MONTEREY REGIONAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCYmontereyonewater.org/dwnloads/agendas_minutes/2014... · 5/22/2014 · BUDGET RECAP: N/A PRIOR BOARD ACTIONS: N/A ALTERNATIVES: N/A

MONTEREY REGIONAL WATER

POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 5 Harris Court, Bldg. D, Monterey, California 93940-5756 (831) 372-3367 or (831) 422-1001 – FAX: (831) 372-6178

REGULAR MEETING

NOTICE AND AGENDA

Thursday, May 22, 2014, 6:30 pm BOARD OF DIRECTORS

[Note: MRWPCA Board Members are appointed from their respective Joint Powers Authority (JPA) jurisdictions.]

Dennis Allion, Chair Del Rey Oaks

Gloria De La Rosa, Vice Chair Salinas

Linda Grier Boronda County Sanitation District

Ron Stefani Castroville Community Services District

Lou Calcagno County of Monterey

Tom Moore Marina Coast Water District

Libby Downey Monterey

Tommy Razzeca Moss Landing County Sanitation District

Rudy Fischer Pacific Grove

Dave Pendergrass Sand City

Ralph Rubio Seaside

VACANT United States Army - Ex-Officio

You are invited to visit our Website @ www.mrwpca.org to access a description of MRWPCA and

its Mission Statement.

NOTE: All enclosures and staff materials regarding the following agenda items are available for public

review on Monday, May 19, 2014 through Thursday, May 22, 2014, at the MRWPCA’s Administrative Office in

Monterey at Ryan Ranch, and at the public libraries located in Castroville, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove,

Salinas, and Seaside.

Note Different

Date

http://www.mrwpca.org/

MRWPCA Regular Meeting Notice and Agenda – Thursday, May 22, 2014, 6:30 pm

2

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Anyone wishing to address the Board on matters not appearing on the Agenda may do so now for not more than three (3) minutes. Comments on any other matter listed on the Agenda are welcome at the time the matter is being considered by the Board.

5. CONSENT AGENDA

The Consent Agenda consists of routine items for which Board approval can be taken with a single motion and vote. A Board Member may request that any item be placed on the Regular Agenda for separate consideration.

A. Approve Board Minutes/Report for Regular Board Meeting of April

28, 2014

B. Receive Financial Statements through April 2014

C. Schedule of Cash and Investments as of April 30, 2014

D. Receive Comparison Percentage of FY 2013/14 Budget Expended

Through April 2014

E. Receive Check Register – April 2014

F. Receive Waste Discharge Report for April 2014; NPDES Monitoring

Report for April 2014; and Plant Flows and Effluent Quality for

Connected Agencies, Plus Flow Charts for RTP, Salinas, Monterey

Peninsula, Marina, Fort Ord, and Castroville for April 2014

G. Receive Actual vs. Budgeted Fiscal Year 2013/14 Expenditures for

the Capital Improvement Program, Capitalized Equipment Fund, Urban

Reclamation Program, and Capacity Fees for April 2014

H. Award Contract for RTP Administration Building Roof Repair and

Modification

I. Approve Memorandum of Understanding for Integrated Regional

Water Management in the Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South

Monterey Bay Region


3

6. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RELATED ACTION ITEMS

Action items related to Committee Reports consist of business which requires a vote by the Board. Committee information only items require no Board action. These items are acted upon in the following sequence: (1) Summary Staff Report (including a draft copy of Committee’s minutes) (2) Committee Chair Comments; (3) Board Questions to Committee Chair and Staff; (4) Public Comments, if any; and (5) Board Discussion and Action.

A. RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE – MAY 8, 2014

1 INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS – RECEIVE ONLY - NO ACTION REQUIRED

AA. G Approve April 10, 2014 RWC Minutes

The RWC Approved the April 10, 2014 RWC minutes

B. Update on CPUC Water Proceedings (A.12-04-019), Monterey

Peninsula Regional Water Authority, and Technical Advisory

Committee

Information only – no action taken/required.

C. Update on the Groundwater Replenishment (GWR) Project and

Urban Reclamation Projects

Information only – no action taken/required.

DD. CLOSED SESSION

Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Arbitration) Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9 (c)

1. Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing Facts and

Circumstances (Dispute Under Third Amendment of Agreement

with MCWRA): One Case

RECEIVE RWC ACTION ITEMS – BOARD ACTION REQUIRED

AA. Consider Approval of Short-Term, Interruptible Salinas Wash

Water Fee

RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve an interim

interruptible/impaired wastewater treatment rate of $548 per million

gallons for any further diversion of Salinas Ag wash water starting

June 1, 2014 and ending on October 31, 2014, or when a new rate

model is approved (subject to legal review) whichever is sooner.


4

B. BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE – MAY 15, 2014

1. INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS – RECEIVE ONLY - NO ACTION REQUIRED

A. BPC Approval of April 17, 2014 BPC Minutes

The BPC Approved the April 17, 2014 BPC Minutes as

Presented

B. Update on FY 2014/15 Budget

Information only - no action required

C. Consider Classification and Salary Equity Adjustments

Information only – no action required

D. Closed Session

A. Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code 54957.6

Agency Negotiator: General Manager

Employee Organizations:

General Employees Association (GEA)

Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG)

Management Employees Group (MEG)

Operations Employee Bargaining Group (OEBG)

7. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

A. Reclamation Project Status Summary

B. Strategic Planning Goals (2011-2014) and One-Year Objectives Update

C. Operational Report

8. STAFF REPORTS

Staff Reports include items for which verbal reports/presentations will be provided. If a specific presentation is planned, it will be listed and summary information may be included with the Agenda. Brief oral reports may be provided for items arising after Agenda preparation. The Board may wish to ask questions or discuss a staff report, but no action is appropriate other than referral to staff, or request that a matter be set as a future Agenda item.

A. General Manager/Legal Counsel

9. CORRESPONDENCE

A. Letter from Monterey County Hospitality Association – thanks for

participating in “The Sustainable Destination: Marketing the Monterey

Region” seminar as a vendor exhibit – May 13, 2014.


5

B. Article from the Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce Business

Journal featuring comments by Salinas Mayor Joe Gunter regarding

MRWPCA testing Salinas produce wash for potential CSIP irrigation

water - May 2014.

10. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS/REPORTS

Board Members may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement or make a brief comment or report on his or her own activities within the jurisdiction of the Agency. No discussion or action is appropriate other than referral to staff for consideration or setting a matter as a future agenda item.

11. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

As permitted by Government Code Section 54956 et seq., the Board may adjourn to a Closed or Executive Session to consider specific matters dealing with pending or potential litigation, certain personnel matters, real property negotiations, or confer with the MRWPCA’s Meyers-Milias-Brown representative.

A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Arbitration) Pursuant to Govt Code 54956.9 (c)

1. Potential Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing

Facts and Circumstances (Dispute Under Third Amendment of

Agreement with MCWRA): One Case

B. Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code 54957.6

Agency Negotiator: General Manager

Employee Organizations:

General Employees Association (GEA)

Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG)

Management Employees Group (MEG)


12. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION

The Board will report out on any reportable action taken during Closed Session, and may take additional action in Open Session, as appropriate.

13. ADJOURNMENT

Set next meeting(s)/location(s)/date(s)/time(s):

Regular and/or Special Meeting(s):

A. Location: MRWPCA Board Room - Ryan Ranch


6

Date(s)/Time(s): BOARD BUDGET WORKSHOP:

Monday, June 9, 2014 at 6:30 pm REGULARLY SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING:

Monday, June 30, 2014 at 6:30 pm


7

* * * * * *

This Meeting Notice and Agenda was posted at the Administrative Offices

of the MRWPCA, 5 Harris Court, Building D, Monterey, California, action

may be taken on any of the items agendized above.

POSTED: Monday, May 19, 2014

BY: /s/Chayito Ibarra Executive Assistant

Page 1


POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY

* * * AGENDA TRANSMITTAL FORM * * *

MEETING DATE: MAY 22, 2014

AGENDA ITEM: 5 – A through I

AGENDA TITLE: CONSENT AGENDA

Consent ( X ) Action ( ) Informational ( )

CONTACT: KEITH ISRAEL, GENERAL MANAGER

PHONE: 372-3367 or 422-1001

DEPARTMENT SUMMARY AND REQUESTED BOARD ACTION:

Listed below are items that are a part of the Consent Agenda:

Routine Items:

A. Approve Minutes/Report for the Regularly Scheduled Board Meeting of April 28, 2014

B. Receive Financial Statements through April 2014

C. Schedule of Cash and Investments as of April 30, 2014

D. Receive Comparison Percentage of FY 2013/14 Budget Expended Through April 2014

E. Receive Check Register for April 2014

F. Receive Waste Discharge Report, April 2014; NPDES Monitoring Report for April 2014; and, Plant Flows and Effluent Quality for Connected Agencies, Plus Flow Charts for RTP, Salinas, Monterey Peninsula, Marina, Fort Ord, and Castroville for April 2014.

G. Receive Actual vs. Budgeted Fiscal Year 2013/14 Expenditures for the Capital Improvement Program, Capitalized Equipment Fund, Urban Reclamation Program, and Capacity Fees for April 2014

Non-Routine Item:

H. Award Contract for RTP Administration Building Roof Repair and Modification

I. Approve MOU for Integrated Regional Water Management in the Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region

Page 2




FINANCIAL IMPACT: ( X ) Yes ( ) No

FUNDING SOURCE: N/A

BUDGET RECAP: N/A

PRIOR BOARD ACTIONS: N/A

ALTERNATIVES: N/A

COMMITTEE REVIEW

AND ACTION: N/A

MANAGER

RECOMMENDATION: Accept Consent Agenda.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Minutes/Reports for Regularly Scheduled Board Meeting of April 28, 2014

2. Financial Information

3. Check Register

4. NPDES Monitoring Report Letters and Flow Charts

5. Expenditures and Revenue Graphs

6. Items H - I

RECOMMENDED

MOTION:

Approve Consent Agenda as presented.

U:\BETTY\Board Agendas\Routine Agenda Items\2014\May\Consent Agenda 5-22-14.doc

M I N U T E S of the Regular Meeting

Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency

Board of Directors

April 28, 2014

1. CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency was Called to Order by Chair Allion at 7:30 pm, on Monday, April 28, 2014 in the Board Room at 5 Harris Court, Building D, Monterey, California.

2. ROLL CALL

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Allion, Chair Del Rey Oaks Gloria De La Rosa Salinas Linda Grier Boronda County Sanitation District Ron Stefani Castroville Community Services District Simon Salinas (Alternate) County of Monterey Tom Moore Marina Coast Water District Libby Downey (arrived at 8:30 pm) Monterey Tommy Razzeca Moss Landing County Sanitation District Alan Cohen (Alternate) Pacific Grove Dave Pendergrass Sand City Ian Oglesby (Alternate) Seaside Vacant – Ex-Officio United States Army

BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None

MRWPCA STAFF PRESENT: Keith Israel General Manager Rob Wellington Legal Counsel John Tiernan Director of Admin Services/Deputy GM Tom Buell Director of Finance

Bob Holden Principal Engineer

Jennifer Gonzalez Engineering Supervisor

DRAFT

DRAFT

Minutes MRWPCA Regular Board Meeting DRAFT April 28, 2014 Page 2

Mark Malanka Maintenance Manager

Mike McCullough Recycled Water Project Assistant

Kim Bates Accounting Assistant II Bill Ragsdale-Cronin Maintenance Supervisor Karen Harris Community Relations Specialist Chayito Ibarra Executive Assistant

OTHERS PRESENT: None

Jeff Krebs – City of Monterey

David Chardavoyne – Monterey County Water Resources Agency

Gary Petersen – City of Salinas

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Stefani led the Pledge of Allegiance.

4. PUBLIC COMMENTS At 7:35 pm, Chair Allion called for Public Comments. None received.

5. CONSENT AGENDA In regards to Item A, Mr. Moore stated his name was left off the March 31, 2014 minutes although he was present.

ACTION TAKEN: On a motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Ms. De La Rosa, the

Board unanimously approved Consent Agenda Items A through J, including

addition of Mr. Moore’s name to the March 31, 2014 Board minutes as being

present, as follows:

A. Approve Board Minutes/Report for Regular Board Meeting of March 31, 2014

B. Receive Financial Statements through March 2014

C. Schedule of Cash and Investments as of March 31, 2014

D. Receive Comparison Percentage of FY 2013/14 Budget Expended through March 2014

E. Receive Check Register – March 2014

F. Receive Waste Discharge Report, February 2014; NPDES Monitoring Report for March 2014; and Plant Flows and Effluent Quality for Connected Agencies, Plus Flow Charts for RTP, Salinas, Monterey Peninsula, Marina, Fort Ord, and Castroville for March 2014

G. Receive Actual vs. Budgeted Fiscal Year 2013/14 Expenditures for the Capital Improvement Program, Capitalized Equipment Fund, Urban Reclamation Program and Capacity Fees for March 2014

H. Receive Residential Dwelling-Unit Aggregate as of March 31, 2014


I. Receive Proposed Committee Dates for May 2014 – March 2015

J. Approve Contract with E2 Consulting Engineers for Structural Evaluation of Existing Outfall

6. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RELATED ACTION ITEMS

A. RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE – MARCH 13, 2014

The following are Information Only Items – No Board Action is needed:

Agenda Item A – Presentation and Tour of Advanced Water Treatment Pilot Plant Mr. Israel stated that the RWC received a general presentation (“Pure Water Monterey – a Groundwater Replenishment Project”) produced by the Joint Outreach Committee that will be provided to the general public. The RWC was also given a tour of the Advanced Water Treatment Pilot Facility.

Information only – no action needed.

Agenda Item B – Approve March 13, 2014 RWC Minutes The RWC approved the March 13, 2014 RWC minutes, as presented.


Agenda Item C – Approve Proposed Recycled Water Committee Meeting Dates The RWC approved the proposed RWC meeting dates through March 2015, as presented.


Agenda Item D – Update on CPUC Water Proceedings (A.12-04-019), Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority, and Technical Advisory Committee Mr. Israel stated that copies of agendas for the MPRWA and TAC meetings were provided to the RWC. He stated that the Committee asked about desal brine disposal to which staff answered that there is an agreement with Cal Am to collect studies to be certain that brine received does not adversely affect the outfall.


Agenda Item E – Update on the Groundwater Replenishment (GWR) Project and Urban Reclamation Projects

A. Schedule – Mr. Holden presented the Schedule and highlighted the following work that was accomplished in the month of April:

MPWMD approved GWR mid-year budget adjustment

Staff executed preliminary design contracts


Staff met with SWRCB Water Rights Division, head engineer and attorney about water rights

Worked on Project Concept Report to present to IAP in May for comments

Updated Project Schedule Phasing report provided to RWC

Source Water Agreements expected to be in place by June 2014 Mr. Moore asked for clarification on the Schedule regarding the source water agreements, and Mr. Israel stated that the project criteria states they must be completed by December; however, staff has set a target date of June. He added that the Negotiations Committee is making progress and hopes to have key business terms soon.

B. Expenditures – Mr. Holden reported the Urban Reclamation project expenditures to date that represent 56% of budget.

C. Joint Meeting (Board of Supervisors and MCWRA Board) – Mr. Israel reported on the Joint Meeting and stated that the Monterey County Board of Supervisors directed MCWRA staff to pursue water rights for alternate water sources and to file the required permits. He stated that discussions will take place in the near future to discuss possible coordination of preparing a joint proposal. He added that the Monterey Herald reported that the MCWRA will be filing for the water rights and also looking at the PERC concept to help develop some of these waters.

Mr. Allion stated that the meeting between the MCWRA, Growers, and MRWPCA held on April 23 included Supervisor Salinas, Gloria De La Rosa, Bob Antle, Dennis Sites, Dale Huss, Dave Hart, Keith Israel and other representatives from the MCWRA Board. He stated the discussion was very candid and open; there were some specific issues raised that Mr. Israel will respond to for the next meeting that will be scheduled within the next couple of weeks. Mr. Allion added that this meeting allowed the opportunity to dispel the misconception that the PCA only wants Salinas’ water for the Groundwater Replenishment Project. He stated that the GWR project can be supported with the water that is produced from the Peninsula. Mr. Allion stated that the PCA Board is working hard with MCWRA and the City of Salinas to ensure there will be more water available for ag for the coming summer. At this meeting we also clarified that it will be 2017 before we need water for GWR, so there is time to develop the new water sources for the County.

Public Comments: Dave Chardavoyne, MCWRA, stated that the San Antonio Dam is only 23% full and they are releasing 60 csf from that dam. They had an agenda item before the MCWRA Board to obtain authorization to reduce the flow to 25 csf.


Ms. De La Rosa agreed that the right people were together for this meeting. She added that it was good to hear everyone’s needs and acknowledged Gary Petersen, who at the meeting identified the sources of water that the City of Salinas can provide. Mr. Salinas stated the importance to continue with an open dialogue in order to work something out and added that Mr. Chardavoyne made it clear at the meeting what is needed. He stated that the needs of the Valley and the City of Salinas need to be considered. Mr. Israel stated additionally there is a unique opportunity working with the City of Salinas to develop the ponds into a possible water storage asset. Because of conservation and the resulting lower flows to the Regional Treatment Plant, the PCA can treat additional waters that would not normally be included. He concurred that the meeting on April 23

was very positive.

Agenda Item D – Closed Session

Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Arbitration) Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9 (c)

1. Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing Facts and Circumstances (Dispute Under Third Amendment of Agreement with MCWRA): One Case

Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code 54956.8 (c)

1. Property: Waste Water Agency Negotiator: Keith Israel, General Manager Negotiating Parties: City of Salinas Under Negotiation: All Terms and Conditions

2. Property: Waste Water and RUWAP Pipeline Agency Negotiator: Keith Israel, General Manager Negotiating Parties: Marina Coast Water District Under Negotiation: All Terms and Conditions

B. BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE – APRIL 17, 2014

The following are Information Only Items – No Board Action is needed:

Agenda Item A – BPC Approval of January 31, 2014 BPC Minutes

The BPC approved the January 31, 2014 BPC Minutes, as presented.

Agenda Item B – BPC Approval of March 21, 2014 BPC Minutes

The BPC approved the March 21, 2014 BPC Minutes, as presented.


Agenda Item C – Approve Proposed Budget/Personnel Committee Meeting Dates

The BPC approved the BPC meeting dates, as presented.

Agenda Item D – Closed Session

A. Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code 54957.6

Agency Negotiator: General Manager Employee Organizations: General Employees Association (GEA) Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG) Management Employees Group (MEG) Operations Employee Bargaining Group (OEBG)

The following are BPC Action Items – Board Action is required:

Agenda Item D – Update on FY 2014/15 Budget Mr. Tiernan stated the Proposed FY 2014/15 Budget has been presented twice to the Budget/Personnel Committee and the Board. The budget information being presented is preliminary; and in May, staff will provide another budget update with further recommendations. Mr. Tiernan noted that if the Board determined there was a need to increase rates, users would have to be notified in early May 2014. Mr. Tiernan reviewed the budget highlights and stated that this budget cycle marks the end of a 3-year Prop 218 rate increase of 6% per year. This fiscal year also marks the end of a two-year MOU with the employee bargaining groups. Mr. Tiernan stated that the Agency’s operating expenses/revenues are estimated to be $18.8M. With no user rate increase, staff is projecting a $2.45 million ending balance for FY 14/15. He added that this includes funding $3.8M in capital projects, and $1M for the GWR Project. It is anticipated that salaries and benefits will increase by 1%. He stated that in the past it has been the Board’s desire not to incur more debt and noted that $2.3M will be transferred to reserves to be used for Capital Projects. With regards to SVRP/CSIP/SRDF, Mr. Tiernan stated that staff was informed today that the budget is $3.4M, but noted that indirect costs have yet to be determined. Mr. Tiernan stated that at the March 31 Board meeting, staff was requested to provide additional examples of rate structures and how they would impact our reserves and capital outlay. Mr. Tiernan provided the following four examples showing different scenarios regarding rate increases: 1) no increase the first year, with an approximate increase of 5% the next years; 2) approximate increase of 2.5% for all years; 3) approximate increase of 2.4% the first year, with an approximate increase of 4.4% the next years; 4) approximate increase of 3.8% to 4.0% all years.


Mr. Tiernan added that at the April 17 BPC meeting, the Committee’s recommendation was to approve a 4% rate increase for the next 3 to 4 years. Mr. Moore expressed support for setting user rates to more closely synchronize the target balance and ending unrestricted general fund balance. Mr. Tiernan stated that the rate increase could be slightly lowered and still “hit the target.”

Public Comments: Gary Petersen, City of Salinas, asked that the Board consider the lowest increase amount over the shortest time span. Chair Allion stated that this Board is acting to cover the costs of our Capital Improvement Program through very moderate user fee increases in order to save future generations the burden of paying off debt.

ACTION TAKEN: On a motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Ms. Grier, the Board

unanimously authorized staff to send out a Proposition 218 notice to users of a

three-year user fee rate increase and directed staff to adjust the proposed user

fee rate to more closely synchronize the target balance and ending unrestricted

general fund balance. [Absent: Downey]

7. ACTION ITEMS

A. Approve Recertification of Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP) Mr. Malanka gave an overview of the 2013 internal audit results for the Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). He stated that our Compliance Engineer, Garrett Haertel, conducted the internal audit. Mr. Malanka reported that the SSMP is in compliance with all requirements; only minor updates are needed to identify responsible staff; and there is no action required by the MRWPCA Board other than to recertify the SSMP. The areas audited included:

Operation and Maintenance Program

Design and Performance Provisions

Overflow Emergency Response Plan

Fats, Oils and Grease Control Plan

System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance

Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modification

SSMP Program Audits

Communication Program which allows public access to the SSMP through the Agency website


Discussion followed regarding some edits that were needed in the material as well as the issue of liability insurance and responsibility to cover sewers with municipalities.

ACTION TAKEN: On a motion by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Oglesby, the Board

approved recertification of the SSMP to remain in compliance with the State

Water Resources Control Board, Sanitary Sewer Overflow Program [Absent:

Downey]

8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

A. Reclamation Project Status Summary Mr. Israel stated that the report is updated. He also noted that about 3 MGD more plant flow was due to the Salinas shunt test.

B. Strategic Planning Goals (2011-2014) and One-Year Objectives Update Mr. Israel stated that the report is updated.

C. Operational Report No comments.

9. STAFF REPORTS

A. General Manager/ Legal Counsel Mr. Israel presented a short video with a motivational message to move towards the future of recycled water.

10. CORRESPONDENCE A. Monterey County Board Order Appointing Supervisor Simón Salinas as

Temporary Alternate to the MRWPCA Board of Directors, April 22, 2014.

11. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS/REPORTS Mr. Pendergrass asked about the GWR funding reimbursement from MPWMD; Mr. Israel stated that the invoices have been delivered. Mr. Moore inquired if any Board members routinely talked to their agency counsel or city attorney about matters discussed in MRWPCA Board closed sessions. Mr. Wellington responded that all Board Members have been advised that under the Brown Act they cannot discuss closed session matters with anyone not in the closed session. Mr. Moore indicated he understood there was some exception in the Government Code that would permit such discussions with city or agency attorneys and fellow council members. Mr. Wellington said that by a law adopted in 2004


there could be such a policy; but since it still would not apply to a Board member excluded from a closed session for a litigation or real property negotiation conflict, he could not recall any instance over the years where this policy would have applied.

[Chair Allion adjourned Open Session at 8:31 pm and commenced Closed Session at 8:32 pm.]

12. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION A. Conference with Legal Counsel- Potential Litigation (Arbitration)

Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9(c) 1. Potential Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing Facts

and Circumstances (Dispute Under Third Amendment of Agreement with MCWRA): One Case

B. Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code 54957.6

1. Agency Negotiator: General Manager Employee Organizations: General Employees Association (GEA) Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG) Management Employees Group (MEG) Operations Employee Bargaining Group (OEBG)

[Chair Allion adjourned Closed Session and reconvened Open Session at 9:10 pm.]

13. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION Legal Counsel reported that with regards to Closed Session agenda item 12–A1, a matter of pending or potential litigation (arbitration), the Board received information from and gave instructions to its negotiators, no reportable action was taken. With regard to the second agenda item 12-B1, conference with labor negotiator, the Board received information from its negotiator, general directions were discussed and given, and no reportable action was taken.

14. ADJOURNMENT At 9:11 pm with no further business, Chair Allion adjourned the meeting to the next regularly scheduled Board Meeting to be held in the Board Room at 5 Harris Court, Building D, in Monterey, California on Thursday, May 22, at 6:30 p.m.

