May 15, 2001

To the Redwood Creek Watershed Group:

Marin Municipal Water District                                           Mt. Tamalpais State Park
National Park Service                                                        Green Gulch Farm
Muir Beach Community Services District                            Marin County Community Development
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)

Dear Redwood Creek Watershed Group:

On behalf of our 7,000 Marin County members, the Sierra Club requests that
the Redwood Creek Watershed Group include environmental interests, as well as property owning interests.

Currently, as your CDFG grant application notes, "The Redwood Creek Watershed Group is composed of representatives of all five landowner groups in the watershed, plus affiliated agencies."  Since all of the water diversions in this watershed flow to these same landowners, there is currently no representation for non-extractive interests in the Redwood Creek Watershed Group.  It has long been a principal of American law that property owners do not have the sole franchise in public trust issues.  Furthermore, it is generally recognized that watershed planning is best done inclusively, as exemplified below (emphasis ours):

Coastal Conservancy (2/27/01) "Stumbling Blocks in Watershed Planning Efforts: All to often, planning efforts fail to consult the ones most affected: landowners AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS."

Department of Fish and Game (3/12/99): "Grants will be for assistance to locally based organizations that generate GENERAL PUBLIC and landowner support for restoration of local watersheds."

Marin County Fishnet 4C Goal (4/11/01): "Counties should support and be
active members of MULTI-STAKEHOLDER groups working on watershed issues."

As your CDFG grant application further notes: "This group has met monthly for one year to communicate better about issues in the Redwood Creek watershed...when necessary, inviting other parties who are familiar with specific issues."  In this last year, to our knowledge, only twice has any meeting of the Redwood Creek Watershed Group been open to the public, and then by invitation only. The Sierra Club feels that it is presently not only necessary, but desirable to open up the Redwood Creek Watershed Group to a broader range of stakeholder interests.  We feel that participation and support from the environmental community is essential for on-going watershed planning efforts and future grant applications.

We would appreciate your earliest written response to our request for representation in the Redwood Creek Watershed Group.

Sincerely,

Cela O'Connor, West Marin Chair Emeritus for Dotty LeMieux, Marin Group Chair
 

Mr Ed Dito, State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Applications and Petitions   Tel: 916-657-1954 / Fax 916 -657-1485

Re: Muir Beach Community Services District Appl# 29331, Redwood Creek, Marin Co.

Dear Mr. Dito:
 
The Sierra Club - Marin Group (Attn: Muir Beach Working Group, Box 116, Bolinas, CA 94924) hereby files a Complaint under California Code of Regulations Section 820, Title 23 against the Applicant Muir Beach Community Services District (MBCSD), 19 Seacape Drive, Muir Beach, CA 94965 (415-388-7804) concerning Application 29331, Redwood Creek, Marin County, CA.  Rather than using the SWRCB Complaint form, and as provided under the complaint process, we are submitting this letter, which organizes our specific complaints and possible solutions to the situations using the format and sequence of your January 14, 2000 letter to the Applicant.  The basis of our Complaint is that the MBCSD Application creates adverse impact on in-stream use and is inconsistent with public trust uses.  We have sent a copy of this Complaint to the alleged offender by regular mail.

WATER CONSERVATION
The proposed MBCSD appropriative rights are subordinate to MMWD's seven pre-1914 water rights in the headwaters of Redwood Creek (#'s 671-5, 680-1) and may be junior to Zen Center's appropriative rights near the mouth of Redwood Creek (#9845).  In addition upstream water possibly available to MBCSD may be required to satisfy two NPS riparian rights downstream of existing or proposed MBCSD wellsites (#02-194, 02-138).  If the holders of these water rights were to exercise them, MBCSD would, of necessity, be forced into extreme and severe conservation.  MBCSD presently has no conservation program.  Emergency notices to conserve water during power outages or during spikes in summer use beyond the District's pumping capacity do not constitute a conservation program.  For comparison with other small nearby coastal communities with conservation programs, the North Marin Water District 1998 report shows its Inverness division of 153 active connections with average annual usage of 58,357 gallons per connection.  MBCSD's 147 connections use an average of 88,660 Gallons per year, over 50% more.  Clearly, there is a very large potential for conservation savings.   Water conservation programs serve not only to protect the stream, but also result in both reduced capital and reduced operating expenses for the District.  In our opinion, a reasonable conservation program such as the one we proposed below can result in savings of at least 30% from MBCSD's current 40-acre foot usage.  Any MBCSD conservation program should provide for a robust list of on-going conservation provisions, as well as provisions for step-ups during drought years.   As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that a draft MBCSD water conservation plan, including capital improvement provisions, regular on-going provisions, the sequence of steps to be applied in drought years, and the rainfall triggers for the steps, should be approved by (not just reviewed by) the protestants.

