Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
QUARTERLY WATER ISSUES UPDATE
May 2005
Issues related to Palo Alto’s water supplier, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
(SFPUC), and the agency representing the wholesale customers of SFPUC, the Bay Area Water
Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA), are discussed below.
I.
Water Supply Issues
Water Availability
The SFPUC’s April 2005 Hydrological Conditions Report (attached) contains information about
the regional system’s water supply reliability. The Hetch Hetchy precipitation index (computed
using six Sierra precipitation stations indicating wetness of the basin) for the 2005 water year to
date (October 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005) was 43.7 inches, or 148 % of the average seasonto-date precipitation. The February precipitation was 6.43 inches, or 108% of the average and
the March precipitation was 8.53 inches, or 156% of average.
The water received in the SFPUC’s Tuolumne Basin reservoirs (Hetch Hetchy, Eleanor and
Cherry Lakes and the New Don Pedro Water Bank) from inflows and precipitation for the 2005
water year to date was about 380,000 acre-feet, or 160% of San Francisco’s normal inflow for
the period. San Francisco’s total entitlement for the 2004 water year (October 1, 2003 through
September 30, 2004) was 331,555 acre-feet.
San Francisco’s water bank in New Don Pedro Reservoir was full at 570,000 acre-feet as of
March 31, 2005. The total water in storage in both the mountain system and the local systems
was about 1,180,000 acre-feet as of April 1, 2005, leaving about 250,000 acre-feet of available
storage capacity in the system.
II.
Water Quality
Chloramine Conversion
The SFPUC and the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) requested that the
Environmental Health Committee of the California Conference of Local Health Officers
(CCLHO) include chloramine on the agenda for its meeting in January. After review of many
available materials and studies on the subject, the CCLHO released its position on chloramines
on March 8, 2005 (see attached letter). Basically, the CCLHO concluded that chloramine is
preferred to chlorine for disinfection of drinking water.
The SFDPH administered a standardized dermatitis questionnaire between September 2004 and
January 31, 2005. SFDPH completed an analysis of the dermatitis questionnaires on March 1
and “did not discover a consistent pattern of skin appearances or symptoms among respondents.”
It found no basis for further investigation of these complaints at this time.
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 1 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Regional Fluoridation
SFPUC is on schedule to convert to regional fluoridation by this summer. SFPUC is
communicating with all the BAWSCA agencies on any changes in monitoring protocols or
schedules.
III.
SFPUC Issues
Water Supply Improvement Project
SFPUC’s capital program, now known as the Water Supply Improvement Project (WSIP), was
discussed by the commission at a series of policy workshops in January and February. At its
February 8 meeting, the commission decided to forward WSIP objectives to the planning
department for it to use in the development of the Programmatic EIR. However, the commission
has not yet adopted the WSIP or the objectives. BAWSCA has been gathering information
regarding impacts on customers to try to educate the commission. BAWSCA has continued
checking the materials provided to the commission on February 8 and has found many errors and
has many unanswered questions. The objectives forwarded to the planning department include:




The “seismic reliability” objective is to be able to provide region-wide service at a demand
level of wintertime loads within 24 hours after a large earthquake. The goal states that 70%
of all turnouts would be restored, but it is not clear whether this was a system-wide goal or
for each agency. San Francisco itself was analyzed to ensure that it would have 70% of its
turnouts available.
The objective for “delivery reliability” is to ensure annual average demands to in the event
of one planned outage and one unplanned outage of major facilities. Again, if these are
system-wide demands, what are the effects on individual agencies?
The “water quality” objective is to meet current and anticipated local, state, and federal
requirements, and proceed with watershed protection projects.
The objective for “water supply” is that region-wide deliveries would not be less than 80%
of annual average demands in a design drought (8 ½ years of drought – the 1987-1992
hydrology followed by the 1976-1977 hydrology). If this hydrology were repeated, the
system-wide cutbacks in the first three years would be 0%, 0%, and 10%. The second three
years would require cutbacks of 10%, 20%, and 10%. The last 2 ½ years would have 20%
cutbacks each year.
