Plan Update, noting that projects included in the 2010 CVWMP Update have been addressed in the Subsequent Program EIR (CVWD, 2012b).

In December 2016, CVWD, CWA, DWA, and IWA submitted a SGMA Alternative Groundwater Sustainability Plan Bridge Document for the Indio Subbasin (Bridge Document) (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2016), which included submittal of the 2010 CVWMP Update. The Bridge Document explained to DWR how the 2010 CVWMP Update was functionally equivalent to the requirements for a GSP and meets the requirements of SGMA.

The Bridge Document submitted to DWR identified the following water management elements for implementation:
• Water conservation measures
• Acquisition of additional water supplies
• Conjunctive use programs to maximize supply reliability • Source substitution programs
• Groundwater recharge programs
• Water quality protection measures
• Other management activities
In its review and subsequent approval of the Bridge Document, DWR provided an Alternative Assessment Staff Report (DWR, 2019) for the Indio Subbasin. This DWR Assessment summarized the principles of its review, the materials submitted as the Alternative Plan, and the required conditions for approval. The DWR Assessment also provided detailed description and evaluation of the Alternative Plan contents as a functional equivalent to a GSP. Lastly, the DWR Assessment presented seven recommendations for improvements to be included in the first 5-year update of the Alternative Plan.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-8 TODD/W&C

1.1.6 Approach to Alternative Plan Update
DWR approved the Alternative Plan for the Indio Subbasin, concluding that:
…technical information in the 2002 and 2010 [CVWMPs] and related documents demonstrate a detailed understanding of the geology and hydrology of the Subbasin, the direct and indirect adverse effects of past groundwater management practices that led to overdraft conditions, and that the Agencies have demonstrated a commitment to eliminating overdraft to stop those adverse effects and to prevent them from occurring in the future. The Alternative quantifies objectives for sustainable management and for correcting groundwater problems and contains a robust set of plans and management actions designed to eliminate overdraft and associated adverse impacts to groundwater conditions. Department staff find the Agencies have set forth a reasonable and feasible approach to eliminating overdraft, which will, in turn, have a beneficial effect to the overall groundwater conditions in the Indio Subbasin, sufficient to avoid undesirable results.

While noting that the Alternative Plan elements are functionally equivalent to GSP elements, DWR also provided seven recommendations to be addressed in this Alternative Plan Update, which would facilitate DWR’s ongoing evaluation and determination of whether implementation of the Alternative Plan is achieving the sustainability goal. The GSAs recognize and incorporate applicable and useful elements of the SGMA framework and GSP preparation process. This Alternative Plan Update document generally follows the sequence and elements of a GSP (as provided in Article 5 of the GSP Regulations) but also provides chapters on water supplies, water demands, and regulatory and policy issues. These additional topics were provided in the 2010 CVWMP Update and are recognized as fundamental to local water management. In preparing this Alternative Plan Update, the DWR evaluation and recommendations have been carefully considered and addressed, consistent with local adaptive management. Responses to DWR evaluation and recommendations are incorporated as appropriate throughout this Alternative Plan Update and addressed specifically in Chapter 9, Sustainable Management.

This Alternative Plan Update was built on the 2010 CVWMP Update and continues implementation of its projects and management actions, with some refinements and deferrals based on Subbasin conditions. In the context of reversing historical overdraft conditions in the Subbasin, this Alternative Plan Update has been developed to provide documentation of groundwater conditions and a comprehensive and detailed update of the water supply analysis, demand forecast, and scenario evaluation (to account for climate change) using the groundwater model. This update also acknowledges and incorporates the Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (CV-SNMP) effort that has recently been initiated.

1.2 Plan Goals and Objectives
The basic goal of this Alternative Plan Update remains the same as the prior iterations of the CVWMP:
• To reliably meet current and future water demands in a cost-effective and sustainable manner.

During the planning process, and to align with SGMA, the GSAs also established a sustainability goal (see Chapter 9, Sustainable Management for more detail):
• To maintain a locally managed, economically viable, sustainable groundwater resource for existing and future beneficial uses in the Indio Subbasin by managing groundwater to avoid the occurrence of undesirable results.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-9 TODD/W&C The underlying Plan objectives were also refined from the 2010 CVWMP Update to reflect the water supply uncertainties facing the Indio Subbasin:

1. Meet current and future municipal water demands with a ten percent supply buffer

2. Avoid chronic groundwater overdraft

3. Manage and protect water quality

4. Collaborate with tribes, state, and federal agencies on shared objectives

5. Manage future costs

6. Minimize adverse environmental impacts

7. Reduce vulnerability to climate change and drought impacts

1.3 GSA Governance
The GSAs responsible for managing the Indio Subbasin in compliance with the SGMA are listed in Table 1-1 and include the following:

Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is a public agency of the State of California organized and operating under the County Water District Law, California Water Code section 30000, et seq, and Coachella Valley Water District Merger Law, Water Code section 33100, et seq. CVWD has groundwater management powers across a portion of the Indio Subbasin and manages replenishment assessment programs under Water Code section 31630-31639. CVWD is governed by a board of five directors, elected by district voters to 4--year terms.

Coachella Water Authority (CWA) is a joint powers authority formed as a component of the City of Coachella and the Housing Authority of the City of Coachella and has statutory authority over water supply.

Desert Water Agency (DWA) is one of the statutorily named, exclusive local agencies given the power to comply with SGMA (Section 10723(c)(1)). DWA is an independent special district created by an act of the State Legislature as set for in Chapter 100 of the appendix to the California Water Code. DWA has groundwater management powers across a portion of Indio Subbasin and manages a replenishment assessment program in addition to provision of retail water service to a portion of its service area. DWA is led by a publicly elected, five-member Board of Directors.

Indio Water Authority (IWA) is a joint powers authority formed as a component of the City of Indio and Housing Authority of the City of Indio and has statutory authority over water supply.

CVWD, CWA, DWA, and IWA each successfully filed a Notice of Election to become exclusive GSAs within their respective jurisdictional areas in the Indio Subbasin.

CVWD has served as the Plan manager for this Alternative Plan Update, led by Zoe Rodriguez de l Rey, Water Resources Manager, [email protected].

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-10 TODD/W&C Table 1-1. Indio Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies Name and Address of GSA Contact with Plan Implementation Authority Coachella Valley Water District
75525 Hovley Ln E
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Jim Barrett
[email protected]

Coachella Water Authority
53-462 Enterprise Way
Coachella, CA 92236
Castulo Estrada
[email protected]

Desert Water Agency
1200 S Gene Autry Trail
Palm Springs, CA 92264
Mark Krause
[email protected]

Indio Water Authority
83101 Avenue 45
Indio, CA 92201
Reymundo Trejo
[email protected]

1.4 Relationship to Other Planning Efforts
This Alternative Plan Update builds on a history of regional collaboration on water management planning and implementation. The GSAs have coordinated and shared information with each of the following planning efforts described below.

1.4.1 Mission Creek Subbasin Alternative Plan Update
The Mission Creek Subbasin of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin is coordinated by a management committee made up of: CVWD, DWA, and Mission Springs Water District (MSWD). CVWD and MSWD have public water systems that rely on groundwater from the Mission Creek Subbasin. CVWD and DWA are GSAs with groundwater replenishment authority for this region and conduct an active recharge program utilizing SWP exchange water. In December 2004, MSWD, CVWD, and DWA signed a Settlement Agreement, in which the agencies agreed to jointly prepare a water management plan for the Mission Creek and Garnet Hill Subbasins.

The Mission Creek-Garnet Hill WMP (CVWD et al., 2013) was completed in January 2013 and was adopted by CVWD, DWA, and MSWD. The purpose of the Mission Creek-Garnet Hill WMP was to manage the water resources to reliably meet demands and protect water quality in a sustainable and cost-effective manner.

The General Managers of MSWD, CVWD, and DWA met regularly to discuss development of the Mission Creek-Garnet Hill WMP and continue to meet quarterly to discuss plan implementation and other water management issues associated with the Mission Creek Subbasin and Garnet Hill Subarea. CVWD and DWA coordinated the planning efforts to ensure consistency between the Mission Creek-Garnet Hill WMP and the 2010 CVWMP Update.

Using the same approach as in Indio Subbasin, the Mission Creek management committee submitted the Mission Creek-Garnet Hill WMP, along with a Bridge Document (Mission Creek management committee, 2016), as an Alternative Plan to a GSP for the Mission Creek Subbasin. On July 17, 2019, DWR approved the Alternative Plan. Throughout the course of this Alternative Plan Update, there has been ongoing communication, coordination, and information sharing among the two planning teams.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-11 TODD/W&C

1.4.2 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan The Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program was established in 2009 by the Coachella Valley Regional Water Management Group (CVRWMG). At that time, the CVRWMG was composed of CVWD, CWA, DWA, IWA,
and MSWD, but has since expanded to include Valley Sanitary District (VSD) as well. The 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management & Stormwater Resources
(IRWM/SWR) Plan Update (2018 Coachella Valley IRWM/SWR
Plan) (CVRWMG, 2018) serves as a combined plan that
addresses the requirements of DWR’s IRWM Program
Guidelines and the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) Stormwater Resource Plan Guidelines. Both State programs provide grant funding to support multi-benefit water management projects that align with the program goals of expanding water supply reliability, improving water quality, and protecting water-based natural resources. The 2018 Coachella Valley IRWM/SWR Plan presents an integrated regional
approach for addressing water management issues through a process that identifies and involves water management
stakeholders from the Coachella Valley. Given that the Indio Subbasin GSAs are all CVRWMG members, this Alternative Plan Update was coordinated with and shared information with the IRWM program.

1.4.3 Urban Water Management Plan
Under the Urban Water Management Planning Act, DWR requires that urban water suppliers develop Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) every 5 years. In the 2015 cycle, each of the water purveyors within the Indio Subbasin prepared and submitted 2015 UWMPs. These UWMPs define their current and future water use, water use targets, sources of supply, source reliability, and existing conservation measures. The Water Conservation Act of 2009 set a goal for the State to reduce urban water use by 20 percent by the year 2020. As documented in the 2015 UWMPs, all the GSAs surpassed their established 2015 water use targets. The 2010 CVWMP Update and Mission Creek/Garnet Hill Water Management Plan (Mission Creek/Garnet Hill WMP) (Coachella Valley Water District [CVWD], Desert Water Agency [DWA], and Mission Springs Water District [MSWD], 2013) were used as references for development of 2015 UWMPs within their study areas.

In the 2020 cycle, all the region’s water purveyors – CVWD, CWA, DWA, IWA, MSWD, and Myoma Dunes Mutual Water Company – prepared a regional 2020 UWMP (CVWD et al., 2021). This 2020 Regional UWMP (RUWMP) built on the demand forecasting and supply analysis prepared for the Alternative Plan Updates for the Indio and Mission Creek Subbasins. Water supply reliability analysis and drought assessment were completed at the regional scale assuming supplies available to each water purveyor.

Throughout the planning process for this Alternative Plan Update, the GSAs have ensured ongoing communication, coordination, and information sharing with the 2020 RUWMP team. As documented in the 2020 RUWMP, all the GSAs successfully surpassed their respective 20 percent by 2020 water use targets.
2018 Coachella Valley Integrated
Regional Water Management &
Stormwater Resources Plan

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-12 TODD/W&C

1.4.4 Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) (CVAG, 2016) is a multi- agency conservation plan for the entire Coachella Valley and surrounding mountains to address State and Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance in the region. The CVMSHCP, last amended in 2016, defines a shared regional vision for balanced growth to enhance and maintain biological diversity and ecosystem processes while also fostering economic growth. The CVMSHCP protects 240,000 acres of open space and 27 species; enhances infrastructure without environmental conflicts; offers opportunities for recreation, tourism, and job creation; and ensures the survival of endangered species (CVAG, 2016). The CVMSHCP was considered in the development of this Alternative Plan Update, with emphasis in the groundwater dependent ecosystem analysis.

1.4.5 Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan The California Recycled Water Policy states that salts and nutrients from all sources must be managed on a basin-wide or watershed-wide basis to attain water quality objectives and protect beneficial uses. This is typically through development of a Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP).

The original 2009 Recycled Water Policy required development of a SNMP by 2014 for each groundwater basin or subbasin in California (later clarified as applicable to priority basins for the GAMA Priority Basin Project). The 2018 Recycled Water Policy amendment includes a requirement that each Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) evaluate each basin or subbasin in its region before April 8, 2021. The RWQCB is required to identify basins where salts and/or nutrients are a threat to water quality and therefore need salt and nutrient management planning to achieve water quality objectives and protect beneficial uses in the long term. These RWQCB evaluations are to be updated every 5 years.

The amended Recycled Water Policy continues to encourage collaborative development of a SNMP among SNMP groups, RWQCBs, the agricultural community, IRWM groups, water and wastewater agencies, other salt and nutrient contributors, stakeholders, and now, GSAs.

In 2015, CVWD, DWA, and IWA created an SNMP for the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (CVWD, et al., 2015). Subsequently, the RWQCB provided comments and recommendations on the 2015 SNMP’s compliance with the updated Recycled Water Policy (Colorado River Basin RWQCB, 2020). In response, a process to update the Coachella Valley SNMP (CV-SNMP) was begun in 2020 with development of a CV- SNMP Groundwater Monitoring Program Workplan that the RWQCB approved in February 2021. The CV- SNMP process also included preparation of a CV-SNMP Development Workplan, approved by the RWQCB in October 2021, that describes a detailed scope of work for update of the CV-SNMP through a collaborative process between the water and wastewater agencies, RWQCB, and other stakeholders.

