SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 380 E. Vanderbilt Way, San Bernardino, CA 92408

REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AGENDA

2:30p.m. Tuesday, September 4, 2012

CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL

1. PUBLIC COMMENT Any person may address the Board on matters within its jurisdiction.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A. August 21, 2012 Board Meeting (Page 4)

3. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS

A. Consider Request for Letter of Suppmi for Re-Establishment of Sphere of Influence from San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District (Page 8)

B. Consider Approval of First Amendment to the SARI Discharge Agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (Page 12)

C. Consider Pminering on a Study to Determine the Usable Capacity and Safe Yield for Each Sub-Basin Within the Yucaipa Basin Area (Page 17)

D. Consider Appointing Representatives to the ACWA Joint Powers Insurance Authority Board of Directors (Page 30)

4. REPORTS (Discussion and Possible Action)

A. General Manager's Repmi

B. Baseline Feeder Committee Workshop, August 27 (Page 34) C. Engineering Committee Workshop, August 29 (Page 36)

D. SA WP A Committee Meetings, September 4 E. Directors Activities

1/37

Meeting of the Board of Directors September 4, 2012 Page2

5. ANNOUNCEMENTS

A. September 10,2012- Basin Technical Advisory Committee, 1:30 p.m. at the District Office

B. September 12, 2012- Reservoir Committee Workshop, 11:30 a.m. at the District Office

C. September 13, 2012- Upper Santa Ana Resources Association, 9:30a.m. at San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District

D. September 17, 2012- Association of San Bernardino County Special District's Dinner, 6:00p.m.

E. September 18, 2012- SAWPA Commission, 9:30a.m. at SAWPA F. September 18, 2012- Board of Directors Meeting, 2:30p.m. at the District Office

G. September 24, 2012- Baseline Feeder Committee Workshop, 3:00 p.m. at the District Office

H. September 26, 2012- Engineering Committee Workshop, 3:00p.m. at the District Office

I. September 27, 2012- Board of Directors Workshop, 3:00p.m. at the District Office

6. CLOSED SESSION

A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a)- Bear Valley Mutual Water Company et al v Kenneth L. Salazar et al- Case No. 8:11-cv-01263 JVS (ANx) (United States District Court Central District of California)

B. Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8(b) - Property No. APN 0140-042-11,29 - Owner: City of San Bernardino - Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment - Agency Negotiator: Douglas Headrick- Negotiating Parties: Listed Above

C. Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8(b)- Property No. APN 0297-011-07, 0297-051-01, 0297-051-02, 0168-311-06, 0168-321-10, 0168-341-04, 0168-342-04, 0168-342-09 - Owner: San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District - Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment- Agency Negotiator: Douglas Headrick -Negotiating Parties: Daniel Cozad

D. Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation- Government Code Section 54956.9(a)- San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District v. Mentone Citrus Growers- Case No. CIVDS1101647 (San Bernardino Superior Court)

E. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation - Initiation of Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) -1 case.

2/37

Meeting of the Board of Directors September 4, 2012 Page3

7. ADJOURNMENT

PLEASE NOTE: Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the District's office located at 380 E. Vanderbilt Way, San Bernardino, during normal business hours. Also, such documents are available on the District's website at www.sbvmwd.com subject to staffs ability to post the documents before the meeting. The District recognizes its obligation to provide equal access to those individuals with disabilities. Please contact Lillian Jaramillo at (909) 387-9214 two working days prior to the meeting with any special requests for reasonable accommodation.

3/37

6004

MINUTES OF

THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING

SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

August 21, 2012

Directors Present: Patrick Milligan, George Aguilar, Steve Copelan, and Mark Bulat

Directors Absent: Mark Alvarez

Staff Present: Douglas Headrick, Sam Fuller, Bob Tincher, Cindy Saks, Brendan Brandt and Lillian Jaramillo

Registered Guests:

Alan Dyer, West Valley Water District

Jeff Beehler, Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority

Matt Levesque, East Valley Water District

Melody McDonald, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District

Manny Aranda, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District

Charles Roberts, Highland Community News

Kip Sturgeon, East Valley Water District

Seth Zielke, Fontana Water Company

Tom Crowley, West Valley Water District

Benjamin G. Kelly, Western Heights Water Company

The regular meeting of the Board of Directors was called to order by President Milligan at 2:33 p.m. at the District office, 380 E. Vanderbilt Way, San Bernardino. A quorum was noted present.

Agenda Item 1. Public Comments.

President Milligan invited any members of the public to address the Board. Hearing none, the meeting proceeded with the published agenda items.

4/37

6005

Agenda Item 2. Approval of Minutes of the August 7, 2012, Board Meeting.

Director Bulat moved to approve the minutes of the August 7, 2012, Board meeting. Director Aguilar seconded. The motion was unanimously adopted with Director Alvarez being noted as absent.

Agenda Item 3. Presentation.

3 a) Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority's One Water One Watershed 2.0. Jeff Beehler gave an overview of the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority's One Water One Watershed (OWOW) 2.0 Plan. OWOW is integrated regional water management planning for the Santa Ana River watershed. There are four components to the Plan that include an update, integration of pillars, provide beneficial incentives, and project tracking. Part of the OWOW governance includes pillar groups that are providing expertise for reviewing and updating the Plan. As part of the integration of pillars, there was a white paper process looking at an integrated systems approach for region wide projects and programs. The Plan also includes providing beneficial incentives for multi­jurisdictional and multi-beneficial projects. Through the OWOW Plan, project proponents must meet statutory requirements, the project must be multi-jurisdictional, have a 25 percent cost-match commitment, and the project must be completed within 5 years. Projects are evenly weighted on cost effectiveness, water reliability, greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, and natural hydrology. Also included, is a performance measurement component to determine if progress is being made in achieving the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan goals and objectives.

Agenda Items 4. Discussion and Possible Action Items.

4 a) Consider State Water Project Audit Contract for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. Cindy Saks summarized the July 27, 2012, proposal from Ernst & Young for audit services relating to the State Water Project for the twelve month period ending June 30, 2013. This is an annual renewal of a contract to audit the State Water Project through the State Water Contractors Independent Audit Association. The District's share of the cost would vary depending on participation by the other State Water Contractors but would not exceed $32,142. Ms. Saks recommended the Board approve the contract for an amount not-to-exceed $32,142.

Director Aguilar moved that the Board authorize entering into the contract with Ernst & Young for auditing services relating to the State Water Project for an amount not-to-exceed $32,142. Director Bulat seconded. The motion was unanimously adopted with Director Alvarez being noted as absent

4 b) Consider 2012 Annual Contribution to the Water Resources Institute at Cal State San Bernardino. Douglas Headrick stated that San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District was a founding member of the Water Resources Institute (WRI) and WRI is requesting a financial contribution for 2012. This item was discussed at the July 5th and

5/37

6006

August 15th Board of Directors Workshop. After the August 15th Workshop, staff was directed to forward the item to the full Board for consideration. Staff recommended approving a contribution of $27,500 for 2012.

Director Copelan moved to approve a financial contribution to the Water Resources Institute in an amount not-to-exceed $27,500 for the year 2012. Director Aguilar seconded. The motion was unanimously adopted with Director Alvarez being noted as absent.