BAWSCA has many questions about the change in cost estimate for the WSIP. Some projects
that were in old CIP are not in the WSIP. Some were not totally removed, but just put into a
different pile – repair and renovation (R&R). SFPUC seems to be making a distinction between
projects such that those in the WSIP are only those that will be paid for by bonds, but those that
will be paid for on an ongoing basis were shifted into R&R. The result is that the cost of those
projects is still there, but has been moved to a different pile so that the WSIP is not as big. Also,
the old CIP cost $3.6 B, of which $2.9 B was the regional system and $700 M was for in-City
projects. The new WSIP cost is $4.3 B, an increase of $700 from the old CIP. However, the
amount for in-City projects has gone down so the amount of the regional system projects has
increased more that the $700 M (plus the cost of projects moved to R&R). BAWSCA is busy
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 2 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
tracking down all these costs to be able to present what the real changes are. Unfortunately, the
commission does not ask the questions BAWSCA does and, doesn’t seem to know about the
discrepancies.
In addition to questions about the cost, BAWSCA has questions about the schedule and whether
it is doable. The last do-over CIP presented to the commission in November 2004 was rejected,
partially because of its very aggressive schedule. The new WSIP schedule appears to contain a
schedule that is as aggressive as that one. BAWSCA has asked SFPUC if the new schedule is
realistic and manageable.
The SFPUC is currently reviewing and revising scopes, cost estimates and schedules for each
project. When complete, it is expected that the SFPUC will adopt a revised plan and that it will
be sent to the state as required in AB 1823.
Updated Wholesale Water Cost Projections
Since the balancing account for the Suburban Revenue Requirement is significantly in favor of
the BAWSCA agencies, SFPUC decreased the wholesale rates by 10% effective April 1. These
lowered rates are expected to stay flat for the next two fiscal years (through FY 06-07).
Projections for the next five years are shown in the following chart along with the SCVWD’s
latest 10-year wholesale water rate projections:
SFPUC/SCVWD Wholesale Water Rates
$700
SFPUC Actual Rates
SFPUC Rate Projection - 3/22/05
SCVWD Pump Tax (Groundwater)
SCVWD Treated Water Rates
Commodity Cost ($/AF)
$600
$500
$400
$300
$200
$100
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 3 of 22
2011
2006
2001
1996
1991
1986
1981
1976
1971
$0
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
San Francisco Board of Supervisors Audit of SFPUC’s Water Enterprise
The San Francisco Budget Analyst Department has conducted an audit of the SFPUC in four
phases: 1) Wastewater, completed in September 2004; 2) Hetch Hetchy, completed in December
2004; 3) Water Enterprise, completed in March 2005; and 4) Infrastructure and SFPUC Bureaus,
to be completed in May 2005. The recently completed audit on the water enterprise had many
findings and recommendations, including:






Regarding long-range financial planning: SFPUC has inadequate financial planning for the
WSIP, SFPUC may not be able to fund repair and replacement projects from current
revenues, and SFPUC lacks effective asset management program.
On wholesale water rates: wholesale customers paid $15 million more than necessary,
accounting methodologies are weak for setting wholesale water rates, there are delays in the
calculation of the Suburban Revenue Requirement, and the independent audits required by
the Master Contract have not been completed.
There is ineffective timing management for the WSIP such that there is significant interest
expense and lost dollar value.
The water enterprise has no business plan and there is no department strategic plan. (This
was identified as a serious problem.).
The monitoring and reporting systems to track project implementation are inconsistent and
lack accountability.
Regarding the PEIR: the SFPUC failed to make a timely determination that a PEIR would be
needed, and nine critical projects have been delayed.
In response, Susan Leal “welcomed” the advice and criticism and promised improvements in the
future.
