HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-05-16 Board Packet 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
DISTRICT BOARDROOM
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY
October 5, 2016
3:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETINGS OF AU-
GUST 3 AND SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
a) AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO UNDERGROUND PIPE-
LINE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR THE 36-INCH LA PRESA AIR-VACUUM
VALVE RELOCATIONS PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
$157,315
b) AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO BLASTCO, INC. FOR THE
978-1 & 850-2 RESERVOIR INTERIOR/EXTERIOR COATINGS AND UP-
GRADES PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $1,106,200
c) APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH ECS IMAGING, INC. FOR ENTER-
PRISE CONTENT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE LICENSING, IMPLE-
MENTATION, AND MIGRATION IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
2
$185,265, AND REASSIGN AN ADDITIONAL $75,265 TO THIS PRO-
JECT FROM IDENTIFIED CIP SAVINGS
ACTION ITEMS
7. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) APPROVE THE WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT AND VERIFICATION
REPORT DATED AUGUST 2016 FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA UNI-
VERSITY INNOVATION DISTRICT PROJECT, AS REQUIRED BY SEN-
ATE BILLS 610 AND 221 (COBURN-BOYD)
8. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
9. THE FOLLOWING ITEM IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMA-
TIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING
AGENDA ITEM:
a) FISCAL YEAR 2016 BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ EXPENSES (BENHAM)
REPORTS
10. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
a) SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
11. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
12. PRESIDENT’S REPORT/REQUESTS
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
13. CLOSED SESSION
a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9:
1 CASE
RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
3
14. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. THE BOARD
MAY ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION
15. ADJOURNMENT
All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be
deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board.
The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the
District’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered
at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website.
Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District
Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280.
If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to
participate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at (619) 670-2280 at least
24 hours prior to the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on September 30, 2016, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda
near the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said
time being at least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors
(Government Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on September 30, 2016.
/s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary
1
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
August 3, 2016
1. The meeting was called to order by President Thompson at 3:30 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Directors Present: Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, General Counsel Daniel
Shinoff, Asst. General Manager German Alvarez, Chief of
Engineering Rod Posada, Chief Financial Officer Joe
Beachem, Chief of Administration and Information
Technology Adolfo Segura, Chief of Operations Pedro
Porras, Asst. Chief of Operations Jose Martinez, District
Secretary Susan Cruz and others per attached list.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Director Croucher, and seconded by Director Lopez and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve the agenda.
5. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL BOARD MEETING OF MAY 23,
2016 AND REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 1, 2016
A motion was made by President Thompson, seconded by Director Lopez and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve the minutes of the special board meeting of May 23, 2016 and regular
board meeting of June 1, 2016.
2
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
No one wished to be heard.
PUBLIC HEARING
7. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL REPORT
THE BOARD WILL BE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL
REPORT. THE BOARD INVITES THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE COMMENTS ON
THE REPORT.
a) APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL
(PHG) REPORT TO TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION IN REDUCING THE
LEVELS OF THE SIX (6) CONSTITUENTS LISTED IN THE REPORT TO
LEVELS AT OR BELOW THE PHGs
Systems Operations Manager Jake Vaclavek indicated that California Health and
Safety Code 116470 specifies that water utilities with more than 10,000 service
connections must prepare a special report every three (3) years by July first if
their water quality measurements have exceeded any Public Health Goals
(PHGs). Please reference the Committee Action notes attached to staff’s report
(Attachment A) for the details of Mr. Vaclavek’s report.
In response to an inquiry from Director Robak, Mr. Vaclavek indicated that the
District is required to test for lead and that all lead levels tested “non-detect” in
the District’s water supply. He noted that the PHG for lead is “0” and, thus, the
District meets this goal and is not required to report lead levels. Mr. Vaclavek
stated in response to another inquiry from Director Robak, that pharmaceuticals
in the water are mostly handled through treatment techniques. The water that
the District purchases has been treated with most of these treatment techniques,
if not all the techniques. Because the treatment techniques are determined to
remove pharmaceutical elements, the District does not test for them. It was
noted that testing for pharmaceuticals and personal care products is extremely
expensive. The District had tested for these elements in the District’s potable
water when the misconnect issue was discovered and the testing found “non-
detect” for most of the elements at a cost of approximately $10,000.