* Public Information Programs: A strong informational program is needed to counter the current community attitude noted by the MBCSD General Manger in the last summer's water bills that water resources are "unlimited."  However, as the Muir Beach Community Plan (1978) notes:  "The drought of 1975-77 caused a severe shortage of water...the water level of the MBCSD well was dropping at the rate of one foot per week, for one month, before the rains ended the drought.  This demonstrates that there is no assurance of an unlimited supply of water from Redwood Creek....In the interests of maintaining our supply, it is the responsibility of the Muir Beach Community Services District to actively educate the community in water conservation and to limit use by any means possible, including an escalating water rate and a recommendation for toilets and appliances designed to use less water."  Severe droughts are a regular documented occurrence in California.  Yet in the flush of wet years and in a desire to avoid the inevitable and the unpleasant, MBCSD seems to have forgotten its water history and seems to have abrogated its responsibilities as outlined in the Muir Beach Community Plan. To counter this perceived forgetfulness and abrogation, and as a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that a draft MBCSD public information program should be approved by (not just reviewed by) the protestants.

* Low flow facilities: As noted in the Muir Beach Community Plan, conservation measures include: ultra-low flush toilets, low flow shower heads, front loading washers and other readily available water saving appliances.  According to Marin Municipal Water District, each customer converted to an ultra-low flush toilet saves about 7800 gallons per year.  If each MBCSD customer converted, this policy alone could save an estimated 3.5 acre-feet per year.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD develop an ultra low flush toilet rebate program and to pass appropriate resolutions to work with the County Building Department to require installation of low flow facilities upon the sale, transfer, construction, or remodeling of any property within the District.

* Tiered rate structure:  As noted in the Muir Beach Community Plan, a tiered rate structure is an important conservation program element.  However, the present tier structure, in force, we believe only since 1994, is inadequate to deter peak summer use.  In 1999, peak summer use exceeded the Districts storage and pumping capacity.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD should revise its tiered rate structure to be: more steeply tiered, more biased against any-year summer use, and contain sufficient rate/tier step-up's be effective in drought years.

* Leakage from defective pipes in the District has historically exceeded established 10% standards. Piping in the lower section of the District was not installed to code, and the District's water is corrosive.  Excessive leakage not only results in higher operating costs for the District, but it may also create a health hazard from septic effluent leaking in when the pipes are shut down. We understand that in 1992-1993, a pipeline break poured over three million gallons (an extra 10 acre feet over historic usage) of heavily chlorinated water directly into Redwood Creek, a critical habitat for endangered and threatened species.  The historic District use of 40 acre-feet per year includes significant leakage due to an inadequate capital replacement program for the distribution system.   The District has a "20 Year Plan" that includes some capital expenses for replacement of parts of the distribution system, but this minimum plan does not account for a full replacement schedule.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD should be required to develop and implement a revised "20 Year Plan" that provides for full replacement of its distribution system at or before the end of each equipment's scheduled lifetime.
 
* Limits on flushing the water line during drought conditions:  Even during wet years, flushing during the dry months stresses the system, reduces fire flow reserves and can possibly affect the Creek.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that the MBCSD not flush their lines during the six dry summer months of every year (not just during drought periods).

