Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/14/86 AGENDA WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WEDNESDAY~ MAY 14, 1986 12:00 P.M. - NOON COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CONFERENCE ROOM Call meeting to order Roll call - Board Members: Moore, Chairman, Ratty, Salvaggio 1. Approve minutes of meeting held March 5, 1986. 2. Scheduled public statements. 3. Correspondence. 4. Letter from Scott. Kuney (North Kern Water Storage.District.attorney) requesting that City join North Kern in terminating the Oilfield Discharge agreement with Chevron U.S.A., Inc. dated May 9, 1978. This agreement allows Chevron U.S.A. to discharge treated oilfield water 'into the Beardsley Canal. FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE RECO~4ENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. 5. Closed Session - Water matters regarding potential litigation. 6. Staff Comments ?. Board Comments 8. Adjournment WATER BOARD- CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 1986 12:00 P.M. -'.NOON The meeting was called to order by Chairman Moore in the Community Services Department Conference Room. The secretary~called the roll as follows: Present: 'Moore (Chairman), Ratty, Salvaggio (seated at 12:05p.m.). The minutes of the Special Meeting. held. January 23, 1986 were approved as presented. ~North of the River Municipal Water .District presented a proposal for a water reclamation project for the Oildale and Rosedale areas. The district was represented by Earl Smith, board member and Chairman of the..Construction and Planning Committee; Ralph Gifford, District Manager; Earne~f' Kartinen,~ District Engineer from Boyle. Engineering; and Mi~e Rector, consulting' geologist. The presentation focused on plans to acquire treated sewage and oilfield wast. ewater for. groundwater recharge, drill water .wells to recover the re- charged water and-use the water for-future .additional domestic supplies for t.he North of. the River area~ Mr. Moore .said City staff would evaluate the proposed project' and if needed, forward questions to the North of the River District. No action.was taken by the Board. The 1986-87 "Water Price and Sand Sale Schedule" was presented before the Board by Mr. Bogart. Mr. Bogar't reviewed the price categories for the different ..types of water avail- able this year. A motion was made by Dr. Ratty for~approval of the 1986-87 "Water Price and Sand Sale'Schedule'' with re- commendation for approval by City Council. The motion passed. Mr. Core presented, for Board information, two Mainline Extension Agreements with Tenneco Realty 'Development Corporation totalling $136,376.62. Adjourned to Closed Session at 12:40p.m. regarding potential litigation water matters (per Government Code No. 54956.9.B(1)). The meeting re-opened to the public at 1..31p.m. Mr. Art Saalfield (sitting in for attorney Alan Daniel), requested the Board' author:ize the Director of Water Resources to communicate with Kern-Tulare Water Distri. ct advising them that the sale of water in question has been approved, subject to the ~ terms and conditions set forth in Mr. Bogart's letter to Kern-~ Tulare Water District dated March 6, 1986. A motion for approval was made by. Dr. Ratty.. The motion passed.~ Mr. Bogart brought up for discussion and Board information, the subject of Kern River cloudseeding operations. Mr. Bogart reviewed the January 1986 updated report of cloudseeding with the Board. The subject of the day and time for the, Water Board meeting and Water Resources Committee ~meeting was again brought before ~ the Board for discussion. It was suggested by Mr.,' Moore that they both be held on the same day, with the Water Resources Committee to immediately follow_ ..... the Water Bo.a~d/., · , Rollie MOore,f C~.ha~rman ~ ~' ~ City of BakerSfield Water Board Carol Pagan, ~ecreta~y City of Bakersfield Water Board 2 LAW OFFICES ASSOCIATES: ROBERT J. SELF~ 1675 CHESTER AVENUE G. NElL FARR~ FrEY B. PAPE ,o,.,. APR 1 1 DAVID gRIFFIN' BAKE~SrlELO, ~ALIrO~NIA 93301-~2 SCOTT g. gUNEY ERNEST A. CONANT~ TELEPHONE (805) 3~7-966J JANES E. NILLAR PHILIP W. GANONG' STE/E W. NICHOLS~ ~aY .. co~ CiTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OF COUNSEL: April 10, 1986 'A P~0FESSIONAL CORPORATION Alan Daniel, Esq. City Attorneys Office City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: Discharge of Oil Field Wastewater into the Beardsley- Lerdo Canal System by Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. Dear Alan: Enclosed please find the most recent letter prepared by C. D. Fiddler, Division Manager, Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., dated April 1, 1986, regarding the above-stated matter. As you are aware, in the last two months we have been discussing with Chevron the issue of what indemnification language should be incorporated into a revised agreement for the discharge of oil field wastewater into the Beardsley- Lerdo Canal System. Chevron has insisted that the indemni- fication language of the 1978 