tac mprwa agenda packet 08-04-14

8/21/2019 TAC MPRWA Agenda Packet 08-04-14

1/34

AgendaMonterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)Regular Meeting

10:30 AM, Monday, August 4, 2014Council 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. April 7, 2014

2. July 7, 2014

AGENDA ITEMS

3. Address Unresolved Questions from the California Public Utilities Commission SettlementAgreement that Need to be Brought to the Directors for Consideration - TAC

4. Discuss the Position of Chair of the TAC - Burnett

5. Discuss the Ground Water Replenishment Memorandum of Understanding - Israel

6. Receive Report and Discuss the Status of Permits, Environmental Reports, Test Resultsand Preliminary Critical Path Method Schedule for the Monterey Peninsula Water SupplyProject - Crooks

7. Receive and Discuss Draft Value Engineering Report Summary of Alternatives - Cullem

ADJOURNMENT


2/34

Created date 08/01/2014 10:46 AM Monday, August 4, 2014

2

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to include the disabled in all ofits services, programs and activities. For disabled access, dial 711 to use the California RelayService (CRS) to speak to staff at the Monterey City Clerks Office, the Principal Office of theAuthority. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend ameeting, dial 711 to use CRS to talk to staff at the Monterey City Clerks 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 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.


3/34

M I N U T E SMONTEREY PENINSULA WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)Regular Meeting

10:30 AM, Monday, April 7, 2014COUNCIL CHAMBER

580 PACIFIC STREETMONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Members Present: Narigi, Riedl, Riley, Stoldt, Burnett

Members Absent: Huss, Israel

Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL

The meeting was called to order at 10:35 a.m.



Member Riley expressed concern that the report provided to the Directors at their April 10 thmeeting did not accurately represent the TAC discussion and he questioned how information isdisseminated from the TAC to the Directors. Executive Director Cullem spoke to the processand indicated he will attempt to improve communication.

Member Riedl reported on a communication from the State Water Resources Control Boardregarding new mandatory requirements to incorporate American iron and steel into anyproposed project that will use SRF funding. He indicated that this could apply to local waterprojects under development.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Chair Burnett invited public comments and had no requests to speak.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. March 3, 2014

On motion by TAC Member Riedl and seconded by TAC Member Narigi and approved by thefollowing vote the Technical Advisory Committee approved the minutes of March 3, 2014.

AYES: 5 MEMBERS:Narigi, Riedl, Riley, Stoldt, Burnett


4/34

MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, April 7, 2014

2

NOES: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Israel, HussABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: NoneRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None

AGENDA ITEMS

2. Receive, Discuss, and Make Recommendations on the Draft Request for Proposal (RFP) andScope of Work for a Value Engineering (VE) Study of the Monterey Peninsula Water SupplyProject (MPWSP) -Cullem

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the process of review prior to the release of theRequest for Proposals for the Value Engineering (VE) Study. He reported that theGovernance Committee agreement dictates Cal Am to hire the VE, but the GovernanceCommittee, in efforts to improve transparency, voted to solicit and contract directly withthe VE and have Cal Am reimburse all expenses. Mr. Cullem further explained that thescope of work is for the desal facility itself and will review both proposed facility sizes andattempt to identify different ways to save money based on the two scales. He clarified that thereis no intent to address the cost effectiveness and that the comparative pricing will come from areport from the Water Management District.

Member Riedl questioned the sustainability requirements, encouraged adding a total page limit,and questioned the limits to the workshop. He also questioned compensation terms includingthe lump sum payment and the contract term. Member Riley left the meeting at 10:56 p.m.

Ian Crooks, Engineering Manager from Cal Am Water spoke to the anticipated schedule andthe Value Engineering contract terms expecting the contract will be fully concluded by the endof July.

Chair Burnett invited public comment and had no requests to speak.

Chair Burnett and Executive Director Cullem reported that notes of the comments receivedwere taken and will be incorporated into the report for the Directors.

On motion by Member Narigi and Seconded by Member Stoldt and approved by the followingvote the TAC approved the DRAFT RFP and recommended forwarding it to the directors withthe incorporated comments.

AYES: 5 MEMBERS:Narigi, Riedl, Riley, Stoldt, Burnett

NOES: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Israel, HussABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: NoneRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None

3. Receive Report on Detailed Schedule for Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Permits,Status of Borehole and Test Slant Well Construction and Update on Alternative Test Well Sites- Cal Am


5/34


3

Ian Crooks, Engineering Manager from Cal Am presented an update on the Schedule of thecompletion of the boreholes reporting that the Cemex and Protrero Road bore holes returnedvery favorable results, the Moss landing area had unfavorable results for the slant test well,which revealed insufficient production potential from that area.

He spoke to the benefits and challenges for each of the testing locations. The CEMEX roadlocations is the preferred location per the settlement agreement, but he indicated that theProtrero Road location also has environmental, habitat and hydrogolocial benefits. Thechallenge is the additional pipeline needed; costs, construction complexity and no outfalldisposal option for test well. He spoke to the anticipated schedule for the test wells and theMPWSP anticipated schedule through full-scale plant start up in July of 2018.

Mr. Crooks indicated that until more progress has been made with the City of Marina, the levelof investment at Protrero Road would be minimized. He reported regarding Cal Ams effortswith the City of Marina to work with the Planning Commission and City Council prior toconsideration of the permit and spoke to the schedule for approval of permits for the MPWSP

and efforts currently underway to keep other permitting agencies informed of the project.

Chair Burnett invited comments from the public.

David Lifland questioned if the differences between the sites would affect the EIR, and if PointBlue was contacted to ensure that the Snowey Plover was not impacted. He expressedconcerns regarding Cal Ams proposed contingencies, the choice for open wells and if multipledrills can be acquired.

Mr. Crooks spoke to Mr. Liflands questions.

4. Receive Update Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Negotiations for GWRSource and Product Water, and on the Progress of the "Pure Water Monterey" Project - Israel

Mike McCullough, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency made the presentationand provided the TAC an update regarding the GWR "Pure Water Monterey" project. He spoketo the produce wash water test shunt, that the demonstration facility is open for educationaltours, the progress regarding the phasing timeline noting they are half way through the pilotplant testing. He reported key activities to include: supplemental GWR budget approved onMarch 17th by the WMD, conducted outreach activities including tours, marketing speakersbureau to talk about the project benefits and updated the website. Source water discussionsare receiving negotiating concepts and discussions are ongoing.

Member Riedl requested elaborating with regard to the source water discussions asking ifprogress was being made to which Mr. McCullough indicated the teams are exchanging ideasregarding cooperating and that the negotiating teams are representing their interest withoutmuch outside agitation. Member Riedl reported about the agendized the Monterey CountyBoard of Supervisors joint meeting with Water Resource Control Agency to discuss acquiringwater rights for Blanco drain and reclamation ditch to provide potable water. The TACdiscussed the purpose of the meeting to determine the quantity and claim of water and


6/34


4

questioned to the economics of water and the possibility the PWM project is cost comparativewith desal.

The TAC further discussed how negotiations would adjust the schedule for the PWMproject. Legal Counsel Freeman indicated that even if the negotiation slip the projectcan still produce on time to which Mr. McCullough affirmed.

