tac mprwa minutes 7-06-15

8/20/2019 Tac Mprwa Minutes 7-06-15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tac-mprwa-minutes-7-06-15 1/4

MINUTES

MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITYTECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)

REGULAR MEETING2:00 PM, Monday, July 6, 2015

COUNCIL CHAMBER580 PACIFIC STREET

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Members Present Cullem, Riley, Stoldt, Sciuto, Narigi, Koker Members Absent: Huss

Staff Present: Legal Counsel, Clerk

CALL TO ORDER

Chair Cullem called the meeting to order at 10:36 AM.

ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS

Chair Cullem invited reports from the TAC and had no requests to speak.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

CONSENT AGENDA

Chair Cullem requested pulling Consent Agenda Items 2 and 3 for discussion.

Member Riley requested that reports made by Cal Am regarding the schedule be included inthe minutes or in some capacity available as part of the record for reference purposes.

On motion by Member Riley and seconded by Member Narigi and passed unanimously, theTAC approved the minutes of May 4, 2015 as presented.

1. Approve Minutes from May 4, 2015 - Milton-Rerig

Action: Approved

2. Receive and Discuss the Draft Final Comment Letter to the California Public UtilitiesCommission (CPUC) on the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Draft EnvironmentalImpact Report - Cullem

Chair Cullem spoke to a public comment letter received expressing concern that theconsultant’s analysis nor the DEIR addressed the longevity or long term sustainability of thetest wells to which Chair Cullem reported that it was not part of the scope of work and it is notpart of the EIR item. It's part of the test well data which they hope to obtain through the testingperiod. He requested if the TAC had comments on the letter.

TAC Member Riley reported Public Water Now held a public water forum and had 5-6 peoplewho made presentations on the slat wells, concerned that there is not enough data, the



MPRWA Minutes Monday, July 6, 2015

MPRWA TAC Meeting Minutes

Regular Minutes - Monday, July 6, 20152

compressed schedule, and the PUC/CCC decision deadlines. He also expressed concern thatthe authors of the report and two members of the Hydrogeological team, were authors of thereport at Huntington Beach and that it might be a conflict of interest. Member Sciuto indicatedthe public comment letter is a reasonable question, but is not within the scope, or within theauspice of the EIR. That it is a technical issue but not an EIR question.

Chair Cullem invited comments from the public on this item. This letter was reviewed, discussed

and addressed.

3. Receive Report and Discuss the Most Recent Cease and Desist Order Extension RequestProposed by Cal Am - Cullem

Executive Director Cullem explained the different versions of the proposal by Cal Am for theCease and Desist Order Extension request, including the most recent versions dated March10th, and June 19th. The final document is still being drafted and has not been released. TheTAC questioned if they will see the final letter prior to it going to the State Water ResourceControl Board to which Chair Cullem reported it was intended for delivery in mid-July and onceit is submitted and is a public document, and it will be emailed out and posted on the website.The group agreed that if the final version contains only minor modifications to the present draft

they are comfortable with it.

Chair Cullem invited public comments and had no request to speak.

AGENDA ITEMS

4. Receive an Update on the Detailed Project Schedule for the Monterey Peninsula Water SupplyProject (MPWSP) with Emphasis on Future Permitting and Approval Requirements - Crooks

Chair Cullem introduced the item and TAC reviewed and discussed Cal Am's latest permits andapprovals schedule in an effort to identify likely future delays or approval challenges that might

require Water Authority attention.

Member Narigi requested an understanding of what happened between the CoastalCommission and Cal Am recently. Ian Crooks, Cal Am explained that the slant test wells wereturned off August 6, 2015 due to a provision in the permit that mandates if the ground waterlevels decline more than 1.5 feet then the well must be turned off and data be evaluated todetermine if the decline is from the test well. Mr. Crooks indicated that they are convinced itwas not the test well but had to comply with the permit. The HWG has analyzed the data andsubmitted a memo addressing permit condition 11 to the CCC, and Cal Am will further evaluatewhile it is turned off to confirm their conclusions on the decline.

