Draft 2025 Urban Water Management Plan — Sunnyvale City Council, June 16, 2026 (part 3 of 4)

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Analysis of Alternative Forecast Scenarios 7-13

7.3 Alternate Scenario Results
The scenario analysis demonstrates how variations in demographic, economic, climate, pricing, and conservation assumptions influence regional water demand trajectories through 2050. Figure 7-9 and Table 7-5 provide a comparison of the volumetric demands for each scenario identified in Table 7-4.

Figure 7-9: Graphical Comparison of Water Demand Scenarios Table 7-5: Tabular Comparison of Water Demand Scenarios (MGD) Scenario 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Baseline 189 197 202 208 213 220
Low 181 167 160 158 155 155
Moderated-
Low 183 182 178 177 175 173
High 191 207 220 234 250 264
Moderated-
High 190 205 216 230 244 256
Historical
Trend 186 189 191 196 200 204

189 220
155
173
256
264
204
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Projected Water Demand (mgd)
Baseline Low Moderated-Low Moderated-High High Historical Trend DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 237 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Analysis of Alternative Forecast Scenarios 7-14
By the early 2030s, the alternative demand projections begin to separate significantly, with continued widening toward 2050. High and Moderated-High Scenarios show the steepest growth, driven by high demographic projections, hotter/drier climate assumptions, and stable real water rates. The inclusion of potential data center loads in the High Scenario amplifies this effect. Low and Moderated-Low Scenarios exhibit substantial reductions in demand, reflecting CA DOF demographics, cooler/wetter climate conditions, and more aggressive real price increases combined with nonfunctional turf restrictions.

Baseline and Historical Trend Scenarios remain near the center of the range, with the Historical Trend Scenario tracking slightly below Baseline due to moderated growth and rate adjustments.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 238 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Summary and Recommendations 8-1

8. Summary and Recommendations
The baseline water demand and conservation projections presented in this report provide a robust foundation for long-term planning across BAWSCA member agencies. Developed through a rigorous process of data collection, econometric modeling, and conservation analysis, these projections are designed to support the 2025 UWMP cycle and inform long-term planning for the region’s water future.

Key elements of the study’s analysis included:
• Integrated Modeling Approach. The Project coupled econometric modeling of sectoral water consumption with detailed end-use conservation accounting. This hybrid framework enables the separation of structural drivers—such as demographic growth, economic trends, and climate impacts—from the effects of conservation programs and pricing policies. The scenario-ready design allows for flexible adaptation as new data, policies, and/or priorities emerge.
• Transparent and Consensus-Based Assumptions. The baseline scenario assumptions are grounded in member agency-approved demographic projections, climate-adjusted temperature scenarios, and best-practice efficiency standards. The process incorporated extensive feedback from member agencies, ensuring that the assumptions reflect both regional trends and local planning realities.
• Explicit Quantification of Conservation: Both passive (code-driven) and active (programmatic) conservation measures were explicitly modeled. Passive savings, driven by ongoing fixture turnover and new construction standards, are projected to steadily reduce water use across all sectors. Active conservation programs, developed in collaboration with member agencies, offer additional potential for demand reduction, but must be invested in to be fully realized.
• Sensitivity to Demographic and Economic Uncertainty: The scenario analysis demonstrates that future water demand is highly sensitive to changes in population, housing, and employment. Scenario analysis highlights the importance of monitoring demographic and development trends and maintaining flexibility in planning to accommodate a range of plausible futures.
• Alignment with Regulatory and Planning Needs: The baseline forecast provides a neutral, transparent point of comparison for evaluating future compliance with regulatory requirements. The results from this comparison demonstrate that the majority of BAWSCA agencies are anticipated to meet their UWUOs across the full period from 2025 – 2050. The baseline forecast also provides insights into future water supply reliability needs and the anticipated effectiveness of current regional conservation strategies and investment.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 239 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Summary and Recommendations 8-2

8.1 Recommendations for Future Analyses and Studies
Water demand projections are a critical component on long-range water resource planning for the region.

Water managers should consider the following recommendations, to help better monitor, track, and understand water demands as key drivers evolve in the future:

Enhanced Monitoring of High-Uncertainty Sectors (e.g., Data Centers):
• Establish a regular monitoring program for new and existing data centers, including tracking permitting, operational cooling technologies, and actual water use. • Consider establishment of new customer classifications that encompass data centers and/or other large industrial users.
• Collaborate with local planning departments and utilities to obtain early warning of large-scale developments.
• Update demand models annually to reflect observed trends and incorporate new data center loads as they materialize.
• Consider introducing an additional model that explicitly considers energy consumption as an independent driver unit for data centers and related industries.

Scenario Analysis of Future Drought Impacts:
• Develop and periodically update drought scenarios that simulate the effects of severe and prolonged droughts on both demand and supply.
• Assess the resilience of current and planned conservation programs under drought conditions. • Integrate lessons learned from recent drought events to refine assumptions and response strategies.
• Revisit participation assumptions for active programs annually, incorporating observed participation rates and, for BAWSCA specifically, feedback from member agencies.

Prioritize High Cost-Effectiveness Water Conservation Programs • Focus on programs with the lowest cost per 1,000 gallons saved (e.g., high-efficiency toilet and urinal retrofits, smart irrigation controllers, and direct-install kits), as identified in the cost-effectiveness analysis tables.
• Regularly review and update the program portfolio to ensure that investments are directed toward measures with the greatest water savings per dollar spent.

Monitor Water Conservation Program Participation and Adjust Outreach • Track participation rates and program uptake annually to identify underperforming programs or sectors.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 240 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Summary and Recommendations 8-3
• Adjust outreach and incentive levels as needed to increase participation in priority programs, especially in sectors or agencies lagging behind regional targets. • Focus active conservation programs on targeted incentives for MF properties, particularly shared laundry facilities, to accelerate the adoption of efficient appliances. • Develop tailored outreach for property owners and managers to address barriers to upgrading inefficient fixtures in MF buildings.

Coordinate Water Conservation Planning with Regulatory Compliance • Use conservation program analysis to support compliance with the UWUO and other regulatory requirements.
• Identify regulated sectors at risk of exceeding the established UWUO budget and prioritize additional or targeted conservation measures for those sectors.

Continuous Improvement of Data and Models:
• Continue to maintain clear documentation of all data sources, model parameters, and calibration methods.
• Maintain consistent and comprehensive data collection regarding core indicators such as population, housing, and employment, in addition to conservation-related metrics including program implementation, associated costs, and achieved savings. • Periodically review and refine model structure and parameters (for both the econometric models and AWE Tracking Tool) to incorporate new data, research, emerging technologies, and regulatory requirements.
• Maintain up-to-date estimates of fixture and appliance stock by sector and efficiency level, using the latest available data and the AWE Tracking Tool.

Lastly, as BAWSCA’s Strategy 2050 effort proceeds, there are several areas for which the new water demand projections and models can directly support. These include:
• Coordination of scenario definitions, assumptions, and timelines between the demand forecasting team and the Strategy 2050 Project to ensure consistency and comparability. • Assessment of the interplay between demand-side uncertainties (e.g., demographics, conservation, high water users) and supply-side uncertainties (e.g., climate change, regulatory shifts) and concomitant risks.
• Use integrated scenario results to identify potential gaps in supply reliability, inform adaptive management strategies, and prioritize investments in both demand management and new supply options.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 241 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix A: Procedure for Reprojecting Demographic Data A-1 Appendix A: Procedure for Reprojecting Demographic
Data
Introduction / Purpose
Key demographic information necessary for water demand forecasting—such as population, employment figures, and housing units—must align with the boundaries of each member agency's service area.

Historical and projected records for these data (e.g., DOF and Plan Bay Area 2050) are available at jurisdictional, census tract, and/or Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) geographical boundaries, which often do not directly align with member agency service area boundaries (see Figure A-1 as an example). These data must be reprojected from their native geographies to member agency service area boundaries in order to be used for statistical modeling and water demand projection. This Appendix documents the data sources and reprojection approach applied in the Project.

Figure A-1: Example of TAZ Tracts Overlapping an Adjacent Member Agency Service Areas

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 242 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix A: Procedure for Reprojecting Demographic Data A-2 Data Sources
Demographic data sources used for econometric modeling and demand projection as well as their native geographies are summarized in Table A-1.

Table A-1: Summary of Demographic Data Sources and Native Geographies Data Source Use Native Geography
DOF Primary data source for determining historical
housing units and population
City and county jurisdictional
boundaries
ACS Supplemental data source for housing units,
population distribution between SF and MF
residences
Census tract
LODES Primary data source for determining historical jobs and job sectors
Census tract
Plan Bay Area 2050 Primary data source for understanding future growth in housing units, population, and jobs
TAZ
In addition to demographic datasets, several geospatial data sources were obtained including:
• Member agency service area boundaries;
• Census tract boundary dataset from the US Census Bureau; • Parcel boundaries obtained from the Alameda County, Santa Clara County, and San Mateo County assessor’s office;
• Land use classification obtained from California Geoportal, General Plan Land Use dataset; and • TAZ boundary dataset from Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

General Reprojection Approach
The general reprojection approach applies the following steps:

Step 1: Define Target Geographies
• Identify the boundaries for the member agencies service areas using GIS datasets approved by member agency representatives.
• Ensure all member agency service area boundaries are spatially aligned and compatible (e.g., same projection, no gaps/overlaps).

Step 2: Source Population Forecasts
• Obtain regional population forecasts and historical datasets (e.g., Plan Bay Area 2050) at the finest available granularity (TAZ, census tract, etc.).

Step 3: Reproject Forecasts to Target Boundaries
• Spatial Overlay:

Overlay forecast units (e.g., TAZs) with target member agency service area boundaries.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 243 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix A: Procedure for Reprojecting Demographic Data A-3 • Weighting Factor:

Use parcel counts (residential parcel counts for population data, non-residential parcel counts for jobs) within the intersection of each forecast unit and target boundary as the primary weighting factor.
o For each forecast unit, calculate the proportion of residential parcels within each target boundary. o Allocate forecasted population, housing units, or jobs to each target boundary based on these proportions.
• Fallback:

If parcel count data is unavailable, use area-weighting (proportion of land area within the target boundary).

Step 4: Interpolate to Desired Time Increments (If Necessary) • For projection datasets (i.e., Plan Bay Area 2050) interpolate the demographic estimates for intermediate years using trends from forecasted years.
• Step 4 is not necessary for DOF, LODES, and ACS datasets.

A simple example of the reprojection procedure is illustrated below:

TAZ #2 has 100 residential parcels within its boundary and a projected population of 2,000 people. 10 of the 100 residential parcels fall within Agency A’s service area. 90 of the 100 residential parcels fall within Agency B’s service area.
• The weighting factor for allocating TAZ #2 population to Agency A equals 10/100 (0.1). • The projected number of people residing in TAZ #2 allocated to Agency A equals 0.1 x 2,000 (200 people).
• The weighting factor for allocating TAZ #2 population to Agency B equals 90/100 (0.9). • The projected number of people residing in TAZ #2 allocated to Agency B equals 0.9 x 2,000 (1,800 people).

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 244 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix B: Monthly and Bimonthly Smoothing Procedure B-1

Appendix B: Monthly and Bimonthly Smoothing
Procedure
Member agencies have different billing and meter reading frequencies. Additionally, within each agency, meter reading cycles can vary by customer. Many agencies universally adopt either monthly or bimonthly billing; however, some utilize a combination of the two billing cycles depending on customer class and date. Water use rates for the different agency billing cycles were standardized to a calendar-month to better reflect the actual seasonal timing of water use for each of the four modeled sectors (other uses are applied as a percentage of total use across the SF, MF, CII, and irrigation sectors).

Water use billed at monthly intervals can generally overlap with two consecutive calendar months. A smoothing equation extracts a single calendar-month use from the two monthly billing periods. For example, April water use is equal to the fraction of the April consumption billed in April plus the fraction of the April consumption billed in May, as demonstrated in the equation below.

𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝑈𝑠𝑒 = (𝐵𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ×
𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠
𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠) +
(𝐵𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ×
𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠
𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠)

Customers billed at bimonthly intervals are divided into two groups, and each group is billed every second month. Bimonthly meter readings contain water use that occurs over a span of three calendar months. For example, April use equals the fraction of April consumption billed in April and June (billing group 1) plus the fraction of April consumption billed in May (billing group 2), per the equation below:

𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝑈𝑠𝑒 = ((
1 4 𝐵𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 +
1 4 𝐵𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) ×
1 2𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+1
2𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠
1 2𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+1
2𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠
) + (
1 2 𝐵𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ×
𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠
1 2𝐴𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+𝑀𝑎𝑦 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠+1
2𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑠
)

Figure B-1 depicts smoothed water use for an agency whose billing structure changes from bimonthly to monthly in late 2022.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 245 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix B: Monthly and Bimonthly Smoothing Procedure B-2

Figure B-1: Example smoothing of consumption for an Agency with a Billing Structure that Changes Over Time
If an agency employs both monthly and bimonthly billing cycles for billing sectors that fall into a single model demand sector, a weighting of smoothed monthly (m) and bimonthly (b) water use (q) is employed to average use (qM,avg) over the two cycles, per the equation below:

𝑞𝑀,𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 𝑤𝑚 × 𝑞𝑚 + 𝑤𝑏 × 𝑞𝑏

The weighting factors (w) are defined in the equations below:

𝑤𝑚 = 𝐴𝑀,𝑚 + 𝐴𝑀+1,𝑚
(𝐴𝑀 + 2𝐴𝑀+1,𝑏 + 𝐴𝑀+2,𝑏) + (𝐴𝑀,𝑚 + 𝐴𝑀+1,𝑚)

𝑤𝑏 = 𝐴𝑀,𝑏 + 2𝐴𝑀+1,𝑏 + 𝐴𝑀+2,𝑏
(𝐴𝑀 + 2𝐴𝑀+1,𝑏 + 𝐴𝑀+2,𝑏) + (𝐴𝑀,𝑚 + 𝐴𝑀+1,𝑚)
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Jan-10
Jun-10
Nov-10
Apr-11
Sep-11
Feb-12
Jul-12
Dec-12
May-13
Oct-13
Mar-14
Aug-14
Jan-15
Jun-15
Nov-15
Apr-16
Sep-16
Feb-17
Jul-17
Dec-17
May-18
Oct-18
Mar-19
Aug-19
Jan-20
Jun-20
Nov-20
Apr-21
Sep-21
Feb-22
Jul-22
Dec-22
May-23
Oct-23
Mar-24
Aug-24
Gallons/Account/Day
Billed Water Use
Smoothed
Monthly Water
Use
Bimonthly Monthly
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 246 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix C: Estimated Model Coefficient Ranges C-1

Appendix C: Estimated Model Coefficient Ranges
This section provides a summary of the econometric model coefficient values for each of the five common water use sectors modeled in the Project. Each model is summarized in tabular form identifying the predictors used, the expected directional influence (i.e., increasing or decreasing effect on water use) the predictor should have on water use, and the range of fitted coefficient values.

Consistent with the panel regression approach, certain model coefficients are shared between agencies while others are unique. Unique coefficients are indicated in the tables below using a range. Note that not all potential model predictors discussed in Section 3 were used in all models.

Table C-1: Single-Family Regression Predictors and Coefficients Predictor Expected Directional
Influence
Model Coefficient Range
PPH + 0.200
Housing Density - -0.454
Water Rate (per 10 CCF) - -0.132 (annual average)
Tmax + -0.120 to 1.026
Tmax (lag 1 month) + -0.247 to 0.514
Precip - -0.060 to 0.001
Precip (lag 1 months) - -0.045 to 0.004
Passive Efficiency Index - -0.325 to -0.107
COVID Indicator + 0.023 to 0.174
Tier 2 Percentage - -1.213 to -0.022
SFPUC Systemwide Voluntary
Rationing - -0.997 to 0.389
State Requested Percent Restriction - -0.154

Table C-2: Multifamily Regression Predictors and Coefficients Predictor Expected Directional
Influence
Model Coefficient Range
Units Per Account Mean + 0.606
Units Per Account 2023 + 0.068
PPH + 0.407
Housing Density - -0.243
Water Rate (per 20 CCF) - -0.083
(annual average)
Tmax + -0.281 to 0.407
Precip - -0.018 to 0.005
Precip (lag 1 month) - -0.015 to 0.01
Precip (lag 2 months) - -0.009 to 0.011
Passive Efficiency Index - -0.358 to 0.131
COVID Indicator + -0.157 to 0.537
SFPUC Systemwide Voluntary
Rationing - -1.528 to 0.255
State Requested Percent Restriction - -1.902 to 1.793

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 247 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix C: Estimated Model Coefficient Ranges C-2

Table C-3: CII Regression Predictors and Coefficients
Predictor Expected Directional
Influence
Model Coefficient Range
Total Jobs per Account + 0.416
GDP + 0.422
Average Unemployment Rate - -0.059
Water Rate (per 20 CCF) - -0.212
Tmax + -1.135 to 1.113
Tmax (lag 1 month) + -0.451 to 0.897
Precip - -0.048 to 0.018
Precip (lag 1 month) - -0.037 to 0.013
Passive Efficiency Index - -1.423 to 0.381
SFPUC Systemwide Voluntary
Rationing - -2.64 to 0.796
State Requested Percent Restriction - -0.624 to 0.386
COVID - -0.453 to 0.392

Table C-4: Dedicated Irrigation Regression Predictors and Coefficients Predictor Expected Directional
Influence
Model Coefficient Range
Precip - -0.187 to -0.016
Precip (lag 1 month) - -0.129 to -0.043
SFPUC Systemwide Voluntary
Rationing - -7.265 to 1.783
State Requested Percent Reduction - -8.633 to 8.381
Tmax + 1.617
Water Rate (per 20 CCF) - -0.272
COVID n/a -0.325 to 0.41

Table C-5: Recycled and Raw Water Regression Predictors and Coefficients Predictor
Expected Directional
Influence
Model Coefficient Range
Precip - -0.276 to -0.005
Precip (lag 1 month) - -0.58 to -0.006
SFPUC Systemwide Voluntary
Rationing - -6.037 to 25.271
State Requested Percent Reduction - -2.129 to 1.225
Tmax + 1.617 to 1.621
Water Rate (per 20 CCF) - -0.272
COVID n/a -2.29 to 0.349

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 248 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix D: Summary of Econometric Model Fits D-1

Appendix D: Summary of Econometric Model Fits
Fitted econometric models were evaluated against historical rates of water consumption using both visual inspection of plotted data and evaluation of several statistical measures of goodness-of-fit.

Statistical measures examined in the study are summarized in Table D-1 below.

Table D-1: Summary of Statistical Measures of Fit
Statistical Measure Definition Example
R2 Measures how well a model explains
the variability of the outcome variable
(rate of water use).

A R2 of 0.5 means that the model
explains 50% of the variability in
the historical rate of billed water
consumption.

Mean Absolute Percent Error Measures the average absolute percent error of the model prediction
across all historical observations.

A mean absolute percent error of
5% indicates that the model’s
prediction is on average 5%
different than the historical rate of
water consumption across all
monthly billings.

Mean Bias Measures the average difference
between predicted values and
observed values. Helps assess
whether a model tends to overpredict
or underpredict on average.

A mean bias of -2% indicates that
on average, the model predicts a
2% lower rate of water
consumption than billed records.

Goodness of fit is a holistic exercise requiring simultaneous judgement of several indicators, including the measures of fit summarized in Table D-1, visual inspection of time series plots and scatter plots comparing model predictions to observed data, and as assessment of the reasonableness of model coefficients.

Table D-2 provides a summary of the model historical model performance for each of the statistical measures of fit identified in Table D-1. Overall, the econometric models illustrate strong measures of overall fit, with R2 values averaging exceeding 0.9 on a regional basis, low percent error, and bias relatively close to 0. The SF models tended to have the strongest measures of fit amongst the sectors, which is typical (and important) given that single family sectors tend to be the highest historical proportional use and most stable. Fit statistics tended to be lower for member agencies and sectors that had less variability on a seasonal basis, however these same agencies also expressed low percent error and bias statistics, indicating acceptable model fits. Error statistics for the irrigation and recycled/raw water models are generally higher than SF, MF, and CII given the smaller sample size, record of historical data, and relatively low number of accounts.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 249 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix D: Summary of Econometric Model Fits D-2

Table D-2: Summary of Historical Model Performance

Model
Statistical Measures of Fit
R2 Mean Absolute Percent
Error
Mean Bias
Regional Pooled Statistics Across All Member Agency Monthly Predictions Single Family .971 6.24% 0.36%
Multi Family .983 6.35% 0.43%
CII .973 9.60% 0.98%
Dedicated Irrigation .901 29.80% 8.18%
Recycled and Raw Water .903 26.96% 7.40%
Member Agency Range
Single Family .526 to .958 3.37% to 11.20% 0.11% to 1.05% Multi Family .512 to .961 3.01% to 11.98% 0.07% to 1.19% CII .421 to .951 4.47% to 27.20% 0.16% to 6.03%
Dedicated Irrigation .635 to .917 13.23% to 50.72% 1.83% to 21.20% Recycled and Raw
Water52
.593 to .956 7.08% to 93.52% 0.39% to 48.81%

52 Maximum recycled water percent error and mean bias reflects a single month for a single agency where the historical prediction significantly differs from the observed value. Mean errors are amplified by the relatively small sample size for this sector.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 250 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-1

Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 251 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-2

Table E-1: Conservation Measure Descriptions
Program
ID Program Name Program Category Program Class Units Program Description 1 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) HET Single-Family Toilet Replacement of existing conventional, low-efficiency toilets (>=3.5 gpf) with high-efficiency toilets (<=1.28 gpf). 2 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) HET Multi-Family Toilet 3 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) HET CII Common Meter Toilet 4 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) HET Single-Family Toilet Replacement of existing low flush toilets (>= 1.6 gpf) with high-efficiency toilets (<=1.28 gpf). 5 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) HET Multi-Family Toilet 6 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) HET CII Common Meter Toilet 7 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf) HET Single-Family Toilet Replacement of existing high-efficiency toilets (1.28 gpf) with high-efficiency plus toilets (<=1.0 gpf). 8 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf) HET Multi-Family Toilet 9 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf) HET CII Common Meter Toilet 10 CII Urinal (1/8 gpf) Replacement Urinal (0.125 gpf) CII Common Meter Urinal Replacement of existing low-efficiency urinals with high-efficiency urinals (0.125 gpf). 11 SF Washer Rebate (WF <=4) Clothes Washers
(residential in-unit) Single-Family Washer
Replacement of traditional clothes washers with high-efficiency clothes washers (< 15 gal/load) 12 MF In-Unit Washer Rebate (WF <=4) Clothes Washers
(residential in-unit) Multi-Family Washer
13 Water Conservation Kits - Indoor Kits & Giveaways Single-Family Kit The Indoor kit includes a high-efficiency showerhead (1.75 gpm), kitchen aerator (1.5 gpm), bathroom aerator (1.0 gpm), digital thermometer, toilet leak detector tablets, Teflon tape, miniature tape measure, rain/drip gauge, shower timer, natural resources facts slide chart, flow rate test bag, and information material. 14 Water Conservation Kits - Outdoor Kits & Giveaways Single-Family Kit The outdoor kit includes a garden hose spray nozzle, male and female end garden hose replacement, soil moisture meter, TORO male and female precision 180° nozzle, TORO male and female precision 90° nozzle, rain/drip gauge, natural resources facts slide chart, flow rate test bag, and information material. 15 Water Conservation Kits - LivingWise Kits & Giveaways Single-Family Kit The LivingWise kit includes a high-efficiency showerhead (1.75 gpm), kitchen aerator (1.5 gpm), bathroom aerator (1.0 gpm), 9 watt LED, LED nightlight, filter tone alarm, digital thermometer, toilet leak detector tablets, miniature tape measure, rain/drip gauge, shower timer, resources fact slide chart, flow rate test bag, Teflon tape, and information material. 16 Water Conservation Kits - Spray Valves Kits & Giveaways CII Common Meter Kit CII water conservation kits include one pre-rinse spray valve. 17 Water Conservation Kits - Aerators/Showerheads Kits & Giveaways CII Common Meter Kit CII water conservation kits include the direct installation of one faucet aerator and one showerhead. 18 CII Technologies Cooling & Heating Systems CII Irrigation Meter CCF Customizable rebate incentive for CII customers to implement projects that result in a reduction of water use per year. 19 SF Turf Replacement Turf Replacement Single-Family Square-foot Replacement of high-water use lawns with low-water use, water-efficient landscape. Includes Lawn Be Gone!, Large Landscape Lawn to Mulch and Lawn Bust Programs. 20 MF Turf Replacement Turf Replacement Multi-Family Square-foot 21 CII Large Landscape Turf Replacement Turf Replacement CII Irrigation Meter Square-foot 22 Rain Garden Addition Rainwater Harvesting Single-Family Square-foot Optional rain garden addition to Lawn Be Gone! Program for water customers under participating agencies. 23 SF In-Line Drip Irrigation Conversion Irrigation System & Devices Single-Family Square-foot Convert overhead sprinklers to in-line drip tubing in existing shrubs, perennial, or annual planting beds. 24 MF In-Line Drip Irrigation Conversion Irrigation System & Devices Multi-Family Square-foot 25 CII In-Line Drip Irrigation Conversion Irrigation System & Devices CII Irrigation Meter Square-foot 26 SF Smart Irrigation Controller Rebate Irrigation System & Devices Single-Family Device Replacement of existing conventional irrigation controller with a "smart" irrigation controller. Program includes WaterSense certified weather-based irrigation controllers and Rachio 3 Smart Controller. 27 MF Large Landscape Smart Irrigation Controller Rebate Irrigation System & Devices Multi-Family Device
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 252 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-3

Program
ID Program Name Program Category Program Class Units Program Description 28 CII Large Landscape Irrigation Controller Irrigation System & Devices CII Irrigation Meter Station 29 SF Irrigation Nozzle Replacement Irrigation System & Devices Single-Family Device Purchase and installation of new technology sprinkler heads that save water by allowing slower water application rates, by improving distribution uniformity, and by reducing the effects of wind-blow overspray. Includes high sprinkler nozzles, spray bodies with integrated pressure regulation and large rotary nozzles. 30 MF Irrigation Nozzle Replacement Irrigation System & Devices Multi-Family Device 31 CII Large Landscape Irrigation Nozzle
Replacement Irrigation System & Devices CII Irrigation Meter Station 32 Rainwater Capture - Rain Barrel <200 Rainwater Harvesting Single-Family Barrel Purchase of a rain barrel (less than 200 gallons) or a small rain cistern (200 to 500 gallons). 33 Rainwater Capture - Cistern >=200 Rainwater Harvesting Multi-Family Barrel 34 Rainwater Capture - Cistern >=200 Rainwater Harvesting CII Common Meter Barrel 35 SF Graywater Laundry to Landscape Rebate Graywater Single-Family Household Purchase and installation of graywater systems to recycle laundry rise water from clothes washers directly to landscape areas without filters, tanks or pumps.
36 Submetering - Other Metering & Submetering Multi-Family Meter Separation of domestic and irrigation meters for HOA or multi-family residential units with combined domestic and irrigation meters.
37 SF Unmetered to Metered Metering & Submetering Multi-Family Meter New submeter installation at existing water customer sites where they do not currently exist at mobile home parks, apartments, HOA's and condominium complexes.
38 SF Water Use Audit Audits & Rpts Single-Family Household Residential home surveys include a site visit by a trained personnel who assesses current water use practices and make recommendations for efficiency improvements. The outdoor portion of the survey can range from a brochure on outdoor savings to an intensive outdoor water efficiency study (turf audit, catch can test, and written recommendations for irrigation scheduling or landscape changes). Conservation devices could be directly installed. 39 MF Water Use Audit Audits & Rpts Multi-Family Property Residential home surveys include a site visit by a trained personnel who assesses current water use practices and makes recommendations for efficiency improvements. For the multi-family sector, these surveys cover indoor use, outdoor landscape, pools, and washing machines. Conservation devices could be directly installed. 40 CII Large Landscape Water Audit Audits & Rpts CII Irrigation Meter Property A large landscape water audit includes a site visit by a trained personnel who assesses current irrigation practices, measures and inspects landscape areas, inspects and tests irrigation system performance, and makes recommendations for improvements in plant material, irrigation equipment, and irrigation schedule. Conservation devices could be directly installed. 41 SF Wireless Flow Monitor Audits & Rpts Single-Family Monitor Wireless devices that continuously measure the flow of water volume and provide alerts in the case of detected leaks. These devices can attach to the meter, incoming water pipes, fitted under the sink or be in-line installed directly on the water main.