agreement be incorporated into the revised agreement. North Kern Water Storage District has on the other hand, insisted that the indemnification clause of the existing agreement is inadequate to protect North Kern and the City of Bakersfield from any damage that may be caused as a consequence of the discharge of Chevron's oil field wastewater into the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System. In an attempt to address Chevron's concerns regarding damage caused not by the discharge itself but rather from the negligence or inattention of water users, I revised the. indemnification language on February 7, 1986. In Mr. Fiddler's letter of February 28, 1986, it was explained that the revised language would somewhat reduce Chevron's exposure but that it still failed to meet the standards that they required. On March 18, 1986, following North Kern's March Board of Directors meeting, I again wrote Mr. Fiddler and informed him that the North Kern Board of Directors were determined that the revised agreement include the indemnification language as proposed. Following Mr. Fiddler's April 1, 1986 letter, I have prepared one final letter explaining that North Kern is commited to its decision that the proposed indemnification language must be incorporated into any agreement and that if Chevron is unable to accept such language, then the May 9, 1978 Agreement will have to be terminated upon one year's written notice as provided in Paragraph 10 of that agreement. Alan Daniel, Esq. April 10, 1986 Page 2 Because Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., and North Kern Water Storage District are at an impasse on the issue of what indemnification language should be incorporated into a revised agreement, we believe it is appropriate t© at this time issue a notice of termination of the May 9, 1978 Agreement. Enclosed please find a letter intended as a one year written notice of termination of the May 9, 1978 Agreement. We should make arrangements for this matter to be placed on the agenda at the next Water Board meeting so that this one year process can commence as soon as possible. Please contact me if either you or Gene Bogart believe additional information should be prepared for the council members of the Water Board. Thank you for your continued cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, Young, Wooldridge, Paulden, Self, Farr & Griffin Scott K. Kuney ~/ ..... Attorneys for North Kern · Water Storage District SKK:re Enclosures cc: C. H. Williams I:hevmn~ ~ ~jj~ Chevron U.S.A. Inc. P. O. Box 1392, Bakersfield, CA 93302 C. D. Fiddler Division Manager April l ~ 1986 Norlhem California Division Production Depa,'tment North Kern ~/ater Storage District City of Bakersfield Proposed Water Discharge Agreement HAND DELIVERED Beardsley Canal Mr. Scott K. Kuney Attorney at law 1675 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Kuney: This is in response to your March lg~ 1986 letter concerning the indemnification language you propose for inclusion in the subject agreement. Chevron is not in the agricultural water business and has presumed that the North Kern ~Vater Storage District and the City of Bakersfield are capable of satisfying themselves as to the suitability of the discharged water for agricultural use, The District and City"' established the water quality standards for the' discharged water in our present agreement entered into in 197g and has since provided input to the California Regional Quality Control Board for the establishment of the quality standards contained in the current NPDES permit Chevron holds for the discharge. Chevron has been paying the District and the City for testing and monitoring the water and is willing to continue to pay such costs. The District and City appear to have been satisfied .with the quality of the water through the years:"' Under the 197g agreement Chevron makes certain warranties and indemnities with respect, to the quality of discharged water. The District and the City have the right to test the quality of the discharged water and the District and City have control over the water after Chevron discharges it into the canal~ i.e.~ blending~ transportation, distribution and use. As previously pointed out~ Chevron has no control over the water after it is discharged into the canal and believes it is unreasonable for the District and the City to expect Chevron to indemnify and hold them harmless for occurrences happening after the discharge; The compensation the District and City are receiving from Chevron coupled with the payments received by the District and the City for the sale of the water' would seem to be adequat~ compensation for any problems that may be encountered in the handling of the discharged' water~ Chevron still fails to see any justification for the indemnification proposed by'you for the new agreement and ask that you reconsider your position. HPL:bl Mr. C. D. Fiddler Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. Post Office Box 1392 Bakersfield, California 93302 