State Audit of SFPUC Maintenance Management
On April 13, the State released the California Department of Health Services (CDHS) audit of
SFPUC maintenance practices required by AB 1823. According to Art Jensen, BAWSCA’s
General Manager, the report’s 14 recommendations demonstrate that San Francisco needs to
improve the way maintenance is managed. San Francisco has formed an asset management
group to address facility condition. SFPUC reported that it has hired Olivia Chen Consultants to
prepare a plan for implementing the audit recommendations. BAWSCA will monitor whether
the recommendations are implemented on a reasonable schedule.
From the executive summary of the report:
“CDHS, through a contract with the Department of Finance, Office of State
Audits and Evaluations (DOF) arranged for an audit to fulfill the requirements of
AB 1823. Staff from DOF conducted the audit from April 2003 through
November 2003, including visits to some field facilities.
“Findings in the DOF report showed there were significant deficiencies in the
method in which SFPUC prepared budgets, and recorded and prioritized
maintenance activities of SFRWS [the San Francisco Regional Water System].
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 4 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Specifically, the auditors concluded that: 1) the MAXIMO database was not
being used to its fullest potential; 2) criteria for funding projects related to major
maintenance and replacement of system components were not documented, but
were implemented based on staff experience and were decentralized; 3) record
keeping was fragmented and; 4) resource allocations were budget-driven and not
need-driven.
“The findings of field investigations included that the majority components and
facilities of SFRWS were generally in overall satisfactory condition as a result of
consistent improvements over the last ten years. The investigations also found
that a few critical facilities were nearing the end of their useful life while others
were in various degrees of risk of failure. The investigation also identified the
need to strengthen the infrastructure and add reliability to operation and service.
“The enactment of AB 1823 has resulted in more attention being targeted by
SFPUC to the improvement of infrastructure and water delivery capacities, better
management of maintenance activities, and a Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
that includes Repair and Replacement (R&R) projects essential for ongoing
maintenance of the aging SFRWS. Based on the reports of the auditor’s field
investigators and official records, CDHS concluded that SFRWS currently
complies with the drinking water standards developed under the California Safe
Drinking Water Act and applicable federal regulations.”
Drain Hetch Hetchy
The movement to drain the Hetch Hetchy Valley got a boost on April 4 when Tom Philp, an
associate editor of the Sacramento Bee’s editorial board received the Pulitzer Prize for editorial
writing on his series supporting the proposal.
In addition, on April 13, the conservation group American Rivers released its annual list of the
ten most endangered rivers in the United States. The Tuolumne River was ranked # 8 on the list
with the following description of why:
“The City of San Francisco has proposed a new pipeline that could increase the
water it removes from the Tuolumne River by as much as 70 percent. Additional
diversions would deplete 100 miles of productive, pristine river habitat and
compound pollution problems in San Francisco Bay. Unless San Francisco
invests in making its existing supplies go further, California could lose some of its
best salmon and steelhead runs, world-class outdoor recreation, and the economic
diversity this river now provides.”
At the request of the governor, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Department
of Parks and Recreation (DPR) are preparing a report that is essentially a review of existing
studies on the impacts of draining the Hetch Hetchy Valley. No new analytical studies will be
done as part of this evaluation. The SFPUC and BAWSCA are working with the state to ensure
that all impacts to all parties are taken into account. These impacts include evaluation of the
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 5 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
likely costs of relocating water and energy supplies, removal of O'Shaughnessy Dam, increased
water treatment, and ecosystem restoration activities for Hetch Hetchy Valley. Conceptual
alternatives to complete restoration of Hetch Hetchy Valley, as well as water and power
replacement options will also be explored. The study is expected to be completed this summer.
IV.
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Activities
Response to Changes to SFPUC’s WSIP
On February 22, BAWSCA General Manager Art Jensen, BAWSCA’s Strategic Counsel Bud
Wendell, BAWSCA Chair Bern Beecham and Rosalie O’Mahoney, Chair of the BAWSCA
Board Policy Committee met with SFPUC General Manager Susan Leal and Richard Sklar,
SFPUC President. At the meeting, BAWSCA delivered a letter (attached) that expresses
BAWSCA’s concern with the progress in completing the WSIP. The letter asks for written
assurances that San Francisco, specifically the mayor, takes seriously its responsibility to
complete the projects on time an on budget. The request was not warmly received at the
meeting, however, President Sklar did invite BAWSCA to participate more fully in planning
discussions around the development of the WSIP.
