Upload
l-a-paterson
View
222
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
1/40
AgendaMonterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)Regular Meeting
10:30 AM, Monday, February 2, 2015Council Chamber580 Pacific Street
Monterey, California
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS
PUBLIC COMMENTSPUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on anysubject which is within the jurisdiction of the MPRWA TAC and which is not on the agenda. Anyperson or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the Committee may do so byaddressing 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 appropriatestaff person will contact the sender concerning the details.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. December 1, 2014 Regular Meeting
AGENDA ITEMS
2. Receive Report On The Status Of Bi-Lateral Agreements For The GWR DefinitiveAgreement (Israel).
3. Discuss Ground Water Replenishment and Desal Cost Comparison Study (Stoldt).
4. Receive Report On Comparison Of Dana Point And Marina Slant Wells (Crooks).
5. Receive And Discuss The Current "Detailed" Monterey Peninsula Water Supply ProjectCritical Path Schedule For Permits And Approvals (Crooks).
6. Consider A Recommendation To The Water Authority Directors Relative To The Vacant
Marina Coast Water District Seat (Cullem).
7. Discuss Preparations For Review Of The Desal DEIR Scheduled For Release In April 2015 (Cullem).
8. Receive Updated MPRWA Fact Sheet and Discuss Authority Expectations Relative to
Each Project Cited (Cullem).
http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79860http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79852http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79852http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79853http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79854http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79855http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79855http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79856http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79856http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79858http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79858http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79859http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79859http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79859http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79859http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79858http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79858http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79856http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79856http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79855http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79855http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79854http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79853http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79852http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=79852http://../agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=798608/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
2/40
Created date 01/30/2015 4:38 PM Monday, February 2, 2015
2
ADJOURNMENT
The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to including the disabled in allof its services, programs and activities. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Monterey CityClerks Office at (831) 646-3935. Notification 30 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Cityto make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II]. Later requests will be accommodated to the extent feasible. Forcommunication-related assistance, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak toCity offices. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a meeting, dial711 to use CRS to talk to the Monterey City Clerk's Office at (831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of adevice.
Agenda related writings or documents provided to the MPRWA are available for publicinspection during the meeting or may be requested from the Monterey City Clerks Office at 580Pacific St, Room 6, Monterey, CA 93940. This agenda is posted in compliance with CaliforniaGovernment Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
3/40
MINUTES
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITYTECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)
Regular Meeting10:30 AM, Monday, December 1, 2014
COUNCIL CHAMBER580 PACIFIC STREET
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Members Present Cullem, Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Stoldt
Members Absent: Huss, Lee
Staff Present: Legal Counsel, Clerk
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS
No reports.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Invited comments from the public and had no requests to speak.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. November 17, 2014 Regular Meeting
Action: Continued to next meeting.
2. October 9, 2014 Special Meeting
On motion by TAC Member Stoldt and Seconded by TAC Member Israel and approved by thefollowing vote the Technical Advisory Committee approved the minutes of October 9, 2014.
AYES: 6 MEMBERS:Cullem, Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Stoldt
NOES: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Huss, Lee
ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: NoneRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None
AGENDA ITEMS
3. Receive Report on the Status of Bi-lateral Agreements for the Ground WaterReplenishment Source Water Definitive Agreement - Stoldt/Israel
Member Stoldt spoke to the hand out provided, Roadmap for a definitive agreement on sourcewaters and water recycling. He spoke to the eight definitive legal agreements that are neededand the tentative dates for the execution for these agreements. The TAC discussed the
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
4/40
MPRWA Minutes Monday, December 1, 2014
MPRWA TAC Meeting Minutes
Regular Meeting Minutes - Monday, December 1, 20142
different agreements and the agencies that would be parties to them. The TAC also discussedthe sources of water included in the agreements and the total targeted acre/ft of water.
Chair Cullem invited public comment and had no requests to speak.
On question, Member Stoldt reported that the externality study contract selection should bemade this week and that staff is conducting an in-house cost analysis for a cost comparisonand feasibility study at this time. Member Israel reported that the application for SRF Fundscannot be filed until a water purchase agreement is solidified but the state is working with thePollution Control Agency to qualify for a 1% financing ability.
The TAC discussed possibilities to meet the cease and desist order for either the GWR projector the Desal facility which is anticipated to be in production near 2nd or 3rd quarter of 2017.
This item was for informational purposes and no action was taken.
4. Receive Status Report on the Test Slant Well Construction and Update on the CurrentDetailed Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Critical Path Permits and ApprovalsSchedule - Crooks
Ian Crooks, Cal Am provided an update on the Test Slant Well Construction progress andpresented the updated production schedule which included the GWR project to demonstratehow the GWR will line up as compared to the Desal project approval and start up. Mr. Crooksreported that Cal Am Staff is working with the Coastal Commission to fulfill the permittingrequirements. December 15th would be the start of the big rig for the test well. On question, Mr.Crooks discussed the appeal filed against the Coastal Commission decision and reported thatpleadings will be done by declaration.
Chair Cullem invited public comment and had no requests to speak.
Mr. Crooks then presented the MPWSP Master Schedule which is updated through specificmilestones. He spoke to the progress anticipated to be made once the Test Well and the EIRare complete, but cited land acquisition issues, including easements that are still unresolved.
The TAC discussed the future possible interactions with the City of Marina as it relates to theCoastal Development Permit and indicated that it will be further discussed at future TACmeetings. Member Stoldt left the meeting at 11:45 AM.
Member Riley spoke to the MPWSP anticipated schedule and the 24 month data collectionperiod. He questioned how much data can and should be collected to be able to make anappropriate decision.
This item was for discussion only and no action was taken.
