XII. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS
The grantee shall be responsible for, indemnify and hold harmless the Conservancy, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liabilities, claims, demands, damages, or costs, including without limitation litigation costs and attorneys fees, resulting from or arising out of the willful or negligent acts or omissions of the grantee, its officers, agents, contractors, subcontractors and employees, or in any way connected with or incident to this agreement, except for the active negligence of the Conservancy, its officers, agents or employees. The duty of the grantee to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as provided in Civil Code Section 2778. This agreement supersedes any right the grantee may have as a public entity to indemnity and contribution as provided in Gov. Code Sections 895 et seq.
The grantee waives any and all rights to any type of express or implied indemnity or right of contribution from the State, its officers, agents or employees, for any liability resulting from, growing out of, or in any way connected with or incident to this agreement.
Nothing in this agreement is intended to create in the public or in any member of it rights as a third-party beneficiary under this agreement.
XIII.INSURANCE
Throughout the term of this agreement, the grantee shall procure and maintain insurance, as specified in this section, against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property that may arise from or in connection with any activities by the grantee or its agents, representatives, employees, or contractors associated with the project undertaken pursuant to this agreement.
As an alternative, with the written approval of the Executive Officer, the grantee may satisfy the coverage required by this section in whole or in part through: (a) its contractors’ procurement and maintenance of insurance for work under this agreement, if the coverage otherwise fully satisfies the requirements of this section; or (b) the grantee’s participation in a “risk management” plan, self-insurance program or insurance pooling arrangement, or any combination of these, if consistent with the coverage required by this section.
1. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
a. Insurance Services Office (“ISO”) Commercial General Liability coverage, occurrence basis (Form CG 00 01) or comparable.
b. Automobile Liability coverage - ISO Form Number CA 0001, Code 1 (any auto). c. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California.
159
City of San Clemente
Grant Agreement No. G26-001
2. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Grantee shall maintain coverage limits no less than:
a. General Liability:
(Including operations,
products and completed
operations, as applicable)
$1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury,
personal injury and property damage.
b. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
c. Worker’s Compensation: Worker’s compensation as required by law.
3. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Executive Officer.
4. Waiver of Subrogation. The grantee hereby grants to the State of California, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of the grantee may acquire against the State of California, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Grantee agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the grantee has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
5. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance must be placed with insurers admitted to transact business in the State of California and having a current Best’s rating of “B+:VII” or better or, in the alternative, acceptable to the Conservancy and approved in writing by the Executive Officer.
6. Verification of Coverage. The grantee shall furnish the Conservancy with original certificates and amendatory endorsements, or copies of the applicable policy language, effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the Executive Officer before work commences. The Conservancy reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage, at any time.
7. Contractors. The grantee shall require each contractor to provide and maintain coverage consistent with the requirements of this section. To the extent generally available, grantee shall also require each professional contractor to provide and maintain errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the contractor’s profession and in a reasonable amount in light of the nature of the project with a minimum limit of liability of $1,000,000.
8. Premiums and Assessments. The Conservancy is not responsible for premiums and assessments on any insurance policy.
160
City of San Clemente
Grant Agreement No. G26-001
XIV. AUDITS/ACCOUNTING/RECORDS
The grantee shall maintain financial accounts, documents, and records (collectively, “required records”) relating to this agreement, in accordance with the guidelines of “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (“GAAP”) published by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The required records include, without limitation, evidence sufficient to reflect properly the amount, receipt, deposit, disbursement of all funds related to work under the agreement, and time and effort reports that permit tracing from the request for disbursement forms to the accounting records and to the supporting documentation.
Additionally, the Conservancy or its agents may review, obtain, and copy all required records.
The grantee shall provide the Conservancy, California State Auditor, Department of Finance, their officers, employees and agents with any relevant information requested and with access to the grantee’s premises upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours, to interview employees and inspect and copy books, records, accounts, and other material that may be relevant to a matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with this agreement and any applicable laws and regulations.
The grantee shall retain the required records for a minimum of three years following final disbursement by the Conservancy. The records will be subject to examination and audit by the Conservancy and the California State Auditor during the retention period.
If the grantee retains any contractors to accomplish any of the work of this agreement, the grantee shall first enter into an agreement with each contractor requiring the contractor to meet the terms of this section and to make the terms applicable to all subcontractors.
The Conservancy may disallow all or part of the cost of any activity or action that it determines to be not in compliance with the requirements of this agreement.
XV. NONDISCRIMINATION
During the performance of this agreement, the grantee and its contractors shall not deny the agreement’s benefits to any person on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status, nor shall they discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. The grantee shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of employees and applicants for employment are free of such discrimination. The grantee and contractors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12900 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §11000 et seq.), the provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 161
City of San Clemente
Grant Agreement No. G26-001
1, Division 3, Title 2 of the Government Code (Gov. Code §§11135-11139.5), and the regulations or standards adopted by the Conservancy to implement such article. The grantee shall permit access by representatives of the Civil Rights Department and the Conservancy upon reasonable notice at any time during the normal business hours, but in no case less than 24 hours’ notice, to such of its books, records, accounts, and all other sources of information and its facilities as said Department or the Conservancy shall require to ascertain compliance with this clause. The grantee and its contractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §11105.)
The grantee shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts to perform work under this agreement.
XVI. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
By signing this agreement, grantee certifies that it is in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, (42 U.S.C., 12101 et seq.), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA.
XVII. PREVAILING WAGE
Work done under this grant agreement may be subject to the prevailing wage and other related requirements of the California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Sections 1720-1861.
If required by law to do so, the grantee shall pay prevailing wage to all persons employed in the performance of any part of the project and otherwise comply with all associated requirements and obligations.
The grantee is responsible for determining whether the project is subject to prevailing wage laws, and for complying with all labor laws applicable to the project. The grantee may also review the Conservancy publication, “Information on Prevailing Wage Laws for State Coastal Conservancy Grantees” (2023), available from the Conservancy on request, which provides general information and is not legal advice to the grantee on whether the grantee’s project is subject to prevailing wage laws.
XVIII.DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE
The grantee’s signature on this agreement constitutes the certification required by Government Code Section 8355 (Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990), which requires that all state grantees provide a drug-free workplace by doing all of the following:
162
City of San Clemente
Grant Agreement No. G26-001
1. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the person’s or organization’s workplace and specifying actions that will be taken against employees for violations of the prohibition.
2. Establishing a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about all of the following:
a. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace.
b. The person’s or organization’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. c. Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs. d. The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.
3. Requiring that each employee engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the drug-free workplace statement and that, as a condition of employment on the grant, the employee agrees to abide by the terms of the statement.
XIX. EXECUTIVE ORDER N-6-22 – RUSSIA SANCTIONS
On March 4, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-6-22 (the EO) regarding Economic Sanctions against Russia and Russian entities and individuals. “Economic Sanctions” refers to sanctions imposed by the U.S. government in response to Russia’s actions in Ukraine, as well as any sanctions imposed under state law. The EO directs state agencies to terminate contracts with, and to refrain from entering any new contracts with, individuals or entities that are determined to be a target of Economic Sanctions. Accordingly, should the Conservancy determine the grantee is a target of Economic Sanctions or is conducting prohibited transactions with sanctioned individuals or entities, that shall be grounds for termination of this agreement.
The Conservancy shall provide the grantee advance written notice of such termination, allowing the grantee at least 30 calendar days to provide a written response. Termination shall be at the sole discretion of the Conservancy.
XX. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY
The grantee, and the agents and employees of the grantee, in the performance of this agreement, are acting in an independent capacity and not as officers or employees or agents of the State of California.
XXI. ASSIGNMENT
Without the written consent of the Executive Officer, the grantee shall not assign this agreement in whole or in part.
163
City of San Clemente
Grant Agreement No. G26-001
XXII. TIMELINESS
Time is of the essence in this agreement.
XXIII.AMENDMENT
Except as expressly provided in this agreement, no change in this agreement will be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties to the agreement. No oral understanding or agreement not incorporated in this agreement will be binding on any of the parties.
XXIV. SURVIVAL
The obligations in sections VII. WORK PRODUCTS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONSERVANCY SUPPORT and XII. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS survive the termination of this agreement.
164
Figure 2 – Site Plan
Exhibit 1: North Beach Concept Design
165
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
Staff Recommendation
April 23, 2026
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT Project No. 25-058-01
Project Manager: Sally Gee
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorization to disburse up to $2,000,000 to the City of San Clemente for the San Clemente North Beach Sand Retention Planning Project, consisting of preparing technical studies, an alternatives analysis, and preliminary designs, and conducting community engagement for a sand retention project to address coastal erosion along the San Clemente shoreline, in Orange County.
LOCATION: North Beach, City of San Clemente, Orange County
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Project Location Map
Exhibit 2: North Beach Concept Design
Exhibit 3: Site Photos
Exhibit 4: Project Letters
RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS
Staff recommends that the State Coastal Conservancy adopt the following resolution and findings.
Resolution:
The State Coastal Conservancy hereby authorizes a grant of an amount not to exceed two million dollars ($2,000,000) to the City of San Clemente (“the grantee”) for the San Clemente North Beach Sand Retention Planning Project, consisting of preparing technical studies, an alternatives analysis, and preliminary designs, and conducting community engagement for a sand retention project to address coastal erosion along the San Clemente shoreline, in Orange County (the “project”).
Prior to commencement of the project, the grantee shall submit for the review and written approval of the Executive Officer of the Conservancy (Executive Officer) the following:
1. A detailed work program, schedule, and budget.
Exhibit 2: Staff Recommendation
166
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT
2. Names and qualifications of any contractors to be retained in carrying out the project.
Findings:
Based on the accompanying staff recommendation and attached exhibits, the State Coastal Conservancy hereby finds that:
1. The proposed authorization is consistent with Chapter 3 of Division 21 of the Public Resources Code, regarding the Climate Ready Program.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the current Conservancy Project Selection Criteria.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Staff recommends the Conservancy authorize a $2,000,000 grant to the City of San Clemente (City) for the San Clemente North Beach Sand Retention Planning Project (project), consisting of preparing technical studies, an alternatives analysis, and preliminary designs, and conducting community engagement for a sand retention project to address coastal erosion along the San Clemente shoreline, in Orange County. The project will advance planning of one of the concepts from the San Clemente Nature-Based Adaptation Project Feasibility Study (Feasibility Study).
While beach nourishment has been a key strategy implemented by the City to combat beach erosion, this approach has not led to increased resilience and adequate protection for City infrastructure during coastal storm events. In 2022, the City of San Clemente initiated a process to identify feasible solutions to promote long term resiliency of the City’s shoreline by completing beach sand replenishment projects and seeking nature-based resilience options to retain sand. There are several critical erosion hotspots along the City’s shoreline which were potential candidate locations for implementation of nature-based solutions that could stabilize the shoreline. The result of this process was the Feasibility Study, completed in late 2025, which assessed three concepts at three different locations. This project will include further planning and analysis of a sand retention project located at North Beach that is based on Concept 1 of the Feasibility Study.
Concept 1 is a multi-benefit, emergent breakwater situated between North Beach and the Capistrano Shores Manufactured Home community (Exhibit 2). The structure is envisioned as an emergent rocky reef, sited offshore parallel to the beach, and made of armor stone material with a “barbell” shape design. The submerged, flared sides of the structure gently slope down around the seaward and side edges to enhance surfing opportunities, and the central/main segment has steeper slopes to dissipate wave energy. The crest along the top of the structure is proposed to be emergent at all times and resilient to future sea level rise. The structure is designed to slow long-shore sediment transport and reduce wave energy to retain sand on the beach. Concept 1 also includes placing approximately 500,000 to 600,000 cubic yards of sandy material on the beach behind the structure during construction. This description of Concept 1 is a preliminary design concept, in which the size, height, and footprint of the structure, as well as the placement area and volume of sand, will be further analyzed as part of the project. 167
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT
This project includes all of the following activities. The City will conduct technical studies needed to address data gaps and inform future environmental review and permitting, including but not limited to studying sediment supply and transport dynamics, water quality, nearshore biological resources, and surfing conditions. The City will also perform an alternatives analysis to optimize the Concept 1 design in consideration of benefits for biological resources, regional sand dynamics, and the City’s approach to address shoreline erosion City-wide. The City will develop preliminary engineering designs and conduct numerical and potentially physical modeling of the design. The City will engage technical advisors, such as regulatory agency staff and topic experts, California Native American tribes, regional stakeholder groups, and the community to refine the designs, address data gaps, and determine project success objectives.
A public outreach program was an essential part of the development of the Feasibility Study to date. This was implemented via general and focused stakeholder group forums in order to assess general reception of concepts, obtain feedback to refine the concepts, and integrate outside ideas into the designs. This public outreach and feedback program will continue as part of the project. Additionally, the City is currently gathering data on who visits San Clemente beaches and identifying if visitors may be travelling to the beaches from disadvantaged communities. As part of the project’s public outreach and feedback program, the City will develop and implement strategies to conduct outreach to beach visitors and to connect with visitors from disadvantaged communities during planning.
North Beach is of significant economic and recreational value to the City of San Clemente. A large pay parking lot is situated adjacent to the beach with retail and dining opportunities nearby. Beachside, there are amenities such as fire pits, an access ramp for people with disabilities, restroom facilities, a public safety building, tot lot playground, and both wet and dry utilities. San Clemente’s largest train stop is situated adjacent to North Beach and is part of the Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo rail corridor. The economic potential this beach holds for the City is second only to the shoreline surrounding the City’s nearly 100-year old Municipal Pier and is therefore a targeted area for improving long term coastal resiliency. This project will plan a potential solution to reduce erosion of the shoreline at North Beach and provide added protection of infrastructure on the shoreline.
The project aims to refine designs for a multi-benefit solution to not only address coastal erosion, but also increase coastal access on the beach and in the water, and support new rocky reef and coastal dune habitats. Overall, the project is envisioned to expand opportunities for public recreation and enjoyment, such as surfing around the structure and beach activities with a re-established beach area. The structure is envisioned to create potential for subtidal and intertidal species colonization and use, similar to the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station's Wheeler Reef modules located further offshore than the proposed structure. In the longer term, establishing a wider beach also sets the stage for potentially implementing dune habitat restoration once the beach has sufficiently widened over time. A widened beach provides an opportunity for shorebirds, native vegetation, and intertidal infaunal and fish species that inhabit sandy beaches to utilize the space. For example, sensitive species such as grunion, threatened or endangered species such as least terns and western snowy plovers, and back beach dune vegetation to expand within their regional distribution range. 168
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT
Site Description:
The City is the southernmost city in Orange County. The City is located north of Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base and south of Dana Point and contains five miles of beaches backed by public infrastructure. The City is in the northernmost portion of the Oceanside Littoral Cell. The primary source of sediment has historically been from San Juan Creek located north of the City and from the coastline north of Dana Point. Due to urbanization and upstream flood control and water supply management actions, the Creek delivers almost no sand to the beach. Historically, sand also moved around Dana Point and fed San Clemente from the north, but due to the construction of Dana Point Harbor and its accompanying breakwater, this source of sand was also cut off.
The City owns the portion of the project site located above the mean high tide line. The California State Lands Commission owns the portions of the project site below the mean high tide line. The project includes working with the State Lands Commission to obtain a lease agreement.
Grant Applicant Qualifications:
To date, the City has been awarded five California Coastal Commission grants for various coastal projects including shoreline monitoring, LCP development, the Feasibility Study, an offshore sand search, and beach attendance data collection. The City has a successful 10-year track record of effective grant management with grant deliverables submitted on time and within budget, including timely submittal of grant progress reporting and reimbursement requests.
CONSISTENCY WITH CONSERVANCY’S PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA:
The proposed project is consistent with the Conservancy’s Project Selection Criteria, last updated on September 23, 2021, in the following respects:
Selection Criteria
1. Extent to which the project helps the Conservancy accomplish the objectives in the Strategic Plan.
See the “Consistency with Conservancy’s Strategic Plan” section below.
2. Project is a good investment of state resources.
The California Coastal Commission funded the City’s Feasibility Study to identify and evaluate nature-based shoreline resilience options. This project will help refine Concept 1 at North Beach for a sand retention structure combined with beach nourishment to combat critical coastal erosion and increase resiliency of the San Clemente shoreline to sea level rise. The City will work closely with regulatory agencies, California Native American tribes, regional stakeholders, and the community to refine the proposed design.
169
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT
3. Project includes a serious effort to engage tribes. Examples of tribal engagement include good faith, documented efforts to work with tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated to the project area.
As part of the project, the City will reach out to tribes to obtain feedback on the design and develop a relationship with interested tribes for City projects. As part of conducting the Feasibility Study, the City solicited input from Acjachemen Tribes, and tribal representatives are on the outreach and distribution lists that the City will use in carrying out the project, though tribal engagement with the Feasibility Study was low. The City is committed to increasing tribal engagement as part of the project by continuing to reach out to tribes and trying various contact methods.
4. Project benefits will be sustainable or resilient over the project lifespan.
The project will conduct an alternatives analysis to optimize the Concept 1 design in consideration of benefits for biological resources, regional sand dynamics, and the City’s approach to address shoreline erosion City-wide. Additionally, the City will conduct further planning and design in consultation with regulatory agencies and regional stakeholders working on coastal erosion issues. This process will develop a more robust and supported project design.
The project will design features to withstand significant storm conditions and high water levels by applying coastal engineering design methods and results gathered from both numerical and physical models. The features will initially be designed to withstand sea level rise using Ocean Protection Council’s 2024 Sea Level Rise Guidelines (or other latest best available science) with the ability to augment them in the future to withstand higher sea levels if needed. This can be achieved by raising the reef and dune crest elevations or adding larger stones to the reef and more sand to the beach and dunes. In the long-term, the City is committed to monitoring the multi-purpose reef structure and widened beach if implemented. Beach elevation profiles behind the structure will be taken to monitor beach performance. Maintenance of the structure will take place on an as-needed basis.
5. Project delivers multiple benefits and significant positive impact.
The project will assist the City in planning a sand retention solution to address critical shoreline erosion. Benefits of the proposed reef structure and widened beach include long term coastal resilience in San Clemente; widening of the sandy beach, enhanced recreational opportunities for visitors and residents; additional rocky intertidal and subtidal habitat; sandy beach habitat for least terns, western snowy plovers, and grunion; and economic resiliency for the City which relies heavily on coastal visitors.
6. Project planned with meaningful community engagement and broad community support.
Throughout the course of the Feasibility Study (2022-2025), an extensive public outreach and feedback program accompanied the development of concept design alternatives. This was achieved through both public meetings and with focused stakeholder groups forums to assess the general reception of concepts, obtain feedback for refinements based on community and stakeholder requests, and integrate outside ideas into the designs. Focused stakeholder groups included the Orange County Transit Authority, Surfrider Foundation, Bring Back Our Beaches 170
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT
community group, Save Our Beaches community group, the North Beach Community Association, and the Capistrano Shores Manufactured Homes Association.
Seven presentations and/or meetings at San Clemente City Hall were held since the initial design concept ideas were drafted in that effort to garner as much community engagement in the Feasibility Study as possible. Focused stakeholder group meetings generally incorporated an open-discussion presentation with concept designs presented in virtual and large-print format for markup by the group. This feedback was incorporated into the development and selection of the conceptual designs that moved forward. Overall, the outreach process identified strong public support for large-scale City-wide beach nourishment as well as multi-purpose reef sand retention features, specifically shore parallel retention structures in the locations selected for the conceptual designs. Continued public outreach and engagement will occur during the project through an iterative process of feedback and project refinement. The City and project team will continue to collaborate with focused stakeholder groups and hold regular public meetings as the process moves from concept through to implementation. Additionally, the project will include outreach to visitors from disadvantaged communities to San Clemente beaches.
