DEIR Appendix B

Appendix B
Source Water Assumptions Memorandum
Pure Water Monterey GWR Project

Draft EIR
April 2015
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
Pure Water Monterey GWR Project

Draft EIR
April 2015
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.
3 Quail Run Circle, Suite 101

Salinas, CA 93907-2348
831-883-4848
FAX 831-758-6328
[email protected]
Schaaf & Wheeler
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
MEMORANDUM
TO:
DATE:
March 26, 2015
CC:
Bob Holden, MRWPCA

Larry Hampson, MPWMD
Alison Imamura, Denise Duffy & Assoc.
FROM:
Andrew Sterbenz, PE
JOB #:
MRWP.01.14
SUBJECT:
Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project Proposed Source Water

Availability, Yield, and Use
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the source water availability and yield estimates for the
Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project (Proposed Project), to explain the seasonal
storage yield estimates, and to provide the proposed maximum and typical (or normal) water use
estimates for the Proposed Project. The GWR Project will develop various source waters and convey
them to the MRWPCA Regional Treatment Plant (RTP) where they will undergo primary and secondary
treatment with the current municipal wastewater flows, and then undergo Advanced Water Treatment
before being conveyed for injection in the Seaside Groundwater Basin. Source waters conveyed to the
RTP which are not required for the GWR project will undergo tertiary treatment at the Salinas Valley
Reclamation Plant (SVRP) and be used to increase the recycled water supply provided to the Castroville
Seawater Intrusion Project (CSIP).
A number of technical documents were prepared to analyze and confirm available source supplies for the
Proposed Project. Source waters for the GWR Project include new surface water diversions, agricultural
wash water, urban stormwater runoff and unused secondary-treated effluent from the RTP which would
otherwise be discharged to the ocean as further described, below. The source water availability studies
that have been used as the basis for estimating yield are cited throughout this report. These reports and
studies include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Reclamation Ditch Yield Study, March 2015
Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Blanco Drain Yield Study, December 2014
Data on Source Water Estimates provided by Bob Holden, MRWPCA, February 2014
Todd Groundwater, (Draft) Memorandum: Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment
Project: Impacts of Changes in Percolation at the Salinas Industrial Wastewater Treatment
Facility on Groundwater and the Salinas River, February 2015
5. Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow
Impacts, March 2015
6. Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project, Urban Runoff Capture
at Lake El Estero, April 2014
7. Data from Monterey County Water Recycling Projects/Salinas Valley Water Project/Salinas
River Diversion Facility Update, MCWRA Board Packet, February 24, 2014
The primary purpose of the GWR Project is to provide high quality replacement water to allow California
American Water Company (CalAm) to extract 3,500 AFY more water from the Seaside Basin for
To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson
-2-
3/26/2015
delivery to its customers in the Monterey District service area and reduce Carmel River system water use
by an equivalent amount. To meet this objective, the GWR Project would include features that would
create a reliable source of water supply by using source waters described below to produce purified
recycled water using existing secondary treatment processes and a new Advanced Water Treatment
(AWT) Facility at the MRWPCA Regional Treatment Plant. After treatment by the AWT Facility, the
purified recycled water would be conveyed to the Seaside Groundwater Basin for subsurface injection
using a series of shallow and deep wells. In the Seaside Groundwater Basin, the treated water would mix
with the groundwater present in the aquifers and be stored for future urban use. CalAm would use
existing wells and improved potable water supply distribution facilities to extract and distribute the GWR
water, enabling CalAm to reduce its diversions from the Carmel River system by this same amount.
Another purpose of the proposed GWR Project is to provide additional water to the Regional Treatment
Plant that could be recycled at the existing tertiary treatment facility (the Salinas Valley Reclamation
Plant) and used for crop irrigation using the Castroville Seawater Intrusion Project system. The Salinas
Valley Reclamation Plant produces tertiary-treated, disinfected recycled water for agricultural irrigation
within the CSIP service area. Municipal wastewater and certain urban dry weather runoff diversions
treated at the Regional Treatment Plant are currently the only sources of supply for the Salinas Valley
Reclamation Plant. Municipal wastewater flows have declined in recent years due to aggressive water
conservation efforts by the MRWPCA member entities. The new sources of water supply developed for
the GWR Project would increase supply available at the Regional Treatment Plant for use by the Salinas
Valley Reclamation Plant during the peak irrigation season (April to September). In addition, the GWR
Project would include Salinas Valley Reclamation Plant modifications to allow tertiary treatment at lower
daily production rates, facilitating increased use of recycled water during the late fall, winter and early
spring months when demand drops below 5 million gallons per day (MGD).
Source waters for the GWR Project include new surface water diversions, agricultural wash water, urban
stormwater runoff and unused secondary-treated effluent from the RTP which would otherwise be
discharged to the ocean.
Agricultural Wash Water
The City of Salinas owns and operates an industrial wastewater collection and treatment system, which
serves approximately 25 agricultural processing and related businesses located in the southeast corner of
the City. This wastewater collection system is separate from the Salinas municipal sewage collection
system. These flows, referred to as Agricultural Wash Water, are conveyed in a network of gravity
pipelines to the Salinas Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility (SIWTF), where it is treated using
aeration and disposed of using evaporation and percolation. These flows would be redirected into the
municipal wastewater system for conveyance to the RTP as a source of supply for the GWR Project.
Annual inflows to the SIWTF were analyzed and a projection of year 2017 flows was prepared by the
MRWPCA1, as shown in the first row of Table 1, below.
The SITWF consists of an aeration basin, three storage/percolation ponds covering 108 acres, drying beds
coving 67 acres and three rapid infiltration basins covering 1.3 acres. To assess the effects of diverting
flows treated at the SIWTF, Todd Groundwater2 estimated the percentages of flows disposed as
evaporation, percolation from the main ponds, and disposal through the drying beds and rapid infiltration
basins (RIBs). These values are show in Table 1, below, and are used in the estimation of seasonal storage
losses discussed later in this memorandum.
Estimation by Bob Holden, MRWPCA, February 2014
Todd Groundwater, (Draft) Memorandum: Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project: Impacts
of Changes in Percolation at the Salinas Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility on Groundwater and the Salinas
River, February 2015
1
2
-3-
3/26/2015
Table 1: Agricultural Wash Water