5. Discuss Presentations and Site Visits to Deep Water Desal and The People's MossLanding Desal on November 17, 2014 and Make Recommendations to the AuthorityBoard - TAC members
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
5/40
MPRWA Minutes Monday, December 1, 2014
MPRWA TAC Meeting Minutes
Regular Meeting Minutes - Monday, December 1, 20143
Chair Cullem spoke to the site visits to both the Deep Water Desal Facility and the PeoplesMoss Landing Desal Project and invited comments from other present TAC members.
Member Riedl questioned how the Moss Landing Harbor District could be the lead agency forthe People's Moss Landing Desal EIR. He also questioned if they have the funding in place tosee the project to completion. He mentioned that they were proposing to put the intake next tothe surf zone which seemed problematic.
Member Narigi questioned if either project had produced definitive schedules, or proof ofpermits that would provide proof of progress to which it was responded that they producedaggressive schedules but may be unrealistic.
Chair Cullem invited public comment and had no requests to speak.
6. Discuss Current Issues of Critical Importance to the Organizations Represented byTechnical Advisory Committee Members -TAC members
This was put on the agenda to discuss the interest of the different members of the TAC, tounderstand the desires of their respective organizations and how each can benefit. Since thekey members are not present, Chair Cullem requested that this item be continued to a latermeeting.
On motion by TAC Member Narigi and Seconded by TAC Member Riedl and approved by thefollowing vote the Technical Advisory Committee tabled this item to a future meeting.
AYES: 6 MEMBERS:Cullem, Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Stoldt
NOES: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Huss, LeeABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: None
RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 12:04 pm.
ATTEST:
Lesley Milton-Rerig, Committee Clerk Jim Cullem, Executive Director/Chair
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
6/40
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
7/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 2.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT:Receive Report on the Status of Bi-lateral Agreements for theGWR Definitive Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC receive an update on the efforts of thePollution Control Agency and the Water Management District in securing
the bi-lateral agreements necessary to secure a Definitive Agreement forsource and product water for the Ground Water Replenishment (GWR)project by March 2015.
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting of December 1, 2014, the TAC received and discussed the"Roadmap for a Definitive Agreement on Source Waters and WaterRecycling". As the completion date is fast approaching, the TAC should
remain informed of its progress.
ATTACHMENTS:
Roadmap for a Definitive Agreement on Source Waters and WaterRecycling as provided December 1, 2014.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
8/40
Tasks for a Definitive Agreement(October 2014March 2015)
Legal Agreements
Water Availability Financial Issues
Water R
Definitive Agreement Scoping: Timeline & Review
Public Discussion
MRWPCAMCWRA (4thAmendment)
MRWPCASalinas (Operations & Financing)
MRWPCAMCWD (Pipeline Lease)
MRWPCAMonterey (Lake El Estero)
MRWPCAMPWMDWatermaster (Water Storage Agreement)
MPWMDMRWPCA (Recycled Water Purchase Agreement)
MPWMDCal Am (Wholesale Water Purchase Agreement)
Public
Outreach
Definitive Agreement Finalized
First Draft of Definitive Agreement
circulated
Review water availability
assumptions; Discuss
operational issues; Wet year,
dry year, average year
considerations; Impact on
facilities and costs
Meet with SW
Staff, Tour
facilities, Co
Strategy for WRights Applic
Meet to Esta
Strategy for W
Rights Applic
Revised 10/23/14
Identify 6 to 8 Agreements, who will sign, scope
Assess a
componen
Project for Pr
Prepare Revis
Water Rig
Applicati
When Defin
Agreemen
Reached,
amended W
Rights Applic
10% Design
Capital
Costs identified
Rate Studyto develop
interruptible
rate for cost
of treatment
Meet with
stakeholders todiscuss pro rata
share and
amount of
capital costs and
initial Prop 218
Strategies Develop
alternative CSIP
funding
allocations &
Prop 218
strategies
3rdParty review
of costs/facilities PublicOutreach
Finalize
estimated
costs,
allocations, and
Prop 218
strategy
Incorporate into
Definitive
Agreement
Discuss with
each provider
of water
Fisheries
Review
Define Terms
Develop Scenarios
Propose Key Terms
Meet with
staff and
board/counsel
Important
Issues
Revise
Definitive
Agreement
Decide on
which waters
to incorporate
and phasing
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
9/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 3.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT: Discuss GWR/DESAL Cost Comparison Study
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Water Authority receive an update from Keith Israel, GeneralManager of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency and David Stoldt,General Manager of the Water Management District on the status of the cost
comparison study of Ground Water Replenishment (GWR) vs Cal Ams Desal facilities.
DISCUSSION:
Integral to the CPUC decision process approving GWR as part of a new PeninsulaWater Supply system, a cost comparison between GWR and the Cal Am Desal facilitiesis required.
This study have been approved and advertised by the Water Management District.
Keith Israel and Dave Stoldt will provide an update of the status of the cost comparisonstudy.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
10/40
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
11/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 4.
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT: Receive Report on Comparison of Dana Point and Marina Slant Wells
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC review available reports on the Dana Point test slantwell, discuss, and make recommendations as appropriate.
DISCUSSION:
At the request of the Water Authority at its meeting of Jan 8, 2015, Cal Am agreed todiscuss the results of the Dana Point test slant well in relation to the MPWSP test slantwell and potential production wells at the CEMEX site.