* Limitations of outside irrigation during drought periods: MBCSD customers should be educated as part of the District's public information program to replace water consuming plants with natives.  Coastal climates offer a wide variety of native plants that require only rainfall.   Water hungry plants make enforcement in drought years difficult and increase the pressure for both cheating and special exemptions.  Underground watering systems are unneeded, prone to leakage, and make enforcement difficult.  With each of MBCSD's customers on septic systems, all of the District water usage is being returned to soils that are within reach of roots.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that the MBCSD should prohibit underground watering systems and enforce a phase-in period, leading to a permanent prohibition on outside irrigation (not just during drought periods).

INCREASED STORAGE CAPACITY
The Sierra Club - Marin Group believes there is ample water in Redwood Creek for both the community and the fishery, provided MBCSD schedules its withdrawals seasonally.  This requires adequate storage to allow a reduction or cessation of pumping during dry months or drought years.   MBCSD currently has a 150,000-gallon tank on property that can reasonably hold a 1,000,000-gallon storage tank, according to the MBCSD General Manager.   Already mentioned in the "20 year Plan" is the need for MBCSD to replace its aging 150,000 tank with a suggested 200,000-gallon tank.  According to the MBCSD General Manager, the economies of tank construction already dictate that this 200,000-gallon tank should be upsized to 300,000 gallons.  Thus MBCSD would build this 300,000-gallon tank irrespective of this Permit and irrespective of the condition of the endangered species in its water source.  Given this circumstance, this 300,000 gallon tank requirement is a "mitigation" in form but not in substance.  While the MBCSD is seeking more flexibility in its pumping schedule to allow for adequate fireflow protection, the Sierra Club - Marin Group believes that increased fire protection is more functionally connected to increased storage capacity, especially in light of MBCSD's lack of any emergency generator capacity.   The argument that MBCSD cannot afford storage capacity beyond the 300,000 gallons already intended is not a matter of fact, but rather a matter of choice.  MBCSD has surplus water district assets that could be converted to increase storage beyond the planned 300,000 gallons, if the District so chooses.  With the survival of endangered species at risk, as well as the need in the District for increased fireflow and emergency reserves, a significant increase in storage should be required.

Currently the District has two storage tanks and two storage tank properties.  This is a historic remnant from decades ago when the District comprised only the lower area of the community.  The upper area of the community, developed in the 70's, had water provided by the developer by means of a completely separate distribution system, storage tank and well site.  When MBCSD acquired the rights to the upper system, it merged the two distribution systems into one and merged the two well sites into one.  But the two separate storage tanks and separate tank sites remain.  The lower tank is not high enough to service the upper third of MBCSD's customers, and must be interconnected to the upper tank by auxiliary pumps and pipes, all at increased cost and complexity.  A larger tank at the upper site would allow a rationalization of the storage system to eliminate the lower tank.  The lower tank site property (150 ft x 150 ft) would then become surplus, and the lower tank could be moved to the well site to retain its storage capacity.  The surplus lower tank property is situated in a slight swale, and has property on either side that has adequately perked for existing homes.  With the high valuations of Muir Beach property, it is very likely that the surplus tank site constitutes a significant water system asset that could be re-allocated into additional storage at the upper tank location.  It is quite possible that the upper storage tank could be increased from 300,000 gallons to almost 1,000,000 gallons by re-allocation of this surplus water district asset.  Storage, which at 300,000 gallons provides "nominal" benefits to the fishery resources, would then begin to provide more significant benefit to the fishery at 1,000,00 gallons, at nominal cost to the District.  Fire protection, which at 300,000 gallons the District seeks to increase by more flexibility in its proposed pumping schedule, would then begin to provide significant benefit to the homeowners at 1,000,000 gallons, at nominal cost to the District.   As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that the District increase the storage at its upper tank location to 1,000,000 gallons.

