Agenda

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Regular Meeting
10:30 AM, Monday, February 2, 2015
Council Chamber
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, California
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on any
subject which is within the jurisdiction of the MPRWA TAC and which is not on the agenda. Any
person or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the Committee may do so by
addressing 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 appropriate
staff 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 Definitive
Agreement (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 Project
Critical 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).

Created date 01/30/2015 4:38 PM

Monday, February 2, 2015

ADJOURNMENT

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to including the disabled in all
of 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 City
Clerks Office at (831) 646-3935. Notification 30 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City
to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.10235.104 ADA Title II]. Later requests will be accommodated to the extent feasible. For
communication-related assistance, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to
City offices. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24
hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a meeting, dial
711 to use CRS to talk to the Monterey City Clerk's Office at (831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a
device.
Agenda related writings or documents provided to the MPRWA are available for public
inspection during the meeting or may be requested from the Monterey City Clerks Office at 580
Pacific St, Room 6, Monterey, CA 93940. This agenda is posted in compliance with California
Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.

M I N U TE S
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)
Regular Meeting
10:30 AM, Monday, December 1, 2014
COUNCIL CHAMBER
580 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 the
following vote the Technical Advisory Committee approved the minutes of October 9, 2014.
Cullem, Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Stoldt
AYES:
6 MEMBERS:
NOES:
0 MEMBERS:
None
ABSENT:
2 MEMBERS:
Huss, Lee
ABSTAIN:
0 MEMBERS:
None
RECUSED: 0 MEMBERS:
None
AGENDA ITEMS
3.

Receive Report on the Status of Bi-lateral Agreements for the Ground Water
Replenishment Source Water Definitive Agreement - Stoldt/Israel
Member Stoldt spoke to the hand out provided, Roadmap for a definitive agreement on source
waters and water recycling. He spoke to the eight definitive legal agreements that are needed
and the tentative dates for the execution for these agreements. The TAC discussed the

MPRWA Minutes

Monday, December 1, 2014

different agreements and the agencies that would be parties to them. The TAC also discussed
the 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 be
made this week and that staff is conducting an in-house cost analysis for a cost comparison
and feasibility study at this time. Member Israel reported that the application for SRF Funds
cannot be filed until a water purchase agreement is solidified but the state is working with the
Pollution Control Agency to qualify for a 1% financing ability.
The TAC discussed possibilities to meet the cease and desist order for either the GWR project
or 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 Current
Detailed Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Critical Path Permits and Approvals
Schedule - Crooks
Ian Crooks, Cal Am provided an update on the Test Slant Well Construction progress and
presented the updated production schedule which included the GWR project to demonstrate
how the GWR will line up as compared to the Desal project approval and start up. Mr. Crooks
reported that Cal Am Staff is working with the Coastal Commission to fulfill the permitting
requirements. 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 that
pleadings 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 specific
milestones. He spoke to the progress anticipated to be made once the Test Well and the EIR
are 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 the
Coastal Development Permit and indicated that it will be further discussed at future TAC
meetings. Member Stoldt left the meeting at 11:45 AM.
Member Riley spoke to the MPWSP anticipated schedule and the 24 month data collection
period. He questioned how much data can and should be collected to be able to make an
appropriate 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 Moss
Landing Desal on November 17, 2014 and Make Recommendations to the Authority
Board - TAC members

MPRWA TAC Meeting Minutes

Regular Meeting Minutes - Monday, December 1, 2014
2

MPRWA Minutes

Monday, December 1, 2014

Chair Cullem spoke to the site visits to both the Deep Water Desal Facility and the Peoples
Moss 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 for
the People's Moss Landing Desal EIR. He also questioned if they have the funding in place to
see the project to completion. He mentioned that they were proposing to put the intake next to
the surf zone which seemed problematic.
Member Narigi questioned if either project had produced definitive schedules, or proof of
permits that would provide proof of progress to which it was responded that they produced
aggressive 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 by