ATTACHMENTS:
Final Draft Report:www.mwdoc.com/documents/FinalDraftReport4-6-07.pdf
Final Report for Dana Point dated 2014
http://www.mwdoc.com/cms2/ckfinder/files/files/Final%20Summary%20Re
port%20FINAL%20January%202014%20KWS%20with%20cover.pdf
Huntington Beach technical report dated October 2014:
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/pdf/ISTAP_Final_Phase1_Report_10-9-14.pdf
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
12/40
MU
NICIPAL
WATE
R
DISTRICT
OF
OR
ANGE
COUNTY
September24,
2014
St reet Addr
ess
18 700 War
d Street
Fountain Valley, Califo
rni a 92708
Mailing A dd r
ess
P.O . Box 20895
Fountain Valle
y, CA 92728-0895
cott McCreary
ia email: sco
t
7
14) 963-3058
ONCUR
Fa
x: 714) 964-9389
www.mwdoc.com
Re: Commen
ts on Draft Pha
se 1 Report Tec
hnical Feasibili
ty of Subsurfac
e Intake
Designsfo
r the Proposed
Poseidon Wate
r Desalination F
acility at Hunt
ington Beach
Californ
ia Independen
t Scientific Tech
nical Advisory
Panel CONCU
R September 2
2
2014
We
offer the follo
wing clarifying
comments on t
he referenced d
raft report.
In general,it does notappear that theISTAP reviewed the full suiteof project reports for
the Dohen
yOcean Desal
ination Project,
Phase 1 Hydrog
eology Investig
ation, Phase 2
Test
Slant Wel
l Design/Constr
uction and Sub
surface Intake F
easibility Inves
tigation and Ph
ase
3 E
xtendedPumpi
ng and Pilot Pla
nt Test,but onl
y reliedon one
report prepared
by
Geoscienceand
some articles p
repared byGe
oscience. These
reports can be
found at our
web
site under Ocea
n Desalination
, Doheny Ocean
Desalination P
roject. We sug
gest a
fi
rst read of the P
roject Summar
y Report. Our c
oncern is that y
our report has
made
fi
ndings regardin
g slant wells th
at we strongly b
elieve are not
supported by ou
r research.
O
ur comments a
re mainly direc
ted to the gene
ralized stateme
nts made regard
ing slant
wells.
IST P F
indings
The
Draft Report pr
ovides the follo
wing findings a
nd conclusions
for slant wells i
nthe
Talb
ert Aquifer as g
eneralized in th
eSummary Ma
trix page 14) w
hich we find to
be
misleading an
d incorrect as e
xplained below
.
Res
ponse to ISTAP
Draft Report F
indings and Co
nclusions
Section 3.3
.6 Slant Wells
Design/Constr
uction Conside
rations.
The rep
ort is correct in
noting that Dua
lRotary
drilling is
a proven water
welltechnolog
y andits applica
tionto angle in
stallations has
also
been prov
en inmining ap
plications, but only in a few water supply projects Hudson River
a
nd Missouri Ri
ver, projects co
nstructed by La
yne) prior to ou
r Test Slant We
llproject on
Doheny StateB
each in 2006.
Howev
er, the report is
incorrect in dra
wing conclusio
ns regarding th
e performance
of the
test slan
t well and extra
polating those
results to a full
scale productio
n well, as many
tr
ade-offs were m
ade in our test
work, due to m
onetary and ti
me constraints.
Larry D. D
ick
Presiden t
W ay ne S O
sborne
Vice President
Brett R. Barbre
Direc tor
Wayne A. Cl
ark
Direc tor
Joa n
C Finnegan
Direc to
r
Susan
Hinman
Direc tor
JefferyM. Thomas
Direc tor
Robert J. Hunter
Gen eral M
anager
M E M B E R G
ENCIES
City of Brea
Ci
ty of Buena Park
E
ast OrangeCounty W ater
District
E
l Toro Water D istrict
Emerald Bay Ser
vice District
City of Fou
ntain Valley
C
ity of G arden Grove
G olden Stat
e Water Co.
Ci
ty of Huntington Beach
Irvine Ranch Water D
is trict
Laguna Beac
h County Water District
City of
La Habra
City of La Palma
Mesa Water Distric
t
M ou
lton Niguel Water Distr ic
t
City o
f Newport Beach
City of Orange
Or a
nge County Water District
City
of San Clemente
City of S
an Juan Capistrano
Santa
Margarita Water District
City of Seal Beach
Serrano W
ater District
South
Coast Water District
Trabuco Ca
nyon WaterDistrict
City
of Tustin
City of Westm
inster
Yorba L
inda Water D istrict
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
13/40
Mr. Scott McCreary
Page 2
September 24, 2014
Due to limited funding, our Test Slant Well project was designed as a uniform 12-inch diameter well (blank
casing and screened interval) without a larger diameter blank pump housing. Consequently, the largest
diameter submersible pump that could be installed in the well was a 10-inch pump. The well was developed
at about 1,700 gpm. A key objective of our test work was to stress the aquifer as much as feasible over a
subsequent 18-month extended pumping test period so that we could gain as much information on the
ability of the well to connect to the ocean and to evaluate pumped water quality as the old marine
groundwater was being pumped out and replaced by ocean water.
This led to a decision to use a high speed, high capacity pump. The well was subsequently equipped in 2009
with a high speed, 2480 rpm, 2,200 gpm pump. We anticipated sand clogging of the gravel pack and
expected a drop off in the well efficiency over the extended pumping test since it was not possible to fully
develop the well at the required 3,300 gpm pumping rate, as a pump at this capacity was not available from
manufacturers. It is industry standard practice to develop wells at 1.5 times the design discharge rate. To do
that for the Test Slant Well would have required a pump capable of approximately 3,300 gpm (2,100 gpm x
1.5). As this was not feasible due to pump house casing diameter limitations, the Test Slant Well was never
fully developed. As such, over time material entered the well during the approximate two year pilot pumping
test which contributed to higher well losses and lower efficiency near the end of the test. This would not
occur with a full scale well.