The lower 100,000-gallon tank, when transferred to the well site, allows storage of raw water.  However, additional storage is possible. The larger the total storage (raw and finished), the greater the seasonal scheduling flexibility, which would allow MBCSD its full annual allotment, but with reduced impact on the fishery.  The possibility should be explored of a dam to store raw water in one of the side canyons, as is done at Green Gulch in the same watershed.  Given that current MBCSD well water is defined as surface water requiring filtration, raw water storage behind a dam would cause no difference in the treatment obligations.  Of course, the benefits to the fishery of increased water storage would need to be carefully balance against the damage that would be done by the dam to its immediate locality.  But it is likely that for an equivalent amount of money, a dam would create more storage capacity than a tank.  A raw water storage facility of any type, either dam or tank, could be sized to the funds available for salmon protection through MBCSD participation in federal or state Grant programs. It is possible that the 1,000,000-gallon upper water tank project could be combined with the raw water storage project.  Proceeds from the surplus lower tank property, combined with the already planned costs for the 300,000 gallon upper tank, would constitute MBCSD's share of the combined cost of both storage facilities.
 
QUANTITY OF WATER TO BE DIVERTED
The Sierra Club - Marin Group realizes that MBCSD is obligated to obtain water for its peak use needs at build-out level in critically dry years.   We believe that peak use, build-out potential, and conservation potential differ for each of the user groups: residential, commercial, and out-of district.  MBCSD should have prepared data documenting each of these calculations however; we understand that this documentation has not been public, even after repeated requests by the public over many months.  The Sierra Club - Marin Group's position is that MBCSD is illegally withholding public information relevent to this Permit and has not demonstrated "reasonable and beneficial use" of its requested .07 cfs (50.6 acre
foot) amount.  As noted under the Conservation section above, current usage is 40 acre-feet without any conservation measures.  Reasonable conservation measures should result in savings of over 30% from the current 40 acre foot use, which should be more than adequate for the limited buildout in a community surrounded by national park land.  Until MBCSD makes public its detailed projections on peak use, buildout, and conservation potential of each user group, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that this Permit be denied.
 
A projected buildout calculation should take into account that significant usage comes from the single commercial user in the District and that significant usage occurs from out-of-district customers.  Since the Muir Beach Community Plan calls for no additional commercial activity, and no expansion of service outside District boundaries, a projected buildout projection should not include any increase in commercial use or out-of-District use.  According to statements by the MBCSD General Manager, residential buildout is estimated, but not documented, at about 15 residences, or about 10% more than current residential use.  Water for this level of buildout is easily provided for by even the most superficial conservation program.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD should be prohibited from expanding its jurisdiction, prohibited from extending water service to any new customers outside its jurisdiction, prohibited from expanding water service to Green Gulch, and required to enter into contracts with existing out-of-district customers that provide for significantly reduced or eliminated water deliveries in drought years.  Until MBCSD makes public its detailed projections on peak use, buildout, and conservation potential of each user group, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that the SWRCB work with the County as needed to impose a moratorium on new construction.

The MBCSD General Manager has further justified, but not documented, the excess water requested as needed for emergency use.  However, as noted in the Conservation section above, the existing use of 40 acre feet includes numerous leaks and pipe breakage due to an inadequate capital replacement program.  With a proper capital replacement program, these emergencies should decline.  Lack of planning and execution on MBCSD's part should not constitute an emergency requiring excess usage.  If the higher allocation requested for emergencies is truly to be reserved for emergencies, then MBCSD has the obligation to keep normal use at the lower non-emergency level, just as it would if the allocation were capped at the normal use level.   At a higher allocation, MBCSD would not need to justify its emergencies to anyone if they were over normal use but below the higher allocation cap.  At the lower allocation, MBCSD would need to justify its emergency use over the normal amount to both the SWRCB and to California Fish and Game.  California law already provides for fully adequate exemptions for emergency use.  To request an extra allocation for emergency use is double dipping. This Permit application by MBCSD calls for 25% more than its current use of 40 acre-feet, which includes excess leakage and excludes any conservation savings. We believe that there is adequate water for both the community and the fishery, but with the survival of a species at stake, we want to assure that MBCSD's projections for peak use at buildout with conservation measures are fair, accurate and public.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that the water appropriated under this Permit should be limited to the quantity of water that can be beneficially used under normal operating conditions (with documented buildout, less conservation savings, less leakage over 10%) and shall, in any event, not exceed .055 cfs (40 acre-feet) per year to be diverted from January 1 to December 31 of each year.