Chair Burnett invited public comment.

David Lifland expressed concern that no solid agreements have been made for source waterfor the proposed projects. He also questioned the quality of water.

The report was received and no action was taken.

5. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Monterey Peninsula WaterManagement District Consultant Selection for GWR Externalities Study- Stoldt

Member Stoldt spoke to the proposed RFQ for conducing an externality study of the GWRproject, which will be distributed by the close of business April 8, 2014. He noted five firms wereidentified. Proposals would be due May 1st with interviews during second week of May. TheBoard is slated to approve the contract during their May 19th meeting and staff expects thatdraft report to be received by July 22ndand a final report by August 19th. A workshop will bescheduled for late August to prepare testimony for CPUC evidentiary hearings during Octoberand November 2014. Chair Burnett invited public comment and had no requests to speak.

Chair Burnett provided comments and suggestions that could be incorporated to include topicssuch as quantification and mobilization, social cost of carbon and discount rates. No further

action was taken.

ADJOURNMENT

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,

Lesley E. Milton, Committee Clerk Jason Burnett, TAC Chair


7/34

M I N U T E SMONTEREY PENINSULA WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)Regular Meeting

10:30 AM, Monday, July 7, 2014COUNCIL CHAMBER

580 PACIFIC STREETMONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Members Present: Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Alternate Member McCullough

Members Absent: Burnett, Stoldt,

Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk

CALL TO ORDER

TAC Member Riedl called the meeting to order at 10:37 a.m.

ROLL CALL



Member Huss reported on participation on the working group for source water negotiations. Thewater rights issue with other sources needs to be taken care of otherwise the projects will nothappen and should be resolved sooner rather that later. Member Riedl reported the publiccomment period for the basin water series closes on August 6, 2014. TAC Member Narigi

arrived at 10:38 AM.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Member Riedl invited public comment and had no requests to speak.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. June 2, 2014 Regular Meeting

On a motion by Member Narigi, seconded by Committee Member Riley and carried by thefollowing vote, the Technical Advisory Committee approved the minutes of June 2, 2014 aspresented.

AYES: 5 MEMBERS:Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Alternate MemberMcCullough

NOES: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 2 MEMBERS: Burnett, Stoldt,ABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: NoneRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None


8/34

MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, July 7, 2014

2

AGENDA ITEMS

2. Report on the Kick-Off Meeting of the Value Engineering (VE) Study Session and ReceivePublic Input on the 30% Design and on the VE Process - Cullem

Executive Director Cullem reported on attending the kick off of the Value Engineering working

group study session. He provided clarification for the purpose of the Value Engineering, whichwas not just to reduce the cost of the project, but the primary function is to improve the value ofthe project. Mr. Cullem clarified that the public is not invited to attend the VE workshop and thatthe purpose of this meeting is to accept any public comment for discussion during theworkshop. During the Directors Meeting on July 10th, a draft preliminary presentation will bemade which will accept additional comments from the public for incorporation into the finalpreliminary discussions.

Member Riley questioned if there is a risk factor related to the high cost of the slant wellinfrastructure and if the VE would address a more traditional intake system as well. ExecutiveDirector Cullem responded to the history of the evaluation of the slant wells vs. open waterintake and reiterated that settlement agreement requires the slant wells to be tested first before

the open water intake is attempted. The Coastal Commission also has a preference for slantwells.

Mr. Cullem spoke to the risk of technologies that have not been used on the west coast whichwill be addressed with the test wells and the monitoring wells. Mr. Narigi spoke to the Ceaseand Desist Order deadline, the CPUC oversight and the efforts taken to date to address hisconcerns. He further questioned how the project is being addressed with respect to the GWRproject and requested an update regarding the June 30thCPUC deadline which helps determinethe final MPWSP size. Mr. Cullem clarified that currently the MPWSP is being designed andreviewed for 9.6 MGD as a way to reduce the RO trains. He believes it has become apparentthat the project will be cheaper to design at the 9.6 at this point, and operate at a lower level.

The TAC questioned if this is the only opportunity to have the VE review the project to whichMr. Cullem responded that the contract indicates the VE review is required at a 30 percentdesign, but there is the opportunity to extend the contract for additional services at the 60percent design point. The TAC encouraged this possibility.

Member Riedl invited pubic comments on the item.

Mike Lord from Affluent Free Technology, commented on concerns expressed by TACmembers and referenced the draft ocean plan regarding desal noting California will require allurban cities to have water from desal by 2030. He expressed concern regarding the level ofbrine that would be generated, as well as factors such as intake of water, entrainment andimpingement, power usage etc. and that this project is leading the way for state legislation. He

thinks there are opportunities to find solutions and that Cal Am is prudent with their efforts toaddress the different types of wells.

Tom Rowley spoke against the projected issues of the outfall and requested the VE look atslant wells as the best source, but to keep the ratepayer in mind while making decisions.


9/34

3. Receive Preliminary Permits and Approvals for the Critical Plath Method Schedule for theMonterey Peninsula Water Supply Project - Cal Am

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the request that Cal Am provide a critical path methodschedule for the MPWSP, specifically outlining ways that the Authority could provide assistanceto ensure the project reduces potential delays. Cal Am Engineering Manager Crooks presented

an overhead version of the schedule which provided all elements of the project and anticipatedcompletion dates. The sheet was set up to indicate which elements were reliant upon thecompletion of others. The TAC briefly reviewed the schedule and requested the schedule beprovided to them in a viewable version. Clerk Milton agreed to distribute.

Member Riedl invited public comment in the item. Tom Rowley expressed concern thatproceeding without the completion of the test slant well prior to the EIR completion will causedelay issues and stranded costs.

No action was taken on this item.

4. Receive Report on Status of Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Marina Test Wellsand the Approval Process for the City of Marina and the California Coastal Commission CoastalDevelopment Permits - Cal Am

Executive Director Cullem provided an update regarding the Marina Mitigated NegativeDeclaring for the test slant well and discussed the completion schedule for approval andconstruction of the test well. Mr. Cullem answered questions from the TAC. Member Riedlinvited public comment and had no requests to speak.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Narigi requested for a future meeting an update of the costs of the MPWSP project from CalAm, the status of the GWR agreements as well as the status of the test and bore hole resultsfrom the hydrogeologist. Having no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at11:53 AM.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,

Lesley Milton, Committee Clerk Jason Burnett, TAC Chair


10/34


11/34

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water AuthorityAgenda Report

Date: August 04, 2014

Item No: 3.

06/12

FROM: Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Address Unresolved Questions from the California Public Utilities CommissionSettlement Agreement that Need to be Brought to the Directors for Consideration

DISCUSSION:

There is no report for this item. This report was requested to be agendized at the July 7,2014 TAC meeting. A verbal discussion will take place at the meeting.


12/34


13/34



Item No: 4.

06/12

FROM: TAC Chair Burnett

SUBJECT: Discuss the Position of Chair of the TAC

DISCUSSION:

On February 14, 2013 the Authority approved changes to the Joint Powers Agreementspecifying that the Chair of any committee, including the TAC, need not be a Director.