Director Croucher indicated that this was discussed at the Engineering
Operations and Water Resources Committee and not only did staff test the
District’s water connections, but they also tested the water from customers’
homes. These tests also showed “non-detect.”
In response to an inquiry from Director Lopez, Mr. Vaclavek indicated that all
treatment plants from which the District receives water are required to provide an
3
annual water quality report. The data from their reports is where the District
determines that its potable water supply exceeds the PHGs. It was discussed
that the District also provides in its water quality report, the agencies that it
receives water from: San Diego Water Authority’s Twin Oaks Water Treatment
Plant, Metropolitan Water District’s Skinner Water Treatment Plant, and Helix
WD’s R.M. Levy Water Treatment Plant. The Carlsbad Desalination Plant has
been added to the list this year as a new source.
President Thompson opened the Public Hearing at 3:42 p.m. As no one wished
to be heard, the Public Hearing was closed at 3:42 p.m.
A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Robak and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve staff’s recommendation.
CONSENT CALENDAR
8. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Thompson and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve the following consent calendar items:
a) AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO CHARLES KING
COMPANY, INC. FOR THE RALPH W. CHAPMAN WATER RECYCLING
FACILITY 14-INCH FORCE MAIN REHABILITATION PROJECT IN AN
AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $1,101,250
b) AWARD AN AS-NEEDED ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES CONTRACT TO BSE ENGINEERING, INC. IN AN AMOUNT
NOT-TO-EXCEED $125,000 FOR FISCAL YEARS 2017-2019 (ENDING
JUNE 30, 2019)
4
c) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4312 FIXING TERMS AND CONDITIONS
FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY
FRED C. SANDERS JR. 2015 REVOCABLE TRUST TO OTAY WATER
DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 18 (APN 498-153-47-00,
11996 PASEO FUERTE, EL CAJON, CA)
ACTION ITEMS
9. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
There were no changes to the board meeting calendar.
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
10. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE
FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS:
a) 2015 INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES PLAN UPDATE (BEPPLER)
Senior Civil Engineer Stephen Beppler indicated that the 2015 Integrated Water
Resources Plan (IRP) update was previously presented at the March 2016 board
meeting. Staff is presenting the completed IRP and will provide a summary of
the recommendations being made within the plan. Mr. Beppler indicated that the
primary reason for updating the IRP is that the last IRP was completed in 2007
when circumstances were considerably different than they are today. In addition,
staff has researched various possible water supply resources and wished to
incorporate that information into the IRP document. Please reference the
Committee Action notes attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of
Mr. Beppler’s report.
Engineering Manager Bob Kennedy indicated in response to an inquiry from
Director Robak that the District does share all its projects with the San Diego
County Water Authority (CWA) and they, in turn, share all their regional projects
with the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). All agencies are aware of what the
District is doing and they do include some of the District’s projects in their Urban
Water Management Plans (UWMP). He noted that CWA’s latest UWMP includes
the Rosarito Desalination Project as a potential water source. General Manager
Watton added that the San Diego Region is now doing a good job in coordinating
with one another on future supply projects. However, it is not believed that MWD
is integrating local supplies into their planning documents.
Director Smith indicated that the Integrated Water Management Plan is prepared
by agencies to allow for the opportunity to apply for grant funds (Proposition 50
funds) from the State. Engineering Manager Kennedy indicated that the District
does apply for those grants, but did not receive any grants in the last round for
5
Proposition 50 funds. He noted that the District has received some grant funding
in previous years.
It was discussed that, as Director Robak noted, the agencies also need to
examine the cost of wholesale water as the local agencies continue to diversify.
San Diego County is paying for 25% of the cost of MWD’s four (4) water
treatment plants which are running at 25% of capacity. General Manager Watton
noted that CWA is responding to this issue, but MWD is not taking the
diversification into consideration.
Senior Civil Engineer Beppler indicated that the IRP does reflect the
diversification that CWA has accomplished over the last few years.
b) UPDATE ON FEASIBILITY OF IPR/DPR - RALPH W. CHAPMAN WATER
RECYCLING FACILITY PURIFICATION PLANT TO SWEETWATER
RESERVOIR TECHNICAL NOTE (BEPPLER)
Senior Civil Engineer Beppler provided a report on the feasibility of IPR/DPR at
the Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) purification plant
which would provide IPR/DPR water through the Sweetwater Reservoir for
potable water production. Please reference the Committee Action notes
attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of Mr. Beppler’s report.
