PLEDGE OF ALLEGI NCE

1

AGENDA WATER ISSUES COMMITTEE MEETING

WITH BOARD OF DIRECTORS * ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT

18700 Ward Street, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Wednesday, December 11, 2019, 8:00 a.m. – Boardroom

* The OCWD Water Issues Committee meeting is noticed as a joint meeting with the Board of Directors for

the purpose of strict compliance with the Brown Act and it provides an opportunity for all Directors to hear presentations and participate in discussions. Directors receive no additional compensation or stipend as a result of simultaneously convening this meeting. Items recommended for approval at this meeting will be placed on the December 18, 2019 Board meeting Agenda for approval.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

ITEMS RECEIVED TOO LATE TO BE AGENDIZED

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution determining need to take immediate action on item(s) and

that the need for action came to the attention of the District subsequent to the posting of the Agenda (requires two-thirds vote of the Board members present, or, if less than two-thirds of the members are present, a unanimous vote of those members present.)

VISITOR PARTICIPATION Time has been reserved at this point in the agenda for persons wishing to comment for up to three minutes to the Board of Directors on any item that is not listed on the agenda, but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the District. By law, the Board of Directors is prohibited from taking action on such public comments. As appropriate, matters raised in these public comments will be referred to District staff or placed on the agenda of an upcoming Board meeting. At this time, members of the public may also offer public comment for up to three minutes on any item on the Consent Calendar. While members of the public may not remove an item from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion, a Director may do so at the request of a member of the public. CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEMS NO. 1 – 9) All matters on the Consent Calendar are to be approved by one motion, without separate discussion on these items, unless a Board member or District staff request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.

1. MINUTES OF WATER ISSUES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 13, 2019 RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes as presented 2. RESOLUTION HONORING DOUGLAS HEADRICK UPON HIS RETIREMENT FROM SAN

BERNARDINO VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Adopt resolution

honoring Douglas Headrick for 30 years of service at water agencies in the Santa Ana Watershed

2

3. ALAMITOS SEAWATER BARRIER 2020-21 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET AND INCREASE TO 2018-19 AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES

RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: 1) Approve the Alamitos Barrier 2020-21 total O&M budget in the

amount of $2,530,000, and authorize payment of the District’s share not to exceed $986,000 payable to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works after receipt and review of invoices; and

2) Approve increase in the amount of $50,500 for the District’s

share of Alamitos Barrier O&M expenses for FY2018-19, for a revised not-to-exceed total of $794,500

4. AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT WEST INC. FOR HABITAT RESTORATION AND

MAINTENANCE SERVICES ON OCWD MITIGATION SITES IN ORANGE COUNTY RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize agreement

with Habitat West Inc. with an annual cost limit of $150,000 for maintenance and other habitat restoration services on designated sites in Orange County for a period of three years for a total cost not to exceed $450,000

5. CITY OF ANAHEIM AGREEMENT REGARDING JACOBS AND CAROLLO ENGINEERS

PFAS STUDIES RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize the General

Manager to execute Agreement with City of Anaheim for Consulting Services Related to PFAS Treatment Testing and PFAS Treatment Systems Planning Study, subject to comments and edits from legal counsel

6. ACCEPTANCE OF COMPLETION OF CONTRACT NO. PB-2019-1, PRADO BASIN

SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT VEGETATION REMOVAL, (MC NABB CONSTRUCTION, INC. DBA DK ENVIRONMENTAL) RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting:

1) Ratify issuance of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. PB-2019-1, Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project Vegetation Removal, in the amount of $10,000; and

2) Accept completion of work and authorize filing a Notice of Completion

3

7. AGREEMENT TO CORRPRO COMPANIES, INC FOR REPLACEMENT OF THREE RECTIFIER ENCLOSURES AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION

RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting:

1) Authorize filing of a Categorical Exemption for the Replacement of Three Rectifier Enclosures in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines; and

2) Authorize issuance of Agreement to Corrpro Companies, Inc. for

Replacement of Three Rectifier Enclosures for an amount not to exceed $39,000

8. AUTHORIZE PAYMENT TO VALLEY DISTRICT FOR DISTRICT’S SHARE OF EXPENSES FOR UPPER SANTA ANA WATERSHED MODEL RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize payment of

$12,289 to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share of Change Order Number 1 for development of the Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan Integrated Model

9. RESOLUTION HONORING MARK LEWIS UPON HIS RETIREMENT FROM THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Adopt resolution

honoring Mark Lewis for his years of service at the City of Fountain Valley

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 10. SANTA ANA RIVER CONSERVATION AND CONJUNCTIVE USE PROGRAM UPDATE: OC BASIN EXTRACTION WELLS RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize General

Manager to negotiate agreements with City of Fullerton, City of Tustin, East Orange County Water District, City of Orange, and Mesa Water and present final agreements to the Board for approval

11. DISTRICT PARTICIPATION AND FUNDING FOR WATER UCI INDUSTRY-COOPERATIVE

RESEARCH CENTER IN 2020 RECOMMENDATION: Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize OCWD

participatation in Water UCI Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) for $50,000 in 2020 via agreement with UCI entitled “University of California Irvine Foundation Contribution Agreement”, subject to approval as to form and content by OCWD General Counsel

4

INFORMATIONAL ITEM 12. STATE BOARD PFAS TECHNICAL SEMINAR SUMMARY CHAIR DIRECTION AS TO ITEMS IF ANY TO BE AGENDIZED AS MATTERS FOR

CONSIDERATION AT THE DECEMBER 18 BOARD MEETING DIRECTORS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS GENERAL MANAGER’S ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS ADJOURNMENT

5

WATER ISSUES COMMITTEE MEMBERS Committee Members Cathy Green - Chair Dina Nguyen - Vice Chair Ahmad Zahra Jordan Brandman Tri Ta Alternates Steve Sheldon Roger Yoh Kelly Rowe Denis Bilodeau Vicente Sarmiento

In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted at the guard shack entrance and in the main lobby of the Orange County Water District, 18700 Ward Street, Fountain Valley, CA and on the OCWD website not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the District Secretary. Backup material for the Agenda is available at the District offices for public review and can be viewed online at the District’s website: www.ocwd.com Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability-related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the District Secretary at (714) 378-3233, by email at [email protected] by fax at (714) 378-3373. Notification 24 hours prior to the meeting will enable District staff to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting. As a general rule, agenda reports or other written documentation has been prepared or organized with respect to each item of business listed on the agenda, and can be reviewed at www.ocwd.com. Copies of these materials and other disclosable public records distributed to all or a majority of the members of the Board of Directors in connection with an open session agenda item are also on file with and available for inspection at the Office of the District Secretary, 18700 Ward Street, Fountain Valley, California, during regular business hours, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday. If such writings are distributed to members of the Board of Directors on the day of a Board meeting, the writings will be available at the entrance to the Board of Directors meeting room at the Orange County Water District office.

http://www.ocwd.com/

http://www.ocwd.com/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

1

MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING WATER ISSUES COMMITTEE

ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT November 13, 2019 @ 8:00 a.m.

Director Green called the Water Issues Committee meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. in the District Boardroom. The Assistant District Secretary called the roll and reported a quorum of the Committee as follows.

CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar was approved upon motion by Director Zahra, seconded by Director Ta, and carried [5-0]. Yes – Green, Zahra, Ta, Sheldon, Rowe 1. Minutes of Water Issues Committee Meeting held October 9, 2019 The Minutes of the Water Issues Committee meeting held October 9, 2019 were approved as presented. 2. Amendment to Agreement with Ruth Villalobos and Associates to Support the Prado Basin Feasibility Study Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: Authorize execution of Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 1170 with Ruth Villalobos and Associates for an amount not to exceed $198,002 to support the Prado Basin Feasibility Study. 3. Request for Proposal from Intera for Model Evaluation Services Regarding Underflow Across County Line Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: Authorize Request for Proposal from Intera, Inc. to evaluate the hydrogeology and respective groundwater models constructed by OCWD and the U.S. Geological Survey for the Water Replenishment District with the goal of reducing uncertainty in estimating groundwater underflow across the county line. 4. Acceptance of Completion of Contract No. SG-2018-1, Construction of OCWD-BS13 and

OCWD-Bs24 Monitoring Well Clusters for Sunset Gap Seawater Intrusion Investigation (ABC Liovin Drilling Inc.)

Committee Members Cathy Green Dina Nguyen (absent) Ahmad Zahra Jordan Brandman (absent) Tri Ta Alternates Steve Sheldon Roger Yoh (absent) Kelly Rowe Denis Bilodeau Vicente Sarmiento

OCWD John Kennedy – Executive Director Christina Fuller – Assistant District Secretary Jeremy Jungreis – General Counsel

11/13/19

2

Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: 1) Ratify issuance of Change Order Nos. 1 and 2; and 2) Accept completion of work and authorize filing a Notice of Completion for Contract No. SG-2018-1, Construction of OCWD-BS13 and OCWD-BS24 Monitoring Well Clusters. 5. Approval of Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority Project Agreements 25 and 26 Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: Approve and authorize execution of Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority Project Agreement 25 (One Water One Watershed) and approve Project Agreement 26 (Roundtables/Task Forces). 6. Annual Santa Ana River Stream Gauging Joint Funding Agreement with the United States Geological Survey Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: 1) Approve and authorize Joint Funding Agreement with USGS to conduct stream gauging of the Santa Ana River below Prado Dam and Santiago Creek at Santa Ana for the period of November 1, 2019 to October 31, 2020; and 2) Authorize payment of $56,350 to the USGS for OCWD’s share of costs for these services 7. Award of Contract No. Tal-2019-1, Talbert Extraction Well Decommissioning and Construction of Replacement Monitoring Well OCWD-M57, to Bc2 Environmental, LLC. Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: 1) Receive and File Affidavit of Publication of Notice Inviting Bids for Contract TAL-2019-1; and 2) Accept bid and award Contract No. TAL-2019-1 to BC2 Environmental, LLC. for an amount not to exceed $333,300. 8. Amendment to Stantec Consulting Services for the Conrock-Warner Transfer Tube Project Recommended for approval at November 20 Board meeting: Authorize issuance of Amendment No. 2 to Stantec Consulting Services in the amount of $38,380 for additional design services for the Conrock-Warner Transfer Tube Project. Directors Bilodeau and Sarmiento arrived during discussion of the following item. MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION 9. Additional Scope to Expand PFAS Bench-Scale Treatment Testing: Amendment to Jacobs for PFAS Treatment Testing Support Services Director of Research Megan Plumlee recalled that Jacobs is providing consulting engineering services for bench- and pilot-scale testing of PFAS treatment for impacted local groundwater. She advised that amendment No. 1 proposes to significantly increase the Jacobs/Battelle scope of work by expanding the number of granular activated carbon (GAC) and novel adsorbents to be evaluated. She reported that the amendment would additionally expand the number of different Producer waters that will be tested against the full set of GAC/adsorbent products. Ms. Plumlee recalled that the original Jacobs proposal and RFP assumed four products would be evaluated in the rapid small-scale column testing (RSSCT) since four products is a typical number for a drinking water client to evaluate. She stated that Jacobs identified eight GAC products, four IX products, and two novel adsorbents that Jacobs and the District staff believe merit testing. She reviewed the scope and costs for the additional proposed work and stated the new project budget would be $728,620.

11/13/19

3

Upon motion by Director Ta, seconded by Director Zahra and carried [5-0], the Committee recommended that the Board at its November 20 meeting: Authorize issuance of Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 1380 with Jacobs for PFAS Treatment Testing Support Services for an amount not to exceed $388,043. Ayes – Green, Zahra, Ta, Sheldon, Rowe CHAIR DIRECTION AS TO ITEMS IF ANY TO BE AGENDIZED AS MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NOVEMBER 20 BOARD MEETING It was agreed to place item Nos. 2-9 on the consent calendar at the November 20 Board meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 a.m. _________________________ Cathy Green, Chair

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: N/A Budgeted Amount: N/A To: Water Issues Committee Cost Estimate: N/A Board of Directors Funding Source: N/A Program/Line Item No.: N/A From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: G. Woodside CEQA Compliance: N/A Subject: RESOLUTION HONORING DOUGLAS HEADRICK UPON HIS

RETIREMENT FROM SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

SUMMARY San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District General Manager Douglas Headrick has worked at water agencies in the Santa Ana Watershed for 30 years. Staff has prepared a resolution honoring his years of service upon his retirement. Attachment(s): Resolution for Douglas Headrick RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Adopt resolution honoring Douglas Headrick for 30 years of service at water agencies in the Santa Ana Watershed. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Douglas Headrick has provided exemplary service in California water for nearly 30 years, including serving as the General Manager of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and also working at the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, and the City of Redlands. Mr. Headrick has led the development and implementation of regional, collaborative projects including the East Branch Extension (Phase 2) of the State Water Project, Enhanced Recharge Project, Habitat Conservation Plan, Hydroelectric Projects, Integrated Model of the Upper Santa Ana Watershed, Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program, and the Sterling Natural Resource Center. He has been instrumental in enhancing regional relationships through the settlement on water rights issues in the Rialto Basin and Lytle Basin, the Modernization of the Western-San Bernardino Watermaster Database, the Regional Recycled Water agreement, and water rights. He has represented Valley District on the State Water Contractors Board of Directors, on the Southern California Water Coalition Board of Trustees, as the Chairman of the Sites

Project Reservoir Committee, and as an alternate Board Director for the Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority. Mr. Headrick has also worked closely with District staff as a Watermaster for the 1969 Santa Ana River Judgment. He is also a volunteer trainer specializing in well drilling and hand pump repair for Lifewater International, through which he travels to developing countries to educate nationals in water resource techniques and transformational development.