1.5 Notice and Communication
This Alternative Plan Update has been developed with input from all five tribes located within the Indio Subbasin, stakeholders, and members of the public. The GSAs established a program website ( www.IndioSubbasinSGMA.org) , initiated regular stakeholder communications, provided program updates, and solicited input at public workshops and tribal workgroups.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-13 TODD/W&C

1.5.1 Participating Agencies and Coordination
The four GSAs—CVWD, CWA, DWA, and IWA—led all stakeholder outreach and communications in accordance with a Communications Plan that was developed at program outset (see Appendix 1-B). The Communications Plan contains outreach strategies and methods to address effective communication with stakeholders during development of the Alternative Plan Update, including building trust between and among the GSAs and property owners/residents, disadvantaged communities, tribes, agricultural interests, and environmental interests. In response to tribal feedback, the GSAs held separate tribal engagement meetings.

1.5.2 GSAs Decision Making Process
The GSAs are the designated decision-making entities for the Alternative Plan Update process. On October 5, 2016, the GSAs entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish an agreement for collaboration and cost-share for management of the Indio Subbasin under SGMA. Each GSA is responsible for the portion of the Indio Subbasin within their respective jurisdictional area (see Figure 2-1). The MOU establishes that its intent is to foster cooperation, coordination, and communication among the GSAs regarding management of the Indio Subbasin.

The 2016 MOU established the GSAs’ intent to develop and submit the Alternative Plan to DWR. On April 3, 2018, the GSAs approved a Supplement to the MOU that outlined the GSAs’ intent to prepare an Annual Report for Water Year 2017. On October 29, 2018, the GSAs approved a Second Supplement to the MOU that allowed for ongoing preparation of Annual Reports by April 1 of each water year, along with preparation of a 2022 Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan Update (see Appendix 1-C). The Second Supplement directs CVWD to serve as the managing entity for selected consultants but allows for input and review of all SGMA-related deliverables and transmittal of all data and files to each of the four GSAs.

The GSAs met monthly to discuss Alternative Plan Update development and implementation activities, assignments and consultant management, milestones, and ongoing work progress. The GSAs participated in all public workshops and directed outreach meetings. Public input, no matter the method received (e.g., phone, email, public meeting), was shared with all the GSAs for consideration throughout the planning process.

1.5.3 Stakeholder Involvement
Public engagement includes both stakeholder coordination and general public involvement. The goal of the public engagement effort was to understand the needs of stakeholders, increase awareness and understanding of the Alternative Plan Update, and promote active involvement in the process. Tribes and stakeholders with interest in water management—including agency representatives, municipalities, agricultural representatives, golf course industry representatives, Homeowners Associations, other large irrigators, environmental justice groups, and non-governmental organizations—are the primary audience for the Alternative Plan Update. The general public was engaged throughout the planning process to share information about the Indio Subbasin and water management decisions and solicit input to the Alternative Plan Update.

As the best way to communicate with and consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the Subbasin, the GSAs established a program website ( www.IndioSubbasinSGMA.org) .

The website provides information to stakeholders during plan development and implementation. From

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-14 TODD/W&C the website, stakeholders can sign up to receive email updates and announcements. Public workshop and meeting announcements, agendas, and materials are posted on the website in advance of each meeting.

To encourage stakeholder involvement in the planning process, the GSAs also provided outreach documents, including the program website, in both English and Spanish to accommodate the primary languages of many community members.

Indio Subbasin SGMA Website, July 2021
Additionally, a stakeholder email list was compiled and maintained throughout the planning process in order to communicate with stakeholders. Announcements were sent in English and Spanish to announce workshops or release of new planning materials. A project-specific email address was advertised and maintained to receive input and feedback from stakeholders.

The GSAs will continue using the stakeholder email list to communicate items of interest to stakeholders during Plan implementation, including upcoming workshops, release of Annual Reports, and GSA Board meetings addressing SGMA topics.

Example of stakeholder email announcement (English on left; Spanish on right).

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-15 TODD/W&C

1.5.4 Public Workshops
Seven public workshops were held (generally on a quarterly basis) during plan development. The public workshops were intended to inform stakeholders and the general public of the Alternative Plan Update progress, solicit data and information to support planning and analysis for the Subbasin, and seek input on key decisions made throughout the planning process. The GSAs recognize the need for and importance of public participation and worked diligently to make sure that tribes, stakeholders, and participants were heard. While the public workshops were planned to be held at various locations within the Subbasin, most workshops were held digitally (video/phone conference) due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Public workshops were announced through the stakeholder email list and the website. The first workshop announcement was sent approximately 30 days prior to an upcoming workshop and a reminder announcement with the agenda was sent approximately 72-hours in advance. Meeting materials (agenda and presentation) were uploaded to the website approximately 72-hours in advance of each workshop.

At public workshops, members of the public
were invited to provide input and comments
on Alternative Plan Update materials and
analysis. GSAs accepted verbal comments and
questions from any participant at meetings
and encouraged written comments at any
time during the planning process. At each
public workshop, the GSA team provided an
overview and update on different technical
topics and asked for feedback. The workshops
topics are summarized in Table 1-2 below.

1.5.5 SGMA Tribal Workgroup
The Alternative Plan Update process represents an opportunity for communication and cooperation among GSAs, tribal governments, and other interested stakeholders. Accordingly, implementation of the Communication Plan has included outreach to the following five tribes:
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Augustine Band of Mission Indians
• Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
• Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
• Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians.

Representatives of the tribal governments and Federal Bureau of Indian Affairs have participated in the Alternative Plan Update process through quarterly meetings of the SGMA Tribal Workgroup. The meetings have provided regular updates and opportunities for discussion and input. While the SGMA Tribal Workgroups were planned to be held in person, most meetings were held digitally (video/phone conference) due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

A tribal email list was also compiled with representatives of all five tribal governments and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. SGMA Tribal Workgroup meetings were announced through the tribal email list and the website. The first announcement was sent approximately 30 days prior to an upcoming meeting and a reminder announcement with the agenda was sent approximately 72-hours in advance. Meeting Public Workshop #1 was held in February 2020.

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-16 TODD/W&C materials (agenda and presentation) were uploaded to the website approximately 72-hours in advance of each meeting.

At the SGMA Tribal Workgroup meetings, tribal representatives have been invited to provide input and comments on Alternative Plan Update materials and analysis. GSAs accepted verbal comments and questions from any participant at meetings and encouraged written comments following the meetings.

The SGMA Workgroup discussion topics generally followed the same outline as for the public workshops (see Table 1-2 below), with some additional detail focused on tribal interests.

The GSAs will continue to coordinate and collaborate with the tribal governments through the SGMA Tribal Workgroup during implementation of the Alternative Plan Update.

1.5.6 List of Public Meetings Where the Alternative Plan Update was Discussed Table 1-2 lists the schedule for Alternative Plan Update meetings. Meeting agendas and summaries from public meetings are provided in Appendix 1-D. Due to local and state restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person meetings were changed to videoconferences as of March 2020.

Table 1-2. Public Meetings on the Alternative Plan Update Meeting
Group/Type
Meeting Date
or Proposed Date
Meeting Topics
SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 1
February 20, 2020 Overview of SGMA, Water Management Planning in the Indio Subbasin, Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan Update
Public Workshop 1 February 20, 2020 Overview of SGMA, Water Management Planning in the Indio Subbasin, Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan Update
SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 2
May 21, 2020 Alternative Plan Update Status, Plan Area, Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model, 2010 Plan Assessment, Groundwater Model Assessment and Approach
Public Workshop 2 May 21, 2020 Alternative Plan Update Status, Plan Area, Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model, 2010 Plan Assessment, Groundwater Model Assessment and Approach
SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 3
November 19, 2020 Alternative Plan Update Status, Plan Area, Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model, Groundwater Model Update, Demand
Forecast, Supply Analysis
Public Workshop 3 November 19, 2020 Alternative Plan Update Status, Plan Area, Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model, Groundwater Model Update, Demand
Forecast, Supply Analysis
SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 4
March 13, 2021 Alternative Plan Update Status, Groundwater Conditions, Sustainable Management Criteria, Groundwater Model Status, Projects and Management Actions
Public Workshop 4 March 13, 2021 Alternative Plan Update Status, Groundwater Conditions, Sustainable Management Criteria, Groundwater Model Status, Projects and Management Actions
SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 5
June 24, 2021 Alternative Plan Update Status, Groundwater Conditions, Sustainable Management, Groundwater Model and Plan
Scenarios

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-17 TODD/W&C Meeting
Group/Type
Meeting Date
or Proposed Date
Meeting Topics
Public Workshop 5 June 24, 2021 Alternative Plan Update Status, Groundwater Conditions, Sustainable Management, Groundwater Model and Plan
Scenarios
CVWD Board of
Directors Study
Session
August 3, 2021 Overview of Alternative Plan Update
DWA Board of
Directors
August 3, 2021 Overview of Alternative Plan Update
SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 6
August 26, 2021 Alternative Plan Update Status, Groundwater Model, Plan Scenarios, Projects and Management Actions, Simulation Results Public Workshop 6 August 26, 2021 Alternative Plan Update Status, Groundwater Model, Plan Scenarios, Projects and Management Actions, Simulation Results SGMA Tribal
Workgroup 7
October 20, 2021 Overview of Alternative Plan Update
Public Workshop 7 October 20, 2021 Overview of Alternative Plan Update CVWD Board of
Directors
December 7, 2021 Overview and adoption of Alternative Plan Update CWA Board of
Directors
December 8, 2021 Overview and adoption of Alternative Plan Update DWA Board of
Directors
December 7, 2021 Overview and adoption of Alternative Plan Update IWA Board of
Directors
December 15, 2021 Overview and adoption of Alternative Plan Update

1.5.7 Comments Received and Response Summary
Comments to the GSAs from tribal representatives, stakeholders, and the public were accepted directly via email. These comments were transferred into a tracking matrix, which was organized by applicable topic or chapter. Comments were then reviewed by the GSAs and consulting team for consideration during finalization of the Alternative Plan Update. The following five letters, as listed below, were received on the Alternative Plan Update. Responses to the comments are provided in Appendix 1-E.

1. California Department of Fish and Wildlife

2. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability and Coachella Valley Waterkeeper

3. Agua Caliente Water Authority

4. La Quinta Residents for Responsible Development

5. United States Department of the Interior – Bureau of Indian Affairs

Chapter 1: Introduction FINAL
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 1-18 TODD/W&C

1.6 Plan Update Adoption
Each of the GSAs held a public hearing to consider adoption of the final Alternative Plan Update, as listed in Table 1-2 above. The adoption hearings were publicly noticed under the Brown Act for each individual GSA, as well as published collectively in The Public Record. Additionally, prior to each adoption hearing, an announcement with the hearing date and GSA website link was sent to the Indio Subbasin tribal and stakeholder email lists. The GSAs received several comment letters before the adoption hearings, included in Appendix 1-F. The final Alternative Plan Update was adopted by all four GSAs. Appendix 1-G has been added with the adoption resolutions.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-1 TODD/W&C CHAPTER 2: PLAN AREA
This chapter describes the Indio Subbasin Alternative Plan Area (Plan Area), including its geographic, institutional, land use planning, and water resources management context.

2.1 Geographic Area
The Plan Area is based on the Indio Subbasin and the areas served by, or expected to be served by, groundwater from the Subbasin. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR), in California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118—Update 2003 (Bulletin 118) (DWR, 2003), defines the Coachella Valley Basin (known as Basin 7-021) as having four subbasins, including the Indio Subbasin (Subbasin 7-021.01). The other subbasins in this region are the Mission Creek, San Gorgonio Pass, and Desert Hot Springs Subbasins.

The Indio Subbasin is identified by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) as the Whitewater River Subbasin.

Subbasins are further described in Chapter 3, Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model.

As shown in Figure 2-1, the Plan Area encompasses the entire Indio Subbasin, which is part of the larger Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, including the Garnet Hill Subarea. The Garnet Hill Subarea is included in the 2012 Mission Creek/Garnet Hill Water Management Plan (2012 MC/GH WMP) (Coachella Valley Water District [CVWD], Desert Water Agency [DWA], and Mission Springs Water District [MSWD], 2013), which was developed in coordination with the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan 2010 Update (2010 CVWMP Update) (CVWD, 2012). The Garnet Hill Subarea is also included in the 2022 Mission Creek Subbasin Alternative Plan Update (Mission Creek GSAs, 2021). Garnet Hill Subarea data collection, analysis, modeling, and planning is being coordinated to ensure consistency between this Alternative Plan Update and the 2022 Mission Creek Subbasin Alternative Plan.

Figure 2-1 shows Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) boundaries in the Indio Subbasin. The four GSAs have been formed by CVWD, Coachella Water Authority (CWA), DWA, and Indio Water Authority (IWA). In this Alternative Plan Update, these GSAs are referred to as the Indio Subbasin GSAs.

Figure 2-2 shows the incorporated areas of the nine cities that overlie the Indio Subbasin and identifies communities in the Subbasin’s unincorporated areas. As indicated on both maps, the Plan Area includes portions of Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial Counties.

While encompassing the Indio Subbasin, the Plan Area also includes lands beyond the Subbasin that are, or in the future may be, reliant on groundwater pumped from the Subbasin. This includes areas to the east within the spheres of influence of the cities of Indio and Coachella that account for several proposed large developments such as Citrus Ranch, Dillon Trails, Desert Lakes, and Lomas del Sol. The Plan Area also includes areas along the western and eastern shores of the Salton Sea that are in CVWD’s domestic service area (i.e., Area 23 and the former Improvement District 11) that receive groundwater from CVWD.

