BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 555|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 555
Author: Wolk (D), et al.
Amended: 9/1/15
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 8-0, 4/14/15
AYES: Pavley, Stone, Allen, Fuller, Hueso, Jackson, Monning,
Wolk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hertzberg
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/28/15
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen
SENATE FLOOR: 36-2, 6/1/15
AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block,
Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall,
Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Huff, Jackson, Lara,
Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Nguyen,
Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk
NOES: Moorlach, Morrell
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hueso, Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-5, 9/3/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Urban retail water suppliers: water loss management.
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill requires each urban retail water supplier, on
or before October 1, 2017, and annually thereafter, to submit
annual water loss audit (WLA) reports to the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) as specified and requires DWR to post such WLAs
and provide technical assistance.
SB 555
Page 2
Assembly Amendments add a requirement that the State Water
Resources Control Board (State Board) provide up to $400,000 for
validation assistance for urban retail water suppliers; and make
a number of clarifying changes.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Requires all urban water suppliers to prepare and adopt urban
water management plans (UWMPs), update them every five years,
and submit them to DWR. Among other requirements, UWMPs must:
a) Provide a description of the service area of the
supplier;
b) Identify and quantify water resources; and,
c) Make water use projections.
2)Specifies that compliance with the Urban Water Management
Planning Act is a prerequisite to receiving state funding for
water projects and programs.
3)Requires, beginning with the 2015 update, that UWMPs contain a
calculation of the distribution system water losses.
4)Requires distribution system water losses to be reported in
accordance with a worksheet approved or developed by DWR using
water loss calculations that are based on the water system
balance methodology developed by the American Water Works
Association (AWWA).
This bill:
SB 555
Page 3
1)Requires each urban retail water supplier, beginning October
1, 2017, and annually thereafter, to submit a completed and
validated water loss audit report to DWR for the previous year
(calendar or fiscal).
2)Requires each water loss audit report to be accompanied by
information identifying steps taken in the preceding year to
increase the validity of data entered into the final audit,
reduce the volume of apparent losses, and reduce the volume of
real losses.
3)Requires DWR to deem incomplete and return to the urban retail
water supplier any final water loss audit report found by the
department to be incomplete, not validated, unattested, or
incongruent with known characteristics of water system
operations. A water supplier shall resubmit a completed water
loss audit report within 90 days of an audit being returned by
the department.
4)Requires DWR to post all validated water loss audit reports on
its Internet Web site in a manner that allows for comparisons
across water suppliers. (a)
5)Requires DWR, by January 1, 2017, to adopt rules for all of
the following:
a) The conduct of standardized water loss audits by urban
retail water suppliers in accordance with the method
adopted by the AWWA.
b) The process for validating a water loss audit report
prior to submitting the report to the department.
c) The necessary qualifications of persons validating a
water loss audit report
SB 555
Page 4
d) The method of submitting a water loss audit report to
the department.
6)Requires DWR to update the rules no later than six months
after the release of subsequent editions of the AWWA's Water
Audits and Loss Control Programs, Manual M36.
7)Requires the State Board, between January 1, 2019, and July 1,
2020, to adopt rules requiring urban retail water suppliers to
meet performance standards for the volume of water losses.
8)Requires the State Board, using funds available for the
2016-17 fiscal year, to contribute up to $400,000 towards
procuring water loss audit report validation assistance for
urban retail water suppliers.
9)Requires DWR, using available funds, to provide technical
assistance to guide urban retail water suppliers' water loss
detection programs, including, but not limited to, metering
techniques, pressure management techniques, condition-based
assessment techniques for transmission and distribution
pipelines, and utilization of portable and permanent water
loss detection devices.
Comments
Is Water Loss a Real Problem? It's hard to know. According to
the California Water Plan, in its discussion on urban water use
efficiency:
"The amount of water lost due to leakage in the distribution
system of the State's water suppliers is not well known. This
is largely due to the fact that not all water suppliers
perform regular water loss audits. If water audits are not
conducted, it is difficult for a water agency to know the
SB 555
Page 5
extent of its losses and unlikely that the agency will
implement practices to reduce these losses." (California Water
Plan Update 2013, Vol. 3, Ch. 3)
Proponents point to a 2011 study prepared for the California
Public Utilities Commission Energy Division titled "Embedded
Energy in Water Pilot Programs Impact Evaluation." Included in
that study was an evaluation of Southern California Edison's
Leak Detection pilot program. However, the statewide estimates
of water losses and economically recoverable losses reported in
that study were essentially back of the envelope calculations;
based on year 2000 urban water use, "the commonly quoted
threshold for acceptable real losses in California of 10% of
volume supplied," and a 40% economically recoverable real losses
rate based on San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's
experience. (Secondary Research For Water Leak Detection
Program And Water System Loss Control Study, December 2009).