Agenda Item 5. Reports (Discussion and Possible Action).

5 a) Reservoir Committee Workshop, August 8, 2012. No oral report was given as a written report was included in the Board packet.

5 b) Advisory Commission on Water Policy, August 9, 2012. No oral report was given as a written report was included in the Board packet.

5 c) Board of Directors Workshop, August 15, 2012. No oral report was given as a written report was included in the Board packet.

5 d) Operations Reports. No oral report was given as a written report was included in the Board packet.

5 e) Treasurer's Report. After discussion, Director Bulat moved approval of the following expenses for the month of July 2012. The State Water Contract Fund $5,726,788.00, Devil Canyon/Castaic Fund $364,123.00, and General Fund $2,293,374.81. Director Aguilar seconded. The motion was unanimously adopted.

5 f) Directors Activities. Director Aguilar reported that he attended the West Valley Water District's Board meeting.

Director Bulat reported that he met with a representative of the University of Lama Linda to discuss possible participation in a zoo and aquarium project that includes a water component.

Agenda Item 6. Announcements. None.

Agenda Item 7. Closed Session. None.

There being no further business, President Milligan adjourned the meeting at 3:21 p.m.

6/37

APPROVAL CERTIFICATION I hereby certify to approval of the foregoing Minutes of San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District.

Secretary Date ___________ _

Respectfully submitted,

Lillian Jaramillo Board Secretary

6007

7/37

DATE: September 4, 2012

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Douglas Headrick, General Manager

SUBJECT: SBVWCD Request for Letter of Support for Re-Establishment of Sphere of Influence

The Valley District Board has been asked to consider supporting the re-establishment of the sphere of influence (SOl) for the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District (WCD). The SOl is a planning tool used by LAFCO to direct the orderly extension of government services. In essence, it tells landowners and public officials what land a particular district or city will annex in the future. The annexation process that converts an area within a SOl to one within the actual boundary of an agency is a separate process with its own extensive series of requirements.

Staff presented the following background on the subject at workshops conducted on August 15 and 29. At the first workshop, Staff was asked to research the proposal further and report back to the Board. At the conclusion of the second workshop, Staff was directed to bring the item to the full Board for consideration with a recommendation for support of the proposal.

Background

AB2838, also known as the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, requires Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO) to review and, as necessary revise, SOls every five years. However, before LAFCO initiates the SOl review, it completes a Municipal Service Review (MSR). The purpose of the MSR is to evaluate all the government agencies that provide similar services within the boundary of the special district or city being reviewed to determine if redundancies exist.

In 2003 LAFCO initiated an MSR and SOl update for the WCD. After a lengthy series of public hearings and studies, LAFCO voted to assign the WCD a SOl of zero indicating that a consolidation should take place. That LAFCO action initiated a lengthy, contentious process that culminated in a 2009 decision by LAFCO to not approve the consolidation of the WCD with Valley District. Since 2009, the Valley District and WCD Boards and Staffs have been working cooperatively on a number of projects and agreements. The most important of these being the

8/37

Cooperative Agreement for the Enhanced Recharge Project, which should be completed and back before the Boards for approvalin September.

Next year LAFCO will once again perform an MSR and SOl review of the WCD. In anticipation of that process, the WCD is requesting that Valley District take a position supporting the re­establishment, and potential minor expansion, of the WCD's SOl. The prior SOl for the WCD coincided with their current boundary.

As shown on the attached map, there is an area that has been identified by the WCD that could be considered for inclusion in their SOl. The green hatched area shown on the map is fully contained within the Bunker Hill Basin and should logically be included in the WCD boundary since their groundwater recharge activities benefit that area just like adjacent land. It was originally excluded from the boundary due to a settlement agreement between Riverside County water interests and the WCD. However, at this time, the City of Riverside Public Utilities Department staff is willing to support the inclusion of that area along the river. The City of Riverside owns, or controls through stock ownership, the vast majority of the production capacity in the excluded area.

Staff was asked to contact the Riverside Public Utilities (RPU) staff and confirm their support for the proposal to include the area along the river in the new SOl. That contact was made and Kevin Milligan confirmed that RPU supports such a proposal but would require further discussions prior to any effort to include this area in the WCD boundary.

Staff and Committee Recommendation

Support the re-establishment of the Sphere of Influence for the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District including the area along the Santa Ana River within the San Bernardino Basin Area and authorize the Board President to sign and send the attached letter.

Attachments

1. Boundary and Sphere of Influence Map 2. Draft Support Letter

9/37

c::J Existing Boundary

~ Riverside Channel Addition

c::J Census Tracts

Census Block Groups

--Freeways

Potential Sphere of Influence Change #2 Current Boundary Plus Riverside Addition

---===::::.----~Feet 0 5,000 10,000 20,000

C. Maxey 31 May 2012

M:\2011 Projects\Potential Sphere of Influence Change.mxd

September 4, 2012

Richard Corneille, President

San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District 1630 West Redlands Blvd., Suite A Redlands, CA 92373

SUBJECT: Support for Re-Establishment of Sphere of lnfluenc~>

Dear President Corneille, ',•,:

;--_,,

The Board of Directors ofthe San Bernardino Valley\1\fater Conservation Distri2th:~cently requested that

the Valley District Board of Directors consider support fo~the re-establ.ishment of YPI.JfSphere of influence

including an expansion to include the are~<along the Santa J1na Hiyerwithin the Bunl~er Hjll Basin. After

considering this request, I am pleased to in,f{)nn ypu that our Bocu'd voted today to support the re­

establishment of your former sphere of influ~nce inclu.c.l,ing the afor~mentioned area along the Santa Ana

River. This decision was based on the ongoing'toopedtiv~relationshipb~:tween our Districts and the

desire to continue to reliabl}"l"ff~etth~,water nee,ds0 f our·cbrls~ityentsthrbugh collaborative projects.

Sincerely,

MARK ALVAREZ Division 1

GEORGE A AGUILAR Division 2

Board of Directors and Officers

C.PATRICK MILUGAN Division 3

MARK BULOT Division 4

STEVE COPELAN Division 5

DOUGLAS D. HEADRICK General Manager

11/37

all SAN BERNARDINO

MUNICIPIT WATER DISTRICT

DATE: September 4, 2012

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Douglas Headrick, General Manager Cindy Saks, Finance Manager

SUBJECT: Consider Approval of First Amendment to the SARI Discharge Agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department.

Background

The contracts for using the Inland Empire Brine Line (IEBL) (formerly Santa Ana Regional Interceptor,

SARI) are between the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) and its four (4) upper

watershed member agencies including Valley District. When the IEBL was first constructed, the four

upper watershed SAWPA agencies, in turn, contracted with agencies within their boundaries for

capacity in the line. Over the years, Valley District has purchased 7.188 MGD (million gallons per day)

of pipeline capacity most of which has been sold to agencies within its boundaries. In addition to

pipeline capacity, a discharger must also purchase treatment and disposal capacity from Orange

County Sanitation District before they can discharge waste into the line. To date, less than 1 MGD of

treatment capacity has been purchased for discharges to the Brine Line from the Valley District service

area. The remaining 6+ MGD of pipeline capacity is not currently in use.