Source \
Month
Ag. Wash
Water - 2017
Rainfall
Evaporation
Percolation
from ponds
1, 2, and 3
RIBs/Drying
Beds
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
156
26.4
-12
158
23.7
-16
201
21.3
-29
307
11.1
-41
311
3.0
-46
391
0.8
-52
435
0.2
-45
444
0.4
-43
367
1.7
-32
-143
-129
-143
-138
-143
-138
-143
-143
-28
-37
-51
-139
-125
-202
-247
-258
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
410
5.7
-28
329
14.2
-15
223
23.7
-12
3,732
132
-372
-138
-143
-138
-143
-1,680
-198
-245
-190
-92
-1,812
Urban Stormwater Runoff

Urban stormwater runoff from two communities would be captured and used for the GWR Project.
Capturing stormwater flows before they reach a stream or river does not require a water rights permit
from the SWRCB.
Stormwater and urban runoff from the southern portion of the City of Salinas is pumped to the Salinas
River (the rest of the City drains into the Reclamation Ditch system). Schaaf & Wheeler3 estimated the
amount of stormwater flow which could be diverted to the municipal wastewater system or the SIWTF for
use in the GWR Project. The estimated average annual yield is provided in Table 2, below.
Stormwater and urban runoff from 2,400 acres within the City of Monterey flow to Lake El Estero, which
is maintained as part of El Estero Park. Excess stormwater is pumped to a discharge point on Del Monte
State Beach. Schaaf & Wheeler4 estimated the amount of stormwater flow which could be diverted to the
municipal wastewater system for use in the GWR Project. The estimated average annual yield is
provided in Table 2.
Table 2: Urban Runoff Sources
Source \ Month
South Salinas
Lake El Estero
Jan
52
24
Feb
41
15
Mar
34
14
Apr
16
5
May
2
1
Jun
0
0
Jul
0
0
Aug
0
0
Sep
2
1
Oct
8
4
Nov
23
10
Dec
47
13
Total
225
87
Surface Water Rights

The Proposed Project would use three new surface water diversion sites to provide new source waters for
recycling. The first two are from the Reclamation Ditch system, which has a drainage area of 157 squaremiles. The Reclamation Ditch carries seasonal stormwater flows, urban runoff from the City of Salinas
and agricultural tile drainage flows. Diversion points are proposed on the Reclamation Ditch at Davis
Road, and on the Tembladero Slough at Castroville, based on the proximity of the channel to existing
wastewater conveyance facilities. Schaaf & Wheeler5 estimated the yield from this system, assuming a
maximum 6 cfs diversion rate at Davis Road, maximum 3 cfs diversion rate at Castroville, and leaving an
in-stream flow of 2 cfs at Davis Road in the winter, 0.7 cfs in the summer, and 1 cfs at Castroville yearround. The average annual yields from these diversions are shown in Table 3, below.
Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow Impacts, March
2015
4 Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project, Urban Runoff Capture at Lake El
Estero, April 2014
5 Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Reclamation Ditch Yield Study, March 2015
3
-4-
3/26/2015
The third diversion is from the Blanco Drain, just above its confluence with the Salinas River. The
Blanco Drain conveys seasonal stormwater flows and agricultural tile drainage from 6,400 acres. Schaaf
& Wheeler6 estimated the yield from this system, assuming a maximum diversion rate of 6 cfs, as shown
in Table 3.
All of these diversions would require water rights permits from the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB).
Table 3: Surface Water Sources
Source \ Month
Reclamation Ditch
Tembladero Slough
Blanco Drain
Jan
162
131
209
Feb
143
117
223
Mar
165
142
246
Apr
162
154
252
May
97
145
225
Jun
132
67
274
Jul
129
66
277
Aug
121
62
244
Sep
80
41
184
Oct
87
45
168
Nov
98
50
133
Dec
146
115
185
Total
1,522
1,135
2,620
Secondary Treated Effluent

Secondary treated municipal effluent from the RTP is currently used as influent for the SVRP tertiary
treatment system or, when demand is low, disposed via the existing MRWPCA ocean outfall. Recycled
water production at the SVRP is managed to match the irrigation demands within the CSIP service area,
which peaks in the spring and summer. Flows which would otherwise go to the outfall may be diverted to
the GWR Project, as influent for the AWT Facility or the modified SVRP. Table 4 shows the average
flows to the ocean outfall during the period 2009-20137.
Table 4: Unused Secondary Treated Effluent
Source \ Month
Excess Effluent
Jan
1,785
Feb
1,219
Mar
1,141
Apr
420
May
88
Jun
49
Jul
27
Aug
34
Sep
114
Oct
859
Nov
1,314
Dec
1,175
Total
8,225
Proposed Project and CSIP Demands

The Proposed Project goal is to produce 3,500 AFY of highly treated (or purified recycled) water for
injection in the Seaside Groundwater Basin to allow CalAm to extract the same amount for treatment and
distribution to their customers in their Monterey District service area. To produce that volume,
approximately 4,320 AFY of source water inflows are required at the Advanced Water Treatment
Facility. During wet or normal water years, an additional 200 AFY may be produced and injected in the
winter months to develop a drought reserve. This would require an additional 248 AFY of source water.
The monthly distribution of this demand is shown in Table 5, below.
Source flows not required for the GWR Project would be made available to create additional recycled
water for the CSIP. Table 5 includes an estimate of new source flows in excess of the AWT inflow needs,
assuming seasonal storage of agricultural wash water (discussed below), year-round diversion of surface
water, and AWT Facility demands for a normal year building a drought reserve.
The CSIP system distributes recycled water, Salinas River water and well water from the Salinas Valley
Groundwater Basin to agricultural irrigation demands in the northern Salinas Valley. Well water is used
to meet peak summer demands in excess of the supply available from the other sources, and also to meet
low demands below the minimum production capacity of the SVRP (currently 5 MGD). Under the
proposed project, the SVRP would be modified to meet recycled water demands as low as 0.5 MGD.
This modification would allow the MCWRA to reduce the use of the CSIP wells, particularly in the
winter months when secondary treated effluent is available. The average CSIP well use for the period
6
7
Data provided by Bob Holden, MRWPCA, February 2014.
-5-
3/26/2015
2009-20138 is shown in Table 5. This provides a reasonable estimate of how much additional recycled
water could be used by CSIP in average year conditions.
Table 5: Monthly GWR and CSIP Use of New Supplies
Use \ Month
GWR Demand
Drought Reserve
New Supplies in
excess of AWT9
CSIP Wells Use
Jan
367
42
Feb
331
38
Mar
367
42
Apr
355
May
367
Jun
355
Jul
367
Aug
367
Sep
355
Oct
367
42
Nov
355
41
Dec
367
42
Total
4,320
248
117
448
129
195
158
304
541
440
514
324
709
606
540
476
504
504
320
300
0
76
0
233
50
354
3,582
4,260
Seasonal Storage at the SIWTF

