REGULAR MEETING OF THE WATER RESOURCES … Resource Committee/2005... · decreased injection needs...

Water Resources Committee Page 1 of 2 February 3, 2005

REGULAR MEETING OF THE WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

WATER REPLENISHMENT DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 12621 E. 166th Street (Corner, Bloomfield & 166th), Cerritos, California

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2005

9:00 A.M.

AGENDA

EACH ITEM ON THE AGENDA, NO MATTER HOW DESCRIBED, SHALL BE DEEMED TO INCLUDE ANY APPROPRIATE MOTION, WHETHER TO ADOPT A MINUTE MOTION, RESOLUTION, PAYMENT OF ANY BILL, APPROVAL OF ANY MATTER OR ACTION, OR ANY OTHER ACTION. ITEMS LISTED AS “FOR INFORMATION” MAY ALSO BE THE SUBJECT OF ANY “ACTION” TAKEN BY THE BOARD OR A COMMITTEE AT THE SAME MEETING. I. DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM II. PUBLIC COMMENT III. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2004

Staff Recommendation: Receive and file. IV. NGWA WATER SUMMIT

Staff Recommendation: Approve up to three (3) of the WRD Technical Staff attend the NGWA Water Summit.

V. NATURAL GAS VS. ELECTRICITY FOR THE GOLDSWORTHY

DESALTER Staff Recommendation: For information.

VI. REGIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT – 2004

Staff Recommendation: Receive and file. VII. GROUNDWATER BASIN UPDATE

Staff Recommendation: For information. VIII. ESR UPDATE

Staff Recommendation: For information. IX. LEO J. VANDERLANS WATER TREATMENT FACILITY UPDATE

Staff Recommendation: For information. X. LEO J. VANDERLANS PERMIT UPDATE

Staff Recommendation: For information. XI. WEST COAST BASIN OPERATING PLAN UPDATE

Staff Recommendation: For information.

Water Resources Committee Page 2 of 2 February 3, 2005

XII. WB-28 SERVICE CONNECTION Staff Recommendation: For information.

XIII. OVERVIEW OF THE MONTEBELLO FOREBAY SPREADING

GROUNDS Staff Recommendation: For information. XIV. ADJOURNMENT Posted by Abigail C. Andom, Deputy Secretary, January 28, 2005.

Water Resources Committee Meeting Page 1 of 3 December 8, 2004

MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2004 REGULAR MEETING OF THE WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE

OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS WATER REPLENISHMENT DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

A regular meeting of the Water Resources Committee of the Board of Directors of the Water Replenishment District of Southern California was held on December 8, 2004 at 12:32 p.m., at the District Office, 12621 E. 166th Street, Cerritos, California. Chairperson Albert Robles called the meeting to order and presided thereover. Sheryll A. Petty recorded the minutes. I. DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM Attendees at the meeting were as follows:

Committee: Directors Albert Robles and Robert W. Goldsworthy Staff: Ted Johnson, Mario Garcia, Hoover Ng, Helene Mendoza, Paul Fu, Mary Sellers, Charlene King. II. PUBLIC COMMENT None.

III. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 2004

The minutes from the November 8, 2004 were approved as submitted.

IV. GROUNDWATER BASIN UPDATE Chief Hydrogeologist Ted Johnson provided an update on replenishment activities and groundwater conditions in the Central and West Coast Basins. Precipitation for October was 4.56 inches which was 1,572% of the normal October average of 0.29 inches. Total pumping for October was 18,825 acre feet, which is 8.6% lower than last year. Groundwater elevation was measured at 93.2 feet on 11/26/04 which is 6.6 feet above the level at the same time last year but still 22 feet below the District’s upper water level goal for well 1601T. Water levels have risen 15 feet since October 1 as a result of the heavy October rains and a large amount of storm water conservation.

Preliminary figures of the total water conserved for the Water Year Ending 09/30/04 in the Montebello Forebay Spreading Grounds was 107,762 acre feet.

The total barrier water injection amounts for the year ending 09/30/04 was 22,938 acre feet which is about 8,400 acre feet less than budgeted due to decreased injection needs at WBBP, installation of telemetry at WBBP and new DGBP wells not online in WY 2003/04.

Other matters highlighted by Mr. Johnson included: the District’s order of nearly 38,000 acre feet of imported spreading water from MWD was initiated and will


take several months to fill; District staff provided comments to the Department of Health Services on the latest Draft Regulations on recyled water for recharge; Staff will bring the Regional Groundwater Monitoring Report to the Committee for approval in January 2005.

V. LEO J. VANDER LANS WATER TREATMENT FACILITY- PRODUCT WATER PUMP REPAIR

About two months ago, the plant began experiencing startup problems with two of the product water pumps in the clearwell (finished water reservoir). Because the manufacturer’s warranty had expired, Staff solicited and received quotes from Floway (the pump manufacturer) and General Pump Company (GPC, a major local pump services firm) for removing and shipping one pump to a shop for inspection. GPC, with a lower fee, was selected for the service. GPC prepared a diagnosis report that suggested that the rubber bearings were swollen probably due to the pumps operating at low net positive suction head (NPSH), which likely resulted from low water levels in the clear well. The low water level was an operational problem resulting from erratic level readings by an ultra sound level meter. This problem has since been resolved. GPS recommends that the rubber bearings be replaced with new ones. The report also recommends that the pump column be replaced with corrosion-resistant 316 stainless steel material. It is difficult and not economical to obtain a second quote from another company for the repair work because the large pump would have to be shipped to another company’s shop to perform a separate yet similar diagnosis. Both the transport and diagnosis would incur costs already borne by the District. The Committee will recommend to the Board that the contract to repair the two water pumps be awarded to General Pump Company.