As shown in Figure 2-1, portions of CVWD’s and DWA’s boundaries are not included in the Plan Area; these include undeveloped mountainous terrain and conservation areas (shown by shading) and areas in other subbasins that do not receive water from the Indio Subbasin.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-2 TODD/W&C Figure 2-1. Plan Area

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-3 TODD/W&C Figure 2-2. Cities and Unincorporated Areas

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-4 TODD/W&C The Indio Subbasin is geographically divided into the West Valley and the East Valley. The West Valley, which includes the cities of Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, and Palm Desert, has a predominantly resort/recreation-based economy that relies on groundwater as its principal water source. The East Valley, which includes the cities of Coachella, Indio, and La Quinta, and the communities of Mecca, Thermal, and Oasis, has a predominantly agricultural economy using groundwater and Colorado River water imported via the Coachella Canal (Canal). The East Valley is southeast of a boundary line extending from Washington Street and Point Happy northeast to the Indio Hills near Jefferson Street, and the West Valley is northwest of this line (shown in red on Figure 2-1).

2.2 Water Management and Land Use Planning Agencies
This section introduces the key water resource management agencies and shows portions of the Plan Area under the jurisdiction of water management and land use planning agencies at the local, state, and federal levels. As discussed below, some agencies have both water and land use management roles. Consistent with Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requirements and local management, the Indio Subbasin GSAs maintain ongoing collaborative relationships with multiple agencies at local, state, and federal levels. Cooperative efforts among water agencies have included data sharing and collaboration on water budget analyses and numerical model development for the Indio, Mission Creek, and San Gorgonio Pass Subbasins, respectively (see Figure 1-1 for Subbasin locations). Land use plans are listed in Section

2.5, Land Use Planning.

2.2.1 Water Agencies
As described below, the major water agencies in the Plan Area are CVWD, CWA, DWA, and IWA (refer to Figure 2-1). MSWD and Myoma Dunes Water Company (MDWC) also serve portions of the Indio Subbasin.

CVWD was formed in 1918 under the County Water District Act provisions of the California Water Code.

The water-related services provided by CVWD include irrigation water delivery and agricultural drainage, urban and domestic water delivery, wastewater reclamation and recycling, stormwater protection, and groundwater management achieved through replenishment, source substitution, and conservation.

CVWD imports Colorado River water via the Coachella Canal (Canal) primarily for agricultural and golf course irrigation and for groundwater replenishment. CVWD is a California State Water Project (SWP) contractor and imports SWP water through an exchange of Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) water with Metropolitan Water District (MWD). SWP exchange water is used for groundwater replenishment. CVWD operates more than 95 wells for domestic supply. It also operates five wastewater reclamation plants, two of which provide recycled water for irrigation.

CWA was established in 1957 as City of Coachella’s water department. CWA is a retail water supplier that meets its demand through groundwater pumped from six CWA-owned and operated wells. The water- related services provided by Coachella include domestic water delivery, wastewater collection and reclamation, and local drainage control. Coachella also operates a secondary treatment wastewater facility.

DWA was founded in 1961 as a groundwater management agency. DWA provides domestic water delivery, irrigation water delivery, and water reuse and groundwater replenishment. DWA is a SWP contractor and imports SWP water through an exchange of CRA water with MWD for groundwater replenishment. DWA pumps groundwater from more than 25 wells for delivery to its retail customers in Cathedral City and Palm Springs. It also uses local surface water from Whitewater River and three mountain streams in its service area. DWA’s local surface water is diverted to WWR-GRF subsurface

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-5 TODD/W&C storage and is recovered by means of nearby production wells. DWA receives secondary treated wastewater from Palm Springs, treats it to tertiary standards for water recycling, and delivers it to large irrigation customers, including golf courses.

IWA was formed in 2000 as a Joint Powers Authority to serve as the legislative and policy entity responsible for delivering water to Indio residents for all municipal water programs and services. IWA provides water supply to most of Indio, and some unincorporated areas of Indio Hills, operating more than 20 wells throughout its service area to meet its customers’ domestic water needs.

As described above, these four water agencies are the Indio Subbasin GSAs, and together in 2016 they submitted the approved 2010 CVWMP Update as the region’s Alternative to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Alternative Plan) to comply with SGMA. Since then, the Indio Subbasin GSAs have been collaborating on the Alternative Plan implementation. While the Indio Subbasin GSAs also collaboratively led development of this Alternative Plan Update, other public agencies are also responsible for, and involved in, water and land use management both in and near the Plan Area.

The MSWD service area overlies a portion of the northernmost Indio Subbasin, including part of the Garnet Hill Subarea, which is included in the MC/GH WMP and the 2022 Mission Creek Subbasin Alternative Plan Update (Mission Creek GSAs, 2021).

Other local water purveyors include the Myoma Dunes Water Company (MDWC), which is a retail urban water supplier serving the community of Bermuda Dunes with groundwater from five wells.

In addition, numerous small private water systems serve local communities (e.g., mobile home parks) and rural businesses.

2.2.2 Local Agencies: Cities and Counties
Figure 2-2 identifies the incorporated areas of the nine cities overlying portions of the Plan Area. As described in the preceding section, two of these cities, Coachella and Indio, have water management roles in addition to land use planning authority.

As shown in Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2, the Plan Area overlaps Riverside, Imperial, and San Diego Counties.

Riverside County encompasses most of the Plan Area, with small portions of the Plan Area in the San Diego and Imperial Counties. County governments have direct local groundwater management roles in well permitting and regulation of small water systems. Most relevant to Indio Subbasin, Riverside County has a well ordinance administered by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health that regulates construction, reconstruction, abandonment, and destruction of wells throughout the county.

The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health is also the permitting agency for small water systems.

SGMA enabled county governments to elect to become GSAs; Riverside County did not elect to become a GSA for Indio Subbasin, nor did San Diego County. San Diego County portions of the Indio Subbasin are within CVWD’s boundaries. CVWD is the exclusive GSA for these areas. Imperial County elected to become GSA for all groundwater basin areas within its boundaries. Additionally, CVWD and Imperial County resolved overlap issues through a Memorandum of Understanding such that CVWD is the exclusive GSA for Indio Subbasin areas in Imperial County.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-6 TODD/W&C

2.2.3 State and Federal Agencies
Figure 2-3 shows that large tracts of land in the Plan Area are owned and managed by state and federal governments. Areas under State jurisdiction include State Parks and State Refuges, plus California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)-owned and operated lands and conservation easements.

Federal agencies with significant lands in the Plan Area include the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation (USBR).

2.2.4 Tribal Governments
Figure 2-4 shows Tribal/Reservation boundaries for the following five Native American tribes: the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians.

The largest of these lands is the Agua Caliente Reservation, which covers 31,500 acres, and the Torres- Martinez Reservation that covers 24,800 acres; however, much of these Tribal/Reservation lands are located outside the Plan Area. Table 2-1 lists the acreage of Tribal/Reservation lands within the Plan Area, which totals 28,070 acres.

Table 2-1. Tribal/Reservation Lands within Plan Area
Tribe Acres
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians 10,184
Augustine Band of Mission Indians 649
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians 707
Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians 15,852
Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians 678

The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians has established the Agua Caliente Water Authority (ACWA) to regulate and administer groundwater in which the Tribe holds federally reserved water rights. ACWA has established a system of permits and fees and engages in monitoring activities.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-7 TODD/W&C Figure 2-3. Federal, State, and Local Government Land

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-8 TODD/W&C Figure 2-4. Tribal/Reservation Lands

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-9 TODD/W&C The 2018 Coachella Valley Integrated Regional Water Management & Stormwater Resources (IRWM/SWR) Plan Update (2018 Coachella Valley IRWM/SWR Plan) (Coachella Valley Regional Water Management Group [CVRWMG], 2018) provides detailed information about regional Tribal nations, Tribal water resources, and key water resources issues, including Tribal water rights, groundwater quality, potential for long-term overdraft, and Tribal participation in regional water planning. Tribal government representatives and the Federal Bureau of Indian Affairs have participated in the Alternative Plan Update process via quarterly meetings of the SGMA Tribal Workgroup (see Section 1.5.5).

2.3 Water Resources Management
Local water resources management began with early (19th Century) agricultural development in the region, which was initially based on groundwater supply. However, local groundwater supply proved insufficient for irrigation and subsequent urban water demand, leading agencies to acquire and import surface water supplies. These early development efforts included the following:
• Developing local surface water for replenishment (e.g., Whitewater River) or diversion (e.g., from Snow, Falls, and Chino Canyon creeks)
• Importing Colorado River water supply through the Canal beginning in 1949 delivered to farmland, golf courses, and replenishment facilities
• Contracting for SWP supply (exchanged for water from the CRA and used for replenishment beginning in 1973)
• Developing recycled water used for landscape and golf irrigation Water sources are further described in Section 2.4, Water Sources.

Development of farmland subsequently necessitated construction of agricultural drainage systems in the form of both tile drainage systems, subsurface, and surface drains (from 1930s to 1990s). In addition, stormwater drainage systems have been developed by local agencies over the years, including the Whitewater River/Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC).

Major systems and facilities are shown on Figure 2-5 and include the Canal, the CRA, GRFs, water reclamation plants (WRPs), and agricultural drain systems.

Other water resource management programs have included implementation of water conservation, source substitution, and water quality programs.

As noted in Section 2.1, Geographic Area, the original 2002 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan for the Indio Subbasin (CVWD, 2002) was developed to eliminate overdraft and provide comprehensive water resources management; in 2010, this plan was updated as the 2010 CVWMP Update with the following water management elements:
• Water conservation
• Acquisition of additional water supplies
• Conjunctive use
• Source substitution
• Groundwater recharge
• Water quality improvements

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-10 TODD/W&C Figure 2-5. Water and Wastewater Facilities

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-11 TODD/W&C With passage of SGMA, the Indio Subbasin GSAs developed the original Alternative Plan consisting of the 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD, 2012) and the SGMA Alternative Groundwater Sustainability Plan Bridge Document for the Indio Subbasin (Bridge Document) (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2016), which was approved by DWR in 2019. Subsequently the Indio Subbasin GSAs have prepared Annual Reports 1; these documents together have served as major planning and reporting documents for water resource management.

2.4 Water Sources
The Plan Area currently relies on a combination of local groundwater, Colorado River water, SWP exchange water, local surface water, and recycled water to meet water demands. Details about each water source are provided in Chapter 6, Water Supply.

2.4.1 Local Groundwater
Local groundwater is pumped from the Indio Subbasin for water supply in the Plan Area. Groundwater has been the principal source of urban water supply in the Plan Area since the early part of the 20th century. Groundwater also supplies water for crop irrigation, fish farms, duck clubs, golf courses, greenhouses, and industrial uses.

The Indio Subbasin is not adjudicated. It experienced chronic groundwater level declines and storage depletion (i.e., overdraft) until the Subbasin was at its minimum storage level in 2009. Overdraft was reversed through management including substantial replenishment and source substitution by CVWD and DWA, and significant water conservation by local communities with the support of the GSAs.

The following three replenishment facilities are currently operated in the Indio Subbasin (refer to Figure 2-5):
• Whitewater River Groundwater
Replenishment Facility (WWR-GRF)
• Palm Desert Groundwater
Replenishment Facility (PD-GRF)
• Thomas E. Levy Groundwater
Replenishment Facility (TEL-GRF)
For replenishment, the Subbasin is divided
into two management areas, the West
Whitewater River Subbasin management
area (i.e., West Valley) and the East
Whitewater River Subbasin management
area (i.e., East Valley). The Subbasin is
divided into areas of benefit (AOBs). The
West Valley is composed of two AOBs, one managed by CVWD and one by DWA, collectively referred to as the West Whitewater River Subbasin Management Area. The West Whitewater River Subbasin Management Area and the WWR-GRF are jointly managed by CVWD and DWA under the terms of the 1976 Water Management Agreement as revised December 15, 1992 and July 15, 2014. CVWD also operates the PD-GRF, which is located in the City of Palm Desert to replenish the Indio Subbasin’s mid-

1 https://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/alternative/print/23; refer to Section D.

CVWD operates the PD-GRF.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-12 TODD/W&C valley area. The East Valley is composed of one AOB (see red dividing line on Figure 2-1); the East Whitewater River Subbasin AOB and the TEL-GRF are managed by CVWD.

In the designated AOBs, groundwater replenishment programs are funded through Replenishment Assessment Charges (RACs) paid by groundwater pumpers (other than minimal pumpers 2) on a per acre- foot basis; this charge covers applicable costs of importing water and recharging the Subbasin.

2.4.2 Colorado River Water
Colorado River water has been a major source
of supply for the Plan Area since 1949 with the
completion of the Coachella Canal. The
Colorado River is managed and operated in
accordance with the Law of the River, which is
the collection of interstate compacts, federal
and state legislation, various agreements and
contracts, an international treaty, a U.S.

Supreme Court decree, and federal
administrative actions that govern the rights
to use of Colorado River water in the seven
Colorado River Basin states.

The Coachella Canal (refer to Figure 2-5) is a
branch of the All-American Canal that brings
Colorado River water into the Imperial and Coachella Valleys. Initially, water delivered from the Canal was used exclusively for agricultural irrigation. As urban growth increased, other water users (primarily golf courses and homeowners’ associations) began using Colorado River water for large landscape irrigation.

Use of Canal water for non-potable purposes helps conserve the Coachella Valley's groundwater supply for domestic use.