To maximize the available supply during the peak irrigation months, the main ponds at the SIWTF would
be used for seasonal storage of agricultural wash water and Salinas urban stormwater. The analysis of
source water yield and proposed diversions assumes that during the months of October through March,
these flows would be directed to the SIWTF. In addition, for the source water assumptions, the use of the
drying beds and infiltration basins would be discontinued, so the only losses would be evaporation and
percolation from the main ponds. During the months of April through September, these flows would be
diverted to the municipal wastewater collection system for recycling and injection into the Seaside Basin
and tertiary treatment for CSIP. Stored water would also be pumped from the SIWTF ponds to the
municipal wastewater collection system.
Results of Source Water Availability Analysis
In the attached Table 6: Source Water Analysis, the monthly storage balance in the SIWTF ponds is
calculated for a normal water year. The inflow, rainfall, evaporation and percolation from Table 1 are
shown in rows 1, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. Urban Runoff from South Salinas is carried from Table 2 into
row 2. Assuming the ponds are empty at the start of October, they would remain wet for nine months a
year, maintaining the operational characteristics of the SIWTF and enabling continued contributions of
seepage water to Salinas River flows and recharge to the Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin10. The net
yield of agricultural wash water and Salinas stormwater for the Proposed Project is shown on line 8.
Other source flows from Tables 2 and 3 are shown on lines 9 through 12, and the net new supply is shown
on line 13. Line 16 shows the projected new supply to augment the CSIP area flows, and Line 23 shows
the supply needed for the GWR Project while developing a drought reserve. Assuming the agencies
divert all of the water shown on this table, there would still be approximately 6,400 AFY discharged
through the ocean outfall (line 26) during normal rainfall years.
Diversion and Use Scenarios
The MRWPCA has a goal of reusing 100% of the secondary treated municipal effluent at the RTP (i.e.,
having no discharge to the ocean), and operating the system as efficiently as possible to reduce the energy
demand. Therefore, the Proposed Project would prioritize the use of secondary treated effluent above the
diversion of surface water sources. The proposed priority of source usage is:
Data from Monterey County Water Recycling Projects/Salinas Valley Water Project/Salinas River Diversion
Facility Update, MCWRA Board Packet, February 24, 2014
9 Excess supplies are calculated as the total of new water conveyed to the RTP (not including secondary
treated effluent) minus the AWT Facility demand
10 Full diversion of flows was analyzed in the report: (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project,
Salinas River Inflow Impacts
8

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
-6-
3/26/2015
Unused secondary treated effluent

Agricultural wash water
Salinas storm water
Reclamation Ditch
Blanco Drain
Tembladero Slough
Lake El Estero
In the attached scenario tables, the use of the various sources is reduced to just meet the demands of the
AWT Facility and offset the current CSIP groundwater use in the wet season (OCT-MAR). During the
dry season (APR-SEP), surface water diversions are shown meeting the monthly AWT Facility demands
and providing extra flow for the CSIP, such that the annual use of new sources equals the annual AWT
Facility demands. In practice, the surface water diversions could be reduced or increased based on the
actual CSIP system demands, up to the total yields shown in Table 6. The demand scenarios considered
are:
Table 7: A normal water year while developing a drought reserve (AWT Facility producing 3,700
AFY)
Table 8: A normal water year with a full drought reserve (AWT Facility producing 3,500 AFY)
Table 9: A drought year starting with a full reserve (AWT Facility producing 2,700 AFY)
In the two normal year scenarios, surface water diversions were only required from the Reclamation Ditch
and the Blanco Drain, and only between April and October.
In the drought year scenario, the stormwater and wastewater availability were reduced. Urban runoff
from Salinas was assumed to be one-third of the historic average. Rainfall on the SIWTF ponds used the
2013 rainfall record (critically dry year). The unused secondary treated effluent values from 2013 were
used, also the historic low. The CSIP groundwater well use from OCT 2013 to SEP 2014 was used as the
CSIP augmentation target. Under this scenario, surface water diversions were required from the
Reclamation Ditch, Blanco Drain and Tembladero Slough, and the diversions were needed from March
through November.
-7-
3/26/2015
References:
City of Salinas, Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility, 2013 Annual Report, January 2014
Monterey County Water Resources Agency, Monterey County Water Recycling Projects/Salinas Valley
Water Project/Salinas River Diversion Facility Update, MCWRA Board Packet, February 24, 2014
Monterey County Water Resources Agency, Salinas Valley Water Project, Annual Flow Monitoring
Reports for Water Years 2010 2013.
Monterey County Water Resources Agency, Application to Appropriate Water, April 2014.
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, Source Water Spreadsheet Analysis, March, 2015.
Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project, Urban Runoff Capture at Lake
El Estero, April 2014
Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow Impacts,
March 2015
Schaaf & Wheeler, (Revised Draft) Reclamation Ditch Yield Study, March 2015
Todd Groundwater, (Draft) Memorandum: Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project:
Impacts of Changes in Percolation at the Salinas Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility on
Groundwater and the Salinas River, February 2015
Table 6: Source Water Analysis for the Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project
Full Surface Water Yields, Normal Water Year, Building a Drought Reserve
1
All facilities built - average water year conditions - all flows in acre-feet
Source Water Available for Recycling
Jan
City of Salinas
2
156
1 Salinas Agricultural Wash Water
3
Agricultural Wash Water (AWW) to Ponds
156
AWW directly to RTP
0
4
52
2 Salinas Urban Storm Water Runoff
Urban runoff to ponds
52
Urban runoff to RTP
0
5
3 Rainfall (on SIWTF, 121 acre pond area)
26
4 Evaporation (from SIWTF, 121 acre pond area)
7
5 Percolation
6 SIWTF pond storage balance

