HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.14.2015 WB Agenda Packet Regular MtgCity of Bakersfield
Water Board
Regular Meeting of
January 14, 2015
Sherman Peak to Farwell
Water Resources
File Packet
WATER BOARD
Harold Hanson, Chair
Bob Smith
Terry Maxwell
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WATER BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - 2:00 p.m.
Water Resources Building Conference Room
1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the Special Meeting of December 3, 2014 for approval - For Board
Review and Action
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
5. REPORTS
A. History and Overview of City of Bakersfield's Domestic /Agriculture Water
Supply - For Board Information
B. Kern River & Isabella Reservoir Operations Report - For Board Information
C. Update on Water Usage in the City's Domestic Water Service Area for
November 2014 - For Board Information
D. Report Regarding Enhanced Water Conservation Plan - For Board
Information
6. HEARINGS
7. DEFERRED BUSINESS
I;pr
0
B
A
K
E
R
S
F
I E
L
D
WATER BOARD
Harold Hanson, Chair
Bob Smith
Terry Maxwell
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WATER BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - 2:00 p.m.
Water Resources Building Conference Room
1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the Special Meeting of December 3, 2014 for approval - For Board
Review and Action
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
5. REPORTS
A. History and Overview of City of Bakersfield's Domestic /Agriculture Water
Supply - For Board Information
B. Kern River & Isabella Reservoir Operations Report - For Board Information
C. Update on Water Usage in the City's Domestic Water Service Area for
November 2014 - For Board Information
D. Report Regarding Enhanced Water Conservation Plan - For Board
Information
6. HEARINGS
7. DEFERRED BUSINESS
Water Board Agenda
January 14, 2015
Page 2
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Reimbursement Agreement Between City of Bakersfield and North Kern Water
Storage District for Weather Modification Program for a not to exceed amount
of $53,776.50- for Board Review and Action
9. KERN RIVER LEVEE DISTRICT
10. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Approval of Proposed 2015 Water Board Meeting Calendar - for Board
Review and Action
11. WATER BOARD STATEMENTS
12. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation
Closed Session pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2),(e)(1)
(One Matter)
13. CLOSED SESSION ACTION
14. ADJOURNMENT
ART CHIANELLO, P.E.
Water Resources Manager
POSTED: January 9, 2015
BAKE
O�ycO &POR�f��s�f
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
IF WATER BOARD
cALO ��
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Minutes
ITEM: 3. A.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT
Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member
Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager
January 9, 2015
APPROVED
�o
DEPARTMENT HEAD `—
Approval of the Minutes of the Special Water Board Meeting of December 3, 2014
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Minutes of the Special Water Board Meeting of December 3,
2014
BACKGROUND:
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
NOTICE
Notice is given that a Special Meeting of the City of Bakersfield Water Board
will be held Wednesday, December 3, 2014 at 2:15 p.m. in the Water Resources
Building Conference Room, at 1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311.
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WATER BOARD
SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, December 3, 2014 - 2:15 p.m.
Water Resources Building Conference Room
1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 2:15 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chairman Hanson, Vice -Chair Johnson, Member Smith
Absent: None
3. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 1, 2014 for approval.
Motion by Johnson to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October
1, 2014. APPROVED ALL AYES
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
A. Ted Page, Kern County Water Agency, spoke regarding City of Bakersfield
and Kern County Water Agency resolved and unresolved issues.
Art Chianello, stated the City and Kern County Water Agency have met and
will continue to meet to discuss these issues.
B. Gene Lundquist, Director of Kern County Water Agency, stated They
appreciate the meeting in October, two of the four issues have been resolved
and would like to see continued discussions and resolutions of the issues.
�r_
oe
/0-10
0
//0
B A
K
E
R
S
F
I E
L
D
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
NOTICE
Notice is given that a Special Meeting of the City of Bakersfield Water Board
will be held Wednesday, December 3, 2014 at 2:15 p.m. in the Water Resources
Building Conference Room, at 1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311.
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WATER BOARD
SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, December 3, 2014 - 2:15 p.m.
Water Resources Building Conference Room
1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA 93311
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Hanson called the meeting to order at 2:15 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chairman Hanson, Vice -Chair Johnson, Member Smith
Absent: None
3. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 1, 2014 for approval.
Motion by Johnson to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October
1, 2014. APPROVED ALL AYES
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
A. Ted Page, Kern County Water Agency, spoke regarding City of Bakersfield
and Kern County Water Agency resolved and unresolved issues.
Art Chianello, stated the City and Kern County Water Agency have met and
will continue to meet to discuss these issues.
B. Gene Lundquist, Director of Kern County Water Agency, stated They
appreciate the meeting in October, two of the four issues have been resolved
and would like to see continued discussions and resolutions of the issues.
Bakersfield, California, December 3, 2014 - Page 2
5. KERN RIVER LEVEE DISTRICT
None
6. REPORTS
A. Kern River & Isabella Reservoir Operations Report
John Ryan, Hydrographic Supervisor, gave a brief update and stated current
storage is at 45,181 acre feet; the recent storm produced an average of one
inch of water content in the basins; and it looks promising for the future. Board
information, no action taken.
B. Oral Report regarding Comparison of Connection Fees between City and
California Water Service Company for a Specific Use
Maurice Randall, Business Manager, gave a brief report and reviewed the
estimated costs to install a domestic and fire protection service water
facilities at 2201 South Union to California Water's main line. The costs
options range from $99,252 to $101,517. Board information, no action
taken.
C. Oral Report regarding Potential Tiered Water Rates
Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager, gave a brief report regarding tiered
water rates and discussed issues that would need to be considered; costs of
delivering water to the property; and steps necessary to implement tiered
water rates.
Mr. Chianello also stated the current City water conservation structure meets
the conservation pricing criteria. The City is on schedule to meet the required
20 percent reduction by 2020. Additional water conservation efforts continue
to be encouraged. Board information.
Staff was directed to report back with a proposed tiered rates model, analysis
of positive and negative impacts on residential and business customers;
analysis of tiered rates per capita, and successful analysis of other cities that
have implemented tiered rates.
Board Member Hanson stated he will be making a referral at the next Council
meeting directing staff to provide a report regarding the possibility of
implementing mandatory water conservation utilizing odd /even watering
days and a report to the full Council.
D. Report regarding Drought Water Usage
Jason Meadors, Water Resources Director, gave a brief report and stated the
State now requires a report on water usage on the 15th of each month. The
September and October, 2014 monitoring report were presented. The actual
water usage reduction per meter was 9.78% in June; 1.04% in July; and 12.18%
Bakersfield, California, December 3, 2014 - Page 3
6. REPORTS continued
D. in August. These reductions are calculated on a per capita water usage
basis. September was approximately 277 gallons per person per day, with a
6.4% reduction. October was approximately 221 gallons per person per day,
with an 8.3 reduction. The reductions are not quite at 20 percent, but all
water conservation helps. Board information, no action taken.
E. Oral Report regarding City and California Water Service Company proposed
water conservation program for even /odd watering days - For Board
Information
Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager, gave a brief update and stated
California Water is interested in partnering with the City of Bakersfield to start a
voluntary even /odd watering conservation program. East Niles Water District
also expressed interest in participating in the voluntary conservation program
in spring. Staff will talk with California Water in more detail regarding the
possibility of implementing the program in 2015 as early as possible.
7. HEARINGS
8. DEFERRED BUSINESS
9. NEW BUSINESS
10. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Proposed Water Board meeting on January 14, 2015 - For Board Review and
Action
Motion by Smith to approve the proposed Water Board meeting date on
January 14, 2015. Approved, Johnson abstained
11. WATER BOARD STATEMENTS
Smith requested staff provide an update report regarding Kern County WaterAgency
issues.
Smith requested staff provide a report regarding review of landscape standards to
include sprinkler systems in new development within the City to install more efficient
sprinkler systems for private residences.
Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager, recognized Russell Johnson and thanked
him for his assistance on the Water Board during his tenure from January 2011 to
December 2014.
Harold Hanson expressed his appreciation to Russell Johnson and thanked him for his
actions on the Water Board.
Russell Johnson thanked Art Chianello and Water Resources staff.
Bakersfield, California, December 3, 2014 - Page 4
12. CLOSED SESSION
A. 1, Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation
Closed Session pursuant to Government Code section
54956,9(d)(2),(e)(1)
(One matter)
Chairman Hanson recessed the meeting to Closed Session at 3:18 p.m.
Chairman Hanson adjourned Closed Session at 3:55 p.m.
13. CLOSED SESSION ACTION
City Attorney Gennaro stated staff was given direction on Closed Session Item A,
14, ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Hanson adjourned the meeting at 3:57 p,m.
Harold Hanson, Chairman
City of Bakersfield Water Board
Bobbie Zaragoza, CIVIC
Secretary, City of Bakersfield Water Board
BAKE[[�
O� aCOMOR�T�'r�1
r
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
cgzlaP WATER BOARD
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Reports
ITEM: 5.A.
TO: Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member
FROM: Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD
DATE: January 8, 2015
APPROVED
C�
SUBJECT: History and Overview of City of Bakersfield's Domestic /Agriculture Water Supply
RECOMMENDATION: For Board Information
BACKGROUND: The oral report and backup information provides an overview of the City of
Bakersfield's unique acquisition in 1976 of Kern River water rights and facilities, and a domestic
water system, and how this purchase was funded.
The Water Resources Department today reflects the agriculture and domestic responsibilities of
the City of Bakersfield, which includes flow and diversion operations of the Kern River as well as
the responsibilities of operating and maintaining a domestic water system.