VI. LEO J. VANDER LANS WATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROJECT – NOTICE OF COMPLETION All phases of construction have been completed at the Leo J. Vander Lans Water Treatment Facility. Aside from the replacement of a valve actuator, PK Contractors and its subcontractors have completed the remaining construction- related issues and overall contract-required work. All major components of the facility have been constructed and/or installed. Operational and maintenance training was provided to the Long Beach Water Department operators. The treatment facility can be formally accepted and a Notice of Completion should be filed. Final retention minus the cost of installing the actuator can be released to the contractor pending clearance of all Stop Notices. The Committee will recommend to the Board to formally accept the Leo J.Vander Lans Water Treatment Facility from PK Contractors, Inc., authorize the General Manager to file a Notice of Completion and release the final contract retention.


VII. WEST COAST BASIN OPERATING PLAN

Assistant General Manager Mario Garcia updated the committee on the progress of the study that was initiated in late October. He noted that staff and the consultant have conducted several stakeholder interviews including Manhattan Beach, Cal Water Service, LADWP, Central & West Basin MWDs, Southern California Water Company, L.A. County Dept. of Public Works, and the Carson group of refineries. A few more will be scheduled in the coming weeks. Director Robles reiterated an earlier request that the directors be interviewed also, and Mr. Garcia assured that that would be done. Director Robles also had questions regarding the structure of the interviews and requested that the consultant be present at the January meeting of the committee.

VIII. WB-28 SERVICE CONNECTION

Staff met with WBMWD, MWD, and L.A. County Dept. of Public Works the previous month to coordinate possible solutions to the low flow penalty situation at WB-28. Mr. Garcia also noted that a follow-up meeting with WBMWD, LACDPW and City of El Segundo was scheduled for the following day to investigate the possibility of a short term solution that would involve increased flow at the connection by El Segundo. It was also noted that a letter from WBMWD had been sent to the CEO of MWD requesting a waiver of the low flow penalties incurred at WB-28. No word had yet come from MWD on whether or not such a waiver would be granted. Staff will closely follow this issue and provide further update to the committee in January.

IX. ADJOURNMENT

With no further business for the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

______________________ Chairperson ATTEST: _________________________ Director

Conference Request – NGWA Ground Water Summit

Page 1 of 9 Water Resources Committee February 3, 2005

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. IV. DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2005

TO: WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE

FROM: ROBB WHITAKER, GENERAL MANAGER

SUBJECT: CONFERENCE REQUEST -- NGWA’S GROUND WATER SUMMIT APRIL 17 - 20, 2005

SUMMARY The National Ground Water Association (NGWA) is the premier organization for groundwater professionals worldwide. NGWA provides information and education on the latest groundwater issues and technologies. Attendance at NGWA conferences and courses is one of best methods for facilitating information exchange among groundwater professionals. NGWA’s Ground Water Summit is a new technical conference that will debut on April 17 – 20, 2005, in San Antonio, Texas. It will engage local, national and international engineers and scientists in a venue that facilitates the exchange and dissemination of technical information and new scientific developments and provides a means for discussing policy and regulatory issues pertaining to groundwater. The Ground Water Summit will cover an extensive range of topics, to allow recent issues and advances in groundwater science, technology, and policy to be highlighted. Accordingly, WRD Staff submitted an abstract for the conference, summarizing the comprehensive capabilities offered by our Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program. The abstract was accepted for a poster presentation at the conference. The abstract and conference information are attached to this writeup. Estimated expenses to attend the conference are about $2,000 per person. FISCAL IMPACT Approximately $2,000 per person. This is a budgeted item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommend that the Board authorize the attendance of up to three WRD Technical Staff at the NGWA’s Ground Water Summit.

Prepared by: Nancy Matsumoto

Reviewed by: Ted Johnson



Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program for the Central and West Coast Groundwater Basins, Los Angeles County, California

Nancy L. Matsumoto and Anthony P. Kirk

Water Replenishment District of Southern California

Abstract The Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD or the District) manages two of the most utilized groundwater basins in Southern California, providing more than a third of the water used by the nearly four million people living within the District’s boundaries. These Central and West Coast Groundwater Basins (CWCB) extend 420 square miles through southern Los Angeles County and are among the region’s most reliable natural water resources. The CWCB were adjudicated in the early 1960s to limit groundwater production and to stabilize declining groundwater levels. Natural recharge is now supplemented through artificial replenishment activities, including coastal injection barriers and percolation basin spreading with imported and recycled water. Significant challenges to groundwater management in the CWCB include seawater intrusion, sustainable pumping and control of pollution sources. A key aspect to managing these highly populated basins is to have a thorough and current understanding of their respective groundwater conditions. This is achieved through effective data collection and management, which yield the necessary information to determine the “health” of the basins and provide a scientific basis for water resources planning and management. The District’s Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program (RGWMP) encompasses much of this data collection and management, as well as data evaluation and recommendations for groundwater resource management. This program has been in place since 1998. The program currently consists of approximately 200 nested monitoring wells at 45 locations throughout the District. These nested wells were installed in a cooperative effort between WRD and the U.S. Geological Survey. Each nested well monitors the major aquifers encountered at its respective location. Water quality samples from the nested monitoring wells are collected twice per year. Water levels are measured daily in most monitoring wells with automatic data loggers, while water levels in all monitoring wells are measured manually by WRD field staff a minimum of four times per year. WRD monitors over 150 water quality constituents including major minerals, common groundwater contaminants, and emergent chemicals on the regulatory horizon. Water quality data from the nested monitoring wells are supplemented with information from nearby production wells to capture the most accurate information available. WRD staff, comprised of Certified Hydrogeologists and Registered Professional Engineers, provide the in-house capability to collect, analyze and report on these groundwater data. The data are stored electronically in the District’s extensive database and Geographic Information System (GIS). WRD Hydrogeology staff prepare an annual report that documents groundwater production, groundwater level, and groundwater quality conditions throughout the District. Data are also made available to stakeholders, the public and consultants through the Internet via an interactive GIS well search tool on the WRD Web Site (http://wrd.org). Work associated with the RGWMP also supports activities relating to both replenishment and water quality protection projects.