PROJECT FINANCING
Coastal Conservancy $2,000,000
Project Total $2,000,000
Conservancy funding is anticipated to come from a Fiscal Year 2023/24 appropriation from the General Fund to the Conservancy to address "urgent sea-level rise adaptation and coastal resilience needs using nature-based solutions or other strategies” (Budget Act of 2023, Chapter 12, Statutes of 2023 (SB 101) as amended by Chapter 38, Statutes of 2023 (AB 102)). The project is consistent with this funding source because the project will advance planning for a sand retention project at North Beach in San Clemente to design a solution to address critical coastal erosion caused by sea-level rise, and that will increase coastal resiliency, enhance wildlife habitat, and protect public infrastructure.
Unless specifically identified as “Required Match,” the other sources of funding and in-kind contributions described above are estimates. The Conservancy does not typically require matching funds or in-kind services, nor does it require documentation of expenditures from other funders or of in-kind services. Typical grant conditions require grantees to provide any funds needed to complete a project.
CONSISTENCY WITH CONSERVANCY’S ENABLING LEGISLATION:
The project is consistent with Division 21, Chapter 3, Section 31113 of the Public Resources Code, which establishes the Climate Ready Program and authorizes the Conservancy to address impacts and potential impacts of climate change on resources within the Conservancy’s jurisdiction (Section 31113(a)).
Under Sections 31113(b) and (c), the Conservancy may award grants to public agencies to undertake projects that address sea level rise and other coastal hazards that threaten coastal 171
SAN CLEMENTE NORTH BEACH SAND RETENTION PLANNING PROJECT
communities, infrastructure, and natural resources. Consistent with Section 31113(b), this is a planning project that will address sea level rise and beach and bluff erosion. Consistent with the Section 31113(c)(2) this project will maximize public benefits and reduce flood risk and enhance fish and wildlife habitat through planning for a multi-benefit, emergent breakwater that will potentially support rocky reef habitat and beach nourishment, which will support coastal dune habitats in the future. Consistent with Section 31113(d)(1)(A-B), the project prioritizes natural infrastructure to help a coastal community adapt to climate change by designing an emergent breakwater that could mimic natural rocky reef systems to adapt to climate change, and provides multiple benefits including long term coastal resilience in San Clemente – widening of the sandy beach, enhancing recreational opportunities for visitors and residents, restoration of sandy beach habitat for wildlife, and economic resiliency for the City.
CONSISTENCY WITH CONSERVANCY’S 2023-2027 STRATEGIC PLAN:
Consistent with Goal 4.1 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Projects, the proposed project will develop project plans for a multi-benefit, emergent breakwater combined with beach nourishment for shoreline protection against sea level rise.
CEQA COMPLIANCE:
This project consists of preparing technical studies, an alternatives analysis, preliminary designs, and outreach and engagement. Thus, the project involves only data gathering, resource evaluation, planning, and feasibility analyses for possible future actions that have not yet been approved or funded. These activities are statutorily exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Section 15262, which exempts planning and feasibility studies for possible future actions that have not yet been approved, adopted, or funded and categorically exempt under Section 15306, which exempts data collection and resource evaluation activities that do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource. The project will consider environmental factors and will not cause a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource.
Upon approval of the project, Conservancy staff will file a Notice of Exemption. 172
910 Calle Negocio
2nd Floor
San Clemente, California
www.san-clemente.org
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 1
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11F.
Submitted By: Public Works
Prepared By: Ray Pantoja, Water Conservation Analyst
Subject:
..titl e
CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN EXEMPTION TO THE CITY’S PURCHASING POLICY, APPROVING THE 2026 WATER LOSS CONTROL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE AND THE MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF
ORANGE COUNTY (MWDOC), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
AGREEMENT, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ..body
Summary:
The City Council is being asked to consider approval of the 2026 Water Loss Control Program Agreement (Agreement) with MWDOC, which will extend the previous Agreement from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2036 (10 Years). The Agreement allows the City to utilize technical assistance through MWDOC and/or its designated contractor in order to complete the City’s annual Water Loss Audit as required under California Water Code § 10608.34. The technical services provided by the Agreement include the Water Loss Audit compilation and the Water Loss Audit validation.
Background:
California Senate Bill (SB) 555 requires urban retail water suppliers to submit annual validated Water Loss Audits to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and comply with strict, supplierspecific water loss performance standards. The City currently contracts with MWDOC under their Water Loss Control Program, which allows the City to select from a menu of various technical assistance programs, which includes the compilation and validation of the City’s annual Water Loss Audit. In addition, there are several other services available which include: audit submission to DWR; meter accuracy testing; system leak detection; system pressure survey; billing data assessment; component analysis; and overall water loss program assistance. For the past several years, the City has only needed assistance with the Water Loss Audit compilation, and the Water Loss Audit validation. All other services provided by the agreement are either done by City Staff or are not required.
The previous Agreement expired on June 30, 2026. The proposed Agreement will extend the term from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2036. Due to regional contracting through the City’s water wholesaler, MWDOC, staff suggests an exemption from the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures. Sections XI.Z.1.1.5 of the Procurement Policy and Procedure No. 201-2-1 allows the City Council to authorize an exemption to the formal and informal solicitation process for “Services and/or supplies obtained from or through agreement with any governmental, public or quasi-public entity.” In this instance, MWDOC is a public or quasi-public entity and there is no reasonable possibility of obtaining better prices commensurate with the time and effort expended. 173
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11F.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 2
Considerations Identified by Staff:
Without technical assistance provided by MWDOC, the City may not have the resources to complete and validate the annual Water Loss Audit as required by SB555. Failure to submit a completed and validated Water Loss Audit may result in the City being subject fines and/or other penalties per the California Water Code.
Council Options:
Adopt Resolution No. 26-148, which will approve an exemption to the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures, approve the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement extending the Agreement from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2036, authorize the City Manager to execute the 2026 Agreement and find the project categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 7 of the state CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (14 CCR Section 15307, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources). Modify and adopt Resolution No. 26-148.
Continue the item and direct staff to provide additional information. Do not adopt Resolution No. 26-148 to approve the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement, which will end the Agreement as of July 1, 2026.
Environmental Review/Analysis:
The proposed City Council action to approve the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement has no potential result in either a direct or physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. This action to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 7 of the state CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (14 CCR Section 15307, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources). Class 7 consists of actions taken by regulatory agencies as authorized by state law or local ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of a natural resource where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment.
Fiscal Impact:
The City’s typical annual cost is approximately $15,000 for technical services under the Water Loss Control Agreement. Funding for the Water Loss Control Program is available in the Water Operating Fund, Water Conservation Program, Account No. 052-464-43690.
Potential Action(s):
..recommendation
If the City Council concurs with the contents of this report, moving the item without modifications would result in adoption of Resolution No. 26-148, which would:
1. Approve an exemption to the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures pursuant to Section XI.A.1.1.5 of Procurement Policy and Procedure No. 201-2-1 for an agreement with a public or quasi-public entity;
2. Approve the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement with the Municipal Water District of Orange County, extending the Agreement from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2036; 174
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11F.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 3
3. Determine that this project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 7 of the state CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (14 CCR Section 15307, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources); and,
4. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement (Attachment 2). ..end
Attachments:
1. Resolution No. 26-148
2. 2026 MWDOC Water Loss Control Agreement
3. 2026 MWDOC Addenda Water Loss Control FY26-27
4. 2025 City of San Clemente Water Loss Audit
Notification:
None.
175
RESOLUTION NO. 26-148
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
EXEMPTION TO THE CITY’S PURCHASING POLICIES
AND PROCEDURES APPROVING THE 2026 WATER
LOSS CONTROL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
SAN CLEMENTE AND THE MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, The City contracts with the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) under the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement (Agreement) for technical services required to complete the City’s annual Water Loss Audit; and WHEREAS, The City and MWDOC seek to extend the term of the Agreement that went into effect July 1, 2016 and expires June 30, 2026; and WHEREAS, the approval of the Agreement will extend the term from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2036; and
WHEREAS, the extension of the Agreement will allow the city to continue to participate in MWDOC’s Water Loss Control Program through June 30, 2036; and WHEREAS, Section XI.A.1.1.5 of Procurement Policy and Procedure No. 201-2- 1 (Purchasing Policies and Procedures) allows the City Council to authorize an exemption to the formal and informal solicitation process for “Services and/or supplies obtained from or through agreement with any governmental, public or quasi-public entity”; and
WHEREAS, the Water Loss Control Program is one of the essential tools that will help the city reach its compliance goals under the AB606/SB1668 regulatory framework for water conservation and water use efficiency.
NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of San Clemente does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. That the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement will extend the Agreement for an additional 10 years from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2036.
Attachment 1
176
Resolution No. 26-148 Page 2
SECTION 3. That the approval of the Agreement will allow the City to continue to participate in the MWDOC’s Water Loss Control Program through June 30, 2036.
SECTION 4. That the City Council authorizes an exemption to the formal and informal solicitation process pursuant to Section XI.A.1.1.5 of Procurement Policy and Procedure No. 201-2-1 for services obtained through an agreement with a public or quasi-public entity and because of the unique educational nature of the project and benefits to the City and the public and the lack of a reasonable possibility of obtaining better prices commensurate with the time and effort expended.
SECTION 5. That the City Manager is authorized and directed to execute the 2026 Water Loss Control Agreement between the City of San Clemente and the Municipal Water District of Orange County.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________________, _______.
ATTEST:
___________________________ __________________________
City Clerk of the City of Rick Loeffler, Mayor of the City of San Clemente, California San Clemente, California
177
Resolution No. 26-148 Page 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) §
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE )
I, LAURA CAMPAGNOLO, City Clerk of the City of San Clemente, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 26-148 was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Clemente held on the _______ day of _______________________, _________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Clemente, California, this _____ day of _________________, ________. __________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of
San Clemente, California
Approved as to form:
___________________________
Elizabeth A. Mitchell, City Attorney
178
1 WATER LOSS CONTROL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
This Water Loss Control Participation Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and effective as of the 1st day of July 2026, by and between the Municipal Water District of Orange County (“MWDOC”) and ____________________________ (“Participating Agency”). MWDOC and Participating Agency may be collectively referred to as “Parties” and individually as a “Party.”
RECITALS
A. MWDOC offers its member agencies (“Member Agencies”) the benefits of certain programs known as choice services, that they may elect to participate in (“Choice Services”). These Choice Services provide cost-sharing and shared services components that allow a Participating Agency to obtain economies of scale and save money. If a Member Agency elects to receive certain Choice Services, the Participating Agency executes an agreement with MWDOC that sets forth the terms and conditions for those Choice Services.
B. With input from its Member Agencies, MWDOC previously prepared a Water Loss Control Shared Services Business Plan, which proposed five water loss control shared services (“Shared Services”) to be provided to Member Agencies by MWDOC staff and, as necessary and as determined by MWDOC, by third-party vendors/contractors (“Contractor or Contractors”).
C. MWDOC also entered into a professional services agreement with E Source Companies, LLC (“Consultant” or “E Source”) for E Source to provide Water Loss Control Technical Assistance (“Technical Assistance”) to Member Agencies (“Consultant Agreement”).
D. The purpose of this Water Loss Control Participation Agreement is to create a unified agreement between MWDOC and Participating Agency that combines all of the water loss control Shared Services and Technical Assistance programs (“Programs”) into one agreement. Addenda to this Agreement will be issued annually.
E. Participating Agency may elect which of the Shared Services and/or Technical Assistance (jointly referred to as WLC Services), if any, it wishes to receive from MWDOC by completing annual election forms (“Election Forms”). The Election Forms include the selected tasks, total required payments and costs, and any additional information and/or requirements specific to each Participating Agency. The annual Election Forms may also be used to tailor the types and amounts of WLC Services that each Participating Agency will receive, as well as the costs. The Election Forms are attached as Addenda A and B to this Agreement.
F. At the end of each year, the Participating Agency may change the WLC Services that it elects to receive for the following year by completing the annual Election Forms under this Agreement.
Attachment 2
the City of San Clemente
179
2 G. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement, whereby the Participating Agency elects to receive, on the terms and conditions described herein, the water loss control shared services provided by MWDOC.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and covenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties do agree as follows:
TERMS
1. Scope of Services. MWDOC will provide the Participating Agency with the water loss control Shared Services and Technical Assistance identified in the Election Forms attached hereto as Addenda A and B. The actual scheduling of Shared Services and/or Technical Assistance shall be done only upon request of the Participating Agency. The Parties agree that MWDOC may provide the WLC Services by utilizing MWDOC staff or Contractors as determined by MWDOC.
2. Term of Agreement. This Agreement will be effective on July 1, 2026, and shall terminate on June 30, 2036 (“Term”)
3. Administration of Consultant and Contractors. MWDOC will provide project management assistance regarding all Contractors and the Consultant, which includes working closely with and managing Contractors and Consultant to ensure compliance with any agreements, facilitating interactions between the Participating Agency and Consultant and/or Contractors, and communicating regularly with the Participating Agency regarding the Shared Services and/or Technical Assistance, as needed.
3.1.MWDOC shall make payments to any Contractor and/or Consultant on a time and materials basis.
3.2.Participating Agency shall provide all documents, information, and assistance requested by any Contractor and/or Consultant during the performance of the WLC Services.
3.3.Addenda A and B are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and include separate attachments for Participating Agencies that include the selected tasks, total required payments and costs, and any additional information and requirements that are specific to each Participating Agency.
3.4.Addenda A and B may be updated as Member Agencies execute this Agreement and become Participating Agencies or pursuant to mutual agreement between a respective Participating Agency and MWDOC.
4. Annual Election Addenda. Prior to July 1 of each year of the Agreement and consistent with the requirements of this Section, Participating Agency may change the Shared Services and/or Technical Assistance that it elects to receive for the following fiscal year (July 1 – June 30) by completing the annual Election Forms, which will replace and become new Addenda A and/or B to this Agreement (“Election Addenda” or “Election Addendum”). The Election Addenda may contain terms that differ from those in the initial 180
3 Election Forms, including adjustments to service types and the addition of new WLC Services as they become available.
5. Cost Sharing by Participating Agencies.
5.1.MWDOC shall:
5.1.1. Collect from Participating Agency upon execution of this Agreement the amount indicated in Addenda A and B that is specific to said Participating Agency, which is the total cost of the selected WLC Services for the Participating Agency.
5.1.2. Inform the Participating Agency of any proposed extra work that would result in an increase in the payments under this Agreement. MWDOC and the Participating Agency must both approve such extra work before MWDOC will notify any Contractor or Consultant to proceed with the work.
5.1.3. On or about February of each year, prepare a final annual accounting for the Participating Agency and either distribute any remaining funds collected back to the Participating Agency, consistent with the amounts in Addenda A and B, roll over any remaining funds for use by the Participating Agency in the following year or, when there are funds due, issue a final bill to the Participating Agency.
5.2.Participating Agency shall:
5.2.1. Pay to MWDOC upon execution of this Agreement, the full amount indicated in Addenda A and B that is specific to the Participating Agency.
5.2.2. Pay to MWDOC, upon approval of any extra work, the full amount owed for any approved extra work. The Participating Agency shall bear all costs associated with extra work it approves.
6. Pricing and Payment. Participating Agency shall pay MWDOC for the WLC Services provided pursuant to this Agreement in the unit cost amounts for each type of elected WLC Service as set forth in Addenda A and B. The unit costs in Addenda A and B may be adjusted each year by MWDOC in MWDOC’s discretion. MWDOC will provide each Participating Agency with notice of any changes to unit costs for the next fiscal year by March 1 of the previous fiscal year, and such adjusted costs shall be reflected in the Election Addenda. With respect to WLC Services that are provided by Contractors/Consultants who are under contract with MWDOC, MWDOC reserves the right to change the unit cost for such WLC Services if there is a change in unit cost by the Contractor, provided, however, that MWDOC gives the Participating Agency no less than sixty (60) days' notice of such change, during which period the Participating Agency may elect to terminate such WLC Services from the Election Addenda. In addition, Participating Agency is not obligated to request any WLC Services and is only required to pay for WLC Services performed by MWDOC at the request of Participating Agency.
7. Billing Procedure and Payment. Within thirty (30) days of receiving Addenda A and/or B, MWDOC shall invoice the Participating Agency for the full unit cost of the WLC Services that have been chosen by the Participating Agency for the upcoming fiscal year. 181
4 Participating Agency shall pay MWDOC within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice. In the event that there is a subsequent change in the scope of the WLC Services that were elected in Addenda A and/or B, MWDOC will provide a revised invoice for such change, and in the event that the change results in a credit to the Participating Agency, then the Participating Agency will have the option to apply the credit to the annual invoice for the next fiscal year or to be issued a refund.
8. Termination. Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other. In such an event, the Parties shall be responsible to each other for any obligations incurred prior to the termination date.
9. Standard of Care. MWDOC will require that all Contractor and/or Consultant services be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and principles, and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised in performing the WLC Services.
10.Accounting. MWDOC shall, for a reasonable time, keep accurate and detailed records of the WLC Services performed and the financial details in connection with such WLC Services, including all accounting books and records related to any payments to Contractors/Consultants (collectively, the “Records”). All Records must be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to local government agencies in the State of California and must be sufficiently complete and detailed to permit an accurate evaluation of the Services provided by MWDOC under this Agreement.
Upon request from the Participating Agency, MWDOC will provide copies of the Contractor/Consultant invoices and MWDOC’s payment records, and shall give the Participating Agency reasonable access, during normal business hours, to such Records.
11.Independent Contractor. The Consultant/Contractor is not a party to this Agreement and is not an employee or agent of MWDOC or any of the Participating Agencies, either as a result of this Agreement or because of the Consultant Agreement between MWDOC and the Consultant/Contractor. The Consultant/Contractor is an independent contractor to MWDOC.
12.Indemnification. MWDOC agrees to indemnify and hold the Participating Agency harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death (collectively, “Claims”), in any manner arising out of any sole and active negligent acts or willful misconduct of MWDOC in connection with the provision of WLC Services.
MWDOC will require any Contractors/Consultants to indemnify and hold harmless Participating Agency from any and all Claims arising out of the negligent acts or willful misconduct of the Contractor/Consultant, its agents and employees, and Participating Agency agrees that it will look solely to the Contractor/Consultant for such Claims, provided, however, that MWDOC will act as the agent of the Participating Agency to enforce the terms of the indemnity with Contractor/Consultant and make any related insurance claims with respect to the insurance coverage provided by Contractor/Consultant. .
MWDOC shall use its best efforts in administering the Consultant Agreement, but makes no representations, guarantees, or warranties to the Participating Agency as to the quality 182
5 or timeliness of work product provided by the Consultant/Contractor pursuant to the Consultant Agreement. The Participating Agency agrees to indemnify MWDOC, its directors, officers, employees and agents against, and will hold and save them harmless from, any and all actions, claims, penalties, obligations or liabilities, in law or in equity, of every kind or nature whatsoever, that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision or other organization arising out of or in any manner directly or indirectly connected with the Consultant Agreement or E Source Services provided for the benefit of the Participating Agency. Participating Agency agrees and acknowledges that MWDOC is not responsible for the maintenance and quality of any of Participating Agency’s facilities, and Participating Agency is responsible for any costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage, or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, arising from such.
13.Insurance. MWDOC shall obtain prior to commencing work and maintain in force and effect throughout the term of this Agreement, all insurance set forth below. MWDOC insurance is provided through the Association of California Water Agencies Joint Powers Insurance Authority and such other insurers as MWDOC may determine from time to time.
13.1. Workers’ Compensation Insurance. MWDOC will maintain workers’ compensation insurance for its employees, covering all work covered by this Agreement, in accordance with applicable law. Upon request, MWDOC will provide an ACORD certificate of insurance or other certificate of insurance satisfactory to the Participating Agency, evidencing such coverage.