Keith E. Israel, General Manager Dennis Allion, Chair Secretary to the Board MRWPCA Board of Directors

U:\BETTY\BOARD OF DIRECTORS\Board Meeting Minutes\2014\April\Board Minutes Draft 4-28-14.doc

ASSETS 2014 2013

CURRENT ASSETS:

CASH & INVESTMENTS 7,823,129 10,039,062

RESTRICTED - CURRENT 2,649,748 3,156,547

RECEIVABLES 5,308,386 2,932,986

INVENTORY 202,772 230,877

PREPAID EXPENSES 212,426 174,832

TOTAL 16,196,461 16,534,305

OTHER ASSETS:

RESTRICTED - NON-CURRENT 8,531,078 9,117,513

DEFERRED DEBT COSTS 718,140 623,045

TOTAL 9,249,218 9,740,558

PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT:

LAND 3,686,207 3,686,207

BUILDINGS, IMPROVEMENTS AND EQUIP. 229,837,618 227,992,741

CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS 10,197,813 12,566,710

243,721,638 244,245,658

LESS ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION 151,775,446 147,942,096

NET P,P & E 91,946,191 96,303,562

TOTAL ASSETS 117,391,870 122,578,424

LIABILITIES AND EQUITIES 2014 2013

CURRENT LIABILITIES:

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 1,448,534 536,976

AP - RESTRICTED ASSETS 2,299,278 2,818,867

ACCRUED WAGES 207,082 261,524

AP - MEMBER ENTITIES 2,278,318 2,937,843

ACCRUED INTEREST PAYABLE 64,893 116,263

LONG-TERM DEBT - CURRENT PORTION 1,873,540 1,642,249

DEFERRED REVENUE 815,853 1,242,291

TOTAL 8,987,500 9,556,014

OTHER LIABILITIES:

LONG TERM DEBT 38,764,297 40,442,824

TOTAL LIABILITIES 47,751,797 49,998,838

EQUITY:

RETAINED EARNINGS

CAPITAL ASSETS, NET OF DEBT 69,916,222 72,533,501

RESTRICTED FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS 350,470 337,680

UNRESTRICTED (626,619) (291,594)

TOTAL EQUITY 69,640,073 72,579,587

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY 117,391,870 122,578,424

MRWPCA

BALANCE SHEET

APRIL 30, 2014 AND APRIL 30, 2013

(UNAUDITED)

2014 2013

OPERATING REVENUES:

WASTEWATER USER FEES - RESIDENTIAL 1,261,486 1,152,055

WASTEWATER USER FEES - OTHERS 403,074 392,876

OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 61,221 19,386

RECLAM. OPERATING REVENUES 180,274 223,826

SRDF OPERATING REVENUES 2,270 20,441

TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 1,908,326 1,808,584

OPERATING EXPENSES:

ADMINISTRATIVE 142,988 141,459

FINANCE 131,633 130,246

ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY 71,917 76,034

RTP ADMINISTRATIVE 49,989 58,706

COLLECTION SYSTEM 258,507 152,970

COGENERATION 65,128 50,096

RTP MAINT & OPS 572,148 549,572

MAJOR O&M - NON-CAPITAL PROJECTS 0 0

RECLAMATION O & M 77,871 155,949

RECLAMATION DISTRIBUTION 102,403 67,877

SRDF O & M 2,270 20,441

TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE 1,474,854 1,403,350

CAPITALIZED OPERATING EXPENSES (120,453) (132,541)

DEPRECIATION 317,033 300,668

OPERATING GAIN (LOSS) 236,891 237,106

NON-OPERATING INCOME (EXPENSE):

INVESTMENT EARNINGS 11,072 42,780

CHANGE IN FAIR-VALUE OF INVESTMENTS 39,537 0

INTEREST (NET) (545,348) (555,721)

OTHER (NET) 1,000 0

TOTAL NON-OP INCOME (EXPENSE) (493,738) (512,941)

NET PROFIT (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS (256,847) (275,836)

CAPACITY CHARGES 63,414 38,335

CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS 0 0

CHANGE IN NET POSITION (193,432) (237,501)

MRWPCA

INCOME STATEMENT

ONE MONTH ENDING APRIL 30, 2014 AND APRIL 30, 2013

2014 2013

OPERATING REVENUES:

WASTEWATER USER FEES - RESIDENTIAL 12,277,068 11,522,617

WASTEWATER USER FEES - OTHERS 4,817,971 4,687,974

OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 503,986 425,940

RECLAM. OPERATING REVENUES 2,152,721 2,178,066

SRDF OPERATING REVENUES 311,173 333,452

TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 20,062,919 19,148,050

OPERATING EXPENSES:

ADMINISTRATIVE 1,571,872 1,550,752

FINANCE 1,524,362 1,579,377

ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY 1,089,768 1,051,009

RTP ADMINISTRATIVE 552,454 515,733

COLLECTION SYSTEM 2,392,762 2,475,966

COGENERATION 725,012 671,036

RTP MAINT & OPS 5,607,495 5,265,964


RECLAMATION O & M 1,329,155 1,417,083

RECLAMATION DISTRIBUTION 823,567 760,983

SRDF O & M 311,173 333,452

TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE 15,927,619 15,621,353

CAPITALIZED OPERATING EXPENSES (1,388,122) (1,190,905)

DEPRECIATION 3,170,328 3,006,682

OPERATING GAIN (LOSS) 2,353,093 1,710,920

NON-OPERATING INCOME (EXPENSE):

INVESTMENT EARNINGS 185,542 75,602

CHANGE IN FAIR-VALUE OF INVESTMENTS (20,136) 0

INTEREST (NET) (269,502) (585,286)

OTHER (NET) 144,558 177,002

TOTAL NON-OP INCOME (EXPENSE) 40,462 (332,681)

NET PROFIT (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS 2,393,555 1,378,239

CAPACITY CHARGES 395,852 724,790CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS 0 0

CHANGE IN NET POSITION 2,789,407 2,103,029

MRWPCA

INCOME STATEMENT

TEN MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2014 AND APRIL 30, 2013

TARGET LEVEL 83.33%

CURRENT YEAR: YEAR TO DATE BUDGET %

USER RELATED FEESWASTEWATER USER FEES - RESIDENTIAL 12,277,068 14,750,000 83.2%

WASTEWATER USER FEES - OTHERS 4,817,971 5,920,000 81.4%

OTHER OPERATING REVENUESOTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 503,986 599,570 84.1%

RECLAM. OPERATING REVENUES 2,152,721 2,788,364 77.2%

SRDF OPERATING REVENUES 311,173 545,004 57.1%

TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 20,062,919 24,602,938 81.5%

ADMINISTRATIVE 1,571,872 1,976,113 79.5%

FINANCE 1,524,362 2,052,951 74.3%

ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY 1,089,768 1,359,685 80.1%

RTP ADMINISTRATIVE 552,454 690,314 80.0%

COLLECTION SYSTEM 2,392,762 3,233,748 74.0%

COGENERATION 725,012 1,077,940 67.3%

RTP MAINT & OPS 5,607,495 7,325,282 76.5%


RECLAMATION O & M 1,329,155 1,673,928 79.4%

RECLAMATION DISTRIBUTION 823,567 1,074,436 76.7%

SRDF O & M 311,173 545,004 57.1%

CAPITALIZED OPERATING EXPENSES (1,388,122) (1,189,045) 116.7%

OPERATING EXPENSE 14,539,497 19,820,356 73.4%

PRIOR YEAR: YEAR TO DATE BUDGET %

WASTEWATER USER FEES - RESIDENTIAL 11,522,617 13,875,000 83.0%

WASTEWATER USER FEES - OTHERS 4,687,974 5,704,000 82.2%

OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 425,940 659,955 64.5%

RECLAM. OPERATING REVENUES 2,178,066 3,251,633 67.0%

SRDF OPERATING REVENUES 333,452 720,784 46.3%

TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 19,148,050 24,211,372 79.1%

ADMINISTRATIVE 1,550,752 1,873,869 82.8%

FINANCE 1,579,377 2,061,419 76.6%

ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY 1,051,009 1,278,164 82.2%

RTP ADMINISTRATIVE 515,733 712,601 72.4%

COLLECTION SYSTEM 2,475,966 3,351,794 73.9%

COGENERATION 671,036 1,083,600 61.9%

RTP MAINT & OPS 5,265,964 6,942,991 75.8%


RECLAMATION O & M 1,417,083 2,097,475 67.6%

RECLAMATION DISTRIBUTION 760,983 1,154,158 65.9%

SRDF O & M 333,452 720,784 46.3%

CAPITALIZED OPERATING EXPENSES (1,190,905) (1,203,925) 98.9%

OPERATING EXPENSE 14,430,449 20,072,930 71.9%

COMPARISON OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES TO BUDGET

MONTH ENDING APRIL 30,2014

MRWPCA

INCOME STATEMENT

% AMOUNT BOOK MARKET

INST TYPE YIELD AT COST VALUE VALUE

GENERAL FUND

UNION BNK MMF/Checking 0.60% 2,228,164.04 2,228,164.04 2,228,164.04

MTY CTY Lien Account 347,487.30 347,487.30 347,487.30

LAIF Savings 0.26% 10,893.68 10,893.68 10,893.68

UNION BNK Securities (See P.2) 2,129,911.93 3,195,347.35 3,195,347.35 ____________ ___________ ___________

4,716,456.95 5,781,892.37 5,781,892.37

NOTE:

The General Fund Investment Account balance includes:

2012 Bond reserve Restricted 885,500.00

LWH - Certificate of Deposits Restricted 3,000.00

General Fund Unrestricted 4,893,392.37____________

GENERAL FUND TOTAL 5,781,892.37$

Total Unrestricted

3 MONTH RUNNING AVERAGE (Feb- Apr) 5,440,492.81$ 4,551,992.81$

CAPITALIZED EQUIPMENT FUND

UNION BNK Securities (See P.2) - - - _________ _________ _________

- - -

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND

UNION BNK Checking 0.60% 15,810.14 15,810.14 15,810.14

UNION BNK Securities (See P.2) 2,237,048.24 2,025,426.33 2,025,426.33

UNION BNK Capacity Fees 0.60% 19,502.43 19,502.43 19,502.43 ___________ ___________ ___________

2,272,360.81 2,060,738.90 2,060,738.90

MRWPCA TOTAL 7,842,631.27$

RESTRICTED

2012 Bond reserve Restricted 885,500.00

LWH - Certificate of Deposits Restricted 3,000.00

Capitalized Equipment Fund Restricted 0.00

Capital Improvement Fund Restricted 2,060,738.90

2,949,238.90$

UNRESTRICTED

General Fund Unrestricted 4,893,392.37$

MRWPCA TOTAL 7,842,631.27$

MRWPCA

SCHEDULE OF CASH & INVESTMENTS

AS OF APRIL 30, 2014

1 of 2

% AMOUNT BOOK MARKET

INST TYPE YIELD AT COST VALUE VALUE

MRWPCA

SCHEDULE OF CASH & INVESTMENTS

AS OF APRIL 30, 2014

RECLAMATION/SRDF *

SVRP & CSIP O&M - CHECKING 0.60% 1,100,873.33

SRDF O&M - CHECKING 0.60% 519,786.46

CASH TOTAL $1,620,659.79

SVRP O&M RESERVE 168,314.97

CSIP O&M RESERVE 214,597.47

SVRP BUREAU OF RECL RESERVE 163,673.37

CSIP BUREAU OF RECL RESERVE 0.00

SVRP SWRCB RESERVE 393,000.00

SVRP EQUIP REPL RESERVE 0.00

CSIP EQUIP REPL RESERVE 70,000.00

SRDF EQUIP REPL RESERVE 0.00

RESERVE TOTAL 1,009,585.81$ *

RECLAMATION FUNDS TOTAL 2,630,245.60$

TOTAL OF ALL FUNDS 10,472,876.87$ **

UNION BANK Securities

MMF 0.30% 74,176.39 311,281.94 311,281.94

Interm. Govt 2.67% 4,511,452.44 4,359,703.59 4,359,703.59

Interm. CA. Bonds 3.32% 630,459.06 623,477.83 623,477.83

Long Term CA Bonds 3.93% 954,184.67 935,896.13 935,896.13

____________ ___________ ___________

6,170,272.56 6,230,359.49 6,230,359.49

* MCWRA funds are held and invested by MRWPCA

** All funds include MCWRA funds as noted above

Per government code requirements, this schedule of investments is in compliance with MRWPCA's Investment policy

2 of 2

76.31%

85.68% 78.50%

58.32%

0.00%

25.00%

50.00%

75.00%

100.00%

MRWPCA O&M SVRP CSIP SRDF

% O

F B

UD

GE

T

FY 13/14 BUDGET VS ACTUAL EXPENDITURES & ENCUMBRANCES

APRIL 30, 2014 Target = 83.33 %

83.33% TARGET

ANNUAL YTD YTD YTD %

No. DEPARTMENT BUDGET EXPENDED ENCUMB. TOTAL OF BUDGET

10 ADMINISTRATION 1,708,665.00 1,249,315.85 45,053.19 1,294,369.04 75.75%

13 FINANCE 1,974,948.00 1,485,426.99 13,830.91 1,499,257.90 75.91%

25 ENVIRON. & SAFETY 1,359,685.00 1,060,610.86 55,748.78 1,116,359.64 82.10%

30 RTP ADMINISTRATION 685,607.00 547,653.16 41,689.26 589,342.42 85.96%

32 FIELD MAINTENANCE 3,196,061.00 2,339,551.15 125,608.12 2,465,159.27 77.13%

37 COGEN 1,077,940.00 724,734.42 105,934.12 830,668.54 77.06%

40 RTP MAINT & OPS 6,525,282.00 4,669,003.02 149,035.05 4,818,038.07 73.84%

TOTAL 10 thru 40 16,528,188.00 12,076,295.45 536,899.43 12,613,194.88 76.31%

50 SVRP - RECL. TRMT. PLANT 1,673,928.00 1,329,154.82 105,141.04 1,434,295.86 85.68%

55 CSIP - RECL. DISTR.SYSTEM 1,074,436.00 823,566.50 19,881.29 843,447.79 78.50%

57 SRDF - RIVER DIVERSION 545,004.00 311,173.05 6,649.74 317,822.79 58.32%

TOTAL ALL DEPTS. 19,821,556.00 14,540,189.82 668,571.50 15,208,761.32 76.73%

EXPENDITURES & ENCUMBRANCES

APRIL 30, 2014

FY 13/14 BUDGET VS ACTUAL

CHECK CHECK VENDOR ITEM CHECK

NUMBER DATE NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT

RECLAMATION O&M

117115 4/3/2014 AIRTEC SERVICE HVAC 1,277.87

117116 4/3/2014 BORGES & MAHONEY CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 173.99

117117 4/3/2014 DAMM SOFTWATER SERVICE, INC. WATER DELIVERY SERVICES 13.49

117118 4/3/2014 FEDEX OUTBOUND SHIPPING 30.01

117119 4/3/2014 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 36.71

117120 4/3/2014 SIERRA CHEMICAL CO. CHLORINE 4,070.08

117121 4/3/2014 TELEDYNE ISCO INC CL2 BASIN SAMPLER HEAD 523.00

117122 4/3/2014 TIM'S GARDENING SERVICE SOIL EROSION SERVICES 1,653.33

117123 4/3/2014 TRANSFORMER TESTING & REPAIRS TRANSFORMER REPAIR 7,702.00

117124 4/3/2014 XEBEC DATA CORP PG&E DATA TRANSMITTAL SERVICES 48.10

117125 4/10/2014 AT&T PHONE SERVICES 97.41

117126 4/10/2014 BECK'S SHOES INC SAFETY SHOES 140.00

117127 4/10/2014 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ANNUAL USE TAX RETURN 2,206.00

117128 4/10/2014 CAL CHEM ENTERPRISES ALUMINUM CHLOROHYDRATE 23,892.35

117129 4/10/2014 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 LAUNDRY SERVICES 110.36


117131 4/10/2014 GAVILAN PEST CONTROL PEST CONTROL SERVICES 325.00

117132 4/10/2014 MONTEREY BAY ANALYTICAL SVCS LAB ANALYSIS SERVICES 60.00

117133 4/10/2014 PRECISION FLOW TECHNOLOGIES ACH POLYMER PUMP SPARE PARTS 313.74

117134 4/10/2014 U.S. TELEPACIFIC CORP. PHONE SERVICES 142.10

117135 4/10/2014 VERIZON WIRELESS-DBA WIRELESS SERVICES 38.47

2041114 4/11/2014 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRICITY 3,410.66

117136 4/16/2014 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CONTRACT #5-07-20-W1284 12TH INSTALLMENT 1,270,415.23

117137 4/16/2014 FEDEX FREIGHT WEST INC SHIPPING CHARGES 154.94

117138 4/16/2014 OFFICE DEPOT INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 54.23

117139 4/16/2014 TELSTAR INSTRUMENTS INC GENERAL LAB SUPPLIES 6,913.05

117140 4/24/2014 ALPHA AIR BALANCING AGENCY INC EXHAUST SYSTEM & VENTILATION MEASUREMENT 1,075.00

117141 4/24/2014 BORGES & MAHONEY CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 282.62

117142 4/24/2014 CAROLLO ENGINEERS PC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, CHLORINE SYSTEM STUDY 10,605.00


117144 4/24/2014 FLSMIDTH USA INC.- TUCSON OPS. KREBS MODEL KSH-30-1440 DESANDER 24,972.25

117145 4/24/2014 SIERRA CHEMICAL CO. CHLORINE 5,087.60

117146 4/24/2014 SOLARCITY CORPORATION ELECTRICITY 18,511.17

SUBTOTAL $1,384,591.80

SALINAS RIVER DIVERSION O&M

70284 4/3/2014 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC DISPLAY PANEL REPLACEMENT 3,293.73

70285 4/10/2014 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ANNUAL USE TAX RETURN 760.00

70286 4/10/2014 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 LAUNDRY SERVICES 19.00

70287 4/24/2014 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRICITY 695.10

SUBTOTAL $4,767.83

APRIL 2014

MONTHLY CHECK REGISTER

C:/Documents and Settings/karenk.MRWPCADOM.000/Local Settings/Temporary Internet Files/CHECKREG/CKREGOC6.WK4



APRIL 2014


CAPITAL PROJECTS

57410 4/3/2014 ANDERSON PACIFIC ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, CLARIFIER PUMP PIT ROOF 4,083.29

57411 4/3/2014 GREEN RUBBER KENNEDY AG MATERIALS, GRIT REMOVAL REHAB 52.80

57412 4/3/2014 KENNEDY-JENKS CONSULTANTS INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, VARIOUS 33,777.12

57413 4/10/2014 AXIOM ENGINEERS, INC. HVAC UPGRADES 6,200.00

57414 4/10/2014 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ANNUAL USE TAX RETURN 132.29

57415 4/10/2014 THE CALIFORNIAN ADS, BUILDING CONTROL UPGRADE 925.64

57416 4/10/2014 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC MATERIALS, GRIT REMOVAL REHAB 8,065.89

57417 4/10/2014 FIA CARD SERVICES MATERIALS, SCADA UPGRADE 405.80

57418 4/16/2014 ALVAREZ TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, RTP SCADA UPGRADES 16,771.71

57419 4/16/2014 BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC CO MATERIALS, SCADA UPGRADE 7,967.16

57420 4/16/2014 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS CO MATERIALS, RTP BUSS DUCT PROJECT 86,364.00

57421 4/16/2014 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC MATERIALS, GRIT REMOVAL REHAB 361.90

57422 4/16/2014 PM DUNN ENGINEERING, INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, CLARIFIER PUMP PIT ROOF 580.00

57423 4/24/2014 ALVAREZ TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, SCADA UPGRADES 1,443.64

57424 4/24/2014 BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC CO MATERIALS, SCADA UPGRADES 29,758.59

57425 4/24/2014 CAROLLO ENGINEERS PC PROFESSIONAL SVCS COGENERATION COMPRESSORS 441.75

57426 4/24/2014 GRAINGER MATERIALS, GRIT REMOVAL REHAB 1,719.73

SUBTOTAL $199,051.31

GENERAL FUND

1030046 4/3/2014 AIRTEC SERVICE HVAC SERVICES 1,485.41

1030047 4/3/2014 ALAMEDA ELECTRICAL DIST INC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 81.17

1030048 4/3/2014 ALHAMBRA & SIERRA SPRINGS COOLER RENTAL 90.33

1030049 4/3/2014 DENNIS ALLION MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 413.44

1030050 4/3/2014 AMERICAN SUPPLY COMPANY INC RESTROOM SUPPLIES 239.62


1030052 4/3/2014 BAYSIDE OIL II INC HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES 530.00

1030053 4/3/2014 BHI MANAGEMENT CONSULTING ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SER 3,395.75

1030054 4/3/2014 BRANOM INSTRUMENT CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 2,028.78

1030055 4/3/2014 BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1,565.32

1030056 4/3/2014 CAL-AM WATER CO WATER SERVICES 552.01

1030057 4/3/2014 LOUIS CALCAGNO MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 100.00

1030058 4/3/2014 CARMEL MARINA CORPORATION WASTE DISPOSAL FEE 611.83

1030059 4/3/2014 THE CARMEL PINE CONE ADS, GREASE OUTREACH CAMPAIGN 180.00

1030060 4/3/2014 CAROLLO ENGINEERS PC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, CIP UPDATE 5,129.55

1030061 4/3/2014 CASTROVILLE AUTO PARTS INC VEHICLE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 61.60

1030062 4/3/2014 CITY OF SALINAS INDUSTRIAL POND USAGE FEE 874,358.91

1030063 4/3/2014 CYPRESS COAST FORD VEHICLE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 160.22


1030065 4/3/2014 GLORIA DE LA ROSA MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 467.20

1030066 4/3/2014 ELIZABETH J. DOWNEY MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 424.64

1030067 4/3/2014 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1,489.47

1030068 4/3/2014 FASTENAL COMPANY GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 95.01


1030070 4/3/2014 RUDOLF FISCHER MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 224.64

1030071 4/3/2014 FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY GENERAL LAB SUPPLIES 2,280.07

1030072 4/3/2014 GOODWAY TECHNOLOGIES CORP GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 2,974.40

1030073 4/3/2014 GRAINGER GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 2,902.88

1030074 4/3/2014 GREEN RUBBER KENNEDY AG GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 422.03

1030075 4/3/2014 GREEN VALLEY INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 913.48

1030076 4/3/2014 LINDA GRIER MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 120.72

1030077 4/3/2014 HACH COMPANY GENERAL LAB SUPPLIES 200.63

1030078 4/3/2014 MONTEREY BAY ANALYTICAL SVCS LAB ANALYSIS SERVICES 210.00

1030079 4/3/2014 MONTEREY SANITARY SUPPLY CORP RESTROOM SUPPLIES 164.19




APRIL 2014


1030080 4/3/2014 MONTEREY TIRE SERVICE VEHICLE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 18.71

1030081 4/3/2014 DR. THOMAS MOORE MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 114.00

1030082 4/3/2014 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 89.83

1030083 4/3/2014 MRWPCA REVENUE FUND SEWER USAGE FEE, HARRIS CT 106.06

1030084 4/3/2014 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1,033.50

1030085 4/3/2014 PACIFIC GAS TECHNOLOGY INC MONITORING, GREENHOUSE GAS 140.00

1030086 4/3/2014 JANE PARKER MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 100.00

1030087 4/3/2014 DAVID K PENDERGRASS MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 313.44

1030088 4/3/2014 THOMAS RAZZECA MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 120.72

1030089 4/3/2014 REDSHIFT INTERNET SERVICES 59.95

1030090 4/3/2014 RALPH RUBIO MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 311.76

1030091 4/3/2014 SAVE THE WHALES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, STORMWATER PROGRAM 12,279.12

1030092 4/3/2014 SHORTY'S PORTABLE TOILETS REFUND BINDER FEE 1,000.00

1030093 4/3/2014 KYLE SNYDER CWEA GII TEST FEE 160.00

1030094 4/3/2014 RONALD T. STEFANI MARCH 2014 BOARD EXPENSES 482.88

1030095 4/3/2014 SUMMIT EQUIPMENT OUTLET, LLC PORTABLE AIR COMRESSOR 3,200.75

1030096 4/3/2014 ROBERT M TASNER & ASSOCIATES PROMOTIONAL ITEMS, COMMUNITY RELATIONS 500.94

1030097 4/3/2014 TIM'S GARDENING SERVICE LANDSCAPING SERVICES 1,936.67

1030098 4/3/2014 TRITON CONSTRUCTION MONTHLY UST INSPECTION 900.00

1030099 4/3/2014 VARGAS TURBO & DIESEL OVERHAUL COGEN ENGINE TURBO 19,759.05

1030100 4/3/2014 XEBEC DATA CORP PG&E DATA TRANSMITTAL SERVICES 48.10

1605 4/4/2014 PARS PARS RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTION 803.54

1600 4/8/2014 HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE CO DEFERRED COMPENSATION 29,471.77

1030101 4/9/2014 MONTEREY CREDIT UNION SOCIAL GROUP DUES 195.00

1030102 4/8/2014 UNITED WAY OF MONTEREY EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS 195.00

1030103 4/9/2014 ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES JANITORIAL SERVICES 3,520.30

1030104 4/10/2014 AFLAC WORLDWIDE HEADQUARTERS SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE SERVICES 993.76

1030105 4/10/2014 APPLIED INDUSTRIAL SOLENOID 702.98

1030106 4/10/2014 ASSOCIATED SERVICES KITCHEN SUPPLIES 727.73



1030109 4/10/2014 BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA MEDICAL INSURANCE PLAN 114,590.10

1030110 4/10/2014 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ANNUAL USE TAX RETURN 9,649.71

1030111 4/10/2014 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 2013 UST FEES 528.00


1030113 4/10/2014 CAPITAL ONE NATIONAL ASSOC OFFICE,KITCHEN SUPPLIES 2,474.77



1030116 4/10/2014 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 LAUNDRY SERVICES 5,848.08

1030117 4/10/2014 DAMM SOFTWATER SERVICE, INC. DISPENSER RENTAL FEE 85.00

1030118 4/10/2014 DATA INSTINCTS PUBLIC OUTREACH, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 1,862.50