Technical Advisory Committee Members -TAC members
This was put on the agenda to discuss the interest of the different members of the TAC, to
understand the desires of their respective organizations and how each can benefit. Since the
key members are not present, Chair Cullem requested that this item be continued to a later
meeting.
On motion by TAC Member Narigi and Seconded by TAC Member Riedl and approved by the
following vote the Technical Advisory Committee tabled this item to a future meeting.
Cullem, Israel, Narigi, Riley, Riedl, Stoldt
AYES:
6 MEMBERS:
NOES:
0 MEMBERS:
None
ABSENT:
2 MEMBERS:
Huss, Lee
ABSTAIN:
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

MPRWA TAC Meeting Minutes

Regular Meeting Minutes - Monday, December 1, 2014
3

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 2.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Receive Report on the Status of Bi-lateral Agreements for the

GWR Definitive Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC receive an update on the efforts of the
Pollution Control Agency and the Water Management District in securing
the bi-lateral agreements necessary to secure a Definitive Agreement for
source 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 Water
Recycling". 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 Water
Recycling as provided December 1, 2014.

06/12

Tasks for a Definitive Agreement

(October 2014 March 2015)

Water Availability

Legal Agreements

O
N
D
J
F

Definitive Agreement Scoping: Timeline & Review

Public Discussion
MRWPCA MCWRA (4th Amendment)
MRWPCA Salinas (Operations & Financing)
MRWPCA MCWD (Pipeline Lease)
MRWPCA Monterey (Lake El Estero)
MRWPCA MPWMD Watermaster (Water Storage Agreement)
MPWMD MRWPCA (Recycled Water Purchase Agreement)
MPWMD Cal Am (Wholesale Water Purchase Agreement)
Identify 6 to 8 Agreements, who will sign, scope

Meet with
staff and
board/counsel
Important
Issues

Define Terms
Develop Scenarios
Propose Key Terms

Revise
Definitive
Agreement

Public
Outreach

Financial Issues

Water Rights
10% Design
Capital
Costs identified

Fisheries
Review

Discuss with
each provider
of water

Review water availability

assumptions; Discuss
operational issues; Wet year,
dry year, average year
considerations; Impact on
facilities and costs

First Draft of Definitive Agreement

circulated

Revised 10/23/14

Rate Study
to develop
interruptible
rate for cost
of treatment

Meet with
stakeholders to
discuss pro rata
share and
amount of
capital costs and
initial Prop 218
Strategies

Decide on
which waters
to incorporate
and phasing

3rd Party review

of costs/facilities

Public
Outreach

Meet with SWRCB

Staff, Tour area
facilities, Confirm
Strategy for Water
Rights Application

Develop
alternative CSIP
funding
allocations &
Prop 218
strategies

Assess all
components of
Project for Progress;
Prepare Revision of
Water Rights
Application

Finalize
estimated
costs,
allocations, and
Prop 218
strategy
Incorporate into
Definitive
Agreement

Definitive Agreement Finalized

Meet to Establish
Strategy for Water
Rights Application

When Definitive
Agreement is
Reached, File
amended Water
Rights Application

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 3.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Discuss GWR/DESAL Cost Comparison Study

RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Water Authority receive an update from Keith Israel, General
Manager 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 Peninsula
Water Supply system, a cost comparison between GWR and the Cal Am Desal facilities
is 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 comparison
study.

06/12

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 4.

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 slant
well, discuss, and make recommendations as appropriate.
DISCUSSION:
At the request of the Water Authority at its meeting of Jan 8, 2015, Cal Am agreed to
discuss the results of the Dana Point test slant well in relation to the MPWSP test slant
well 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

06/12

MUNICIPAL1
WATER
DISTRICT
OF
ORANGE
COUNTY

September 24, 2014

Street Address:
18700 Ward Street
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 20895
Fountain Valley, CA 92728-0895
(714) 963-3058

Scott McCreary
CONCUR

via email: scott@concurinc.net

Fax: (714) 964-9389

www.mwdoc.com
Larry D. Dick
President
Wayne S. Osborne
Vice President
Brett R. Barbre
Director
Wayne A. Clark
Director
Joan C. Finnegan
Director
Susan Hinman
Director
Jeffery M. Thomas
Director
Robert J. Hunter
General Manager

