U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

43–951 PDF 2008

S. HRG. 110–460 

CURRENT WATER BILLS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

S. 2259 H.R. 1140 

H.R. 31 H.R. 1503 

H.R. 716 H.R. 1725 

H.R. 786 H.R. 1737 

H.R. 813 H.R. 2614 

APRIL 8, 2008 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

JON TESTER, Montana 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

FRANK MACCHIAROLA, Republican Staff Director 

JUDITH K. PENSABENE, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota, Chairman 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

JON TESTER, Montana 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF BINGAMAN and PETE V. DOMENICI are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator From South Dakota ........................................ 1 

Polly, Kris, Deputy Commissioner for External & Intergovernmental Affairs, 

Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior ......................................... 2 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 15 

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 17 

(1) 

CURRENT WATER BILLS 

TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:37 p.m., in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tim Johnson presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM SOUTH DAKOTA 

Senator JOHNSON. I have called this hearing for the Water and 

Power Subcommittee. It is my pleasure to welcome everyone here 

this afternoon. 

Today’s hearing is relatively straightforward. Pending before the 

subcommittee are 10 bills that seek to authorize new projects 

under the Bureau of Reclamation’s water reuse and recycling program, otherwise known as the Title 16 program. The BOR is involved in assessing feasibility of each of these projects, and today 

we will hear the results of BOR’s evaluation. 

All the bills before this subcommittee today, except one, involve 

communities in California. I will briefly summarize these bills for 

the record. 

One, S. 2259 and its companion H.R. 813, the Santa Ana River 

Water Supply Enhancement Act. 

Two, H.R. 31, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Recycled Water Act. 

Three, H.R. 716, the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Act. 

Four, H.R. 786, authorizing a water supply demonstration project 

in Los Angeles County. 

Five, H.R. 1140, the South Orange County Recycled Water Enhancement Act. 

Six, H.R. 1503, an Arizona bill authorizing the Avra/Black Wash 

Riparian Restoration Project. 

Seven, H.R. 1725, the Rancho California Water District Recycled 

Water Act. 

Eight, H.R. 1737, the city of Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act. 

Nine, H.R. 2614, authorizing recycling projects for the Yucaipa 

Valley Water District and the city of Corona, California. 

These bills demonstrate the popularity of the Title 16 program. 

Communities of all sizes are striving to improve the efficiency with 

which they use water in order to address long-term needs. The subVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:46 Aug 26, 2008 Jkt 043391 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\DOCS\43951.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: MONICA
2 

committee’s goal is to ensure that any legislation that moves forward is consistent with the purpose of the Title 16 program and 

supports the projects that are technically and economically viable. 

I, therefore, look forward to learning more about these projects during today’s hearing. 

Since there are no Senators otherwise in attendance, we will now 

turn to the sole witness for today’s hearing. Representing the administration is Kris Polly, the Deputy Commissioner for External 

and Intergovernmental Affairs with the Bureau of Reclamation. 

Welcome and thank you for being here, Mr. Polly. 

Before starting, I would like to quickly note that the subcommittee has received additional written testimony on several of 

the bills before us today. That testimony, as well as the written 

submission of Mr. Polly, will be made part of the official hearing 

record. 

Senator JOHNSON. Mr. Polly, please go ahead and summarize 

your written testimony. Following that, we will have a brief question and answer period. 

STATEMENT OF KRIS POLLY, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR 

EXTERNAL & INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF 

RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. POLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Kris Polly, Deputy 

Commissioner for the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be 

here today to give the Department’s views on nine bills which 

would amend Title 16 of Public Law 102–575, the Reclamation 

Wastewater and Groundwater Study Act. 

For the reasons described below, the Department cannot support 

these bills. 

H.R. 813 would authorize the Secretary to participate in several 

projects in southern California. 

Section 2 of the bill authorizes the Secretary to participate in the 

planning and construction of treatment systems and wetlands for 

the flows of the Santa Ana River into the Prado Basin. The bill authorizes an appropriation of $20 million to carry out this function. 

On March 18, 2007, Reclamation approved the feasibility study 

for this project and deemed two of the four component treatment 

systems feasible. The remaining two systems will be addressed 

upon completion of ongoing studies. 

Section 3 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 

assist local agencies and projects to construct regional brine lines 

to export salinity to the Pacific Ocean. 

Section 4 of the bill authorizes the Secretary to participate in the 

planning and construction of the Lower Chino Dairy Area Desalination Demonstration and Reclamation Project. Reclamation approved the feasibility study associated with the project on November 28, 2006, and deemed it to be feasible. 

The Department is concerned that under section 4, the legisla- tion proposes a cost sharing of 25 percent, or $50 million. The Department does not believe there is justification to support assigning 

a cap higher than the current $20 million for this project and 

strongly opposes this provision. 

For these reasons, the Department cannot support H.R. 813. 

3 

H.R. 31 would authorize Interior to participate in the planning 

and construction of facilities to treat and distribute recycled water 

within the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District service area. 

H.R. 31 provides a Federal funding of 25 percent of the total 

project cost, or $12.5 million, whichever is less. 

The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District is heavily dependent on imported water provided by the Metropolitan Water District 

of Southern California. In order to lessen this dependence and provide for future growth, the district is developing plans for recycled 

water systems in the Alberhill and Wildomar areas. The Alberhill 

system consists of the wastewater treatment facility and distribution system including pumps, pipelines, and storage facilities. A 

preliminary construction cost estimate for the Alberhill system is 

$38.5 million. The Wildomar system also consists of pumps, pipelines, and storage facilities. The total estimated cost of the 

Wildomar system is about $19 million. 

Reclamation determined the Wildomar project to be feasible on 

November 15, 2007. The Alberhill system has not been reviewed. 

H.R. 716 would authorize the Secretary to participate in the 

planning and construction of the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse 

Plan. Under the proposed legislation, costs incurred by the city of 

Santa Rosa prior to the date of enactment would be credited by the 

Secretary toward the total cost of the Santa Rosa Urban Water 

Reuse Plan. Reclamation is working with the city to develop a feasibility study, but Reclamation has not yet determined the feasibility of this project. 

The project envisioned in H.R. 786 involves infiltration of storm 

water runoff to recharge the groundwater basin in the Los Angeles 

and San Gabriel watersheds. 

The Department believes that it is not necessary to specifically 

authorize a demonstration project under Title 16 since section 1605 

already provides authority to participate in demonstration projects. 

Further, Congress appropriated $492,000 for this demonstration 

project in fiscal year 2008, and Reclamation has already begun participation in this project. 

H.R. 1140 would authorize planning and construction for two 

projects. 

Section 2 of the bill deals with the San Juan Capistrano Recycled 

Water System, with a Federal cost share not to exceed 25 percent 

and a funding authorization of $18.5 million. Reclamation reviewed 

this project as part of the CALFED Title 16 review and found the 

information submitted for this project lacks six of the nine requirements needed to determine feasibility. Absent these items, Reclamation cannot determine the feasibility of this project. 

Section 2 of the bill would also authorize the San Clemente Reclaimed Water Project. The local district has not been in consultation with Reclamation, nor has Reclamation received any copies of 

a feasibility study to support the authorization of this project. 

H.R. 1503 would authorize the Secretary to participate in the 

planning and construction of a water recycling facility to enhance 

and restore riparian habitat in the Black Wash Sonoran Desert 

Ecosystem in Avra Valley, Arizona. H.R. 1503 provides for Federal 

funding of 25 percent of the total project cost, or $14 million, 

whichever is less. 

4 

Pima County intends to expand its 1.5 million gallon per day 

wastewater treatment facility to a capacity of 5 million gallons per 

day. Currently treated effluent is not reused. The proposed project 

would provide tertiary treatment and establish procedures to recharge the reclaimed water in ponds and the Black Wash. Recharging the water in the channel of Black Wash will create and 

preserve wildlife habitat. 

The Department supports efforts to increase reclaimed water use 

in southern Arizona. Reclamation has been working with Pima 

County to review the technical, regulatory, and contractual issues 

involved in the project. The discussions have been preliminary. To 

date, steps necessary to prepare a feasibility report have not been 

discussed. 

H.R. 1725 would authorize participation in the planning and the 

construction of the Rancho California Water District’s facilities for 

water recycling, desalination, and distribution of non-potable water 

supplies. 

The Rancho California Water District is heavily dependent on 

imported water provided by the Metropolitan District of Southern 

California. In order to lessen this dependence, the district has developed a regional integrated resources plan. Together, the component projects would expand local water resources by increasing conjunctive use, expanding the use of recycled water, and substituting 

untreated water for the treated water that is currently being used 

for agricultural irrigation. 

Implementation of the plan would require the construction of 

pipelines, pumping plants, an advanced water treatment facility, 

and brine disposal facilities. Reclamation, in collaboration with the 

district, recently completed work on a feasibility study, and on November 15, 2007, deemed this project feasible. 

In fiscal year 2008, Congress appropriated $123,000 for this 

project. Using these funds, Reclamation is working with the Rancho California Water District to complete compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act for this project. 

H.R. 1737 would authorize participation in the planning and construction of the Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and Treatment Project, also known as the GREAT project, which would reclaim impaired water in the area of Oxnard, California. 

The GREAT project consists of three parts: one, a regional 

groundwater desalination facility; two, a recycled water system to 

serve agricultural water users and to protect groundwater sources 

from saltwater intrusion; and three, a brine line that will convey 

desalination concentrates to an enhanced saltwater wetland. 

Reclamation currently is reviewing the feasibility study submitted by the city of Oxnard for this project. 

H.R. 2614 would authorize the planning and construction of two 

projects that treat impaired surface water, reclaim and reuse impaired groundwater and wastewater, and provide brine disposal in 

the State of California. 

First, this bill would authorize the Yucaipa Valley Regional 

Water Supply Renewal Project. Reclamation has reviewed the facility and the feasibility study submitted by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District, and this project was deemed feasible on March 26, 2008. 

5 

H.R. 2614 would also authorize the city of Corona Water Utility, 

Water Recycling, and Reuse Project. Reclamation has reviewed the 

feasibility study submitted by the city of Corona. Based on the 

technical information provided, Reclamation cannot determine the 

feasibility of this project and additional information has been requested from the city. 

In closing, I would like to note that of the 35 Title 16 projects 

specifically authorized and the 2 demonstration projects undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being 

pursued and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active 

projects, after fiscal ear 2008, is nearly $400 million. The Federal 

cost share for the 12 projects currently not being pursued is an estimated $220 million. 

Given Reclamation’s current annual budget of approximately 

$900 million, this is not an insubstantial number. In light of this 

fact and the substantial Federal cost share associated with the active Title 16 projects, we cannot support the authorization of new 

projects at this time. 

While the Department is not able to support new project authorizations, we certainly understand the projects established by Title 

16 are important to many water users in the West. To that end, 

Reclamation actually works with local sponsors on feasibility reviews of Title 16 projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation 

can play a constructive, albeit limited, role with local sponsors in 

weighing the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my comments. I would be happy 

to answer any questions that you may have. 

[The prepared statements of Mr. Polly follow:] 

H.R. 813

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to give the 

Department’s views on HR 813, the Santa Ana River Water Supply Enhancement 

Act of 2007. The Department does not support this bill. 

HR 813 would amend Title XVI, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater 

Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in 

several projects. 

Section 2 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with 

the Orange County Water District, to participate in the planning, design, and construction of the natural treatment systems and wetlands for the flows of the Santa 

Ana River, California, and its tributaries into the Prado Basin. Section 2 of the bill 

authorizes an appropriation of $20 million to carry out this function. With regard 

to this project, on March 18, 2007, Reclamation approved the feasibility study and 

deemed two of the four component treatment systems feasible. The remaining two 

systems will be addressed upon completion of ongoing studies. 

Section 3 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, under Federal reclamation law and in cooperation with units of local government, to assist agencies 

in projects to construct regional brine lines to export the salinity imported from the 

Colorado River to the Pacific Ocean. 

Section 4 of the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with 

the Chino Basin Watermaster, the Inland Empire Utilities Agency, and the Santa 

Ana Watershed Project Authority, acting under Federal Reclamation laws, to participate in the design, planning, and construction of the Lower Chino Dairy Area 

desalination demonstration and reclamation project. With regard to this project, 

Reclamation approved the feasibility study on November 28, 2006 and deemed this 

project feasible. 

These three projects would have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority in the President’s Budget. 

6 

In addition to the proposed three projects, the Department is also concerned that 

under section 4, the legislation proposes a cost sharing of 25 percent, not to exceed 

$50.0 million. The Department does not believe there is justification to support assigning a cap higher than $20.0 million, the cap for Title XVI projects enacted after 

1996, and strongly opposes this provision. 

While the Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies and increase recycled water use in California, the Department does not support HR 813. 

The Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI 

projects in light of the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects 

now being actively pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The remaining authorized Federal cost share for the active 

projects, after FY 2008, is nearly $400 million. The authorized Federal cost share 

for the 12 projects currently not being pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has revised and improved its Directives 

and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe 

that Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing 

the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 813. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 31

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to give the 

Department of the Interior’s views on HR 31, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water 

District Wastewater and Recycled Water Facilities Act. Although the Wildomar portion of this project has been deemed technically feasible, the Department does not 

support HR 31. 

