Agenda

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Regular Meeting

10:30 AM, Monday, November 4, 2013
Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency Regional Treatment Plant
14811 Del Monte Blvd, Marina 93933

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ADJOURN TO FIELD TRIP

1. Tour of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency Regional Treatment Plant
at 14811 Del Monte Blvd, Marina 93933

RECONVENE TO REGULAR MEETING

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 TAC may do so by addressing the
Committee during Public Comments or by addressing a letter of explanation to: MPRWA TAC,
Attn: MPRWA Clerk, 580 Pacific St, Monterey, CA 93940.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

2. August 19, 2013

AGENDA ITEMS

3. Receive Report, Discuss and Make Recommendations Regarding Ground Water
Replenishment Project Bifurcation, including timeline and process for cost comparison and
other project criteria (Burnett)

4. Receive Report, Discuss and Make Recommendations Regarding Ground Water
Replenishment Project Schedule and Areas where the Water Authority Can Assist in
Evaluating and Moving the Project Forward (Israel)

5. Discuss, Provide Staff Direction in Identifying Information Necessary to Evaluate the
Ground Water Replenishment Project (Cullem)

ADJOURNMENT


Created date 11/01/2013 9:42 AM Monday, November 4, 2013
2


The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to include the disabled in all of
its services, programs and activities. For disabled access, dial 711 to use the California Relay
Service (CRS) to speak to staff at the Monterey City Clerks Office, the Principal Office of the
Authority. 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 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 public
inspection during the meeting or may be requested from the Authority Clerk at 440 Harcourt
Ave, Seaside, CA 93955. This agenda is posted in compliance with California Government
Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.


r
_ 4-Way Stop
" J - 1 = = 1 f f 1 1 1 = 1
Regional Wastewater
Treatment Facility
T
o

C
a
s
t
r
o
v
i
l
l
e

Sali nas

River
Del Monte Blvd.
Exits #41 2
Monterey Regional
Environmental Park
Sign
D
e
l

M
o
n
t
e

B
l
v
d
.

ERN
MONTEREY REGIONAL WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
Directions to the
Regional Treatment Facility
From Hwy 101:
From Hwy 101 @ Prunedale take
Hwy 156 Exit. Hwy 156 turns into
Hwy 1 South @ Castroville.
(Continue directions from Hwy 1
South.)
From Del Monte Blvd:
From Hwy 1 South:
Go 3 miles south past Castroville.
Immediately after crossing the
Salinas R. bridge take the Del
Monte Blvd Exit #412 & turn left
over Hwy 1. Continue with
directions below.
From Monterey (Hwy 1 North):
On Hwy 1 go 2 miles past Marina
Take the Del Monte Blvd Exit #412
Turn right onto Del Monte Blvd.
Continue with directions below.
When on Del Monte Blvd turn left after the railroad tracks at the
Regional Environmental Park sign onto Charlie Benson Lane. Turn
right at four way stop. Continue on road through the chain link gate.
Take the second left into the parking lot. {Note: for the bus turn-
around, take the third left turn and head to the flag pole.)
Call (831) 883-1118 if
further directions are
needed
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 1., tem Page 1, Packet Page 1


M I N U T E S
MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)
Regular Meeting
2:00 PM, Monday, August 19, 2013
COUNCIL CHAMBER
580 PACIFIC STREET
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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

Members Absent: None

Staff Present: Legal Counsel, Executive Director, Clerk

CALL TO ORDER
Chair Burnett called the meeting to order at 2:03 p.m.

ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORTS FROM TAC MEMBERS

Executive Director Cullem reported on the Authority field trip to the Poseidon desalination
facility in San Diego, CA and indicated future tours are possible if other members are
interested. Member Israel indicated he would be attending a conference in Southern California
and anticipates attending a presentation from Poseidon.

