EXHIBIT 24-A
Amended
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Local Water Project Grant
Application
1.
Name
of Project Sponsor
City of Monterey, Plans and Public Works Department
2.
Type
of Entity
Public Entity, City of Monterey
3.
Project
Name or Title
Monterey Regional Water Recovery Study
4.
Project
Sponsor Contact Information
Jeff Krebs, P.E.
Plans and Public Works
City of Monterey
580 Pacific St, Rm 7
Monterey, CA 93940
5.
Amount
of Funding Requested
$85,000
6.
Geographic
Location of Project
Monterey Peninsula: Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, Seaside, and Monterey County
7.
Project
Purpose and Description
Task A-1: Examine the feasibility of Peninsula-wide water recovery and reclamation system and possibilities for sources, including finding uses of storm and non-storm water flows. Utilizing storm and non-storm water flows will reduce the Peninsula’s dependence on the Carmel River aquifer, a river that supports the local steel head salmon population, as well as reduce the dependence on, and the recovery of, local aquifers.
This project will examine the feasibility of Peninsula-wide water recovery and reclamation system, impacting the cities of Pacific Grove, Monterey, and Seaside, Presidio of Monterey, Naval Post Graduate School, Monterey Peninsula Regional Parks District, Monterey County, and the PCA. This is the first step toward implementing capital improvements to accomplish the task of providing a reliable local source of water and regional storm water management and is consistent with the new Storm Water Resource Plan Guidelines as outlined in SB-985.
The study will explore many possibilities for sources, including the capture of water at the Peninsula’s major drainages at El Estero, Laguna Grande (Roberts Lake), David Ave Reservoir, and Del Monte (Navy) Lakes, capture and diversion of waters that flow into the Pacific Grove Area of Special Biological Significance (PGASBS), as well as the possible integration of all sources to optimize yield. Additionally, the study seeks to determine which sources of urban runoff can be feasibly harvested; which surface reservoirs are economically feasible; and identify water quality challenges associated with each source.
Task A-2: Coordinate outreach to multiple jurisdictions to determine stakeholder involvement.
Task B: Focus on how best to transport, treat, and store the water
Finding possible sources of water is but one critical aspect; this study will also focus on how best to transport, treat, and store the water. Possibilities include a bi-directional reclaimed water main that could transport non-potable water to and from the Peninsula area; smaller local treatment systems; larger regional systems, such as transport to Marina treatment works with integration into the California American (CalAm) system; and treatment and injection into local aquifers including aquifers currently containing non-potable water, such as can be found within the cities.
Task C: Develop conceptual design for the preferred project and at least one feasible alternative.
Task C-1: Work with a
Technical Advisory Committee during development of concept design
Task C-2:
Prepare conceptual design plans with sufficient detail of project
facilities for environmental review of the preferred project and at least one
feasible alternative
Task D: Identify the need for drainage basin water rights permits from the State Water Resources Control Board.
Task E: Prepare the CEQA/NEPA environmental review document
The
proposed IS will include the following sections:
§ CEQA Determination
Page
§ Table of Contents
§ Introduction: This section will
cite the environmental review requirements of the proposed project, pursuant to
CEQA.
§ Project Description: This section will describe the proposed
project. A brief description of the
project’s location, environmental setting, and existing uses within the area
affected will be included. Text and
exhibits will be used to describe and illustrate the characteristics of the
proposed project. The environmental document
will include a maximum of four (4) exhibits to enhance the written text and
clarify the project and potential environmental impacts. Exhibits are anticipated to include: Regional
Vicinity Map, Local Vicinity Map, Site Plan, and details and sections.
§ Evaluation of
Environmental Impact:
Use the environmental checklist in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines to address
the environmental topics of CEQA. This section will describe the potential
impacts and mitigation measures for the proposed project.
Task F: Develop project implementation work plan
Task F-1: Identify additional permitting and regulatory
requirements,
Task F-2: Develop project
timeline/schedule
Task F-3: Prepare project work
plan
8.
District
Goals. Does the proposed project provide water to meet additional District
goals? District goals include the following four goals:
Can
the Project provide water supply to the District for drought/rationing reserve
(i.e. water that is not supplied to a beneficial use immediately upon project
completion) and if so, how much?
Dependent on the feasibility of project implementation, a portion
of water could be reserved for drought rationing in the future.