1030119 4/10/2014 DOCUTEC REPLACE DRUM UNIT 161.20

1030120 4/10/2014 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 936.86

1030121 4/10/2014 FALCON AIR BIRD ABATEMENT BIRD ABATEMENT SERVICES AT RTP 4,000.00

1030122 4/10/2014 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 462.25

1030123 4/10/2014 FIA CARD SERVICES LUNCH MEETING, FUEL, GENERAL SUPPLIES 389.27

1030124 4/10/2014 FIA CARD SERVICES FAREWELL LUNCH MEETING, ASSISTANT GM 354.61

1030125 4/10/2014 FIA CARD SERVICES LUNCH FOR MANAGER'S TRAINING 152.99



1030128 4/10/2014 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 398.32



1030131 4/10/2014 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SVCS GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 434.43




APRIL 2014


1030132 4/10/2014 INSIGHT PLANNERS PUBLIC RELATIONS, WEBSITE UPDATE 2,400.00

1030133 4/10/2014 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYS BATTERY/AIR COMPRESSOR 116.04

1030134 4/10/2014 JENSEN INSTRUMENT COMPANY REPLACEMENT VALVE FOR ENGINE COOLING SYSTEM 5,525.20

1030135 4/10/2014 KEMIRA WATER SOLUTIONS INC FERRIC CHLORIDE 31,469.31

1030136 4/10/2014 MCWD, MARINA COAST WATER DIST WATER SERVICES 412.30

1030137 4/10/2014 MONTEREY BAY ANALYTICAL SVCS ANALYTICAL TESTING, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 5,825.78

1030138 4/10/2014 MONTEREY COUNTY PETROLEUM DIESEL FUEL 12,729.74

1030139 4/10/2014 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 3,546.05

1030140 4/10/2014 MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL SERVICES PROPOSAL TO PERFORM A WASTEWATER RATE STUDY 1,800.00

1030141 4/10/2014 MUNIQUIP, INC. WIRELESS ALARM SYSTEM & SERVICE PACKAGE 1,698.50

1030142 4/10/2014 MUTUAL OF OMAHA INSURANCE CO. LIFE & AD&D INSURANCE 1,676.22

1030143 4/10/2014 NEXTRAQ VEHICLE GPS MONITORING FEES 367.65

1030144 4/10/2014 PAJARO / SUNNY MESA WATER SERVICES 34.51

1030145 4/10/2014 PENINSULA MESSENGER SERVICE COURIER SERVICES 729.00

1030146 4/10/2014 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC-198 MILLER SUITCASE WELDER FOR FIELD MAINTENANCE 2,502.03

1030147 4/10/2014 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS #8155 PAINT 420.51

1030148 4/10/2014 STURDY OIL COMPANY INC OIL 4,102.70

1030149 4/10/2014 TECHNO COATINGS INC RTP COATING CONTRACT-YEAR 8 74,439.00

1030150 4/10/2014 TELEDYNE ISCO INC BATTERIES FOR SOURCE CONTROL SAMPLING EQUIPMENT 2,850.84

1030151 4/10/2014 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR - 042 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 1,016.49

1030152 4/10/2014 TORO PETROLEUM CORPORATION VEHICLE FUEL 440.79

1030153 4/10/2014 TRIMARK ASSOCIATES, INC. MONTHLY DATA REPORTING & SUPPORT SERVICES 725.00

1030154 4/10/2014 TRUCKSIS ENTERPRISES INC. SIGNS 458.60

1030155 4/10/2014 U.S. TELEPACIFIC CORP. PHONE SERVICES 2,700.20

1030156 4/10/2014 US PEROXIDE LLC HYDROGEN PEROXIDE 15,083.56

1030157 4/10/2014 VERIZON WIRELESS-DBA WIRELESS SERVICES 319.96

1030158 4/10/2014 WAGEWORKS, INC FSA/DFSA BENEFIT PLAN 90.72

1601 4/11/2014 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF FEDERAL WITHHOLDING, MEDICARE TAXES 40,464.96

1602 4/11/2014 PERS, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PERS RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTION 67,675.24

1603 4/11/2014 EDD 801-3161-8 STATE WITHHOLDING TAX PAYMENT 11,099.33

1041114 4/11/2014 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRICITY, GAS 19,768.50

1030159 4/16/2014 ALAMEDA ELECTRICAL DIST INC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1,623.02

1030160 4/16/2014 AMPTEKS, INC. REPLACEMENT BREAKERS 23,766.51

1030161 4/16/2014 APPLIED INDUSTRIAL GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 287.64

1030162 4/16/2014 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER SERV. CUSTOMER SERVICE BILLS PRINTING & POSTAGE 10,559.88



1030165 4/16/2014 CHECK PROCESSORS, INC. PAYMENT PROCESSING FOR HOME BANKING 1,067.50

1030166 4/16/2014 CITY OF WATSONVILLE CCLEAN ANNUAL FEE FOR FY 13/14 26,005.25

1030167 4/16/2014 CITY OF WATSONVILLE CONFERENCE ROOM RENTAL, STORMWATER MEETING 889.00

1030168 4/16/2014 CLAREMONT BEHAVIORAL SERVICES EAP SERVICES 477.40

1030169 4/16/2014 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 592.32

1030170 4/16/2014 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL, INC ANALYTICAL TESTING-GROUNDWATER PROJECT 38,880.00



1030173 4/16/2014 FIRST ALARM "MAN DOWN " ALARM SERVICES 112.32

1030174 4/16/2014 FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY GENERAL LAB SUPPLIES 536.13

1030175 4/16/2014 GRAINGER GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 689.91



1030178 4/16/2014 HARN R/O SYSTEMS, INC PILOT PLAN LEASE, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 21,000.00

1030179 4/16/2014 KEMIRA WATER SOLUTIONS INC FERRIC CHLORIDE 15,473.05

1030180 4/16/2014 LOMBARDO DIAMOND CORE DRILL HOLES FOR ELECTRICAL 705.00

1030181 4/16/2014 MONTEREY BAY ANALYTICAL SVCS ANALYTICAL TESTING, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 539.00




APRIL 2014


1030182 4/16/2014 NELLOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 3,610.00

1030183 4/16/2014 OFFICE DEPOT INC. OFFICE /KITCHEN/ BOARD SUPPLIES 457.28

1030184 4/16/2014 P. WEDGE COMPANY LTD. WALL MOUNT WINDSOCK ASSEMBLY FOR RTP 2,750.00

1030185 4/16/2014 PACIFIC ECORISK, INC. TOXICITY TESTING FOR EFFLUENT & BRINE 4,037.22

1030186 4/16/2014 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC-198 GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 38.68

1030187 4/16/2014 STAPLES CONTRACT & COMMERCIAL KITCHEN,OFFICE SUPPLIES 229.20

1030188 4/16/2014 TRUCKSIS ENTERPRISES INC. GLOSS LAMINATED SIGN-GROUNDWATER PROJECT 79.55

1030189 4/16/2014 ZERO WASTE ENERGY, LLC POWER PURCHASED FOR RTP 4,614.07

1611 4/17/2014 PARS PARS RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTION 803.54

1606 4/24/2014 HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE CO DEFERRED COMPENSATION 29,771.77

1030192 4/24/2014 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES 4/1/14-7/1/14 MASTER CRIME PROGRAM RENEW 283.00

1030193 4/24/2014 ALPHA AIR BALANCING AGENCY INC SERVICES EXHAUST SYSTEM 1,075.00

1030194 4/24/2014 ALVAREZ TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC SUPPORT, COMPUTER SERVERS 1,215.00

1030195 4/24/2014 AMEZCUA INSURANCE SERVICES SALINAS PAYMENT STATION 23.10


1030197 4/24/2014 BALCH PETROLEUM CONTRACTORS REPAIR DIESEL DISPENSER AT RTP 1,537.37

1030198 4/24/2014 BANK OF AMERICA LUNCH MEETINGS/RATE MODEL 249.05

1030199 4/24/2014 BANK OF AMERICA WATER ASSOCIATION MEETING, GROUND WATER PROJECT 175.00

1030200 4/24/2014 BREZACK & ASSOCIATES PLANNING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 20,133.75

1030201 4/24/2014 BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC CO GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 2,791.66



1030205 4/24/2014 CASTROVILLE COMM. SVCS. DIST. WATER SERVICES 56.95

1030206 4/24/2014 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 SHREDDING SERVICES 51.35

1030207 4/24/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL CORP. LEASE PAYMENTS FOR PHONE SYSTEM 2,167.98

1030208 4/24/2014 CITY OF SALINAS INDUSTRIAL POND USAGE FEE 235,327.75

1030209 4/24/2014 CLAREMONT BEHAVIORAL SERVICES EAP SERVICES 471.20

1030210 4/24/2014 CULLIGAN WATER CONDITIONING CALCITE TANK SERVICES 425.70

1030211 4/24/2014 CUMMINS-WEST INC SPARE COOLANT JACKET HEATERS 2,459.50


1030213 4/24/2014 DENISE DUFFY & ASSOC., INC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 102,880.52

1030214 4/24/2014 DYNAMIC PRESS-DBA LETTERHEAD PRINTING 338.55

1030215 4/24/2014 E2 CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 8,192.50

1030216 4/24/2014 EL CAMINO MACHINE & WELDING GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES 516.00

1030217 4/24/2014 ENTRAVISION COMMUNICATIONS ADS, GREASE OUTREACH CAMPAIGN 820.00

1030218 4/24/2014 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL, INC ANALYTICAL TESTING, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 2,500.00




1030222 4/24/2014 FLOOR CENTER PAYMENT STATION FEE 152.38

1030223 4/24/2014 FORT ORD REUSE AUTHORITY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 1,281.75



1030227 4/24/2014 GREEN RUBBER KENNEDY AG GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1,065.26


1030229 4/24/2014 HACH COMPANY GENERAL LAB SUPPLIES 280.95

1030230 4/24/2014 INDUSTRIAL SCIENTIFIC CORP. LEASE GAS METERS 1,439.64

1030231 4/24/2014 MAGANA'S MARKET PAYMENT STATION FEE 229.37

1030232 4/24/2014 MBUAPCD, MONTEREY BAY UNIFIED COGEN PERMIT FEES 2,922.00

1030233 4/24/2014 MONTEREY BAY ANALYTICAL SVCS LAB ANALYSIS SERVICES 2,519.00

1030234 4/24/2014 MONTEREY BAY URGENT CARE SPIROMETRY / AUDIOMETRIC TESTS & HAZMAT 128.00

1030190 4/24/2014 MONTEREY CREDIT UNION SOCIAL GROUP DUES 195.00

1030235 4/24/2014 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 3,999.35

1030236 4/24/2014 MRWMD, MONTEREY REGIONAL SLUDGE DISPOSAL FEE 21,231.91




APRIL 2014


1030237 4/24/2014 NPG OF MONTEREY-SALINAS LLC ADS, GREASE OUTREACH CAMPAIGN 2,045.00

1030238 4/24/2014 PARS ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 358.21

1030239 4/24/2014 SEPARATION PROCESSES, INC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 18,900.28

1030240 4/24/2014 SJ STATE UNIV RESEARCH FOUND. NPDES OUTFALL SAMPLING BOAT SERVICES 1,475.00

1030241 4/24/2014 STAPLES CONTRACT & COMMERCIAL OFFICE SUPPLIES 510.35

1030242 4/24/2014 SWRCB OPERATOR TRAINING CERTIFICATION 170.00


1030243 4/24/2014 TODD ENGINEERS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 37,409.50

1030244 4/24/2014 TORO PETROLEUM CORPORATION VEHICLE FUEL 460.52

1030245 4/24/2014 TRUCKSIS ENTERPRISES INC. SUPPLIES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 696.92

1030191 4/24/2014 UNITED WAY OF MONTEREY EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS 195.00

1030246 4/24/2014 US PEROXIDE LLC HYDROGEN PEROXIDE 14,971.05

1030248 4/24/2014 VALERIE J. YOUNG PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, GROUNDWATER PROJECT 2,400.00

1030224 4/24/2014 VIVIAN GAIL NEU PAYMENT STATION FEE 27.72

1030247 4/24/2014 XEROX CORPORATION COPIER SERVICES 1,172.21

SUBTOTAL $2,142,144.57

TOTAL $3,730,555.51


CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (Actual vs. Budgeted 2013/14)

$4,074,000

$2,322,988

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

2013/14

Budgeted

Amount

July 2013 –

April 2014

Expenditures

CAPITALIZED EQUIPMENT FUND (Actual vs. Budgeted 2013/14)

$432,916

$356,981

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

2013/14

Budgeted

Amount

July 2013 –

April 2014

Expenditures

URBAN RECLAMATION PROGRAM (Actual vs. Budgeted 2013/14)

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

2013/14

Budgeted

Amount

July 2013 –

April 2014

Expenditures

$3,656,351

Original

Budget

$4,470,000

MPWMD

Budget

Shared

Amount

Amendment

$1,389,714

$5,859,714

$3,166,045

$1,646,998

Amount

Received

from

MPWMD

CAPACITY CHARGES Actual vs. Anticipated 2013/14 Revenues

April 2014

$700,000

$408,995

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

2013/14

Anticipated

Revenue

July 2013 –

April 2014

Actual Revenue

Page 1





AGENDA ITEM: 5 - H

AGENDA TITLE: AWARD CONTRACT FOR RTP ADMIN BUILDING ROOF

REPAIR AND MODIFICATION


CONTACT: TOM KOURETAS, ASSOCIATE ENGINEER

PHONE : 883-6178

DEPARTMENT SUMMARY AND REQUESTED BOARD ACTION: The roof over the original portion of the RTP Administration Building has developed leaks, due to the original installation in 1990, over the past few years. The leakage has progressed and worsened to the point that the repair/modification of this roof needs to be addressed. This RTP Admin Building roof was replaced in 2006 as part of a larger RTP roof replacement project. The Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) panels employed for the entire roof replacement project provided a lightweight, strong, corrosion resistant roofing system for several buildings and structures. With the exception of the RTP admin building roof, all other onsite installations using this system have performed well and held up as expected. Investigating the issue at the RTP Admin Building further, staff has determined that the leakage problems encountered stem primarily from deficiencies in the original installation of the roofing panels, and that these problems are unique to this building. The current roof repair project include the replacement of some localized panels damaged as a result improper anchoring, and repairs to underlying plywood sheathing and water damage. Modifications over the entire roof to prevent the development of similar leakage problems elsewhere include replacement of all undersized, incorrectly installed, or otherwise insufficient anchorage and the addition of oversized stainless steel washers. Requests for bids for this work were declined by two contractors citing the specialized nature of FRP work; particularly in a repair/rehab context. After a detailed investigation of the repair site, a third contractor

submitted the following bid:

Company Location Bid Amount Scudder Roofing Company Monterey $ 51,543

Scudder Roofing is a local contractor well recommended, experienced in a wide range of

Page 2




roofing applications, including FRP and repair/rehab work. Staff recommends that the Board approve a contract with Scudder Roofing Company in the amount of $51,543 to construct the RTP Administration Building Roof Repair Project.


FUNDING SOURCE: CP270 - RTP Admin Building Roof Repair

BUDGET RECAP: Total Estimated Cost: $ 51,543

Amt Budgeted FY 13/14: $ 50,000

New Funding Required: $0 Total CIP for 13/14 is

underbudget

New Revenue: $0

Revenue Impact: $0

New Personnel? NO

Change in Board Policy? NO

PRIOR BOARD

ACTIONS:

Approval of FY 13/14 budget (June 2013)

ALTERNATIVES: N/A

COMMITTEE REVIEW

AND ACTION: N/A

MANAGER

RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Approval

ATTACHMENTS: None

RECOMMENDED

MOTION: Approve Award of Construction Contract for the RTP Admin

Building Roof Repair/Modification to Scudder Roofing

Company in the amount of $ 51,543.

Page 1





AGENDA ITEM: 5 – I

AGENDA TITLE: APPROVE AMENDED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) FOR INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE MONTEREY PENINSULA, CARMEL BAY, AND SOUTH MONTEREY BAY REGION


CONTACT: BOB HOLDEN, PRINCIPAL ENGINEERING

Phone: 645-4634


The Board approved the Memorandum of Understanding for Integrated Regional Water

Management in the Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Area on

September 28, 2009. MCWD joined the group in 2011 and other changes have occurred.

To be eligible to receive a grant, it is necessary to approve an amended MOU that adds

MCWD and make the other changes. An attached track changes version of the MOU

shows the changes since the Board approved the original MOU. Also attached is the

Amended MOU, signed by MPWMD.

We request that the Board direct the General Manager to sign the Amended MOU.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

FUNDING SOURCE:

BUDGET RECAP: Total Estimated Cost:

Amt Expended to Date:

Amt Budgeted FY 13/14:

New Funding Required: $0

New Revenue: $0

Page 2




Revenue Impact: $0

New Personnel? NO

Change in Board Policy? NO

PRIOR BOARD

ACTIONS: Approved MOU that is being amended September 28, 2009.

ALTERNATIVES: N/A

COMMITTEE REVIEW

AND ACTION: N/A

MANAGER

RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Approval

ATTACHMENTS: 1) Original MOU with proposed changes shown 2) Amended MOU signed by MPWMD

RECOMMENDED

MOTION:

That the Board approve the amended Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Integrated Regional Water Management in the Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region and direct the General Manager to sign the MOU.

Amended Regional Water Management Group MOU

Page 1 of 11 AprilAugust 20132

AMENDED

Memorandum of Understanding for

Integrated Regional Water Management in the

Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region

1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to recognize a mutual

understanding among entities in the southern Monterey Bay area regarding their joint efforts

toward Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) planning. That understanding will

continue to increase coordination, collaboration and communication for comprehensive

management of water resources in the cities and unincorporated portions of the Monterey

Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region (Region).

A. Background and Description of Amendments. The initial MOU to form a Regional

Water Management Group (RWMG) was fully executed on July 22, 2008 by the Big Sur

Land Trust (BSLT), a 501 (c) 3 organization, the City of Monterey, the Monterey

Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), the Monterey County Water

Resources Agency (MCWRA), and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District

(MPWMD). The MOU formed a Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) for the

purposes of developing and implementing projects consistent with the guidelines set by

the State of California for IRWM.

Subsequently, the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) requested approval to become

part of the RWMG and signed an amended MOU in June 2011 that includes MCWD as a

member of the RWMG. In 2012, the Resource Conservation District of Monterey

County (RCD) agreed to become a member of the RWMG.

This amended MOU reflects the addition of MCWD and the RCD as members of the

RWMG, describes processes and guidelines for changing the membership of the RWMG,

and amends the MOU to meet Proposition 84 standards.

2. RECITALS

A. The State of California desires to foster Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)

planning and encourages local public, non-profit, and private (for profit) entities to define

planning regions appropriate for managing water resources and to integrate strategies

within these planning regions.

B. Water resources management authority in the Region is currently distributed among

various public agencies with a range of legal powers and regulatory responsibilities.

These public agencies have definite jurisdictional boundaries, whereas sensible water

resources planning and management frequently requires actions in multiple jurisdictions.

Non-public entities within the Region have considerable interests in cooperating with

public entities to protect, manage, and enhance water resources within the Region.

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Attachment 1 Page 1 of 11



C. Six Four public entities and one non-profit entity in the Region with responsibility and

interests in the management of water resources have agreed to form a Regional Water

Management Group for the purposes of developing and implementing projects consistent

with the guidelines set by the State of California for IRWM. These entities are: 1.) the

Big Sur Land Trust (BSLT), a 501 (c) 3 organization; 2.) the City of Monterey; 3.) the

Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA); 4.) the Monterey

County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA); 5) the Marina Coast Water District

(MCWD); 6) the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County; and 75.) the

Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD).

D. The Regional Water Management Group has defined an appropriate planning Region that

takes into consideration jurisdictional limits, powers and responsibilities, and watershed

and groundwater basin boundaries. The Regional Water Management Group is taking

the lead in overseeing and implementing a detailed IRWM Plan within the planning

Region. The Region is generally described as encompassing approximately 347 square

miles and consists of groundwater basins and coastal watershed areas contributing to the

Carmel Bay and south Monterey Bay. The Region includes coastal watersheds from the

southernmost portion of the San Jose Creek watershed north to the northern limit of the

Seaside Groundwater Basin. The inland area is bounded by the Seaside Groundwater

Basin to the north and by the Carmel River watershed to the south and east. The western

limit of the planning Region generally coincides with the land and Pacific Ocean

interface, but includes the Pt. Lobos, Carmel Bay, and Pacific Grove Areas of Special

Biological Significance (ASBS) adjacent to the coastal portion of the Region.

The principal groundwater basins in the planning Region are the Seaside Groundwater

Basin and the Carmel Valley Aquifer. The Region includes about 38 miles of the coast

within the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, three ASBS, the Cities of Carmel-

by-the Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Seaside, and

unincorporated portions of Monterey County including the Carmel Valley watershed (255

square miles), Pebble Beach, the Carmel Highlands and portions of the Seaside

Groundwater Basin adjacent to Highway 68 (also known as Canyon Del Rey). This

description of the planning Region is not intended to be a limitation on projects and

resource planning that may be shared between adjacent IRWM planning Regions (e.g.,

the Greater Monterey County Salinas Valley IRWM planning Region to the north and

east).

E. The entities signatory to this MOU desire to link and integrate efforts to jointly oversee

the development and implementation of a comprehensive Integrated Regional Water

Management Plan for the Region.

3. GOALS

The goals of the collaborative effort undertaken pursuant to this MOUemorandum of

Understanding are:

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



3.1 To implement a comprehensive IRWMP for the Region that will consider the

strategies that are required by the State under CWC 79562.5 and 79564 and

subsequent modifications required under Proposition 84. Eligible projects must

yield multiple benefits and include one or more of the following elements (PRC §

75026.(a)):including at a minimum: ecosystem restoration, environmental and

habitat protection and improvement, water supply reliability, flood management,

groundwater management, recreation and public access, storm water capture and

management, water conservation, water quality protection and improvement, water

recycling, and wetlands enhancement and creation. Optional additional elements

that may be considered include: conjunctive use, desalination, imported water, land

use planning, non-point source pollution control, promotion of the steelhead run,

surface storage, watershed planning, water and wastewater treatment, and water

transfers.

Water supply reliability, water conservation and water use efficiency

Stormwater capture, storage, clean-up, treatment, and management

Removal of invasive non-native species, the creation and enhancement of

wetlands, and the acquisition, protection, and restoration of open space and

watershed lands

Non-point source pollution reduction, management and monitoring

Groundwater recharge and management projects

Contaminant and salt removal through reclamation, desalting, and other

treatment technologies and conveyance of reclaimed water for distribution to

users

Water banking, exchange, reclamation and improvement of water quality

Planning and implementation of multipurpose flood management programs

Watershed protection and management

Drinking water treatment and distribution

Ecosystem and fisheries restoration and protection

3.2 To develop implement a comprehensive IRWMP for the Region that incorporates

water supply, water quality, flood and erosion protection, and environmental

protection and enhancement objectives.

3.3 To improve and maximize coordination of individual public, private, and non-profit

agency plans, programs and projects for mutual benefit and optimal gain within the

Region.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



3.4 To help identify, develop, and implement collaborative plans, programs, and

projects that may be beyond the scope or capability of individual entities, but which

would be of mutual benefit if implemented in a cooperative manner.

3.5 To facilitate regional water management efforts that include multiple water supply,

water quality, flood control, and environmental protection and enhancement

objectives.

3.6 To foster coordination, collaboration and communication between stakeholders and

other interested parties, to achieve greater efficiencies, enhance public services, and

build public support for vital projects.

3.7. To realize regional water management objectives at the least cost possible through

mutual cooperation, elimination of redundancy, and enhanced regional

competitiveness for State and Federal grant funding.

Chayito

Typewritten Text




4. DEFINITIONS

4.1 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP or IRWM Plan). The

plan envisioned by state legislators and state resource agencies that integrates the

strategies, objectives, and priorities for projects to manage water resources

proposed by public entities, non-profit entities, and stakeholders within a defined

Planning Region. The minimum plan standards are as shown in Appendix A of

“Integrated Regional Water Management Grant Program Guidelines, November

2004, Department of Water Resources and State Water Resources Control Board,

Proposition 50, Chapter 8,” as revised. Minimum IRWM Plan standards may be

revised from time to time by the State of California.

4.2 Integration. The combining of water management strategies and projects to be

included in an IRWMP.

4.3.a Lead Agency for IRWM Plan Development. The Monterey Peninsula Water

Management District is designated by the Regional Water Management Group to

lead the development or implementation of an Integrated Regional Water


4.3.b Lead Agency for IRWM Grant Applications. The Regional Water Management

Group may designate any entity in the Regional Water Management Group to be

the Lead Agency in making application to the State for grant funds.

4.4. Non-profit Agency. A 501 (c) (3) corporation, conservancy, group or other

organization involved in water resources management in the Region.

4.5 Private Agency. A private or publicly held for-profit corporation or property

owner involved in water resources management in the Region

4.6. Project. A specific project that addresses a service function.

4.7. Public Agency. A state-authorized water district, water agency, water management

agency or other public entity, be it a special district, city or other governmental

entity, responsible for providing one or more services in the areas of water supply,

water quality, wastewater, recycled water, water conservation, stormwater/flood

control, watershed planning and aquatic habitat protection and restoration.

4.8. Region. The area defined by the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG)

consisting of watersheds, sub-watersheds and groundwater basins under the

jurisdiction of one or more entities within the RWMG.