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT

HONORING DOUGLAS HEADRICK FOR 30 YEARS OF SERVICE IN THE SANTA ANA WATERSHED

Whereas Douglas Headrick has provided exemplary service in California water for nearly 30 years, including serving as the General Manager of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and also working at the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, and the City of Redlands, and Whereas Mr. Headrick has led the development and implementation of regional, collaborative projects including the East Branch Extension (Phase 2) of the State Water Project, Enhanced Recharge Project, Habitat Conservation Plan, Hydroelectric Projects, Integrated Model of the Upper Santa Ana Watershed, Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program, and the Sterling Natural Resource Center, and Whereas Mr. Headrick has been instrumental in enhancing regional relationships through the settlement on water rights issues in the Rialto Basin and Lytle Basin, the Modernization of the Western-San Bernardino Watermaster Database, the Regional Recycled Water agreement, and water rights, and Whereas, Mr. Headrick has represented Valley District on the State Water Contractors Board of Directors, on the Southern California Water Coalition Board of Trustees, as the Chairman of the Sites Project Reservoir Committee, and as an alternate Board Director for the Delta Conveyance Design and Construction Authority, and Whereas Mr. Headrick has worked closely with District staff as a Watermaster for the 1969 Santa Ana River Judgment, and Whereas Mr. Headrick is also a volunteer trainer specializing in well drilling and hand pump repair for Lifewater International, through which he travels to developing countries to educate nationals in water resource techniques and transformational development, and Whereas Mr. Headrick has demonstrated superb professional conduct in his career and is a dedicated public servant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Board of Directors of the Orange County Water District wishes to honor and congratulate Douglas Headrick for his dedication and successful leadership at the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District and express best wishes for his continued efforts in providing clean water.

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: Partial Budgeted Amount: $986,000 (FY20-21) To: Water Issues Committee Cost Estimate: $1,036,500 Board of Directors Funding Source: General Fund Program/Line Item No.: 1050.56026.9932 From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: R. Herndon/D. Mark CEQA Compliance: N/A Subject: ALAMITOS SEAWATER BARRIER 2020-21 OPERATIONS AND

MAINTENANCE BUDGET AND INCREASE TO 2018-19 AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES

SUMMARY Staff recommends approval of the 2020-21 Alamitos Barrier operations and maintenance (O&M) budget of $2,530,000, of which $986,000 is the District’s share, as proposed by the Alamitos Barrier Joint Management Committee. Staff also requests an increase of $50,500 in authorized expenditures for 2018-19 to account for additional injection well redevelopment costs. Attachment: Alamitos Barrier 2020-21 Operation and Maintenance Budget Table RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: 1. Approve the Alamitos Barrier 2020-21 total O&M budget in the amount of

$2,530,000, and authorize payment of the District’s share not to exceed $986,000 payable to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works after receipt and review of invoices; and

2. Approve increase in the amount of $50,500 for the District’s share of Alamitos Barrier O&M expenses for FY2018-19, for a revised not-to-exceed total of $794,500.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In 1964, the District entered into an “Agreement for the Cooperative Implementation of Alamitos Barrier Project,” with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (now part of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works - LACDPW). Under the terms of the agreement, the LACDPW operates and maintains the Alamitos Seawater Barrier and its physical facilities under the direction of the interagency Joint Management Committee (JMC). The JMC comprises eight agency staff members, half appointed by LACDPW and half appointed by the District. Each year the JMC reviews and recommends for approval an O&M budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The barrier O&M budget comprises several activities including

injection facilities O&M and administration, monitoring well data collection and maintenance, and data analysis and reporting. The total O&M budget is divided between LACDPW and OCWD in proportion to the water injected into the barrier by each agency. With 17 new injection wells that went on line in September 2018, the District’s share of total injection (7,500 AF/year) is estimated to be about 40% or 3,000 AF/year. On November 13, 2019, the JMC proposed a total O&M budget of $2,530,000 for 2020-21, of which the District’s estimated share is $986,000. These amounts exclude approximately $70,000 liability insurance premiums which are shared equally between LACDPW and OCWD and paid separately. There is a lag time in receiving invoices from LACDPW, so one-half of the annual expenses is paid in FY20-21, and the other half is paid in FY21-22. Staff recommends Board approval of the O&M budget and payment of the District’s share. Staff also requests Board approval to increase the payment authorization by $50,500 for invoices from LACDPW for 2018-19 barrier O&M expenses, bringing the total not-to-exceed authorization of $794,500 for that year. The requested increase is for additional costs incurred by LACDPW for injection well redevelopment work that was carried over from the prior year. Due to the lag in invoicing from LACDPW, the second semi-annual invoice from LACDPW for 2018-19 expenses will be paid by OCWD in our FY2019-20. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS 1/16/19, M19-5 – Approve the 2019-20 O&M budget for the Alamitos Barrier in the amount of $2,465,000 and authorize the payment of OCWD’s share in the amount of $1,102,500, payable to LACDPW. 1/17/18, M18-6 – Approve the 2018-19 O&M budget for the Alamitos Barrier in the amount of $1,860,000 and authorize the payment of OCWD’s share in the amount of $744,000, payable to LACDPW. 9/16/15, R15-9-125 - Approve and authorize execution of Amendment to Agreement for Cooperative Implementation of Alamitos Barrier Project, Supplement No. 8 with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) to revise the District’s annual payment to LACDPW that incorporates a prorated portion of the actual costs of the Alamitos Barrier maintenance yard. 9/17/14, R14-9-126 - Approve and authorize execution of the cost-sharing Agreement for Construction of Additional Facilities for the Alamitos Barrier Project Supplement No. 7 with the LACDPW for the design and construction of injection and monitoring well facilities and payment by LACDPW to OCWD at one-half of the cost of the new facilities located between Points B and C for a total not to exceed $1,253,000; and approve an increase to the Alamitos Barrier Improvement Project budget by $4,693,000 for a revised total capital project budget of $14,752,000. 12/18/13, M13-181 – Authorize general liability insurance policy for the Alamitos Barrier for calendar year 2014 and authorize inclusion of general liability insurance premiums in future Alamitos Barrier annual O&M budgets submitted separately for Board approval.

9/16/98, R98-9-141 - Approve and authorize execution of Supplement No. 6 to Alamitos Barrier Project agreement with LACDPW. Provides for the District to construct additional barrier facilities identified in Geologist's Report on Alamitos Barrier Improvement Project Construction Unit 12, consisting of 5 new injection wells, one new extraction well, and 3 new monitoring wells. 3/17/93, R93-3-44 - Authorize execution of Supplement No. 5 to Alamitos Barrier Project agreement with Los Angeles County Flood Control District (now part of Los Angeles County Department of Public Works). Supplement provides for expansion of Alamitos Barrier Joint Management Committee from six to eight members (LACFCD and the District each to appoint one additional member) 10/4/89, R89-10-201 - Authorize execution of Supplement No. 4 to Alamitos Barrier Project agreement with Los Angeles County Flood Control District providing for joint participation in design, construction, operation and maintenance of the Alamitos Barrier Project. Provides for the District to design and construct required additional Alamitos Barrier facilities identified in the District’s Engineer's Report regarding Seawater Intrusion at the Alamitos Barrier, approved 5/3/89 by Resolution No. 89-5-90. 4/17/85, R85-4-41 - Approve and authorize execution of Alamitos Barrier Hydroelectric Project Site lease and Royalty Agreement with Los Angeles County Flood Control Dist. & Hydro Electric Constr. Inc.; & Supplement No. 3 to Alamitos Barrier Project Agreement to provide for construction of hydroelectric project at Alamitos Barrier. 9/25/69, R69-9-96 - Approve Supplement No. 2, Amending the Agreement for Cooperative Implementation of the Alamitos Barrier Project. 1/20/65, R891 – Authorize Agreement with LACFCD for Geologic Services on Alamitos Barrier Project (Supplement No. 1). 6/17/64, R831 - Approve Agreement for Cooperative Implementation of the Alamitos Barrier Project.

ABP FY 2020-21 Operation and Maintenance Budget

JMC Fiscal LACFCD OCWD WRD TOTALNo. Year Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual1. Analysis and direction of injection operation ($)

2016-17 55,250 67,944 29,750 16,145 85,000 84,0892017-18 65,000 85,629 35,000 22,216 100,000 107,8452018-19 65,000 97,978 35,000 59,797 100,000 157,7752019-20 55,000 45,000 100,0002020-21 90,000 60,000 150,000

2. Maintenance and repair of injection wells ($)2016-17 292,500 294,809 157,500 70,054 450,000 364,8632017-18 292,500 390,733 157,500 101,374 450,000 492,1072018-19 292,500 263,657 157,500 160,912 450,000 424,5692019-20 247,500 202,500 450,0002020-21 270,000 180,000 450,000

3. Operations of Injection Well Facilities ($)2016-17 26,000 38,379 14,000 9,120 40,000 47,4992017-18 32,500 54,179 17,500 14,057 50,000 68,2362018-19 32,500 37,411 17,500 22,832 50,000 60,2432019-20 38,500 31,500 70,0002020-21 42,000 28,000 70,000

4. Analysis and direction of extraction operation ($)2016-17 0 0 0 0 0 02017-18 0 0 0 0 0 02018-19 0 0 0 0 0 02019-20 0 0 02020-21 0 0 0

5. Redevelopment, maintenance, and repair of extraction wells ($)2016-17 10,000 0 0 0 10,000 02017-18 10,000 0 0 0 10,000 02018-19 10,000 0 0 0 10,000 02019-20 10,000 0 10,0002020-21 10,000 0 10,000

6. Operations of Extraction Wells ($)2016-17 6,000 1,510 0 0 6,000 1,5102017-18 5,000 1,538 0 0 5,000 1,5382018-19 5,000 1,556 0 0 5,000 1,5562019-20 5,000 0 5,0002020-21 5,000 0 5,000

7. Maintenance and repair of ABP ($)2016-17 227,500 224,063 122,500 53,243 350,000 277,3062017-18 227,500 243,510 122,500 63,178 350,000 306,6882018-19 195,000 224,174 105,000 136,815 300,000 360,9892019-20 165,000 135,000 300,0002020-21 222,000 148,000 370,000

8. Maintenance of Observation Wells ($)2016-17 45,500 1,058 24,500 252 70,000 1,3102017-18 130,000 102,389 70,000 26,564 200,000 128,9532018-19 32,500 6,403 17,500 3,908 50,000 10,3102019-20 82,500 67,500 150,0002020-21 30,000 20,000 50,000

9. Collection of groundwater data ($)2016-17 130,000 143,655 70,000 34,136 200,000 177,7912017-18 130,000 137,535 70,000 35,683 200,000 173,2182018-19 130,000 111,979 70,000 68,341 200,000 180,3202019-20 96,250 78,750 175,0002020-21 120,000 80,000 200,000

10. Yard Maintenance ($)2016-17 75,380 68,518 4,620 4,635 80,000 73,1532017-18 70,760 38,503 9,240 9,989 80,000 48,4922018-19 66,250 54,965 8,750 8,750 75,000 63,7152019-20 35,750 29,250 65,0002020-21 65,000 10,000 75,000

11. Injection Well Redevelopment ($)2016-17 260,000 403,333 140,000 95,842 400,000 499,1752017-18 650,000 416,790 350,000 108,134 1,000,000 524,9242018-19 325,000 551,322 175,000 336,475 500,000 887,7962019-20 550,000 450,000 1,000,0002020-21 600,000 400,000 1,000,000

12. Processing of data and preparation of reports ($)2016-17 39,000 46,570 21,000 11,066 60,000 57,6362017-18 39,000 69,081 21,000 17,923 60,000 87,0042018-19 39,000 42,207 21,000 25,759 60,000 67,9672019-20 44,000 36,000 80,0002020-21 48,000 32,000 80,000

13. Oversight of Reclaim Water Program ($)2016-17 19,500 35,663 10,500 8,474 30,000 44,1382017-18 29,250 34,005 15,750 8,822 45,000 42,8272018-19 32,500 10,701 17,500 6,531 50,000 17,2322019-20 27,500 22,500 50,0002020-21 30,000 20,000 50,000