MEMBER AGENCIES
City of Brea
City of Buena Park
East Orange County Water District
El Toro Water District
Emerald Bay Service District
City of Fountain Valley
City of Garden Grove
Golden State Water Co.
City of Huntington Beach

Re: Comments on Draft Phase 1 Report Technical Feasibility of Subsurface Intake

Designs for the Proposed Poseidon Water Desalination Facility at Huntington Beach,
California, Independent Scientific Technical Advisory Panel, CONCUR, September 22,
2014
We offer the following clarifying comments on the referenced draft report.
In general, it does not appear that the ISTAP reviewed the full suite of project reports for
the Doheny Ocean Desalination Project, Phase 1 Hydrogeology Investigation, Phase 2 Test
Slant Well Design/Construction and Subsurface Intake Feasibility Investigation and Phase
3 Extended Pumping and Pilot Plant Test, but only relied on one report prepared by
Geoscience and some articles prepared by Geoscience. These reports can be found at our
website under Ocean Desalination, Doheny Ocean Desalination Project. We suggest a
first read of the Project Summary Report. Our concern is that your report has made
findings regarding slant wells that we strongly believe are not supported by our research.
Our comments are mainly directed to the generalized statements made regarding slant
wells.
ISTAP Findings
The Draft Report provides the following findings and conclusions for slant wells in the
Talbert Aquifer as generalized in the Summary Matrix (page 14) which we find to be
misleading and incorrect as explained below.

Irvine Ranch Water District

Laguna Beach County Water District

Response to ISTAP Draft Report Findings and Conclusions

City of La Habra
City of La Palma
Mesa Water District
Moulton Niguel Water District
City of Newport Beach
City of Orange
Orange County Water District
City of San Clemente
City of San Juan Capistrano
Santa Margarita Water District
City of Seal Beach
Serrano Water District
South Coast Water District
Trabuco Canyon Water District
City of Tustin
City of Westminster
Yorba Linda Water District

Section 3.3.6 Slant Wells

Design/Construction Considerations. The report is correct in noting that Dual Rotary
drilling is a proven water well technology and its application to angle installations has also
been proven in mining applications, but only in a few water supply projects (Hudson River
and Missouri River, projects constructed by Layne) prior to our Test Slant Well project on
Doheny State Beach in 2006.
However, the report is incorrect in drawing conclusions regarding the performance of the
test slant well and extrapolating those results to a full scale production well, as many
trade-offs were made in our test work, due to monetary and time constraints.

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.

MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY

Mr. Scott McCreary

Page 3
September 24, 2014

Comment on Geochemical Issues (Page 50 and 61)

The report states that the greatest risk of clogging occurs where there is mixing of dissimilar waters or a
change in water chemistry (e.g. introduction of dissolved oxygen) and clogging is of greatest concern where
rehabilitation is complex and expensive. These challenges are primarily related to old marine groundwater
that is anoxic and can contain elevated levels of dissolved iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn). This is the case in
the marine aquifer offshore of Doheny State Beach. Over the 18 month extended pumping test, the
produced water remained anoxic as the fraction of ocean recharge increased rapidly into the upper screen
sections. In this location there is an abundance of organic matter in the shallow sediments that will likely
allow the uptake of dissolved oxygen to continue for a long period of time.
Modeling (flow, variable density and geochemical) is currently being conducted to provide an estimate of the
time to pump out the old marine groundwater that is enriched with dissolved Fe/Mn and to estimate the
steady state water quality conditions. The plan is to first pump out the old marine groundwater before using
this water for feedwater for the desalination facility, a process that is estimated to take about one year. This
will allow a better determination of steady state conditions, whether or not the aquifer will be fully oxidized
with ocean water, and will allow final pilot testing to determine if any pretreatment is required to remove
any residual low levels of Fe/Mn and minerals. A small amount of mixing in the range of 5% of fresh
groundwater compared to 95% ocean water (based on modeling work) is not expected to cause any
significant issues with process treatment and membrane fouling.
Section 5.2.5 Slant Wells Completed in the Talbert Aquifer
Current slant well technology utilizing the telescopic method of design and construction can result in angled
wells (slant wells) extending 1,000 lineal ft. With long screen sections extending beneath the ocean floor,
onshore drawdown impacts would be minimized, The statement that slant wells "would draw large volumes
from the Orange County Groundwater Basin" as a fatal flaw has not been demonstrated by defendable
modeling and or pilot testing. A simple pilot test using a vertical well completed in the Talbert aquifer on the
Project site could demonstrate impacts on water level changes in the Talbert aquifer and the overlying semiperched aquifer. Monitoring wells in the Talbert aquifer and shallow layers would provide the necessary
interference information to confirm if there were impacts to the OCWD groundwater basin.
Water quality parameters analyzed during the testing would allow estimates of percentage of ocean water
and inland water recharge. With the well screen well out under the ocean, under a constant head boundary,
the maximum rate of draw from the inland aquifer would be no greater than about 5%, based on modeling
conducted for the San Juan Creek confined alluvial offshore aquifer system. At this rate, about 6 mgd of
injected well water would be produced by the slant wells compared to production of 120 mgd from the slant
wells. The project would only have to provide the replacement supply to OCWD in this amount, as most of
the injection well barrier is recharged to the basin and subsequently produced. This is a relatively small
impact on supply. The impact to the barrier would be eliminated if the slant wellfield were situated across
the full width of the Talbert Aquifer and provided a sufficient cone of depression to control seawater

MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY

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.

Comment on Sea Water 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 Aquifer

Hydrogeology

Impact on freshwater aquifers

Design Considerations

Complexity of Construction
Performance Risk degree of
uncertainty of outcome
Reliability of Intake System
Frequency of Maintenance
Complexity of Maintenance
Sensitivity to sea level rise
Risk of adverse fluid mixing
Risk of clogging
Risk of significant change in
inorganic chemistry

Yes, but minor at 5% of

produced water
Medium
Low

Oceanographic
Geochemistry

Precedent on large scale in

similar geologic conditions
Key considerations/fatal flaws
Technically feasible? Yes or No

High
Low
Low
Low Actually a positive benefit
Low
Low
Low
No precedent
None
Yes

MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY

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:

Mr. Tom Luster

Dr. Dennis Williams, Geoscience
Dr. Matt Charette, WHO'
Mr. Gerry Filteau, SPI
Mr. Ron Davis, CalDesal

MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 5.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Receive and Discuss the Current "Detailed" MPWSP Critical

Path 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 of
the DEIR delay .
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting of November 7, 2014, the California Coastal Commission
issued a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for Cal Am's test slant well at
the 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 by
CPUC Administrative Law Judge Weatherford's to delay the release of the
DEIR.
Accordingly, the TAC needs to review Cal Am's latest "detailed" permits
and approvals schedule in an effort to identify likely future delays or
approval challenges that might require Water Authority attention.
ATTACHMENTS:
Current Cal Am critical path schedule for Permits and Approvals

06/12

FULL SCALE PLANT & PIPELINES SCHEDULE - [WORKING PRODUCT & SUBJECT TO CHANGE]

Exported on January 30, 2015 5:18:44 PM MST

Page 1 of 4

Exported on January 30, 2015 5:18:44 PM MST

Page 2 of 4

Exported on January 30, 2015 5:18:45 PM MST

Page 3 of 4

Exported on January 30, 2015 5:18:45 PM MST

Page 4 of 4

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 6.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Consider a recommendation to the Water Authority relative to

the 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 the
Marina 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. Brian
accepted the invitation and served as a member until his departure from
MCWD in January 2015.
The TAC should discuss inviting the current interim General Manager, Bill
Koker, to fill the MCWD seat on the TAC.
EXHIBITS:
A- Staff report provided to the Water Authority on Aug 14, 2014

