being one mgd over. it was also said to require beginning in 2011-2012 and go through 2018. it had to be adopted as part of the regular budget rate process of there was plenty of time for our wholesale customers as well as us to deliberate and to provide notice to customers as necessary. based on actual usage, the requirement should be simple and easy to calculate and administer as part of the retail rate, and pass through the retail rates. further, it had to be equal monthly installments collected in the immediately following year. even though you factored and considered this as part of the march hearings or the march rate adoption, we would not actually administer it until we went all the way through 2011-2012. we have actual water deliveries at the end of 2011-2012, which typically take until august/september. we would implement it if necessary almost a year later. let us just pause for a moment and look where we are, where we have been, and where we are projected. this chart is one that we use a lot.

total usage was 224 mgd, roug hly 15% under the 265. in the most recent year, our water usage system was down nearly 8%, so additional conservation and additional lower usage because of cooler weather and also the economy has some part to do with that. what we discussed here today are the key variants. the water enterprise, water use is lower than assumed in the budget. our retail usage through october went out another 0.4%. -- went down another 0.4%. " severally continue to conserve and losuse lower water. that is on top of the lower 8.5%-9% that was already lower. significant lower usages of water. we play catch up very quickly with our wholesale rates. retail rates because of prior fund balances, we were able to implore lower retail sales and we continue on the retail side to be able to do that. those retail rates are set through june 2014. we plan to collect those administer those as adopted for the retail side. waste water overall is under budget. hollow or water demand of water waste, the savings are also there. partly because of

that will be levied if the combined purchases exceed that interim supply limitation of 265 mgd. the limitation would go to agencies that exceed their supply limitation. it goes out to all customers, so it makes the allocation a very important thing for customers, as you will see by the comments we of received already and the number of customers who are here today to comment on the matter. in addition to the environmental enhancement surcharge, peir included litigation matters. depending on which matters are implemented, the cost could total to about $7 million worth of mitigation. some of that is what your purchase. some of that is in fundamental -- some of that is water purchase. some of that -- the wholesale customer collective allocation includes the demands of san jose and santa clara. that is one of the reasons why this is an interesting and difficult problem to deal with. that number is the same as the individual supply guarantees added up for the customers plus demand. with the interim supply allocation, we have to shoehorn in san jose and santa clara along with every bod