STATE?4ENT.OF THOMAS M. STETSON
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, WATER DEPARTMENT SEMINAR
February S, 1981
EXCERPT
PAGES 5 -8
Ci't of Bake'rs'field' 'Acqui'sit'i'on
Early in 1966 I was retained by the City of Bakers-
field to prepare a study and report on alternative sources of
water supply for the Bakersfield urban area. There were four
principal sources of water supply then considered available to
the Bakersfield area. These were: (1) local ground water,
(2) Kern River water, (3) Central Valley Project water through
the proposed East Side Division, and (4) the State lVater Project
through a contract with the Kern County Water Agency.
The continued reliance on the ground water basin as a
sole source of supply, although an economical source, was
fraught with uncertainties as to its dependability and future
quality due to the large overdraft on the ground water basin.
A dependable supply of water was not available from the Central
Valley Project. The proposed East Side Division had not been
authorized. Its timing of construction was very uncertain, and
now it appears that the East Side Division may never be constructed.
Kern River water was recognized as a source that may
be available and could possibly be obtained through exchanges
for State Project water. State Project water was available and
was considered to be of suitable quality and dependability but
it was the most expensive source of supply. It was considered
that obtaining a supply of State water and then exchanging that
supply with Kern River interests for their Kern River water
would be a feasible method of obtaining a long -term water supply
for the Bakersfield area.
_S_
City representatives then attempted to negotiate various
means of acquiring Kern River water for use in the urban Bakers-
field area, mainly through exchanges for State Project water.
These efforts did not succeed. After a number of years of such
negotiations the City decided to institute legal proceedings to
acquire Kern River water for the long -term needs of the Bakers-
field area.
The Kern County Land Company, formed by James Haggins,
W. B. Carr and Lloyd Tevis in 189 °0,, was acquired by Tenneco in
1967. On September 29, 1970 the City of Bakersfield and Cali-
fornia Water Service Company jointly initiated litigation claim-
ing an interest in Kern River water against various subsidiaries
of Tenneco West, Inc., and other parties with interests in the
Kern River. Also on that same date the City of Bakersfield
initiated an action to condemn various subsidiaries of Tenneco
and other Kern River interests seeking to obtain the first 77,000
acre -feet per year of water and water rights of the Kern River,
(The quantity of 77,000 acre -feet is the amount of water pro-
jected by the Kern County Water Agency to be required to meet
the future water needs of the urban Bakersfield area through
the year 2000.)
In 1973, as a result of extensive negotiations with
Tenneco, the City agreed to a settlement of this matter whereby
the City would acquire all of Tenneco's water rights and water
properties at a cost of $17.9 million. As a result of this the
City now owns an average annual entitlement to more than 125,000
acre -feet of Kern River water plus two utilities which were
-6-
subsidiaries of Tenneco West. One of thes
Kern River Canal and Irrigating Company on
of the river immediately north of the City
is an irrigation water utility which still
water and owns a right to more than 101000
on the average from the Kern River.
e utilities is the
the northerly side
of Bakersfield. That
serves irrigation
acre -feet per year
The City also acquired the Kern Island Water. Company,
another water utility, which included both a domestic ;cater
system and a large irrigation utility system. The irrigation
utility system of Kern Island Water Company was sold by the City
to the Kern Delta Water District at a price of $3.5 million.
However, the City retained the Ashe Water system, which was the
domestic water utility of the Kern Island Water Company, and
continues to own that system which is now operated under a
management agreement by the California Water Service Company.
All in all the City acquired approximately one -third
of the water rights of the first point interests of the Kern
River and all of Tenneco's water transmission facilities and
storage rights in Lake Isabella at a net cost of about $14.25
million.
The properties acquired from Tenneco by the City of
Bakersfield included the following:
1. Kern Island Canal Company, including the Ashe Domestic
Water System
2. Kern River Canal and Irrigating Company
3. Kern River Conduit, which is a concrete - -lined canal
extending from Bakersfield downstream on the southerly
side of the Kern River to the vicinity of Interstate
Highway 5.
-7-
4. Water rights . of the utility canal companies listed as
items 1 and 2 above, water rights of the Kern River
Conduit, and other water rights owned by Tenneco
identified as Castro, Wilson, Calloway and Railroad.
S. Storage rights in Lake Isabella, to the extent of 34%
of all conservation storage 'space in that reservoir.
6. 22800 acres of land astride the Kern River between the
extention of Renfro Road and Interstate Highway 5 and
most of the riverbed from Allen Road upstream to
approximately Manor Street in Bakersfield.
As previously mentioned, the City sold to the Kern
Delta Water District the Kern Island Water Company irrigation
utilities, including their water rights, and retained only the
Ashe Domestic System of that company. This was the result of a
lawsuit filed by the Kern Delta Water District which, unless
settled, would have probably prevented the acquisition of the
Tenneco properties by the City of Bakersfield. The City also
quitclaimed the ownership of the Beardsley Canal and Calloway
Canal, acquired from Tenneco, to the North Kern Water Storage
District at a price of $150,000. The City retained its rights
to use both of those canals to the extent of the same capacities
that it owned prior to the quitclaim to North Kern. The-rights
to use of capacities of those canals were the subject of previous
agreements between the Tenneco interests and North Kern and the
change of ownership simply meant that as properties owned by
North Kern they would not be subject to future property tax
assessments.
-8-
u
i M
47-11
W,
•
I l
0
l a
lrM
0
C
a�
U
cz
t�
M,
Loll
1 "4%
0
c
c
M
r
r
O
N
w
r
N
N
O)
M
11
0
r
O
N Q
O
U
cv
r
5
O
ca
75
O
CL
U
H
w
aD
v
L
0
Q
(1)
(D
L
(1)
f+
N r�
O
CC�L
Cl)
h-
4)
4-9
U
W
E
a
L
L
L
a
L
T�
0 .0
L M
L
i
O
U
ca
O
L
.a:
E
cn
N
O
L
Q
0
y
V
t
Q
L
O
L
T�
i
L
O
IL
cc
0
V
c�
C
G
i
CL
Q
CA
y
V
y
v
L
L
O
L
LM
cc
c
Y+
y
Q
C.
3
M�
W
N r�
O
CC�L
Cl)
h-
4)
4-9
U
W
E
a
L
L
L
a
L
T�
0 .0
L M
L
i
O
U
ca
O
L
.a:
E
cn
N
O
L
Q
0
y
V
t
Q
L
O
L
T�
i
��BAKE
HCOFPORATt RSc�
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
IF WATER BOARD
O �yl
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Reports
ITEM: 5. B.
TO: Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member APPROVED
FROM: Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD aC
DATE: January 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Kern River & Isabella Reservoir Operations Report
RECOMMENDATION: For Board Information
BACKGROUND: Report by John Ryan Hydrographic Supervisor on current Kern River flow and
Isabella storage conditions.
I.L
Q
W
M
W
Q
L6'1
r
O
N
i
d'
r
O
N
(siseyIUOJed UI UOIJBA913) JJOV UI 3()VIdOIS
0-
0
o
C)
O--
O ai
O-
O ti
o--
O w
o-
O ti
o--
O li
o-
O ii
O-
O S
o-
O L
o"
O Ir
-
O li
O N
O
O A
O
O
O
O
M
O
O g
0$
O p
O
LO
O 6
O
O
LO
O
O
Lo
O.
0,
O
L N
O
0O
Lo $
0 - O
R
LO °
to
U-)
Lo
�
C�
co v
v
(�
�
y
O 0 O O O O O O O O O
O N coo ON co LO It M N
T
dN0O3S Had Aid oieno
Lo
T
1
a
to
T
1
6)
Q
r
LO
r
1
C
Ln
T
2
Lo
T
Q.
Q
cu
l(7
T
1
LL
LO
1
c
co
U
0
d'
T
O
Z
T
i11
U
rrk
�.
I
III
3j
0
LL
E c
L (�
o
_
L
M
c6
cv
H
�
I
LL
I
I
MM�
O 0 O O O O O O O O O
O N coo ON co LO It M N
T
dN0O3S Had Aid oieno
Lo
T
1
a
to
T
1
6)
Q
r
LO
r
1
C
Ln
T
2
Lo
T
Q.
Q
cu
l(7
T
1
LL
LO
1
c
co
U
0
d'
T
O
Z
T
i11
U
rrk
�.
Q
J
V
Q
Q
IL
Z
Z
co
W
ix
LU
z
Ir
LU
W
Z_ ,n
CC o
ON
W co
U) c
ca
0
W
O O O O O O O O
uOj Cm C N N
(sayoul);ua}u03 Jejum
O O O
O LO O
T
Q
Q
ci
G uj
Z
W
c Q
O co Lu
N U
:3N �
O
O W
cc
7 cc
E ti
� Q
V
Q Q
CZ J
c� LI,�
C EL
co 3 U)
C �C
N m
U-
a�
U
E
U
N
0
E
N
O
co
P7
N¢
� 0
p
Q
____ ___
____ ___
---------
- ______
M
T
O Q
N
N o
N N
- "--------
-----
--------------------
_______
---------------
____- -
-------
-----------------
- - - - --
---- - - -
- -- --
------------
---------
---------
- - --
� Q
N N
R
O �
N
T
O
0
O
------------------------------------------------------------
_
---------
-
O O O O O O O O
uOj Cm C N N
(sayoul);ua}u03 Jejum
O O O
O LO O
T
Q
Q
ci
G uj
Z
W
c Q
O co Lu
N U
:3N �
O
O W
cc
7 cc
E ti
� Q
V
Q Q
CZ J
c� LI,�
C EL
co 3 U)
C �C
N m
U-
a�
U
E
U
N
0
E
N
O
Q�BAKE
�ppRPRRAT��S�
U � O
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
cALIF0`` WATER BOARD
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Reports
ITEM: 5.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT
Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member
Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager
January 8, 2015
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD 6� 7 C
Update on Water Usage in the City's Domestic Water Service Area for November
2014.