Examples include Flume and WaterSmart (VertexOne). Note devices that sense water on the floor or humidity to indicate a leak are not included.
42 SF AMI Leak Alert Audits & Rpts Single-Family Household Leak detection alert systems of various sorts that identify leaks on the customer side of the meter, where the metering is Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). Since AMI technology connects customer meters to the utility through a network, it allows storage and analysis of water use patterns, in addition to billing. An AMI Leak Alert Program, thus, is one that uses the data infrastructure to identify customers with leaks, and to send alerts. This activity assumes AMI is utilized with the ability to both identify a leak at a customer site and to alert the customer in a way that allows subsequent repair or resolution (mail, email, text, and/or call). Not included are devices installed on the customer side of the meter. 43 MF (4 or fewer units) AMI Leak Alert Audits & Rpts Multi-Family Property 44 Water Use Monitoring - Water Calculator Education Single-Family Household Website available to water customers with advice on how to set irrigation controllers properly and how to manage it thereafter. 45 Water Use Monitoring - Footprint Calculator Education Single-Family Household An interactive website quiz that calculates a persons water footprint. The website also includes information on what a water footprint is, ways to save water and educational resources. 46 Water Use Monitoring - RSAT Kit/Home Survey Kit Kits & Giveaways Single-Family Household An at-home self-audit survey that includes a step-by-step guide to check for flow rates, leaks, and general inefficiencies. 47 In-School Education - Poster Contest Education Single-Family Household Annual contest part of the school education program designed to promote water conservation awareness among students in kindergarten through 5th grade.
48 In-School Education - EarthCapades Education Single-Family Performance School assemblies designed to increase student awareness of water conservation by combining age-appropriate state science standards with circus skills, juggling, music, storytelling, comedy, and audience participation to teach environmental awareness, water science and conservation.
49 In-School Education - Water-Wise Kits & Giveaways Single-Family Kit Through the Water-wise School Education Kits Program, kits are distributed to 5th grade students that enable them to install water saving devices and perform a water audit in their home. After the student performs the audit and installs the water and energy savings devices, affidavits signed by the parents are returned to the school, collected by the teacher, and forwarded to Water Wise for program documentation of implementation and resulting savings. The kit includes energy and water savings high-efficiency showerhead, kitchen aerator, flip control bathroom aerator, energy cost calculator, mini-tape measure, flow rate test bag, multi-function drop/rain gauge, water temperature check card, toilet leak detector tablets. 50 In-School Education - Classroom Visit Education Single-Family Household DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 253 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-4

Program
ID Program Name Program Category Program Class Units Program Description 51 In-School Education - Teacher Training Education Single-Family Household A collection of classroom resources on conservation for teachers. 52 Public Outreach Education Single-Family Household
BAWSCA participates in the Water Conservation Showcase event every year and helped form the Silicon Valley Water Conservation Award Coalition to recognize programs and leadership that has contributed to the advancement of water conservation in Silicon Valley. Other measures taken include collaborations with member agencies for public outreach and community events.
53 Water Efficient Landscaping - Conservation
Garden Education Single-Family Household Water Conservation Garden that demonstrates low water landscaping concepts. Visit the garden to learn how you can incorporate these water conservation concepts into your landscaping project. 54 Water Efficient Landscaping - Education Classes Education Single-Family Household BAWSCA's Landscape Education Classes are designed to introduce homeowners, commercial property managers, landscape service providers, and others to the concepts of water-efficient and sustainable landscaping. 55 Water Efficient Landscaping - Garden Tours Education Single-Family Household Garden tours which showcase homes around the Bay Area that have beautiful water conserving gardens comprised primarily of California native plants. These tours are regional throughout the Bay Area and provide homeowners, landscape professionals, and others with ideas for design and implementation of water-efficient landscapes. 56 Water Efficient Landscaping - Water-Wise Tool Education Single-Family Household A website full of information on how to garden beautifully while saving water. 57 Certification - Green Business Education CII Common Meter Certification Program designed to encourage businesses follow best practices for energy and water conservation, waste management, and more.
58 Certification - QWEL Education Single-Family Certification Free or low cost 20-hour training and certification on irrigation and water management to receive an EPA WaterSense labeled professional certification in irrigation system audits. 59 Affordability/Equity - Grants Grants Single-Family Grant Grants for non-profit, government agencies and schools/universities to test new and innovative water conservation technologies and programs.
60 Affordability/Equity - Assistance Program Grants Single-Family Grant Qualified water customers receive a free water and energy conservation assessments to residents. Services include indoor and outdoor leak assessments, and if needed, installation of new fixtures such as high-efficiency toilets, bathroom faucets, outdoor hose bibs, and sprinkler heads.
61 Building Efficiency Program Cooling & Heating Systems CII Common Meter CII Establishment
Program designed to address energy and water use in existing buildings to help make them more efficient, thereby saving owners money, improving the safety and comfort of the building stock, and reducing emissions that are driving climate change. 62 Showerhead Replacement (<= 1.8 gpm) Low Flow Showerhead (<=

1.8 gpm) Single-Family Showerhead
Replacement of existing low efficiency showerheads with low-flow showerheads rated 1.8 gpm or less. 63 Showerhead Replacement (<= 1.8 gpm) Low Flow Showerhead (<=

1.8 gpm) Multi-Family Showerhead
64 Bathroom Direct Install HET Single-Family Toilet
Direct installation of high efficiency toilets, inefficient showerheads and bathroom faucets by a contractor. 65 Bathroom Direct Install HET Multi-Family Toilet
66 Irrigation System Flow Sensor Rebate Irrigation System & Devices Single-Family Controller Installation of irrigation flow sensors that measure the flow rate from which the volume of water being delivered to an irrigation system can be inferred. 67 Irrigation System Flow Sensor Rebate Irrigation System & Devices Multi-Family Controller 68 SFR Medium Cistern (501-999 gal) Rebate Rainwater Harvesting Single-Family Barrel Purchase of a medium cistern (501 to 999 gallons) or a large cistern (1,000+ gallons) for the purpose of rainwater harvesting. 69 SFR Large Cistern (1000+ gal) Rebate Rainwater Harvesting Single-Family Barrel 70 CII Ozone Laundry Washer Rebate Laundries & Laundromats CII Common Meter Washer Ozone laundry systems utilize cold-water, lower amounts of detergent and fewer rinse cycles to conserve water and energy.

Applicable to hospitals, nursing homes, hotels/motels, universities and prisons. 71 CII Commercial Kitchen Dishwasher Rebate Commercial Kitchens & Restaurants CII Common Meter Dishwasher Installation of high efficiency dishwashers in commercial and industrial kitchens. 72 CII Commercial Kitchen Spray Rinse Valve Rebate Commercial Kitchens & Restaurants CII Common Meter Spray Valve Installation of pre-rinse spray valves that control the water flow in sprayers for rinsing food waste from pots, pans, utensils, and dishware before entering a dishwasher.
73 CII Commercial Kitchen Food Steamer Rebate Commercial Kitchens & Restaurants CII Common Meter Food Steamer Installation of water efficient food steamers in commercial and industrial kitchens. 74 CII Restaurant Dipper Well Rebate Commercial Kitchens & Restaurants CII Common Meter Dipper Well Installation of high efficiency dipper wells that utilize automatic shutoffs and other features to reduce water use. Can include replacement of low efficiency dripper wells.
75 CII Large Landscape Water Budget Audits & Rpts CII Irrigation Meter Site Large landscape, irrigated area greater than 1 acre, where water budgets tied to water rates. 76 Acoustic Hydrant Cap Leaks and Water Loss CII Common Meter Hydrant Cap Leak detection technology. System water loss is calculated by determining the total water inputs into the system against the total measurable outputs of the system. Inputs are measured at the point of entry into the water network through a meter.

Outputs are then calculated at residential or commercial meters where customers purchase the water.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 254 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-5

Table E-2: Conservation Cost and Savings Assumptions
Program ID Program Name Units
BAWSCA Defined Programs Valley Water Defined Programs Other Utility Defined Programs Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost
($/1000
gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost
($/1000
gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost ($/1000 gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
1 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 - 70 0.2 - 0.28 28 25 2 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA $150 $0.43 39 25 50 - 150 0.14 - 0.43 39 25 3 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA $150 $0.43 39 25 50 - 150 0.14 - 0.43 39 25 4 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 0.26 28 25 5 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA $150 $0.43 39 25 50 - 150 0.19 - 0.57 39 25 6 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA $150 $0.43 39 25 50 - 150 0.19 - 0.57 15 25 7 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 0.3 28 25 8 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 - 150 0.22 - 0.65 39 25 9 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf) Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 - 150 0.22 - 0.65 16 25 10 CII Urinal (1/8 gpf) Replacement Urinal NA NA NA NA $150 $0.78 21 25 150 - 150 0.83 20 25 11 SF Washer Rebate (WF <=4) Washer NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 100 - 150 1.65 - 2.48 11 15 12 MF In-Unit Washer Rebate (WF <=4) Washer NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 100 - 150 2.23 - 3.34 8 15 13 Water Conservation Kits - Indoor Kit $40 $1.48 7 10 $40 $1.48 7 10 15 0.56 7 10 14 Water Conservation Kits - Outdoor Kit $38 $1.61 6 10 $38 $1.61 6 10 NA NA NA NA 15 Water Conservation Kits - LivingWise Kit $55 $2.04 7 10 $55 $2.04 7 10 NA NA NA NA 16 Water Conservation Kits - Spray Valves Kit NA NA NA NA $50 $0.18 77 10 35 0.5 19 10 17 Water Conservation Kits - Aerators/Showerheads Kit NA NA NA NA $60 $3.74 4 10 3.68 - 60 0.23 - 3.74 4 10 18 CII Technologies CCF $4 $0.55 2 10 $4 $0.55 2 10 4 0.55 2 10 19 SF Turf Replacement Square-foot $2 $5.56 0 10 $5 $13.70 0 10 0.71 - 3 1.97 - 8.34 NA 10 20 MF Turf Replacement Square-foot $2 $5.56 0 10 $5 $13.70 0 10 0.71 - 3 1.97 - 8.34 NA 10 21 CII Large Landscape Turf Replacement Square-foot $2 $5.56 0 10 $5 $13.70 0 10 0.77 - 1 2.14 - 2.78 NA 10 22 Rain Garden Addition Square-foot $1 $3.61 0 10 $3 $8.22 0 10 NA NA NA NA 23 SF In-Line Drip Irrigation Conversion Square-foot NA NA NA NA $0 $1.10 0 10 0.25 1.1 NA 10 24 MF In-Line Drip Irrigation Conversion Square-foot NA NA NA NA $0 $1.10 0 10 0.25 1.1 NA 10 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 255 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-6

Program ID Program Name Units
BAWSCA Defined Programs Valley Water Defined Programs Other Utility Defined Programs Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost
($/1000
gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost
($/1000
gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost ($/1000 gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
25 CII In-Line Drip Irrigation Conversion Square-foot NA NA NA NA $0 $1.10 0 10 0.25 1.1 NA 10 26 SF Smart Irrigation Controller Rebate Device $82 $0.86 26 10 $82 $0.86 26 10 125 1.31 26 10 27 MF Large Landscape Smart Irrigation Controller
Rebate Device $125 $0.05 727 10 $1,461 $0.55 727 10 125 - 960 0.05 - 0.36 727 10 28 CII Large Landscape Irrigation Controller Station $25 $0.01 727 10 $3,295 $1.24 727 10 25 - 960 0.01 - 0.36 727 10 29 SF Irrigation Nozzle Replacement Device $5 $0.86 2 10 $9 $1.48 2 10 4.51 - 5 0.77 - 0.86 2 10 30 MF Irrigation Nozzle Replacement Device $5 $0.86 2 10 $11 $1.86 2 10 4.51 - 18 0.77 - 3.08 2 10 31 CII Large Landscape Irrigation Nozzle
Replacement Station $5 $0.86 2 10 $7 $1.12 2 10 37 6.34 2 10 32 Rainwater Capture - Rain Barrel <200 Barrel $50 $16.15 2 5 $150 $48.46 2 5 50 16.15 2 5 33 Rainwater Capture - Cistern >=200 Barrel $200 $16.15 7 5 $200 $16.15 7 5 NA NA NA NA 34 Rainwater Capture - Cistern >=200 Barrel $200 $16.15 7 5 $200 $16.15 7 5 NA NA NA NA 35 SF Graywater Laundry to Landscape Rebate Household NA NA NA NA $200 $3.04 18 10 200 5.03 11 10 36 Submetering - Other Meter NA NA NA NA $300 $0.68 60 20 302 - 1,950 0.69 - 4.45 60 20 37 SF Unmetered to Metered Meter NA NA NA NA $150 $0.40 51 20 NA NA NA NA 38 SF Water Use Audit Household $125 $2.02 34 5 $125 $2.02 34 5 125 2.02 34 5 39 MF Water Use Audit Property NA NA NA NA $75 $3.74 11 5 75 3.74 11 5 40 CII Large Landscape Water Audit Property $1,700 $1.04 893 5 $1,400 $0.66 1,160 5 725 0.44 893 5 41 SF Wireless Flow Monitor Monitor $200 $4.57 24 5 $200 $4.57 24 5 0 - 200 22.83 24 1 42 SF AMI Leak Alert Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.003 - 301 0.01 - 1,178 1 1 43 MF (4 or fewer units) AMI Leak Alert Property NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.003 - 20 0 - 27.40 2 1 44 Water Use Monitoring - Water Calculator Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 45 Water Use Monitoring - Footprint Calculator Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 46 Water Use Monitoring - RSAT Kit/Home Survey Kit Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 47 In-School Education - Poster Contest Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 48 In-School Education - EarthCapades Performance NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 49 In-School Education - Water-Wise Kit NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 In-School Education - Classroom Visit Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 256 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-7

Program ID Program Name Units
BAWSCA Defined Programs Valley Water Defined Programs Other Utility Defined Programs Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost
($/1000
gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost
($/1000
gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
Utility
Cost
($/unit)
Utility Unit
Cost ($/1000 gal)
Expected
Savings
(gpd/unit)
Life of
Savings
(Years)
51 In-School Education - Teacher Training Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 52 Public Outreach Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 53 Water Efficient Landscaping - Conservation
Garden Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 54 Water Efficient Landscaping - Education Classes Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 55 Water Efficient Landscaping - Garden Tours Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 56 Water Efficient Landscaping - Water-Wise Tool Household NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 57 Certification - Green Business Certification NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 58 Certification - QWEL Certification NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 59 Affordability/Equity - Grants Grant NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 60 Affordability/Equity - Assistance Program Grant NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 61 Building Efficiency Program CII
Establishment NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 62 Showerhead Replacement (<= 1.8 gpm) Showerhead $4 $0.50 2 10 $10 $1.14 2 10 4.26 - 10 0.49 - 1.14 2 10 63 Showerhead Replacement (<= 1.8 gpm) Showerhead $4 $0.50 2 10 $10 $1.14 2 10 4.26 - 10 0.49 - 1.14 2 10 64 Bathroom Direct Install Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 65 Bathroom Direct Install Toilet NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 350 0.73 53 25 66 Irrigation System Flow Sensor Rebate Controller NA NA NA NA $190 $5.78 9 10 190 5.78 9 10 67 Irrigation System Flow Sensor Rebate Controller NA NA NA NA $190 $1.93 27 10 190 1.93 27 10 68 SF Medium Cistern (501-999 gal) Rebate Barrel $50 $3.26 8 5 $300 $19.57 8 5 350 22.85 8 5 69 SF Large Cistern (1000+ gal) Rebate Barrel $50 $2.84 10 5 $300 $17.12 10 5 400 22.73 10 5 70 CII Ozone Laundry Washer Rebate Washer NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2,100 0.54 704 15 71 CII Commercial Kitchen Dishwasher Rebate Dishwasher NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 72 CII Commercial Kitchen Spray Rinse Valve Rebate Spray Valve NA NA NA NA $50 $0.71 19 10 50 0.71 19 10 73 CII Commercial Kitchen Food Steamer Rebate Food Steamer NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1,250 - 1,400 1.54 - 1.72 223 10
74 CII Restaurant Dipper Well Rebate Dipper Well NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 75 CII Large Landscape Water Budget Site $44 $0.10 1,160 1 $0 $0.00 1,160 1 NA NA NA NA 76 Acoustic Hydrant Cap Hydrant Cap NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1,189 NA 165 NA DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 257 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-8

Table E-3: Residential End Uses by Technological Efficiency Level Class
End Use Mechanical
Efficiency
Projections 2025-2050
Technology 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Change %
Change
SF Toilets
Pre-ULFT 151,442 113,341 84,668 63,085 46,838 34,611 -116,831 -77.15% ULFT 350,144 276,937 219,042 173,255 137,043 108,403 -241,741 -69.04% HET 437,464 566,933 670,738 747,887 808,391 857,304 419,840 95.97% % Pre-ULFT 16.13% 11.84% 8.69% 6.41% 4.72% 3.46% - -
SF Showerheads
>2.5 gpm 15,998 8,085 3,643 2,046 1,149 645 -15,353 -95.97% (1.8, 2.5) 293,958 172,598 101,596 59,886 35,328 20,849 -273,108 -92.91% <=1.8 gpm 441,284 585,085 674,318 725,450 757,342 778,760 337,476 -247,609 % >2.5 gpm 2.13% 1.06% 0.47% 0.26% 0.14% 0.08% - -
SF Clothes
Washers
Conventional 195,946 193,675 193,394 193,228 193,565 194,423 -1,523 -0.78% High-Efficiency 169,031 178,204 185,034 189,295 192,395 194,972 25,942 15.35% % Conventional 53.69% 52.08% 51.10% 50.51% 50.15% 49.93% - - SF Dishwashers
Conventional 84,968 64,128 51,356 43,669 39,227 36,777 -48,191 -56.72% High-Efficiency 260,799 288,178 307,155 318,722 326,419 332,124 71,325 27.35% % Conventional 24.57% 18.20% 14.32% 12.05% 10.73% 9.97% - - MF Toilets
Pre-ULFT 78,569 60,818 47,959 37,796 29,776 23,450 -55,119 -70.15% ULFT 195,636 154,654 122,259 96,650 76,407 60,404 -135,231 -69.12% HET 339,297 487,333 628,848 745,917 854,434 973,556 634,259 186.93% % Pre-ULFT 12.81% 8.65% 6.00% 4.29% 3.10% 2.22% - -
MF Showerheads
>2.5 gpm 9,555 5,502 3,168 1,824 1,051 605 -8,950 -93.67% (1.8, 2.5) 214,334 126,295 74,488 43,956 25,946 15,318 -199,016 -92.85% <=1.8 gpm 372,572 551,486 699,212 810,128 906,936 1,012,115 639,544 171.66% % >2.5 gpm 1.60% 0.81% 0.41% 0.21% 0.11% 0.06% - -
MF
In-Unit
Clothes
Washers
Conventional 96,044 106,513 118,683 129,230 139,915 153,072 57,028 59.38% High-Efficiency 85,854 100,190 114,759 126,795 138,403 152,133 66,280 77.20% % Conventional 52.80% 51.53% 50.84% 50.48% 50.27% 50.15% - - MF
Shared
Clothes
Washers
Conventional 23,117 26,033 29,280 32,054 34,816 38,164 15,047 65.09% High-Efficiency 22,357 25,643 29,080 31,952 34,763 38,137 15,780 70.58% % Conventional 50.84% 50.38% 50.17% 50.08% 50.04% 50.02% - - MF Dishwashers
Conventional 57,447 48,091 43,180 40,664 40,120 41,465 -15,982 -27.82% High-Efficiency 197,209 241,293 283,640 317,771 349,525 385,822 188,613 95.64% % Conventional 22.56% 16.62% 13.21% 11.34% 10.30% 9.70% - -

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 258 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-9

Table E-4: CII End Uses by Technological Efficiency Level Class End Use
Technology
Mechanical
Efficiency
Projections 2025-2050
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Change %
Change
CII Toilets
Pre- ULFT 51,923 40,352 31,727 24,873 19,438 15,132 -36,790 -70.86% ULFT 102,789 83,811 68,337 55,720 45,433 37,045 -65,744 -63.96% % Pre-ULFT 33.56% 32.50% 31.71% 30.86% 29.96% 29.00% - - CII Urinals
>=1 gpf 23,376 18,985 15,398 12,472 10,090 8,151 -15,226 -65.13%

0.5 gpf 2,420 1,973 1,609 1,312 1,070 872 -1,548 -63.96%

0.25 gpf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.125 gpf 14,977 22,401 28,390 33,661 38,286 42,927 27,951 186.63% 0 gpf 1,347 1,744 2,063 2,348 2,601 2,863 1,517 112.62% % >=1 gpf 55.50% 42.09% 32.45% 25.05% 19.39% 14.87% - -

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 259 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-10

Table E-5: Annual Active Savings by Program(a), MG
ID Program Name Units Clas
s
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
1 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to
HET (1.28 gpf)
Toilet SF
1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 23 24 25 26 27 392 2 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to
HET (1.28 gpf)
Toilet MF
0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 40
3 Toilets - Conventional (>=3.5 gpf) to
HET (1.28 gpf)
Toilet CII
0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 49
4 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET
(1.28 gpf)
Toilet SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET
(1.28 gpf)
Toilet MF
2 5 7 9 11 13 12 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 6 229 6 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6 gpf) to HET
(1.28 gpf)
Toilet CII
2 4 6 8 10 11 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 310 7 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+
(<=1.0 gpf)
Toilet SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+
(<=1.0 gpf)
Toilet MF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
9 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf) to HET+
(<=1.0 gpf)
Toilet CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13
10 CII Urinal (1/8 gpf) Replacement Urinal CII 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 40 11 SFR Washer Rebate (WF <=4) Washer SF 1 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 204 12 MFR In-Unit Washer Rebate (WF
<=4)
Washer MF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 Water Conservation Kits - Indoor Kit SF 8 17 25 33 41 49 56 64 72 79 87 94 100 107 114 121 127 134 141 147 154 161 167 174 181 187 2,640 14 Water Conservation Kits - Outdoor Kit SF 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 31 427 15 Water Conservation Kits -
LivingWise
Kit SF
3 5 7 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 27 29 31 32 33 35 36 38 39 40 42 43 44 46 692 16 Water Conservation Kits - Spray
Valves
Kit CII
2 4 5 7 8 10 12 13 15 16 18 19 21 23 24 26 27 29 30 32 34 35 37 38 40 42 568 17 Water Conservation Kits -
Aerators/Showerheads
Kit CII
1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 11 167 18 CII Technologies CCF Irr. 4 8 12 16 20 24 27 31 35 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 845 19 SFR Turf Replacement Square-foot SF 9 18 27 36 46 55 64 74 84 93 94 95 96 97 97 98 99 100 101 103 104 105 106 107 107 108 2,123 20 MFR Turf Replacement Square-foot MF 2 4 7 9 11 14 16 19 21 24 24 24 25 25 25 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 28 28 28 545 21 CII Large Landscape Turf
Replacement
Square-foot Irr.
3 6 9 12 16 21 27 32 38 43 46 49 52 54 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 62 63 63 1,128 22 Rain Garden Addition Square-foot SF 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 75 23 SFR In-Line Drip Irrigation
Conversion
Square-foot SF
12 23 35 47 59 71 83 95 106 118 119 119 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 2,563 24 MFR In-Line Drip Irrigation
Conversion
Square-foot MF
1 2 3 5 6 8 10 12 14 15 16 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 366 25 CII In-Line Drip Irrigation
Conversion
Square-foot Irr.
3 6 10 14 19 24 28 33 38 43 45 47 49 50 51 52 53 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 1,100 26 SFR Smart Irrigation Controller
Rebate
Device SF
6 12 19 25 31 38 45 52 59 66 64 62 61 59 57 55 53 50 48 46 46 47 47 47 47 47 1,189 27 MFR Large Landscape Smart
Irrigation Controller Rebate
Device MF
8 17 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 97 99 102 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 110 111 112 112 113 114 2,212 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 260 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-11

ID Program Name Units Clas
s
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
28 CII Large Landscape Irrigation
Controller
Station Irr.
8 14 21 29 37 46 54 62 70 78 80 82 83 84 84 85 85 86 86 87 87 88 88 89 89 90 1,793 29 SFR Irrigation Nozzle Replacement Device SF 1 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 167 30 MFR Irrigation Nozzle Replacement Device MF 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 287 31 CII Large Landscape Irrigation
Nozzle Replacement
Station Irr.
1 1 2 2 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 143 32 Rainwater Capture - Rain Barrel
<200
Barrel SF
3 7 10 14 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 414 33 Rainwater Capture - Cistern >=200 Barrel MF 0 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 70 34 Rainwater Capture - Cistern >=200 Barrel CII 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 35 35 SFR Graywater Laundry to
Landscape Rebate
Household SF
1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 30
36 Submetering - Other Meter MF 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 29 37 SFR Unmetered to Metered Meter MF 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 38 38 SFR Water Use Audit Household SF 7 12 17 20 23 23 23 23 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 578 39 MFR Water Use Audit Property MF 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 40 CII Large Landscape Water Audit Property Irr. 32 57 78 96 112 113 116 117 118 119 120 120 121 122 122 123 123 124 125 126 127 127 127 127 127 127 2,947 41 SFR Wireless Flow Monitor Monitor SF 49 54 59 65 70 74 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 1,947 42 SFR AMI Leak Alert Household SF 30 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 809 43 MFR (4 or fewer units) AMI Leak
Alert
Property MF
73 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 1,924 44 Water Use Monitoring - Water
Calculator
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
45 Water Use Monitoring - Footprint
Calculator
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
46 Water Use Monitoring - RSAT
Kit/Home Survey Kit
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
47 In-School Education - Poster
Contest
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
48 In-School Education -
EarthCapades
Performance SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
49 In-School Education - Water-Wise Kit SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 In-School Education - Classroom
Visit
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
51 In-School Education - Teacher
Training
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
52 Public Outreach Household SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 Water Efficient Landscaping -
Conservation Garden
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
54 Water Efficient Landscaping -
Education Classes
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
55 Water Efficient Landscaping -
Garden Tours
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
56 Water Efficient Landscaping -
Water-Wise Tool
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
57 Certification - Green Business Certification CII 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 Certification - QWEL Certification SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 261 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-12

ID Program Name Units Clas
s
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
59 Affordability/Equity - Grants Grant SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 Affordability/Equity - Assistance
Program
Grant SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
61 Building Efficiency Program CII
Establishment
CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
62 Showerhead Replacement (<= 1.8
gpm)
Showerhead SF
0 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 79
63 Showerhead Replacement (<= 1.8
gpm)
Showerhead MF
0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 48
64 Bathroom Direct Install Toilet SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 Bathroom Direct Install Toilet MF 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 38 66 Irrigation System Flow Sensor
Rebate
Controller SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
67 Irrigation System Flow Sensor
Rebate
Controller MF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
68 SFR Medium Cistern (501-999 gal)
Rebate
Barrel SF
0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 40
69 SFR Large Cistern (1000+ gal)
Rebate
Barrel SF
0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 43
70 CII Ozone Laundry Washer Rebate Washer CII 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 73 71 CII Commercial Kitchen Dishwasher
Rebate
Dishwasher CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
72 CII Commercial Kitchen Spray
Rinse Valve Rebate
Spray Valve CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
73 CII Commercial Kitchen Food
Steamer Rebate
Food Steamer CII
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21
74 CII Restaurant Dipper Well Rebate Dipper Well CII 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 CII Large Landscape Water Budget Site Irr. 442 446 450 453 457 461 465 469 473 476 480 483 486 490 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 7,548 76 Acoustic Hydrant Cap Hydrant Cap CII 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Regional Total
721 848 968
1,09
0 1,20
8 1,30
8 1,40
3 1,49
3 1,58
2 1,67
2 1,70
1 1,72
8 1,75
6 1,77
8 1,39
2 1,40
8 1,42
4 1,44
0 1,45
7 1,47
4 1,49
2 1,51
0 1,52
7 1,54
4 1,55
9 1,57
5 37,05
5 Regional Total, Single-Family
134 192 248 304 358 406 453 495 538 581 591 602 614 624 635 644 653 662 672 681 693 704 716 727 738 749 14,41
3 Regional Total, Multi-Family 90 107 123 142 161 179 195 211 227 243 246 250 253 255 256 257 259 260 262 264 265 267 268 269 270 271 5,853 Regional Total, CII Common Meter 6 11 16 21 26 31 34 37 40 43 46 48 51 54 56 59 61 63 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 81 1,286 Regional Total, Irrigation
492 538 580 623 663 692 721 750 778 806 817 827 838 846 445 448 451 454 457 461 464 467 469 471 473 474 15,50
4 (a) San Jose Municipal Water System - North San José – Alviso active savings cannot be broken out at the program level as the annual measures are applied to the whole San Jose service area. Total active savings for San Jose Municipal Water System - North San José – Alviso is estimated to be 0.08 MGD in 2050 based on the projected water demand relative to the entire San Jose agency demand.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 262 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-13