13.2. Liability and Other Insurance. MWDOC will maintain during the term of this Agreement general liability coverage of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage; automobile liability (owned, scheduled, non-owned or hired) of at least $1,000,000 for bodily injury and property damage each accident limit; workers’ compensation (statutory limits) and employer’s liability ($1,000,000) (if applicable); requiring 30 days (10 days for non-payment of premium) notice of cancellation to Participating Agency.
13.3. Contractor Insurance Coverage. If MWDOC employs Contractors to provide services covered by this Agreement, MWDOC shall require that each Contractor meet MWDOC’s minimum insurance requirements. Contractor will provide a certificate of insurance to MWDOC, which will be required to name MWDOC and Participating Agencies as additional insureds to any Consultant or Contractor’s liability coverage.
13.4. Expiration of Coverage. If any of the required coverages expire during the term of the Agreement, MWDOC and its Contractors, as applicable, shall provide updated renewal certificate(s), including the general liability additional insured endorsement, at least ten (10) days prior to the expiration date.
14.Independent Contractor. MWDOC shall act as an independent contractor in the performance of the WLC Services provided for in this Agreement and shall furnish such WLC Services in MWDOC’s own manner and method, and in no respect shall MWDOC or any of its agents be considered an agent or employee of Participating Agency. No provisions of this Agreement shall be intended to create a partnership or joint venture between MWDOC or any of its agents and Participating Agency, and neither Party shall 183
6 have the power to bind or obligate the other Party, except as expressly set forth in this Agreement.
15.Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following addresses, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose. Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or sent via commercial overnight courier and shall be effective upon receipt. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.
MWDOC: Participating Agency:
Harvey De La Torre, General Manager ________________________ Municipal Water District of Orange County ________________________ 18700 Ward St. ________________________
P.O. Box 20895 ________________________
Fountain Valley, CA 92728 ________________________
16. Jurisdiction and Venue. In all matters concerning the validity, interpretation, performance, or effect of this Agreement, the laws of the State of California shall govern and be applicable. The Parties hereby agree and consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of California, and that venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Orange County, California.
17.Counterparts and Facsimile. This Agreement may be executed by the Parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all the Parties had executed the same instrument. Counterpart signatures may be transmitted by facsimile, email, or other electronic means and have the same force and effect as if they were original signatures. All parties have participated in the drafting of this Agreement.
18.Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be held illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, in whole or in part, the legality, validity, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby.
19.Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof, and the Parties have made no agreements, representations, or warranties, either written or oral, relating to the subject matter hereof that are not set forth herein. Except as provided herein, this Agreement may not be modified or altered without prior written approval from both parties.
20.Authority to Execute. Each Party represents and warrants to the other Party that all necessary action has been taken by such Party to authorize the undersigned to execute this Agreement and to bind it to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
21.Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals and section titles set forth herein are incorporated herein and are an operative part of this Agreement.
City of San Clemente
184
7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have hereunto affixed their names as of the day and year thereinafter written, which shall be and is the effective date of this Agreement.
MWDOC: PARTICIPATING AGENCY:
Date Date
Harvey De La Torre
General Manager
Municipal Water District of Orange County
Name: _______________________
Title: _________________________
Agency: ______________________
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form
Date Date
Name: Joseph Byrne, Esq. Name: _________________________ City of San Clemente
185
8 ADDENDUM A
Water Loss Control Shared Services Election Form
Fiscal Year 2026-2027
FY26-27
Water Loss Control Shared Services
Agency:
Contact Person:
Contact E-mail:
Contact Phone:
Task 1: Water Audit Validation
Water audit validation will be conducted at Level 1 in accordance with the methodology established in the Water Research Foundation project 4369: Level 1 Water Audit Validation Guidance Manual.
Water audit validation aims to identify and appropriately correct for inaccuracies in water audit data and the application of methodology. Furthermore, validation also evaluates and communicates the uncertainty inherent in water audit data. To accomplish these goals, MWDOC’s validation Shared Service will follow the steps published in the Water Research Foundation Level 1 Water Audit Validation Guidance Manual. The process will include:
• Review the water audit and supporting documentation.
• Review performance indicators for evidence of inaccuracy. • Review audit inputs and data validity grades and confirm correct application of methodology in a Level 1 validation interview. Adjust inputs and data validity grades, if necessary.
• Review performance indicators again for evidence of persisting inaccuracy. • Document results.
MWDOC’s validation Shared Service will also employ the California-specific additional guidance developed by the California Water Loss Technical Assistance Program and subsequently taught in the Water Audit Validator (WAV) certificate course.
Validation results will be documented in a format acceptable to the Department of Water Resources. Templates for this format have been published by the California- Nevada section of the American Water Works Association on their WAV Certification webpage.
Deliverables include:
• Level 1 Validation Summary Notes
• Certified Validation Report (signed by validator)
Yes
No
$_________
Water Balance Validation is a Core service provided by MWDOC to its member agencies at no cost. MWDOC member agencies are
requested to check the box to the left indicating their choice to have MWDOC validate their annual water balance.
The Cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana may access MWDOC’s Water Audit Validation service for a fee of $990 per validation.
City of San Clemente
Ray Pantoja
[email protected]
(949) 361-6127
X
0.00 Type text here
Attachment 3
186
9 Task 2: Meter Accuracy Testing
Customer meter accuracy testing enables an agency to measure a retail meter’s performance and, consequently, the throughput that the meter fails to register. By measuring a meter’s inaccuracy, an agency can understand the financial loss it causes and develop a plan to manage meter performance within its system.
Customer meter tests will be conducted in accordance with the methodology set forth in American Water Works Association manual M6, Water Meters – Selection, Installation, Testing, and Maintenance. The stipulations in manual M6 include:
• Specific low, medium, and high flow rates for each meter type and size • Minimum test volume by flow rate and meter size
• Generally acceptable accuracy limits for new and repaired meters M6 also enumerates test procedures for laboratory tests and field tests that MWDOC staff and/or contractors will be required to follow.
Agencies can choose between two customer meter accuracy testing service providers: McCall’s Meters, Inc. or Westerly Meter Service Company. The Meter Accuracy Testing (MAT) Worksheet, Attachment 2 to this document, summarizes the fees for each meter accuracy testing service provider. Note that the fees are slightly different between providers. As a result, each service provider has its own MAT Worksheet. Agencies will need to:
• Select the meter accuracy testing company of their choice, • Identify the number and sizes of meters to be tested (green data entry cells), and • Estimate the number of meetings (McCall’s) or hours and mileage (Westerly) for meetings with the selected company.
This worksheet should be used to calculate the total cost for meter accuracy testing services for your agency. The cost estimate calculated in the MAT Worksheet should be entered into the shaded cell immediately below. E Source is available to assist agencies in quantifying the number and sizes of meters to be tested, and in interpreting the results, as part of Task 3: Component Analysis of Apparent Losses.
Small-meter (5/8 – 2 inch) testing will require agencies to remove the meters from the field and deliver them to the selected meter-testing company. Meter testing company locations are provided below. Large meters (3 inches and larger) will be tested in-situ.
McCall’s Meters, Inc. Westerly Meter Company
1498 Mesa View Street 1937 W. Eleventh St. Suite E
Hemet, CA 92543 Upland, CA 91786
(951) 654-3799 (951) 205-3725
Deliverables include:
• Meter accuracy testing results
• Warehousing of test results data
$
$_________
$________
MWDOC Administrative Fee Charged Per Meter Accuracy Test Invoice Processed, Not to Exceed Four Charges per Fiscal Year = $346
Input the total dollar amount calculated in the MAT Worksheet. Task 2 Total 187
10 Task 3a: Distribution System Leak Detection
Leak detection will be conducted using a comprehensive acoustic survey, meaning that leak detection technicians will sound all accessible appurtenances regardless of spacing distances. The following protocols will be adopted for leak detection:
• Sounding points: Physical contact and sonic leak sound amplification will occur for each hydrant, and customer service connection. Valves may be used as contact points, if necessary. • Sonic ground listening (hard cover): When normal contact points are not available or cannot be created within a reasonable distance, sonic ground listening devices will be used by making ground contact directly over the pipe at intervals no greater than six (6) feet when ground cover is pavement, concrete, or a similar hard surface. If excessive ambient noise precludes the effectiveness of the ground listening device in an area during daytime hours, then survey will be considered during nighttime hours. Such situations will be pre-approved with retail agency staff before any night surveying is undertaken.
• Sonic ground listening (soft cover): When normal ground contact points are not available and ground cover is not a hard surface, probe rods will be used at 10-foot intervals. A sound amplifier will be used on probe rods
• Verification: All indications of leaks found during initial survey will be verified a second time, after which the leak will be pinpointed with a computer-based leak sound correlator whenever possible. Pinpointing leak locations through interpretation of sound intensity, whether by ear, decibel metering, or comparable methods, will be used when contact points are available for access with a computer-based leak sound correlator.
MWDOC staff will perform distribution system leak detection at a cost of $350 per mile of distribution main surveyed for MWDOC member agencies and $374 per mile for non-member agencies. Metropolitan will contribute $170 per mile thereby reducing the cost to $180 per mile to member agencies. Deliverables include:
• Distribution System Leak Detection Plan
• Weekly progress reporting and leak verification
• Final Reporting
• Training for measuring leak rates in gallons per minute Please note that in order to be eligible to receive Metropolitan funding, participating agencies must provide leak repair results. All leaks must be investigated, repaired, or slated for repair, and their status reported to MWDOC within 60 days of the completion of the leak survey. If a MWDOC member agency does not report this information to MWDOC within 60 days, the member agency will have to pay the full cost of the survey at $350 per mile. MWDOC may also perform visual/acoustic verification of repairs as needed to satisfy Metropolitan funding requirements.
Participating agencies must elect a minimum of 50 miles or the full system, whichever is less. $_________ Task 3a total = miles X $180 for MWDOC Member Agencies Task 3a total = miles X $374 for the Cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana 188
11 Task 3b: Suspected Leak Survey
MWDOC staff will perform a suspected leak survey at a cost of $683 per leak investigation. The methodology to detect suspected leaks will employ the same process described in Task 3a. Deliverables include:
• Suspected leak consultation
• Field leak investigation
• Written report and pinpointed leak location
Please note that pricing may vary if the suspected leak survey area extends beyond one city block. For assistance in determining suspected leak survey costs for your needs, please contact Rachel Davis at the number or e-mail address below.
Municipal Water District of Orange County Rachel Davis
Water Loss Control Programs Supervisor (714) 593-5308
[email protected]
Please see Attachment 1 for more details.
$ Task 3b Total = number of suspected leaks X $683
Task 4: Distribution System Pressure Survey
The methodology used for pressure surveying depends on the survey goal of: 1) Average zonal and system pressure survey, or 2) Pressure transient survey using high frequency logger. Methodology must be agreed upon with each agency before surveying begins. The methodology to be determined includes:
• Logger settings (e.g., sampling and recording frequencies) • Logger deployment locations
• Logger deployment durations
• Analysis of data after logger retrieval
1) Average Zonal and System Pressure Survey
Pressure loggers can be deployed to evaluate the pressure range in a system or zone, which can then be used to estimate the average system or zonal pressure. Loggers should be placed strategically to capture the highs and lows of each pressure zone in the system. The survey methodology must be tailored to the infrastructure being studied.
2) Pressure Transient Survey
A pressure transient survey identifies instantaneous, damaging pressure swings caused by infrastructure malfunctions, sudden and significant demand changes, or rapid hydrant operation. Pressure transients move quickly and can only be identified with a high sampling frequency. At a minimum, loggers should be deployed immediately upstream and downstream of pressure-regulating infrastructure suspected of transient production.
The resulting data analysis will include:
• Transient identification using a relative or absolute amplitude threshold o Absolute: transient amplitude
o Relative: ratio of transient amplitude to average location pressure • Temporal transient alignment to study the direction and speed of transient propagation MWDOC staff will perform a distribution system pressure survey at a cost of $4,157 per 8-logger survey. $ Task 4 Total = number of 8 logger surveys X $4,157.
189
12 Fiscal Year 26-27
Year 8
Summary of Shared Services Elections:
(transfer total for each Shared Service above to this summary table) Task 1: Water Audit Validation Yes
No
$ (3-Cities only)
Task 2: Meter Accuracy Testing
Total Elected Amount
Less Rollover Funds to be Applied
*Indicate task #(s) to move $ from
$
$
Task 3a: Distribution System Leak Detection
Total Elected Amount
Less Rollover Funds to be Applied
*Indicate task #(s) to move $ from
$
$
Task 3b: Suspected Leak Survey
Total Elected Amount
Less Rollover Funds to be Applied
*Indicate task #(s) to move $ from
$
$
Task 4: Distribution System Pressure Survey
Total Elected Amount
Less Rollover Funds to be Applied
*Indicate task #(s) to move $ from
$
$
Total Elected Amount: $
Less Total Rollover Funds to be Applied: $
Total Amount to be Invoiced: $
(continues on next page)
Check One;
Invoice Upon Receipt
Invoice July 1, 2026
X
0.00 0.00
190
13 By: By:
Date: Date:
Harvey De La Torre, General
Manager
Name:
Title:
Municipal Water District of Orange County Agency:
City of San Clemente
191
14 Attachment 1
Water Loss Control Shared Services
Suspected Leak Survey
Background:
MWDOC’s Suspected Leak Survey Shared Services has evolved into two distinct elections based on the varying needs of member agencies. The first election is a Known Area Suspected Leak Survey of an isolated geographic area and requires a simple and limited investigation. The “Known Area” leak survey is billed at a flat rate as defined in Task A below.
The second election is an Unknown Area Suspected Leak Survey of a broader geographic area and requires significantly more investigation and time to complete than a “Known Area” survey.
The “Unknown Area” leak survey is billed based on actual time spent planning, executing, and reporting the investigation.
MWDOC staff will evaluate each suspected leak investigation request and inform the requesting agency whether the investigation falls under Task A or Task B, as described below. Before initiating the “Unknown Area” leak survey, MWDOC staff will provide the requesting agency with an estimated, not-to-exceed cost for the investigation.
Task A: Known Area Suspected Leak Survey
MWDOC staff will perform a suspected-leak survey at a cost of $651 per investigation. The leak investigation area shall not exceed one standard city block. MWDOC will listen to all meters and hydrants within the survey area using appropriate acoustic equipment. Digital Correlating loggers will be placed on valves and other appurtenances as needed to perform leak correlations. These loggers are more sensitive than the human ear, accurately registering and locating leaks by tuning into the leak’s digital sound signature. Other techniques, such as visual inspection and chlorine residual testing, may be used if applicable.
Deliverables include:
• Suspected leak consultation
• Field leak investigation
• Written report documenting findings and leak location if found $ A Total = number of suspected leaks X $683
192
15 Task B: Unknown Area Suspected Leak Survey
MWDOC staff will perform a suspected leak survey at its cost, including time and materials. The leak investigation area may expand beyond a city block and may change during the course of the investigation. MWDOC will listen to meters and hydrants within the survey area using Acoustic Digital Water Leak Detectors. Correlating loggers will be placed on valves and other appurtenances as needed to perform leak correlations. These loggers are more sensitive than the human ear, accurately registering and locating leaks by tuning into the leak’s digital sound signature. Other techniques such as visual inspection and chlorine residual testing may be used if applicable.
Deliverables include:
• Suspected leak consultation
• Field leak investigation
• Written report documenting findings and leak location, if found Note that the value below is an estimated, not to exceed cost. Because the exact location of the leak is not known and may evolve during the survey, the estimated cost is also subject to change.
$ Task B Estimated Total based on Time and Materials = $ 193
16 Attachment 2
Meter Accuracy Testing (MAT) Worksheet
McCall’s Meters, Inc.
McCall's Meters, Inc.
Meter Accuracy Testing Fee Worksheet
Participating Agency:
Contact Person: Phone
& Email:
Rate Quantity Total
Small Meter Testing
5/8 - 1 in. $45.00 $
1 1/2 in. and up $60 to $65 (1) $
3 in. Turbine $80.00 $
Large Meter Testing
3 in and up. $225 (2) $
Ratesfor Pickup or Delivery of Meters $125/hour
Ratesfor attending meetings $125/day $
Total: $
(1) Fixed rate of $60 for non-turbine meters and $65 for turbine meters. (2) Requires a minimum of 4 meters per day; If less than 4 tests, a portal-toportal fee of $125 will be charged. 194
17 Attachment 2
Meter Accuracy Testing (MAT) Worksheet
Westerly Meter Service Company
Rate Quantity Total
Small Meter Testing
5/8 - 1 in. $30.00 $
1 1/2 in. and up $70.00 $
3 in. Turbine N/A $
Large Meter Testing
3 in and up. $200 $
Ratesfor Pickup or Delivery of
Meters No Charge (1)
Ratesfor attending meetings $150/hr. + mileage $
Total: $
(1) No charge for orders transport of over 50 meters. Transport of less than 50 is based on time and mileage 195
18 ADDENDUM B
January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027
Water Loss Control Technical Assistance Tasks
TASKS
1 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
Project administration:
Partner with E Source and the larger MWDOC group (Required) ● Communication
● Systems of data collection and management
● Travel expenses
● Invoicing
$2,200 Project administration
TASK 2 WATER AUDIT COMPILATION
Task 2: Water audit compilation:
Estimate apparent and real water
loss. Assess data availability and
quality
● Water audit data collection and review
● Raw billing data validation (study of completeness and consistency, pro‐rating to reduce lag‐time effects) ● Water audit compilation
● Water audit documentation in preparation for level 1 validation $11,240 Task 2: Water audit compilation
TASK 3 SOURCE OR PRODUCTION METER VOLUMETRIC ACCURACY TESTING Task 3: Source/Production meter volumetric accuracy testing:
Design and conduct a volumetric source meter accuracy test Establish a field‐validated water‐supplied baseline for the water audit Document test procedures for future meter accuracy investigation ● Site visit and test design
● Volumetric accuracy test with comparative meter or reservoir reference volume ● Data chain assessment (“loop audit” or SCADA calibration), if relevant ● Test results analysis and documentation
● Test procedure documentation
$9,270 Task 3: Volumetric production meter accuracy test, per meter.
TASK 4 BILLING DATA CHAIN ASSESSMENT
Task 4: Detailed custom billing data chain assessment:
Assess billing data for potential errors and/or inconsistencies ● Mapping of meter read collection and billing process
● Comparison of raw data across billing data management platforms (read collection system, billing data system, and reporting system)
● Identification of data transmission errors ‐ misreads, zero reads, dropped reads, duplicated reads, etc.
Varies Task 4: Billing data chain assessment.
196
19 TASK 5 COMPONENT ANALYSIS
Task 5a: Component analysis of real losses – Gap Analysis:
Assess repair data in preparation for a real loss component analysis. • Collection of leakage repair documentation
• Evaluation and summarization of repair data
• Identification of gaps in repair documentation
• Memo documenting recommendations for repair data improvements and documentation Task 5b: Component analysis of real losses:
Establish the distribution system’s unique leakage profile Determine cost‐effective leakage management strategies for the short‐, medium‐, and long‐term • Collection of leakage repair documentation
• Evaluation of repair process documentation
• Determination of unique leakage profile (background, unreported, and reported leakage) • Analysis of cost‐effective intervention against leakage • Leak management program design
Task 5c: Component analysis of apparent losses:
Assess customer meter inaccuracy
Value apparent losses
Design an apparent loss management strategy
5c-1: Small Meter Test Strategy & Sample - $7,680
• Facilitate discussions to understand agency goals for customer meter testing • Develop test strategy based on agency goals
5c-2: Small Meter Test Sample - $3,280
• Develop meter sample based on pre-defined test strategy (if test strategy has not been defined, consider signing up for Small Meter Test Strategy & Sample)
5c-3: Small Meter Test Data Analysis - $7,920
• Analyze small customer meter test data
• Note: Agency must complete small customer meter testing to execute this task. See shared services contract for customer meter testing options and costs if necessary. 5c-4: Large Meter Test Design - $3,960
• Develop large meter test design including testing schedule • Test design employs least cost of ownership model to prioritize large meters for testing 5c-5: Large Meter Test Data Analysis - $6,080 typical cost (discuss pricing with E Source. Pricing based on test data and billing data availability)
• Analyze large customer meter test data
• Note: Agency must complete large customer meter testing to execute this task. See shared services contract for customer meter testing options and costs if necessary. $5,560 Task 5a: Component analysis of real losses – Gap Analysis $16,180 Task 5b: Component analysis of real losses
$8,560
$3,660
$8,840
$4,420
Varies
Task 5c: Component analysis of apparent losses (meter testing budget through Shared Service Contract is also required if testing cannot be conducted in‐house) 5c-1: Small Meter Test Strategy & Sample
5c-2: Small Meter Test Sample
5c-3: Small Meter Test Data Analysis
5c-4: Large Meter Test Design
5c-5: Large Meter Test Data Analysis $6,780, typical (discuss pricing with E Source. Pricing based on test data and billing data availability)
197
20 TASK 6 SWRCB WATER LOSS STANDARD ASSISTANCE
Task 6a: Information Order Response Assistance:
Document response to Information Orders from the SWRCB related to compliance with the Water Loss Standard.