RECOMMENDATION: For Board information.
BACKGROUND: The emergency drought regulations implemented by the Governor
require the City to report water usage to the State by the 15th of each month. The City
began reporting monthly water usage for its domestic water service area in June 2014.
From November 2013 to November 2014 the City added 1,044 new residential
connections to domestic water service area.
In November 2014, the City reported to the State a total water production of 1,357,576
hundred cubic feet (CCF). In November 2013 the total water production was 1,687,363
CCF, for a reduction of 329,787 CCF in 2014. This equates to a reduction of 19.5% in
total water usage.
Based on estimated populations of 140,644 in November 2014 and 137,000 in November
2013, and considering a residential use percentage of 74.2% in 2014 and 74.6% in 2013,
the City reduced its residential gallons per capita per day (R -GPCD) to 179 in November
2014, which is down from 229 in November 2013. This equates to an R -GPCD reduction
of 21.8 %.
To summarize, total water production from November 2013 to November 2014 was
reduced by 19.5 %. Considering population growth, there was a 21.8% reduction in
residential water usage in the same time period.
Drinking Water Information Clearinghouse (DRINC)
Monitoring Report Calculations
Month: November
Year: 2014
No. of Days in Month: 30
November November
2014 2013
Total Potable Water Production (CCF): 1,357,576 1,687,363
Residential Use Percentage: 74.2% 74.6%
Estimated Population: 140,644 137,000
R -GPCD: 179 229
R -GPCD Increase /Reduction( -): -21,89,
Input Used to Calculate Residential Use Percentage:
November November
2014 2013
Single Family Residential (SFR) Water Use -CBK01 (CCF): 952,254 1,192,344
Multi - Family Residential (MFR) Usage -CBK15 (CCF): 54,426 65,604
Total Residential Usage (CCF): 1,006,680 1,257,948
Input Used to Calculate Estimated Population:
2010 Census Population: 130,600
2010 Active Residential Connections: 37,428
2010 Baseline R -GPCD: 3.49
November
November
2014
2013
SFR Metered Connections- CBK01:
39,912
38,868
MFR Metered Connections- CBK15:
387
387
Total Residential Connections:
40,299
39,255
New Residential Connections: 1,044
Art Chianello
From: SWRCB Office Research, Planning & Performance <drinc @waterboards.ca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 11:04 AM
To: Art Chianello
Subject: Monitoring Report Acknowledgement for 1114
Hello Art Chianello,
Thank you for your Monitoring Report. Below is the information you have submitted for the month of 1114:
Reporter
Art Chianello
Urban Water
Bakersfield City of
Supplier
Stage /Mandatory
3 Yes
Reporting Month
1114
Total Potable Water
1357576 CCF
Production
Last Year's
1687363 CCF
Monthly Production
Residential Use
74.2%
Percentage
Non - revenue Water
CCF
November 2013 had a population of
137000. November 2013 residential
Qualification
use percentage was 74.6% November
2013 R -GPCD was 229.
Population
140644
R -GPCD
179
Enforcement
Actions
Implementation
Recycled Water
Office of Research, Planning & Performance
mater Boards.
P0PUL4 -1 1�,,A
R..
NOV 2DO
i 0h�`
17
R -GrPCD
N DV °2- 01b
ccl
IZ EDu L-r! o N
OFBAKER
0CDRPDR� }Fd •v
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
IF WATER BOARD
�9L0 �
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Reports
ITEM: 5.D.
TO: Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member APPROVED
FROM: Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD �C-
DATE: January 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Report Regarding Enhanced Water Conservation Plan
RECOMMENDATION: For Board Information
BACKGROUND: At the Water Board meeting of December 3, 2014, City staff presented a report
regarding a proposed water conservation program for even /odd day outdoor irrigation
watering. Urban water purveyors, California Water Service Company and East Niles Community
Services District expressed interest in partnering in an urban water conservation program.
Since that meeting staff has had several discussions with Cal Water's conservation experts and
East Niles to discuss details of a conservation program. The goal of the outdoor water
conservation program is to achieve long -term reduction patterns that are based on best
practices for efficient outdoor irrigation. Research suggests that mandatory even /odd watering
days, while having near term effects on water usage reduction, may lead to usage inefficiency
and thus undermines conservation goals.
An enhanced water conservation plan is recommended that will incorporate multiple facets of
water conservation education. Water conservation pamphlets will be made available at the
purveyors lobbies, and as water bill inserts. Water conservation information will be posted on the
purveyors' websites. Information regarding the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)
Programs, such as the HERO (Home Energy Renovation) Program, will also be made available to
City residents. Through a partnership with the City of Bakersfield, PACE programs are available
to residents as an affordable way to make water efficient upgrades to their homes. Residents
can use the PACE programs to finance water conservation renovation projects. Most homes
are eligible and payments are made through property tax assessments. Application of this
information will coincide with the City's and Cal Water's Smart Irrigation Controller rebate
program and efficient sprinkler nozzle program for residential use. Efficient outdoor irrigation
incorporates the idea that watering every day is not required.
Tracking participation, ongoing success and growth of the Enhanced Water Conservation Plan
is an important component. Therefore, it is recommended that a website be established where
people can anonymously check a box that they are "part of the team" and the date that they
started implementing efficient outdoor water irrigation.
Rebates and Vrogninis -
Rebates and Programs
Select your district (and, in some cases, your water system) to see a
list of conservation rebates and programs currently available to you. If
you do not know your district and water system, visit the Find My
District page.
Service
Type " Residentia!
District'` Bakersfieid
Water Lit of Bakersfield IV
System y
High- efficiency toilet rebate (Non- Premium Models)
Amount: Up to $50
Eligible Devices: Non - Premium Models from this list APPLY
WaterSense labeled toilets are independently certified to meet
rigorous criteria for both performance and efficiency.
WaterSense labeled toilets must use 1.28 gallons per flush or
less and meet a minimum MaP threshold of 350 grams of
waste removed from the toilet fixture in a single flush.
High- efficiency toilet rebate (MaP Premium Models)
Amount: Up to $100
Eligible Devices: Premium MaP Models from this list APPLY
In addition to meeting the rigorous performance standards of
WaterSense labeled toilets, MaP premium toilets must use
1.06 gallons per flush or less and meet a minimum MaP
threshold of 600 grams of waste removed from the toilet
fixture in a single flush.
High- efficiency clothes washer rebate
Amount: $150
Page 1 of 2
https: / /www.calwater.com/ conservation/ rebates - and - programs / residential /bk/city %20of%2O... 1/9/2015
Rebates and Programs -
Eligible Devices: Devices from this list APPLY
High - efficiency clothes washers use 35 -50% less water and
approximately 50% less energy than traditional washers. See
the rebate application for additional restrictions and
qualifications.
Smart Irrigation Controller rebate
Amount: Up to $125
Eligible Devices: Devices from this list APPLY
Smart Irrigation controllers automatically adjust their watering
schedule in response to changing weather conditions. See the
rebate application for restrictions and qualifications.
Free Sprinkler Nozzles
To help you save water around your home, Cal Water is
partnering with FreeSprinklerNozzles.com to make water -
saving Toro Precision Series Spray Nozzles available at no
charge to our customers. Single- family accounts are eligible to
receive up to 25 free nozzles. To receive a voucher for free
spray nozzles, have your Cal Water account number available
and go to www.freesprinklernozzles.com. For more
information, visit the Free Sprinkler Nozzles page.
Page 2 of 2
https:// www. calwater .com /conservation/rebates- and - programs / residentia l /bk/city %20of` /o20... 1/9/2015
Conservation Kits - Page 1 of 1
Conservation Kits
We are pleased to offer our single - family residential customers
conservation kits featuring a range of water - saving plumbing retrofit
fixtures. These kits are available at no charge to help make conserving
water that much easier.
Each kit includes:
• Two high - efficiency showerheads (use 2 gallons per minute
[gpmD
• One hose nozzle
• Two bathroom faucet aerators (use 1.0 gpm)
• Toilet leak tablets
• One kitchen faucet aerator (uses 1.5 gpm)
These fixtures are available to current Cal Water single - family
residential customers while supplies last, and will be mailed to the
service address on record. There is a limit of one kit per service
address per three -year period.
To receive your kit, fill out the form
below.
Account
Number
Zip
Code
X reCAPTCHA challenge image
Privacy & Terms
E_, w.uc I C )r •, i IF, Lcr „u
https: / /www.calwater.com /conservation /conservation -kits/ 12/04/2014
Ohero
Natural Gbas Storage
Water Fleater
Hot Water Delivery
System
A
High - Efficiency
Faucets
Artificial Turf
High-Efficiency
Showerhead
Drip Irrigation
;s
Community Development Home Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Programs
Frequently Asked Questions
Building Division
Building Division Home
Building Reports
PACE Energy Efficiency Financing
Programs
Schedule Building Inspection
Code Enforcement
Code Enforcement Home
Code Enforcement Staff
Economic Development
Program Description:
PACE financing allows property owners to fund energy efficiency water efficiency and renewable energy protects with no up -front
costs With PACE residential and commercial property owners can finance 100% of their protect and pay it back. mer time as a
voluntary, property tax assessment through their existing property tax bill
Information available about programs available to Bakersfield residential and commercial property owners can be found below
CaliforniaFIRST
hero , (tO Figtree ENERGY SAVING FINANCING
FINANCING
................. _... _.....
Economic Development Home More information>
Economic Development Staff
Reports & Plans
Planning Division
Planning Division Home
Maps
MBHCP
Planning Staff
Public Hearing Notices
Reports & Plans
Site Plan Review Approvals
Boards & Calendars
Board of Building Appeals
Boards & Commissions
More information>
California HERO Program Residential Eligible Product List
Water Efficiency Products
PRODUCT CATEGORY PRODUCT TYPE
ELIGIBILITY SPECIFICATIONS
Hot Water
1.