At the Authority Directors meeting of July 10th, 2014 the Authority elected DirectorBurnett as President. Accordingly, Director Burnett has indicated his desire to pass theChair position of the TAC to another member.

Recommendations from the TAC will be conveyed to the Water Authority Board prior toits selection of the new Chair.


14/34


15/34



Item No: 5.

06/12


SUBJECT: Discuss the Ground Water Replenishment Memorandum of Understanding

DISCUSSION:

Attached as Exhibit A is the most recent (June 12, 2014) schedule for the CPUCconsideration of GWR for inclusion into the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project.

Member Israel will discuss the status of the agreements for GWR source water and thedraft water purchase agreement (WPA) in the context of the schedule.


16/34

Task Due Date Responsible Party NotesFile Motion for

Bifurcation of theGWR Decision

August 2013 MRWPCA Complete and Granted

Board Actions toApprove Revised

Governance Committee

Agreement

October 2013August/Sept 2013

MPWMD, MPRWA,County, & Cal-Am

To be Completed inOctober

Executed Agreementsfor GWR Source Water

and/or DeclaratoryRelief

June 23, 2014June 30

MRWPCAAction on

Meet & Confer inProgress

Draft WPAMar 2014August

MPWMD & MRWPCA Delayed due to source

water agr & funding

Obtain Representationsfrom DPH re Use of

Extracted GWR WaterOct 2014

MRWPCA See June 5, 2014

Concept approval letter

from CDPH

Obtain Representations

from RWQCB re Use ofExtracted GWR Water Oct 2014

MRWPCA See June 5, 2014

Concept approval letterfrom CDPH

Storage Agreementwith Seaside Basin

WatermasterJul 2014September

MRWPCA & MPWMDDelayed as noted

above

GWR Basis of DesignComplete with At Least

10% DesignJul 2014August

MRWPCA

Delayed as noted

above

GWR Financing PlanSufficient for SRF

FundingAug 2014September


above

Agreement on Terms ofWPA

May 2014September

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,&MPWMD

Delayed as noted

above

Perform RevenueRequirement Analysis

Including Any DebtEquivalency Effect

Jul 2014August


above

Perform Assessment ofGWR Positive and

Negative Externalitiesfor Any Premium

Showing

June 2014September

MRWPCA & MPWMD Delayed as noted

above

DEIR Circulated July 2014August

MRWPCA Coordinate with CPUC

EIR

Dilution WaterRequirements

July-October 2014 MRWPCA

Project Approved andFEIR

October 2014December

MRWPCA Coordinate with CPUC

EIR

All Permits for GWRConstruction Obtained Major Permits

1stQuarter 2015

January 2015

MRWPCA


17/34



Item No: 6.

06/12


SUBJECT: Receive Report and Discuss the Status of Permits, Environmental Reports, TestResults and Preliminary Critical Path Method Schedule for the MontereyPeninsula Water Supply Project

DISCUSSION:

As requested by the TAC at the July 7, 2014 meeting, attached is the ExecutiveSummary of the MPWSP Hydrogeologic Investigation Technical Memorandum (TM1).Exhibit A (attached) is the Executive Summary and the full report is available atwww.watersupplyproject.org/downloads .

The Cal Am Representative will discuss the key points of the Technical Memorandumas well as the status of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and theEnvironmental Assessment (EA) for the test slant well. Exhibit B is a copy of theExecutive Directors comments to NOAA on the EA.

At this time, the Marina City Council is scheduled to consider the Marina CoastalDevelopment Permit at a special meeting on August 26, 2014.

The Cal Am Representative will also present and discuss the preliminary Critical PathMethod Schedule, in particular as it relates to the test slant well.


18/34

fir

Lc;

P R E P R E D F O R

alifornia

R BF Consultin

u I y 8 2

M onterey Peninsula W ater Su pply Project

H ydrogeologic Investigation

Technical M emo randum TM 1)

Sum mary of R esults - Ex ploratory B oreholes

ter e

D U X C O S

Dev e

pre

P.O. Sox 220, aaremani, CA 91711 P .9v9)

I4

.441-

5K7i i

PR . Ped c r r,

oeA Dow

\)

wgz


19/34

Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Hydrogeologic Investigation

Technical Memorandum (TM 1) - Summary of Results - Exploratory Boreholes

-Jul-14

CALIFORNIA AMERICAN WATER / RBF CONSULTING

MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION

TECHNICAL MEMO RANDUM TM 1)

SUMMARY OF RESULTS - EXPLORATORY BOREHOLES

1 0

XECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 1 ntroduction

The investigation and findings described in this Technical Memorandum are the result of collaborative

planning and discussions among the hydrogeologic experts that represent key stakeholders for

groundwater use and management in the Salinas Valley and onterey Peninsula area of central

California. The Hydrogeology Working Group (HWG) consisted of the following experts: Mr. Tim Durbin

and Mr. Martin Feeney (both representing the Salinas Valley Water Coalition and the Monterey County

Farm Bureau), Mr. Peter Leffler (representing CalAm), and Dr. Dennis Williams (representing the CPUC

CEQA Team). The HWG was formed as a result of a 2013 Settlement Agreement among parties to an

ongoing CPUC-proceeding resulting from CalAm's proposed Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project,

to review and approve the scope of field investigation and development of a hydrogeologic conceptual

model from which to construct the groundwater modeling tools. The names of the HWG members are

presented here to indicate the general agreement among the members on the core findings of the

investigative work described herein.

The work completed for this investigation was described in the Hydrogeologic Investigation Workplan

(Workplan), Attachment 1, dated 18-Dec-2013. This investigation represents the first phase of field data

gathering to develop a hydrogeologic conceptual model for the project area that is accepted by the

stakeholders. The conceptual model will be used to refine the existing North Marina Ground Water

Model (NMGWM) and construct a new focused model (CEMEX model). These models will be used to

evaluate proposed project operations and impacts. Additional phases of field testing are planned and

outlined in the Workplan.

Since September 2013, six exploratory boreholes were drilled at the CEMEX facility. Total borehole

depth ranged from 250 feet (ft) below ground surface (bgs) to 350 ft bgs. Three of the boreholes were

used to collect continuous soil cores, undisturbed soils samples, samples for mechanical grading

GEOS IEN E

alifornia American Water RBF Consulting


20/34

Montere

y Peninsu

la Water S

upply Pro

ject Hydro

geologic

Investigati

on

Technical

Memorand

um (TM

1) - Summ

ary of Res

ults - Exp

loratory B

oreholes

-Jul-14

analy

sis, and

geophys

ical log

s. Two b

orings

were use

d to con

struct i

solated z

ones' fo

r collec

tingwat

er

quali

ty samp

les from

aquife

rs at dis

crete de

pths an

d the la

st boreh

ole(CX

-B4) w

as used

to colle

ct

c

ontinuou

s soil c

ores, un

disturbe

d soils s

amples,

sample

s for me

chanica

l grading

analys

is, geop

hysical

logs, and to collect water qualit

y sampl

es. A tot

al of fift

een (15)

aquifer

zone te

sts have

been co

mpleted

at

the CEM

EXsite

. Water

quality

samples

collect

ed from

theisol

atedaqu

iferzon

es were

analyze

d for

t

he same

suiteo

f analyt

es outlin

ed inth

e Work

plan an

d includ

ed gene

ral phy

sical,ge

neralm

ineral,

v

olatileo

rganicc

ompoun

ds, pest

icides,t

ritium,a

nd stabl

e isotop

es of ox

ygen an

d hydrog

en.

