Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Tac Draft Minutes 02-25-13

Tac Draft Minutes 02-25-13

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0|Likes:
Published by L. A. Paterson
Technical Advisory Committee
Technical Advisory Committee

More info:

Published by: L. A. Paterson on Mar 16, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/16/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
M I N U T E SMONTEREY PENINSULA WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)Regular meeting2:00 PM, Monday, February 25, 2013580 PACIFIC STREETCITY COUNCIL CHAMBERSMONTEREY, CALIFORNIAMembers Present:
Huss, Israel, Riedl, Riley, Seigfried, Stoldt, Burnett,
Members Absent:
Narigi
Staff Present:
Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk
CALL TO ORDERROLL CALLPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEREPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS
Chair Burnett reported on a meeting he attended with the California Coastal Commission andCal Am to discuss permitting issues for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project testwells. They also discussed the process of for obtaining parallel permits and requested that theAuthority host monthly meetings to stay informed about the project application status. Heindicated that several action items resulted from the meeting for Cal Am to follow up with. ChairBurnett also took the opportunity to recognize two staff members for their efforts towardsubmitting testimony to the California Public Utilities Commission prior to the deadline onFebruary 22, 2013.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Chair Burnett opened the item to public comments for items not on the agenda and had norequests to speak.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. February 4, 2013On a motion by Member Stoldt seconded by Member Riley and carried by the following vote,the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority TAC approved the minutes of February 4,2013 as amended.AYES: 7 DIRECTORS:Huss, Israel, Riedl, Riley, Seigfried, Stoldt, Burnett,NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
 
MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, February 25, 20132ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: NarigiABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None
AGENDA ITEMS
2. Receive Report and Discuss Outside Agency Actions Regarding the Monterey Peninsula WaterSupply Projecta. Monterey County Board of Supervisors - (Burnett)Chair Burnett reported that the Monterey County Board of Supervisors supported and adoptedthe Authority’s position statement as well as discussed the issue of the statement of principles.The Governance committee document was unanimously approved and the Board appointed tothe governance committee the primary representative Supervisor Potter and an alternaterepresentative the Supervisor from the Salinas region. Chair Burnett acknowledged it as animportant step to have a united voice with all six member city mayors and all five supervisors tohave the same stance. The Board endorsed the statement of principles in general, but did notformally adopt the position statement as their own due to pending litigation and settlementagreement with Cal Am. Chair Burnett opened this item to public comment, and having norequests to speak, turned to the next report from Member Stoldt.b. Monterey Peninsula Water Management District - (Stoldt)Member Stoldt reported on the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Board meetingon January 30, 2013 and approved similar actions including stronger support for Ground WaterReplenishment, and pending the identification of non substantive changes, approved theGovernance document. MPWMD re-endorsed the concept of a public contribution as well asseveral other financial suggestions. The Board voted 6-0,under further consideration voted 4 to2,to oppose surcharge two, and continued to endorse further evaluation of backstops. Theissue of project sizing, a general statement of support, was deferred to a special meeting onFebruary 12, 2013 where the Board agreed with the demand forecast and project sizing, withand without GWR.Chair Burnett opened the item for comments from the public. Sue McCloud spoke to a letterpublished in the Monterey Herald opinion page from Member Stoldt, thanking him for making acomplicated project more understandable to the public. She then suggested publication of thesame Article in the Salinas Californian. Nelson Vega questioned why Member Stoldt did notinclude the costs per acre foot because he thinks the public is only concerned about the costand if the project can be built He then requested that the Authority help Cal Am attain the sourcewater need for the MPWSP project. With no further requests to speak, Chair Burnett closedpublic comment.c. Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency - (Israel)Member Israel deferred to report on this item until Agenda Item 4.d. Monterey Regional Waste Management District Presentation of Availability of Landfill Gas forPower Generation (W. Merry)
 
MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, February 25, 20133William Merry from the Monterey Regional Waste Management District made a presentation onefforts to make the landfill gas (LFG) to energy project viable enough to sell power to adesalination facility. The District has been producing energy through the landfill gas to energyprogram for 30 years. Mr. Merry discussed that the LFG program is an economic benefit for asmall to medium landfill however there have been many lessons learned over the course of theproject. He observed that when the developer began the project in 1983, energy prices declinedimmediately even though PG&E had forecast a rise in prices, and the developer sold the LFGproject to the District. In the beginning years of operating the project, revenues fell short ofoperating expenses. Lesson learned: be critical of forecasts.Mr. Merry then discussed different types of power purchase agreements and optimal markets tosell their converted power and indicated that PG&E has a strangle hold on small biomassgenerators adding new generation to the grid. That would be a disincentive to go forward withenergy production, but an agreement with the MPWSP project would be an “over the fence” ordirect access agreement and would eliminate most or all PGE fees. He also indicated that theDistrict currently has the opportunity to sell gas as boiler fuel and in the future is consideringincreasing generation of energy to 7 megawatts. Mr. Merry also explained that the District isexploring the option to turn the landfill gas into compressed natural gas to fuel vehicles andcurrently has an informal agreement with the MRWPCA to explore options for converting biogasto CNG to run vehicles on the alternative fuel. Mr. Merry further explained that efforts todiversify opportunities to utilize landfill gas is a redundancy that small producers can use to stayprofitable. He encouraged the Authority to urge Cal Am to consider the District energy as a wayto close the loop by buying local energy.Items/challenges that would need to be addressed if the MPWSP would consider Purchasingpower from the District:
 
The district is actively engaged in making decisions for the next 10 to 20 years. Theyneed to use the LFG productively or flare it off.
 
Addressing the imbalance: if the demand is higher than the supply? On a growth scale.They are producing 24/7. Tolerance for supply changes
 
Identification of the redundancy requirements
 
Identification of the demand including: continuous, average demand; maximum; andseasonal
 
Identification of the tolerance for electric power supply to be down (in the event of aPG&E mandated shut down, or Natural Disaster)
 
What is facility’s power redundancy requirements/plan
 
What is facility’s anticipated down time?
 
What would MPWSP be willing to pay for power on a kilowatt-hour basis? District willneed to be paid at market rates
 
When would MPWSP wish to negotiate, sign a power sales agreement?Mr. Merry answered questions from the TAC. Member Siegfried asked if the District had theability or would consider selling the LFG in raw form to the desal facility instead of processing itat your facility, so that the facility would be able to use that heat generated during combustionto make the process more efficient. Mr. Merry responded by discussion of the supply sourceand lifespan of the landfill. Regulations from the state are requiring greater diversion from thelandfill. On the waste water side, there is a push to develop power generation through solids.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->