06/12

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: August 14, 2014

Item No: 7.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Receive report, discuss, and vote on staff proposal to add the General
Manager, 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 Water
Supply 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 make
a recommendation to the settling parties to add a MCWD hydrologist to the test slant
well Hydrogeologic Working Group (HWG).
DISCUSSION:
During January and July 2014, the City of Marina has been heavily involved in the
permitting of the bore hole construction and in consideration of a mitigated negative
declaration (MND) and coastal development permit (DP) for Cal Am's test slant well at
the CEMEX site.
During public hearings, the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) raised a number of
concerns that suggest a lack of communication between MCWD and Cal Am, and with
the Water Authority as well. This situation has not only delayed progress on the desal
plant approval and construction, but has raised serious concerns on the part of the
MCWD and City of Marina that its water needs may be placed at risk as a result of the
desal plant slant wells.
To initiate a dialog on these issues, several informal MCWD/MPRWA management
level meetings were held during the week of August 4. Amongst other things, it was
concluded that participation by MCWD representatives on the TAC, and possibly on the
HWG, 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, insure
the concerns of Marina residents get timely consideration, and improve communication
between and amongst MCWD, Cal Am, and the Water Authority.
It should be noted that the TAC already has a member from the agricultural community
to articulate ag interests prior to Water Authority decisions and deliberations. Thus, the
Executive Director recommends the Authority extend an invitation to the MCWD District
Engineer (Interim General Manager) to join the TAC for the same purpose.

06/12

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 7.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Discuss Preparations for Review of the Desal DEIR Scheduled

for Release in April 2015.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC discuss preparations for review of the
Desal DEIR scheduled for release by the CPUC in April 2015.
DISCUSSION:
On January 23, 2015,The CPUC Administrative Law Judge delayed the
circulation of the Cal Am Desal DEIR until April of 2015 in order to allow
data from the test slant well to be available. He also increased the period of
time available for public comment and preparation of the FEIR.
Whenever the DEIR finally is circulated, the TAC will be tasked with
reviewing 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.

06/12

GW2/sbf/avs 1/23/2015

FILED
1-23-15
01:36 PM

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Application of California-American Water

Company (U210W) for Approval of the
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
and Authorization to Recover All Present
and 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 parte communications 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.

143858682

-1-

A.12-04-019 GW2/sbf/avs

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

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 test
well is subject to litigation that could delay its drilling and operation.

-2-

A.12-04-019 GW2/sbf/avs

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.

Briefs shall use a common outline. Cal-Am shall consult with parties to develop a
common outline, and shall serve the common outline no later than 15 days after
issuance of the DEIR.
2

Reply Briefs will follow the same common outline as the Opening Briefs.

-3-

A.12-04-019 GW2/sbf/avs

2. Ex parte communications with decisionmakers in this proceeding are

prohibited.
Dated January 23, 2015, at San Francisco, California.

/s/ GARY WEATHERFORD

Gary Weatherford
Administrative Law Judge

-4-

23 January 2015
UPDATED Schedule and Task List for MPWSP Post Settlement (REV 23 JAN 2015)
RED are changes from 7 Oct 13 Schedule.
CPUC Calendar Dates
Task
Comments on
Settlement Agreements
Due
Reply Comments on
Settlement Agreements
Due
Prehearing
Conference: Status of
Settlement Motion (if
any), of CEQA work
& other matters
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
Informational Hearing
on Settlement
Agreements
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
DEIR circulated for
Comment
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
Cal-Am to file and serve
a common outline for
legal and policy briefs,
after consulting with
parties
Comments on DEIR
Due
Common Outline
Opening Briefs filed and
served on legal and
policy issues
Reply Briefs filed and
served on legal and
policy issues
All party meeting
FEIR published
Proposed
Decision addressing
certification of FEIR and
issuance of CPCN
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
Target for Commission
Action on Phase I
015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