4.9. Service Function. A water-related individual service function provided by a

private, public, or non-profit entity, i.e. water supply, water quality, wastewater,

recycled water, water conservation, stormwater/flood protection, watershed

planning, recreational facilities, and habitat protection and restoration.

4.10 Signatory Entity. A public, private, or non-profit entity within the Region that is

signatory to this MOU.

4.11 Stakeholder. A non-signatory public, private, or non-profit agency identified in

the IRWM Plan with an interest in water resources management within the Region.

4.12 Technical Advisory Committee. The committee organized to advise the Regional

Water Management Group and Stakeholders concerning the IRWM Plan.

Normally, tThe group will be is comprised of individuals with technical

backgrounds in the fields of marine and freshwater biology, ecology, geology,

engineering, hydrogeology, planning, resource conservation, riparian systems,

water conservation, and water quality. However, stakeholders with interests in a

Chayito

Typewritten Text




particular aspect of resource or project management, but not necessarily a technical

background, may also be considered for inclusion in the TAC.

4.13 Regional Water Management Group. The group of entities that takes the lead in

overseeing the development and implementation of the Integrated Regional Water

Management Plan within the Planning Region. The RWMG consists of the

Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, the Monterey County Water

Resources Agency, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, the City of

Monterey, the Marina Coast Water District, the Resource Conservation District of

Monterey County, and the Big Sur Land Trust.

4.14. Water Management Strategies. Plans for and activities to be considered in an

IRWMP include, but are not limited to, ecosystem restoration, environmental and

habitat protection and improvement, water-supply reliability, flood management,


management, water conservation, water quality improvement, water recycling, and

wetlands enhancement and creation.

5. IRWMP PARTICIPANTS

5.1 Adopting Entities. The entities in the Region that participate in the development,

adoption, and implementation of the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

for the Region. Each entity intending to carry out a project proposed in the IRWMP

must formally adopt the IRWMP or provide written substantiation of acceptance by

the governing authority of the entity. For a public agency, adoption of the IRWMP

is by formal resolution of the governing body. For a non-profit or for-profit entity,

proof of acceptance of the IRWMP by the equivalent of a public agency governing

body is required (e.g., by a board of directors or other management entity).

5.2. Stakeholders. Entities, such as other public, private, and non-profit entities,

business and environmental groups, that are considered valuable contributors to the

understanding and management of the Region’s water resources.

5.3. Regulatory Agencies. These agencies, including, but not limited to, the Central

Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Coastal Commission, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, California Public Utilities Commission, National Marine

Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the

California Department of Fish and Game, will be invited to participate in the

development and implementation of the IRWMP.


developing and implementing an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

within the Planning Region.

(the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, the Monterey County Water


Monterey, and the Big Sur Land Trust).

6. MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING

6.1. Subject matter scope of the IRWMP. The IRWMP for the Region will include,

but is not limited to, water supply, water quality, wastewater, recycled water, water

Chayito

Typewritten Text




conservation, stormwater/flood control, watershed planning, erosion prevention,

and habitat protection and restoration. It is acknowledged that the proposals

contained in the IRWMP may be based, in part, on the land-use plans of the

member entities local governments such as Cities, Monterey County, and special

districts located within the Region. Therefore, the resultant IRWMP will by design

have incorporated the land-use plans and assumptions intrinsic to the respective

water-related service function.

6.2. Geographical scope of the IRWMP. The area for this Memorandum is generally

defined as the watersheds and associated groundwater basins contributing to the

south Monterey Bay and Carmel Bay as shown in Figure 3-1: Map of Monterey

Peninsula Integrated Regional Water Management Planning Region in the IRWM

Plan.

The Region includes coastal watersheds from the southernmost portion of the San

Jose Creek watershed north to the northern limit of the Seaside Groundwater Basin.

The inland area is bounded by the Seaside Groundwater Basin to the north and by

the Carmel River watershed to the south and east. The western limit of the planning

Region generally coincides with the land and Pacific Ocean interface, but includes

the Pt. Lobos, Carmel Bay, and Pacific Grove Areas of Special Biological

Significance (ASBS) adjacent to the coastal portion of the Region.

However, it is recognized that the geographic scope represented in the IRWM Plan

may be amended to include projects that are implemented cooperatively between

IRWM planning regions (e.g., with the Salinas Valley Greater Monterey County

IRWM planning region) and is not intended to be a rigid boundary.

6.3. Approach to developing the IRWMP. The Lead Agency will provide a draft

IRWMP to the Water Management Group and other public, private, and non-profit

entities for review and comment. It will be the responsibility of each entity

signatory to this Memorandum to provide the Lead Agency with information

described in the draft for the IRWMP concerning project proposals or to identify the

need for a water management strategy for each service function provided by a

signatory entity.

In order to be part of a final included in the IRWMP, all proposals for development

of water management plans and water development project proposals related to the

IRWMP must meet the standards identified in the draft IRWM Plan for the Region.

A technical advisory committee consisting of staff representatives from the

Regional Water Management Group, other Stakeholders and such other

organizations as may become contributing entities, will review proposed

management plans and project proposals for consistency with the draft IRWMP and

recommend a prioritized list of projects to be carried out within the Region. The

Regional Water Management Group and Stakeholders will meet to review the

recommendation made by the TAC.

6.4. Approval of prioritized project list. Approval of the prioritized project list should

occur by consensus of the Regional Water Management Group and Stakeholders

Chayito

Typewritten Text




and should be based on the prioritization process described in the IRWMP and the

recommendations of the Technical Advisory Committee. However, if a consensus

cannot be reached among the Stakeholders and Regional Water Management

Group, the Regional Water Management Group may make a final determination of

the prioritized project list.

6.5. Adoption of the IRWMP. Plan adoption will occur by approval of the governing

board of each entity. Each member of the RWMG shall adopt the IRWM Plan or an

amended IRWM Plan, when should the Plan becomes available. Project proponents

named in an IRWM grant application shall adopt the IRWM Plan or amended

IRWM Plan prior to submittal of the grant application. It should be noted at that the

adopted Plan and project list may be amended from time to time as described

below.

6.6 Amendment of IRWMP or Prioritized Project list. The IRWM Plan and

prioritized project list may be amended from time to time. Any member of the

Regional Water Management Group or Stakeholders may request that the Lead

Agency convene a meeting of the Regional Water Management Group and

Stakeholders for the purposes of amending the IRWM Plan or the prioritized project

list. However, it is anticipated that the IRWMP or prioritized project list will be

amended no more frequently than annually, unless more frequent amendments are

required to meet State IRWM standards or grant application cycles. An amended

IRWM Plan must be consistent with State IRWM standards as described in

Definition 4.1 “Integrated Regional Water Management Plan” and any subsequent

revisions by the State to IRWM guidelines.

6.7. Project Implementation. Project proponents will be responsible for completing

proposed projects and providing project reports to the Lead Agency.

6.8 Project Monitoring. The Regional Water Management Group will be responsible

for monitoring the implementation of the IRWMP. The technical advisory

committee will regularly report to the General Managers and Governing Boards of

the Regional Water Management Group regarding progress on the development and

implementation of the IRWMP. The Lead Agency will be responsible for

coordinating data collection and dissemination.

6.9 Grant Applications. The Regional Water Management Group will designate a

Lead Agency to apply for grant funds. The Lead Agency for each grant application

should have a mission and expertise that is consistent with the purpose of the grant

being applied for.

6.10 Grant Awards and Agreement. The Lead Agency will be the grantee and

administer the grant on behalf of the Regional Water Management Group and

Stakeholders.

6.11 Participation in Regional Water Management Group (RWMG). Any qualified

stakeholder may petition to become a member of the RWMG. A qualified

stakeholder must demonstrate the following: a) an interest, responsibility or

authority over multiple resources within the region; or b) a unique interest,

responsibility, authority, or asset not shared by any other entity within the RWMG.

The RWMG shall consider such a request for a change to the RWMG and shall vote

by majority to accept or reject the request.

6.12 Length of Term in Regional Water Management Group. Members of the

RWMG may change from time to time, depending on the level of resources

Chayito

Typewritten Text




available to each entity. However, there is no required minimum or maximum

length of time required as a member of the RWMG. If an entity withdraws from the

RWMG, the remaining entities should attempt to replace the interest, responsibility

or authority lost by the withdrawal.

6.13 Rights of the Parties and Constituencies: This MOU does not provide any added

legal rights or regulatory powers to any of the signatory parties, or to the RWMG as

a whole. This MOU does not of itself give any party the power to adjudicate water

rights, or to regulate or otherwise control the private property of other parties. This

MOU does not contemplate the parties taking any action that would adversely affect

the rights of any of the parties, or that would adversely affect the customers or

constituencies of any of the parties.

6.141 Termination. An entity signatory to this MOU may withdraw from participation

upon 30 days advance notice to the other signatory entities, provided it agrees to be

financially responsible for any previously committed, but unmet resource

commitment.

6.152. Personnel resources. It is expected that the General Managers and/or other

officials of each entity signatory to this MOU will periodically meet to insure that

adequate staff resources are available to implement the IRWM Plan.

6.163. Other on-going regional efforts. Development of the IRWMP is separate from

efforts of other organizations to develop water-related plans on a regional basis

around Monterey Bay and the Central Coast. As the IRWMP is developed and

implemented, work products may be shared to provide other entities and groups

with current information.

7. INDEMNIFICATION

7.1 Each Party shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other parties, to the extent

allowed by law and in proportion to fault, against any and all third-party liability for

claims, demands, costs or judgments (direct, indirect, incidental or consequential)

involving bodily injury, personal injury, death, property damage or other costs and

expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses) arising or

resulting from the acts or omissions of its own officers, agents, employees or

representatives carried out pursuant to the obligations of this Agreement.

7.2 These indemnity provisions shall survive the termination or expiration of this

Agreement. Further, each Party will be liable to the other Party for attorneys’ fees,

costs and expenses, and all other costs and expenses whatsoever, which are incurred

by the other Party in enforcing these indemnity provisions.

8. RECORD OF AMENDMENTS

8.1 June 2010 -– add Marina Coast Water District to RWMG. Revise Goals,

Definitions and MOU terms to reflect Proposition 84 requirements.

8.2 March 2012 – add process to change RWMG, define when plan is to be adopted,

revise to Proposition 84 standards

8.3 August 2012 – add Resource Conservation District of Monterey County to RWMG

Chayito

Typewritten Text




9.8. SIGNATORIES TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

We, the duly authorized undersigned representatives of our respective entities, acknowledge the

above as our understanding of the intent and expected outcome in overseeing the development

and implementation of an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Monterey

Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region.

WATER MANAGEMENT GROUP

____________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Monterey County Water Resources

Agency

____________________________________

Date

************************************

____________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Big Sur Land Trust

____________________________________

Date

************************************

____________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Monterey Peninsula Water Management

District

___________________________________

Date

___________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Monterey Regional Water Pollution

Control Agency

___________________________________

Date

************************************

___________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

City of Monterey

____________________________________

Date

************************************

___________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Marina Coast Water District

____________________________________

Date

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Board President, Resource Conservation

District of Monterey County

____________________________________

Date

************************************

U:\mpwmd\IRWM\Regional Water Management Group\2013

Amended MOU\RWMG-MOU-April2013-track-

changes_watermarked.docxU:\mpwmd\IRWM\Regional Water Management Group\2013 Amended MOU\RWMG-MOU-

April2013-track-changes.docx

Chayito

Typewritten Text



Page 1 of 10 April 2013

AMENDED

Memorandum of Understanding for

Integrated Regional Water Management in the

Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region

1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to recognize a mutual

understanding among entities in the southern Monterey Bay area regarding their joint efforts

toward Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) planning. That understanding will

continue to increase coordination, collaboration and communication for comprehensive

management of water resources in the cities and unincorporated portions of the Monterey

Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region (Region).

A. Background and Description of Amendments. The initial MOU to form a Regional

Water Management Group (RWMG) was fully executed on July 22, 2008 by the Big Sur

Land Trust (BSLT), a 501 (c) 3 organization, the City of Monterey, the Monterey

Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), the Monterey County Water

Resources Agency (MCWRA), and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District

(MPWMD). The MOU formed a Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) for the

purposes of developing and implementing projects consistent with the guidelines set by

the State of California for IRWM.

Subsequently, the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) requested approval to become

part of the RWMG and signed an amended MOU in June 2011 that includes MCWD as a

member of the RWMG. In 2012, the Resource Conservation District of Monterey

County (RCD) agreed to become a member of the RWMG.

This amended MOU reflects the addition of MCWD and the RCD as members of the

RWMG, describes processes and guidelines for changing the membership of the RWMG,

and amends the MOU to meet Proposition 84 standards.

2. RECITALS

A. The State of California desires to foster Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)

planning and encourages local public, non-profit, and private (for profit) entities to define

planning regions appropriate for managing water resources and to integrate strategies

within these planning regions.

B. Water resources management authority in the Region is currently distributed among

various public agencies with a range of legal powers and regulatory responsibilities.

These public agencies have definite jurisdictional boundaries, whereas sensible water

resources planning and management frequently requires actions in multiple jurisdictions.

Non-public entities within the Region have considerable interests in cooperating with

public entities to protect, manage, and enhance water resources within the Region.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



C. Six public entities and one non-profit entity in the Region with responsibility and interests

in the management of water resources have agreed to form a Regional Water

Management Group for the purposes of developing and implementing projects consistent

with the guidelines set by the State of California for IRWM. These entities are: 1.) the

Big Sur Land Trust (BSLT), a 501 (c) 3 organization; 2.) the City of Monterey; 3.) the

Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA); 4.) the Monterey

County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA); 5) the Marina Coast Water District

(MCWD); 6) the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County; and 7.) the

Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD).

D. The Regional Water Management Group has defined an appropriate planning Region that

takes into consideration jurisdictional limits, powers and responsibilities, and watershed

and groundwater basin boundaries. The Regional Water Management Group is taking

the lead in overseeing and implementing a detailed IRWM Plan within the planning

Region. The Region is generally described as encompassing approximately 347 square

miles and consists of groundwater basins and coastal watershed areas contributing to the

Carmel Bay and south Monterey Bay. The Region includes coastal watersheds from the

southernmost portion of the San Jose Creek watershed north to the northern limit of the

Seaside Groundwater Basin. The inland area is bounded by the Seaside Groundwater

Basin to the north and by the Carmel River watershed to the south and east. The western

limit of the planning Region generally coincides with the land and Pacific Ocean

interface, but includes the Pt. Lobos, Carmel Bay, and Pacific Grove Areas of Special

Biological Significance (ASBS) adjacent to the coastal portion of the Region.

The principal groundwater basins in the planning Region are the Seaside Groundwater

Basin and the Carmel Valley Aquifer. The Region includes about 38 miles of the coast

within the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, three ASBS, the Cities of Carmel-

by-the Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Seaside, and

unincorporated portions of Monterey County including the Carmel Valley watershed (255

square miles), Pebble Beach, the Carmel Highlands and portions of the Seaside

Groundwater Basin adjacent to Highway 68 (also known as Canyon Del Rey). This

description of the planning Region is not intended to be a limitation on projects and

resource planning that may be shared between adjacent IRWM planning Regions (e.g.,

the Greater Monterey County IRWM planning Region to the north and east).

E. The entities signatory to this MOU desire to link and integrate efforts to jointly oversee

the development and implementation of a comprehensive Integrated Regional Water


3. GOALS

The goals of the collaborative effort undertaken pursuant to this MOU are:

3.1 To implement a comprehensive IRWMP for the Region that will consider the

strategies that are required by the State under CWC 79562.5 and 79564 and

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



subsequent modifications required under Proposition 84. Eligible projects must

yield multiple benefits and include one or more of the following elements (PRC §

75026.(a)):

Water supply reliability, water conservation and water use efficiency

Stormwater capture, storage, clean-up, treatment, and management

Removal of invasive non-native species, the creation and enhancement of

wetlands, and the acquisition, protection, and restoration of open space and

watershed lands

Non-point source pollution reduction, management and monitoring

Groundwater recharge and management projects

Contaminant and salt removal through reclamation, desalting, and other

treatment technologies and conveyance of reclaimed water for distribution to

users

Water banking, exchange, reclamation and improvement of water quality

Planning and implementation of multipurpose flood management programs

Watershed protection and management

Drinking water treatment and distribution

Ecosystem and fisheries restoration and protection

3.2 To implement a comprehensive IRWMP for the Region that incorporates water

supply, water quality, flood and erosion protection, and environmental protection

and enhancement objectives.

3.3 To improve and maximize coordination of individual public, private, and non-profit

agency plans, programs and projects for mutual benefit and optimal gain within the

Region.

3.4 To help identify, develop, and implement collaborative plans, programs, and

projects that may be beyond the scope or capability of individual entities, but which

would be of mutual benefit if implemented in a cooperative manner.

3.5 To facilitate regional water management efforts that include multiple water supply,

water quality, flood control, and environmental protection and enhancement

objectives.

3.6 To foster coordination, collaboration and communication between stakeholders and

other interested parties, to achieve greater efficiencies, enhance public services, and

build public support for vital projects.

3.7. To realize regional water management objectives at the least cost possible through

mutual cooperation, elimination of redundancy, and enhanced regional

competitiveness for State and Federal grant funding.

4. DEFINITIONS

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text



4.1 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP or IRWM Plan). The

plan envisioned by state legislators and state resource agencies that integrates the

strategies, objectives, and priorities for projects to manage water resources

proposed by public entities, non-profit entities, and stakeholders within a defined

Planning Region. The minimum plan standards are as shown in Appendix A of

“Integrated Regional Water Management Grant Program Guidelines, November

2004, Department of Water Resources and State Water Resources Control Board,

Proposition 50, Chapter 8,” as revised. Minimum IRWM Plan standards may be

revised from time to time by the State of California.

4.2 Integration. The combining of water management strategies and projects to be

included in an IRWMP.

4.3.a Lead Agency for IRWM Plan Development. The Monterey Peninsula Water

Management District is designated by the Regional Water Management Group to

lead the development or implementation of an Integrated Regional Water


4.3.b Lead Agency for IRWM Grant Applications. The Regional Water Management

Group may designate any entity in the Regional Water Management Group to be

the Lead Agency in making application to the State for grant funds.

4.4. Non-profit Agency. A 501 (c) (3) corporation, conservancy, group or other

organization involved in water resources management in the Region.

4.5 Private Agency. A private or publicly held for-profit corporation or property

owner involved in water resources management in the Region

4.6. Project. A specific project that addresses a service function.

4.7. Public Agency. A state-authorized water district, water agency, water management

agency or other public entity, be it a special district, city or other governmental

entity, responsible for providing one or more services in the areas of water supply,

water quality, wastewater, recycled water, water conservation, stormwater/flood

control, watershed planning and aquatic habitat protection and restoration.

4.8. Region. The area defined by the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG)

consisting of watersheds, sub-watersheds and groundwater basins under the

jurisdiction of one or more entities within the RWMG.

4.9. Service Function. A water-related individual service function provided by a

private, public, or non-profit entity, i.e. water supply, water quality, wastewater,

recycled water, water conservation, stormwater/flood protection, watershed

planning, recreational facilities, and habitat protection and restoration.

4.10 Signatory Entity. A public, private, or non-profit entity within the Region that is

signatory to this MOU.

4.11 Stakeholder. A non-signatory public, private, or non-profit agency identified in

the IRWM Plan with an interest in water resources management within the Region.

4.12 Technical Advisory Committee. The committee organized to advise the Regional

Water Management Group and Stakeholders concerning the IRWM Plan.

Normally, the group will be comprised of individuals with technical backgrounds in

the fields of marine and freshwater biology, ecology, geology, engineering,

hydrogeology, planning, resource conservation, riparian systems, water

conservation, and water quality. However, stakeholders with interests in a

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text



particular aspect of resource or project management, but not necessarily a technical

background, may also be considered for inclusion in the TAC.


overseeing the development and implementation of the Integrated Regional Water

Management Plan within the Planning Region. The RWMG consists of the

Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, the Monterey County Water


Monterey, the Marina Coast Water District, the Resource Conservation District of

Monterey County, and the Big Sur Land Trust.

4.14. Water Management Strategies. Plans for and activities to be considered in an

IRWMP include, but are not limited to, ecosystem restoration, environmental and

habitat protection and improvement, water-supply reliability, flood management,


management, water conservation, water quality improvement, water recycling, and

wetlands enhancement and creation.

5. IRWMP PARTICIPANTS

5.1 Adopting Entities. The entities in the Region that participate in the development,

adoption, and implementation of the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

for the Region. Each entity intending to carry out a project proposed in the IRWMP

must formally adopt the IRWMP or provide written substantiation of acceptance by

the governing authority of the entity. For a public agency, adoption of the IRWMP

is by formal resolution of the governing body. For a non-profit or for-profit entity,

proof of acceptance of the IRWMP by the equivalent of a public agency governing

body is required (e.g., by a board of directors or other management entity).

5.2. Stakeholders. Entities, such as other public, private, and non-profit entities,

business and environmental groups, that are considered valuable contributors to the

understanding and management of the Region’s water resources.

5.3. Regulatory Agencies. These agencies, including, but not limited to, the Central

Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Coastal Commission, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, California Public Utilities Commission, National Marine

Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the

California Department of Fish and Game, will be invited to participate in the

development and implementation of the IRWMP.


developing and implementing an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

within the Planning Region.

6. MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING

6.1. Subject matter scope of the IRWMP. The IRWMP for the Region will include,

but is not limited to, water supply, water quality, wastewater, recycled water, water

conservation, stormwater/flood control, watershed planning, erosion prevention,

and habitat protection and restoration. It is acknowledged that the proposals

contained in the IRWMP may be based, in part, on the land-use plans of the

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



member entities local governments such as Cities, Monterey County, and special

districts located within the Region. Therefore, the resultant IRWMP will by design

have incorporated the land-use plans and assumptions intrinsic to the respective

water-related service function.

6.2. Geographical scope of the IRWMP. The area for this Memorandum is generally

defined as the watersheds and associated groundwater basins contributing to the

south Monterey Bay and Carmel Bay as shown in Figure 3-1: Map of Monterey

Peninsula Integrated Regional Water Management Planning Region in the IRWM

Plan.

The Region includes coastal watersheds from the southernmost portion of the San

Jose Creek watershed north to the northern limit of the Seaside Groundwater Basin.

The inland area is bounded by the Seaside Groundwater Basin to the north and by

the Carmel River watershed to the south and east. The western limit of the planning

Region generally coincides with the land and Pacific Ocean interface, but includes

the Pt. Lobos, Carmel Bay, and Pacific Grove Areas of Special Biological

Significance (ASBS) adjacent to the coastal portion of the Region.

However, it is recognized that the geographic scope represented in the IRWM Plan

may be amended to include projects that are implemented cooperatively between

IRWM planning regions (e.g., with the Greater Monterey County IRWM planning

region) and is not intended to be a rigid boundary.

6.3. Approach to developing the IRWMP. It will be the responsibility of each entity

signatory to this Memorandum to provide the Lead Agency with information for the

IRWMP concerning project proposals or to identify the need for a water

management strategy for each service function provided by a signatory entity.

In order to be included in the IRWMP, all proposals for development of water

management plans and water development project proposals related to the IRWMP

must meet the standards identified in the IRWM Plan for the Region.

A technical advisory committee consisting of staff representatives from the

Regional Water Management Group, other Stakeholders and such other

organizations as may become contributing entities, will review proposed

management plans and project proposals for consistency with the IRWMP and

recommend a prioritized list of projects to be carried out within the Region. The

Regional Water Management Group and Stakeholders will meet to review the

recommendation made by the TAC.

6.4. Approval of prioritized project list. Approval of the prioritized project list should

occur by consensus of the Regional Water Management Group and Stakeholders

and should be based on the prioritization process described in the IRWMP and the

recommendations of the Technical Advisory Committee. However, if a consensus

cannot be reached among the Stakeholders and Regional Water Management

Group, the Regional Water Management Group may make a final determination of

the prioritized project list.

6.5. Adoption of the IRWMP. Plan adoption will occur by approval of the governing

board of each entity. Each member of the RWMG shall adopt the IRWM Plan or an

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text



amended IRWM Plan, when the Plan becomes available. Project proponents named

in an IRWM grant application shall adopt the IRWM Plan or amended IRWM Plan

prior to submittal of the grant application. It should be noted that the adopted Plan

and project list may be amended from time to time as described below.

6.6 Amendment of IRWMP or Prioritized Project list. The IRWM Plan and

prioritized project list may be amended from time to time. Any member of the

Regional Water Management Group or Stakeholders may request that the Lead

Agency convene a meeting of the Regional Water Management Group and

Stakeholders for the purposes of amending the IRWM Plan or the prioritized project

list. However, it is anticipated that the IRWMP or prioritized project list will be

amended no more frequently than annually, unless more frequent amendments are

required to meet State IRWM standards or grant application cycles. An amended

IRWM Plan must be consistent with State IRWM standards as described in

Definition 4.1 “Integrated Regional Water Management Plan” and any subsequent

revisions by the State to IRWM guidelines.

6.7. Project Implementation. Project proponents will be responsible for completing

proposed projects and providing project reports to the Lead Agency.

6.8 Project Monitoring. The Regional Water Management Group will be responsible

for monitoring the implementation of the IRWMP. The technical advisory

committee will regularly report to the General Managers and Governing Boards of

the Regional Water Management Group regarding progress on the development and

implementation of the IRWMP. The Lead Agency will be responsible for

coordinating data collection and dissemination.

