Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7A - ATTACHMENT NO.3 <br />Saltworks Proposal- Water Group Summary Report (22 January 2010) Page 46 <br /> <br />water supply. However, numerous factors would have to be defined and resolved to <br />realize this supply. The potable water supply needed for the Saltworks project, as <br />described in Chapter 2, would likely require multiple projects to be implemented. Each <br />project would require negotiated agreements with the parties to the project (end users) <br />and, for projects outside the City service area, would also require negotiated agreements <br />with the SFPUC customer(s) and the SFPUC. A number of the projects defined by the <br />SFPUC could require project-specific CEQA review. An overview of the range of <br />impacts and mitigations of the WSI P aggressive level for recycled water projects and <br />groundwater demand reduction projects is presented in the WSIP PEIR. <br /> <br />Several City and SFPUC plans as noted above have enumerated water savings through <br />demand reduction measures such as those measures included in OMS's offset supply <br />option. If offset of potable water supply is pursued as a source for the Saltworks project, <br />further evaluation will be necessary to determine if each identified offset project has <br />already been accounted for by the City or the SFPUC in their long-term plans. This <br />further analysis cannot be accomplished until more specific offset projects are defined by <br />the City and/or OMS. <br /> <br />3.8 Proposed Surface Water Transfer <br /> <br />As indicated in Section 3.2, OMS proposes to provide a new source of surface water to <br />serve the Saltworks project. The source may also serve as a means of augmenting the <br />City's existing potable water supplies. This section of the report describes OMS's <br />proposal; identifies the agreements and approvals necessary to make this supply <br />available to the City; notes uncertainties associated with this proposal; and reaches <br />preliminary conclusions regarding the feasibility of this proposal. The documents <br />reviewed in performing this analysis are listed in Chapter 4. <br /> <br />3.8.1 Description of Surface Water Available for Transfer <br />OMS's proposed water supply for the Saltworks project consists of the transfer of <br />surface water rights acquired by OMS from the Nickel family, which obtained the water <br />rights in a negotiated agreement with Kern County Water Agency (KCWA). <br /> <br />KCW A is an agency created by State law to serve as the local contracting entity for the <br />State Water Project (SWP). KCWA is a party to the long-term water supply contract with <br />the Department of Water Resources (DWR) governing the delivery of water from the <br />SWP to water wholesalers throughout the State. The allocation of SWP water to water <br />wholesalers, including KCWA, is set forth in "Table A" of the long-term contract. <br />Deliveries to wholesalers from the SWP under the long-term contract are generally <br />referred to as "Table A water." <br /> <br />In this case, OMS did not acquire "Table A water" from KCWA (although, as explained <br />below, KCWA's Table A water would playa role in the proposed transfer of surface <br />water). Instead, the water supply that OMS intends to rely upon is commonly referred to <br />as "Nickel water." The following chronological narrative traces the origins of this water, <br />and describes how OMS proposes to use it for the Saltworks project. <br /> <br />Prior to 2000 <br />The Nickel family patriarch, George Nickel, moved to Kern County in the 1960s. Nickel <br />purchased the 16,OOO-acre Hacienda Ranch, including the property's right to water from <br /> <br />39 <br />