Due Date
August 30, 2013

Responsible Party

Notes
Complete

September 13, 2013

Complete

September 16, 2013

Complete

October 2014

MPRWA

December 2-3, 2013

Complete

January 2015

MPRWA

Feb 28, 2014

April 2015
April 2015

all
MPRWA

April 29, 2014 15 days

after issuance of DEIR

all

April 14, 2014

60 days from DEIR
April 29, 2014
75 days from DEIR

all

May 14, 2014

15 days from Opening
Briefs
July 2015
June 17, 2014
October 2015
July 2014 Phase 1
December 2015

all

CPUC
CPUC

July 2015

MPRWA

August 2014

Complete

all

CPUC

Complete

23 January 2015
Task
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
All party meeting

Due Date
October 2015

Responsible Party
MPRWA

January 2016

MPRWACPUC

Proposed Decision on
Commission Agenda

February 2016

CPUC

Testimony, settlement
discussions, hearings,
decisions from
Settlement K

December 2014-July
2015 November 2015June 2016

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
MPWMD, CPUC

015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

Notes

See GWR Schedule

23 January 2015
GWR (Rev 5 JAN 2015)
Task
File Motion for
Bifurcation of the
GWR Decision
Board Actions to
Approve Revised
Governance Committee
Agreement
Executed Agreements
for GWR Source Water
and/or Declaratory
Relief

Due Date
August 2013

Responsible Party
MRWPCA

Notes
Complete and Granted

August/Sept 2013

MPWMD, MPRWA,
County, & Cal-Am

To be Completed in
October

MRWPCA

Meet & Confer in

Progress for Definitive
Agreements (March
2015)

MPWMD & MRWPCA

Delayed per Oct 2014

CPUC Adjustment of
Phase 2 Schedule

MRWPCA

Dept Public Health

Concept Project
Approval received
June 2014
????

Sept-Nov 2013
6 Party Joint MOU
Approved mid-Oct 2014

Draft WPA
Oct-Dec 2013
April 2015
Obtain Representations
from DPH re Use of
Extracted GWR Water

Oct-Dec 2013
June 2014

Obtain Representations
from RWQCB re Use of
Extracted GWR Water

Oct-Dec 2013
June 2014

Storage Agreement
with Seaside Basin
Watermaster

Oct-Dec 2013
April 2015

GWR Basis of Design

Complete with At Least
10% Design

Oct-Dec 2013
October 2014

GWR Financing Plan

Sufficient for SRF
Funding

Oct-Dec 2013
May 2015

Agreement on Terms of
WPA

Perform Revenue
Requirement Analysis
Including Any Debt
Equivalency Effect
Perform Assessment of
GWR Positive and
Negative Externalities
for Any Premium
Showing
DEIR Circulated
015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

MRWPCA

MRWPCA & MPWMD

MRWPCA

complete

MRWPCA & MPWMD

Jan 2014
June 2015

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
&MPWMD

MRWPCA & MPWMD

Jan-Mar 2014
June 2015
Jan-Mar 2014
June 2015

MRWPCA & MPWMD

July 2014 March 2015

MRWPCA

Coord w/Cal Am DEIR

23 January 2015
Dilution Water
Requirements
Project Approved and
FEIR

July-October 2014
Not Required
October 2014
September 2015

MRWPCA

CPUC Testimony
Phase Commences

November 2015

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
MPWMD, CPUC

CPUC Evidentiary
Hearings

January 2016

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
MPWMD, CPUC

All Permits for GWR

Construction Obtained

Target for CPUC Action

on Phase 2 Decision

015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

MRWPCA

MRWPCA
January 2015
February 2016
June 2016

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
MPWMD, CPUC

For Major Permits

23 January 2015
Source Wells (Rev 5 JAN 2015)
Task
Drill Exploratory
Boreholes
Commence
Hydrogeologic Study
and Technical Report
Permits for CEMEX
Site Test Well

Due Date
Sept. 2013 February
2014
August 2013

Responsible Party
Cal-Am

Notes
Complete

Cal-Am / SVWC

Underway

January 2014 Nov 12,

2014

Cal-Am

Coastal Commission
Approved CDP.
CEQA lawsuit pending

Drill CEMEX Site Test

Well

February 2014 NovDec

14-FebMar 15 subject
to Coastal Commission

Cal-Am

Results of Test Well

Operation Obtained
Hydrogeologic Study
and Technical Report
Complete and Results
Filed with CPUC
Necessary Agreements
from CEMEX for
Source Wells
All Necessary Permits
for Construction of
Source Wells Obtained