In June of 2006, SAWPA made some changes to their fee structure in order to protect the long-term

viability of the Brine Line. The original fee structure to cover maintenance costs was based solely

upon the amount of flow in the Brine Line. If an agency was not discharging to the Brine Line, they did

not pay any fees to SAWPA beyond the initial cost to purchase the pipeline capacity. The new fee

structure implemented by SAWPA is similar to the State Water Project fee structure which includes

both fixed charges (paid regardless of flow) and variable charges (based on flow). However, the

original contracts for pipeline capacity between Valley District and pipeline capacity owners within its

boundaries did not specifically include a provision for these fixed charges. Valley District has

contracts with Yucaipa Valley Water District, City of Colton, City of Rialto, and the City of San

Bernardino Municipal Water Department.

12/37

The Valley District Engineering Committee met twice earlier this year to consider updating its older

contracts for Brine Line capacity so that these new charges are "passed through" to the agencies that

own the capacity. At the conclusion of the second workshop, Staff was directed to send discharge

agreement amendments to the four agencies and work cooperatively to have them approved. To

recognize the valuable partnerships among our agencies and the regional significance of the IEBL, the

amendments offered by the Valley District Board cover the new fixed fee charges through June 2012.

As of July 1, 2012, all fixed fee charges for brine line capacity will be paid by the actual owners of the

capacity under the terms of the amendments.

Valley District Staff has been working with each of the four entities that own brine line capacity over

the last few months to obtain approval of the amendments. The City of San Bernardino Municipal

Water Department was the first to sign the amendment in June 2012. Staff is recommending that the

Board authorize the discharge agreement amendment attached.

The Yucaipa Valley Water District Board is scheduled to approve the amendment on September 19,

2012 and the City of Colton Council will consider it on October 2, 2012. Staff is still working with the

City of Rialto City Attorney on a schedule for approval.

Staff Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Valley District Board of Directors approve the attached First Amendment to

the SARI Discharge Agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department.

Attachment

First Amendment to the SARI Discharge Agreement with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water

Department

13/37

FIRST AMENDMENT To THE SARI DISCHARGE AGREEMENT

This First Amendment to the SARI Discharge Agreement ("Amendment") is executed and deemed effective ~ 2012, by and between the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, a California municipal water district ("VALLEY DISTRICT") and the Board ofWater Commissioners of the City of San Bernardino (the "Department").

RECITALS

A VALLEY DISTRICT and the Department entered into that certain SARI Discharge Agreement dated March 2, 1993 ("Discharge Agreement"), whereby the Department agreed, among other things, to purchase from VALLEY DISTRICT a discharge right allocation for the discharge of a specified amount of industrial waste water into the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (formerly the "SARI", and currently referred to as the "Brine Line"), system based upon the terms and conditions of a SARI Capacity Agreement ("SARI Capacity Agreement") between VALLEY DISTRICT and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority ("SAWPA''), dated June 22, 1993.

B. The fees and costs associated with the Department's right to discharge wastewater into the Brine Line system, which fees and costs are adjusted from time to time, are established by SA WP A through Resolutions.

C. SA WP A invoices VALLEY DISTRICT for the fees and costs to discharge wastewater into the Brine Line system based upon the amount of capacity owned and sold to capacity owners in the VALLEY DISTRICT service area. VALLEY DISTRICT, in turn, invoices the capacity owners, such as Department, for their share of these fees and costs.

D. In 2006, SAWPA adopted a new fee structure for the Brine Line which requires all capacity owners to pay additional fixed charges for the maintenance of the pipeline system, regardless of whether a capacity owner is discharging into the Brine Line. To date, the Department's portion of these fixed fees have been paid by Valley District.

E. On July 1, 2012, Valley District will cease payment of the Department's portion of the fixed charges and will begin to invoice Department for these fixed fees along with any other fees and costs related to the discharge of wastewater into the Brine Line system.

F. VALLEY DISTRICT and the Department desire to amend the Discharge Agreement to reflect and clarify the Department's obligation to pay all fees and costs imposed by SA WP A for use of the Brine Line.

14/37

OPERAT.IVJ: PROVISIONS

Now, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants contained herein and other valuable consideration, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and by this reference made a part ofthis Amendment.

2. Definitions. The definitions in the Discharge Agreement shall apply to this Amendment unless otherwise provided herein.

3. Other Costs. Section 4 of the Discharge Agreement is hereby amended to include the following provisions, which shall be inserted after the final sentence of Section 4:

"DEPARTMENT agrees to satisfy any and all other payment obligations for other costs imposed by SA WP A whether fixed or contingent, related to the use of the SARI system, including without limitation any and all fees or costs related to maintenance, operations and repairs. The payment obligation for any and all such fees shall be fully satisfied without regard to whether any discharge, treatment or disposal right is exercised."

4. Amendment to Prevail. The provisions of this Amendment shall prevail over any inconsistent or conflicting provisions of the Discharge Agreement and shall supplement the remaining provisions thereof Except as herein expressly modified and amended, all terms and provisions of the Discharge Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

5. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed separately in counterpart by each party and when all of the separately executed counterpart signature pages have been attached in a single instrument, the same shall constitute a fully executed counterpart of this Amendment.

15/37

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the day and year first above written.

VALLEY DISTRICT:

San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water Distract, a California municipal water district

By; ________________________ __

Name: ______________________ __

Its: ----~--------------------

DEPARTMENT:

City of San Bernardino Board ofWater Commissioners

By 1\:~ G A jv/\ Name: Toni Callicott\

Its: President ------~====~------------

Name: __ ~R==ob=i=n~O~h=a=m=a~---------

Its: ______ ~S=e=cr~&=a~ry~-------------

16/37

DATE: September 4, 2012

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Bob Tincher, Manager of Engineering & Planning

SUBJECT: Consider Partnering on a study to Determine the Usable Capacity and Safe Yield for Each Sub-Basin within the Yucaipa Basin Area

The Engineering Committee is recommending that the Board authorize up to $45,000 to partner

with the City of Redlands, South Mesa Water Company, City of Yucaipa, Western Heights

Water Company and Yucaipa Valley Water District on the cost to determine the usable capacity

and safe yield for each sub-basin within the Yucaipa Basin Area per the attached proposal from

Geoscience Support Services, Incorporated (Geoscience).