Re: The May 9, 1978 Agreement Executed Between Chevron U.S.A., Inc., City of Bakersfield, North Kern Water Storage District Dear Mr. Fiddler: This letter is written to provide Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., with written notice of termination of the Agreement dated May 9, 1978, and executed between Chevron, U.S.A., Inc.; First Party, and the City of Bakersfield and North Kern Water Storage District, Second Party. The City of Bakersfield and North Kern Water Storage District, Second Party, hereby gives Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., First Party, notice that one (1) year from the date of this letter that the above-referenced agreement shall be terminated. Very truly yours, SECOND PARTY CITY OF BAKERSFIELD By. Mayor, City of Bakersfield By. Chief Financial Advisor APPROVED AS TO FORM: By. City Attorney NORTH KERN WATER STORAGE DISTRICT By. By. ~ ~ LAW OFF|CE.~ ASSOCIATES: JOSEPH~ WOOLDRIDGE' ~I~O~J-~TO, WOO]~.[]~X~]~, ~EH, S~, ~ ~ ~[FF[~ HARTIN R. LEE A. CAMERON PAULDENe Ilga7-1984J A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS PHILIP N. OFFICER DAVID GRIFFIN' BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA g33OI-BEg8 SCOTT K. COUNSEL: ~p:i1 [0, 1986 · . .... ....... o. B APE i 1 1986 C. D. Fiddler. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. CITY ATTORNEY'S OFfiCE POS~ Office Box 1392 Bakersfield, California 93302 Re: Discharge of Oil Field Wastewater into the Beardsley- Lerdo Canal System by Chevron, U.S.A., Ina. Dear Mr. Fiddler: I have reviewed your letter of April 1, 1986, in which you request ~hak North Kern Wa~er Storage Distrlck reconsider its position concerning ~he inde~ifica~ion language ~o be incorporated into a revised oil field was~ewater discharge agreement. After careful review of Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. 's position concerning the inde~ification clause and the discharge of.oil field was~ewaker in~o the Beardsley-Lerdo Canal System, North Kern Wa~er Storage District is. co,ired to its decision that any 'agreemen~ ~o be executed between the District and Chevron must include ~he language in the proposed inde~ification clause. Thank you for your candor in this matter. Very truly yours, Young, Wooldridge, Paulden, Self, Farr & Griffin Scott K. Kuney, Attorneys ~ for North Kern Water .~/ Storage District S KK: re cc: North Kern Water Storage District Board of Directors. bcc: Alan Daniel, Esq. KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY :':' '-: "../.:'.f .4. ,ON Bakersfield, California 93302 Directors: phone: (805) 393-6200 Fred L. Starrh Division 1 11" 0 I 1~(~86 Stuart T. Pyle Engineer-Manager President George E. Nibble John L. Willis Division 3 '~"~'mt'/l'll[rJ~ ~¥/~$ l'~'n~"~l-'-*~.~.,~x:~ i~,[ ~) Assislant Engineer-Manager Michael Radon Division 4 Robert E, McCarthy Division 5 Pat Schilling Henry C. Garnett Division 6 Secretary Gene A. Lundquisl Division 7 Address mail to: P.O. Box 58 April 30, 1986 93302-0058 City of Bakersfield D,epartment of Water Resources 4101 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California 93309 RE: Organizational Meeting of "KCWA Groundwater Storage Advisory Committee" Gentlemen: On April 9, 1986, the KCWA Board of Directors approved formation of the "Kern County Water Agency Groundwater Storage Advisory Committee." Your Disi~rict has been appointed a member of the Committee by Agency Board President Fred Starrh. Total membership in the Co~ittee, its purpose and scope is summarized in the enclosed "KCWA Groundwater Storage Advisory Committee Gui del ines ." Attendance of your designated representatives is requested for the organizational meeting of the Committee, which is set for May 6, 1986, at 10:00 A.M., in the KCWA Board Room. You are reminded that your representatives are to be composed of one member of your Board and one member of your staff. Enclosed is a proposed agenda for the first meeting. Please be pre- pared to discuss these subjects, as well as other issues your District considers important to the process. If you have any questions, please feel free to con- tact Tom Clark of this office or myself. Si ncerely, Engineer-Manager TC: wep xc: KCWA ~ater Problems Con~ittee enclosures April 24, 1986 "KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY GROUNDWATER STORAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE GUIDELINES" CREATION The "Kern County Water Agency Groundwater Storage Advisory Commit- tee" shall be formed by the Kern County Water Agency Board of Directors. PURPOSE The Advisory Committee shall be charged with the responsibility of making recommendations to the Agency on all facets of proposed groundwater storage programs or proj.ects in the San Joaquin Valley portion of Kern County. MEMBERSHIP Membership shall be composed of Districts and entities that have a direct physical interest in the groundwater storage projects, including management of~lands, water and facilities within the area influenced by the project, and entities that may be involved