Sin

ce Septe

mber20

13, sev

en explo

ratory b

orehole

s were d

rilledin

the Mo

ss Landi

ng area.

Six bor

ings

w

ere dri

lled to

a dep

th of 20

0 ft bgs

. One bo

ring (M

DW-1)

was dri

lled to a

depth o

f 300 ft

bgs. Ea

ch

boreh

ole was

used to

collect

continu

ous soil

cores,

undistur

bed soil

sample

s, samp

les for m

echanic

al

grading

analys

is, and g

eophysi

cal logs.

Two iso

lated aq

uifer zo

nes wer

e constr

ucted in

borehol

es ML-1

,

M

L-2, ML

-3,ML-

4, ML-6

, and PR

-1(for a

total of

12zone

s) to col

lectdep

th-specif

ic groun

dwater q

uality

samples

. Four i

solated

aquifer

zones w

ere con

structed

to colle

ct grou

ndwater

sample

s from

Boring

MDW

1.

1.2 ind

ings

12 1 G

eneral

h

e conc

eptual h

ydroge

ologic

model d

evelop

ed from

this in

vestiga

tion su

ggests t

hat a

feedwate

r supply

system

using sl

ant well

s at the C

EIVIEX

site is

feasible

and can

utilize t

heDune

Sand A

quifer

andund

erlying

terrace

deposit

s (180-

Foot Eq

uivalen

t Aquife

r) as co

nduits t

o

extrac

t water t

hrough

the seaf

loor ben

eath Mo

nterey B

ay.

T

his opin

ion will

betested

using t

henewl

y constru

cted CE

MEX M

odel an

d the ref

ined NM

GWM

and

willbe f

ieldtest

ed using

a test s

lant wel

l and gr

oundwa

ter mon

itoring s

ystem a

s describ

ed

in th

e Hydro

geologic

Investig

ation W

orkplan.

The

concep

tualmo

del also

indicat

es that t

he Perc

hed A

Aquife

r betwe

en the M

olera a

nd

Sa

ndholtR

oad Sa

linas Ri

ver Stat

e Beach

parkin

g lots co

uld pro

vide an

alternat

ive targ

et for

co

nstructio

n of as

ubsurfac

e feedw

ater sup

ply syst

em.

1

2 2 CE

MEX A

rea

The CEMEX facility islocated onthe westernmost edge of the180/400-Foot Aquifer Subbasin of the

Salin

as Valle

y Groun

dwater

Basin, a

s curren

tly map

ped by D

WR(2

003) and

theMC

WRA (

2011). T

he

finding

s of the

investig

ationat

CEMEX

are sum

marized

below:

An

isolated zo

ne iscon

structed by

theinsta

llation of

well scree

n at asele

cted depth

interval

and isolati

ng the we

ll screen

above

andbelow

using be

ntonite se

als. Const

ruction of

isolated z

onesallow

s depth s

pecific sa

mpling of

groundwa

ter.

G

EOS

IEN E

alifor

nia Ameri

can Water

& RBF Co

nsulting


21/34

Montere

y Peninsula Water S

upply Project Hydro

geologic Investigati

on

Technica

l Memorandum (TM

1)- Summary of R

esults - Exploratory B

oreholes

-Jul-14

A significan

t clay layer is n

ot present bene

ath the Dune S

and Aquifer at

the CEMEX sit

e at

elevation

s commonly at

tributed to the S

alinas Valley A

quitard (SVA)

,suggesting a d

ifferent

depositiona

l environment t

han that of the

180-Foot Aquif

er in the Salina

s Valley. Thew

ater

quality datasuggests groundwater in the Dune Sand Aquifermay be in hydraulic continuitywith

the underlying

aquifer units

The degreeof

hydraulic con

tinuity willbe

determinedby

constructio

n of aquifer spe

cific monitorin

g wells and the

long-termpum

ping test of the

test

slant well.

Stratigrap

hic relationship

s and litholog

ic observation

s indicate that

the aquifer sys

tem

underlying th

e Dune Sand A

quifer consists

of terracedepo

sits that are old

er than the inla

nd

1

80-Foot Aquifer

deposits, since t

hey underlie the

OlderDune San

d.

The

terrace deposi

ts appear to be

a distinct lithol

ogic unit in ter

ms of geologic

history and

deposition

al environmen

t in the Dune

Highland area

and may be hy

drostratigraph

ically

equivalentto the

180-FootAquif

er in the Salinas

Valley.

For purpose

s of this docume

nt, the alluvial m

aterials encoun

tered near the co

ast (in the CEM

EX

area) are

based solely o

n analyses of bo

rehole samples

(and geophysic

al borehole logs

). As of

yet, no

direct correlatio

n can be made b

etweenthese co

astal alluvial de

positsand the s

tandard

naming

convention fou

nd furtherinlan

d (e.g., 180-Foo

t Aquifer,400-F

oot Aquifer, SV

A, etc).

C

onsequently, th

e naming conve

ntion agreed upo

n by the HWG,

includes the wo

rd equivalent

s

ince the litholo

gic units that m

ake up the aqui

fers at CEMEX

and in the Sal

inas Valley are

chro

nologically diffe

rent, but stratigr

aphically equiva

lent.

As a hydroge

ologic unit, the

terrace deposits

will be designat

ed as the 180-Fo

ot Equivalent (1

80-

FTE

) Aquifer. The

extent of h

ydrostratigraphi

c equivalencew

ill be evaluated

through a pump

ing

test utilizing

the test slant we

lls and a monito

ring network.

Th

e current interp

retation of the

distinctive dark

greenish-gray

clay found atde

pths ranging

from 241 to

282 ft bgs at C

EMEX is that i

t may represent

a change in the

depositional hi

story

and is unde

rlainby a unit eq

uivalent to the A

romas Sand(?)/

400-Foot Aquife

r.

Both the D

une Sand Aqui

fer andthe unde

rlying 180-FTE

Aquifer extend

seaward benea

th the

M

onterey Bay.

Gr

oundwater in th

e Dune Sand A

quifer and most

ofthe groundw

ater in the 180-

FTEAquifer

ex

hibit high conce

ntrations of total

dissolved solids

(TDS), ranging

from 24,000 to

32,000 mg/L,

indicating a seawater source.

Hydraulic

conductivity for

the Dune Sand

at CEMEX rang

ed from an aver

age low valueof

273

ft/day to a

naverage high v

alue of 779 ft/da

y.

Cal

ifornia American Wa

ter & RBF Consultin

g

GEOS

IEN E


22/34

M

onterey

Peninsu

la Wate

rSupply

Project

Hydrog

eologic

Investig

ation

Tech

nical M

emorand

um (TM

1)- Sum

mary o

f Result

s - Expl

oratory

Borehol

es

-Jul-14

Hyd

raulic

condu

ctivity

for the

Olde

r Dune

Sand

atCEM

EX ra

nged f

rom an

avera

ge low

value

of

136 f

t/day t

o an a

verage

high v

alue o

f372 f

t/day.