BACKGROUND

The San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley District) has historically taken a

leadership role in studying and managing groundwater resources within its service area. Valley

District funded a large portion of the study of the San Bernardino Basin Area by the United

States Geological Survey (USGS) which resulted in a groundwater flow model that has been

extremely useful in assisting with management decisions and estimating the benefit of various

water management strategies. Valley District has also been funding a large portion of the

present USGS study of the Yucaipa Basin area (Basin). The first USGS study of the Basin was

completed in 1970. More recently (since the late 1990's), Valley District has been participating

in the funding of the following USGS tasks:

1. Construct a multi-level monitoring well near Wilson Creek

2. Track the path of State Water Project water recharged at Wilson Creek spreading basins.

3. Develop lithologic descriptions

4. Develop electronic versions of geophysical logs

5. Use existing information to define groundwater subbasins

6. Use gravity model to determine the depth and configuration of the basin and subbasins

17/37

In addition to the work by the USGS, the Basin has also been studied by John Mann in 1986

and David Keith Todd in 1988. In 1990, John Mann and David Keith Todd recommended using

a working safe yield of 9,270 acre-feet which is the average of their independent safe yield

estimates. A summary of the estimated safe yield values for the Basin from the various studies

is below:

Study Safe Yield (acre-ft}

USGS (1970) Mann (1986) Todd (1988) Mann and Todd, average (1990)

7,000 10,634 7,910 9,270

In 1990, John Mann and David Keith Todd recommended using a working safe yield of 9,270

acre-feet which is the average of their independent safe yield estimates. Average extractions

from the Basin for the period 1999 to 2010 have consistently exceeded this estimated safe yield

(see below). Starting in 2003, imported State Project Water began being delivered to help close

the gap between safe yield and actual production.

Yucaipa Basin Production

liiiiiWHWC iiiiSMWC RJYVWD liiiiiRedlands SafeYield ==SWP(YVWD)

14,000

12,000

4,000

2,000

0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

40,000

35,000

30,000 ~ ~

25,000 ~ ~

20,000 ~ 3

15,000 ~-Vl

10,000

5,000

0

The South Mesa Water Company, Western Heights Water Company and Yucaipa Valley Water

District utilize the Basin to meet most of the water needs for their nearly 70,000 customers. In

addition, the City of Redlands has pumped some water from the Basin (see below).

18/37

SMWC WHWC YVWD Redlands Year a/f % a/f % a/f % a/f % TOTAL

1999 1,081 9% 2,334 20% 7,233 61% 1,262 11% 11,910

2000 2,051 16% 2,505 19% 7,494 58% 829 6% 12,879

2001 2,036 17% 2,406 20% 6,750 56% 833 7% 12,025

2002 2,210 16% 2,565 19% 7,796 58% 973 7% 13,544 2003 2,300 16% 2,359 17% 8,880 62% 688 5% 14,227

2004 2,196 15% 2,514 18% 9,400 66% 92 1% 14,202 2005 1,915 14% 2,439 18% 9,202 68% 64 0% 13,620 2006 2,066 15% 2,635 19% 8,919 65% - 0% 13,620 2007 2,173 16% 2857 22% 8,204 62% - 0% 13,234 2008 2,210 19% 2,973 26% 6,422 55% - 0% 11,605 2009 2,132 20% 2,740 25% 5,923 55% - 0% 10,795 2010 1,817 16% 2,486 23% 6,742 61% - 0% 11,045

Avg 2,016 16% 2,568 20% 7,747 61% 395 3% 12,726

The water agencies realize that the current extractions from the Basin are not sustainable and

have been meeting together to develop a groundwater management plan for this important

resource.

Valley District and the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency (Pass Agency) are the wholesale

water agencies for the area. Valley District serves the area north of the county line and the

Pass Agency serves the area south of the county line. The retail water agencies have asked

both wholesale water agencies to partner with them on the development of the groundwater

management plan.

More recently, the retail water agencies asked Valley District to take the lead in soliciting

proposals to estimate the usable capacity and safe yield of each sub-basin within the Yucaipa

Basin Area. Five (5) proposals were received and interviews were held with each firm on

August 10, 2012. The interview committee (committee) was made up of staff from YVWD, City

of Redlands, WHWC and Valley District. The Request for Proposal allowed the firm(s) to select

their own approach to answer two questions for each sub-basin: (1) usable capacity and (2)

safe yield. This provided a full spectrum of approaches from the "bare minimum" to a watershed

model. The committee's ranking of the proposals is shown below:

Firm Deliverable FEE Geoscience Support Services, Inc. Database, geophysical survey, watershed model, report $ 168,545 Firm2 Database, report $ 77,200 Firm3 Database, report $ 77,638 Firm4 Spreadsheet, limited analysis, report $ 25,456 Firm 5 Database, H20 Cloud, report $ 165,387

19/37

The committee is recommending the selection of Geoscience because their approach results in

a watershed model that can be used to develop a groundwater flow model and because they

have successfully completed this type of work throughout the valley. Members of the committee

will be pre$ent at this workshop.

The committee also developed a cost sharing option where the "regional agencies", City of

Yucaipa, Pass Agency and Valley District pay 50% of the study cost and the remaining 50% is

proportioned to the retail water agencies based on their production from the basin (see below).

Portion Agency(s) Basin Production %Study Cost Study Cost ($) Valley District, SGPWA, City of Yucaipa

SGPWA City of Yucaipa (?) Valley District

Yucaipa Valley Water District Western Heights Water Company

City of Redlands South Mesa Water Company

n/a 50% $84,272.50 18% $30,000.00

8% $14,000.00 24% $40,272.50

61% 30% $51,090.38 20% 10% $17,179.47

3% 2% $2,605.27 16% 8% $13,397.39

100% 100% $168,545.00

On August 7, 2012 the Board agreed to pay 50% of the cost to prepare a grant application for a

$250,000 (no local cost share required) Department of Water Resources Local Groundwater

Assistance Grant. The work in this study is part of the grant application so all, or a portion, of

these study costs could be offset by grant funds, if awarded.

Engineering Committee Recommendation

Authorize up to $45,000 to partner with the City of Redlands, South Mesa Water Company, City

of Yucaipa, Western Heights Water Company and Yucaipa Valley Water District on the cost to

determine the usable capacity and safe yield for each sub-basin within the Yucaipa Basin Area

per the proposal from Geoscience Support Services, Incorporated. Ask staff to place on the

agenda for an upcoming Board of Directors meeting for consideration.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Proposal for Determination of the Usable Capacity and Safe Yield for Each Sub-Basin

within the Yucipa Basin Area, Yucaipa California, Geoscience Support Services,

Incorporated, June 29, 2012.

20/37

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRM ............................................................ 1

PROJECT EXPERIENCE ......................................................................... 2

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ................................................................ 2

PROJECT APPROACH .......................................................................... 3

PROJECT SCOPE .................................................................................. 4

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART .................................................................. 7

PROJECT SCHEDULE ............................................................................ 8

COST PROPOSAL- UNDER SEPARATE COVER

APPENDIX A- GEOSCIENCE, RMC, SOUTHWEST GEOPHYSICS QUALIFICATIONS

OPTIONAL TASK 3.1 AND DESCRIPTION OF GEOPHYSICAL METHODS

INTRODUCTION TO THE TEAM

GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc., (GEOSCIENCE) is pleased to provide herein our proposal to provide professional services to San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Valley District) and partners for the determination of the usable capacity and safe yield of the Yucaipa Ground Water Basin and subbasins. GEOSCIENCE is an established geohydrologic consulting firm specializing in ground water resource planning, development, management, and protection, and has worked for Valley District on numerous projects for over a decade. GEOSCIENCE routinely uses sound and current geohydrologic methods to understand the subsurface structure and the nature of aquifer systems for determination of maximum perennial yield or sustainable yield in

ground water basins. GEOSCIENCE will be joined by RMC Water

and Environment. Since 1999 RMC Water and Environment (RMC) has worked extensively for Yucaipa Valley Water District and is well acquainted with data and operations and personnel of YVWD and other local partners. A resume for Mr. Steve Goldman · of RMC is provided in Appendix A.