BAWSCA Budget
BAWSCA’s Proposed FY 05-06 Budget is $2.1 million. The general manager identified the
most critical areas of work support as: 1) timely progress in getting the system fixed on budget
and schedule; 2) oversight, input and review of the PEIR; 3) master contract administration and
negotiation; and 4) actions that improve water supply reliability. The nine “results to be
achieved” in FY 05-06 include:
1.
Administration and oversight of the existing contract;
2.
Evaluate choices and potential consequences of members’ desired objectives and results
for the next water contract with San Francisco;
3.
Oversight and input into SFPUC’s WSIP program and its implementation;
4.
Support of Allies. Information to local state legislators, business, labor, local government,
water customers, and the media; and call on them, if necessary, to safeguard the health,
safety and economic well being of residents and communities.
5.
Dialogue with organizations that participate in the environmental review and approval
process for rebuilding the system.
6.
Water efficiency programs: 1) Implementing cost-effective water conservation programs,
funded by the agencies that participate; 2) Coordinate with regional water agencies to
implement a public education program targeted at landscape watering; and 3) Identify
additional cost-effective water saving measures to meet planned growth. Identify and
implement activities to support implementation of identified cost-effective water
reclamation projects.
7.
Coordinated input for members’ Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) revisions.
8.
Coordinate community preparedness to avoid the possible consequences of long-term
water outages.
9.
Professional and efficient operation of the agency.
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 6 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
The budget includes a new staff person to assist the Water Resource Analyst so that she can
provide better coordination between member agencies on UWMP completion and interfacing
with SFPUC’s PEIR. The new person would assist with conservation program implementation
also.
V.
City of Palo Alto Utilities Issues
Capital Improvement Program Status Update
The Phase I Improvements Project entails preliminary design, final design, related studies (e.g.
environmental CEQA compliance, geotechnical evaluations) and construction-phase services for
various capital improvement projects related to improving distribution system water quality and
the reliability of the water supply system.
A contract with Carollo Engineers for this work was originally executed in June 2002. The
contract was amended in March 2004 (CMR:164:04) to include the following additional work:

Preparing an environmental impact report (EIR) for the well rehabilitation project, the new
well sitting and construction projects, the new reservoir and pump station project, and the
Mayfield reservoir pump station project which comprise the 8-hour emergency water supply
project.

Expanding the scope of the basic improvements project (currently under design) to include
two other projects not considered in the original scope: replacing the pumps (including
related mechanical, electrical and instrumentation equipment) at the Boronda and Park pump
stations.
The status of each of the projects as of April 12, 2005 is presented below:
1.
Reservoir Booster Station Improvements
This project consists of upgrading and replacing the mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation
equipment at the following pump stations: Quarry, Corte Madera, Boronda, Park, and Dahl. In
addition, this project will provide a secondary connection/supply to Pressure Area 4 (the area
generally bounded by Foothill Expressway, Page Mill Road, Arastradero Road, and Deer Creek
Road).
 The City has processed the CEQA documents (Categorical Exemption) for this work as a
part of the Planning Department's December 2003 assessment and formal filing with the
county.
 Council awarded the contract to Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction,
Incorporated on November 8, 2004 (CMR:465:04). Construction groundbreaking is
expected to begin in May 2005, and to be complete within 12 months thereafter.
 Staff has identified a location that will have a minimum impact on use of Foothills Park
by the public and park operations for temporary project construction trailers. The
location for these trailers is in the park maintenance yard. An informational CMR went
to City Council February 14, 2005 (CMR:153:05).
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 7 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
2.