financially in the Agency project or that have a water supply that will be impacted by the project. Committee members will include, but not be limited to, the follow- ing groups of interests: Kern River Interests Buena Vista WSD City of Bakersfield Henry Miller WD Kern Delta WD Olcese/La Hacienda North Kern WSD SWP Groundwater Area Member Units Cawelo WD Improvement District No. 4 Rosedale-Rio Bravo WSD Semitropic WSD West Kern WD West Side Member Units Bel ridge WSD Berrenda Mesa WD Lost Hills WD Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa WSD Other Interests County of Kern Each entity shall recommend a Director of its Board as the member of the Committee and a staff person as the alternate member. Both the member and alternate are urged to attend all meetings. To facilitate the work of the Advisory Committee and the Agency, a Steering Committee shall be formed with two representatives desig- nated by the Kern River Interests, two representatives designated by the SWP Groundwater Member Units, one representative designated by the West Side Member Units, one representative designated by the County of Kern and two representatives designated by the Agency. AGENDA KCWA GROUNDWATER STORAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE DATE: May 6, 1986 TIME: 10:00 A.M. PLACE: KCWA Board Room 3200 Rio Mirada Drive Bakersfield, CA 1. Election of Officers - President, Vice-President, Secretary 2. Appoint Steering Committee Kern River Interests - two members County of Kern - one member ,~ KCWA Groundwater Member Units - two members KCWA Non-Groundwater Member Units - two members 3. Appoint Kern Fan Subcommittee Suggested: Berrenda Mesa W.D. North Kern W.S.D. Buena Vista W.S.D. Olcese W.D. City of Bakersfield Rosedale-Rio Bravo W.S.D. Henry Miller W.D. West Kern W.D. Kern Delta W.D. 4. DWR Proposal 5. Other Alternatives - MWD and Local Programs 6. KCWA Financing Powers 7. Existing Groundwater Programs - Staff Recommends that each general meeting include a presentation and discussion of existing programs, i.e., 2,800 acres, Rosedale-Rio Bravo W.S.D., etc. 8. New Business 9. Adjourn -3- STATE OF CALIFORNIA--THE RESOURCES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 1416 NINTH STREET, SACRAMENTO 95814 P.O. BOX 388 95802 (916) 445-9248 .S T.P 'CI4,/~// TNC [] -- G~f.; [] WJH RKB .,- r'... 1986 AFF~ Dks El Hr. Fred Starrh, President Kirin County Water Agency Kern County Water Agency P. O. Box 58 Bakersfieid, CA 93302 Dear Mr. Sta~rh: Thank you for giving the Department of Water Resoure.es (DWR) an opportunity t° present the inttiaI concepts of a conjunctive use ground water program on the Tenneco West Corporation property in Kern County at your March 2?th Board meeting. This ietter summarizes the materiaI presented at the meeting, provides a more detaiied discussion of the need and purpose of the program, and describes the inttiai studies done by DWR in recent months. Summary o The purpose of the program is to deveIop an economieai iong-term storage arrangement for meeting State Water Project (SWP) water needs during dry years. o The proposed investigation wtIi determine (1) the basic feasibiIity of the program, (2) the nature of the iocai agency agreements, and (3) whether there is sufficient basis for the Department to proceed to purchase the necessary land. o The Program EnvironmentaI Impact Report (EIR) wiii review the impacts of the proposed iand purchase on the area and its environment. If the program proceeds, specific projects wiii be pianned and EIR's prepared on each project. o The Program EIR scheduie is designed to aIiow a iand purchase decision by this summer. The present scheduie provides for a draft by May 8 and a finai report on.June 30. However, a decision wiIi not be made untiI the concurrent engineering, economic and financial studies shown on the attached work plan are sufficient to make that decision. o The Department envisions that actual operation of the spreading and extraction facilities would be by Kern County Water Agency and/or its. member units under contract with the State. Under SB 189 (Ayala), approved in 1985, the State is required to have a contract with the Agency before undertaking such a program. Hr. Fred Sterrh Page 2 APR 1 8 1986 o Our studies to date have been based on the availability of one million acre- feet of ground water storage for this recharge program'. o The State would purchase the amount of land needed to protect adjacent landowners from state program facilities' impacts. The actual amount of land needed would be determined in engineering studies. o The SWP would benefit by addition 'of a storage facility south of the Delta permitting storage of surplus Delta outflows. In addition it will allow the SWP to go to conjunctive operation of surface and ground water supplies, which will increase the system efficiency. o There is a possibility of developing wetlands habitat for waterfowl in eon junction with the water spreading areas. o By retiring existing irrigated lands from production ground water