A proposed optional task included herein is conducting a geophysical evaluation to confirm or adjust the locations of subbasin boundaries. If this task is selected, Southwest Geophysics will provide the geophysical services. Southwest

~"' "' "'"'"' ~C?>;;;;;; , 7" =~~if~"'~ ~":_:"'~"':r'i(::""'";"'~ "' ~v ""'= ":"' :m~~M !K "' ;::; q;~ "'""x '?1?~? ?J;: , Sal'l Berl'larOIJ'lo Valley l\.llul'licigal Waten Disl!nict ~ " ~ : Q • ~ s~

0

~ t1. 0 <;

';::' "' "' X z~ "' """" x,:' "' "' ~ z 0 0< ~ WS:~~ ,y "'"'Y "' ~~2%- "'~ ""£= = =;: ~"' '""' "'~ "'"'" "' ~ « : ~;; , E

Geophysics has recently completed the geophysical surveys of the Santa Ana River recharge basins for Valley District and have successfully completed numerous projects in other areas of Southern California (see Appendix A). An expanded description of relevant project experience for Southwest Geophysics can be also be found in Appendix A

PROJECT EXPERIENCE

• City of Banning, Riverside, 2011. Evaluated the maximum perennial yield for ground water storage units within the City of Banning water resource area.

• Antelope Valley, los Angeles County, ongoing, Review of technical components of the physical solution for assignment for adjudication of basin and currently conducting refinement of USGS Antelope Valley Ground Water Model for allocation of sustainable yield by subbasin.

• Rancho California Water District, Temecula, 2008. Geohydrologic study that evaluated the maximum perennial yield of the Wolf Valley ground water basin.lake Arrowhead Community Services District, San Bernardino County, 2005. Geohydrologic evaluation of the maximum perennial yield of the ground water basin in the lake Arrowhead Area.

• Western Municipal Water District, Northern Temecula Valley, 2007. Presented the data, findings and conclusions of a geohydrologic study to evaluate the operational safe yield for a portion of the northern Temecula Valley ground water basin to recommend potential areas for artificial recharge.

• Lemieux & O'Neill, Santa Maria, 2003. Provided expert advice and opinion concerning the characteristics and hydrologic conditions of the Santa Maria Ground Water Basin and whether the basin was in a state of overdraft. The Court used the data to assign Sustainable Yield Value to the Basin.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING

Based upon our review of the RFP we understand that the project will include the following tasks:

• Use Existing Data and Studies to determine depths of producing zones and water quality,

• Prepare an estimate of Usable Capacity for each sub-basin, • Prepare an estimate of Safe Yield for each sub-basin, • Review Subbasin Boundaries defined by previous studies, • Review water levels to confirm subbasin boundaries or propose an alternative, • Incorporate the results of the WHWC Study conducted by GEOSCIENCE (currently in

progress), • Provide a 100% Draft and Final Report, and • Schedule team meetings as appropriate over the course of the study.

The sections below provide: project approach, proposed scope of work, organizational chart, and project schedule. The GEOSCIENCE team's experience on similar projects and proximity to work area, along with qualifications and resumes for project personnel and subsonsultant are included in Appendix A. GEOSCIENCE and RMC are located in La Verne and Irvine, California respectively, in close proximity to study area. The estimated cost to complete this work is provided in Table 1 attached to this letter under separate cover and is good for a period of 90 days from the date of this proposal.

PROJECT APPROACH Re-definition of Subbasins Boundaries The Yucaipa Basin Area extends from the Crafton Hills and San Timoteo Badlands on the west to the Yucaipa Hills, San Gorgonio Mountains on the east, from the San Bernardino Mountains (Yucaipa Ridge) to the Banning Fault on the South. The Yucaipa Basin Area includes numerous faults, or groundwater barriers, that divide the Basin area into compartments. The Yucaipa Area lies in an area that is tectonically active and complex bounded on the north by the Active San Andreas Fault Zone. The Crafton Hills Fault Zone and minor faults, both northwest and northeast trending, cross the Yucaipa area and have resulted in the formation of discrete ground water subbasins. However, the exact boundaries of each subbasin have not been previously well defined. Review of subbasin boundaries is currently being completed by the USGS in their existing contract with Valley District. However, their data review process precludes the release of preliminary data for the current study. Therefore, the task to refine the subbasins boundaries will be included in the proposed scope. GEOSCIENCE will work closely with the USGS where possible in the completion of the study and both data sets can be compared when available.

Safe Yield Calculation (Sustainble Yield) and Usable Storage Capacity For this study, we will employ the term "sustainable yield," which for a groundwater basin is that yield considered to be the amount of pumping that, for given land use conditions, producing return flow which, in combination with other recharge, results in no long-term depletion of ground water storage, that is, no chronically declining groundwater storage and associated groundwater levels. Sustainable Yield derives from both "native" and {(supplemental" conditions. Native conditions consist of natural recharge and returns flows derived from natural recharge. Supplemental conditions include recharge of imported water and return flows that are the result of the use of imported water both directly and indirectly, as well as capture of stormwater that would otherwise be lost out of the basin. For this study 'Sustainable Yield will be calculated by the water balance method using calibrated watershed model to develop critical inflow and outflow terms.

John Mann and David Keith Todd recommended a working perennial yield of 9,270 acre-feet per year for 1987 for the Yucaipa ground Water basin. The approach used by Mann and Todd are based on empirical relations. This approach is neither a physical based nor distributed parameter method. In other words, areal distribution of watershed parameters such as density of vegetation, slope, pervious/impervious areas, and soil parameters were not taken into account by the method. Modern watershed modeling tools such as the Hydrologic Simulation

"' "'"" os= """0"'"' = ~ "'~ ;;;;;;/'=- 3{;'"" 7

7 ""' "';,.~"' x ::"'"' ;:s~""'~~'*'#0"'"~:?"'7./! "'"' "'&"' ;;;"' """" ~=w :::'?:"'-~ ~~"' Sh~= ;; n, z f! ;::!*,;:;"""'~ s !?:;;.1;

~ ,ysan Bernarltlino 1\Zalle),liVIunic;lgal Waten IDistriGt ~ :: ~ " ~ , ," '3 ° "

" "' 0 "' ""

"' /"" "'~ "x"'~=~"'v~= ~Yf:!""'"' "' "' """'"' *~ ~~ "' ~ 2ev:Sv ,~;;;~ 0

;: - "'"' " = ~:

Program - Fortran (HSPF) can comprehensively simulate all the components of the hydrologic system on a daily basis. Through model simulations, recharge for each subbasin can be quantified. In addition the changes in ground water recharge due to urbanization can also be quantified.

