EXHIBIT 19-C
MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT
DRAFT
FINDINGS of APPROVAL
CONSIDER APPLICATION TO CREATE
“DMC” WATER DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM
Service area: APN 013-321-004
Application #20090120DMC, Permit #S09-21-L4
Adopted by MPWMD Board of Directors on _______, 2009
Unless noted otherwise, all cited documents and
materials are available for review at the MPWMD Office,
It
is hereby found and determined as follows:
1. FINDING: The McAweeney
Family Trust dated March 18, 2008 (Dan J. McAweeney and Gayla R. McAweeney,
Trustees), is identified as the owner of the property at
EVIDENCE: Application #20090120DMC, site map and application materials dated January 20,
2009; Grant Deed recorded by the Monterey County Recorder on April 11, 2008
(Document ID #2008022627).
2. FINDING: The parcel is within the area served by California Am
EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in
Finding #1; map of CAW service area.
3. FINDING: A valid well construction permit for a new well was issued
by the Monterey County Health Department (MCHD) on April 14, 2008. The well was constructed on May 7, 2008 and
was tested for 72-hours during “dry season” conditions starting on August 5,
2008.
EVIDENCE: Monterey County Health Department
Permit #08-11304; State Department of Water Resources Well Completion Report e069114;
72-Hour Constant Rate Well Pumping and
Aquifer Recovery Test with Pumping Impact Assessment for DMC Construction Well,
prepared by Bierman Hydrogeologic, dated
January 16, 2009 (referred to herein as “Hydrogeologic
Assessment”); Review of Well
Source and Pumping Impact Assessment for DMC Construction Well, prepared by
Pueblo Water Resources, dated February 20, 2009 (referred to herein as “Technical Review”).
4. FINDING: Applicant has applied for a permit to create the DMC Water
Distribution System (WDS) for a well to provide potable and irrigation water
for office (commercial) use on the parcel as specified in Finding #1.
EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in
Finding #1.
5. FINDING: Based on District staff analysis of the well data
provided in the application, 2.79 acre-feet per year (AFY) has been set as the
annual production limit for the DMC WDS to meet the water needs for the parcel specified
in Finding #1.
EVIDENCE: MPWMD
Technical Review of Hydrogeologic Assessment specified in
Finding #3; MPWMD Permit
#S09-21-L4, Condition of Approval #3.
6. FINDING: The application to create the DMC WDS, along with supporting materials, is in accordance with District Rules 21 and 22.
EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in Finding
#1.
Required Findings (MPWMD Rule 22-B)
7. FINDING: The approval of the Permit would not cause unnecessary
duplication of water service with any existing system. The subject property is within the CAW
service area, and CAW water is currently serving an existing commercial
structure. However, additional CAW water
for a new, larger building is unavailable due to existing constraints and
production limitations imposed by State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
Order WR 95-10 and the need to reduce CAW diversions from the
EVIDENCE: Map of CAW service area; MPWMD Permit #S09-21-L4, Conditions of Approval #1 through #4, and #26. SWRCB Order 95-10.
8. FINDING: The approval of the Permit would not result in water
importation or exportation to or from the District, respectively. The referenced parcel is located wholly within
the MPWMD [Rule 22-B-2]
EVIDENCE: MPWMD boundary location maps.
9. FINDING: Approval of the application would not result in
significant adverse impacts to “Sensitive Environmental Receptors” (SER) as
defined by MPWMD Rule 11, including the Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer (CVAA). There is one active well within 1,000 feet of
the subject well, but no SER located within 1,000 feet. Site-specific hydrogeologic evaluations have
demonstrated that well pumping of up to 2.79 AFY is not expected to have
significant impacts on the CVAA, including pumping during extended dry-season pumping
periods. [Rule 22-B-3]
EVIDENCE: MPWMD
Technical Review of Hydrogeologic Assessment specified in
Finding #3; MPWMD Permit
#S09-21-L4, Condition of Approval #3 and
#26. MPWMD Notice of Determination dated
_______ 2009
adopted by the District Board on September ___, 2009 as described in Findings #21 and
#22.
10. FINDING: The
application adequately identifies the claim of right (overlying use) for the
source of water supply (percolating groundwater) and provides supporting
verification (deed to property). [Rule 22-B-4]
EVIDENCE: Permit Application as specified in
Finding #1; Grant Deed showing ownership of property by applicant.
11. FINDING: The
application demonstrates existence of a long-term reliable source of water
supply for the proposed use of up to 2.79 AFY (2.1 AFY for potable commercial use
and 0.69 AFY for landscape irrigation.
The MPWMD Technical Review concludes
that the supply should be adequate to provide water during peak and extended
dry season periods with the production limit of 2.79 AFY. [Rule 22-B-5]
The
long-term sustainable capacity of wells completed in fractured bedrock collectively
referred to by MPWMD as the “Miscellaneous formations” is dependant on a
variety of factors that cannot be fully evaluated through analysis of
relatively short duration (i.e., 72 hours or less) pumping tests. The movement and long-term availability of
groundwater in these materials are controlled by the occurrence, connectedness,
and distribution of fractures. The
distribution and connectedness of fractures to sources of recharge are
essentially random, and the volume of groundwater in storage in these systems
is often limited. The low volumes of
groundwater in storage can limit long-term supply particularly during periods
of deficient recharge. The implications
of these factors should, therefore, be taken into consideration when planning
long-term use of wells that are completed in fractured bedrock settings.