6.9 Grant Applications. The Regional Water Management Group will designate a

Lead Agency to apply for grant funds. The Lead Agency for each grant application

should have a mission and expertise that is consistent with the purpose of the grant

being applied for.

6.10 Grant Awards and Agreement. The Lead Agency will be the grantee and

administer the grant on behalf of the Regional Water Management Group and

Stakeholders.

6.11 Participation in Regional Water Management Group (RWMG). Any qualified

stakeholder may petition to become a member of the RWMG. A qualified

stakeholder must demonstrate the following: a) an interest, responsibility or

authority over multiple resources within the region; or b) a unique interest,

responsibility, authority, or asset not shared by any other entity within the RWMG.

The RWMG shall consider such a request for a change to the RWMG and shall vote

by majority to accept or reject the request.

6.12 Length of Term in Regional Water Management Group. Members of the

RWMG may change from time to time, depending on the level of resources

available to each entity. However, there is no required minimum or maximum

length of time required as a member of the RWMG. If an entity withdraws from the

RWMG, the remaining entities should attempt to replace the interest, responsibility

or authority lost by the withdrawal.

6.13 Rights of the Parties and Constituencies: This MOU does not provide any added

legal rights or regulatory powers to any of the signatory parties, or to the RWMG as

a whole. This MOU does not of itself give any party the power to adjudicate water

rights, or to regulate or otherwise control the private property of other parties. This

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text




MOU does not contemplate the parties taking any action that would adversely affect

the rights of any of the parties, or that would adversely affect the customers or

constituencies of any of the parties.

6.14 Termination. An entity signatory to this MOU may withdraw from participation

upon 30 days advance notice to the other signatory entities, provided it agrees to be

financially responsible for any previously committed, but unmet resource

commitment.

6.15. Personnel resources. It is expected that the General Managers and/or other

officials of each entity signatory to this MOU will periodically meet to insure that

adequate staff resources are available to implement the IRWM Plan.

6.16. Other on-going regional efforts. Development of the IRWMP is separate from

efforts of other organizations to develop water-related plans on a regional basis

around Monterey Bay and the Central Coast. As the IRWMP is developed and

implemented, work products may be shared to provide other entities and groups

with current information.

7. INDEMNIFICATION

7.1 Each Party shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other parties, to the extent

allowed by law and in proportion to fault, against any and all third-party liability for

claims, demands, costs or judgments (direct, indirect, incidental or consequential)

involving bodily injury, personal injury, death, property damage or other costs and

expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses) arising or

resulting from the acts or omissions of its own officers, agents, employees or

representatives carried out pursuant to the obligations of this Agreement.

7.2 These indemnity provisions shall survive the termination or expiration of this

Agreement. Further, each Party will be liable to the other Party for attorneys’ fees,

costs and expenses, and all other costs and expenses whatsoever, which are incurred

by the other Party in enforcing these indemnity provisions.

8. RECORD OF AMENDMENTS

8.1 June 2010 – add Marina Coast Water District to RWMG. Revise Goals, Definitions

and MOU terms to reflect Proposition 84 requirements.

8.2 March 2012 – add process to change RWMG, define when plan is to be adopted,

revise to Proposition 84 standards

8.3 August 2012 – add Resource Conservation District of Monterey County to RWMG

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



9. SIGNATORIES TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

We, the duly authorized undersigned representatives of our respective entities, acknowledge the

above as our understanding of the intent and expected outcome in overseeing the development

and implementation of an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the Monterey

Peninsula, Carmel Bay, and South Monterey Bay Region.

____________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Monterey County Water Resources

Agency

____________________________________

Date

************************************

____________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Big Sur Land Trust

____________________________________

Date

************************************

____________________________________

Signature

_David J. Stoldt_____________________

Printed Name

Monterey Peninsula Water Management

District

__7/8/2013__________________________

Date

___________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Monterey Regional Water Pollution

Control Agency

___________________________________

Date

************************************

___________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

City of Monterey

____________________________________

Date

************************************

___________________________________

Signature

____________________________________

Printed Name

Marina Coast Water District

____________________________________

Date

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Page 1





AGENDA ITEM: 6 – A

AGENDA TITLE: RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE

Consent ( ) Action ( X ) Informational ( )


Phone: 372-3367 OR 422-1001


The General Manager and Legal Counsel met with the Recycled Water Committee on

Thursday, May 8, 2014, on the following agenda items:

PUBLIC COMMENTS

1. APPROVE APRIL 10, 2014 RWC MINUTES

2. UPDATE ON CPUC WATER PROCEEDINGS (A.12-04-019), MONTEREY

PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE

3. UPDATE ON THE GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT (GWR) PROJECT AND

URBAN RECLAMATION PROJECTS

4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SHORT-TERM, INTERRUPTIBLE SALINAS WASH

WATER FEE

5. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS/REPORTS

6. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Arbitration)

Pursuant to Government code 54956.9 (c)

1. Potential Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing Facts and Circumstances (Dispute Under Third Amendment of Agreement with MCWRA): One Case

7. POSSIBLE ACTION ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS


FUNDING SOURCE: N/A

BUDGET RECAP: N/A

Page 2





ALTERNATIVES: N/A

COMMITTEE REVIEW AND

ACTION: N/A

MANAGER

RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. May 8, 2014 Draft RWC Minutes

2. March 13, 2014 MPRWA Minutes

3. March 27, 2014 MPRWA Minutes

4. April 10, 2014 MPRWA Minutes

5. May 5, 2014 TAC agenda

6. May 8, 2014 MPRWA agenda

7. MRWPCA Proposed GWR Project Phasing

8. Independent Advisory Panel (IAP) Photos

9. RWC staff memo for the May 8, 2014 RWC Agenda Item 4: Consider Approval of Short-Term, Interruptible Salinas Wash Water Fee

RECOMMENDED MOTION: Receive and Approve Recycled Water Committee

recommendation(s), as follows:

That the Board approve an interim interruptible/impaired wastewater treatment rate of approximately $548 per million gallons for any further diversion of Salinas Ag wash water starting June 1, 2014 and ending on October 31, 2014, or when a new rate model is approved (subject to legal review) whichever is sooner.

Joint Powers Authority Member Entities: Boronda County Sanitation District, Castroville Community Services Water District, County of Monterey, Del Rey Oaks, Fort Ord, Marina Coast Water District, Monterey, Moss

Landing County Sanitation District, Pacific Grove, Salinas, Sand City, and Seaside.

C O M M I T T E E M I N U T E S / R E P O R T

RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE Thursday, May 8, 2014

3:00 pm to 4:55 pm

5 Harris Court, Building D Monterey, CA 93940

AGENDA:

PUBLIC COMMENTS (on matters not listed on the agenda):


2. UPDATE ON CPUC WATER PROCEEDINGS (A.12-04-019), MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

3. UPDATE ON THE GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT (GWR) PROJECT AND URBAN RECLAMATION PROJECTS

4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SHORT-TERM, INTERRUPTIBLE SALINAS WASH WATER FEE



A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Arbitration) (Pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.9 (c))

1. Potential Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing Facts and Circumstances (Dispute under Third Amendment on Agreement with MCWRA): One Case.


PRESENT: Recycled Water Committee:

Dennis Allion Ron Stefani Libby Downey Dave Pendergrass

Ralph Rubio

DRAFT

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Minutes/Report RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE DRAFT May 8, 2014 Page 2 of 7 ABSENT: None

PRESENT: MRWPCA Staff: Keith Israel General Manager

Rob Wellington Legal Counsel George Thacher Legal Counsel John Tiernan Director of Admin Services/Deputy GM Tom Buell Director of Finance Bob Holden Principal Engineer Chayito Ibarra Executive Assistant

OTHERS PRESENT: Gary Petersen – City of Salinas

Dave Chardavoyne – MCWRA

David Lifland – Public Member

Nancy Isakson – SVWC

PUBLIC COMMENTS: At 3:00 pm, Chair Allion called for Public Comments – none received.


Chair Allion stated that the April 10, 2014 draft RWC minutes are presented to the Committee for their approval.

ACTION TAKEN: On a motion by Mr. Pendergrass, seconded by Mr. Stefani, the Recycled Water Committee approved the April 10, 2014 RWC Minutes. [Abstain: Allion] 2. UPDATE ON CPUC WATER PROCEEDINGS (A.12-04-019), MONTEREY

PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Mr. Israel stated that copies of agendas for the MPRWA and TAC meetings were provided to the RWC. He added that the Authority continues to be interested in the status of the source water agreements.

Information only – no action needed. 3. UPDATE ON THE GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT (GWR) PROJECT AND

URBAN RECLAMATION PROJECTS A. Schedule – Mr. Holden provided a summary of the activities for the project team through April and May. He reported that the Independent Advisory Panel meeting

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Minutes/Report RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE DRAFT May 8, 2014 Page 3 of 7

on May 1 and 2 was very successful and that the comments from the expert panel regarding the GWR project were very encouraging and positive. He reported that a Concept Report has been submitted to the IAP and will soon be forwarded to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) for review and comment. He added that the CEQA process and pilot study work are continuing. Mr. Holden reported that in their general comments, the IAP emphasized the importance of securing water rights for the project. He added that according to Criterion #3, all source water agreements are projected to be in place by June 2014 and FEIR approval in November or December 2014. B. Independent Advisory Panel (IAP) – Mr. Holden reported in more detail on the second IAP that convened May 1 and 2, 2014. Representatives from the California Department of Public Health, Monterey County Environmental Health, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board attended and participated. He summarized the program for the two-day meeting and noted the four general comments provided by the Panel:

The Panel commends the project team for the significant amount of effort and progress that has been made in reaching the project goals.

The organization of the Panel meeting and field trip was both instructive and productive not only for the Panel members, but for others in attendance, including regulators.

The progress that the project team has made in their responsiveness to the previous Panel report is exemplary.

The Panel concurs with the project team on the importance of securing the water rights and associated contracts for the various source waters.

Chair Allion added that he met with the panel members on Thursday evening and heard very positive comments about the meeting. Mr. Israel added that the tour of the various source water sites was beneficial in helping everyone better understand the potential that is available especially because of the proximity of our facilities to the various water sources. C. Expenditures – Mr. Holden reported on the Urban Reclamation (UR) projects expenditures to date and stated that the projects are 83% complete on a time basis. Some discussion followed regarding reimbursement payments from MPWMD and Mr. Israel stated that in order to prevent having to sell investments, the payment will need to be available by the end of this month.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Public Comments:

David Lifland asked about the draft EIR, circuits that will be used, and the testing on chemicals that the CDPH will be evaluating. Mr. Holden responded that the Draft EIR will be out in August; there has been lots of testing through the pilot facility and that the results have been very favorable and in line with the requirements of the CDPH.


4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SHORT-TERM, INTERRUPTIBLE SALINAS WASH WATER FEE Legal Counsel Wellington advised the RWC that the draft proposed agreement with MCWRA and the City of Salinas included on the agenda will be addressed in Closed Session. Chair Allion clarified that the Committee could go forward with a discussion of the Interruptible/Impaired Salinas Wash Water Fee. Mr. Holden recounted the diversion of water from Lake El Estero and Salinas ag wash water into our system in February and noted that there was no Salinas storm water available at that time. He stated that the Board approved an additional two-month diversion of Salinas ag wash water that will conclude on May 31, 2014. He added that MCWRA and various growers had verbally indicated that they would like the ag wash water diversion to continue after the end of May. Due to the current drought, and in anticipation of an official request for the ag wash water for the CSIP system, staff determined the cost for an interruptible/impaired water source and prepared the agenda item. MCWRA’s request, in the form of the agreement which should not have been included in the agenda, was received after the agenda posting. Mr. Holden provided a handout to the RWC Members illustrating the full cost of treating domestic waste water versus the proposed cost for interruptible/impaired water treatment and for capacity (connection) fees. He stated that capacity fees were excluded during the testing period because the source waters would only be accepted into existing facilities for a short period of time and only if surplus capacity existed. The Agency would also have the ability to decline flows when they exceeded our capabilities. Mr. Holden explained that since February the user fee calculation for taking these special water sources has now been refined to include expenses: power to pump the water to the RTP and to handle the different processes within the RTP, repairs (materials and labor which would be expected to increase with additional flows), labor costs to monitor flows and alarms from new water sources, and overhead for associated expenses. He stated that the cost determined by this fee calculation

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text


would be closer to $180 AF. This rate is proposed as a temporary rate until the attorneys, accountants and auditors review and concur that it is an appropriate rate for long term interruptible/impaired water supply service. Mr. Israel stated that staff will bring a study to the RWC and Board next month that will confirm that there is capacity for these flows and still enough capacity to allow full build out for our communities. He confirmed that plant capacity is 29.6 MGD and current usage is at 17 MGD. Mr. Wellington stated there is this technical level that must be met and also some legal issues that apply: 1) all users need to be treated equally in terms of services they are receiving and paying for; 2) if service is truly interruptible/impaired is there a valid reason for no capacity charge (this has to be determined based on logic and technical reasons); 3) any costs associated with a project cannot be charged to our sewer user rates. He indicated that it may take up to six weeks to work out these issues. Mr. Holden stated there should be a long term interruptible/impaired water rate established but probably no sooner than October 31. Chair Allion added that because the Board is currently considering a small increase to our user fees, it is important to clarify that user fees are not used to subsidize any other project that does not benefit our sewer rate payers. Discussion followed regarding the treatment of the ag wash water and the differentiation from sewage water which must be taken into the system; about the concept of “interruptible/impaired” and the impression that the MCWRA and growers are considering this water to be an ongoing need; and the possibility to qualify this water as a special class. Public Comments: David Lifland asked about the type of treatment the ag wash water would receive, and Mr. Buell responded that it would be processed with all domestic waste through the secondary treatment process. He also asked if Salinas would be paying for the costs, and Mr. Wellington stated that this question is subject to current negotiations. Mr. David Chardavoyne, General Manager for MCWRA, asked about the new calculation and formula that results in a higher per AF cost. He stated that WRA and grower support resulted from the incremental cost that was publicized as $120 AF, but now will be asked to pay 50% more after June 1. He also noted that the Monterey County Auditor Controller would likely not approve a blanket indirect overhead charge. He stated that the growers spent $70M for facilities that were supposed to supply 19,500 AF – they have not gotten that, but adding this water will help get there. He recommended that the RWC not give a recommendation to the Board at this time.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Mr. Gary Petersen, Director of Public Works for City of Salinas, stated that Salinas is interested in the interruptible rate and fully understands that the $120 agreed to during the testing period did not cover the full cost of processing the water. The City acknowledges that they are not currently being good stewards of this water by letting it evaporate into the air or percolate. Mr. Petersen stated that within a year the City would like to see this water recycled to help prevent seawater intrusion. He added that 60% of flows to the RTP come from Salinas and that the peak flow could have been as high as 16,000 AF; it has never been 19,500 AF. The agreement stating that the growers should get 19,500 AF was crafted in 1992 – he suggested that perhaps this should be looked at again – people are fighting for water that never existed. He added that this additional water from the industrial ponds could help fill the gap and this gap has a monetary value. Mr. Rubio stated that there has been a lot of discussion on the rate and added it will be based on whatever the current rate is allowing staff to have several weeks to refine the language. He also stated that the tertiary plant was built in cooperation with others – by itself it does not work. Everyone agreed to send water to the regional plant. No one owns the whole portion of that – cooperation got it built and cooperation got that water to the CSIP. He stated that it will take more cooperation to expand it for the good of everyone. Ms. Downey added that the Agency land was provided for the tertiary facility. Staff indicated that they would provide additional clarification/refinement prior to Board consideration on May 22.

ACTION TAKEN: On a motion by Mr. Rubio, seconded by Ms. Downey, the RWC recommends that the full Board approve an interim interruptible/impaired wastewater treatment rate of approximately $548 per million gallons for any further diversion of Salinas Ag wash water starting June 1, 2014 and ending on October 31, 2014, or when a new rate model is approved (subject to legal review) whichever is sooner.


No comments or reports.

[Chair Allion adjourned Open Session at 4:09 pm and commenced Closed Session. 6. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Arbitration) Pursuant to Govt. Code §54956.9 (c)

Chayito

Typewritten Text



1. Potential Initiation of Litigation (Arbitration) Based on Existing Facts and Circumstances (Dispute under Third Amendment on Agreement with MCWRA): One Case

[Chair Allion adjourned Closed Session at 4:54 pm, and reconvened Open Session.] 7. POSSIBLE ACTION ON CLOSED SESSION ITMES

Legal Counsel reported that the RWC received information, no reportable action was taken.

At 4:55 pm, with no further business, Chair Allion adjourned the Recycled Water Committee meeting to the next regularly scheduled Recycled Water Committee meeting on June 19, 2014 at 3:00 pm. U:\BETTY\BOARD COMMITTEES\RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE\2014\May\RWC draft minutes May 8.doc

Chayito

Typewritten Text


MINUTES MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)

Regular Meeting 7:00 PM, Thursday, March 13, 2014

COUNCIL CHAMBER 580 PACIFIC STREET

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Directors Present: Burnett, Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Della Sala, Rubio

Directors Absent: None Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Authority Clerk ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE REPORTS FROM BOARD DIRECTORS AND STAFF There were no reports from Directors. Executive Director Cullem reported on changes to the printed packet materials and questioned direction on how to proceed with Cal Am’s request to reduce Surcharge 1 from 15% to 4.5% and extend the period of time it was charged. The Directors requested he handle it administratively.

PUBLIC COMMENTS President Della Sala invited public comment for items not on the agenda.

• Tom Rowley spoke to the Government Affairs Committee meeting where Nichole Charles reported regarding SB 936. He requested re-ordering the agenda to take up Agenda Item 8 first.

• Doug Wilhelm questioned the proposed reduced surcharge asking if it would increase the total amount of money over the course of the loan. Executive Director Cullem responded that it would not.

• George Breammer advocated strongly for residents to take care of themselves and encouraged individuals to obtain personal rain water and grey water catchment, and other self sustaining water supply systems.

• Darby Mossworth spoke concerning future legislation that would allow unlimited amounts of money to be contributed to elections.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES On a motion by Director Pendergrass, seconded by Director Edelen, and carried by the following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved the minutes for both January 30, 2014 and February 13, 2014.

AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Burnett, Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della Sala

NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

MPRWA Minutes Thursday, March 13, 2014

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority Regular Meeting Minutes - Thursday, March 13, 2014

2

ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None RECUSED: 0 DIRECTORS: None

1. January 30, 2014 Special Meeting Action: Approved

2. February 13 2014 Action: Approved AGENDA ITEMS

3. Approve and File Checks for the Period of February 2014. Action: Approved Authority Clerk Milton reported regarding checks processed during February 2014. Under public comment David Lifland requested an update regarding reimbursement from the County of Monterey and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, both which are still pending.

On a motion by Director Rubio, seconded by Director Kampe, and carried by the following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved to file the checks for the month of February 2014


NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None RECUSED: 0 DIRECTORS: None

4. Authorize Staff to Send Letter Nominating the Salinas and Carmel River Basins Study for Funding Under the Bureau of Reclamation's FY14 Basin Study Program Dave Stoldt, General Manager of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District spoke to the item which would focus on assessing long term climate change on the local water supply from the Salinas and Carmel river basins. Mr. Stolt requested a letter of support nominating this study to the Bureau of Reclamation to accompany the application put forth by MRWPCA and MRWMD. In closing, he informed the Directors he would not stay for Agenda Item 8 to maintain the neutrality of the MPWMD. President Della Sala invited public comment on the item and had no requests to speak. On a motion by Vice President Burnett, seconded by Director Rubio, and carried by the following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority authorized staff to send a letter nominating the Salinas and Carmel River Basins study for funding under the Bureau of Reclamations’ FY 14 Basin Study Program.



Chayito

Typewritten Text




3

5. Adopt Resolution Approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP (Brownstein) as Special

Counsel for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, Authorize the Executive Director to sign a Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest, and Authorize the President to execute the agreement for legal services. Executive Director Cullem spoke to the item regarding extending the legal services contract through December 31, 2014 and authorize changing the firm from being the Authority’s Attorney of Record to being Special Legal Council.

President Della Sala invited public comment on the item. Salfwat Malek questioned the total cost of the contract. Mr. Cullem indicated the budgeted amount is not to exceed $194,000 for 2014.

Mayor Rubio questioned if there was any ability to align the contract with the fiscal year. Mr. Cullem spoke to the administrative effort required to process, renew and track all contracts at one time. Director Kampe spoke to the substantial costs for the legal services but defended the costs by saying that these are substantial projects which require a large level of collaboration, cooperation and perseverance and that this is a very modest budge considering the total cost of the project. The Directors spoke in support Mr. McGlothlin's efforts and experience noting that although expensive, his efforts saved rate payers over 120 million dollars between the Settlement Agreements and through Governance Committee structure and participation of the RFQ and RFP process. On a motion by Director Edelen and seconded by Director Rubio, and carried by the following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved the staff recommendation and adopted Resolution 14-02 Approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP (Brownstein) as Special Counsel for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, authorized the Executive Director to sign a Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest, and authorized the President to execute the agreement for legal services.



6. Authorize Extension of Contract with the City of Monterey For Executive Director Services

On a motion by Director Rubio and seconded by Director Edelen, and carried by the following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority authorized extending the contract with the City of Monterey for Executive Director services.


NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None

Authority Clerk Milton reported on the item requesting the Authority to authorize extension of the contract for Executive Director services with the City of Monterey. President Della Sala recused himself as mayor of the City of Monterey, the contracting agency. Vice President Burnett invited public comment on the item and had no requests to speak. The Directors spoke to the outstanding job Mr. Cullem has been doing.

Chayito

Typewritten Text




4

ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None RECUSED: 0 DIRECTORS: None

7. Adopt Financial Policies and Procedures

On a motion by Director Edelen and seconded by Director Kampe, and carried by the following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority adopted the presented Financial Policies and Procedures as amended.



8. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Issues, Implications of Commissioning a Study Regarding a Public Take Over of Cal Am. Executive Director Cullem provided a report regarding the February 3, 2014. the Water Authority TAC meeting which discussed the issues and implications of commissioning a study regarding a public acquisition of Cal Am and recommended that the Authority first consider if the issue was appropriate for consideration and authority under the formation agreement, and second, how the action may be interpreted by state agencies, as well as any impact on future bond funding. Mr. Cullem outlined the following four options for consideration should the Water Authority decide to consider conducting a study of an acquisition of Cal-Am:

1. Commission a study of a public takeover of Cal-Am with the intent to provide information prior to a vote by the public.

2. Commission a study of a public takeover of Cal-Am with the intent to provide a Water Authority recommendation prior to a vote by the public.

3. Defer consideration of study until some undetermined time after a vote by the public. 4. Determine that commissioning a study of the subject is outside the purpose of the Water

Authority. President Della Sala invited public comments on the item.

Executive Director Cullem provided the report and recommended adopting a policy that more clearly outlines the procedures and operations with regard to financial operations for the Authority. Director Kampe requested adding language to the whistle blower policy to report to the President and/or Vice President any concerns.

Chayito

Typewritten Text




5

• Tom Rowley, Nelson Vega, John Narigi and Rick Heuer said the public needs correct

facts regarding the impacts if the ballot measure passes and spoke in support of the study.

• Safwat Malek and Mike Baer spoke in support of publicly owned water utilities in the county and expressed concern regarding costs and the PUC.

• Phil Wellman, Darby Mossworth, a citizen, Sal Cardinale, Melanie Krislock, Charlie Check, Alan Ebels, Andrew Bell, Doug Whilhelm, John Hall, Dan Turner, George Brehmer, Jay Rowland and Jessie Williams requested the Directors to support Public Water Now and spoke against Cal Am.

• Dan Presser suggested having a public forum as a way to inform voters of Measure O.

• Kevin Tilden from Cal Am spoke to the comments regarding water spikes and requested anyone who experiences a spike should contact customer service who will help recognize the leak and fix it. If it is identified and fixed they are not penalized. He indicated that all political advertisements paid for by cal am are clearly labeled and most are not done at rate payer or customer expense. He urged an impartial, factual analysis and spoke in support of the study.

• George Riley expressed disappointment regarding the TAC discussion of this item and did not think that the staff report was objective or includes all the information available. He spoke in support of Public Water Now and publicly owned water.

• David Lifland Spoke in support of public water but indicated that the community should focus their efforts on obtaining a water source first.

• Ron Cohen Managing Director of Public Water Now spoke against the study indicating the amount of money projected would only politicize the issue but not analyze it.

Public Comment was closed.

Director Edelen spoke to the Cease and Desist Order imposed and the requirement to find a new water source and spoke to the challenges that the desal project is up against. He spoke in support of the study, as an independent analysis from to provide factual information back to the Board and the public.

Director Rubio spoke to the purpose of the Authority and to the need for non-biased, factual information to help the voters understand the impacts of the Measure. Director Burnett spoke to the TAC discussion on the item reiterating it was a regular, publicly noticed meeting with an agenda distributed prior to the meeting and there was minimal public participation. He spoke against comments that there was not an opportunities for proper or equal debate. He spoke to the community debating water for generations and the Authority is moving toward a decision. The TAC recommendation was for the Board to conduct an analysis which focuses on the purpose of the Authority as written in the mission statement and listed the reasons that this project falls within the scope of the authority.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text



6

Director Kampe questioned the election dates and the ability to complete the project prior to the election and then spoke to public sentiment of priorities presented 1.5 years ago within his jurisdiction with the priority being sufficient water supply. He spoke in support of low cost water, but noted it was more important is having sufficient water first. He lastly indicated that no matter how objective the report is, it will always be viewed as partisan and also did not think that it would be a wise use of money for timing purposes.