Hyd

raulic

condu

ctivity

of the

terrac

e depo

sits tha

t make

up th

e 180-

FTE A

quifer

ranged

from

an

ave

rage lo

wvalu

eof 1

13ft/d

ayto a

n avera

ge hig

hvalu

e of 34

2ft/da

y.

H

ydrau

lic co

nducti

vityv

alues w

ill be

furth

er refi

ned ba

sed on

thelo

ng-te

rm tes

t slant

well

p

umpin

g test.

An

alysis

ofcat

ion/an

ionra

tios in

dicate

s that

groun

dwate

r inth

e lowe

r port

ionof

180-F

TE

Aq

uifer a

nd in th

e 400

-Foot A

quife

rhave

been g

eoche

micall

yaltere

d due

to sea

water i

ntrusio

n.

Tritium

resu

lts ind

icate t

hat gro

undw

ater in

the lo

wer po

rtion

of the

180-F

EAqu

ifer is

older

tha

n grou

ndwate

rin th

e uppe

r porti

onof t

he180

-FTE A

quife

r and t

heDun

eSan

d Aqui

fer.

Analy

sis of

oxyge

n and

hydrog

en iso

topess

ugges

ts that

at both

the C

EMEX

andM

oss L

andin

g

sites,saltwater from the ocean is mixingwith afreshwatersource thathas not undergone

signi

ficant e

vapor

ation (

as wou

ld be

expect

ed of a

surfac

e wate

r sour

ce).

Hy

drostra

tigrap

hic rel

ationsh

ips in

dicate

that sla

nt we

lls dril

led into

the D

une S

and Aq

uifer a

nd

180

-FTE

Aquif

er will

receiv

e rech

arge p

rimari

ly from

ocea

n sour

cesthr

ough v

ertica

l leaka

ge

fro

m the

seafl

oor an

d horiz

ontal

recharg

e from

offsh

ore su

bseaa

quifer

s. This

willb

e teste

d by

the CE

MEX

and ref

ined N

MGW

Ms as

well as

field p

umpin

gtests.

1 2

3Mo

ssLan

ding A

rea

he

Mo

ss La

nding

areai

s loca

ted no

rth of

them

outh

of the

Salin

as Riv

er, w

hich o

verlie

s the

w

estern

most e

dge o

fthe 1

80/400

-Foot

Aquif

er Sub

basin.

Borin

gs we

re dril

led an

dsamp

led at

Moss

La

nding

Harbor

anda

t the M

olera,

Potrer

o Roa

d, and

Sandh

olt Ro

ad par

king lo

ts of S

alinas

River

State

Bea

ch. Th

e expl

oratory

borin

gs pri

marily

penet

rated f

luvial

sedim

ents as

sociat

edwit

h Holo

cene a

nd

La

te Pleis

tocene

Salina

s Rive

r depo

sition.

T

he Per

ched A

Aq

uifer

is ascr

ibedt

o the

Holoc

ener

iveral

luviu

m and

cons

idered

to be

the

h

ydrost

ratigra

phic eq

uivale

nt of t

he Dun

e San

dAqu

ifer loc

ated to

the so

uth.

Th

e Perc

hed

A Aq

uifer

in the

Moss

Landi

ng are

a is c

ompos

ed of

interb

edded

river

and

fl

oodpla

indep

osits.

The te

rm Perc

hed A

Aquifer

referst

o the sha

llow aq

uifer ab

ove the

SalinasV

alley A

quitard

. Traditi

onally, t

he term

p

erched

aquifer

refers to

a hydro

geolog

ic condi

tion whe

re an aq

uifer is

formed

by grou

ndwate

r being p

resent a

bove

(perch

ingon)

an impe

rmeable

unit su

ch as cl

ay but w

ithan u

nsatura

tedport

ionof an

aquife

r betwee

n the bo

ttom of

the

clay

andth

e underl

yingsat

urated p

ortion o

f a lowe

r aquife

r.

G

EOS

IEN

E

alifo

rnia Am

ericanW

ater &R

BF Con

sulting

4


23/34



.1u1 14

With the exception of the sediments penetrated in Boring PR-1 and MDW-1, individual sand and

sand and gravel lenses do not appear to be either vertically or areally extensive in Moss Landing.

Significant variations in TDS concentrations suggest that groundwater is mixed with seawater,

and is likely present in semi-isolated lenticular deposits.

In general the upper isolated aquifer test zones were above a depth of 110 ft bgs. TDS

concentrations ranged from 3,200 mg/L to 34,000 mg/L.

The lower isolated aquifer zones were generally constructed at depths exceeding 150 ft bgs.

With the exception of Zone 1 of PR-1 (190-200 feet) at 630 mg/L, the TDS concentrations ranged

from 7,400 mg/L to 34,000 mg/L.

Boring PR-1 penetrated a very permeable unit in the Perched A Aquifer from 54 to 139 ft bgs.

Groundwater in this interval approximated seawater quality (i.e., 34,000 mg/L). This unit is

interpreted to continue, but decrease in thickness southward towards Boring MDW-1. To the

north, the unit is interbedded with fine-grained units.

It is interpreted that the lowest portion of Boring PR-1 penetrated the SVA. Very low TDS

concentrations (630 mg/L) encountered in the lowest zone in Boring PR-1 suggest that isolated

zones of freshwater may exist within the 180-Foot Aquifer or that the sand unit is laterally

discontinuous and may be interbedded with the SVA. In this last interpretation, Boring PR-1 did

not completely penetrate the SVA.

Hydraulic conductivity values for the permeable portion of the Perched A Aquifer penetrated

in PR-1 ranged from 194 ft/day to 717 ft/day, based upon relationships between grain size

distribution and hydraulic conductivity.

The permeable unit between Boring PR-1 and MDW-1 represents a potential location for slant

wells.

The Moss Landing Borings (ML-1, ML-2, ML-3, ML-4, and ML-6) did not penetrate significant

thicknesses of permeable deposits to produce the required feedwater supply volume for the

MPWSP.

GEOS IEN E

alifornia American Water & RBF Consulting


24/34

4

x-root

Aorier

40o-Fo

ot..Aqu

o F

EM EX

Salin

as

Q

Ui fer

M

onter

ey Pen

insula W

ater

Supply

Projec

t Hydr

ogeolo

gic Inv

estiga

tion

Te

chnica

l Mem

orandu

m(TM

1) - S

ummar

y of Re

sults -

Explor

atory B

oreho

les

-Jul-14

1.2.