We propose to use the HSPF model to quantify recharge terms both inflow and outflow parameters for the subbasins. In addition, potential stormwater capture estimates for major and minor tributary creeks will be made in developing the ground water recharge parameters for the water balance. Stormwater capture projects can increase local water supply and increase the sustainable yield. The inflow and outflow terms and proposed method of calculation are tabulated in the table below:

Inflow Terms Method of Outflow Terms Method of Evaluation Evaluation

Deep Percolation of HSPF Model

Ground Water Direct Measurement

Rainfall Extraction Percolation of Stream

HSPF Model Subsurface Historic and Current Ground

Flow and Storm Run-Off Outflow Water Levels Deep Percolation of

HSPF Model Applied Water Subsurface Mountain

HSPF Model Front recharge Artificial Recharge of Reported SWP Water Values

Determination of Usable Storage Capacity The usable capacity of each subbasin is a function of the volume of the saturated thickness of aquifer materials with high transmissivity. The amount of usable ground water basin capacity will be determined by an analysis of current and historic ground water production in conjunction with an analysis of ground water level changes in the discrete ground water storage units.

PROJECT SCOPE Task 1.0- Data Collection and Review GEOSCIENCE will collect, compile and review available data, maps, engineering drawings, reports and documents related to well siting, well production, water quality and geohydrologic conditions within the project area. A data request list will be sent to Valley District who will forward the data request to the partnering entities. The types of data to be collected will generally be geohydrologic and operational in nature and will include (but not necessarily limited to):

• Precipitation data • Pumping test data • Well location survey data • Historical ground water elevation data • Lithologic logs • Historical well production data

GEOSCIENCE will also research and collect public sources of information such as the USGS online monitoring wells database, California Department of Public Health, and Department of Water Resources. As GEOSCIENCE has previously conducted work in the Yucaipa area and will

use our extensive library of in-house reference reports and data for the project. Once all the required data have been compiled, a detailed review of the documents and data will be conducted. These data will provide an in-depth understanding of the study area and its operational aspects that will be utilized in subsequent tasks.

Task 2.0- Development of a layered Basemap GEOSCIENCE will obtain selected GIS data {shapefile format) from the partnering entities for use in preparing maps and presenting data. Using these data and our in-house GIS library, a detailed geohydrologic base map will be constructed for the study area to provide a base for graphically presenting data. Data to be presented will include geologic information, well locations {both private and public), basin boundaries, structural features {faults), ground water elevation contours, and surface drainages.

Task 3.0- Re-Evaluation of Subbasin Boundaries The locations of historical mapped traces of faults and ground water barriers will be re­evaluated through the use of recently published data and review of historical round water levels. Geophysical survey work to confirm ground water barriers assessed from water level data is recommended as an optional task and is described in Appendix A. Controlled source audio magnetotellurics/magnetotellurics {CSAMT/MT) survey method is recommended and will augment and allow confirmation of the gravity survey work recently completed by the USGS. The assessment of the boundaries of the subbasin will be discussed with client before subsequent tasks are initiated.

Task 4.0- Geologic and Hydrologic Characterization Using the data collected and reviewed in Tasks 1.0 and 2.0, the geology and geohydrology of the study area will be characterized. Pumping test data and water level history will be used to evaluate the hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and storativity of producing zones within the area. The type, productivity, areal extent and available storage and operational capacity for the aquifers within each sub-basin will be evaluated along with factors affecting the direction and rate of ground water movement.

Task 5.0- Determination of Usable Storage Capacity Based upon previous studies, the continuation of development of the Yucaipa Basin Area is dependent upon imported water supplies. However, imported water may not always be reliable or available in the quantities needed each year. Reserve or banked water supplies in storage in the Yucaipa Basin area is necessary to insure the continued development of Yucaipa Basin area in the event imported water is not available for some period of time. Therefore the usable storage capacity within each subbasin will be evaluated for long-term recharge of imported or recycled water. This task will review driller's log data to re-evaluate the specific storage of the hydrostratigraphic units within each subbasin and recalculate the usable capacity of each subbasin based upon the redefined subbasin geometry, specific yield, and historical ground water levels.

Task 6.0- Estimation of Sustainable Yield (Native Yield +Supplemental Yield)

We propose to re-evaluate "native" conditions as calculated by previous workers and will assess the contribution to the ground water system from "supplemental" conditions existing in the basins. In order to estimate the amount of ground water development possible, the water balance method using equation of hydrologic equilibrium will be prepared:

Inflow= Outflow ±_Change in Storage

Subtask 6.1- Hydrologic Water Balance The Sustainable Yield for each subbasin will be calculated using the selected hydrologic base period established from a cumulative departure from mean precipitation chart prepared from representative precipitation station(s) within or near the study area. The sustainable yield calculated using the water balance method and HSPF watershed model will be independently checked using three additional methodologies described in Section 6.2 and Section 6.3 below.

Subtask 6.2- Historical Pumping and Ground Water level Analysis An independent check of the Sustainable Yield will be carried out by subbasin using the· following methods: 1) Zero Net Draft method involves plotting average ground water elevation for a selected period of time and comparing it to ground water production for the same period. If the mean ground water elevation at the beginning and end of the period is the same, the production during the period is taken as a measure of the maximum perennial yield. (Note: The Estimation of Maximum Perennial Yield using the Net-Zero Draft method for the Western Heights Subbasin will be incorporated into this study). 2) The Hill Method is a simplification of the Equation of Hydrologic Equilibrium. By plotting annual change in ground water elevations against annual draft, Hill measured the maximum perennial yield as the draft corresponding to a zero change in elevation.

Subtask 6.3- Historical Changes in Ground Water Storage An additional independent check of the calculation of Sustainable Yield will be carried out by evaluating the historic change in ground water levels in relation to ground water extraction. Historical change in ground water storage will be calculated using change in ground water level, specific yield, and area. The results will be compared to the results of the water balance (Task 6.1).

Task 7.0- Preparation of Report A summary of work related to the data collection, analysis, and usable storage capacity and sustainable yield estimates will be fully documented in a comprehensive report. Eight hardcopies of the report will be produced, together with an electronic version of the report in PDF format. Once comments on the draft report are received from SBVMWD and incorporated, five final bound hardcopies of the report will, together with an electronic version of the report in PDF format, be produced.

Task 8.0- Project Meetings GEOSCIENCE will attend meetings, as necessary to coordinate project activities, and report on project results. For cost estimating purposes, three meetings are assumed as follows: 1) Project startup meeting, 2) Two progress meeting, and 3} Presentation of the Draft Report Findings, and 4) Final meeting for presentation of project results.

" San Be~;arCHno V;lley 1\Zl~~icigaJ~W~t;~ !E)j~t~ict! ~ y"~~ G ~ ~.:ce- w~ ~. :=~ ;·~~ ~. ·; Xc.~Y;: &

80

iPi • "'~. " y* • • l& *' • •" 6 ;;\ ~ . .

. . ~ "" ~"" ~ - ~ ~

"' - " = "'"" ~ "' "' "~ "" ~ ~ b"" "'~ ~ ""~ = "' .32= w:~- "" =>"" ,.;; "" 0 "' ~""~

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

A highly qualified and enthusiastic team, experienced in geophysical surveys and fault hazard analysis has been assembled to meet the goals of Valley District. With over 35 years of experience in ground water management, Dr Dennis Williams will act as the Principal-in-Charge for this project. Mr. Brian Villalobos, a licensed Professional Geologist, Certified Hydrogeologist, and Certified Engineering Geologist with over 20 years of experience, will function as the project manager. Mr. Scott Goldman will provide detailed knowledge of existing local databases.