Chair Burnett reported on meetings with the Coastal Commission and thanked all parties
involved for their efforts during the California Public Utilities Commission settlement agreement.
He then reported that commissioners from the CPUC were in Carmel and met with staff to
discuss water issues.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Tom Rowley spoke expressing concern there were no written reports to coincide with the
agenda and then spoke about the topic of public outreach discussed at the Directors meeting.
He requested that the Authority improve efforts at communicating a complete background of
why our community is in this situation, educating about the whole scope of the potential impacts
if we dont have water and clarifying that there are no easy solutions.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. July 15, 2013
Action: Approved

On motion, the TAC approved the Minutes of July 15, 2013 as presented. 6-0-0-1 Riley
Abstained.
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 2., tem Page 1, Packet Page 3
MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, August 19, 2013



2


AGENDA ITEMS

2. Discuss and Make Recommendations Regarding Public Funding Opportunities
Action: Received Report and Discussed

TAC Member Stoldt presented the report noting this was an informational item. He walked the
TAC members through a series of handouts detailed public funding opportunities for water
projects. Opportunities included State Revolving Loans, Safe Drinking Water Revolving Fund
and Proposition13 planning grants and loans. He indicated the projects that would be most
beneficial would be the bi-annual state water bond, as well as Propositions 50 and 84 monies,
some of which is awarded based on geographic region. Member Stoldt answered questions
from the TAC.

The item was opened for public comment. Nelson Vega requested clarification for what projects
are eligible for specific bond monies and if there were any for desal specifically. Having no
further requests to speak, public comment was closed. Member Stoldt spoke to Mr. Vegas
question, indicating the water is split for allocation for different types of water projects. Regional
monies are supposed to be distributed to the region, which there will always be, and the
designations are not known for the additional categories at this time.

The TAC discussed ways the Authority and local agencies could leverage efforts to
communicate the community needs at the state level. The TAC agreed this item should be
revisited, put on the priority list and recommended that the Authority assist with lobbying for
state funds.

3. Discuss and Provide Recommendations Regarding Progress of the Ground Water
Replenishment Project
Action: Received Update and Discussed

TAC Member Israel reported as General Manager of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution
Control Agency to provided an update on the Ground Water Replenishment project proposed
by the MRWPCA. He spoke to the progress of the project in terms of technical activities, CEQA
feasibility studies, outreach activities including source water tours, policy activities and other
upcoming activities. He listed and spoke to three potential sources of water and a potential
collaborative effort with the Marina Coast Water District. He reported that the feasibility study,
is being finalized for release in the near future. The TAC discussed the proposed GWR
schedule and any potential slippage. Mr. Israel noted the goal is to have an operation facility
within 1.5 years after proposal is accepted.

Mr. Israel outlined the following upcoming activities:
Meet with CPUC environmental consultants to coordinate CEQA
Facilitate Additional source water meeting tours
Consider bids for leased equipment for pilot treatment testing
Develop proposed project definition through ac opponent screening analysis.

MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 2., tem Page 2, Packet Page 4
MPRWA TAC Minutes Monday, August 19, 2013



3
The item was opened to public comment. Nelson Vega questioned if the peninsula had a right
to use the water in the agricultural wash ponds. Mr. Israel indicated he has a meeting
scheduled to determine that question but that Salinas Valley would likely have first right of the
water and any extra water would be available for the Peninsula but in the future, it could be
different. Sue McCloud spoke to the need to inform the public about proper disposal and
practices for things like pharmaceuticals. She then spoke to a documentary regarding the
Potomac that has parallels to local water issues and could be useful. Having no further
requests to speak, public comment was closed.

The TAC then discussed the water rights and the changes in water usage demands due to
produce operating facilities operating year round. This item was for information only and no
action was taken.

4. Receive Update on Local Efforts for Storm Water Mitigation (Information Only) - Cullem
Action: Received Update and Discussed

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the item and the significance of Areas of Biological
Significance (ASBS) in our area. Recent meetings have been about thinking of storm water as
feed water and determinations are underway to find out if there is enough capacity in the
MPRPCA to process all storm water as waste water. Storm water is an issue all peninsula cities
will need to address. Mr. Israel spoke to the flows and the facility capacity and is advocating for
an integrated plan. If successful, it could be a model for other cities in the future. The item was
opened to public comment and there were no requests to speak.

5. Approve Amendment to Meeting Schedule
Action: Approved

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the need to adjust the meeting time to facilitate
administrative changes and ensure efficient meeting schedules.