Table E-6: Annual Program Budgets per $K
ID Program Name Units Class
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
1 Toilets - Conventional
(>=3.5 gpf) to HET
(1.28 gpf)
Toilet SF
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 212 2 Toilets - Conventional
(>=3.5 gpf) to HET
(1.28 gpf)
Toilet MF
2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 28
3 Toilets - Conventional
(>=3.5 gpf) to HET
(1.28 gpf)
Toilet CII
1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 27
4 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6
gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf)
Toilet SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6
gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf)
Toilet MF
20 19 19 21 19 20 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 6 Toilets - ULFT (>=1.6
gpf) to HET (1.28 gpf)
Toilet CII
26 29 29 31 30 30 11 9 9 11 9 9 11 9 9 11 9 9 11 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 369 7 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf)
to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf)
Toilet SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf)
to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf)
Toilet MF
2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
9 Toilets - HET (1.28 gpf)
to HET+ (<=1.0 gpf)
Toilet CII
2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
10 CII Urinal (1/8 gpf)
Replacement
Urinal CII
2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 69
11 SFR Washer Rebate
(WF <=4)
Washer SF
23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 614 12 MFR In-Unit Washer
Rebate (WF <=4)
Washer MF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 Water Conservation
Kits - Indoor
Kit SF
75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 1,801 14 Water Conservation
Kits - Outdoor
Kit SF
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 404 15 Water Conservation
Kits - LivingWise
Kit SF
51 51 51 51 51 46 46 46 46 46 40 40 40 40 40 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 1,069 16 Water Conservation
Kits - Spray Valves
Kit CII
6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 83
17 Water Conservation
Kits -
Aerators/Showerheads
Kit CII
21 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 11 11 11 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 309 18 CII Technologies CCF Irr. 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 570 19 SFR Turf Replacement Square-foot SF 800 808 816 824 832 840 849 858 868 878 888 899 910 921 933 946 959 972 986 1,001 1,016 1,016 1,016 1,016 1,016 1,016 23,882 20 MFR Turf Replacement Square-foot MF 160 165 166 168 174 175 177 179 180 182 184 186 188 190 192 194 201 204 206 209 211 211 211 211 211 211 4,950 21 CII Large Landscape
Turf Replacement
Square-foot Irr.
250 257 272 308 367 491 535 539 544 548 553 557 562 567 573 578 584 590 597 603 610 610 610 610 610 610 13,536 22 Rain Garden Addition Square-foot SF 20 27 27 28 28 21 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 25 25 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 640 23 SFR In-Line Drip
Irrigation Conversion
Square-foot SF
3 3 3 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 188 24 MFR In-Line Drip
Irrigation Conversion
Square-foot MF
10 12 12 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 554 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 263 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-14

ID Program Name Units Class
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
25 CII In-Line Drip
Irrigation Conversion
Square-foot Irr.
35 37 38 52 53 54 54 55 56 58 59 60 61 62 64 65 66 68 69 71 72 72 72 72 72 72 1,570 26 SFR Smart Irrigation
Controller Rebate
Device SF
66 66 66 67 67 71 71 71 72 72 51 52 52 52 52 52 52 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 1,530 27 MFR Large Landscape
Smart Irrigation
Controller Rebate
Device MF
21 21 21 28 28 29 28 28 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 724 28 CII Large Landscape
Irrigation Controller
Station Irr.
33 26 27 34 34 41 34 35 35 35 42 36 36 36 36 44 37 37 38 38 45 38 38 38 38 45 957 29 SFR Irrigation Nozzle
Replacement
Device SF
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 204 30 MFR Irrigation Nozzle
Replacement
Device MF
28 28 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 759 31 CII Large Landscape
Irrigation Nozzle
Replacement
Station Irr.
7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 209 32 Rainwater Capture -
Rain Barrel <200
Barrel SF
798 796 796 801 796 796 802 796 796 802 796 797 802 797 797 802 797 797 803 797 797 797 797 797 797 797 20,747 33 Rainwater Capture -
Cistern >=200
Barrel MF
13 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 420 34 Rainwater Capture -
Cistern >=200
Barrel CII
10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 220 35 SFR Graywater
Laundry to Landscape
Rebate
Household SF
42 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 107 36 Submetering - Other Meter MF 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 119 37 SFR Unmetered to
Metered
Meter MF
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 25
38 SFR Water Use Audit Household SF 70 70 71 71 71 71 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 73 1,870 39 MFR Water Use Audit Property MF 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 158 40 CII Large Landscape
Water Audit
Property Irr.
77 92 93 100 101 102 104 104 105 106 107 107 107 108 109 109 110 110 113 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 2,761 41 SFR Wireless Flow
Monitor
Monitor SF
1,118 1,222 1,322 1,422 1,522 1,622 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 1,722 42,668 42 SFR AMI Leak Alert Household SF 772 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 3,703 43 MFR (4 or fewer units)
AMI Leak Alert
Property MF
2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 93
44 Water Use Monitoring -
Water Calculator
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
45 Water Use Monitoring -
Footprint Calculator
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
46 Water Use Monitoring -
RSAT Kit/Home
Survey Kit
Household SF
3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 62
47 In-School Education -
Poster Contest
Household SF
25 25 25 25 25 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 694 48 In-School Education -
EarthCapades
Performance SF
2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 2,543 66,109 49 In-School Education -
Water-Wise
Kit SF
373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 373 9,685 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 264 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| Appendix E: Supplementary Conservation Tables E-15

ID Program Name Units Class
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
50 In-School Education -
Classroom Visit
Household SF
49 49 49 49 49 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 1,377 51 In-School Education -
Teacher Training
Household SF
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26
52 Public Outreach Household SF 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 1,656 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 311 9,438 53 Water Efficient
Landscaping -
Conservation Garden
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
54 Water Efficient
Landscaping -
Education Classes
Household SF
17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 475 55 Water Efficient
Landscaping - Garden
Tours
Household SF
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 36
56 Water Efficient
Landscaping - Water-
Wise Tool
Household SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
57 Certification - Green
Business
Certification CII
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 260 58 Certification - QWEL Certification SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 Affordability/Equity -
Grants
Grant SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
60 Affordability/Equity -
Assistance Program
Grant SF
52 152 152 152 152 152 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2,813 61 Building Efficiency
Program
CII Establishment CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
62 Showerhead
Replacement (<= 1.8
gpm)
Showerhead SF
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 99
63 Showerhead
Replacement (<= 1.8
gpm)
Showerhead MF
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 62
64 Bathroom Direct Install Toilet SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 Bathroom Direct Install Toilet MF 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 53 66 Irrigation System Flow
Sensor Rebate
Controller SF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
67 Irrigation System Flow
Sensor Rebate
Controller MF
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
68 SFR Medium Cistern
(501-999 gal) Rebate
Barrel SF
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 150 69 SFR Large Cistern
(1000+ gal) Rebate
Barrel SF
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 132 70 CII Ozone Laundry
Washer Rebate
Washer CII
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 55
71 CII Commercial
Kitchen Dishwasher
Rebate
Dishwasher CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
72 CII Commercial
Kitchen Spray Rinse
Valve Rebate
Spray Valve CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 265 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
| E-16

ID Program Name Units Class
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Total
73 CII Commercial
Kitchen Food Steamer
Rebate
Food Steamer CII
1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 40
74 CII Restaurant Dipper
Well Rebate
Dipper Well CII
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
75 CII Large Landscape
Water Budget
Site Irr.
57 58 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 62 62 62 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 1,079 76 Acoustic Hydrant Cap Hydrant Cap CII 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Regional Total 8,090 7,630 7,758 7,970 8,136 8,381 8,453 8,458 8,478 8,512 8,498 8,499 8,534 8,543 8,525 8,566 8,573 9,945 8,642 8,657 8,693 8,683 8,683 8,683 8,683 8,693 220,966 Regional Total, Single-Family 7,258 6,779 6,887 7,007 7,111 7,220 7,283 7,288 7,298 7,315 7,296 7,297 7,314 7,321 7,334 7,349 7,357 8,716 7,392 7,402 7,420 7,419 7,419 7,419 7,419 7,420 190,740 Regional Total, Multi-Family 272 281 283 306 309 311 297 295 297 303 301 303 309 308 310 316 320 323 329 329 332 332 332 332 332 332 8,092 Regional Total, CII Common Meter 80 71 71 76 72 74 56 52 53 57 50 49 52 48 48 54 49 50 54 50 49 47 47 47 47 49 1,452 Regional Total, Irrigation 480 499 517 581 644 776 817 823 830 838 851 851 858 866 832 847 848 856 868 876 892 885 885 885 885 892 20,682

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 266 of 473 ends

BAWSCA December 8, 2025
Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections Study Final Report
|

This page is intentionally left blank.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 267 of 473 ends

Hazen and Sawyer
201 Mission Street • Suite 500 • San Francisco, CA 94105 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 268 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 269 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

APPENDIX D
City of Sunnyvale
2025 Urban Water Management Plan
Projected Demands Provided to Wholesale Agencies
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 270 of 473 ends

Anticipated Supplies (AF) or
% of Demand 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Groundwater Pumping 141 7,997 7,997 7,997 7,997 7,997 Valley Water Treated Water 7,835 9,341 11,222 11,928 12,163 12,410 SFPUC Purchased Water 11,775 12,006 12,488 13,350 14,090 14,090 Local Surface Water - - - - - - Recycled Water Deliveries 896 1,008 1,120 1,232 1,809 2,385 Other Water - Describe - - - - - - Total - Calculated 20,646 30,352 32,827 34,507 36,058 36,881 NOTE: Supplies shown in AF. These values represent demands after passive conservation savings.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 271 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

APPENDIX E
City of Sunnyvale
2025 Urban Water Management Plan
SBX7-7 C
ompliance
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 272 of 473 ends

City of Sunnyvale
2020 Urban Water Management Plan
SECTION 5 – Baselines and Targets

Page 5 ends

www.hydroscience.com
– BASELINES AND TARGETS
The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 (SBX7-7) required a statewide reduction in urban per capita wat
er use by 20% by the year 2020. To achieve this statewide objective, the California Legislature required each water retail supplier to develop a 2020 water use target based on population to help the state collectively achieve a 20% reduction. Reporting for SBX7-7 began in the 2010 UWMP with the calculation of the Baseline, the 2015 Interim Target, and the 2020 Target, each in units of gpcd. In the 2015 UWMP, each retail agency was required to demonstrate compliance with its 2015 Interim Target to ensure they were on track to meet the goal of 20% reduction by 2020. In the 2020 UWMP, each retail agency is required to demonstrate compliance with its 2020 Target. The Baseline, 2015 Interim and 2020 Targets, and 2020 Compliance are calculated through completion of the SBX7-7 Verification Form prepared by DWR, submitted as Appendix E of the 2020 UWMP, and summarized in Table 5-1 and Table 5-2.

5.1 Service Area Population
Accurate service area population estimates are necessary to calculate representative daily per cap
ita water use. The 2020 population for the City’s service area is based on DOF estimates for the City of Sunnyvale, as described in Section 3.4. Historical populations from 1995-2007 using DWR methodology and DOF data were used to calculate baseline water use. Population estimates used for SBX7-7 calculations are included in SBX7-7 Table 3 (Appendix E).

5.2 Gross Water Use
Gross Water Use is defined in Water Code Section 10608.12 (h) as the total volume of water ent
ering the distribution system of a retail water supplier with four possible deductions:
• Recycled water,
• Water placed in long term storage,
• Water exported for use by another urban water supplier, and/or • Agricultural water use.

The City did not make any deductions to their reported total volume of water entering the distribution system. Gross water use is categorized by supply source and presented in SBX7-7 Table 4 and SBX7-7 Table 4-A in Appendix E.

5.3 Baselines and Targets Summary
Baselines and targets were established as part of the 2010 UWMP. For recycled water retailers, the
re was the option, if eligible, to use a base period of up to 15 years for calculating the Base Daily Water Use. The City was not eligible for the 15-year base period, so the baseline water use was calculated using a 10-year base period. The City selected the period of 1995-2004 as the 10-year base period. The five-year period 2003-2007 was used to calculate the minimum water use reduction requirement. Baseline periods are included in SBX7-7 Table 1 (Appendix E).

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 273 of 473 ends

City of Sunnyvale
2020 Urban Water Management Plan
SECTION 5 – Baselines and Targets

Page 5 ends

www.hydroscience.com
The baseline per capita water use for each period was calculated using gross water use totals for each year and the historical service area population estimates. Calculations are described and presented in SBX7-7 Table 5 in Appendix E. Because the 5-year baseline per capita water use was greater than 100 gpcd, the minimum water use reduction requirement was also calculated.

This calculation was used to determine whether the City’s 2020 water use target meets the minimum water use reduction requirement (per section 10608.22 of the California Water Code).

Four methods are allowed by Water Conservation Bill of 2009 for calculating the 2020 water use targets. Method 1 states that the target per capita daily water use in 2020 is 80% of the 10-year baseline per capita daily water use. This method was used because it was the most applicable to the available data. The 2020 per capita water use target cannot exceed 95% of the five-year compliance baseline water use. The calculated Method 1 2020 target of 139 gpcd is below the minimum water use target of 158 gpcd (95% of the City’s 5-year average baseline), therefore no adjustment to the 2020 target is necessary. Table 5-1 presents a summary of the baselines, targets, and Method 1 2020 minimum water use reduction target.

Table 5-1: Baselines and Targets Summary
Baseline Period Start Year End Year Average Baseline
Water Use1
Confirmed 2020
Target1,2
10-year 1995 2004 174
139
5-year 2003 2007 167
Notes:

1. All values are in gpcd.

2. Method 1 2020 minimum water use reduction based on 80% of the 10-year baseline.

5.4 2020 Compliance Daily per Capita Water Use
The City’s 2020 per capita water use is 115 gpcd using the 2020 gross water use (potable and rec
ycled water) detailed in Section 4 and the DOF population estimates for 2020. This is well below the 2020 target of 139 gpcd; thus, achieving compliance with SBX7-7.

As mentioned in Section 4 , water use for 2020 was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Although 2020 water use by sector showed a slight decline in commercial water compared to 2015, that decrease was offset by the increase in residential water use. Since the total gross water use is assumed to be representative of a non-pandemic year, no adjustments were made to the 2020 gpcd.

Table 5-2 presents the final 2020 water use and confirmed compliance with SBX7-7.

Table 5-2: 2020 Compliance
Actual 2020 GPCD 2020 Total
Adjustments
Adjusted 2020
GPCD
2020 Confirmed
Target GPCD
Did Supplier
Achieve Targeted
Reduction for
2020? Y/N
115 0 115 139 Y
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 274 of 473 ends

SB X7-7 Table 0: Units of Measure Used in 2020 UWMP*
(select one from the drop down list)
Acre Feet
*The unit of measure must be consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in Submittal Table 2-3.

NOTES:

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 275 of 473 ends

NOTES:

SB X7-7 Table 2: Method for 2020 Population Estimate
Method Used to Determine 2020 Population
(may
check more than one)

1. Department of Finance (DOF) or
American Community Survey (ACS)

3. DWR Population Tool

4. Other
DWR recommends pre-review

2. Persons-per-Connection Method
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 276 of 473 ends

156,503 2020
SB X7-7 Table 3: 2020 Service Area Population
2020 Compliance Year Population
NOTES:

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 277 of 473 ends

Exported
Water *
Change in
Dist. System
Storage*
(+/-)
Indirect
Recycled
Water
This column will
remain blank
until SB X7-7
Table 4-B is
completed.

Water
Delivered
for
Agricultural
Use*
Process Water
This column will
remain blank
until SB X7-7
Table 4-D is
completed.
20,187 - - 20,187 NOTES:

SB X7-7 Table 4: 2020 Gross Water Use
2020 Volume
Into
Distribution
System
This column will
remain blank until
SB X7-7 Table 4-A
is completed.
2020 Gross Water
Use
2020 Deductions
* Units of measure (AF, MG , or CCF) must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in SB X7-7 Table 0 and Submittal Table 2-3.

Compliance
Year 2020
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 278 of 473 ends

Volume Entering
Distribution System 1
Meter Error
Adj
ustment 2
Optional
(+/
-)
Corrected Volume
Entering
Distribution System
87 - 87 Volume Entering
Distribution System 1
Meter Error
Adj
ustment 2
Optional
(+/
-)
Corrected Volume
Entering
Distribution System
383 383
A purchased or imported source
1 Units of measure (AF, MG , or CCF) must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in SB X7-7 Table 0 and Submittal Table 2-3. 2 Meter Error Adjustment - See guidance in Methodology 1, Step 3 of Methodologies Document Compliance Year
202
0 SB X7-7 Table 4-A: 2020 Volume Entering the Distribution System(s), Meter Err
or Adjustment
Complete one table for each source.

Nam
e of Source Recycled Water
Name of Source
SB X7-7 Table 4-A: 2020 Volume Entering the Distribution System(s) Meter Err
or Adjustment
Complete one table for each source.
1 Units of measure (AF, MG , or CCF) must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in SB X7-7 Table 0 and Submittal Table 2-3. 2 Meter Error Adjustment - See guidance in Methodology 1, Step 3 of Methodologies Document NOTES
This water source is (check one) :

The supplier's own water source
A purchased or imported source
Well
Compliance Year
202
0 This water source is (check one) :

The supplier's own water source
NOTES: Although 383 AF of recycled water was produced at the WPCP, approximately 611 AF of purchased potable water from SFPUC was added to the recycled water distribution system, making the total recycled water demand 994 AF.

Approximately 713 AF was distributed within City limits, with the remaining 281 AF distributed to services outside City limits (Moffett Field and the Apple® Campus 2) DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 279 of 473 ends

Volume Entering
Distribution System 1
Meter Error
Adj
ustment 2
Optional
(+/
-)
Corrected Volume
Entering
Distribution System
11,052 11,052
Volume Entering
Distribution System 1
Meter Error
Adj
ustment 2
Optional
(+/
-)
Corrected Volume
Entering
Distribution System
8,665 8,665
SFPUC
This water source is (check one) :

SB X7-7 Table 4-A: 2020 Volume Entering the Distribution System(s), Meter Error Adjustment
Complete one table for each source.
1 Units of measure (AF, MG , or CCF) must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in SB X7-7 Table 0 and Submittal Table 2-3. 2 Meter Error Adjustment - See guidance in Methodology 1, Step 3 of Methodologies Document NOTES:
1 Units of measure (AF, MG , or CCF) must remain consistent throughout the UWMP, as reported in SB X7-7 Table 0 and Submittal Table 2-3. 2 Meter Error Adjustment - See guidance in Methodology 1, Step 3 of Methodologies Document Compliance Year
202
0 Compliance Year
2020
Valley Water
This water source is (check one) :

The supplier's own water source
A purchased or imported source
SB X7-7 Table 4-A: 2020 Volume Entering the Distribution System(s), Meter Error Adjustment
Complete one table for each source.

NOT
ES:

Name of Source
The supplier's own water source
A purchased or imported source
Name of Source
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 280 of 473 ends

2020 Gross Water
Fm SB X7-7 Table 4
2020 Population Fm
SB X7-7 Table 3 2020 GPCD
20,187 156,503 115

SB X7-7 Table 5: 2020 Gallons Per Capita Per Day
(GPCD)
NOTES:

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 281 of 473 ends

Extraordinary
Events1
Weather
Normalization1
Economic
Adjustment1
115 - - - - 115 156 YES NOTES:
1 All values are reported in GPCD
2 2020 Confirmed Target GPCD is taken from the Supplier's SB X7-7 Verification Form Table SB X7-7, 7-F.

SB X7-7 Table 9: 2020 Compliance
Optional Adjustments to 2020 GPCD
Did Supplier
Achieve
Targeted
Reduction for
2020?
Actual 2020
GPCD1
2020 Confirmed
Target GPCD 1, 2TOTAL
Adjustments1
Adjusted 2020
GPCD 1
(Adjusted if
applicable)
Enter "0" if Adjustment Not Used
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 282 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 283 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

APPENDIX F
City of Sunnyvale
2025 Urban Water Management Plan
2021 Santa Clara Valley Water District Groundwater
Management Plan
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 284 of 473 ends

The 2021 Santa Clara Valley Water District Groundwater Management Plan can be downloaded at:
https://assets.valleywater.org/files/2021_GWMP.pdf
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 285 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

APPENDIX G
City of Sunnyvale
2025 Urban Water Management Plan
Water Conservation Plan
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 286 of 473 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT
The Environmental Management chapter contains information on the following topics:
/g81 Water Supply — information on various sources of potable and nonpotable water, and policies to ensure adequate supplies, water conservation efforts and water quality.
/g81 Wastewater Collection and Treatment — information on the wastewater collection system and the Water Pollution Control Plant and policies for future treatment issues.
/g81 Urban Runoff — Information on sources of urban runoff and treatment methods, as well as policies to minimize quantity of urban runoff and improve quality.
/g81 Air Quality — information on sources air pollution and policies for addressing this pollution through transportation and land use. /g81 Solid Waste — information on collection, recycling programs and disposal and policies to reduce future waste and increase recycling efforts.

CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 287 of 473 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 288 of 473 ends

WATER SUPPLY
GOAL EM-1

ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLIES

ACQUIRE AND MANAGE WATER SUPPLIES SO THAT EXISTING AND FUTURE REASONABLE DEMANDS FOR WATER, AS PROJECTED IN THE 20-YEAR FORECAST, ARE RELIABLY MET. (Previously Water Resources Goal A / Adopted in 2008) The City has several sources of potable water to meet expected water demand. These include local groundwater wells, imported supplies from the San Francisco Public 5TILITIES#OMMISSION3&05# AND3ANTA#LARA6ALLEY7ATER$ISTR ICT3#67$ PLUS
interagency connections with other local water suppliers for emergencies. Temporary interruptions of water supply from one source can be readily offset by increasing supply from the other available sources.

In order to further manage supplies, the City uses recycled water for nonpotable use and water conservation efforts. Future challenges will include the possible expansion of the recycled water system and new capital projects to address the aging water infrastructure. $URING THE LAST YEARS
ON AVERAGE
3&05# AND 3#67$ HAVE TOGE THER SUPPLIED
approximately 90 percent of the total potable water used in the City. Of the remaining 10 percent, about six percent of the potable water demand has been supplied by seven City-owned and operated wells. To offset potable water demand for landscape irrigation and other non-potable uses, the remaining four percent has been supplied by recycled water produced by the Sunnyvale Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). 7–3
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 289 of 473 ends

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7– 4
Figure 7-1:

Water System
Facilities Map
M
AR
Y
LA
WR
ENC
E
W
OLFE

TA S M A N

HOMESTEAD
MONROE
EL
CAM
INO
RE
AL
KIFER

FREMONT
MA TH
ILD
A
FAI
R OA
KS
BERN
ARD
O
BO
WERS
MAUDE
ARQUES
JAVA
REED
HOLLEN
BECK

REMINGTON

CARIBBEAN
GR

EAT AMER
IC
SU
NN
YVA
LE
LING
SU
NNYV
ALE
SARA
TO
GA

OLD SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA
FAI
R O
AKS

CENTRAL EXPR
ESSWAY
US-101
CA-85
US-280
CA-237
EVELYN
Department of Public Works, 2007
Pressure Zones
Zone I - Fluoridated (SFPUC)
Zone II - Not Fluoridated (SCVWD)
Zone III - Not Fluoridated (SCVWD)
Zone II Future Expansion
Production Wells
Q Active
Q Standby
Q Cal Water
Interagency Connections
GA Cal Water
GA Cupertino
GA Mountain View
GA Santa Clara
Blended Area"" "
"" "
Water Tank
Connection Point to
Water Supplier
Major Streets
Highway/Expressway
Å Train Station
! Light Rail Station
Light Rail
Railroad
Creek
Channel
¸

0.5 Miles
Water System Facilities
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 290 of 473 ends

Figure 7-2: Historical Percentage of Annual Water Deliveries by Source 1997 1998
SFPUC
Wells
Recycled
SCVWD
1999 2000 2001 2002
Year
0%
10%
20%
30%
Percent
40%
50%
60%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Department of Public Works, 2007
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
3&05#USESTHE(ETCH
(ETCHY2ESERVOIROUTSIDEOF9OSEMITE6ALLEYAS ITSPRIMARYWATER source. Maximum and minimum usages of water are stipulated in the City’s current INDIVIDUALCONTRACTWITH3&05#)FTHEOVERALLUSAGEBYALLSUB URBANRETAILCUSTOMERS exceeds the maximum available level, the maximum amount of water available to Sunnyvale would be reduced based on the master agreement that covers both the City ANDOTHER3&05#WHOLESALECUSTOMERS4HE#ITYWOULDTHENRELYO NONEOFITSOTHER water supply sources (Santa Clara Valley Water, City Wells, Recycled Water) to meet the demand.
5NDERTHECURRENTCONTRACTANDBARRINGCATASTROPHICEVENTS THE 3&05#BELIEVESITCAN
meet the demands of its retail and wholesale customers in years of average and above- average precipitation.

Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD)
The current contract calls for Sunnyvale to submit proposed water delivery schedules to SCVWD f
or three-year periods, indicating amounts of treated water desired by the City during each of the three years. SCVWD can make reductions to the water requested by Sunnyvale consistent with its ability to deliver water to all its customers.

To maintain water supply reliability and ﬂexibility, SCVWD’s water supply is from a variety of sources including local groundwater, imported water, local surface water, and recycled water. The District has a program to optimize the use of groundwater and surface water and prevent groundwater overdraft and land subsidence. 7–5
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 291 of 473 ends

City Wells
Sunnyvale has seven operating wells that are kept in full production capacity and one well ma
intained in stand-by mode for emergencies. The seven operating wells are used A S A S U P P L E M E N T AL S O U R C E T O TH E I M P O RT E D 3 & 0 5 # A N D 3 # 67 $ W A T E R SUPPLIES 7ELL water is an important component of the City’s water shortage contingency plan, as INDICATEDINTHE5RBAN7ATER-ANAGEMENT0LAN57-0
SCVWD, charged with alleviating land surface subsidence and monitoring of groundwater levels and withdrawal rates, has authority over the amount of water that can be extracted from local wells. The allowable withdrawal of groundwater by Sunnyvale depends on a number of factors, including withdrawals by other water agencies, quantity of water recharged and carryover storage from the previous year.

Cal Water provides service from its own wells and facilities to about a dozen service area pockets in Sunnyvale many of which are connected with the City’s system.

Recycled Water
The Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) produces approximately 13 million gallons per day (m
gd) of high-quality advanced secondary-treated wastewater. A portion of this water is further treated to “disinfected tertiary” recycled water standards, and can be used for approved non-potable purposes, such as landscape irrigation, industrial cooling towers and construction. Recycled water is a reliable, drought-resistant, City- controlled supply that helps conserve and augment the potable water supply (See Figure 7-3, Existing Recycled Water Facilities).

Recycled water is currently delivered to primarily irrigation customers. Most recycled water usage occurs between April and October, with usage demand peaking during the months of July and August.

The WPCP can normally meet all recycled water demand, although seasonal changes in the WPCP’s oxidation ponds occasionally make it difﬁcult to meet the more stringent water quality requirements for disinfected tertiary recycled water versus discharge to the Bay. Modest increases in demand can be accommodated by the existing production and delivery systems.

Future Water Supply Issues
According to the annually-updated 20-year water forecast, the City has adequate supply comm
itments and facilities to reliably meet the projected water needs of its residents and businesses for the foreseeable future.

Innovative demand-side inﬂuence programs can help balance future supply versus demand. Techniques such as water banking, water transfers, plumbing retroﬁts, landscaping with low-water using plants, rate structures encouraging conservation, and other more restrictive demand side management options could be put into effect if needed. These measures, together with increased use of recycled water for non-potable purposes, appear adequate to ensure sufﬁcient water supply to meet the foreseeable needs of the future.

Subsidence: Subsidence is the
motion of a surface (usually,
the Earth’s surface) as it
shifts downward relative to a
ﬁxed point such as sea-level.

The opposite of subsidence
is uplift, which results in
an increase in elevation.

Subsidence can occur when
too much groundwater is
pumped out, causing the land
above to sink.