DIVERSION PERIOD
The Sierra Club - Marin Group believes that restricting the hours of pump operation from 10pm to 6am constitutes "mitigation" in form more than substance.  Since off peak (night-time) electricity costs are about 1/3 less than on peak (daytime) power, the MBCSD already has a significant incentive to pump at night. Presently MBCSD pumps on average 19 hours per day, so increasing the rate but decreasing the hours will save MBCSD money.  More important to the fishery is to limit total daily withdrawals so that the aquifer has the opportunity to restore.  We note that there is a mathematical inconsistency in the January 14 letter between the section titled "QUANTITY OF WATER TO BE DIVERTED" and the section titled "DIVERSION PERIOD."  In the QUANTITY section, the District's proposed use is limited to .07 cfs, which we believe, as noted in the prior section, should be .055 cfs.  This January 14 DIVERSION section limits the pumping hours to 8 out of 24.  Whether the appropriated amount is .07 cfs, or .055 cfs, the limitation on hours of pumping to 8 out of 24 hours will reduce the annual withdrawal amount by two thirds, which is clearly not intended.  Nevertheless, we believe a daily limit on pumping is required. With MBCSD's requested increase in pumping capacity to 50 gallons per minute, that daily limit could be pumped in the twelve off-peak hours 8pm - 8am and still offset the transpiration cycle.   Unless an emergency situation can be justified per California law, the proposed increased flexibility to allow daytime pumping for emergency restoration of fire flow storage should be met through increase storage capacity and/or a stepped up conservation program, not by burdening the aquifer.   As a condition of this
Permit, and based on the .055 cfs annual figure, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD should be required to limit daily withdrawals of 4774 cubic feet (35,710 gallons) per day.

ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY
MBCSD currently has an unused 100 x 100 foot lot surrounded by State Park land near Kent Canyon on Frank Valley Road.  The current well site is adjacent to both NPS and State Park lands, at the farthest edge of the District property, but still within 100 feet of the Creek and thus too close. As all wells do, the current well at the edge of the MBCSD property will fail and a new well will need to be drilled which by definition will be closer to the Creek.  Your letter suggests that a three party land exchange be investigated that would provide MBCSD with a wellsite on a several acre site owned by NPS near Highway One.  However, a two party land exchange between the State Park and MBCSD would also benefit both the Creek and MBCSD by providing more land adjacent to its current wellsite that would allow subsequent well locations to be further from the Creek.  This two party exchange would also provide additional space at the current wellsite for increased water storage facilities and the required but presently ignored water treatment facilities.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD should make its best effort to accomplish this land exchange with State Parks.

Any subsequent or simultaneous exchange with NPS for the suggested well site near Highway One would need to be carefully studied, in order to reasonably protect MBCSD's customers.   As noted, the District would need to drill test wells to assure that the water was of sufficient quantity and quality and to assure against salt-water intrusion.  As the Muir Beach Community Plan notes: "In a system like ours, where the water flows past the pumping station and into the ocean, there must always be sufficient quantity to insure against the back-up of ocean water and the subsequent danger of saline infusion to the water supply."  Yet this potential salt-water problem, not unknown amongst coastal water systems, has various solutions, including timing of pumping to the tidal schedule, and the installation of a subsurface wedge or clay curtain that increases head.  So, while the problem may not even occur, solutions do exist.  As you have correctly pointed out, the benefits to MBCSD of this downstream site are significant.  Eliminated would be the cost to replace the old and leaky 3,000 feet of main, resulting in many tens of thousands of dollars in savings.  MBCSD would also have significantly less energy costs in pumping a 3,000 foot shorter distance to its tank.  These should be adequate incentives for MBCSD to pay for its test wells.  The pumping facility in this several acre NPS site should be located for safety and security and the test wells should operate for a sufficient time to assure MBCSD that a transfer of well site is safe.  And the costs to MBCSD, if any, of assuring against salt water intrusion would need to be balanced against the capital and operational benefits to MBCSD and the benefits to the fishery.