14. Projects and Studies ($)2016-17 6,500 19,171 3,500 4,556 10,000 23,7272017-18 6,500 125,552 3,500 32,574 10,000 158,1262018-19 6,500 62,613 3,500 0 10,000 62,6132019-20 5,500 4,500 10,0002020-21 12,000 8,000 20,000

15. ABP Liability Insurance ($)2016-17 37,500 37,794 37,500 37,794 75,000 75,5882017-18 38,000 38,951 38,000 38,951 76,000 77,9022018-19 38,000 32,162 38,000 32,162 76,000 64,3242019-20 40,000 40,000 80,0002020-21 35,000 35,000 70,000

16.2016-17 1,230,630 1,382,469 635,370 345,315 1,866,000 1,727,7842017-18 1,726,010 1,738,394 909,990 479,465 2,636,000 2,217,8592018-19 1,269,750 1,497,128 666,250 862,281 1,936,000 2,359,4092019-20 1,402,500 1,142,500 2,545,0002020-21 1,579,000 1,021,000 2,600,000

2016-17 1,193,130 1,344,675 597,870 307,521 1,791,000 1,652,1962017-18 1,688,010 1,699,443 871,990 440,515 2,560,000 2,139,9582018-19 1,231,750 1,464,966 628,250 830,119 1,860,000 2,295,0862019-20 1,362,500 1,102,500 2,465,0002020-21 1,544,000 986,000 2,530,000

2016-17 2,450 1,165 4,550 4,895 7,000 6,0602017-18 2,450 910 4,550 3,504 7,000 4,4142018-19 2,960 2,009 4,440 3,287 7,400 5,2952019-20 2,800 4,200 7,0002020-21 3,000 4,500 7,500

Total ABP Expenditure ($)

TO

TA

LS

Total ABP Operations and Maintenance ($) [Item 16-Item 15]

Volume of Water (ac-ft)

A-20

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: Yes Budgeted Amount: $150,000 To: Water Issues Committee Board of Directors

Cost Estimate: $150,000/year Funding Source: General Fund

Program/ Line Item No. 1080.57016 From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: G. Woodside/ R. Zembal/

B. Johnson CEQA Compliance: N/A

Subject: AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT WEST INC. FOR HABITAT

RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES ON OCWD MITIGATION SITES IN ORANGE COUNTY

SUMMARY The District has several re-vegetation sites adjacent to recharge facilities in Orange County that require ongoing maintenance to comply with regulatory permits. The District has used a contractor for this work for several years and recently rebid the work because the contractor’s agreement will expire in February 2020. Following a competitive bid process, staff recommends issuing an Agreement with Habitat West for this work for the next three years. RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize issuance of an Agreement to Habitat West Inc. with an annual cost limit of $150,000 for maintenance and other habitat restoration services on designated sites in Orange County for a period of three years and a total cost not to exceed $450,000. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Regulatory permits from the state and federal resource agencies are required for many of the District’s projects in the recharge area in Anaheim and Orange. The permits require restoration sites at and near the District’s recharge facilities. The required restoration is usually the planting and maintenance of native plants. Habitat restoration sites require annual maintenance, including removing weeds, to get them started and producing maximally for wildlife over time. Some of the designated locations require planting and each of the sites require maintenance, including:

• Periodic weeding by hand with machinery such as weed wackers for control of non-native weeds.

• Ensuring adequate irrigation is provided to plants via irrigation systems. • Periodic placement and maintenance of irrigation systems. • Planting new sites or to augment or replace lost specimens.

The designated restoration sites include:

• Several sites in and near Burris Basin • Five Coves Riparian Grove and Freshwater Marsh • Conrock Basin Riparian Stream and Egret Colony Site • Huckleberry Basin Riparian Edge • Mills Pond • Santiago Basins and Creek

Following a competitive bid process, the Board authorized Agreement No. 1067 with Habitat West for a three-year period beginning in February 2015. This Agreement was extended until February 2020, with the fixed hourly rate unchanged from Habitat West’s 2015 agreement. Since the agreement with Habitat West is expiring in February 2020, staff solicited bids for this work for the next three-year period. Bids were received from three firms. The lowest hourly rate bid was submitted by Habitat West Inc. (Table 1). Table 1. Prevailing Wage Comparison for Restoration and Maintenance Services

Soltis $/hr Habitat West $/hr Nature’s Image $/hr Laborer 26.50 27.50 35.00 Skilled Laborer 34.00 30.50 36.75 Foreman with Truck 64.50 47.50 55.00 Supervisor 66.50 58.00 61.00 Superintendent/Project Mgr 78.50 75.00 80.00 Landscape/Irrigation Laborer 92.45 78.51 117.00 Landscape/Irrigation Tender 33.75 33.35 42.00 Annual Inflation Wage increase 5% 2% 2% Average Wage Rate 56.60 50.05 60.96

The contractor would be responsible for restoration and maintenance services identified for each of the restoration project sites over a renewed three-year maintenance period. At the beginning of each month the vendor shall coordinate with OCWD and discuss the maintenance activities planned for the month including the work to be completed and the schedule that will ensure maximum plant growth and non-native weed control at each of the project sites. OCWD has the discretion to make any adjustments to monthly schedule that are needed. Staff recommends issuing an Agreement to Habitat West Inc. with an annual cost limit of $150,000 for maintenance and other habitat restoration services on designated sites in Orange County for a period of three years and a total cost not to exceed $450,000. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS 2/18/15, R15-2-24 - Issuance of Agreement No. 1067 with Habitat West, Inc. for on-call plant restoration services. 02/15/17, R17-2-10 Amendment to Agreement No. 1067 with Habitat West, Inc. for

continuation of on-call plant restoration services.

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL

Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: N/A Budgeted Amount: N/A To: Water Issues Committee Cost Estimate: N/A Board of Directors Funding Source: N/A Program/ Line Item No. From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: Required Staff Contact: J. Kennedy/C.Olsen

Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A CEQA Compliance: N/A

Subject: CITY OF ANAHEIM AGREEMENT REGARDING JACOBS AND CAROLLO ENGINEERS PFAS STUDIES

SUMMARY The District recently hired two consultants (Jacobs and Carollo Engineers) to complete specific tasks regarding the PFAS issue. The attached agreement with the city of Anaheim would allow the city to pay for additional work with either consultant above and beyond the District’s scope of work. Attachment Draft PFAS consulting Services Agreement with city of Anaheim RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize the General Manager to execute Agreement with City of Anaheim for Consulting Services Related to PFAS Treatment Testing and PFAS Treatment Systems Planning Study, subject to comments and edits from legal counsel BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Carollo Engineers Carollo Engineers was hired to perform a PFAS Treatment Systems Planning Study which includes reviewing ten Groundwater Producer systems to determine the best option to treat groundwater production wells impacted by a possible 10 ppt perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) Response Level. The contract amount is $399,996. The participating Producers include Anaheim, East Orange County Water District, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Irvine Ranch Water District, Orange, Santa Ana, Serrano Water District, Tustin and Yorba Linda Water District. This Planning Study will be beneficial for Producers who may be shutting down wells and needing PFAS treatment systems to resume serving groundwater. On an individual Producer basis, the Planning Study would assess the number of wells impacted, location of wells, and areas available for a treatment system(s). It would also determine how the treatment system(s) would be integrated into the Producer’s existing operations, determine if a centralized treatment plant is feasible for combining wells (individual or multiple

Producers), assess the potential for blending, provide initial support for permitting and develop capital and operation and maintenance costs associated with potential land acquisition, permitting, pipeline connections and system integration. Jacobs Jacobs has been hired for $728,619 to perform bench and pilot-scale testing of various treatment technologies that could be applied at groundwater wells. Different activated carbon and ion exchange materials will be fully evaluated to determine the best option for each of the impacted Producers. Possible City Work The additional work the City could request Jacobs or Carollo to perform is listed below:

• Project management services as required to support the City Tasks • Additional Meetings and/or Site Investigations specifically related to the City’s

various groundwater production sites • Perform/develop data analysis and/or modeling based on pilot results to

recommend a media/resin best suited to treat the different water qualities across the City’s groundwater well sources. Evaluate Anaheim’s water quality goals beyond that of treating for PFAS. Evaluate available media options for achieving the required PFAS removal and to achieve desired water quality goals. Provide recommendations for any additional analysis or pilot testing.

• Develop a Preliminary Design Report (PDR) for two (2) selected sites. The PDR shall include, but not limited to, more detailed site layout drawings (~30%) for proposed treatment, pretreatment, pumping, storage, and/or ancillary facilities; material recommendations; and cost estimates.

• Provide supplemental draft and final reports to document additional consulting services as authorized by the City.

• Provide additional consulting services as-needed for the successful completion of the work related to the items listed above.

Prior Relevant Board Actions: 11/20/19 R19-11-166: Approve amendment to Jacobs for PFAS treatment testing Support services 10/16/19 R19-10-148: Hired Carollo Engineers for $399,996 to provide a PFAS Planning Study for the 11 impacted Groundwater Producers 8/7/19 R19-8-111: Hired Jacobs to provide PFAS pilot and bench testing for activated carbon and ion-exchange treatment technologies 7/17/19 M19-105: Authorize issuance of a Request for Proposals for a Producer PFAS Treatment System Planning Study 6/19/19 M19-98: Authorize issuance of a Request for Proposals for PFAS Treatment Testing Support Services

1

AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND THE CITY

OF ANAHEIM FOR CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO PFAS

TREATMENT TESTING AND PFAS TREATMENT SYSTEMS

PLANNING STUDY

THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), is made and entered into on this _____ day of _______________, 20__, by and between the ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California organized under Chapter 924 of the Statutes of 1933, as amended, hereinafter referred to as “OCWD”; and CITY OF ANAHEIM, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as “City.” OCWD and City are sometimes hereinafter individually referred to as “Party” and hereinafter collectively referred to as “Parties.”

RECITALS

WHEREAS, OCWD is a duly organized special governmental district existing pursuant to the Orange County Water District Act, Chapter 924 of the California Statutes of 1933, as amended; and

WHEREAS, City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under

the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California; and

WHEREAS, OCWD and the City have jointly prepared and agreed to a scope of work

that was incorporated into a request for proposals that was sent to a number of competent consulting firms for PFAS Treatment Testing Support Services (“PFAS Support Services”) and PFAS Treatment Systems Planning Study (“PFAS Planning Study”), collectively the “Projects”; and

WHEREAS, the City participated in a working group of OCWD staff who recommended selection of consulants for PFAS Support Services and PFAS Planning Study; and

WHEREAS, OCWD entered into a consulting agreement with Jacobs Engineering

(“Jacobs”) dated August 15, 2019 (“Support Services Agreement”) for the PFAS Support Services (“Support Services”); and

WHEREAS, OCWD entered into a consulting agreement with Carollo Engineers, Inc.

(“Carollo”) dated November 15, 2019 (“Planning Services Agreement”) for the PFAS Planning Study; and

WHEREAS, OCWD agrees to design, administer, and manage a Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth herein; and; and WHEREAS, the City may request, in writing, amendments to those agreements for City specifc tasks (“City Tasks”) on which OCWD and the City will work collarboratively, and the City agrees to reimburse OCWD for the cost and expense of the City Tasks;

2

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the

Parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1: Recitals. The Recitals above are deemed true and correct, are hereby

incorporated in this Section as though fully set forth herein, and each Party to this Agreement acknowledges and agrees that they are bound by the same.

Section 2: OCWD’s Specific Obligations.

A. OCWD will pay 100% of the costs for the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement, except for the costs of the City Tasks contained in the amendments to those agreements.OCWD will administer Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement and any amendments thereto. As soon as reasonably possible after receipt of City Tasks, OCWD will amend the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement to have the Consultants perform those tasks. The City shall not be responsible for payment of the City Tasks prior to these amendments. OCWD shall coordinate all aspects of the Projects with the selected consultants, Jacobs and Carollo, collectively, the “Consultants”. OCWD shall communicate with and update the City, regularly and upon request, regarding the applicable portions of the Projects.OCWD shall make payments to the Consultants for the City Tasks within forty-five (45) days of receipt of a Consultant’s invoice unless City has informed OCWD that the invoiced services have not been successfully delivered. OCWD shall provide the City with any Consultant invoice within five (5) business days of their receipt by OCWD. Upon City’s request, OCWD will provide copies of OCWD’s payment records.

B. OCWD shall ensure that the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement shall contain indemnification and insurance provisions, in favor of OCWD and City, their respective officials, officers, and employees, that include requirements, limits, coverages, and terms and conditions in conformance with sound risk management principles for projects of this kind, nature, risk, and complexity. Further, OCWD shall ensure that Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement provide for indemnity and insurance protection for City in amounts and form at least equal to the protection OCWD secures for itself.

