VALLEY CENTER MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
Regular Board Meeting Monday, June 20, 2011 Time: 2:00 P.M. Place: Board Room 29300 Valley Center Road Valley Center, CA 92082
The Valley Center Municipal Water District Board of Directors’ meeting was called to order by President Broomell at 2:00 P.M.
Board members present were: Directors Broomell, Polito, Aleshire, Stone and Haskell. Staff members present were: General Manager Arant, General Counsel de Sousa, District Engineer Grabbe, Director of Finance Jeffrey, Director of Operations Hoyle, Board Secretary Johnson, Manager of IT Pilve, and Project Manager Carrillo. Spectators present were Ms. Jacqueline Howells - Howells Government Relations, Ms. Lisa Skutecki and Ms. Jaime Sayre - Brown and Caldwell, and Mr. David Ross - Roadrunner Newspaper.
1. Upon motion by Stone, seconded by Polito and unanimously carried, the following consent calendar items were approved:
• Minutes of the Board meeting held June 6, 2011• Audit demand check numbers 129184 through 129299 for May 27 through June 9, 2011• Board of Director’s request for reimbursement of expenses and report of expenses
2. Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of District’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Update:
President Broomell opened the public hearing to discuss and receive comments on the proposed 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Update at 2:01 p.m. District Engineer Grabbe conveyed that the report was prepared by Brown and Caldwell, as it was five years ago, and turned the presentation over to Ms. Lisa Skutechi and Ms. Jaime Sayre from Brown and Caldwell to detail the findings of the report.
Ms. Skutechi explained that each water supplier having 3,000+ customers or delivering 3,000+ acre feet of water is required to submit a plan to satisfy the Urban Water Management Plan Guidelines which was originally introduced as Assembly Bill 797 in 1983. The Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) is required to be submitted every five years to the Department of Water Resources (DWR). The plan defines water supplies and demands and provides a 25 year comparison of average, single dry, and multiple dry years. The San Diego County Water Authority also submits an overall plan which sets a foundation for retail plans, such as the District’s.
New requirements in the 2010 plan include identifying the gallons per day per capita (GPCD) target for 2020, notifying surrounding cities and counties within 60 days that you are submitting a plan, and discussing lower income household water use. Grants and loans are conditioned on implementation of Demand Management Measures and the DWR will hold up grants if the plan is not turned in on time. In order to address SBX7-7, additional time was allowed for this plan which would normally have been due in 2010. Ms. Skutecki reported that the District has met all of the notification require¬ments and, if adopted today, the plan will meet the timing requirements.
Ms. Sayre reported that the methodology used to forecast future water demands includes population growth predictions, employment and land use history. In the last five years there has been a decrease of almost 25% in the farming of avocados and citrus. SANDAG forecasts an additional 28% decrease in agriculture and an increase in single family homes of 91% by 2035. There are four methods available to determine the GPCD target. Brown and Caldwell chose Method 1, which is 80% of the baseline use, to produce a target of 1768 GPCD. Coordination with the SDCWA on M&I demand, agricultural demand, system losses and possible annexations produced a baseline total demand to the Water Authority for the next 25 years. The District’s 2020 demand limits are a lot higher than the projected water demand. It was questioned whether these projections are realistic. Mr. Arant stated that, by law, the District has access to this water which puts the District in a good position for the future.
Ms. Sayre highlighted other items required to be discussed in the UWMP which include Best Management Practices, Demand Management Measures, the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, and water quality information.
The public hearing conducted to receive input on the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Update was closed at 2:34 p.m.
Upon motion from Aleshire, seconded by Haskell and unanimously carried, the following Resolution, entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-25
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFTHE VALLEY CENTER MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICTADOPTING THE 2010 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE
was adopted by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Directors Broomell, Polito, Aleshire, Stone and Haskell NOES: None ABSENT: None
3. Update on Federal Advocacy Efforts and Activities:
Ms. Jacqueline Howells of Howells Government Relations (HGR) presented a status report on the meetings attended and contacts made in Washington D.C., at the ACWA Conference, and at the NWRA Federal Conference in recent months to advocate the District’s project objectives.