Development pumping at a rate 1.5 times the desired production rate is typically performed to fully entrain
and remove finer grain materials from the near well zone. At the normal production rate, these materials are
no longer entrained and a clear producing well is developed. This was not possible with our decision to use
the high capacity pump and consequently it was expected that sand clogging and well deterioration was
experienced over the extended pumping test.
For the full scale project, the well will be designed with a larger diameter pump blank housing casing, which
will enable development pumping at 4,500 gpm to produce a clear production well at 3,000 gpm. We are
certain that a thoroughly developed well can be constructed which will minimize well deterioration over
time. In addition, the use of 2507 Super Duplex Stainless Steel should show very low rates of corrosion and
biofouling, based on our pilot testing work, which will allow long periods between well maintenance
(estimated at 5 to 10 yrs to perform major re-development work).
Slant well maintenance is not complex nor is it much more difficult than what is required for conventional
vertical wells, but it is just done at an angle. Proven well development methods of jetting, brushing,
swabbing/bailing, air lifting, and development pumping would be used for the full scale production well and
any future re-development work. We learned a great deal on how to work at an angle and we don t see any
significant difficulties in construction, development and maintenance of the full scale production wells. At
Doheny, we plan to install 9 wells, 7 would be operational at any one time and 2 would be in standby
rotational status. This allows the operation to continue through the summer period when beach access is
not permitted should a pump fail. The ITSAP conclusions regarding design consideration and maintenance
should show a low risk rather than medium risk, as the medium finding was based on incorrect interpretation
of our test work.
MUNICIP L W TER DISTRICT OF OR NGE COUNTY
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
14/40
Mr.S
cott M
cCrea
ry
P
age 3
S
eptem
ber 24
,2014
C
omme
nt on
Geoch
emica
lIssu
es Pa
ge 50 a
nd 61
)
Th
e repo
rt state
s that
the gr
eatest
risk of
clogg
ing oc
curs w
here
there i
s mixi
ng of
dissim
ilar w
aters o
r a
chan
ge in
water
chemi
stry (e
.g. intr
oduct
ion of
dissol
ved ox
ygen)
andc
loggin
g is of
greate
st con
cernw
here
reh
abilita
tion is
comp
lex an
d exp
ensive
. Thes
e chal
lenges
are pr
imaril
y rela
ted to
old ma
rine g
round
water
thatis
anox
ic and
canco
ntain
elevat
ed lev
els of
dissolv
ed iro
n (Fe)
andm
angan
ese (M
n).T
his is
the cas
e in
th
e mar
ine aq
uifer o
ffshor
eof D
oheny
State
Beac
h.Ove
rthe
18mo
nth ex
tende
d pum
ping t
est, th
e
pr
oduce
dwate
r rem
ained
anoxic
as the
fract
ion of
ocean
recha
rge in
crease
drapi
dly int
othe
upper
screen
sec
tions.
In this
locati
on the
re is a
n abun
dance
of org
anic m
atter
in the
shallo
w sed
iment
s that w
ill lik
ely
allo
w the
uptak
e of di
ssolve
d oxyg
en to
contin
ue for
a lon
g perio
d of t
ime.
Mode
ling(f
low,v
ariable
dens
ity and
geoc
hemic
al) isc
urrent
ly bein
g con
ducted
to pr
ovide
an esti
mateo
f the
time topumpout theoldmarine groundwater that is enrichedwith dissolved Fe/Mn and to estimatethe
stea
dy sta
te wat
er qua
lity co
nditio
ns. Th
e plan
is to
first p
ump o
ut the
old m
arine
ground
water
befor
eusin
g
thi
swate
r for f
eedwa
ter fo
rthe d
esalin
ation f
acility
, a pro
cess t
hat is
estima
ted to
take a
bout o
ne ye
ar. Th
is
will
allow
a bett
er dete
rmina
tion o
f stead
y stat
e cond
itions
, whet
her or
not th
e aqui
fer wil
l be fu
lly ox
idized
wi
th oce
an wa
ter, an
dwill
allow
final p
ilot te
sting
to dete
rmine
if any
pretr
eatme
nt is re
quire
dto re
move
a
nyres
idual
lowle
vels of
Fe/M
n and
miner
als.A
small
amoun
t of m
ixing i
n the
range
of 5%
of fres
h
gr
oundw
ater c
ompa
red to
95% o
cean
water
(based
on m
odelin
gwor
k) is n
ot exp
ected
to cau
se any
si
gnifica
nt iss
ues wi
th pro
cess tr
eatme
nt and
mem
brane
foulin
g.
Sect
ion 5.
2.5 Sla
nt We
lls Co
mplet
ed in t
he Tal
bert A
quifer
C
urrent
slant w
ell te
chnolo
gy uti
lizing
thete
lescop
ic met
hodof
desig
n and
constr
uction
canre
sultin
angle
d
w
ells (s
lant w
ells) e
xtendi
ng 1,0
00 lin
eal ft.
With
long s
creen s
ection
s exte
nding
benea
th the
ocean
floor,
onsho
re dra
wdow
n imp
acts w
ould b
e min
imize
d, The
statem
ent th
at sla
nt wel
ls wo
uld dr
aw lar
ge vo
lumes
from
the Or
ange C
ounty
Grou
ndwa
ter Ba
sin as
a fata
l flaw
has n
ot bee
ndem
onstra
ted by
defen
dable
m
odeli
ng and
or pi
lot tes
ting. A
simp
le pilo
t testu
sing a
verti
cal we
ll com
pleted
in the
Talbe
rt aqu
ifer on
the
P
roject
site c
ould d
emon
strate i
mpact
s on w
ater l
evel ch
anges
in the
Talbe
rt aqu
ifer an
d the
overly
ing se
mi-
p
erche
d aqui
fer. M
onitor
ing we
lls in
the Ta
lbert a
quifer
ands
hallow
layer
s wou
ld pro
vide th
e nece
ssary
inte
rferen
ce info
rmati
on to c
onfirm
if th
ere we
re imp
acts t
o the O
CWD
grou
ndwat
er basi
n.