C. Inform the City of any proposed extra work for the City Tasks that would result in an increase to City's payment obilgations. OCWD and the City must both approve such extra work before OCWD notifies Jacobs or Carollo to proceed with the extra work.

3

Section 3: City’s Specific Obligations. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of a

Consultant invoice from OCWD, the City shall pay OCWD for those invoiced City Tasks which the City has determined Consultant has successfully performed.

Section 4: Reimbursement and Total Costs. The City’s payment obligation for the City

Tasks shall not exceed a cumulative total of Three Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($350,000) (“Contract Amount”) unless otherwise approved by City Council by amendment of this Agreement, except as set forth herein. On behalf of the City, the Public Utilities General Manager is authorized to approve extra work in a total cumulative total amount of twenty percent (20%) of the Contract Amount.

Section 5: Independent Contractor. The Consultants will not be a party to this Agreement and will not be an employee or agent of OCWD or the City, either as a result of this Agreement or as a result of a professional services agreement between OCWD and the Consultants. The Consultants will be an independent contractor to OCWD.

Section 6: Indemnification.

A. OCWD shall use its best efforts in administering the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement, but makes no representations, guarantees or warranties to the City as to the quality or timeliness of work product provided by the selected contractor pursuant to the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement. The City shall indemnify OCWD, its directors, officers, employees and agents against, and will hold and save them harmless from, any and all actions, claims, penalties, obligations or liabilities, in law or in equity, of every kind or nature whatsoever, that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision or other organization arising out of or in any manner directly or indirectly connected with the Projects pursuant to the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement.

B. OCWD shall indemnify, defend and hold the city, its officers, employees and agents against, and will hold and save them harmless from, any and all actions, claims, penalties, obligations or liabilities, in law or in equity, of every kind or nature whatsoever, that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision or other organization arising out of or in any manner directly or indirectly connected with the Projects pursuant to the Support Services Agreement and Planning Services Agreement.

Section 7: Term. This Agreement will be in full force and effect until the completion of the Projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause upon giving the other Party sixty (60) days prior written notice. If this Agreement is terminated, OCWD will be paid for those incurred, reimbursable costs in accordance with Section 4.

4

Section 8: Notices. All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder

will be in writing and will be personally delivered or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, , and will be deemed received upon the earlier of: (i) the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice if delivered personally or by messenger or overnight courier; (ii) three (3) business days after the date of posting by the United States Post Office if by mail; or (iii) when sent if given by electronic transmission. Notices or other communications will be addressed as follows:

To OCWD: Orange County Water District 10500 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Attention: Mike Markus, General Manager To City: City of Anaheim – Public Utilities Department 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1101 Anaheim, CA 92805 Attention: Dukku Lee, Public Utilities General Manager Facsimile: (714) 765-4138 Section 9: Jurisdiction. In the event of a dispute regarding performance or interpretation

of this Agreement, the venue for any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement will lie in the Superior Court of California for Orange County.

Section 10: No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is entered into by and for

City and OCWD, and nothing herein is intended to establish rights or interests in individuals or entities not a party hereto.

Section 11: Governing Law. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the

State of California. Section 12: Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the

Parties relating to the subject matter hereof; and the Parties have made no agreements, representations, or warranties, either written or oral, relating to the subject matter hereof that are not set forth herein. Except as provided herein, this Agreement may not be modified or altered without prior written approval from both parties.

Section 13: Waiver. A waiver of a breach of the covenants, conditions, or obligations

under this Agreement by either Party will not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or other covenants, conditions, or obligations of this Agreement.

Section 14: Modification. Alteration, change, or modification of this Agreement will

be in the form of a written amendment, which will be signed by both Parties.

5

Section 15: Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement will continue in full force and effect.

Section 16: Agreement Execution and Authorization. Each of the undersigned

represents and warrants that they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement and that such execution is binding upon the entity on whose behalf they are executing this Agreement.

[SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT PAGE]

6

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed

as of the day and year first above written.

ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT By:___________________________________ Mike Markus,

General Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: GENERAL COUNSEL By:_______________________ Jeremy Jungreis , General Counsel CITY OF ANAHEIM By: __________________________________ Dukku Lee, Public Utilities General Manager

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

By:________________________ By:__________________________________ Daniel A. Ballin, Theresa Bass, City Clerk Deputy City Attorney

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: Yes Budget: $549,850 To: Water Issues Committee Final Cost: $559,850 (Phase 1) Board of Directors Funding Source: CIP/Prop 84 Program/Line Item No. C09005 From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: NA Engineers/Feasibility Report: Yes Staff Contact: C. Olsen/R. Bouley CEQA Compliance: Yes Subject: ACCEPTANCE OF COMPLETION OF CONTRACT NO. PB-2019-1,

PRADO BASIN SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT VEGETATION REMOVAL (MC NABB CONSTRUCTION, INC. DBA DK ENVIRONMENTAL)

SUMMARY The PB-2019-1, Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project Vegetation Removal was completed in November 2019. Staff recommends filing a Notice of Completion for Contract PB-2019-1. RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: 1. Ratify issuance of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. PB-2019-1, Prado Basin

Sediment Management Demonstration Project Vegetation Removal, in the amount of $10,000; and

2. Accept completion of work and authorize filing a Notice of Completion. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The District and the Army Corps of Engineers work together to temporarily retain water behind Prado Dam. The purpose of the Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project (SMDP) is to increase retained water volume in Prado Basin by removing up to 120,000 cubic yards of sediment from District property within Prado Basin. Due to the location of the work, nesting birds and rainy season water flows dictate that work must be completed between August and early December. To accommodate this schedule, the SMDP was separated into the SMDP Vegetation Removal Project and the SMDP Excavation Project. These will be completed as separate project phases one year apart. The District awarded the contract for PB-2019-1, Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project Vegetation Removal to McNabb Construction, Inc, (DBA – DK Environmental) (McNabb) in August of this year. McNabb has completed the vegetation removal work included in their contract with OCWD. There was one change order to the

contract with McNabb. Chage order No. 1 was issued for $10,000 under the General Manager’s signing authority for additional grading work to establish access to the site. The excavation phase of the SMDP will be advertised for bid in early 2020, and the excavation work will be completed between August and December of 2020. The project location and sediment storage site are shown in Figure 1, below:

Figure 1 – SMDP Project Vicinity and Sediment Storage Area

A summary of the projected expenditures is shown in Table 1, below:

Table 1: Prado Basin SMDP Budget Summary

Description Budget Projected Expenditures

Design Preliminary Design $ 1,362,000 $ 1,362,000 Corps Fees $ 128,000 $ 128,000 Final Design $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Mitigation/Environmental Documentation $ 120,000 $ 120,000

Subtotal $ 1,640,000 $ 1,640,000 Phase 1 Construction Pre-Construction Studies and Monitoring $ 40,000 $ 40,000 SMDP Vegetation Removal $ 549,850 $ 549,850 CCO #1 $ 10,000 Phase 1 Contingency (10%) $ 54,960 Phase 2 Construction SMDP Dredging and Excavation $ 1,483,000 $ 1,483,000 Phase 2 Contingency $ 102,190 $ 147,150 Operations Management/Monitoring/CM $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Project Evaluation/Reporting $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 2,260,000 $ 2,260,000

Total Project Budget $ 3,900,000 $ 3,900,000

Prop 84 Funding ($ 750,000) ($ 750,000)

OCWD Project Cost $ 3,150,000 $ 3,150,000

PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) 8/21/2019, R19-8-123; Award Contract No PB-2019-1, Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project Vegetation Removal to McNabb Construction, Inc. DBA DK Environmental. 5/22/2019, M19-74: Approve Publication of Notice Inviting Bids for Prado Basin Sediment Demonstration Project Vegetation Removal 9/19/2018, R18-9-126: Adopt Resolution certifying the final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #2016041060) for the Orange County Water District Five Year (2018 To 2023) Prado Water Conservation Program pursuant to the proposed United States Army Corps of Engineers Deviation to the Prado Dam Water Control Plan and Sediment Management Demonstration Project and Approving the projects and associated actions 1/20/2016, R16-1-9: Adopt Resolution approving the Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project which includes the following items:

• Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project;

• Adopting the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration and the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program;

• Approve the Project and establish the Project budget of $3,898,000; • Authorizing staff to complete the permitting process with the Army Corps of Engineers

and the resource agencies, execute the permits received for the Project from the Army Corps of Engineers and the resource agencies, and prepare and implement the Habitat Management Program for the Project;

• Authorizing issuance of Notice Inviting Bids for sediment removal; • Authorizing filing of Notice of Determination

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: Yes Budgeted Amount: $75,000 To: Water Issues Committee Cost Estimate: $39,000 Board of Directors Funding Source: R&R Program/Line Item No. R19024 From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: C. Olsen / B. Smith CEQA Compliance: Categorical Exemption Subject: AGREEMENT TO CORRPRO COMPANIES, INC FOR REPLACEMENT OF

THREE RECTIFIER ENCLOSURES AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SUMMARY Three rectifier enclosures that have been in service for 27 years are failing due to exposure to the environment. The enclosures protect rectifier equipment that reduce corrosion on the Green Acres Project distribution system by controlling the electrical voltage of the metal pipe. Staff issued a Request for Quotation for replacement of the enclosures and recommends award to Corrpro Companies, Inc. RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting:

1. Authorize filing of a Categorical Exemption for the Replacement of Three Rectifier Enclosures in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines; and

2. Authorize issuance of Agreement to Corrpro Companies, Inc. for Replacement of Three Rectifier Enclosures for an amount not to exceed $39,000.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Rectifier equipment was installed when the second and third reaches of the Green Acres Project (GAP) distribution system was constructed in 1992. By using anodes and electrical power, the rectifiers control corrosion of the metal pipes caused by the electric potential between the metal and the surrounding soil. These rectifiers are housed inside enclosures to protect them from vandals, the environment, and to protect the pump from the electrical power being used. After 27 years, three of these enclosures are failing primarily due to exposure to the environment. The location of these three enclosures is shown in Figure 1. On October 23, 2019, staff released a Request for Quotation (RFQ) to replace the three enclosures. The rectifiers housed inside the enclosures are to be removed and reused inside the new enclosures. The project is consistent with the Categorical Exemption for Replacement or Reconstruction (Class 2) because it is replacing small existing structures in a way that maintains the original purpose and does not increase capacity. The RFQ was

publicly advertised on the District website and was sent directly to contractors that typically perform this type of work. Two quotations were received by the November 18, 2019 due date and are summarized in Table 1. Both quotations adequately covered the requested scope of work and were provided by companies that the District has successfully used in the past. Staff recommends awarding the Replacement of Three Rectifier Enclosure agreement to Corrpro Companies, Inc. as it has provided the lowest quote to perform the work. The anticipated project budget is shown in Table 2. Staff recommends reserving the balance of the project budget in contingency as coordination fees may arise with Southern California Edison, and the rectifier equipment may need to be replaced if it stops functioning when it is disconnected and re-energized during the project.

Figure 1: Location of the Three Rectifier Enclosures

Table 1: Replacement of Three Rectifiers Quotation Summary Contractor Quotation

Corrpro Companies, Inc. $39,000 Farwest Corrosion Control Company $45,775

Table 2: Replacement of Three Rectifiers Project Budget

Description Proposed Budget

Design (In-House) $ 0 Construction Construction Contract Construction Management (In-House)

$ 39,000 $ 0

Project Contingency $ 36,000 Total Project Budget $ 75,000

PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) N/A

1

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: No Budgeted Amount: $0 To: Admin/Finance Committee Cost Estimate: $12,289 Board of Directors Funding Source: Reserves Program/Line Item No. 1044.53001 From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: G. Woodside CEQA Compliance: N/A Subject: AUTHORIZE PAYMENT TO VALLEY DISTRICT FOR DISTRICT’S SHARE

OF EXPENSES FOR UPPER SANTA ANA WATERSHED MODEL

SUMMARY

Santa Ana Watershed agencies are collaborating to develop an Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). An important part of developing the HCP is preparing a new model of surface water and groundwater flow in the upper watershed. Additional expenses were incurred to address comments on the model.

Attachment(s): • Documentation of Change Order Number 1

RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize payment of $12,289 to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share of Change Order Number 1 for development of the Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan Integrated Model BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In 2014, water agencies in the upper watershed began a collaborative effort to prepare an Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan. This Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) will be a comprehensive, regional plan to manage land and create wildlife habitat that includes most of the watershed tributary to Prado Dam, excluding the San Jacinto Watershed and Temescal Creek. Such a plan would enable participants to avoid or minimize resource conflicts that delay or prevent the completion of individual proposed water management projects. The board approved the District’s participation in the HCP in May 2016. San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley District) is taking the lead in the development of the Upper Santa Ana HCP. Other participants include Western Municipal Water District (Western), City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, City of Riverside Public Utilities, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, East Valley Water District, West Valley Water District, County of San Bernardino Flood Control District, Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA), and the City of Rialto.