Distribution System Water Quality Enhancement
This project consists of constructing reservoir mixing systems at Monte Bello, Dahl, Park, and
Mayfield reservoirs, and ammonia feed at the Hale, Rinconada, and Peers Park well sites. In
addition, Carollo provided the City with a water quality monitoring program and
recommendations for mobile dechlorination equipment that is used during the City’s annual
water system flushing operation. This project is part of the larger package including the two
projects described in 1. above and 3. below.
3.
Existing Booster Station Improvements
This project consists of designing pressure regulator upgrades at the Quarry, Corte Madera,
Boronda, Park, and Dahl booster stations. These improvements are necessary to improve the
City’s ability to manage water quality in the Foothills Area, as well as supply emergency water
demands during a shutdown of SFPUC’s Hetch-Hetchy aqueduct system. This project is part of
the larger package including the two projects above.
4.
8-hour Emergency Water Supply Project
These projects consist of these major components:
A. Reservoir, Pump Station, and Phase 1 Well – the new reservoir, pump station and well,
which were recommended in the report entitled “Water Wells, Regional Storage, and
Distribution System Study” (1999 Study), will help bring the City's system in compliance
with the DHS recommended supply criteria of meeting at least 8-hours of maximum day
demand while maintaining fire suppression reserves; and
B. Existing and New Wells and Mayfield Pump Station – rehabilitating the City’s existing
wells to enhance the supply reliability for on-going demands during a shutdown of the
SFPUC Hetch-Hetchy aqueduct system. This project also includes expanding the
Mayfield pump station to deliver water to the Foothills area in the event of such a
shutdown.
Carollo Engineers completed the final documentation of the Environmental Constraints Analysis
(ECA) in November 2004. The ECA included analysis of project alternatives including
desalination, SCVWD connection, and the existing system interties for comparison to the
recommendations made in the 1999 Study. The test hole programs for the Phase I well, and for a
possible well at the Roth site (Heritage Park), were completed in November 2003. This
information was made part of the November 2004 ECA.
A web site with information on the emergency water supply project has been developed and
posted (http://www.cpau.com ). The site will be expanded as more information is known and as
the EIR proceeds. The current status of the 8-hour emergency water supply project follows:
 Carollo assisted the City with the public involvement (PI) program for this project. The
PI programs purpose is to gauge and account for public interest in the improvement
projects, and to help refine the list of possible project sites to help focus the EIR. The
intent of the focus group meetings was two-fold: 1) to meet with the various interest
groups to communicate about, and get buy-in on, Palo Alto’s need for the additional
storage capacity; and 2) to obtain some early feedback, concerns, and questions from
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 8 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update

these community members so that we would have an early indication of community
support or lack of support for the project. A staff report requesting approval to proceed
with the emergency water supply project EIR will be scheduled at a future date.
Design work for the improvements will not start until after the EIR is complete. The
projected date for EIR certification is November 2005.
Urban Water Management Plan
Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs), due at the end of the year, have several new
requirements this year. In the past, some agencies have viewed the requirements as
inconveniences with no consequences for not complying. However, more teeth have been added
and they have been used as grounds for lawsuits regarding development and growth.
 There have been several amendments to the act since 2000:
o New substantive requirements for plans (groundwater, recycled water, desalination,
import minimization, demand management, water quality). The plans reported in the
UWMPs in the past must be compared to actual activities completed in the intervening
time. A detailed demand management plan for 2006-2010 must be completed, in which
one must go much further than required in the past to describe exactly what steps need to
be taken to implement the plans identified. In addition, a detailed description of current
programs must be provided.
o New procedural requirements (notice to cities and counties, coordination of plans, copy
of adopted plan to State Library)
o New obligations on wholesalers and retailers to exchange information.
o Plan and implementation as a condition to eligibility for State grants.
 There has been a court decision invalidating an UWMP: Friends of the Santa Clara River v.