pumpage would be reduced, resulting in up to 70,000 acre-feet a year reduction in overdraft of the basin. o The State also plans to evaluate in-lieu ground water storage proposals which have been suggested recently by the Agency, Rosedale-Rio Bravo WaD and Semitropic WaD. Each of these proposals will be reviewed in eon junction with the 1983 Kern County Optimization Study. Pro, ram Environmental Impact Report DWR is investigating this project by preparing a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and conducting concurrent engineering, economic and financial studies. Further California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis would be undertaken when there is a proposed plan for operating and managing the land that is purchased. The Program EIR deals primarily with the impacts of land purchase issues and is a necessary legal step that would permit purchase of the Tenneco property. However, before we can make a recommendation on the purchase to the State Water Contractors it will be necessary to develop engineering, economic and financial information on probable use of the property. We look forward to your cooperation in studies of (1) the general location, type and magnitude of facilities; (2) physical constraints in operation of a recharge- extraction project; (3) operation of the project as a unit of the SWP system; and (4) the associated costs. DWR commenced the process by filing a Notice of Preparation on March 14, 1986. Mr. Donald J. Finlayson will be coordinating the preparation of the Program EIR. This EIR will be prepared and reviewed over the next three months with the Final EIR scheduled for release to the public about the end of June. Mr. Fred Starrh Page 3 APR 1 8 1986 Discussion Several months ago DWR became aware that substantial acreage in western Kern County was for sale by a single owner (Tenneco West). The ground water basin underlying the property has the potential to accommodate storage of substantial quantities of water for long periods of time. : After discussions with staff of the'Agency regarding the potential of the area for a conjunctive use operation using SWP water and facilities, DWR undertook the initial study of a possible project. That study concluded that there is a reasonable expectation for developing long-term storage of imported water to reduce SWP deficiencies in dry years and to revise land use over the area to substantially reduce ground water overdraft. DWR considers this conceptual conjunctive use ground water recharge project to be a viable means of reducing SWP deficiencies in dry years and ground water overdraft in Kern County. Last year the Governor signed SB 187 which provides that such a ground water storage project to provide yield for the SWP "shall not be constructed or operated within the boundaries of an agency that has contracted for a supply of water from the State Water Resources Development System unless the department enters into a contract with that agency concerning the facility." Approximately 46,000 acres of land is available for purchase from the Tenneco West Corporation. About 20,000 acres of this land is now being used for agricultural production. Acquisition of the entire 46,000 acres will be evaluated because a buffer zone may be needed to protect adjacent properties from varying water levels during periods of recharge and extraction. It is presently assumed that any land purchased would be taken out of agricultural production and converted to natural habitat and possibly intermittent wetlands. The reduction or cessation of the farming operation would reduce average annual ground water consumptive use by up to 70,000 acre- feet. The actual operation of the facilities is expected to be contracted to Kern County Water Agency or other local entities rather than operated by the State, State Water Project Operation Studies Operation studies for the conjunctive use ground 'water storage program were performed over a hydrologic period equivalent to the 1922-78 historic period for 1990-1eve1 facility development and water demands. These studies were to determine when SWP water and California Aqueduct capacity would be available for recharge, and when water would be needed to be extracted for deficiency reduction. These studies assumed a hypothetical operational ground water. Hr, Fred Starrh Page ~ ~,PR 1 8 1986 storage capacity of one million acre-feet (AF) in the Kern River Fan area under the purchased property. Potential storage capacity will be determined following additional coordination with the Agency and studies by the Department. Allowable recharge and extraction rates were assumed to be 40,000 and 30,000 AF per month respectively. Furthermore, it was assumed that only existing SWP facilities would be available. The operation studies were performed with the objective of maximizing the SWP average annual delivery while protecting, but not increasing, the firm SWP yield. Future operation studies will evaluate objectives of maximizing SWP firm yield and some combination