Director Pendergrass spoke against a study that the results will be taken as the Authority position and will perpetuate skepticism. He spoke to the history of the failed desal project which caused the formation of this group to provide governance of the public site. He reminded the public of the concession by Cal Am to allow public oversight.

Vice President Burnett indicated we are operating in the realities of a water-constrained environment faced with a regulatory guideline in the way the CDO was intended. This is not a question of if we like or don't like Cal Am, it is about what will deliver a water supply solution to have sufficient water, cost effectively with appropriate governance. He expressed fear that the single greatest risk is losing the consensus that the community has built in the last two years. This issue has the potential to be divisive enough to leave us in a position not to be able to petition for a relaxation of the CDO because no project will be complete by January 1, 2016 and the ramifications are severe because there will be no water supply, regardless of ownership.

Vice President Burnett then outlined the accomplishments of the Authority over the last two years of its existence including the tenants of the Authority Governance committee and the benefits it provides, the profit cuts achieved through the public financing work saving the rate payers over 20 million dollars and then he spoke to the hurdles yet to come.

The Directors discussed their authority and weather the public would be better served by the Authority taking a position or if the public would be better served by laying out impartial, factual information. The Directors spoke against the study due to timing, unknown true cost charged back to the member jurisdictions and many will not change their minds based on the report and suggested taking a position as peninsula mayors.

On Motion by Director______ and seconded by Director Pendergrass and passed by the following vote the Authority directed staff to write up and bring back for approval a document which outlines the Authority position opposing ballot Measure O, described this evening, and verify the legal ability to take such a position.


NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None RECUSED: 0 DIRECTORS: None President Della Sala adjourned the meeting to recess at 10:09 p.m.

9. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Recommendation on the Status of Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project

Chayito

Typewritten Text




7

The meeting reconvened at 10:14 p.m. Executive Director Cullem provided an update on the status of the borehole construction project noting the second bore hole drilling was about to begin and the results of the water analysis will be released once certified. He then spoke to the power purchase agreement status and indicated the report regarding the capital costs of the engineering solution will be published by the end of march. He further reported on the slippage being reflected in the CPUC schedule reflected as a total 6-month delay being imposed by the CPUC.

The Directors discussed the timeline and indicated that the City of Marina’s ultimate approval sped up the process by months and should be recognized and that the schedule as presented is doable unless something else delays the project. President Della Sala invited public comment on the item.

• Tom Rowley expressed concern regarding lack of data in the draft EIR from the test

slant wells indicating since it is new technology it will be challenging and will invite criticism. Suggested having the TAC review.

• David Lifland requested getting Point Blue to sign off on a well, requested an update on the remaining reports due to the City of Marina and asked if the Authority should or could intervene.

Ian Crooks, Engineering Manager for Cal Am spoke to the issue of getting viable slant well technology and reported that nearly all reports due to the City of Marina have been completed and the consultant will have a draft MDNA ready in April for public review. Chair Burnett indicated that if there is any desire by the Board for additional review or analysis of the Draft EIR, or the issue of brine disposal it should be agendized in the near future.

ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m. ATTEST: Lesley Milton, Authority Clerk Chuck Dells Sala, President

Chayito

Typewritten Text



Regular Meeting 7:00 PM, Thursday, March 27, 2014

SEASIDE CITY HALL 440 HARCOURT AVE SEASIDE, CA 93955

Directors Present: Burnett, Edelen, Pendergrass Rubio, Della Sala

Directors Absent: Kamp Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Authority Clerk ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE REPORTS FROM BOARD DIRECTORS AND STAFF Vice President Burnett announced that the Governance Committee meeting on Monday, March 31, 2014 will begin the value engineering process for the design-build contract of the desalination facility. The Committee will also receive a project update and alternative intake strategies. Mr. Burnett further reported that SB 936 was introduced by Assemblymember Bill Monning and that Dave Stoldt and Mr. Burnett will be testifying in support of the legislation. Executive Director Cullem received notice from County Administrator Office that they are pursuing approval and payment for their fair share contribution for FY 2012-13 which would offset any additional funding needed for the current fiscal year, noting that the County is represented on the Governance Committee, representing the rate payers of unincorporated Monterey County. PUBLIC COMMENTS

• David Lifland expressed concern regarding the lack of storage during dry seasons and suggested consideration of building additional reservoirs to hold the storm flows.

• Dan Turner spoke to the relative costs of pubic and private water. Questioned Director Edelen’s comment previously made regarding a study of public vs private water. He spoke against the credibility of the organization and the complicated nature of the findings.

• Lee Willaby Pacific Grove resident spoke in support of Public Water Now. • Tina Holsten expressed concern regarding Cal Am taking advantage of the water politics

on the peninsula and expressed concerned that if the public wants to buy out Cal Am it would be more expensive in the future.

• Mr. Cardinale questioned the financing of the desal facility and how the bonds would be paid to which Vice President Burnett spoke to how utilities are regulated in the State of California.

AGENDA ITEMS

1. Consider Taking A Position on Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Measure "O" (Discussion/Action)

Chayito

Typewritten Text




2

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the item, recapping the previous meeting where this item was discussed and outlined the changes proposed to the draft resolution included in the packet. President Della Sala invited public comment for the item.

• Tom Rowley, Rick Heuer, Linda Doras, Dean Province and Lawson Little spoke in support of adopting the proposed resolution taking a position against Measure O.

• David Lifland expressed concern regarding unintended consequences for the efforts of Public Water Now.

• Dale Heikhaus, Safwat Malek, Lee Willaby and Ron Nelson requested that the Authority not take a position on the measure.

• Renee Boscoff, Nelson Vegas, Sam Teel, Chair of Monterey County Hospitality association, Kevin Stone Monterey County Association of Realtors, Mike Zimmerman, Coalition of Peninsula Businesses, Jody Hansen President of Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Rick Aldinger and Maria Buell spoke in support of taking a position against Measure O citing the focus should be to obtain a sustainable water supply and public vs. private water can be debated after. Residents and businesses need water to survive.

• Alvin Edwards, Seaside Council Member requested this decision be taken to each Member’s City Councils before a decision is made.

• Tina Holsten, Michael Baer, David Rodder, Suzie Yapley and Dianne Cotton spoke in support of measure O and against Cal Am.

• Malone Hodges spoke to the confusion of the water issue and how there are so many agencies being so opposed. He thanked the Directors for the leadership by the Authority.

• Mike Bekker spoke as Chair of Pacific Grove Chamber of Commerce and requested supporting Measure O. Speaking as a resident; he spoke to disinformation being spread around regarding the ballot measure and is confusing voters.

• George Riley spoke representing Public Water Now expressed disappointment that the Authority did not request or allow Public Water Now to make a presentation on Measure O and spoke with frustration to the limitation to 3 minutes. He reported on calling the State Water Resources Control Board who said that passage of Measure O will not impact the CDO.

• Paul Bruno spoke with disagreement to Mr. Riley in that the passage of the measure will impact the community with negative consequences and is a risk we cannot afford.

• Scott Dick spoke to research conducted which provides solid, substantiated evidence of other cities that facilitate public water, all being more expensive. He spoke to the study done by Food and Water Watch which provided information that is being misinterpreted by PWN for their benefit. He requested that the Authority oppose Measure O because it will not produce cheaper water as advertised.

Having no further requests to speak, Public Comment was closed. Mayor Edelen expressed disappointment that a large number of audience members left the meeting after public comment before there was even a response given or a dialogue facilitated. He spoke to the focus of the Board to provide a sustainable water supply and anything that distracts from that is an issue, which Measure O would. He spoke concerning the projected disastrous impacts to the Monterey Peninsula if the CDO was enforced. Mayor Rubio spoke to his comments made during the last meeting and indicated he did not hear any facts that were data driven, which changed his position on this issue. He believes

Chayito

Typewritten Text




3

that this action is consistent with the purpose of the Authority. Director Kampe spoke to the responsibility as Mayors to ensure a water supply to support the infrastructure of the community and assured the public that they are not immune from the consequence as residents, if the community is forced to ration water. He spoke in support of the resolution. Director Pendergrass indicated that his position had not changed from the last meeting and that Measure O will prohibit finding a water supply. Vice President Burnett expressed concerned with the level of the misinformation being distributed and spoke to the need to work collaboratively as a community to obtain a water supply before the water cliff. He spoke to efforts the Mayors have been involved with to make that happen, and that taking a position is not politically advantageous, but that he thinks it is the right thing to do in this community. President Della Sala thanked the community for their passion and their comments and the Authority members for their courage. He cited this as politically risky position but is being taken to obtain a water supply for the current citizens as well future generations. He felt that Mayors are elected to make decisions in the best interest and for the betterment of their communities. The Directors discussed suggested resolution changes speaking to potential impacts of base closures and that language should be added to say securing a water supply will help to retain the military establishments here on the Monterey Peninsula, and the next round of BRAC will align with the timing of the proposed completion of our water supply projects. On motion by Director Rubio and seconded by Director Edelen and passed by the following vote the Authority approved Resolution no. 14-02, as amended, in its entirety expressing opposition to Measure O.



ADJOURNMENT Having no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 7:33 p.m. ATTEST: Lesley Milton, Authority Clerk Chuck Della Sala, President

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Regular Meeting 7:00 PM, Thursday, April 10, 2014

580 PACIFIC STREET MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Directors Present: Burnett, Edelen, Alt. Lucius, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della Sala

Directors Absent: None Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk ROLL CALL President Della Sala called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Alternate Director Casey Lucius was present representing the City of Pacific Grove.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE REPORTS FROM BOARD DIRECTORS AND STAFF No reports from Directors or staff.

PUBLIC COMMENTS President Della Sala invited public comments for items not on the agenda.

Tom Rowley spoke representing the Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers Association regarding Monterey Peninsula Water Management District use of Ordinance 152 funds, and is awaiting a decision by the judge regarding a submitted referendum. He thanked the Directors for not approving a study and for not supporting Measure O. Nelson Vega requested an update of the projects that make up the portfolio and spoke to the potential to size the desalination facility at over 12,000 acre/foot. David Lifland spoke to the proposed plan that the Seaside Basin would be a mixture of water from all three water projects, but questioned the intentions to price that water.

AGENDA ITEMS

1. Receive, Discuss, Revise, and Approve the Request for Proposal (RFP) and Scope of Work for a Value Engineering (VE) Study of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) Executive Director Cullem indicated that the Governance Committee voted for selecting and contracting directly with the Value Engineering firm for the design build contract to ensure public oversight and transparency. The purpose of the VE would be to look for fatal flaws and identification of efficiencies and reduced costs through design improvements and is most effectively done at 30% design build. The estimated costs is not to exceed $200,000 with all costs reimbursable by Cal Am. The Authority would solicit and acquire the value engineer, but the Governance Committee will select the firm. Vice President Burnett indicated the TAC

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

MPRWA Minutes Thursday, April 10, 2014

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority Regular Meeting Minutes - Thursday, April 10, 2014

2

reviewed and recommended the attached RFP, contract and scope of work for the RFP.

Director Rubio requested that the Authority incur any undue liability from the contract. President Della Sala invited public comment.

Nelson Vega questioned the assurance of this project and if the timing was premature expressing concern regarding stranded costs. David Lifland questioned if there was a performance clause. Tom Rowley spoke to Director Rubio's concern regarding liability and in support of advice from the Legal Counsel Freeman.

Director Burnett spoke to the schedule and the process by which Cal Am would or would not incorporate suggestions from the VE. Legal Counsel Freeman indicated that because we are involved in the PUC process we have to maintain the adopted schedule. The performance clause must be handled between Cal Am and the VE firm. Mr. Freeman further clarified the common local government practice for City projects to require the project to fund an EIR but the City would contract for the services, to ensure the extra layer of transparency and public oversight and control.

On a motion by Director Lucius and seconded by Director Edelen and carried by the following vote, the Authority approved authorizing the Executive Director to advertise the Request for Proposal (RFP) and Scope of Work for a Value Engineering (VE) Study of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP), if approved by the Governance Committee:

AYES: 6 DIRECTORS: Burnett, Edelen, Alt. Lucius, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della Sala


2. Receive Update, Discuss and Provide Recommendation on Update to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority Work Plan Executive Director Cullem spoke to the status of the items approved in the previously adopted work plan. He requested direction for additions to the work plan.

He noted that Monterey Peninsula Water Pollution Control Agency General Manager Israel requested to make a full presentation to the public regarding the Ground Water Replenishment "Pure Water Monterey" project to provide an update regarding the status of the project, the status of the water negotiations, the status of the settlement agreement meetings to bring the Authority and the public up to date. The Directors agreed to agendize a presentation by the MRWPCA. Executive Director Cullem encouraged the public to attend educational tours of the GWR testing facility.

Chayito

Typewritten Text




3

Director Burnett requested direction on when the Authority would like to proceed to request an official extension of the Cease and Desist Order (CDO) from the State Water Resources Control Board and suggested timing for a petition be submitted in 2014.

Director Rubio spoke to the definition of when the projects can be considered viable. Director Edelen indicated it must be after the election deciding Measure O.

With regard to the required permits, the City of Marina requested more effort to keep the staff and the City more informed regarding the project. The directors discussed the permitting schedule that the level of involvement and requested to remain informed of the timelines and participate when necessary.

President Della Sala invited public comment.

Tom Rowley spoke to the CDO extension request timing and things that need to be done prior to the request, including more participation from the County of Monterey. Nelson Vega requested that the Authority not lose sight of the cost per acre foot of water and spoke to the impacts of uncertainty of water is going to have with regard to economic development. Source water is the issue and cost per acre foot is paramount to a viable project. Citizens are not serviced by water too expensive to drink. David Lifland spoke in support of having a successful test well prior to the petition and questioned the hydrogeological report results.

Alternate Director Lucius requested adding to the strategy of the CDO that if this body is not necessarily submitting a request for the extension, but a statement of support, a coordinated strategy is important to demonstrate process and impact, including all of the agencies and associations voices into these different statements of support could be more powerful one representative to pleased. Its not just the request, but the impact of statement of support. The Directors agreed and requested that the Authority continue to pursue the work plan as written with the above additional directions

3. Approve Mid-Year FY 2013-2014 Amended Budget and Approve the FY 2014-2015 Budget

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the item outlining the previously adopted budget for the 2013-14 fiscal year, which accounted for a carry over balance that was never realized due to the increase of legal services expenses. He indicated that the Authority would not be required to request additional contributions from member cities if funds outstanding from Monterey County are approved. He called attention to the contract assistance line item for value engineering services approved as fully reimbursable earlier in the meeting indicating that the contract will not be issued until the fund have been received for reimbursement.

Mr. Cullem then outlined the anticipated expenditures for Fiscal year 2014-15 and noted that the funds were from Monterey County have not been factored into this budget yet as it is not guaranteed however if the county agrees to the fair share contribution, the budget would be amended.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text



4

President Della Sala invited public comment

Neslon vega indicated that the Authority should include more funding for public outreach to promote the benefits and accomplishments of the agency. The public needs to understand what would happen if the Authority was not created. Tom Rowley suggested re-extending the request to the County to participate in this agency. He also spoke in support of Mr. Vega's comments regarding the Authority efforts to date.

On motion by Director Pendergrass and seconded by Director Rubio and passed by the following vote the Authority approved the staff recommendation for amending the FY 13-14 budget and approving the proposed FY 14-15 operating budget as presented.

AYES: 6 DIRECTORS: Burnett, Edelen, Alt. Lucius, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della Sala

NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None RECUSED: 0 DIRECTORS: None ADJOURNMENT Having no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 8:31 p.m.

ATTEST: Lesley Milton, Authority Clerk Chuck Della Sala, President

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Agenda Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Regular Meeting

10:30 AM, Monday, May 5, 2014

Council Chamber 580 Pacific Street

Monterey, California

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS

PUBLIC COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on any subject which is within the jurisdiction of the MPRWA TAC and which is not on the agenda. Any person or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the Committee may do so by addressing the Committee during Public Comments or by addressing a letter of explanation to: MPRWA TAC, Attn: Monterey City Clerk, 580 Pacific St, Monterey, CA 93940. The appropriate staff person will contact the sender concerning the details.

AGENDA ITEMS

1. Receive Report on RFP Process for the Value Engineering (VE) Study of the Monterey

Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) and Approve Selection of Rick Riedl as TAC Representative on the VE Review Committee - Cullem.

2. Receive Report on the Test Slant Well Permits and Construction - Cal Am

3. Receive Report on Negotiations for GWR Source and Product Water - Isreal

4. Receive Report on Cost Comparison Study of GWR vs DESAL - Stoldt

ADJOURNMENT

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. For disabled access, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to staff at the Monterey City Clerk’s Office, the Principal Office of the Authority. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a meeting, dial 711 to use CRS to talk to staff at the Monterey City Clerk’s Office at (831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a device or for information on an agenda. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the MPRWA are available for public inspection during the meeting or may be requested from the Monterey City Clerk’s Office at 580 Pacific St, Room 6, Monterey, CA 93940. This agenda is posted in compliance with California Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Agenda Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Regular Meeting

7:00 PM, Thursday, May 8, 2014 Council Chamber 580 Pacific Street


ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORTS FROM BOARD DIRECTORS AND STAFF

PUBLIC COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on any subject which is within the jurisdiction of the MPRWA and which is not on the agenda. Any person or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the Authority may do so by addressing the Authority during Public Comments or by addressing a letter of explanation to: MPRWA, Attn: Monterey City Clerk, 580 Pacific St, Monterey, CA 93940. The appropriate staff person will contact the sender concerning the details.

CONSENT ITEMS

1. Minutes from March 13, 2014 Regular Meeting - Milton

2. Minutes from March 27, 2014 Regular Meeting - Milton

3. Minutes from April 10, 2014 Regular Meeting - Milton

4. Approve and File Checks through May 8, 2014 - Milton

5. Adopt Resolution Accepting the Amended Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and Adopting the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Operating Budget - Cullem

AGENDA ITEMS

6. Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction on Public Outreach - Beleny

7. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction on Presentation from the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Regarding the Deep Water Desal Project - Stoldt

8. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Presentation from Monterey

Regional Water Pollution Control Agency Regarding Negotiations for Source and Product Water for the Ground Water Replenishment Project - Israel

9. Receive Report, Discuss and Approve Adopting a Resolution Amending the Governance

Committee Agreement to Authorize the Governance Committee and Water Authority to Advertise and Award The Value Engineering Contract - Cullem

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Thursday, May 8, 2014

2

10. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Commissioner Michael R. Peevey and ALJ Gary Weatherford's Ruling Requesting Comments on Surcharge Options and Proposals - Cullem

ADJOURNMENT

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. For disabled access, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to staff at the Monterey City Clerk’s Office, the Principal Office of the Authority. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a meeting, dial 711 to use CRS to talk to staff at the Monterey City Clerk’s Office at (831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a device or for information on an agenda. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the MPRWA are available for public inspection during the meeting or may be requested from the Monterey City Clerk’s Office at 580 Pacific St, Room 6, Monterey, CA 93940. This agenda is posted in compliance with California Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


MRWPCA Proposed Groundwater Replenishment Project Phasing

F/F CEQA Technical

2015 2014 2013 2016

F/F CEQA Technical

REGULATORY PERMITTING &

ENGINEERING REPORT

REGULATORY PERMITTING CDPH/SWRCB

Construction

REGULATORY PERMITTING CDPH/SWRCB

Updated 5/7/14

PILOT PLANT & WELL TESTING

EIR Scoping: Project

Understanding, Notice of

Preparation, and

Public Meeting

Admin Draft Facility Plan

Final Facilities Plan Report

Start Up

CPUC Hearings & Workshops

Dec. 2016

Water Quality Sampling & Shunt Tests

Public Review of Draft EIR

Respond to Comments

Source Water Rights & Purchase

Agreement

Final EIR

Certify EIR and Approve GWR

Facility Design

Mobilization & Site Retrofits

IAP Meetings

SRF & Title XVI

Funding

Coordination

Internal Draft Facilities Plan & Feasibility Study

Reports

Technical

Reports for

Admin Draft

EIR

Facility Testing

Dec. 2014

Pilot Test Start & Monitoring

Well Install

Outreach

Meetings

Internal Draft Facilities Plan &

Technical Reports and Admin Draft

EIR Preparation

2nd Admin/ Screen-

check Draft EIR Prep

Product Water Conveyance,

Injection Well Easements and

Design Refinements

Scoping Report

Technical Team Prepares

Conceptual Design

Information

•Source Water

•Treatment

•Product Water Conveyance

•Groundwater Injection

•Cal Am Distribution

Project Description & Alternatives

•Source Water •Treatment •Product Water

Conveyance •Groundwater

Injection •Cal Am

Distribution

Background Development & Investigations

Alternative Analysis Report

SRF & Title XVI Applications

Final Feasibility Study Report

RFP for Design & Build

CPUC Determination

Construction

July 2015

CPUC Settlement

Hearings

Facilities & Feasibility Reports Facilities & Feasibility Reports

Product Water

Conveyance, Injection

Well Design, Siting

Complete

Tour of Water Purification Demonstration Facility

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Blanco Drain water going into the Salinas River

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Using existing wet well to pump water from

lake to manhole

Field Trips to Possible Diversion Locations

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Update of Project Progress from Multiple Presenters

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Joint Powers Authority Member Entities: Boronda County Sanitation District, Castroville Community Services District, County of Monterey, Del Rey Oaks, Fort Ord, Marina Coast Water District, Monterey, Moss

Landing County Sanitation District, Pacific Grove, Salinas, Sand City, and Seaside.

MEMORANDUM TO: RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE FROM: BOB HOLDEN, PRINCIPAL ENGINEER (Via Keith Israel, General Manager) DATE: MAY 8, 2014 SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SHORT-TERM,

INTERRUPTIBLE SALINAS WASH WATER FEE ───────────────────────────────────────────────────BACKGROUND:

In February 2014, the Recycled Water Committee recommended and the Board approved a two-month additional diversion tests from Lake El Estero, Ag wash water and Salinas storm water into MRWPCA conveyance structures and facilities. The costs to be paid on an incremental rate of $370/MG with one-half the cost for the Ag wash water to be paid by the City of Salinas. Due to the drought, one two-day (February 24-26, 2014, 4.5 mg) diversion was provided from Lake El Estero but none from the City of Salinas storm water system. The Ag wash water diversion began April 1 and will conclude May 31. No additional diversion of waters is needed for the GWR pilot treatment facilities.

However, with the drought, the two reservoirs in South County are too empty to provide water to the Salinas River Diversion Facility and thus to the Castroville Seawater Intrusion Project. Additionally, this diversion would also provide an opportunity for Salinas to perform certain pond maintenance activities. As a result, MCWRA and various growers had verbally indicated that they would like the Ag wash water diversion to continue after the end of May. No official request had been received by the agenda cut-off date (May 2) to accept this water beyond May. However, it seemed prudent to anticipate their request and to have in place interim fees, should that situation occur. Therefore, this agenda item was initiated. The attached (Produce Wash Water Utilization Agreement) official request was received in the form of a three-party draft Produce Wash Water Utilization

Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE Short-term interruptible Salinas wash water fee May 8, 2014 Page 2 of 3 Agreement at 4:49 PM on May 6. Staff is reviewing this and should have comments for the Committee on May 8. In February, the incremental fee for an interruptible wastewater supply to benefit the GWR pilot testing was estimated based on power and chemical costs at the Salinas Pump Station and Regional Treatment Plant without labor or overhead. Similar to February, capacity fees are excluded because these waters would only be accepted into existing facilities, would be for a short period of time, and only if surplus capacity existed. MRWPCA would have the ability to not accept flows or stop flows when they exceed our capabilities. The user fee calculation has been refined from that provided in February to include expenses and labor for facility repairs which would be expected to increase with additional flow plus labor to monitor flows, alarms from the new water sources, plus overhead for all the expenses. This equation for calculating fees is proposed on an interim basis until a new rate is officially established or until October 31, 2014, whichever occurs first. This will allow for creating of a new rate model and associated ordinance. The proposed interim rate model is:

K = (71,431*V) + (85.76*V*B) + (232.98*V*S) + 6.18, where K = Annual user charge V = Average daily wastewater flow in mgd B = Average wastewater Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) concentration

in mg/L S = Average wastewater Suspended Solids (SS) concentration in mg/L

$6.18 is annual customer charge

The new incremental costs associated with a new interruptible wastewater are based on 6,914 million gallons pumped to and treated at the Regional Treatment Plant from the various pump stations during fiscal year 2012-2013 and the 2013-2014 MRWPCA budget. Given representative values for V, B, and S yield the following costs:

$/Million Gallons

Volume Expenses (per mg) $195.70

Treatment for BOD (per mg) $172.69

Sludge (per mg) $180.00

Total Incremental Cost $548.39

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

RECYCLED WATER COMMITTEE Short-term interruptible Salinas wash water fee May 8, 2014 Page 3 of 3 Staff proposes that the above formula be used representing approximately $548 per million gallons for this water. In summary, it should be noted that this interim rate is interruptible and available subject to Board approval. Our normal rate for the Ag Wash Water would be $3,357 per million gallons for regular discharges plus a connection fee of $73.4 million; thus, this rate should only be offered on a discretionary basis until long-term rates are available and reviewed by Legal Counsel. RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests that the Recycled Water Committee recommend that the Board approve an interim interruptible wastewater treatment rate of approximately $548 per million gallons for any further diversion of Salinas Ag wash water starting June 1, 2014 and ending on October 31, 2014, or when a new rate model is approved (subject to legal review) whichever is sooner.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Page 1





AGENDA ITEM: 6 – B

AGENDA TITLE: BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE

Consent ( ) Action ( X ) Informational ( )


Phone: 372-3367 OR 422-1001


The General Manager and Legal Counsel met with the Budget/Personnel Committee on Thursday, May 15, 2014 on the following agenda items:

PUBLIC COMMENTS

1. APPROVE APRIL 17, 2014 BPC MINUTES

2. UPDATE ON FY 2014/15 BUDGET

3. CONSIDER CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS

4. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS

5. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION A. Conference with Labor Negotiator

Pursuant to Government code 54957.6

Employee Organizations: General Employees Association (GEA) Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG) Management Employees Group (MEG) Operations Employees Bargaining Group (OEBG)



FUNDING SOURCE: N/A

BUDGET RECAP: N/A

Page 2





ALTERNATIVES: N/A


ACTION: N/A

MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: N/A

ATTACHMENTS: 1. May 15, 2014 Draft BPC Minutes

RECOMMENDED

MOTION:

Receive and Approve Budget/Personnel Committee recommendation(s), as follows:

Information only – no action required.