● Compilation of results and findings from related activities to date ● Memo documenting response to Information Order
Task 6b: Off‐Ramp Assistance:
Document compliance with Off‐Ramp criteria
● Collection of relevant data and supporting documents
● Document activities and/or data proving compliance with each Off‐Ramp criterion ● Compilation of Off‐Ramp request
Task 6c: Economic Model Custom Input Evaluation:
Calculate custom inputs and compile supporting documents for the SWRCB’s economic model. ● Request and compilation of relevant data (e.g. leak repair documentation, leak detection results, financial data, infrastructure data, etc.)
● Review of data collected to identify what custom inputs may be calculated ● Calculation of customized value for inputs where the minimum data threshold is met ● Compilation of supporting documents for input adjustment application ● Assistance with creating memo to the SWRCB, requesting custom input adjustment Task 6d: Questionnaire Response Assistance
Document responses to SWRCB required reporting (Data Quality, Pressure Management, Asset Management, and/or Leak Registry)
● Request and compilation of relevant data
● Review of data collected
● Calculation and/or narration of response to each question ● Review of responses with agency staff
● Assistance with submitting response to questionnaire
$ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 6a: Information Order Response Assistance
$6,060 Task 6b: Off‐Ramp Assistance
$ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 6c: Economic Model Custom Input Evaluation
$ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 6d: Questionnaire Response
198
21 TASK 7 WATER LOSS TEAM DEVELOPMENT
Task 7a: Team Development Process Maps:
Establish a water loss team roster
Document processes related to water audit data collection ● Interviews with staff
● Identification of key water loss team members
● Document and map water loss data collection processes Task 7b: Educational Workshops:
In‐person educational workshop with agency staff to provide water loss background and connect day‐to‐day tasks with water loss calculation.
Workshops will offer an opportunity to elicit feedback from staff and prepare them for upcoming projects and data requests.
● Development of slides and materials for meeting
● Travel to agency
● Facilitation of educational workshop
$7,560 Task 7a: Team Development Process Maps
$5,680 Task 7b: Educational Workshops
TASK 8 LEAK SIMULATION MODEL
Task 8: Leak Simulation Model:
Quantify the impacts of leak detection technique accuracy on achievable overall system loss rates and projected workload
Evaluate the cost‐benefit of leakage control strategies under varying assumptions of fundamental leakage characteristics.
● Collection of leakage repair documentation
● Assessment of unique leakage profile
● Consider sub‐system level infrastructure characteristics and their impact on loss rates, including pipe‐ segment level data for likelihood and consequence of failure, if available. ● Provide an intuitive visualization of the water distribution system that shows how leakage control strategies are implemented and their resulting impact on individual leaks and system‐level leakage rates.
● Estimate future system‐wide loss rates under varying assumptions for leakage characteristics and loss recovery efforts that can be compared with state regulatory targets or other performance goals. ● Project the workload required to implement and maintain various leakage management strategies, including manual acoustic leak detection, automated acoustic noise loggers, satellite leak detection. $ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 8: Leak Simulation Model
199
22 TASK 9 WATER LOSS PILOT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND EVALUATION Task 9: Water Loss Pilot Program Management and Evaluation:
Develop a pilot plan to assess the effectiveness of leakage management technologies/strategies ● Collection of previous water audits and repair data
● Development of pilot plan detailing the leakage management techniques to be piloted, scale of implementation, and level of effort required from participating agency staff ● Work with participating agency to vet and manage technology providers ● Tracking and collection of data during pilot implementation ● Recommend metrics to evaluate the success of the pilot program and identify data collection necessary to calculate metrics
● Report on the performance of each pilot technology and recommend next steps necessary for full system implementation
$ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 9: Water Loss Pilot Program Management and Evaluation TASK 10 WATER LOSS STANDARD COMPLIANCE PLAN
Task 10: Water Loss Standard Compliance Plan:
Develop a Water Loss Compliance Plan to assist with meeting the Water Loss Standard ● Review the participating agency’s Water Loss Standard modeled by the SWRCB ● Evaluate data uncertainty and recommendations for data improvement ● If available, consider results of leak simulation model, real loss component analysis, and/or pilot results ● Develop a timeline, cost estimate, and key milestones associated with the Water Loss Compliance Plan, based on existing data sources
$ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 10: Water Loss Standard Compliance Plan
TASK 11 MISCELLANEOUS WATER LOSS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Task 11: Miscellaneous Water Loss Technical Assistance
For tasks not covered in Tasks 1-10, provide agency technical assistance for water loss analysis and/or compliance with State regulations.
● Assess level of support and associated costs through consultation with E Source ● E Source to provide cost proposal before proceeding
● Cost proposal shall be developed in accordance with hourly rates in Technical Assistance Program Contract
$ Varies,
Discuss
with E
Source
Task 11: Miscellaneous Water Loss Technical Assistance
200
Addendum B
January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027
Water Loss Control Technical Assistance Tasks
Participating Agency: _San Clemente_______
Cost Sheet for Selected Water Loss Control Services with E Source Tasks: (All tasks are performed by E Source) Task
Cost
Selected
Service
Met Funding
Request
(up to 50%
of task cost)
Task 1 – Project Administration and Progress Reporting (Required) $2,200 $2,200 Task 2 – Water Audit Compilation $11,240 $11,240
Task 3 – Source or Production Meter Volumetric Accuracy Testing $9,270 $ Task 4 – Custom Detailed Billing Data Chain Assessment Varies Task 5 – Component Analysis
Task 5a: Component Analysis of Real Losses – Gap Analysis Task 5b: Component Analysis of Real Losses
Task 5c: Component Analysis of Apparent Losses
$5,560
$16,180
Varies
$
$
$
Task 6 – SWRCB Water Loss Standard Assistance
Task 6a: Information Order Response Assistance
Task 6b: Off-Ramp Assistance
Task 6c: Economic Model Custom Input Evaluation
Task 6d: Questionnaire Response Assistance
Varies
$6,060
Varies
Varies
$
$
$
$
Task 7 – Water Loss Team Development
Task 7a: Team Development Process Maps
Task 7b: Educational Workshops
$7,560
$5,680
$
$
Task 8 – Leak Simulation Model Varies $
Task 9 – Water Loss Pilot Plan and Evaluation Varies $
Task 10 – Water Loss Compliance Plan Development
Task 10a: Water Loss Compliance Plan Development
Task 10b: Water Loss Compliance Plan Updated
Varies
$
$
Task 11 – Miscellaneous Water Loss Technical Assistance Varies $ Rollover Funds to be Applied: $15
New Amount to be Invoiced
(Task Totals Less Rollover Funds) Total: $13,425
This Cost Sheet may be updated upon mutual consent of the parties as indicated in writing.
By: By:
Date: Date:
Harvey De La Torre, General Manager Title:
Municipal Water District of Orange County Agency:
City of San Clemente
201
6.0_2021_02_11
Name of Utility: VOS Volume from Own Sources
Name of Contact Person: VOSEA VOS Error Adjustment
Email: WI Water Imported
Telephone | Ext.: WIEA WI Error Adjustment
City/Town/Municipality: WE Water Exported
State / Province: WEEA WE Error Adjustment
Other State/Province: BMAC Billed Metered Authorized Consumption Country: BUAC Billed Unmetered Authorized Consumption
Audit Preparation Date: UMAC Unbilled Metered Authorized Consumption Audit Year: UUAC Unbilled Unmetered Authorized Consumption Audit Year Label: (Fiscal, Calendar, etc) SDHE Systematic Data Handling Errors Audit Period Start Date: CMI Customer Metering Inaccuracies Audit Period End Date: UC Unauthorized Consumption
Volume Reporting Units: Lm Length of mains
Water System Structure: Nc Number of service connections Water Type: Lp Average length of (private) customer service line System ID Number: AOP Average Operating Pressure
Validator Name/ID: CRUC Customer Retail Unit Charge
Validator Email: VPC Variable Production Cost
Estimated Total Population Served by Water Utility:
Color Key User input Calculated Optional default
Guidance for the Guidance for the
or
AWWA Web Resources for Water Loss Control
https://www.awwa.org/Resources-Tools/Resource-Topics/Water-Loss-Control or Items referenced in the Free Water Audit Software v6.0 on the web:
Data Grading Matrix v6.0
Example Water Audit v6.0
Water Audit Compiler v6.0
AWWA Reports on Performance Indicators
M36 Manual
If you have questions or comments regarding this software please contact us at: [email protected] Answer questions about operational practices for each
audit input, and the data validity grades will automatically populate.
Review NRW components, performance indicators and
graphical outputs to evaluate the results of the audit.
Enter notes to explain how values were calculated,
document data sources, and related information about data management practices.
Interactive Data
Grading
949-361-6127
San Clemente
USA
Acre-feet
Nov 20 2025
California (CA)
Jun 30 2025
Jul 01 2024
Fiscal
2025
Enter the required data on this worksheet to calculate the water balance and data grading.
Water Balance
Loss Control
Planning
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0
Enter Basic Information
Raymond Pantoja
[email protected]
Table of Contents (TOC)
The current sheet. Enter contact information and basic
audit details.
Key of Input Acronyms In order of appearance in
the Worksheet
City of San Clemente
This spreadsheet-based water audit tool is designed to help quantify and track water losses associated with water distribution systems and identify areas for improved efficiency and cost recovery. It provides a "top-down" summary water audit format and is not meant to take the place of a full-scale, comprehensive water audit format. Auditors are strongly encouraged to refer to the most current edition of AWWA M36 Manual for Water Audits for detailed guidance on the water auditing process and targeting loss reduction levels. This tool contains several separate worksheets. Sheets can be accessed using the tabs at the bottom of the screen, or by clicking the TOC links below.
Start Page
Blank Sheet
Worksheet
Interactive Data Grading
After clicking an acronym button, answer all visible questions in the order they're presented, choosing best-fit answer
Dashboard
Notes
Acknowledgements for development of the AWWA Free
Water Audit Software v6.0.
Acknowledgements
By popular demand! A blank sheet.
The world is your canvas.
The values entered in the Worksheet automatically
populate the Water Balance.
Use this sheet to interpret the results of the audit validity score and performance indicators.
Use this sheet to understand the terms used in the audit process.
Diagrams depicting possible customer service connection line configurations.
Definitions
Service
Connection
Diagram
Choosing to enter unit of percent or volume
(applies to VOSEA, WIEA, WEEA, CMI)
Limiting
Choosing to enter default or custom input
(applies to UUAC, SDHE, UC)
choose entry option:
1.00% percent
7 Grade will populate when all visible questions
are complete for an input
The limiting criteria will be labeled along the right. If only 1 limiting criterion is shown, improving on that criterion will achieve a higher data grade. If multiple limiting criteria are shown, improving on each limiting criterion is necessary to achieve a higher data grade. A complete inventory of data grading criteria is available in the Data Grading Matrix v6.0 (see web resources)
0.25%
Retail
Potable Water
custom 75.000
volume 25.000
default
CA3010036
Rachel Davis
Use acronym buttons in IDG header to navigate among inputs. Acronym Key above.
White = needs answers, orange = complete, clear = not required. Example below. 51,545
[email protected]
choose entry option:
Worksheet
American Water Works Association Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
FWAS v6.0
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Start Page 1
202
Water Audit Report for:
Audit Year:
All volumes to be entered as: ACRE-FEET PER YEAR
WATER SUPPLIED choose entry option:
VOS Volume from Own Sources: n g n/a 0.000 Acre-ft/Yr n g n/a percent acre-ft/yr under-registration VOSEA WI Water Imported: n g 7 7,032.027 Acre-ft/Yr n g 10 volume acre-ft/yr over-registration WIEA WE Water Exported: n g 3 17.405 Acre-ft/Yr n g 4 0.00% percent acre-ft/yr select….. WEEA 7,011.572 Acre-ft/Yr
.
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION
BMAC Billed Metered: n g 9 6,733.575 Acre-ft/Yr
BUAC Billed Unmetered: n g n/a 0.000 Acre-ft/Yr
UMAC Unbilled Metered: n g 10 69.426 Acre-ft/Yr choose entry option:
UUAC Unbilled Unmetered: n g 3 16.834 Acre-ft/Yr 0.25% default acre-ft/yr Default option selected for Unbilled Unmetered, with automatic data grading of 3 6,819.835 Acre-ft/Yr
WATER LOSSES 191.737 Acre-ft/Yr
Apparent Losses
Default option selected for Systematic Data Handling Errors, with automatic data grading of 3 choose entry option:
SDHE Systematic Data Handling Errors: n g 3 16.834 Acre-ft/Yr 0.25% default acre-ft/yr CMI Customer Metering Inaccuracies: n g 6 29.333 Acre-ft/Yr 0.40% volume acre-ft/yr under-registration UC Unauthorized Consumption: n g 3 16.834 Acre-ft/Yr 0.25% default acre-ft/yr Default option selected for Unauthorized Consumption, with automatic data grading of 3
63.001 Acre-ft/Yr
Real Losses
128.736 Acre-ft/Yr
191.737 Acre-ft/Yr
NON-REVENUE WATER
277.997 Acre-ft/Yr
SYSTEM DATA
Lm Length of mains: n g 10 212.8 miles (including fire hydrant lead lengths) Nc Number of service connections: n g 8 17,967 (active and inactive) Service connection density: 84 conn./mile main
Yes
Lp Average length of (private) customer service line: n g 10 ft (average distance between property line and meter) AOP Average Operating Pressure: n g 8 86.0 psi
COST DATA
CRUC Customer Retail Unit Charge: n g 10 $4.77
VPC Variable Production Cost: n g 8 $1,426.55 $/acre-ft $/yr (optional input) WATER AUDIT DATA VALIDITY TIER:
go to
dashboard
PRIORITY AREAS FOR ATTENTION TO IMPROVE DATA VALIDITY: KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR TARGETS:
Based on the information provided, audit reliability can be most improved by addressing the following components: OPTIONAL: If targets exist for the operational performance indicators, they can be input below:
1: Water Imported (WI) Unit Total Losses: 23.1 gal/conn/day 2: Unauthorized Consumption (UC) Unit Apparent Losses: 3.4 gal/conn/day 3: Systematic Data Handling Errors (SDHE) Unit Real LossesA : 19.7 gal/conn/day
Unit Real LossesB: gal/mile/day
If entered above by user, targets will display on KPI gauges (see Dashboard) Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop/property line? AWWA Free Water Audit Software:
Worksheet
4.580
City of San Clemente
3.050
Jul 01 2024 - Jun 30 2025
Water Supplied Error Adjustments
2025 Fiscal
Real Losses:
WATER LOSSES:
Average length of customer service line has been set to zero and a data grading of 10 has been applied A weighted scale for the components of supply, consumption and water loss is included in the calculation of the Water Audit Data Validity Score *** The Water Audit Data Validity Score is in Tier IV (71-90). See Dashboard tab for additional outputs. *** $/100 cubic feet (ccf)
$28,574,624
Total Annual Operating Cost
go to start page
NON-REVENUE WATER:
If entering an
Error Adjustment,
select under- or overregistration
29.333
WATER SUPPLIED:
AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION:
Apparent Losses:
Click 'g' to determine data validity grade
Click 'n' to add notes
FWAS v6.0
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
To access definitions, click the input name
To edit water system info:
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Worksheet 2
203
Interactive Data Grading Responses
2025
go to notes
vos Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions vos.0 Did the water utility supply any water from its own sources during the audit year? No vos.1 What percent of own supply volume is metered?
vos.2 What is the frequency of electronic calibration?
vos.3 What level of data transfer errors are checked as part of the electronic calibration process?
vos.4 Is the most recent electronic calibration documentation available for review? vos.5 What is the frequency of in-situ flow accuracy testing? vos.6 Is the most recent in-situ flow accuracy testing documentation available for review? vos.7 What are the total volume-weighted average results of in-situ flow accuracy testing (during or closest to audit year)?
vos.8 Have testing and calibration procedures been closely scrutinized for compliance with procedures described in the AWWA M36 and/or M33 Manual(s)? vos.9 Which best describes the frequency of finished water meter readings? vos.10
Which best describes the frequency of data review for anomalies/errors? These can include numbers that are outside of typical patterns, and zero or 'null' values that may reflect a gap in data recording.
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT: n/a
(see Start
Page for
For questions 2-10 below: Choose the answer that applies for those meters that measure >90% of the finished water volume.
In-situ flow accuracy testing = a test process that confirms the flow measuring accuracy of the primary device (the flowmeter), in its installed location, using an independent reference volume.
Electronic calibration = a process that checks for error in the metering secondary device(s) and/or the tertiary device(s).
Secondary device can include conversion to mA, meter transmitter or similar instrumentation.
Tertiary device can include SCADA, historian or other computerized archival system. go to input Volume from Own Sources (VOS) - Data Grading Criteria
SDHE CMI UC
VOS VOSEA WI WIEA WE WEEA BMAC BUAC UMAC
Lm Nc Lp AOP CRUC VPC
Use acronyms for navigation
Orange = complete
FWAS v6.0 American Water Works Association. Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
UUAC
White = incomplete
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 3 of 41 204
Interactive Data Grading Responses
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 4 of 41 205
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
vosea Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions vosea.1 Are tank levels monitored automatically & recorded daily? vosea.2 Are daily changes of stored water volumes in distribution system tanks included in the tabulation of the daily "Volume from Own Sources" quantity? vosea.3 Is the annual net distribution storage change included in either the VOS input or the VOSEA input?
vosea.4 Are the flow accuracy test and/or electronic calibration results included in the VOSEA input in the water audit?
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT: n/a
go to input Volume from Own Sources Error Adjustment (VOSEA) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 5 of 41 206
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
wi Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions wi.0 Did the water utility import any water during the audit year? Yes wi.1 What percent of water imported is metered? >99%
wi.2 What is the frequency of electronic calibration? None, or Not within last 5 years Limiting wi.3 What level of data transfer errors are checked as part of the electronic calibration process? Data transfer errors are checked at secondary device(s), but not to tertiary device(s) Limiting wi.4 Is the most recent electronic calibration documentation available? Yes wi.5 What is the frequency of in-situ flow accuracy testing? Annually Limiting wi.6 Is the most recent in-situ flow accuracy testing documentation available? Yes wi.7 What are the total volume-weighted average results of in-situ flow accuracy testing (during or closest to audit year)? At or within ±3%
wi.8 Have testing and calibration procedures been closely scrutinized for compliance with procedures described in the AWWA M36 and/or M33 Manual(s)? Yes wi.9 Which best describes the frequency of meter readings (data collection frequency as opposed to billing frequency)? Continuous
wi.10
What is the frequency of data review & correction by Exporting or Importing Utility for data gaps and/or anomalies? These can include numbers that are outside of typical patterns, and zero or 'null' values that may reflect a gap in data recording.
