tac mprwa minutes 05-04-15

8/20/2019 Tac Mprwa Minutes 05-04-15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tac-mprwa-minutes-05-04-15 1/5

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

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)Regular Meeting

10:30 AM, Monday, May 4, 2015COUNCIL CHAMBER

580 PACIFIC STREETMONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

CALL TO ORDER

Member Stoldt called the meeting to order at 10:30 AM.

ROLL CALL

embers Present: Kocher Riedl, Israle, Stoldt, Huss, Riley, Cullem, Narigi

embers Absent: None

taff Present: Legal Counsel, Clerk

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS

None

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Member Stoldt invited comments from the public and had no request to speak.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. April 6, 2015 Regular Meeting

On a motion by Committee Member Huss seconded by Committee Member Israel and carriedby the following vote, the MPRWA Technical Advisory Committee approved the minutes fromApril 6, 2015 as amended.

AYES: 8 MEMBERS: Kocher Riedl, Israel, Stoldt, Huss, Riley, Cullem,Narigi

NOES: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 0 MEMBERS: NoneABSTAIN: 0 MEMBERS: NoneRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None



MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, May 4, 2015

2

AGENDA ITEMS

2. Receive Report, Discuss, and Make Recommendations on the Pure Water MontereyGroundwater Replenishment (GWR) Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) -

Cullem

Member Israel introduced the item and reported on the release of the Draft EnvironmentalImpact Report for the Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project.

Paul Scuito, Deputy General Manager at MRWPCA, provided a brief highlight of the project andthe release of the DEIR for the public review and comment period. He spoke to the key topicsaddressed in the DEIR including the project description, water quality and regulatorycompliance, groundwater hydrology, surface water hydrology and alternatives. The publicreview period closes on June 5, 2015. He spoke to two public meetings to be held, one inSeaside the other in Salinas to ensure there is adequate public comment. Mike McCulloughspoke to the number of California cities that have begun to use this technology and process. He

spoke to the project details and how to submit public comments on the DEIR. Mr. Scuito andMr. McCullough answered questions from the TAC.

Member Riley questioned the brine discharge plan. Member Huss questioned the cost of theproject. Member Stoldt spoke to the efforts to determine the costs of the project. Member Narigiagreed that it's imperative to understand the full costs of the project. Member Stoldtencouraged the Board and the public to visit www.purewatermonterey.org and pay specificattention to the alternatives. He reminded the Committee that this is not a feasibility study nor acost analysis, this is an environmental document. Mr. Stoldt then provided an update on thedefinitive agreements and spoke to progress made.

Member Huss informed the Board that there will be a meeting to inform the growing community

regarding the status of the project.

On question, Member Kocher spoke to the agreement between MRWPCA and MCWD, tomonetize the investment in pipe and how it will be constructed, and that the MCWD isinterested in negotiating an outfall agreement, and the cost of the water, and the big thing ishow much water is MCWD going to have a right to initially and eventually. They don't want tonegotiate away future water or invalidate previous agreements.

Member Riley questioned how to protect against sea water intrusion, to which the TACdiscussed the Catch Water Seaside Intrusion project and the CSIP.

Member Stoldt Invited comments from the public.

• Tom Rowley spoke to Member Huss's comments regarding seawater intrusion andrequested a description on how they will interconnect. He also spoke in support ofdetermining the costs of the processes.

Member Israel responded with anticipation that the Final EIR will be available for adoption inSeptember 2015.

http://www.purewatermonterey.org/






3

Legal Counsel Freeman indicated that the Water Authority elected not to have the EIR'sreviewed, but would the TAC recommend that any sections of the EIR have an independentreview. The TAC discussed the need to spoke in support of having outside expertise review thedocument in whole or in part.

Member Narigi moved that the Authority accept the recommendation of the TAC to have bothDEIR project documents reviewed by independent technical and legal counsel that specialize inEIR review and water topics if possible, seconded by Member Huss.

The TAC discussed the details and the merits of the motion as well as the scheduling issues toobtain a consultant and who would be able to complete a true review of the EIR prior to the endof the public comment period.

Member Stoldt invited public comments again.

• Tom Rowley spoke to his disappointment that the Authority chose not to obtain anindependent review of the DEIRs. He discouraged the Authority from being pennywise.

