Deputy General Manager Frank Belock provides an overview of the Emergency Storage Project. Projects covered include Olivenhain Dam, San Vicente Dam Raise, Lake Hodges Pumped Storage and affiliated projects. Also includes an update on the MWD rate litigation currently taking place. From Water Talks: Building and Securing Water Reliability on January 31, 2012.
2. $3.5 billion CIP (1989 – 2030)
$1.5 billion Emergency Storage Program (ESP)
Dozens of major projects – completed or under
construction
Olivenhain Reservoir and Lake Hodges 2
3. Four Phases
System of pipelines,
pump stations and
reservoirs
Store water locally
Provide more flexible
water deliveries
Over 90,000 AF
Meet needs through
2030
3
4. Pipeline
Dam and Reservoir
Pump Station
4
10. Project: Lake Hodges Pump Station and Pumped
Storage Projects
Completed: 2012
Cost: $181 million
Benefits: 20,000 AF ESP storage; 40MW power 10
11. 120 feet deep
Equivalent to a 10
story building
underground
Helps to capture
runoff
Pumps up 770 feet
to Olivenhain
Reservoir
12. Generate hydroelectric
power during peak
power demands
25-year Power Purchase
and Sale Agreement
with SDG&E
SDG&E Revenues +
Energy Savings
~ $6 M / yr
12
13.
14. Project: San Vicente Pipeline, Pump Station &
Surge Tank
Completed: 2011
Cost: $459 million
Benefit: Improved Water Delivery
14
15.
16. Project: San Vicente Dam Raise
Complete: 2013
Cost: $449.5 million
Benefit: Increase reservoir
capacity by 152,000 acre-feet 16
16
25. Enhancing Regional
Water Supply Reliability
TOTAL- 196,000 AF
(90K Emergency + 100K
Carryover + 6K Operational)
SAN VICENTE
152,000 AF
2013
HODGES
20,000 AF 2010
OLIVENHAIN
24,000 AF
2004
25
26. Construction of first facilities began in 2000
Final phase complete in 2014
Costs spread out over several decades to minimize
water rate impacts
Provides 90,100 acre-feet of water storage for
emergency use
Environmental mitigation is included to make up for
construction impacts
26
28. The amount of money at stake in the Water
Authority’s rate lawsuit vs. MWD (over 45 years):
$1.3 billion to
$2.1 billion
28
29. In October 2003, Colorado River QSA is executed:
◦ Water Authority signs 45- to 75-year deal to buy 200,000
AF annually from the Imperial Irrigation District
◦ Water Authority agrees to line the All American and
Coachella canals and receive 80,000 AF annually for 110
years
◦ Requires transportation rate from MWD to move supplies
to San Diego through MWD’s system
29
30. MWD had to disaggregate its uniform water rate
to develop a transportation charge for the Water
Authority’s transfer supplies
Facing a loss of water sales revenues due to the
Water Authority’s supply diversification, MWD took
vast majority of its water supply costs and
misallocated them to its transportation charge to
move the Water Authority’s IID and Canal Lining
transfer supplies
30
31. < 2003 2003>
MWD
System
Costs
New Rate Structure Misallocates Water Supply
Uniform Costs to Transportation Charge
Water Water
Rate Supply
Costs
Water System Power Water
MWD Must
Supply Access Rate Stewardship
Disaggregate
Rate Rate Rate
Its Costs
Charged for Transportation
Water Supply Costs
MWD System Costs
Charged for Purchase of MWD Water
31
32. Water Supply Costs
MWD System Costs
Water System Power
Supply Access Rate
Rate Rate
Charged for Transportation
Charged for Purchase of MWD Water
32
33. MWD is required to place disputed payments
made by the Water Authority into an escrow
account
◦ By end of 2012, escrow balance will grow to
approximately $78 million
◦ By the end of 2013, escrow balance will grow to
approximately $135 million
If the Water Authority wins the case, MWD must
return the money to the Water Authority
33
34. Case assigned to San Francisco Superior Court Judge
Richard Kramer
◦ Case has been designated as “complex”
Assigned to single judge for all purposes
Complex cases generally get more attention and resources from the
court
Estimated trial court decision in late 2012
Imperial Irrigation District and Utility Consumers’ Action
Network (UCAN) are litigants on Water Authority’s side
Jan. 6, 2012: Court granted Water Authority and IID
motion to allow discovery in case
Next hearing: Feb. 17, 2012 (case management
conference)
34