February 2014 2015

February 2016 2017

Cal-Am

Delayed -see above

Cal-Am

Delayed -see above

015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

June 2015
?
Nov. 2015, or sooner
?Nov 2016, or sooner

Cal-Am

Nov. 2015, or sooner

?Nov 2016 or sooner

Cal-Am

23 January 2015
Securitization (Rev 5 JAN 2015)

Initial Revision and

Redline of Legislation

Early September 2013

MPWMD

Complete

Obtain Cal-Am Input on

Draft 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

Draft Summary of
Legislation

December 2013

Introduce Legislation

January 2014

Lobbying Effort

February-April 2014

Legislation Adopted
Governor Signed

April-May 2014 Sept 19,

2014

Initial Draft of Motion for

Financing Order

April 2014

In Progress Complete

MPWMD

Complete
MPWMD, MPRWA, &
Cal-Am

015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

April 2014
March 2015

In Progress Complete

Passed Senate
Unanimously; Referred
to Assembly Complete
MPWMD

March 2015
Perform Analysis to
Demonstrate Annual
Customer Benefits
Exceed 1.0% of Total
Annual Revenue
Requirement

Complete

MPWMD & Cal-Am

23 January 2015
Motion Application for
Financing Order

May 2014

MPWMD

May 2015
Obtain CPUC Financing
Order

August 2014 November

2015

Preliminary Discussions
with Bond Underwriters

September-December
2014

MPWMD

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 Bond

Financing

End of 2015 Q2-Q3

2016

MPWMD

015621\0002\11340073.1
1/30/15

Order on securitization
financing on satisfaction
of remaining criteria
from Settlement K
Complete??

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority

Agenda Report

FROM:

Date: February 02, 2015

Item No: 8.

Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Receive Updated MPRWA Fact Sheet and Discuss Authority

Expectations Relative to Each Project Cited.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the TAC review and comment on the revised Water
Authority fact sheet, discuss the Water Authority's expectations with
respect to each project cited in the fact sheet, and provide appropriate
recommendations to staff and to the Water Authority Board.
DISCUSSION:
The MPRWA fact sheet is updated periodically and is intended to provide
updated information on progress toward completing one or more water
supply projects to replace Cal Am's overdraft of the Carmel River and
projected reductions from the Seaside Aquifer. The fact sheet is usually a
leave-behind when staff or board members make verbal presentations to
community groups.
The latest update includes schedule changes up through and including the
Jan 23, 2015 ruling from the CPUC Administrative Law Judge delaying the
release of the Desal DEIR.
The TAC needs to review the update and insure that Water Authority
expectations are being addressed for each project cited on the fact sheet.
ATTACHMENTS:
Updated Fact Sheet as of Feb 1, 2015.

06/12

Portfolio Approach
To maximize our ability to resolve our water shortage by the CDO deadline (currently January 1, 2017, but an extension
is under discussion), the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA) has adopted a portfolio approach to
move forward. All projects included in the portfolio must meet four conditions set forth by the Authority.

Support Conditions Required by the Authority

1. Project economics must be competitive.
2. Project must have suitable public governance, accountability and transparency.
3. Project must have clear path to permitting and constructing the facility as near to the Cease and Desist
Order deadline as possible.
4. Project must have contingency plans to address significant technical, permitting and legal risks.
A further eight financial, governance, and permitting & contingency plan conditions were required of Cal Am to obtain the
Authoritys support for the desal plant. These can be found at www.mprwa.org.

Water Portfolio Projects

The Peninsulas water portfolio includes the following four projects:
Pure Water Monterey
Groundwater Replenishment (GWR)

Desalination Plant

Owned & operated by Cal Am

Alternate desal facilities include Deep Water Desal
and Peoples Desal
6.4 or 9.6 MGD depending on GWR success
Desalinates ocean water
The Authority required eight financial, governance &
contingency conditions for Cal Am to obtain the
Authoritys support for the project
Scheduled to begin operations mid 2018 or 2019
depending on size

Watch video presentation on GWR project at

http://bit.ly/gwr_over

Aquifer Storage & Recovery (ASR)