On motion by Member Narigi and Seconded by Member Riley and passed by the following
vote, the TAC approved the changes to the meeting schedule as proposed, moving the
meeting time to 10:30 a.m. on the first and third Monday of each month, with the second
meeting as an optional meeting. 7-0-0-0


ADJOURNMENT

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,





Lesley Milton, Committee Clerk Jason Burnett, TAC Chair

MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 2., tem Page 3, Packet Page 5

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority
Agenda Report

Date: November 04, 2013
Item No: 3.



06/12

FROM: TAC Chair Jason Burnett

SUBJECT: Ground Water Replenishment Project Bifurcation, Timelines, Cost Comparison
Process and Other Project Criteria

RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the TAC receive an updated briefing on GWR bifurcation, timelines and
schedules, cost comparison process, and other project criteria as agreed to by the settling
parties to the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement.
DISCUSSION:
Attached is an extract from the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement which considers the
Groundwater Replenishment Project (GWR).
Sections 4.1 and 4.3(a) discuss the bifurcation issue, section 4.2(a)(vi), 4.2 (b), 4.3(c)(ii) and
4.3(c)(iv) address cost issues, section 4.2(a)(ix) and 4.3(c)(v) address revenue issues, section
4.4(a)addresses debt equivalence, and section 4.2 outlines the project criteria.

ATTACHMENT:

Extract of Comprehensive Settlement Agreement

MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 3., tem Page 1, Packet Page 7
5
4. GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT PROJECT
4.1 Separate Phasing of Groundwater Replenishment Project
(a) The Parties agree that the Commission shall decide whether to
authorize California American Water to build, as part of the MPWSP, a smaller desalination
plant to accommodate the WPA for the product water of the separate GWR Project or,
alternatively, build a larger desalination plant without a WPA for the GWR product water (the
GWR Decision), based on findings related to schedule, cost, benefits, and feasibility. The
parties agree that the decision whether these findings are or will be made requires additional
information that is currently not available, including more detailed information regarding the
schedules and designs of the GWR Project and MPWSP desalination plant, as well as
agreements for source and product water for the GWR Project. Accordingly, the parties agree
that the GWR Decision should be made in a separate phase of this proceeding after the parties
have developed necessary information.
(b) The Parties have developed and set forth in this section certain criteria
for consideration by the Commission to facilitate its adopting findings necessary to making
the GWR Decision after evidentiary hearings in this separate phase.
(c) The Parties agree to file and support a Motion for Bifurcation of the
GWR Decision into a separate phase. Such motion will:
(i) Identify GWR Decision criteria to be addressed in the separate
phase as outlined in Section 4.2 below;
(ii) Seek such additional amendments in the scope of this proceeding
as may be necessary; and
(iii) Present an agreed-upon procedural schedule and scope as
identified in Section 4.3 below, including the possibility that an advice letter process may be
used to demonstrate fulfillment of some criteria after the Commission decision in the bifurcated
phase.
4.2 Findings for GWR Decision
(a) After careful consideration and negotiations, the Parties agree the
Commission should make the GWR Decision based upon the findings set forth below and/or
information supplied pursuant to the advice letter process in Section 4.3(f). If all of the
findings are made or addressed through the advice letter process, then California American
Water shall be ordered to enter into a WPA and build the smaller desalination plant. If they
are not made or addressed through the advice letter process, then California American Water
shall proceed with the larger desalination plant. On that basis, the Parties recommend that the
Commissions primary focus be on the findings set forth below in the separate phase where it
makes the GWR Decision. The findings are as follows:
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 3., tem Page 2, Packet Page 8
6
(i) MRWPCA has approved the GWR Project pursuant to a certified
Final EIR; and no CEQA suit has been filed within 30 days of a Notice of Determination
("NOD"), or if a CEQA suit is filed, no stay of the GWR Project has been granted;
(ii) The status of required permits is consistent with the published
project schedule, and for any required permits not yet obtained, the weight of the evidence in the
record does not show that any of the required permits for the GWR Project are unlikely to be
obtained in a timeframe consistent the published project schedule;
(iii) There is sufficient legal certainty as to agreements or other
determinations in place to secure delivery of source water(s) necessary to produce between 3,000
to 3,500 acre feet per year of GWR product water for the recommended project.
1
(1) The parties acknowledge that MCWRA and MRWPCA are
the parties to that certain Agreement Between The Monterey County Water Resources Agency
and the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency For Construction and Operation of a
Tertiary Treatment System dated June 16, 1992, as amended by Amendment No. 1 on May 30,
1995, Amendment No. 2 on February 16, 1998, and Amendment No. 3 executed by MRWPCA
on May 10, 2002 and MCWRA on May 29, 2002 (all collectively hereinafter referred to as
Tertiary Treatment Agreement) and that MCWRA and MRWPCA disagree as to the amounts
of tertiary treated water, as that term is defined in Section 2 of aforementioned Amendment
No. 3 to the Tertiary Treatment Agreement, to which each is entitled under the Tertiary
Treatment Agreement. With respect to the availability of such tertiary treated water from the
Tertiary Treatment Agreement for the GWR Project in an amount that would support a
Commission finding of sufficient legal certainty, such availability shall be determined pursuant
to the dispute resolution provisions in the Tertiary Treatment Agreement and shall not be
determined through action by this Commission. Therefore, the parties agree that with respect to
any product water(s) to be conveyed by MRWPCA to implement the GWR Project that are
provided pursuant to rights to such tertiary treated water under the Tertiary Treatment
Agreement, for the purposes of this Settlement Agreement, no Party shall request either the
Commission or the Governance Committee to interpret, rule on, or provide any opinion as to
contract rights under the Tertiary Treatment Agreement, and further agree that neither the
Commission nor the Governance Committee should so interpret, rule on, or provide any opinion
as to any such contract rights;
(iv) The weight of the evidence in the record does not show that the
California Department of Health or the Regional Water Quality Control Board will decline to
accept or approve the GWR extraction or GWR treatment and injection processes, respectively;
1
The Parties recognize that based upon the expected number of trains needed for the desalination plant, the
desalination plant could be optimally sized to accommodate certain discrete capacities of 3,000 or 3,500 acre feet
per year of GWR product water in order to produce a certain combined capacity from the desalination plant and the
GWR Project. California American Water and MRWPCA recognize that cost optimization may not occur at certain
discrete capacities for the GWR Project and desalination plant based on the configuration, size and number of the
trains. Certain parties have entered into a settlement agreement regarding the sizing of the desalination facilities for
purposes of planning and engineering, which provides for the possible combined capacity of the desalination plant
and the GWR Project.
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 3., tem Page 3, Packet Page 9
7
(v) The GWR Project is on schedule, as verified by a report issued by
an engineer licensed in California, to be operable,
2
on or before the later of (a) the then-effective
date of the Cease and Desist Order of the SWRCB or such other date as the SWRCB states in
writing is acceptable, or (b) the date the MPWSP desalination project is scheduled to become
operable. The Parties acknowledge that the actual date of operation for the GWR Project and the
desalination project could vary from the operation date projected in the schedules, and therefore
agree to a range of up to an additional four months from the projected date of operation, before
the GWR Project schedule would no longer be considered on an acceptable schedule;
(vi) Preliminary design for the GWR Project is at least at the 10%
level, represented by a basis of design report (so that an accurate project cost estimate can be
generated) or is at a level similar to or more advanced than the level of design for the
desalination project portion of the MPWSP;
(vii) A GWR Project funding plan, sufficient in detail to be accepted as
an application for a State Revolving Fund loan, is in place;
(viii) California American Water, MPWMD, and MRWPCA have