Water
quali
ty para
meter
s anal
yzed d
uring
the te
sting w
ould
allow
estima
tes of
perce
ntage
of oce
an wa
ter
and
inland
water
recha
rge. W
ith th
e well
scree
n well
out u
nder th
eoce
an, un
der a
consta
nthea
d bou
ndary,
the m
aximu
m rat
eof dr
aw fro
m the
inlan
daqui
fer wo
uld be
no gr
eater
than a
bout 5
%, ba
sed on
mode
ling
co
nduct
ed for
theSa
n Juan
Cree
k conf
ineda
lluvial
offsh
ore aq
uifers
ystem
. At th
is rate
, abou
t 6 mg
d of
injec
ted we
ll wat
er wou
ld be
produ
ced by
the s
lant w
ells co
mpare
d to p
roduc
tion of
120 m
gd fr
om the
slant
w
ells.
The p
roject
would
onlyh
ave to
prov
ide the
repla
cemen
t supp
ly to O
CWD
in th
is amo
unt, a
s most
of
the
inject
ion we
ll barr
ier is
rechar
ged to
the ba
sin an
d subs
equen
tly pro
duced
. This
is a r
elative
ly sma
ll
im
pact o
n sup
ply. T
he imp
act to
the ba
rrier w
ould
be eli
minate
d if th
e slan
twell
field w
ere si
tuated
acros
s
the
full w
idth of
the T
albert
Aquif
er and
provi
ded a
suffici
ent co
ne ofd
epres
sion to
contr
ol sea
water
MUN
ICIP L
W TE
R DIST
RICTO
F OR
NGEC
OUNTY
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
15/40
Mr. Scott McCreary
Page 4
September 24, 2014
intrusion. This could be an added benefit of using slant wells, especially under future sea level rise
conditions.
Comm ent on Sea W ater Intrusion
Contrary to what the ISTAP panel implies, wells pumping at the coast or from subsea aquifers beneath the
ocean floor do not contribute to sea water intrusion but on the contrary, help prevent sea water intrusion
through the creation of an extraction trough that intercepts seawater. Modeling studies of the full scale
slant well project at Doheny State Beach, Dana Point show that the slant well pumping trough will provide
seawater intrusion control. It should be noted that the gold standard in seawater intrusion control once was
considered to include both an extraction trough and an injection barrier. OCWD found that it could operate
just the injection barrier to provide effective seawater intrusion control, which has been utilized for many
years. However, in the future with sea level rise, the use of injection wells will become less effective and
problematic and a shift to extraction wells will be required to prevent sea water intrusion. A recent OCWD
study (Technical Memorandum, February 2013) evaluated potential effects from sea level rise to determine
protective levels, impacts on groundwater conditions and seawater intrusion, and how long injection wells
could be utilized before it would be necessary to shift to an extraction trough.
In conclusion, we have no issue if you eliminate slant wells from consideration at the Huntington Beach
location; but if you do so, they need to be for fully supportable and technically covered reasons. We would
request that the report be modified with the following revised matrix and appropriate changes to the text of
the report.
Criteria
Subfactor
Slant Wells in Talbert quifer
Hydrogeology
Impact on freshwater aquifers
Yes, but minor at 5 of
produced water
Design Considerations
Complexity of Construction
Performance Risk degree of
uncertainty of outcome
Reliability of Intake System
Frequency of Maintenance
Complexity of Maintenance
Medium
Low
igh
Low
Low
Oceanographic
Sensitivity to sea level rise
Low Actually a positive benefit
Geochemistry
Risk of adverse fluid mixing
Risk of clogging
Risk of significant change in
inorganic chemistry
Low
Low
Low
Precedent on large scale in
similar geologic conditions
No precedent
Key considerations/fatal flaws
None
Technically feasible? Yes or No
es
MUNICIP L W TER DISTRICT OF OR NGE COUNTY
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
16/40
Mr. Scott McCreary
Page 5
September 24, 2014
This letter was jointly prepared with Dr. Dennis Williams, Geoscience and reviewed and concurred to by Dr.
Matt Charette, Coastal Geochemist, WHO and Mr. Gerry Filteau, President, SPI (Desalination Process
Treatment). We would be most willing to meet with the ISTAP to go over our findings, answer questions, and
to provide clarifications to their report.
If you should have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned at (714) 593-5003.
Sincerely,
Richard B. Bell, PE
Principal Engineer and Project Manager
cc
r. Tom Luster
Dr. Dennis Williams, Geoscience
Dr. Matt Charette, WHO
Mr. Gerry Filteau, SPI
Mr. Ron Davis, CalDesal
MUNICIP L W TER DISTRICT OF OR NGE COUNTY
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
17/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 5.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT:Receive and Discuss the Current "Detailed" MPWSP CriticalPath Schedule for Permits & Approvals.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC receive an update on the Cal Am MPWSP
Critical Path Schedule for Permits and Approvals including the impact ofthe DEIR delay .
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting of November 7, 2014, the California Coastal Commissionissued a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for Cal Am's test slant well atthe CEMEX site, and construction of the test well is underway.
The issuance of the CDP was critical to the MPWSP schedule, however
many additional permits and approvals, as well as technical issues, remain.
The situation has been further complicated by the Jan 23, 2015 ruling byCPUC Administrative Law Judge Weatherford's to delay the release of theDEIR.
Accordingly, the TAC needs to review Cal Am's latest "detailed" permitsand approvals schedule in an effort to identify likely future delays orapproval challenges that might require Water Authority attention.