Issues discussed with Federal contacts:• VCMWD funding priorities/projects• Potential federal funding opportunities outside the earmark process• Fiscal Year 2011 funding• President’s FY 2012 budget • Ongoing “Earmark” process• WaterSMART grants HGR submitted and other grants being pursued• Attended Hearing on “Creating abundant water and power supplies and job growth by restoring common sense to federal regulations”
Committee meetings attended by HGR:• Senate Energy & National Resources (Title XVI – Reclamation Projects)• Senate Energy & Water Development Appropriations (Feinstein is Chair)• Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Sub-committee (USEPA STAG grants & SRF)• Senate Agriculture & Rural Development Appropriations Subcommittee• House Energy & Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee (Title XVI)• House National Resources Water & Power Subcommittee (Solar Projects)• House Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Sub-committee (USEPA STAG grants & SRF)
HGR met with and briefed federal staff members from the following offices:• Senator Dianne Feinstein• Senator Barbara Boxer• Congressman Darrell Issa• Congressman Brian Bilbray• Congressman Ken Calvert• Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack• House National Resources Water & Power Subcommittee• Senate Energy & National Resources Committee• House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee• Dept. of Interior – Bureau of Reclamation• Counsel on Environmental Quality• Department of Agriculture – NRCS and Rural Development• Environmental Protection Agency• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission• Department of Energy• Office of Management & Budget
Ongoing and future federal advocacy plans include meeting with:• Bureau of Reclamation – WaterSMART and feasibility studies• US Environmental Protection Agency – monitor SRF funding• US Dept. of Agriculture – National Resources Conservation Service• Office of Management & Budget – keep them appraised• Dept. of Energy/Energy Associations – Solar opportunities• Senator Feinstein’s office – Authorization legislation• Senator Boxer’s office – WRDA• Congressmen Issa & Bilbray – updates and educating on Issues• Other Congressional Committees and Federal Departments & Agencies – updates and education, monitoring legislation and the budget process
Ms. Howells noted that there is still a moratorium on earmarks in both the House and Senate. Two WaterSMART grant applications were submitted this year, one has been turned down. She thanked Wally Grabbe for all of his efforts in preparing the applications and stated that they had learned from the experience and will reapply next year. Ms. Howells also reminded the Board that the District should not expect any federal funding for two to three years from when projects are introduced.
4. Approval to Purchase Centrifuge Unit for Lower Moosa Canyon Water Reclamation Facility:
Project Manager Carrillo presented a request to purchase a centrifuge unit to replace the existing unit at the Lower Moosa Canyon Water Reclamation Facility. He reported that the existing centrifuge has been in operation for approximately 12 years and is nearing the end of its useful service life. Replacement parts for the unit are getting harder to obtain and service requests are not timely. The existing unit still looks and performs fairly well. However, there are some capacity issues since it is used for both dewatering and thickening of the sludge from Moosa and the Woods Valley Ranch WRF. Staff solicited three quotes which include costs for the purchase of the new centrifuge (including control panel and polymer feed system), removal of the existing centrifuge, and installation of all new equipment.
Centrisys Corporation $271,800 Cortech Engineering, Inc. $361,200 Alfa Laval $376,000
Mr. Carrillo met with representatives of Centrisys to discuss the District’s needs and to learn more about their equipment. District staff was invited to view a pilot plant located in San Clemente to witness a demonstration and ask questions.
Funds for replacement of the centrifuge were allocated in the FY 2010-11 budget in the amount of $350,000. After purchasing the equipment, paying for sales tax, SCADA integration and staff time, a surplus is anticipated that could be used for future Lower Moosa Canyon projects. Once awarded, the equipment should be delivered in approximately three months.
Staff recommended approval of Resolution 2011-26 authorizing the purchase of a new centrifuge unit from Centrisys Corporation.
Upon motion from Aleshire, seconded by Stone and unanimously carried, the following Resolution, entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-26
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFTHE VALLEY CENTER MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICTAPPROVING PURCHASE OF A CENTRIFUGE UNIT FORLOWER MOOSA CANYON WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
5. Woods Valley Ranch Water Reclamation Facility Phase 1 Project Update and Request to Enter a Professional Services Agreement with Separation Processes:
Project Manager Carrillo reviewed the progress of the Woods Valley Ranch Water Reclamation Facility Phase 1 project. Originally the plant design capacity was 104,000 gpd for average daily flow. Currently the plant flows an average of 55,000 gpd. Since going to full operation in 2007, the plant has experienced several different capacity issues. The District and Siemens have been working together toward finding solutions to meet the average daily flows. Siemens has agreed to upgrade the current B10R Membrane system to the newer B40N MemPulse system in order to meet the original design capacities.