Can
the Project provide water supply to the District for potential future
reallocation to the jurisdictions (i.e. water that is not supplied to a
beneficial use immediately upon project completion) and if so, how much?
The City will request a certain amount of water to be allocated
to the City of Monterey and anticipates a portion for use within their
jurisdiction.
Can
the project be run in a manner that would provide surplus production that could
be “banked” into the Seaside Groundwater Basin utilizing the District’s Aquifer
Storage and Recovery project?
The project will explore the feasibility of treating water to
potable surface water standards to allow transport into the Seaside Aquifers
utilizing the District’s Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project.
Are
there multiple benefits to the region or the State as described in section 6,
above?
Multiple benefits to the
region are expected as an outcome of project implementation, including reduced
dependence upon existing surface and sub-surface waters. A potential reduction
in flows to the Pacific Grove Area of Special Biological Significance, a
requirement of the State Water Resources Control Board, may also be achieved.
9.
Technical
Feasibility of this Project
This project will use existing studies, including the Monterey Vista Study, 1999 Fugro Report and ASBS Refined 2006 Feasibility Study of Alternatives Management Plan, which provide proof that the project is technically feasible, and explore other options for water reclamation, treatment and storage. (See supporting documents)
10. Project Schedule
See table below for proposed project timeline.
|
Schedule Category |
|
Start Date |
Completion Date |
|
1 |
Project Administration |
October 30, 2015 |
December 31, 2017 |
|
2 |
Assumed Grant Application approval and receipt by City Council |
October 30, 2015 |
December 15, 2015 |
|
3 |
Send out RFP, review, and award contract |
January 1, 2016 |
April 30, 2016 |
|
4 |
Task A: Examine the feasibility of Peninsula-wide water recovery and reclamation system and possibilities for sources; Stakeholder outreach and coordination |
May 1, 2016 |
July 31, 2016 |
|
5 |
Task B: Focus on how best to transport, treat and store the water. |
August 1, 2016 |
September 30, 2016 |
|
6 |
Task C: Develop conceptual design for the preferred project and at least one feasible alternative. |
October 1, 2016 |
January 30, 2017 |
|
7 |
Task D: Obtaining drainage basin water rights. |
October 1, 2016 |
January 30, 2017 |
|
8 |
Task E: Prepare the CEQA/NEPA IS environmental review document |
February 1, 2017 |
June 30, 2017 |
|
9 |
Task F: Develop project implementation work plan. |
July 1, 2017 |
December 31, 2017 |
11. Project Financing
See table below for proposed project financing.
|
Budget Category |
|
City Share (Cost Match) 50% |
Requested District Share (Grant Funding) 50% |
Total 100% |
|
1 |
Direct Project Administration Costs (6%) |
$5,100 |
$5,100 |
$10,200 |
|
2 |
Task A: Examine the feasibility of Peninsula-wide water recovery and reclamation system and possibilities for sources; Stakeholder outreach and coordination |
$10,000 |
$10,000 |
$20,000
|
|
3 |
Task B: Focus on how best to transport, treat and store the water |
$20,000 |
$20,000 |
$40,000
|
|
4 |
Task C: Develop conceptual design for the preferred project and at least one feasible alternative. |
$34,000
|
$34,000 |
$68,000 |
|
5 |
Task D: Obtaining drainage basin water rights. |
$5,000 |
$5,000 |
$10,000 |
|
6 |
Task E: Prepare the CEQA/NEPA IS environmental review document |
$5,900 |
$5,900 |
$11,800 |
|
7 |
Task F: Develop project implementation work plan. |
$5,000 |
$5,000 |
$10,000 |
|
|
Grant Total [Sum (a) through (g) for each column] |
$85,000 |
$85,000 |
$170,000 |
|
Source(s) of funds for Non-State Share (cost match) |
NIP |
n/a |
|
|
12. Annual Cost of Water
Cost per acre-foot of water produced per year will be determined by the study outcome.
13. Land and Right of Way Requirements Status
The drainage basins’ utilized surface water rights will be required.
14. Permits
Required permits will be determined through implementation of the work plan.
15. Consultants, Plans, and Bids
The City will follow city purchasing rules regarding the use of hiring consultants and requesting bids, which includes the RFP (Request for Proposals) and Call for Bids process.
U:\staff\Boardpacket\2015\20151116\ActionItems\24\Item24_Exhibit24-A.docx