2

Completion of the Upper Santa Ana HCP will provide the basis for the upper watershed agencies to implement their water management projects. Absent the HCP, recycled water and stormwater capture projects may result in removing water from the Santa Ana River at a rate that leaves insufficient water to support riparian habitat in Prado Basin and may adversely impact associated beneficial uses in Prado Basin. Additionally, the reduced river flows could adversely affect operations of the OCWD Prado Wetlands. The purpose of developing the new model and using the model in the HCP is to make sure there is adequate water remaining in the river for environmental needs, including sustaining the mitigation investments OCWD has made in Prado Basin. The District, IEUA, Valley District and Western agreed to share the cost to develop a new model for the upper watershed area tributary to Prado Dam. The model includes both surface water flow and groundwater flow.

In July 2017, the Board approved the District’s cost share in development of the model. The model has been completed and is currently being used to run various scenarios in support of the HCP. The agencies funding the Santa Ana River Integrated Model project are recommending a budget increase to cover refinements to the model calibration report based upon comments provided by the Chino Basin Watermaster (CBWM) and IEUA. On April 30, 2019, after the groundwater model was complete, the CBWM and IEUA submitted a list of over 40 comments mostly regarding model calibration. Valley District asked the consultant (Geoscience) and the peer review team of USGS and Balleau Groundwater to review the comments. A workshop was then held on July 10, 2019 with the modeling team, technical review team and peer review team to thoroughly discuss the comments and the resulting action. The general result of this review is that the comments resulted in some refinements to the model calibration report. The total cost for this additional work is $73,732. Since much of the additional cost would have been avoided if the comments were submitted while the model was still under development, CBWM and IEUA have volunteered to pay 50% of the change order amount, or $36,866. The remaining 50% will be split equally among the District, Western, and Valley District, corresponding to $12,289 each. Staff recommends the Board authorize payment of $12,289 to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share of Change Order Number 1 for development of the Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan Integrated Model.

PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) 3-20-2019, M19-44 - Authorize payment of the District’s cost share in development of the Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan Integrated Model for an amount not to exceed $286,337 to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. 7-19-2017, R17-7-101- Approve and authorize execution of cost share agreement for Upper Santa Ana Watershed Model with San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, Western Municipal Water District, and Inland Empire Utilities Agency subject to approval as to form by General Counsel; authorize payment of the District’s model development cost share in an amount not to

3

exceed $326,624 to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District 5-18-2016, M16-71 - Authorize the District’s participation in the Upper Santa Ana River Habitat Conservation Plan as a participating agency and funding partner and authorize payment of $118,400 to the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share for development of the Habitat Conservation Plan

1

To:

Mr. Bob Tincher, M.S., P.E.

Deputy General Manager ‐ Resources

San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District

380 East Vanderbilt Way

San Bernardino, CA 92408‐3593

From:

Johnson Yeh, Ph.D., PG, CHG

Principal/ Groundwater Modeler

GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc.

David Barnes

Project Geohydrologist/ Modeler


Lauren Wicks, PG

Project Geohydrologist


Date: October 9, 2019

Subject: Updated Scope of Work and Cost Estimate to Address IEUA/CBWM Comments on

TM‐3 and TM‐5a Following Modeling Subcommittee Meeting

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) and Chino Basin Watermaster (CBWM) submitted comments on

April 30, 2019 regarding the development of the Upper Santa Ana River Integrated Model (Integrated SAR

Model). These comments, which are provided in Attachment A and summarized in Table 1, largely concern

TM‐3: Model Calibration (dated June 29, 2018) and predictive scenario runs, the first part of which are

presented in TM‐5a: Predictive Scenario Results – Part 1 (dated January 31, 2019). Preliminary Geoscience

responses and recommendations to these comments were submitted to the Technical Advisory

Committee (TAC) as a draft version of this technical memorandum on May 29, 2019, and discussed at the

May 30, 2019 model workshop. Responses to each specific comment submitted by IEUA/CBWM are

provided in attached Table 1. Per the suggestion of several TAC members, a modeling subcommittee

meeting was held to discuss IEUA/CBWM comments in detail.

Technical Memorandum

Updated Scope of Work and Cost Estimate to Address IEUA/CBWM Comments on TM 3 and TM 5a 9‐Oct‐19

2

1.2 Modeling Subcommittee Meeting

The July 10, 2019 modeling subcommittee meeting was attended by representatives of the San

Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley District), Orange County Water District (OCWD), United

States Geological Survey (USGS), Balleau Groundwater, Inc., Geoscience, and RBC Resources and

Wildermuth Environmental, Inc. (WEI) – consultants to IEUA and CBWM. A summary of the discussion and

action items by Wes Danskin of the USGS is provided in Attachment B. During this subcommittee meeting,

Balleau Groundwater presented the findings of their additional review of the most recent Integrated SAR

Model calibration in the Chino Basin compared to that from the WEI Chino Basin Model (2015). This

presentation is provided as Attachment C. Finally, WEI was asked to provide a summary of their

understanding following the modeling subcommittee meeting. This summary email from Mark

Wildermuth is provided as Attachment D.

Some of the main conclusions from the subcommittee meeting include:

“The [Integrated SAR Model] seems to be well suited for its intended purpose, and likely is capable

of providing guidance in identifying the hydrologic effects of different water‐management

projects” (USGS Conclusion 1; see Attachment B).

“Additional calibration, including by using an automated technique, does not seem warranted at

this time” (USGS Conclusion 2; see Attachment B).

Review of the Integrated SAR Model and WEI Chino Basin Model “imply that, despite different

calibration methods, the two models are part of a set of similar representations of the Chino Basin

hydrologic system. Model responses in specific areas differ, but could be refined with additional

calibration (if it became needed) as additional monitoring data is collected in key areas of interest

for either model. Accordingly, it appears that either model can have utility in examining specific

basin management decisions in specific areas of interest with consideration of local model

performance” (Balleau Groundwater Conclusion 4; see Attachment C).

“Valley District committed to Ron, IEUA and the Watermaster that any water quality model built

on the [Integrated SAR Model] would be used only for groundwater basins upstream of Riverside

Narrows” (WEI; see Attachment D).

A summary of the modeling subcommittee meeting was also presented to the TAC by Wes Danskin at the

July 25, 2019 status update conference call. Balleau Groundwater presented a summary of their review

at this conference call as well. Following the conference call, Tim Sovich from OCWD sent a series of emails

of his understanding of the subcommittee meeting and material provided by USGS, WEI, and Balleau


3

Groundwater. In it, he agreed with the USGS summary and felt the conclusions and recommendations

included within the summary document were consistent with the overall consensus of the modeling

subcommittee meeting. These OCWD comments are included here as Attachment E.

Also included within these summaries were several items for additional work that Geoscience intends to

address. The purpose of this TM is to outline the additional scope of work for the Integrated SAR Model,

based on the consensus from the modeling subcommittee meeting and follow‐up summaries

(Attachments B through E). Tasks associated with the proposed scope of work are described in Section 2,

while a cost estimate and revised project schedule are presented in Sections 3 and 4, respectively.

2.0 PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK

The proposed scope of work to address comments from IEUA/CBWM and resolve the action items

discussed at the modeling subcommittee meeting will be coved under Task 5.6: Address IEUA/CBWM

Comments. This task includes the following five subtasks.

2.1 Task 5.6.1: Edits with No Additional Cost

IEUA/CBWM comments requiring no additional cost have either already been addressed through previous

comments from the TAC or will be covered under future tasks that have already been considered by the

project budget. They include:

Modification of figures illustrating flux terms (comments TM3‐7, TM3‐8, and TM3‐10 through

TM3‐12). These comments have already been addressed based on similar comments received by

other agencies. Per the USGS’s suggestion, additional figures have been added showing the

relative magnitude of each flux term. Therefore, adjusting the scale of the flux terms to allow for

greater detail will not impact the reader’s ability to assess each term’s contribution to the water

budget.

Additional model scenario runs with recovery plans (comment TM5a‐1). At the January 29, 2019

Model Workshop, the TAC discussed how to incorporate recovery of HCP recharge into the

modeling analysis. Scenario 4 incorporates different possible water management alternatives into

the analysis, along with addressing storage capacity limitations in upgradient basins. Therefore,

no additional budget will be needed to address the comment regarding water management

alternatives.


4

2.2 Task 5.6.2: Additional Clarification/Explanation to TM‐3 or TM‐1

The specific IEUA/CBWM comments related to this category are detailed in attached Table 1. We propose

to address several requests for clarification or additional text, figures, and/or tables in the final version of

TM‐3. These changes, which will be addressed under proposed Task 5.6.2, do not affect the Integrated

SAR Model itself. Comments to be addressed include:

Clarification of the goals of the project and Integrated SAR Modeling (comments TM3‐1 through

TM3‐4). Additional clarification will be added to TM‐3 to address these comments.

Clarification of the process of developing the Chino Basin Model for the Integrated SAR Model

(comments TM3‐5 and TM3‐6). Additional clarification will be added to TM‐3 to address these

comments.

Additional explanation of Integrated SAR Model calibration methodology and process (comments

TM3‐15 and TM3‐General). Additional clarification will be added to TM‐3 to address these

comments, including additional discussion of the level of effort used to calibrate the model.

Additional explanation of Integrated SAR Model calibration performance (TM3‐22, and TM3‐25

through TM3‐27). Additional clarification will be added to TM‐3 to address these comments,

including additional discussion of metrics used to assess calibration performance and general

expectations of model calibration.

Additional comparison of model calibration in the Chino Basin (OCWD comments regarding

Balleau Groundwater presentation). Balleau Groundwater compared hydrographs of wells in both

calibration datasets based on common location. Geoscience formally requested the WEI, 2015

calibration dataset in May of 2018 and again following the May 30, 2019 workshop. Additional

comparison of the level of calibration is possible if CBWM provides WEI’s calibration data.

We also plan to address some of the comments in a revised TM‐1: Model Integration (draft issued

March 16, 2018), which describes the individual model updates and integration along with the

construction and calibration of the Chino Basin Model. Requests for clarification or additional information

to be included in the final version of TM‐1 include:

Additional description/clarification of the construction and calibration of the Chino Basin Model

(which includes Temescal Basin) (comments TM3‐8, TM3‐11, TM3‐12, TM3‐18).

Additional description of Streamflow Routing Package assumptions (comments TM3‐23 and

TM3‐24).

Additional explanation on groundwater pumping distribution to model layers (specifically in Chino

Basin) (comment TM3‐14).


5

Additional IEUA/CBWM comments regarding model calibration will be addressed through the

recommended action items from the modeling subcommittee meeting, as described below.

2.3 Task 5.6.3: Action Items from the Modeling Subcommittee Meeting

Action items arising from the modeling subcommittee meeting are succinctly summarized in USGS’s

summary (Attachment B). These action items will be covered under proposed Task 5.6.3 and are

summarized in the following sections.

2.3.1 Obtain and Provide a Better Description, if Possible, of the Biologic Requirements that Define the Required Accuracy of the Integrated SAR Model

One area of discussion at the subcommittee meeting surrounded the biologic requirements that define

the required accuracy of the model. While these values may not be known or well‐defined, a discussion

of the accuracy of the model with respect to the objectives and uses of the model will be added to TM‐3.

This task assumes two (2) additional conference calls to discuss biologic requirements or one (1) additional

subcommittee meeting.

2.3.2 Provide a Better Description of the Accuracy of the Integrated SAR Model to Simulate Heads and Flows, Both in Space and Time

Relative Error

Concern was expressed during the subcommittee meeting that quantity of shallow groundwater well

observation in the vicinity of the SAR were influencing calibration statistics in the Chino Basin. Statistics

with downsampled observations at these shallow wells will be added to TM‐3. Additional discussion is

provided in the USGS subcommittee meeting summary in Attachment B.

Coefficient of Variation

WEI expressed a desire to see R2 values for observations in each groundwater basin. These additional

statistics will be computed and added to the TM‐3 documentation.

Maps and Graphs Showing Areas of Model Problems

At the suggestion of USGS and others, a map showing qualitative calibration will be developed and

presented. Maps of spatial distribution of residuals show a measure of quantitative error. The qualitative

map should provide a spatial view of the modeler’s view of model calibration for water levels and fluxes.

Per the recommendation of OCWD (see Attachment E), this qualitative analysis will also consider

groundwater flow patterns and water level gradients.


6

2.3.3 Add a Report Section on Uses and Limitations

A Uses and Limitations section will be added to the report stating what and how the model should be

used, and stating what the model should not be used for.

2.3.4 Add a Report Section on Future Work

A Future Work section will be added to the report that discusses future steps that can be taken to enhance

the quality or use of the Integrated SAR model, and why each step is important.