Product must be listed in the
Delivery System
CEC Appliance Efficiency Database.
High- Efficiency
2.
Toilet and urinals fixtures are eligible.
Toilet Fixture
3.
Flow rate <_ 1.28 GPF.
4.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
1.
Product must be listed in the
High- Efficiency
CEC Appliance Efficiency Database.
Faucet Fitting
2.
Flow rate <_ 1.5 GPM.
Weather -Based
3.
Must be permanently installed.
Indoor
4.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
Water Efficiency
1.
Product must be listed in the
High- Efficiency
CEC Appliance Efficiency Database.
Showerhead
2.
Flow <_ 2.0 GPM.
Rainwater
3.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
1. System meets the definition of one of the
MAXIMUM TERM
(YEARS)
20
15
15
15
10
10
10
20
20
following water delivery options:
Hot Water
a. Dedicated Recirculation Line
Delivery System
b. Whole House Manifold System
c. Demand - initiated Recirculating System
d. Core Plumbing System
2.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
1.
Product must be on SoCal Water Smart
High- Efficiency
Qualified Sprinkler Nozzle product list.
Sprinkler Nozzle
2.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
Weather -Based
1.
Product must be WaterSense Qualified.
Irrigation Controller
2.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
1.
Product installed be installed in turf,
Drip Irrigation
garden, planter, or flower bed area.
2.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
Rainwater
1.
Sized to hold > 50 gallons at one time.
Outdoor
Water Efficiency Catchment System
2.
Must be permanently installed.
3.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
1.
System must meet
California Plumbing Code, Chapter 16A.
2.
Product must comply with local code and
Gray Water
permitting requirements.
System
3.
Eligible system types include:
a. Single- Fixture
b. Multi- Fixture Simple (S 250 GPD)
c. Multi- Fixture Complex (> 250 GPD)
4.
Installed per manufacturer specs.
!hero
MAXIMUM TERM
(YEARS)
20
15
15
15
10
10
10
20
20
California HERO Program Residential Eligible Product List
PRODUCT CATEGORY
PRODUCT TYPE
ELIGIBILITY SPECIFICATIONS MAXIMUM TERM
(YEARS)
1.
Product must be water and air permeable.
2.
Product must be non -toxic and lead free.
3.
Product must be recyclable.
4.
Product installation must carry
Outdoor
>_ 10 year warranty.
Water Efficiency
Artificial Turf 5.
Installed per manufacturer specs. 10
6.
Product infill material must be
one of the following:
a. Acrylic Covered Sand
b. Crumb Rubber
c. Zeolite
1.
Product installation area must replace
existing live turf grass area.
2.
Requested financing amount may include:
a. Removal /disposal of existing turf grass
material
b. Site preparation for landscaping
installation
c. Installation of drought tolerant
landscaping options
d. Installation or conversion to eligible
Outdoor
irrigation options
Drought Tolerant 3.
Requested finance amount may not
Water Efficiency
Landscaping
20
include:
a. Installation of live plants or
biodegradable plant material
b. Removal of pre- existing hardscape
areas (i.e. driveways, pools, etc.)
c. Installation of water features (i.e.
ponds, fountains, etc.)
d. Installation of any other products not
listed in specification #2
4.
All products to be installed to
manufacturer specs and industry best
practices.
!hero
OFBAKE
NCORPORAT� RScn
U ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
cA�`l WATER BOARD
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: New Business
ITEM: 8 • A
TO: Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member APPROVED
FROM: Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager DEPARTMENT HEADI A
DATE: January 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Reimbursement Agreement between City of Bakersfield and North Kern Water
Storage District for Weather Modification Program for a not to exceed amount of
$53,776.50.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Board referral to City Council for approval.
BACKGROUND: The City has been participating in the weather modification program
with the other Kern River interests since 1977. This program is formally known as the Kern
River Basin Cloud Seeding Program. In November 2013, the City Council approved an
agreement with North Kern Water Storage District (North Kern) to conduct the program.
The agreement expired at the end of the operation season on April 30, 2014.
Cloud seeding artificially stimulates clouds to produce more rainfall or snowfall than
they would produce naturally. Attached is the California Water Plan eNews bulletin,
which discusses a recent $13 million research project, conducted by the state of
Wyoming, where it was concluded that cloud seeding can increase annual mountain
snowfall by up to 15 %. The bulletin also references another publication which is
attached: California Water Plan Update 2013, Volume 3, Chapter 11, "Precipitation
Enhancement." This publication states that cloud seeding in California my increase
annual precipitation or runoff ranging from 2 to 15 %. Page 11-6 of this report shows the
weather modification project areas from 2011 in California. Note that the Kern River
project area is included in this map.
RHS Consulting, the company that North Kern contracts with for cloud seeding program
estimates a precipitation /runoff increase of 11 to 12 %. At a 90 % confidence level, RHS
estimates 3% to 20 % increase in streamflow.
In a median year, the City of Bakersfield's historic Kern River yield is approximately
99,000 acre feet. At a 10% increase in yield, there would is an additional 9,900 acre feet
of water. At $53,776.50 per year, the cost of the water potentially generated by cloud
seeding is very inexpensive at $5.43 per acre foot.
City staff will continue to research for additional documentation regarding the proven
effectiveness of weather modification.
Wednesday Update ;> Jan. 7, 2015
This weekly electronic newsletter is designed to keep you current on California Water Plan news.
We welcome comments, suggestions and any news Iips that may be of interest to water planners.
California water issues The Mountain Counties Water Resource::
on tap for day -long Associ, is offering a day of presentations ^/
and discussions on a variety of California /
event next month in Auburn watertopics. Itwill be held Friday, Feb. 6, in \1,,tilitain(:uunrics
Auburn. The event will feature sessions on
California Water Plan Update 2013 (including
the Uluutitain Uuunties Regior: ), the governor's California
Water Action Plan, and the Proposition 1 water bond.
Cloud seeding research A 13 million research proiect conducted by the state of Wyoming
project suggests increase suggests cloud seeding can increase annual mountain snowfall
by up to 15 percent while having negligible environmental impacts.
for mountain snowfall The final research will be submitted to scientific journals for review.
Details are available in this Associated Press report. Cloud seeding
is discussed in California Water Plan Update 2013, Volume 3,
Chapter 11, "Precipitation Enhancement."
Colorado issues draft The Colorado Water Conservation n
of first comprehensive Board has issued the first draft of C O L O M D O S
Colorado's Water Plan. It is the WATER PLAN
state water plan state's first comprehensive water
plan of its kind. It comes at a time when Colorado is facing a Booming
gap between water supply and water demand. The final version is
expected to be submitted by December 2015.
Video details drought A new video is providing a snapshot of drought impacts on the
impacts throughout the Colorado River. Gnailenged lout Unbroken: S., riinu the Gc,
River illustrates actions for addressing shortages throughout the
Colorado River system system. The video was shown during the annual conference of the
Colorado River Water Users Association. Details on the conference
are available in the Decemb,�;r ewtiutt of the WestFAST newsletter.
C A L I F O R N 1 A The Splash is a feature of the California
WATER PLAN SPLASH Water Plan to spotlight topics from
Update 2013 3 and and i ts Highlights booklet.
Resource Management Strategies: California Water Plan Update 2013 presents a comprehensive and
diverse set of 30 resource management strategies (RMSs) that can help meet the water - related needs of each
region and the state. The RMSs described in Volume 3 should be considered by local agencies, governments
and organizations as tools for preparing their integrated regional water management plans. The combination
of strategies will vary from region to region, depending on climate, projected growth, existing water system,
and other factors. Update 2013 includes three new RMS chapters — "Outreach and Fngagemz�nt" (Chapter
29), " j :a t n r" (Chapter 26), and "Water and Cultt,re" (Chapter 30) — that are listed with the
other strategies in The potential benefits and costs of the RMSs, are summarized in
VOLUME 3 - RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 11
Precipitation Enhancement
.r
im
,r
Bodega Bay, CA. NOAH staff installs a
10 meter -high meteorological tower, which
measures atmospheric pressure, temperature.
relative humidity, wind speed. wind direction,
precipitation, and net radiation, at the Bodega
Marine Laboratory (March 2013).
dr
•L:'4
G
�► _ .#
,�'.�.{v~ � ` � ♦ . err. � ,,'V
.• ;;ICY '.� •�. , f!- i��ii�� _ � �
Contents
Chapter 11. Precipitation Enhancement .................................... ............................... 11 -5
PotentialBenefits ............................................................................................. ...........................11
-5
PotentialCosts..... ............................................................................................ ...........................11
-9
Major Implementation Issues .......................................................................... ...........................11
-9
ReliableData ............................................................................................ ...........................11
-9
Operational Precision ............................................................................... ..........................11
-10
Concern over Potential Impacts .......................................................... ...............................
11 -10
Funding................................................................................................ ..............................11-11
Inadvertent Weather Modification .............................................................. ...............................
11 -11
Connections to Other Resource Management Strategies ................................ ..........................11
-12
Recommendations....................................................................................... ..............................11-12
References ....................................................................................................... ..........................11
-13
ReferencesCited ...................................................................................... ..........................11
-13
Additional References ............................................................................. ..........................11
-13
Figures
Figure 11 -1 Weather Modification Project Areas in 2011 ................................ ...........................11 -6
11 -4
Chapter 11. Precipitation
Enhancement
Precipitation enhancement, commonly called "cloud seeding," artificially stimulates clouds
to produce more rainfall or snowfall than they would produce naturally. Cloud seeding injects
substances into the clouds that enable snowflakes and raindrops to form more easily. Precipitation
enhancement is the one form of weather modification done in California. Forms conducted in
other states include hail suppression (reducing the formation of large, damaging hailstones) and
fog dispersal (when fog is below freezing temperature). (There are some unconfirmed reports of
hail suppression attempts in the San Joaquin Valley, using hail cannons, but the scientific basis
for this method is dubious.)