2005 Ground Water Summit (#5095) April 17-20, 2005 _ Hyatt Regency San Antonio _ San Antonio, Texas

Before March 4 After March 4

NGWA Member $295 $375 Nonmember $445 $525 Full-Time Student (I.D. required) $100 $100 Workshops (Space is limited and pre-registration is encouraged.) Workshop One: Eight-Hour OSHA Refresher Course $150 $150 Workshop Two: Practical Guidelines and Best Practices for Managing Ground Water Data $150 $150 Workshop Three: Optimization Modeling $150 $150 Field Trips (Limited to the first 45 registrants) Field Trip One: Edwards Aquifer Authority $60 $75 Field Trip Two: San Antonio Water Systems $60 $75 Student Mentoring Luncheon (Limited to the first 50 registrants) Free Free NGWA reserves the right to cancel any event with insufficient pre-registration. My $ _____________ registration fee in U.S. funds is enclosed. (Make check payable to NGWA.) Name ____________________________________________ Position ________________________ Company/Organization Name ________________________________________________________________________________ Business Address ____________________________________ City/State/Zip __________________ Home Address ______________________________________ City/State/Zip __________________ Business Phone ____________________________________ Fax ___________________________ E-mail ____________________________________________ NGWA member _____ Yes Membership # ___________________ _____ No Please do not mail your registration form after March 15, 2005. After this date, you are welcome to register online, via telephone, fax, credit card; or plan to register on-site. ONLINE registration at http://info.ngwa.org/servicecenter/ meetings/index.cfm �



2005 Ground Water Summit Session Descriptions S1: Ground Water in Developing Countries: Appropriate Technology, Sustainability, and Self-Sufficiency by Michael Campana This session will explore the role of ground water in alleviating water shortages in developing countries and will emphasize projects that are sustainable, technologically appropriate, and consistent with the principles of integrated water resources management. Presenters will be from nongovernmental organizations, private voluntary organizations, consulting firms, government agencies (e.g., Peace Corps, U.S. Agency for International Development), and academia. Papers addressing some of the quality issues (e.g., arsenic, fluoride, nitrate, pesticides, pathogens) will also be presented. S2: Bioremediation of DNAPLs—Do DNAPLs Inhibit or Enhance Bioactivity? by Evan Cox Conventional thinking several years ago was that the close proximity of dense, nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) to bioactive zones caused inhibition of bioactivity due to toxicity of the DNAPL. However, recent research and field implementation data is providing indications that DNAPLs are not always inhibitory, and may even enhance the overall effectiveness of the remediation. This session will provide a forum for discussion of the effectiveness of bioremediation for various DNAPLs including when and if inhibition occurred, particular challenges unique to bioremediation of DNAPL source zones, and other lessons learned from research and field implementation activities. S3: Advances in Ground Water Tracers Cancelled. S4: Recycling Remediation Technologies: What Have We Learned? by Patrick Hicks, Maureen Leahy, and Richard Raymond A recent revival of “traditional” soil and ground water remediation technologies has been noted in some sectors of the environmental industry. Some of the technologies being recycled include ground water pump and treat applications and use of hydrogen peroxide for in situ bioremediation, among others. These technologies had fallen from favor in the industry during the past decade, but appear to be supported again by some environmental regulators and practitioners. This resurgence may be due to several factors including recent discoveries or innovations that have overcome historical impediments to the design and application of the technologies, or a lack of historical perspective regarding the collective experience with these technologies amassed by seasoned professionals. This session will provide a forum and opportunity for the exchange of experience, historical perspective, and recent innovations concerning more traditional soil and ground water remediation technologies. S5: Geophysics for Ground Water Applications by John Jansen Most ground water studies are hampered by the density of subsurface data that can be obtained within practical limits. Geophysical methods can provide denser data coverage using nonintrusive methods. Unfortunately, geophysics can be intimidating or confusing to nongeophysicists. This session will feature prominent geophysicists who are skilled communicators, presenting case histories that illustrate the proper integration of several common surface and borehole geophysical methods for a variety of ground water studies. S6: Water Supply and Ground Water Resource Management by John Jansen As water supply becomes a more critical issue around the world, the need for effective



hydrogeologic evaluations of the resources becomes more important. Most water supply investigations involve flow systems that are much larger than the scale of a typical environmental project. As a result, broader and more multidisciplinary skills are needed to successfully develop and manage ground water resources. This session will present several case histories that illustrate the proper integration of geology, geochemistry, hydrology and politics this is needed to effectively develop and maintain ground water resources for water supply applications. S7: “None of This, Some of That”—Technical and Economic Aspects of Treatment Trains by Julie Konzuk and Suzanne O’Hara The cost-effectiveness of some ground water remediation technologies, particularly more aggressive treatment techniques, tends to decrease exponentially as the targeted end goal becomes more ambitious. Often, it is desirable to follow up the primary remedy with a less aggressive technique that is more cost-effective as a polishing step. However, the primary remedy often impacts the aquifer environment in such a way as to complicate implementation of the secondary remedy, and the overall cost-effectiveness of the treatment train is therefore impacted. This session will provide a forum for discussion of both the technical and economical aspects of treatment train implementation for ground water remediation. S8: Water Resource Strategies in Arid Environments by Richard Laton and Lance Eckhart cosponsored by Sustainability of Semi-Arid Hydrology and Riparian Areas As urban populations centers continue to grow and move toward arid environments, water resource strategies on a mass scale for this type of climate become critical. Recharge concepts come to the forefront as conservation alone cannot provide sustainable resources for long-term growth. Artificial recharge and water banking are two potential solutions for maintaining adequate water supply. Impacts of these two solutions need to be evaluated more closely. Further, new strategies must be developed and existing ones need to be reanalyzed. This session will address strategies for developing sustainable water resources in arid environments as well as the impacts to local and regional ground water systems as the result of these strategies. S9: Ground Water Education—Field vs. Classroom by Richard Laton, Alan Dutton, and Vicki Remenda cosponsored by the Geological Society of America, Hydrogeology Division, and the International Association of Hydrogeologists, U.S. National Chapter Ground water education has changed since the early 1970s. This change has been brought about due to the increase in field-based research/work being conducted by the industry. Today’s industry and government employers are seeking basic field experiences and knowledge that current students are lacking. Geology departments focusing on the traditional geologic criteria have seen enrollment drop during the past decade. This is in part due to the movement away from high-paying petroleum research and exploration jobs, but is also due to the changing economy. What steps are needed at the department level to encourage more students to enter the geoscience community? Are ground water resources (management) the next generation’s petroleum? How does the academic community change to meet these demands? What focus should the academic community put forward for the next generation of students? Are we focusing on what the industry really needs? How do we provide an environment in which imagination, creative problem-solving, and appreciation for complexities are fostered among undergraduates in the earth sciences? The excitement that comes at the moment of discovery of new (or new to the learner) information, afforded to graduate students and professors, is rarely part of the undergraduate experience except in the case of the senior thesis or design project. Hattie and Marsh (1996) concluded “a desirable aim of a university would be to devise strategies to enhance the relationship