ATTACHMENTS:
Current Cal Am critical path schedule for Permits and Approvals
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
18/40
ULL SCALE PLANT & PIPELINES SCHEDULE - [WORKING PRODUCT & SUBJECT TO CHANGE]
ported on January 30, 2015 5:18:44 PM MST
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
19/40
ported on January 30, 2015 5:18:44 PM MST
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
20/40
ported on January 30, 2015 5:18:45 PM MST
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
21/40
ported on January 30, 2015 5:18:45 PM MST
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
22/40
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
23/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 6.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT: Consider a recommendation to the Water Authority relative tothe vacant MCWD seat.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC consider a recommendation to the Water
Authority to invite the District Engineer or Acting General Manager of theMarina Coast Water District as a member of the Water Authority TAC.
DISCUSSION:
At Exhibit A is the staff report provided to the Water Authority on Aug 14,2014, recommending that Brian Lee be invited to join the TAC. Brianaccepted the invitation and served as a member until his departure fromMCWD in January 2015.
The TAC should discuss inviting the current interim General Manager, BillKoker, to fill the MCWD seat on the TAC.
EXHIBITS:A- Staff report provided to the Water Authority on Aug 14, 2014
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
24/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: August 14, 2014
Item No: 7.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT: Receive report, discuss, and vote on staff proposal to add the GeneralManager, or District Engineer, of the Marina Coast Water District(MCWD) as a member of the Authority Technical Advisory Committee(TAC) and to add a MCWD hydrologist to the Monterey Peninsula WaterSupply Project (MPWSP) Hydrogeologic Working Group.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Water Authority invite Marina Coast Water District (MCWD)
participation on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and consider if it should makea recommendation to the settling parties to add a MCWD hydrologist to the test slantwell Hydrogeologic Working Group (HWG).
DISCUSSION:
During January and July 2014, the City of Marina has been heavily involved in thepermitting of the bore hole construction and in consideration of a mitigated negativedeclaration (MND) and coastal development permit (DP) for Cal Am's test slant well atthe CEMEX site.
During public hearings, the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) raised a number ofconcerns that suggest a lack of communication between MCWD and Cal Am, and withthe Water Authority as well. This situation has not only delayed progress on the desalplant approval and construction, but has raised serious concerns on the part of theMCWD and City of Marina that its water needs may be placed at risk as a result of thedesal plant slant wells.
To initiate a dialog on these issues, several informal MCWD/MPRWA managementlevel meetings were held during the week of August 4. Amongst other things, it wasconcluded that participation by MCWD representatives onthe TAC, and possibly ontheHWG, would provide early MCWD input on technical issues related to the Desal facility
and the slant wells, facilitate MCWD environmental review of the MPWSP EIR, insurethe concerns of Marina residents get timely consideration, and improve communicationbetween and amongst MCWD, Cal Am, and the Water Authority.
It should be noted that the TAC already has a member from the agricultural communityto articulate ag interests prior to Water Authority decisions and deliberations. Thus, theExecutive Director recommends the Authority extend an invitation to the MCWD DistrictEngineer (Interim General Manager) to join the TAC for the same purpose.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
25/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 7.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT:Discuss Preparations for Review of the Desal DEIR Scheduledfor Release in April 2015.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC discuss preparations for review of theDesal DEIR scheduled for release by the CPUC in April 2015.
DISCUSSION:
On January 23, 2015,The CPUC Administrative Law Judge delayed thecirculation of the Cal Am Desal DEIR until April of 2015 in order to allowdata from the test slant well to be available. He also increased the period oftime available for public comment and preparation of the FEIR.
Whenever the DEIR finally is circulated, the TAC will be tasked withreviewing it and advising the Water Authority Board as appropriate. The
TAC members are asked to discuss preparations for that review.
ATTACHMENTS:
ALJ Ruling of January 23, 2015 and revised CPUC schedule.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
26/40
143858682 - 1 -
GW2/sbf/avs 1/23/2015
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Application of California-American WaterCompany (U210W) for Approval of theMonterey Peninsula Water Supply Projectand Authorization to Recover All Presentand Future Costs in Rates.
Application 12-04-019(Filed April 23, 2012)
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES RULING UPDATING SCHEDULE
In order to allow the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) to incorporate more
complete data, the procedural schedule for Phase 1 of this proceeding is
modified. The primary changes are that the DEIR may be issued later than
previously scheduled, and that there will be a comment period on the DEIR of
60 days, rather the previous 45 days.
In addition, given the large number of parties in this proceeding, a ban on
ex partecommunications with decisionmakers is effective immediately. Two
all-party meetings will be added to the revised schedule to allow for parties to
present their views to the Commissioners in a fair and controlled manner.
In a previous ruling issued by Administrative Law Judge Minkin on
August 21, 2014, parties Opening Briefs on legal and policy issues were due
60 days after issuance of the DEIR. To accommodate the revised comment
period on the DEIR, Opening Briefs are now due 75 days after issuance of the
DEIR, with Reply Briefs due 15 days after Opening Briefs.
FILED1-23-15
01:36 PM
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
27/40
A.12-04-019 GW2/sbf/avs
- 2 -
California-American Water (Cal-Am) has drilled a number of boreholes to
provide stratigraphic data that will be useful in performing hydrologic analysis
for the DEIR. In addition, Cal-Am is drilling a test well at the Cemex site. In the
process of drilling the test well, additional stratigraphic data will be obtained
that could be useful in the DEIRs hydrologic analysis.1 Incorporation and
analysis of this data, such as its use in modeling runs, is taking more time than
allowed for in the current schedule.