Director Smith indicated that the Engineering Operations and Water Resources
Committee reviewed this project and it is important to note that the District is
looking at new technologies and, at this time, such a project is not cost feasible
as the sewer flow is too small and too erratic and it would be costly to dispose of
the brine from the treatment process to warrant pursuing as a supply source.
In response to an inquiry from Director Robak, Senior Civil Engineer Beppler
indicated that when you have a hydraulic retention time of less than six (6)
months before water is pulled, then it is DPR.
Director Thompson indicated the question is how much subsidy (grants) it would
take to make this project feasible. He indicated that until the District acquires
some subsidies that would make the project viable, the project will be shelved.
Director Croucher indicated that he feels that the District has thought outside the
box to identify reliable and quality water at an affordable/accessible price for the
District’s customers. Some of the ideas/projects that the District has researched
have worked out well and some have not. He stated there is a balance between
the cost of water and the push to conserve water because if customers conserve
too much, one (1) gallon of water would become very costly and would be
beyond the public’s ability to purchase water. He thanked staff for the report as it
educates them on the process.
President Thompson inquired if the District received a grant that provided full
subsidy for the cost, would the project be competitive. Director Smith indicated in
6
his experience it is very difficult to get even up to 50% funding. You may get
perhaps 25% funding from the Department of Water Resources and possibly
10% funding through Proposition 50. None of the grants provide for operations
and maintenance costs.
REPORTS
11. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
General Manager’s Report
General Manager Watton introduced Ms. Tenille Otero who is the District’s new
Communications Officer. He noted that she joins the District from CWA where
she worked for 14 to 15 years. He also presented information from his report
which included the implementation of the Tyler Cashiering Solution, fiscal year-
end audit, Rosarito Desalination Project, and the District’s customers’ water
conservation level.
Director Robak inquired when the letter from the Surfrider Foundation and
Wildcoast regarding the District Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection Project
was received. General Manager Watton responded approximately a week or so
ago. He indicated that staff will provide copies to the board.
In response to an inquiry with regard to the Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer
Rehabilitation Project from Director Smith, Chief of Engineering Posada indicated
that the contractor insists that they prefer to have one crew as it is hard to
manage a project when there is more than one crew working on the project. He
indicated that the contractor does acknowledge that they are late on the project.
Staff has been keeping customers updated on the project’s status and there have
been no complaints from customers. He stated that staff is continuing to work
with the contractor to complete the project.
CWA Report
General Manager Watton indicated that Director Croucher has been nominated
for the position of Secretary to CWA’s board. He indicated that Mr. Mark Muir
from the City of Encinitas will be the incoming Chair. Director Croucher added
that CWA representatives visited Sacramento to meet with legislators to discuss
the past and future specific to the water restrictions. They also discussed who
the proper representatives were for California on issues concerning the Bay
Delta and Colorado River as there has been some disagreement on the matter of
representation. He indicated that CWA and the San Diego Chamber of
Commerce representatives will also travel to Washington, D.C. to meet with
legislators to discuss water issues. He shared that Mr. Frank Belock, CWA’s
Deputy General Manager, has retired and that CWA does not plan on replacing
his position. He lastly indicated that there is a new website on water which is
sponsored and developed by CWA. The site can be visited from a link on CWA’s
website.
7
Director Lopez inquired if the CWA video, “To Quench a Thirst,” has been
integrated into the District’s website. He asked that the District do so if it has not.
Staff indicated that they would do so.
12. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Robak indicated that a couple weeks ago the District’s website was
down for a whole day. He asked if the District tracks how often the website is
down. Chief of Administration Adolfo Segura indicated that the District does
monitor this. Staff has checked the logs and the District’s provider did have
some issues in propagating the DNS (Domain Name Server). However, the
reports indicate that it was only intermittent. He stated that the District receives
alerts 24 hours a day and the alerts are monitored by staff. Director Robak also
shared that he read an article about Israel. He indicated that their desalination
plant is producing more water than their Country’s needs that they now sell the
excess water to Jordan.
Director Lopez indicated that the Metro Commission has canceled their last two
(2) meetings. He inquired if they were still holding their Metro TAC meetings.