agreed on a WPA whose terms are just and reasonable; and
(ix) The revenue requirement for the combination of the GWR Project
and the smaller desalination project, including the projected debt equivalence for the GWR
Project, if any, determined pursuant to Section 4.4, is just and reasonable when compared to the
revenue requirement for a larger desalination project alone.
(b) The parties agree that a revenue requirement premium for the
combination of the GWR Project and a smaller MPWSP desalination project may be
determined just and reasonable, for some, but not necessarily all of the following reasons, if
the combined GWR/smaller desalination project affords significant net benefits in comparison
to a larger desalination project alone upon a consideration of all positive and negative
externalities associated with the GWR Project. Significant positive benefits that could support
the Commissions approval of such a premium, include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) a material schedule advantage in that the GWR Project is anticipated to be operable sooner
than the desalination plant; (ii) water supply resilience and reliability (benefit of the portfolio
approach); and (iii) other positive externalities of the GWR Project, including, but not limited
to reduced atmospheric carbon emissions, reduced brine discharge, and the implementation
and encouragement of State policies regarding water recycling through early adoption of a
water reuse project. The Parties anticipate that the evidentiary hearings in the separate phase
will support findings by the Commission of an upper range of reasonableness for the price of
GWR Project water for inclusion in the WPA based upon consideration of all positive and
negative externalities associated with the GWR Project.
2
The operable date of the GWR Project is the date when extractions may first be made by California American
Water from the Seaside Groundwater Basin as the result of the injection and storage of GWR Project recycled water.
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 3., tem Page 4, Packet Page 10
8
4.3 Procedural Schedule and Scope
(a) The Parties agree to file a Motion to Bifurcate or Otherwise Resolve
GWR Decision consistent with this Settlement Agreement promptly after the filing of this
Settlement Agreement. The bifurcated schedule is intended to allow determination of the
GWR Decision by the Commission prior to the time when California American Water is at the
necessary decision point relative to the sizing of the desalination facilities.
(b) The Parties agree to request, as part of the aforementioned motion, that
the Commission establish the following procedural schedule, designed to achieve a timely
determination of the GWR Decision:
(i) Testimony of Interested Parties December 2014
(ii) Settlement commencing in January 2015
(iii) Concurrent Rebuttal Testimony January 2015
(iv) Evidentiary Hearings February 2015
(v) Briefing March 2015
(vi) Proposed Decision June 2015
(vii) Final Decision July 2015
(c) The Parties acknowledge that this schedule is intended to provide time
for the following:
(i) finalization of source water agreements and determinations;
(ii) refinement of the design of the GWR and MPWSP desalination
projects to support accurate cost comparisons;
(iii) agreement on the form and terms of a WPA, as evidenced by an
executed agreement between the parties to the WPA;
(iv) assessment of the benefits of the GWR Project that may reflect a
revenue requirement premium that is just and reasonable;
(v) estimation of the revenue requirement adjustment, if any, the
Commission determines necessary for the WPA pursuant to Section 4.4; and
(vi) completion of other GWR Project milestones prior to testimony
and hearings.
(d) The Parties agree that: (i) the Governance Committee, as described in
Appendix 1 to this Agreement, is comprised of representatives of local public agencies that
are directly accountable to the public that will be served with water from the MPWSP; (ii) that
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 3., tem Page 5, Packet Page 11
9
the Governance Committee provides an appropriate means for expression of community
preferences concerning the MPWSP; (iii) the GWR Decision will impact the size of the
MPWSP desalination plant; and (iv) for this reason, the Governance Committees opinion on
any one or more of the findings for the GWR Decision set forth above should be provided to
the Commission for the Commissions consideration. Therefore, should the Governance
Committee issue a written statement concerning any one or more of the findings set forth
above on or before the date set forth above in Paragraph 4.3(b) for submission of testimony or
evidentiary hearings, California American Water shall file said written statement with the
Commission within ten days of receipt for the Commissions consideration.
(e) The Parties agree that the Commission should be able to adopt findings
supporting its GWR Decision at the end of the GWR Decision Phase outlined above, but
acknowledge that certain necessary actions may not have occurred by that time. With respect
to those actions, the Parties agree that the Commission may direct California American Water
to file an advice letter with the Commission demonstrating that the remaining actions have
occurred. Issues which may be resolved by advice letter could include, but are not limited to,
MRWPCAs approval of the GWR Project.
4.4 Debt Equivalence for the GWR Project
(a) The Parties acknowledge that a WPA is a contractual obligation of a
significant amount of California American Waters future cash flows. If the obligation must
be capitalized by, and is an obligation of, California American Water under Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) standards then in effect, it would have a significant
impact on the amount of debt and capital assets California American Water records on its
financials and could potentially adversely impact California American Water's debt ratios. If it
is not required to be capitalized, the rating agencies could nonetheless impute debt for the
WPA, which could have a negative impact on the credit rating of California American Water
as a stand-alone entity. The Parties therefore agree that the Commission shall determine
whether adjustments to the California American Water revenue requirement for the Monterey
County District are required to address the debt equivalence impact resulting from the WPA
for the GWR Project or for the capitalized obligation of the WPA in a separate phase of this
proceeding before the Commission (as described in Section 4.3). California American Water
shall consider in good faith any reasonable terms and conditions of a WPA advanced by the
public agencies intended to address the debt equivalence issue for the GWR Project.
5. HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDY
5.1 California American Waters hydrologist and technical team will work with
SVWCs hydrologist and technical team, and other technical experts designated by California
American Water and the SVWC (collectively, the Technical Group), to develop a written work
plan for the proposed source water intake sites consistent with the study recommendations
presented in SWRCBs May 22, 2013 Draft Review of the MPWSP. The primary purpose of the
work plan is to reach agreement among the Technical Group about the studies, well tests, field
work, modeling, monitoring, and other data analyses most appropriate to assess and characterize
whether and to what extent the proposed operation of the MPWSP may adversely affect the
SRGB and the water supply available to legal water users thereof (Hydrogeologic Study). The
MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 3., tem Page 6, Packet Page 12
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority
Agenda Report