Winter orographic cloud seeding (cloud seeding where wind blows over a mountain range,
thereby causing clouds and rain or snow by lifting the air) has been practiced in California
since the early 1950s. Most of the projects are along the central and southern Sierra Nevada,
with some in the Coast Ranges. The projects generally use silver iodide as the active seeding
agent, supplemented by dry ice if aerial seeding is done. Silver iodide can be applied from
ground generators or from airplanes. Occasionally, other agents, such as liquid propane, have
been used. In recent years, some projects have been trying hygroscopic materials (substances
that take up water from the air) as supplemental seeding agents. Figure I IA shows rain and
snow enhancement programs that were considered operational in 2011. Most rain and snow
enhancement projects are long -term projects that operate in all or most years. A few, such as
Monterey County's project, only ran for one or two seasons. Historically, the number of operating
projects has increased during droughts, up to 20 projects in 1991, but has leveled off at about
a dozen in wet or normal water years. Most of the agencies or districts doing precipitation
enhancement projects suspend operations during very wet years once enough snow has
accumulated to meet their water needs.
State requirements for sponsors of weather modification projects consist of filing a notice of
intent (NOI) initially, and every five years after for continuing projects; some record keeping
by operators; and annual or biennial reports to the California Department of Water Resources
(DWR). The information to include in the NOI can be obtained from DWR. In addition, sponsors
need to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act and should send annual letter
notices to the board of supervisors within affected counties and to DWR. The National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also requires activity reports, which give the number
of days and hours of operation and the amounts of seeding material applied.
Policy statements by both the American Meteorological Society in 1998 and the World
Meteorological Organization in 2007 support the effectiveness of winter orographic cloud -
seeding projects, although they acknowledge that results may be uncertain because of the high
degree of background variability of weather. A more detailed treatment of weather modification
capabilities, position statements, and the status of the discipline is in Guidelines for Cloud
Seeding to Augment Precipitation (American Society of Civil Engineers 2006).
An editorial in the international journal Nature in June 2008 advocated for a renewed push
for scientific research into weather modification activities. For years, weather modification
supporters faced a perceived negative bias in the scientific community because early increase
11 -5
Figure 11 -1 Weather Modification Project Areas in 2011
Lake Almanor
Tahoe - Truckee
Upper American River-
Upper Mokelumne River—
North Fork Stanislaus River
Walker River
Tuolumne River
Weather Modification project area
County boundary
Upper San Joaquin River Mono -Owens
Kings River
Kaweah River
Monterey County
Santa Barbara County
11 6
Kern River
San Gabriel River
claims were exaggerated. The editorial in a widely respected scientific journal may mark a turn
in opinion. Massive weather modification efforts in China for the 2008 Olympics did not go
unnoticed in the press that year. Also, in 2011, evaluations of a five -year experimental program in
the Snowy Mountains of southeastern Australia confirmed a significant precipitation increase in
seeded storms.
Since 2009, the last time the California Water Plan was updated, there have not been many
new developments in weather modification in California. Most of the projects have continued
to operate as before. The demise of one of the oldest commercial operators in the field,
Atmospherics Inc. in Fresno, led to some changes as sponsors had to find a substitute operator.
A new firm, RHS Consulting Ltd., entered the field and in 2011 was conducting operations in the
San Joaquin, Kaweah, and Kern river watersheds in the southern Sierra Nevada mountains.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG &E) had planned a new project on the Pit and McCloud
rivers in Northern California on the headwaters of Shasta Lake, but this has been dropped
to avoid further controversies in light of criticism of PG &E after one of its gas pipelines
exploded in San Bruno in 2010. This would have been one of the more productive precipitation
enhancement projects in California because the region gets frequent storms and has the ability
to take advantage of natural storage by increasing precipitation recharge of the large volcanic
aquifers that feed the Pit and McCloud rivers year round (also increasing hydroelectric power
production on these rivers). Potential yield could have been as much as 200,000 acre -feet (af) of
precipitation. Much of the added precipitation would have gone into recharging the large volcanic
aquifer, which supplies the year -round springs in the region.
Another area of interest to California is the Colorado River basin, where a lengthy drought has
caused the seven states of that basin — Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,
Utah, and Wyoming — to look at all potential options. The best hope of augmenting Colorado
River water supply is wintertime cloud seeding in the headwater states of Colorado, Utah, and
Wyoming. There are already many seeding programs in place. However, the basin states have
agreed to work together in a program for implementing new programs and to designate new areas
for seeding and possibly longer seasons of operation for existing projects. There were 15 projects
already operating in the Upper Basin; there may be potential for up to 15 more in the region,
including four in Arizona. From a 2006 study (Griffith and Solak 2006) by North American
Weather Consultants, which does weather modification, the combined potential yield of the
new programs could be 800,000 of per year on average. This is based on a 10 percent increase
in precipitation. Additional amounts could be obtained by augmenting the existing programs,
primarily by funding a longer season of operation. As a start, the Lower Basin states added about
$390,000 per year in the three years from 2010 through 2012 to enhance Upper Basin cloud -
seeding efforts.
More research in weather modification is desirable. The kind of research needed and the
equipment needed are beyond the ability and funding of independent project sponsors, although
much can be gained from piggybacking research onto existing programs. To this end, legislation
was introduced in the 1 l Oth Congress by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas and then -Rep.
Mark Udall of Colorado for federal funding of weather modification research and to increase the
effectiveness of existing programs through applied research. This federal research funding effort
was unsuccessful.
11 -7
In California, proposals have been made to the California Energy Commission's (CEO's) Electric
Program Investment Charge program (formerly named the Public Interest Energy Research
Program [PIER Program]) for additional research into cloud seeding to evaluate the effectiveness
of existing programs in the state and optimize their effectiveness. Justification would be the
potential impact on hydroelectric energy production. This approach would survey the latest
scientific advances in cloud physics, remote sensing, atmospheric science, seeding technologies,
and evaluating strategies and would recommend the best course of action to maximize the
contribution of operational cloud- seeding programs to California's water and energy supplies.
Researchers could also study the potential effect of climate change and atmospheric pollution
on seeding practices and capabilities. DWR recommends that the Electric Program Investment
Charge program include and fund research on cloud seeding in its activities.
The State of Wyoming has undertaken a major weather modification research program, which
is now in its seventh year (it began in 2006). The objective is to evaluate, with help from the
scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), the potential for increased
snowpack in the Sierra Madre and Medicine Bow Mountains of southern Wyoming with a
randomized experimental design. Some storms are seeded, and some are left unneeded, with
extensive measurements of moisture tracking in the air and of results on the ground. The program
will need another couple of years after the current one to gain the 120 to 150 cases needed to
detect with statistical confidence a positive increase in snowpack due to seeding.
Progress in confirming snowfall enhancement has been made in the Snowy Mountains of
Australia. A recent scientific paper by Manton and Warren (2011) shows a 14- percent increase in
precipitation when comparing seeded and unseeded experimental units from 2005 through 2009
during the passage of winter cold fronts.
Potential Benefits
In California, all precipitation enhancement projects are intended to increase water supply or
hydroelectric power. The amounts of water produced are difficult to determine, but estimates
range from a 2 to 15 percent increase in annual precipitation or runoff. A National Research
Council (NRC) 2003 report on weather modification had limited material on winter orographic
cloud seeding, such as is practiced in California and other western states. However, the report did
seem to concur that there is considerable evidence that winter orographic weather modification
works, up to a 10 percent increase. A 2012 study by the Utah Department of Natural Resources
(updating a 2005 study through the 2010 season) showed an average increase in April 1
snowpack water content ranging from 3 to 15 percent from a group of projects that had been
operating from seven years (high Uinta Mountains) to 32 years (central /southern Utah). The
overall estimated annual runoff increase for Utah was about 180,000 acre -feet, or about 6 percent
for the study areas. Estimated costs in 2010 were $2.27 per acre -foot (af) from these ground
seeding programs.
Actual increases in annual runoff are probably less in California than in Utah. A new estimate
made for Update 2013 by DWR staff is that the combined California precipitation enhancement
projects, on average, generate about 400,000 of of runoff annually, which would be an average of
about a 4 percent increase in runoff.
Accepting the PG &E estimate for the formerly proposed Pit River- McCloud River cloud- seeding
project of 200,000 of for that region (which is one of the most favorable areas for cloud seeding
11 -8
because of more fi•equent storms and generally colder weather conditions than other parts of the
state tend to have), another 200,000 to 300,000 acre -feet per year (af /yr.) may be available in
other areas. Thus, a reasonable state estimated total could average 400,000 of /yr. Many of the
other best prospects are in the Sacramento River basin, in watersheds that are not seeded now.
The North Lahontan and South Lahontan hydrologic regions are already well covered by cloud -
seeding projects, except for the Susan River and the Carson River. With the exception of the
upper Trinity River watershed, and perhaps the Russian River, there is little new potential in the
North Coast Hydrologic Region because limited storage capacity would mean not much extra
rainfall could be captured.
There is also potential to increase water production by more effective seeding operations in
existing projects. Precipitation enhancement should not be viewed as a remedy for drought,
however; cloud- seeding opportunities are generally fewer in dry years. They work better in
combination with surface or groundwater storage to increase average supplies. In the very
wet years, when sponsors already have enough water, cloud - seeding operations are usually,
suspended.