between teaching and research.” This strategy of linking undergraduate learning with research has the potential to deeply engage both students and faculty. Submissions on strategies for engaging undergraduate students in both experiential activities and research-linked learning in hydrogeology and related earth sciences will be presented. S10: “Sounded like a Good Idea at the Time…”—Lessons Learned from Attempted Remediation Under Nonoptimal Conditions by David Major and Ross Miller Unlike the medical community that presents failures, every case study of a remedial technology seems to be deemed a success. These success stories are often associated with sites that have optimal conditions for remediation (e.g., sandy aquifer, neutral pH, simple contaminant profile). More interest is being generated in “pushing the envelope” and using these technologies at sites with less optimal conditions (e.g., fractured bedrock, clay aquitard, acidic ground water, multiple contaminant DNAPL source) or in ways not previously attempted. Often, implementation of various remedies at these less optimal sites is challenging, and many lessons can be learned on how these challenges were met and potentially overcome. In some cases, technologies fail even in simple settings because of a fundamental flaw or understanding of how to best implement the technology. This session will provide a forum for discussion of sites or laboratory studies where the envelope has been pushed, targeting lessons learned from failures and successes, and challenges overcome in order to develop a better understanding of the limits and application for a number of remedial technologies. Important Note: Former Sessions 11 and 13 will now be presented in one combined session. S11: Detection, Transport, and Health Impacts of Pathogens in Ground Water by Larry McKay, Ronald Harvey, and Randy Gentry Occurrence of waterborne pathogens in ground water supplies and their influence on public health is often difficult to detect. This is partly because of the transient nature of many pathogen sources, our reliance on monitoring of indicators (such as E. coli), rather than actual pathogens, and the large spatial or temporal variability in hydrogeologic factors controlling pathogen transport. The objective of this session is to bring together researchers working on key issues related to waterborne pathogens, including: development of improved techniques for monitoring and identifying pathogens and their sources in ground water, investigation of factors controlling subsurface transport of pathogens, approaches to assessing health impacts, measures to prevent or remediate pathogen-contaminated ground water, and assessment of aquifer vulnerability to pathogen contamination. S13: Ground Water Microbiology by John Schnieders This session includes, but is not limited to the topics of aquifer microbiology, water well microbiology, microbial contamination of ground water, geomicrobiology that directly or indirectly affects ground water, remediation microbiology that affects ground water/aquifers, aquifer recharge as a source of microbial influence, and contaminant effects on ground water microbiology. S12: Ground Water Law, Policy, and the Tragedy of the Commons: The Obstacles and Some Possible Solutions to Sustainable Ground Water Management in the Southwest by Timothy Parker, Tom Johnson, and Vicki Kretsinger cosponsored by Groundwater Resources Association of California The legal doctrines governing ground water use and ownership in the Southwest encourage exploitation of the common-pool resource. These doctrines rapidly evolved largely as a result of technological changes that facilitated the swift expansion of ground water development in the irrigated Southwest at the beginning of the last century.



However, applied hydrogeology has lagged the rush to the pump house and efforts to integrate science with policymaking are needed to mitigate consequences associated with an incomplete understanding of water resources systems. More often than not, existing policies, including law, water rights administration, economics, and politics have separated surface water and ground water regulation and management. Correspondingly, there has been a lack of integrated water resources management programs. This in turn has also resulted in other issues related to longterm water resources availability, including overdraft, debates over the determination of safe yield, land subsidence, salt water intrusion, and contamination issues. Potential solutions for addressing these issues and overcoming obstacles to sustainable ground water management vary widely but include developing better technical information and standards, creating incentives for using coordinated resource management, seeking remedy in the courts, and incorporating science-based approaches and methods in water resources policies. S14: Arsenic Removal from Ground Water: Chemistry, Treatment Technologies, and Case Studies in Developing Countries by Robert Schreiber and Ganesh Ghurye This session will include research papers, case studies, and cost estimates of various treatment technologies. This session covers four areas: (1) Arsenic speciation, preservation, oxidation, and subjects related to arsenic chemistry. (2) Arsenic removal technologies including activated alumina adsorption, other adsorptive media, ion exchange, iron coagulation-(micro) filtration, and membranes. (3) Cost estimates. Papers from the U.S. EPA and consulting firms will be presented to enumerate the advantages/drawbacks of various technologies and present cost estimates based on case studies for various technologies. (4) Arsenic problems have arisen in Bangladesh, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and other developing countries. Assessment progress will be discussed, as well as application of control and treatment technologies that could provide cost-effective solutions. S15: Mass Flux Determination and Use in Remediation Design and Performance Assessment by Randall Sillan and Eric Nichols This session will encompass the range of topics related to subsurface dissolved mass flux/mass discharge. Presentation themes will include regulatory acceptance, field measurement techniques, case studies, application in remedial strategy development and remedial design, and guidance for use of mass flux for site decision-making. S16: Emerging Contaminants and Their Impact on America’s Water Supply by Scott Summy This session discusses emerging contaminants of concern that are impacting America’s water supply. Cleanup costs of contaminated drinking water supplies should be placed on those responsible for the pollution. Several communities and water providers have recently prevailed in lawsuits against corporate polluters to achieve cleanup and treatment costs for their contaminated drinking water supplies. Learn what legal remedies are available to cities to deal with the burgeoning costs associated with water contamination. S17: Edwards Aquifer by George Ozuna and Gregory Stanton The Edwards Aquifer is the major source of water for more than 1.5 million people in the San Antonio area and provides nearly all of the water used for industrial, military, irrigation, and public supplies. Roughly two-thirds of all recharge to the Edwards Aquifer results west of Bexar County and is from direct infiltration of precipitation and stream flow loss in the recharge zone. After entering the aquifer, the water generally moves from west to east to points of discharge in Bexar County (mostly public-supply wells) and