Water imported via the Coachella Canal is also used at the TEL-GRF and conveyed through the Mid-Valley Pipeline to the PD-GRF for groundwater replenishment. Colorado River water obtained through transfer agreements with MWD is also used at WWR-GRF. As documented in the Indio Subbasin Annual Report for Water Year 2018-2019 (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2020), approximately 76 percent of delivered Colorado River water conveyed through the Canal was for agricultural use, about 11 percent was delivered for urban and golf course irrigation uses, and about 13 percent was replenished at TEL-GRF and PD-GRF.

2.4.3 State Water Project
The SWP is managed by DWR and includes 705 miles of aqueduct and conveyance facilities extending from Lake Oroville in northern California to Lake Perris in the south. DWA and CVWD initially contracted for water from the SWP in 1962 and 1963, respectively. CVWD and DWA purchased additional SWP transfers from the Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District in Kings County and from the Berrenda Mesa Water District in Kern County.

2 CVWD’s enabling legislation defines a minimal pumper as any producer who produces 25 or fewer acre-feet (AF) in any year. DWA’s legislation defines a minimal pumper as any producer who produces 10 or fewer AF in any year.

The Coachella Canal was completed in 1949.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-13 TODD/W&C There are no physical facilities to deliver SWP water to the Plan Area. CVWD’s and DWA’s SWP water is exchanged with MWD for an equal amount of Colorado River water from MWD’s CRA.

SWP exchange water (i.e., Colorado River water) is recharged at the WWR-GRF and at the Mission Creek Groundwater Replenishment Facility (MC-GRF) in the Mission Creek Subbasin.

2.4.4 Surface Water
Natural surface water flow in the Plan Area occurs as a result of precipitation and concentrated stream runoff originating from the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains, with lesser amounts originating from the Santa Rosa Mountains. DWA operates stream diversion facilities on Snow, Falls, and Chino Creeks and captures subsurface flow from the Whitewater River Canyon for urban water supply in DWA’s service area. Local surface water is also used for agricultural irrigation near Whitewater River.

2.4.5 Recycled Water
Recycled water is a reliable, locally
produced and managed water supply.

Figure 2-5 shows WRP locations and other
wastewater treatment facilities in the Indio
Subbasin. Currently, three WRPs provide
recycled water for irrigation in the Indio
Subbasin. Of these, two recycled water
facilities are operated by CVWD (WRP-7 and
WRP-10) and the DWA WRP is operated by
DWA in cooperation with the City of Palm
Springs. Recycled water from WRP-7 is
applied to golf courses in the Sun City area
and recycled water from WRP-10 is
delivered for golf course irrigation and
homeowners’ association landscaping. The
DWA WRP provides tertiary treatment for irrigation of golf courses, parks, and other landscaping in the Palm Springs area.

In addition, a new wastewater treatment plant, to be operated by MSWD, has begun construction in the Garnet Hill Subarea. Upon startup, secondary treated wastewater will be percolated; later, tertiary treatment will be added and the water reused in the Mission Creek Subbasin.

For other wastewater treatment facilities in the region, treated effluent is discharged either to onsite percolation/evaporation ponds or to the CVSC that runs from Indio to the Salton Sea. However, because recycled water is a reliable source and suitable for landscape irrigation in lieu of groundwater pumping, expansion of water recycling facilities is planned (see Chapter 11, Projects and Management Actions).

Additional water recycling in the region could be gained not only through continuing population growth but also through connecting currently unsewered areas (i.e., some rural portions of the Subbasin and urban areas that use septic tank/leachfield systems to treat and dispose wastewater).

WRP-10 provides recycled water to large irrigation
customers in the mid-Valley area.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-14 TODD/W&C

2.5 Land Use Planning
The Indio Subbasin GSAs recognize that land use changes can affect water demand in the Plan Area and affect their ability to achieve and maintain sustainable groundwater management over this Alternative Plan Update’s planning and implementation horizon. To address this challenge, this Alternative Plan Update has included the following:
• Description of the 2010 CVWMP Update population, growth, and demand projections as compared to historical data, followed by update in Chapter 5, Demand Projections. • Description of planning assumptions used to develop water supply projections for the 2010 CVWMP Update and a comparison of these projections to actual supply used to meet demand, followed by update in Chapter 6, Water Supply.
• Assessment of the existing numerical groundwater flow model, followed by an update of its water budgets and calibration to provide a reliable tool for simulation of future conditions in Chapter 7, Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios.

Land use development is guided by land use planning agencies, including those of California cities and counties, which are required to prepare General Plans. General Plans must include elements addressing land use, open space, conservation, and housing, among other elements. General Plans may include optional elements relating to capital improvements/public facilities, flood management, and elements regarding water. General Plans are updated through periodic review or are amended with adoption of specific plans that, for example, may provide customized planning for a defined area or a large-scale project.

In addition to cities and counties, other governmental agencies prepare similar general planning documents. Table 2-2 lists the Subbasin’s pertinent land use planning agencies and presents information about the latest plan adoptions and coverage of land use planning responsibility.

Table 2-2. Land Use Planning Agencies
Agency General Plan Adoption Coverage Area
City of Desert Hot Springs 2020 Entire city.

City of Palm Springs 2007; Housing Element
updated in 2014; limited
update underway
Entire city; city acts as tribe’s agent for Agua
Caliente Tribal trust lands per land use agreement.

City of Cathedral City Draft 2019 Entire city; city acts as tribe’s agent for Agua Caliente Tribal trust lands per land use agreement.

City of Rancho Mirage 2017 Entire city; city acts as tribe’s agent for Agua Caliente Tribal trust lands per land use agreement.

City of Palm Desert 2016 Entire city.

City of Indian Wells Updated 2013 (Land Use
updated 2007); update
underway
Entire city.

City of Indio 2019 Entire city.

City of Coachella 2015 Entire city.

City of La Quinta 2013 Entire city.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-15 TODD/W&C Agency General Plan Adoption Coverage Area
County of Riverside 2015 Unincorporated land; county acts as Tribe’s agent for Agua Caliente Tribal trust lands per land use
agreement. All other Tribal/Reservation lands
excluded.

County of Imperial 2015 2015 unincorporated land; West Shore, Hot Mineral Spa, Bombay Beach.

County of San Diego 2011 Unincorporated land; open space in Coachella Valley.

Agua Caliente Band of
Cahuilla Indians
Land Use Ordinance 2013 Tribal trust lands; other lands covered by land use contracts or agreements with cities and Riverside
County.

Torres Martinez Desert
Cahuilla Indians
Revised 2016 Tribal/Reservation lands.

Cabazon Band of Mission
Indians
1983 Tribal/Reservation lands.

Augustine Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Not available Tribal/Reservation lands.

Twenty-Nine Palms Band
of Mission Indians
2017 Tribal/Reservation lands.

BLM 2002 California Desert Conservation Area—Coachella
Valley Amendment
BLM 2004 Santa Rosa and Santa Jacinto National Monument USFS 2005 San Bernardino National Forest
USFWS 2013 Coachella Valley National Wildlife Refuge
CDPR 2005 Anza Borrego Desert State Park
CDPR 2002 Mount San Jacinto State Park
CDFW 2015 State wildlife action plan
Coachella Valley
Conservation Commission
2008 Coachella Valley conservation areas under Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan

Local land use planning is governed by the plans listed in Table 2-2; general land use designations are listed below.
• Residential—Includes hillside, very low, low-, medium-, high-density residential, and mobile home parks
• Commercial—Includes general, neighborhood, shopping centers, offices, and resort hotels • Mixed Use—Includes combinations of residential, commercial, and public uses • Industrial—Includes business parks, light industrial, and general industrial • Institutional and Public Facilities—Includes governmental offices, cultural facilities, libraries, museums, schools, hospitals, police and fire stations, utility substations as well as other public or quasi-public administrative offices or meeting spaces
• Open Space—Includes parks, natural open spaces, and habitat areas; golf courses, pool areas, and landscaped lands defined as private open space; and natural or man-made watercourses

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-16 TODD/W&C • Overlay Areas—Includes special land use designations that provide standards in addition to those of the underlying land use; typically to protect historical areas or limit development in hazard areas • Agricultural—Includes row and truck crops, nurseries, citrus and date palm groves, vineyards, ranches, poultry farms, and other agricultural related uses Figure 2-6 shows existing land use in the region. Detailed information about land use patterns and trends was compiled and analyzed to develop water demand projections; this is documented in Chapter 5, Demand Projections.

Under SGMA, water supply and land use decision-making policy was amended to require closer coordination and consultation among GSAs and land use approval agencies. SGMA aims to improve water supply planning and management and accommodate projects that may result in increased water supply demand or may impact water resource management. In the Coachella Valley, land use plans and growth forecasts are periodically reviewed by water agencies in conjunction with preparing water management plan updates like this Alternative Plan Update and urban water management plans (UWMPs). These activities are consistent with SGMA, which states that close coordination between water agencies and land use approval agencies is vital. SGMA requires water agencies to provide a city or county with its current GSP or Alternative Plan and other relevant information like UWMPs, capital improvements or plans, and descriptions of water supplies and demands (California Water Code Section 65352.5).

Before adopting a General Plan, or any substantial General Plan amendment, planning agencies must review and consider the approved GSP or Alternative Plan and must refer the proposed adoption or substantial amendment to any affected GSA. SGMA also requires that a GSP or Alternative Plan account for the most recent planning assumptions stated in local General Plans.

While nothing specified in SGMA or contained in a GSP can be interpreted as superseding the land use authority of cities or counties, Senate Bill (SB) 610 and SB 221 require that this information should be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by a city or county for projects subject to CEQA that are of a specific size. As a result, local water agencies prepare and adopt water supply assessments and written verifications of water supply availability for large developments as required by SB 610 and SB 221.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-17 TODD/W&C Figure 2-6. Land Use Map

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-18 TODD/W&C

2.6 Disadvantaged Communities
Figure 2-7 shows the extent of disadvantaged communities (DACs), severely disadvantaged communities (SDACs), and economically disadvantaged areas (EDAs) as indicated by unemployment percentage and local financial hardship. DWR maintains two mapping tools for DACs and EDAs with periodic updates based on the American Community Survey (DWR, 2021a and DWR, 2021b). In the Indio Subbasin, these communities are diverse and include farm workers, urban and rural residents, and low-income seniors.

Groundwater is the water source, so ensuring that groundwater remains safe and reliable is a priority.

Historically, localized water quality issues have included arsenic, chromium-6, nitrates, total dissolved solids, radionuclides, and bacteria (see Chapter 8, Regulatory and Policy Issues).

Organizations in the Coachella Valley have interacted and coordinated with DACs (inclusive of SDACs and EDAs) for many years. In 2007, the DAC Planning Group was formed regionally to track the progress of DAC programs under California’s Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 84). Since 2009, the Coachella Valley IRWM Program, which is a partnership among CVWD, CWA, DWA, IWA, MSWD, and Valley Sanitary District (VSD), has engaged in targeted outreach to DACs. The DAC Outreach Program was implemented in 2012 to improve DAC participation in the Coachella Valley IRWM process and has continued to evolve to this day. The 2018 Coachella Valley IRWM/SWR Plan and the 2020 Colorado River Funding Area Water Needs Assessment (Colorado River Funding Area Partners, 2020) summarizes known water and wastewater needs of DACs and includes opportunities for future engagement and projects related to system consolidations, education, safe drinking water, and wastewater treatment.

General outreach efforts conducted by the CVRWMG aim to encourage DAC participation in the Coachella Valley IRWM Program and to ensure that DAC needs and concerns are incorporated into current and future planning documents. The Coachella Valley IRWM Program has also provided increased technical, engineering, and grant support for DACs that apply for IRWM grant opportunities. Through Proposition 84 and the California Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (Proposition 1), the IRWM Program has provided millions of dollars to support DAC planning and construction projects.

The DAC Infrastructure Task Force, which is a collaboration between CVWD, non-profit organizations, regulatory agencies, and municipalities, meets bimonthly to secure access to safe affordable drinking water, wastewater, and flood control services in historically disadvantaged Coachella Valley regions through strategic planning, funding procurement, needs assessment, and reporting. This continued, consistent level of outreach over the years has allowed for relationship building with the DAC community.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-19 TODD/W&C Figure 2-7. Disadvantaged Communities and Economically Disadvantaged Areas

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-20 TODD/W&C

2.7 Water Use Sectors
Water use in the Plan Area includes four predominant water user groups: municipal, agriculture, golf, and other. Water demand in the Plan Area is met through a supply combination of groundwater, surface water, and non-potable water, including recycled water and imported Canal water. Major water use sectors and sources are described below; detailed information is provided in Chapter 5, Demand Projections.
• Municipal—The municipal group includes all water uses related to urban development, including residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional. Municipal water supplies predominantly consist of groundwater in the Plan Area, with some local surface water in portions of the DWA service area and non-potable water (i.e., recycled water and Canal water) for irrigation in the CVWD and IWA service areas. Supplies are generally served by the local water agencies (i.e., CVWD, CWA, DWA, and IWA). In some areas, small public water systems, private pumpers, and private mutual water companies and purveyors supply water in their services areas, with most using groundwater. • Golf—The golf group consists of water uses related to golf course irrigation and maintenance. Golf courses primarily use groundwater from private wells, Canal water, or recycled water. In a few limited areas, golf courses use domestic water supply. Some golf water users also provide water stored in onsite ponds to municipal users (e.g., homeowners’ associations) for irrigation. • Agriculture—The agriculture group consists of water uses related to irrigation of crops and agricultural production. Canal water is the predominant agricultural water supply with some surface water use and with groundwater pumped from private wells in areas where Canal water is not available.
• Other–The other group consists of water uses related to recreational lakes, fish farms, duck clubs, and planned surf parks. These demands are met using Canal water, potable water, or water pumped from private wells.

