MPWMD BOARD MEETING--DEC 14, 2009--EXHIBIT 20C--DRAFT FINDINGS OF APPROVAL FOR APPLICATION #20090720GRE

#e069122 dated September 22, 2008. 72-Hour Constant Rate Well Pumping and Aquifer Recovery Test with Pumping Impact Assessment for Greek Orthodox Church, prepared by Bierman Hydrogeologic, dated June 24, 2009 (referred to herein as “Hydrogeologic Assessment”); Review of Well Source and Pumping Impact Assessment for Greek Orthodox Church (APN 259-021-013), prepared by Pueblo Water Resources, dated August 19, 2009 (referred to herein as “Technical Review”).

4. FINDING: Applicant has applied for a permit to create the Greek Orthodox Church Water Distribution System (WDS) for a well to provide potable and irrigation water for non-residential (church) uses on the parcel 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, 1.65 acre-feet per year (AFY) has been set as the annual production limit for the Greek Orthodox Church WDS to meet the water needs for the parcel specified in Finding #1. A loss factor for water treatment and conveyance was not needed.

EVIDENCE: MPWMD Technical Review of Hydrogeologic Assessment specified in Finding #3; MPWMD WDS Memorandum #6 dated August 6, 2009; email correspondence from Bierman to District staff dated November 4, 2009; MPWMD staff assessment in December 14, 2009 Board of Directors agenda materials; MPWMD Permit #S09-31-L4, Condition of Approval #3.

6. FINDING: The application to create the Greek Orthodox Church 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, but there is presently no CAW service to the parcel. CAW water is not available 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 Carmel River until a replacement source is developed. The property also appears to benefit from overlying water rights to percolating groundwater. The proposed system will be limited to one Connection for non-residential (church) use only. [Rule 22-B-1]

EVIDENCE: Map of CAW service area; MPWMD Permit #S09-31-L4, Conditions of Approval #1 through #4. SWRCB Order 95-10 dated July 1995.

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). One neighboring well is located within 1,000 feet of the subject well. [Rule 22-B-3]

EVIDENCE: MPWMD Technical Review of Hydrogeologic Assessment specified in Finding #3; MPWMD Permit #S09-31-L4, Condition of Approval #3. MPWMD Notice of Determination dated December ___, 2009 adopted by the District Board on December ___, 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 Deeds 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 1.65 AFY (an estimated 0.89 AFY for potable use and 0.76 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 for the proposed production. [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 period 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 #S09-31-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 Resource 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 Monterey County parcels; Hydrogeologic Assessment and Technical Review specified in Finding #3.

14. FINDING: MPWMD Permit #S09-31-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. A stand-by CAW meter may be installed for separately plumbed indoor fire suppression only (ceiling fire sprinklers) as the parcel is within the CAW service area. [Rule 22-B-8]

EVIDENCE: Map of CAW service area available at District office; MPWMD Permit #S09-31-L4, Condition of Approval #13. 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 #S09-31-L4, Condition of Approval #14.

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” and will provide potable water for non-residential (church) 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 #S09-31-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 #S09-31-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 #S09-31-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 #S09-31-L4, Condition of Approval #3. California Water Code.

Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

21. FINDING: In the review of this application, MPWMD has followed those guidelines adopted by the State of California and published in the California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. Specifically, the MPWMD as a Responsible Agency under CEQA for this action has complied with Guidelines Section 15096, and relies on actions by the CEQA Lead Agency; in this case the City of Monterey. The MPWMD, as a Responsible Agency for this project, has considered the City of Monterey’s Mitigated Negative Declaration dated June 7, 2002, and adopted by the City on August 13, 2002, in conjunction with approval of two church buildings (Use Permit #08-214). The City filed a Notice of Determination dated December 30, 2002 with the County Clerk on January 9, 2003. City of Monterey mitigations prescribed by the Mitigated Negative Declaration are included in the City of Monterey approval documents for Use Permit #08-214. It is noted that the City reconfirmed its 2002 environmental documents in its approval of a time extension for the Use Permit on September 23, 2008, and filed a Notice of Exemption regarding that extension on November 6, 2008.

Copies of the City of Monterey CEQA documents adopted on August 13, 2002 and on September 23, 2008 have been provided to MPWMD Board members for review prior to the public hearing on this matter. The MPWMD Board has considered the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration previously prepared and approved by the City of Monterey, and relied on the City’s information as part of its decision-making on this matter.

EVIDENCE: CEQA Guidelines Section 15096; City of Monterey Use Permit #08-214 adopted August 13, 2008; City of Monterey Notice of Determination for St. John’s Greek Orthodox Church filed January 9, 2003; MPWMD Notice of Determination for Greek Orthodox Church WDS dated December ____, 2009, as directed by the MPWMD Board at a public hearing on December ____, 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 “St. John’s Greek Orthodox Church” is located Monterey City Hall, Pacific and Madison Streets, Monterey.

EVIDENCE: Findings and Evidence provided in Finding #21 above; MPWMD Notice of Determination dated December ____, 2009 as described in Finding #21.

U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2009\20091214\PubHrg\20\item20_exh20c.doc

Prepared by H. Stern on 11/30/09