4 Ref

ineme

nt of

NMG

WM

and

Deve

lopm

ent of

Focu

sed C

EM

EXM

odel

Th

e geo

logic

a

nd h

ydrog

eolo

gic d

ata c

ollec

ted d

uring

this

inves

tigat

ion w

as u

sed to

pre

pare

the

in

terpre

tatio

ns of

hydro

strati

graph

ic rel

ations

hips

in the

Mos

sLan

ding

and C

EME

X are

as. A

conc

eptua

l

mod

el of

theh

ydros

tratig

raphi

c uni

ts fro

m the

Mos

s Lan

ding

to CE

MEX

area

asin

terpre

tedf

romd

ata

c

ollec

tedfr

omth

is inv

estiga

tion i

s sho

wnbe

low o

n Fig

ure 1

-1

oIsa

Nuev

a y Mo

ro Co

jo

alin

as Val

ley

o

rt Ord

Dune

om

plex

Mo

ss La

nding

Perche

dA A

quifer,

V

A

1n-roo'

. Aquif

er

900-Fo

nt Aquii

er

Note: 1

0x Vert

ical Exa

ggeratio

n

Figur

e 1 1

. Hydr

ostra

tigrap

hic M

odel

M

oss La

nding

to C

EMEX

Are

a

The

follo

wing

table

prov

ides a

corr

elatio

n of

thege

olog

ic and

hyd

rostra

tigrap

hic u

nits t

o gro

undw

ater

mod

el lay

ers o

f the S

alina

sVal

ley In

tegra

ted G

round

wate

r and

Surfa

ce W

ater M

odel

(SVI

GSM

) and

the

NM

GWM

. In

addit

ion, t

he pr

oject

techn

ical a

dviso

ry gr

oup d

escri

bed i

nSec

tion 2

.4 re

quest

ed th

ata

t

hird m

odel

(a fo

cused

mod

el) be

cons

tructe

d in t

he CE

MEX

area

. The

new

focus

ed m

odel

is des

ignate

d

as

the C

EME

XM

odel (

CM)

and w

illbe

discu

ssed

inSec

tion

6. The

mod

el lay

ers of

the C

M, a

s corr

elated

to the

SVIG

SM

and N

MGW

M, a

re als

o sho

wn on

Tabl

e 1-1.

GEO

S IE

N E

aliforn

ia Am

ericanW

ater&

RBF

Consul

ting


25/34



-Jul-14

Table 1-1.

Correlation of Geologic and Hydrostratigraphic with SVIGSM, NMGWM, and CM Model Layers

180/013-Foot Aquifer Subbasin

Surface

Geologic

Surface Geologic

Units

Units

Map

Symbol

_4+6...

z

Hydro-

stratigraphic

Units

CE1V1EX Area

Surface

Geologic

Surface Geologic

Units

Units

Map

Symbol

Hydro-

stratigraphic

Units

S V I G S M

Layer'

CEIVIEX

NMCWM

Model

Layer

Layer

Benthic Zone -

Benthic Zone

-

Benthic Zone

Constant

Head

1

1

lluvium

Qa l

Perched A

Aquifer

Dune Sand

Qd

Dune Sand

Aquifer

l 2

2

Older Dune Sand

Qod

3

Older Alluvium

Qo

Salinas Valley

Aquitard

Older Terrace/

Marine Terrace

Qt (Qmt?)

18 0 -FTE

Aquifer

l 3 5

180-Foot

Aquifer

1 4

6

Older Alluvium/

Marine Terrace

Qd/Qmt 7

Older Alluvium/

Older Alluvium

Fan A ntioch

Qo/Qfa 8

Older Alluvial Fan

Placentia

Qfp

180/400-

Foot

Aquitard

Aromas Sand

(undifferenciated)

?)

Oar)?)

180/400-

Foot

Aquitard

2a 5 9

Aromas Sand

(undifferentiated)

O a r

400-Foot

Aquifer

400-Foot

Aquifer

2 6

10

Aromas Sand

Eolian/Fluvial

Lithofacies

Qae/Qaf

Paso Robles

Formation

QT

400/900-

Foot

Aquitard

Paso Robles

Formation

QT

400/900-

Foot

Aquitard

3a

7 11

900-Foot

Aquifer

900-Foot

Aquifer

3 8

12

SVIGSM considers 'a layers to be aquitards (vertical hydraulic conductivity and thickness are input)

Subsurface Holocene geologic unit not mapped at surface

GEOSCIENCE

alifornia American Water & RBF Consulting


26/34


27/34



Item No: 7.

06/12


SUBJECT: Receive and Discuss Draft Value Engineering Report Summary of Alternatives

DISCUSSION:

The Value Engineering Workshop conducted by Value Management Strategies (VMS)was completed on July 11th, 2014. Public Agencies were represented by staff of theMonterey Peninsula Water Management District and the Monterey Peninsula RegionalWater Authority. A verbal presentation of the preliminary results of the study was briefedto a joint meeting of the Governance Committee and the Authority July 10th, 2014.

The draft final report is currently under review by Cal Am and the other workshopparticipants. However, a copy of the draft table of VE alternatives is provided attachedas Exhibit A for discussion by the TAC and the public.

As soon as the final VE report has been released, it will be posted on the projectwebsite www.watersupplyproject.org. This is expected to be completed by mid-August.

See staff report from August 7th, 2014 TAC meeting for a complete description of the VEprocess and purpose.


28/34

VE

ALT

ER

NAT

IV E

S

R A F

T R E

PO R T

T

he r

esults

of t

his st

udy a

re pr

esen

ted a

s indi

vidu

al alt

ernat

ives t

o the

base

line

conc

ept. E

ach

alte

rnat

ive co

nsis

ts of

a sum

mar

y of t

he ba

selin

e con

cept

, a de

scrip

tion

of th

e sug

geste

d cha

nge,

a

listin

gof

its ad

vanta

ges a

nd d

isadvantages, acostcomparison, discussion of scheduleandrisk

impa

cts

if ap

plica

ble),

and a

brie

fnar

rative

com

parin

g the

d

esign

Sk

etch

es an

d cal

culat

ions

are a

lso pr

esen

ted w

here

appl

icabl

e.

R

ough

orde

r-of-

magn

itude

initi

al an

dlife

-cyc

lecos

t esti

mate

swe

re pre

pare

dwh

ere a

pplic

able i

n

order

toco

mpa

re th

e net

cost

diffe

rence

betw

een

theb

aseli

ne co

ncep

ts an

d the

VE

Alter

nativ

es. In

s

ever

al cas

es, t

hees

timat

esdo

not

inclu

deth

e tot

al fea

ture

cost,

but

only

those

com

pone

nts t

hat a

re

ch

ange

d by

thea

ltern

ative

. The

read

er sh

ould

note

that

the e

fforts

ofth

e VE

team

in

deve

lopin

g the

alte

rnati

ves i

n the

sh

ort ti

me

peri

od of th

eVE

study

limits

their

find

ingst

o ca nc

el A U

al

lev

eralla

es

and

rough

or

der-o

f-ma

gnitu

de

cost

estim

ates

only

A

dditio

nally

, wit

h th

e pro

ject

being

ny

ere

a

via

a des

ign-b

uild

contr

actor

alre

ady u

nder

cont

ract,

the c

ost sa

ving

s or c

ost i

ncrea

ses r

eport

ed fo

r the

V

E Al

terna

tives

repr

esent

their

pote

ntial

cost

impa

cts on

ly an

d we

re de

velo

ped toprovide decision

m

akers

a sen

seof

the

poten

tial s

ignifi

canc

e of t

heV

E Alt

ernat

ives.