then northeast, parallel or almost parallel, to the northeast-trending Balcones Faults into Comal and Hays counties, where it is discharged to wells and springs. Additional recharge to the Edwards Aquifer occurs in the recharge zone in northern Bexar County and southern Comal and Hays counties. San Antonio's water-supply needs are perceived by many to compete directly with those of farmers and ranchers west of the city. Furthermore, withdrawals to meet the city's growing needs are a threat to the continuation of flows at Comal Springs, the largest spring in the Southwest, and San Marcos Springs. Both springs supply water to meet downstream needs, sustain federally listed endangered species, and support local economies through tourism. A better understanding of the complex hydrogeologic processes that control water availability of the Edwards Aquifer is imperative for optimal resource management. S18: Comprehensive Regional Water Quality Monitoring Programs and Data Interpretation Issues by Kelly Warner and Ann Ardis Synthesizing water quality data on a regional scale that crosses many political, geologic, and hydrologic boundaries is difficult. Developing a framework to assess differences across and within a region is essential for extrapolating results to areas of similar hydrogeology. The U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program has been sampling and analyzing ground water quality data collected with consistent and uniform methods since 1991. Data have been analyzed locally to determine local factors affecting water quality, but extrapolating those findings beyond the local scale often is problematic. Analysis at the national scale has provided summaries of the national occurrence and distribution of water quality, but the large variability in hydrogeologic conditions across the nation often confounds the analyst’s ability to sort out factors that affect water quality. Analysis at an intermediate regional scale by aquifer brings together local and national scale information to identify the water quality in some of the most widely used aquifers. Sixteen aquifers have been selected for regional analysis based on water use for public and domestic supply, and geographic distribution of regional aquifers. These 16 aquifers accounted for approximately 74% of the total use of ground water for dinking water supply in the United States in 1990. Continued urban expansion and limits on quality and quantity of surface water have made these aquifers even more essential for drinking water supply. There are three general types of information provided by regional ground water quality investigation—statistical description, spatial descriptions, and explanation of observed conditions. Regional analysis on radionuclides, dissolved solids, pesticides, arsenic, volatile organic compounds, and deicing chemicals are examples of point and nonpoint issues that are being addressed on a regional scale. Each of the 16 regional aquifers has a unique set of hydrologic characteristics, and each responds differently to natural and human induced stress. The continuing challenge for any regional analysis is to develop inferences about the primary effects of human activities, climate, geology, and soils on the water quality of the individual regional aquifer system and to assess similarities among these systems. S19: Integrated Management and Assessment of Ground Water and Surface Water Resources by Mike Wireman and Kevin Frederick During the past decade, reliance on ground water for municipal and domestic water supplies has increased tremendously. This increase is primarily due to population increases in areas of the country with limited, available surface water resources and moderate to severe drought conditions in the western United States. The increase in ground water development has resulted in potentially nonsustainable pumping of aquifers, reductions to stream base flows and, and reductions in ground water discharge to wetlands and springs. To aid federal, state, and local governments in developing and implementing sustainable management strategies, which recognize the integrated relationship between ground water and surface water at the watershed



and aquifer scale, water resource managers and hydrogeologists need to provide new insights, tools, and methodologies that can be utilized to better assess contemporary hydrologic conditions within watersheds and aquifers. S20: Optimization in Ground Water Management and System Design by Richard Peralta Applications of formal optimization to several ground water arenas are presented. Examples include regional planning, water supply development, contamination remediation, environmental protection, and water management. Discussed is the optimization software used in the examples, and the pros and cons of using optimization software. S21: Water Supply Security Cancelled. S22: Water Quality Data Management by Keith Modesitt Ground water professionals have been using spreadsheets and Microsoft® Access databases for years to manage water quality data. During this time, the data have continued to grow in size and complexity. Data managers usually have the additional need to combine disparate data sources into an integrated data management system to analyze and report data from several media. Once the disparate data is stored in a usable format, data managers can use technologies such as GIS, spatial analysis, statistics, modeling, and data mining to perform multimedia analysis such as surface water and ground water interaction. This session will address the latest best management practices and technologies for managing water quality data. S23: Revolutionizing Ground Water Cleanup through the Triad Approach Cancelled.

Natural Gas vs. Electric Page 1 of 1 Water Resources Committee February 3, 2005

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. V.

DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2005



SUBJECT: NATURAL GAS VERSUS ELECTRICITY FOR GOLDSWORTHY DESALTER

SUMMARY At the Water Resources Committee meeting on July 6, 2004, Mr. Ranjiv Goonetilleke of Southern California Gas Company gave a presentation on the concept of using natural gas engines at the District’s water treatment facilities. Mr. Goonetilleke stated that the District may be able to save energy costs with the conversion from electricity to natural gas. The Committee directed staff to investigate the concept further with the Gas Company and to report back with its findings. The Gas Company offered the District a complimentary analysis on “gas vs. electric” for the Goldsworthy Desalter, which is located within the Gas Company’s service areas. Staff conducted a field tour of the Desalter and provided data to Gas Company personnel for their analysis. On November 29, 2004, staff met again with the Gas Company representatives to discuss the analysis on the Desalter. The Gas Company cautioned that the analysis was preliminary, approximate, and used many assumptions to simplify the calculations. It was intended to provide an “order-of-magnitude” cost-benefit of using natural gas versus electricity. The analysis suggests that the RO feed pump and the finished water pump may be configured to utilize natural gas. The analysis states that on an operation-and-maintenance (O&M) basis, a complete conversion from electricity to natural gas would result in an increase of annual energy cost by approximately $20,000 or equivalent to an 8% increase. If an electric/gas hybrid system is constructed with natural gas for on-peak usage and electricity for off-peak use, the analysis predicts an annual savings of approximately $22,000 in energy cost. However, the analysis does not consider the capital costs required to construct the gas engine system, which is estimated to range from $500,000 to $1,000,000. If the capital costs were included in the cost-benefit analysis, the conversion from the existing electric system to an electric/gas hybrid system would not be economical.

Prepared by: Paul Fu

Reviewed by: Mario Garcia

Natural Gas vs. Electric Page 2 of 1 Water Resources Committee February 3, 2005

Other factors that the analysis did not consider were physical space restrictions and potential obstruction of the existing facility’s operations and maintenance activities. As an example, a gas engine for the RO feed pump requires an approximate footprint of 15 feet by 8 feet. In order to install the gas engine without interfering the existing operations, the current building would need to be expanded and additional land must be purchased/leased. A building expansion is likely to impact Torrance’s operations in the City Yard where the Desalter is situated. In addition, the finished water pump area (the clearwell) has no available space. The addition of a gas engine is not feasible at this second location (finished water pumps) without substantial modifications to the clearwell. Based on current conditions at the Goldsworthy Desalter, the conversion of motors/engines from electricity to natural gas is not economical. The concept, however, should be evaluated for future expansions and/or new facility construction. FISCAL IMPACT None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION For Information.

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. VI




SUBJECT: REGIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT – WATER YEAR 2003/2004

SUMMARY WRD Staff is in the final stages of preparation of the 2003/2004 Regional Groundwater Monitoring Report, which describes the groundwater levels, groundwater quality and replenishment water quality for the Central and West Coast Basins (CWCB) for the previous water year. Staff will present findings from the report at the committee meeting. The purpose of the Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program is to perform the basic District function of tracking groundwater levels and groundwater quality. This information is utilized to determine the health of the groundwater basins and to assist in development of concepts to optimize the use of our local groundwater resource. The major components of the staff-operated program include the following: • Establish a network of monitoring wells throughout the District. • Collect water levels from these wells at regular (daily) intervals using automated data loggers. • Collect water quality samples from these wells twice per year using the Districts’ sampling

vehicle. • Collect water quality data for the different types of replenishment waters recharging the CWCB. • Analyze the water level and water quality data to establish first hand knowledge of current

basin conditions. • Incorporate the information into WRD’s Geographic Information System (GIS) database that

can be accessed by Staff, Stakeholders, and the public. • Prepare Annual Reports on the Program findings. FISCAL IMPACT Staff is soliciting quotations from qualified printing services for final printing of the report in similar style and binding as the previous year. Total reproduction expenses are not expected to exceed $4,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommend that the Board receive and file the 2003/2004 Regional Groundwater Monitoring Report.

RGWR Year 2003-2004 Page 1 of 1 Water Resources Committee, February 3, 2005

Prepared by: Tony Kirk


Groundwater Basin Update Page 1 of 2 Water Resources Committee, February 3, 2005

MONTEBELLO FOREBAY KEY WELL 1601T

6570

7580

8590

95100

105

110

115

120125

130135

140

145

150

155160

165

1-O

ct

1-N

ov

1-D

ec

1-Ja

n

1-Fe

b

1-M

ar

1-Ap

r

1-M

ay

1-Ju

n

1-Ju

l

1-A

ug

1-S

ep

Wat

er S

urfa

ce E

leva

tion

Abo

ve S

ea L

evel

in F

eet

Ground Surface Long Term Goal 2004-05

HISTORIC HIGH = 138.3 FEET (MAY 7, 1942)HISTORIC LOW = 18.1 FEET (DEC 9, 1957)

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. VII.




SUBJECT: GROUNDWATER BASIN UPDATE

SUMMARY Staff will present the monthly update on conditions in the Central and West Coast Groundwater Basins, including precipitation, replenishment activities, pumping amounts, groundwater levels, and other matters affecting the basins' conditions. A summary of the information to be presented is presented below: Precipitation (Los Angeles Civic Center Station, LCC, October through December): • 13.53 inches (309% of the long term average of 4.38 inches over this time period). Pumping (October through December): • Central Basin……...43,361 af (4% lower than last year). • West Coast Basin….10,664 af (12% lower than last year). Water Levels in Montebello Forebay Key Well 1601T: • Groundwater elevation was measured at 107.93 feet on January 12, 2005. Water levels

have risen over 30 feet since the start of the Water Year (October 1, 2004) due to the heavy rains and replenishment water purchased by WRD.