For example, concern was noted regarding agricultural pumping quantities in Chino Basin. This concern

was also raised in comments made by WEI on TM‐1 (See Comment #7). Groundwater pumping was

requested in initial data requests made to CBWM. CBWM provided groundwater pumping, and these

data did not match values for agricultural pumping used by WEI in their Chino Basin Groundwater Model

(2015). The WEI modeled groundwater pumping values were not provided to Geoscience. To resolve the

discrepancy, Geoscience increased pumping in Chino Basin agricultural wells to match the volumes of

agricultural pumping reported in the WEI 2015 modeling report. Pool 1 Agricultural Pumping is shown in

Table 3‐1 of the WEI 2015 modeling report, and in Table 12 of the Integrated SAR Model TM‐3. While

there may be some slight differences in the distribution of this agricultural pumping between the

Integrated SAR Model and the WEI Chino Basin Model, the pumping volumes are approximately the same.

Redistributing this pumping in the Integrated SAR Model to match the pumping analysis work completed

by WEI, assuming this data is made available, would require the model to be recalibrated and scenarios

to be rerun. As indicated in the USGS summary, the consensus from the modeling subcommittee meeting

was that additional calibration is not warranted at this time. Therefore, a discussion of the differences in

pumping in the Chino Basin will be added to the final model report in the Future Work section.

2.4 Task 5.6.4: Additional Project Management for Extended Project Schedule

Addressing the above tasks, including the process of responding to the individual comments, will extend

the project schedule by approximately three months. As such, additional project management will be

needed for supplementary monthly project update meetings. This task assumes two (2) additional

conference call status update meetings and one (1) additional model workshop.

2.5 Task 5.6.5: Response to Comments and Preparation for/Attendance at Subcommittee Meeting

This task covers the considerable effort associated with responding to comments from IEUA/CBWM as

well as preparing for and attending the unforeseen modeling subcommittee meeting held on July 10, 2019

at Valley District. This work has already been completed and is itemized in Table 2.


7

3.0 COST ESTIMATE TO COMPLETE PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

Our estimated costs associated with the above scope of work are summarized in the following table and

detailed in attached Table 3. The proposed budget for the entire project, including the additional Task 5.6,

is shown in attached Table 4.

Estimated Cost to Address CBWM/IEUA Comments on TM‐3 and TM‐5a

Proposed Task

Cost Due

Largely to

Delay

Cost Due to

Out of Scope

Work

Total Cost

Task 5.6.1: Edits with No Additional Cost ‐ ‐ $0

Task 5.6.2: Additional Clarification/Explanation to TM‐3 or TM‐1 $8,340 ‐ $8,340

Task 5.6.3: Address Action Items from Modeling Committee Meeting ‐ ‐

$17,440

Obtain and Provide a Better Description of the Biologic Requirements that Define the Accuracy of the Model1

‐ $9,920

Provide a Better Description of the Accuracy of the Model to Simulate Heads and Flows

$5,378 ‐

Add a Report Section on Uses and Limitations ‐ $1,071

Add a Report Section on Future Work ‐ $1,071

Task 5.6.4: Additional Project Management for Extended Project Schedule ‐ ‐

$22,840 Two (2) Additional Conference Calls $6,793 $6,793

One (1) Additional Workshop ‐ $9,254

Task 5.6.5: Prepare for and Attend Modeling Subcommittee Meeting $25,112 ‐ $25,112

Total Cost (Task 5.6) $45,623 $28,109 $ 73,732 1 Assumes 2 additional conference calls or 1 additional subcommittee.

The total estimated cost to complete Task 5.6 (including Tasks 5.6.1 through 5.6.5) of this scope of work

is $73,732.

4.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION ITEMS

An updated project schedule is provided as attached Figure 1. As shown, the anticipated project end date

– including a 3‐month delay for conducting the proposed Tasks – is the end of January 2020.


Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: N/A Budgeted Amount: N/A To: Water Issues Committee Cost Estimate: N/A Board of Directors Funding Source: N/A Program/Line Item No.: N/A From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: J. Kennedy CEQA Compliance: N/A Subject: RESOLUTION HONORING MARK LEWIS UPON HIS RETIREMENT FROM

THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY SUMMARY City of Fountain Valley Public Works Director Mark Lewis is retiring in December. Staff has prepared a resolution honoring his thirty-three years of public service. Attachment(s): Resolution for Mark Lewis RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Adopt resolution honoring Mark Lewis for his years of service at the City of Fountain Valley. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Mark Lewis is the Public Works Director at the city of Fountain Valley. Mark also sits on the Laguna Beach County Water District Commission. Mark has always been a strong supporter of the District’s projects and programs and is well respected among the Groundwater Producers.

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT

HONORING MARK LEWIS FOR HIS YEARS OF PUBLIC SERVICE AT THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

WHEREAS, Mark Lewis has provided exemplary public service in Southern California and for the citizens of the city of Fountain Valley (the City); and WHEREAS, Mark has been a strong supporter of the Orange County Water District and its efforts to develop new local water supply projects to help ensure that Orange County’s residents and businesses have an adequate water supply; and WHEREAS, Mark is a respected leader in the Orange County water community who actively participated in the monthly Orange County Water District Groundwater Producers group meetings providing insightful comments and direction regarding groundwater management issues and policies; and WHEREAS, Mark has always worked to balance the needs to sustainably and successfully operate the Orange County Water District groundwater basin with the desires and needs of the Groundwater Producers; and WHEREAS, Mark is a long-time resident of Laguna Beach and has served on the Laguna Beach County Water District Commission since 2005. During Mark’s tenure a historic agreement between the Laguna Beach County Water District and Orange County Water District was approved which allows for Laguna Beach to receive 2,025 acre-feet per year of groundwater; and

WHEREAS, The Orange County Water District is located in the city of Fountain Valley and has had to coordinate the construction of many facilities with the city. Mark’s leadership has provided for excellent coordination between the two organizations; and

WHEREAS, Mark has been a major supporter of the Groundwater Replenishment System reclamation program and has worked closely with Orange County Water District to ensure the Green Acres Project was a success for users in the city of Fountain Valley; and WHEREAS, Under Mark’s leadership, the city of Fountain Valley is one of the few Groundwater Producers that can pump 100% of its water supply needs from the groundwater basin. This provides significant water supply reliability benefits to the City and allows the City to take advantage of programs with Orange County Water District; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Board of Directors of the Orange County Water District wishes to honor and congratulate Mark Lewis for his outstanding dedication to public service and successful leadership at the city of Fountain Valley and expresses its best wishes for his retirement.

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: N/A Budgeted Amount: N/A To: Water Issues Committee Cost Estimate: N/A Board of Directors Funding Source: N/A Program/Line Item No. N/A From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: G. Woodside/A. Hutchinson CEQA Compliance: N/A Subject: SANTA ANA RIVER CONSERVATION AND CONJUNCTIVE USE

PROGRAM: OC BASIN EXTRACTION WELLS

SUMMARY

The Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program (SARCCUP) is a multi-faceted project involving OCWD and the other four Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) member agencies. The SARCCUP agencies are recommending modifying the program to provide approximately $8M in funding for five new production wells in Orange County. Staff recommends that General Manager be granted authority to negotiate agreements with the five agencies receiving grant funding for new production wells. Attachment: Presentation RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize General Manager to negotiate agreements with City of Fullerton, City of Tustin, East Orange County Water District, City of Orange, and Mesa Water and present final agreements to the Board for approval. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In May 2015, the Board authorized participation with the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley District), Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA), and Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) (collectively “Agencies”) in planning the watershed-scale Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program (SARCCUP or Project), which is being partially funded by a $55 million Proposition 84 grant. The Project provides multiple, regional benefits to the Santa Ana River Watershed and is made up of three elements: 1. Removal of a non-native plant Arundo Donax and habitat restoration for the Santa Ana

Sucker fish. The Arundo removal will recover approximately 2,400 acre-feet per year of water that is currently consumed by Arundo.

2. A large-scale, conjunctive use element that utilizes storage space in the watershed’s groundwater basins allowing the banking of wet year supplies for use in dry years, facilitating the augmentation of drought and emergency water supplies.

3. Water use efficiency (WUE) measures to lower water demands in the watershed. The WUE element includes extending the Proposition 84 2014 Drought Round WUE program for technical support for conservation programs and public outreach.

Conjunctive Use Element Decision Support Modeling (DSM) was conducted to simulate the anticipated operations of the facilities, quantify the benefits, and quantify the costs. The DSM results produced a new Project configuration with a more optimal allocation of groundwater storage to align with the reduced cost alternative. This new storage allocation included storing water in the Orange County groundwater basin. Storing water in the Orange County groundwater basin has several advantages in that the water is recharged by OCWD, the water is stored locally, and is immediately available when needed in dry years. The water stored within OCWD represents 100 percent of OCWD’s share of SARCCUP. No water for any other agency would be stored in the Orange County groundwater basin. The Orange County groundwater bank would be filled with imported water, including surplus State Water Project (SWP) from Valley District. The banked surplus SWP water has additional value in that it can be used during dry periods when the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) declares and allocation and reduces imported supplies. The banked surplus SWP water, also called Extraordinary Supply, can be used to offset some or all reduced imported supplies to OCWD’s service area. OCWD will purchase the surplus SWP water directly from MWD and pay the same rate it pays for untreated imported water. Program Approvals In May 2019, the Board approved participation in SARCCUP, including Arundo Donax removal and establishing a 36,000 acre-feet bank in the Orange County groundwater basin. The establishment of storage within the Orange County groundwater basin was part of Amendment 1 to the DWR Grant Agreement. Proposed additional program changes include allocation of approximately $8M to OCWD for new production wells. In addition, the program deadline is being extended two years to end in 2023. These changes and others will be presented to DWR as Amendment No. 2 to the DWR Grant Agreement. A key driver for changes in storage allocations and funding, is the withdrawal of IEUA from participation in the grant funded part of the program. IEUA still intends to be part of the water bank to preserve options for future involvement. Figure 1 shows where water bank storage is located based on the recommended Amendment No. 2 to the DWR Grant Agreement.

Figure 1. Locations of SARCCUP Water Bank Storage (Amendment 2)

Additional Production Wells in Orange County The additional SARCCUP grant funds allocated to Orange County would be used to assist groundwater producers in constructing new production wells. These new wells would supplement existing production capacity in withdrawing stored SARCCUP water from the Orange County basin during dry years. All 19 groundwater producers were given the opportunity to request grant funding. Those producers that did not receive grant funding for new wells as part of MWD’s Conjunctive Use Program were given higher priority. The following five groundwater producers elected to receive grant funds:

• City of Fullerton • City of Orange • City of Tustin • East Orange County Water District (EOCWD) • Mesa Water

The proposed well locations are shown on Figure 2.

Figure 2. Locations of Proposed SARCCUP Production Wells

Based on the current known extent of PFAS in groundwater, OCWD requested that all five groundwater producers assess whether PFAS treatment may be required and if, so, would it would be feasible to relocate the proposed wells to areas not affected by PFAS. Mesa Water is in an area of the basin where PFAS has not been detected. At this time, it appears the proposed City of Tustin well will not require treatment; however, it is possible treatment could be required in the future. Fullerton, Orange and EOCWD were not able to identify alternative locations to place wells that would not require PFAS treatment. As a result, these well will likely require treatment for PFAS after they are constructed. SARCCUP grant funds are being provided for well construction only.

Schedule The schedule for the extraction well component of SARCCUP is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 Estimated Schedule for Extraction Well Component of SARCCUP

December 2019 Amendment No. 2 submitted to DWR. July 2020 DWR approval of Amendment No. 2 August 2020 Board Authorizes SAWPA/OCWD Agreement Amendment

Producer CEQA completed September 2020 OCWD/Producer Agreements Executed October 2020 Begin Submitting Invoices to DWR September 2023 Producer Deadline to Complete Construction, Submit Final Invoices

Project Budget The additional grant funds will be passed on to the participating producers, resulting in no impact to the OCWD SARCCUP budget. Recommendation Staff recommends that the General Manager be authorized to negotiate agreements with City of Fullerton, City of Tustin, East Orange County Water District, City of Orange, and Mesa Water and present final agreements to the Board for approval. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) 4/19/19; R19-4-57 – Considering the Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2016101079) For the Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program (SARCCUP), Approve OCWD-SAWPA Subgrantee Agreement, Establish Project Budget and Associated Actions. 12/5/18, R18-12-166 - Approve and authorize execution of amendment to Cost Share Letter Agreement for the SARCCUP Environmental Impact Report to increase OCWD’s share by $26,920 and authorize payment to the Inland Empire Utilities Agency for an amount not to exceed $26,920. 4/19/17, R17-4-55 - Approve SARCCUP Cost share for Program Management. 6/15/16, R16-6-83 - Approve and authorize execution of the SARCCUP Memorandum of Understanding for Program Implementation subject to approval as to form by the District’s legal counsel; Approve and authorize execution of Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority Project Agreement 23 (PA23) subject to approval as to form by the District’s legal counsel; and, Approve and authorize Cost Share Letter Agreement for the SARCCUP Program Environmental Impact Report subject to approval as to form by the District’s legal counsel

and authorize payment to the Inland Empire Utilities Agency for an amount not to exceed $68,080. 2/17/16, M16-23 - Authorize payment to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for cost share for support model for the Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program (SARCCUP). 5/20/2015, R15-5-68 - Approve and authorize execution of Memorandum of Understanding for the Santa Ana River Conjunctive Use Project, subject to approval as to form by District legal counsel; and authorize payment of $17,830 to the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share in the Santa Ana River Watermaster Action Team evaluation of watershed-scale conjunctive use projects and water use efficiency and preparation of Proposition 84 grant funding submittal, bringing the District’s total contribution to $67,120. 3/19/2014, M14-49 - Authorize payment of $36,238 to the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share in the Santa Ana River Watermaster Action Team evaluation of watershed-scale conjunctive use projects and water use efficiency 7/24/2013, M13-102 - Authorize payment of $13,052 to the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District for the District’s cost share in the Santa Ana River Watermaster Action Team evaluation

Santa Ana River Conservation and Conjunctive Use Program (SARCCUP): OC

Basin Extraction Wells

Water Issues Committee

December 11, 2019

SARCCUP was awarded $55M in grant funding for:

• Groundwater Bank (180,000 af storage)

• Habitat Improvement: Arundo Removal & Santa Ana Sucker fish habitat restoration

• Water Use Efficiency: Turf Replacement, support for Conservation‐Based Rates, outreach

How the Water Bank benefits OCWD

• Provides access to surplus State Water Project (SWP) water from San Bernardino Valley

MWD (Valley District).