An organizational chart for the GEOSCIENCE Project Team is shown below. Detailed resumes as well as licenses and certifications are included in Appendix A.

Consultants·

1) GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. 620 West Arrow Highway La Verne, CA 91750 {909} 451-6650 www assiwqter com

2} RMC Water and Environment 15510-C Rockfield Blvd, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 949.587.1700

3} Southwest Geophysics, Inc. 8057 Raytheon Road San Diego, CA 92111 {858} 527-0849 www.southwestgeophysics.com

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Mr.:>reve~:~otaman (.tJ,I't:, tsLt:t:

Principal 949.420-5314

sgoldm an@ rm cwater.com

(,jljij.ii~i~~.~.~.~.! .. ~~.~.~~.~~lll,l,.jhJ Brian A. Villalobos (1), PG, CHG, CEG

Senior Geohydrolagist {909} 451-6650 x145

bvil/alobos@ geoscience-water.com

GEOHYDROLOGIC REVIEW AND ANALYSIS

Johnson Veh (1), Ph.D., PG, CHG SenlorGeohydrologlst I Lead

Modeler {909) 451-6650x 142

jye h@ geoscience-water.com

Joe Kingsbury (1), PG Staff Geohydrologlst (909) 451-6650x109

geosclence-water.com

Hansvanae vrugc (OiJ 1 PG, LEG, PGP

Principal Geophysicist (858} 527-0849

hvandevrugt@southwestgeophysics.com

uenru:; c. vv uuarn~ \.LJ1 t"n.u., t"U,

CHG President

{909} 451-6650 x140 dwilllam s@ geosclence-water.com

( SURFACE WATER MODEL )! '. ~ri?ffi~iliffi~hi'ffi~riiffi~iiimf-Hiriif-?iffi'lf-?i:tn~ .... ri:lhririf-?lh .. ,

AlicoWolf(1), PG, CHG Project Geohydro/oglst I Modeler

{909} 451-6650 x105 awol/@ geoscience-water.com

"' 00 "" - = 0 7! »~ ~;'lt::::r0~*=:"'x"'"' PC 00"'~ :; ""'"''"" 'B ~ 0 '";,c:: "'"'~ " "'"""', :::x,~ ~,~~?; 04 ~::'10~~~ J ~0 :;;, ~ """" ~"'* »"'"''"~ "' "' :::"'

San BennarC!ino xtalle~ IV'IuniciQal Water 1D1st~iet ~ ~ ~ ~ ~" " , y " i'l "£ ~ 7 " )(

- ~ ~

"' "' "' "" "' ;/ 7 % "' ~ 0 '""" = : "' ~~~ = ""

PROJECT SCHEDUlE

A project schedule detailing each task is shown below. The GEOSCIENCE Team's capacity to perform the work on this contract is excellent at this time, and we can fully commit all staff necessary to complete this work.

Project Schedule

Jf = ~0' " :;;sl;; *-" ,5:b 5£/'"y Jf""S"'- "' ;;:_ 2({ ""J0""~;;1;\0"?~~'1Ji'!,; :""= ,'''\"- "'""' " ex "'8 "'"'~ ~~= !2m ;; :; ~Jh/ "' ;:;;; :« ffl

" San Bernarclino 'Valley, 1\11unieigal NX!atets !District 7 7

~ 7 ~" 0

7

7 ~ 0

7

7 7

7

7 7

8 0

= ~ " 0 "' - "' ~ ~ ~ - = / ~ ""' "'"'

DATE: September4,2012

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Douglas D. Headrick, General Manager Cindy Saks, Finance Manager

SUBJECT: Appointments to the ACWA Joint Powers Insurance Authority Board of Directors.

Background

The Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) sponsors and provides services for the

District's employee medical and dental benefit plans. In 2010, the ACWA Health Benefits

Authority (ACWA HBA) amended and restated the Bylaws and Joint Powers Agreement to

strengthen the HBA structure in fulfilling its fiduciary responsibility and the Valley District Board

adopted a Resolution ratifying the Bylaws and Agreement. Effective July 1, 2012, ACWA

HBA transitioned its operations and health benefits programs into the ACWA/Joint Powers

Insurance Authority (ACWA/JPIA). The Valley District Board adopted a Resolution approving

the termination of the ACWA HBA and authorizing the District's membership in the

ACWA/JPIA. Throughout this process the existing health insurance benefit plans have not

changed.

In accordance with the ACWA/JPIA agreement, Valley District is required to appoint a

representative and an alternate to represent the District on the ACWA/JPIA's Board of

Directors. Staff is recommending a Valley District Board member be appointed as the primary

JPIA representative and the General Manager be appointed as the District's alternate

representative.

Staff Recommendation

• Appoint a Valley District Board member to serve as the District's representative

on the ACWA/JPIA Board of Directors and appoint the General Manager to serve

as the alternative representative.

Attachments

• Letter from ACWA Joint Powers Insurance Authority dated July 13, 2012

30/37

JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY

P. 0. Box 619082

Roseville, CA 95661-9082

phone

916.786.5742

800.231.5742

direct line

916.774.7050

800.535.7899

fax

916.774.7040

www.acwajpia.com

President

E.G. "Jeny" Gladbach

Vice President

TomCuquet

Chief Executive Officer

Walter "Andy" Sells

Executive Committee

John A. Coleman

TomCuquet

Joseph Dion

E.G. "Jeny" Gladbach

David T. Hodgin

W.D. "Bill" Knutson

Melody A. McDonald

Charles W. Muse

Lou Reinkens

To: General Managers

From: Walter "Andy: Sells, Chief Executive Officer

Date: July 13, 2012

Subject: Welcome to the JPIA

On July 1, 2012, the ACWA Health Benefits Authority transitioned its Employee Benefits programs to the JPIA. The programs and coverages you enjoyed though the HBA are still the same now that they are part of the JPIA. You are also now members of the JPIA. The JPIA was formed in 1979 as a means to consistently and cost effectively providing the broadest possible insurance coverages to its member agencies.

While Members of the JPIA may participate in one, two, three, or all four of its Programs, they all have the same thing in common. They all have a representative (JPIA Director) on the JPIA's Board of Directors.

Article 7 of the JPIA's Agreement addresses the JPIA's Board of Directors. In part, it states that the Authority (ACWNJPIA) shall be governed by the Board of Directors which is composed of one representative from each Member, who shall be a member director selected by the governing board of that Member. Each Member, in addition to appointing its member of the Board, shall appoint at least one Alternate who shall be an officer, member of the governing board, or employee of that Member. The Directors and Alternates serve until a successor is appointed and at the pleasure of the Member by which he or she has been appointed. Each Director representing a Member, or his or her Alternate, shall have one vote.

The JPIA Board of Directors' meetings are held twice a year, during the spring and fail ACWA Conferences. While the Diiectors and/or their Alternates are encouraged to attend these Board meetings, the JPIA understands that it is not always possible. Expenses, per diem, and fees incurred by the Directors and Alternates to attend the Board meetings and the ACWA conferences are the responsibility of their respective districts.