Prepared by: Ted Johnson

Reviewed by: Robb Whitaker


Montebello Forebay Spreading Grounds: • Imported Water - approximately 22,000 af purchased so far in WY 2004/05. Approximately

16,000 af remaining on the order. • Recycled Water - Numbers not yet provided by the County for the WY. • Local Water (Storm water plus base flow) - Estimated by County at 30,000 af from October

to mid January. Barrier Wells (October & November 2004): • Imported - 2,779 af (4,302 af same period last year). • Recycled - 917 af (534 af same period last year, WCBBP only). Other Matters Regarding Recharge and the Groundwater Basins: • The Groundwater Replenishment Coordination Group met on January 18, 2005 to discuss

spreading opportunities and imported water availabilities. The spreading grounds are full of storm water and will be for some time as the upstream dams that contained much of the runoff slowly releases the water to the grounds. Imported water is currently available, but there is no room for it at the full spreading grounds. WRD's remaining order of approximately 16,000 af will be resumed when the spreaindg grounds can accommodate the water.

FISCAL IMPACT For information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION For information.

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. VIII.




SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE 2005 ENGINEERING SURVEY AND REPORT

SUMMARY On January 5, 2005, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 05-725, which ordered the preparation of the annual Engineering Survey and Report (ESR) pursuant to Section 60300 of the California Water Code. This report determines, among other things, the groundwater conditions in the Central and West Coast Basins over the past, present, and ensuing Water Years (WY), including pumping amounts, water levels, annual overdraft, accumulated overdraft, change in storage, and the amount of replenishment water needed for the ensuing year and the associated costs. The report also describes any water quality projects needed for the purpose of protecting and preserving the groundwater supplies within the District. The ESR provides the cost of replenishment water component of the District's budget. The separate Annual Budget document being prepared by the Finance Department provides the remaining components of the budget, including the costs for District projects and programs. Together, these two documents will help the Board determine the Fiscal Year 2005/2006 Replenishment Assessment (RA). Staff’s tentative schedule to meet the Water Code required deadlines for this year’s ESR and RA process is as follows:

• January 5, 2005 - Board orders the preparation of the ESR (completed); • March 2 - Board receives and files ESR and declares whether a RA is needed for the

ensuing fiscal year 2005/2006; • April 6 - Board opens the Public Hearing on ESR and proposed RA. Likely continues

the hearing to subsequent dates; • May 4 - Close the Public Hearing and adopt the FY05/06 Replenishment Assessment.

Staff will provide a progress on the ESR to the Committee. FISCAL IMPACT None STAFF RECOMMENDATION For Information.

Prepared by: Ted Johnson

Reviewed by: Robb Whitaker

LVJL Facility Update Page 1 of 1 Water Resources Committee, February 3, 2005

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. IX.




SUBJECT: LEO J. VANDER LANS WATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROJECT UPDATE

SUMMARY The Leo J. Vander Lans Water Treatment Facility, formerly known as the Alamitos Barrier Advanced Water Treatment Facility, has completed all phases of construction. The Notice of Completion was accepted by the Board on January 5, 2005 and the document was filed at the Los Angeles County Registrar/Recorder office on January 7, 2005. Release of final retention, minus the cost of replacing a defective flush valve actuator, is currently withheld pending completion of the County filing and clearance of all Stop Notices.

The facility will be used to treat recycled water for injection into the Alamitos Barrier. The plant is undergoing routine maintenance at various stations and the product water pumps are currently being repaired to install new bearings and new pump columns The facility remains fully operational and staff continues to exercise the plant at periodic intervals. Once the operating permit is granted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Long Beach Water Department will assume operational responsibility. Training was provided to Long Beach Water Department operators during construction but it is likely that a refresher session will be needed before the actual transfer of responsibilities is completed. FISCAL IMPACT None STAFF RECOMMENDATION For information.

Prepared by: Charlene King


MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. X.




SUBJECT: REGULATORY PERMIT UPDATE FOR RECYCLED WATER SERVICE TO ALAMITOS SEAWATER BARRIER

SUMMARY Discussions regarding the regulatory permit required for the Alamitos Barrier Recycled Water Project, aka the Leo J. Vander Lans Water Treatment Facility (WTF), have been held with the State Department of Health Services (DHS) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) since September 1999. The RWQCB is responsible for issuing the water recycling permit upon recommendation by the DHS. In late 2002, DHS indicated that they wanted to give priority to the Harbor Water Recycling Project (Harbor) and use its permit as a template for the Alamitos permit. The Harbor Project will provide advanced treatment of recycled water at the City of Los Angeles Terminal Island Treatment Plant and deliver it to the Dominguez Gap. The Harbor Project permit was adopted on October 2, 2003. Subsequently, staff met with DHS and RWQCB to resume discussions re permit requirements. In December 2003, staff also provided additional data to demonstrate that the ultraviolet light treatment at the plant was capable of reducing N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) to acceptable levels. After reviewing this data and finding these results acceptable, DHS held a public hearing on February 4, 2004. On July 8, 2004, the DHS issued the Findings of Fact (FOF) and Conditions for recycled water use and recommended approval of the project to the RWQCB. The District has reviewed them and is prepared to accept them. In addition to DHS’ conditions, the RWQCB also wants to include in the pending permit all DHS action levels (effective January 1, 2005, they are now referenced as notification and response levels) as enforceable limits of the recycled water. They also included them in the Harbor Project permit. The District believes this condition is overly restrictive and unnecessary. In discussions with the RWQCB, they stand firm in including this requirement, and have indicated that this action is consistent with their antidegradation policy (State Water Resources Control board Resolution No. 68-16), which is to prevent any contamination in local groundwater basins, as measured by any increases in ambient groundwater quality. Action levels are based on preliminary information and are intended to serve only as advisory levels by the DHS. They are not enforceable standards. Drinking water supplies are not required to meet action levels; however, they may be monitored. DHS’ policy has been to determine which action levels are

Prepared by: Hoover Ng


Regulatory Permit Update Page 2 of 2 Water Resources Committee, 02/03/05

most likely to be of concern for individual situations and require only monitoring. When action levels become enforceable standards or Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), then DHS requires compliance with them. The WateReuse Association, representing the District and other agencies, has presented arguments to the State Water Resources Control Board SWRCB for a more reasonable approach to implementing the aforementioned antidegradation policy, which permits some water quality changes if benefits are considered. The SWRCB is currently in discussions with the local RWQCB’s. The Los Angeles RWQCB has decided to postpone issuing the draft permit for the Alamitos Barrier Recycled Water Project, pending resolution of this issue. Staff will provide additional information to the committee. FISCAL IMPACT Delays in the delivery of recycled water to the Alamitos Barrier would result in continued use of imported water and delays in effecting long term savings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION For information.