Our DEIR preparation process also needs to remain coordinated with the
DEIR being prepared by the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency
(MRWPCA) for their Groundwater Replenishment Project, and recent revisions
to the Groundwater Replenishment Project (such as the identification of new
source water) must also be analyzed and incorporated into the California Public
Utilities Commissions DEIR. In order to include this data and the related
analysis in the DEIR, more time is needed than is provided by the current
schedule. Because of the scope of the EIR, and its relationship to the
Groundwater Replenishment Project, we will be allowing for a 60-day, rather
than a 45-day, comment period on the DEIR.
Finally, it is important that the DEIR (and Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR)) provide adequate information and analysis of the possible effects
of the MPWSP on groundwater. The State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) has indicated that this is a topic that is important for the Commission
to address, and has given us some guidance on how to do so. Commission staff
1 Because of the duration required for a pump test from the test well, it is unlikely that
significant pump test data from the test well will be available for the DEIR. In addition, the testwell is subject to litigation that could delay its drilling and operation.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
28/40
A.12-04-019 GW2/sbf/avs
- 3 -
has consulted with SWRCB on this issue, and it appears that the potential value
of the additional data and analysis that hopefully will become available
outweighs the cost of the minor delay that is contemplated.
Accordingly, the schedule is modified to be as follows:
April 2015 DEIR issued for comment.
60 days from DEIR Comments on DEIR.
75 days from DEIR Opening Briefs filed and served.2
15 days from Opening Briefs Reply Briefs filed and served.3
July 2015 All-party meeting.
October 2015 FEIR published.
December 2015 Proposed Decision issued.
January 2016 All-party meeting.
February 2016 Proposed Decision on Commission Agenda.
The schedule for Phase 2 of this proceeding may also need to be modified,
but we will not modify it at this time. As the proceeding progresses, we will
evaluate the need to modify the Phase 2 schedule.
IT IS RULED that:
1. The schedule for this proceeding is modified as described above.
2 Briefs shall use a common outline. Cal-Am shall consult with parties to develop acommon outline, and shall serve the common outline no later than 15 days afterissuance of the DEIR.
3 Reply Briefs will follow the same common outline as the Opening Briefs.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
29/40
A.12-04-019 GW2/sbf/avs
- 4 -
2. Ex partecommunications with decisionmakers in this proceeding are
prohibited.
Dated January 23, 2015, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ GARY WEATHERFORD
Gary WeatherfordAdministrative Law Judge
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
30/40
23 January 2015
UPDATED Schedule and Task Lis t for MPWSP Post Settlement (REV 23 JAN 2015)
RED are changes from 7 Oct 13 Schedule.
CPUC Calendar Dates
Task Due Date Responsible Party NotesComments onSettlement Agreements
Due
August 30, 2013 Complete
Reply Comments onSettlement Agreements
Due
September 13, 2013 Complete
PrehearingConference: Status ofSettlement Motion (ifany), of CEQA work
& other matters
September 16, 2013 Complete
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
October 2014 MPRWA Complete
Informational Hearingon SettlementAgreements
December 2-3, 2013 Complete
Quarterly Check-in Callwith Settling Parties
January 2015 MPRWA Complete
DEIR circulated forComment
Feb 28, 2014April 2015
all
Quarterly Check-in Callwith Settling Parties
April 2015 MPRWA
Cal-Am to file and servea common outline for
legal and policy briefs,after consulting with
parties
April 29, 2014 15 daysafter issuance of DEIR
all
Comments on DEIRDue
April 14, 201460 days from DEIR
all
Common OutlineOpening Briefs filed and
served on legal andpolicy issues
April 29, 201475 days from DEIR
all
Reply Briefs filed andserved on legal and
policy issues
May 14, 201415 days from Opening
Briefs
all
All party meeting July 2015 CPUC
FEIR published June 17, 2014October 2015
CPUC
ProposedDecision addressing
certification of FEIR andissuance of CPCN
July 2014 Phase 1December 2015
CPUC
Quarterly Check-in Callwith Settling Parties
July 2015 MPRWA
Target for CommissionAction on Phase I
August 2014
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
31/40
23 January 2015
Task Due Date Responsible Party Notes
Quarterly Check-in Callwith Settling Parties
October 2015 MPRWA
Quarterly Check-in Callwith Settling PartiesAll party meeting
January 2016 MPRWACPUC
Proposed Decision onCommission Agenda
February 2016 CPUC
Testimony, settlementdiscussions, hearings,
decisions fromSettlement K
December 2014-July2015 November 2015-
June 2016
Cal-Am, MRWPCA,MPWMD, CPUC
See GWR Schedule
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
32/40
23 January 2015
GWR (Rev 5 JAN 2015)
Task Due Date Responsible Party Notes
File Motion forBifurcation of theGWR Decision
August 2013 MRWPCA Complete and Granted
Board Actions toApprove RevisedGovernance Committee
Agreement
August/Sept 2013 MPWMD, MPRWA,County, & Cal-Am To be Completed inOctober
Executed Agreementsfor GWR Source Water
and/or DeclaratoryRelief
Sept-Nov 20136 Party Joint MOU
Approved mid-Oct 2014
MRWPCA Meet & Confer inProgressfor DefinitiveAgreements (March
2015)
Draft WPAOct-Dec 2013April 2015
MPWMD & MRWPCA Delayed per Oct 2014CPUC Adjustment ofPhase 2 Schedule
Obtain Representationsfrom DPH re Use ofExtracted GWR Water
Oct-Dec 2013June 2014
MRWPCA Dept Public HealthConcept ProjectApproval received
June 2014
Obtain Representationsfrom RWQCB re Use ofExtracted GWR Water
Oct-Dec 2013June 2014
MRWPCA ????