Daily
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
7 For questions 2-10 below: Choose the answer that applies for those meters that measure >90% of the water imported volume.
In-situ flow accuracy testing = a test process that confirms the flow measuring accuracy of the primary device (the flowmeter), in its installed location, using an independent reference volume.
Electronic calibration = a process that checks for error in the metering secondary device(s) and/or the tertiary device(s).
Secondary device can include conversion to mA, meter transmitter or similar instrumentation.
Tertiary device can include SCADA, historian or other computerized archival system. go to input Water Imported (WI) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 6 of 41 207
Interactive Data Grading Responses
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 7 of 41 208
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
wiea Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions wiea.1 Is an agreement in place between Exporting and Importing Utility for the purchase of water? Yes, written
wiea.2 Are meter accuracy testing or electronic calibration requirements stipulated in the water purchase agreement? Yes, and stipulated as more frequent than annual wiea.3 Are flow accuracy test and/or electronic calibration results used to inform the error adjustment input in the water audit? Yes, results are analyzed and incorporated wiea.4 Who has access to the import meter readings including current and archived data? Exporting and Importing Utility FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
10 go to input Water Imported Error Adjustment (WIEA) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 8 of 41 209
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
we Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions we.0 Did the water utility export any water during the audit year? Yes we.1 What percent of water exported is metered? >99%
we.2 What is the frequency of electronic calibration? None, or Not within last 5 years Limiting we.3 What level of data transfer errors are checked as part of the electronic calibration process?
we.4 Is the most recent electronic calibration documentation available? we.5 What is the frequency of in-situ flow accuracy testing? None, or Not within last 5 years Limiting we.6 Is the most recent in-situ flow accuracy testing documentation available? we.7 What are the total volume-weighted average results of in-situ flow accuracy testing (during or closest to audit year)?
we.8 Have testing and calibration procedures been closely scrutinized for compliance with procedures described in the AWWA M36 and/or M33 Manual(s)? we.9 Which best describes the frequency of meter readings (data collection frequency as opposed to billing frequency)? Once per month
we.10
What is the frequency of data review & correction by Exporting or Importing Utility for data gaps and/or anomalies? These can include numbers that are outside of typical patterns, and zero or 'null' values that may reflect a gap in data recording.
Once per month
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
3 For questions 2-10 below: Choose the answer that applies for those meters that measure >90% of the water exported volume.
In-situ flow accuracy testing = a test process that confirms the flow measuring accuracy of the primary device (the flowmeter), in its installed location, using an independent reference volume.
Electronic calibration = a process that checks for error in the metering secondary device(s) and/or the tertiary device(s).
Secondary device can include conversion to mA, meter transmitter or similar instrumentation.
Tertiary device can include SCADA, historian or other computerized archival system. go to input Water Exported (WE) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 9 of 41 210
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
weea Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions weea.1 Is an agreement in place between Exporting and Importing Utility? Yes, written weea.2 Are meter accuracy testing or electronic calibration requirements stipulated in the water purchase agreement? No, but meter accuracy testing and/or electronic calibration is conducted upon request of the importing utility weea.3 Are flow accuracy test and/or electronic calibration results used to inform the error adjustment input in the water audit? No Limiting
weea.4 Who has access to the import meter readings including current and archived data? Exporting and Importing Utility FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
4 go to input Water Exported Error Adjustment (WEEA) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 10 of 41 211
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
bmac Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions bmac.0 Were any customers metered in the audit year? Yes bmac.1 For billed metered accounts, what % of bills are estimated in a typical billing cycle? 5% or less bmac.2
How often does the utility read its customer meters?
For systems with multiple read frequencies, select the reading frequency that describes the majority of your customers.
Monthly Limiting
bmac.3 Is the BMAC volume pro-rated to represent consumption occuring exactly during the audit period? Yes
bmac.4 How frequently does internal review by utility staff of the BMAC volumes occur? Every billing cycle bmac.5 What level of detail is examined in the internal review of BMAC volumes? Totals grouped by use type or customer class Limiting bmac.6 When was the most recent billing data review by someone who is independent of the utility billing process? Within last 3 years
bmac.7 What level of detail was examined in the review by someone who is independent of the utility billing process? Full billing database query and analysis of raw data to verify the summary consumption volumes FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
9 go to input Billed Metered Authorized Consumption (BMAC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 11 of 41 212
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
buac Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions buac.0 Was there any billed consumption on unmetered accounts in the audit year? No buac.1 What portion of billed accounts are unmetered (% by number of accounts)? buac.2 Methodology to quantify consumption for unmetered accounts? buac.3 How frequently is unmetered customer consumption estimated? FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
n/a
go to input Billed Unmetered Authorized Consumption (BUAC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 12 of 41 213
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
umac Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions umac.0 Did the water utility have any unbilled-metered consumption in the audit year? Yes umac.1 Does the water utility policy articulate which accounts are exempt from billing? Policy includes specific exemptions umac.2 How many unbilled metered accounts exist? Monitored, count available umac.3
How often is each unbilled customer meter read?
For systems with multiple read frequencies, select the reading frequency that describes the majority of your customers.
Monthly or more frequently
umac.4 How often are unbilled metered volumes reviewed for error? Each billing cycle FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
10 go to input Unbilled Metered Authorized Consumption (UMAC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 13 of 41 214
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
uuac Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions uuac.0 On the Worksheet, the status of the default option is: Default is used because Custom Value is selected but no value has been entered uuac.1 How well-understood is the extent of unbilled unmetered use? Complete inventory exists uuac.2 Which best describes the records that are kept for events of unbilled unmetered use? Each event is documented
uuac.3 How is the majority of unbilled unmetered use estimated? Entirely from event-specific estimates FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
3 This Data Grading Criteria is hidden when the 'default' input is used on the Worksheet go to input Unbilled Unmetered Authorized Consumption (UUAC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 14 of 41 215
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
sdhe Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions sdhe.0 On the Worksheet, the status of the default option is: Default is used because Custom Value is selected but no value has been entered sdhe.1 Which best describes how the input was derived?
sdhe.2 Which best describes validation performed in the billing software for multipliers (conversions between unit of meter reading and unit of billing)? sdhe.3 Which best describes the policy for new service accounts to ensure there is no lapse between start of customer water usage and start of measurement/billing? sdhe.4 Which best describes auditing that takes place on the billing process? FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
3 This Data Grading Criteria is hidden when the 'default' input is used on the Worksheet go to input Systematic Data Handling Error (SDHE) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 15 of 41 216
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
cmi Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions cmi.0 Was there any metered customer usage during the audit period? Yes cmi.1 Do you test meters reactively (when triggered by customer complaint or billing/consumption flag)? Reactive testing conducted
cmi.2
For small size customer meters, which best describes the frequency of proactive testing (effort beyond when triggered by customer complaint or billing/consumption flags)?
Not recurring, but conducted within 5 years prior to audit period Limiting cmi.3 Which best describes what meters are included in the proactive small size customer meter testing activities? Proactive - representative sample (for small meters) cmi.4 For mid and large size customer meters, which best describes the frequency of the proactive testing program? Not recurring, but conducted within 5 years prior to audit period Limiting cmi.5 Which best describes what meters are included in the proactive mid- and large customer meter testing activities? Testing targeted to subsets of meters (ie most revenue generating or customer types) cmi.6 Which best describes how the input was derived? Calculated based on most recent meter accuracy tests, but not comprehensive of all meter performance cmi.7 Has the input derivation been reviewed by someone with expert knowledge in the M36 methodology? Yes
cmi.8 To what extent does meter replacement occur and for which meters? Annual proactive replacement of subset of meters (i.e. by age or throughput) cmi.9 Which best describes the reliability of meter installation records? Records are kept for meter installations, and they include data on installation date, type, size, and manufacturer FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
6 go to input Customer Metering Inaccuracies (CMI) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 16 of 41 217
Interactive Data Grading Responses
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 17 of 41 218
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
uc Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions uc.0 On the Worksheet, the status of the default option is: Default is used because Custom Value is selected but no value has been entered uc.1 Which best describes how the input was derived?
uc.2 Which best describes the extent of unauthorized consumption tracking and oversight?
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
3 This Data Grading Criteria is hidden when the 'default' input is used on the Worksheet go to input Unauthorized Consumption (UC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 18 of 41 219
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
Lm Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions Lm.1 How was the input derived? Derived directly from Mains inventory (GIS, ledger, etc) Lm.2 Are hydrant laterals included in the input derivation? Yes Lm.3 Which best describes how the Mains inventory (GIS, ledger, etc) is kept up to date? Additions or subtractions are updated in the mains inventory (GIS, ledger, etc), at least annually Lm.4 Which best describes how the Mains inventory (GIS, ledger, etc) is field validated to confirm field conditions match the inventory? Field validation is accomplished (i.e. in daily operations or specific validation projects) FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
10 go to input Length of Mains (Lm) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 19 of 41 220
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
Nc Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions Nc.1 How was the input derived? Extracted from Services inventory (GIS, billing system, etc) Nc.2 What is the count of services based on? Non-premise based, i.e. meter count, customer count Limiting Nc.3 Are inactive (but still pressurized) service lines included in the input? These may be metered or unmetered. Yes
Nc.4 Which best describes how the inventory of service connections (GIS, billing system, etc) is kept up to date? Additions or subtractions are updated in the service line inventory (GIS, billing system, etc), at least annually Nc.5 Which best describes how the inventory of service connections (GIS, billing system, etc) is field validated to confirm field conditions match the inventory? Field validation is accomplished for the entire system (i.e. in daily operations or specific validation projects) FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
8 go to input Number of Service Connections (Nc) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 20 of 41 221
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
Lp Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions Lp.0 Are customer meters typically located at the curbstop or property line? Yes Lp.1 How was the input derived?
Lp.2 Which best describes how the Customer Service Line and Meter Locations mapping is kept up to date?
Lp.3 Which best describes how the Customer Service Line mapping is validated to what is in the field?
Lp.4 Which best describes the policy to define where the utility's ownership of the service line ends, and the customer's ownership of the service line begins? FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
10 go to input Average Length of (Private) Customer Service Line (Lp) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 21 of 41 222
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
aop Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions aop.1 Which best describes checks on the boundary integrity for the system's pressure zone(s)? Normally-closed boundary valves between zones have been confirmed within the past 3 years to be fully closed aop.2 Which best describes how one-time pressure readings (i.e. from hydrants) are collected? Collected annually during routine system flushing and/or hydrant testing aop.3 Which best describes where continuous pressure data (via temporary data loggers or permanent telemetry) is collected? At zone boundary conditions only (i.e. supply entry points, PRVs, booster stations) Limiting aop.4 Which best describes how continuous pressure data is collected? Year-round data collection via permanent monitoring aop.5 How was the input derived? Derived from hydraulic model, where model has not been field calibrated in the last 5 years FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
8 go to input Average Operating Pressure (AOP) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 22 of 41 223
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
cruc Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions cruc.0 Was any metered consumption billed on a volumetric basis in the audit period? Yes cruc.1 Which best describes the use and reliability of the current rate structure? Customer bill calculations have been checked to confirm the rate structure is correctly implemented cruc.2 Choose the option that best describes how the input was derived A volume-weighted average of all rates was calculated cruc.3 Is there any additional volumetric revenue the utility receives that depends on water meter readings, such as sewer? Yes, and this has been incorporated into the volume-weighted average calculation cruc.4 Has the input derivation been reviewed by someone with expert knowledge in the M36 methodology? Yes
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT:
10 go to input Customer Retail Unit Charge (CRUC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 23 of 41 224
Interactive Data Grading Responses
go to notes
vpc Criteria Question Select Best-Fit Answers to All Visible Questions vpc.1 Choose the option that best describes how the input was derived Multiple sources of water exist, and a volume-weighted average was calculated for all sources vpc.2
Choose the option that best describes which short-run marginal costs have been included in the input, using the definitions below for reference. Short-run marginal costs can include the following:
- chemicals + power for treatment, typically applicable if the utility is producing/treating water
- power for distribution, typically applicable if pumps exist in the distribution network - water acquisition costs, typically applicable if the utility is purchasing water or incurs any extraction costs for withdrawing from a source
Some short-run marginal costs may not be applicable. The auditor should analyze the system characteristics to determine which costs are applicable for inclusion in the VPC input derivation. See also the latest AWWA M36 Manual for further guidance.
All applicable short-run marginal costs are included
vpc.3
Choose the option that best describes which long-run marginal costs have been included in the input, using the definitions below for reference. Long-run marginal costs can include the following:
- water treatment residuals management, typically applicable if solids are produced from water treatment process
- accelerated wear & tear on dynamic equipment, typically applicable if pumps exist for treatment and/or distribution, or any other equipment exists that wears out as a function of use instead of time (i.e. filter media, chemical dosing pumps, uv disinfection bulbs, etc) - payouts for damage claims from main and service line breaks, typically applicable if damage claims are paid by the utility
- accelerated expansion of supply capacity, typically applicable if the utility is at or nearing supply capacity, or scarecity costs in water scarce areas - full cost pricing that includes all lifecycle costs and externalities (internalized or not) Some long-run marginal costs may not be applicable. The auditor should analyze the system characteristics to determine which costs are applicable for inclusion in the VPC input derivation. See also the latest AWWA M36 Manual for further guidance.
Long-run marginal costs have not been evaluated for applicability, and are not included Limiting vpc.4 Has the input derivation been reviewed by someone with expert knowledge in the M36 methodology? Yes
FINAL DATA GRADE FOR THIS AUDIT INPUT: 8
go to input Variable Production Cost (VPC) - Data Grading Criteria AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Interactive Data Grading 24 of 41 225
AWWA Free Water Audit Software: Dashboard
Water Audit Report for: City of San Clemente Audit Year: Fiscal Jul 01 2024 - Jun 30 2025 Actual KPI result Target (see Worksheet)
1 US$ = Local
Data Validity Score: Data Validity Tier: enter current conversion rate for local currency Tier II (26-50) Tier III (51-70)
Tier IV (71-90)
Tier I (≤25)
Tier V (91-100)
Total Loss Cost Rate Apparent Loss Cost Rate Real Loss Cost Rate $/conn/year $/conn/year $/conn/year
NRW Components Summary
Unit Total Losses Unit Apparent Losses Unit Real LossesA gal/conn/day gal/conn/day gal/conn/day
Average Operating Pressure
psi
Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) Unit Real LossesB
dimensionless gal/mile/day
See UARL definition for additional guidance on the ILI
Real Losses Unauthorized Consumption Acre-ft/Yr gal/conn/day Systematic Data Handling Errors Unbilled Unmetered Auth Cons Customer Metering Inaccuracies Unbilled Metered Authorized Cons Apparent Losses
Real Losses
Unbilled Authorized Cons
Non-Revenue Water
2025
74 Tier IV (71-90)
Data Validity
gauge %iles per validated industry ranges2
0.737
See Loss Control Planning for Tier Details
Key Performance Indicators
10.22 go to worksheet go to grading go to references
17.50 9.5
7.27 3.1
(UARL) Unavoidable Annual Real Losses 370.5 18.4
VPC
0.3 540
result is below
10th %ile
result is below
10th %ile
6.4 86
CRUC
Basis of Valuation
Blended
86.3 278.0
$130,709
$183,648
$123,054
$437,411
63.0 128.7 VPC
Volume Value
Acre-ft/Yr $/Yr
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
Total Volume of NRW = 278 Acreft/Yr
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
Total Cost of NRW =
$437,411/Yr
10th %ile
25th %ile
Median
75th %ile
90th %ile
2 3 4
2 3 4
2 3 4
2 3 4
2 3 4
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
FWAS v6.0
2 3
4 2
3 4 Median
90 90 th %ile 90 th %ile th %ile
Median Median
Median
Median Median
Median Median
25th
%ile
25th
%ile
25th
%ile
25th
%ile 25th
%ile
25th
%ile
25th
%ile
25th
%ile
75 75 th %ile 75th %ile th %ile
75th %ile 75th %ile 75th %ile
75 75 th %ile th %ile
10 10 th %ile 10 th %ile th %ile
90 10th %ile th %ile 90 10 th %ile th %ile
90 90 th %ile 90 th %ile th %ile 10 10 th %ile 10 th %ile th %ile Guidance Information for Key Performance
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Dashboard 25
226
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Dashboard 26
227
Water Audit Report for: City of San Clemente Fiscal
Audit Year: 2025 Jul 01 2024 - Jun 30 2025
General Notes:
Audit Item Notes on Input Derivation Notes on Data Validity Grading go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
Volume from
Own Sources
Error Adjustment
(VOSEA)
AWWA Free Water Audit Software:
User Notes
Volume from
Own Sources
(VOS)
Water Imported
(WI)
Water Imported
Error Adjustment
(WIEA)
Water Exported
(WE)
FWAS v6.0
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights
Reserved.
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Notes 27
228
Audit Item Notes on Input Derivation Notes on Data Validity Grading go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
Water Exported
Error Adjustment
(WEIA)
Billed Metered
Authorized
Consumption
(BMAC)
Billed Unmetered
Authorized
Consumption
(BUAC)
Unbilled Metered
Authorized
Consumption
(UMAC)
Unbilled
Unmetered
Authorized
Consumption
(UUAC)
Systematic Data
Handling Errors
(SDHE)
Customer
Metering
Inaccuracies
(CMI)
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Notes 28
229
Audit Item Notes on Input Derivation Notes on Data Validity Grading go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
go to
worksheet
go to
grading
Customer Retail
Unit Charge
(CRUC)
Variable
Production Cost
(VPC)
Unauthorized
Consumption
(UC)
Length of Mains
(Lm)
Number of
Service
Connections
(Nc)
Average Length of
(private) Customer
Service Line
(Lp)
Average
Operating
Pressure
(AOP)
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Notes 29
230
Hello, I am a blank sheet, at your service.
1.5%
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 231
Water Balance Water Audit Report for:
Audit Year: 2025 Jul 01 2024 - Jun 30 2025
Data Validity Tier: Tier IV (71-90)
Water Exported
(WE)
(corrected for known
errors)
Revenue Water
(Exported)
17.405 17.405
Billed Metered Consumption (BMAC)
(water exported is removed) Revenue Water
6,733.575
6,733.575 Billed Unmetered Consumption (BUAC) 6,733.575
0.000
6,819.835 Unbilled Metered Consumption (UMAC)
69.426
0.000 86.260 Unbilled Unmetered Consumption (UUAC)
16.834
Water Supplied Systematic Data Handling Errors (SDHE) 277.997 7,028.977 Apparent Losses 16.834
7,011.572 63.001 Customer Metering Inaccuracies (CMI)
29.333
Unauthorized Consumption (UC)
Water Losses 16.834
191.737 Leakage on Transmission and/or Distribution
Mains
Real Losses Not broken down
7,028.977 128.736 Leakage and Overflows at Utility's Storage Tanks
Not broken down
Leakage on Service Connections
Not broken down
Water Imported (WI)
(corrected for known
errors)
AWWA Free Water Audit Software
Non-Revenue Water
(NRW)
Billed Authorized Consumption
Unbilled Authorized Consumption
(corrected for known
errors)
City of San Clemente
Billed Water Exported
Volume from Own
Sources (VOS)
System Input
Volume
Authorized
Consumption
FWAS v6.0
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Water Balance 31
232
Water Audit Report for:
Audit Year: 2025
Data Validity Tier:
Functional Focus
Area
Audit Data Collection
Short-term loss control
Long-term loss control
Target-setting
Benchmarking
AWWA Free Water Audit Software:
Determining Water Loss Standing
For validity scores of 50 or below, the shaded blocks should not be focus areas until better data validity is achieved.