7 Recovery of flow from SIWTF storage ponds to RTP
8 AWW and Salinas Runoff to RTP
Water Rights Applications to SWRCB
9
9 Blanco Drain
10
10 Reclamation Ditch at Davis Road

11
11 Tembladero Slough at Castroville
12 City of Monterey - Diversion at Lake El Estero
13 Subtotal New Waters Available
Use of Source Water
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
3/26/2015
Total
158
201
307
311
391
435
444
367
410
329
223
3,732
158
0
201
0
0
307
0
311
0
391
0
435
0
444
0
367
410
0
329
0
223
0
1,477
2,255
41
41
0
34
34
0
16
0
16
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
8
8
0
23
23
0
47
47
0
225
205
20
24
21
11
14
24
132
(12)
(16)
(29)
(41)
(46)
(52)
(28)
(15)
(12)
(251)
(143)
(129)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(1,257)
684
0
0
763
0
0
847
0
0
647
32
355
362
100
413
0
172
563
0
0
435
0
0
444
0
0
369
253
0
0
466
0
0
605
0
0
304
2,579
209
223
246
252
225
274
277
244
184
168
133
185
2,620
162
143
165
162
97
132
129
121
80
87
98
146
1,522
131
24
526
117
15
498
142
14
567
154
5
928
145
1
881
67
0
1,036
66
0
907
62
0
871
41
1
675
45
4
304
50
10
291
115
13
459
1,135
87
7,943
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
448
0
448
195
0
195
304
0
304
0
573
573
0
514
514
0
681
681
0
540
540
0
504
504
0
320
320
76
0
76
233
0
233
354
0
354
1,610
3,132
4,742
Surface waters at RTP to AWT

Secondary effluent to AWT
AWW and Salinas urban runoff to AWT
Feedwater to AWT
409
0
0
409
369
0
0
369
409
0
0
409
0
0
355
355
0
0
367
367
0
0
355
355
0
0
367
367
0
0
367
367
0
0
355
355
304
105
0
409
291
105
0
396
409
0
0
409
2,191
210
2,166
4,567
Subtotal- all waters (including secondary effluent)
857
564
713
928
881
1,036
907
871
675
485
629
763
9,309
12
14 Secondary effluent to SVRP

13
15 New sources available to CSIP
16 Amount to augment CSIP Area Flows
17
18
19
20
Feb
21 FEEDWATER AMOUNT AT RTP TO GWR PROJECT AWTF

22 FEEDWATER TO ESTABLISH CSIP AREA DROUGHT RESERVE
(200 AFY AWTF PRODUCT WATER) 14
23 TOTAL TO GWR ADVANCED WATER TREATMENT FACILITY
367
331
367
355
367
355
367
367
355
367
355
367
4,320
42
409
38
369
42
409
355
367
355
367
367
355
42
409
41
396
42
409
248
4,568
24 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE CSIP AREA WELL WATER USE (2009-2013)
448
195
304
440
324
606
476
504
300
76
233
354
4,260
1,785
1,219
1,141
420
88
49
27
34
114
859
1,314
1,175
8,225
1,337
1,024
837
420
88
49
27
34
114
678
976
821
6,405
117
129
158
573
514
681
540
504
320
50
3,586
25 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO OCEAN OUTFALL

(2009-2013)15
26 WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO OCEAN OUTFALL WITH PROPOSED
DIVERSIONS TO CSIP/AWT 16
27 NEW SUPPLIES IN EXCESS OF AWT DEMANDS 17
Notes
1 Presumes all facilities associated with diversions are completed.
2 Table 2-1, p. 5, Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Engineers. Revised Draft, Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow Impacts, Prepared for Denise Duffy & Associates, February 2015.
3 Volume of effluent from City of Salinas agricultural wash water to be directed into ponds 1,2,3, and the aeration pond for storage.
4 Average monthly flow from Revised Draft, Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow Impacts, Prepared for Denise Duffy & Associates, February 2015.
5 Rainfall from Revised Draft, Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow Impacts, Prepared for Denise Duffy & Associates, February 2015. Pond area presumed to be Ponds 1,2, 3 + Aeration lagoon.
No rainfall/evaporation or storage assigned to drying beds.
6 Table 3, Todd Groundwater, Draft Memorandum, Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project: Impacts of Changes in Percolation at the Salinas Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility on
Groundwater and the Salinas River, February 11, 2015.
7 Table 4, Ibid.
8 Ponds 1,2,3 and aeration basin hold up to 1,065 acre-feet (one foot of freeboard). If flow to ponds would exceed the maximum volume, it is presumed that excess flow can be diverted to the RIBs or drying beds
or flow can be diverted to the RTP. Presume that pond storage goes to zero sometime during the year (shown here starting in July).
9 Max diversion = 6 cfs diversion. See REVISED DRAFT BLANCO DRAIN YIELD STUDY, Schaaf and Wheeler, December 2014.
10 Max. diversion = 6 cfs. See REVISED DRAFT RECLAMATION DITCH YIELD STUDY, Schaaf and Wheeler, March 2015. Note that flow figures shown here are a combination of flow estimates in the S&W analysis
made for the 2 cfs instream requirement Jan-May and 1 cfs instream requirement for June-Dec.
11 Max. diversion = 3 cfs. See REVISED DRAFT RECLAMATION DITCH YIELD STUDY, Schaaf and Wheeler, March 2015. Figures shown here are the difference between the combined Davis Road/TS diverison with
Seasonal Bypass. This presumes the preference is to remove flow at Davis Road first, rather than bypass flow to Tembaldero Slough.
12 Unused secondary effluent waste water currently discharged to Monterey Bay would be used in conjunction with improvements at the RTP to provide additional flow to the Salinas Valley Reclamation Project
(SVRP) during periods of low demand (i.e., < 5 mgd).
13 New source waters not used by AWT in the summer months will be available to SVRP for CSIP.
14 A drought reserve of up to 1,000 AF would be created over five years by producing 200 AFY additional product water from the GWR Project AWTF during winter months and storing the water in the Seaside Basin.
This would establish a "water bank" that the CSIP can draw on in droughts. The drought reserve would allow flow at the RTP for the GWR Project to be temporarily reduced during critically dry periods, thus
freeing up more of the newly available inflows to the RTP to be sent to the CSIP area. Extraction from the Seaside Basin would continue at the average rate to supply the Monterey Peninsula.
15 Average monthly RTP discharge, 2009-2013 (reported by MRWPCA).
16 Secondary treated municpal effluent not used for SVRP/CSIP or the AWT.
17 Excess is calculated as Line 13 minus Line 23
CSIP-GWR-use06APR15.xlsx/DEIR Sources
4/10/2015
Diversion Pattern for a Normal Water Year, Building a Drought Reserve
1
Jan
City of Salinas
2
156
3
156
AWW directly to RTP
0
4
52
52
Urban runoff to RTP
0
5
26
7
5 Percolation