See GOAL EM-7 (Effective
Wastewater Treatment)
for discussion and policies
relating to the Water
Pollution Control Plant and its
production of recycled water.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7– 6
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 292 of 473 ends

City Hall
Community Center
Corp
Yard
Water Pollution Control Plant
Moffet Golf
Course
NTRAL
MA
RY
LA
W
RE
NCE
WOLFE

TA S M A N

HOMESTEAD
MONROE
EL CAM

INO REA
L
KIFER

FREMONT
MA T
HILDA

FAIR OAKS
BERNAR
DO
BOWER
S
MAUDE
ARQUES
JAVA
REED
HOLLEN
BE
CK

REMINGTON

CARIBBEAN
GREA
T AM
ERICA
SUN
NY
VAL
E
SUN
NYVALE
SARA
TOGA

OLD SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA
FAIR
O
AK
S

CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY
US-10
1 CA-85
US-280
CA-237
EVELYNEllis
Wilcox
Vargas
Bishop
Nimitz
Laurelwood
Stocklmeir
Cumberland
San Miguel
West Valley
Fremont High
Cherry Chase
Homestead High
Peterson Middle
Cupertino Middle
Sunnyvale Middle
Serra Park
Braly Park
and School
Raynor Park
Panama Park
Ortega Park
Murphy
Park
Encinal Park
Cannery
Park
De Anza
Park
Fairwood Park
and School
Baylands Park
Columbia Park
and Middle
School
Lakewood Park
and School
Plaza
Del
Sol
Fair Oaks Park
Ponderosa Park
and School
Greenwood Park
El Camino/Wolfe
Washington
Park
Las
Palmas
Park
San
Antonio
Park
Orchard
Gardens
Park
Victory
Village
Park
Sunnyvale Golf Course
Recycled Water Facilities
Recycled Water Storage
Existing Reclaimed Water Pipes
Future Reclaimed Water Pipes
Parcels with Recycled Water
! Schools and Parks
Department of Public Works, 2008
Major Streets
Highway/Expressway
ÅTrain Station
! Light Rail Station
Light Rail
Railroad
Creek
Channel
¸

0.5 Miles
Figure 7-3:

Recycled Water
System Map
7–7
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 293 of 473 ends

The City will also continue to address the following:
/g81 Replacement and repair of City water supply infrastructure and City wells. /g81 #OO R DINA TIO NWI TH3 &0 5 #AND3#67$TOENSUR ETHEIRINFRASTRUCTURE IS REPAIRED and maintained adequately.
/g81 Planning for the possibility of an earthquake and its effect on the levees and the water system.
/g81 Temporary loss of water supplies from SCVWD, which could be replaced in the short term by a combination of increased production from City wells and an increase in 3&05#SUPPLY
/g81 Increased storage and system capacity for recycled water supply to facilitate signiﬁcant increases in recycled water production. The WPCP’s Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) will include an evaluation of recycled water production in the context of the overall future needs of the plant.

POLICY EM-1.1 MANAGE WATER SUPPLY TO MEET DEMANDS FOR POTABLE WATER THROUGH THE EFFECTIVE USE OF WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENTS. (Previously Water Resources Policy A.1.)
/g81 EM-1.1a Investigate possibilities to increase well water sources within the City. (Previously Water Resources Action Statement A.1c)
POLICY EM-1.2 MAXIMIZE RECYCLED WATER USE FOR ALL APPROVED

PURPOSES BOTH WITHIN AND IN AREAS ADJACENT TO THE CITY, WHERE FEASIBLE. (Previously Water Resources Policy A.2.)
/g81 EM-1.2a5PDATEthe 2000 Recycled Water Master Plan to provide a current roadmap for potential expansions to the City’s recycled water system. (Previously Water Resources Action Statement A.2f)
/g81 EM-1.2b Pursue opportunities for external funding for existing and future recycled water projects by supporting the efforts of regional water quality and recycling organizations such as BARWRP as they seek and apply for funding for expansion and continued support of recycled water and water quality in the region. (Previously Water Resources Action Statement A.2h)
See GOAL SN-1 (Acceptable
Levels of Risk for Natural
and Human-Caused Hazards)
for discussion and policies
relating to earthquake
hazards and mitigation.

See GOAL EM-7 (Effective
Wastewater Treatment)
for policies relating to the
production of recycled water.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–8
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 294 of 473 ends

POLICY EM-1.3 PROVIDE ENOUGH REDUNDANCY IN THE WATER SUPPLY

SYSTEM SO THAT MINIMUM POTABLE WATER DEMAND AND FIRE

SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENTS CAN BE MET UNDER BOTH NORMAL AND EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES. (Previously Water Resources Policy A.3) GOAL EM-2

WATER CONSERVATION
PROMOTE MORE EFFICIENT USE OF THE CITY’S WATER RESOURCES TO REDUCE THE DEMANDS PLACED ON THE CITY’S WATER SUPPLIES. (Previously Water Resources Goal B / Adopted in 2008)
The City currently provides water in six broad categories: multi-family residential, single- family residential, institutional, landscape, commercial/industrial (incorporating all non- residential accounts not classiﬁed as landscape) and users of recycled water (Figure 7-3).

Figure 7-4: Annual Water Consumption by Use Category
1997 1998
Residential
Apartments
Landscape
Institutional
Recycled Water
Commercial/Industrial
1999 2000 2001 2002
Year
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000Acre Feet
2003 2004 2005 2006
Source: Department of Public Works, 2007
From 1987 to 1992, California experienced a prolonged drought, with severe water shortages and water rationing in Santa Clara County. Through the cooperative efforts of water retailers and their customers, Santa Clara County endured the drought with minimal economic and aesthetic impacts. Between 1984 and 1993, the City experienced a decrease in water consumption, primarily due to water conservation in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. Some of the demand management practices that w e r e u s e d t o m axi m i z e th e a v ail a b il i ty o f w a t e r s u p p l y d u r i n g th e d r o u gh t , s u c h a s 7–9
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 295 of 473 ends

inverted rates and water Best Management Practices, continue to this day. On-going water conservation efforts were able to reduce potable water consumption from 161 gallons per capita per day in 2000 to 139 gallons per capita per day in 2006, a 13.6 percent reduction for residential customers. Demand in the commercial/industrial sector remained ﬂat with a slight decline in 2006.

Water use varies depending on weather, seasonal climatic patterns, business conditions and the economy. Long-term trends in water requirements are valuable in projecting future supply needs. Figure 7-5 illustrates past, current and projected total water usage through 2030. Additional details on the current and planned water supplies to meet THESEDEMANDSAREPROVIDEDINTHE3UNNYVALE5RBAN7ATER-ANAGEM ENT0LAN Figure 7-5: Historic and Projected Water Demand
1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 2018 2028 2033
Year
22,000
23,000
24,000
25,000
26,000
27,000
28,000
29,000
30,000Water Usage (AF)
Source: Department of Public Works, 2007
The City uses a variety of demand management measures to assist in meeting this projected demand. Many of the Demand Management Measures (DMMs) offered by Sunnyvale are actually programs run by or coordinated through Santa Clara V alley W ater District (SCVWD). The programs have been either funded through the wholesale water rates paid by Sunnyvale, or directly reimbursed by the City. The DMMs implemented by the City, water usage restrictions during normal and drought years and OTHERDETAILSCANBEFOUNDINTHE5RBAN7ATER-ANAGEMENT0LAN Conservation measures include the following:
/g81 Inclining block tier rate structure that penalizes excessive water consumption /g81 Conservation efforts consistent with industry Best Management Practices (BMPs) /g81 Recycled water program to replace the use of potable water for non-potable uses where possible.

The Sunnyvale 2005
Urban Water Management
Plan is available at
GeneralPlan.inSunnyvale.com
See Goal EM-1 (Adequate
Water Supplies ) and Goal
EM-7 (Effective Wastewater
Treatment) for more
information about the City’s
recycled water system.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–10
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 296 of 473 ends

The City also has a drought response based on the Sunnyvale Water Conservation Plan.

This plan, adopted in 1977 and updated in 1989, includes mandatory and voluntary water use restrictions associated with different levels of reduction, rate block adjustments for each level, and approaches for enforcement.

The City will continue to plan and coordinate its water needs with regional and local wholesalers and retailers for best management of available water supplies. By 2030 the City expects to save almost 800 acre feet of water per year through conservation measures.

POLICY EM-2.1 LOWER OVERALL WATER DEMAND THROUGH THE

EFFECTIVE USE OF WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS IN THE RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND LANDSCAPING ARENAS. (Previously Water Resources Policy B.1)
GOAL EM-3

RELIABLE AND SAFE WATER DISTRIBUTION

PROACTIVELY MAINTAIN THE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE

TO ENSURE THE RELIABLE AND SAFE DELIVERY OF WATER UNDER NORMAL AND EMERGENCY CONDITIONS TO BOTH CURRENT AND FUTURE CUSTOMERS. (Previously Water Resources Goal C / Adopted in 2008)
The City owns, operates, and maintains a water supply and distribution system that includes connections with City suppliers and neighboring water utilities. Although not obvious, ground elevations in Sunnyvale vary from sea level at the north end of the City to 300 feet above sea level at the southwest corner. Because of this elevation difference, the water system is broken up into a series of three pressure zones (Figure 7-1, Water System Facilities).

Within the City’s service area, some pocketed areas adjacent to Fremont Avenue and Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road receive water from Cal Water. These areas were formerly part of the county, but have been annexed by Sunnyvale. Cal Water produces water from its own wells, which meets all federal and state quality requirements. The City has provided six emergency connections to Cal Water service areas to improve ﬁre ﬂows and reliability, and all ﬁre hydrants have been replaced to conform to City standards.

Perhaps the largest water system issue for the City is the need for signiﬁcant and on-going investment in improvements to the water system infrastructure. A signiﬁcant portion of the City’s investment in water system infrastructure is represented by the transmission and distribution pipelines. Approximately 80 percent of the 330 miles of transmission and distribution pipelines and related facilities were constructed in the 1960s and are Additional information
on water conservation
measures and programs can
be found in on the SCVWD
website. The SFPUC also has
corresponding plans for the
City and County of
San Francisco.

One acre foot of water
= 325,851 gallons. 800
acre feet of water =
approximately 260 million
gallons of water.7–11
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 297 of 473 ends

potentially approaching the end of their estimated 50 year service life. While actual service life varies depending on site speciﬁc factors, utility services provided today are “using up” infrastructure resources which must be replaced to serve future customers.

POLICY EM-3.1 MAINTAIN A PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES FOR RELIABILITY OF POTABLE AND RECYCLED WATER SYSTEMS. (Previously Water Resources Policy C.1)
POLICY EM-3.2 MAINTAIN A PROACTIVE LONG RANGE INFRASTRUCTURE

PLAN THAT IDENTIFIES SCHEDULES AND FUNDS AND IMPLEMENTS NEEDED

SYSTEM UPGRADES AND REPLACEMENTS BEFORE FACILITIES EXCEED THEIR EFFECTIVE USEFUL LIVES. (Previously Water Resources Policy C.2) POLICY EM-3.3 MAINTAIN AN UP-TO-DATE EMERGENCY WATER
OPERATIONS PLAN. (Previously Water Resources Policy C.3) GOAL EM-4

ADEQUATE WATER QUALITY

ENSURE THAT ALL WATER MEETS STATE AND FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR AESTHETICS, QUALITY AND HEALTH. (Previously Water Resources Goal D/ Adopted In 2008) Water delivered in the City originates from different sources and is therefore subject to different water quality conditions. Waters from different sources blend within the distribution system, depending on the daily demand, seasonal quality and relative quantity ﬂuctuations, and temporary interruptions due to maintenance activities, resulting in water quality variances. In all cases the City’s water quality meets or exceeds all federal and state requirements.

The City conducts an extensive water quality monitoring program in compliance with all applicable state and federal requirements. Over 2,000 samples are collected each year from the distribution system, imported sources, wells in operation, storage tanks, and/or household taps, depending on the constituent of interest. Samples are analyzed b y e i th e r th e C i ty ’ s s t a t e - c e rtiﬁ e d l a b o r a t o ry o r an o u t s i d e s t a t e - c e rtiﬁ e d l a b o r a t o ry .

The City has been in consistent compliance with the requirements of its water quality monitoring program since it was instituted in 1988.

The principal law governing
drinking water safety in the
United Stated is the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA).

Enacted in 1974, the SDWA
requires the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to
establish comprehensive
national drinking water
regulations and to set
enforceable standards for
health-related drinking water
contaminants.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–12
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 298 of 473 ends

The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) requires the City to distribute to ALLCUSTOMERSAN!NNUAL7ATER1UALITY2EPORT4HISREPORTPROVI DESINFORMATIONON contaminants that may be present in the three source waters and in the distribution system. Testing has consistently shown that the water provided by the City meets established water quality standards.
4HE3&05#COMPLETEDCONSTRUCTIONOFITSNEW
SYSTEM
WIDEmUORIDATIONFACILITYIN
"EGINNING IN .OVEMBER
ALL WATER DELIVERED FROM THE 3&05#WAS mUORIDATED SCVWD does not currently ﬂuoridate its water, though it is currently studying the feasibility of doing so. The City does not ﬂuoridate its well water. As a result, some areas of Sunnyvale receive ﬂuoridated water (the northern part of the City approximately north of El Camino Real), other areas receive non-ﬂuoridated water (southern portion), and some areas receive a mixture. City staff manages the water system to provide CONSISTENTCONCENTRATIONSOFmUORIDEBYKEEPINGTHE3&05#AND3 #67$SERVICEAREAS separated as much a possible.

The SD W A regulations have contin ued to evolve as more monitoring data have been collected by water systems, monitoring and detection capabilities have improved, and new constituents of concern have been identiﬁed. City staff continues to closely track new and proposed regulations and update monitoring and analyses accordingly.

POLICY EM-4.1 MAINTAIN AND UPDATE A COMPREHENSIVE WATER

QUALITY-MONITORING PROGRAM THAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS ALL STATE

AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS, WHILE ALSO MEETING SPECIFIC CITY AND RESIDENTS’ NEEDS. (Previously Water Resources Policy D.1) POLICY EM-4.2 MAINTAIN AN AGGRESSIVE INSPECTION AND PREVENTIVE

MAINTENANCE PROGRAM THAT ENSURES THAT BACKFLOW FROM
POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED WATER SERVICES IS PREVENTED. (Previously Water Resources Policy D.2)
/g81 EM-4.2a Investigate the potential for the City owning all backﬂow devices, thereby ensuring their proper function and maintenance. (Previously Water Resources Action Statement D.2d)
POLICY EM-4.3 PROVIDE APPROPRIATE SECURITY AND PROTECTION OF WATER FACILITIES. (Previously Water Resources Policy D.3) 7–13
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 299 of 473 ends

POLICY EM-4.4 MAINTAIN AND UPDATE AN ACTION PLAN THAT RESPONDS TO AND PROTECTS WATER SUPPLIES FROM CONTAMINATION. (Previously Water Resources Policy D.4)

WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT
GOAL EM-5

MINIMAL POLLUTION AND QUANTITY OF WASTEWATER

ENSURE THAT THE QUANTITY AND COMPOSITION OF WASTEWATER GENERATED IN

THE CITY DOES NOT EXCEED THE CAPABILITIES OF THE WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM OR AND THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT. (Previously Wastewater Goal 3.3.A / Adopted in 2001)
GOAL EM-6

EFFECTIVE WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM

CONTINUE TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM

SO THAT ALL SEWAGE AND INDUSTRIAL WASTES GENERATED WITHIN THE CITY ARE

COLLECTED AND CONVEYED UNDER SAFE AND SANITARY CONDITIONS TO THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT. (Previously Wastewater Goal 3.3B / Adopted in 2001) GOAL EM-7

EFFECTIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT

CONTINUE TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT,

USING COST EFFECTIVE METHODS, SO THAT ALL SEWAGE AND INDUSTRIAL

WASTES GENERATED WITHIN THE CITY RECEIVE SUFFICIENT TREATMENT TO MEET

THE EFFLUENT DISCHARGE AND RECEIVING WATER STANDARDS OF REGULATORY AGENCIES. (Previously Wastewater Goal 3.3C / Adopted in 2001) The wastewater from homes and businesses (toilet, shower, kitchen sink, etc.) is carried by sanitary sewer lines to the Sunnyvale Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), where it is treated before being discharged to local waterways which ﬂow into the San Francisco Bay. The amount and quality of this efﬂuent is regulated by the San Francisco Bay Water CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–14
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 300 of 473 ends

1UALITY #ONTROL "OARD 4HE "OARDS PURPOSE IS TO PROTECT BENElCIAL USES OF THESan Francisco Bay in compliance with the California Water Code and federal Clean Water Act.

WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
Sunnyvale’s wastewater collection system has the capacity to convey all sewage and indu
strial wastes generated when the City is fully developed in accordance with the land use projections (approximately 55.7 million gallons per day). Five major trunk networks terminate at the Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), referred to as the Lawrence, Borregas, Lockheed, Moffett and Cannery trunks. Figure 7-7 is a map showing drainage area boundaries for the areas served by the ﬁve collection networks. Capacities of individual networks are:

Figure 7-6: Capacities of Individual Sewer Collection Areas Collection Area Capacity in Million Gallons per Day (MGD) Lawrence 22.0
Borregas 17.0
Cannery 5.5
Lockheed 4.9
Moffett Field 6.3
TOTAL 55.7
Based on growth projections in 2001, it is not anticipated that ﬂows will exceed the capacity of the overall collection system. Speciﬁc locations within the collection system may require additional capacity in the future.

As sanitary sewers become older, gaps from cracks, joints, aging gaskets and leaking services tend to allow some groundwater or rainwater to enter the system. This process is called inﬁltration. A certain amount of rainwater may also ﬁnd its way into the wastewater system as inﬂow. Inﬂow can result from direct connections of storm drains or downspouts to the wastewater system, either in the right-of-way or on private property. Components of the system itself, such as piping, manholes, pumps, etc., will also require replacement as they exhaust their life expectancy.

Inﬁltration and inﬂow can interfere with the needed capacity of sanitary sewers and the WPCP. Though virtually impossible to eliminate altogether, maintenance crews use closed circuit video inspection to monitor for bad joints and/or broken pipes which allow inﬁltration. Private industry is also inspected for illegal storm drain cross-connections to ensure that the quantity of rainfall that ﬂows to the WPCP is kept under control.

If inﬁltration and inﬂow are allowed to continue unmitigated, additional wastewater ﬂows could overwhelm treatment plant capacity and result in increased treatment costs. 7–15
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM CHAPTER 7 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 301 of 473 ends

City crews maintain the operation of the sewer main lines by regular ﬂushing and performing repairs to the system. Areas of known-grease or dirt accumulation are ﬂushed on an enhanced cleaning schedule. Depending upon the degree of build-up, the frequency may vary from several weeks to several months.

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT
The WPCP provides treatment of wastewater from residential, commercial, and indu
strial sources from the City of Sunnyvale, the Rancho Rinconada portion of Cupertino, and Moffett Federal Airﬁeld. The WPCP is designed to treat an average of

29.5 million gallons of wastewater per day and a peak ﬂow of 40 million gallons per day.

From 2004 to 2007, the average dry weather efﬂuent ﬂow was 14.2 MGD, well within the plant capacity.

The WPCP is designed to combine physical, chemical, and natural biological processes to treat wastewater This unique combination allows the WPCP to consistently produce a high-quality efﬂuent from which more than 85 percent of the pollutants have been removed from the inﬂuent. This wastewater treatment process provides both secondary and advanced treatment to produces a high quality efﬂuent, suitable for discharge into San Francisco Bay under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and for recycling for irrigation and other uses.

Wastewater is treated at three distinct levels: primary, secondary, and tertiary. /g81 Primary Treatment — The ﬁrst stage in the treatment process to remove solids. /g81 Secondary Treatment — The second stage in the treatment process where oxygen is added to help remove remaining solids and bionutrients. /g81 Ter t ia r y Treat ment — The third stage in the treatment process to remove ammonia, algae, and bacteria.

Recycled water is tertiary treated wastewater diverted from discharge and treated for reuse in industrial processes, landscape irrigation, and other non-potable uses. It is used by businesses and the City of Sunnyvale for landscape and golf course irrigation, and d e c o r a ti v e p o n d s . B y r e u s in g w a t e r in th i s w a y , v al u a b l e p o t a b l e ( dr inkin g ) w a t e r i s conserved. The rest of the tertiary efﬂuent is discharged into the Guadalupe Slough, which ﬂows to the Bay.

In 2011, about 10 percent of the daily ﬂow is diverted for reuse. The City of Sunnyvale water recycling program provides a sustainable and drought-resistant supply of water to portions of the City for non-potable uses.

Wastewater Pre-Treatment Program
The Pretreatment Program includes Industrial Waste Inspectors, Laboratory Chemists and Fi
eld Technicians, whose primary goal is the protection of the treatment plant and sanitary sewer collection system from industrial waste. By regulating the disposal of industrial wastewater into the sanitary sewer, the Pretreatment Program seeks to prevent the introduction of pollutants that could interfere with the operation of the See wpcp.insunnyvale.com
for more information on the
NPDES Permit and related
programs and regulations.

Potable water is ﬁt for
consumption by humans and
other animals. Non-potable
water is all other water.

See Goal EM-1 (Adequate
Water Supplies) for discussion,
policies, and a map of the
recycled water system.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–16
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 302 of 473 ends

#*
#*
#*
From Rancho
Rinconada
L
MAR
Y
LAWR
ENC
E
WOLF
E

TA SM A N

HOMESTEAD
MONROE
EL CA
MI

NO REAL
KIFER

FREMONT
MA
TH
ILDA

FA IR OAKS

BERNARDO
BO
WERS
MAUDE
ARQUES
JAVA
REED
HO
LLENB
ECK

REMINGTON

CARIBBEAN
GREAT
AME
RICA
SU
NNYV
ALE
SUNN
YVAL
E SA
RA
TOG
A

OLD SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA
FA
IR O
AK
S

CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY
US-101
CA-85
US-280
CA-237
EVELYN

BORREGAS
LAWRENCE 2
LAWRENCE 1

CANNERY

LOCKHEED

MOFFETT
Sewer Collection Facilities
#* Sewer Lift Station
Main Sewer Trunk Line
Sewer Collection Areas
Borregas
Cannery
Lawrence 2
Lawrence 1
Lockheed
Moffett
Department of Public Works, 2001
Major Streets
Highway/Expressway
ÅTrain Station
! Light Rail Station
Light Rail
Railroad
Creek
Channel
¸

0.5 Miles
Figure 7-7: Sewer
Collection Area Maps
7–17
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT CHAPTER 7 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 303 of 473 ends

Plant, cause damage to the sewer system, compromise public health or worker safety, or pass through the Plant to the Bay.

Industrial and commercial facilities are regulated through discharge permits, Best Management Practices (BMPs), and routine inspection and monitoring. Discharge Permits contain speciﬁc requirements and limits for the concentration of pollutants in wastewater discharges. On average, the Pretreatment Program has 70 active industrial WASTEWATERDISCHARGEPERMITSISSUEDTO3IGNIlCANT)NDUSTRIAL5SERS3)5S !DDITIONALLY
hundreds of commercial facilities are regulated through the application of BMPs tailored to speciﬁc activities commonly found in commercial businesses. When implemented, the BMPs reduce or eliminate the introduction of pollutants into the sanitary sewer.

Regulatory Compliance Activities
The WPCP operates under the requirements set for by the Global Warming Solutions Act of
2006, Assembly Bill 32 or AB 32. AB 32 is a California State Law that ﬁghts climate change by establishing a comprehensive program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from all sources throughout the state. AB 32 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop regulations and market mechanisms to reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, representing a 25 percent reduction statewide, with mandatory caps beginning in 2012 for signiﬁcant emissions sources. For the Plant, it sets in motion a series of mandatory reporting, and equipment maintenance requirements that are additional to the “normal” function of maintaining plant efﬂuent compliance.

Future Water Pollution Control Plant Improvements
Plant capacity appears sufﬁcient based on use in 2001 and the updated projections. The Envi
ronmental Protection Agency requires that when ﬂows reach 75 percent of design capacity, agencies begin to evaluate future needs and develop plans for expansion, if appropriate. Based on 2001 ﬁgures, it is not anticipated that this milestone will be reached in Sunnyvale and it will not be necessary to evaluate ways to provide additional capacity at the WPCP during the next ﬁve to ten years. Projections indicate that ﬂows may not continue to increase signiﬁcantly between 2001 and 2020. This overall projection is attributed to changes in land use, changes in water consumption patterns, and the overall reduced rate of growth.

Portions of the WPCP were ﬁrst constructed in 1954 and are now nearly 50 years old. In addition, the nature of wastewater treatment itself presents an adverse environment for facilities and equipment. In order to maintain this infrastructure and ensure the ongoing ability to meet efﬂuent and recycled water quality requirements, it is necessary to have in place a strategy for the ongoing refurbishment and replacement of components of the plant.

An asset condition assessment conducted in 2005 identiﬁed several critical plant structures as at-risk, and in need of rehabilitation soon. In 2007, a Capital Project Strategic Infrastructure Plan (SIP) was put in place to set future direction of plant process enhancements and physical improvements. Following completion of this effort, SIP implementation is expected to continue for ten to ﬁfteen years for construction of new and/or rehabilitated plant facilities.

See wpcp.inSunnyvale.com for
annual water quality reports
and information.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–18
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 304 of 473 ends

0OLICIESSUPPORTING'OAL%-
-INIMAL0OLLUTIONAND1UANTITYO F7ASTEWATER
POLICY EM-5.1 WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT IMPROVEMENTS

SHOULD BE DESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED AND MAINTAINED AND THE

QUANTITY OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES SHOULD BE CONTROLLED SO THAT THE

PLANT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE EXPANDED IN EXCESS OF ITS CAPACITY OF

29.5 MGD. (Previously Wastewater Policy 3.3A.1)
POLICY EM-5.2 ENSURE THAT WASTES DISCHARGED TO THE WASTEWATER

COLLECTION SYSTEM CAN BE TREATED BY EXISTING TREATMENT
PROCESSES OF THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT. (Previously Wastewater Policy 3.3A.2)
Policy supporting Goal EM-6 (Effective Wastewater Collection System):

POLICY EM-6.1 INSPECT CRITICAL POINTS IN THE WASTEWATER MANAGE-

MENT SYSTEM ANNUALLY TO ENSURE THAT THE PROPER LEVEL OF MAIN-

TENANCE IS BEING PROVIDED AND THAT THE FLOW IN SEWERS DOES NOT EXCEED DESIGN CAPACITY. (Previously Wastewater Management Policy 3.3B.1) Policy supporting Goal EM-7 (Effective Wastewater Treatment):

POLICY EM-7.1 MONITOR WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE TO MEET REGULATORY STANDARDS. (Previously Waste- water Management Policy 3.3C.1)
POLICY EM-7.2 COORDINATE OPERATING PROCEDURES WITH THE CITY

ENERGY POLICY TO OPTIMIZE AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PROGRAM SO THAT MINIMUM USE AND RELIANCE ARE PLACED ON OUTSIDE ENERGY SOURCES. (Previously Wastewater Management Policy 3.3C.2)
7–19
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT CHAPTER 7 DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 305 of 473 ends

POLICY EM-7.3 ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

APPROACH TO SOLVING WATER QUALITY ISSUES OF THE SANTA CLARA BASIN WATERSHED AND THE SOUTH BAY. (Previously Wastewater Management Policy 3.3C.3)
POLICY EM-7.4 PRODUCE QUALITY RECYCLED WATER AND SEEK TO MAXIMIZE THE USE OF THIS RESOURCE. (Previously Wastewater Management Policy 3.3C.4)
/g81 EM-7.4a Study feasibility of recycled water for restoration and/or enhancement of marshlands.

URBAN RUNOFF
GOAL EM-8

PROTECTION OF CREEKS AND BAY

ASSURE THE REASONABLE PROTECTION OF BENEFICIAL USES OF CREEKS AND SAN FRANCISCO BAY, ESTABLISHED IN THE REGIONAL BOARD’S BASIN PLAN, AND PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS. (Previously Surface Runoff Goal A / Adopted in1993)
GOAL EM-9

ADEQUATE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
MAINTAIN STORM DRAIN SYSTEM TO PREVENT FLOODING. (Previously Surface Runoff Goal B / Adopted in 1993)
CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–20
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 306 of 473 ends

GOAL EM-10

REDUCED RUNOFF AND POLLUTANT DISCHARGE

MINIMIZE THE QUANTITY OF RUNOFF AND DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO THE

MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE BY INTEGRATING SURFACE RUNOFF CONTROLS INTO NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT LAND USE DECISIONS. (Previously Surface Runoff Goal D / Adopted in 1993)
5RBAN RUNOFF CONSISTS OF STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM RAINFALL AS WELL AS NON STORMWATER
runoff from human activities (e.g. over-irrigation of landscapes, vehicle washing, DISCHARGES FROM POOLS
SPAS
OR WATER FEATURES
ETC 5RBAN RUNOFF IS COLLECTED AND
transported through the city’s storm drain system and ultimately discharged to local waterways. Managing urban runoff minimizes the discharge of pollutants to creeks, waterways, and San Francisco Bay, and prevents or minimizes ﬂooding. The protection of local waterways preserves water quality and maintains the structural integrity of creeks, channels, and shoreline to prevent both potential ﬂooding and the degradation of their natural form and function.
5RBANIZATION INCREASES IMPERVIOUS SURFACES ASSOCIATED WITH DEVE LOPMENT WHICH
increases the amount of urban runoff. Runoff typically collects impurities while passing over rooftops, streets, parking lots, landscaping and gutters. Often this runoff is untreated and deposits impurities in the creeks and the San Francisco Bay after being conveyed through a storm drain system. This increased runoff results in increased erosion and sedimentation in creeks. Conveying runoff through a storm drain system also makes less water available to creeks and groundwater during dry weather.