West Coast Basin Operating Plan Page 1 of 1 Water Resources Committee, February 3, 2005

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. XI.




SUBJECT: WEST COAST BASIN OPERATING PLAN

SUMMARY During the review of WRD’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP), it became apparent that an evaluation of current basin management objectives for the West Coast Basin would be required prior to issuing a final recommendation on CIP projects associated with that basin. After further discussion on the purpose and intent of such an evaluation, staff developed and distributed a request for proposals (RFP) outlining the proposed scope of work. The District received proposals from CH2MHILL and Bookman-Edmonston. The proposal review committee met with both firms to review their scope of work and approach and subsequently recommended the contract be awarded to CH2MHILL. The Water Resources Committee unanimously concurred with the proposal review committee’s recommendation at their September 13, 2004. The Board of Directors unanimously approved the contract at their October 6, 2004 meeting. Work on the West Coast Basin Operating Plan Study was initiated in late-October with the District’s consultant, CH2MHILL. The intent of this study is to formulate alternative operational scenarios for the West Coast Basin and determine how those alternatives may affect Basin water producers, other stakeholders, and existing operations. The scope of work for the project is summarized by the seven tasks shown below.

1. Kick-off Meeting 2. Interview Pumpers and Stakeholders / Collect Data 3. Formulate Operational Scenarios 4. Conducted Preliminary Screening of Alternative Operational Scenarios 5. Assess Economics of Selected Operational Scenarios 6. Prepare Report 7. Attend Meetings (as required)

The consultant is currently in the process of completing Task Two of the Study. To date, the consultant and staff have interviewed and requested water system information from a majority of the West Coast Basin Stakeholders including the following:

California Water Services Company City of Los Angeles Los Angeles County Department of Public Works City of Manhattan Beach

Prepared by: Jason Weeks


West Coast Basin Operating Plan Page 2 of 1 Water Resources Committee, February 3, 2005

Oil Refineries in the Carson area Southern California Water Company City of Torrance West Basin Municipal Water District

The City of Inglewood is the last major stakeholder to be interviewed; this is expected to be completed by the end of January. Upon receipt of all of the information requested from each of these stakeholders, the consultant will begin Tasks 3 and 4. These tasks are expected to commence in mid-February, at which time the District’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings will serve as a public venue for input and review. Several special TAC meetings will be scheduled from mid-February to mid-March to complete these tasks. FISCAL IMPACT None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION For information.

050128 WB-28 Service Connection.doc Page 1 of 2 Water Resources Committee February 3, 2005

MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. XII.




SUBJECT: WB-28 SERVICE CONNECTION

SUMMARY The WB-28 service connection delivers imported water from MWD’s system to the West Coast Basin Barrier Project (WCBBP). Over the past several months, the District has incurred low flow penalties at the connection due to flow rates at the connection falling below 10% of the rated meter capacity of 160 cubic feet per second (cfs). These penalties are assessed by MWD to WBMWD, and WBMWD passes them directly to WRD. Staff has investigated the situation and discovered that there are several elements that have contributed to the low demand through WB-28, not the least of which is modification work at the barrier by L.A. County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). In October 2004, staff drafted a letter to WBMWD formalizing a request for relief from the low flow penalty and finding a long term solution for the problem. Subsequent to this request, WBMWD sent a letter to the CEO of MWD seeking a waiver for the low flow penalties. To date, WBMWD has received no formal response from MWD regarding its request to waive the low flow penalties, but the WBMWD board did approve reimbursing WRD the WBMWD surcharge portion ($102/AF of the $520/AF total rate) of the penalty. Staff continues to coordinate with WBMWD, MWD, LACDPW, and City of El Segundo to resolve the problem as quickly as possible. On an interim basis, El Segundo, which also receives water from the WB-28 connection, has cooperatively altered its operation to shift its entire demand to that connection instead of at another location. This results in the immediate avoidance of low flow conditions at WB-28 but can not serve as a long term solution. While several meetings with staffs of the above-mentioned agencies have been held to discuss potential fixes, much remains to be done with respect to a long-term solution. Given the potential of further decreasing the demand for imported water at WB-28 once WBMWD’s recycled water plant expansion is completed, the ideal solution would be a permanent waiver from MWD. This would avoid expensive capital modifications to install another metering structure. If, however, such a waiver is not granted, WRD will

Prepared by: Mario Garcia

Reviewed by:

050128 WB-28 Service Connection.doc Page 2 of 2 Water Resources Committee February 3, 2005

have to seek another permanent solution to avoid future low flow conditions. If the ultimate answer involves additional capital facilities, WRD should coordinate such improvements with WBMWD. FISCAL IMPACT For invoices through December 2004, penalties have totaled $300,092. WBMWD has credited its surcharge portion totaling $58,864 so the net penalty is $241,228. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This item is provided for information and update to the Committee.


MEMORANDUM

ITEM NO. XIII.




SUBJECT: OVERVIEW OF THE MONTEBELLO FOREBAY SPREADING GROUNDS

STAFF WILL PRESENT AN OVERVIEW PRESENTATION TO THE COMMITTEE.

Prepared by:

Reviewed by:

Date post:	04-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	duongkhue
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

REGULAR MEETING OF THE WATER RESOURCES … Resource Committee/2005... · decreased injection needs...

Documents