9
9 Blanco Drain
10

11
Use of Source Water
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
3/26/2015
Total
158
201
307
311
391
435
444
367
410
329
223
3,732
158
0
201
0
0
307
0
311
0
391
0
435
0
444
0
367
410
0
329
0
223
0
1,477
2,255
41
41
0
34
34
0
16
0
16
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
8
8
0
23
23
0
47
47
0
225
205
20
24
21
11
14
24
132
(12)
(16)
(29)
(41)
(46)
(52)
(28)
(15)
(12)
(251)
(143)
(129)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(1,257)
684
0
0
763
0
0
847
0
0
647
32
355
362
100
413
0
172
563
0
0
435
0
0
444
0
0
369
253
0
0
466
0
0
605
0
0
304
2,579
64
225
274
277
244
184
1,268
162
97
132
129
121
80
721
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
581
0
0
735
0
0
969
0
0
841
0
0
809
0
0
633
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,568
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
448
0
448
195
0
195
304
0
304
420
226
646
88
368
456
49
614
663
27
474
501
34
442
476
114
278
392
76
0
76
233
0
233
354
0
354
2,342
2,402
4,744

Feedwater to AWT
0
409
0
409
0
369
0
369
0
409
0
409
0
0
355
355
0
0
367
367
0
0
355
355
0
0
367
367
0
0
367
367
0
0
355
355
0
409
0
409
0
396
0
396
0
409
0
409
0
2,401
2,166
4,567
857
564
713
1,001
823
1,018
868
843
747
485
629
763
9,311
12, 17
14 Scondary effluent to SVRP

13
17
18
19
20
Feb

367
331
367
355
367
355
367
367
355
367
355
367
4,320
42
409
38
369
42
409
355
367
355
367
367
355
42
409
41
396
42
409
248
4,568
448
195
304
440
324
606
476
504
300
76
233
354
4,260
1,785
1,219
1,141
420
88
49
27
34
114
859
1,314
1,175
8,225
928
655
428
374
685
412
3,482

(2009-2013)15
Notes
7 Table 4, Ibid.
17 Assume all unused secondary effluent is used by SVRP/CSIP in APR-SEP
CSIP-GWR-use06APR15.xlsx/Normal_Building_Reserve
4/10/2015
Diversion Pattern for a Normal Water Year when the Drought Reserve is Full
1
Jan
City of Salinas
2
156
3
156
AWW directly to RTP
0
4
52
52
Urban runoff to RTP
0
5
26
7
5 Percolation

9
9 Blanco Drain
10

11
Use of Source Water
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
3/26/2015
Total
158
201
307
311
391
435
444
367
410
329
223
3,732
158
0
201
0
0
307
0
311
0
391
0
435
0
444
0
367
410
0
329
0
223
0
1,477
2,255
41
41
0
34
34
0
16
0
16
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
8
8
0
23
23
0
47
47
0
225
205
20
24
21
11
14
24
132
(12)
(16)
(29)
(41)
(46)
(52)
(28)
(15)
(12)
(251)
(143)
(129)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(1,257)
684
0
0
763
0
0
847
0
0
647
32
355
362
100
413
0
172
563
0
0
435
0
0
444
0
0
369
253
0
0
466
0
0
605
0
0
304
2,579
161
153
189
152
173
192
1,020
162
97
132
129
121
80
721
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
678
0
0
663
0
0
884
0
0
716
0
0
738
0
0
641
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,320
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
448
0
448
195
0
195
304
0
304
420
323
743
88
296
384
49
529
578
27
349
376
34
371
405
114
286
400
76
0
76
233
0
233
354
0
354
2,342
2,154
4,496

Feedwater to AWT
0
367
0
367
0
331
0
331
0
367
0
367
0
0
355
355
0
0
367
367
0
0
355
355
0
0
367
367
0
0
367
367
0
0
355
355
0
367
0
367
0
355
0
355
0
367
0
367
0
2,154
2,166
4,320
815
526
671
1,098
751
933
743
772
755
443
588
721
8,816
12

13
17
18
19
20
Feb

367
331
367
355
367
355
367
367
355
367
355
367
4,320
0
367
0
331
0
367
355
367
355
367
367
355
0
367
0
355
0
367
0
4,320
448
195
304
440
324
606
476
504
300
76
233
354
4,260
1,785
1,219
1,141
420
88
49
27
34
114
859
1,314
1,175
8,225
970
693
470
416
726
454
3,729

(2009-2013)15
Notes
7 Table 4, Ibid.
CSIP-GWR-use06APR15.xlsx/Normal_Full_Reserve
4/10/2015
Diversion Pattern for a Drought Year Starting with a Full Drought Reserve
1
Jan
City of Salinas
2
156
3
156
AWW directly to RTP
0
4
17
2 Salinas Urban Storm Water Runoff, 1/3 Average
17
Urban runoff to RTP
0
5
3 Rainfall (Year 2013 rate on SIWTF, 121 acre pond area)
11
7
5 Percolation

