The total of 51.95 MGD (58,211 AFY) that went to groundwater replenishment was an 25.8% increase over the preceding fiscal year. Of the total amount of water reused during FY 01-02, 61.4% went for groundwater replenishment (although normally the percentage is about two-thirds of the total reuse). More reclaimed water is used for groundwater recharge than for all other applications combined because of its cost-effectiveness. The San Jose Creek, Whittier Narrows and Pomona WRPs discharge to rivers or creeks (i.e., flood control channels) that can convey the effluent by gravity to existing off-stream recharge basins. These basins and the unlined portions of the rivers and creeks permit large volumes of reclaimed water to percolate by gravity into the aquifer. Reclaimed water used in this way incurs no additional capital improvement and related operation and maintenance (O&M) costs or any energy consumption for pumping.The remainder of the reclaimed water usage was divided between four broad categories of direct usage. A total of 421 of the individual reuse sites used reclaimed water for some form of landscape irrigation, and approximately 13.343 MGD (14,967 AFY), or 15.8% of the total water reused, went toward this application. These sites include 94 parks, 89 schools, 72 roadway greenbelts, 82 commercial and office buildings, 20 nurseries, 18 golf courses, 20 public facilities (e.g., police station, post office, libraries, landfills), 13 residential developments, seven churches and six cemeteries. Agricultural usage was approximately 6.215 MGD (6,964 AFY), or 7.3% of the total reused. Industrial applications of reclaimed water (which include carpet dyeing, paper manufacturing, oil field injection, cooling systems and construction applications such as dust control and concrete mixing) totaled 6.923 MGD (7,757 AFY), or 8.2% of the total reused. And finally, 6.205 MGD (6,953 AFY), or 7.3% of the total reused, went to environmental enhancement of a wildlife habitat in the Mojave Desert. Figure 5 shows the distribution of reuse flows among these various applications. Table 3 lists the number of sites in each category of use, along with total acreage and average daily usage.

Figure 5
Distribution of Reclaimed Water Usage
Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Table 3
Categories of Reclaimed Water Usage
Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Reuse Application	No. of Sites	Area Applied (acres)	Usage (MGD)
Parks	94	2,362.3	3.666
Golf Courses	18	2,146.5	3.711
Schools	89	1,001.3	1.884
Roadway Greenbelts	72	568.3	1.099
Public Facilities1	20	480.7	1.011
Commercial Buildings	82	269.4	0.720
Nurseries	20	134.6	0.316
Cemeteries	6	235.4	0.549
Residential	13	107.8	0.347
Churches	7	8.6	0.041
Industrial2	13	226	6.923
Agriculture3	11	1,712.0	6.215
Environmental	2	200	6.205
SUBTOTAL	446	9,452.9	32.687
Groundwater Recharge	2	646	51.949
TOTAL	448	10,098.9	84.636

NOTES:

1. "Public Facilities" includes police stations, libraries, post offices, city halls, government offices, landfills, etc.

2. Industrial processes receiving reclaimed water include paper manufacturing, carpet dyeing, concrete mixing, cooling, oil field injection and construction applications such as soil compaction and dust control.

3. The California Polytechnic University, Pomona, while technically a school, uses most of its reclaimed water for agricultural purposes and is thus included in this category.

Economic and Environmental Impacts

At the end of FY 01-02, the Districts had 21 contracts (one currently inactive and four pending initial deliveries) for the sale and/or delivery of reclaimed water produced at its facilities. Unit prices charged for the reclaimed water during FY 01-21 ranged from zero to $126.53 per acre-foot, depending on the contract. Initially, the formula used to calculate the unit price was one-fifth of either the annual O&M costs of the source WRP, or the flow-weighted average O&M costs of a group of WRPs. All new contracts, beginning with Contract No. 3133 signed with the Central Basin Municipal Water District (CBMWD) in 1991, have the cost of the reclaimed water based on a more equitable formula. The unit price of the reclaimed water commodity is based on one-half the savings realized by the water purveyor by replacing its alternative supply of domestic water with reclaimed water, with a price floor of 30% O&M and never to exceed 100% of the O&M costs. Actual O&M and energy costs incurred by the Districts while operating the pump stations on behalf of the purchasers of reclaimed water are also fully recovered through these contracts. The contract numbers, parties, dates of execution and expiration, quantities of water, cost formulas and FY 01-02 actual costs are presented in Appendix A. In FY 01-02, the Districts received a total of $1,700,864 in revenue from the sale of reclaimed water. Since the reclaimed water delivered to the various distribution systems was not dosed with either sulfur dioxide or sodium bisulfate for dechlorination or with defoamant, an estimated $111,487 in chemical savings was realized at the five Los Angeles Basin WRPs.