Cloud seeding has advantages over many other strategies of providing water. A project can be
developed and implemented relatively quickly without multiyear lead times. In areas where
it snows, it could offset some of the loss in snowpack expected from climate change. This
may benefit mountain meadows and would delay the fire season in forests. As a resource
management strategy, precipitation enhancement would qualify as part of integrated regional
water management (IRWM). Seeding opportunities tend to be greater in Northern California
than in Southern California because Northern California has more frequent storms and cooler
temperatures.
Potential Costs
Costs for cloud seeding generally would be less than $30 per of of water supply each year. State
law says that water gained from cloud seeding is treated the same as natural supply in regard to
water rights. Southern California projects would be more expensive because of fewer seeding
opportunities, but imported supplies are also more expensive there.
It is estimated that about $3 to $5 million is being spent now on yearly operations. Realizing the
additional 300,000 to 400.000 of of potential new supply could require an initial investment of
around $8 million for planning, reports, and initial equipment, plus around $6 million in annual
operations costs. Over the next 25 years, that would add up to about $150 million, which would
be nearly $22 per of of water supply.
Major Implementation Issues
Reliable Dat.,
No complete and rigorous comprehensive study has been made of all California precipitation
enhancement projects. Part of the reason is the natural variability of weather and the difficulty in
locating unaffected control basins. Some studies of individual projects have been made in the past
years on certain projects, such as the Kings River, which have shown increases in water. A recent
NMI
evaluation by Dr. Bernard Silverman, published in the journal Atmospheric Research (Silverman
2010), represents the best efforts so far on the longer- running cloud- seeding projects and is
generally positive in showing results. Aerial seeding, or combination aerial and ground seeding,
showed better results than ground seeding alone.
Or,r*rr+tional Prc-ci -inn
It is difficult to target seeding materials to the right place in the clouds at the right time. There is
an incomplete understanding of how effective operators are in their targeting practices. Chemical
tracer experiments have provided support for targeting practices. New seeding agents, and
transport and diffusion studies with some of the new atmospheric measuring tools, like some
currently being employed by NOAA in hydrometeorological test bed experiments, would be
helpful.
Concern over Potential Impacts
Questions about potential unintended impacts from precipitation enhancement have been
raised and addressed over the years. Common concerns relate to downwind effects (enhancing
precipitation in one area at the expense of those downwind), long -term toxic effects of silver,
and added snow removal costs in mountain counties. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)
did extensive studies on these issues. The findings were reported in its Project Skywater
programmatic environmental impact statement in 1977 and its Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project
environmental assessment in 1981. The available evidence does not show that seeding clouds
with silver iodide causes a decrease in downwind precipitation; in fact, at times some of the
increase of the target area may extend up to 100 miles downwind (Harris 1981). (A seminar
specifically on downwind effects at the end of April, 2012 in Las Vegas at the annual meeting of
the Weather Modification Association confirmed earlier findings of no loss to downwind areas;
often adjacent downwind areas also showed some increase.)
The potential for eventual toxic effects of silver has not been shown to be a problem. Silver
and silver compounds have a rather low order of toxicity. According to the USBR, the small
amounts used in cloud seeding do not compare to industry emissions of 100 times as much into
the atmosphere in many parts of the country or individual exposure from tooth fillings. Watershed
concentrations would be extremely low because only small amounts of seeding agent are used.
Accumulations in soil, vegetation, and surface runoff have not been large enough to measure
above natural background levels. A 2004 study done for Snowy Hydro Limited ( Williams and
Denholm 2009) in Australia has confirmed the earlier findings described above.
Some silver accumulation testing by PG &E on the Mokelumne River and Lake Almanor
watersheds was presented at the 2007 annual meeting of the Weather Modification Association.
Both watersheds have been seeded for more than 50 years. Sampling at Upper Blue Lake and Salt
Springs Reservoir showed very low to undetectable concentrations in water and sediment. Similar
results were found at Lake Almanor upon testing water, sediment, and fish samples during the
2000 -2003 period. Amounts were far below any toxic levels, and there was little to suggest
bioaccumulation. Therefore, continued operations should not result in any significant chronic
effect on sensitive aquatic organisms.
11 -10
In regard to snow removal, little direct relationship to increased costs was found for small,
incremental changes in storm size, because the amount of equipment and manpower to maintain
the roadway is essentially unchanged. In other words, the effort to clear a road of 5.5 inches of
snow is practically the same as the effort to clear a road of 5 inches of snow.
All operating projects have suspension criteria designed to stop cloud seeding anytime there is a
flood threat. Moreover, the type of storms that produce large floods are naturally quite efficient
in processing moisture into rain anyway. In such conditions, seeding is unlikely to make a
difference.
Fundinq
Little federal research funding for weather modification has been available in the past 20 years.
The USBR had some funding in 2002 and 2003 in the Weather Damage Mitigation program.
Desert Research Institute of Nevada obtained a grant of $318,000 from this source early in 2003
to evaluate its seeding in the eastern Sierra Nevada.
The USBR is also providing some funds to Desert Research Institute for its current Walker River
program to augment stream inflow to Walker Lake in Nevada.
Bills introduced in the 110th Congress attempted to reestablish federal support for more weather
modification research, some of which would have provided research support on existing
operating projects. This legislation was supported by the Western States Water Council, the seven
Colorado River basin states, the Colorado River Board of California and others. These bills,
Senate Bill 1807 (Hutchison) and House Bill 3445 (Udall) did not pass.
The major research effort in recent years has been funded by the State of Wyoming: an extensive
test of cloud seeding in two adjacent mountain regions, the Sierra Madre and the Medicine
Bow Mountains. This is a classical randomized statistical experiment in which some storms are
seeded and some are not. About 30 cases (testing opportunities) will occur in an average winter
season. By the end of 2012, the project had produced 123 cases but needed about 60 more to
increase statistical confidence, according to NCAR researchers — which would be at least two
more seasons. The Wyoming Legislature in 2012 provided two more years' worth of funding to
complete the experiment. Costs are on the order of $1 million per year.
Inadvertent Weather Modification
There is evidence that human activities such as biomass burning, transportation, and agricultural
and industrial activities modify local and sometimes regional weather. The effects of aerosols
on clouds and precipitation are complex. Studies by Ramanathan, Rosenfeld, Woodley, and
others suggest suppressed precipitation formation in affected clouds due to pollution and dust
( Ramanathan et al. 2001; Rosenfeld 2000; Rosenfeld and Givati 2006; Rosenfeld and Woodley
2001). Some aerosols can enhance precipitation, and some, especially the very fine aerosols
in diesel smoke, can reduce precipitation. Much more research is needed to evaluate the air
pollution effects on precipitation processes and the amount of impact, as well as possible effects
on cloud- seeding programs. It is possible that some of the California cloud- seeding projects
have offset a potential loss in precipitation from air pollution, which may have obscured a more
am
positive effect from the weather modification projects. Research work in Israel has demonstrated
such effects (Givati and Rosenfeld 2009).
Recent research by Scripps and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has indicated that
dust from western China can increase northern Sierra Nevada west slope precipitation (Ault et al.
2011).
Connections to Other Resource Management
Strategies
The precipitation enhancement strategy is strongly connected to these strategies:
• Forest Management (see Volume 3, Chapter 23): Much of California's cloud seeding takes
place over the forested western side of the Sierra Nevada.
• Watershed Management (see Volume 3, Chapter 27): Upper watersheds in the Sierra Nevada
are the catchment for enhanced precipitation from cloud seeding.
Recommendations
I . The State should support the continuation of current projects, as well as the development of
new projects, and help in seeking research funds for both old and new projects. Operational
funding support for new projects may be available through the IRWM program.
2. DWR should collect base data and project sponsor evaluations of existing California
precipitation enhancement projects, and projects of other western states; independently
analyze them; and perform research on the effectiveness of this technology to supplement
water supplies while minimizing negative impacts.
3. DWR should support efforts to investigate the potential to augment Colorado River supply
by cloud seeding, in cooperation with the Colorado River Board of California, the other
Colorado River basin states, the USBR, and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California.
4. DWR, in partnership with the USBR, and seeking cooperation from PG &E, should produce
an environmental impact report/environmental impact statement on a Pit River - McCloud
River project similar to the one proposed several years ago, because this area has one of
the best potential yields. This could benefit both the Central Valley Project and the State
Water Project (which share in -basin use north of and in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta),
and there would appear to be multiple State benefits from augmenting recharge of the huge
northeastern California volcanic aquifer.
DWR should support research on cloud physics and cloud modeling being done by the
NOAA labs and academic institutions. With improvement, these models may become tools
to further verify and test the effectiveness of cloud - seeding activities.
6. The State should support research on potential new seeding agents, particularly ones that
would work at higher temperatures. Climate change may limit the effectiveness of silver
iodide, the most commonly used agent, which requires cloud temperatures well below
freezing, around -5 °C, to be effective. (Additionally, the increasing costs of silver are a
detriment to some ongoing projects.)
11-12
7. DWR should support efforts by California weather modification project sponsors, such as
that proposed in 2002 -2003 by Santa Barbara County Water Agency, to obtain federal and
State research funds for local research experiments built upon their operating cloud - seeding
projects. In this regard, DWR recommends that the CEC Electric Program Investment
Charge program include research studies on weather modification.
References
References Cited
American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006. Guidelines for Cloud Seeding to Angment Precipitation. Second Edition.
Reston (VA): American Society of Civil Engineers. [ASCE Manual No. 81.] 200 pp.
Ault AP, Williams CR, White AB, Neiman PJ, Creamean JM, Gaston CJ, Ralph FM, Prather KA. 2011. "Detection of
Asian dust in California Orographic precipitation." Journal of Geophysical Research 116(August, Issue D16).