9
9 Blanco Drain
10

11
Use of Source Water
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
3/26/2015
Total
158
201
307
311
391
435
444
367
410
329
223
3,732
158
0
201
0
0
307
0
311
0
391
0
435
0
444
0
367
410
0
329
0
223
0
1,477
2,255
14
14
0
11
11
0
5
0
5
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
3
3
0
8
8
0
16
16
0
76
69
7
36
(12)
(16)
(29)
(41)
(46)
(52)
(28)
(15)
(12)
(251)
(143)
(129)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(138)
(143)
(1,257)
550
0
0
584
0
0
628
0
0
452
0
312
163
100
412
(27)
0
391
0
0
435
0
0
444
0
0
368
245
0
0
433
0
0
521
0
0
100
2,362
246
252
225
274
277
244
184
168
133
2,003
165
162
97
132
129
121
80
87
98
1,071
0
0
0
0
0
0
132
0
543
154
0
880
145
0
879
67
0
864
66
0
907
62
0
871
41
0
673
45
0
300
50
0
281
0
0
0
762
0
6,198
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
509
0
509
9
0
9
87
176
263
0
747
747
0
742
742
0
731
731
0
770
770
0
734
734
0
540
540
75
0
75
35
0
35
730
0
730
1,445
4,441
5,886

Feedwater to AWT
0
367
0
367
0
331
0
331
367
0
0
367
0
0
133
133
0
0
137
137
0
0
133
133
0
0
137
137
0
0
137
137
0
0
133
133
300
67
0
367
281
74
0
355
0
367
0
367
948
1,206
809
2,963
876
340
630
880
879
864
907
871
673
442
390
1,097
8,849
12

13
17
18
19
20
Feb

367
331
367
133
137
133
137
137
133
367
355
367
2,963
0
367
0
331
0
367
133
137
133
137
137
133
0
367
0
355
0
367
0
2,963
24 PEAK CSIP WELL WATER USE (OCT 2013-SEP2014)
509
221
242
1,197
1,261
1,303
1,025
453
165
35
730
7,150
1,725
802
87
142
507
1,607
4,870
849
462
398
510
2,219
25 DRY YEAR WASTEWATER EFFLUENT TO OCEAN OUTFALL (2013) 15

(0)
Notes
4 Assume dry year at 1/3 the average monthly values from Revised Draft, Groundwater Replenishment Project, Salinas River Inflow Impacts, Prepared for Denise Duffy & Associates, February 2015.
7 Table 4, Ibid.
15 Monthly RTP discharge during critically dry year, 2013 (reported by MRWPCA).
CSIP-GWR-use06APR15.xlsx/Drought_Full_Reserve
4/10/2015
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING

SOURCE WATERS AND WATER RECYCLING
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) is made this 8th day of October

2014, by and between Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, the Monterey
County Water Resources Agency, the City of Salinas, the Marina Coast Water District, and
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, collectively the Parties.
The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (PCA) was formed as a California
Joint Powers Agency by a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Monterey Regional Water
Pollution Control Agency, effective June 29, 1979. The Monterey County Water Resources
Agency (WRA) was established in 1995 pursuant to the Monterey County Water Resources
Agency Act. The City of Salinas (Salinas) is a California charter city and municipal
corporation. The Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) is a county water district established
in 1960 pursuant to Water Code 30000, et seq. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management
District (MPWMD) was established in 1977 as a California special district pursuant to the
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Law (Chapter 527 of the Statutes of 1977, as
amended, found at Water Code Appendix (Water C. App.) 118-1, et. seq.)
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, PCA entered into an Annexation Agreement, dated April 25, 1989, with MCWD
providing, among other things, annexation of MCWD and for it to become a member entity of
MRWPCA; and,
WHEREAS, the Annexation Agreement between PCA and MCWD provides MCWD a water
right entitlement equal, as a minimum, to the volume of MCWD wastewater treated by PCA;
and,
WHEREAS, PCA entered into an agreement with WRA, dated June 16, 1992, for construction
and operation of a tertiary treatment system (the 1992 Agreement), with subsequent
amendments thereto, as follows: Amendment No. 1 on May 30, 1994; Amendment No. 2 on
February 16, 1998; and, Amendment No. 3 on May 28, 2002; and,
WHEREAS, the 1992 Agreement, as amended, caused WRA to finance $29,763,849.56 in
tertiary treatment and related facilities; and,
WHEREAS, PCA and Monterey Peninsula Water Management District on May 20, 2013
entered into a Cost Sharing Agreement for the planning and development of the Pure Water
Monterey Groundwater Replenishment (GWR) Project for the advanced treatment and
recycling of a variety of source waters for indirect potable reuse;
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in reliance on the foregoing, the Parties hereby agree to negotiate
a Definitive Agreement to establish contractual rights and obligations of all Parties, containing,
as a minimum, the following provisions:
1.
Protection of MCWDs Recycled Water Right Entitlement

a. Reaffirmation by PCA of MCWDs recycled water right entitlement granted to
MCWD pursuant to Paragraph 12 of the April 25, 1989 Annexation Agreement
between PCA and MCWD.
b. Reaffirmation that MCWDs recycled water right is the senior right.
c. MCWD, in use of its recycled water entitlement, will comply with all applicable
requirements set forth in Contract No. 5-07-20-W1284, between the Bureau of
Reclamation and WRA including, but not limited to, those contained in
Paragraphs 10b and 10c, all at MCWDs sole cost and expense.
d. MCWDs recycled water right entitlement may be made contractually available
by MCWD to another Party and may be made available to WRA for CSIP if not
utilized by MCWD, or its assignee, in any given year.
2. Provision of Recycled Water to WRA

a. WRA to be supplied recycled water during the agricultural growing season in a
minimum volume equal to the wastewater flows to the Regional Treatment Plant
from all existing PCA members, plus treated waters originating from a variety of
newly identified additional incremental and interruptible sources described in
Section 3.a. hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 3.a.iii.
b. The cost of primary and secondary treatment of Salinas agricultural wash water,
estimated at $179/acre-foot in 2014, to be paid to PCA by Salinas, the future rates
for which to be established pursuant to Section 3(o) hereof.
c. The cost of tertiary treatment of agricultural wash water to be paid to PCA by
WRA, the future rates for which will be established by a protocol to be set forth in
the Definitive Agreement.
Page 2 of 8
3. Phase I GWR Project Water and CSIP Area Additional Water