V

E ST

R A T

EG I

E S

VE

stud

ies r

esult

in th

edev

elopm

ent

of a n

umb

er of

alter

nativ

es. W

hile

it is

possi

ble fo

r all

alte

rnativ

es to

bei

mple

ment

ed,ty

pica

lly th

erea

re co

mbin

ation

s of

some

alte

rnati

ves th

at m

ay

pr

ovide

the

best

solut

ion fo

r the

proj

ect.T

his

is due

tot

he fa

ct tha

t som

e alt

erna

tives

may

be

comp

eting

idea

s or d

iffer

ent w

ays

to ad

dress

thes

ame

issue

.

As a

resu

lt of

these

facto

rs, th

e VE

tea

m de

velop

ed a

strate

gy th

at re

prese

nts o

ne p

ossib

le

co

mbi

natio

nof a

ltern

ative

sfor

the p

rojec

tto a

ssist

the d

ecisi

on m

akers

in th

eir e

valua

tion

of the

VE

alternatives. This strategy is

based

onf

acto

rs tha

t inc

lude

impro

ved

perfo

rman

ce, l

ikelih

ood

of

imp

leme

ntati

on, a

nd/or

cost

savi

ngsp

oten

tial.T

hisi

nform

atio

n isa

guid

e an

d isn

ot in

tend

ed to

rejec

t the

other

alter

nativ

es fr

oms

takeh

olde

r con

sider

ation

.

V E

A LT

E R N

A T IV

E S U

M M

A R Y

T AB

LE S

A

lterna

tive N

o.

Descri

ption

S

umm

ary

of V

EAl

terna

tive

s

In

itial C

ost Sa

vings

L

ifeCy

cleCo

st

ota

l Cos

t Savin

gs

Savin

gs

ote

ntial

B

uildi

ng an

d Sit

e Des

ign A

ltern

ative

s

B

D 1

Re

vise l

ayou

t of R

Oan

dAd

min b

uildi

ng:

c

reate

one

build

ing w

ith o

verlo

ok, i

mpro

ved

25

0,00

0)

s

ight

lines

and

a red

uced

cour

tyard

BD

2 Eli

mina

te fir

epro

tectio

n of

the

bu

ilding

s wh

ere n

ot re

quire

d by

code

35

9,00

0

M

ontere

y Pen

insula

Wate

r Supp

ly Pro

ject

Desa

linatio

n Plan

t

0

25

0,00

0)

0

3

59,0

00

VE A

lte rna

tives

7


29/34

( 475,000)

0

42,000 0

34,000 0

( 50,000)

406,000

196,000

0

( 475,000)

42,000

34,000

356,000

196,000

Life Cycle Cost

otal Cost Savings

Savings

otential

Alternative No. Description

nitial Cost Savings

BD-3

Increase occupancy categories of

process structures (category IV for the

process-critical facilities)

BD-4

Shift site layouts to avoid collapsible

soils

BD-5 Use a geogrid-reinforced soil mat in lieu

of dynamic soil compaction

BD-6

Connect the 4160 to 480 transformers

directly to the 21kV switchgear

BD-7 Simplify landscaping using xeriscaping

principles and eliminate irrigation

Treatment Equipment and Equipment Layout Alternatives

E 1 Revise configuration of RO trains to

accommodate flat foot foundation

E 2 Use radially split case pumps in lieu of

segmental pumps

E 3

Install acceptance testing connections as

permanent

E 4

Construct the filtered water storage tanks

out of concrete and construct as rectangular

E 5 Use fiberglass for the granular

pretreatment filters in lieu of steel

E 6

Relocate VFDs for RO feed water high

pressure pumps to filter effluent transfer

pumps

E 7

Use above-ground FRP piping in lieu of

below grade HDPE

- -

Maintainability Alternatives

M-1

Increase size of the filtered water

storage tanks

M-2

Provide

lifts to move heavy equipment

400,000

202,000

( 200,000)

73,000

180,000

463,000

62,000

( 480,000)

( 350,000)

0

400,000

4,298,000

4,500,000

0

200,000)

0

73,000

228,000

408,000

0

463,000

0

62,000

0

480,000)

0 350,000)

Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Desalination Plant

E Alternatives

8


30/34

L

ife Cy

cleCo

st

ota

l Cost

Savin

gs

Savin

gs

ote

ntial

A

lterna

tive N

o. &

Descri

ption

n

itial C

ost Sa

vings

M-

3 Elim

inat

e pum

ps in

che

mical

stor

age

sum

ps

M-4Split theCO2tankto share 120-ton

requi

reme

nt be

twee

ntw

otan

ks

R

isk M

itig

ation

and

Sched

ule A

lter

nativ

es

0

0

0

o

0

0

RS1

Ref

ine th

e des

ignt

o me

et tes

t we

ll dat

a

w

ater

qual

ity in

form

ation

5,

227,0

00

o

5,22

7,000

R

S 2

Rev

ise c

onstr

uctio

n sch

edule

usin

g

m

ultip

le cre

ws p

er dis

cipli

ne to

acce

lerate

p

rojec

t com

plet

ion

Treatment ProcessAlternatives

T

P 1Con

sidei

ass

umin

g a h

ighe

rreco

very

ra

te on

the

RO to

50%

on

the fi

rst pa

ss an

d

90%

on t

hese

cond

pass

(48%

tota

l rec

overy

)

TP

2Insta

ll a p

lug o

n the

mai

n per

meat

e line

aft

er th

esec

ond o

rthi

rd m

embr

ane a

nd u

se

all o

f the

same

elem

ents

TP 3

In

stall

a sec

ond p

ass b

racki

sh RO

trai

n

ont

he sp

lit str

eam

to im

prov

e wa

ter q

uality

andreduce energyuse

( 3,

701,0

00)

0

3,701

,000)

6,6

58,0

00

2

,935,

000

9

,593

,000

( 53,

000)

3

,341,

000

3,2

88,0

00

(

300,0

00)

5,3

73,00

0

5,07

3,00

0

TP

4

Elim

inat

e sul

furic

acid

additi

on fr

om

proc

ess

326,0

00

o

326,0

00

TP

5 Pro

vide

a spa

rech

emica

l inje

ction

f

uncti

on to

Des

alPla

nt

(

326,

000)

0

(

326

,000)

TP

6

El

imin

ate th

eUV

trea

tmen

tsyst

em

7

50,00

0

1,

961,0

00

2,7

11,00

0

TP

7

C

onsi

der m

ore e

ffici

ent w

ays o

f me

eting

CTre

quire

men

ts(flo

ccul

ation

cham

ber,

536,000

o

536,000

mem

bran

epre

treatm

ent

,etc.