HR 31 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 

Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and construction of facilities needed to treat wastewater and distribute recycled water within the Elsinore 

Valley Municipal Water District’s service area. It provides for Federal funding of 25 

percent of the total project cost or $12.5 million, whichever is less. 

The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District is located in southwestern Riverside 

County, which has been experiencing rapid growth. The District is heavily dependent on imported water provided by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California. In order to lessen this dependence and to provide for additional future 

growth, the District is developing plans for recycled water systems in the Alberhill 

and Wildomar areas. 

The Alberhill system consists of a wastewater treatment facility and distribution 

system, which includes pumps, pipelines, and storage facilities. A preliminary construction cost estimate of the Alberhill system is $38.5 million. The Wildomar system consists of a distribution system which includes pumps, pipelines, and storage 

facilities. Total estimated cost of the Wildomar system is about $19 million. 

Reclamation has determined the Wildomar project to be feasible on November 15, 

2007. The Alberhill system has not been reviewed. 

While the Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies and increase recycled water use, we do not support HR 31. These projects would have to 

compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority in 

the President’s Budget. The Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already authorized 

for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has revised and improved its Directives 

and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe 

that Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing 

the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

7 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 31. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 716

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to provide the Department 

of the Interior’s views on HR 716, a bill to authorize Reclamation to participate in 

the design, planning, and construction of the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan. 

The Department does not support HR 716. 

HR 716 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 

Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, Title XVI) to include the City of Santa Rosa, 

California, Urban Water Reuse Plan. Under the proposed legislation, costs incurred 

by the City of Santa Rosa prior to the date of enactment would be credited by the 

Secretary toward the total cost of the Santa Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan. 

Reclamation is working with the City of Santa Rosa to develop a feasibility study, 

but Reclamation has not yet determined the feasibility of this project. I would like 

note that the Department does support efforts to increase local water supplies and 

increase recycled water use in the West; however, Title XVI provisions require that 

these technical studies be completed and reviewed to determine the feasibility and 

cost effectiveness. The Department believes this legislation should not be enacted 

without a proper analysis to ensure this project is feasible. 

Further, H.R. 716 authorizes the appropriation of up to $20 million or a maximum 

of 25 percent of total project costs, whichever is less. This project would have to 

compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority in 

the President’s Budget. The Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already authorized 

for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has developed Directives and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

For the reasons noted above, the Department does not support HR 716. Mr. 

Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to answer any questions. 

H.R. 786

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to give the 

Department’s views on HR 786, the Los Angeles County Water Supply Augmentation Demonstration Project. The Department does not support this legislation. It is 

not necessary to specifically authorize a demonstration project under Title XVI of 

P.L. 102-575, as amended, since Section 1605 already provides authority to participate in demonstration projects. We are already implementing this proposed project 

using funds appropriated in FY 2008. 

The project that HR 786 would involve infiltration of storm water runoff to recharge the groundwater basin in the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Watersheds. The 

project consists of a neighborhood demonstration project that would demonstrate the 

potential for infiltration of storm water runoff to recharge groundwater by retrofitting one or more sites in the Los Angeles Area with state-of-the-art best management practices and perform pre-development and post-development monitoring to 

assess the resulting potential new water supply. 

This project was jointly developed by the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council, City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Los Angeles 

County Department of Public Works, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control 

Board, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Water Replenishment 

District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, and the 

City of Santa Monica Environmental Programs Division, with technical input from 

Reclamation. Project benefits include local drought protection, water quality improvements and reduced dependence on imported water. 

8 

HR 786 would authorize Reclamation to participate in planning, design, construction and assessment of a demonstration project. The legislation does not specify an 

authorization of appropriations amount, but provides that the Federal share should 

not exceed 25 percent of project costs. However, since Section 1605 of Title XVI already authorizes the Secretary to construct, operate, and maintain demonstration 

projects, and since Congress has appropriated $492,000 for this demonstration 

project in Fiscal Year 2008, Reclamation has already initiated participation in this 

project. Because of other priorities in the President’s Budget, we have not included 

funding for this project in our FY 2009 budget. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 786. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 1140

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am here today to present the views of 

the Department of the Interior on HR 1140, a bill to authorize water recycling 

projects in Southern California. HR 1140 would amend Title XVI, the Reclamation 

Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (P.L. 102-575) to include design, planning, and construction authority for two local projects. For reasons described below, the Department does not support HR 1140. 

HR 1140, as written, would amend Title XVI to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and construction of two water recycling 

projects in south Orange County in the State of California. 

Section 2 of the bill would authorize the San Juan Capistrano Recycled Water 

System, with a Federal cost share not to exceed 25 percent, and a funding authorization of appropriation of $18.5 million. Reclamation reviewed this project as part 

of the CALFED/TitleXVI review and found the information submitted for this 

project lacked 6 of the 9 requirements needed to determine feasibility. Absent these 

items, Reclamation could not determine the feasibility of the project. This does not 

mean the project is not feasible, but rather that until the six remaining items are 

completed, Reclamation cannot provide a feasibility determination. 

Section 2 of the bill would also authorize the San Clemente Reclaimed Water 

Project. The local district has not been in consultation with Reclamation nor has 

Reclamation received any copies of a feasibility study to support the authorization 

of this project. Without a proper analysis to ensure this project meets appropriate 

federal guidelines for consideration of construction authorization, we cannot support 

Reclamation’s participation in the planning, design and construction activities. 

While the Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies and increase recycled water use, we do not support H.R. 1140. This project would have 

to compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority 

in the President’s Budget. The Department continues to believe it is not prudent to 

authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation revised and improved its Directives and 

Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that 

Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the 

merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes by testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 1140. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 1503

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to give the 

Department of the Interior’s views on HR 1503, the Avra/Black Wash Reclamation 

and Riparian Restoration Project Act. The Department does not support HR 1503. 

H.R. 1503 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study 

and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), to authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to participate in the design, planning, and construction of water recycling facilities 

to enhance and restore riparian habitat in the Black Wash Sonoran Desert ecosystem in Avra Valley, west of the metropolitan Pima County area in Arizona. It 

9 

provides for Federal funding of 25 percent of the total project cost or $14 million, 

whichever is less. 

Pima County intends to expand the 1.5 million gallon per day wastewater treatment facility to a capacity of 5 mgd. Currently, treated effluent is not reused. The 

proposed project would provide tertiary treatment and establish procedures to recharge the reclaimed water in ponds and the Black Wash. The treated effluent that 

was previously evaporated would instead recharge the aquifer, and state law would 

allow this recharge to be measured and stored as credits to be pumped at a later 

date. By recharging the water in the channel of Black Wash, riparian and wildlife 

habitat will be created, preserved and protected. The project includes plans to provide baseline ecological reconnaissance for monitoring of diversity and ecological 

health of the site. 

The Department supports efforts to increase reclaimed water use in southern Arizona. Reclamation has been working with Pima County to review the technical, regulatory and contractual issues involved in the project but discussions have been preliminary. To date, the steps necessary to prepare a feasibility report that meet the 

requirements for feasibility of Title XVI projects have not been discussed. Because 

the technical studies are not complete, the feasibility and cost effectiveness of this 

project cannot be determined. 

In addition, while the Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies 

and increase recycled water use, we do not support H.R. 1503. The Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light of 

the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively 

pursued. This project would have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority in the President’s Budget. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation revised and improved its Directives and 

Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe that 

Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing the 

merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on H.R. 1503. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 1725

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to give the 

Department of the Interior’s views on HR 1725, the Rancho California Water District Recycled Water Treatment and Reclamation Facility Act. Although the project 

has been deemed technically feasible, the Department does not support HR 1725. 

HR 1725 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 

Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 

participate in the design, planning, and construction of the Rancho California Water 

District’s facilities for water recycling, demineralization, desalination, and distribution of non-potable water supplies in Riverside County, California. 

The Rancho California Water District is located in southwestern Riverside County, which has been experiencing explosive growth. The District is heavily dependent 

on imported water provided by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. In order to lessen this dependence the District has developed a Regional Integrated Resources Plan that includes three components. Together, the component 

projects will expand local water resources by increasing conjunctive use by about 

13,000 acre-feet per year, expanding the use of recycled water by about 16,000 acrefeet per year, and substituting untreated water for the treated water that is currently being used for agricultural irrigation. Implementation of the Regional Integrated Resources Plan would require the construction of pipelines, pumping plants, 

an advanced water treatment facility, and brine disposal facilities. The total estimated cost is about $350 million. 

Reclamation, in collaboration with the District, recently completed work on a feasibility study and, on November 15, 2007, deemed this project feasible. In Fiscal 

Year 2008, Congress appropriated $123,000 for this project. Using these funds, Reclamation is working with the Rancho California Water District to complete compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for this project. 

10 

H.R. 1725 authorizes the appropriation of up to $20 million or a maximum of 25 

percent of total project costs, whichever is less. The Department supports efforts to 

increase local water supplies and increase recycled water use in southern California. 

However, this project would have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority in the President’s Budget. While we are committed 

to working with the District to address its water supply needs, the Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light of 

the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively 

pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has revised and improved its Directives 

and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe 

that Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing 

the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 1725. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 1737

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to give the 

Department’s views on HR 1737, the City of Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act of 2007. Due to the reasons outlined below, the Department cannot support 

this legislation. 

HR 1737 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 

Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.) to authorize the Secretary to participate in 

the design, planning, and construction of permanent facilities for the Groundwater 

Recovery Enhancement and Treatment (GREAT) project, which would reclaim impaired water in the area of Oxnard, located in Ventura County, California. It provides for Federal funding of 25 percent of the total project cost or $20 million, 

whichever is less. 

The City of Oxnard, Port Hueneme Water Agency, United Water Conservation 

District, and Calleguas Municipal Water District have jointly developed the GREAT 

project, which consists of three parts: (1) a regional groundwater desalination facility; (2) a recycled water system to serve agricultural water users and to protect 

groundwater sources from seawater intrusion; and (3) a brine line that will convey 

desalination concentrates to an enhanced saltwater wetland. Project benefits include 

local drought protection and reduced dependence on imported water. 

Mr. Chairman, the Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies, 

including brackish groundwater desalination and reclaimed water use, in southern 

California. However, HR 1737 would authorize the design and construction of the 

project before the feasibility study is completed. Reclamation prefers that feasibility 

studies be completed first to determine whether a particular project warrants Federal construction authorization. 

With regard to this specific project, Reclamation currently is reviewing the feasibility study submitted by the City of Oxnard for this project. Therefore, the Department believes the legislation to be premature and cannot support HR 1737 at this 

time. This project would have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation 

program for funding priority in the President’s budget. The Department continues 

to believe it is not prudent to authorize new Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI projects now being actively pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has revised and improved its Directives 

and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe 

that Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing 

the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

11 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 1737. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

H.R. 2614

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Kris Polly, Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. I am here today to present the views of 

the Department of the Interior on HR 2614, a bill to authorize water supply, reclamation reuse and recycling, and desalination projects in Southern California. HR 

2614 would amend Title XVI, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study 

and Facilities Act (P.L. 102-575) to include design, planning, and construction authority for two specific projects. For reasons described below, the Department does 

not support HR 2614. 

HR 2614, as written, would authorize the design, planning, and construction of 

projects to treat impaired surface water, reclaim and reuse impaired groundwater 

and wastewater, and provide brine disposal in the State of California. 

Specifically, this bill would authorize the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply 

Renewal Project. Reclamation has reviewed the feasibility study submitted by the 

Yucaipa Valley Water District. Based on the technical information provided, Reclamation could not determine the feasibility of the project, and additional information was requested. The District recently submitted the additional information, and 

Reclamation’s final analysis of the project’s feasibility is expected soon. 

HR 2614 would also authorize the City of Corona Water Utility, California Water 

Recycling and Reuse Project. Reclamation has reviewed the feasibility study submitted by the City of Corona. Based on the technical information provided, Reclamation could not determine the feasibility of the project, and additional information 

has been requested from the City. This does not mean the project is not feasible, 

but rather that until the remaining information is reviewed, Reclamation cannot 

provide a feasibility determination. 

Mr. Chairman, the Department supports efforts to increase local water supplies 

and increase recycled water use in southern California. However, HR 2614 would 

authorize the design and construction of these projects before the feasibility study 

is completed. Reclamation prefers that feasibility studies be completed first to determine whether these particular projects warrant Federal construction authorization. 

The Department believes this legislation is premature and does not support HR 

2614. 

In addition, H.R. 2614 authorizes the appropriation of up to $20 million or a maximum of 25 percent of total project costs, whichever is less, for each of these two 

projects. These projects would have to compete with other needs within the Reclamation program for funding priority in the President’s Budget. 

Moreover, the Department continues to believe it is not prudent to authorize new 

Title XVI projects in light of the Federal cost share already authorized for Title XVI 

projects now being actively pursued. 

Of the 35 Title XVI projects specifically authorized and 2 demonstration projects 

undertaken through the general authority, 21 projects are actively being pursued 

and 4 are complete. The Federal cost share for the active projects, after FY 2008, 

is nearly $400 million. The Federal cost share for the 12 projects currently not being 

pursued is estimated at $220 million. 

While Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we 

understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water 

users in the West. To that end, Reclamation has revised and improved its Directives 

and Standards that govern reviews of Title XVI projects. By doing so, we believe 

that Reclamation can play a more constructive role with local sponsors in weighing 

the merits and ultimate feasibility of proposed water recycling projects. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment on HR 2614. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. 

Senator JOHNSON. Mr. Polly, according to your testimony, BOR 

has a backlog of about $400 million in Title 16 projects. Yet, the 

President’s 2009 budget requests only $7 million for construction. 

This is a 70 percent reduction from the 2008 appropriations provided by Congress, which was $24 million. 

In the face of increasing concerns about water availability, 

whether due to draught, climate change, environmental needs, or 

population increases, what is the justification for the defunding of 

12 

a successful program that required a relatively low cost share and 

promotes water use efficiency? 

Mr. POLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The Title 16 program is an important program. It represents new 

water. However, it is one program among many that the Bureau 

of Reclamation and the Department has to divide our limited resources to fund, and priorities are set accordingly. 

Senator JOHNSON. Your testimony on H.R. 813 strongly opposes 

a provision which would allow an increase in their overall cap in 

the Lower Chino project to $50 million. The cap in the Lower Chino 

project in its Senate counterpart, S. 2259, is $26 million. The general cap on an individual Title 16 project under existing law is $20 

million in October 1996 prices. If the $20 million cap is based on 

1996 prices, what is the cap in today’s dollars? 

Mr. POLLY. Mr. Chairman, the cap is probably closer to $30 million. However, we will get you a thorough, comprehensive answer 

for you and the committee. 

Senator JOHNSON. S. 2259 calls for the establishment of a center 

for technological advancements of membrane technology and education in Orange County. Your written testimony does not address 

this provision. What is the Department’s position on the establishment of the center? 

Mr. POLLY. Mr. Chairman, the Bureau of Reclamation has a 

technical services center in Denver, Colorado that, among other 

things, does desalination research. We also have a facility in New 

Mexico called Tula rosa that specifically works on brackish groundwater desalination. For those reasons, we did not think an additional facility was necessary. 

Senator JOHNSON. Your testimony indicates that the BOR is already participating in the demonstration project that is the subject 

of H.R. 786. This innovative approach to groundwater recharge 

would seem to have potential application elsewhere. Does BOR 

view this as a worthwhile project which warrants more support? 

Mr. POLLY. Yes, it is a worthwhile project. However, our participation is based on appropriations, and our priorities have to be set 

according to our budget demands. 

Senator JOHNSON. Three of the bills before this subcommittee 

today involve desalination projects: S. 2259, H.R. 737, and H.R. 

2614. Obviously, desalination must be economically viable in southern California. Are the economics associated with these projects 

unique to southern California, or is desalination becoming viable in 

other areas of the country? 

Mr. POLLY. Desalination is primarily of great interest to those regions with very limited water supplies. It is our understanding that 

in the private sector, the cost for desalination ranges between $400 

and $1,200 per acre foot. I know at the Bureau of Reclamation’s 

own desalination plant in Yuma our costs are between $300 and 

$900 per acre foot. Ultimately, the viability of desalination rests 

within the pocketbook of the beholder. 

Senator JOHNSON. Your testimony notes that the BOR has not 

yet prepared a feasibility report for the Avra/Black Wash project in 

Arizona and that the necessary technical studies have not been 

completed. Has Pima County done any technical work which it has 

13 

submitted to the BOR for review? Does BOR know the basis for the 

$14 million authorized for the project? 

Mr. POLLY. We have been in conversations with Pima County 

since 2005. However, our conversations have been largely conceptual. We have not discussed feasibility reports. As to the $14 million, we cannot speak to that. 

Senator JOHNSON. The status of the feasibility reviews for several projects is not clear from your testimony. For example, one, a 

regional brine line in H.R. 813; two, the Alberhill project in H.R. 

31; three, the Santa Rosa project in H.R. 716; four, the Oxnard 

project in H.R. 1737; and five, the projects in H.R. 2614. 

Can you elaborate on the specific status of the pending feasibility 

reviews or at least provide them for the record? If and when BOR 

makes a positive feasibility determination on any of these projects, 

will you ensure that the subcommittee is informed? 

Mr. POLLY. Mr. Chairman, the status of the feasibility studies 

are the subject of ongoing conversations between our people in the 

field and the project sponsors. So we are happy to obtain that information and provide a comprehensive answer to you and the committee. 

As for reporting on the status of those feasibility studies once 

they are complete, our history has always been to send a letter to 

the project sponsors to inform them their project has become feasible, and we are happy to provide that same information to the 

committee, should the project sponsors and the committee wish 

that. 

Senator JOHNSON. I have no additional questions. Thank you, 

Mr. Polly, for representing the administration’s views today. 

For the information of Senators and their staffs, questions for the 

record are due by close of business tomorrow. 

With that, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:59 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(15) 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

RESPONSES OF KRIS POLLY TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JOHNSON

Question 1a. Your ‘‘revised and improved Directives and Standards’’ for the Title 

16 program indicates that BOR ‘‘may also receive funding from the non-Federal 

project sponsor to perform the [feasibility] review process.’’ Has BOR requested 

funding in the 2009 budget for performing feasibility reviews for Title 16 projects, 

or does it rely on non-Federal project sponsors? 

Answer. The President’s FY 2009 budget contains a request for $800,000 for research and administration of the Title XVI program—including $50,000 for Reclamation’s participation in the review of appraisal and feasibility level studies. 

Question 1b. Did BOR receive funding from the non-Federal project sponsors of 

the projects being heard today? How much funding does BOR ask for to do its reviews? 

Answer. Reclamation did not obtain any money from the non-Federal sponsors of 

these projects. Reclamation does not ask for funds from sponsors to perform its reviews. We perform this work as a general service for our customers. 

Question 2. Your testimony on H.R. 813 strongly opposes the provision that would 

increase the overall cap on the Lower Chino Project to $50 million. The cap on the 

Lower Chino Project in the Senate counterpart—S.2259—is $26 million. The general 

cap on individual Title 16 projects under existing law is $20 million in October 1996 

prices. If the $20 million cap is based on 1996 prices, what is the cap in today’s 

dollars? 

Answer. In very basic terms, the cap in today’s dollars would be approximately 

$27 million. However the law gives Reclamation discretion in implementing the cap. 

Any expansion of this cap would further jeopardize Reclamation’s ability to address 

the approximately $655 million backlog of already authorized Title XVI projects. 

The Department does not believe there is justification to support assigning a cap 

higher than $20.0 million, the cap for Title XVI projects enacted after 1996. While 

Reclamation is not supporting new project authorizations at this time, we understand that the projects established by Title XVI are important to many water users 

in the West. 

Question 3. S. 2259 calls for the establishment of a ‘‘Center for Technological Advancement of Membrane Technology and Education’’ at Orange County. Your written testimony does not address this provision. What is the Department’s position on 

the establishment of the Center? 

Answer. Reclamation already has a Technical Service Center in Denver which is 

a world-class engineering, science, research, and support center for water related 

projects. Similarly, Reclamation, in conjunction with experts from across the country, operates the Tularosa Basin National Desalination Research Facility in New 

Mexico and the Water Quality Improvement Center in Yuma Arizona. In light of 

these facilities and the expertise possessed by Reclamation, this Center is unnecessary. 

Question 4a. The status of feasibility reviews for several projects is not clear from 

your testimony. For example, (1) the regional brine lines in H.R. 813; (2) the 

Alberhill project in H.R. 31; (3) the Santa Rosa project in H.R. 716; (4) the Oxnard 

project in H.R. 1737; and (5) the projects in H.R. 2614. Can you elaborate on the 

specific status of the pending feasibility reviews, or at least provide them for the 

record? 

16 

(1) Regional Brine Lines.—The feasibility of this project was approved in 2004 and 

construction is currently underway. 

(2) Alberhill Project.—This project is still in the conceptual stage, and its sponsor 

Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District has not submitted information regarding 

the project 

(3) Santa Rosa Project.—Since August 2006, the City of Santa Rosa has submitted: 1) an Engineering Evaluation; 2) an Economic Analysis; 3) a Financial Feasibility Analysis; and 4) a Draft Environmental Impact Report, and other documents; however, a determination of feasibility has not yet been possible. 

Oxnard Project.—The City recently submitted a feasibility study to Reclamation 

for this project. A formal review of the study is underway. 

(4) Projects in H.R. 2614.—Yucaipa: The Yucaipa Valley Water District recently 

provided the necessary information, and on March 26, 2008, the feasibility study for 

the Yucaipa project was approved. 

Corona: Reclamation is awaiting submittal of additional information. The City of 

Corona has not provided the requested information to date. 

Question 4b. If and when BOR makes a positive feasibility determination on any 

of these projects, will you ensure that the Subcommittee is informed? 

Answer. Typically, Reclamation provides feasibility determinations via letter to 

the project sponsors so that they can determine their future activities from that 

point onward. If it is the desire of the Committee and the project sponsor, we can 

share those letters with the Committee and have done so upon request in the past. 

(17) 

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

STATEMENT OF THE RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT (RCWD), RIVERSIDE

COUNTY, CA, ON H.R. 1725 

H.R. 1725, Rancho California Water District’s (RCWD) water reclamation project 

(‘‘Rancho California Water District Southern Riverside County Recycled/Non-Potable 

Distribution Facilities and Demineralization/Desalination Recycled Water Treatment and Reclamation Facility Project’’) will substantially expand the use of recycled and raw water in Riverside County, California. This project is vital to Southern 

California and will impact water supplies in all the Western states. RCWD provides 

water supply, wastewater collection and treatment, and water recycling services to 

over 110,000 businesses and individual customers in an area encompassing 160 

square miles in one of the nation’s most rapidly growing areas. Riverside County— 

where RCWD is located—is the third fastest growing county in the nation. RCWD’s 

service area includes the Cities of Temecula, portions of the City of Murrieta and 

unincorporated portions of Southwest Riverside County. The Cities of Temecula and 

Murrieta, alone, respectively experienced a 15 percent growth rate in 2006. 

Due to the ongoing growth in Southwest Riverside County, total demands for 

RCWD’s service area are estimated to rise to almost double the current demand by 

the year 2050. For this reason, and the ever-increasing demand on the California 

Bay Delta and the Colorado River systems, implementation of creative and innovative projects such as RCWD’s proposed project is critical to meeting the demands 

of not only RCWD but all of the West. 

We want to thank the Honorable Chairman, Senator Tim Johnson, and other Subcommittee Members for holding this hearing to consider H.R. 1725. We also want 

to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for the excellent work of their staff, 

Mike Connor and Josh Johnson, whose counsel and advice over the past year has 

been invaluable to us. We also would like to thank Senator Dianne Feinstein and 

Senator Barbara Boxer and their staff for helping us to have this hearing become 

a reality. It is our hope that this hearing will lead us quickly to a markup of the 

bill and ultimate passage by the Senate and a signature by the President, so that 

we can continue to progress on this vital project to Southern California, which will 

impact water supplies in all the Western states. 

We feel strongly, that due to the progress RCWD has made to date on its project, 

it merits passage by the Subcommittee, the full Committee and the full Senate. 

Since the introduction of H.R. 1725 in early 2007, it was passed by the full House; 

and the project received the statutorily required positive feasibility determination 

from the Bureau of Reclamation in November 2007. RCWD is currently working 

with the local Bureau of Reclamation to complete National Environment Policy Act 

(NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, which will 

be completed by the end of 2008, and for which funding was received in the fiscal 

year 2008 Omnibus Appropriations bill. RCWD already has exceeded the required 

local 50 percent match for those funds. Moreover, RCWD—having completed study 

and design of the first phase of its project—will begin construction by mid-2008. The 

Water District has requested FY09 appropriations for its project, which makes passage of authorization legislation even more crucial. 

PASSAGE OF H.R. 1725 CRITICAL TO LOCAL AND REGIONAL ECONOMY

RCWD has maximized the development of its local well water resources, groundwater recharge program, recycled water production and delivery systems and has 

implemented an aggressive water conservation program which includes a conservation rate structure. RCWD’s innovative targeted conservation program won statewide recognition in 2007 when it was awarded the Clair Hill Environmental award 

by the Association of California Water Agencies. 

18 

Even with all of the above-mentioned efforts, if RCWD takes no action, future demands will have to be met with high-cost treated imported water creating additional 

burdens on the California Bay Delta and Colorado River systems. In order to meet 

these future demands in a sustainable manner and contribute to State and Federal 

solutions for the California Bay Delta and Colorado systems, RCWD invested in the 

preparation of a regional Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) that was completed in October of 2005. 

The regional IRP examined current and future supply issues with a long-term 

perspective that analyzed all possible supply-side and demand-side management opportunities. Due to the extensive technical nature of the IRP and the quality of the 

proposed project resulting from its completion, the Metropolitan Water District of 

Southern California incorporated the RCWD IRP results into its Integrated Area 

Planning Program. 