There are two approaches to managing urban runoff. The ﬁrst is the conveyance approach, which seeks to “get rid of the water.” A conveyance stormwater system collects and concentrates runoff through a network of impervious gutters, drainage structures and underground pipes. Because the system collects water from impermeable surfaces and carries it through impervious pipes, suspended pollutants are concentrated in the rapidly ﬂowing runoff. When the system reaches its outfall, large volumes of polluted water can be emptied, untreated, into a natural water body and the large volume can further erode our natural waterways.

The City, as part of the region, is transitioning from the conveyance approach to a newer inﬁltration approach often referred to as Low Impact Development (LID). This system seeks to “preserve and restore the hydrologic cycle.” An inﬁltration stormwater system seeks to inﬁltrate runoff into the soil by allowing its to ﬂow slowly over permeable surfaces. These permeable surfaces can double as recreational and landscape areas during dry weather. Because the inﬁltration network allows much of the runoff to return to the soil, overall runoff volume is reduced, and more water is available to replenish groundwater and maintain stream base ﬂows. Storm drain systems are designed to transport urban runoff to the San Francisco Bay or nearby creeks or channels. Adequate storm drain systems help prevent or minimize property damage due to ﬂooding. The Impervious Surfaces:

Constructed or modiﬁed
surfaces that do not
effectively allow inﬁltration
of rainfall into the soil
below. Impervious surfaces
include, but are not limited
to building rooftops, asphalt
or concrete pavement,
sidewalks, and driveways
where such surfaces are not
constructed with pervious
materials. Pervious Surfaces:

May include natural or
designed landscapes or
specially constructed
paving materials (e.g.
pervious paving) that allow
stormwater to inﬁltrate into
sub-surface soils.
7–21
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — URBAN RUNOFF CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 307 of 473 ends

City of Sunnyvale owns and operates approximately 150 miles of storm drains, with two pump stations that collect runoff from low-lying urban areas and discharge to creeks and sloughs which are at a higher elevation (see Figure 7-8: Storm Drain System).

To address both the quantity and quality of urban runoff, the City has undertaken a series of programs to both reduce and treat runoff. These programs and actions are collectively described as 5RBAN 2UNOFF "EST -ANAGEMENT 0RACTICES "-0S 5RBAN Runoff BMPs are continually changing based on recent studies, practical experience and advancements in construction materials. These new practices include Low Impact Development, source control and pollution prevention. Low Impact Development includes methods to retain and treat runoff onsite through detention and landscape features. Source control measures typically include reducing the amount of impervious surface for new development or large remodeling/additions. Pollution prevention includes installing non-mechanical ﬁlters to lessen the volume of runoff, minimizing pesticides, covering areas such trash enclosures or loading docks and requiring drainage of dirty areas to sanitary sewer lines rather than storm drains. Public outreach and information is also an important part of reducing urban runoff.

Regulations and Permit Requirements
There are a variety of laws and permit requirements regulating the quantity and quality of urban r
unoff regionally. These agencies include:
/g81 Federal — The Federal Clean Water Act, as amended in 1987, requires the City to obtain NPDES permits for discharge of stormwater and develop stormwater management plans and “to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable.” The 3AN&RANCISCO"AY2EGIONAL7ATER1UALITY#ONTROL"OARD 2EGIONAL "OARD OR 271#" ISSUES PERMITS TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF THE &EDERAL Clean Water Act.
/g81 State — The Clean Water Act and State of California legislation requires that the beneﬁcial uses of water bodies be protected, and must meet standards set for water quality and to control sources of pollution.
/g81 City — The City has an ordinance that addresses stormwater pollution prevention and provides appropriate adequate legal authority to implement provisions of its NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit, which effectively implement controls on pollutants in urban runoff and meet permit requirements.

Collaboration with Regional Agencies
Water resource protection at the local and regional level is becoming more complex. A wide var
iety of regulatory agencies, diverse sources of nonpoint source pollution, and a multitude of stakeholders make it difﬁcult to achieve a consistent, easily understandable strategy for watershed protection. The City continually works with a variety of agencies and stakeholders to facilitate watershed protection and urban runoff management.

See dpw.inSunnyvale.com
for more information about
Urban Runoff BMPs and City
programs.

Maximum Extent
Practicable: A standard for
implementation of stormwater
management programs under
the Clean Water Act to reduce
the level of the pollutants
in stormwater runoff to the
maximum extent possible,
taking into account equitable
considerations and competing
facts including, but not
limited to the seriousness
of the problem, public
health risks, environmental
beneﬁts, pollutant removal
effectiveness, regulatory
compliance, cost, and
technical feasibility.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–22
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 308 of 473 ends

The City is a member of the Santa Clara Valley 5RBAN 2UNOFF 0OLLUTION 0REVENTION 0ROGRAM3#652000
ANASSOCIATIONOFSOUTHBAYCITIES
THE 3#67$
AND3ANTA
#LARA#OUNTRY!LLMEMBERSOF3#652000HAVESHAREDACOMMON.0$%3STORMWATER permit for their discharge into local creeks and South San Francisco Bay since 1990 and leverage resources to better facilitate each agency’s compliance with the permit. 4HROUGH 3#652000
THE#ITYALSOPARTICIPATESINTHE"AY!REA 3TORMWATER-ANAGEMENT Agencies Association (BASMAA), which was started by local governments to promote regional consistency and to facilitate the efﬁcient use of public resources by sharing information. In addition, BASMAA provides a forum for representing and advocating the common interests of member programs at the regional and state level. 4HE#ITYALSOPARTICIPATESINTHE#ALIFORNIA3TORMWATER1UALITY !SSOCIATION#!31!
a quasi-governmental organization, which advises the State Water Resources Control Board on matters related to developing stormwater regulations. It assists municipalities and others in compliance with the municipal, construction and industrial NPDES stormwater mandates of the federal Clean Water Act.

Future Trends
Regulatory requirements from both state and federal agencies will continue and likely b e c o
m e m o r e r e s t r i c t i v e a s e a c h N P D E S P e r m i t i s r e - i s s u e d . T h e C i t y w i l l n e e d t o perform periodic updating of the goals and policies associated with urban runoff, the 5RBAN 2UNOFF -ANAGEMENT 0LAN
AND SECTIONS OF THE 3UNNYVALE -UNICIPAL #ODE TO address these changes, update data and emerging trends, as well as measure success toward completing urban runoff goals. Annual reports will continue to be made to the Regional Board to demonstrate compliance with NPDES permit provisions and document the City’s progress toward meeting the establish goals and policies through the implementation of action statements.

In addition, the storm drain systems will continue to be monitored and maintained to ensure the adequate collection and transfer of urban runoff.

Beneﬁcial Uses: The uses
of water of the State of
California that are protected
against degradation.

Examples of beneﬁcial uses
include, but are not limited
to: domestic, municipal,
agricultural and industrial
water supply; power
generation; recreation;
aesthetic enjoyment;
navigation; and preservation
of ﬁsh and wildlife and
other aquatic resources or
preserves.
7–23
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — URBAN RUNOFF CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 309 of 473 ends

Figure 7-8: Storm
Drain System

CENTRAL
MA
RY
LAW
RENC
E
WOLFE

T ASMAN

HOMESTEAD
MONROE
EL CAM

INO REAL
KIFER

FREMONT
MA
THILD
A
FAIR
O
AKS
BER
NAR
DO
BOWER
S
MAUDE
ARQUES
JAVA
REED
HOLL
ENBECK

REMINGTON

CARIBBEAN
GREA
T AME
RICA
SU
NN
YVA
LE
ELLI
NG
SUN
NYVALE
SARAT
OGA

OLD SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFOR
NIA
FAIR
OA
KS

CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY
US-101
CA-8
5 US-280
CA-2
37 EVELYN
Storm Drain System
Drainage Basin Boundary
# Wells
Storm Drain Pipes
Well Buffer of 600 feet
Retention Pond
HMP Applicability Zone
Infiltration Device Zones
Exclusion
Inclusion
Department of Public Works, 2001
Major Streets
Highway/Expressway
ÅTrain Station
! Light Rail Station
Light Rail
Railroad
Creek
Channel
¸

0.5 Miles
CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–24
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 310 of 473 ends

Figure 7-9: Where does it go?
Policies that support Goal EM-8 (Protection of Creeks and Bay):

POLICY EM-8.1 COMPLY WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PARTICI-

PATE IN PROCESSES WHICH MAY RESULT IN MODIFICATIONS TO REGULA- TORY REQUIREMENTS. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy A.1) POLICY EM-8.2 CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE IDENTIFICATION AND DEVEL-

OPMENT OF APPROACHES TO STORMWATER TREATMENT AND BEST MAN-

AGEMENT PRACTICES TO CONTROL SOURCES OF POLLUTANTS THROUGH

PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATEWIDE AND NATIONAL ASSOCIA- TIONS AND AGENCIES (E.G. SANTA CLARA VALLEY URBAN RUNOFF POLLU-

TION PREVENTION PROGRAM (SCVRRP), BAY AREA STORMWATER MANAGE-

MENT AGENCIES ASSOCIATION, STORMWATER QUALITY ASSOCIATION, AND AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION AND SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS). (Previously Surface Runoff Policy A.2)
POLICY EM-8.3 ENSURE THAT STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES AND

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) ARE IMPLEMENTED TO REDUCE THE

DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS IN STORM WATER TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy A.3)
7–25
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — URBAN RUNOFF CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 311 of 473 ends

/g81 EM-8.3a Modify Industrial Pretreatment permits to also require BMPs to control the discharge of pollutants to city-owned storm drains. (Previously Surface Runoff Action Statement A.3b)
/g81 EM-8.3b Label approximately 1060 municipal storm drainage inlets a year until all inlets are labeled and maintain labels as necessary to educate the public on the fate of material discharged to storm drains. (Previously Surface Runoff Action Statement A.3e)
POLICY EM-8.4 EFFECTIVELY PROHIBIT ILLICIT DISCHARGES AND IMPROPER DISPOSAL OF WASTES INTO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy A.4)
POLICY EM-8.5 PREVENT ACCELERATED SOIL EROSION. CONTINUE

IMPLEMENTATION OF A CONSTRUCTION SITE INSPECTION AND CONTROL

PROGRAM TO PREVENT DISCHARGES OF SEDIMENT FROM EROSION AND

DISCHARGES OF OTHER POLLUTANTS FROM NEW AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. (PREVIOUSLY SURFACE RUNOFF POLICY A.5)
POLICY EM-8.6 (NEW) MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS FROM STORMWATER AND

URBAN RUNOFF ON THE BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY OF NATURAL DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND WATER BODIES.

Policies that support Goal EM-9 (Adequate Storm Drain System):

POLICY EM-9.1 MAINTAIN AND OPERATE THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM SO THAT STORM WATERS ARE DRAINED FROM 95 PERCENT OF THE STREETS WITHIN ONE HOUR AFTER A STORM STOPS. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy B.1.) POLICY EM-9.2 RESPOND TO STORM DRAIN EMERGENCIES. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy B.2)
CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–26
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 312 of 473 ends

Policies that support Goal EM-10 (Reduced Runoff and Pollutant Discharge):

POLICY EM-10.1 CONSIDER THE IMPACTS OF SURFACE RUNOFF AS PART

OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS AND IMPLEMENT BMPS TO

MINIMIZE THE TOTAL VOLUME AND RATE OF RUNOFF OF WASTE QUALITY AND

QUANTITY (HYDRO MODIFICATION) OF SURFACE RUNOFF AS PART OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy D.1) POLICY EM-10.2 CONSIDER THE ABILITY OF A LAND PARCEL TO

DETAIN EXCESS STORM WATER RUNOFF IN FLOOD PRONE AREAS AND REQUIRE INCORPORATION OF APPROPRIATE CONTROLS. REQUIRE THE

INCORPORATION OF APPROPRIATE STORMWATER TREATMENT AND

CONTROL MEASURES FOR NEW AND REDEVELOPMENT REGULATED

PROJECTS AND/OR ANY SITES THAT MAY REASONABLY BE CONSIDERED TO

CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO THE POLLUTION OF STORMWATER AND URBAN

RUNOFF AS DEFINED IN THE CURRENT VERSION OF THE STORMWATER MUNICIPAL REGIONAL PERMIT. (Previously Surface Runoff Policy D.2) POLICY EM-10.3 REQUIRE THE INCORPORATION OF APPROPRIATE

STORMWATER TREATMENT AND CONTROL MEASURES FOR INDUSTRIAL AND

COMMERCIAL FACILITIES AS IDENTIFIED IN THE STORMWATER MUNICIPAL REGIONAL PERMIT. (New)
POLICY EM-10.4 SUPPORT LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS THAT WILL REDUCE OR ELIMINATE POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN AT THE SOURCE. (New) POLICY EM-10.5 PROMOTE EDUCATION AND OUTREACH EFFORTS TO

SCHOOLS, YOUTH, RESIDENTS, AND BUSINESSES REGARDING URBAN RUNOFF AND STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION ACTIONS. (New) 7–27
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — URBAN RUNOFF CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 313 of 473 ends

AIR QUALITY
GOAL EM-11

IMPROVED AIR QUALITY
IMPROVE SUNNYVALE’S AIR QUALITY AND REDUCE THE EXPOSURE OF ITS CITIZENS TO AIR POLLUTANTS. (Previously Air Quality Goal A / Adopted in 1993) All major urban areas in California, including Sunnyvale, experience some degree of reduced air quality. The combination of climatic conditions and a multitude of air pollutant sources (particularly the automobile) results in reduced air quality, which can be considered as reducing the quality of life by adversely affecting human health, causing damage to plants or crops, and other effects such as soiling, visibility reduction and accelerated corrosion of materials.

One of the major reasons that air quality continues to be a problem in the Bay Area speciﬁcally and California in general, is a relatively high rate of population and economic growth. The major obstacle to improved air quality in the future is increasing population and vehicle use and deteriorating operating conditions on highways and roads.

The major air quality problems in the Bay Area are ozone, carbon monoxide, and PM-10.

Ozone and carbon monoxide are primarily released in the air from combustion sources such as automobiles and factories. PM-10 (otherwise known as suspended particulate matter) is a collection of particles of dust, soot, aerosols and other matter which are small enough to remain suspended in the air for a long period of time. Man-made sources of PM-10 include automobile exhausts and road travel, smoke, and factory emissions.

To combat this, the most efﬁcient and cost-effective technological or “hardware” controls have already been implemented. Remaining technological controls, which ar e in cr eas in gl y exp e ns i v e , h a v e b ee n f o un d t o b e un a b l e t o r e d u ce e miss i o ns t o th e point where all air quality standards (glossary in the margin) would be met. Therefore, attention has been focused in recent years on the relationship of land use, community design and transportation as a means of reducing air pollutant generation. For further INFORMATIONONAIRQUALITYMEASUREMENTSANDMODELING
SEE!PPEN DIX(
!IR1UALITY
Technical Report.

Cooperation with Regional Agencies
Past efforts by federal, state and local governments have resulted in steady, gradual impr
ovement in air quality in Sunnyvale and the greater Bay Area. Sunnyvale is within THE "AY !REA !IR 1UALITY -ANAGEMENT $ISTRICT "!!1-$ 4HE #ITY OF 3UNNYVALE has implemented a number of programs and projects that directly or indirectly reduce air pollutant emissions. Most of these programs are part of a larger regional effort to improve air quality. These projects include:

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–28
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 314 of 473 ends

/g81 !DDINGHIGHOCCUPANCYVEHICLE(/6 LANESTO53 32
AND324HESE
improvements have expanded their capacity.
/g81 F a c i l i t a t i n g r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s u c h a s t h e T a s m a n L i g h t R a i l e x t e n s i o n , increases in Caltrain service, and a “Super Express” commuter bus service. /g81 Constructing high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on Lawrence Expressway.

POLICY EM-11.1 THE CITY SHOULD ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN REGIONAL AIR QUALITY PLANNING. (Previously Air Quality Policy C.1 also Air Quality Goal C) Land Use and Air Quality
Future development within Sunnyvale impacts regional air quality. Direct impacts are those r
elated to emissions released on-site from stationary sources. Indirect impacts are related to vehicle trips attracted to or generated by residential, commercial or employment-generating land uses.

Stationary Sources — Industries are required to provide information to the public about emissions of toxic air contaminants (quick description in the margin) and their impact on public health. There are 71 sources of TACs within Sunnyvale. The majority of these sources are microelectronic industries, dry cleaners and auto repair businesses.

Future growth in Sunnyvale may include new stationary sources of pollutants. However, any new stationary sources would be subject to the “no net increase” requirements of THE#ALIFORNIA#LEAN!IR!CT
WHICHREQUIRES"!!1-$TODEVELOP APERMITTINGSYSTEM tha t p r o vi des n ew so ur ces, can o nly be a pp r o v ed if th er e is an o ffsettin g decr ease in emissions elsewhere in the air basin. For any new businesses or facilities that could emit air pollutants, it is important to consider sensitive receptors. The siting of any new sensitive receptors also needs to consider any existing air pollutant sources nearby.

Indirect Sources — Indirect automobile emissions estimated with future buildout are shown to increase slightly in the next 10 years. Reducing emissions from these indirect sources is likely to be an important strategy in regional efforts to attain the state and federal ambient air quality standards in the Bay Area.

There are several methods in which land use regulations can be used to both reduce emissions and alleviate the impact on residents. By locating employment and retail service areas closer to residential areas, vehicle use can be reduced.

In 1993, the Sunnyvale Futures Study examined the effects of revising the General Plan to provide for an improved jobs/housing balance. The study considered potential residential designations of several sites previously designated with commercial and industrial uses and was approved by Council and created a series of Industrial-to- Residential (ITR sites.) Preliminary ﬁndings indicated that increased carbon monoxide concentrations will occur at certain intersections. However, predicted air quality would The Bay Area Air Quality
Management District
(BAAQMD) is required to
prepare and adopt a list
of actions, improvements
and programs that improve
system-wide transportation
level of service (LOS) and
improve air quality. See
Goal LT-5 (Effective, Safe,
Pleasant and Convenient
Transportation) for
further discussion and
policies on transportation
improvements.

California Clean Air Act
— A law setting forth a
comprehensive program to
ensure that all areas within
the State of California will
attain federal and state
ambient air quality standards
by the earliest practicable
date. The law mandates
comprehensive planning
and implementation efforts,
and empowers local air
pollution control districts to
adopt transportation control
measures and indirect source
control measures to achieve
and maintain the ambient air
quality standards.
7–29
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — AIR QUALITY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 315 of 473 ends

fall within the standards. Improvements in the job/housing balance would provide more local housing options, reducing commute lengths and vehicle miles traveled.

Major progress has been made in the 1980’s and 1990’s in reducing emissions from stationary sources and mobile sources in the Bay Area, with the result that steady improvement in air quality has been documented despite POPULATIONGROWTH5NDERTHE #A L I FOR N IA#LEA N! I R!C TA ND! MEND MENT S
T HEST ATE! I R2ESOU RCES"OARDAND"!!1-$
will be adopting new and more stringent regulations on existing and future industrial sources, implementing more stringent emission standards for vehicles, developing and implementing transportation control measures (TCMs) to reduce vehicular emissions, and adding new sources to the list of controlled process (e.g. consumer products, ﬁreplaces and wood stoves, etc.). These measures, if implemented expeditiously, should continue the overall improvement in air quality evident over the past 20 years.

POLICY EM-11.2 UTILIZE LAND USE STRATEGIES TO REDUCE AIR QUALITY

IMPACT, INCLUDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CITIZENS TO LIVE AND WORK IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. (Previously Air Quality Policies B.1 and C.2) POLICY EM-11.3 REQUIRE ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT TO UTILIZE SITE

PLANNING TO PROTECT CITIZENS FROM UNNECESSARY EXPOSURE TO AIR POLLUTANTS. (Previously Air Quality Policy A.1)
POLICY EM-11.4 APPLY THE INDIRECT SOURCE RULE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH SIGNIFICANT AIR QUALITY IMPACTS. INDIRECT SOURCE REVIEW

WOULD COVER COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS AS WELL AS OTHER LAND USES THAT PRODUCE OR ATTRACT MOTOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC. (Previously Air Quality Policy B.3)
Transportation Improvements and Air Quality
There are two main ways that transportation improvements can positively impact air qual
ity. The ﬁrst is to reduce congestion that causes increased vehicle emissions (stop- and-go). The second is to enhance and encourage alternative modes of transportation to reduce the total number of car trips. Sunnyvale has undertaken a variety of programs to improve air quality with regards to transportation.

Sensitive Receptors —
Sensitive populations such
as children, athletes, elderly
and the sick that are more
susceptible to the effects
of air pollution than the
population at large.

See Goal LT-1 (Coordinated
Regional Planning) and
LT-6 (Supportive Economic
Development Environment)
for policies on mixed uses
and locating housing closer to
employment centers
CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–30
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 316 of 473 ends

Reduce Congestion
/g81 Trafﬁc signal improvement and synchronization
/g81 Ten-year capital improvements plan
/g81 Preferential parking for carpool vehicles
/g81 Transportation demand management (TDM)
Alternative Transportation Modes
/g81 Continue to require City sidewalks
/g81 Develop requirements for bicycle facilities
/g81 Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) to review and advise City Council on capital improvement projects involving bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as educational programs.
/g81 Electric City vehicles
POLICY EM-11.5 REDUCE AUTOMOBILE EMISSIONS THROUGH TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS. (Previously Air Quality Policy A.2) POLICY EM-11.6 CONTRIBUTE TO A REDUCTION IN REGIONAL VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED. (Previously Air Quality Policy C.3)
POLICY EM-11.7 REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM CITY OF SUNNYVALE FLEET VEHICLES. (Previously Air Quality Policy C.4)
POLICY EM-11.8 ASSIST EMPLOYERS IN MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) PLANS FOR EXISTING

AND FUTURE LARGE EMPLOYERS AND PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF TDM PLANS FOR EMPLOYMENT CENTERS IN SUNNYVALE. (Previously Air Quality Policy B.2)
See Goal LT-5 (Effective,
Safe, Pleasant and
Convenient Transportation)
for policies on transportation
improvements.

Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) —
Strategies that reduce
travel demand such
as telecommuting,
teleshopping, ﬂextime,
carpooling, increased use
of public transit, and other
strategies to reduce the
number of trips made in
single-occupant vehicles.
7–31
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — AIR QUALITY CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 317 of 473 ends

SOLID WASTE
Collection Programs
GOAL EM-12

SAFE AND HEALTHY SOLID WASTE COLLECTION

ENSURE THAT MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IS COLLECTED AND TRANSPORTED IN A SAFE AND HEALTHY MANNER. (Previously Solid Waste Goal 3.2A / Adopted in 1993) GOAL EM-13

CLEAN NEIGHBORHOODS

ENCOURAGE RESIDENTS TO MAINTAIN CLEAN NEIGHBORHOODS BY PREVENTING

UNSIGHTLY ACCUMULATIONS OF DISCARDED MATERIALS AND ILLEGAL DUMPING OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE.
(Previously Solid Waste Goal 3.2B / Adopted in 1996)
Solid waste consists of virtually all of the materials discarded by residents and businesses in the course of daily life, business activities and manufacturing. It does not include hazardous wastes, radioactive wastes, medical waste, sewage or liquids. Because accumulations of solid waste can present public health problems, the Sunnyvale Municipal Code requires all occupied residence and business premises to subscribe to regular collection services. According to a 2010 study performed for the City by Cascadia Consulting Group, single-family residents generate approximately 34 percent of the solid waste collected, multi-family residents account for 22 percent, and the remaining 44 percent comes from businesses, government agencies, schools and other institutions and construction and demolition projects.

Collection of solid waste in Sunnyvale is performed by a private company under contract with the City. The contract takes the form of a franchise agreement that is “exclusive,” that is, no other company is allowed to collect solid waste. Exclusivity minimizes the community and environmental impacts of refuse collection by limiting the number of trucks used for collection. It reduces pavement damage, noise and air pollution fr o m h ea vy co ll ecti o n tru cks co m p ar ed t o an o p e n mar k et a p p r o a c h wh e r e m ul ti p l e companies may serve homes and businesses located near each other. The Sunnyvale franchise agreement also gives the City the ability to enforce community standards for service quality, collection hours, truck and container colors and cleanliness, grafﬁti removal, use of clean air fuels, etc.

The City periodically provides special disposal programs at discounted or no cost. These programs are designed to discourage illegal dumping of solid waste and to minimize accumulations of discarded material in the community. These programs include:

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–32
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 318 of 473 ends

/g81 Spring/Fall Extra Dump Weekends —On four weekends per year (two each for spring and fall), Sunnyvale residents can dispose of extra solid waste at the City- owned Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer (SMaRT Station®), 301 Carl Road, at no charge. “Extra Dump” Weekends are for residents only, and not for businesses, contractors, non-resident property owners or other commercial establishments. The SMaRT Station permit allows over 1,000 vehicle trips per day on Extra Dump event days.
/g81 On-Call Collection — Service to residents of single-family homes includes as many as two on-call collections per calendar year. Residents may schedule these pickups on any of their regular collection days and may set out two cubic yards of extra solid waste and two “bulky” items, such as a couch, refrigerator, or other appliance. /g81 Neighborhood Cleanups — Working with recognized neighborhood associations, the City offers a number of neighborhood cleanup events. During these events, typically held on a weekend, the City arranges for delivery of “roll-off” debris boxes to pre-selected locations. The boxes are emptied and returned throughout the event.

These events provide a convenient disposal option for residents who cannot or do not utilize other special disposal options.

POLICY EM-12.1 PROVIDE CONVENIENT AND COMPETITIVELY PRICED SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS SERVICES. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2A.1) POLICY EM-13.1 PROVIDE PERIODIC OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTS TO DISPOSE OF REFUSE AT DISCOUNTED OR NO CHARGE. (Previously Solid waste Policy 3.2C.1)
7–33
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — SOLID WASTE CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 319 of 473 ends

Recycling and Source Reduction
GOAL EM-14

RECYCLING AND SOURCE REDUCTION PROGRAMS

REDUCE SOLID WASTE THROUGH RECYCLING, SOURCE REDUCTION, EDUCATION AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS. (Previously Solid Waste Goal 3.2B/Adopted in 1996) Sunnyvale has long been a leader in recycling and in 1982 was one of the ﬁrst cities in the Bay Area to begin collecting residential recyclables at curbside. In 1990, Sunnyvale became the ﬁrst city in the state to adopt the Source Reduction and Recycling Element required by the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). In 1994 the SMaRT Station materials recovery facility (MRF) began sorting recyclables from solid waste and remains one of the most sophisticated municipal MRFs in the nation.

These and other programs and facilities are reﬂected in Sunnyvale’s state-calculated diversion rate, which has increased from 18 percent in 1990 to 65 percent in 2009. In 2009 the state Disposal Reporting System coordinated by CalRecycle documented disposal of 88,442 tons originating in Sunnyvale. This marks a 60 percent disposal reduction since 1982, when the City disposed of 222,000 tons, even though the City has seen substantial growth in population and business activity over that 27-year period. Milestone dates of major components of the City’s diversion effort include:
/g81 Curbside recycling for single-family residences (1982) /g81 Concrete Recycling lease at Sunnyvale Landﬁll (1985) /g81 Household Hazardous Waste drop-off events (1985)
/g81 Cardboard collection for businesses (1991)
/g81 City Facility Recycling (1991)
/g81 Materials Recovery Facility operations at SMaRT Station (1994) /g81 Yard trimmings collection for single-family residences (1994) /g81 Recycling collection for multi-family residences (1996) /g81 New Materials Recovery Facility at SMaRT Station (2009) Zero Waste Strategic Plan
In 2009, the City Council adopted a Zero Waste Policy that broadly describes a vision for ev
en greater diversion efforts. The ﬁrst step in implementing the Zero Waste Policy was a 2010 study detailing the composition of Sunnyvale’s generated and disposed waste (the latter consisting of the unrecycled residue following materials recovery at the SMaRT Station).