Castaic Lake Water Agency (2004) 123 Cal. App. 4th 1. This court ruling raises the
significance of the UWMP. In this case, even though groundwater contamination issues
were discussed in CLWA’s UWMP, the UWMP was ruled invalid because it didn’t contain
detailed plans regarding how groundwater treatment would occur. The court concluded that
no “reliable analysis” of water supply was available. Then, two weeks later, another lawsuit
was brought against CLWA (which it also lost) saying that it couldn’t proceed on a planned
water acquisition (which was included in the UWMP) since the plan was inadequate. So if a
plan is invalid, other elements of the plan may also be ruled invalid. There is a duty to
implement the plan if elements of it appear in the plan.
 Coordination with SFPUC is essential:
o SFPUC and BAWSCA agency plans should be internally consistent and support the
WSIP Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR).
o BAWSCA agencies must supply water use projections to wholesale agencies. SFPUC
sent a letter requesting information that is required for the UWMP – each agency’s
projections for purchases in 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030. For the PEIR, agencies
only had to state purchase needs in 2030. Staff completed this request by sketching out a
long-term water efficiency program. In response to this information, SFPUC will inform
each agency of its ability to provide the water requested.
Staff is preparing Palo Alto’s UWMP and is planning to bring a draft to the UAC by September.
BAWSCA and SFPUC are coordinating the preparation of standard descriptions of the regional
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 9 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
system and master contract, including the supply assurance, to be used by all the member
agencies in their plans.
VI.
Operating Measures
The four attached charts describe water utility operating measures for FY 04-05 through March
2005:
Water System O&M - Mainline Leak Repairs
Water Main Leaks by Type of Pipe
Water Main Shutdowns and Customers Affected
Unplanned Water Service Disruption
VII.
1.
2.
3.
Attachments
SFPUC Hydrological Conditions Report for February 2005
February 22 letter to Richard Sklar and Susan Leal from Art Jensen and Bern Beecham
March 8 letter from CCLHO with opinion on chloramines and its Appendix B, containing
suggestions and recommendations for water utilities
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 10 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Number of Hours to Repair
Water System O&M Mainline Leak Repairs
FY 04-05 (as of March 2005)
5
Target 4 Hours or Less
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Break Number
100% services restored in 4 hours or less
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 11 of 22
Total No. of breaks: 9
Avg. Hrs. to Repair: 2
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Water Main Leaks by Type of Pipe
Material Failure Only (FY 04-05 as of March 2005)
35
30
PVC
Number of Leaks
25
20
AC
15
Other
10
5
0
1994/95
Cast Iron
1995/96 1996/97
Miles of CI: 59.1 (31% )
Miles of PVC: 22.1 (5% )
1997/98 1998/99
1999/00 2000/01
Miles of AC: 124.3 (56% )
Miles of CCP: 17.3 (8% )
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 12 of 22
2001/02 2002/03
2003/04 2004/05
Total Miles of Main: 226
Water Main Shutdowns & Customers Affected
Planned and Unplanned FY 04-05
90
80
70
Customers Affected
Number of Shutdowns
00
00
Total Customers Affected: 193
Total Shutdowns: (Planned -1, Unplanned - 9 )
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 13 of 22
Jun-05
Nov-04
00
May-05
Oct-04
00
Apr-05
1
Mar-05
2
Feb-05
4
Jan-05
2
Dec-04
1
Sep-04
20
10
0
Aug-04
60
50
40
30
Jul-04
Number of Shutdowns & Customers Affected
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Unplanned Water Disruptions
By Cause/Main Lines Only
Number of Outages
3
Material Failure
3rd Party
City Crews
2
1
0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0
Total Material Defect: 3
Total 3rd Party: 6
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Total City Crews: 0
Total Disruptions: 9
Page 14 of 22
Jun-05
May-05
Apr-05
Mar-05
Feb-05
Jan-05
Dec-04
Nov-04
Oct-04
Sep-04
Aug-04
Jul-04
0
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 15 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 16 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 17 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 18 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 19 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 20 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 21 of 22
Attachment A – Quarterly Water Issues Update
Item 6: Utilities Quarterly Report Update Attachment A: Water
Page 22 of 22