RCWD’s project meets the ‘‘federal need’’ requirement for federal water projects 

in that it has been determined to be financially and technically viable and feasible. 

Further, because the project fills an identified treated water shortfall gap for California’s Inland Empire as identified in the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California’s recently completed GAP Analysis, it relieves regional demands on the 

State Water and Colorado River systems, creates substantial energy savings for the 

State of California as a whole, sustains agriculture and open space for the region, 

and helps further the federal government’s goal of increased beneficial reuse of recycled water, H.R. 1725 is worthy of passage and the project is worthy of federal funding. 

The current water crisis in Southern California, which resulted in a 30 percent 

mandatory water cutback to agricultural customers adds to the sense of urgency for 

the project. Local agriculture, which accounts for 47 percent of RCWD’s customers, 

cannot be sustained without a reliable and affordable water supply. (RCWD is the 

largest retail agricultural water supplier in the Metropolitan Water District of 

Southern California’s service area.) The current water supply conditions in the State 

provide no hope of either a sustainable or affordable water supply for Southern California agricultural users. RCWD’s project, however, provides both an affordable and 

sustainable water supply because the cost per acre foot of water produced from the 

project is at a level that can be sustained by the current water rate charged to the 

agricultural customers of the Rancho California Water District. 

The agricultural industry in RCWD’s service territory is the major employer for 

members of the local disadvantaged communities. There is a high probability that 

if the project is not implemented in the next five years a substantial portion of the 

local agricultural industry will be lost forever. If this occurs, it will create a severe 

hardship to the local disadvantaged and business communities, substantial open 

space and wildlife corridors will be lost, and over $1.4 billion of local and regional 

economic stimulus will needlessly be lost. 

NOTE: Background on the recent 30 percent mandatory agriculture 

water cutback—the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Interim Agricultural Water Program (IAWP) provides for the delivery of surplus water for agricultural purposes at a discounted rate. In exchange for 

the discounted rate, agency participants agree to reduce import water deliveries by 30 percent in times of shortage. In October 2007, MWD published 

updated IAWP reduction guidelines and called for a mandatory 30 percent 

reduction, which began January 1, 2008. 

Additionally, there will be a 20 percent rate increase by the Metropolitan Water 

District of Southern California over the next two years for all users including agricultural users. 

PROJECT BACKGROUND AND BENEFITS

The project will provide cost-effective and sustainable water supplies to meet local 

demands through 2050. It will free up enough treated water to serve 70,000 new 

households in Southern California by converting agricultural demands from treated 

water to recycled and raw water. It will shift 144 cubic feet per second (cfs) peak 

demand off of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s treated water 

system. It will create the ability beneficially to reuse 16,000 acre feet (AF)/year of 

recycled water, which will relieve demands on the statewide system (California Bay 

Delta and Colorado River). (One AF of water equates to approximately 326,000 gallons or enough water to supply two families for over one year.) 

The project will increase the sustainability of Southern Riverside County’s avocado, citrus and wine industries. These agricultural industries add exponentially to 

the regional economy and provide environmental benefits as they contribute over 

19 

$1.4 billion annually, employ over 150,000 people in Riverside County and preserve 

open space. In addition, the agricultural industry contributes positively to the environment as avocado trees produce approximately 185 million pounds of oxygen and 

absorb 7.1 million pounds of pollutants in the air annually, including 2.8 million 

pounds of ozone and 2.1 million pounds of particles. 

The project also will enable RCWD to retain 10,000 AF/year of additional Colorado River and California Bay Delta water for use during peak, traditionally high 

cost recycled and raw water demand months, by storing this water in low demand/ 

high supply winter periods. The project will save the Water District $200/AF and 

will reduce energy costs expended for the pumping of imported water by approximately $1.5 million annually and for pumping recycled water out of the watershed 

by approximately $1.3 million annually. 

RCWD’s project will provide numerous environmental benefits such as reducing 

the carbon footprint by eliminating emissions by 4.9 million pounds/year and reducing energy use and costs by $3 million/year, alleviating substantial stress on California’s severely strained energy system. Additionally, the project will reduce energy 

demand by 9,765 Kilowatts per hour by reducing pumping costs for diverting treated wastewater that currently is being pumped out of the basin. 

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF RECLAMATION FEASIBILITY DETERMINATION

Significantly, the project already received a positive feasibility determination by 

the Bureau of Reclamation in November 2007, which declared the project technically 

and economically feasible. To facilitate that positive determination, in May 2007, 

RCWD—in cooperation with Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and Western Municipal Water District (WMWD)—completed a $430,000 twelve-month feasibility study which insured viability of the project. As noted, the results of the RCWD 

feasibility study facilitated the Bureau of Reclamation’s finding that the RCWD feasibility study met the Bureau’s ‘‘Directives and Standards’’ for feasibility studies 

and its official positive feasibility determination. 

RCWD MAY 2007 JOINT FEASIBILITY STUDY RESULTS

RCWD’s feasibility study determined that it is technically and economically feasible for RCWD to demineralize wastewater and convey the demineralized and raw 

imported water to agricultural areas, through the construction of new pumping, piping, and storage infrastructure in order to replace the current use of costly, imported potable/treated water for these demands. The study also examined facilitating additional storage in Vail Lake to capture otherwise lost winter flows for high 

demand summer use. Over forty project alternatives were considered, before arriving at the final project recommendation. 

STATUS OF THE PROJECT

RCWD completed the study and design of the first phase of the project in early 

2008 and is slated to begin construction by mid-2008. The required regional and federal processes are well underway. RCWD is working with the Bureau of Reclamation on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environment 

Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, which will be completed by the end of 2008. 

REGIONAL AND FEDERAL SUPPORT

As a demonstration of its regional support and the federal need for RCWD’s 

project, it was selected as a Tier I priority under the Metropolitan Water District 

of Southern California’s Official Integrated Area Study, which stated, ‘‘This project 

is considered to be highly adaptable, low risk, and has excellent overall benefits.’’ 

The project also was approved by California’s Proposition 50 Integrated Regional 

Water Management Plan and is expected to receive funding under California’s Proposition 84 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, the latter of which process 

is currently underway. 

The project received $123,000 in the Fiscal Year 2008 Omnibus Appropriations 

bill, which is being used with the local Bureau of Reclamation to complete CEQA 

and NEPA requirements. RCWD has already provided over the required 50 percent 

local match by contributing over $200,000 toward this effort. 

The project is enthusiastically supported by numerous regional and local entities 

including but not limited to Riverside County; the cities of Temecula and Murrieta; 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the major purveyor of water to 

Southern California; The Nature Conservancy; the California Avocado Commission, 

which serves 6,500 grower members; Sunkist Growers; Eastern Municipal Water 

District; Western Municipal Water District; the Santa Ana Watershed Project AuVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:46 Aug 26, 2008 Jkt 043391 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\43951.TXT SENERGY2 PsN: MONICA
20 

thority, which includes the five largest water agencies in the Santa Ana River Watershed (Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Orange County Water District, San 

Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District and 

Western Municipal Water District); and McMillan Farm Management Company, an 

agribusiness that operates over 1,500 acres of avocados and citrus in RCWD’s service area and contributes approximately $20 million to the local economy. (Letters 

of support have been sent to RCWD’s California congressional delegation from these 

organizations and can be provided to Energy Committee Members upon request.) RCWD’s Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09) $2 million appropriations request for the project 

was included in Riverside County and the City of Temecula’s FY09 Priority Lists 

as a project of regional importance. Both the county and the city asked the appropriate California congressional delegation Members to support RCWD’s FY09 federal funding request. 

TOTAL PROJECT COST AND POST-IMPLEMENTATION COST SAVINGS

The total project cost is currently estimated at $141 million. (It has been reduced 

to this amount through cost offsets.) H.R. 1725—under consideration by this Committee—will authorize the statutory limit of $20 million for Title XVI water reclamation projects or only 14 percent of the total cost of the project. Local funds will 

provide the remaining $121 million or 86 percent of the total cost of the project. 

(RCWD is expecting to receive $4 million in California Proposition 84 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan funding.) The project will save the Water District $200/AF. When implemented, it is esti- mated that the project will produce a gross savings of $789 million in purchased 

water costs over the 30-year life of the project. When the capital costs of the project 

are netted against the purchase water savings, the project produces a significant net 

savings (NPV) of $83 million over its lifetime. 

ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT

Reduces Risk of Losing Critical Agricultural Industry 

• Industry contributes $1.4 billion annually to Riverside County • Industry directly employs 150,000 people in Riverside County • Agriculture processing contributes 4,000 additional jobs to the County • Agriculture processing contributes $7 million annually to Riverside County • Avocado trees in RCWD’s service area produce approximately 185 million 

pounds of oxygen each year • Avocado trees also absorb approximately 7.1 million pounds of pollutants from 

the air each year including 2.8 million pounds of ozone and 2.1 million pounds 

of particles 

ENERGY SAVINGS AND OTHER BENEFITS TO THE ENVIRONMENT

As the western United States continue to battle rising energy costs and continued 

risk of brownouts and blackouts, finding ways to reduce energy demand continues 

to be a critical component of any federal project. Implementing RCWD’s water reclamation project not only will free up substantial amounts of water for other users 

in California, but will also significantly lower energy demands, bringing with it the 

resultant benefits. 

• Lowers greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the electrical energy associated 

with conveying imported water to the region, treating imported water, and exporting recycled water out of the basin. • Reduces energy demand by 9,765 Kilowatts per hour by reducing pumping costs 

for diverting treated wastewater that currently is being pumped out of the basin • Saves $3 million in annual energy costs • Reduces carbon emissions by 4.9 million pounds per year 

• Sustains open space 

PROJECT SPECIFICS

The project consists of three distinct, but integrated components, which will provide vast regional and federal benefits. The estimated total project cost is $141 million. 

COMPONENT ONE—EXPAND LOCAL RECYCLED AND RAW WATER RESOURCES

Construct a 48-inch pipeline to transport raw water from MWD’s aqueduct system 

for storage in Vail Lake. By storing this water in low demand/high supply winter 

periods, up to 10,000 AF/year of additional Colorado River and California Bay Delta 

21 

water can be retained for use during peak recycled and raw water demand months. 

Water cost will be $230-$330/AF, saving the district approximately $200/AF. Estimated project component cost: $28 million. 

COMPONENT TWO—CONVERT EAST SIDE AGRICULTURE TO A COMBINED RECYCLED AND

RAW WATER SYSTEM

Convert Water District’s east side agricultural delivery system (vineyard and citrus) to a combined recycled and raw water system to allow recycled water, untreated water stored in Vail lake, or raw water purchased from MWD to be used 

for agricultural irrigation. Build delivery system to transport water from Vail Lake 

to convert wine and citrus agriculture to non-potable water and link east side nonpotable system to recycled water. Water cost will be $230-$330/AF, will save the 

water district approximately $200/AF for water treatment, and will relieve peak demand on MWD’s regional treatment facilities, the Colorado River and California 

Bay Delta systems.(Will relieve 5K AF/year of treated water demands.) Estimated 

project component cost: $57 million. 

COMPONENT THREE—DEMINERALIZE / DESALINATE RECYCLED WATER AND CONVERT

WEST SIDE AGRICULTURE TO RECYCLED SYSTEM

Construct demineralization/desalination plant to lower total dissolved solids (TDS) 

levels of recycled water from EMWD’s wastewater reclamation facility below 500 

parts TDS and convert Water District’s west side agricultural delivery system to a 

non-potable system. Lowering the TDS limits below 500 parts TDS will allow RCWD 

to utilize recycled water which currently is pumped to dispose of in the Santa Ana 

River. RCWD currently cannot reuse this water because the State Water Control 

Board limits of 500 parts TDS are below the wastewater plant’s recycled water level 

of 750 parts TDS. Running 50 percent of this water through a micro filtration and 

reverse osmosis process will lower the TDS levels below the current basin standard 

of 500 parts TDS and will allow up to 16,000 AF of recycled water to be retained 

in the basin annually for reuse. In addition to creating a new beneficial reuse of 

recycled water, this project component will provide a non-interruptible, sustainable 

supply of water to our agricultural customers. Estimated project component cost: 

$56 million. 

TUCSON AUDUBON SOCIETY, 

Tucson, AZ, April 22, 2008. 

Hon. TIM JOHNSON, 

Chairman, Water and Power Subcommittee. 

DEAR SIR: Tucson Audubon Society is a 501(c) 3 non-profit environmental organization based in Tucson Arizona, serving residents of eastern Pima County and 

Santa Cruz County. Established in 1949, Tucson Audubon partners closely with government agencies and other NGOs to promote environmental education, conservation, and outdoor recreation. 

Tucson Audubon supports HR1503 and the April 8, 2008 testimony of Michael 

Gritzuk, Director of Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department, on 

behalf of the bill that would establish water reclamation and environmental restoration in the Avra Valley/Black Wash area of Pima County. 

Riparian habitat is extremely important for wildlife in our region. We have lost 

much of our former riparian habitat through overgrazing, erosion and groundwater 

pumping. Many species of conservation concern are dwindling due to these losses. 