• Provides access to Northern CA water that can be purchased and conveyed by Valley

District for recharge

• Recharged water can be designated as “Extraordinary Supply” to MWD and be used to

offset reductions during MWD Allocations

• Cost for surplus SWP is same as untreated MWD water

The Program has evolved based on Decision Support Modeling and agency participation.

• DSM resulted in more optimal

Program configuration.

• More recent changes involve

IEUA withdrawal.

Current Water Bank Configuration

The SARCCUP agencies recommend Amendment 2 be submitted to DWR.

• 2 year schedule extension to 2023

• $8M in grant funding provided to OCWD for additional extraction wells

*Only changes to OCWD portion of Program shown.

All producers were given the opportunity to request funding. Five retailers responded.

• Producers that did not receive grant funding for MWD’s CUP were given priority.

• Participating Producers:– Fullerton

– Orange

– East Orange County Water District

– Tustin

–Mesa Water

Wells constructed by highlighted producers will likely require PFAS treatment.

The $8M in grant funding assists the retailers in making nearly $25M in funding commitments to construct new wells.

Total Investment: $24,921,000

Projected SARCCUP Extraction Well Schedule

SARCCUP

Dec. 2019

Submit Amendment 2 to DWR

July 2020

Amendment 2 Approved by DWR

Aug. 2020

Board Considers SAWPA/OCWD 2ndAmended Agreement

Sept. 2020

OCWD/Producer Agreements Executed

October 2020

Begin Submitting Invoices to DWR

September 2023

Complete Construction WorkPrepare final invoice package

Quarterly Progress Reports to DWR

Producer CEQA Completed

Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize General Manager to

negotiate agreements with City of Fullerton, City of Tustin, East Orange County

Water District, City of Orange, and Mesa Water and present final agreements to the

Board for approval.

Recommendation

Extra Slides

Footer

SARCCUP storage allocation has changed over time.

Agency (Groundwater Basin)Grant Proposal Storage

Allocation (af)Amendment 1 Storage

Allocation (af)Proposed

Amendment 2 Storage Allocation

(af)IEUA (Chino) 96,000 50,000 0

Valley District (San Bernardino) 60,000 64,000 64,000

EMWD (San Jacinto) 19,500 19,500 19,500

WMWD (Riverside, Elsinore, Chino)

0 10,500 10,500‐17,500

OCWD (Orange County) 0 36,000 36,000

Total 180,000 180,000 130,000‐137,000

Producers in the MWD CUP Program

• Santa Ana (2)

• GSWC

• Buena Park

• Westminster

• Anaheim

• Garden Grove

• YLWD

Footer

AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: Yes Budgeted Amount: $20,000 (Partial) To: Water Issues Committee Board of Directors

Cost Estimate: $50,000 (FY19-20) Funding Source: General Fund Program/ Line Item No.: N/A

From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: Pending Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A Staff Contact: M. Plumlee/J. Dadakis CEQA Compliance: N/A

Subject: DISTRICT PARTICIPATION AND FUNDING FOR WATER UCI INDUSTRY-COOPERATIVE RESEARCH CENTER IN 2020

SUMMARY Water UCI is forming an Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) and has asked the District to participate as a member of the Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) as well as contribute $50,000 annual funding to be used for research. IAB members would identify research topics, assist with development of Request for Proposals (RFPs), and select projects to fund. The proposed IAB members OCWD, Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD), and Moulton Niguel Water District (MNWD) have identified per- and poly- fluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) as a priority topic for the first year of the Research Center. Attachments: 1) Presentation 2) UCI Foundation Contribution Agreement (Draft) RECOMMENDATION Agendize for December 18 Board meeting: Authorize OCWD participation in Water UCI Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) for $50,000 in 2020 via agreement with UCI entitled “University of California Irvine Foundation Contribution Agreement”, subject to approval as to form and content by OCWD General Counsel.

BACKGROUND

Water UCI is an interdisciplinary center at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) focused on water research. Water UCI is forming an Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC or Research Center) and has asked the District to participate as an industry partner. The District would serve as a member of the Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) as well as contribute funding to be used for research. The theme of the Research Center is Water Scarcity with a focus on building water systems of the future. Water UCI representatives have met with OCWD and other Orange County water agencies to define the Research Center vision and structure. In brief, IAB members would propose research topics of importance to the IAB members and general industry, assist Water UCI with development of Request for Proposals (RFPs) that describe the

prioritized projects, and select proposed Center projects to fund via an IAB voting process. Once the projects are underway, IAB members would receive quarterly updates and review findings. The projects would result in final reports, presentations, and scientific journal publications. Additionally, the IAB members would provide general direction and oversight for the Research Center in collaboration with Water UCI. Current proposed IAB members are: OCWD, Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD), Moulton Niguel Water District (MNWD), and potentially the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) and the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). Water UCI is an interdisciplinary center in the UCI School of Social Ecology with strong links to the Departments of Civil & Environmental Engineering and Earth System Science. Water UCI was launched in July 2014 to foster collaboration among UCI faculty, students, and researchers to tackle grand challenges facing the world’s freshwater such as climate variability, population growth, urbanization, and the energy-water nexus. Water UCI is seeking funding from various sources, including through the proposed IUCRC (Southern California water agency funding) as well as the federal National Science Foundation (NSF) in order to continue its mission and increase industry relationships. REQUIRED FUNDING FROM OCWD Membership fees from the District would be $50,000 per year, subject to annual Board approval, for up to five years in Phase I. Membership fees received by the Research Center from OCWD and other IAB members are considered program income. IAB funding will be distributed over the Research Center’s research portfolio; however, individual industry members can provide additional support for specific "enhancement" projects under separate arrangements with the university. In order to limit the portion of the funding that is used for administrative costs, the standard indirect cost rate for UCI will not be applied. Instead, Water UCI commits that only 20% of IAB funding will be applied to administrative and overhead costs, such as to support an appointment for staff from Water UCI to serve as the Center Coordinator, with the balance allocated to directly support the research activity. RESEARCH TOPICS AND DIRECTION PROVIDED BY INDUSTRY MEMBERS Research topics will be refined in early 2020 as the IAB members convene to manage the center and identify study topics. Based on a November meeting, IAB members identified per- and poly- fluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) as a priority topic for the first year of the Research Center. Water UCI and the IAB will develop an RFP focused on identifying potential sources of PFAS to Orange County sewer systems (i.e., Orange County “sewershed”) including residential, industrial, and commercial sources. Due to the limited amount of funding currently available (approximately $140,000 in water agency commitments), the proposed study will have a limited scope and serve as a preliminary study. Additional fundraising may occur depending on the specific scope. The proposed project seeks to measure PFAS in major sewer trunk lines for a selected agency, and to trace the origin of the PFAS up-sewer via sampling of smaller and

smaller branches of the system, to identify whether a limited number of sources/ locations (e.g., industrial areas) may be responsible for a disproportionate share of the PFAS load to the region’s wastewater treatment plant. Additionally, the project seeks to characterize different residential wastewater streams in homes to identify whether one stream is responsible for a disproportionate share of the PFAS (e.g., laundry wash water, kitchen and bathroom sink wastewater, shower wastewater, toilet wastewater). Based on current planning, the project would be expected to begin in Spring of 2020. On the basis of an initial survey completed in 2018 by the interested local IAB member agencies, other potential research topics for the Center include:

• Reverse osmosis membrane research • Potable water treatment optimization • Potable reuse water quality monitoring technology • Brine concentration and management • Wetland treatment operations and design • Natural treatment systems • Emerging contaminant/pharmaceuticals related research • Potential for direct potable reuse in Orange County • Storm water capture and use • Water use efficiency • Water supply reliability planning including climate variability implications • Unintended consequences water use efficiency programs have on recycled water

quality and supply development, wastewater systems, and treatment processes The IAB would meet at least annually to outline research priorities for that year and decide on a list of project topics. Projects may be multi- or single-year and may require varying funding levels. RFPs would be distributed to targeted UCI faculty by Water UCI. Should relevant faculty expertise not be present at UCI, proposals may also be solicited from other universities. FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES Water UCI is also seeking funding from other sources to supplement the IAB funding provided by local water agencies. In particular, Water UCI will be developing a proposal to the federal NSF under the NSF IUCRC program. This program enables industry-relevant research via partnerships among industry, academia, and government, which are formalized through an NSF-required IAB to advise the Research Center’s management. Water UCI was unsuccessful in their 2018 NSF proposal for IUCRC funding, for which the District approved $50,000 annual funding pending the NSF award. However, Water UCI received favorable feedback indicating that if they re-submit, and if in particular an IAB is formed with water agency memberships in advance of the new proposal, they are more likely to obtain an award due to demonstrated interest and progress. While it is the IAB’s expectation that Water UCI actively pursue outside funding, the participating agencies staff have expressed support for forming the Research Center irrespective of supplemental funding. Outside funding would service to increase the number and scope of research projects that could be completed.

If Water UCI is awarded IUCRC funding from NSF, Water UCI will receive $150,000 annually from NSF for five years (Phase I, $750,000 total). During Phase I (five years), the Center must raise a minimum of $150,000 annually (cash, no in-kind equivalent) from its industry members (IAB). Funds would be used to support research projects as directed by the IAB. The Research Center could then request funding for five more years (Phase II), for which NSF would award $100,000 annually ($500,000 total); in potential Phase III, NSF would award $50,000 annually ($250,000 total) over five additional years. The NSF contribution decreases in each phase because the Research Center is expected to bring in its own funding through increased industry membership and industry contributions. During Phase II and III (each five years), the non-NSF funding share requirement increases to $200,000 and $250,000 annually, respectively. Thus, combining the IAB and NSF contributions, Center funding is $300,000 annually through all three phases ($1.5M total in each five-year phase), plus any additional funds that the Center is able to raise through increased IAB contributions. Subject to a successful Phase I and continued NSF funding, the District would at that time consider continuing to provide funding at this rate or higher/lower for Phase II, and similarly, Phase III. Per NSF requirements, at least 90% of the Center’s program income must be used to support direct costs of the research, and up to 10% may be used to support indirect costs. For the industry members, this is advantageous since industry funding otherwise provided directly to universities for research is subject to much higher university overhead costs (e.g., approximately 50%). NEXT STEPS Staff seeks approval to participate as a member of the IAB and to contribute cash funding for five years beginning in early 2020 at an annual amount of $50,000 subject to annual OCWD Board of Directors approval. In the Spring of 2020, Water UCI will require a letter of support from the District to include in their NSF application that will state the intent of the District to participate. The letter will state that the continued funding commitment is contingent on a successful initiation of the IUCRC in 2020 resulting in a Center structure and vision that the District deems consistent with its mission and research objectives. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) 3/21/2018, R18-3-26: Authorize District participation and funding for Water UCI Industry-Cooperative Research Center funded by NSF.