The benefits to the fishery are significant: higher flows in 3,000 feet of Creek, less impact on the riparian corridor, a wellsite further from the Creek, and less leakage potential for chlorinated water.  NPS also benefits from fewer disturbances to its lands from a shorter and more direct pipe route from well to storage.  With such potential benefits to MBCSD, NPS and the fishery, the Sierra Club - Marin Group believes that the transfer with NPS for this downstream location should be diligently pursued on a best efforts basis.  We are therefore concerned about the position paper distributed at the recent Public Meeting by a MBCSD Director listing claimed problems with this proposed NPS wellsite.  We wish to address the points raised in this position paper:

1. Salt Water Intrusion: This position paper claims that salt-water intrusion into the proposed NPS wellsite is likely in the event of "floods."  However, since floods are fresh water events, we believe this concern is completely unfounded.   The Big Lagoon Restoration, as outlined in the Phil Williams Reports, was to restore a fresh water Lagoon, so the claimed "infiltration" of salt water from Big Lagoon would be unlikely.  Assuming the NPS wellsite was adopted, it is clear that NPS should agree that any subsequent Big Lagoon Restoration plan would not encourage salt-water intrusion into the new wellsite.  The NPS wellsite certainly needs to be tested for saltwater intrusion.  However, its proposed location north of Highway One makes salt-water intrusion unlikely. Nevertheless, careful testing and analysis is required, rather than an a priori rejection of the site.
2. Proximity of Septic Systems: The closest corner of the several acre proposed NPS wellsite is more than the claimed 50-100 feet away from the closest septic system and it is upstream.  The vast majority of the NPS site is hundreds of feet upstream from the nearest septic system, not the claimed 50-100 feet.  The NPS wellsite is almost 1,500 feet upstream from the "commercial system for the restaurant/bar/bed& breakfast", not the claimed 50-100 feet.  For comparison, the current MBCSD wellsite is located adjacent to and downstream from a livestock exercise area.
3. Proximity of Automobile/Highway Pollutants:  The proposed NPS wellsite will likely be more than the claimed 100 feet of Highway One depending on the exact location, but wherever it is proposed to be, it will be upstream from Highway One.  For comparison, the current MBCSD wellsite is located adjacent to the heavily traveled Franks Valley Road, carrying almost two millions visitors to Muir Woods.  The claim that "Muir Beach residents are strongly interested in protecting the purity of their drinking water" may be true, but MBCSD has to date ignored drinking water regulations requiring MBCSD to install and maintain filtration systems to treat water from its existing wellsite.
4. Proximity to Chemical Pollutants: The proposed NPS wellsite will likely be more than the claimed 100 feet from a (long-closed) gas station site, depending on its exact location, but again, the site will be upstream, and gasoline hydrocarbons biodegrade over time.  In comparison the current MBCSD wellsite is just upstream from fields previously sprayed with herbicides and/or pesticides having a longer soil presence than hydrocarbons.
5. Location in a Floodplain: The NPS wellsite will most likely be in the 100-year floodplain, however close to its edge.  For comparison, the current wellsite is much closer to the stream, closer to the center of the floodplain. Two of the important ecological reasons to exchange the well site are to remove it further from the creek and to remove it from the riparian zone.  Both reasons indicate that an exchange will result in less impact on the floodplain compared to the current site.  Current law provides for building in a floodplain when the alternative is more environmentally damaging.
6. Unreliability: The claimed unreliability of the NPS wellsite by reference to Green Gulch wells makes no sense, since the implied uncertainty applies as well to the long-term future of the existing MBCSD well site.  As the Muir Beach Community Plan notes: "The drought of 1975-77 caused a severe shortage of water...the water level of the MBCSD well was dropping at the rate of one foot per week, for one month.."  This '75-'77 drought was likely an aquifer-wide event in which a downstream wellsite would have longer access to water.  Hydrologically, the further downstream the well is located, the more likely it is to be a good provider.  The unsatisfactory experience with the old MBCSD well, which was 1500 feet even further downstream from the proposed NPS wellsite, was a question of poor water quality, not inadequate quantity.  The tiny site (a few hundred square feet) of this old well made it impossible to re-locate for better water quality.  The proposed NPS wellsite should be of sufficient size to allow considerable adjustment in exact wellsite location. Certainly any new wells would have to be carefully tested before MBCSD relies on them. The possibility of unsatisfactory wells is an argument for appropriate testing, not an argument for rejecting the site without any testing.  The benefits to MBCSD, to NPS and to the fishery are significant enough that test wells should be drilled and the results carefully analyzed.