Preliminary Comparisons - can begin to
rely upon with PIs for performance
comparisons for real losses
Performance Benchmarking with PIs is
meaningful in comparing real loss
standing
Identify Best Practices/ Best in class;
PIs are very reliable as real loss
performance indicators for best in class
service
Research information on leak detection
programs; Begin flowcharting analysis
of customer billing system
Tier II (26-50) Tier V (91-100)
Analyze business process for customer
metering and billing functions and water
supply operations; Identify data gaps;
improve supply metering
Stay abreast of improvements in
metering, meter reading, billing, leakage
management and infrastructure
rehabilitation
Conduct loss assessment investigations
on a sample portion of the system:
customer meter testing, leak survey,
unauthorized consumption, etc
Establish ongoing mechanisms for
customer meter accuracy testing, active
leakage control and infrastructure
monitoring
Refine, enhance or expand ongoing
programs based upon economic
justification
Launch auditing and loss control team;
address supply metering deficiencies
Evaluate and refine loss control goals
on a yearly basis
Begin to assess long-term needs
requiring large expenditure: customer
meter replacement, water main
replacement program, new customer
billing system or AMR/AMI system
Begin to assemble economic business
case for long-term needs based upon
improved data becoming available
through the water audit process
Conduct detailed planning, budgeting
and launch of comprehensive
improvements for metering, billing or
infrastructure management
Continue incremental improvements in
short-term and long-term loss control
interventions
Establish long-term apparent and real
loss reduction goals (+10 year horizon)
Establish mid-range (5 year horizon)
apparent and real loss reduction goals
City of San Clemente
Water Loss Control Planning Guide
Establish/revise policies and procedures
for data collection
Refine data collection practices and
establish as routine business process
Annual water audit is a reliable gauge of
year-to-year water efficiency standing
Tier III (51-70) Tier IV (71-90)
Water Audit Data Validity Tier (Score Range)
Tier I (1-25)
Tier IV (71-90)
Jul 01 2024 - Jun 30 2025
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
FWAS v6.0
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Loss Control Planning 32 233
Item Name
Apparent
Losses
AUTHORIZED
CONSUMPTION
Average Length of
(private)
Customer Service
Line
(Lp)
Average
Operating
Pressure
(AOP)
Billed Authorized
Consumption
AWWA Free Water Audit Software:
Definitions
Description
= billed metered + billed unmetered + unbilled metered + unbilled unmetered consumption The volume of metered and/or unmetered water taken by registered customers, the water utility's own uses, and uses of others who are implicitly or explicitly authorized to do so by the water utility; for residential, commercial, industrial and public-minded purposes.
Typical retail customers' consumption is tabulated usually from established customer accounts as billed metered consumption, or - for unmetered customers - billed unmetered consumption. These types of consumption, along with billed water exported, provide revenue potential for the water utility. Typically a lag will exist between timing for reading of supply meters and reading of customer meters. A lag-time correction should typically be calculated to account for this. Be certain to tabulate the water exported volume as a separate component and do not "double-count" it by including in the billed metered consumption component as well as the water exported component.
Unbilled authorized consumption occurs typically in non-account uses, including water for fire fighting and training, flushing of water mains and sewers, street cleaning, watering of municipal gardens, public fountains, or similar public-minded uses. Occasionally these uses may be metered and billed (or charged a flat fee), but usually they are unmetered and unbilled. In the latter case, the water auditor may use a default value to estimate this quantity, or implement procedures for the reliable quantification of these uses. This starts with documenting usage events as they occur and estimating the amount of water used in each event. (See Unbilled Unmetered Authorized Consumption) This is the average length of underground customer service line, Lp, that is owned and maintained by the customer; from the point of ownership transfer to the customer water meter, or building line (if unmetered). The quantity is one of the data inputs for the calculation of Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL), which serves as the denominator of the performance indicator: Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI). The value of Lp is multiplied by the number of customer service connections to obtain a total length of customer owned piping in the system. The purpose of this parameter is to account for the unmetered service line infrastructure that is the responsibility of the customer for arranging repairs of leaks that occur on their lines. In many cases leak repairs arranged by customers take longer to be executed than leak repairs arranged by the water utility on utility-maintained piping. Leaks run longer - and lose more water - on customerowned service piping, than utility owned piping.
If the customer water meter exists near the ownership transfer point (usually the curb stop located between the water main and the customer premises) this distance is zero because the meter and transfer point are the same. This is the often encountered configuration of customer water meters located in an underground meter box or "pit" outside of the customer's building. The Free Water Audit Software asks a "Yes/No" question about the meter at this location. If the auditor selects "Yes" then this distance is set to zero and the data grading score for this component is set to 10.
If water meters are typically located inside the customer premise/building, or properties are unmetered, it is up to the water auditor to estimate a system-wide average Lp length based upon the various customer land parcel sizes and building locations in the service area. Lp will be a shorter length in areas of high density housing, and a longer length in areas of low density housing and varied commercial and industrial buildings. General parcel demographics should be employed to obtain a total Lp length (Lc) and subsequently a weighted average Lp length for the entire system.
Refer to the "Service Connection Diagram" worksheet for a depiction of the service line/metering configurations that typically exist in water utilities. This worksheet gives guidance on the determination of the Average Length, Lp, for each configuration.
This is the average pressure in the distribution system that is the subject of the water audit. If the water utility is compiling the water audit for the first time, the average pressure can be approximated, but with a low data grading. In subsequent years of auditing, effort should be made to improve the accuracy of the average pressure quantity. This will then qualify the value for a higher data grading.
In the absence of a hydraulic model, the average pressure may be approximated by obtaining readings of static water pressure from a representative sample of fire hydrants or other system access points evenly located across the system. A weighted average of the pressure can be assembled; but be sure to take into account the elevation of the fire hydrants, which typically exist several feet higher than the level of buried water pipelines.
If your water utility has an up-to-date and calibrated hydraulic model of the water distribution system, it can be utilized to obtain a very accurate quantity of average pressure. However using the average pressure of all “nodes” in the system model is not necessarily the most accurate way to calculate the average operating pressure. This is especially true if there are significant pressure differences throughout the system, and the “nodes” are not evenly distributed throughout the distribution system. The most accurate calculation is to obtain the average pressure that each pipe segment experiences. The way to do this is to calculate the pressure at each end of the pipe. Then calculate the average of those two values and multiply this average value by the length of that pipe. This must be calculated for all pipe segments in the model. Finally calculate the sum of all of these values and and divide by the total pipe length. This effectively calculates a weighted average of pressure over the total pipe length. For low density systems (<32 connections/mile), average mains pressures at the service connection or curb stop may have greater influence and should be considered.
All consumption that is billed and authorized by the utility. This may include both metered and unmetered consumption. See "Authorized Consumption" for more information.
= systematic data handling errors + customer metering inaccuracies + unauthorized consumption Apparent Losses include all types of inaccuracies associated with customer metering (worn meters as well as improperly sized meters or wrong type of meter for the water usage profile) as well as systematic data handling errors (meter reading, billing, archiving and reporting), plus unauthorized consumption (theft or illegal use).
NOTE: Over-estimation of Apparent Losses results in under-estimation of Real Losses. Under-estimation of Apparent Losses results in over-estimation of Real Losses.
A
FWAS v6.0
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
Find
Find
Find
Find
View
Service
Connection
Diagram
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Definitions 33
234
Item Name Description
Billed Metered
Authorized
Consumption
(BMAC)
Billed Unmetered
Authorized
Consumption
(BUAC)
Customer
Metering
Inaccuracies
(CMI)
Customer Retail
Unit Charge
(CRUC)
Infrastructure
Leakage Index
(ILI)
Apparent water losses caused by the collective under-registration of customer water meters. Many customer water meters gradually wear as large cumulative volumes of water are passed through them over time. This causes the meters to under-register the flow of water. This occurrence is common with smaller residential meters of sizes 5/8-inch and 3/4 inch after they have registered very large cumulative volumes of water, which generally occurs only after periods of years. For meters sized 1-inch and larger - typical of multi-unit residential, commercial, institutional and industrial accounts - meter under-registration can occur from wear or from the improper application of the meter; i.e. installing the wrong type of meter or the wrong size of meter, for the flow pattern (profile) of the consumer. For instance, many larger meters have reduced accuracy at low flows. If an oversized meter is installed, most of the time the routine flow will occur in the low flow range of the meter, and a significant portion of it may not be registered. It is important to properly select and install all meters, but particularly large customer meters, size 1-inch and larger.
The auditor has two options for entering data for this component of the audit. The auditor can enter a percentage under-registration (typically an estimated value), this will apply the selected percentage to the two categories of metered consumption to determine the volume of water not recorded due to customer meter inaccuracy. Note that this percentage is a composite average inaccuracy for all customer meters in the entire meter population. The percentage will be multiplied by the sum of the volumes in the Billed Metered and Unbilled Metered components. Alternatively, if the auditor has substantial data from meter testing activities, he or she can calculate their own loss volumes, and this volume may be entered directly.
Note that a value of zero will be accepted but is not recommended, as all metered systems tend to have some degree of inaccuracy. A positive value should be entered. A value of zero in this component is generally valid only if the water utility does not meter its customer population.
The formula for caculating a volume of CMI from a percentage input is as follows: CMI volume = (BMAC+UMAC)/(1-CMI%)-(BMAC+UMAC) The Customer Retail Unit Charge represents the volumetric portion of the total charges that customers pay for water service. The CRUC does not include fixed charges. This unit charge cost is applied routinely to the components of Apparent Loss, since these losses represent water reaching customers but not (fully) paid for. Since most water utilities have a rate structure that includes a variety of different charges costs based upon class of customer, a volume-weighted average of water sold at each unique rate should be calculated to determine a single composite charge that should be entered into this cell. Finally, the weighted average charge should also include additional charges for sewer, storm water or biosolids processing, but only if these charges are based upon the volume of potable water consumed.
For water utilities in regions with limited water resources and a questionable ability to meet the drinking water demands in the future, the Customer Retail Unit Charge Cost might also be applied to value the Real Losses; instead of applying the Variable Production Cost to Real Losses. In this way, it is assumed that every unit volume of leakage reduced by leakage management activities will be sold to a customer.
Note: the Free Water Audit Software allows the user to select the units that are charged to customers (either $/1,000 gallons, $/hundred cubic feet, or $/1,000 litres) and automatically converts these units for purpose of calculating Apparent Loss valuations. The monetary units are United States dollars, $.
The ratio of the Current Annual Real Losses (Real Losses) to the Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL). This performance indicator is dimensionless.
NOTES ON THE UARL AND ILI:
1. This Free Water Audit Software version 6 presents the calculated UARL and ILI for systems of all sizes and all pressures. Some published research is now available on predicting how UARL is likely to be modified when modeling low leakage limits in systems that are very small (< 3000 conn), or have very low average pressures, or have very high pressures (aka boundary cases). Inherent over- or under- estimation of UARL volume may exist in these boundary cases, as they operate at or near the limits of the UARL model assumptions. More widespread application and understanding of system specific corrections to the UARL model in these boundary cases is now likely to occur, but are not included in the FWAS at the time of this publication. Caution is advised when using the standard UARL modeled value (and subsequently the ILI) for boundary cases. In boundary cases, the ILI may still be considered a general Performance Indicator, but not used as an absolute performance measurement or for benchmark comparisons.
2. The UARL term is based on average operating pressure in a given audit year, and a utility's current pressure conditions may not be optimized. Thus, ILI should always be interpreted with some measure of pressure, and only used for tracking progress if all justifiable pressure management has already been completed.
All metered consumption which is billed to retail customers, including all groups of customers such as domestic, commercial, industrial or institutional. It does NOT include water supplied to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is metered and billed. Be sure to subtract any consumption for exported water sales that may be included in these billing roles. Water supplied as exports to neighboring water utilities should be included only in the Water Exported component. The metered consumption data can be taken directly from billing records for the water audit period. The accuracy of yearly metered consumption data can be refined by including an adjustment to account for customer meter reading lag time since not all customer meters are read on the same day of the meter reading period. However additional analysis is necessary to determine the lag time adjustment value, which may or may not be significant.
All billed consumption which is calculated based on estimates or norms from water usage sites that have been determined by utility policy to be left unmetered.
This is typically a very small component in systems that maintain a policy to meter their customer population. However, this quantity can be the key consumption component in utilities that have not adopted a universal metering policy. This component should NOT include any water that is supplied to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is unmetered but billed. Water supplied as exports to neighboring water utilities should be included only in the Water Exported component.
Find
Find
Find
Find
Find
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Definitions 34
235
Item Name Description
Length of Mains
(Lm)
NON-REVENUE
WATER
Number of
Service
Connections
(Nc)
Real Losses
Revenue Water
Service
Connection
Density
Systematic Data
Handling Errors
(SDHE)
Total annual
operating cost
(optional input)
Physical water losses from the pressurized system (water mains and customer service connections) and the utility’s storage tanks, up to the point of customer consumption. In metered systems this is the customer meter, in unmetered situations this is the first point of consumption (stop tap/tap) within the property. The annual volume lost through all types of leaks, breaks and overflows depends on frequencies, flow rates, and average duration of individual leaks, breaks and overflows.
*This input has been made optional, as it is no longer used in calculating a Performance Indicator. Auditors are welcome to continue to track this input as desired.* These costs include those for operations, maintenance and any annually incurred costs for long-term upkeep of the drinking water supply and distribution system. It should include the costs of day-to-day upkeep and long-term financing such as repayment of capital bonds for infrastructure expansion or improvement. Typical costs include employee salaries and benefits, materials, equipment, insurance, fees, administrative costs and all other costs that exist to sustain the drinking water supply. Depending upon water utility accounting procedures or regulatory agency requirements, it may be appropriate to include depreciation in the total of this cost. This cost should not include any costs to operate wastewater, biosolids or other systems outside of drinking water.
Apparent losses caused by accounting omissions, errant computer programming, gaps in policy, procedure, and permitting/activation of new accounts; and any type of data lapse that results in under-stated customer water consumption in summary billing reports. Systematic Data Handling Errors occur as a customer consumption volume and can result in a direct loss of revenue potential. Water utilities can find "lost" revenue by keying on this component.
Utilities typically measure water consumption volumes registered by water meters at customer premises. The meter should be read routinely (ex: monthly) and the data transferred to the Customer Billing System, which generates and sends a bill to the customer. Data Transfer Errors result in the registered consumption volume value being less than the actual consumption volume, creating an apparent loss. Such error might occur from illegible and mis-recorded hand-written readings compiled by meter readers, inputting an incorrect meter register unit conversion factor in the automatic meter reading equipment, or a variety of similar errors.
Apparent losses also occur from Data Analysis Errors in the archival and data reporting processes of the Customer Billing System. Inaccurate estimates used for accounts that fail to produce a meter reading are a common source of error. Billing adjustments may award customers a rightful monetary credit, but do so by creating a negative value of consumption volume, thus under-stating the actual consumption. Account activation lapses may allow new buildings to begin using water for months without meter readings and billing. Poor permitting and construction inspection practices can result in a new building water service commencing without a billing account, a water meter and meter reading; i.e., the customer is unknown to the utility's billing system. Close auditing of the permitting, metering, meter reading, billing and reporting processes of the water consumption data trail can uncover data management gaps that create volumes of systematic data handling error. Utilities should routinely analyze customer billing records to detect data anomalies and quantify these losses. For example, a billing account that registers zero consumption for two or more billing cycles should be checked to explain why usage has seemingly halted. Given the revenue loss impacts of these losses, water utilities are well-justified in providing continuous oversight and timely correction of data transfer errors & data handling errors.
If the water auditor has not yet gathered detailed data or assessment of systematic data handling error, it is recommended that the auditor apply the default value of 0.25% of the Billed Authorized Consumption volume. However, if the auditor has investigated the billing system and its controls, and has well validated data that indicates the volume from systematic data handling error is substantially higher or lower than that generated by the default value, then the auditor should enter a quantity that was derived from the utility investigations and select an appropriate grading. Negative or zero values are not allowed for this audit component.
Note: occasionally billed consumption volumes for a customer account may be over-stated due to issues of double-counting an account or applying an overstated meter multiplier. The possibility of such occurrences should be explored in the data validation process, particularly if billed authorized consumption volumes for the year, or for any sub-group of customers (by classification or meter size), appears to be inordinately high. It is recommended to correct any such errors in the billed consumption total for the year, rather than consider these volumes part of Systematic Data Handling Error. =number of customer service connections / length of mains Length of all pipelines (except service connections) in the system starting from the point of system input metering (for example at the outlet of the treatment plant). It is also recommended to include in this measure the total length of fire hydrant lead pipe. Hydrant lead pipe is the pipe branching from the water main to the fire hydrant. Fire hydrant leads are typically of a sufficiently large size that is more representative of a pipeline than a service connection. The average length of hydrant leads across the entire system can be assumed if not known, and multiplied by the number of fire hydrants in the system, which can also be assumed if not known. This value can then be added to the total pipeline length. Total length of mains can therefore be calculated as:
Length of Mains, miles = (total pipeline length, miles) + [ {(average fire hydrant lead length, ft) x (number of fire hydrants)} / 5,280 ft/mile ] or
Length of Mains, kilometres = (total pipeline length, kilometres) + [ {(average fire hydrant lead length, metres) x (number of fire hydrants)} / 1,000 metres/kilometre ]
Those components of System Input Volume that are billed and have the potential to produce revenue. = Apparent Losses + Real Losses + Unbilled Metered Consumption + Unbilled Unmetered Consumption. This is water which does not provide revenue potential to the utility.
Number of customer service connections, extending from the water main to supply water to a customer. This includes the actual number of pressurized piping connections, including fire connections, whether active or inactive. This may differ substantially from the number of customers (or number of accounts). Note:
this number does not include the pipeline leads to fire hydrants. The total length of piping supplying fire hydrants should be included in the "Length of mains" input, and excluded from the Number of service connections input.
Find
Find
Find
Find
Find
Find
Find
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Definitions 35
236
Item Name Description
Unauthorized
Consumption
(UC)
Unbilled
Authorized
Consumption
Unbilled Metered
Authorized
Consumption
(UMAC)
Unbilled
Unmetered
Authorized
Consumption
(UUAC)
Unavoidable
Annual Real
Losses (UARL)
The UARL is a theoretical reference value representing the technical low limit of leakage for well managed systems in good condition, with aggressive active leakage control. It is a key variable in the calculation of the Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI).
UARL (gallons) = (5.41Lm + 0.15Nc + 7.5Lc) x P x 365 d/year, or
UARL (litres) = (18.0Lm + 0.8Nc + 25.0Lc) x P x 365 d/year where:
Lm = length of mains (miles or kilometres)
Nc = number of customer service connections
Lp = the average length of customer service connection piping (feet or metres) (see the Worksheet "Service Connection Diagram" for guidance on deterring the value of Lp) Lc = total length of customer service connection piping (miles or km) Lc = Nc X Lp (miles or kilometres)
P = Average operating pressure (psi or metres) (see Average Operating Pressure definition) NOTES ON THE UARL AND ILI:
1. This Free Water Audit Software version 6 presents the calculated UARL and ILI for systems of all sizes and all pressures. Some published research is now available on predicting how UARL is likely to be modified when modeling low leakage limits in systems that are very small (< 3000 conn), or have very low average pressures, or have very high pressures (aka boundary cases). Inherent over- or under- estimation of UARL volume may exist in these boundary cases, as they operate at or near the limits of the UARL model assumptions. More widespread application and understanding of system specific corrections to the UARL model in these boundary cases is now likely to occur, but are not included in the FWAS at the time of this publication. Caution is advised when using the standard UARL modeled value (and subsequently the ILI) for boundary cases. In boundary cases, the ILI may still be considered a general Performance Indicator, but not used as an absolute performance measurement or for benchmark comparisons.
2. The UARL term is based on average operating pressure in a given audit year, and a utility's current pressure conditions may not be optimized. Thus, ILI should always be interpreted with some measure of pressure, and only used for tracking progress if all justifiable pressure management has already been completed.