of firm and average delivery. The preliminary operation studies indicate that the average annual SWP deliveries can be increased by about 225,000 AF per year through conjunctive operation with a Kern County ground water storage program. The study indicated that recharge to and extraction from the ground water basin averaged about 100,000 AF per year with storage and withdrawals approximately balanced over the operational period. The results of this study were then used as input to a ground water simulation model as described below. Ground Water Model Studies The effects of a recharge and extraction program on the ground water basin under the purchased land were predicted using DWR's San Joaquin Valley Ground Water Model (GWM). The model structure was modified somewhat in the area of the property to better reflect the boundaries of the recharge site and projected recharge operations' by others on adjacent lands such as Rosedale-Rio Bravo WSD's Jerry Slough and the City of Bakersfield's 2,800 acre spreading site, The GWM included local inflow and CVP water supplies approximated from historical valley rim inflows and river diversion curves, and the SWP conjunctive use program developed from the previously discussed operation study. Projections were made beginning with Spring 1983 ground water conditions. Three scenarios were assumed for each set of projections. The base case assumed that current irrigated land use in the purchase area would be continued into the foreseeable future. The second scenario assumed irrigation on the agricultural lands would cease so that the overdraft correction benefits of the program could be identified. The last scenario removed the purchased agricultural land from production and included the SWP recharge and extraction program. Mr. Fred Starrh Page 5 APR 1 8 {986 Overall, the GWM initial projections indicated that a conjunctive use ground water recharge program could be operated to preclude the ground water levels from rising too close to the surface during recharge efforts, and would generally raise area ground water levels above the existing base conditions. Cost Analysis ~" An initial, rather rough cost estimate was done for the possible conjunctive use ground water recharge program. ~he estimate for the first costs, i.e., capital costs to construct facilities, were based on construction of generic features that are not site specific. The locations of the canal, wells, and related facilities were not determined. ~he first cost consisted of: oAssumed purchase price for about 46,000 acres of land. o Construction of a ten mile long 700 cfa canal with one pumping station. o Construction of about 3,500 acres of spreading grounds. o Construction of 110 new wells for extraction. The number of existing wells that may be usable has not been determined. If existing wells can be used the amount of new wells may be reduced. oConstruction of surface collection facilities to transport water from wells to an existing local canal or back to the California aqueduct. The estimated cost of the above items is about $100 million. If this cost were financed by revenue bonds over 30 years at nine percent interest the annual debt service would be about $10 million. An estimate for the annual operation cost was based on an average annual recharge of 100,000 acre-feet per year and an average annual extraction of 100,000 acre-feet per year. However, extraction and recharge costs are not likely to occur in the same year. Annual cost estimates include maintenance costs for the canal, wells, and spreading grounds; recharge costs consisting of pumping costs in the new canal and variable spreading costs in the spreading grounds; and extraction costs for pumping from the basin to existing surface distribution facilities. ~he estimated average annual operation costs are about ,$3 million per. year. The total annual costs for debt service and operation would be about ,$13 million. If only the average annual extraction of 100,000 acre-feet per year from the basin is considered as the yield, the cost of new water would be about $130 per acre-foot. If the ground water basin is operated conjunctively with the surface water facilities of the SWP, the yield could increase to 225,000 acre-feet per year and the cost would drop to about $60 per acre-foot. Mr. Fred Starrh Page 6 APR 1 8 ~9~6 Because this project would be operating in the Kern County ground water basin that. county agencies depend on for water supply, we are open to any suggestions or eommen>ts you may have on how to evaluate this program. For further information you may wish to contact me at (916) 445-6582 or have your staff contact Mr. Donald J. Finlayson at (916) 445-6860. Sincerely, David N. Kennedy Director Attachment KERN RIVER FAN RECHARGE PROJECT Reconnaissance Study Plan .Motice of,Prep_~ration S::T System Operation Studies lcrn~nic .=_nd Financial Studies ' :Zeo,:rt to Director .e~:-r.r. and to SWP Contractors :re.~.?~ia~_a La'nd' Purchase , ':?>~ ?.:..-~ F_=a~-ibilit~: Studies Prcsact