Storage Agreementwith Seaside Basin
WatermasterOct-Dec 2013April 2015
MRWPCA & MPWMD
GWR Basis of DesignComplete with At Least
10% DesignOct-Dec 2013October 2014
MRWPCA complete
GWR Financing PlanSufficient for SRF
FundingOct-Dec 2013
May 2015
MRWPCA & MPWMD
Agreement on Terms ofWPA Jan 2014
June 2015
Cal-Am, MRWPCA,&MPWMD
Perform Revenue
Requirement AnalysisIncluding Any DebtEquivalency Effect
Jan-Mar 2014June 2015
MRWPCA & MPWMD
Perform Assessment ofGWR Positive and
Negative Externalitiesfor Any Premium
Showing
Jan-Mar 2014June 2015
MRWPCA & MPWMD
DEIR Circulated July 2014 March 2015 MRWPCA Coord w/Cal Am DEIR
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
33/40
23 January 2015
Dilution WaterRequirements
July-October 2014Not Required
MRWPCA
Project Approved andFEIR
October 2014September 2015
MRWPCA
CPUC TestimonyPhase Commences
November 2015 Cal-Am, MRWPCA,MPWMD, CPUC
CPUC EvidentiaryHearings
January 2016 Cal-Am, MRWPCA,MPWMD, CPUC
All Permits for GWRConstruction Obtained January 2015
February 2016
MRWPCA For Major Permits
Target for CPUC Actionon Phase 2 Decision
June 2016 Cal-Am, MRWPCA,MPWMD, CPUC
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
34/40
23 January 2015
Source Wells (Rev 5 JAN 2015)
Task Due Date Responsible Party Notes
Drill ExploratoryBoreholes
Sept. 2013 February2014
Cal-Am Complete
Commence
Hydrogeologic Studyand Technical Report
August 2013 Cal-Am / SVWC Underway
Permits for CEMEXSite Test Well
January 2014 Nov 12,2014
Cal-Am Coastal CommissionApproved CDP.
CEQA lawsuit pending
Drill CEMEX Site TestWell
February 2014 NovDec14-FebMar 15 subject
to Coastal Commission
Cal-Am
Results of Test WellOperation Obtained
February 2014 2015February 2016 2017
Cal-Am Delayed -see above
Hydrogeologic Studyand Technical Report
Complete and ResultsFiled with CPUC
June 2015
?
Cal-Am Delayed -see above
Necessary Agreementsfrom CEMEX for
Source Wells
Nov. 2015, or sooner?Nov 2016, or sooner
Cal-Am
All Necessary Permitsfor Construction of
Source Wells Obtained
Nov. 2015, or sooner?Nov 2016 or sooner
Cal-Am
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
35/40
23 January 2015
Securit ization (Rev 5 JAN 2015)
Initial Revision and
Redline of Legislation
Early September 2013 MPWMD Complete
Obtain Cal-Am Input onDraft Legislation
Late September 2013 MPWMD, MPRWA, &Cal-Am
Complete
Retain Necessary
Additional
Financial/Legal
Consultants (Charles
Atkins)
October 2013 MPWMD In ProgressComplete
Revise Financial
Comparison of
Securitization v. Cal-Am
Financing
October 2013 MPWMD & Cal-Am In ProgressOn-Going
Meeting with
Community/Interest
Groups and Cities
October-December
2013
MPWMD & MPRWA In Progress Complete
Further Revise
Legislation as
Necessary
October-November
2013
In Progress Complete
Draft Summary of
Legislation
December 2013 MPWMD Complete
Introduce Legislation January 2014 Complete
Lobbying Effort February-April 2014 MPWMD, MPRWA, &
Cal-Am
In Progress Complete
Legislation Adopted
Governor Signed
April-May 2014 Sept 19,
2014
Passed Senate
Unanimously; Referred
to Assembly Complete
Initial Draft of Motion for
Financing Order
April 2014
March 2015
MPWMD
Perform Analysis to
Demonstrate Annual
Customer Benefits
Exceed 1.0% of Total
Annual Revenue
Requirement
April 2014
March 2015
MPWMD & Cal-Am
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
36/40
23 January 2015
Motion Application for
Financing Order
May 2014
May 2015
MPWMD
Obtain CPUC Financing
Order
August 2014 November
2015
Order on securitization
financing on satisfaction
of remaining criteriafrom Settlement K
Preliminary Discussions
with Bond Underwriters
September-December
2014
MPWMD Complete??
Drafting of
documentation for bond
requestsDocuments
September
2014January-April 2015
MPWMD & Cal-Am
Preliminary Discussions
with Rating Agencies
February-April 2015 MPWMD
Issuance of Public BondFinancing
End of 2015 Q2-Q32016
MPWMD
015621\0002\11340073.11/30/15
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
37/40
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report
Date: February 02, 2015
Item No: 8.
06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem
SUBJECT:Receive Updated MPRWA Fact Sheet and Discuss AuthorityExpectations Relative to Each Project Cited.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC review and comment on the revised WaterAuthority fact sheet, discuss the Water Authority's expectations with
respect to each project cited in the fact sheet, and provide appropriaterecommendations to staff and to the Water Authority Board.
DISCUSSION:
The MPRWA fact sheet is updated periodically and is intended to provideupdated information on progress toward completing one or more watersupply projects to replace Cal Am's overdraft of the Carmel River andprojected reductions from the Seaside Aquifer. The fact sheet is usually a
leave-behind when staff or board members make verbal presentations tocommunity groups.
The latest update includes schedule changes up through and including theJan 23, 2015 ruling from the CPUC Administrative Law Judge delaying therelease of the Desal DEIR.
The TAC needs to review the update and insure that Water Authorityexpectations are being addressed for each project cited on the fact sheet.
ATTACHMENTS:
Updated Fact Sheet as of Feb 1, 2015.
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
38/40
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
39/40
---
-
8/9/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 02-02-15
40/40
-
-
------- -------