Any kind of Authorized Consumption which is neither billed nor metered. This component typically includes water used in activities such as fire fighting, flushing of water mains and sewers, street cleaning, fire flow tests conducted by the water utility, etc. In most water utilities it is a small component.
This component does NOT include water supplied to neighboring utilities (water exported) which is unmetered and unbilled – an unlikely case. Also, if any potable water used at a water treatment plant is tapped from a location upstream of the meter(s) used to determine the Volume from Own Sources in the audit, this is outside of the boundary of the audit and should therefore not be included as part of Unbilled, Unmetered Authorized Consumption.
This component has many sub-components of water use which may not yet be quantified. The default is 0.25% of the Billed Authorized Consumption volume (BMAC + BUAC), and is recommended for temporary use if customized estimates are not yet available, with recommendation to begin tracking and estimating these volumes for the next audit.
Note that a value of zero is not permitted, since all water utilities likely have some volume of water in this component occurring in their system.
The user may develop an audit based on one of three unit selections:
1) Million Gallons (US)
2) Megalitres (Thousand Cubic Metres)
3) Acre-feet
Once this selection has been made in the instructions sheet, all calculations are made on the basis of the chosen units. Should the user wish to make additional conversions, a unit converter is provided below (use drop down menus to select units):
Units and
Conversions
All consumption that is unbilled, but still authorized by the utility. This includes Unbilled Metered Authorized Consumption (UMAC) + Unbilled Unmetered Authorized Consumption (UUAC). See "Authorized Consumption" for more information.
Metered consumption which is authorized by the water utility, but, for any reason, is deemed by utility policy to be unbilled. This might for example include metered water consumed by the utility itself in treatment or distribution operations, or metered water provided to civic institutions free of charge. It does not include water supplied to neighboring utilities (water exported) which may be metered but not billed.
Includes water illegally withdrawn from fire hydrants, illegal connections, bypasses to customer consumption meters, or tampering with metering or meter reading equipment; as well as any other ways to receive water while thwarting the water utility's ability to collect revenue for the water. Unauthorized consumption results in uncaptured revenue and creates an error that understates customer consumption. In most water utilities this volume is low and, if the water auditor has not yet gathered detailed data for these loss occurrences, it is recommended to use the default value of 0.25% of the Billed Authorized Consumption volume. However, if the auditor has investigated unauthorized occurrences, and has well validated data that indicates the volume from unauthorized consumption is substantially higher or lower than that generated by the default value, then the auditor should enter a quantity that was derived from the utility investigations. Note that a value of zero will not be accepted since all water utilities tend to have some volume of unauthorized consumption occurring in their system. Find
Find
Find
Find
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Definitions 36
237
Item Name Description
Convert From…
Million Gallons (US) = 306.888329 Acre-feet
Variable
Production Cost
(VPC)
(applied to Real
Losses)
Volume from Own
Sources
(VOS)
Volume from own
sources: error
adjustment
Water Exported
(WE)
Water Exported:
Error Adjustment
(WEEA)
Water Imported
(WI)
100
An estimate or measure of the volume by which the Water Exported volume is incorrect. This adjustment is a weighted average that represents the collective error for all of the metered and archived exported flow for all days of the audit year. Meter error can occur in different ways. A meter may be inaccurate by under-registering flow (did not capture all the flow), or by over-registering flow (overstated the actual flow). Error in the metered, archived data can also occur due to data gaps caused by temporary outages of the meter or related instrumentation. All water utilities encounter some degree of error in their metered data, particularly if meters are aged and infrequently tested. Occasional errors also occur in the archived data. Enter a positive percentage or volume, then select 'under-registration' or 'over-registration' from the drop-down immediately adjacent. If regular meter accuracy testing is conducted on the meter(s) - which is usually conducted by the water utility selling the water - then the results of this testing can be used to help quantify the meter error adjustment. Corrections to data gaps or other errors found in the archived data should also be included as a portion of this meter error adjustment. See Water Supplied Error Adjustments definition for guidance on how to calculate this input.
The cost to produce and supply the next unit of water (e.g., $/million gallons). This cost can include both short-run and long-run marginal costs. See the VPC data grading questions on IDG tab for examples of short-run and long-run marginal costs that may be included.
It is common to apply the VPC unit cost to the volume of Real Losses. However, if water resources are strained and the ability to meet future drinking water demands is in question, then the water auditor may be justified in applying the Customer Retail Unit Charge to the Real Loss volume, rather than applying the Variable Production Cost.
The volume of water withdrawn (abstracted) from water resources (rivers, lakes, streams, wells, etc) controlled by the water utility, and then treated for potable water distribution. Most water audits are compiled for utility retail water distribution systems, so this volume should reflect the amount of treated drinking water that entered the distribution system. Often the volume of water measured as treated effluent of the treatment works is slightly less than the volume measured at the raw water source, since some of the water is used in the treatment process. Thus, it is useful if flows are metered at the effluent of the treatment works.
Water treatment plants are also often supplied potable drinking water and therefore are a “customer” of the water utility. If the service connection line serving the water treatment plant is downstream of treated water effluent flowmeters, this water should be metered and billed as billed authorized consumption. In this case, this volume of water does not enter into any calculations for Volume from Own Sources. If the service connection line suppling potable water to the treatment plant is upstream of treated water effluent flowmeters, then this water is considered “process” water and included with calculations accounting for process water use.
If metering exists only at the raw water source, an adjustment for water used in the treatment process should be included to account for water consumed in treatment operations such as filter backwashing, basin flushing and cleaning, plant potable water consumption (if the supply is drawn upstream of effluent flowmetering.) and similar uses. If the audit is conducted for a wholesale water agency that sells untreated water, then this quantity reflects the measure of the raw water, typically metered at the source.
The Water Imported volume is the bulk water purchased to become part of the Water Supplied volume. Typically this is water purchased from a neighboring water utility or regional water wholesale supplier, and is metered at the custody transfer point of interconnection between the two water utilities. Usually the meter(s) are owned by the water supplier selling the water to the utility conducting the water audit. The water supplier selling the bulk water usually charges the receiving utility based upon a wholesale water rate.
An estimate or measure of the degree of inaccuracy that exists in the master (production) meters measuring the annual Volume from own Sources, and any error in the data trail that exists to collect, store and report the summary production data. This adjustment is a weighted average number that represents the collective error for all master meters for all days of the audit year and any errors identified in the data trail. Meter error can occur in different ways. A meter or meters may be inaccurate by under-registering flow (did not capture all the flow), or by over-registering flow (overstated the actual flow). Data error can occur due to data gaps caused by temporary outages of the meter or related instrumentation. All water utilities encounter some degree of inaccuracy in master meters and data errors in archival systems are common. Enter a positive percentage or volume, then select 'under-registration' or 'over-registration' from the dropdown immediately adjacent. See Water Supplied Error Adjustments definition for guidance on how to calculate this input.
The Water Exported volume is the bulk water conveyed or sold by the water utility to neighboring water systems that exists outside of their service area.
Typically this water is metered at the custody transfer point of interconnection between the two water utilities. Usually the meter(s) are owned by the water utility that is selling or transfering the water: i.e. the exporter. If the water utility who is compiling the annual water audit sells or transfers bulk water in this manner, they are an exporter of water.
Note: The Water Exported volume is typically sold to wholesale customers who are charged a wholesale rate that is different than retail rates charged to the retail customers existing within the service area. Many state regulatory agencies require that the Water Exported volume be reported to them as a quantity separate and distinct from the retail customer billed consumption. For these reasons - and others - the Water Exported volume is always quantified separately from Billed Authorized Consumption in the standard water audit. Be certain not to "double-count" this quantity by including it in both the Water Exported box and the Billed Metered Consumption box of the water audit Worksheet. This volume should be included only in the Water Exported box.
Enter Units:
(conversion factor = 3.0689)
Converts to…..
Find
Find
Find
Find
Find
Find
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Definitions 37
238
Item Name Description
Water Imported:
Error Adjustment
(WIEA)
WATER LOSSES = apparent losses + real losses
= water supplied - authorized consumption
Water Losses are the difference between Water Supplied and Authorized Consumption. Water losses can be considered as a total volume for the whole system, or for partial systems such as transmission systems, pressure zones or district metered areas (DMA), if one of these configurations are the basis of the water audit.
An estimate or measure of the volume by which the Water Imported volume is incorrect. This adjustment is a weighted average that represents the collective error for all of the metered and archived imported flow for all days of the audit year. Meter error can occur in different ways. A meter may be inaccurate by under-registering flow (did not capture all the flow), or by over-registering flow (overstated the actual flow). Error in the metered, archived data can also occur due to data gaps caused by temporary outages of the meter or related instrumentation. All water utilities encounter some level of meter inaccuracy, particularly if meters are aged and infrequently tested. Occasional errors also occur in the archived metered data. Enter a positive percentage or volume, then select 'under-registration' or 'over-registration' from the drop-down immediately adjacent. If regular meter accuracy testing is conducted on the meter(s) - which is usually conducted by the water utility selling the water - then the results of this testing can be used to help quantify the meter error adjustment. See Water Supplied Error Adjustments definition for guidance on how to calculate this input.
Disclaimer: The guidance provided below should be considered general, representing a typical approach to determining Error Adjustment. Supply metering setups, metering technologies, instrumentation, data recording/archival, and data management systems can vary significantly from one water utility to the next.
Inherent margins of error will also vary among different testing and calibration methods and the measurement systems being tested. Other factors that may be important include, but are not limited to, frequency of testing and calibration practices, data communication outages in the audit period, tested flowrates versus typical operating flowrates, and test durations. All of these factors must be considered when assessing Error Adjustment for the Water Supplied inputs. Each specific situation should be carefully analyzed to determine the most appropriate approach for determining the Error Adjustment to input, if any.
General: For the Water Supplied inputs, there are three typical sources of error that may warrant an Error Adjustment on the Worksheet.
1. Meter error: measurement inaccuracy in the meter(s) used to derive the input volume, typically identified through in-situ flow accuracy testing. Applicable for VOS, WI and WE. If no such testing has been performed, adjustment for meter error is not typically recommended.
2. Data transfer error: inaccuracy in archived volumes, typically due to gaps in data, programming errors impacting unit conversions, and/or programming errors impacting totalization of measured volumes over the audit period. Applicable for VOS, WI and WE. These errors are typically identified through electronic calibration to verify data transfer at the secondary device (i.e. conversion to mA, meter transmitter or similar instrumentation) and/or the tertiary device (i.e. SCADA, historian or other computerized archival system).
3. Net distribution storage change: The difference between end of audit period and beginning of audit period for total finished water stored, downstream of the system input meter(s). Typically applicable for VOS or WI. This volume is typically derived by comparing distribution storage tank water levels at end and beginning of the water audit period and using approximate tank geometry to convert levels to volumes.
Derivation Guidance:
If an Error Adjustment input is being calculated as a volume, each source of error (described above) may be separately calculated, with careful consideration of under- vs over-registration, then added together to determine the composite volume to input. The composite input should be entered on the Worksheet as a positive number, then under- or over-registration selected on the adjacent dropdown.
If an Error Adjustment input is being calculated as a percent, some very general guidance for calculating each error source (described above) is provided below.
The auditor is again cautioned that each specific water supply setup needs to be evaluated closely as noted in the Disclaimer. Refer to the latest AWWA M36 Manual for additional discussion and guidance on this matter.
1. Meter error: If in-situ flow accuracy testing has been performed, and inherent testing method error is understood, first the meter accuracy % may be determined as follows:
meter accuracy % = System input meter(s) volume / Reference volume Then, the meter error % may be determined as follows:
meter error % = meter accuracy % - 100%
2. Data transfer error: If electronic calibration at the secondary (i.e. conversion to mA, meter transmitter or similar instrumentation) and/or tertiary (i.e. SCADA, historian or other computerized archival system) devices has been performed, first the data transfer accuracy % may be determined as follows:
data transfer accuracy % = Tertiary device volume / Reference volume (typically at Secondary device) Then, the data transfer error % may be determined as follows:
data transfer error % = data transfer accuracy % - 100% If no error is identified, or if electronic calibration has not been performed, or if no secondary or tertiary devices exist, a data transfer error % adjustment is not typically recommended.
3. Net distribution storage change. If meter error and/or data transfer error are being calculated as a %, it is recommended to make the adjustment for net distribution storage change as a volume adjustment, directly in the VOS or WI input, as applicable.
The final step is to add meter error % and data transfer error %:
Error Adjustment % = meter accuracy % + data transfer error % If the total Error Adjustment % calculates out as a negative number, it represents an under-registration. Vice versa, if positive. The composite input should be entered on the Worksheet as a positive number, then under- or over-registration selected on the adjacent dropdown.
Water Supplied
Error
Adjustments
Find
Find
Find
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Definitions 38
239
#REF!
AWWA Free Water Audit Software:
Customer Service Line Diagrams
Average Length of Customer
Service Line
The three figures shown on this
worksheet display the
assignment of the Average
Length of Customer Service
Line, Lp, for the three most
common piping configurations.
Figure 1 shows the
configuration of the water meter
outside of the customer building
next to the curb stop valve. In
this configuration Lp = 0 since
the distance between the curb
stop and the customer metering
point is essentially zero.
Figure 2 shows the
configuration of the customer
water meter located inside the
customer building, where Lp is
the distance from the curb stop
to the water meter.
Figure 3 shows the
configuration of an unmetered
customer building , where Lp is
the distance from the curb stop
to the first point of customer
water consumption, or, more
simply, the building line.
In any water system the Lp will
vary notably in a community of
different structures, therefore the
average Lp value is used and
this should be approximated or
calculated if a sample of service
line measurements has been
gathered.
American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights
FWAS v6.0
Click for more
information
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Service Connection Diagram 39 240
DEVELOPED BY: Will Jernigan, PE Software Chair Cavanaugh David Sayers Black & Veatch
Kate Gasner Water Systems Optimization
George Kunkel, PE Kunkel Water Efficiency Consulting
Andrew Chastain-Howley, PG, MCSM Black & Veatch
REFERENCES:
A special thanks to those members of the AWWA Water Loss Control Committee and other water industry stakeholders who assisted in the review and testing of this software.
2. Kunkel, G. et al. AWWA WLCC Reference Water Audit Dataset . 2020. AWWA. Denver, CO. https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/ec13ae01-7800-4114-8d72-98827b509e18/Good%20Practices%20on%20Leakage%20Management%20-%20Case%20Study%20document._Final.pdf
4. Trachtman G., A. Wyatt, et al. 2019. Assessment of Performance Indicator for Non-Revenue Water Target Setting and Progress Tracking . AWWA. Denver, CO.
5. Trachtman G., A. Wyatt, et al. 2019. WRF 4695: Guidance on Implementing an Effective Water Loss Control Plan . Water Research Foundation. Denver, CO.
6. Lambert, A. 2020. Low ILIs and Small Systems. Llandudno, UK. https://leakssuitelibrary.com
7. Good Practices on Leakage Management, Main Report . EU Reference Document. European Commission, Luxembourg. 2015.
8. Service Connection Diagrams courtesy of Ronnie McKenzie, WRP Pty Ltd.
AWWA Free Water Audit Software:
Acknowledgements
AWWA Free Water Audit Software - Version 6.0
developed by the
Water Loss Control Committee of the American Water Works Association December 2020
This software is intended to serve as a basic tool to compile a preliminary, or “top-down”, water audit. It is recommended that users also refer to the current edition of the AWWA M36 Publication, Water Audits and Loss Control Programs, for detailed guidance on compiling a comprehensive, or “bottom-up”, water audit using the same water audit methodology.
1. Kunkel, G., G. Trachtman, A. Wyatt, and W. Jernigan. Water Loss Control Committee Report: Key Performance Indicators for Non-Revenue Water—AWWA’s 2020 Position . 2020.
Journal AWWA. https://awwa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/awwa.1428
3. AWWA Water Audits and Loss Control Programs, M36 Publication. 5th Edition, (forthcoming) 2021. AWWA. Denver, CO.
9. Sturm, R., W. Jernigan, C. Stief, and D. Blackwell. Level 1 Water Audit Validation Guidance Manual . 2nd Edition, (forthcoming) 2021. Project #5057. Denver: Water Research Foundation.
https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/1ddfba34-e1ce-4888-b031-6c559cb28e47/Good%20Practices%20on%20Leakage%20Management%20-%20Main%20Report_Final.pdf American Water Works Association.
Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved.
FWAS v6.0
www.awwa.org
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Acknowledgements 40 241
VERSION HISTORY:
Version: Release
Date:
Number of
Worksheets:
v1 2005/
2006 5
v2 2006 5
v3 2007 7
v4 - v4.2 2010 10
v5 2014 12
v6 2020 11
If you have questions or comments regarding the software please contact us via email at: [email protected] v6 brings an overhaul to the user interface for data grading, now presented as a series of questions on the Interactive Data Grading (IDG) tab for each input that, when answered (by selecting best-fit answer from a dropdown menu), automically determines the data grade for the given input. This provides transparency to the data practices selected and which specifically are limiting, removes subjectivity in data grade assignments, and provides clarity on candidate next steps for data validity improvements. IDG tab includes navigation buttons across top banner for ease of movement between inputs, and color signals for completion. The Worksheet (fka Reporting Worksheet) includes overt designation of error adjustment as "under" or "over" for the 3 Water Supplied inputs, as well as Customer Metering Inaccuracies. This makes the convention consistent, transparent, and reduces chance of user error. A Blank Sheet has been added allowing the user to, as desired, perform supplemental calculations or capture additional relevant information. The Dashboard has been overhauled to include Data Validity, NRW Components and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). KPIs are presented in gauge format, depicting the specific KPI result against the range of results from Level 1 validated data in North America (see Web Resources, Start Page). Percentage-based indicators (% of supply, % of cost) removed as these indicators were deemed unreliable and sunset by the AWWA Water Loss Control Committee, subsequent to research and reporting from its NRW Performance Indicators Task Force.
In v5, changes were made to the way Water Supplied information is entered into software, with each major component having a corresponding Master Meter Error Adjustment entry (and data grading requirement). This required changes to the data validity score calculation; v5 of the software uses a weighting system that is, in part, proportional to the volume of input components. The Grading Matrix was updated to reflect the new audit inputs and also to include clarifications and additions to the scale descriptions. The appearance of the software was updated in v5 to make the software more user-friendly and several new features were added to provide more feedback to the user. Notably, a dashboard tab has been added to provide more visual feedback on the water audit results and associated costs of Non-Revenue Water. A comments sheet was added to allow the user to track notes, comments and to cite sources used.
Key Features and Developments
The AWWA Water Audit Software was piloted in 2005 (v1.0 beta). The early versions (1.x) of the software restricted data entry to units of Million Gallons per year. For each entry into the audit, users identified whether the input was measured or estimated.
The most significant enhancement in v2 of the software was to allow the user to choose the volumetric units to be used in the audit, Million Gallons or Thousand Cubic Metres (megalitres) per year. Two financial performance indicators were added to provide feedback to the user on the cost of Real and Apparent losses.
In v3, the option to report volumetric units in acre-feet was added. Another new feature in v3 was the inclusion of default values for two water audit components (unbilled unmetered and unauthorized consumption). v3 also included two examples of completed audits in units of million gallons and Megalitres. Several checks were added into v3 to provide instant feedback to the user on common data entry problems, in order to help the user complete an accurate water audit. v4 (and versions 4.x) of the software included a new approach to data grading. The simple "estimated" or "measured" approach was replaced with a more granular scale (typically 1-10) that reflected descriptions of utility practices and served to describe the confidence and accuracy of the input data. Each input value had a corresponding scale fully described in the Grading Matrix tab. The Grading Matrix also showed the actions required to move to a higher grading score. Grading descriptions were available on the Reporting Worksheet via a pop-up box next to each water audit input. A water audit data validity score is generated (max = 100) and priority areas for attention (to improve audit accuracy) are identified, once a user completes the requied data grading. A service connection diagram was also added to help users understand the impact of customer service line configurations on water losses and how this information should be entered into the water audit software. An acknoweldgements section was also added. Minor bug fixes resulted in the release of versions 4.1 and 4.2. A French language version was also made available for v4.2.