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–34
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 320 of 473 ends

As of 2011, the City had contracted with a consultant to create a Zero Waste Strategic Plan that will deﬁne just what “Zero Waste” is and will identify program and facility options for achieving Zero Waste. Potential actions will be both “upstream,” as in placing controls on problematic materials that become waste and “downstream,” as in technologies such as composting and anaerobic digestion with the potential to extract additional value from SMaRT Station residues that are currently disposed.

Many components of solid waste have economic value when they are separated, handled, packaged or offered for collection in a manner different from solid waste.

Other components have been designated by state or federal regulations as hazardous waste that may not be disposed in a landﬁll. Over the past 30 years, this trend has led to an increasingly fragmented waste stream, with equally fragmented systems for collecting, handling and disposing or recycling individual waste stream components.

This increased regulation and special handling has provided beneﬁts to the environment by minimizing damaging discharges to air, water and land. It has also increased the efﬁciency of the economy as a whole, by extracting value from products previously disposed. But, while those who manufacture, distribute and retail products proﬁt from their sale, the “end of life” costs associated with achieving these environmental and societal beneﬁts are borne primarily by local agencies, such as the City, and ultimately paid for by local rate payers and taxpayers. This imbalanced approach provides a misleading message to consumers by understating the true cost of their individual purchases, while increasing the refuse disposal bills of the community, regardless of the individual rate payer’s level of consumption.

Product Stewardship
One way to restore an appropriate balance of responsibility is the concept of Product Stewar
dship, an approach that holds producers liable for the costs of responsibly managing their products at end of life. Extending producer responsibility for products from “cradle to cradle” acknowledges that producers have the greatest control over product design and therefore have the greatest ability and responsibility to reduce toxicity and waste. The City of Sunnyvale has a history of supporting product stewardship – on April 16, 2002, Council directed that the City become a member of the national Product Stewardship Institute and passed a product stewardship resolution.

Product Stewardship is more effective at the state and national levels than it is locally, given the ﬂows of people and products throughout the region. Successful examples in California include 2010 legislation that will put the paint industry in charge of collecting waste paint and the carpet industry in charge of recovering and recycling used carpeting. The cost of the stewardship system will be built into the cost paid by consumers of paint and carpet.
7–35
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — SOLID WASTE CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 321 of 473 ends

Household Hazardous Wastes
By law, hazardous wastes are not to be collected or disposed along with municipal solid waste. Di
sposal of hazardous wastes generated by businesses is regulated by state and federal laws that require documentation of shipments, including their receipt at the hazardous waste disposal site.

Hazardous waste generated by residential use is termed, “Household Hazardous Waste,” or HHW. Common HHW items include paint, pesticides, lawn care products, home maintenance and cleaning products and automotive products. It is illegal to dispose of HHW with ordinary garbage.

O n e w a y t o r e d u c e t h e a m o u n t o f H H W t h a t i s i m p r o p e r l y d i s p o s e d i s t o p r o v i d e residents with legal opportunities for disposal of HHW. To this end, the City provides HHW drop off events by way of the Countywide HHW Program, with a portion of the program funding coming from a per-ton fee charged by Santa Clara County on disposed solid waste. The remaining cost is paid by the Solid Waste Program from garbage collection rate revenues.

The City leases to the Countywide HHW Program an event site at 164 Carl Road. As of 2011, this is one of three ﬁxed locations at which the Program holds regular events, eleven a year at the Sunnyvale site. The other locations are in San Martin and in San Jose. Sunnyvale residents are eligible to use events at the three ﬁxed sites or any of the temporary locations used by the Program. Sunnyvale resident participation, measured by the number of vehicles dropping off HHW, equals 7-8 percent of the number of single-family homes in Sunnyvale.

Encouraging resident use of HHW events is not necessarily the best or most cost- effective way to decrease improper disposal of HHW . HHW disposal is costly (about $60 per vehicle on average, in 2010) and unbridled use of HHW events could cause serious cost increases for the Solid Waste Fund and higher rates for Sunnyvale residents and businesses.

As a result, the City encourages reduced generation of HHW and an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) approach to handling discarded HHW. Residents are encouraged to reduce generation by:
/g81 5SINGNON
TOXICALTERNATIVES
/g81 5SINGUPPRODUCTSTHATWOULDBECOME((7IFDISCARDED /g81 Sharing products with neighbors and friends
As described above, an EPR approach to items that will become HHW when discarded places more responsibility for end-of-life management with the businesses that manufacture, distribute and sell hazardous materials to consumers. EPR has the potential to reduce the City’s cost of managing HHW material. Materials that adversely affect public health and the environment if improperly disposed and that could be better managed with an EPR approach include pharmaceuticals, sharps (needles and lancets) and household batteries.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–36
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 322 of 473 ends

POLICY EM-14.1 REDUCE GENERATION OF SOLID WASTE BY PROVIDING SOURCE REDUCTION PROGRAMS AND PROMOTING REDUCTION BEHAVIOR. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2B.1)
POLICY EM-14.2 MAXIMIZE DIVERSION OF SOLID WASTE FROM DISPOSAL

BY USE OF DEMAND MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES, PROVIDING AND

PROMOTING RECYCLING PROGRAMS AND ENCOURAGING PRIVATE SECTOR RECYCLING. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2B.2)
POLICY EM-14.3 MEET OR EXCEED ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL

LAWS AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING SOLID WASTE DIVERSION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF RECYCLING AND SOURCE REDUCTION PROGRAMS. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2B.3)
POLICY EM-14.4 INCREASE DEMAND FOR RECYCLED MATERIALS BY

ADVOCATING LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION THAT WILL INCREASE USE OF RECYCLED CONTENT PRODUCTS. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2B.4) Disposal Programs
GOAL EM-15

ENVIRONMENTALLY-SOUND DISPOSAL

DISPOSE OF SOLID WASTE IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND, DEPENDABLE AND COST-EFFECTIVE MANNER. (Previously Solid Waste Goal 3.2D / Adopted in 1996) From the City’s perspective, the environmental impacts, costs and legal liabilities of solid waste disposal link together the past, the future and the present. The past is important because the City and individual waste generators located in Sunnyvale retain liability for environmental issues related to waste previously disposed, regardless of the 7–37
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — SOLID WASTE CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 323 of 473 ends

location. This calls for responsible management of the closed Sunnyvale Landﬁll, which served the community’s waste disposal needs from the 1920s to 1993. The future is important because it will someday become the past. That is to say, the City’s choices of disposal method and location for the waste of the future will someday create liability for actions taken or not taken with regard to that waste. In the present, the City expends money based on past waste disposal decisions and plans its future disposal methods and locations.

The City’s choice of disposal method and site is of great importance to the City itself and to waste generators located in Sunnyvale due to the liability associated with disposal.

Waste placed in a landﬁll doesn’t go “away” and, under certain circumstances, future environmental cleanup costs at a disposal site may create ﬁnancial liability for the City.

In decades past the City has, in fact, been assessed liability for small percentages of the cleanup cost at two hazardous waste landﬁlls and a waste oil recycling facility. Although the dollar amounts in these cases were relatively small, the experience is instructive.

Closed Sunnyvale Landﬁll
The Sunnyvale Landﬁll stopped accepting refuse on September 30, 1993. Final cover place
ment in compliance with state regulations was completed in 1994. Approximately 93 of the landﬁll’s 100 acres contain waste. An area of about 7 acres is developed for post-closure use as a biosolids monoﬁll disposal site. It is designed to accept biosolids from the WPCP when market conditions or the characteristics of the biosolids make it difﬁcult or expensive to take them elsewhere.

The closed landﬁll represents one of the largest areas of open space in Sunnyvale. It is especially valued for recreation because portions are adjacent to the Bay Trail. The walking trails and landﬁll maintenance roads on the South and West Hills are heavily used for lunch time recreation by employees of companies located in the nearby Moffett Park industrial area. Walking, biking, bird watching and the scenic views from the top of the West Hill are especially popular with the public.

Since closure, the landﬁll has developed increasing biological diversity. Many mammal, reptile and bird species are observed. Most notable is the Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea), a “species of special concern.” Burrowing owls nest in old ground squirrel burrows on the landﬁll surface and are observed seasonally, often at up to four sites. The City manages the landﬁll surface around these owl sites so as to enhance its value as habitat for the owls (for example, grass is mowed short to enhance visibility of prey and predators). Landﬁll maintenance activities are scheduled to avoid active burrows and to avoid choice nesting sites in the breeding season. Additionally, leash laws are actively enforced as the presence of loose dogs discourages use of the landﬁll as owl habitat.

CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7–38
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 324 of 473 ends

Asphalt and Concrete Recycling Facility
Since 1985, the City has leased space at or near the landﬁll to a private company that recy
cles concrete and asphalt. The source of the raw material is typically pavement material generated by roadway and sidewalk repairs or demolition of concrete structures.

Because the facility accepts material that would be otherwise disposed of in a landﬁll, it is an important component of the City’s compliance with the 50 percent diversion mandate contained in the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). The City’s lease requires the operator to report the jurisdiction of origin of the raw materials, and that information is available to the City and other jurisdictions for preparing AB 939 compliance reports.

Household Hazardous Waste
Another post-closure activity is the Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) event site at 164 Ca
rl Road, which is leased by the City to the Countywide HHW Program. This location is also used as an operations base and storage location for the City’s landﬁll post-closure maintenance staff.

Kirby Canyon Landﬁll
Waste is disposed at Kirby Canyon under a 1991 disposal agreement between the City and Wa
ste Management of California, a private company that operates Kirby Canyon, leasing the site from Castle & Cook. The term of the disposal agreement ends in 2021.

The agreement requires that the City deliver to the SMaRT Station all municipal solid waste collected by its franchised hauler. It then requires that all municipal solid waste that is not segregated at the SMaRT Station for recycling be delivered to Kirby Canyon for disposal. Although the agreement was drawn up contemplating disposal at Kirby Canyon, it does contain provisions for Waste Management to direct the City’s waste elsewhere under speciﬁed conditions.

In 1991 Sunnyvale, Mountain View and Palo Alto selected the Kirby Canyon Landﬁll, operated by Waste Management of California and located in south San Jose, as their site for long term garbage disposal. These three “SMaRT Station” cities, combined, are the largest single customer at Kirby Canyon. Identiﬁable contributors of the waste, such as large industrial generators located in Sunnyvale, can also be named directly in cleanup actions. As a result, these generators tend to share the City’s concern about the integrity of disposal sites. The cities cooperated in the construction and now the operation of the 3-A243TATIONPURSUANTTOTHE3ECOND-EMORANDUMOF5NDERSTANDING-/5 4HE-/5SPELLSOUTEACHCITYSOPERATIONALANDlNANCIALOBLIGAT IONSANDBENElTSWITH regard to the facility. It places Sunnyvale at the center of the relationship as owner and operator of the SMaRT Station.

See Goal EM-13 (Recycling
and Source Reduction
Programs) for discussion of
Household Hazardous Waste
collection.
7–39
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — SOLID WASTE CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 325 of 473 ends

The agreement with Waste Management allows the landﬁll operator to increase City costs due to regulatory changes. Depending on the type of regulation, these cost increases could apply to incoming solid waste as well as “in place” solid waste disposed in prior years. Reducing the amount of solid waste for which the City is responsible in landﬁlls in the future may be the most cost-effective way to manage the cost of complying with future environmental regulations.

The City’s decision to enter into a long-term disposal contract with Waste Management was driven in part by the technical qualiﬁcations of that company, its proactive approach to regulatory compliance and its practice of keeping up with rapidly changing requirements and standards for landﬁll construction, operation and monitoring. City staff conducts an annual review and assessment of regulatory documents for Kirby Canyon to verify that the site continues to be operated in a way that minimizes future City liabilities. Future city decisions and policies that affect where Sunnyvale wastes (hazardous and non-hazardous alike) are disposed should likewise consider not just the immediate cost of disposal, but also the potential for long-term environmental cleanup liabilities.

Planning For Future Disposal
The fact that Sunnyvale has landﬁll disposal capacity under contract until 2021 shoul
d not lead to complacency. There were 16 years between the designation of the SMaRT Station site as suitable for a transfer station and the date the facility was ready for operation. It should be assumed that acquiring new disposal capacity will take a minimum of ﬁve years—possibly longer if coordination with other cities is required.

Thus, the City should begin the process of arranging for post-2021 disposal no later than 2016. The time prior to 2016 should be used to determine a Zero Waste Strategic Plan and investigate potential technologies, partnerships and funding issues, all of which will affect the amount and type of disposal capacity required post-2021.

As 2021 approaches, the City should begin developing its strategy for future transfer and disposal methods, locations and partnerships. This process must be well under way no later than 2016, ﬁve years prior to the expiration of the current disposal agreement in order to assure an orderly transition to post-2021 disposal options consistent with the Zero Waste Strategic Plan.

POLICY EM-15.1 ASSURE THAT THE CITY POSSESSES A MINIMUM OF FIVE YEARS OF REFUSE DISPOSAL CAPACITY AT ALL TIMES. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2D.1)
CITY OF SUNNYVALE GENERAL PLAN – JULY 2011
7– 40
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 326 of 473 ends

/g81 EM-15.1a When available disposal capacity equals 1 0 years or less, initiate actions to arrange for sufﬁcient capacity to accommodate present and projected City needs. (Previously Solid Waste Action Statement 3.2D.1b)
POLICY EM-15.2 REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF REFUSE BEING DISPOSED,

GENERATE RECYCLING REVENUES, AND MINIMIZE TRUCK TRAVEL TO THE

DISPOSAL SITE THROUGH USE OF THE SUNNYVALE MATERIALS RECOVERY AND TRANSFER (SMART) STATION. (Previously Solid Waste Policy 3.2D.2) 7– 41
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT — SOLID WASTE CHAPTER 7
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 327 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

APPENDIX H
City of Sunnyvale
2025 Urban Water Management Plan
SFPUC and Valley Water Drought Analyses Documents
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 328 of 473 ends

Services of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

OUR MISSION: To provide our customers with high-quality, efficient, and reliable water, power and sewer services in a manner that values environmental and community interests and sustains the resources entrusted to our care.

525 Golden Gate Ave
San Francisco, CA 94102
(415) 554-3155
sfpuc.gov

March 11, 2026

Danielle McPherson
Senior Water Resources Specialist
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency
155 Bovet Road, Suite 650
San Mateo, CA 94402

Dear Ms. McPherson,

This letter contains the supply reliability of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Regional Water System (RWS) that the SFPUC has prepared for the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), which the Wholesale Customers may also use in their respective 2025 UWMPs. The SFPUC has assessed the RWS’s supply reliability under the following planning scenarios:

1. Projected supply reliability for years 2030 through 2050, assuming total demand is equivalent to the sum of the projected retail and wholesale demands on the RWS, which includes Wholesale Customer purchase projections provided to the SFPUC by BAWSCA on March 4, 2026 (refer to Table 1 below).

2. Projected supply reliability for 2050, assuming total demand is equivalent to the sum of the projected retail demands on the RWS and the Wholesale Customers’ Supply Assurance of 184 MGD.

3. Under each of the above demand conditions, projected supply reliability for the following scenarios: (a) with implementation of the 2018 amendments to the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan (Bay-Delta Plan Amendment) and (b) without implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 329 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 2 of 14 ends

Table 1. Retail and Wholesale RWS Demand Assumptions Used for Supply Reliability Modeling (MGD)
20251 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Retail 61.1 62.7 61.2 61.9 64.0 66.7
Wholesale2 130.1 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4
Total 191.2 196.6 197.5 202.5 208.1 215.1
1 2025 demands are from the FY 2024-25 Table J-1 water use calculations, prepared pursuant to the Water Supply Agreement between the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers.
2 2030 through 2050 Wholesale Customer purchase projections were provided to the SFPUC by BAWSCA on March 4, 2026, and include demands for the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara.

The total amount of water the SFPUC can deliver to the Retail and Wholesale Customers from the RWS depends on several factors, including (1) the amount of water that is available to the SFPUC from natural runoff, (2) the amount of water in reservoir storage, and (3) the amount of water that the SFPUC releases from the RWS for purposes other than customer deliveries (e.g., instream flow releases below RWS reservoirs). For planning purposes, the SFPUC “average year” or “normal year” is based on historical hydrology under conditions that allow the RWS reservoirs to be filled over the course of the snowmelt season, allowing full deliveries to customers. For “dry-year” supply scenarios, the SFPUC plans its water deliveries using a water-supply planning methodology with reference to a simulated 8.5-year design drought.

In each demand scenario for 2030 through 2050, the SFPUC estimated RWS deliveries using the standard SFPUC procedure, which includes adding increased levels of rationing as needed in dry years to balance the demands on the RWS with available water supply. The five consecutive dry-year sequence shown in the tables below represent years 2 through 6 of the design drought.

The SFPUC chose this sequence because year 2 is the first year in which system-wide water use reductions could take effect, as the design drought sequence generally begins year 1 with full reservoirs. All simulations that the SFPUC has prepared for its 2025 UWMP have increased levels of rationing in the final years of the design drought sequence. The SFPUC has presented the results in the standardized format prescribed by DWR.

Assumptions about the status of the dry-year water supply projects included in the SFPUC’s Water System Improvement Program (WSIP) are provided below in Table 2 titled “WSIP Project Assumptions for RWS Supply Modeling.” The table reflects instream flow requirements at San Mateo and Alameda Creeks, DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 330 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 3 of 14 ends

as described in the UWMP “common language” that the SFPUC provided to BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers separately from this letter.

The SFPUC utilized the Water Shortage Allocation Plan (WSAP) that is incorporated in the Water Supply Agreement between the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers to allocate the RWS supply available during dry years between the Retail Customers and the Wholesale Customers in the 2025 UWMP supply reliability analysis. The WSAP, also known as the Tier 1 Plan, defines the method for allocating between the Retail Customers collectively and Wholesale Customers collectively the available RWS supplies during system-wide shortages. The SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers most recently amended the WSAP in 2025. Also in 2025, the Wholesale Customers adopted an updated Tier 2 Plan, which allocates the collective Wholesale Customers’ share of available RWS supplies from the Tier 1 Plan among each of the 26 Wholesale Customers. The WSAP addresses shortages that require a system-wide reduction in water use of 20% or less, consistent with the SFPUC’s Level of Service Goal. For any shortage scenario requiring a system- wide reduction in water use above 20% in the supply reliability analysis, the SFPUC applied the Tier 1 Plan’s allocation of supplies between the Retail Customers and Wholesale Customers for a shortage requiring a system-wide reduction in water use of 16-20%.

Because of the uncertainty surrounding implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, the RWS supply reliability assessment evaluates two future supply scenarios: (1) with implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, and (2) without implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment. It is unknown when implementation may begin on the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment; for the purposes of the 2025 UWMP analysis, the SFPUC included it beginning in the 2030 modeling scenarios (see Tables 4a-4g and 6).

The SFPUC incorporated additional modeling assumptions in the 2025 UWMP analysis regarding the State Water Resources Control Board curtailments and assumptions regarding agreements with Turlock and Modesto Irrigation Districts pertaining to instream flow obligations.

1. D uring the last two drought periods, 2013-2016 and 2021-2023, the State Water Resources Control Board implemented curtailments through emergency regulations and curtailment orders that attempted to limit diversions from Central Valley watersheds including the Tuolumne River at certain times. Due to the uncertain legality of the State Water Resources Control Board’s curtailment actions as well as the DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 331 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 4 of 14 ends

uncertainties regarding any potential future curtailment actions against San Francisco, the SFPUC’s RWS supply reliability analyses do not assume curtailments are in effect.

2. Through a 1966 agreement with the Modesto and Turlock Irrigation Districts (Districts), who are more senior downstream appropriative water rights holders on the Tuolumne River, San Francisco may become responsible for up to approximately 51.7% of any flow releases the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) may require through issuance of a new license for the Districts’ Don Pedro Hydropower Project. The exact flow contribution for which San Francisco may become responsible is highly uncertain and may depend on multiple currently unknown factors, including an anticipated Endangered Species Act biological opinion from the National Marine Fisheries Service and a Clean Water Act section 401 water quality certification from the State Water Resources Control Board. San Francisco’s potential responsibility for FERC-ordered flows may further depend on San Francisco’s ability to enter into a new or extended agreement with the Districts to offset a portion of San Francisco’s flow contributions in exchange for payment. Due to the high levels of uncertainty surrounding the Districts’ FERC-relicensing process, as well as the unknown timing for license issuance, the SFPUC’s RWS water supply reliability analyses do not assume additional water supply losses from any potential new FERC-ordered flow releases.

3. The simulation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment scenario assumes that a 1996 agreement between San Francisco and the Districts (the Side Agreement), which allows San Francisco to pay the Districts in lieu of contributing a portion of current FERC-ordered flow releases, remains in effect, and that the San Francisco share of flows in excess of and not covered by the Side Agreement is approximately 51.7%. These assumptions were made for the purpose of completing the modeling for the UWMP update, and they do not represent a commitment by San Francisco or the Districts to any future agreement or of San Francisco accepting responsibility for any future FERC-ordered flow releases.

Based on current projected demands, supply modeling for the two future supply scenarios shows significantly different supply reliability projections for the RWS:
• With i
mplementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment: Under this scenario, using the demand assumptions shown in Table 1, RWS supplies are expected to range from full availability in an average year DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 332 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 5 of 14 ends

(100%) to as low as 57% in multiple dry years when compared to water supplies in an average year. In other words, RWS supplies could be reduced by up to 43% in a multi-year drought. See Tables 4a-4g and 6. • Without implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment: Under this scenario, using demand assumptions shown in Table 1, there are no anticipated shortages of RWS supplies. See Tables 5a-5g and 7.

Table 8 below pr
ovides the Wholesale Customer purchase projections and
Wholesale Customer allocation of RWS supply for the five-year drought risk assessment from 2026 to 2030. The supply projections for 2026 to 2030 are based on a linear growth from 2025 to 2030 levels of demand as calculated by BAWSCA. This table does not assume implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment because the start of implementation remains uncertain.

In the forthcoming 2025 UWMP, the SFPUC acknowledges that it has a Level of Service objective to meet an average annual water demand of 265 MGD from the SFPUC watersheds for Retail and Wholesale Customers during non- drought years, as well as a contractual obligation to supply 184 MGD to the Wholesale Customers, subject to reduction under certain conditions. The SFPUC will, accordingly, include the results of modeling based on a Wholesale Customer demand of 184 MGD to facilitate planning that supports meeting this Level of Service objective and its contractual obligations. The results of this modeling will be in an appendix to the 2025 UWMP prepared by the SFPUC.

The RWS supply projections shown in the tables below are more accurately characterized as supplies that will be used to meet projected Retail and Wholesale Customer demands.

It is our understanding that you will pass this information on to the Wholesale Customers. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact Jennifer Lee at [email protected] or (415) 551-4563.

Sincerely,

Steven R. Ritchie
Assistant General Manager, Water Enterprise
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 333 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 6 of 14 ends

Table 2: WSIP Project Assumptions for RWS Supply Modeling Projects Base Year 2025 Base Year 2030 and
Beyond
Base Year 2040 and
Beyond
Lower Crystal Springs
Dam Improvements
Crystal Springs storage
not fully restored
Crystal Springs storage
not fully restored
Crystal Springs storage
not fully restored
Regional Groundwater
Storage and Recovery
(GSR) Project
GSR account partially
filled at spring 2020
level of 43,000 AF; GSR
recovery rate of

5.2 MGD
a
GSR account fully filled;
GSR recovery rate of

6.2 MGD
a
Alameda Creek
Recapture Project Project not built Project built and operating
Project built and
operating
Dry-Year Transfers Not in effect Not in effect Not in effect a. The GSR Project was intended to provide 7.2 MGD over 7.5 years, however current limitations on the number of wells available will result in deliveries less than 7.2 MGD over 7.5 years.

Table 3: Projected Total Regional Water System Supply Utilized and Portion of Regional Water System Supply Utilized by Wholesale Customers in Normal Years [For Table 6-9]:

RWS Supply 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
RWS Supply Utilized (MGD) 196.6 197.5 202.5 208.1 215.1 RWS Supply Utilized by Wholesale
Customersa (MGD) 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4
a. RWS supply utilized by Wholesale Customers from 2030 through 2050 is equivalent to Wholesale Customer purchase projections provided to the SFPUC by BAWSCA on March 4, 2026, and includes demands for the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 334 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 7 of 14 ends

Basis of Water Supply Data: With Implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment

Table 4a: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2030, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Single dry year 2030 147.5 75% 92.2
At shortages 20% or greater,
wholesale allocation is
assumed to be 62.5% and
retail allocation is 37.5%.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2030 147.5 75% 92.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2030 123.9 63% 77.4 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2030 123.9 63% 77.4 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2030 123.9 63% 77.4 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2030 123.9 63% 77.4 Same as above.

Table 4b: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2035, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Single dry year 2035 146.2 74% 91.3
At shortages 20% or
greater, wholesale
allocation is assumed to be

62.5% and retail allocation
is 37.5%.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2035 146.2 74% 91.3 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2035 124.4 63% 77.8 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2035 124.4 63% 77.8 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2035 124.4 63% 77.8 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2035 124.4 63% 77.8 Same as above.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 335 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 8 of 14 ends

Table 4c: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2040, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Single dry year 2040 145.8 72% 91.1
At shortages 20% or
greater, wholesale
allocation is assumed to be

62.5% and retail allocation
is 37.5%.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2040 145.8 72% 91.1 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2040 123.5 61% 77.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2040 123.5 61% 77.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2040 123.5 61% 77.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2040 123.5 61% 77.2 Same as above.

Table 4d: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2045, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Single dry year 2045 145.7 70% 91.0
At shortages 20% or
greater, wholesale
allocation is assumed to be

62.5% and retail allocation
is 37.5%.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2045 145.7 70% 91.0 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2045 122.8 59% 76.7 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2045 122.8 59% 76.7 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2045 122.8 59% 76.7 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2045 122.8 59% 76.7 Same as above.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 336 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 9 of 14 ends

Table 4e: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2050, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Single dry year 2050 146.2 68% 91.4
At shortages 20% or
greater, wholesale
allocation is assumed to be

62.5% and retail allocation
is 37.5%.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2050 146.2 68% 91.4 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2050 122.6 57% 76.6 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2050 122.6 57% 76.6 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2050 122.6 57% 76.6 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2050 122.6 57% 76.6 Same as above.

Table 4f: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], B ase Year 2050, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment and Wholesale Demands at 184 MGD Supply Assurance Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2050 250.7 100% 184.0
Single dry year 2050 145.4 58% 90.9
At shortages 20% or
greater, wholesale
allocation is assumed to be

62.5% and retail allocation
is 37.5%.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2050 145.4 58% 90.9 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2050 120.3 48% 75.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2050 120.3 48% 75.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2050 120.3 48% 75.2 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2050 120.3 48% 75.2 Same as above.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 337 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 10 of 14 ends

Table 4g: Projected RWS Supply Availability [Alternative to Table 7-1], Years 2030-2050, With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
2050 (with 184
MGD Supply
Assurance)
Average year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Single dry year 75% 74% 72% 70% 68% 58%
Consecutive 1st dry year 75% 74% 72% 70% 68% 58%
Consecutive 2nd dry year 63% 63% 61% 59% 57% 48%
Consecutive 3rd dry year 63% 63% 61% 59% 57% 48%
Consecutive 4th dry year 63% 63% 61% 59% 57% 48%
Consecutive 5th dry year 63% 63% 61% 59% 57% 48%

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 338 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 11 of 14 ends

Basis of Water Supply Data: Without Implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment

Table 5a: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2030, Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Single dry year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Consecutive 1st dry year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Consecutive 2nd dry year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Consecutive 3rd dry year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Consecutive 4th dry year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9
Consecutive 5th dry year 2030 196.6 100% 133.9

Table 5b: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2035, Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Single dry year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Consecutive 1st dry year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Consecutive 2nd dry year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Consecutive 3rd dry year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Consecutive 4th dry year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3
Consecutive 5th dry year 2035 197.5 100% 136.3

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 339 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 12 of 14 ends

Table 5c: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2040, Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Single dry year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Consecutive 1st dry year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Consecutive 2nd dry year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Consecutive 3rd dry year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Consecutive 4th dry year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6
Consecutive 5th dry year 2040 202.5 100% 140.6

Table 5d: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2045, Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Single dry year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Consecutive 1st dry year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Consecutive 2nd dry year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Consecutive 3rd dry year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Consecutive 4th dry year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1
Consecutive 5th dry year 2045 208.1 100% 144.1

Table 5e: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2050, Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Single dry year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Consecutive 1st dry year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Consecutive 2nd dry year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Consecutive 3rd dry year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Consecutive 4th dry year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
Consecutive 5th dry year 2050 215.1 100% 148.4
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 340 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 13 of 14 ends

Table 5f: Basis of Water Supply Data [For Table 7-1], Base Year 2050, Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment and Wholesale Demands at 184 MGD Supply Assurance Year Type Base
Year
RWS
Volume
Available
(MGD)
% of
Average
Supply
Wholesale
Volume
Available
(MGD)
Notes on Calculation of
Wholesale Allocation of
RWS
Average year 2050 250.7 100% 184.0
Single dry year 2050 225.6 90% 158.9
At 10% shortage, wholesale
allocation is 64% (144.4 MGD)
and retail allocation is 36%
(81.2 MGD). Retail allocations
above 66.7 MGD are re-
allocated to Wholesale
Customers, per the Water
Supply Agreement. Therefore,

14.5 MGD is added to
wholesale allocation, bringing
it to 158.9 MGD.

Consecutive 1st dry year 2050 225.6 90% 158.9 Same as above.