a. Phase I to provide water from newly identified sources that are incremental
additions over and above the incoming wastewater flows as identified in the 1992
Agreement, which consists of Salinas agricultural wash water, Salinas
stormwater, all recoverable Reclamation Ditch water diverted at Davis Road, a
portion of Tembladero Slough water diverted at Castroville, all recoverable
Blanco Drain water, Lake El Estero stormwater, and reoperation of the Salinas
ponds to store winter flows for summer use. Such waters may also include
additional stormwater from other locations on the Monterey Peninsula. Phase I
includes both (a) improvements to the SVRP in order to provide winter water to
offset pumping at CSIP (contingent upon WRA completing hydraulic
modifications to the existing CSIP system), and (b) treatment of wastewater from
the Regional Treatment Plant that has been determined to be excess and not
processed by the SVRP, provided, however, that PCA not curtail SVRP
operations to produce said excess water, but in both cases such sources are not
considered incremental additions.
i. Projected annual amounts are 4,320 acre-feet for GWR
Project, and 5,292 acre-feet for CSIP Area Replacement
Water, and 248 acre-feet GWR to be held in drought
reserve. These are approximate amounts based on average
year conditions, but actual amounts will vary annually;
ii. Projected costs of Phase I water are to be defined in the
Definitive Agreement, consistent with Sections 3(k) and
3(l) below and subject to third party review as discussed in
Miscellaneous below;
iii. Except for the commitments under Section 3.j. below, the
Parties agree that Salinas agricultural wash water may be
utilized by PCA for the time period necessary for an
average annual amount of 4,320 acre-feet for the GWR
Project to be achieved from Phase I Additional Sources.
However, PCA is obligated to endeavor to develop the
additional supplies identified under Section 3.a. and
transition a portion of the agricultural wash water for the
benefit of CSIP and WRA.
Page 3 of 8
iv. The Definitive Agreement to only apply to wastewater

from existing PCA members and derived from the PCAs
2001 Service Area and water sources identified in Sections
3.a. and 3.q. Any future additions or annexations to the
PCA Service Area or future sources outside of the 2001
Service Area will be subject to future agreement(s).
b. Phase I to be operational in 2017, but the Parties will adjust schedule for
construction and operation if and as needed.
c. WRAs participation in Phase I to be contingent upon its successful completion of
the Proposition 218 process, if applicable.
d. In 2014 WRA filed an application with the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) for water rights to appropriate waters of the Blanco Drain for the
purpose of providing additional waters for CSIP and for domestic supplies within
the Salinas River Valley; and, for water rights to appropriate waters of the
Reclamation Ditch and Tembladero Slough for the purpose of providing
additional waters for CSIP and for domestic supplies within the Salinas River
Valley. The Parties agree that such water rights shall be retained exclusively by
WRA. The Parties to pay pro rata all costs associated with WRAs procurement
and retention of Blanco Drain, Tembladero Slough, and Reclamation Ditch water
rights. The Parties agree to work jointly on obtaining the water rights. The
Parties may agree to apply for water rights in increments to facilitate issuance of
permits.
e. CSIP participants to be separately responsible for the tertiary treatment costs of
the water processed and delivered through the SVRP. GWR participants to be
separately responsible for the costs of advanced water treatment through the
GWR facilities.
f. The Parties to work cooperatively and collaboratively among themselves, in good
faith, to determine appropriate crop irrigation water quality standards for water
supplies.
g. The Parties to work cooperatively and collaboratively among themselves, in good
faith, to determine if, when, and how much of each water will be collected and
sent to the RTP for treatment.
Page 4 of 8
h. Excess flows to be made available to each other Party, as may be desired.

Excess flows to be defined in the Definitive Agreement, but are generally
accepted to mean waters available for treatment at the SVRP or GWR facilities,
but not desired by the project participants to be processed and delivered at that
period of time.
i. PCA to have rights to the first 4,320 acre-feet annually of the new incremental
waters defined under Section 3.a. above, plus amounts in the six winter months to
produce 200 acre-feet to be placed in drought reserve. WRA can request that
PCA schedule withdrawals from the drought reserve in lieu of processing the
incremental waters in order to make a like amount available to CSIP in time of
need. Withdrawals will be limited to no more than the amount on deposit in the
drought reserve.
j. WRA to receive the agricultural wash water on terms similar to the Produce Wash
Water Agreement, dated 1 July 2014, in 2015, 2016, and 2017 and until the GWR
project becomes operational.
k. PCA, at its cost and expense, to use its consultant to prepare a comprehensive rate
analysis, to devise appropriate Interruptible Rates that will likely be less
expensive than current non-Interruptible Rates for pumping, odor control, primary
and secondary treatment. Separate Interruptible Rates to apply to each water
source, but each separate Interruptible Rate to be subject to future escalation
consistent with standard factors for operation and maintenance inflation over
time. WRA will not pay rates for water it does not receive.
l. Capital costs to be shared by PCA and WRA proportional to the waters projected
to be made available on an average annual basis. Fixed pro rata capital costs to be
paid annually by the Parties, irrespective of water requested or received.
However, the calculation of pro rata shares of capital costs to be based only upon
facilities actually built and average annual water expected to be made available
vis the constructed facilities. In recognition of potential, yet undetermined,
benefits of the existing operations of the Salinas Industrial Ponds to the recharge
of the groundwater basin and the Salinas River for purposes of calculating water
made available to CSIP 33% of the water attributable to the Salinas agricultural
wash water would not be counted in the calculation of the proportional cost to
WRA. Annual recovery of fixed capital costs to include any annual capitalized
costs for facilities leased by PCA for the furnishing of water to the Parties.
Page 5 of 8
m. PCA subject to concurrence by the rate study to waive all capacity charges for use
of water on an Interruptible basis from presently identified water sources to be
included in Phase I or Phase II.
n. Pursuant to subsequent agreement and lease, PCA and Salinas to negotiate a
separate agreement and lease and develop a seasonal working protocol for
diversion of Salinas Industrial Ponds (Agricultural Wash Water) and storm water
as allowed by available storage. PCA to pay Salinas an annual lease payment to
be recovered in the cost of water in accord with criteria to be established in the
Definitive Agreement.
o. PCA, if it uses tertiary treated water for the GWR Project, to comply with all
applicable requirements set forth in Contract No. 5-07-20-W1284, between the
Bureau of Reclamation and WRA including, but not limited to, those contained in
Paragraphs 10b and 10c, all at PCAs sole cost and expense.
Phase II CSIP Area Additional Water