Tucson Audubon and its partners work to conserve water and to restore habitats, 

using water harvesting techniques, and sometimes with the use of reclaimed wastewater. Creating new riparian and wetland habitat is an important step toward redressing habitat losses. Wastewater treatment plants offer particular opportunities 

for creating new riparian habitat. 

Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) is particularly innovative in providing reclaimed water for wildlife habitat and incorporating wildlife habitat into new wastewater plant designs. PCRWRD has responded to a key recommendation in the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan to utilize reclaimed water for habitat restoration projects. The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan is a long term vision for protecting the heritage and natural resources of 

the west in Pima County. 

The Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department is sensitive too to the wildlife 

watching industry, which has an annual total economic effect of approximately $1.5 

billion in Arizona. By proactively incorporating facilities for bird watchers and other 

22 

wildlife watchers to the habitats created at their plant sites, the Department adds 

to the value of our region to wildlife tourists. 

In addition, by restoring the riparian habitats to critical to wildlife, the Department is adding to the quality of life for the people that live nearby. 

Tucson Audubon supports HR1503 and the April 8, 2008 testimony of Michael 

Gritzuk, Director of Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department, on 

behalf of the bill. 

Yours Sincerely, 

DR PAUL GREEN, 

Executive Director. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL GRITZUK, P.E., DIRECTOR, PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL

WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT, TUCSON, AZ, ON H.R. 1503 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, Pima County, Arizona is submitting this testimony for the record to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water and Power on April 8, 2008 regarding ‘‘HR 

1503, The Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration Project’’. My 

name is Michael Gritzuk and I am the Director of the Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department in Pima County, Arizona which is the lead agency 

for this Project. 

Pima County, Arizona would like to solicit the support of the Committee for the 

establishment of the water reclamation and environmental restoration project contained in HR 1503 for the Avra Valley/Black Wash area of Pima County, a predominantly rural area with exceptional environmental values, which is undergoing rapid 

population growth and corresponding wastewater infrastructure expansion. This 

project is located at the current Avra Valley Water Reclamation Facility site, in the 

northerly portion of Avra Valley adjacent to the Black Wash riparian area. Project 

stakeholders with whom we have consulted have included the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Pima County Regional Flood Control District, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Tucson Audubon Society, City of Tucson Water Department and the Pima 

County Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation Department. 

To understand the importance of this project, I would like to tell you about Pima 

County’s environmental initiatives and the Department’s efforts to meet the needs 

of our growing population in an environmentally sensitive manner. Pima County, 

Arizona, is located in the southernmost part of Arizona among the magnificent 

mountains and valleys of the Sonoran Desert. Pima County has a climate typical 

to the lower desert elevations in the American Southwest with only 8 –12 inches 

of annual rainfall. 

Pima County includes a central metropolitan area containing the City of Tucson, 

City of South Tucson, Town of Oro Valley, Town of Marana, Town of Sahuarita; a 

substantial urban population in the unincorporated areas of the County adjacent to 

these municipalities; significant amounts of rural ranch and farm lands; and the 

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe and the Tohono O’odham Nation (whose lands cover a large portion of Western Pima County). 

The population of Pima County reached one million in January 2007, and is projected to grow significantly over the next 20 years. Official growth projections are 

9 percent between 2010 and 2015, 10 percent between 2015 and 2020, 10 percent 

between 2020 and 2025, and 9 percent between 2025 and 2030. 

These significant projected increases in population demonstrate that Pima County 

is feeling the growth pressures which have made Arizona one of the fastest growing 

states in the Nation with significant statewide issues regarding water availability, 

local and regional transportation infrastructure, and wastewater conveyance and 

treatment capacity. In the mid-1980’s, Arizona instituted the Active Management 

Area Program, which established a goal of safe-yield for water demand and use 

within the state’s major metropolitan areas. This concept is now being expanded to 

the rural areas of the state, an even more necessary measure given the current 

drought conditions in the Southwest. In this water-scarce environment, reuse, recharge and environmental restoration have become increasingly important uses for 

high quality reclaimed water. 

To manage the critical issues of accommodating a steadily increasing population 

and preserving environmentally sensitive areas for future generations to enjoy, 

Pima County has developed and begun to implement its award-winning Sonoran 

Desert Conservation Plan over the last decade. 

The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, which received the American Planning 

Association’s 2002 Outstanding Planning Award, covers a 3.9 million-acre portion of 

the Sonoran Desert ecosystem in Pima County, Arizona. The Pima County Board 

23 

of Supervisors and Administrator initiated the Plan in 1998 in response to conservation needs for rare animal and plant species, most significantly the federally listed 

cactus ferruginous pygmy owl. The purpose of the Plan is to ensure the long-term 

protection of ‘‘the heritage and natural resources of the west in Pima County.’’ The 

Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan contains six areas of focus: Protection of Critical 

Habitat; Biological Corridors; and Mountain Parks; Riparian Restoration; Historic 

and Cultural Preservation and Ranch Land Conservation. Over 205 reports have 

been produced, including a mapped conservation reserve design that prioritizes the 

protection of the region’s biodiversity by applying the six areas of focus above. 

The Pima County Board of Supervisors has led this effort, coordinating with 12 

major government land managers and about 40 community groups. In December 

2001, Pima County incorporated the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan into its comprehensive land use plan. The comprehensive land use plan addresses many problems caused by urban sprawl, such as a declining tax base, land consumption, water 

availability, and a loss of cultural identity. It prescribes the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan to address natural and cultural resources protection and incorporates 

the conservation reserve design into a Conservation Lands System categorizing future land use in all unincorporated lands in the planning area. The land use categories in the Conservation Lands System include: Important Riparian Areas, Biological Core Areas, Scientific Research Management Areas, Multiple Use Management Areas, Recovery Management Areas, Agriculture within Recovery Management Areas and Critical Landscape Connections. 

The planning process generated a series of policy changes and conservation 

achievements. Over the years, a series of ordinances have been passed that seek to 

protect biological resources while promoting better quality urban design. Ordinances 

include buffer overlay zones around biological preserves, hillside development restrictions, riparian habitat mitigation, native plant protection, conservation subdivisions, big box store limitations and home design standards. More significantly to 

this project, the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan also recommends effluent utilization for habitat restoration projects. 

The Pima County Wastewater Reclamation Department, as a self-sustaining utility enterprise of the County, has a dual mandate to (1) provide regional wastewater 

conveyance, treatment and reclamation facilities for the public health and welfare 

of the community and (2) implement the environmental land use and conservation 

policies of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. To accomplish these goals, the Department operates three major metropolitan wastewater treatment and reclamation 

facilities and eight smaller subregional reclamation facilities spread throughout the 

2,500 square mile service area of Eastern Pima County which treat a total of 69 

million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD). The Department also maintains a rigorous operations and maintenance and rehabilitation program for its 3,300 linear 

miles of sewer conveyance lines. The Department has been innovative and aggressive in confronting the challenges of protecting the public health and safety while 

producing a high quality reclaimed water product for multiple uses within the community, including reuse on parks and school grounds, recharge to the aquifer and 

restoration of environmentally sensitive areas. 

As part of its innovative program, the Department also managed the Arid West 

Water Quality Research Project, from 1995 to 2007, which was a cooperative regional approach to water quality issues in the Arid West funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pima County also constructed the Kino Ecosystem 

Restoration Project in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This 

Project captures and harvests storm water for use on the turf facilities of the spring 

training complex for the Arizona Diamondbacks, Colorado Rockies and Chicago 

White Sox. The Department is currently implementing (in coordination with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality) a $1+ billion program to optimize advanced treatment, odor control and bio-solids handling at its major metropolitan 

treatment facilities, including the construction of a new 32 million gallon per day 

(MGD) Water Reclamation Campus. The new water reclamation campus will provide reclaimed water for a proposed major community sports and park complex 

planned to be constructed adjacent to this campus. The sports and park complex 

would include multiple softball, baseball and soccer fields, as well as park facilities 

and ecosystem enhancement and trails along the Santa Cruz River. This will be in 

addition to the existing community water reclamation system which provides irrigation for local golf courses, city and county parks and street medians. 

In addition to these accomplishments, the Department faces continuing challenges 

in expanding and upgrading its rural treatment facilities to provide needed sewer 

capacity in time to meet the demands of growth while providing a sustainable environment for the new facilities in the adjacent area. 

24 

The Department recently upgraded the Green Valley Water Reclamation Facility 

(WRF), which serves a major retirement community south of the Tucson metropolitan area. The existing facility now produces Class A+ effluent which is then sold 

for reuse to an adjacent golf course resort complex. This integrated and sustainable 

approach to water reclamation has enabled the community to conserve 2 million gallons per day of groundwater resources while providing a valuable recreational amenity to the Green Valley community. 

A similar opportunity exists 40 miles to the northwest of Green Valley in the Avra 

Valley/Black Wash area. Formerly a highly rural and ranching area, this valley is 

bordered on the east by the Tucson Mountain Regional Park, which includes the famous Old Tucson movie set and the internationally recognized Arizona-Sonora 

Desert Museum and the Saguaro National Monument, and on the southern and 

western boundaries by ranch lands, grasslands, the Tohono O’odham Nation and the 

Pascua Yaqui Tribal lands. 

The Department currently operates a wastewater treatment facility utilizing percolation and evaporation ponds for this area—the Avra Valley Water Reclamation 

Facility (WRF). The Pima County Board of Supervisors has developed the Southwest 

Area Infrastructure Plan to accommodate the rapid growth in this area by establishing urban densities in the center of Avra Valley while maintaining the rural 

character and open space on the Valley’s perimeters, thus preserving the magnificent panoramas of the rugged Sonoran Desert landscape for future generations. 

To accomplish the wastewater functions of this Plan, the Department intends to 

upgrade and expand the existing Avra Valley WRF, currently permitted for 2.2 

MGD, to a 4.0 MGD facility with advanced ultra-violet disinfection and filtration 

which will produce very high quality Class A+ water suitable for reuse, recharge 

and environmental restoration. Further, the additional percolation ponds required 

for the expanded facility will be designed to enhance the habitat and environmental 

benefit to the area. However, even in its present configuration, the Avra Valley 

WRF is already well known to the regional and national birding community due to 

its unique juxtaposition of desert upland habitat and ample surface water in the 

percolation ponds and its proximity to the Black Wash riparian area. Sonoran 

Desert bird species, such as the Roadrunner, Gambel’s Quail, Cactus Wren, Curvedbill Thrasher, White-Wing Doves and Harris’s Hawk can be seen on and adjacent 

to the Avra Valley Facility. Priority vulnerable species using the area include the 

Bell’s Vireo, Rufous-winged Sparrow, and Abert’s Towhee. Shorebirds and waterfowl 

including herons, egrets, sandpipers, glossy ibis, and other migratory birds are 

found in and around the ponds (as well the occasional pelican or seagull blown offcourse by the summer monsoon storms). In addition to the bird species, the adjacent 

Black Wash area also provides valuable breeding areas for desert amphibians as 

well as habitat for jack rabbits, javelina, deer, snakes, lizards, and Gila monsters. 

In order to continue and enhance these environmental benefits of the Facility, the 

Department proposes to create a multi-purpose facility incorporating wastewater 

treatment and watershed reclamation, habitat conservation, education and recreation, including wildlife watching with interpretative and hiking trails as part of the 

site expansion. This will establish the area as an educational site for the sustainable 

use of water resources, habitat conservation and restoration that is consistent with 

the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. The existing percolation ponds would be rehabilitated to better perform their technical function while still retaining their usefulness as habitats for waterfowl and shorebirds. As noted previously, the Department will also create additional percolation basins which would be designed in a 

more natural pond-like configuration with trails for birders and hikers to provide 

year-round access. Thus, the expansion of the habitat will be coupled with an expansion of the viewing opportunities for visitors and yet maintain the functional benefit 

of the ponds for the Avra Valley WRF. Further, advanced treatment with ultra-violet disinfection and filtration facilities will be installed for the new plant capacity 

of 4.0 MGD which will continue to keep the effluent quality and value consistently 

high. Additional features for visitors will include a public restroom and signage 

along the birding trails for wildlife education and information. In addition to these 

features, significant environmental restoration is proposed around the perimeters of 

the Facility as well as a continuing effort to preserve and enhance the riparian environment in the Black Wash which runs along the western edge of the WRF. 

The total Project costs for the 4.0 MGD water reclamation and environmental restoration project are now estimated at $56 million (2008 dollars). The federal support 

of $14 million requested in HR 1503 would be utilized for the environmental features and water quality treatment processes discussed in this testimony. All the 

water resources for this project are under the control of Pima County as an integral 

part of the wastewater treatment process and maintenance of facility site. 

25 

Finally, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, in response to Deputy 

Commissioner’s Kris Polly’s testimony on H.R. 1503, Pima County looks forward to 

working with Bureau of Reclamation staff to conduct the required feasibility studies. 

We want to move forward together with the Bureau in this unique opportunity to 

utilize reclaimed water to achieve the ecosystem restoration and habitat enhancement goals of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan through the Title XVI Program. 

On behalf of Pima County, I thank the Committee for the opportunity to provide 

this testimony. 

CITY OF SANTA ROSA, 

April 4, 2008. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN BINGAMAN: The City of Santa Rosa appreciates the opportunity 

to submit written testimony to your committee regarding H.R. 716—the Santa Rosa 

Urban Reuse Plan Act. 

The Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Plan is a model for reuse of treated wastewater for 

landscape irrigation. The project is especially important in a region that remains 

semi arid for six months of the year and where droughts pose a genuine threat to 

both human and protected/threatened salmonid populations. Using recycled water 

for landscape irrigation conserves valuable fresh water for not only human consumption but also for watershed preservation and enhancement. 

BACKGROUND

The Santa Rosa Regional Wastewater System serves the Northern California cities of Santa Rosa, Cotati, Rohnert Park, Sebastopol and parts of unincorporated 

Sonoma County, serving a population that exceeds 225,000. This system recycles 

over 80 percent of its tertiary-treated water to: 1) irrigate over 6,400 acres of farmlands, vineyards and public and private landscaping; and 2) inject into the Geysers 

geothermal fields to recharge natural geysers in order to produce green electricity. 

The remainder of the water is seasonally discharged into the Russian River. 

Santa Rosa’s reuse system has been developed over the last 40 years and includes 

cutting edge projects, such as the public-private partnership to use recycled water 

to produce green power at the Geysers. The City is an experienced urban water recycler with programs already in place at two city parks, a golf course and Sonoma 

State University. As committed water recyclers, the City has invested over $350 

million in water treatment and re-use projects over the years. 

MAJOR GOALS OF THE SANTA ROSA URBAN REUSE PLAN

• Minimize the impacts to the Russian River (a vital migratory corridor for three 

federally protected salmon species by meeting sub-regional growth requirements 

with decreased water diversions and a reduction in required seasonal recycled 

water discharge. 

• Reduce irrigation of farmland listed as high quality habitat for four endangered 

species, including the California Tiger Salamander. 

• Use all recycled water produced by a growing population to irrigate parks, 

schools, roadway median strips, cemeteries, new commercial and residential developments, and golf courses. 

• Assist the City in meeting hot weather landscape irrigation demands without 

increasing diversion of potable water from the Russian River. 

• Provide flexibility to accommodate the use of recycled water made available by 

neighboring agencies. 

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS

The main conveyance of regional water supplies is the Russian River, a 115-mile 

coastal stream that is a migration corridor for threatened salmon and steelhead. 

The Urban Reuse Project—and similar projects that will follow in its footstep—will 

result in fewer withdrawals from the River and its tributaries and safeguard vital 

habitat for threatened steelhead and coho salmon. 

The Project will also help restore habitat for the endangered California Tiger Salamander and three endangered plant species by allowing formerly irrigated farmland to return to vernal pools, and in some cases, providing recycled water for seasonal wetlands. 

Finally, the project will allow winter water production to be used for summer 

urban irrigation uses and reduce recycled water discharges to the Russian River. 

26 

WATER CONSERVATION BENEFITS

Most of the City of Santa Rosa’s potable water is provided under contract by the 

Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), which withdraws water from the Russian 

River. For three of the past six years, at the request of the SCWA, the State Water 

Resources Control Board has issued a Temporary Urgency Flow Modification Order 

for the Russian River, reducing flows from an upriver dam and impacting local 

water availability. The combination of regulatory requirements needed to protect 

threatened species and warming climate trends increase the likelihood that these 

‘‘temporary’’ flow reductions may continue to occur frequently or become permanent. 

Even in ‘‘normal’’ weather years, the City of Santa Rosa, experiences water supply 

problems on especially hot days, due to high urban irrigation demands and a constrained delivery system operated by the SCWA. 

By replacing potable water used for urban landscape irrigation with recycled 

water, the Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Project will significantly reduce or eliminate 

the impacts of potential fresh water shortages. 

PROJECT ELEMENTS AND COSTS

The project will provide recycled water to 1,000 of the largest water users in the 

City, including parks, schools, fair grounds, industrial and commercial facilities. The 

project will provide 1,000 million gallons of recycled water (3,000 acre-feet) per year 

for urban irrigation, avoiding both fresh water withdrawals and treated wastewater 

discharges of this volume into the Russian River. The total projected costs are over 

$100 million dollars. The City’s intent is to have the Bureau of Reclamation review 

the feasibility study, the completed environmental documents before moving ahead 

with the project. It was our understanding that the Bureau would be charging a fee 

for the initial review. We did not want to proceed with that level of review until 

we knew if we would be getting Federal support with the project. If the Committee 

reports the Bill, then the City will be forwarding our documentation to the Bureau. 

The City encourages you to approve H.R 716 Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Project. 

If authorized, the City will continue to look at the cost benefit of the Urban Reuse 

Project as well other options to creatively reuse our recycled water resource. 

We are very appreciative of the support we have received for this project from our 

Representative, Ms. Lynn Woolsey, and her staff. Her interest and encouragement 

have been important to the City’s interest in pursuing this legislative course. 

Thank you for your consideration. The City is happy to answer any additional 

questions the committee might have during its review. 

SUMMARY

The Santa Rosa Urban Reuse Plan/Project consists of the following elements and 

costs: 

H.R. 716 would provide an authorization for up to $20 million of the project cost 

but not more than 25 percent of total project cost, with the remainder expected to 

be local funding. 

PROJECT STATUS

An Environmental Impact Report has been completed and certified, and preliminary design work has been completed. With the appropriation of federal funds, final 

design and construction can begin. With federal appropriations, the first phase of 

the project could be completed, and water delivered to customers by 2010. As demand grows over the next 5 to 7 years, the second and final phase of the project 

would be completed. The City has a financing plan to cover the local (75-percent) 

share of the Project cost. The first phase of the financing plan will be implemented 

in summer 2007; bonds will be sold to finance final design phase. 


Santa1.eps
27 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion I would like to reiterate the importance of this regional project 

which benefits water supply but also federally protected salmon populations and the 

protected California Tiger Salamander, while enhancing the Russian River Watershed. The City of Santa Rosa’s Sub-regional Wastewater System looks forward to 

continuing to raise the bar with respect to conservation and recycling and the approval of H.R. 716 should help ensure the viability of the Santa Rosa Urban Reuse 

Plan as a model recycling program. 

Senator Bingaman and members of the Committee, the City of Santa Rosa and 

I appreciate your interest in the long term sustainability of the water supply, environmental and species protection in this important watershed. 

Thank you, 

BOB BLANCHARD, 

Mayor. 

*Map of Urban Reuse Plan Area has been retained in subcommittee files. 

STATEMENT OF RONALD YOUNG, GENERAL MANAGER, ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL

WATER DISTRICT, ON H.R. 31 

Chairman Johnson, Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Ron Young, and 

I serve as the General Manager of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District in 

Lake Elsinore, California. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony to the Subcommittee regarding EVMWD’s comprehensive plans for water recycling within two of the fastest growing communities within our very large service 

area along the I-15 corridor in Western Riverside County, California. 

I also want to thank Senator Diane Feinstein for recommending HR 31 be given 

a hearing. Senator Feinstein and her staff have always been very helpful and understood the importance of this legislation to our region. 

BACKGROUND

Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) is located in the southeastern 

portion of Riverside County and borders the eastern boundary of Orange County. 

EVMWD’s jurisdiction includes the City of Lake Elsinore, the City of Canyon Lake, 

a portion of the City of Murrieta, unincorporated areas of the County of Riverside, 

and a portion of the Cleveland National Forest. EVMWD provides potable water 

service, wastewater treatment and disposal, and recycled water to customers within 

its jurisdiction. Currently, EVWMD has approximately 38,000 water service connections, most of which also include wastewater connections. EVMWD is a sub-agency 

of the Western Municipal Water District, a member agency of the Metropolitan 

Water District of Southern California. 

Water demand within EVMWD’s service area has also been growing rapidly due 

to new development and population growth. EVMWD expects water demand to double by 2030. As a result, EVMWD seeks ways to use recycled water to offset limited 

sources of potable water supply. EVMWD has the opportunity to develop the 

Wildomar Recycled Water program and the Alberhill Wastewater Reclamation Facilities. These two projects will ultimately create approximately 4,500 acre feet a 

year in new water; enough for 32,000 new people. 

This new water supply is even more significant when we consider that last year 

the City of Lake Elsinore was the third fastest growing city in Riverside County and 

Riverside County was the second fastest growing county in the Nation. 

The incentive for using recycled water is to conserve a precious local water source 

and substantially lower our customers’ water costs. The Lake Elsinore Unified 

School District will be one of the biggest beneficiaries of this project. We expect the 

project could save the school district over two hundred thousand dollars a year in 

water costs. Given the current projected cuts in state funding for schools over the 

next year; this project will help keep teachers in the classroom and books on the 

shelves. 

This project will also benefit Riverside County’s newest city, the City of Wildomar. 

The official incorporation date for Wildomar is July 1st 2008. There are many 

logistical and financial hurdles for new cities to overcome and the cost of water is 

one of them. However, if this bill is approved, EVMWD can begin supplying low cost 

recycled water to all of the City of Wildomar’s parks, greenbelts, and pubic cemetery. 

Another major user of recycled water in the Wildomar area will be a golf course 

for the Summerly residential development being built by John Laing Homes, Inc 

(JLH). The total cost for this first phase of the Wildomar project is approximately 

28 

$4.9 million. JLH’s contribution is $2.8 million and EVMWD’s cost is approximately 

$2.1 million. 

This is a key element to the overall Wildomar Recycled Water project and to keep this project moving forward, we need Congress to commit to funding $4.8 million 

immediately. 

UNIQUE AND IMMEDIATE REGIONAL BENEFITS

On March 6, EVMWD staff, Wildomar City Councilwoman Elect Marsha Swanson, and Lake Elsinore Unified School District representatives met with Chris 

Carillo and James Peterson of Senator Feinstein’s California staff. In that meeting 

the water district outlined the following eight reasons that make this project so 

unique. 

• Nearly 20 percent of California’s total energy use is used to move water. This 

project will save approximately 15 million kWh per year of electricity from reduce imported water. • Every acre foot of recycled water that is generated saves our water district an 

acre foot of expensive imported water. These two projects combined are estimated to save EVMWD over $2.6 million a year in imported water costs. • Wildomar is the newest city in Riverside County and will benefit greatly from 

the annual financial savings from using recycled water to irrigate its parks, 

greenbelts, and public cemetery. • The Lake Elsinore Unified School District has already seen its water bills decrease over $100k a year due to the installation of weather based irrigation controllers provided by our water district. We currently anticipate an additional annual savings of approximately $200k if H.R. 31 is passed. • The feasibility studies with the Bureau of Reclamation have been completed 

and all design documents and construction plans have been completed; this 

project can start construction immediately. • To ensure full implementation and success of this project, the cost of customer 

connections have been figured into the overall cost of the project. Therefore, all 

39 large users that have been identified on the map on page six will be converted immediately. • The regional benefits of this project include the cooperation of several different 

agencies in southwest Riverside County to treat and deliver the recycled water. 

Along with our partners, Eastern Municipal Water District and Rancho California Water District we represent over 800,000 customers. • One of the most significant aspects of this project is the variety of funding 

sources committed to building this project. EVMWD has committed $7.4 million, 

John Laing Homes has provided approximately $2.8 million, and the State of 

California has provided the water district with a grant for $4 million. Once H.R. 

31 is approved, the cost share for this regional project will include $4.8 million 

from the Federal government for fiscal year 2009. 

WILDOMAR RECYCLED WATER PROJECT

EVMWD proposes to implement a Master Plan for a recycled water system to 

serve its southern region. This Wildomar Recycled Water project is intended to ultimately deliver 2,429 acre-feet per year (AF/yr) of recycled water to 34 user sites. 

(see table 1) Potential users include schools, homeowners’ associations, parks, a 

cemetery, a nursery, a church, and a stadium. The project would require construction of pipelines, pump stations, and reservoirs to distribute recycled water. 

Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) recently constructed the TVRWRF Effluent Disposal Pipeline. This pipeline conveys excess effluent from EMWD’s wastewater facility in Temecula and RCWD’s Santa Rosa Water Reclamation Facility 

(SRWRF) to EMWD’s existing 54-inch Reach 4 pipeline, which will ultimately discharge effluent in the Temescal Wash, which is under the jurisdiction of Region 8, 

the Santa Ana RWQCB. 

EVMWD has purchased the ability to use a portion of the capacity in the pipeline 

as part of a separate agreement with Eastern and Rancho involving wastewater 

treatment of a portion of EVMWD’s service area. (see map) This agreement allots 

EVMWD up to 1.5 million gallons a day, or 1,680 acre feet per year of recycled 

water. EVMWD expects to wholesale purchase the remaining supply of recycled 

water from Rancho California Water District or Eastern Municipal Water District. 

This project is solely for water development. EVMWD will promote this project in 

the community through established outreach materials developed by the District. 

The total project cost for the design, planning, and construction of permanent facilities needed to establish recycled water distribution for the southern region of 

EVMWD’s service area is estimated at $19 million. The funding support for this 

29 

project is needed to match the local and state funds that have been given to 

EVMWD to develop this new water supply. 