Date: November 04, 2013
Item No: 4.



06/12

FROM: Authority Clerk

SUBJECT: Receive Report, Discuss and Make Recommendations Regarding Ground Water
Replenishment Project Schedule and Areas where the Water Authority Can
Assist in Evaluating and Moving the Project Forward (Israel)
DISCUSSION:
An oral discussion will take place at the meeting about the attached schedule.

ATTACHMENT:
Adopted Schedule and Task List for MPWSP Post Settlement - GWR Project

MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 4., tem Page 1, Packet Page 13
October 7, 2013
015621\0002\10768534.1
Schedule and Task List for MPWSP Post Settlement
GWR
Task Due Date Responsible Party Notes
File Motion for
Bifurcation of the
GWR Decision
August 2013 MRWPCA Complete and Granted
Board Actions to
Approve Revised
Governance Committee
Agreement
October 2013 MPWMD, MPRWA,
County, & Cal-Am
To be Completed in
October
Executed Agreements
for GWR Source Water
and/or Declaratory
Relief

June 2014

MRWPCA Meet & Confer in
Progress

Draft WPA
Mar 2014

MPWMD & MRWPCA
Obtain Representations
from DPH re Use of
Extracted GWR Water

Oct 2014
MRWPCA
Obtain Representations
from RWQCB re Use of
Extracted GWR Water

Oct 2014
MRWPCA
Storage Agreement
with Seaside Basin
Watermaster

Jul 2014
MRWPCA & MPWMD
GWR Basis of Design
Complete with At Least
10% Design

Jul 2014
MRWPCA
GWR Financing Plan
Sufficient for SRF
Funding

Aug 2014
MRWPCA & MPWMD
Agreement on Terms of
WPA

May 2014

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
&MPWMD

Perform Revenue
Requirement Analysis
Including Any Debt
Equivalency Effect

Jul 2014
MRWPCA & MPWMD
Perform Assessment of
GWR Positive and
Negative Externalities
for Any Premium
Showing
June 2014 MRWPCA & MPWMD
DEIR Circulated July 2014 MRWPCA
Dilution Water
Requirements
July-October 2014 MRWPCA
Project Approved and
FEIR
October 2014 MRWPCA
All Permits for GWR
Construction Obtained

???
MRWPCA

MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 4., tem Page 2, Packet Page 14
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority
Agenda Report

Date: November 04, 2013
Item No: 5.



06/12

FROM: Authority Clerk

SUBJECT: Discuss, Provide Staff Direction in Identifying Information Necessary to
Evaluate the Ground Water Replenishment Project (Cullem)

DISCUSSION:
There is no report for this item. An oral report and discussion will take place at the meeting.

MPRWA TAC Meeting, 11/4/2013 , tem No. 5., tem Page 1, Packet Page 15