Givati A, Rosenfeld D. 2009. "Comments on 'Does Air Pollution Really Suppress Precipitation in Israel. "' Journal of
Applied Meteorology and Climatology 48(8):1733 -1750,
Griffith D, Solak M. 2006. The Potential Use of Winter Cloud Seeding Programs to Angment the Flow ofthe Colorado
River. Sandy (UT): North American Weather Consultants. Prepared for the Upper Colorado River Commission.
March. 49 pp.
Harris ER. 1981. Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.
Denver (CO): Office of Atmospheric Resources Research.
Manton M, Warren L. 2011. "A Confirmatory Snowfall Enhancement Project in the Snowy Mountains of Australia— Part
II: Primary and Associated Analyses." Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 50(7):1448 -1458,
National Research Council. 2003, Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research. Washington (D.C.): National
Academies Press. December. 144 pp.
Nature. 2008. "Change in the Weather." [Editorial on the need for weather modification research.] Nature 453(June
1 9):957 -958.
Ramanathan V, Crutzen PJ, Kiehl JT, Rosenfeld D. 2001. "Aerosols, Climate, and the Hydrologic Cycle." [Magazine.]
Science 294(5549):2119 -2124.
Rosenfeld D. 2000. "Suppression of Rain and Snow by Urban and Industrial Air Pollution." Science 287(5459):1793-
1796.
Rosenfeld D, Givati A. 2006. "Evidence of orographic precipitation suppression by air pollution - induced aerosols in the
western United States." Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 45(7):893 -911.
Rosenfeld D, Woodley W. 2001. "Pollution and clouds." Physics World. February. pp 33 -37.
Silverman B. 2010. "An Evaluation of Eleven Operational Cloud Seeding Programs in the Watersheds of the Sierra
Nevada Mountains." Atmospheric Research 97(4):526 -539. September.
Williams BD, Denholm JA. 2009. "Assessment of the Environmental Toxicity of Silver Iodide with Reference to Cloud
Seeding Trial in the Snowy Mountain ofAustralia." Journal of Weather Modification 41(April):71 -96.
Additional Reference-,
American Meteorological Society. 2013. "AMS Journals Online." Boston (MA): American Meteorological Society. [Web
page.] Viewed online at . Accessed: April 18, 2013.
11 -13
American Society of Civil Engineers and Environmental Water Resources Institute. 2004. Standard Practice for the
Design and Operation of Precipitation Enhancement Projects. Reston (VA): American Society of Civil Engineers.
[ASCE /EWRI 42 -04.] May. 74 pp.
American Society of Civil Engineers. 2003. "Atmospheric Water Resources Management." Reston (VA): American
Society of Civil Engineers. [ASCE Policy Statement No. 275.]
Boe B, Bomar G, Cotton WR, Marler BL, Orville HD, Warburton JA. 2004. "The Weather Modification Association's
Response to the National Research Council's Report Titled: `Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research'
Report of a Review Panel." Journal of Weather Modification 36(1):53 -82.
Cardno ENTRIX. 2011. Geochemistry and Impacts of Silver Iodide Use in Clond Seeding. Concord (CA): Cardno
ENTRIX. May. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Desert Research Institute. 2011. Clond Seeding Operations and Research in the Walker River Basin to Increase Water
Delivery to Walker Lake. [Semi - annual progress report for the period April 1, 2011 through Sept. 30, 2011.]
Prepared by Huggins AW, project manager, Division of Atmospheric Sciences, Desert Research Institute.
2011. Final Report — Cloud Seeding Project for Tahoe and Truckee Basins for WY2011. Prepared by Huggins
AW, project manager, Division of Atmospheric Sciences, Desert Research Institute.
Givati A, Rosenfeld D. 2004. "Quantifying Precipitation Suppression Due to Air Pollution." Journal ofApplied
Meteorology and Climatology 43(7):1038 -1056.
Griffith D, Solak M, Almy R, Gibbs D. 2005. "The Santa Barbara Cloud Seeding Project in Coastal Southern California,
Summary of Results and Their Implications." Journal of Weather Modification 37(April):21 -27.
Hunter S. 2007. Optimizing Cloud Seedingfor Water and Energy in California. Denver (CO): U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, Technical Service Center. March. Prepared for the California Energy Commission Public Interest
Energy Research Program. 38 pp.
Kings River Conservation District, Kings River Water Association, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., and California Department
of Water Resources. 2011. Summary and Evaluation of 2010 -2011 Winter Cloud Seeding Operations for the Kings
River Watershed, California. Sandy (Utah): North American Weather Consultants Inc. Report No. WM 11 -2,
NAWC Project No. 10 -273. Prepared for Kings River Conservation District, Kings River Water Association,
Pacific Gas & Electric Co., and California Department of Water Resources. Prepared by Weston TW, Yorty DP,
Flanagan T, Solak ME, and Griffith DA of North American Weather Consultants Inc.
List R. "The Serious Flaws oftheAcademies' Report on Weather Modification Research." Journal of Weather
Modification 37(April):67 -70.
Manton M, Warren L, Kenyon S, Peace A, Bilish S, Kemsley K. 2011. "A Confirmatory Snowfall Enhancement Project
in the Snowy Mountains of Australia— Part I: Project Design and Response Variables." Journal ofApplied
Meteorology and Climatology 50(7):1432 -1447.
Marler B. 2007. "Cloud Seeding Impacts? Water, Sediment and Tissue Studies." [Presentation at the annual meeting of
the Weather Modification Association, San Francisco (CA).]
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2013. "NOAA in Your State and Territory: 2013 — California."
Washington (DC): National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [Word document available through Web
page.] 28 pp. Viewed online at: http:// www.legislative.noaa.gov/NIYS /. Accessed: April 18, 2013,
New South Wales Department of Environment and Conservation and Sydney Catchment Authority. 2007. Summary from
one -day "Workshop on Cloud Seeding." Sydney (Australia). 5 pp.
North American Weather Modification Council. 2013. "Publications." [Web page.] Viewed online at: http: / /wwxv.nawmc.
org /4dcgi /GetCategoryRecord /Publications. Accessed: April 23, 2013.
Ramanathan V, Ramana MV. 2003 "Atmospheric Brown Clouds: Long Range Transport and Climate Impacts." EM
(December):28 -33. Viewed online at: huh J cdu'FM_Paper_2ttn31_final pdt_ Accessed: April
18, 2013.
Ryan T. 2005. "Weather Modification for Precipitation Augmentation and Its Potential Usefulness to the Colorado River
Basin States." Los Angeles (CA): Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. October 34 pp.
11 -14
Southwest Hydrology. 2007. "Cloud Seeding." [Magazine, entire issue devoted to cloud seeding.] Tucson (AZ):
University of Arizona. Southwest Hydrology 6(2). 44 pp.
United Nations Environment Programme and the Center for Clouds, Chemistry and Climate. 2002. The Asian
Brown Cloud.- Climate and Other Environmental Impacts. Nairobi (Kenya). Prepared for the United Nations
Environment Programme.
Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources. 2005. Utah Cloud Seeding Program, Increased
Runoff /Cost Analysis. Salt Lake City (UT): Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources.
May. 15 pp.
2012. Utah Cloud Seeding Program, Increased Runoff /Cost Analyses. Salt Lake City (UT): Utah Department of
Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources. February. 19 pp.
World Meteorological Organization. 2013. "Archive." [Web archive of volumes /issues of the journal Bulletin.] Viewed
online at: hup / w-w- wwmo.mt/ pages / publications /bulletin_en/arehive /index_en hunt. Accessed: April 23, 2013.
11 -15
AGREE ENT NO.
a.vREE E T FO' REI BURSE ENT OOF
�ER OODIFI ATION P0MIN . COSTS
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on , by
and between the CITY OF BAKE SFIELD, a Charter city and municipal
corporation ( "CITY" herein), NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT ( "DISTRICT'
herein),
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Department of Water Resources, State of California, initially
issued to the DISTRICT a permit for Weather Resources Management (herein
referred to as the "permit "), dated July 2, 1950 (Permit # 11), which authorizes the
DISTRICT to conduct a Weather Resources Management Program (hereinafter
referred to as the "Program "; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield, North Kern Water Storage District, Kern
Delta Water District and Buena Vista Water Storage District currently participate
in the Kern River Basin Cloud Seeding Program; and
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT has entered into a contract with RHS Consulting,
Ltd. ( "Contractor" herein) who has on its staff qualified and recognized weather
resources management personnel and other professionals necessary to carry
out and supervise the program and it has at its disposal the equipment
necessary to carry out the Program; and
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2015 the City of Bakersfield Water Board
approved participation in Kern River Weather Modification Program for the
2014/2015 season; and
WHEREAS, the total amount to conduct a Weather Resources
Management Program is estimated to be Two Hundred Fifteen Thousand Four
Hundred Forty -Two Dollars ($215,106). The shared cost for each participant is
twenty -five percent (25 %) of the total cost, not to exceed Fifty -Three Thousand
Seven Hundred Seventy Sixty Dollars and 50 cents ($53,776.50); and
NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing recitals herein, CITY and
DISTRICT mutually agree as follows;
SA2015 Water Board \150114 Water Board\Item 9A \North Kern Weather Reimb 2014.15.docx
January 8, 2015
-- Page 1 of 6 Pages --
1. PROGRAM. CITY shall participate in the Kern River Weather
Modification Program for the 2014/2015 season.
2. CONTRACTOR. Contractor shall engage in artificial cloud
nucleation operations during the term of the contract, within the target area
identified by and consistent with the INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS
OF KERN RIVER WEATHER MODIFICATION PROGRAM and the above referenced
permit, The purpose of this cloud nucleation operation is to increase
precipitation within the target area.