In the Plan Area, a number of rural communities are not connected to the GSAs’ domestic water system(s).

Residents in these communities depend on individual domestic wells or private wells connected to independent small water systems to supply their drinking water. The local groundwater supplies of several small water systems have shown elevated concentrations of arsenic and other constituents that are currently regulated or may be in the near future (e.g., chromium-6). CVWD and CWA are actively pursuing consolidation of small water systems in their domestic service areas. Figure 2-8 shows the locations of small community water systems using wells, which was compiled from DWR’s Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program website and cross-referenced with California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Division of Drinking Water (DDW) data.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-21 TODD/W&C Figure 2-8. Small Water System Wells

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-22 TODD/W&C

2.8 Water Resources Monitoring
In general, water resources monitoring addresses climate (i.e., temperature, precipitation, evaporation), streamflow, subsidence, groundwater elevations, surface water and groundwater quality, groundwater pumping, and drain flows. For this Alternative Plan Update, water resources monitoring discussions are focused on the Indio Subbasin. Monitoring programs are briefly described below, and Chapter 10, Monitoring Program, provides additional information along with recommendations for improvement.

2.8.1 Climate
Climate data are available from DWR’s California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) for four active CIMIS stations in the Indio Subbasin (Figure 2-9). Precipitation data have been collected for the 12 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District precipitation monitoring stations, which are also shown in Figure 2-9. Data were used to support groundwater conditions characterization and an evaluation of irrigation water demands for agricultural and golf course uses.

2.8.2 Streamflow
USGS measures streamflow at 19 locations in the Indio Subbasin, which are also shown on Figure 2-9.

DWA measures surface water diversions from Snow, Falls, Whitewater, and Chino watersheds.

Streamflow data are compiled annually to support tracking of Subbasin conditions as part of the Indio Subbasin Annual Reports.3

2.8.3 Subsidence
USGS, in cooperation with CVWD, has been studying land subsidence in the Coachella Valley since 1997, and recently completed a comprehensive report of findings (USGS, 2020) that documents historical subsidence, plus recent cessation of subsidence and uplift. Figure 2-10 shows the USGS land-subsidence monitoring network, which consists of geodetic monuments used as global positioning system (GPS) stations that can be surveyed repeatedly. This monitoring network has grown over time and currently includes 24 stations. In addition to these stations, interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) data are available that use radar images from satellites to provide broad spatial mapping of land surface vertical displacement. These InSAR data are used by USGS, as documented in the comprehensive report of findings, and are now also provided by DWR on its SGMA Data Viewer.4

2.8.4 Groundwater Elevations
Groundwater level monitoring data are available for selected wells in the Indio Subbasin dating back to 1910. Figure 2-11 illustrates the distribution of monitored wells as of water year (WY) 2018–2019, when levels were measured in 345 wells by the Indio Subbasin GSAs as part of their respective groundwater level monitoring programs. As shown, 52 of these wells were monitored by the Indio Subbasin GSAs and MSWD as part of the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) Program. DWR established the CASGEM Program in 2009 to track seasonal and long-term groundwater elevation trends in California’s groundwater basins. The CASGEM Program continues today as a tool to support SGMA. In general, elevation monitoring data are used to characterize basin conditions, evaluate pumping and recharge operations, and support groundwater modeling and model calibration.

3 https://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/alternative/print/23; refer to Section D. 4 https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-23 TODD/W&C Figure 2-9. Climate and Streamflow Monitoring Stations

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-24 TODD/W&C Figure 2-10. USGS GPS Stations and Wells used for Subsidence Monitoring

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-25 TODD/W&C Figure 2-11. Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Well Locations

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-26 TODD/W&C

2.8.5 Surface Water and Groundwater Quality
Surface water and groundwater quality monitoring is performed by multiple agencies in the Plan Area.

For example, water purveyors are required by State law to monitor and report on the quality of their water sources, and report to each customer and the SWRCB DDW. These data are publicly available on the SWRCB’s GAMA Program website. In addition, Tribes monitor water quality in their wells and maintain records; not all these data are publicly available. Local water agencies conduct water quality monitoring as summarized below.
• CVWD—CVWD monitors domestic wells and wells to monitor recharge areas, conduct special studies to address a specific parameter (such as chromium-6) or a specific area, and conducts Coachella Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (CV-SNMP) monitoring • CWA—CWA monitors its domestic wells and conducts CV-SNMP monitoring • DWA—DWA monitors streams and its domestic wells, monitors for State emerging contaminants (e.g., per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances [PFASs]), and conducts CV-SNMP monitoring • IWA—IWA monitors its domestic wells and conducts CV-SNMP monitoring Figure 2-12 shows the locations of
groundwater wells with available water
quality data examined for characterization
of groundwater quality as part of this
Alternative Plan Update (i.e., wells reporting
recent water quality data). These
groundwater wells include supply,
irrigation, and monitoring wells. These wells
include those installed near GRFs and two
nested monitoring wells near the Salton Sea
that monitor changes in groundwater levels
and quality as potential indications of saline
intrusion.

In 2020, the GSAs – in collaboration with
local water and wastewater agencies,
RWQCB, and other stakeholders – initiated
an update to the 2015 CV-SNMP. The process began with development of a CV-SNMP Groundwater Monitoring Program Workplan that the RWQCB approved in February 2021. The CV-SNMP process also included preparation of a CV-SNMP Development Workplan that the RWQCB approved in October 2021.

These two Workplans are included as Appendix 2-A and describe the actions to be undertaken by the GSAs to monitor, evaluate, and protect groundwater quality.

2.8.6 Groundwater Pumping
Information about groundwater production is critical to Indio Subbasin management. California Water Code Division 2 Part 5 requires each well owner or operator in the counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Ventura extracting more than 25 acre-feet per year (AFY) of groundwater to file a Notice of Extraction and Diversion of Water with the SWRCB. In addition, the enabling legislation of CVWD and DWA respectively require that all production subject to replenishment assessment must be measured, Monitoring wells are sampled by the GSAs for a variety
of water quality constituents.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-27 TODD/W&C and replenishment assessment invoices based on quantities produced are billed monthly or quarterly. The reporting threshold for pumpers within CVWD’s boundary is 25 AFY, while the threshold for DWA is 10 AFY. All production wells exceeding these thresholds are required to have a measuring device capable of measuring and registering the amount of water produced; 550 wells in these areas subject to the replenishment assessment are metered (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2020). Both CVWD and DWA maintain production records for wells in their respective areas. Figure 2-13 illustrates the distribution of groundwater production wells in the Indio Subbasin.

2.8.7 Drain Flows
The CVSC and associated subsurface and
open drains receive intercepted shallow
groundwater from agricultural fields and
convey flow to the Salton Sea. A USGS gage
station measures flow in the lower CVSC
near the Salton Sea (Figure 2-7), while
CVWD measures drain flows at 27 sites on a
monthly basis. The CVSC and drain system
receive not only shallow groundwater but
flows of Canal water in excess of requested
deliveries (i.e., regulatory water), treated
wastewater, and fish farm effluent. Drain
flow data are used to track groundwater
outflow and to calibrate the Subbasin’s
numerical groundwater flow model.

CVWD measures drain flows at 27 sites on a
monthly basis.

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-28 TODD/W&C

Figure 2-12. Wells with Water Quality Data Used for Alternative Plan Update

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-29 TODD/W&C

Figure 2-13. Water Year 2018–2019 Groundwater Production

FINAL

Chapter 2: Plan Area FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 2-30 TODD/W&C

This page intentionally left blank.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-1 TODD/W&C CHAPTER 3: HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL
This chapter describes the Indio Subbasin hydrogeologic conceptual model (HCM), and establishes the Plan Area’s geologic framework, including hydrogeologic boundaries, geologic formations and structures, and principal aquifer units. This chapter also summarizes groundwater recharge and discharge areas, describing how and where water flows into and out of the Subbasin. An important aspect of this system is artificial recharge of groundwater (i.e., replenishment), which is conducted at Plan Area groundwater replenishment facilities (GRFs). GRF operation has been critical to halting and reversing groundwater level declines and storage depletion, which are key criteria for sustainability in the Indio Subbasin.

The HCM presented here is a summary of relevant aspects of the Subbasin hydrogeology that influence groundwater sustainability. Chapter 7, Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios and Chapter 9, Sustainable Management, refer to the technical information summarized here.

3.1 Physical Setting
Figure 3-1 shows the extent of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin (Basin), which encompasses more than 800 square miles and extends from the San Gorgonio Pass area in the San Bernardino Mountains to the northern shore of the Salton Sea. The Basin is bordered by the San Bernardino Mountains on the north, the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains on the west, the Little San Bernardino Mountains on the east and Salton Sea on the south. The San Bernardino, San Jacinto, and Santa Rosa Mountains impede eastward movement of storms and create a rain shadow, which results in an arid climate and greatly reduces the contribution of direct precipitation as a source of natural recharge to the Basin. Figure 3-1 also shows the GRF locations.

The Basin is composed of the San Gorgonio Pass, Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, and Indio Subbasins (Figure 3-1). The boundary between the San Gorgonio Pass and Indio Subbasins is a bedrock constriction and divide; otherwise, the boundaries between Subbasins within the Basin are generally defined by faults that represent barriers to the lateral movement of groundwater. This discussion focuses on the Indio Subbasin.

The western half of the Indio Subbasin is characterized by an urban resort/recreation-based economy and includes the cities of Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Thousand Palms, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, and Indian Wells. The eastern half has a predominantly agricultural-based economy and includes the cities of Indio, Coachella, and La Quinta, along with the unincorporated communities of Mecca, Thermal, and Oasis.

As shown in Figure 3-2, the Indio Subbasin has been described in terms of five Subareas: Garnet Hill, Palm Springs, Thermal, Thousand Palms, and Oasis.

3.2 Geologic Setting
The Indio Subbasin is bounded on its northern, northwestern, southwestern, and southern margins by uplifted bedrock; Subbasin sedimentary fill consists of thick sand and gravel sedimentary sequences eroded from the surrounding mountains. Sedimentary infill in the Indio Subbasin thickens from north to south, and depending on location within the Subbasin, is at least several thousand and as much as 12,000 feet thick. The upper approximately 2,000 feet constitute the aquifer system that is the primary source of groundwater supply (DWR, 1979). Figure 3-3 is a geologic map encompassing the Indio Subbasin.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-2 TODD/W&C Figure 3-1. Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin and Subbasins

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-3 TODD/W&C Figure 3-2. Groundwater Subareas of the Indio Subbasin

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-4 TODD/W&C From about the City of Indio southeasterly to the Salton Sea, the Indio Subbasin is characterized by increasingly thick layers of silt and clay, especially in the shallower portions of the Indio Subbasin. These silt and clay layers are remnants of ancient lakebed deposits and impede the percolation of water applied for irrigation (DWR, 1964).

3.2.1 Garnet Hill Subarea
The Garnet Hill Subarea, located
between the Garnet Hill Fault and the
Banning Fault, is considered part of
the Indio Subbasin as defined in
DWR's California’s Groundwater:

Bulletin 118—Update 2003 (Bulletin
118) (DWR, 2003) and as shown in
Figure 3-2. The relative scarcity of
wells in the Garnet Hill Subarea limits
available geologic information and
understanding of groundwater
interactions between this Subarea
and the adjoining Mission Creek and
Indio Subbasins. The 2013 Mission
Creek/Garnet Hill Subbasins Water Management Plan (CVWD, DWA, and MSWD, 2013) states that groundwater production is low in the Garnet Hill Subarea and is not expected to increase significantly in the future due to relatively low well yields compared to those in the Mission Creek Subbasin. Groundwater levels in the western and central portions of the Subarea show response to large replenishment quantities from the Whitewater River GRF (WWR-GRF), while levels are relatively flat in the eastern portion of the Subarea.

While the Garnet Hill Subarea receives subsurface inflow from Mission Creek Subbasin and some natural recharge from occasional high flows of Mission Creek and other streams, the chemical character of the groundwater and its direction of movement indicate that the main source of inflow to the Subarea comes from percolation associated with the Whitewater River (CVWD, DWA, and MSWD, 2013).

3.2.2 Palm Springs Subarea
Located in the northwestern portion of the Indio Subbasin, the Palm Springs Subarea is bounded by the Garnet Hill Fault to the north and the eastern slopes of the San Jacinto Mountains to the south and extends southeast to Cathedral City. Alluvial fan deposits consist of heterogeneous, coarse-grained sediments with a total thickness in excess of 1,000 feet. Although there is no lithologic distinction apparent based on water well driller’s logs, the total thickness of recent deposits suggests that Ocotillo Conglomerate underlies recent Fanglomerate deposits at a depth ranging from 300 to 400 feet (DWR, 1964). Substantial natural and artificial recharge (i.e., replenishment) occurs through the thick sequence of coarse sediments in this Subarea.

Water from the Colorado River Aqueduct is conveyed through the Whitewater Hydropower Plant and ultimately feeds
WWR-GRF.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-5 TODD/W&C Figure 3-3. Geologic Map

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-6 TODD/W&C

3.2.3 Thermal Subarea
Groundwater in the Palm Springs Subarea moves southeastward into the Thermal Subarea. As shown in Figure 3-2, the division between the Palm Springs Subarea and the Thermal Subarea is near the City of Cathedral City.