District staff has questions regarding the MemPulse system and is seeking the assistance of Separation Processes, Inc. (SPI) to evaluate the proposed modification, and if approved, monitor its performance. SPI has experience in dealing with Siemens and with other membrane manufacturers on similar issues at other agencies. SPI’s services would also include reviewing the proposed warranty, review of O&M’s for the MemPulse System, develop a testing procedure for Clean Water Flux, review biological and membrane system operating data for three months after a successful start-up, and developing reports on plant performance.
SPI’s costs for testing, monitoring for three months, and documenting the performance and warranty of the new MBR system will be paid for by Newland Communities at a cost of approximately $35,000. The District would then be responsible for costs associated with continuing the monitoring and testing of the membrane system for the next nine months, to provide for the first year of operation, at a cost of approximately $20,000. The actual warranty on the membranes would be for seven years.
Mr. Carrillo reported that Seimens will be providing submittals on the new equipment in July. Once approved, installation of the new equipment would proceed with start up and testing expected in September.
Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2011-28 authorizing the District to enter into a professional services agreement with Separation Processes, Inc.
Upon motion from Polito, seconded by Stone and unanimously carried, the following Resolution, entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-28
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFTHE VALLEY CENTER MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICTAPPROVING ENTERING INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTWITH SEPARATION PROCESSES, INC. FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THEWOODS VALLEY RANCH WATER RECLAMATION FACILITYPHASE 1 PROJECT
6. A CWA Health Benefits Authority Election Recommendation:
An election ballot for the open HBA Board of Directors positions was received at the District. There are three candidates running for the two Northern California positions up for election; one position for any size agency and one position for agencies with greater than 20 employees. Director Aleshire, the District’s designated representative to the HBA and elected member of the HBA Board of Directors, reviewed the candidates and made his recommendation: Position 1 - Bruce Rupp, Position 2 - Dennis Michum.
Upon motion from Stone, seconded by Polito and unanimously carried, staff was directed to cast the District’s vote for the HBA Board of Director candidates as recommended by Director Aleshire.
GENERAL MANAGER’S AGENDA:
7. Miscellaneous Information Items:
General Manager Arant reported on the following miscellaneous items:
• It has been reported that Metropolitan Water District voted to withdraw funding under the rate integrity provisions of the Water Authority’s local projects and conservation contracts in retaliation for their lawsuit challenging Met’s rates. Funding has been pulled from the Ramona MWD Reclamation project, however, they did decide to keep funding the customer conservation incentive rebates.
• Discussions have begun with Dave Seymour, General Manager of Rainbow Municipal Water District, on the use of their vactor truck for cleaning sewer lines. A proposal from Rainbow is forthcoming.
• ACWA lead a group of about 50 water and business interests and submitted an Alternative Delta Plan to the Delta Stewardship Counsel (DSC). This group has been developing a delta plan to either build a canal or tunnel under the delta to improve conveyance. The DSC’s direction has been leaning heavily toward ecosystem restoration, not fixing the water supply. A request was made to include the Alternative Delta Plan as a project alternative in the Environmental Impact Report that will be drafted over the summer.
• On June 23, 2011 the Water Authority will be considering its next two year budget. The new budget is 16% less than their last one. It also includes an increase of approximately 6.3% to its member agencies. The net effect of this increase will vary per agency.
BOARD OF DIRECTOR’S AGENDA
8. Health Benefits Authority (HBA):
Director Aleshire reported that he has completed his report on office accommodations for the HBA. He will present his report and recommend the HBA move out of the ACWA facilities at the HBA Board meeting on June 27, 2011.
Also at the June 27th meeting, Dr. Aleshire will present an agenda item recommending the HBA compensate the HBA Directors out of the HBA budget rather than from their respective agency budgets.
9. Employment Agreement with General Manager Effective July 1, 2011:
President Broomell reported that the Board of Directors had completed their annual employee evaluation of the General Manager.
Upon motion from Aleshire, seconded by Stone and unanimously carried, the Amended Employment Agreement with Gary T. Arant was approved effective July 1, 2011.
10. Upon motion by Aleshire, seconded by Haskell and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m.