At your earliest convenience, please complete and return the attached form with the Director's and Alternate's names, titles, mailing addresses, and email addresses so that we may update our data base.

The JPIA's Bylaws, Agreement, and Directors' Manual can be found on our website (an updated version of the manual will be available within the next few weeks). On the "Committees" tab, select "Board of Directors"

31/37

from the drop down menu. On that page, you will find resource information for the Board of Directors (www.acwajpia.com/CmBOD.aspx).

Within 30 days of being appointed, the JPIA Directors must file the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) Statement of Economic Interest Assuming Office Statement and send the original signed form to the JPIA. The Alternates are not required to complete the form. The form and other Statement of Economic Interest resources can also be found on the Board of Directors web page. For questions about filing this form, contact Michelle Stites at the JPIA a~ (800) 535-7899, ext. 3153.

If you have any questions, please feel free to send an email to Michelle Stites at mstites@acwajpia.com or give her a call at the number listed above.

32/37

JPIA Board of Directors - Member/Alternate

An excerpt from the JPIA Agreement:

"Article 7- Board of Directors"

(a) The Authority shall be governed by the Board of Directors which is hereby established and which shall be composed of one representative from each Member, who shall be a Member director selected by the governing board of that Member. Each Member, in addition to appointing its member of the Board, shall appoint at least one alternate who shall be an officer, member of the governing board, or employee of that Member. The alternate appointed by a Member shall have the authority to attend and participate in any meeting of the Board when the regular member for whom he or she is an alternate is absent from said meeting.

(b) Each Director or alternate of the Board shqll serve until a successor is appointed. Each Director or alternate shall serve at the pleasure of the Member by which he or she has been appointed.

(c) Each Director representing a Member, or his or her alternate, shall have one vote.

Please have you agency's Board of Directors designate a JPIA Director Representative and Alternate Representative.

Member Agency:

JPIA Director Representative: Must be a member of the agency's board of directors.

Preferred mailing address:

E-mail address:

Phone number:

JPIA Alternate Representative: ----------~---------­

Preferred mailing address:

E-mail address:

Phone number:

Please mail form to: Attn: Michelle Stites, ACWNJPIA, PO Box 619082, Roseville, CA 95661-9082

or FAX to: (916) 774-7040 33/37

DATE: September 4, 2012

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Baseline Feeder Committee Wen Huang, Principal Engineer

SUBJECT: Baseline Feeder Committee Report- August 27, 2012

The Baseline Feeder Committee met at 3:00PM on Monday, August 27, 2012 in the conference

room at the offices of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. President Milligan

chaired the meeting. Directors Aguilar, Bulat, and Copelan participated in the meeting. Pete

Fox of the City of Rialto, Linda Jadeski of West Valley Water District, Don Hough of Riverside

Highland Water Company, Ben Coleman of East Valley Water District, and Doug Headrick and

Wen Huang of staff also participated.

Staff reported that the construction of the Baseline Feeder Well Replacement Project is

essentially completed. The California Department of Public Health issued a Domestic Water

Supply Permit to Valley District for operation of the system on August 15. The startup testing for

full operations of the new Baseline Feeder System began on August 20. A 7 -day continuous

test run started on August 27. Following a successful test run, it is anticipated that the system

will be placed into normal operation on September 4.

A ceremony for the commencement of the new Baseline Feeder System is being planned. All

governing board members of the Baseline Feeder stakeholders will be invited to celebrate the

completion of the project. In addition, a community information meeting is being planned at the

site. Facility tours will be provided at the events.

Staff also provided an update on the design of the improvements to the Baseline Feeder to

better control the flows at delivery points along the pipeline. A workshop was held on August 15

with participation by the staff of the Baseline Feeder stakeholders to review and discuss the

34/37

50% design plans. Comments were received and will be incorporated into the next design

submittals.

It is anticipated that the 90% design plans will be ready for review by the staff of the Baseline

Feeder stakeholders in early October. The final design plans and specifications should be

ready for bidding in November 2012. Following the bidding and award process, the construction

should take place in January through March 2013, when the demand is low, to minimize the

impact to the Baseline Feeder stakeholders.

Staff Recommendation: For information only; no action is required.

35/37

DATE: September 4, 2012

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Douglas Headrick, General Manager Sam Fuller, Chief Engineer Bob Tincher, Manager of Engineering and Planning

SUBJECT: Engineering Committee Meeting, August 29, 2012

The Engineering Committee met at 3:00 PM on Wednesday, August 29, 2012 in the Board

Room at the offices of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. President Milligan

chaired the meeting. Directors Aguilar, Bulat, and Copelan participated in the meeting.

A. San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District's Request for Letter of Support for Re­

Establishment of Sphere of Influence: Doug Headrick presented a continued item from a

prior Board workshop regarding a request by the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation

District to support the re-establishment of their sphere of influence. Those Boardmembers

present directed staff to bring the proposal to the full Board for consideration. It is covered

in a separate report on this agenda.

B. Rialto-Colton Basin Groundwater Recharge Facilities: Doug Headrick provided a

background history of recharge activities in the Rialto Basin, and an overview of current

challenges and future outlook for recharge in the Rialto Basin. Staff has been meeting with

various agencies and investigating possibilities for delivery and conveyance of State Water

Project water to provide recharge in the Cactus Basins for many years. The most feasible

and economical alternative currently identified includes construction of a turnout near

Riverside Avenue and about 0.5 miles of pipeline along the Devil Canyon -Azusa Pipeline

easement to Locust Avenue, where existing storm drain facilities would facilitate

conveyance to the Cactus Basins for recharge. Current challenges for implementation of

the recharge in the Rialto -Colton Basin include pending litigation among various agencies

for the drainage facilities along Interstate 210 and the ongoing remedial investigation for the

groundwater contamination in the Basin led by USEPA.

36/37

At the conclusion of the discussion, staff was directed by the Engineering Committee to

continue working with the stakeholders of the Cactus Basins and the Rialto - Colton Basin,

especially with US EPA to integrate recharge component into its overall remedial

investigation and actions.

C. Partnering on the Cost to Determine the Usable Capacity and Safe Yield for Each Sub­

Basin within the Yucaipa Basin Area: Bob Tincher presented a request from the City of

Redlands, South Mesa Water Company, City of Yucaipa, Western Heights Water Company

San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency and Yucaipa Valley Water District to partner on the cost

of a study to determine the usable capacity and safe yield for each sub-basin within the

Yucaipa Basin Area per the attached proposal from Geoscience Support Services,

Incorporated (Geoscience). The retail water agencies realize that their current extractions

from the Yucaipa Basin area are not sustainable and are working together to develop a

groundwater management plan. This study would be the first step toward this plan. The

Engineering Committee decided to recommend that up to $45,000 be authorized for this

study and asked that the item be placed on the September 4, 2012 Board agenda (see the

staff report for this action item for further details).

D. Construction Projects Update: Sam Fuller presented several photographs showing the

progress of the work on several of the District's projects and the Department of Water

Resources' East Branch Extension project.

Staff Recommendation

Receive and file

37/37