Figure 3-4 presents a generalized stratigraphic column of the Thermal Subarea showing local geologic units and groundwater zones. As illustrated, the hydrostratigraphy is characterized by the following:
• A shallow semi-perched and confining zone consisting of recent silts, clays, and fine sands • An upper aquifer with unconfined (water table) conditions • A semi-confining aquitard of fine-grained materials
• A lower aquifer with confined and artesian conditions As shown on Figure 3-4, fine-grained clay deposits of the upper Ocotillo Conglomerate Formation separate the upper and lower aquifers. The clay deposits are not regionally extensive or sufficiently thick enough to completely restrict vertical groundwater flow between the upper and lower aquifer zones and are thus referred to as an aquitard.

The aquitard is absent, and no distinction between the upper and lower aquifer zones occurs, along the southwestern margins of the Thermal Subarea at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, such as the alluvial fans at the mouth of Deep Canyon and near the City of La Quinta.

The lower aquifer, composed of Ocotillo Conglomerate Formation, consists of silty sands and gravels with interbeds of silt and clay. The lower aquifer contains the greatest quantity of stored groundwater in the Indio Subbasin. The top of the lower aquifer occurs at a depth ranging from 300 to 600 feet below ground surface (bgs). The thickness of the zone is undetermined, as the deepest wells in the Coachella Valley do not fully penetrate the formation. Available data indicate that the zone is at least 500 feet thick and can be in excess of 1,000 feet thick. The thickness of the aquitard overlying the lower aquifer zone ranges from 100 to 200 feet, although in some areas near the Salton Sea it may be in excess of 500 feet.

Capping the upper aquifer zone in the Thermal Subarea is a shallow fine-grained zone in which semi- perched groundwater occurs (Figure 3-5). This zone consists of recent silts, clays, and fine sands and is relatively persistent southeast of the City of Indio. It ranges from 0 to 100 feet thick and is an effective barrier to deep percolation. The low permeability of the materials southeast of the City of Indio has contributed to irrigation drainage challenges in the area. Semi-perched groundwater has been maintained by irrigation water applied to agricultural lands, necessitating construction of an extensive subsurface tile drain system (DWR, 1964). North and west of the City of Indio, the zone is composed mainly of clayey sands and silts, and its effect in retarding deep percolation is limited.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-7 TODD/W&C Figure 3-4. Generalized Stratigraphic Column Thermal Subarea

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-8 TODD/W&C Figure 3-5. Approximate Extent of Shallow Semi-Perched Aquifer in the Thermal Subarea

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-9 TODD/W&C

3.2.4 Thousand Palms Subarea
The Thousand Palms Subarea (Figure 3-2) is located along the southwest flank of the Indio Hills and is differentiated from the Thermal Subarea by groundwater quality differences (DWR, 1964). In brief, groundwater in the Thousand Palms Subarea is characterized by sodium sulfate chemistry that is distinct from the calcium bicarbonate water of the Thermal Subarea. The differences in water quality indicate that replenishment to the Thousand Palms Subarea comes primarily from the Indio Hills and is limited in supply. The relatively sharp boundary between chemical characteristics of water derived from the Indio Hills in the Thousand Palms Subarea and groundwater in the Thermal Subarea suggests there is little intermixing between the two Subareas.

The configuration of the water table north of the community of Thousand Palms is such that the generally uniform, southeasterly gradient in the Palm Springs Subarea diverges and steepens to the east along the base of Edom Hill. This steepened gradient suggests the presence of a barrier to groundwater flow in the form of a reduction in sediment permeability or a southeast extension of the Garnet Hill Fault. Gravity surveys by DWR (1964) do not indicate a subsurface fault. Accordingly, the sharp increase in gradient is attributed to lower sediment permeability to the east.

3.2.5 Oasis Subarea
Another peripheral zone of unconfined groundwater, with different chemical characteristics from water in the major Indio Subbasin areas, is found underlying the Oasis Subarea that extends along the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Water-bearing materials underlying the Subarea consist of highly permeable alluvial fan deposits. Although groundwater data suggest that the boundary between the Oasis and Thermal Subareas may be a buried fault extending from Travertine Rock to the community of Oasis, the remainder of the boundary is a lithologic change from the coarse fan deposits of the Oasis Subarea to the interbedded sands, gravel, and silts of the Thermal Subarea. Little information is available as to the thickness of the water-bearing materials, but it is estimated to be in excess of 1,000 feet.

3.3 Faults
The Indio Subbasin is bordered on the southwest by the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains. The boundaries between Subbasins within the Basin are generally defined by faults that serve as effective barriers to the lateral movement of groundwater. The Indio Subbasin is separated from the Mission Creek Subbasin by the Banning Fault, and from the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin by the San Andreas Fault (Figure 3-3). Both faults represent effective barriers to groundwater flow.

The Garnet Hill Subarea lies between the Garnet Hill and Banning Faults, which act as partially effective barriers to lateral groundwater movement. The Garnet Hill Fault partially impedes groundwater flow from the Garnet Hill Subarea toward the south. This effect is revealed by close inspection of groundwater level information on either side of the Garnet Hill Fault; for example, the groundwater level contour map in the Indio Subbasin Annual Report for Water Year 2018-2019 (see Figure 3-2; Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2020) shows differences of as much as 220 feet across the Garnet Hill Fault; such elevation differences also are illustrated on the hydrogeologic cross section B-B’ (Figure 3-10). The Garnet Hill Fault does not reach the surface and is probably effective as a barrier to lateral groundwater movement only below a depth of about 100 feet (CVWD, DWA, and MSWD, 2013). A comparison of Figure 3-2 and Figure 3-3 indicates that the Palm Springs Subarea is bounded by the Garnet Hill Fault to the north.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-10 TODD/W&C

3.4 Recharge and Discharge Areas
This section identifies groundwater inflows and outflows and describes the respective recharge and discharge areas of the Indio Subbasin. Quantification of the inflows and outflows will be described in more detail in Chapter 4, Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions and Chapter 7, Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios.

3.4.1 Groundwater Inflows
Sources of inflow (i.e., recharge) to the Indio Subbasin include the following:
• Infiltration of natural inflows through mountain-front and stream channel recharge • Subsurface inflows
• Artificial recharge of imported water (i.e., replenishment) • Wastewater percolation
• Return flows from municipal/domestic use, agriculture, golf courses, and other sources From 2000 to 2019, combined return flows have represented the largest source of recharge in the Subbasin, followed by imported water recharge and natural mountain front and stream channel recharge.

3.4.1.1 Infiltration of Natural Inflows
Precipitation that falls in the San Jacinto, Santa Rosa, and Little San Bernardino Mountains is the primary source of natural recharge in the Indio Subbasin with only minor recharge from precipitation in the Little San Bernardino Mountains. Mountain-front recharge includes subsurface inflow from canyons and surface runoff from minor tributaries along the mountain fronts. The Whitewater River is the major stream channel contributing recharge with additional infiltration along other channels such as Snow and Falls Creeks in the upper valley and several smaller streams in the lower portion of the valley that only flow during wet years. The annual volume of natural recharge varies significantly as the annual volume of precipitation varies widely. During normal and wet years, mountain front recharge from these streams and smaller watersheds percolates into the Subbasin as additional subsurface flow.

3.4.1.2 Subsurface Inflows
Natural inflow to the Indio Subbasin includes subsurface inflow from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin through the bedrock constriction, subsurface inflow from the Mission Creek Subbasin across the Banning Fault, and subsurface inflow from Desert Hot Springs Subbasin across the Banning and San Andreas Faults.

In addition, subsurface inflow occurs from beneath the Salton Sea to deep zones in the Indio Subbasin.

3.4.1.3 Artificial Recharge of Imported Water (Replenishment) Artificial recharge is accomplished as follows:
• In the western portion of the Indio Subbasin at the WWR-GRF • In the mid-valley at the Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility (PD-GRF) • In the eastern portion of the Indio Subbasin at the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility (TEL-GRF) (formerly the Dike 4 Recharge Facility) The source of replenishment water for the WWR-GRF is State Water Project (SWP) exchange water (i.e., water exchanged for Colorado River water via the Colorado River Aqueduct [CRA]), while the source of replenishment water for the Palm Desert GRF (PD-GRF) and Thomas E. Levy GRF (TEL-GRF) is Colorado River water via the Coachella Canal (Canal).

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-11 TODD/W&C

3.4.1.4 Wastewater Percolation
The urban portions of the Indio Subbasin are served primarily by municipal sewer systems that convey wastewater to municipal wastewater treatment plants. A portion of the treated wastewater that is not recycled and reused or discharged to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC) is disposed to percolation/evaporation ponds.

3.4.1.5 Return Flows from Use
Deep percolation of water applied to agricultural fields, golf courses, and urban landscapes represents a major inflow to the groundwater system and is referred to as irrigation return flow. In addition to the wastewater percolation that occurs at wastewater treatment ponds, some inflow occurs from septic tank/leachfield systems that are used to treat and percolate wastewater. These are grouped with return flows because they are individually small and distributed across rural portions of the Indio Subbasin and a few urban areas without access to sewer systems. There are also some septic systems in areas with access to sewer services that have not connected.

3.4.2 Groundwater Outflows
Indio Subbasin groundwater outflows consist of the following:
• Groundwater pumping
• Subsurface and drain flows to Salton Sea
• Evapotranspiration (ET)

3.4.2.1 Groundwater Pumping
Groundwater pumping is the largest component of outflow from the Indio Subbasin. Groundwater is pumped for agricultural, municipal, golf course, and other beneficial uses within the Indio Subbasin; additional groundwater is pumped from the Indio Subbasin and exported for use within the Plan Area in adjacent Subbasins.

3.4.2.2 Subsurface and Drain Flows to Salton Sea
In the eastern Indio Subbasin, the confining unit of the upper aquifer impedes deep percolation of applied water, resulting in saturated soil conditions that reduce agricultural productivity. In the 1930s, a network of open drainage ditches was constructed to alleviate this condition. Subsurface (i.e., tile) drainage systems were installed to control high water table conditions and to intercept higher salinity, shallow groundwater. The CVSC and associated drains receive intercepted shallow groundwater from agricultural fields and convey flows to the Salton Sea. The CVSC and drain system also receive flows of Canal water that exceed requested deliveries (i.e., regulatory water), treated wastewater, and fish farm effluent.

Historically, with relatively high groundwater levels, groundwater naturally flowed toward the Salton Sea.

With groundwater level declines in the southeastern Indio Subbasin, the rate of outflow to the Salton Sea decreased. Since about 2015, groundwater level increases have resulted in restoration of net outflow of groundwater to the Salton Sea (see Section 7.2.5).

3.4.2.3 Evapotranspiration
Prior to development, water outflow through ET was significant above the semi-perched aquifer in the southeastern portion of the Coachella Valley. As native landscapes were converted to agriculture,

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-12 TODD/W&C groundwater outflow to ET decreased. Additionally, a portion of the imported water used for groundwater replenishment and/or disposed as wastewater is lost to evaporation.

3.5 Hydrogeologic Cross Sections
Seven hydrogeologic cross sections were developed to illustrate hydrogeologic conditions across the Indio Subbasin. Figure 3-6 shows the locations of the cross sections along with the GRF locations. Cross sections A-A’, A’-A’’, and A‘’-A’’’ (Figures 3-7 through 3-9) form a contiguous 50-mile cross section oriented along the central longitudinal axis of the Indio Subbasin, starting in the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin in the northwest and ending at the northern shore of the Salton Sea in the southeast.

3.5.1 Longitudinal Cross Sections
Cross Section A-A’ (Figure 3-7) runs along the axis of the Indio Subbasin from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin to just southeast of Date Palm Drive in Cathedral City in the Palm Springs Subarea. Permeable sands and gravels comprise most of the Subbasin deposits with smaller lenses of fine sand and clay, which increase in frequency to the southeast. Depth to bedrock (bottom of Subbasin) is about 1,400 feet at the northwest edge and increases to the southeast, where depths to bedrock are greater but known only to the extent that depth to bedrock exceeds the maximum depth of local wells.

The Figure 3-7 legend indicates use of two different groundwater elevation sources. The solid triangle indicates the water year (WY) 2018-2019 groundwater elevation, which was derived from contours shown in Indio Subbasin Annual Report for Water Year 2018-2019 (Indio Subbasin GSAs, 2020). Subsequently, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has installed three new wells in the area at the northwest end of the cross section where groundwater monitoring points had been sparse. To provide a more accurate depiction of groundwater elevations in this area, groundwater elevations measured in 2019 in the three new wells were used; these are denoted in the legend as “measured 2019 groundwater elevation data from wells projected onto the section,” and are shown as open triangles. This new information provides a more accurate depiction of groundwater levels in an area characterized by substantial changes over short distances in ground surface elevation, groundwater levels, and depth to bedrock.

Groundwater flow is from northwest to southeast and groundwater elevations range from greater than 1,100 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin to about 500 feet above msl near the southeast end of the section. Groundwater elevations and gradients are strongly influenced by groundwater replenishment activities at WWR-GRF.

Cross Section A’-A’’ (Figure 3-8) runs along the axis of the Subbasin continuing the A-A’ cross section through the northwest portion of the Thermal Subarea. Increasing fine sands and clay lenses are noted when compared with cross section A-A’. The approximate boundary between the upper and lower aquifer is illustrated on the cross section. As illustrated, depths to bedrock are greater than 1,300 feet based on maximum well depths.

Cross section A’’-A’’’ (Figure 3-9) runs along the axis of the Subbasin continuing the A’-A’’ cross section through the northwest portion of the Thermal Subarea to the Salton Sea. Increasing fine sands and clay lenses are noted when compared with cross section A’-A’’. The approximate boundary between the upper and lower aquifer is illustrated in the cross section. Depths to bedrock are greater than 1,500 feet based on maximum well depths.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-13 TODD/W&C Groundwater flow is from northwest to southeast and groundwater elevations range from nearly 1,200 feet above msl at the northwest end of the Subbasin to at or above the ground surface (at about 240 feet below msl) at the southeast end of the Subbasin. The extent of artesian conditions is shown on Figure 3-9.