U:\BETTY\Board Agendas\Routine Agenda Items\2014\May\BPC 5-15-14 Meeting Transmittal.doc

Joint Powers Authority Member Entities: Boronda County Sanitation District, Castroville Community Services Water District, County of Monterey, Del Rey Oaks, Fort Ord, Marina Coast Water District, Monterey,

Moss Landing County Sanitation District, Pacific Grove, Salinas, Sand City, and Seaside.

C O M M I T T E E M I N U T E S / R E P O R T

BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE

Thursday, May 15, 2014 12:35 pm to 1:22 pm

5 Harris Court, Building D


AGENDA: PUBLIC COMMENTS



3. CONSIDER CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS

4. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS

5.

CLOSED SESSION A. Conference with Labor Negotiator

Pursuant to Government Code 54957.6

Employee Organizations: General Employees Association (GEA) Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG) Management Employees Group (MEG)



PRESENT: Budget/Personnel Committee

Dennis Allion, Acting Chair Lou Calcagno (arrived at 12:39 pm) Gloria De La Rosa Dave Pendergrass

Ron Stefani (Alternate)

DRAFT

For Board informational purposes only. These Minutes will be considered for approval by the Committee at the June 13

BPC meeting.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE DRAFT May 15, 2014 Page 2 of 4 ABSENT: Rudy Fischer

PRESENT: MRWPCA Staff

Keith Israel General Manager

Rob Wellington Legal Counsel

John Tiernan Dir Admin Services/Deputy GM

Tom Buell Leara Sampson Lindsay Synsteby

Director of Finance Human Resources Administrator Customer Service Supervisor

Chayito Ibarra Executive Assistant

OTHERS PRESENT: None

PUBLIC COMMENTS At 12:36 pm, Acting Chair Allion called for Public Comments; none received.


Acting Chair Allion stated that the April 17, 2014 draft BPC minutes were presented to the BPC for their approval.

ACTION TAKEN: On a motion by Mr. Pendergrass, seconded by Ms. De La Rosa, the Budget/Personnel Committee approved the April 17, 2014 BPC Minutes. [Absent: Calcagno]


Mr. Tiernan stated that the preliminary FY 2014/15 budget four times: twice to the Budget/Personnel Committee and twice to the full Board. Staff is continually updating the projections for the Agency’s FY 2014/15 budget and at the June 9 Budget Workshop staff will go over the proposed budget in detail. Mr. Tiernan reviewed the budget highlights and stated that currently the total budget that is being presented is $28M. The ending unrestricted fund balance is $3.9M and our bond covenant is 2%; the requirement is 1.25%. Mr. Tiernan noted that rerouting the Salinas ag water to the regional system is not included in the budget. If, prior to June, the agreement is completed to receive the ag water, the revenue and expense will be added to the budget and will be cost neutral. The Board authorized staff at the April 30 Board meeting to begin the Proposition 218 notification process and, the 218 Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to our rate payers on the monthly fee increase on May 8, 2014. The Public Hearing will be held at the Board meeting on June 30, 2014. The rates shown on the Public

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text

BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE DRAFT May 15, 2014 Page 3 of 4

Hearing notice represent the maximum rate increases allowed over the next three years. Mr. Tiernan stated that at the April 28 Board meeting, staff was also directed to adjust the projected user fee rates to meet, but not go below, fund balances. This reduced the estimated user fee rate increase from 4% to 3.8%. Ms. De La Rosa asked whether any calls have been received from rate payers regarding the rate increase notification. Mr. Tiernan introduced Ms. Synsteby, Customer Service Supervisor, who stated that only a couple of calls have been received and most called to ask about the business rates.


3. CONSIDER CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS Mr. Tiernan stated that in 2011 the Agency performed an Agency-wide salary survey and classification study to fulfill a requirement in the employees’ MOU. The data showed that 15 of the 26 benchmark positions were paid 5% or more below the market median. At that time the Agency chose to implement the classification changes only. In 2012, Koff and Associates updated the data. The data showed that there were now 16 of the 26 benchmark positions paid 5% or more below the market median. The Agency chose not to implement any of the increases. Mr. Tiernan stated that recently, the Agency had Koff and Associates update the salary data only. The Agency requested that they look at only the positions that were paid 5% or more below market in the 2012 study. Due to organizational changes, there are only 13 positions that need to be updated. The data showed that of those 13 positions, 5 positions were still 5% or more below the market median and 6 positions were more than 10% below the market median. The Agency would like to look at adjustments for the following 5 positions that are more than 10% below the market median:

Executive Assistant/Clerk to the Board (20% below market)

Human Resources Administrator (15.9% below market)

Maintenance Manager (11.8% below market)

Safety Officer (18.7% below market)

Source Control Inspector II (11.1% below market)

Mr. Tiernan noted that there were not enough comparable matches for the Customer Service Supervisor position, and so the Agency will continue to look at proper comparisons for this position.

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

BUDGET/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE DRAFT May 15, 2014 Page 4 of 4

Discussion followed regarding the comparison agencies being used. Mr. Tiernan stated that, as required in the MOU, we compared agencies that treat wastewater, that are similar in flow, and number of employees. Mr. Calcagno stated that when the County of Monterey performs salary surveys they look at Counties that are comparable to them such as Tulare County and Fresno. Mr. Tiernan noted this is an informational item and at the next BPC meeting staff will present the consultant’s finalized report and recommend specific salary adjustments for the Committee to review.


4. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS No comments received.

[Acting Chair Allion adjourned Open Session at 12:50 pm and commenced the Closed Session.


A. Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government code 54957.6

Agency Negotiator: General Manager Employee Organizations: General Employees Association (GEA) Mid-Management Employees Group (MMEG) Management Employees Group (MEG) Operations Employee Bargaining Group (OEBG)

[Acting Chair Allion adjourned Closed Session at 1:21 pm, and reconvened the Open Session.]

6. POSSIBLE ACTION ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS Legal Counsel reported that in the Closed Session the BPC received information from its negotiator, general directions were discussed and given, and no reportable action was taken.

At 1:22 pm, with no further business, Acting Chair Allion adjourned the Budget/Personnel Committee meeting to the next regularly scheduled Budget/Personnel Committee meeting on Friday, June 13 at 12:30 pm. U:\BETTY\BOARD COMMITTEES\BUDGET-PERSONNEL COMMITTEE\2014\May\BPC Minutes Draft May 15.doc

Chayito

Typewritten Text


Chayito

Typewritten Text

Chayito

Typewritten Text





AGENDA ITEM: 7 – A

AGENDA TITLE: RECLAMATION PROJECT STATUS SUMMARY

Consent ( ) Action ( ) Informational ( X )


Phone: 372-3367 OR 422-1001


See attached Reclamation Project Status Summary.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: No ( ) Yes ( X )

FUNDING SOURCE: N/A

BUDGET RECAP: N/A


ALTERNATIVES: N/A


ACTION: N/A

MANAGER

RECOMMENDATION: N/A

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Reclamation Project Status Summary

2. Water Quality and Operations Committee Minutes and Agenda

3. Reclamation Highlights for May and Graphs

4. Water Recycling Tours and Presentations

RECOMMENDED MOTION: None required.

U:\BETTY\Board Agendas\Reclamation\2014\May\Reclamation Xmtl 4-28-2014.doc

SUMMARY OF THE RECYCLED WATER ACTIVITIES May 2014

A. TERTIARY PLANT OPERATIONS 1. Background

Since beginning operation in 1998, approximately 61 billion gallons of recycled water has been produced. Since the early years, annual production has increased from 5,000 acre feet (AF) in 1998 to about 13,300 AF in 2007. During the peak irrigation months (May through August), almost 100% conversion of plant secondary effluent to tertiary occurs. The Spring (March and April) and Fall (September and October) periods usually require only moderate demand for water. The plant is typically shut down November through February each year.

2. 2003 Operations Tertiary production started early in the Spring. Initially, irrigation demand and plant production varied depending upon rainfall and wind. Then, for about five months, plant production was at full capacity. Starting in late September, water demand dropped as the irrigation season closed. Through this year, the quality of the recycled water product continued to be excellent (see attached graphs). Due to the rainfall, the plant shut down in early November.

3. 2004 Operations

The tertiary plant started up with limited operations the week of February 13, and ran for five days. However, because of rain, the plant shut down until early March. The plant re-started on March 9, and ran continuously since then with plant flows operating at the maximum production rate of about 20+ MGD for most of the year. However, with the early season precipitation, the SVRP shut down on October 20, instead of the usual time in early November.

4. 2005 Operations With the wet Spring of 2005, the tertiary plant only ran for a few days in mid-March. However, because of continued rain, full and ongoing start up did not occur until April 19. After that time, plant production was generally at full capacity. However, with cooler weather and precipitation, the plant shut down in early November. Calendar year 2005 marked the eighth year of successful recycled water operation.

5. 2006 Operations 2006 was the ninth year of reclamation operations. Initially, because of generally dry weather during the early winter, we planned to start up the reclamation plant in late February/early March. However, February, March and April were much wetter than normal. Thus, start up began in mid-April and we continued at about full production after that. Depending upon weather conditions, the Reclamation Plant typically shuts down by the end of October

SUMMARY May 2014 Page 2

due to reduced irrigation demand. However, this year, the plant continued operating through mid-November.

6. 2007 Operations 2007 was the tenth year of recycled water operations. Because of a dry January and moderate irrigation demand, the plant started up at the end of January 2007. Water production was low until mid-March, due to the weather. The plant ran near capacity for most of the irrigation season to meet demand; however, with precipitation in early October and the end of the primary growing season, the plant was shut down at the end of October.

7. 2008 Operations The plant started up at low flows in late February 2008. To prepare for the 2008 irrigation season, sand was removed from the bottom of the storage pond which should keep coliform levels low in the pond during the peak summer irrigation period. March plant output increased due to increased irrigation demand and record production was recorded for the March-April production period. Because of warmer than normal weather, the plant shut down mid-December.

8. 2009 Operations

Because of warmer and dryer weather than normal during our 12th year of operation, the plant had limited operation in January 2009. With the February precipitation, the plant didn’t restart until mid-March. Since then, irrigation demand picked up dramatically and we were at maximum production from April through August. In September demand declined somewhat due to reduced cropping plans. And, with the big rain in mid October, the plant shut down for the rest of the season.

9. 2010 Operations A. RECLAMATION TREATMENT PLANT (SVRP) Significant rain was welcomed the later part of January and all of February. Because of this, the reclamation plant did not start up until late March. Thereafter, the plant was up and down during most of April. Since early May, the plant was fully operational and performed well. SVRP production started to decline in October with end of operations in mid-November due to rain.

B. INFLATABLE DAM (SRDF) The Salinas Valley Water Project started up in later part of April 2010. River water is now pumped (and disinfected) and mixed with recycled water in the CSIP storage pond. This additional water project has worked well. Recycled water production continued at maximum capacity through early October. On October 18, 2010 river water pumping was stopped for the season. The inflatable dam was lowered in mid-November until Spring 2011, per fisheries service requirements.


10. 2011 Operations A. RECLAMATION TREATMENT PLANT (SVRP) Due to dry weather at the beginning of the year, the SVRP started up in late January for a number of days and then shut down due to an extended period of precipitation. This was the earliest beginning of the irrigation season and SVRP operation. Then, because of ongoing wet weather, the plant was down for much of February. In March, the facility started up again for long- term operations, and peak irrigation production demand has continued since then. Demand dropped in early October due to cooler fall temperatures and precipitation. Shut down occurred in early November. B. INFLATABLE DAM (SRDF) Since late last April, the inflatable dam was in service to coincide with peak irrigation demand. During September and October, repairs to the hole in the river bank along with improvements to the rubber dam were completed. It is now ready for next year’s operation.

11. 2012 Operations Irrigation demand was high during most of January due to dry conditions. However, the SVRP was down due to annual maintenance and chlorine facility repairs. SVRP started up on February 2, and was mostly running about half capacity through much of April. After that began the typical “summer” irrigation period with the SVRP in full output. Starting in mid-September water demand has started to drop because of reduced irrigation needs. The inflatable dam has been in operation this summer in accordance with the MCWRA permit. However, inflatable dam pumping ended the third week of October. Partial SVRP operation continued through part of November.

12. 2013 Operations The SVRP completed its normal off season maintenance work and it started up on February 11, 2013 to meet limited grower water demands. Flows increased through May, due to dry weather conditions and irrigation demand. Maximum summer irrigation demand has now reduced. Seasonal plant shutdown could occur by the end of November or early December.

13. 2014 Operations With the lack of rain over the first part of the year, the SVRP started operation early beginning in January. It was up and down thereafter in coordination with rain events. Plant production picked up in early March due to warming temperatures and lack of moisture. April has shifted into normal peak plant production. Also in April, the Salinas shunt was started routing about 3 MGD of Salinas wash water than the system for GWR Pilot Plant testing.


B. WATER QUALITY AND OPERATIONS AND GROWER COMMITTEE MEETINGS The last Water Quality and Operations Committee regular meeting was held on April 24, 2014. The last Annual Growers’ Meeting was held on February 19, 2009 at the MRWPCA Regional Treatment Plant (RTP). No Growers’ Meeting was held in 2010, 2011, or 2012. The next regular meeting of Water Quality and Operations Committee is scheduled for May 29, 2014.

C. SALINAS VALLEY ACTIVITIES As the largest customer to MRWPCA, the Agency has been working with the City of Salinas personnel on a number of items as it pertains to addressing current and future issues facing the transmission and treatment of wastewater generated by the City.

Sent out notices for a Request for Proposals regarding the Salinas Pump Station Capacity Enhancements Programmatic Environmental Review Documents. These documents will analyze the environmental impacts associated with the various alternatives for improving the pump station capacity.

Submitted a technical report to the City staff on the water quality parameters and daily flows into the Industrial Waste Treatment Facility. The report highlighted peak hourly flows into the facility, as well as conducted hourly water quality samples for a typical in-season weekday and weekend.

Met with City staff to discuss possible projects to be submitted as part of the Greater Monterey County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.

D. JOINT MOUs In 2009 and 2010 a Special MRWPCA Board/Ad Hoc Committee (including Board Members from MCWD and MCWRA) met and completed the RUWAP and other regional water project agreements. Four MOU’s with our Agency, MCWD and MRWCPA Boards were to encourage development of projects to implement water solutions for the community. A joint brine outfall agreement with MCWD was approved by the MCWD and MRWPCA Boards in January 2010. There has always been positive public agreement about the value of using recycled water and beginning in 2011 there have been efforts made with MPWMD and Cal Am to bring this resource to the Monterey Peninsula. In early 2012, a MOU between these parties was completed and work continues to develop a criteria that will result in a project that includes a desal facility, aquifer storage and recovery enhancements and replenishment of the Seaside Groundwater Basin to meet the adjudication imposed as a result of the overdraft of the basin for water supplies to the Monterey Peninsula communities.


E. GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT PROJECT Since 2004, staff has been exploring opportunities for a Groundwater Replenishment Project for the Seaside Groundwater Basin. The project would consist of a water purification facility at the Regional Treatment Plant, distribution pipelines and injection wells. An update of the project description was prepared as a long-term component for the Regional Water Plan in July 2008. Public outreach provided by Lois Humphreys of TRG and Associates and general engineering and planning assistance by Camp, Dresser and McKee (CDM) resulted in a coordination and kickoff meeting of all consultants held in February 2006. The Recycled Water Committee and Board have continually monitored Scopes of Work updates and progress on these project tasks. Trips that included MRWPCA Board members, staff, and local policy makers were arranged to see Orange County replenishment operations. Latest groups to participate in tours to Orange County Replenishment System facility included our new Board members, partner agency leaders and public officials in April 2013 These trips resulted in very positive reinforcement for this Agency to continue to pursue the GWR project. In March 2008, the Seaside Watermaster authorized $100,000 of funding for the Seaside Groundwater Replenishment project design and planning activities. In late October 2008, a Joint Board Meeting was held with the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. A Joint MOU was adopted in February 2009 to encourage future cooperation in planning water projects. The updated 2009 regional MOU’s will provide enough water to also support the proposed groundwater replenishment project. With the approval of the regional desal project by the CPUC in December 2010, work restarted on groundwater replenishment as a future water opportunity including new strategic planning goals and objectives. During 2011 progress on the regional desal project/Regional Water Plan stalled. However, the GWR was re-stimulated by the formation of a new Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Plan initiated by Cal Am in April 2012 that also includes MPWMD and their ASR project in a program of water projects. As a result, the Board has recognized the importance to expedite progress for GWR to help meet the cease and desist order deadline of December 2016.

F. REGIONAL WATER PROJECT

On April 14, 2006, a leadership meeting was held of local cities, water and wastewater agencies to discuss the need for regional water planning. A further policy makers’ meeting was held on February 21, 2007. The most recent staff


meeting was held in June 2007. A draft MOU was considered by the group on July 23, 2007. The Division of Ratepayer Advocate of the PUC helped coordinate local efforts for a regional alternative solution of Cal-Am’s Desalination Project. Meetings were scheduled monthly since late January 2007. In April 2007, a listing of non-potable projects was developed for review and consideration as a phased alternative. A consultant has been hired to refine this effort. A report on potential projects was submitted on July 1, 2008. The CPUC Draft EIR was issued January 30, 2009. Public comment meetings were held the first week of March 2009. MRWPCA DEIR comments were provided to the CPUC on April 15, 2009. CPUC Public meetings were held in Monterey and Seaside during mid July. In December 2009, the CPUC certified the Final EIR. Settlement agreements were developed by the parties during Spring 2010. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) held hearings and cost workshops in May 2010 and early June with public workshops during the last week of June. After that, her recommendations were forwarded to the CPUC in late October. Since that time, the Commissioners received comments from the parties on the pending decision. Final approval by the CPUC was announced on December 2, 2010. Monterey County issued a Notice of Determination in early January 2011. The alleged Conflict-of-Interest matter, as well as the pending Ag Land lawsuit, further delayed project progress. The three project partners began mediation last summer (2011) to resolve issues. However, in mid-January 2012, Cal Am exited the current regional project and said that they will initiate a revised project. The CPUC has confirmed that it is supporting the new Cal Am proceeding.

G. MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT On April 23, 2011 Cal Am submitted a revised regional water project known as the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project to the CPUC that includes a smaller desal project, GWR and MPWMD’s ASR project. This new Water Supply Plan is currently being vetted by the CPUC.

H. WATER RECYCLING TOURS/PRESENTATIONS Attached is a list of the tours of the reclamation plant and presentations that have been provided since the last Board meeting.

Attachments:

1. Water Quality and Operations Committee Minutes for April 24, 2014 and agenda for May 29, 2014.

2. Reclamation Highlights for May 2014 and Graphs: (1) Combined Recycled, Well and River Water Demand and Deliveries; (2) Recycled, Well and River Water Deliveries; (3) MCWRP Treatment Plant Performance - Recycled Water


Flow to Pond; (4) Total Dissolved Solids; (5) Chloride; (6) Sodium; (7) SAR; and (8) Recycled Water Deliveries and Long-Term Demand.

3. Water Recycling Tours and Presentations, April 22, 2014 through May 13, 2014.

U:\BETTY\Board Agendas\Reclamation\2014\April\Summary - Rec Status April 2014.doc

MONTEREY COUNTY WATER RECYCLING PROJECTS

WATER QUALITY AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES

The MCWRP Water Quality and Operations Committee (WQ&Ops) met on Thursday,

April 24th, 2014. The meeting was held at the MRWPCA Treatment Facility and Water

Recycling Project in Marina.

Committee Members Present: Non-Committee Members Present:

Dale Huss

Doug Scattini

Jason Reed

David Hart

Keith Israel Tom Kouretas

David Chardavoyne James Dix

Dennis Lebow Erica Lecce

James Dix

John Tiernan

Patrice Parsons

Mike McCullough

Garrett Haertel

Committee Members Absent: Mark Foxworthy

John Baillie Christopher Bunn

Steve Rodoni Ed Mora

John Ramirez Richard Pozzi

Chris Moss

Cathy Paladini

Fabrico Urubo

Michael Cahn

Bill Ragsdale-Cronin

1. CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Huss called the meeting to order at 10:08 a.m.

2. ROLL CALL

Roll Call was taken, and as shown above, a quorum was present.

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Huss said he would talk with Mr. Moss later to follow-up on getting Jim Slater’s memorial

plaque down at the SRDF. Mr. Moss responded that the plaque has already been placed at the

SRDF.

4. ACTION ITEMS

A. Approve Minutes of the March 20th WQ&Ops meeting – Kouretas

COMMITTEE ACTION: On a motion by Mr. Lebow, seconded by Mr. Scattini, the Committee

approved the March 20th meeting minutes.

Minutes April 24, 2014

Water Quality and Operations Committee

Page - 2 -

Page 2 of 4

5. INFORMATION ITEMS

A. Receive MCWRP Operations Updates

1. Discussion on Draft FY 14/15 CSIP/SVRP/SRDF Budget – WRA

Ms. Paladini gave a PowerPoint discussion on the Draft CSIP, SVRP, and SRDF budgets

for the 2014-15 fiscal year. Ms. Paladini noted that cost increases compared to FY 2013-14

posed a challenge to budget reduction efforts. For example, we have seen a 23% increase in

utility costs over last year, a 16% increase in chemical costs, and a projected 14% increase

in water demand. With all these factors, the total increase in PCA’s overall combined

budget (SVRP/CSIP/SRDF) proposed for FY 2014-15 is only 4.34%.

Ms. Paladini continued that the current drought conditions have highlighted some

inflexibility in the budget process which MCWRA staff plans to seek Board approval to

remedy. Basically there needs to be more flexibility in the allocation of Zone 2B

assessments; funds should be able to be allocated differently on an annual basis depending

on factors such as operational needs, drought conditions, etc. For example, this upcoming

year CSIP costs will be higher (higher demand, increased energy usage/cost). Also, with

SRDF offline for the season [SRDF] demand charges will not be available, yet SRDF O&M

still needs to be covered. With that, Ms. Paladini said WRA staff will be reviewing the

existing ordinances and resolutions which dictate how Zone 2B funds are allocated. From

there they would like to develop a draft ordinance to bring to their Board which sets out a

methodology for fund allocation between CSIP, SVRP and SRDF. The goal is for this new

methodology to provide the flexibility to properly account for the different factors and

projects’ needs that can change year-to-year. A discussion ensued on fund allocations for

this upcoming year and the FY 2014-15 budget in general.

A question was asked about SRDF costs when offline. Mr. Moss answered with an

example, stating that SRDF costs for this past February were $34k and that most of this is

fish monitoring related. Mr. Bunn asked if the $300k line item allocated for labor in the FY

2014-15 budget was largely for fish related work. Mr. Moss said yes. Mr. Chardavoyne

added that WRA has reduced SRDF’s fish related costs by maximizing the use of in-house

labor (without adding additional staff) and limiting the use of outside contractors wherever

possible.

Ms. Paladini closed by saying that this budget will be discussed at that April 28th WRA

Board meeting and will then go to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Huss commented that

WRA’s work to improve the budgeting process is appreciated along with this detailed,

transparent look into next year’s budget.

2. Receive SRDF Update – Moss

Mr. Moss reported there are two outstanding lawsuits related to SRDF. The suit filed by

WRA (for approximately $2,300,000) against the design engineering firm regarding the

erosion and subsequent emergency repair to the SRDF has been assigned to the Santa Clara

County court. Mr. Moss was unsure as to when the trial begins. The suit filed by one of the

contractors who worked on the SRDF emergency repair (for $130,000) against WRA is

currently in arbitration. This suit is over a payment disagreement for some change order

work (involving dewatering).