ALBERHILL RECYCLED WATER PROJECT

EVMWD, with the assistance of a $75k state grant, prepared a recycled water Facilities Planning Report (FPR) for EVMWD’s Alberhill Service Area entitled The 

FPR Alberhill Service Area Recycled Water Master Plan. The planning study is focused on providing recycled water to potential customers within EVMWD’s Alberhill 

Service Area. Within this service area there are several potential sources of recycled 

water, including EVMWD’s proposed $38 million Alberhill Wastewater Reclamation 

Facility, which will be implemented in three phases; 1, 2A, and 2B. 

Phase 1 includes all existing customers including six developers within the proposed Alberhill Community Facilities District (CFD). 

Phase 2A includes the future customer, Pacific Clay, which is a proposed development near the Alberhill CFD. The significant recycled water demand associated 

with this development will justify the capital costs incurred for the additional facilities. 

Phase 2B includes future customer, the Village Development, which is not 

planned to be constructed until 2019. 

EVMWD is currently completing the preliminary design for the Alberhill WRF. 

Our goal for completing the first phase of the Alberhill WRF construction is December 2010. The recent 2005 EVMWD Alberhill Water & Wastewater Facilities Phasing Plan indicates that the initial capacity for Alberhill WRF is 1.0mgd. The initial 

1.0mgd plant will need to incorporate 0.5mgd incremental treatment trains to accommodate the uncertainties associated with planned developments. The ultimate 

capacity of Alberhill WRF is 5.4mgd. 

EVMWD is looking for a twenty-five percent match from the federal government. 

This funding would be spread over eight years and total $9.6 million 

CONCLUSION

Water demand within EVMWD’s service area has also been growing rapidly due 

to new development and population growth. EVMWD expects water demand to double by 2030. As a result, EVMWD seeks ways to use recycled water to offset limited 

sources of potable water supply. EVMWD has the opportunity to develop the 

Wildomar Recycled Water program and the Alberhill Wastewater Reclamation Facilities. These two projects will create approximately 4,500 acre feet a year in new 

water. This will offset the equivalent demands of about 30,000 residents. 

This new water supply is even more significant when we consider that last year 

the City of Lake Elsinore was the third fastest growing city in Riverside County and 

Riverside County was the second fastest growing county in the Nation. 

This rapid growth in residential and commercial development is the most opportune and economically feasible time to build recycled water uses into these development projects. 

I urge your speedy favorable action on HR 31, so construction of these vital recycled water facilities can keep moving forward and EVMWD can continue to meet 

the current and future water demands of its customers. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

CITY OF WILDOMAR, 

April 2, 2008. 

Hon. TIM JOHNSON, 

U.S. Senate Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: I am writing to convey my support for H.R. 31, the 

Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wastewater and Recycled Water Facilities 

Act of 2007. This legislation overwhelmingly passed the House last July, and we encourage the Senate to do the same. 

The Wildomar water recycling project, which would be authorized by this legislation, is ready to begin construction and would bring immediate benefits to our part 

of the Inland Empire. 

Wildomar is the newest city in Riverside County and will benefit greatly from the 

annual financial savings from using recycled water to irrigate its parks and greenbelts. 

Thank you again, Chairman Johnson for taking the lead on this most significant 

recycled water project for the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Federal 

30 

funding support for this project is vital and necessary to match the local and state 

funds that have been given to EVMWD to develop this new water supply. 

Sincerely, 

BOB CASHMAN, 

Mayor Elect. 

ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, ON H.R. 31 

Federal Request.—$14.4 Million 

The Benefit.—An Energy-Efficient Alternative 

• 1.5 billion gallons of ‘new’ water created 

• Energy for one acre-foot of imported water costs approximately $880, while the 

energy for one acre-foot of recycled water costs $470 

• 20% of all energy consumed in California is used moving water 

• Water recycling is one of the most innovative, cost-effective and promising solutions to conserve water and energy 

The Need.—Reduced Reliance on Imported Water & Conserve Local Supplies 

• EVMWD serves the 3rd fastest growing area in Riverside County, which is the 

2nd fastest growing county in the nation 

• 33% pumping cutbacks to the Delta will reduce the reliability and availability 

of imported water supplies (Judge Wanger Decision) 

• Prolonged droughts, unreliable water supplies and aging infrastructure will become southern California’s next major crisis 

PROPOSED PROJECTS

Wildomar Recycled Water Project: Distribution Facilities 

Total Project Cost: $19 million 

Project Funding: 

• $4 million from state grant 

• $4.8 million from Congress 

• 7.4 million EVMWD contribution 

• 2.8 million Local Contribution 

Alberhill Recycled Water Project: New Treatment & Distribution Facilities 

Total Project Cost: $38.5 million 

Project Funding: 

• $9.6 million from Congress 

• $28.9 million EVMWD contribution 

Defining a Recycled Water Model for California 

• 1.5 billion gallons of ‘new’ water each year, enough to serve 36,000 people 

• $2.7 million saved a year in imported water costs 

• $1.8 million saved a year in electricity costs 

• 15 million kWh of electricity saved, enough to serve 1,685 homes for a year 

EVMWD IS GOING GREEN ...

• 765kWh of solar power produces 5 million gallons of recycled water a day 

• 12% of EVMWD’s electricity needs are supplied by solar power 

• Recycled water is stabilizing lake levels in southern California’s largest natural 

lake 

• Lake Elsinore Advanced Pump Sotrage (LEAPS) will: 

—Use ‘green’ wind and solar power to maintain lake levels 

—Generate more ‘green’ hydropower for EVMWD to produce more recycled 

water 

—Provide ‘green’ energy for southern California in times of blackouts and 

brownouts 

31 

STATEMENT OF CITY OF OXNARD, CA, WATER GREAT PROGRAM, ON H.R. 1737 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Bingaman, Members of the Committee. . . I am Andres Herrera, 

Councilman for the City of Oxnard. I am pleased to submit this testimony to address a bill to amend the ‘‘Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act,’’ better known as H.R. 1737.’’ 

On behalf of the City of Oxnard, we would like to thank you for this opportunity. 

We also wish to publicly recognize Congresswoman Lois Capps for reintroducing this 

legislation as well as her continued support for regional water supply solutions in 

her district. 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Known as ‘‘The City That Cares,’’ Oxnard is a beautiful community to call home. 

It is enriched by a culturally diverse people, strong economy and breezy weather. 

Located 62 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles and 35 miles south of Santa 

Barbara, Oxnard enjoys its rich agricultural land and sandy beaches. 

Oxnard’s current water supplies consist of groundwater from the coastal aquifers 

underlying the Oxnard Plain and imported state water purchased from the 

Calleguas Municipal Water District. These sources are blended in proportions necessary to balance water quality and water supply cost. The groundwater supplies 

utilized by Oxnard are either pumped from a groundwater recharge area and delivered to the city through a local water management agency or pumped through extraction facilities owned and operated by the City of Oxnard. 

However, like other cities in California, Oxnard is faced with several water resource challenges. 

• First, Oxnard is a growing community with a population of nearly 200,000. The 

City of Oxnard is engaged in a general plan update, as we speak. According to 

the California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, Oxnard is 

now the largest city in Ventura County and the 20th largest city out of 475 cities statewide. A U.S. Census Bureau projection predicts that the U.S. population will double by 2100 using moderate assumptions. California’s population 

is growing at a rate of 700,000 per year, which means the state’s population 

will reach 50 million by 2020. It is a given—Oxnard will continue to grow and 

so will demands on our water resources. • Second, to help restore overdraft conditions, the city’s groundwater allocation 

has been reduced by 20 percent over the past twenty years through the efforts 

of the local groundwater management agency. An additional five-percent reduction is planned for 2010, for a total 25 percent reduction over historical usage. • Third, imported Northern California water, through the State Water Project, is 

becoming increasingly more costly and less reliable as the demand on California’s water supplies continues to increase with the population. 

THE GREAT PROGRAM AND ITS REGIONAL BENEFITS

The solution to Oxnard’s water resource challenges? The Groundwater Recovery 

Enhancement And Treatment Program—or, as it’s more commonly known; ‘‘the 

GREAT Program’’. 

The GREAT Program is a holistic, conjunctive use type water resources project 

that combines wastewater purification and reuse, groundwater injection, aquifer 

storage and recovery, and brackish or groundwater desalination. Implementation of 

this program will provide significant regional benefits: 

• Improved reliability of high-quality water deliveries to the Oxnard Plain. • Sufficient water supplies to meet Oxnard’s water resource needs. • Enhanced local water supply stewardship through recycling and reuse of a substantial portion of the region’s wastewater by upgrading the existing Oxnard 

Wastewater Treatment Plant. The plant is currently a secondary treatment facility, with effluent being discharged to the Pacific Ocean. Under the GREAT 

Program, the plant will be converted to a 30-million gallon per day tertiary and 

advanced treatment facility. The discharge will then be used for agricultural irrigation, non-potable municipal and industrial uses, and groundwater recharge. 

Recapturing this lost resource will be made possible through a new Advanced 

Water Purification Facility. 

• Reduced demand on imported water by pumping local groundwater that is no 

longer pumped by agricultural interests. 

• Elimination of costly water delivery system improvements by more efficiently 

using local water resources and reducing our reliance on imported state water. 

32 

• Reduced cost of wastewater reclamation due to a new brine line for the Regional 

Groundwater Desalination Facility. We believe desalination, one method of 

reusing water by removing salts or salinity to meet purification standards, has 

enormous potential. 

• Membrane concentrate from the new Groundwater Desalter and Advanced 

Water Purification Facility will be utilized for local, coastal wetlands restoration. This is a valuable water resource that would otherwise be a waste product 

and disposed of in the Oxnard Wastewater Treatment Plant’s ocean outfall. 

COMPONENTS OF THE GREAT PROGRAM

There are several components to the GREAT Program. 

The Groundwater Desalter is currently under construction. It will utilize 8-inch 

diameter reverse osmosis membrane treatment technology to produce high-quality 

potable water that will be blended with Oxnard’s local groundwater sources. The 

Desalter will be capable of producing 7.5 million gallons of water per day with an 

ultimate capacity of 15 million gallons per day. This facility will be operational in 

August 2008. 

Construction should begin on the 30-million gallon per day Advanced Water Purification Facility in the next 10 to 12 months. This project includes tertiary treatment facilities to meet the State Department of Health Services criteria for unrestricted reuse and advanced treatment using large-diameter reverse osmosis membrane technology. Both treatment facilities, the Desalter and Advanced Water Purification Facility, are based on desalination technology. 

The Advanced Water Purification Facility is also responsible for producing a new 

water source. Referred to as GREAT ‘‘Purified’’ Water, this resource will be utilized 

for various non-potable purposes and will be of higher quality than existing local 

groundwater. The facility will also help relieve overdrafting of the local groundwater 

basin, which has led to seawater intrusion. However, even more beneficial, the 

GREAT Program will create a seawater injection barrier to prevent the ocean from 

mixing with and contaminating underground water supplies. We have been working 

closely with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and completed and submitted our required project feasibility study. The project also has a certified environmental impact report and has garnered all of its necessary land-use entitlements. 

Finally, a silver lining of the GREAT Program is a component study entitled the 

Membrane Concentrate Demonstration Wetlands Project. This element was created 

to demonstrate the environmentally safe use of membrane concentrate to restore 

coastal wetland ecosystems. Positive results successfully demonstrated the viability 

of wetland-based concentrate reuse. As home to one of the few remaining wetland 

restoration sites in Southern California, this is very encouraging news. This means 

that membrane concentrate, which is similar to brackish water found within these 

estuaries, may be a suitable water source to help restore the Ormond Beach wetlands. 

PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION

The GREAT Program has presented the City of Oxnard with a tremendous opportunity to inform and educate residents, and the surrounding region, on critical 

water resource issues such as conservation, preservation of our wetlands and the 

facts surrounding purified water. Experience has shown us that an effective public 

awareness effort can help foster widespread understanding. 

Our public outreach effort actually started months before the GREAT Program 

was launched in 2001. The campaign has been well received and widely reported 

in regional news and industry publications. It includes media relations, an interactive website, informational brochures, educational videos, presentations, public 

tours and numerous special events. 

AWARD-WINNING PROGRAM

The GREAT Program is a state and federal award-winning program. Over the 

past few years it has garnered statewide and national attention for its innovation. 

It was this year’s recipient of the prestigious League of California Cities Helen Putnam Award and was a finalist for the Association of California Water Agencies 2004 

Clair A. Hill Award for Excellence. It also received recognition from the Consulting 

Engineers and Land Surveyors of California. 

CONCLUSION

The City of Oxnard’s GREAT Program will provide measurable enhancements for 

Oxnard residents and its surrounding communities. While municipalities across the 

33 

state face many challenges, the GREAT Program is an example of how challenges 

can be transformed into opportunities to better serve residents, seek innovative 

technological means to generate solutions, facilitate partnerships, build public 

awareness and enhance public confidence. Yes...we believe that we have made significant progress. 

However, with your support of H.R. 1737, the ‘‘City of Oxnard Water Recycling 

and Desalination Act of 2005,’’ we believe can work cooperatively to make this essential project a reality. More importantly, we will ensure a reliable and affordable 

source of high-quality water for Oxnard residents. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee... Once again, the City of Oxnard 

would like to thank you for convening this hearing. We are extremely supportive 

of your efforts to ensure adequate and safe water supplies for the entire country. 