Consecutive 2nd dry year 2050 225.6 90% 158.9 Same as above.

Consecutive 3rd dry year 2050 225.6 90% 158.9 Same as above.

Consecutive 4th dry year 2050 225.6 90% 158.9 Same as above.

Consecutive 5th dry year 2050 225.6 90% 158.9 Same as above.

Table 5g: Projected RWS Supply [Alternative to Table 7-1], Years 2030-2050, Without Bay- Delta Plan Amendment
Year Type 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
2050 (with 184
MGD Supply
Assurance)
Average year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Single dry year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90%
Consecutive 1st dry year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90%
Consecutive 2nd dry year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90%
Consecutive 3rd dry year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90%
Consecutive 4th dry year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90%
Consecutive 5th dry year 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90%

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 341 of 473 ends

2025 UWMP Supply Reliability Memo
March 11, 2026

Page 14 of 14 ends

Supply Projections for Consecutive Five Dry Year Sequences

Table 6: Projected Multiple Dry Years RWS Wholesale Allocation [For Table 7-4], With Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2050 (with 184 MGD
Supply Assurance)
First year 92.2 91.3 91.1 91.0 91.4 90.9
Second year 77.4 77.8 77.2 76.7 76.6 75.2
Third year 77.4 77.8 77.2 76.7 76.6 75.2
Fourth year 77.4 77.8 77.2 76.7 76.6 75.2
Fifth year 77.4 77.8 77.2 76.7 76.6 75.2

Table 7: Projected Multiple Dry Years RWS Wholesale Allocation [For Table 7-4], Without Bay-Delta Plan Amendment
2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2050 (with 184 MGD
Supply Assurance)
First year 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4 158.9
Second year 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4 158.9
Third year 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4 158.9
Fourth year 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4 158.9
Fifth year 133.9 136.3 140.6 144.1 148.4 158.9

Table 8: Projected RWS Supply for 5-Year Drought Risk Assessment [For Table 7-5] Year 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Wholesale Purchase
Projectionsa (MGD) 130.9 131.6 132.4 133.2 133.9
RWS Supply Utilized by
Wholesale Customersb (MGD) 130.9 131.6 132.4 133.2 133.9 a. Wholesale Purchase Projections for 2026-2030 assume a linear growth between 2025 actual demands and 2030 projections, as calculated by BAWSCA.
b. This table does not assume implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment because the start of implementation remains uncertain.

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 342 of 473 ends

General Values are rounded to the nearest 1,000 AF.

Imported Water Based on CalSim 3 model runs for Delivery Capability Report 2025.

SFPUC Supplies
SFPUC deliveries are based on modeled supply reliability results and estimates provided by BAWSCA; values reflect scenarios that assume implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment.

Recycled Water
Non-potable recycled water supplies are based on projections provided by retailers and reflect anticipated future recycled water use. Potable recycled water supplies assumes implementation of the Pure Water Silicon Valley.

Demand All model demands are based on the WSMP countywide demand of 330 TAF.

Supply Portfolio
Assumes Valley Water's Water Supply Master Plan 2050 low-cost portfolio:

Semitropic storage (350 TAF) through 2035; groundwater banking (250 TAF) starting 2040; Sisk Reservoir expansion in 2035; DCP in 2045; Pure Water Silicon Valley in 2035.

Operations
Under normal year conditions, sustainable storage is maintained and no withdrawals from long-term storage are assumed; demands are met by incoming supplies. During droughts, stored water accumulated during normal and wet years is used to bridge gaps between reduced incoming supplies and Hydrology Model period is 1922–2021; single dry year is 1977; multi-year drought is 1988–1992; this remains the most severe extended drought in the record.

Infrastructure
Anderson Reservoir is dewatered in 2030 and operational by 2035. Seismic upgrades to Calero, Guadalupe, Almaden, and Anderson are complete in the 2035 model runs and later.

Supply Definition
Reasonably available supply is water in storage above thresholds for emergency needs, subsidence protection, and operational withdrawal limits for each storage facility.

Shortage Response
In the 5-year drought, WSCP actions are required in years 4 and 5 for some future scenarios; these shortages are addressed through demand reduction and supply augmentation.

Notes
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 343 of 473 ends

Water Supply 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Surface water 56,000 76,000 77,000 76,000 76,000
Imported water 177,000 163,000 163,000 164,000 164,000
SFPUC Supply 50,000 51,000 52,000 53,000 54,000
Natural Groundwater Recharge 61,000 61,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Recycled water (potable) 0 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000
Recycled water (non-potable) 20,000 22,000 24,000 26,000 28,000 Supply Total 365,000 397,000 400,000 403,000 406,000
Demand Total 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Difference (Surplus) 35,000 67,000 70,000 73,000 76,000 Water Supply 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Surface water 11,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
Imported water 42,000 37,000 37,000 37,000 37,000
SFPUC Supply 30,000 31,000 32,000 33,000 32,000
Natural Groundwater Recharge 47,000 48,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 Recycled water (potable) 0 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000
Recycled water (non-potable) 20,000 22,000 24,000 26,000 28,000 Supply from Storage 181,000 250,000 246,000 245,000 246,000 Supply Total 331,000 422,000 420,000 422,000 424,000
Demand Total 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Difference 1,000 92,000 90,000 92,000 94,000
Multiple Dry Years Supplies and Demands (Acre-feet rounded to nearest 1,000) 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Supply 232,000 242,000 243,000 225,000 223,000
Supply from Storage 175,000 245,000 239,000 242,000 242,000 Demand Totals 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Surplus/(Shortfall) 77,000 157,000 152,000 137,000 135,000 WSCP Actions
Revised Difference
Supply 322,000 287,000 287,000 267,000 268,000
Supply from Storage 136,000 212,000 196,000 188,000 186,000 Demand Totals 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Surplus/(Shortfall) 128,000 169,000 153,000 125,000 124,000 WSCP Actions
Revised Difference
Supply 262,000 231,000 232,000 203,000 204,000
Supply from Storage 121,000 186,000 174,000 160,000 159,000 Demand Totals 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Surplus/(Shortfall) 53,000 87,000 76,000 33,000 33,000
WSCP Actions
Revised Difference
Supply 266,000 241,000 240,000 241,000 241,000
Supply from Storage 35,000 121,000 106,000 63,000 63,000 Demand Totals 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Surplus/(Shortfall) (29,000) 32,000 16,000 (26,000) (26,000) WSCP Actions 29,000 26,000 26,000
Revised Difference 0 0 0
Supply 277,000 304,000 309,000 282,000 282,000
Supply from Storage 32,000 54,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Demand Totals 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000 330,000
Surplus/(Shortfall) (21,000) 28,000 9,000 (18,000) (18,000) WSCP Actions 21,000 18,000 18,000
Revised Difference 0 0 0
Fifth Year
Average Year Supplies and Demands (Acre-feet rounded to nearlest 1,000) Single Dry Year Supplies and Demands (Acre-feet rounded to nearest 1,000) First Year
Second Year
Third Year
Fourth Year
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 344 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 345 of 473 ends

www.hydroscience.com

APPENDIX I
City of Sunnyvale
2025 Urban Water Management Plan
Sunnyvale Annex Within Volume II of the 2023 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 346 of 473 ends

Santa Clar
a County
Multijur
isdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan 2023 Update
City of Sunnyvale Annex
February 21, 2024
Attachment 3

Page 1 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 347 of 473 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Attachment 3

Page 2 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 348 of 473 ends

1. City of Sunnyvale

1.1. Hazard Mitigation Plan Points of Contact
The point of contact during the Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) planning process for the City of Sunnyvale was the Office of Emergency Services Coordinator in the Public Safety Department. This annex within the MJHMP was developed using information provided by the City of Sunnyvale’s Local Planning Team.

Table 1: City of Sunnyvale Local Planning Team Members for the 2023 Santa Clara County MJHMP
Name Position Organization Role on Team and in Planning Process
Trudi Ryan Director,
Community
Development
City of Sunnyvale General oversight, hazard
identification, and plan development
Ramana
Chinnakotla
Director,
Environmental
Services
City of Sunnyvale Hazard identification and plan
development
Sean Smith Street Operations
Manager
City of Sunnyvale Hazard identification and plan
development
Mary
Jeyaprakash
Senior Planner City of Sunnyvale Hazard identification and plan development
Suzanne Park Chief Building
Official
City of Sunnyvale Hazard identification and plan
development

The City’s Local Planning Team Members participated in the MJHMP by attending meetings on the Plan Kick-Off, Risk Assessment, Capabilities Assessment, Mitigation Strategy, Wrap-up, and three one-on-one meetings with the planning consultant. In addition, the city filled out the requested forms on each section or provided the requested information verbally to the planning consultant, which were used to draft this annex. The city also shared information regarding public opportunities to participate in the draf t plan update utilizing the digital survey and seven in-person and virtual public outreach meetings. Further, the City team was provided the opportunity to review the draft plan prior to submittal to Cal OES and FEMA.

Attachment 3

Page 3 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 349 of 473 ends

Table 2: Ex
ternal Stakeholders Invited to Be Involved in Planning Process Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description
American Red Cross Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations, among
others.

A nonprofit humanitarian
organization that provides
emergency assistance, disaster
relief, and disaster
preparedness education in the
United States.

Amateur Radio Emergency
Service (ARES)
Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

A corps of trained amateur radio
operator volunteers organized to
assist in public service and
emergency communications.

California Office of Emergency
Services (Cal OES)
Local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation
activities.

Office responsible for
overseeing and coordinating
emergency preparedness,
response, recovery, and
homeland security activities
within the state.

California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection
Local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation
activities.

The fire department of the
California Natural Resources
Agency.

California Department of
Transportation
Agencies that have the authority
to regulate development.

An executive department of the
U.S. state of California.

Cattlemen’s Association Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

A nonprofit trade association
that represents California's
ranchers and beef producers in
political affairs.

City of East Palo Alto Neighboring communities. A city in San Mateo County, California, United States.

City of Menlo Park Neighboring communities. Menlo Park is a city at the eastern edge of San Mateo
County.

Cooper-Garrod Estate
Vineyards
Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

Garrod Farms is a family-owned
and operated estate winery and
stables.

Department of Homeland
Security
Agencies that have the authority
to regulate development.

The U.S. federal executive
department responsible for
public security, roughly
comparable to the interior or
home ministries of other
countries.

Department of Toxic
Substances
Agencies that have the authority
to regulate development.

An agency of the government of
the state of California that
protects public health and the
environment from hazardous
waste.

Attachment 3

Page 4 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 350 of 473 ends

Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description
Downtown Streets Team Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations.

Teams that restore dignity,
inspire hope, and provide a
pathway to recover from
homelessness.

Emergency Medical Services Agencies that have the authority to regulate development.

Provides statewide coordination
and leadership for the planning,
development, and
implementation of
local
EMS systems.

Emergency Services Volunteer
Representative
Local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation
activities.

Organization that ensures public
safety, security, and healt h by
addressing and resolving
different emergencies.

Federal Aviation Administration Agencies that have the authority to regulate development.

Offers civil aviation safety
enforcement services.

Google Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

American multinational
technology company focusing
on artificial intelligence, online
advertising, search engine
technology, cloud computing,
computer software, quantum
computing, e-commerce, and
consumer electronics.

Hidden Villa Farm Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations, among
others.

Nonprofit educational
organization teaching programs
on environmental and
multicultural awareness.

Intel Corporation Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

An American multinational
corporation and technology
company headquartered in
Santa Clara, California.

Kaiser Permanente—Santa
Clara
Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

An American integrated
managed care consortium.

Life Moves Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations, among
others.

Provides interim housing and
supportive services for
homeless families and
individuals to rapidly return to
stable housing.

Attachment 3

Page 5 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 351 of 473 ends

Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description
Moffett Field Ames Research
Center, National Aeronautics
and Space Administration
(NASA)
Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

Major NASA research center
at Moffett Federal Airfield in
California's Silicon Valley.

National Weather Service,
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
Local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation
activities.

Scientific and regulatory agency
within the U.S. Department of
Commerce.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private
organizations, and neighboring
communities.

One of the largest combination
natural gas and electric utilities
in the United States.

Regional Water Quality Control
Board
Agencies that have the authority
to regulate development.

Provides government regulatory
services related to water
pollution and control.

Rotating Safe Car Park Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations.

Allows for temporary overnight
parking for homeless individuals
or families living out of their
cars as a safe alternative to
sleeping on the streets or in a
homeless shelter.

Santa Clara County CERT Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations.

Trains residents to prepare for
and respond to life-threatening
events in their community.

Santa Clara County FireSafe
Council
Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations.

A nonprofit, grassroots
organization that provides
education and project
assistance for homeowners.

Santa Clara County Local
Oversight Program
Local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation
activities.

Program to oversee assessment
and mitigation of contaminated
sites to protect groundwater
resources, human health,
safety, and the environment.

Santa Clara County Parks Agencies that have the authority to regulate development, and
neighboring communities.

Provide, protect, and preserve
regional parklands for the
enjoyment and education.

Santa Clara County Planning &
Development
Agencies that have the authority
to regulate development, and
neighboring communities.

Plays a key role in supporting
economic development and
ensuring opportunities for the
public to participate in
land development.

Attachment 3

Page 6 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 352 of 473 ends

Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description
Santa Clara County Sheriff’s
Office
Agencies that have the authority
to regulate development, and
neighboring communities.

A local law enforcement agency
that serves Santa Clara County,
California.

Santa Clara University Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

A private Jesuit university in
Santa Clara, California.

Santa Clara Valley Open Space
Authority
Neighboring communities An independent special district in Santa Clara County.

St. Louise Hospital (Santa Clara
County Hospital System)
Representatives of nonprofit
organizations, including
community-based organizations,
that work directly with and/or
provide support to underserved
communities and socially
vulnerable populations.

Community hospital.

Stanford Healthcare Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations, and neighboring
communities.

Multispecialty clinic that
provides convenient access to
advanced, specialty care in the
South Bay.

Vista Center for the Blind and
Visually Impaired
Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations.

Empowers individuals who
are blind or visually impaired to
embrace life to the fullest
through evaluation, counseling,
education, and training.

County of Santa Clara Neighboring jurisdiction, local
agency involved in hazard
mitigation.

Response for engaging the
whole community in assessing
needs and developing strategies
to achieve stronger mitigation
capabilities within the Santa
Clara County Operational Area.

City of Campbell Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

City of Cupertino Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley.

City of Gilroy Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

City of Los Altos Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

Town of Los Altos Hills Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

Town of Los Gatos Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

City of Milpitas Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

City of Morgan Hill Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

City of Mountain View Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County.

City of Palo Alto Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley.

City of San José Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley.

City of Santa Clara Neighboring communities. A city near San Jose, in California’s Silicon Valley.

City of Saratoga Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley.

Attachment 3

Page 7 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 353 of 473 ends

Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description
Santa Clara County Fire
Department
Local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation
activities, and neighboring
communities.

A California Fire Protection
District serving Santa Clara
County.

Santa Clara Valley Water
District
Representatives of businesses,
academia, and other private
organizations, and neighboring
communities.

Provides stream stewardship,
wholesale water supply, and
flood protection for Santa Clara
County, California.

The City of Sunnyvale met with and solicited input on the draft plan from a broad range of stakeholders including local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities (including the Chief Building Official and Environmental Services Director), agencies that have the authority to regulate development (including the town’s Community Development Director, Senior Planner, and NOAA), neighboring communities (such as the City of Santa Clara and City of Mountain View), representatives of business, academia, and other private organizations (like the utility company PG&E and major employer Intel), as well as representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations (including the American Red Cross and Downtown Street Teams which helps the unhoused in Sunnyvale).

In addition to inviting a wide range of stakeholders, the City supported public outreach and engagement through distributing a digital survey utilizing social media. This survey reached members of underserved populations, including primarily non-English speaking households.

Attachment 3

Page 8 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 354 of 473 ends

Figur
e 1: Sunnyvale Social Media Outreach for Community Meeting

Attachment 3

Page 9 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 355 of 473 ends

Figur
e 2: Sunnyvale Social Media Outreach for Public Survey

In addition, the MJHMP was discussed at two virtual and five in-person public meetings across Santa Clara County. These in-person meetings were targeted towards areas with socially vulnerably populations. In this case, the plan focused on those who are socially vulnerable as they belong to an access and functional needs (AFN) population. This plan update utilized the legal definition of AFN for this approach. The California Government Code Section 8593.3 defines Access and Functional Needs as “Individuals who have: Developmental, intellectual, or physical disabilities; Chronic conditions or injuries; Limited English proficiency or non-English speaking; Or individuals who are: older adults, children, or pregnant; living in institutional settings; or Low-income, homeless, and/or transportation disadvantaged.” In Saratoga, according to the U.S. Census an estimated 46.1% of the population speaks a language other than English, a key factor to consider while developing any kind of emergency management and mitigation approach to public outreach. The C-MIST framework is used to integrate AFN populations in the operational area into emergency management through communications, maintain health, independence, support, safetyand self-determination, and transportation. These meetings were also designed to be accessible for AFN (access and functional needs) populations. The public was also provided the opportunity to comment on the draft plan.

Comments from the public survey were reviewed, evaluated for alignment with planning priorities, and incorporated as appropriate. The top hazards of concern included wildfire (including wildfire smoke), flooding, and extreme heat. Specifically,, the public highlighted the risk of flooding in Sunnyvale all the way to El Camino. Overall, the public emphasized the need for public education and outreach and partnership building, including with utility and water districts. These suggestions are incorporated into the mitigation actions Sunnyvale has selected.

The participation of the City of Sunnyvale and its stakeholders helped inform the development of the MJHMP and this annex in accordance with current priorities. The new plan continues to expand upon the work of the prior plan including emphasizing partnerships both within jurisdictions and special districts as well as with external stakeholders. Further, there is an increased emphasis on climate change, reflecting the increased understanding of the risk this hazard poses to the OA. The City did not identify additional changes in priorities to be highlighted in their annex.

1.2. Jurisdiction Profile
The following is a summary of key information about the jurisdiction and its history:
 Date of Incorporation: 1912
 Current Population: 153,091 as of July 1, 2022
 Population Growth: Based on data tracked by the California Department of Finance and the U.S. Census Bureau, Sunnyvale has experienced a population increase since the last plan update. The overall population has increased from an estimated 55,811 people in January 2017 to 153,091 on July 1, 2022.
 Location and Description: The City of Sunnyvale is located in Santa Clara County, California. It encompasses 24 square miles. Santa Clara County makes up the southern portion of the San Francisco Bay Area. Sunnyvale is bordered by the San Francisco Bay and portions of San José to the north, Moffett Federal Airfield to the northwest, Mountain View to the west, Los Altos to the southwest, Cupertino to the south, and Santa Clara to the east. U.S. Highway 101 and the historic El Camino Real traverse the City.
 Brief History: Sunnyvale’s history has always revolved around its economy. Initially, the area’s vast open space and fertile soil were ideal for the fruit orchards that supported the settlement’s first residents. With the arrival of the railroad in 1864, the economic base of the community was able to expand, as canneries to process the fruit from the surrounding orchards were built near Attachment 3

Page 10 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 356 of 473 ends

the rail
lines. In 1906, the Hendy Iron Works relocated from San Francisco to Sunnyvale, continuing the area’s industrial development. By 1940, the population had grown to about 4,400, and the Hendy Iron Works was taken over by Westinghouse to support the war effort. After the war, the defense-related industry arrived, capitalizing on the pleasant climate and Moffett Naval Air Station. Lockheed Missiles & Space Company moved to Sunnyvale in 1956, and soon became Sunnyvale’s largest employer. The 1950s and 1960s became the periods of greatest growth for the community, resulting in a population of 96,000 in 1970. The defense era gave way to the high-tech era when the microprocessor was introduced in 1971. During the years that followed, companies with foresight saw the potential of computers and the power of semiconductors. The city became the nexus of research, development, and manufacturing that created Silicon Valley, and that legacy continues today in the era of the Internet.  Climate: Sunnyvale’s weather is typical of the Northern California coast, which can be categorized as a Mediterranean climate. It has mild, moist winters and comfortably warm, very dry summers. The average precipitation in inches per year is approximately 15.71. The average temperature ranges from 71 to 53 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). Average daytime summer temperatures are in the high 70s, and during the winter, average daytime high temperatures rarely stay below 50 °F.
 Governing Body Format: The City of Sunnyvale is a charter City. The charter authorizes the creation of the City and outlines its powers, functions, and organization. The original Charter of the City of Sunnyvale was established by vote of the people of the City of Sunnyvale as t he organic law of the City under the authority of the Constitution of the State of California and became effective on May 18, 1949. The municipal government provided by the Charter is known as the “Council-Manager” form of government. The elective officers of the City consist of a City Council composed of seven members selected from geographic districts within the City. The Mayor and Vice Mayor are directly elected serving two-year and one-year terms, respectively.

The City of Sunnyvale consists of 11 departments: City Attorney, City Manager, Community Development, Environmental Services, Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology, Library and Recreational Services, NOVA Workforce Services, Public Safety, and Public Works.

The City of Sunnyvale has a strong tradition of community participation, one of which is through service on a board or commission. There are 11 boards and commissions that report to the City Council. The City Council assumes responsibility for the adoption of this plan, while the City Manager will oversee its implementation.

1.3. Development Trends
Development for the City of Sunnyvale can be categorized from moderate to high within the last few years, consisting of residential as well as commercial development. The City of Sunnyvale adopted its general plan in 2011 and is the City’s blueprint for long-term growth. The Land Use element of this plan, which was updated in 2022, describes a significant level of future growth. The city can be expected to change based on an increase in population, changing demographics, the need for newer infrastructure, and other forces like climate change. New areas where noticeable change may occur under new Land Use and Transportation goals and policies include designated parcels on El Camino Real, within the newly identified Village Centers, the Lawrence Station area, and the Peery Park industrial and office area.

The City of Sunnyvale is surrounded by other cities and the Bay of San Francisco. All new development will be infill and density. Building higher density projects, will bring more people who will be vulnerable to the current hazards. New development replacing current buildings will strengthen the cities resilience as older buildings are taken out of the building stock and new buildings are built to new codes.

The City of Sunnyvale has not experi
enced a significant amount of development in previously undeveloped areas, but has had re-development.. New buildings are constructed under current structural standards. Population growth has been in decline in recent years, so new population exposure is expected to be minimal in the coming years. Climate change may increase heat, drought, and weather- related risks in the future. Recent and new development may be susceptible to impacts from hazards with Attachment 3

Page 11 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 357 of 473 ends

a possibly large geographic extent, such as heavy rain, high winds, extreme heat, and drought. It is not anticipated that there is an increased risk for wildfire and landslide, which have limited risk in Sunnyvale.

Rigorous implementation of current building codes is expected to limit increased vulnerability to flood and earthquake. Overall, vulnerability is likely to increase.

Table 3: Recent and Expected Future Development Trends
Criterion Response
Has your jurisdiction annexed any land
since the development of the previous
hazard mitigation plan?
 If yes, give the estimated area annexed
and estimated number of parcels or
structures.

No
Is your jurisdiction expected to annex any
areas during the performance period of
this plan?
 If yes, please describe land areas and
dominant uses.
 If yes, who currently has permitting
authority over these areas?
No
Are any areas targeted for development
or major redevelopment in the next five
years?
 If yes, please briefly describe,
including whether any of the areas are
in known hazard risk areas.

Yes, all development in the City is considered
redevelopment
because the current city is essentially
built-upon, and new development requires
redevelopment of existing properties.

Hazard risk areas:
 Moffett Park is in the floodplain.
 Numerous industries in the city are hazardous
occupancies.

How many building permits were issued
in your jurisdiction since the
development of the previous hazard
mitigation plan?
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Total
Number
of
Permits
No
response
(NR)

NR NR NR NR NR
Please provide the number of permits for
each hazard area or provide a qualitative
description of where development has
occurred.

No response
Please describe the level of buildout in
the jurisdiction, based on your
jurisdiction’s buildable lands inventory. If
no such inventory exists, provide a
qualitative description.

No response

Attachment 3

Page 12 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 358 of 473 ends

1.4. Capability Assessment

1.4.1. Resources for the 2023 Planning Initiative
The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for inclusion into the 2023 Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for both Volume 1 and Volume 2 (City of Sunnyvale Annex). All the below items were additionally reviewed as part of the full capability assessment for the City of Sunnyvale.
 Sunnyvale General Plan: The General Plan was reviewed to incorporate relevant information, such as development trends.
 Building and Zoning Codes: Current building codes were reviewed to assess capabilities and identify any potential gaps to incorporate in the mitigation strategy.  Sunnyvale Economic Development Plan: This plan was reviewed to identify any potential mitigation gaps and cross planning initiatives.

1.4.2. Full Capability Assessment
An assessment of legal and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 200 and Table 201. An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 202. An assessment of staffing capabilities is presented in Table 203. An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 204. Information on National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 205. An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 206. Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in
Table 207. Development and permitting capabilities are presented in Table 208, and the community’s adaptive capacity for the impacts of climate change is presented in Table 209.

Table 4: Legal and Regulatory Capabilities: Codes, Ordinances, and Requirements Legal and Regulatory Capability Local
Authority
Other
Jurisdiction
Authority
State
Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Building Code Yes No Yes Yes
Comment: 2022 California Building Code
Zoning Ordinance Yes No Yes Yes
Comment: Sunnyvale Municipal Code, Title 19
Subdivision Ordinance Yes Yes Yes Yes
Comment: Sunnyvale Municipal Code Title 18
Stormwater Management Ordinance No No No No
Comment: SMC 12.60
Other Natural Hazard-Specific
Ordinances
No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Post-Disaster Recovery No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Attachment 3

Page 13 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 359 of 473 ends

Legal and Regulatory Capability Local
Authority
Other
Jurisdiction
Authority
State
Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Real Estate Disclosure No No Yes No
Comment: None Identified.

Growth Management Yes No Yes No
Comment: Sunnyvale Municipal Code, Title 9
Site Plan Review No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Environmental Protection No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Flood Damage Prevention No No No No
Comment: Sunnyvale Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 62 Emergency Management Yes No No No
Comment: Sunnyvale Municipal Code, Title 2
Climate Change No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Acquisition of land for open space
and public recreation uses
No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Table 5: Planning, Legal, and Regulatory Capabilities
Planning, Legal, or Regulatory
Capability
Local
Authority
Other
Jurisdiction
Authority
State
Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
General Plan Yes No Yes Yes
Is the plan compliant with Assembly Bill 2140?
Comment: Plan was adopted 7/26/2011
Capital Improvement Plan Yes No No Yes
How often is the plan updated? Every two years
Comment: The City has adopted a Capital Improvement Plan and the Sunnyvale website lists project and infrastructure project summaries.

Floodplain or Watershed Plan No No No No
Comment: None Identified. City relies on FEMA floodplain maps.

Stormwater Management Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Urban Water Management Plan Yes Yes Yes Yes
Comment: The City updates the Urban Water Management Plan every 5 years.

Habitat Conservation Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Attachment 3

Page 14 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 360 of 473 ends

Planning, Legal, or Regulatory
Capability
Local
Authority
Other
Jurisdiction
Authority
State
Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Green Infrastructure Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Parks or Open Space Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified, but there is a ‘Parks of the Future’ document.

Economic Development Plan No No No No
Comment: Economy is addressed in the General Plan Land Use and Transportation chapter.

Transportation Plan Yes No No Yes
Comment: The General Plan’s Chapter 3 - Land Use and Transportation was updated 6/2022.