p. Phase II to provide water from newly identified sources that are incremental
additions over and above the incoming wastewater flows as identified in the 1992
Agreement, as amended, and may consist of diversion of remaining Tembladero
Slough water, potential future advanced treated water, and UniKool water.
q. Phase II to approximate up to 3,754 AFA of new water.
r. Phase II to be operational by 2022.
s. Projected costs of Phase II will be determined in the future, consistent with
engineering feasibility analysis, preliminary design, and third party rate consultant
analysis.
t. Phase II would be contingent on its successful completion of the Proposition 218
process, if applicable.
4. Accounting Protocols
PCA to enter into a separate agreement with WRA by December 31, 2014 to achieve the
following:
Page 6 of 8
a. PCAs adoption of activity-based costing for all its CSIP, SRDF and SVRP
activities.
b. Revision of the various financial protocols currently utilized to achieve one
standard protocol for each of CSIP, SRDF and SVRP.
c. Allocation methodologies for costs associated with CSIP, SRDF, and SVRP.
d. An annual audit of PCAs financial transactions related to CSIP, SRDF and SVRP
at WRA expense.
e. PCA to credit to the CSIP and SVRP accounts any pro rata revenues it receives
from byproducts of tertiary treated wastewater.
f. A third-party agreed upon by both PCA and WRA to be hired to design and
implement these Accounting Protocols.
MISCELLANEOUS
1. This Memorandum of Understanding is intended to provide a framework for negotiation
of a Definitive Agreement. This Memorandum is not intended to create binding
contractual obligations and other essential terms in addition to those set forth in this
Memorandum are to be negotiated and agreed upon before the Parties reach a Definitive
Agreement.
2. It is recognized and acknowledged that the Parties may not agree upon or enter into a
Definitive Agreement. In such an event, no Party shall make any claim against any other
Party related to the failure to enter into a Definitive Agreement.
3. An independent third-party review of proposed capital and operating costs to be
performed before WRA Board approval of the Definitive Agreement.
4. The term of the Definitive Agreement to be 30 years or as subsequently agreed upon in
5. The Definitive Agreement may result in an Amendment to the 1992 Agreement and the
amendments thereto. All previous Amendments will be reviewed to ensure conformity
and continuity of relevant provisions. Amendment No.3 to be novated by the Definitive
Agreement and any terms of Amendment No.3 that remain applicable will be restated in
Page 7 of 8
6. The Definitive Agreement will incorporate standard contract language to govern

enforcement and resolution of disputes.
7. This Memorandum of Understanding will expire the earlier of (i) execution of a
Definitive Agreement, or (ii) March 31, 2015.
8. Individuals whose signatures appear on this document represent, warrant, and guarantee
they are authorized to execute this document on behalf of those entities on whose behalf
they purport to execute this document.
WITNESS, the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, the Monterey County
Water Resources Agency, the City of Salinas, the Marina Coast Water District, and the Monterey
Peninsula Water Management District entered into this Memorandum of Understanding as of the
date first written above.
MONTEREY REGIONAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
By:
Dennis Allion, Board Chair
MONTEREY COUNTY WATER RESOURCES AGENCY
By:
Louis R. Calcagno, Chair of the Board of Supervisors
CITY OF SALINAS
By:
Joe Gunter, Mayor
MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT
By:
Thomas P. Moore, Board President
MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
By:
David Potter, Board Chair
Page 8 of 8

DEIR Appendix B

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEIR Appendix B

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEIR Appendix B

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appendix B

Source Water Assumptions Memorandum

Pure Water Monterey GWR Project

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

Pure Water Monterey GWR Project

3 Quail Run Circle, Suite 101

Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS

March 26, 2015

Bob Holden, MRWPCA

Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project Proposed Source Water

To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson

To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson

Table 1: Agricultural Wash Water

Urban Stormwater Runoff

Surface Water Rights

To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson

Secondary Treated Effluent

Proposed Project and CSIP Demands

To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson

Seasonal Storage at the SIWTF

To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson

Unused secondary treated effluent

To: Bob Holden & Larry Hampson

6 SIWTF pond storage balance

10 Reclamation Ditch at Davis Road

Use of Source Water

Surface waters at RTP to AWT

Subtotal- all waters (including secondary effluent)

14 Secondary effluent to SVRP

21 FEEDWATER AMOUNT AT RTP TO GWR PROJECT AWTF

24 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE CSIP AREA WELL WATER USE (2009-2013)

25 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO OCEAN OUTFALL

6 SIWTF pond storage balance

10 Reclamation Ditch at Davis Road

Use of Source Water

Surface waters at RTP to AWT

Subtotal- all waters (including secondary effluent)

14 Scondary effluent to SVRP

21 FEEDWATER AMOUNT AT RTP TO GWR PROJECT AWTF

24 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE CSIP AREA WELL WATER USE (2009-2013)

25 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO OCEAN OUTFALL

6 SIWTF pond storage balance

10 Reclamation Ditch at Davis Road

Use of Source Water

Surface waters at RTP to AWT

Subtotal- all waters (including secondary effluent)

14 Scondary effluent to SVRP

21 FEEDWATER AMOUNT AT RTP TO GWR PROJECT AWTF

24 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE CSIP AREA WELL WATER USE (2009-2013)

25 FIVE YEAR AVERAGE WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO OCEAN OUTFALL

6 SIWTF pond storage balance

10 Reclamation Ditch at Davis Road

Use of Source Water

Surface waters at RTP to AWT

Subtotal- all waters (including secondary effluent)

14 Scondary effluent to SVRP

21 FEEDWATER AMOUNT AT RTP TO GWR PROJECT AWTF

24 PEAK CSIP WELL WATER USE (OCT 2013-SEP2014)