Engineering Manager Bob Kennedy indicated that they are holding those
meetings. He also reported that he attended the District’s board and committee
meetings and agenda briefing meetings with General Manager Watton. He lastly
indicated that he has served on the District’s board for 16 years now and he has
witnessed the growth, progress and the quality of staff that has been recruited.
He indicated that he would like to see the purchase of desalinated water from
Mexico’s Rosarito Desalination Project through fruition and plans to run again for
his seat in November.
Director Smith reported that he attended the District’s committee and board
meetings this past month.
13. PRESIDENT’S REPORT
President Thompson presented his report on meetings he attended during the
month of July 2016 (his report is attached). He noted that he distributed an
updated Board Member Organizational and Committee Appointments list and it
includes a new Ad Hoc Committee (Ad Hoc City of San Diego Matters
Committee) which was suggested during the closed session discussion at the
July board meeting. The committee will deal with the matters with the City of San
Diego. He also shared that he too plans to seek reelection to his seat in
November.
14. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson
adjourned the meeting at 5:04 p.m.
8
___________________________________
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
9
President’s Report
July 6, 2016 Board Meeting
A) Meetings attended during the Month of June 2016:
1) June 1: OWD Regular Board Meeting
2) June 8: Attended a meeting of the Water Conservation
Garden JPA.
3) June 9: Attended the City of Chula Vista Development Forum
4) June 16: Met with City of Chula Vista City Manager, Gary
Halbert. Discussed items mutual to both the City and the
District and provided an update on District issues.
Attendee: General Manager Watton
5) June 17: Committee Agenda Briefing. Met with General
Manager Watton to review items that will be presented at
the June committee meetings.
6) June 22: Attended the District’s Finance, Administration
and Communications Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and
made recommendation on items that will be presented at the
July board meeting.
7) June 27: Met with Water Conservation Garden JPA Members
and Executive Director. Discussed future funding of the
WCG.
8) June 29: Met with Sweetwater Authority. Discussed issues
for the City of Chula Vista Interagency Task Force.
Attendees: Director Smith and General Manager Watton.
1
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
September 7, 2016
1. The meeting was called to order by President Thompson at 3:34 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Directors Present: Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, General Counsel Daniel
Shinoff, Asst. General Manager German Alvarez, Chief of
Engineering Rod Posada, Chief Financial Officer Joe
Beachem, Chief of Administration Adolfo Segura, Chief of
Operations Pedro Porras, Asst. Chief of Operations Jose
Martinez, District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per
attached list.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Director Croucher, and seconded by President Thompson
and carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve the agenda.
5. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF JULY 6,
2016
A motion was made by President Thompson, seconded by Director Croucher to
approve the minutes of the July 6, 2016 board meeting. District Secretary Susan
Cruz indicated that she wished to note that on page four (4) of the minutes there
were a couple of corrections to the minutes which Director Smith had brought to
her attention. The corrections are indicated in a strike-thru copy of the minutes
which has been placed on the dias for each director.
Director Smith indicated that he also wished to clarify his comments in the last
paragraph of page three (3) of the minutes. He indicated that the intent of his
comment was for the District to look if there was any possibility of using the
potable water meter to cover the capacity fee for both the potable and recycled
meters, thus, reducing the cost to the District of the $1.3 million in potable
2
capacity fees the District would be required to pay to the San Diego County
Water Authority (CWA). He stated that he believes that Engineering Manager
Dan Martin had indicated that the capacity of the meters are generally very close
to the need of the property (so there would likely not be extra capacity on the
existing potable meter). However, it is something he would like staff to research
should there be a possibility that the District could find some savings in the
capacity fees that would have to be paid to CWA.
Director Thompson amended his motion to approve the minutes of July 6, 2016
to include the underline and strike-thru copy of page 4 of the proposed minutes
which were provided to the board. Director Croucher accepted the amendment
and seconded the motion. The motion carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
Mr. Larry Olds of El Cajon indicated that he retired from the Otay Water District
with 20 years of service. He stated that he resides within division five (5) and is
represented by Director Robak on the Board of Directors. He indicated that
before he made his remarks, he wished to note that September is National
Childhood Cancer Awareness Month and the month is dedicated to assisting
children with cancer. He then shared his concern that Director Robak did not
serve on any of the District’s committees with the exception of the District’s Ad
Hoc Optimization Committee. He inquired why his board representative did not
serve on any District standing committees and felt that he was not being well
represented with his representative not being on a committee.