Publically Owned
Pumps water into the Seaside Basin for later use
Two sites already operational
20,000 Acre Feet (AF) available for storage
Receives water from GWR, Desal, Carmel River
overflow & Mother Nature
Watch video presentation on the ASR project at
http://bit.ly/asr_over

Publically Owned
Approximately 3.2 MGD
Recycles & cleans waste water & potentially storm
water & Salinas Produce wash water, then injects it
into the Seaside Basin for later use
Modeled after the successful plant in Orange County
Pilot Facility currently operating
Projected to begin operations end of 2017

Pacific Grove Small Projects

Publically Owned
Includes rainwater collection, gray water and other
projects
Will reduce the water demand on the Peninsula
Decreases water run-off into the ocean
Why 15,296 AF per Year?
Existing Use + Lots of Record +
Economic Rebound Allowance + Pebble
Beach proposed Del Monte Forest.

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is a Joint Power Authority (JPA)
with the goal to find a solution to the Peninsula Water shortage. It consists of six peninsula cities: Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks,
Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City and Seaside, with Monterey County participating on the Governance Committee.
www.mprwa.org

Howd We Get Here? A Brief Background.

1995

The state Water Resources Control Board decides California American Water is only entitled to about 30% of
what it had been pumping.

2003

A court order requires Cal Am to also reduce its take from the underground Seaside basin.

2009

The State Water Resource Control Board mandates Cal Am to cut back
use of Carmel River, with a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) effective
January 1, 2017.

2010

Cal Ams regional desal project approved by the state PUC. The project
later fell apart due to legal issues and conflict of interest accusations.

2012

Cal Am files an application for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply

Project with the state Public Utilities Commission with a new desal project
proposal as part of its Monterey Peninsula Water Supply project. This is
the desal project included in the portfolio.

Economic Effects of a Lost

Water Supply
More than $1billion a year if the Peninsula
loses just half of its current water supply:

An estimated $742 million annual loss in

commercial sales from hotels,
restaurants, grocery stores

$261 million per year in lost industrial

production, such as food production;

6,000 lost jobs

Moving Forward: A Path to a New Water Supply

2014

Feb
Sept
Dec

Install last two bore holes at CEMEX

Governor signs legislation enabling Cal-Am to maintain ownership of the desal plant while funding a
greater portion of the project with public bonds to save rate payers tens of millions in interest.
Receive Coastal Commission permit to install test slant well for desal project

2015
April
Oct
Dec

Storage Agreement with Seaside Basin Watermaster; Draft EIR Circulated for GWR; CPUC circulates
Draft EIR for desal project
Execute Agreements for GWR Source Water and/or Declaratory Relief for GWR;
CPUC circulates Final EIR for desal project
60% Desal Facility Design Completed; Obtain CPUC Financing Order & Certificate of Public
Convenience & Necessity (CPCN) for Desal; GWR Financing Plan Sufficient for SRF Funding

2016
Construction of Desal project; Construction & Facility Testing of GWR
June
CPUC Final Decision for GWR
Sept
Obtain Rating on Water Rate Relief Bonds for Desal project; 90% Desal Facility Design Completed;
GWR EIR Certification/Project Approval
Oct
Determine Desal Capacity (9.6 MGD if GWR is not approved, 6.4 MGD if GWR project is under
construction)
Nov
Finalize results of test slant well and receive permits for production wells; Final Desal Design
Completed/Construction Begins
EOY(?) Water Rate Relief Bonds Issued for Desal project
How Will My Water Bills Change?
4th Qtr GWR Construction begins
2017

Dec

2018

June

- - - - - - - January 1, 2017 Deadline - - - - - - Grand Opening & Startup of GWR

Overall, water bills will increase by an

estimated 41% by 2018, when it will level out
except for general rate increases.

Partial Startup of Desal Plant

Videos to Watch
Overview of the Project

http://bit.ly/wsp_over

Tour Orange Countys Waste Water Treatment Plant

http://bit.ly/OCtour

Sand City Desal Plant

http://bit.ly/SCdesal

For more information on the Monterey Peninsulas water projects and progress toward the CDO deadline,
visit ww.mprwa.org. You will also find links to GWR & Cal Ams Monterey Peninsula Water Supply project sites.