Table 4 compares selected potable water rates and reclaimed water rates (in effect as of the end of FY 01-02), illustrating the savings realized by the end users. Table 5 lists all of the current reclaimed water purveyors.

Table 4
Potable vs. Reclaimed Water Rates
Fiscal Year 2002-2002

Purveyor	Potable Water	Reclaimed Water	Discount
Long Beach Water	656.51	328.01 - 459.56	30 - 50
City of Cerritos	413.82	217.80	47
City of Lakewood	574.99	413.82	28
Central Basin MWD	478.00	216.00 - 276.00	42 - 55
Pomona Water	453.06 - 566.32	125.44 - 192.72	57 - 78
Walnut Valley Water	670.82	570.63	15
San Gabriel Valley Water	564.80	313.20 - 484.30	14 - 45

To put things into perspective, the 94,838 AF of water reused in FY 01-02 is equivalent to the water supply for a population of 474,190, between the populations of Cleveland, Ohio and Long Beach, California (the 33rd and 34th largest cities in the U.S., according to 2000 census figures). The use of locally produced reclaimed water reduces the need to pump State Project water over the Tehachapi Mountains at a net energy cost of 3,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per acre-foot. Thus, approximately 284.5 million kWh of electricity were conserved in FY 01-02, which is equivalent to the annual output of a 32.5 megawatt powerplant consuming 154,179 barrels of oil. At $0.11/kWh, this equates to an annual savings of $31.3 million in electricity. At $30.49/barrel (October 2, 2002 spot price), this equates to an annual savings of $4.7 million in oil. These energy savings are expected to be even greater in future years as the energy crisis in California continues.

The conservation of fossil fuels and energy also resulted in significant reductions in potential air pollutants. During FY 01-02, 163.6 tons of nitrogen oxide, 28.5 tons of carbon monoxide, 17.1 tons of sulfur oxides, 5.7 tons of particulates and 1.4 tons of reactive organic gases were kept out of the atmosphere. Perhaps more important, the use of local reclaimed water avoided the production of 213,386 tons of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. Table 6 summarizes the water, energy chemicals and air pollutant savings realized by the use of local reclaimed water sources.

Table 6
Water, Energy, Chemical and Air Pollutant Savings from Reclaimed Water Usage
Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Category	Units	Savings
Water Supply	acre-feet	94,838
Water Supply	No. of People	474,190
Energy	kilowatt-hours	284,514,000
Energy	megawatts	32.5
Energy	barrels of oil	154,179
Electricity	dollars	31,296,540
Petroleum	dollars	4,700,933
WRP chemicals	dollars	110,798
Nitrogen oxide	tons	163.6
Carbon monoxide	tons	28.5
Sulfur oxides	tons	17.1
Particulates	tons	5.7
Reactive organic gases	tons	1.4
Carbon dioxide	tons	213,386

Summary
Of the 509.78 MGD of treated effluent produced by the Districts, 190.23 MGD (37.3%) was treated to a suitable level for reuse, with 84.63 MGD (16.6%) actually being reused at 448 individual sites in 26 cities for numerous diverse applications. The use of reclaimed water increased by 19.4% over the preceding fiscal year, setting the record for highest fiscal year amount reused. The use of 94,838 AF of locally produced reclaimed water essentially resulted in the conservation of the water supply of 474,190 people, and in significant reductions in treatment plant chemical usage, water rates for end users, energy consumption and air pollutant production.