Director Croucher indicated that he wished to donate his per diem for today’s
meeting to the cancer foundation named in memory of Mr. Olds’ granddaughter,
the Kylie Rowand Foundation.
Director Robak noted that Mr. Olds lost his two (2) year old granddaughter, Kylie
Rowand, to cancer and Grossmont High School student, Bryan Wilcox recently
lost his battle to cancer as well.
PUBLIC HEARING
7. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE
DISTRICT’S OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM
PROJECT
3
THE BOARD WILL BE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FINAL EIR/EIS) FOR THE
DISTRICT’S OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM
PROJECT. THE BOARD INVITES THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE COMMENTS
ON THE REPORT.
a) CERTIFY THAT THE FINAL EIR/EIS FOR THE DISTRICT’S OTAY MESA
CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT HAS BEEN
COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, THE CURRENT STATE
GUIDELINES, AND THE DISTRICT’S LOCAL GUIDELINES, AND THAT
IT REFLECTS THE INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF THE DISTRICT;
FIND THAT THE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE
PROJECT WILL BE AVOIDED THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF
FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES, AS SHOWN IN THE FINAL
EIR/EIS AND THE MITIGATION, MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM FOR THE FINAL EIR/EIS; AND APPROVE THE FINDINGS
AND THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE
PROJECT
Environmental Compliance Specialist Lisa Coburn-Boyd indicated that staff is
requesting that the Board certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report/Final
Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIR/EIS) for the District’s Otay Mesa
Conveyance and Disinfection System Project (Project) has been completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the current State
guidelines, and the District’s Local Guidelines, and that it reflects the
independent judgement of the District. Additionally, staff requests the approval of
the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Findings and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Project. Please reference the
Committee Action notes attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of
Ms. Coburn-Boyd’s report.
PUBLIC HEARING
President Thompson opened the public hearing at 3:55 p.m. Ms. Fay Crevoshay
representing Wildcoast requested to speak. Ms. Crevoshay indicated that her
organization is a binational conservation organization that works in both the
United States and Mexico. She stated that her organization opposes the
District’s Project and is puzzled that the Otay WD is considering importing water
from a desalination plant that will take its water from the most polluted beach in
Baja California. Her organization feels that all would be in a better position if the
sewer water being released to the ocean was treated and reused first. If
additional water was needed then the desalination plant could be considered.
President Thompson thanked Ms. Crevoshay for her comments. There were no
other requests to speak. The public hearing was closed at 4:03 p.m.
4
DISCUSSION
General Manager Watton observed that none of Ms. Crevoshay’s comments
relate to the District’s Final EIR/EIS or the Project and stated that this was also
addressed in the letter responding to the San Diego Chapter of the Surfrider
Foundation’s and Wildcoast’s concerns. He offered to meet with Ms. Crevoshay
to discuss some of the items she spoke of today.
Ms. Coburn-Boyd indicated that the District understands that Wildcoast and
Surfrider would like to see the wastewater released from Mexico’s treatment
plant reused, but the reuse of that water is not related to the District’s project.
Ms. Coburn-Boyd also noted that the District is complying with all the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The board discussed the concerns expressed by Ms. Crevoshay and it was
indicated that there would be ridged water quality standards, as required by the
State of California, on the water purchased from the Rosarito Desalination Plant
and the plant would also be included in the District’s Water Quality Report
(Consumer Confidence Report) published yearly. The report lists the District’s
water resources and the results of the water testing on those supplies. It was
also discussed that the Desalination Project is an important potential project for
the region as we work to diversify our water supply resources.
A motion was made by President Thompson, seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve staff’s recommendation.
CONSENT CALENDAR
8. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
President Thompson pulled items 7f, ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 558 AMENDING
SUBDIVISION “E” OF SECTION 2.01 OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF
ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH THE GENERAL MANAGER’S SIGNATORY
AUTHORITY AT $125,000, for discussion.