Thank you for the opportunity and for your consideration of the Groundwater Recovery Enhancement and Treatment (GREAT) Program. 

SAN TIMOTEO WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, 

Beaumont, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

United States Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

J ANDREW SCHLANGE, 

General Manger. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, 

Temecula, CA, April 15, 2008. 

Mr. Joseph B. Zoba, 

General Manager, Yucaipa Valley Water District, P.O. Box 730, Yucaipa, CA. 

Subject: Approval of Feasibility Study; Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR MR. ZOBA: The Bureau of Reclamation is pleased to inform you that the feasibility study for and supporting documentation submitted for the Yucaipa Valley 

Regional Water Supply Renewal Project meets the requirements of a feasibility 

study as defined under the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 

Facilities Act (43 U.S.0 390h et seq), as amended. 

Enclosed for your information is a copy of the formal approval memorandum 

dated March 26, 2008. Please note that prior to the execution of any construction 

funding agreements, completion of NEPA compliance and the submittal of specific 

financial capability documentation will be required. 

If you have any questions, please call me at 951-695-5310. 

Sincerely, 

WILLIAM J. STEELE, 

Area Manager. 

Enclosure 

34 

MEMORANDUM 

To: Director, Office of Program and Policy Services 

Attention: 84-50000 

Through: Lorri Gray, Regional Director 

From: William J. Steele, Area Manager 

Subject: Approval of Findings, Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal 

Project 

The purpose of this memorandum is to request your approval aouthern California 

Area Office’s (SCAO) findings for the feasibility study report for the Yucaipa Valley 

Regional Water Supply Renewal Project (Title XVI feasibility report). For the reasons outlined below, the SCAO finds that the feasibility study for the subject project 

is complete and meet the requirements of the Title XVI program. Therefore, SCAO 

recommends that the Bureau of Reclamation finds that this Title XVI feasibility report meets the requirements of a feasibility study as defined under Section 1604 of 

Public Law 102-575, as amended. 

A meeting was held on August 18, 2006, between SCAO and the Yucaipa Valley 

Water District (District) to discuss the feasibility study for this project. Subsequently, on September 11, 2006, the District submitted a feasibility study. Mr. Dennis Wolfe (SCAO), in consultation with Messrs. Rick Martin and Dean Marrone (Office of Program and Policy Services), reviewed the study and compared the documentation submitted to the elements of a complete feasibility study as defined in 

the ‘‘Guidelines for Preparing, Reviewing, and Processing Water Reclamation and 

Reuse Projects under Title XVI of Public Law 102-57, as Amended’’ (Title XVI 

Guidelines). On November 7, 2006, SCAO requested additional information regarding the environmental analysis element from the District. The requested information, which consists of a complete Mitigated Negative Declarayion for the Yucaipa 

Brineline Project, was received by SCAO on January 3, 2008, and has now been reviewed. The additional information was found satisfactory by Messrs. Dennis Wolfe 

and Miguel Rocha (Title XVI Program Manager, Office of Program and Policy Services). 

A waiver from the requirements identified in Reclamation Manual Directive and 

Standard WTR 11-01, Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program Feasibility 

Study Review Process (D&S) is requested for the following reasons: 

• This review was initiated before the D&S was approved. 

• The D&S was modeled after the review process used for this Title XVI feasibility study report resulting in minor variances from the D&S. 

• Formally following the review process identified in the D&S will require additional time and funding that will not result in different findings. 

• This waiver will apply to this Title XVI feasibility study report and will not 

have any Reclamation-wide effect. 

• Approval of this waiver will set a precedent for one other report (City of Corona) 

where the review process was initiated prior to signature of the D&S. 

• This memorandum will serve as the sole means of communication of this waiver. 

For the reasons set forth above, SCAO finds that the Title XVI feasibility study 

report for the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal Project now meets 

the requirements of a feasibility study as defined under Section 1604 of Public Law 

102-575, as amended. Your concurrence and approval of SCAO’s findings is requested. 

Concur: 

LORI GRAY, 

Regional Director. 

Approve: 

ROSEANN GONZALES, 

Director, Office of Program and Policy Services. 

35 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

Washington, DC, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chair, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304 Dirksen 

Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN BINGAMAN: Thank you for including my bill, H.R. 716, the Santa 

Rosa Urban Water Reuse Plan Act, as part of your hearing on April 8, 2008, in the 

Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Your continued leadership on conservation issues is greatly appreciated. 

As you may know, the Santa Rosa Water Reuse Plan will be vital in helping the 

City of Santa Rosa (in my district in Sonoma County, California) minimize its impact on the Russian River, the main conveyance of regional water supplies and a 

vital migratory corridor for threatened salmon and steelhead. 

H.R. 716 will authorize $20 million to help design and construct water recycling 

pipelines to distribute recycled wastewater throughout Santa Rosa and its partner 

communities. Using treated wastewater to irrigate new developments, median 

strips, and park landscapes will yield long-term benefits in conserving valuable 

fresh water for human consumption and watershed preservation and enhancement 

for Santa Rosa and nearby communities. This is especially important in a region 

that remains arid for six months of the year and where droughts pose a genuine 

threat to humans and endangered species. 

If this legislation is not authorized, Santa Rosa may resume previous levels of discharges of untreated waters into the Russian River, further endangering the river 

ecosystem. This will reverse years of progress, ensuring years of conflict with downstream communities and mounting costs to the city. Passing the Urban Water Reuse 

Program will be helpful, in tandem with other programs, to reduce further Russian 

River discharges. 

Again, thank you for your consideration of H.R. 716, and I look forward to working with you on this bill as it moves through your committee. 

Thank you, as always, for your leadership. 

Sincerely, 

LYNN WOOLSEY, 

Member of Congress. 

LAKE ELSINORE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, 

Lake Elsinore, CA, April 1, 2008. 

Hon. TIM JOHNSON, 

U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN JOHNSON: I am writing to convey my support for H.R. 31, the 

Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wastewater and Recycled Water Facilities 

Act of 2007. This legislation overwhelmingly passed the House last July, and we encourage the Senate to do the same. 

The Wildomar water recycling project, which would be authorized by this legislation, is ready to begin construction and would bring immediate benefits to our part 

of the Inland Empire. 

The Lake Elsinore Unified School District has already seen its water bills decrease over $100k a year due to the installation of weather based irrigation controllers provided by the water district. We anticipate an additional annual savings of 

approximately $200k if H.R. 31 is passed and the water district can build the much 

needed recycled water infrastructure outlined in this bill. 

Thank you again, Chairman Johnson for taking the lead on this most significant 

recycled water project for the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Federal 

funding support for this project is vital and necessary to match the local and state 

funds that have been given to EVMWD to develop this new water supply. 

Sincerely, 

DR. FRANK W. PASSARELLA, 

District Superintendent. 

36 

ASSEMBLY CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE, 

Sacramento, CA, February 6, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Subject: Support of HR 2614, Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply 

Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. Over the 

past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically 

building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, state, and 

federal funds. 

There is no opposition to this project. The 108th and 109th Congress has passed 

it to the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 

3638 in the 109in Congress. 

HR 2614 authorizes the construction of a twenty mile brine line and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in YVWD’s groundwater basin due their 

aggressive recycled water program. The project will reduce demand on the State 

Water Project by four billion gallons per year, or 27,000 families. 

YVWD has become a conservation leader in the Inland Empire. This project is important to the long-term goal of water self-sufficiency, thereby protecting the residents of the East San Bernardino County from drought. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

BILL EMMERSON, 

Assemblyman, 63rd District, 

PAUL COOK, 

Assemblyman, 65th District, 

ROBERT DUTTON, 

Senator, 31st District. 

CRAFTON HILLS OPEN SPACE CONSERVANCY, 

Yucaipa, CA, February 7, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Subject: Support of HR 2614, Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply 

Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. Over the 

past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically 

building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, state, and 

federal funds. 

There is no opposition to this project. The 108th and 109th Congress has passed 

it to the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 

3638 in the 109th Congress. 

HR 2614 authorizes the construction of a twenty mile brine line and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in YVWD’s groundwater basin due their 

aggressive recycled water program. The project will reduce demand on the State 

Water Project by over four billion gallons per year. 

YVWD has become a conservation leader in the Inland Empire. This project is important to the long-term goal of water self-sufficiency, thereby protecting the residents of the East San Bernardino County from drought. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

INGRID LAGERLOF, 

Executive Director. 

CITY OF YUCAIPA, 

Yucaipa, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

37 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, as you are aware, the project was included in your 

S. 3638 in the 109th Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

DICK RIDDELL, 

Mayor. 

CITY OF BANNING, 

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR, 

Banning, CA, February 28, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Subject: Support of HR 2614, Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply 

Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. Over the 

past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically 

building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, state, and 

federal funds. 

There is no opposition to this project. The 108th and 109th Congress has passed 

it to the Senate on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 

3638 in the 109th Congress. 

HR 2614 authorizes the construction of a twenty mile brine line and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in YVWD’s groundwater basin due their 

aggressive recycled water program. The project will reduce demand on the State 

Water Project by four billion gallons per year, or 27,000 families. 

YVWD has become a conservation leader in the Inland Empire. This project is important to the long-term goal of water self-sufficiency, thereby protecting the residents of the East San Bernardino County from drought. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

BRENDA SALAS, 

Mayor. 

CITY OF BANNING, 

ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT, 

Banning, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re:Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

38 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

JAMES EARHART, 

Public Utilities Director. 

BEAUMONT CHERRY VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, 

Beaumont, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re:Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ma Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

C.J. BUTCHER, 

General Manager. 

CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, 

SANTA ANA REGION, 

Riverside, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re:Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalination facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan to improve water quality in the 

watershed. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

GERARD J. THIBEAULT, 

Executive Officer. 

39 

CITY OF CALIMESA, 

Calimesa, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Nan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

DAVID A. LANE, 

City Manager. 

EAST VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, 

Highland, CA April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water-recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty-mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

the groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional 

Water Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Very truly yours, 

ROBERT E. MARTIN, P.E., 

General Manager. 

SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, 

San Bernardino, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important legislation which includes a water recycling 

project for the Yucaipa area. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

40 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

a groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan, as approved by the Regional 

Water Quality Control Board and the 2007 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also reduce the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation was passed by the 108th and 109th House of Representatives but 

not the Senate. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

RANDY VAN GELDER, 

General Manager. 

SAN GORGONIO PASS WATER AGENCY, 

April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty-mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basins of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District and the Upper Santa Ana region in general. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Very truly yours, 

JEFF DAVIS, 

General Manager & Chief Engineer. 

SANTA ANA WATERSHED PROJECT AUTHORITY, 

Riverside, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re:Support of FIR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN: I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

State, and Federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twentymile brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in the groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is 

an important element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project also will lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

41 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

CELESTE CANTU ́, 

General Manager. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, 

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, 

San Bernardino, CA, May 6, 2003. 

Mr. Bruce Granlund, 

Board President, Yucaipa Valley Water District, 12770 Second Street, Yucaipa, CA. 

SUBJECT: Letter of Support for the Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR MR. GRANLUND: The County of San Bernardino supports the construction 

of the proposed Yucaipa Valley Regional Water Supply Renewal Project. The project 

will involve the construction of a desalinization facility and approximately 20 miles 

of brine disposal pipeline. The project is essential to provide a reliable water supply 

for the region and effectively eliminate the buildup of minerals and various contaminants in the eastern portion of the Santa Ana Watershed. 

This particular project, coupled with the Yucaipa Valley Water District’s aggressive recycled water program, is a vital step in minimizing the amount of water imported from the fragile ecosystem in northern California. 

On behalf of the County of San Bernardino, I support the District’s project and 

believe it is prudent to secure the necessary funds to implement the construction 

of these facilities. 

Sincerely, 

DENNIS HANSBERGER, 

Chairman, Supervisor, Third District. 

OAK VALLEY PARTNERS, L.P., 

Calimesa, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

MARK KNORRINGA, 

Director of Development. 

42 

SUNCAL COMPANIES, 

INLAND EMPIRE DIVISION, 

Corona, CA, April 3, 2008. 

Hon. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

U.S. Senate, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: Support of HR 2614—Yucaipa Valley Water District Regional Water Supply Renewal Project 

DEAR SENATOR FEINSTEIN, I am writing in support of HR 2614 and ask for your 

assistance in passing this important water recycling project in the Senate. 

Over the past five years, the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) has been methodically building recycled water infrastructure with a combination of ratepayer, 

state, and federal funds. HR 2614 would authorize the construction of a twenty mile 

brine disposal pipeline and a desalinization facility to remove salts accumulating in 

groundwater basin of the upper Santa Ana Watershed. This project is an important 

element in the Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan approved by the Regional Water 

Quality Control Board. 

In addition to improving groundwater quality, the project will also lessen the dependence on imported water from northern California by the Yucaipa Valley Water 

District. 

This legislation has been passed by the 108th and 109th Congress to the Senate 

on a voice vote. Furthermore, the project was included in your S. 3638 in the 109th 

Congress. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Sincerely, 

PETER JOHNSON, 

Division President. 

Æ