3. COSTS. This reimbursement agreement only includes the CITY's
agreed cost. CITY shall reimburse DISTRICT for costs incurred by DISTRICT to
conduct a Weather Resources Management Program, in an amount not to
exceed Fifty -Three Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Sixty dollars and Fifty cents
($53,776.50).
4. PAYMENTS. DISTRICT shall invoice CITY pursuant to this agreement
and provide CITY with documentation for costs incurred for materials, labor and
equipment, CITY shall reimburse DISTRICT for these costs within 45 days of
receipt,
5. ASSIGNMENT. Neither this Agreement, nor any interest in it, may be
assigned or transferred by any party without the prior written consent of all the
parties. Any such assignment will be subject to such terms and conditions as
CITY may choose to impose,
6. CORPORATE AUTHORITY. Each individual signing this Agreement on
behalf of entities represents and warrants that they are, respectively, duly
authorized to sign on behalf of the entities and to bind the entities fully to each
and all of the obligations set forth in this Agreement.
7. EXECUTION. This Agreement is effective upon execution. It is the
produce of negotiation and all parties are equally responsible for authorship of
this Agreement. Section 1654 of the California Civil Code shall not apply to the
interpretation of this Agreement.
S. EXHIBITS. In the event of a conflict between the terms, conditions or
specifications set forth in this Agreement and those in exhibits attached hereto,
the terms, conditions or specifications set forth in this Agreement shall prevail. All
exhibits to which reference is made in this Agreement are deemed incorporated
in this Agreement, whether or not actually attached,
SA2015 Water Board \150114 Water Board\Item 9A \North Kern Weather Reimb 2014.15.docx
January 8, 2015
-- Page 2 of 6 Pages --
9. GOVERNING LAIN. The laws of the State of California will govern the
validity of this Agreement, its interpretation and performance. Any litigation
arising in any way from this Agreement shall be brought in Kern County,
California.
10. FURTHER ASSURANCES. Each party shall execute and deliver such
papers, documents, and instruments, and perform such acts as are necessary or
appropriate, to implement the terms of this Agreement and the intent of the
parties to this Agreement.
11. MERGER AND MODIFICATION. This Agreement sets forth the entire
Agreement between the parties and supersedes all other oral or written
representations. This Agreement may be modified only in a writing approved by
the City Council and signed by all the parties,
12. NEGATION OF PARTNERSHIP. City shall not become or be
deemed a partner or joint venture with DISTRICT or associate in any such
relationship with DISTRICT by reason of the provisions of this Agreement. DISTRICT
shall not for any purpose be considered an agent, officer or employee of City.
13. NO WAIVER OF DEFAULT. The failure of any party to enforce against
another party any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of
that party's right to enforce such a provision at a later time, and shall not serve
to vary the terms of this Agreement, The acceptance of work or services, or
payment for work or services, by CITY shall not constitute a waiver of any
provisions of this Agreement,
14. NON - INTEREST. No officer or employee of City shall hold any interest
in this Agreement (California Government Code section 1090).
15. NOTICES. All notices relative to this Agreement shall be given in
writing and shall be personally served or sent by certified or registered mail and
be effective upon actual personal service or depositing in the Unites States mail.
The parties shall be addressed as follows, or at any other address designated by
notice;
CITY: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Water Resources Department
1000 Buena Vista Road
Bakersfield, CA 93311
Telephone; (661) 326 -3715
SA2015 Water Board \150114 Water Board \Item 9A \(North Kern Weather Reimb 2014.15.docx
January S, 2015
-- Page 3 of 6 Pages --
DISTRICT: NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
P. O. Box 81435
Bakersfield, CA 93330 -1435
Telephone: (661) 393 -2696
Facsimile: (661) 393 -6884
16. TERM. This Agreement shall commence upon complete and
authorized execution by all parties,
17. TERMINATION. This Agreement will terminate upon the completion
of the work as described in Exhibit A, payment has been received by DISTRICT
from the CITY for such work and DISTRICT has completed an operations and
monitoring plan with the cooperation of the City,
18. EXHIBITS. In the event of a conflict between the terms, conditions or
specifications set forth in this Agreement and those in exhibits attached hereto,
the terms, conditions, or specifications set forth in this Agreement shall prevail.
All exhibits to which reference is made in this Agreement are deemed
incorporated in this Agreement, whether or not actually attached.
19. EXECUTION. This Agreement is effective upon execution. It is the
product of negotiation and all parties are equally responsible for authorship of
this Agreement, Section 1654 of the California Civil Code shall not apply to the
interpretation of this Agreement,
CITY: CITY OF BAKFIELD
Water Resources Department
Attn: Art Chianello, P.E,
Water Resources Manager
1000 Buena Vista Road
Bakersfield, California, 93311
AGENCY: NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
Attn: Richard A, Diamond
General Manager
P. O, Box 81435
Bakersfield, CA 93380 -1435
20. ASSIGNMENT. Neither this Agreement nor any rights, interests,
duties, liabilities, obligations or responsibilities arising out of, concerning or
related in any way to this Agreement (including, but not limited to, accounts,
actions, causes of action, claims, damages, demands, liabilities, losses,
obligations, or reckonings of any kind or nature whatsoever, for compensatory or
SA2015 Water Board \150114 Water Board\Item 9A \North Kern Weather Reimb 2014.15.docx
January 8, 2015
-- Page 4 of 6 Pages --
exemplary and punitive damages, or declaratory, equitable or injunctive relief,
whether based on contract, equity, tort or other theories of recovery provided
for by the common or statutory law) may be assigned or transferred by any
party. Any such assignment is prohibited, and shall be unenforceable and
otherwise null and void without the need for further action by the non - assigning
party or parties,
21. TIME. Time is of the essence in this Agreement.
22. BINDING EFFECT. The rights and obligations of this Agreement shall
inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the parties to the contract and
their heirs, administrators, executors, personal representatives, successors and
assigns, and whenever the context so requires, the masculine gender includes
the feminine and neuter, and the singular number includes the plural, This
Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which
shall be considered as an original and be effective as such,
23. CORPORATE AUTHORITY. Each individual signing this Agreement on
behalf of entities represent and warrant that they are, respectively, duly
authorized to sign on behalf of the entities and to bind the entities fully to each
and all of the obligations set forth in this Agreement.
24. INDEMNITY. CITY and Contractor have entered into a separate
indemnification agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to
be executed, the day and year first -above written,
"CITY"
"DISTRICT"
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
in
Print Name:
HARVEY L. HALL
Mayor Title:
Signatures on following page
SA2015 Water Board \150114 Water Board\ltem 9A \North Kern Weather Reimb 2014.15.docx
January 8, 2015
-- Page 5 of 6 Pages --
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
in
ART CHIANELLO, P.E.
Water Resources Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
By:
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
COUNTERSIGNED:
in
Insurance:
NELSON SMITH
Finance Director
Attachments:
SA2015 Water Board \150114 Water Board\Item 9A \North Kern Weather Reimb 2014.15.docx
January 8, 2015
-- Page 6 of 6 Pages --
Bngx��s��
•
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
WATER BOARD
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Miscellaneous
ITEM: 10 . A .
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT
Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Member
Terry Maxwell, Member
Art Chianello, Water Resources Manager
January 7, 2015
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD 1G
Approval of Proposed 2015 Water Board Meeting Calendar
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the 2015 Water Board Meeting Calendar.
BACKGROUND:
The following are proposed dates for 2015 Water Board meetings:
February 18
March 1 1
April 15
May 13
June 10
July 1
August 5
September 9
October 7
November 10
December 16
SCHEDULED MEETINGS
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WATER BOARD
JANUARY 2015 THROUGH DECEMBER 2015
SREGULAR MEET8NGS
CBEG N @ 2:00 R.M.
Holidays - City Hall Closed
JANUARY
S
M
T
W
TH
F
S
S
2
3
4
#
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
251
261
27
281
291
30
31
31
31
:•-
OCTOBER
S
S
M
T
F-71
TH
F
S
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
12
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
211
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
31
OCTOBER
S
S
M
T
F-71
TH
F
S
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
12
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
211
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
31
FEBRUARY
S
M
T
W
ITH
IF
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15'
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
23
24
25j
261
271
28
29
30
31
NOVEMBER
MAY
S
M
T
W
TH
F
S
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
!12
6
7
8
9
10
11
18
19
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25j
261
271
28
29
30
31
NOVEMBER
S
W■u�,W
T
W
W�1W
F
S
W,
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
27''
28
29
30
30
31
30
31
NOVEMBER
S
M
T
W
TH
F
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
27''
28
29
30
30
31
30
31
MARCH
S
M
T
W
TH
F
S
1
2
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
i24
12
13
14
15
16
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
23
25
26
27
28
291
30
31
30
31
JUNE
S
M
T
W
TH
F
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
30
31
SEPTEMBER
S
M
W
Na
W,W,r1i1W
F
S
W
=
=
=mImmI
4
5
6
7
mmm
9
10
11
WW®
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
DECEMBER
S
M
T
W
TH
F
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
BA
tj O� a��ovhoR
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
O WATER BOARD
9LIF0
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2015 AGENDA SECTION: Closed Session
ITEM: /-,;Z . 4.
TO: Harold Hanson, Chairman
Bob Smith, Commissioner
Terry Maxwell, Commissioner
FROM: Virginia Gennaro, City Attorney
DATE: January 8, 2015
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD la
CITY ATTORNEY Vd-
SUBJECT: Conference with Legal Counsel — Potential LiflgaHon
Closed session pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2),(e)(1)
(One matter).
VG:dll
S: \WATER\Waferboard \14 -15 Clsessionadmin \01- 14- 15.Potlil.Docx
1/8/2015