)

TP

8

E

limi

nate

baffl

es in

thetr

eated

wat

er

sto

rage

tanks

;obt

ain C

Tpo

ints e

lsew

here

TP 9

Op

timiz

e con

figur

ation

from

inta

ke

w

ells t

oRD

mem

bran

e sys

tem

10

0,000

70

0,000

0

14

7,00

0

1

00,0

00

84

7,000

M

onter

ey Pe

ninsul

a Wat

er Sup

ply Pr

oject

es

alinat

ion Pla

nt

E A

lternat

ives

9


31/34

Life Cycle Cost

otal Cost Savings

Savings

otential

Alternative No. Description

nitial Cost Savings

TP-10

Consider sand removal process prior to

( 225,000)

pretreatment

4,515,000

4,290,000

TP 11

Eliminate the backwash treatment

system and discharge directly to brine basin

TP 12 Install system to blend the brine with

raw water

TP 13

For 6.4 MGD plant option, eliminate

brine pit and circulate the permeate and

brine until discharge is allowed

200,000

( 150,000)

( 761,000)

0

0

0

200,000

( 150,000)

( 761,000)

Note Because the cost data depicted above represent

savings,

a number in parentheses represents a cost

increase.

VE Strategy Summ ary

Strategy Description

Enhanced Value Combination

Alternatives: BD-6, E-2, E-5, E-6, M-4,

TP-1, TP-2, TP-3, TP-4, TP-5, TP-6, TP-7,

TP-8, TP-9, TP-10, TP-11

Initial Cost

C C

erformance

alue

Savings

avings hange

hange

9,161,000 23,204,000

13 %

29 %

OTHER CONSIDER TIONS

The VE team also identified a number of observations and design comments / suggestions for

consideration primarily by the project designers. The suggestions consist of either technical review

comments on the design documents themselves or ideas for which VE team could not quantify the

performance or cost impacts. Narrative documentation of these design comments is included

following the VE Alternatives.

Monterey Pen insula Water Supply Project Desalination Plant

E A lternatives

10


32/34

Reg u

lation

s gov

Y

ou r R

ec eip

t

age 1

of 3

re

gul

afi

ons

1;

Y

ou

r c

om

me

nt

wa

s su

bm

itt

ed

suc

ces

sfu

lly

The National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration NOAA) Other:

l n SlaiiL Test

Well

E

For

related

inform

ation

, 7:77a: DC

V t

oldN

Your

Rec

eipt

Y our C oT ram nn

t

Tra C IC :1 1(1

N

u m be

r:

l

jy8df

8 iqfk

Your

comm

ent wil

l be vi

ewable

on

Reg

ulatio

ns.eov

after

the ag

ency h

as

reviewed it whichmay be an

ind

efinite

amou

nt of t

ime.U

se you

r

tra

cking

numb

er to f

indou

t the s

tatus

of

your c

omme

nt.

Y o

u r co

m m en

t:

Co

mme

nt:

On b

ehalf

of the

M on

terey

Pen

insula

Reg

iona

l W at

er Au

thorit

y

iV

1FR

W A),

I wan

tto e

xpres

sou

r support forapproval of the

E

nviro

nme

ntal A

sses

sm en

t (EA

) for

the C

alifor

nia A

meric

an W

ater

(Cal

Am)

Slan

t Test

W ell

Proje

ct.

TheM

onte

reyP

enin

sula

has s

trugg

led fo

r ove

r 30

years

to fin

d a n

ew

su

pply

of w a

ter to

prote

ct ag

ainst

perio

dic d

roug

hts as

wel

l as to

c

omply

w ith

CDC

200

9-008

0. At

long

last,

the c

omm

unity

has c

ome

tog

ether

in su

ppor

t of C

al Am

's M

onter

ey Pe

ninsu

la W

aterS

upp

ly

Pr

oject

iviPW

SP) .

This

proj

ect ha

s be

en in

tense

ly scr

utiniz

ed b

y a w

ide va

riety

of

sta

lzeho

lders

who

parti

cipate

d as

inter

vener

s in t

he CP

UC'

s proc

ess

for

eva lu

ating

Cal

Am's

proje

ct ap

plica

tion 1

2-04

-019.

Thos

e sta

keho

lders

incl

uded

repre

senta

tives

of e

nviron

men

tal gr

oups

as w

ell as

agric

ultur

al

inter

ests.

O

n Ju l

y 31,

2013

, a si

gnific

ant m

ajorit

y (16

) of in

terve

ners

adop

ted a

S

ettlem

ent

agree

men

t in w

hich

it was

agre

ed th

at a

Tech

nical

Grou

p

http ://www regulations gov/

/25/2014


33/34

R

egula

tion

sgov

You

r Rec

eipt

a

ge 2

of 3

ro

uld

befo

rme

dto

prep

are a

Hy

drog

eolo

gic S

tudy

to i

dent

ify w

hat,

;f

any,

impa

ct th

e int

z..:k

e sla

nt vl

?ells

.,vo

u dh

ave

on th

e Sa

linas

Val

ley

gr

oun

dwat

er. A

s no

ted

in th

e EA

, th

e Te

chni

cal G

rou

p de

volo

ped

the

Noit

h ivi

aiina

Gro

und

Wat

er M

odel

W;li

Ch wi

ll be

furt

her r

efin

ed by

dat

a

coll

ected

fro

mth

e tes

t sla

ntw

ell.

Th

e E

A al

so ob

zerv

est

hat t

hete

st sl

ant w

ell

has

beco

me

a cri

tical

co

mpo

nent

oft

he C

EQA

an

d EA

pro

cess

for

the l

arge

r MP

WS

P.

A

ltho

ugh

the M

PR

WA

sup

ports

a co

mp

lete a

nd c

omp

rehe

nsiv

e

env

iron

men

tal p

roce

ss fo

r the

test

wel

l pro

ject,

it sh

ould

be

reco

gniz

ed

tha

t the

purp

ose

ofth

e M

PW

SPi

s to

elim

inate

the

curr

ent s

erio

us

de

trim

ental

env

iron

men

tal im

pac

ts to

the

Carm

el R

iver

.

Fin

ally

,it c

anno

t be

over

state

d th

at th

eco

mmu

nity

is fa

cing

a v

ery

ser

ious

dea

dline

wit

h CD

O 2

009

-006

0, an

d its

imp

lem

enta

tion

wou

ld

ha

veg

rave

eco

nom

ican

dso

cial

con

sequ

ence

sin

our

regio

n. W

e d

o

no

t ha

ve a

ltern

ative

s to

the

time

ly co

mpl

etion

of

the M

PW

SP,

and

the

test slantwell, requested byenvironmental interestsin

the

firs

t pla

ce,i

s

c

ritic

al to

eva

luati

ng th

epr

ojec

t and

mo

ving

forw

ard

.

Si

ncer

ely,

Jam

es

M.C

ulle

m,P

.E.

Exe

cuti

ve D

irect

or

MPR

WA

831-

241

-350

3

F

irst

Nam

e:

J

ame

s

Las

t Na

me:

Cu

llem

C

ity:

M

onte

rey

Cou

ntry

:

St

ate o

r

Pr

ovin

ce:

CA

Oroa

niza

tion

Nam

e:

M

onte

rey

Pe

nins

ula

T

his i

nform

ation

will

otappe

ar on

R

egul

ation

s.gov

:

M

ailin

g

Ad

dres

s

735Pacific

S

trest

ZIP

IPos

tai

Co

de:

93

940

U

plo

ad&

iFil

e(s)

o file

su

ploa

ded

ihi

i

nfc rm

ation

1 D p e

c r c n

Re

guia

dons.

gov:

http://www.regulations.gov/

/25/2014


34/34

tac mprwa agenda packet 08-04-14

Documents