Consequently, it is not clear whether those estimates of 840,000
acre feet/year (af/y) real losses and 350,000 af/y economically
recoverable real losses are reasonably accurate or not.
Do any other states require this? According to the Center For
Neighborhood Technology:
"In June of 2010, the Georgia Water Stewardship Act (the Act)
was signed into law in an effort to create a "culture of water
conservation" throughout the state of Georgia. One of the main
components of this legislation was a mandate requiring that
all utilities serving populations of 3,300 and above submit
annual water loss audits utilizing the American Water Works
Association (AWWA) and International Water Association (IWA)
water audit methodology (M36)."
"Currently, Georgia has had 100% compliance from utilities for
every year that they have been required to submit the AWWA
water audits. It is interesting to note that some utilities
serving populations less than 3,300, while not included in
this mandate, are now using the auditing method voluntarily
after hearing positive anecdotes from their larger system
peers. The success of Georgia's program provides an effective
blueprint for other states and agencies in how to begin
providing support to their utilities in moving forward with
SB 555
Page 6
best practices in water loss management." (Stepping Up Water
Loss Control: Lessons From The State Of Georgia, February
2014)
Besides Georgia, it appears that some states have water loss
detection requirements of one type or another. But none of
those states have programs as rigorous as Georgia's or as
proposed by this bill.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
1)One-time General Fund (GF) costs of approximately $150,000 for
DWR to develop the rules for standardizing and validating
water loss audit reports and auditors.
2)Annual GF costs of approximately $150,000 for DWR to review
urban water supplier audit reports and post the reports on its
Internet website.
3)Increased annual GF costs shifts of between $150,000 and
$200,000 to provide technical assistance to urban water
suppliers on water loss detection programs.
This bill requires DWR to provide technical assistance with
existing resources. However, DWR indicates this cost is not
absorbable and would require reductions in existing programs.
4)Absorbable one-time costs for the State Board to consult with
DWR to develop water loss metrics and performance standards.
The 2015-16 Budget Act provides $833,000 (special fund) and
two positions to SWRCB for water conservation activities that
are available fulfill these requirements.
SB 555
Page 7
5)Absorbable one-time costs to the State Board of up to $400,000
(Drinking Water State Revolving Fund) for its contribution
towards procuring water loss audit report validation
assistance for urban water suppliers.
It is presumed the urban water suppliers will be responsible
for their validation costs after the first year. The author
may wish to clarify that the urban water supplier is
responsible for its ongoing validations costs after the
2016-17 year.
SUPPORT: (Verified9/3/15)
Aclara
California League of Conservation Voters
Clean Water Action
Coca-Cola Company
Dignity Health
Environment California
Gap
Heal the Bay
Irvine Ranch Water District
MillerCoors
Natural Resources Defense Council
Regional Water Authority
San Diego County Water Authority
Sierra Club California
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
Sonoma County Water Agency
Symantec Corporation
U.S. Green Building Council, California
OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/3/15)
None received
SB 555
Page 8
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, the author
asserts that "it is essential that all California communities
use existing water supplies as efficiently as possible.
"Despite the availability of free audit software and the
establishment of a Best Management Practice for water loss by
the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), urban
water suppliers have been slow to realize the full potential of
water loss control. One reason for the slow adoption of water
loss control methods is the unreliability of water loss audit
data. One CUWCC study found that 35% of water audit data
submitted by California water suppliers was invalid.
"By requiring urban water suppliers to report system audit
results and directing DWR to set audit standards, while
providing the necessary technical assistance, water suppliers
will achieve effective water loss control and contribute to
California's water management, climate mitigation and climate
adaption goals."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-5, 9/3/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bloom, Bonilla,
Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez,
Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Eggman,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo
Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Roger
Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey,
Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mayes, McCarty,
Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Olsen, Perea,
Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,
Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,
Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins
NOES: Bigelow, Grove, Mathis, Obernolte, Patterson
NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough, Dahle, Hadley, Harper
Prepared by:Dennis O'Connor / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
9/3/15 19:22:10
SB 555
Page 9
**** END ****