On June 10th, the HWG submitted another memo with supporting data to show it was a regional

decline and not related to the test well. The CCC took the memo under consideration and onJuly 4th, they agreed generally with HWG, however because how the permit provision is written,they will need a permit amendment to continue to run the test well. Mr. Crooks expects to beback before the CCC in August for a new permit condition. He anticipates a total delay in thetest well of three months.






The TAC discussed the proximity of the test wells, the salinity levels achieved and desired thevolume trends with different pumping velocities. Mr. Crooks then reported on the monitoringwell data. He detailed the impacts of the different wells and the data changes when the wellswere turned off on June 5th. Mr. Crooks then detailed the current anticipated schedule, whichwas dated June 18, 2015. He indicated that a detailed spreadsheet that includes a list of allpermits that are necessary to be acquired for plant construction will be ready for public reviewin September. The TAC requested it be categorized by Federal, State and Local permits.

Mr. Crooks further pointed out efforts that the team is working toward to compress the scheduleto get it built in 15 months. The bids for pipelines will be released in July 2015 which will helpdetermine if it can be achieved in 15 months, noting the pipeline permits will be challenging witheach of the city jurisdiction regulations for construction.

Finally, he noted the DEIR comment period for the MPWSP was extended explaining they willchange the dates for whatever is in the public's best interest and until they have received allcomments, they will determine later if further extensions are requested.

Chair Cullem invited comments from the public and had no requests to speak.

5. Discuss, Provide Input to the Water Authority for a Possible Comment letter to the PCA / WaterManagement District on the Pure Water Monterey/Ground Water Replenishment (GWR) Project

– Sciuto

Member Sciuto spoke to the draft letter and the discussions regarding ag wash water and thatthis is more qualitative and quantitative. The City of Salinas is seeing an increase in ag washwater and the trend of that water supply is going upward. Mr. Sciuto outlined the differentquantities of water that are being considered for source water including the Blanco Drain, agwash water, the Reclamation ditch and other projects. Member Sciuto then spoke to the statusof the definitive agreements and the ongoing negotiations.

Member Stoldt spoke to a five piece water right application that was submitted two weeks ago.which addresses the source water options. He indicated there is a lot of water remaining in thesources that are subject to future water rights. The memo addresses what happens after acouple of dry years in a row, and if there remains substantial flows to support the project. Heindicated he is confident that source water is not the problem with the PWM project, it's theMarina Coast Water District and the California Coastal Commission.

Mr. Sciuto and Mr. Stold answered questions from the TAC. On question by the TAC bothMembers Stoldt and Sciuto are confident that there are sufficient flows for long term projectoperations. TAC Members discussed current funding opportunities, financing capabilities, totalcost and cost caps.


6. Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Staff Direction on the California State MandatoryConservation Requirements - Stoldt






Member Stoldt reported that in accordance with Governor Brown's Executive Order mandatingcuts in residential water use statewide, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)staff prepared regulations for implementing the Order. Input from water management districts,including the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), was solicited in April2015 and the MPWMD position was supported by a letter from the Water Authority.

At its meeting of May 5 2015, the SWRCB adopted the regulations, and Mr. Stoldt provided anupdate as to how these regulations will affect Peninsula water users. He also outlined themandatory reporting criteria which requires monthly reports to monitor usage. There are 9categories of reductions targets between 4 to 36% and cities are judged based on your totalwater system production.

June is first reporting month and the District will continue to check data and determine if interimsolutions need to be addressed. Smaller water systems must reduce by 25% or make strongefforts to limit irrigation to 2 days per week. 2013 is the benchmark because it was a non-emergency year. He reported that the District has started fining people, and notification lettershave been also issued. Mr. Stoldt answered questions from the TAC.


ADJOURNMENT

Having no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 11:50 AM.

ATTEST:

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

tac mprwa minutes 7-06-15

Documents