On the call for the vote, the motion failed by the following vote.

AYES: 2 MEMBERS: Narigi, HussNOES: 2 MEMBERS: Riley, KocherABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: CullemABSTAIN: 3 MEMBERS: Riedl, Israel, StoldtRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None

The TAC then discussed the ability to address a limited scope of review, what topics would it

cover. Allison Immumura from Denise Duffy and Associates recommended the following foursections as the key chapters for a focused review of the GWR project: 1) The Summary, 2)Chapter 2, Project Detail, 3) Chapter 3 - Compliance with Water Quality Regulations and 4)Chapter 6 - Alternatives Analysis. She commented that there was a coordinated effort betweenthe two EIR teams, so that they could properly characterize the cumulative impacts of eachprojects and to ensure that the EIRs were not piece milled.

On question, Ms. Immamura indicated that since the MPWSP provides the PWM as analternative, the public can comment on the analysis of the variant analysis for the PWM projectas part of their comments submitted for the MPWSP project.

3. Receive Report, Discuss, and Make Recommendations on the Monterey Peninsula WaterSupply Project (MPWSP) Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) - Cullem

Member Stoldt indicated the Draft EIR was released for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supplyproject on May 30, 2015 for the public review period. He reported that there will be publicmeetings May 26th in Marina, May 27th in Seaside and May 28 in Carmel. All comments aredue by July 1, 2015. He further reported that the PWM project only had a 45 day review periodand that the MPWSP will have a 60 day review period. Finally Member Stoldt requested the




4

TAC to review the chapters suggested by Mrs. Immamura for a good overview of the project.

Member Stoldt invited comments from the public.

• Tom Rowley spoke to the brine discharge plan, he questioned Legal Counsel Freemanas to who would be considered a NEPA expert and that this document needs to passCEQA and NEPA and spoke in support of an independent expert to review the DEIR.

The TAC again discussed the merits of having independent review of the DEIR documents.

Chair/Executive Director Cullem arrived at 11:24 AM.

Member Narigi suggested that the TAC meet again in two weeks with potential concerns withboth projects, as far as our expertise can take us, and made a motion that the TAC request theAuthority Directors hire an independent consultant to review the MPWSP EIR from a technicaland legal standpoint as it relates strictly to the desal project. Second by Member Huss andpassed by the following vote;

AYES: 2 MEMBERS: Narigi, Huss Riedl, Riley, Kocher, IsraelNOES: 2 MEMBERS: NoneABSENT: 1 MEMBERS: NoneABSTAIN: 3 MEMBERS: StoldtRECUSED: 0 MEMBERS: None

Chari Cullem spoke to the Director’s position that the Authority’s member agencies haveenough expertise and efforts to review the EIRs in house and that if there are any specificconcerns, they can be passed to the County for a technical review so that the Authority will nothave to expend any funds. Member Narigi spoke to this being a critical juncture with significantpotential impacts to the community and that the Authority owes it to the community to do anobjective review of the desal plant.

The TAC questioned who at the county would be assigned as it would be a deciding factor. Thisitem will be brought before the Authority on May 14th.

4. Receive Report, Discuss, and Make Recommendations on the California State MandatoryConservation Requirements - Stoldt

Member Stoldt indicated that the State Water Resources Control Board released revisedmandatory conservation regulations and that there will be another draft released whichincorporates the comments received to date. Mr. Stoldt outlined the calculations for themandatory standards applied, and that our region is responsible for an 8% cut back and that

currently we are showing 11% savings which he anticipates can be sustained as long as wecan maintain current conservation efforts. Finally, he reported that he will visit each of the CityCouncils to report on the new regulations.

Chair Cullem invited public comment on the item and had no requests to speak.

The TAC discussed the regulation of the new mandates and questioned how the state isresponding to the recent debate regarding tiered water rates.




5

Riley requested an update on the externality study to which Member Stoldt reported that theresults need to be a model that works and shows the PWM and the Desal costs, which aredeveloped for the testimony and should be ready by June.

ADJOURNMENT

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,

Lesley Milton-Rerig, Committee Clerk Jim Cullem, Chair/Executive Director

tac mprwa minutes 05-04-15

Documents