AWWA Free Water Audit Software v6.0 Acknowledgements 41 242
910 Calle Negocio
2nd Floor
San Clemente, California
www.san-clemente.org
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 1
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11G.
Submitted By: Beaches, Parks and Recreation
Prepared By: Samantha Wylie, Beaches, Parks and Recreation Director Subject:
..titl e
CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 26-149, APPROVING THE BEACHES, PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION FY 2026-27 WORK PLAN
..body
Summary:
The purpose of this report is to present the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission’s Fiscal Year 2026-27 Work Plan for City Council review and approval. The proposed Work Plan identifies five priority areas for the upcoming fiscal year, including playground replacements, residency requirements, cost of services and revenue monitoring, development of a sand policy, and monitoring of the pilot Aquatics Partnership Policy.
Background:
The Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission (“Commission”) serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council on matters related to the City’s beaches, parks, recreation facilities, programs, and services. As part of the City’s annual work planning process, commissions and committees identify priority projects and initiatives to pursue during the fiscal year. The annual Work Plan provides a framework for focusing Commission efforts, coordinating staff resources, and identifying matters that may require future City Council consideration. At its meeting on August 11, 2026, the Commission considered its priorities for Fiscal Year 2026-27 and identified five areas of focus, including the establishment of ad-hoc subcommittees for several of the identified priorities.
Discussion:
The proposed Fiscal Year 2026-27 Work Plan includes the following priority areas:
1. Playground Replacements: Review playground replacement projects that have received funding and provide input and recommendations as projects move through the design and implementation process. The ad-hoc subcommittee will consist of Vice Chair Garcia, Commissioner Mann, and Commissioner Kamali.
2. Residency Policy: Participate in a joint ad-hoc subcommittee with the Golf Course Committee to review residency requirements and verification procedures and develop recommendations for potential improvements. The Commission representatives will consist of Commissioner Haskins and Commissioner Dyer.
3. Cost of Services and Revenue Review: Review the City’s Cost of Services documents and receive quarterly revenue updates from staff to monitor recreation program and facility revenues and cost recovery.
243
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11G.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 2
4. Sand Policy: Continue development of a policy addressing sand management, including review and retention strategies. The ad-hoc subcommittee will consist of Commissioner Dolegowski, Chair Johnson, Commissioner Ambrose, and Commissioner Higginson.
5. Aquatics Partnership Policy: Monitor and review implementation of the pilot Aquatics Partnership Policy and provide recommendations based on the results of the pilot period.
Approval of the Work Plan establishes these items as Commission priorities for Fiscal Year 2026-
27. Recommendations resulting from the Commission’s review that require policy changes, additional funding, contractual commitments, or other City Council authorization will be presented separately for consideration.
Considerations Identified by Staff:
The proposed Work Plan focuses Commission efforts on several active City initiatives while providing opportunities for ongoing review and policy development. The use of ad-hoc subcommittees will allow specific topics to receive focused review before recommendations are presented to the full Commission.
Implementation of the Work Plan will be prioritized based on available staff capacity, project schedules, funding, and coordination with other City initiatives. The Commission and its ad-hoc subcommittees will serve in an advisory capacity and will not independently establish City policy, authorize expenditures, or direct City operations.
Council Options:
Adopt Resolution No. 26-149, which will approve the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission 2026-27 Work Plan and make related findings under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Modify the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission 2026-27 Work Plan by either (a) removing proposed items or (b) adding items.
Continue the item with further direction provided to staff and the Commission. Deny the Work Plan.
Environmental Review/Analysis:
Approval of the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission Work Plan establishes advisory priorities and does not constitute approval of any physical project. Therefore, approval of the Work Plan is not a project subject under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5). Future projects will be evaluated for CEQA compliance, as applicable, at the appropriate time.
Fiscal Impact:
Approval of the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Commission Work Plan does not authorize additional expenditures or establish new budget appropriations. Work Plan activities will be undertaken within existing staff resources and adopted budgets where feasible. Should an individual initiative 244
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11G.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 3
require additional funding or consultant services, staff will return to the City Council for authorization as appropriate.
Potential Action(s):
..recommendation
If the City Council concurs with the information provided within this staff report, moving this item without modifications would result in adoption of Resolution No. 26-149, which would approve the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission Fiscal Year 2026-27 Work Plan as proposed. ..end
Attachment:
1. Resolution No. 26-149
Notification:
Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission
245
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 26-149
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
BEACHES, PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 WORK PLAN
WHEREAS, the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council on matters related to the City’s beaches, parks, recreation facilities, programs, and services; and
WHEREAS, the City utilizes annual work plans to establish priorities for its commissions and committees and to coordinate those priorities with available City resources and City Council direction; and
WHEREAS, the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission considered its Fiscal Year 2026-27 Work Plan and identified five priority areas for continued review and development; and
WHEREAS, the Commission established ad-hoc subcommittees to assist with certain Work Plan priorities, including coordination with the Golf Course Committee regarding residency requirements; and
WHEREAS, approval of the Work Plan establishes priorities for the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission but does not authorize additional expenditures, contractual commitments, policy changes, or implementation of individual projects requiring separate City Council approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Clemente does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby approves the Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission Fiscal Year 2026-27 Work Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 3. Implementation of the Work Plan shall be subject to available staff resources, adopted City budgets, applicable City policies and procedures, and any additional City Council authorization required for individual projects, policy changes, contracts, or expenditures.
SECTION 4. Ad-hoc subcommittees established as part of the Work Plan shall operate in an advisory capacity for the limited purpose of reviewing their assigned topics and developing recommendations for consideration by the full Commission. 246
Resolution No. 26-149 Page 2
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________________, _______.
ATTEST:
___________________________ __________________________
City Clerk of the City of Rick Loeffler, Mayor of the City of San Clemente, California San Clemente, California
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) §
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE )
I, LAURA CAMPAGNOLO, City Clerk of the City of San Clemente, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 26-149 was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Clemente held on the _______ day of _______________________, _________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Clemente, California, this _____ day of _________________, ________. __________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of
San Clemente, California
Approved as to form:
____________________________
Elizabeth A. Mitchell, City Attorney
247
Resolution No. 26-149 Page 3
Exhibit “A”
ANNUAL WORK PLAN
Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission
FY 2026-2027
Project Name: (No. 1) Playground Replacements
Purpose, Goals, and Deliverables of Project:
Review playground replacements for all funded projects and provide input and recommendations as projects move through design and implementation. Ad-hoc: Vice Chair Garcia, Commissioner Mann, and Commissioner Kamal.
Estimated Project Costs. If cost is involved, is it included in the adopted City budget? Included in FY2027 CIP.
Project Timeline (Anticipated Start and End Dates): FY 2026-27 Resources Needed (including Staff hours): Committee and staff time.
Is this a new project or unfinished project from the prior fiscal year? Unfinished Project Name: (No. 2) Residency Policy
Purpose, Goals, and Deliverables of Project:
Participate with the Golf Course Committee in reviewing residency requirements and verification procedures and develop recommendations for potential improvements. Commissioners Haskins and Dyer.
Estimated Project Costs. If cost is involved, is it included in the adopted City budget? Within existing resources.
Project Timeline (Anticipated Start and End Dates): FY 2026-27 Resources Needed (including Staff hours): Staff and Committee time Is this a new project or an unfinished project from the prior fiscal year? New 248
Resolution No. 26-149 Page 4
ANNUAL WORK PLAN
Beaches, Parks and Recreation Commission
FY 2026-2027
Project Name: (No. 3) Cost of Services & Revenue Review Purpose, Goals, and Deliverables of Project:
Review Cost of Services documents and receive quarterly revenue status updates from staff to monitor recreation revenues and cost recovery.
Estimated Project Costs. If cost is involved, is it included in the adopted City budget? Within existing resources.
Project Timeline (Anticipated Start and End Dates): FY 2026-27 Resources Needed (including Staff hours): Commission and staff time Is this a new project or unfinished project from the prior fiscal year? Ongoing Project Name: (No. 4) Sand Policy
Purpose, Goals, and Deliverables of Project:
Continue development of a policy addressing sand management, including review and retention strategies. Ad-hoc: Commissioner Dolegowski, Chair Johnson, Commissioner Ambrose, and Commissioner Higginson.
Estimated Project Costs. If cost is involved, is it included in the adopted City budget? Unknown Project Timeline (Anticipated Start and End Dates): FY 2026-27 Resources Needed (including Staff hours): Commission time.
Is this a new project or unfinished project from the prior fiscal year? Unfinished 249
Resolution No. 26-149 Page 5
Project Name: (No. 5) Aquatics Partnership Policy
Purpose, Goals, and Deliverables of Project:
Monitor and review implementation of the pilot Aquatics Partnership Policy and provide recommendations based on the results of the pilot period.
Estimated Project Costs. If cost is involved, is it included in the adopted City budget? None Project Timeline (Anticipated Start and End Dates): FY 2026-27 Resources Needed (including Staff hours): Staff time.
Is this a new project or unfinished project from the prior fiscal year? Ongoing 250
910 Calle Negocio
2nd Floor
San Clemente, California
www.san-clemente.org
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 1
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11H.
Submitted By: Public Works
Prepared By: Belgin Cuhadaroglu, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer Subject:
CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH Q&E PIPELINE COMPANY FOR THE CAMINO VERA CRUZ RECYCLED WATER LINE EXTENSION, CIP PROJECT NO. 17407 Summary:
The City Council is being asked to consider adopting Resolution 26-150 (Attachment 1), accepting the work performed by Q&E Company for the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407, and filing a Notice of Completion (Attachment 2).
Background:
On November 4, 2025, the City Council awarded a
construction contract (Attachment 3) to Q&E Pipeline
Company to extend an existing recycled water line to
serve additional customers. The project included the
installation of approximately 402 linear feet of pipeline and three irrigation meters to provide additional
recycled water within the Forster Ranch Home Owners
Association’s (HOA) areas.
The estimated summary of expenses for the Recycled
Water Expansion account include: alternative analysis
for recycled water expansion, planning, grant
applications, a Recycled Water Master Plan Update,
and construction for the extension of the Vera Cruz
Recycled Water Line related to this NOC are provided below:
Project Management/Admin/Design $ 232,181
Master Plan Update/Design 366,938
Surveying 16,340
Grant Funding Consultation 102,950
Construction Contract 557,677
Construction Management & Inspection 96,400
Geotechnical Construction Support 4,750
Total Construction Cost $ 1,377,236
251
Meeting Date: September 1, 2026 Agenda Item: 11H.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE 2
Council Options:
Adopt Resolution No. 26-150, which would accept the completed construction work for the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407. Adopt Resolution No. 26-150 with modifications.
Continue the item with a direction to provide additional information.
Environmental Review/Analysis:
This Project was determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15303 of the state CEQA Guidelines, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), 14 CCR Section 15303.
Fiscal Impact:
The total project cost of $1,377,236 is within the approved project budget of $1,868,428, funded from the Water Acreage Fee Reserve Fund, Account No. 052-467-45300-000-17407. The construction costs for the extension of the Recycled Water Line in Camino Vera Cruz is approximately $658,427.
Potential Action(s):
If the City Council concurs with the recommendations contained in this staff report, moving this item without modifications would result in adoption of Resolution No. 26-150, which would:
..recommendation
1. Accept the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407, from Q&E Pipeline Company;
2. Authorize the City Clerk to execute and record the Notice of Completion for the completed Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407;
3. Authorize the City Clerk to release the Payment Bond 35 days from the recordation of the Notice of Completion upon verification with the Engineering Division that no liens have been levied against the Contractor, Q&E Pipeline Company; and
4. Authorize the City Clerk to release the performance bond for this project upon receipt of a warranty bond in a form acceptable to the Public Works Director/City Engineer in the amount of 25% of the total construction cost.
..end
Attachment:
1. Resolution No. 26-150
2. Notice of Completion
3. Staff Report dated November 4, 2025
Notification:
None.
252
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 26-150
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA, TO ACCEPT AND FILE A
NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT WITH Q&E PIPELINE COMPANY FOR THE
CAMINO VERA CRUZ RECYCLED WATER LINE
EXTENSION, CIP PROJECT NO. 17407
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2025, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Q&E Pipeline Company for the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407; and
WHEREAS, the work included the installation of approximately 402 linear feet of pipeline and three irrigation meters to provide additional recycled water within the Forster Ranch Home Owners Association’s (HOA) areas; and
WHEREAS, Q&E Pipeline Company has completed the work to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director/City Engineer.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Clemente does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and incorporated fully herein.
SECTION 2. That the City Council accepts as complete the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407 from Q&E Pipeline Company.
SECTION 3. That the City Council authorizes the City Clerk to execute and record a Notice of Completion for Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407.
SECTION 4. That the City Council authorizes the City Clerk to release the payment bond for this project 35 days from the recordation of the Notice of Completion upon verification with the Engineering Division that no liens have been levied against Q&E Pipeline Company.
SECTION 5. That the City Council authorizes the City Clerk to release the performance bond for this project upon receipt of a warranty bond in a form acceptable to the Public Works Director/City Engineer in the amount of 25% of the total construction cost.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________________, 2026. 253
Resolution No. 26-150 Page 2
ATTEST:
___________________________ __________________________
City Clerk of the City of Rick Loeffler, Mayor of the City of San Clemente, California San Clemente, California
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) §
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE )
I, LAURA CAMPAGNOLO, City Clerk of the City of San Clemente, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 26-150 was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Clemente held on the _______ day of _______________________, _________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Clemente, California, this _____ day of _________________, ________. __________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of
San Clemente, California
Approved as to form:
____________________________
Elizabeth A. Mitchell, City Attorney
254
Attachment 2
Recording Requested By:
City of San Clemente
When Recorded, Mail To:
City Clerk Department
City of San Clemente
910 Calle Negocio
San Clemente, CA 92673
Recorded for the benefit of the City of San
Clemente and exempt from recording fees
pursuant to Government Code Section 27383.
Space above this line is for Recorder’s Use Only
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Notice is hereby given by the City of San Clemente, a Municipal Corporation, that a public work of improvement has been completed as follows:
1. Project title or description of work: Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, Project No. 17407.
2. Date of completion: July 1, 2026.
3. Street address or legal description of the project site: At intersection between Camino Vera Cruz and Camino De Los Mares, San Clemente, CA 92672.
4. Name of owner: City of San Clemente.
5. Interest or estate of owner: City of San Clemente
6. Address of owner: 910 Calle Negocio, Suite 100, San Clemente, CA 92673 Name and address of contractor: Q&E Pipeline Company, 2235 Marquette Ave., Pomona, CA 91766.
I am the City Clerk for the City of San Clemente, a Municipal Corporation, the owner of the indicated interest or estate in the property described above. I make this verification on behalf of the City of San Clemente. I have read this Notice of Completion and know its contents. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on __________________________ in San Clemente, California. _________________________________
Laura Campagnolo, City Clerk of the City of San Clemente, California.
255
910 Calle Negocio
2nd Floor
San Clemente, California
www.san-clemente.org
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Agenda Item: 11E.
Submitted By: Public Works
Prepared By: Belgin Cuhadaroglu, Senior Civil Engineer
Subject:
..titl e
CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO Q&E
PIPELINE COMPANY FOR THE CAMINO VERA CRUZ RECYCLED WATER LINE EXTENSION, CIP PROJECT NO. 17407, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ..body THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Fiscal Impact:
The estimated total construction cost of $597,000 is within the approved budget of $1,868,428 from Account No. 052-467-45300-000-17407, Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, Phase II, Water Acreage Fee Reserve Fund.
Summary:
Before the City Council is the award of a construction contract to Q&E Pipeline Company, in an amount not to exceed $507,000, for the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension.
Due to high demand for recycled water conversion within the Forster Ranch Home Owners Association’s (HOA) areas, approximately 402 linear feet of recycled water line pipes and three irrigation meters will be installed, at the intersection of Camino de Los Mares and Camino Vera Cruz, to provide recycled water to reduce the use of imported potable water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
1 Attachment 3
256
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Agenda Item: 11E.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
Background:
Recycled water customers account for approximately 15% of the City's overall water demand and utilize approximately 1,200 acre-feet per year of recycled water. The City's customer use of recycled water reduces the City's need for imported potable water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan).
Upon completion of the City’s recycled water expansion, Phase I, in 2014, there was one remaining area within Forester Ranch that provided approximately 10.5 acre-feet of water use adjacent to an existing recycled water line. City staff coordinated with the homeowners association and determined the best location to install additional new meters for conversion of the private irrigation system to recycled water. The project is recommended at this time prior to the paving of the Camino De Los Mares/Camino Vera Cruz intersection. Approximately 402 linear feet of pipeline and 3 irrigation meters will be installed to provide additional recycled water, as shown below.
The City originally conducted formal
competitive bidding for the Camino
Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line
Extension and received bids on May
5, 2025; however, after further
evaluation, staff recommended to
re-scope the bid package and re-bid
the project with a scope of work that
will better address the potential
conflicts with underground utilities.
On June 3, 2025, the City Council
approved rejecting the bids received
on May 5, 2025, and directed staff
to re-bid the project.
Staff modified the scope of work and prepared a bid package for the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled water line extension, notified local contractors, advertised the project for competitive bidding on the PlanetBids website, and in the San Clemente Times. Four bids were received on October 16, 2025, ranging from $507,000 to $884,676 as shown on the table below.
Company Name Company Location
Bid
Amount
Q&E Pipeline Company Pomona, CA $507,000
O'Connell Engineering &
Construction, Inc. Winchester, CA $591,875
Big Ben Engineering Irvine, CA $597,890
Alliance Diversified Escondido, CA $884,676
The lowest responsive and responsible bidder is Q&E Pipeline Company of Pomona, California, in the amount of $507,000. Based on the lowest bid, the estimated total construction cost for this project is as follows:
2 HOA (2. ◄ AFY) DE LOS MARES
I
I
I
~
CAMINO VERA CRUZ
257
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Agenda Item: 11E.
CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
Construction Administration, Management and Inspection $ 90,000 Construction $507,000
Estimated Total Construction Cost $597,000
As required by state law and City policy, the contractor, Q&E Pipeline Company will be required to provide performance and payment bonds simultaneously with execution of the construction contract (Attachment 2). Project plans and specifications are on file in the City Clerk’s office.
Council Options:
Adopt Resolution No. 25-169 (Attachment 1), finding the project categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, 14 CCR Section 15303) of the State CEQA Guidelines, awarding the construction contract to Q&E Pipeline Company, and authorizing the City Manager to execute a construction contract in an amount not to exceed $507,000. Modify and adopt Resolution 25-169.
Continue the item and direct staff to provide additional information. Do not adopt Resolution No. 25-169 and put the project on hold.
Environmental Review/Analysis:
This Project was determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15303 of the state CEQA Guidelines, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), 14 CCR Section 15303).
Recommended Actions:
..recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 25-169, which will:
1. Find the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, Project No. 17407, categorically exempt from CEQA under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, 14 CCR section 15303) of the State CEQA Guidelines;
2. Award a contract to Q&E Pipeline Company, as the lowest responsible and responsive bidder, for the Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Q&E Pipeline Company in an amount not to exceed $507,000 in a form substantially similar to Contract No. 25-54 (Attachment 2) for Camino Vera Cruz Recycled Water Line Extension, CIP Project No. 17407. ..end
Attachment:
1. Resolution No. 25-169
2. Contract No. C25-54 (without attachments)
Notification:
All Bidders.
2583