Water Issues CommitteeDecember 11, 2019

District Participation and Funding for Water UCI Research Center

2

Background on Water UCI

• Interdisciplinary water research center at UCI, formed in 2014

• Emphasis on collaboration among UCI researchers and industry

3

New Research Center within Water UCI

• Water UCI is forming an “Industry-University Cooperative Research Center” (IUCRC) and has requested OCWD participation

• Commitments thus far are: IRWD, SMWD, MNWD Potential additional members: OCSD, MWD

• The agencies serve as the “Industrial Advisory Board” to the IUCRC

4

Membership Fees

• Annual $50,000 subject to annual Board approvals, starting in early 2020, for up to 5 years in Phase I

• The funding is used for research, except 10-20% for overhead costs

5

IAB Role and Oversight

• IAB would convene periodically to manage the center and define research topics that are important to IAB members

• IAB would assist Water UCI with RFP development

• IAB would select projects to fund via IAB voting process, based on UCI faculty proposals received

6

PFAS Identified as Priority Research Topic for Center’s First Year

• Proposed IAB members met in November and identified PFAS as a preferred topic

• Water UCI developed a draft RFP

• Project funding would be ~$140,000

Source: https://cen.acs.org/ (2018)

7

PFAS Identified as Priority Research Topic for Center’s First Year

• Project focus on sources of PFAS to municipal wastewater

• Measure PFAS in sewer system, tracing the origins up-sewer

• Is a certain trunk line or region (residential, industrial) responsible for a disproportionate share?

• What about residential wastewater streams from homes?

Source: Teng and Mitch (2015)

8

Recommendation

Authorize the District to participate in the Water UCI Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) for $50,000 in 2020 via agreement with UCI entitled “University of California Irvine Foundation Contribution Agreement”, subject to approval as to form and content by OCWD General Counsel.

DC/LG

DRAFT – FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY

Contribution Agreement

I. Introduction The purpose of this Agreement is to summarize the mutual understanding of _______________ (Donor), the University of California, Irvine Foundation (Foundation), and The Regents of the University of California for the benefit of the Irvine Campus (UCI), collectively referred to as “Parties” regarding an irrevocable contribution (Contribution) in support of Water UCI, an interdisciplinary center in the School of Social Ecology (School). This Agreement will be made a part of the Foundation’s and UCI’s records and is intended as a guide to those who will administer the fund in the future. II. University of California, Irvine Foundation

The Foundation represents that it is qualified as a charitable organization described in Section 501(c)(3) and as a public charity under 170(b)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code. (Federal ID 95-2540117). III. Description of the Contribution The Donor hereby irrevocably pledges a total of $50,000 to the Foundation. The pledge will be fulfilled on or before June 30, 2020. Upon review of the outcome of research activities made possible through this contribution, the Donor may choose to fund an additional year or years using the same conditions as set forth in this Contribution Agreement.

The Donor acknowledges that they are not placing any restrictions on the timing or schedule of

the expenditures related to these funds. Payments will be made in money or in marketable securities acceptable to the Foundation. If payments are made with stock, the securities will be transferred to an account in the name of the Foundation. The value of the Contribution will be established on the date of transfer of the stock. The Foundation is authorized to sell the stock as soon as it is determined to be prudent. The proceeds from the sale of the stock will be invested in accordance with the investment policies of the Foundation.

IV. Purpose and Administration of the Fund

The purpose of the Contribution is to provide current-use support for research within Water UCI through the Industry University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC), currently being overseen by David Feldman, Ph.D. The funds will be pooled with contributions from additional IUCRC member agencies and distributed to researchers identified and chosen through a competitive proposal process overseen by a committee comprised of Water UCI and IUCRC member agencies.

The results of all funded research projects are to be made publically available and eligible for publication in peer-reviewed journals. IUCRC member agencies will be granted the opportunity to review research results prior to public release to ensure required anonymization of data.

[name of donor] Contribution Agreement Page 2 of 3

DC/LG

The Donor understands that the Contribution will be administered in accordance with the University of California and UCI’s administrative guidelines and procedures, and will be subject to administrative fees applicable for contributions to the campus. V. Future Considerations

The Foundation and UCI are grateful for the Donor's support of the campus and are committed to fulfilling the Donor’s objectives reflected in this Agreement. As research and academic programs move forward, there is the possibility that it may become impracticable for this Contribution to serve the specific purpose of the stated intentions. If this unlikely circumstance should occur, UCI will consult with the Donor, if possible, and the UCI Chancellor will direct that the Contribution be devoted to UCI purposes that the Chancellor deems to be most consistent with the Donor's wishes. VI. Recognition

UCI may publish the name of the Donor in various publications, press releases, and publicity vehicles. For recognition purposes related to this Agreement, the Donor will be identified as “__________________.”

In recognition of this Contribution, the Donor shall be recognized as a member of Water UCI’s

Industry-University Research Partners program.

VII. Binding Obligation The Donor intends this Contribution Agreement to be fully enforceable to the extent that the obligation has not been satisfied by contributions completed following the date of this Agreement. Miscellaneous a) Situs: This Agreement is executed in and will be governed by the laws of the state of California. b) Entire Agreement: This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding of the Parties concerning

the terms of this Contribution. c) Amendment: This Agreement may be amended at any time by written agreement signed by each

party. d) Date: The effective date of this Agreement will be the date this Agreement is fully executed. For the Donor: DRAFT Name Date Title

For UCI and the Foundation: DRAFT Brian T. Hervey, CGPP, CFRE Date Vice Chancellor, University Advancement and Alumni Relations President, UCI Foundation In Acknowledgement for the School: DRAFT Nancy Guerra, Ed.D. Date Dean

[name of donor] Contribution Agreement Page 3 of 3

DC/LG


Meeting Date: December 11, 2019 Budgeted: N/A Budgeted Amount: N/A To: Water Issues Committee

Board of Directors Cost Estimate: N/A

Funding Source: N/A Program/ Line Item No. From: Mike Markus General Counsel Approval: N/A Staff Contact: J. Dadakis

Engineers/Feasibility Report: N/A CEQA Compliance: N/A

Subject: STATE BOARD PFAS TECHNICAL SEMINAR SUMMARY SUMMARY Staff will provide a summary of the State Water Resources Control Board’s Technical Seminar entitled “PFAS in California: Past, Present, & Future” and held in Sacramento over December 4-5. The two-day seminar and concurrent datathon will share technical information about per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), the current landscape and state of knowledge about PFAS, and upcoming technical advances in remediating or treating PFAS. Attachment: Agenda for December 4 -5 State Board PFAS Technical Seminar RECOMMENDATION Informational PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION(S) None

Day 1 December 4, 2019 Page 1 Webcast Link: https://video.calepa.ca.gov/

Technical Seminar

PFAS IN CALFORNIA: PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE

Location: California Environmental Protection Agency 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 Webcast Information: https://video.calepa.ca.gov/

Date: December 4, 2019 (8:30AM – 4:00PM) and December 5, 2019 (8:30AM – 3:30PM)

Objective: The State Water Resources Control Board is hosting a twoday Technical Seminar and concurrent Datathon on per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to share technical information about PFAS (past), the current landscape and state of knowledge about PFAS (present), and the upcoming technical advances in remediating or treating PFAS (future). Data scientists are invited to work alongside PFAS experts during the Datathon to develop data schema and answer broader PFAS questions. Their results will be presented to the larger seminar audience at the end of the 2nd day.

Day 1 Seminar Agenda Bryon Sher Auditorium, 2nd Floor8:30AM to 9:00AM – Registration (1st Floor)

Opening Remarks and Keynote Address (9:00AM to 9:30AM) E. Joaquin Esquivel, Chair of the State Water Resources Control Board

Update on Water Board Actions (9:30AM to 10:00AM) Dan Newton, Division of Drinking Water, State Water Resources Control Board

Shahla Farahnak, Division of Water Quality, State Water Resources Control Board PAST: WHAT ARE PFAS – WHY DO WE CARE? (10:00AM to 11:30AM)

Panel 1: History, Use, Nomenclature, Chemistry, Toxicology

Erica Kalve, P.G., San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board Overview of the History, Use and Nomenclature of PFAS

Karla Buechler, Ph.D., Eurofins/ TestAmerica Overview of existing PFAS chemistry and laboratory analysis methods Melanie Marty, Ph.D., and Christopher Banks, Ph.D., Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Summary of current knowledge on the toxicological effects from PFAS in humans 11:30AM to 1:00PM Lunch


Technical Seminar

PRESENT: WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PFAS? (1:00PM to 4:00PM)

Panel 2: Drinking Water – PFAS Data Analysis on Source and Treated Drinking Water and the Economic and Legal Impacts to Public Water Purveyors

Susan Glassmeyer, Ph.D., National Exposure Research Laboratory, USEPA Overview of current nationwide PFAS research in source and treated drinking water Matthew Small, Ph.D., P.G., Region 9, USEPA Summary of the latest data analysis tools being used by US EPA Matthew Edling, Sher Edling LLP Summary of the economic and legal impacts to public water purveyors from PFAS investigations Panel 3: Exposure Pathways – Impact to Human Body and Effects on Aquatic Ecosystems

Jim Strandberg, P.G., CHG, Woodard & Curran Overview of the various exposure pathways for PFAS to humans Kathleen Attfield, Sc.D, Center for Healthy Communities, California Department of Public Health Update on CDPH’s effort to conduction biomonitoring in California Rebecca Sutton, Ph.D, San Francisco Estuary Institute Summary of research on PFAS effects to aquatic ecosystems

4:30PM6:00PM

Cinema Showing: “The Devil We Know”

Sierra Hearing Room, 2nd Floor


Technical Seminar

Day 2 – Seminar Agenda Bryon Sher Auditorium, 2nd Floor

8:30AM to 9:00AM Registration (1st Floor)

FUTURE: WHAT CAN WE DO FOR PFAS SOURCE CONTROL? (9:00AM to 11:30AM)

Panel 4: Approaches to Remediating, Treating, and Monitoring for PFAS

Rula Deeb, Ph.D., BCEEM, PMP, Geosyntec Latest approaches & technologies in PFAS remediation Eugene Leung, P.E., Division of Drinking Water, State Water Resources Control Board Update on new and upcoming treatment technologies for PFAS at public water systems and point of use Kavitha Dasu, Ph.D., Battelle Update on new or developing monitoring methods (target vs nontarget) for PFAS

Panel 5: Regulatory Approaches in Reducing PFAS in Consumer Products and Packaging Simona Bălan, Ph.D., Department of Toxic Substances Control Update on DTSCs efforts to address PFASs as a class through the Safer Consumer Products process Robert Contreras, CalRecycle Update on CalRecycle’s efforts to address PFAS in Recyclable Products

Jen Jackson, San Francisco Department of the Environment Municipal level efforts to address PFAS

11:30AM to 1:00PM Lunch

DATATHON RESULTS WORKSHOP AND OPEN DISCUSSION (1:00PM TO 3:00PM)

Closing Remarks (3:00PM to 3:30PM) Dan Newton, Division of Drinking Water, State Water Resources Control Board

Shahla Farahnak, Division of Water Quality, State Water Resources Control Board


Technical Seminar

Day 1 & 2 Datathon Agenda8:30AM to 9:00AM – Registration (1st Floor)

December 4, 2019 December 5, 2019Encouraged: Attend Seminar Panel #1 (9:00AM to 11:30AM) Bryon Sher Auditorium, 2nd Floor

Datathon 9:00 AM to 11:30 AM Rooms 230 and 240, 2nd Floor

Datathon 1:00 PM to 4:00 PM Training Room 2 West/East, 2nd Floor

Datathon Results Presentations and Open Discussion1:00 PM to 3:00 PM Bryon Sher Auditorium, 2nd Floor

Panel #1 at the Seminar provides background on PFAS that maybe useful for the project themes at the Datathon. On the afternoon of the 2nd day of the Seminar, Datathon data theme leaders will present their results to the attendees of the Seminar.

Theme #1: PFAS Analysis and InterventionInterpretation of multiple timepoint PFAS concentration data for a water district can provide insights into possible sources of contamination. However, thorough analyses can be complex and timeconsuming. The goal of this project is to develop data analytic tools to expedite the analysis process for a water district, including statistical hypothesis testing of potential transport pathway factors, such as rainfall and proximity to potential sources. Data Scientist Lead: Melissa Salazar, Moulton Niguel Water DistrictTheme #2: PFAS Biomonitoring: Possible Linkages to Drinking WaterCDPH conducted biomonitoring for PFAS in selected regions in California. The relative contribution of PFAS in drinking water to body load is unknown. The goal of this project is to determine if drinking water PFAS levels are correlated with measured exposure concentrations using statistical hypothesis testing. Data Scientist Lead: Danny Kwon, California Department of Public HealthTheme #3: PFAS Source Identification through FingerprintingPFAS sources may be identified through chemical composition ratios. The goal of this project is to develop a tool that would be capable of analyzing data collected by the State Water Board through PFAS Investigations to identify potential sources of contamination. Data Scientist Lead: Sarabeth George, Region 2, Water Board

DATATHON RESULTS WORKSHOP AND OPEN DISCUSSION (December 5, 2019, 1:00PM TO 3:00PMBryon Sher Auditorium, 2nd Floor)

PLEDGE OF ALLEGI NCE

Documents

Transcript of PLEDGE OF ALLEGI NCE