It
should be noted that MCHD well construction permits include a generic
disclaimer regarding the long-term sustainability of wells completed in hard
rock formations.
EVIDENCE: Hydrogeologic Assessment and Technical
Review specified in Finding #3.
12. FINDING: The
source of water supply is non-alluvial fractured bedrock (consolidated rock) of
the area collectively referred to by MPWMD as the “Miscellaneous formations.” The cumulative effects of issuance of a Permit
for the subject well would not be expected to result in significant adverse
impacts to the source of supply or the species and habitats dependent on the
source of supply. These impacts have
been evaluated by the District, including calculations of extended (6 months) dry
season pumping cycles. The existence of
one well and no SER within 1,000 feet of the subject well and the estimated
production from the subject well were also considered. [Rule
22-B-6]
EVIDENCE: Hydrogeologic
Assessment and Technical Review specified in Finding #3. MPWMD Permit
#S09-21-L4, Condition of Approval #3.
13. FINDING: The
source of supply for the subject parcel is not derived from the Carmel Valley
Alluvial Aquifer or the Monterey Peninsula Water Resources System. The source of supply is not within the
jurisdiction of the SWRCB, and has not been determined to be tributary to the
source of supply for any other system. The
source of supply is from fractured bedrock in the area collectively referred to
as the “Miscellaneous formations” (percolating groundwater). [Rule 22-B-7]
EVIDENCE: MPWMD map showing boundaries of project
site and jurisdiction of SWRCB superimposed on
14. FINDING: MPWMD
Permit #S09-21-L4 does not allow
a permanent intertie to any other water distribution system. The proposed WDS will be limited to a
physically and legally separate system and is not connected to the CAW system. Temporary water service could be provided by trucked-in
water in a non-fire emergency such as system failure. It is acknowledged that the existing
commercial building has an active CAW meter, but that connection will be
severed so that the CAW supply serves only irrigation needs as prescribed in
the Conditions of Approval. A stand-by
CAW meter may be installed for separately plumbed indoor fire suppression only
(ceiling fire sprinklers). [Rule 22-B-8]
EVIDENCE: Map of CAW service area available at
District office; MPWMD Permit #S09-21-L4,
Condition of Approval #13 and #26. MCHD Permit
#08-11304. MPWMD Rules and Regulations.
15. FINDING: A
back-flow protection device to prevent contamination of the CAW system is
required, if deemed necessary by CAW. [Rule 22-B-9]
EVIDENCE: Map of CAW service area; MPWMD Permit #S09-21-L4, Condition of Approval #14. MCHD Permit #08-11304.
Minimum Standards for Granting a Permit
(MPWMD Rule 22-C)
16. FINDING: The
application adequately identifies the responsible party as the property owner
specified in Finding #1.
EVIDENCE: Permit application and Grant Deed specified
in Finding #1.
17. FINDING: The
application meets the definition of a “Single-Parcel Connection System” but it
will provide potable water for commercial use on the parcel identified in
Finding #1. It is therefore subject to,
and must conform with California Title 22 water quality standards as
administered by MCHD. [Rule 22-C-2]
EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in
Finding #1. MPWMD Permit #S09-21-L4, Conditions
of Approval #1, #2, #3, and #15; California Administrative Code, Title 22; MPWMD
Rule 11.
18. FINDING: The
application identifies the location of the source of supply for water
distribution system (water source and well site). [Rule 22-C-3]
EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in
Finding #1, including location map. MPWMD
Permit #S09-21-L4, Condition of Approval #4.
19. FINDING: The
approval of the application would not create an overdraft or increase an
existing overdraft of a groundwater basin.
No overdraft has been declared for the fractured bedrock (consolidated
rock) in the area collectively referred to by MPWMD as the “Miscellaneous
formations.” [Rule 22-C-4]
EVIDENCE: MPWMD hydrologic monitoring data and
annual reports; MPWMD Permit #S09-21-L4,
Condition of Approval #3.
20. FINDING: The
approval of the application would not adversely affect the ability of existing
systems to provide water to users due to conditions of approval that limit
future water use to a reasonable and acceptable amount. Overlying water rights
holders are also co-equal to other overlying users. [Rule 22-C-5]
EVIDENCE: MPWMD hydrologic monitoring data and
annual reports; Hydrogeologic Assessment
and Technical Review
specified in Finding #3; MPWMD Permit #S09-21-L4, Condition of
Approval #3.
Compliance with
21. FINDING: In
the review of this application, MPWMD has followed those guidelines adopted by
the State of
Copies
of the City of
EVIDENCE: CEQA Guidelines Section 15096; City of Monterey
Use Permit #08-155; MPWMD Notice of Determination for DMC WDS dated __________, 2009, as
directed by the Board at a public hearing on September __, 2009.
22. FINDING: Pursuant
to CEQA Section 15091, the MPWMD Board finds that the project will not
have a significant effect on the environment, based on the documentation cited
in Finding #21 as well as the hydrogeologic information provided in Finding
#3. Mitigation measures are not made as conditions
of approval by MPWMD for this action. The full record for the “
EVIDENCE: Findings and Evidence provided in
Finding #21 above; MPWMD Notice of Determination dated _________, 2009 as described in Finding #21.
U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2009\20090921\PubHrng\19\item19_exh19c.doc