1. Water Supply Planning A Legal Overview Edward J. Casey Weston Benshoof Rochefort Rubalcava & MacCuish 333 South Hope Street, 16 th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 (213) 576-1005, ecasey@wbcounsel.comecasey@wbcounsel.com May 18, 2004

2. Overview of Presentation ► Review of Case Law Leading Up To SB 610/221 ► Review SB 610/221 (Enacted in 2002) ► Review Legal Requirements for UWMPs ► Identify Open Questions

3. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► Not Many CEQA Cases Concerning Water Supply Pre - 1990s ► Stanislaus (1995) ► One of First CEQA Cases Dealing with Water Supply ► 25-Year, Phased Project ► Firm Water Supply Only Identified For First Phase (5 years) ► EIR Invalidated Because No Analysis of Long-Term Water Supplies

4. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► County of Amador (1999) ► CEQA Challenge To Water Agency’s Adoption of Long-Term Water Supply Program ► Program Planned For Additional Water Supplies To Meet Anticipated Growth In Draft General Plan ► EIR Invalidated For Lack of Analysis of Growth Impacts From Additional Water Supplies

5. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► Newhall Ranch – Trial Court Decision (2000) ► Three Sources of Waters – Reclaimed, Flood Flows, SWP ► SWP ► Cannot Assume Full Contractual Entitlements ► Only Evidence Before Court Was Historical Deliveries ► Flood Flows ► Inadequate Evidence Re Ability of Aquifer To Store Water ► Death Knell of “Will Serve” Letter

6. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► “Newhall II” (2003) ► Pre – 610/221 EIR ► Water Supply Analysis Assumes 100% SWP Entitlements During Wet Years, 50% During Dry Years ► EIR Struck Down ► Insufficient Evidence Supporting Assumptions ► Key Factor → SWP System Not Fully Built Out

7. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► PCL/Monterey Amendments ► “Paper Water” ► Full SWP Entitlement Is A “Hope,” ► “Actual, Reliable” Water Supply Less Than Entitlement ► Connection Between Land Use Planning and Water Supply ► Condemns Land Use Planning Based On “Paper Water” ► Worst Case Scenario ► Need To Analyze Long-Term Shortage Scenario

8. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► Save Our Peninsula (Monterey County ) (2001) ► Groundwater Overdraft ► Multiple Issues Need To Be Analyzed

9. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► Napa Citizens (2001) ► Airport Development Project ► Source of Water Identified ► EIR Still Struck Down ► Water Source Still Not Firm; Agreements Still Needed ► Not Need Guaranteed Source, But Need To Analyze Back-up Source (Worst Case Scenario)

10. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► Friends of Eel River (2003) ► Sonoma County Water Agency ► Proposed Project to Increase Water Diversion from Russian River ► EIR Struck Down Because No Analysis of PG&E Projects That Would Decrease Amount of Water Discharged into Russian River

11. CEQA Cases Pre – 610/221 ► San Joaquin Raptor (2003) ► New UC Campus at Merced ► Proposed Source of Water Was Groundwater ► Basin Near Overdraft ► EIR Upheld Based on City’s Water Supply Plan ► City’s Proposed Supply Projects Provide Sufficient Basis to Conclude No Significant Water Impacts

12. Lessons Learned ► Build It, and Water Will Follow ► Days Are Over ► Demonstrate Long-Term Supplies Based on Evidence ► Need To Address Worst Case Scenarios ► Drought/Loss of Supplies/Third Party Actions ► Groundwater Carries Special Problems ► Connection Between Water Supply Planning and Land Use Planning ► Not Need Guaranteed Water Supply ► Reasonable Probability/Certainty

13. SB 610/221 ► Essential Elements ► Demonstrate Sufficient Water Supply to Meet Project and Cumulative Demand in Normal, Single and Multi- Dry Years Over 20 Year Horizon ► List of Qualifying Projects ► 500 residential units or equivalent water demand ► Substantial Evidence Test Applies ► Projections; Not Guarantee ► Can Rely on Future Water Supplies Depending on: ► Contracts, Capital Budget, Permits, Water Rights ► Special Rules For Groundwater

14. Guideline Documents ► DWR’s Guidelines for SB 610/221 ► DWR’s Guidelines for Assessing State Project Water ► MWD’s Reliability Report of 2003

15. UWMPs ► Urban Water Management Plans ► 610/221 Both Provide That Information and Projections in UWMP May Be Used in 610/221 Reports ► UWMPs Prepared Every Five Years ► New Requirements Re Groundwater ► CLWA’s UWMP Challenged in Court ► Challenge Rejected by Trial Court ► Heavy Reliance on Substantial Evidence Test and Expert Opinion

16. Open Legal Questions ► Attack on Plan Documents ► UWMPs, MWD’s Reliability Report, Etc. ► When Can Rely, Or Not Rely, On Plan Documents?

17. Open Legal Questions ► Groundwater As Source ► Issue Is Legal Entitlement to Produce Groundwater and Third Party Impacts ► Types of Basins ► Adjudicated ► Managed But Not Adjudicated ► Neither Adjudicated Nor Managed ► Red Flag

18. Open Legal Questions ► Proving Likelihood of Additional Water Supply in Future ► Required to Show Permits, Plans, Contracts, Capital Budgets ► When Are Proposed Plans Sufficiently Ripe?

19. Open Legal Questions ► Worst Case Planning – How Much Needed? ► Existing Supplies ► Back-up Plans

20. Open Legal Questions ► Connection Between Land Use Planning and Water Supply Planning ► Who Does What and When?