Overall, these longitudinal cross sections document a down-valley progression of alluvial sediment from predominantly sand and gravel to increasing fine sands with limited clay lenses and then to the clay- dominated sediments at the Salton Sea. Highlights of this evaluation are summarized below. • With the significant thickness of coarse sediments and depth to groundwater, the northwestern portion is the primary forebay area for substantial groundwater recharge, including artificial recharge at WWR-GRF.
• The middle portion is transitional, with increasing fine sand and silt and more clay lenses, recognition of upper and lower aquifers, and decreasing depth to groundwater. • The distal portion shows a progression to predominant clay, the clear definition of upper and lower aquifers, and shallow groundwater and artesian conditions that would indicate Subbasin discharge under natural conditions.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-14 TODD/W&C Figure 3-6. Cross Section Locations

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-15 TODD/W&C Figure 3-7. Cross Section A to A’

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-16 TODD/W&C Figure 3-8. Cross Section A’ to A’’

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-17 TODD/W&C Figure 3-9. Cross Section A’’ to A’’’

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-18 TODD/W&C

3.5.2 Perpendicular Cross Sections
Cross sections B-B’, C-C’, D-D’, and E-E’ (Figures 3-10 through 3-13) were constructed perpendicular to the main axis of the Indio Subbasin. Collectively, these cross sections incorporate hydrogeologic information from the five main Subareas of the Indio Subbasin except the Indio Hills and Barton Canyon Subareas, which are semi-water bearing and generally lack subsurface information. The Subbasin bottom is not well defined but extends beyond the maximum depth of groundwater wells drilled in the Indio Subbasin (i.e., 1,500 feet).

Cross section B-B’ (Figure 3-10) runs roughly north-south intersecting cross section A-A’. Cross section B-- B’ crosses the Palm Springs Subarea in the south and the Garnet Hill Subarea and the Mission Creek Subbasin in the north. Cross section B-B’ shows sands and gravels with fine sand and clay lenses, with deposits thickening toward the center of the Indio Subbasin. Displacements of geologic materials along the Garnet Hill and Banning Faults are shown in Figure 3-10. These faults provide the boundaries between the Palm Springs and Garnet Hill Subareas of the Indio Subbasin and between the Indio and Mission Creek Subbasins. Cross section B-B’ is roughly perpendicular to the northwest to southeast flow direction in the Indio Subbasin. Significant change in groundwater elevations is shown across the two faults confirming that the faults act as partial barriers to groundwater flow.

Cross section C-C’ (Figure 3-11) runs perpendicular to cross section A’-A’’. Cross section C-C’ crosses the Thermal and Thousand Palms Subareas of the Indio Subbasin in the southwest and the Mission Creek and Desert Hot Springs Subbasins in the northeast. Cross section C-C’ shows sands and gravels with increasing frequency of fine sand and clay lenses compared with cross section B-B’. Subbasin sediments thicken toward the center of the Indio Subbasin. Displacement of the Banning Fault provides the boundary between the Indio and Mission Creek Subbasins. Cross section C-C’ shows the boundary between the upper and lower aquifers. This cross section is roughly perpendicular to the northwest to southeast flow direction in the Indio Subbasin with depths to water of about 200 feet in the central portion of cross section C-C’.

Cross section D-D’ Figure 3-12) runs perpendicular to Cross Section A’’-A’’’. Cross section D-D’ crosses the Oasis and Thousand Palms Subareas of the Indio Subbasin in the southwest and the Desert Hot Springs Subbasins in the northeast. Cross section D-D’ shows sands and gravels with increasing frequency of fine sand and clay lenses compared with Cross Section C-C’. Basin sediments thickening toward the center of the Indio Subbasin. The San Andreas Fault provides the boundary between the Indio and Desert Hot Springs Subbasins. Cross section D-D’ shows the boundary between the upper and lower aquifers. Cross section D-D’ is roughly perpendicular to the northwest to southeast flow direction in the Indio Subbasin with shallow depths to water, typically less than 40 feet in the central portion of the cross section.

Cross section E-E’ (Figure 3-13) runs perpendicular to Cross Section A’’-A’’’. Cross section E-E’ crosses the Oasis and Thousand Palms Subareas of the Indio Subbasin in the southwest and the Desert Hot Springs Subbasins in the northeast. Cross section E-E’ shows sands and gravels with increasing frequency of fine sand and clay lenses compared with cross section D-D’. Basin sediments thicken toward the center of the Indio Subbasin. The San Andreas Fault is the boundary between the Indio and Desert Hot Springs Subbasins.

Cross section E-E’ shows the boundary between the upper and lower aquifers. The cross section is roughly perpendicular to the northwest to southeast flow direction in the Indio Subbasin with shallow depths to water. The extent of artesian conditions is shown in Figure 3-13.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-19 TODD/W&C The perpendicular cross sections provide
additional insights into the hydrogeology of
the Indio Subbasin as listed below.
• The relatively narrow, bedrock or
fault-bounded character of the Indio
Subbasin in the northwest
• The substantial thickness of the
Subbasin that occurs along the
eastern margin of the Indio Subbasin
or along the Subbasin axis
• The greater proportion of coarse-
grained sediments along the western
mountain front and limit of regional
clay to the west, indicating a narrow
mountain-front forebay for natural
recharge and for artificial recharge (e.g., TEL-GRF on Section D-D’, Figure 3-12).

TEL-GRF utilizes a narrow mountain-front forebay for
artificial recharge.

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-20 TODD/W&C Figure 3-10. Cross Section B to B’

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-21 TODD/W&C Figure 3-11. Cross Section C to C'

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-22 TODD/W&C Figure 3-12. Cross Section D to D’

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-23 TODD/W&C Figure 3-13. Cross Section E to E’

FINAL

Chapter 3: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model FINAL

Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 3-24 TODD/W&C

This page intentionally left blank.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-1 TODD/W&C CHAPTER 4: CURRENT AND HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS This chapter describes the current and historical groundwater conditions in the Indio Subbasin. The Indio Subbasin is the primary source of groundwater supply for the Plan Area (see Figure 2-1 in Chapter 2, Plan Area) and is a California Department of Water Resources (DWR)-designated Subbasin (No. 7-021.01) of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. Adjoining groundwater basins and Subbasins are shown in Figure 1-1 in Chapter 1, Introduction. While the Plan Area overlies portions of the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin and the Orocopia Valley, Chocolate Valley, and West Salton Sea basins, these are not major sources of regional groundwater supply.

Groundwater conditions are described with reference to the six sustainability indicators identified in the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). These include:

1. Groundwater elevations

2. Groundwater storage

3. Potential subsidence

4. Groundwater quality

5. Seawater intrusion

6. Interconnected surface water and groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs) Descriptions of groundwater conditions focus on the period 1990 through 2019. While historical data also are provided (for example, historical change in groundwater storage from 1970), this 30-year period encompasses varying climatic conditions (including state-wide drought) and represents current operations relative to water importation, groundwater replenishment, water recycling, and water conservation, among other management actions. This period is also consistent with the update of the numerical groundwater flow model. The original numerical model was calibrated from 1936 to 1996 and was updated through 2019 as part of this Update.

4.1 Groundwater Elevations
This section summarizes groundwater conditions in terms of elevations, flows, trends over time, vertical groundwater gradients and depth to groundwater, and regional groundwater level changes. The groundwater elevation monitoring program is described briefly in Chapter 2, Plan Area.

4.1.1 Groundwater Elevations, Flow, and Trends
Figure 4-1 shows the Water Year (WY) 2018-2019 groundwater elevation contour map for the Indio Subbasin. Groundwater elevations of the principal aquifer are averaged over the water year; this is most representative, as local groundwater levels do not exhibit strong seasonal trends. As shown on the figure, regional groundwater flows are in a northwest-to-southeast direction through the Indio Subbasin.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-2 TODD/W&C Figure 4-1. Indio Subbasin Groundwater Elevation Contours WY 2018-2019

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-3 TODD/W&C Groundwater elevations range from greater
than 1,100 feet mean sea level (msl) near the
San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin in the northwest
to approximately -220 feet msl in the
southeast along the northern shoreline of the
Salton Sea. The hydraulic gradients across the
Indio Subbasin in WY 2018-2019 were
typically steeper in the northwest, flattening
downgradient to the southeast. Groundwater
elevations and gradients are strongly
influenced by groundwater replenishment
activities near the Whitewater River
Groundwater Replenishment Facility (WWR-
GRF) and Thomas E. Levy Groundwater
Replenishment Facility (TEL-GRF). The Palm
Desert Groundwater Replenishment Facility (PD-GRF) Phase 1 operations began in early 2019, and the effects on groundwater levels are only beginning to be apparent. Geological faults, constrictions, and pumping also affect localized hydraulic gradients.

Figure 4-2 shows locations of wells with long-term hydrographs. Long-term water level hydrographs for selected wells distributed across the Indio Subbasin are presented on Figures 4-3 to 4-5 to illustrate groundwater elevation trends over time in the West Valley, East Valley, and confined area. Full-sized hydrographs are provided in Appendix 4-A. The surface elevation of each well is shown in the hydrographs as a horizontal line color-coded to match the respective hydrograph. The hydrographs depict the groundwater level response to historical pumping and water management activities identified and implemented in the 2002 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002 CVWMP) (CVWD, 2002) and 2010 CVWMP Update (CVWD, 2012).

Figure 4-3 shows hydrographs for wells in the West Valley area. The hydrographs show that groundwater levels have responded directly and positively to historical replenishment activities at the WWR-GRF.

Groundwater elevations in the Palm Springs/Cathedral City area have remained relatively stable over time with more moderate positive responses to upgradient WWR-GRF replenishment activities. Groundwater levels in the Palm Desert area have stabilized since 2005 and increased slightly since 2010.

Figure 4-4 shows hydrographs for the East Valley, where groundwater elevations in Indio, Coachella, Bermuda Dunes, and La Quinta have stabilized since 2005 and even increased slightly in the La Quinta area since 2010. Groundwater elevations near Thermal and Mecca have responded positively to replenishment activities at the TEL-GRF since recharge commenced in 2009.

Collectively, the hydrographs illustrate the effectiveness of groundwater replenishment, source substitution, and conservation programs under varying climatic and water use conditions.

Recharge at TEL-GRF commenced in 2009.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-4 TODD/W&C Figure 4-2. Wells with Long-Term Hydrographs

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-5 TODD/W&C Figure 4-3. Water Level Hydrographs West Valley

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-6 TODD/W&C Figure 4-4. Water Level Hydrographs East Valley

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-7 TODD/W&C

4.1.2 Vertical Groundwater Gradients (Artesian Conditions) Historically, eastern portions of the Indio Subbasin experienced artesian conditions with sufficient pressure to cause groundwater levels in wells to rise above the ground surface; such artesian-flowing wells attracted early settlers to farm in this area. Artesian conditions declined in the late 1930s as a result of increased local groundwater pumping. The completion of the Coachella Canal by the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) in 1949 brought Colorado River water to the eastern Coachella Valley for agricultural irrigation purposes. Artesian conditions returned in the early 1960s through the 1980s, as imported Colorado River water was substituted for groundwater production. Beginning in the late 1980s, groundwater use increased again, resulting in declining water levels and loss of artesian conditions.

Groundwater water management programs (including groundwater replenishment, source substitution, and water conservation) are restoring local groundwater levels, and artesian conditions have recurred in the eastern Indio Subbasin. Benefits associated with artesian conditions include reduced groundwater pumping costs and water quality protection of the deeper, confined production zone aquifers Figure 4-5 shows the location of ten artesian well hydrographs through WY 2018-2019. The area of artesian conditions has remained relatively stable in comparison to WY 2017-2018. The wells show either stable groundwater levels or increasing trends since about 2010.

4.1.3 Groundwater Occurrence (Depth to Water)
Figure 4-6 shows averaged depth to water contours for the Indio Subbasin for WY 2018-19. Greatest depths to water are observed in the northwestern portion of the basin (generally greater than 200 feet).

The effect of the Garnet Hill Fault is seen in the abrupt change in groundwater levels across the fault.

Depths to groundwater generally decrease to about 100 to 250 feet in the mid-Subbasin area and then to zero or above the ground surface in artesian wells near the Salton Sea (see Figure 4-2 for approximate extent of artesian conditions). In addition to relatively shallow or artesian conditions in the principal aquifer, the East Valley (Thermal Subarea) is characterized by a shallow semi-perched aquifer (see extent in Figure 3-5 in Chapter 3, Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model). The occurrence of shallow groundwater in the East Valley led to construction of an agricultural drain system, shown in Figure 2-5 of Chapter 2, Plan Area. As described in the 2010 CVWMP Update, the shallow groundwater is associated with a risk of liquefaction, a process by which sediments below the water table lose strength and deform (typically due to seismic shaking) and can cause damage to buildings. The Riverside County General Plan has recognized liquefaction, mapped areas of risk, and defined protective land use policies (County of Riverside, 2020).

4.1.4 Groundwater Elevation Change
Figure 4-7 shows a 10-year groundwater elevation change map for the Indio Subbasin, including two zoomed-in maps to show water level changes for the numerous wells in the mid-valley area and TEL-GRF vicinity. The change in groundwater elevation is based on the difference between the average groundwater elevations for wells monitored by Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Coachella Water Authority (CWA), Desert Water Agency (DWA), and Indio Water Authority (IWA) between WY 2008-2009 and WY 2018-2019 (10 years).