EMERGENCY CONDITIONS
MBCSD maintains that increased flexibility in pumping time, an excess of allocated water over current usage, and the ability to exceed the allocated amount are all necessary for emergencies and to restore fire flow capacity after emergencies.  The Sierra Club - Marin Group believes that many MBCSD "emergencies" are the result of an inadequate capital replacement system for an out-of code and out-of-date water system.  The first line of defense against the loss of water due to emergencies should not be a call to SWRCB, but rather a realistic review of the "20 Year Plan" to provide for a proper water system.  The second line of defense should be to step up the conservation efforts.  The so-called emergency of summer 1999 when the District was unable to pump enough to retain its needed fire flow reserve was due not to an "emergency" but rather to the District's lack of conservation programs.  Nevertheless, the summer '99 emergency notice proved effective and usage dropped significantly for the few days needed to restore fire capacity.  As previously noted, to include an emergency allocation over current usage use (40 acre-feet without conservation savings) is double dipping when the law already provides for fully adequate exemptions for emergencies. Furthermore, current usage already includes a history of excess leaks and excess breakages that are "emergencies" only because of an inadequate capital replacement program.  Proposed increased flexibility to allow daytime pumping for emergency restoration of fire flow storage should be met through increase storage capacity, not by burdening the aquifer.  Lack of planning and execution on MBCSD's part should not constitute an emergency requiring excess usage.  As a condition of this Permit, the Sierra Club - Marin Group recommends that MBCSD demonstrate that it has made the appropriate steps toward replacing its aging system, including significantly increasing its storage capacity, and instituted stepped up conservation efforts, including issuing water emergency notices as first steps before requesting an emergency exemption.

The Sierra Club - Marin Group believes that there are solutions that satisfy the needs of both the fishery and MBCSD, provided good faith best efforts are made by MBCSD to determine how much can be done that is reasonable and practical.   As the Muir Beach Community Plan further notes: "The protection of salmon and steelhead spawning grounds...is essential," just as is protection of the downstream rearing habitat.   Our recommendations on mitigations in this MBCSD Permit are nominally costly to MBCSD and many mitigations benefit MBCSD as well as the fishery.  While it seems likely that MBCSD's current wellsite has nominal impact on the Creek in wet years, there is no data for any other well location or for drought conditions when the fishery is most vulnerable.  As the Muir Beach Community Plan notes: "The drought of 1975-77 caused a severe shortage of water...the water level of the MBCSD well was dropping at the rate of one foot per week, for one month, before the rains ended the drought."   Water policy and planning must always be judged from the perspective of a drought year. Assuming our mitigations are accepted, the Sierra Club - Marin Group would support a mitigated negative declaration for this Application.  Absent these mitigations, the Sierra Club will insist on a full EIR and will vigorously defend the needs of the fishery.   We ask the SWRCB to put the Sierra Club - Marin Group on the list of parties interested in this Application.  We also ask that we receive in a timely fashion copies of all further notices or any correspondence concerning this Application so that we have appropriate time for comment.  We understand that the National Marine Fisheries Service's recent proposed 4(d) rules under the Endangered Species Act may require further mitigations in this watershed, thus the Sierra Club - Marin Group wishes to reserve the opportunity for further comment and participation in watershed planning efforts.

We declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief,  Cela O'Connor, West Marin Chair Emeritus, Conservation Committee Member; Tel: 415-868-1617 / Fax: press ** / Email: oconnor@linex.com