|
ADMINISTRATIVE
COMMITTEE |
||||
|
|
||||
|
1. |
CONSIDER
APPROVAL OF SCOPE OF WORK AND EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR PHASE 2 STUDIES
RELATED TO MPWMD 95-10 DESALINATION PROJECT |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Meeting
Date: |
November 24,
2008
|
Budgeted: |
No |
|
|
|
||||
|
From: |
|
Program: |
Water Supply Projects |
|
|
|
General
Manager |
Line Item No.: |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Prepared
By: |
Andrew M. Bell |
Cost
Estimate: |
$734,242 - $1,649,000 |
|
|
|
||||
|
General Counsel Approval:
N/A |
||||
|
Committee Recommendation:
N/A |
||||
|
CEQA Compliance: N/A |
||||
SUMMARY: Provided as Exhibit 1-A is the scope of work, consultant costs, and schedule prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes Associates (JSA) and Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) for conducting Phase 2 studies for the MPWMD 95-10 Desalination Project. The Phase 1 studies for this project, completed by JSA and CDM in October 2008, was a constraints analysis and additional policy review regarding the potential for the project. No “fatal flaws” for development of the project were identified in the Phase 1 studies.
The Phase 2 studies would include field hydrogeologic investigations of seawater extraction sites in the coastal area of the Fort Ord Dunes State Park west of Highway 1, to include installation and testing of a production well, groundwater modeling, and a study of the use of the regional treatment plant outfall for disposal of brine from the desalination plant. Phase 2 would also include development of a detailed project description suitable for analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act, as well as planning-level capital and annual operation and maintenance costs of the project. The scope of work includes five optional tasks (Tasks 1.A through 1.E) which could be authorized at a future date if findings of the basic scope determine that the optional tasks would be necessary or beneficial.
RECOMMENDATION: The Board should receive a presentation by consultants JSA and CDM representatives, receive public comment, and discuss the scope of work, costs, and schedule as presented in Exhibit 1-A. If the Board decides to proceed with the Phase 2 studies, staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to contract with CDM and JSA for the basic scope of work, not including the five optional tasks, at a cost not to exceed $775,000. This includes a contingency of approximately 5.5% over the proposed costs for the basic scope of work. As this expenditure is not included in the FY 2008-2009 budget, the Board must designate a source of funds. Staff recommends drawing from the District’s $2.5 million line of credit, and that the Board determine the method of repayment at a future meeting.
BACKGROUND: At the January 24, 2008 Board meeting, the Board endorsed Director Brower’s request to direct staff to prepare a report on requirements to update the MPWMD 95-10 Project, a seawater desalination project proposed to be located in Sand City that was most recently studied by MPWMD in 2004. At the April 21, 2008 Board meeting, the Board authorized Phase 1 studies of the project, termed a “constraints analysis,” to be conducted by JSA and CDM. Representatives of these two firms presented their report at the August 18, 2008 Board meeting. At that meeting, the Board directed that the consultants be authorized to address additional policy issues related to the feasibility of the project. The report on the consultants’ findings and conclusions regarding these issues was received by the Board at the October 20, 2008 meeting.
Exhibit 1-A contains a scope
of work, estimated costs, and a schedule for the Phase 2 studies.
IMPACT TO DISTRICT STAFF/RESOURCES:
The “Budgeting Cost Estimate” shown in
Table 1 of Exhibit
1-A includes a total amount of $734,242 for the basic scope of work
(Tasks 1, 2, and 3). Optional Tasks 1.A
through 1.3 would add approximately $915,000, for a total of approximately
$1,649,000. No funds for the Phase 2
studies conducted to date are included in the FY 2008-09 budget. If the Board decides to proceed with the Phase
2 studies, the $2.5 million line of credit authorized earlier in 2008 could be
used to fund it at the outset. At
present, there are a number of uncertainties regarding the most advantageous
method of repaying funds drawn from the line of credit. For example, FY 2008-09 user fee revenues
could be significantly greater than anticipated in the budget. The Board would determine at a future meeting
whether it is necessary to increase the user fee rate, or to use another source
of revenue. The consultant contracts
for the Phase 2 studies would be administered by District Engineer Andrew Bell.
EXHIBITS
1-A MPWMD 95-10 Project, CDM and UCF/Jones & Stokes Scope of Work – Phase 2 Field Program, Permitting, and Engineering Support
U:\staff\word\committees\Admin\2008\20081124\01\item1.doc