Page - 3 -

Page 3 of 4

3. SVRP Operations – Dix

Mr. Dix said that we’ve have been receiving additional flows for the Salinas Industrial

Ponds amounting to approximately 2 MGD. The plan is to continue to receive the Salinas

Industrial Pond flows until the end of May. Mr. Dix then presented the recycled water

agronomic values through April: SAR - 4.8, TDS - 856 mg/L, Chloride - 269 mg/L, and

Sodium - 180 mg/L. He added that for March, the recycled water to well water flow

breakdown was 902 ac-ft. to 214 ac-ft. For this month so far (through April 22nd ) it is 959

ac-ft. to 120 ac-ft. Mr. Huss commented that we hope the desal project that is eventually

constructed uses a dual-pass reverse-osmosis RO treatment system so that the salinity of

our source water is not affected negatively. If somehow dual-pass RO is not included in the

final installed desal facility, we need to be ahead of the curve by thinking about what needs

to be done to maintain at least the current water quality we’ve got. For the next meeting Mr.

Huss asked that there be a discussion on the desal facility’s potential effects on recycled

water quality.

4. CSIP/SRDF Operations – Malanka/Moss

Mr. Franks reported that over the last two months water orders have been okay, but these

last few days there have been issues. This morning we saw CSIP flows at 38,000 gpm; far

greater than what was ordered. Apparently many irrigators decided not to irrigate yesterday

(despite having placed water orders) presumably because it was windier than normal. The

problem is that they simply took yesterday’s ordered flows today without any notification.

It is imperative that we are notified of any changes to water orders. We were able to

accommodate these unexpected flows only because it is still early in the season. If this were

anytime from June to mid-September, this would have created a serious problem in terms of

water availability. Mr. Franks continued that just a few days ago 29 million gallons used,

while collectively only 13.2 million gallons had been ordered. Mr. Huss suggested that Mr.

Franks send out a stern “courtesy” reminder email about the importance of water order

accuracy, particularly given the drought situation. Mr. Lebow asked Mr. Franks to let him

know if any of these uncooperative water order practices are coming from operations he

manages. Mr. Huss echoed that request.

a.) Update on Contingency Wells – WRA

Mr. Moss reported there are four candidate wells being considered as contingency

wells (assuming everything works out logistically and in terms of well owner

cooperation). He continued that WRA is talking to the owners of those wells and will

be sending them an informational letter explaining the situation and exactly what

assistance we’re asking of them.

b.) Update on Supplemental Well Repairs and Espinosa Booster Station

Modifications – WRA

Regarding the Espinosa Booster station modifications, Mr. Moss said that we’ve got a

plan and are working on scheduling. The work should be done by mid-August to mid-

September. Mr. Moss then summarized the status of the Supplemental Wells in need

of repairs:

- Well 14A1: A new screen has been installed, and they’re working on sizing a



Page - 4 -

Page 4 of 4

new smaller pump motor. That should be ordered in two to three weeks and they

hope to have the well operational by the end of next month.

- New Well #2 needs a patch. They had a contractor retained but he was non-

responsive. They are now in the processes of getting the second contractor up to

speed and started on the well patching work.

Mr. Huss noted that we should work on a plan for the destruction of the two out-of-service

leaking Supplemental Wells discussed at last month’s meeting. He recalled that Mr. Moss

said destruction of one of these would cost approximately $46k. He suggested that we at

least try to address one of these wells this year.

5. Discuss Research on Irrigation Water Fertilizer Value for Vegetable Production -

Cahn

Mr. Cahn thanked Mr. McCullough for inviting him to address the Committee on this

research. Mr. Cahn began with the central question addressed of his presentation: How

much fertilizer credit should be taken for Nitrogen in irrigation water? From this, the

following main points considered in this research were discussed:

- The effect of applied water volume on Nitrogen recovery

- Is there a minimum Nitrogen concentration in irrigation water that has fertilizer

value?

- The effect of Nitrogen form (nitrate vs. ammonium) on recovery

- Does high Nitrate concentration in the irrigation water affect soil Nitrate levels?

A lengthy discussion on Mr. Cahn’s research ensued. The Committee expressed interest in

this ongoing project and asked Mr. Cahn to return to a future meeting to discuss the results

of the next phase. Mr. Cahn closed by summarizing some of their findings and the next step

in this ongoing research:

- Low concentrations of nitrate-N (12 ppm) in irrigation water were taken up by lettuce

- Fertilizer value of NH4 and NO3 sources of N were equivalent

- Volume of water applied to the crop did not affect the recovery rate of Nitrogen

from the irrigation water

- 2014 trials will evaluate if Nitrogen in water is equivalent to fertilizer Nitrogen

B. Receive Health Department Update – Sandoval

A MCEHD representative was not in attendance.

6. SET NEXT MEETING

The next Water Quality and Operations Committee Meeting shall be on Thursday, May 29, 2014 from

10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon at the Regional Treatment Plant.

7. ADJOURNMENT – The meeting was adjourned at 11:32am.

- 1 -

MONTEREY COUNTY WATER RECYCLING PROJECTS

WATER QUALITY AND OPERATIONS

COMMITTEE MEETING

AGENDA

TIME: 10 a.m. – 12 p.m.

DATE: Thursday, May 29, 2014

PLACE: MRWPCA Treatment Facility and Water Recycling Project

14811 Del Monte Blvd., Marina, CA 93933

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PUBLIC COMMENT – on matters not on the agenda

4. ACTION ITEMS

A. Approve Minutes of the March 20th Meeting – Kouretas

5. INFORMATION ITEMS

A. Receive MCWRP Operations Updates

1. Receive SRDF Update – Moss

a.) Review Original Full-size SRDF Specifications and Cost Reducing

Changes During Design Phase –WRA

2. SVRP Operations – Dix

3. Receive Update on Soil Salinity Study – Platts

4. Discuss Planned Desalination Facility’s Potential Effects to Recycled Water

Quality – Committee

5. CSIP / SRDF Operations – Malanka/Moss

a.) Update on Supplemental Well Repairs and Espinosa Booster Station

Modifications –WRA

B. Receive Health Department Update – Sandoval

6. SET NEXT MEETING

7. ADJOURNMENT

RECLAMATION PROJECT STATUS SUMMARY

Highlights for May 2014

Salinas Valley Reclamation Project (SVRP)

• SVRP was offline the beginning of April due to precipitation and

online on April 7, 2014.

Began diverting water from the Salinas Industrial Ponds to the

regional treatment plant on April 1, 2014.

For last month, approximately 92% of the secondary effluent was

captured for recycling/distribution.

Water deliveries for last month:

o Recycled Water – 1,431 acre-feet (86% of Total to Growers)

o CSIP Well Water – 240 acre-feet (14%)

o River Water (SRDF) – offline

o TOTAL – 1,671 acre-feet to Growers

Recycled Water Agronomic values for April:

o SAR (Sodium Adsorption Ratio) – 4.8

o Sodium – 180 mg/L

o Chloride – 269 mg/L

o Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) – 856 mg/L

Salinas River Diversion Facility (SRDF)

SRDF is offline

Combined Recycled, Well, and River Water Demand &

Deliveries

January 2011 – April 30, 2014

Ja

n '1

1

Ap

r

Ju

ly

Oc

t

Ja

n '1

2

Ap

r

Ju

ly

Oc

t

Ja

n '1

3

Ap

r

Ju

ly

Oc

t

Ja

n '1

4

Ap

r

Budget Total Combined

Water Deliveries

Recycled, Well, and River Water Deliveries January 2011 through April 30, 2014

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

2100

2400

2700

3000

3300

3600

Ja

n '1

1

Ma

r '1

1

Ma

y '1

1

Ju

ly '1

1

Se

pt

'11

No

v '1

1

Ja

n '1

2

Ma

r '1

2

Ma

y '1

2

Ju

ly '1

2

Se

pt

'12

No

v' 1

2

Ja

n '1

3

Ma

r '1

3

Ma

y '1

3

Ju

ly '1

3

Se

pt

'13

No

v '1

3

Ja

n '1

4

Ma

r '1

4

Recycled Water Well Water River Water

Acre

Feet/

Mo

nth

MCWRP TREATMENT PLANT PERFORMANCE

RECYCLED WATER FLOW TO POND January 2011 – May 11, 2014

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

W/A

1/3

/11

W/A

2/7

W/A

3/1

4

W/A

4/1

8

W/A

5/2

3

W/A

6/2

7

W/A

8/1

W/A

9/5

W/A

10/1

0

W/A

11/1

4

W/A

12/1

9

W/A

1/2

3

W/A

2/2

7

W/A

4/2

W/A

5/7

W/A

6/1

1

W/A

7/1

6

W/A

8/2

0

W/A

9/2

4

W/A

10/2

9

W/A

12/3

W/A

1/7

W/A

2/1

1

W/A

3/1

8

W/A

4/2

2

W/A

5/2

7

W/A

7/1

W/A

8/5

W/A

9/9

W/A

10/1

4

W/A

11/1

8

W/A

12/2

3

W/A

1/2

7

W/A

3/3

W/A

4/7

SV

RP

P

LA

NT

F

LO

W

TO

P

ON

(M

GD

)

* WA x/xx: Week of Averages (Monday through Sunday)

2011 2012 2013 2014

TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS)

January 2011 – May 6, 2014

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Jan

'11

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'12

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'13

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'14

Mar

May

TO

TA

L D

ISS

OLV

ED

SO

LID

S (

mg

/l)

MWRSA: 842 mg/l

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

CHLORIDE January 2011 – May 6, 2014

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Jan

'11

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'12

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'13

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'14

Mar

May

CH

LO

RID

E (

mg

/l)

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

SODIUM January 2011 – May 6, 2014

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Jan

'11

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'12

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'13

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'14

Mar

May

SO

DIU

M m

g/l

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) January 2011 – May 6, 2014

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Jan

'11

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'12

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'13

Mar

May

Ju

ly

Sep

t

No

v

Jan

'14

Mar

May

SA

R

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

Off

line

RECYCLED WATER DELIVERIES

AND LONG-TERM DEMAND as of April 30, 2014

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Ja

n '1

1

Ap

r

Ju

ly

Oc

t

Ja

n '1

2

Ap

r

Ju

ly

Oc

t

Ja

n '1

3

Ap

r

Ju

ly

Oc

t

Ja

n '1

4

Ap

r

Re

cy

cle

d W

ate

r (A

cre

-Fe

et/

Mo

nth

)

Projected Recycled Water

Demand (Long-Term)

Actual Deliveries

Maximum Long-Term Monthly

Plant Output (1,918 AF)

Water Recycling Tours & Presentations From April 22 – May 13, 2014

Date Group Presentation Tour Guide/

Presenter Persons

4/22/13 Earth Day, CSU Monterey

Bay, Seaside Exhibit Featuring Pharmaceutical

Waste Take Back List

Interns: M. Chaney

B. Granados 30

4/26/14 Earth Day, Natividad Creek Park, Salinas

Exhibit Featuring Pharmaceutical Waste Take Back List

K. Harris with Interns:

M. Chaney B. Granados

30

4/30/14

Monterey County Hospitality Association Sustainability Seminar, Asilomar Conference Center, Pacific Grove

Exhibit Featuring Grease Trap Cleaning Poster, Water Conservation

Devices (MPWMD), Low Impact Development and Stormwater

Protection Guidelines for Restaurants (Monterey SEA).

K. Harris 35

5/1/14

Pure Water Monterey GWR Independent

Advisory Panel, and Consultants

GWR Project Report Presentations and Walking Tour of Advanced Water

Treatment Demonstration Facility X

B. Holden M. McCullough

K. Harris 21

MRWPCA Presentations and Tours April 22 – May 13, 2014 Page 2 of 2

Date Group Presentation Tour Guide/

Presenter Persons

5/8/14 Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA)

Conference

Walking Tour of Advanced Water Treatment Demonstration Facility

X M. McCullough

K. Harris 8

5/9/14

UC Santa Barbara Grad Students – Drought

Solutions Documentary Film Team

Tour of RTP, SVRP and CSIP with Video Interviews with Community Relations, Lab Analyst, Recycled Water Coordinator, and MCWRA

Assistant General Manager/ Chief of Operations and Maintenance

X

K. Harris B. Holden S. Burnett B. Buche

4

Page 1





AGENDA ITEM: 7 – B

AGENDA TITLE: STRATEGIC PLANNING GOALS (2011-2014) AND ONE-

YEAR OBJECTIVES UPDATE



Phone: 372-3367 OR 422-1001


The MRWPCA Board and Staff met with the Board Facilitator on Friday, May 9, 2014, to

develop new One-Year Objectives for the Three-Year Strategic Planning Goals for

2011-2014.

Mission Statement: “The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency is

dedicated to meeting the wastewater and reclamation needs of our member agencies

while protecting the environment.”

Vision Statement: “The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency will

be a model customer service provider for the efficient, innovative utilization of

wastewater.”

Core Values: “The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency values:

Cost-efficient, consistent and reliable service and business practices;

Open, honest lines of communication between and among Board,

public and staff;

Ethical behavior;

Customer-focused and -centered;

Helpful and timely responses;

Loyalty and dedication.”

Note: Attached are updates from the old goals/objectives, the new Five-Year Goals

and Objectives will be presented and discussed at the June 30, 2014 Board meeting.

Page 2




FINANCIAL IMPACT: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

FUNDING SOURCE: N/A

BUDGET RECAP: N/A

PRIOR BOARD ACTIONS:

N/A

ALTERNATIVES: N/A

COMMITTEE REVIEW AND ACTION:

N/A

MANAGER RECOMMENDATION:

Approval

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Three-Year Goals (2011-2014) and new One-Year

Objectives (May 2013 through 2014)

RECOMMENDED MOTION: None required.

U:\BETTY\Board Agendas\Strategic Goals\2014\May\SP GOALS Transmittal 5-22-14.doc

A

THREE-YEAR GOALS (2011-2014)

and

ONE-YEAR OBJECTIVES (May 2013-2014)

MISSION STATEMENT The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency is dedicated to meeting the

wastewater and reclamation needs of our member agencies while protecting the environment.

VISION STATEMENT The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency will be a model

customer service provider for the efficient, innovative utilization of wastewater.

CORE VALUES (not in priority order)

The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency values:

- Cost-efficient, consistent and reliable service and business practices - Open, honest lines of communication between and among Board, public and staff

- Ethical behavior - Customer-focused and centered

- Helpful and timely responses - Loyalty and dedication

THREE-YEAR GOALS

(2011-2014 not in priority order)

- Develop the use of recycled and replenishment water - Achieve sufficient pump station and conveyance capacity

to meet the needs of member agencies - Enhance and maintain our aging infrastructure

- Update and consolidate a disaster preparedness plan

Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency

B

M O N T E R E Y R E G I O N A L W A T E R P O L L U T I O N C O N T R O L A G E N C Y

ONE-YEAR STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

May 10, 2013 – May 1, 2014

THREE-YEAR GOAL: DEVELOP THE USE OF RECYCLED AND REPLENISHED WATER

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

STATUS

COMMENTS

DONE ON TARGET

REVISED

1. By May 23, 2013

General Manager

Recommend to the Board for action a Cost Reimbursement Agreement for Groundwater Replenishment with MPWMD.*

X

Approved by Board on May 23

2. By August 1, 2013

General Manager and Board Chair Dennis Allion, working with the MPWMD and MPRWA

Develop a joint Public Outreach and Acceptance Plan for GWR.

X

First Joint Meeting of 3 Entities held on Oct 23

Other Meetings were held on Nov 6, Nov 26, Dec 17, 2013 and Jan 14, Feb 4, Feb 19, March 4 & March 20, 2014

Short term plan developed & funded through June 2014

3. By September 1, 2013

Recycled Water Committee (Dennis Allion-lead), working with a consultant and in cooperation with the MPWMD and MPRWA

Ensure that a group of staff and volunteers are trained as a Speakers Bureau to obtain support for Groundwater Replenishment (GWR).

June 30

Outreach event schedule being developed in coordination with FY 2014/15 GWR budget

4. By December 1, 2013

Recycled Water Project Manager

Provide a cost-benefit analysis of additional source waters (e.g., vegetable wash water, stormwater) for GWR and present the results to the Board.

June 30

Considered as part of Project draft EIR

Consider as part of source water agreements

5. By January 1, 2014

Recycled Water Project Engineer

Prepare and submit two or more grant applications for GWR funding.

June 15

Submitted App to USBOR on 2/19 - Salinas & Carmel River Basin Study

Additional Applications in process

6. By February 1, 2014

Board Chair Dennis Allion and General Manager

Secure GWR source water.

June 30

Negotiations Underway

Anticipate draft MOU by June 30

C

THREE-YEAR GOAL: ACHIEVE SUFFICIENT PUMP STATION AND CONVEYANCE CAPACITY TO MEET

THE NEEDS OF MEMBER AGENCIES

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

STATUS

COMMENTS

DONE ON TARGET

REVISED

1. At the November 2013 Board meeting

Assistant General Manager, working with the Senior Engineer

Complete an inventory and analysis of pump station capacities and projected needs of member agencies and report the results to the MRWPCA TAC for presentation to the Board.

June 15

Included as part of capacity analysis study

Will discuss at June TAC meeting


Assistant General Manager

Based on the inventory and analysis for member agency pump station capacities and projected needs, develop trigger flows for capacity improvements.

June 15

For inclusion in 2014/15 CIP

Will dissuss at June TAC meeting



Complete the programmatic EIR for the Salinas Pump Station Conveyance.

June 30

Coordinate with Salinas source water activities & GWR draft EIR

4. By April 1, 2014

Assistant General Manager and Senior Engineer

Prepare the Project Design Report for increased capacity for the Moss Landing Pump Station.

June 15

In progress

D

THREE-YEAR GOAL: ENHANCE AND MAINTAIN OUR AGING INFRASTRUCTURE

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

STATUS

COMMENTS

DONE ON TARGET

REVISED

1. At least quarterly

Deputy General Manager

Advise the ratepayers of the need to enhance MRWPCA’s aging infrastructure through the MRWPCA Pipeline newsletter.

X



Review the 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and recommend revisions to the Board for action.

June 15

As part of FY 2014/15 Budget workshop

3. By March 1, 2014

Deputy General Manager and Director of Finance

Update the rate model and present funding options for operations and capital improvements to the Board for action.

X

To Board of Directors in April

4. By April 1, 2014

Deputy General Manager

Notify ratepayers if there are to be changes in rates for the next 3-5 years.

X

Notifications sent out May 10, 2014

E

THREE-YEAR GOAL: UPDATE AND CONSOLIDATE A DISASTER PREPAREDNESS PLAN

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

STATUS

COMMENTS

DONE ON TARGET

REVISED

1. By September 1, 2013


Present the current status of the Disaster Preparedness Plan(s) to the Board for direction.

X

Presented at the September Board Meeting

2. By October 1, 2013

Assistant General Manager and the Safety Officer

Update the MOU with Marina Fire Department and, as appropriate, develop a MOU with other agencies to prepare for a catastrophic event.

X

Updated MOU with City of Marina Approved at the Sept 30 Board Meeting

3. By November 1, 2013

Maintenance Manager and Assistant General Manager

Identify gaps in current disaster preparedness plans and recommend to the Board for action options to address the gaps and obtain the Board’s input on other elements to be included.

X

March 31 Board Meeting

4. By April 1, 2014


Present a draft Disaster Preparedness Plan to the Board for direction.

June 15

For consideration at June 9 Budget Workshop Meeting

5. By May 1, 2014


Present the final Disaster Preparedness Plan to the for Board action.

June 15

For consideration at June 9 Budget Workshop Meeting

Page 1





AGENDA ITEM: 7 – C

AGENDA TITLE: OPERATIONS/SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS REPORT


CONTACT: JOHN TIERNAN, DIR OF ADMIN SERVICES / DEPUTY

GENERAL MANAGER

Phone: (831) 645-4602

Operations:

RTP:

4/1: Salinas Industrial Pond water diverted to the Salinas pump station. Approximately 3 mgd.

Influent flow = 20.2 mgd; Effluent flow = 4.39 mgd

Secondary effluent: Suspended Solids = 9 mg/L; CBOD = 8 mg/L; Turbidity = 2.8 NTU

SVRP/SRDF:

4/2: Dewatered the SVRP storage pond due to proliferation of algae and lack of Grower demand due

to the recent rain.

Water provided to Growers: SVRP (recycle) = 1,431 ac-ft (85% of total); CSIP (well water) = ~ 250

ac-ft (15% of total); TOTAL = 1,675 ac-ft provided to Growers

Engineering Services:

CP249/267 (Biocell/Liquid Waste): Award of Contract and preconstruction Meeting.

Fort Ord Pump Station Pavement Repairs: Award of contract and preconstruction meeting.

Renewable Energy Credits: Submitted 2013 data to WREGIS.

Reclamation Projects:

UR502 (GWR): Continued feasibility study/facilities planning/Wastewater Flow Projections, began

reviewing sections of the ADEIR, continued providing materials for negotiations.

UR503 (Brine): Obtained Exclusive Negotiating Agreement payment from Cal Am and approved

baseline corrosion study.

Safety:

Completed a HAZMAT drill on 4/3/14 involving a leaking Chlorine Cylinder outside of the Chlorine

building at the RTP.

Completed the 3-year Chlorine Risk Management Plans (RMP), Process Hazard Analysis (PHA)

review and edit to comply with the EPA regulations; Contracted Risk Management Professionals Inc.

(Jason Sinkler, Garrett Haertel and I attended).

Three 8-hour HAZMAT refreshers were completed along with 3 Emergency Response Team training

classes reviewing the new blood pressure cuff and disposable temperature thermometers.

Mike McCullough:

GWR:

Tour of Pilot Facility for Recycled Water Committee Members

Tour of Pilot Facility for Water Awareness Committee

Page 2




Maintenance:

Utilities: Continued working on Fiber upgrade to RTP and Admin, site to site VPN, Phone and

Internet services with ATT, equipment room at RTP is good; have located path for fiber from Landfill

road to RTP. Completed new breaker installation and trip setting adjustments required by the Arc

Flash study, Labeling and training will complete this project. Repaired drive # 3 at FOPS, ground

fault card burned up, no spares available, and re-wired drive to run. Completed grinder installations

at Stations 13, 15, and SEPS.

CSIP/SRDF/SVRP: CSIP: running wells as needed to boost pressure; repairs underway at well

#14A1. Met with WRA and their engineering contractor; and working on plans and specifications for

Espinosa booster station modifications.

Facilities: RTP HVAC upgrade project has been awarded and work should start soon. Ordered new

projectors for Harris Court Board and Conference rooms.

Co-Gen: Engines #2 and #3 online, Engine #1 down for rebuilding. Tuned up Engines #2 and #3 in

preparation for peak demand period, and ordered replacement camshaft for Engine #1.

Laboratory:

Worked with Operations to include daily drying beds information and automatic exporting to Lab

Data spreadsheets.

Began testing influent, primary influent, primary effluent, trickling filter and secondary effluent 24-

hour composite samples daily for orthophosphate (o-PO4). Results are being used for the GWR

pilot study in order to determine the effect that ferric chloride dosage has on o-PO4 removal

throughout the treatment process.

Source Control

Conducted MRWPCA Pretreatment Program facility inspections, follow up compliance inspections,

or sampling/monitoring at the following facilities: Sabor Farms; Salinas Tallow; Mission Linen

Supply #2100 (2).

Generated and issued MRWPCA Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permits to the following industrial

facilities: Salinas Tallow Company, Culligan Water Conditioning.

Conducted the weekly and monthly industrial wastewater monitoring for billing as required by the

Salinas Ponds Contract at the 24 permitted facilities. In all, 60 grab sampling events were

completed.

Human Resources

The recruitment for the Finance Manager closed April 22nd. We received 20 applications and they

are being reviewed.

The recruitment for the Director of Operations & Maintenance/Deputy General Manager closed April

28th. CPS HR received 96 resumes and they are being reviewed by their staff.

ATTACHMENTS: None

RECOMMENDED

MOTION: None required.

U:\BETTY\Board Agendas\Information Items\2014\May\Operations Report 7 C May 2014.doc

9MAY 2014 - SALINAS VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BUSINESS JOURNAL

WatercontinuestobeaveryimportantareaofworkandconsiderationforCityofSalinasStaff,MayorandCouncil.EvenasIwritethistheCityofSalinasisprovidingover4milliongallonsofproducewash

adayaspartofatest. ThetestbeingcompletedbytheMontereyRegionalWaterPollutionControlAgency(PCA)whencompletewillverifythatqualityofwaterprovidedsatisfiestheneedsoftheCastrovilleSeawaterIntrusionProjectorCSIP.CSIPprovidesirrigationwaterforagriculturalusesintheNorthern

areasoftheSalinasValley. ConsideringtheamountofSalinasRiverwaterrequiredtosupportCSIPthatisnotavailableduetodroughtconditions,thistestishighlyimportant. IfthetestingcomesoutasexpectedtheCitywillbeworkingwithMontereyCounty,theMonterey

CountyWaterResourcesAgencyandPCAtoprovidethiswaterforanextendedperiod. ThisisonemoreexampleofhowtheCityofSalinasdemonstratesawillingnesstoaddressregionalissuesaffectingtheagriculturalindustry. Thisisthefirstofmanystepstocomefromthecitythatleads.

Salinas Sends Water to Fight Salt Water Intrusion

by Mayor Joe Gunter

APRIL CONNECT AT LUNCH

pizza and salad were the order of the day at April’s Connect at Lunch.

The Chamber’s Account Manager Teresa Slaton shares a smile with Tene Shake and Ly gisse.

Councilmember Steve McShane got even more excited when he saw the Easter Bunny with his colorful eggs.

April Mixer

If you have something to share, please contact us

at 831-751-7725