Shoreline Management Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Community Wildfire Protection Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Forest Management Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Climate Action Plan Yes No No Yes
Comment: Sunnyvale has adopted the Climate Action Playbook.

Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan
Yes No No Yes
Comment: The General Plan Safety Element and the City EOP address emergency management goals, issues, and contingencies.

Local Emergency Operations Plan Yes No No Yes
Comment: The City has adopted an EOP in 2017.

Threat and Hazard Identification and
Risk Assessment (THIRA)
No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Post-Disaster Recovery Plan No No No No
Comment: None identified.

Continuity of Operations Plan No No No No
Comment: None Identified.

Public Health Plan No Yes No No
Comment: Santa Clara County Strategic Public Health Plan Attachment 3

Page 15 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 361 of 473 ends

Table 6: F
inancial Capabilities
Financial Capability Could the resource be
used to fund future
mitigation activities?
Has the funding resource been
used in the past for mitigation
activities? If yes, for what type
of mitigation activities?
Community Development
Block Grants
Not unless the funds are
specifically dedicated to
Disaster Response: CDBG-
DR funds.

No
Other Federal Funding
Programs
Only for public facility
buildings that serve the
whole community.

No
Capital Improvements Project
Funding
Yes Road Maintena nce and
Rehabilitation, Streetlight Conduit
Replacement, Upgrading Fuel
Stations, Emergency Generator
Installation projects and Widening
and Retrofitting Bridges and
Overpasses to meet current seismic
requirements receive CIP funding.

Authority to Levy Taxes for
Specific Purposes
Yes Unknown
User Fees for Water, Sewer,
Gas or Electric Services
Yes Unknown
Stormwater Utility Fee There is no current
stormwater utility fee
Incur Debt through General
Obligation Bonds
Yes Unknown
Incur Debt through Special
Tax Bonds
Yes Unknown
Incur Debt through Private
Activity Bonds
No N/A
Withhold Public Expenditures
in Hazard-Prone Areas
Unknown Unknown
State Funding Programs Yes Road Maintena nce and
Rehabilitation, Streetlight Conduit
Replacement, Intelligent
Transportation Systems, Traffic
Signal Controller Maintenance
Replacement and Upgrades, Future
Traffic Calming projects and
preventative maintenance on various
bridges received funding from SB1
and Gas Tax funding sources.

Development Impact Fees for
Homebuyers or Developers
No N/A
Public or Private Partnership
Funding Sources
Yes, State and Federal Yes - Mary Carson water tank
seismic retrofitting
Other Funding Sources No N/A
Attachment 3

Page 16 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 362 of 473 ends

Table 7:

Staffing Capabilities
Staffing Capability Have Capability? Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations?
Is staff trained on
natural hazards
and mitigation?
Chief Building Official  Yes
 Full T
ime
 Community
Development
Yes Yes
Parks and Recreation
Director
 No N/A N/A
Emergency Manager  Yes
 Full T
ime
 Office of Emergency
Services
Yes Yes
Community Planner  Yes
 Full Time
 Community
Development
Department
Yes Yes
Civil Engineer  Yes
 Full Time
 Public Works
Yes Yes
Engineers or
professionals
trained in building or
infrastructure
construction practices
Yes – CDD covers private
building structures only.

Yes-CDD Flood and
Earthquake
hazards-CDD
Planners or engineers
with knowledge of land
development and land
management practices
 Yes
 Full T
ime
 Community
Development and
Public Works
Yes, as appropriate Yes
Planners or engineers
with an understanding
of natural hazards
 Yes
 Full T
ime
 Community
Development and
Public Works
Yes Yes
Surveyors  No N/A N/A
GIS Coordinator or
personnel skilled or
trained in GIS
applications
 Yes
 Full Time
 ITD
No No
Attachment 3

Page 17 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 363 of 473 ends

Staffing Capability Have Capability? Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations?
Is staff trained on
natural hazards
and mitigation?
Public Works Director  Yes
 Full T
ime
 Public Works and
Parks
Yes Yes
Fire Chief  Yes
 Full T
ime
 Public Safety
Yes Yes
Environmental Director  Yes

Yes Yes
Staff with training in
benefit/cost analysis
 Unknown

Unknown Unknown
Scientist familiar with
natural hazards in local
area
 No -N/A -N/A

Table 8: Administrative and Technical Capabilities
Administrative or Technical
Capability
Have Capability? Has the capability been used to
assess or mitigate risk in the past? If
yes, what type of hazard event?
Maintenance programs to
reduce risk
Yes
Mutual aid agreements Yes DPS has t he ability to deploy as a single resource or as a crew when requests for
mutual aid are received.

Hazard data and information Yes The Offi ce of Emergency Services keeps records of extreme weather, pandemics,
and other emergencies on the City’s
share drive.

Hazus analysis or GIS
software
Yes Yes, dur ing emergency notifications,
mapping software has helped dispatch
and OES send out alerts (weather,
dangerous animals on the loose, active
threats).

Grant writing Yes Yes, the City received FEMA funds for the 2017 Pr
esident’s Day storm damage
and for COVID-19 emergency response
costs.

Attachment 3

Page 18 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 364 of 473 ends

Administrative or Technical
Capability
Have Capability? Has the capability been used to
assess or mitigate risk in the past? If
yes, what type of hazard event?
Does your jurisdiction have
any established warning
systems or services for
hazard events?
Yes AlertS CC alerts are sent directly to your
mobile device, landline, and or
email. Alerts for fire, earthquake, Heavy
rain, heavy winds, extreme
temperatures, crime, and instructions
during a disaster. Also, Sunnyvale uses
Nixle, which is a zip code-based, opt-in

service messaging platform. Rave
Mobile Safety is a mass notification
platform to communicate internal/work-
related emergency conditions to all City
staff (e.g., building closure, power
outages, criminal activity, Heavy rain,
heavy winds, extreme temperatures-
related issues). For creek and dam
related water emergencies, Valley Water
utilizes Blackboard, a mass notification
system for jurisdictions.

Table 9: National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance Topic Response
What department in your jurisdiction is
responsible for floodplain management?
Department of Community Development
Who acts as your jurisdiction’s floodplain
administrator?
Community Development Director delegated to
Building Official
Is the floodplain administrator or NFIP
Coordinator certified?
Yes
Is floodplain management an auxiliary
function in your jurisdiction?
No
What is the date of adoption of your flood
damage prevention ordinance?
Adopted November 1, 1994: Ordinance 2486-94.

Update will be adopted in October 2023.

Do floodplain development regulations meet
or exceed FEMA or state minimum
requirements? If regulations exceed
requirements, in what ways?
Yes
Attachment 3

Page 19 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 365 of 473 ends

Topic Response
How are the substantial
improvement/substantial damage provisions
implemented?
Both the Floodplain Administrator and Building
Offic
ial are authorized to make substantial
improvement and substantial damage
determinations in accordance with subsection

16.62.120(e) of Sunnyvale’s Municipal Code. The
Floodplain Administrator and Building Official are
responsible for coordinating together to determine
market value, compare cost of improvements or
repair to market value, making SD/SI
determinations, and notifying permit applicants
when their work constitutes SD/SI. The Floodplain
Administrator is responsible for reviewing all
permits. The Floodplain Administrator is
responsible for permanently keeping and making
available for public inspection all permits as it
relates to the administration of these regulations
and flood provisions of the building codes.

Provide an explanation of the permitting
process for development within the floodplain.

Flood Insurance Manual:
https://ww
w.fema.gov/flood-insurance-manual.

CRS Manual: https://www.fema.gov/media-
library/assets/documents/8768?id=2434
Does your floodplain management program
meet or exceed minimum requirements?
Yes
When did your jurisdiction enter the NFIP? May 15, 1978 Current Effective FIRM: May 18, 2009
Is your jurisdiction in good standing with the
NFIP?
Yes
Are the jurisdiction’s Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs) digital, paper, or both?
Digital
Explanation of NFIP administration services
within your jurisdiction.

Provide permits, site reviews, and mapping
services
Barriers to running an effective NFIP program
in your jurisdiction.

None
When was the most recent Community
Assistance Visit (CAV) or Community
Assistance Contact (CAC)?
March 12, 2015
Is a CAV or CAC scheduled or needed? Scheduled
Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding
NFIP compliance violations that need to be
addressed?
No
Do your flood hazard maps adequately
address the flood risk within your jurisdiction?
Yes
Does your floodplain management staff need
any assistance or training to support its
floodplain management program?
Yes
Does your jurisdiction participate in the
Community Rating System (CRS)?
Yes, Class 7
Attachment 3

Page 20 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 366 of 473 ends

Topic Response
How many structures are exposed to flood risk
within your jurisdiction?
 In 10% annual chance flood hazard area:
1,020
 I
n 1% annual chance flood hazard area: 1,475
 In 0.2% annual chance flood hazard area:
23,666

How many flood insurance policies are in
force in your jurisdiction?
 What is the insurance in force?
 What is the premium in force?
 1,057 policies in force
 $275,62
7,200 insurance in force
 $996,831 premium in force
Areas of flood risk with limited NFIP policy
coverage.

No
How many total loss claims have been filed in
your jurisdiction?
 How many claims were closed without
payment or are still open?
 What is the total amount of paid claims?
 How many claims were for substantial
damage?
 10 total loss claims have been filed
 5 claims closed without payment
 $68,655.19 total payments for losses
How NFIP compliance will be continued during
the next 5 years.

Provide permits, site reviews, and mapping
services
; public education and outreach

Table 10: Education and Outreach Capabilities
Education or Outreach
Capability Response
How does the
personnel, program, or
organization relate to
disaster resilience and
mitigation?
Could the personnel,
program, or
organization help
implement future
mitigation activities?
Does your jurisdiction have
a Public Information Officer
or Communications Office?
Yes The Publi c Information
Officer can directly
communicate hazard or
disaster related
information.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction have
personnel skilled or trained
in website development?
Yes OCM houses the
Communications Office
which manages the city’s
website.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction have
hazard mitigation
information available on
your website?
Yes The City website
includes disaster
preparedness and
emergency services
information.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction
utilize social media for
hazard mitigation education
and outreach?
Yes The City utilizes the
Facebook and Instagram
platforms.

Yes
Attachment 3

Page 21 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 367 of 473 ends

Education or Outreach
Capability Response
How does the
personnel, program, or
organization relate to
disaster resilience and
mitigation?
Could the personnel,
program, or
organization help
implement future
mitigation activities?
Does your jurisdiction have
any citizen boards or
commissions that address
issues related to hazard
mitigation?
Yes The City has various
boards and commissions
that address hazard
mitigation related issues;
Boards and
Commissions |
Sunnyvale, CA.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction have
any ongoing public
education or information
programs that could be
used to communicate
hazard-related information?
Yes The Depart ment of
Public Safety’s Office of
Emergency Services
provides training,
support, and services to
ensure the City is
prepared to respond to
and recover from the
effects of major
emergencies.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction have
local citizen groups or
nonprofit organizations
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, and/or
underserved populations?
Yes The Sunnyvale Office of
Emergency Services
offers a Community
Emergency Response
Team (CERT) Basic
Training class.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction have
natural disaster or safety
related school programs?
Yes Every school, private or
public, has their own
preplanned natural
disaster operational
plan.  This plan often
involves the ICS system.

These plans can be
found in their "safety
plan" that is signed off by
a Neighborhood
Resource Officer (NRO)
each year.

Yes
Does your jurisdiction have
public/private partnership
initiatives addressing
disaster-related issues
No N/A N/A

Attachment 3

Page 22 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 368 of 473 ends

Table 11: C
ommunity Classifications
Participating? Classification Date
Classified
Community Rating System Yes 7
Building Code Effectiveness Grading
Schedule
Yes 3
Insurance Services Office (ISO) Fire Rating Unknown - - National Weather Service StormReady
Program®
No N/A N/A
Firewise USA® Program No N/A N/A

Table 12: Development and Permitting Capabilities
Development or Permitting Capability Response
Does your jurisdiction issue development
permits?
 If no, who does? If yes, which department?
Yes, Community Development
Does your jurisdiction have the ability to track
permits by hazard area?
Yes. The City tracks flood zones.

Does your jurisdiction have a buildable lands
inventory?
No. With few exceptions, all private lands are
buildable.

Table 13: Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change
Adaptive Capacity Assessment Question Jurisdiction Rating Technical Capacity
Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts Medium
Comment: Most staff is aware of issues, but more could be done to provide information on specific impacts and how to address.

Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts Low Comment: Project specific impacts including greenhouse gas emissions as well as compliance with the City’s Climate Action Plan are evaluated on project-by-project basis during California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. If project does not meet the State allowances, mitigation measures are required but the City Council can still approve the project with “overriding considerations” if the project will result in significant Green House Gas (GHG) emissions beyond what can be mitigated. Sunnyvale does not currently have the resources/tools to conduct jurisdiction- level monitoring of climate change impacts.

Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities Low
Comment: Do not have this capacity.

Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory High
Attachment 3

Page 23 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 369 of 473 ends

Adaptive Capacity Assessment Question Jurisdiction Rating Comment: Sunnyvale has conducted GHG emissions inventories and plans to conduct them biennially per City’s Climate Action Plan.

Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts Medium
Comment: Project specific impacts including greenhouse gas emissions as well as compliance with the City’s Climate Action Plan are evaluated on project-by-project basis during California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. If project does not meet the State allowances mitigation measure are required but the City Council can still approve the project with “overriding considerations” if the project will result in significant GHG emissions beyond what can be mitigated.

Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks Medium Comment: City staff participate in several regional groups addressing climate risks including but not limited to Joint Venture Silicon Valley Public Sector Climate Protection Task Force, Santa Clara Valley Water District South Bay Shoreline Study, and County of Santa Clara Silicon Valley 2.0 Risk Assessment Tool. However, each of these forums tends to be more information sharing. South Bay lacks unified approach to adaptation planning and response. It seems there are multiple entities involved but not a single lead agency.

Implementation Capacity
Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes Low
Comment: Sunnyvale’s adopted Climate Action Plan and Adaptation Chapter. Action A.3.1 calls for City to “analyze and disclose possible impacts of climate change on the project or plan area with an emphasis on sea level rise.” Project specific impacts including greenhouse gas emissions as well as compliance with the City’s Climate Action Plan are evaluated on project-by-project basis during California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. If project does not meet the State allowances mitigation measure are required but the City Council can still approve the project with “overriding considerations” if the project will result in significant GHG emissions beyond what can be mitigated.

Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts Medium Comment: City Council adopted Sunnyvale’s Climate Action Plan in May 2014. City is currently implementing; however, while plan will meet the State’s near-term 2020 target, CAP does not meet 2030 or 2050 GHG reduction targets. City Council considering actions to update CAP to meeting long- term targets and formally adopt State targets as local goal.

Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts Low
Comment: Sunnyvale’s CAP includes a chapter on Adaptation; however, the identified actions are general and emphasize participation on regional groups. The City could benefit through the development of a City specific adaption plan; however, resources and capacity are limited.

Champions for climate action in local government departments Medium Comment: Most staff are generally aware of Climate Change issues, especially CDD, DPW, ESD involved in CAP and development projects. Staff could benefit from more information about specific climate impacts to Sunnyvale and by having more tools and resources on how to address adaption as a part of their work.

Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies High
Comment: Elected officials, Sustainability Commission, and community groups (SunnyvaleCool, Livable Sunnyvale, etc.) are actively engaged on climate issues and supportive of City action.

Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation Low Comment: City currently has no funding dedicated to climate change adaptation; any funding would have to come from the General Fund.

Attachment 3

Page 24 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 370 of 473 ends

Adaptive Capacity Assessment Question Jurisdiction Rating Local authority over sectors likely to be negative impacted Low Comment:

Public Capacity
Local residents’ knowledge of and understanding of climate risk Medium Comment: Small group of Sunnyvale resident community is aware and actively engaged; broader community is aware but not engaged.

Local residents’ support of adaptation efforts Low
Comment: Small group of Sunnyvale resident community is aware and actively engaged; broader community is aware but not engaged or interested in changing their behaviors or taking actions on climate issues.

Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts Medium Comment: Not a lot of information on specific adaptation actions a resident can take; broader community may be aware but not engaged or interested in changing their behaviors or taking actions on climate issues.

Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts Medium Comment: Most large companies in area are engaged and take precautions to adapt/mitigate their own effects on climate. Mid-size and small companies may not have the resources to address or engage on the issue.

Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comment: North Sunnyvale borders the South San Francisco Bay and its wetland and marsh habitats.

This area is included in the South San Francisco Shoreline Study. The goal of the Shoreline Study is to protect the parts of Santa Clara County’s shoreline with the highest potential damages and threats to human health and safety from flooding, using a combination of flood protection levees and wetlands.

This approach using natural infrastructure would provide increased flood protection and restored Bay habitats, as well as a flood protection system that can evolve in the future. The Shoreline Study is coordinated with another project in the area, the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project, which seeks to restore historic wetlands on 15,100 acres of former salt ponds in the South Bay. This study is moving forward in phases and the first phase selected is the Alviso Reach which does not include Sunnyvale.

1.4.3. Opportunities to Expand Upon and Improve Existing Capabilities The hazard mitigation planning process presented the opportunity for the community to discuss and evaluate their current capabilities however, building mitigation capabilities is an ongoing process. New capabilities can be added which will support mitigation. Current capabilities can also be enhanced to actively support mitigation and reduce risk. Significant efforts have been made to increase the capabilities of jurisdictions across the OA. By participating in this plan update, each community is reinforcing their support for mitigation and understanding of the capabilities they need to successfully implement mitigation measures. Actions that can expand and improve existing authorities, plans, policies, and resources for mitigation include:
 Developing a Climate Action Plan which incorporates hazard data and actions to adapt to a changing climate.
 Budgeting and passing policies and procedures for mitigation actions.  Adopting and implementing stricter mitigation regulations.  Approving the training of staff for mitigation activities.

Attachment 3

Page 25 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 371 of 473 ends

 Approving mitigation updates to existing plans as new needs are recognized.  Continuing to update plans as necessary to ensure they are current and reflect the needs of the community or special district.
 Further developing warning systems and messaging.
 Creating and implementing additional public education and outreach offerings and increasing the volume of translated materials.
 Ensuring grant opportunities are capitalized upon to meet mitigation goals.

Each type of the four FEMA-identified capabilities were evaluated, in addition to OA-priority capabilities like adaptive capacity. Gaps and limitations, if any, are discussed in the tables above. Additional jurisdiction-specific opportunities to expand on and improve capabilities for reducing risk include:
 Continue to participate in the Community Rating System and identify additional actions to both reduce flood risk and reduce flood insurance premiums.
 Support public outreach and engagement on hazard mitigation, climate risks, and climate adaptation.
 Expand engineering capabilities to support public infrastructure mitigation measures.  Update the city’s Climate Action Plan including hazard data and actions to adapt to a changing climate.
 Support staff in increasing their familiarity with anticipated natural hazard and climate impacts, particularly local impacts and risk reduction related tools and resources.  Identify and utilize additional federal or local funding sources for hazard mitigation. Since the last update, multiple new grant programs that support mitigation measures have been established.

FEMA’s annual BRIC grant program funds a variety of mitigation actions, including infrastructure projects, nature-based solutions, climate adaptation, hazard resistant building codes, and projects benefitting disadvantaged communities.


1.5. Integration with Other Planning Initiatives
This section describes the process for integrating the hazard mitigation plan into local planning mechanisms.

1.5.1. Existing Integration
The following plans and programs currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the 2017 hazard mitigation plan:
 Sunnyvale General Plan: The General Plan is aligned with and includes references to the HMP and will be amended with the new plan update.
 Building and Zoning Codes: Current building codes are and will be incorporated to reflect mitigation priorities per city process.
 Public Outreach Programs: Programs include direct outreach to property owners of earthquake vulnerable buildings and general public education through the City website and utility mailers.  Government Functions: Day-to-day government functions ensure building permit applicants comply with the hazard mitigation requirements.

Attachment 3

Page 26 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 372 of 473 ends

 Stormwater Management Plans and Procedures: Planning applications require a preliminary review of stormwater management plans.

These plans and programs will continue to integrate the 2023 hazard mitigation plans and goals and will be updated to match new information as each of these plans and programs are updated.

1.5.2. Opportunities for Future Integration
The following plans and programs do not currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan, but provide an opportunity for future integration:
• Capital Improvement Plan: There is an opportunity to include mitigation actions, projects, and priorities in the next Capital Improvement Plan. The plan is updated every 2 years and is expected to be completed in 2024.
• Climate Action Plan: The city is considering updating the CAP, or actions within the CAP.

Adaptation actions that relate to the impacts of climate change and associated hazards as described in this plan’s risk assessment could be incorporated if and when this update occurs.

The Draft Game Plan 2028 will go before city council in March 2024. • Urban Water Management Plan: This plan is updated every 5 years. There will be the opportunity to incorporate additional hazard data, GIS products, goals, and actions into this plan next update. This plan was last published in 2020 and anticipated to be renewed in 2025.

The Department of Community Development houses the Planning responsibilities for the City of Sunnyvale. The Director of Community Development, as well as the city’s Senior Planner, participated in this plan update. They, along with the city’s other team members, will be responsible for disseminating information on this plan and ensuring it’s integration into other planning mechanisms moving forward.

1.6. Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History Table 210 lists all past occurrences of natural hazards within the jurisdiction.

Table 14: Natural Hazard Events
Type of Event FEMA Disaster #
(if applicable)
Date Preliminary
Damage Assessment
COVID-19 Pandemic DR-4482 3/22/2020 Unknown

1.7. Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities
 Hazus earthquake models show potential structural losses of $2.2 billion for a 100- year probabilistic earthquake and $8 billion for a 500-year probabilistic earthquake. Of the fault-based scenarios, the highest loss-estimates for Sunnyvale were from the San Andreas fault, with an estimated $2 billion in damage, which is 6.17% of the total replacement value. Although specific population impact counts are not available, it can be anticipated that numerous human impacts from injuries, disruption to basic services, and people seeking shelter from being displace from homes will occur. Sunnyvale has mostly moderate liquefaction potential, which contributes to the effects of ground shaking.
 Sunnyvale is less at risk to wildfire than many cities in the OA. 366 structures and 1,037 people are located in wildfire hazard areas. These structures are valued at $15 million, or 0.53% of the total replacement value. Sunnyvale is primarily urban, so wildfire risk is primarily concentrated in Attachment 3

Page 27 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 373 of 473 ends

undeveloped
open space near the bay. Wildfire is expected to increase as climate change contributes to increasingly dry and hot conditions. Vegetation management in open space can reduce wildfire risk.
 Sunnyvale has the 4th highest number of people within potential dam inundation areas. 30,143 people are at risk. $6.3 billion in structures are exposed to inundation from dam failure of the Stevens Creek Dam. Because dam ownership and maintenance are the dam owner’s responsibility, public education of dam risk and ability to evacuate safely are important methods for risk reduction in the city.
 Hazus was used to generate loss estimates from riverine flooding. 13.969 people (9% of total) are within the 1% annual flood hazard zone, and 21,284 (13.75%) are within the 0.2% annual flood hazard zone. Both are the 4th highest population percentage exposed to flood in the OA. Damage estimates for a 1% flood hazard are $833 million, or 9.02% of the total replacement value. $1.36 billion in losses are estimated for a 0.2% flood, which is 4.64% of the total value. Levees help reduce flood risk to a significant portion of Sunnyvale. Proper maintenance and monitoring of levees is needed to maintain these benefits. Areas of high social vulnerability do overlap with potential flooding areas.
 Landslide potential is of less concern for Sunnyvale than many cities in the OA. 611 people (0.39% of the total population) are in potential landslide areas. Structures potentially at risk to landslide have a total value of $200 million. Landslide potential in Sunnyvale is most common along highway interchanges, which will likely be smaller slope failures possibly related to heavy rain events or earthquake. Slopes along creeks may also experience erosion and failure.  It is anticipated that the impacts of drought will be consistent across the OA. Drought impacts make vegetation more vulnerable to disease and wildfire. Extended drought may necessitate limits on landscape irrigation or higher costs for irrigation, which can have economic impacts.

Although agriculture is not a primary economic sector in the OA, drought can have severe negative impacts on growth of crops and gardens. Droughts are expected to become more common and possibly of greater intensity or longevity due to ongoing climate change.

Conservation and other water management efforts are needed to help maintain an adequate water supply. Water use restrictions will likely have greater negative impact on low-income households and other disadvantaged communities.
 Impacts from inclement weather such as heavy rain, hail, and wind are likely to be very similar across the OA. Individual events may impact only limited areas, but the entire OA is at risk to similar conditions. Heavy rain may cause localized flooding on roadways and low -lying areas which may disrupt transportation for the general public and can also delay emergency response.

Heavy rain can also have cascading impacts on landslide potential or strain the capacity of dams.

High winds can disrupt power, communication and other services and cause damage to structures. Trees and branches may fall during high winds and damage aboveground power lines.

High winds can also contribute to wildfire risk. Extreme heat or cold can be harmful to health, particularly for those with inadequate housing with adequate warming and cooling systems, which may be a greater risk for those in older housing or multi-unit housing or those with less income for higher energy costs associated with cooling. Climate change will likely increase the number of extreme heat events in the future, and events may extend over a longer number of days. This can contribute to increased health risks for older populations, outdoor workers, and unhoused populations. Extended extreme heat events can also strain power systems and contribute to rolling blackouts. Climate change may also change precipitation patterns and heavy rain or wind events.
 Extreme cold events are infrequent and expected to occur less in the future due to warming trends associated with climate change. Impacts to critical facilities, infrastructure, and other assets are minimal. Primary concerns associated with extreme cold are potential health impacts to vulnerable populations such as unhoused individuals, outdoor workers, or individuals without adequate heat in their homes. The very young and very old have more difficulty maintaining body temperature and may be more likely to be adversely affected by extremes in cold and heat.

Attachment 3

Page 28 of 50 ends

DRAFT
Attachment 1

Page 374 of 473 ends

 Sunnyvale has no assets directly at risk to tsunami. Tsunami risk is not profiled in this annex.

Repetitive loss records are as follows:
 Number of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-identified Repetitive-Loss Properties (RL): 0
 Number of FEMA-identified Severe-Repetitive-Loss (SRL) Properties: 0  Number of RL Properties or SRL Properties that have been mitigated: 0

Other noted vulnerabilities include:
 Ten URM buildings remain in Sunnyvale, all of which are located in the South Murphy Avenue historical area, which is exempt from the State URM legislation; none of these URMs are residential structures.
 A major industrial zone in the City is in an area considered to be more vulnerable to damage resulting from an earthquake. This land is at or below sea level and is protected by a system of dikes and levees.
 The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission system needs to be upgraded and designed to current seismic standards so that it is able to deliver water even in the event of a major earthquake.
 Minor roadway and pedestrian crossing flooding during heavy rain events occurs at Fair Oaks/Tasman, Evelyn/Hendy, and Fair Oaks/California. Flooding may cause unsafe conditions for vehicle and pedestrian access and cause damage to cars. Flooding may also r estrict access to nearby Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and Caltrain stations. Some residents in these areas may not have access to private transportation and, therefore, likely use public transit to commute to work or reach essential services.
 Private property, utility easements, and public infrastructure along the east areas of Stevens Creek. Areas along Robin Way, Mockingbird Lane, W. Cardinal Drive, and W. Knickerbocker Drive with steep slopes have an increased risk of damage from landslides. Extra maintenance efforts or capital improvement projects may need to occur to ensure drainage systems remain adequate and function properly.

1.7.1. Social Vulnerability
As seen in Figure 136, Sunnyvale has a complex mix of low to moderately high social vulnerability. This indicates a variety of social characteristics that may make recovery from a disaster more difficult for some residents. More resources may be needed to address the specific needs of individuals in these areas.

The Social Vulnerability Index shows that some census tracts in the city have as high as 21% of the population below the 150% poverty estimate and 32% in cost-burdened occupied housing units with an income of less than $75,000 (more than 30% of income spent on housing). In the central portion of the city, as much as 46 % of housing is in multi-unit structures of 10 or more units. Those in multi-unit housing are often more likely to be displaced following a disaster but may also have fewer financial resources to seek alternate housing.

U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts indicate that 59% of Sunnyvale’s population speaks a language other than English at home, 49.6% of the population is of Asian origin, and 49.4% of the population is foreign born. These are important considerations in public education outreach efforts to inform residents of hazard risks.

Heavy rain, wind, extreme heat or cold, and drought can occur throughout the city, so all vulnerable populations could potentially experience greater impacts from those hazards. Earthquake , liquefaction, Attachment 3

Page 29 of 50 ends

Sunnyvale City CouncilJune 16, 2026

Sunnyvale City Council
June 16, 2026