■ As California water use rises, officials OK fines

Even as Gov. Jerry Brown has called for a voluntary reduction in residents’ water use by 20 percent, Californians overall actually increased their use by 1 percent last May, according to a report by officials of the State Water Resources Control Board.

The report by Max Gomberg, the board’s climate change mitigation strategist; Carlos Mejia, its staff counsel; and Eric Oppenheimer, division chief of the board’s Office of Research, Planning and Performance, helped convince the panel Tuesday to impose emergency regulations and mandatory water use prohibitions.

The board also agreed to back the new water restrictions with fines of $500 a day for individual violators and $10,000 a day for water agencies that don’t comply.

The new regulations become effective Aug. 1.

Felicia Marcus, chairperson of the board, said, “Everyone in the state is going to be expected to step up.”

She said many residents and companies in the state don’t understand the severity of the drought. “There are communities in danger of running out of water all over the state,” she said.

California’s South Coast was the worst offender, increasing its water use by 8 percent above the previous year, the three wrote in their report that corrected an earlier estimate that Californians statewide had decreased water use by 5 percent. North Lahontan, along California’s northeast border with Nevada, also increased its consumption, though by 5 percent.

One of the cities that has succeeded in stepping up its conservation efforts — at least as measured against the rest of the state — is Benicia.

The city’s voluntary cutback of 10 percent compares to reductions along the San Joaquin River and the state’s central coast, which also cut back by 10 percent. The San Francisco Bay and Colorado River areas trimmed use by 5 percent; South Lahontan reduced consumption by 9 percent, the North Coast has cut back 12 percent, and the best response has come from the Sacramento River area, which reduced consumption by 13 percent.

Benicia City Manager Brad Kilger wrote the City Council last month that from March 1 to May 31, city residents reduced their total consumption by 10 percent when compared to the same time period in 2012.

Statewide, agriculture accounts for 75 percent of total water consumption, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture asked the University of California-Davis, the state’s land grant college, to study the matter.

The university’s Center for Watershed Sciences completed the study, which said some farmers could see their wells run dry by next year.

This could cost the state $2.2 billion if croplands aren’t planted, and more than 17,000 would lose their jobs, the study forecast.

Since Californians have been unable to comply with Brown’s call for a 20-percent voluntary drop in water use, the Water Board on Tuesday opted to impose emergency regulations that would temporarily prohibit applying water to hard surfaces for washing, watering of outdoor landscapes that causes runoff, using a hose without a shutoff nozzle to wash a car, and using potable water in a fountain or decorative water container unless the water is recirculated.

Exceptions would be made for health, safety and some permitted exceptions.

Urban water suppliers would be required to put in place contingency plans that mandate restrictions on outdoor water use.

If no such plans exist, outdoor watering would be limited to a maximum of two days a week, or alternate plans would need to be put in place to achieve a comparable reduction in water use when compared to 2013.

Smaller water systems also would need to restrict outdoor irrigation to no more than two days a week or achieve the same water goals in other ways.
Violators could face fines of up to $500 a day, and the board itself could impose a civil liability of up to $500 a day.

Should the Water Board issue a cease-and-desist order, violations could cost a scofflaw up to $10,000 a day. The board also might direct Attorney General Kamala Harris to seek an injunction against a violator.

Urban water suppliers would be required to track water use, from the amount of potable water produced to estimates of the gallons of water individual consumers use each day.

Prior to the board’s Tuesday meeting, the Association of California Water Agencies, which represents more than 430 public water agencies that deliver more than 90 percent of residential, commercial and agricultural water throughout the state, wrote the panel.

It recommended that enforcement and fine provisions should be handled at the local level; that monthly reports of water use are important, but estimated gallons of water used per person each day should be deleted; that washing solar panels should be allowed because they need a monthly bath to operate efficiently so the state can reach 2020 renewable energy goals; and that any new regulations shouldn’t apply to wholesale water suppliers.

The Water Board also heard from a variety of other individuals, agencies and companies.

Disneyland’s environmental compliance manager, Janina Jarvis, described the resort’s multiyear, non-stormwater diversion plan for reclaiming water used in nightly washdowns of stage areas that face guests.

The Orange County Water District has said the resort pumps nearly 35 million gallons of “near-distilled-quality” groundwater replenishment system (GWRS) water daily into injection wells that are seawater intrusion barriers, and another 35 million gallons are pumped daily into recharge basins in Anaheim, where it’s filtered to replenish aquifers of the county’s groundwater basin and becomes part of the drinking water supply.

Jarvis asked that these resort washdowns be exempt from state regulation.

Chris Spain, chef executive officer of HydroPoint Data Systems of Petaluma, wrote that many companies have adopted smart irrigation systems that should be exempt as well to protect landscape assets.

San Diego Zoo President Douglas Meyers wrote that the zoo has a wetlands habitat that demonstrates natural filtration and drought-tolerant landscaping. But he worried that some of the proposed restrictions might endanger visitor and employee health, particularly since some surfaces — from picnic tables to bird and animal perches, sleeping areas and other habitats — need to be cleaned with water to prevent disease.

In addition, Meyers wrote, some animals need the zoo to keep some plants irrigated so they can browse, and some of the zoo’s rare and endangered plants that are being propagated also require irrigation.