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-8 TODD/W&C Figure 4-5. Water Level Hydrographs Artesian Wells

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-9 TODD/W&C Figure 4-6. Depth to Water Contours

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-10 TODD/W&C Figure 4-7. Ten-Year Change in Groundwater Elevation (WY 2008-09 to WY 2018-19) FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-11 TODD/W&C Groundwater levels in the Indio Subbasin have increased significantly over the 10 years from WY 2008--2009 to WY 2018-2019. The largest groundwater increases are observed in the vicinity of the WWR-GRF and TEL-GRF, with water level increases as much as 200 feet and 100 feet in the immediate vicinity of the two facilities, respectively. In the mid-valley area near Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and La Quinta, groundwater level increases have ranged from 7 to 15 feet, reflecting the benefits of source substitution and conservation programs. Some localized declines in groundwater levels are observed in the Palm Desert area to northeast of Bermuda Dunes. Replenishment at the PD-GRF began in February 2019 and is expected to raise groundwater levels in the mid-valley region. Groundwater levels in the southeastern portion of the Indio Subbasin have increased between 10 and 40 feet, reflecting storage benefits from replenishment operations at the TEL-GRF and decreased pumping.

4.2 Changes in Groundwater Storage
The Indio Subbasin Annual Reports and Engineer’s Reports on Water Supply and Replenishment Assessment have previously assessed annual changes in groundwater storage. These assessments are intended to detect overdraft and, if overdraft were to occur, to track overdraft as a basis for sustainability planning. This section briefly defines Subbasin change in storage; a more detailed numerical description is in Chapter 7, Numerical Model and Plan Scenarios.

Long-term sustainability is typically assessed based on changes in groundwater storage over a historical period on the order of 10 to 20 years including wet and dry periods. Figure 4-8 shows the annual change in groundwater storage from 1970 through WY 2018-2019 (gray columns). The starting year of 1970 was selected because it is 3 years before imported water replenishment commenced in the Indio Subbasin.

The data used to prepare this figure are based on calendar year until WY 2016-2017, when data sources were compiled for the water year for the first Annual Report.

Figure 4-8 also shows the annual inflows, outflows, groundwater production, and 10- and 20-year running- average changes in groundwater storage. As shown on the chart, annual inflows to the Indio Subbasin (dark blue line) are highly variable with years of high inflows generally corresponding to wet years when State Water Project (SWP) delivery volumes were greater. Higher inflows in the mid-1980s occurred when Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) commenced large-scale advanced water deliveries to the Indio Subbasin. The chart shows that after an extended period of decline, both the 10- and 20-year running average changes in storage have shown upward trends since 2009, and the 10--year running average has been positive since 2017.

Figure 4-9 shows the cumulative change in storage since 1970. The goal of the 2010 CVWMP Update is to eliminate groundwater overdraft, not to restore the Subbasin to historical conditions. Since 2009, the Indio Subbasin has recovered approximately 840,000 acre-feet (AF) of groundwater in storage, or about 45 percent of the cumulative depletion observed from 1970 to 2009.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-12 TODD/W&C Figure 4-8. Historical Change in Groundwater Storage in Indio Subbasin

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-13 TODD/W&C Figure 4-9. Cumulative Change in Groundwater Storage since 1970 FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-14 TODD/W&C

4.3 Land Subsidence and Potential for Subsidence
Land subsidence is the differential lowering of the ground surface, which can damage structures and facilities. This may be caused by regional tectonism or by declines in groundwater elevations due to pumping. The latter process is relevant to Subbasin management and the Alternative Plan. As groundwater elevations decline in the subsurface, dewatering and compaction of predominantly fine- grained deposits (such as clay and silt) can cause the overlying ground surface to subside.

Land subsidence due to groundwater withdrawals can be temporary (elastic) or permanent (inelastic).

Elastic deformation occurs when sediments compress as pore pressures decrease but expand by an equal amount as pore pressures increase. A decrease in groundwater elevations from groundwater pumping causes a small elastic compaction in both coarse- and fine-grained sediments; however, when compaction is small, conditions can return to normal once water levels recover. Because elastic deformation is relatively minor and fully recoverable, it is not considered an impact. Land subsidence, resulting from aquifer system compaction and groundwater level declines, has been a concern in the Coachella Valley since the mid-1990s and has been investigated since 1996 through an on-going cooperative program between CVWD and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) (Sneed and Brandt, 2020). Global Positioning System (GPS) surveying, using GNSS-Inferred Positioning System and Orbit Analysis Simulation Software (GIPSY-OASIS) and interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) methods have been used to determine the location, extent, and magnitude of the vertical land-surface changes in the Coachella Valley.

The network of GPS stations in the Subbasin is shown in Figure 2-9 in Chapter 2, Plan Area. The GPS measurements have been used to determine elevation changes at specific locations, while InSAR measurements have documented the geographic extent of elevation changes for the Indio Subbasin.

Analysis of InSAR data collected from 1995 to 2017 by the USGS indicates that as much as 2.0 feet of subsidence occurred in the Indio Subbasin from 1995 to 2010 near Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and La Quinta (Sneed and Brandt, 2020).

Figure 4-10 shows basin-wide subsidence and uplift from December 28, 2014, to June 27, 2017. Since 2010, groundwater levels have stabilized or have been partially recovered in response to the implementation of source substitution, conservation, and groundwater replenishment programs included in the 2010 CVWMP Update. Up to 1 inch of uplift has been measured since 2011 in the Palm Springs area, corresponding to higher groundwater levels in response to upgradient WWR-GRF recharge. In the Thermal area, the ground surface has also rebounded about 2 inches over the past 10 years, returning to elevations observed in 2001. This rebound roughly coincides with commencement of recharge operations at the TEL--GRF in 2009. The Indio Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) plan to continue monitoring water levels and subsidence to track the effects of management actions on land subsidence.

Water levels in wells near the subsidence geodetic monuments 1, in and near the three subsiding areas shown by InSAR, and throughout the Subbasin generally indicate longer-term stability or rising groundwater levels since about 2010. These results mark a reversal in trends of groundwater level declines during the preceding decades.

1 Most geodetic monuments consist of flat metal disks that are anchored in the ground or to a structure and can be surveyed repeatedly.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-15 TODD/W&C Figure 4-10. Subsidence Map, 2014-2017
FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-16 TODD/W&C Although many areas have stopped subsiding, and a few have even uplifted, a few areas did subside during 2010–2017, though at a slower rate, partly reflecting the character of sediments in the basin. Subsidence when groundwater levels are stable or recovering indicates that residual compaction may have occurred.

At the same time, coarse-grained materials and thin aquitards may have expanded as groundwater levels recovered. The continued Subbasin-wide stabilization and recovery of groundwater levels since 2010 is likely a result of various projects designed to increase recharge or to reduce reliance on groundwater.

4.4 Groundwater Quality
The 2010 CVWMP Update considered groundwater quality issues including salinity, nitrate, arsenic, hexavalent chromium(chromium-6), uranium, and perchlorate. In its Alternative Assessment Staff Report, DWR recommended that the Alternative Plan Update provide additional documentation in maps, specifying fluoride, arsenic, chromium-6, and dibromochloropropane (DBCP) distributions. This Alternative Plan Update has included substantial collection of water quality data into a database and evaluation of the areal extent, vertical distribution, and time trends for these selected constituents.

4.4.1 Constituents of Concern
Constituents of concern include total dissolved solids (TDS), nitrate, arsenic, chromium-6, uranium, fluoride, perchlorate, and DBCP. Elevated TDS and nitrate concentrations are linked to current and historic water and wastewater management, agricultural activity, urban land use, septic systems, and natural conditions. In the Indio Subbasin, arsenic, chromium-6, uranium, and fluoride are naturally occurring and geologically derived. DBCP is a soil fumigant historically used in agriculture. Perchlorate can be found in some fertilizers and was first detected in Colorado River water in 1997. Atmospheric deposition of perchlorate can also occur naturally with concentration in groundwater particularly in desert regions (USGS, 2014).

4.4.2 Data Sources for Water Quality Mapping
Groundwater quality data have been collected from CVWD, CWA, DWA, IWA, the USGS National Water Information System, and the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) website. Data included samples from monitoring wells, public supply wells, and private agricultural and domestic wells. Monitoring wells and relatively deep public supply wells have been the source of the most frequent and recent measurements. Wells are identified on cross sections and plots using state well numbers (SWN). An abbreviation of the full SWN is used on some maps, such as vertical water quality cross sections. For this evaluation, data were used only for raw (untreated) groundwater samples, only for wells with verified locations, and only for years 1990 or later.

To best characterize conditions, available groundwater quality data were assessed spatially with plan-view maps, vertically in cross sections, and, for TDS and nitrate, temporally in time-concentration plots. The graphics are presented and then followed by a discussion of each constituent of concern.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-17 TODD/W&C

4.4.3 Plan View Concentration Maps
Water quality maps (Figures 4-11 to 4-18) show the spatial distribution of the constituents. For each well with water quality data during the period 1990-2019, the most recent water quality measurement is shown on the plan-view maps and cross sections. The most recent measurement at each well was used, as opposed to the median or mean of a given period, because constituents of concern may show increasing or decreasing trends over time in some wells. Such trends are depicted on the time- concentration plots for TDS and nitrate.

The water quality measurements were interpolated across the Subbasin for each constituent as indicated by the color-ramping in each map legend. Some areas of the Subbasin that lack monitoring wells and data were excluded from the analysis.

Constituent concentrations typically vary with depth (see water quality cross sections). However, depth- specific data are limited and insufficient for mapping water quality of different depth zones. The mapping presented here is intended to depict water quality in vertical zones that generally provide groundwater supply to production wells. These wells are typically greater than 300 feet deep; accordingly, monitoring wells with screened intervals less than 300 feet deep were not included. Information on screened intervals is lacking for some wells, but these were included because most Subbasin wells are screened at depths greater than 300 feet. For nested wells (groups of monitoring wells at one location with a range of screened interval depths), water quality data are shown for the nested well with depth commensurate with nearby public supply wells.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-18 TODD/W&C Figure 4-11. TDS Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-19 TODD/W&C Figure 4-12. Nitrate as NO3 Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-20 TODD/W&C Figure 4-13. Arsenic Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-21 TODD/W&C Figure 4-14. Chromium-6 Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-22 TODD/W&C Figure 4-15. Uranium Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-23 TODD/W&C Figure 4-16. Fluoride Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-24 TODD/W&C Figure 4-17. Perchlorate Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-25 TODD/W&C Figure 4-18. DBCP Concentration Map

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-26 TODD/W&C

4.4.4 Water Quality Cross Sections
To evaluate vertical variations in groundwater quality, 14 vertical cross sections (A-A’ through N-N’) were prepared. The cross-section locations are shown in Figure 4-19 and the cross sections are shown in Figures 4-20 through 4-33, each of which documents the most recent concentrations reported from 1990 to 2019 for TDS, nitrate, arsenic, and chromium-6. Because the cross sections are intended to show vertical variations, shallow monitoring wells are included. The well screens on each cross section are color-coded according to the most recent concentration, which is shown at the bottom of the well profile. Vertical scales may vary between figures.

4.4.5 Time-Concentration Plots for TDS and Nitrate
Figure 4-34 and Figure 4-35 present selected time-concentration plots that represent temporal trends in TDS and nitrate, respectively. Time-concentration plots were created for all wells with at least five TDS or nitrate measurements. These plots were then evaluated within the context of the water quality maps, water quality cross sections, and hydrogeologic cross sections to represent groundwater quality trends in various Subareas. The wells shown in the time-concentration plots were selected based on the following criteria:
• Location – Wells were selected to provide a broad distribution across the Subbasin. • Ongoing and/or recent monitoring – Wells were prioritized with recent and frequent measurements over the 1990-2019 period.
• Trends – Wells that best represent groundwater quality trends in each Subarea were selected. • Well construction – Wells with known screened depths were prioritized. Groups of wells with different screened intervals were selected to illustrate relationships between temporal water quality trends and depth.

In some cases, multiple wells are plotted on one chart and differentiated by different color lines. On the map the wells are circled with the corresponding chart color. Where wells are nested or are in essentially the same location, only one color is provided around the well symbol.

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-27 TODD/W&C Figure 4-19. Water Quality Cross Section Location

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-28 TODD/W&C Figure 4-20. Cross Section A-A’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-29 TODD/W&C Figure 4-21. Cross Section B-B’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-30 TODD/W&C Figure 4-22. Cross Section C-C’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-31 TODD/W&C Figure 4-23. Cross Section D-D’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-32 TODD/W&C Figure 4-24. Cross Section E-E’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-33 TODD/W&C Figure 4-25. Cross Section F-F’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-34 TODD/W&C Figure 4-26. Cross Section G-G’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-35 TODD/W&C Figure 4-27. Cross Section H-H’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-36 TODD/W&C Figure 4-28. Cross Section I-I’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-37 TODD/W&C Figure 4-29. Cross Section J-J’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-38 TODD/W&C Figure 4-30. Cross Section K-K’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-39 TODD/W&C Figure 4-31. Cross Section L-L’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-40 TODD/W&C Figure 4-32. Cross Section M-M’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-41 TODD/W&C Figure 4-33. Cross Section N-N’ with TDS, Nitrate as NO3, Arsenic, and Chromium-6

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-42 TODD/W&C Figure 4-34. TDS Time-Concentration Plots

FINAL

Chapter 4: Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions FINAL Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update 4-43 TODD/W&C Figure 4-35. Nitrate as NO3 Time-Concentration Plots
FINAL

Rancho Mirage City CouncilSeptember 1, 2022

Rancho Mirage City Council
September 1, 2022