A motion was made by Director Smith, seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
5
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve the following consent calendar items:
a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4313 AMENDING POLICY NO. 21 OF THE
DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REDEFINE THE FEE LIMITS
FOR MINOR PROJECTS OF LESS THAN $50,000 AND ADD
CLARIFYING LANGUAGE FOR EXISTING PRACTICES WITH
RESPECT TO PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
b) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4315 ELECTING THAT THE DISTRICT BE
SUBJECT TO THE CALIFORNIA UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION
COST ACCOUNTING ACT (CUPCCAA) PROCEDURES AND
ADOPTING BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY NO. 53, INFORMAL
BIDDING PROCEDURES UNDER THE CUPCCAA; AND AMEND
SECTION 7 PRICING/BIDDING REQUIREMENTS OF THE OTAY
WATER DISTRICT PURCHASING MANUAL
c) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 557 AMENDING THE APPENDIX OF
SECTION 6, CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE (COIC), CONTAINED
WITHIN THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO UPDATE THE
POSITION TITLES REQUIRED TO FILE A FORM 700 AND TO INCLUDE
LANGUAGE IN SECTION 6.02 WHICH WILL ALLOW THE GENERAL
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO DESIGNATE POSITIONS TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE COIC’S APPENDIX AT ANY TIME BETWEEN THE
BIENNIAL REVIEW PERIODS
d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4311 TO UPDATE BOARD POLICY NO. 19,
SMOKING, TOBACCO, AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS, DUE TO
RECENT LEGISLATION EXPANDING THE WORKPLACE PROHIBITION
AGAINST SMOKING INCLUDING ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES
e) RATIFY THE EMERGENCY CONTRACTED WORK PERFORMED BY
KIRK PAVING FOR THE GREENSVIEW DRIVE MAIN BREAK REPAIR
President Thompson presented item 7f for discussion:
f) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 558 AMENDING SUBDIVISION “E” OF
SECTION 2.01 OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO
ESTABLISH THE GENERAL MANAGER’S SIGNATORY AUTHORITY AT
$125,000
Director Smith indicated that he was interested in understanding what items
would not be forwarded for the board’s consideration if the General Manager’s
signatory authority was increased to $125,000 and commented that this would be
a long term decision for the board and if General Manager Watton were to retire,
6
he felt concerned in providing this level signatory authority to the new General
Manager. He made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 558 amending subdivision
“E” of section 2.01 of the District’s Code of Ordinances to establish the General
Manager’s signatory authority at $75,000. The motion was seconded by Director
Croucher.
There was discussion that the delegated authority was for efficiency purposes
and the board has the discretion to withdraw or adjust the authority at any time.
It was suggested that contracts the General Manager approves under his
authority could be reported in the General Manager’s monthly report to the board.
Director Smith’s motion, seconded by Director Croucher was carried with the
following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to adopt Ordinance No. 558 amending subdivision “E” of section 2.01 of the
District’s Code of Ordinances to establish the general manager’s signatory
authority at $75,000:
ACTION ITEMS
9. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) APPROVE THE CONTINUANCE OF THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM
ON THE INSTALLATION OF NEW RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES ON
OTAY MESA FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR TO JULY 2017
Engineering Manager Martin indicated that this item provides a recommendation
to continue the temporary moratorium on the installation of new recycled water
facilities in the Otay Mesa area for a period of one (1) year to July 2017. He
indicated that this item was last heard at the July 6, 2016 board meeting where
staff presented an update of the factors, including the Otay Mesa recycled water
financial analysis, which supported staff’s recommendation at that meeting to
place a permanent moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities
in the Otay Mesa area. The factors included the cost of supply, infrastructure
costs, recycled water demand and the expiration of recycled water incentives.
Please reference the Committee Action notes attached to staff’s report
(Attachment A) for the details of Mr. Martin’s report.
Mr. Martin noted that on the dias for each member of the board is a letter from
the East Otay Mesa Property Owners’ Association voicing support and the
reasons for their support of staff’s recommendation to extend the temporary
moratorium for an additional year.
7
A motion was made by President Thompson, seconded by Director Smith and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve staff’s recommendation.
10. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
There were no changes to the board meeting calendar.
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
11. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE
FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS:
a) FISCAL YEAR 2016 YEAR-END REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S
FISCAL YEAR 2015-2018 STRATEGIC PLAN
Chief of Administrative Services Adolfo Segura presented the Fiscal Year-End
2016 Strategic Plan Report. Please reference the Committee Action notes
attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of Mr. Segura’s report.
There was discussion concerning the target for the measure, water use per
capita per day, that staff will be researching what would be an appropriate target
and would have a recommendation by the mid-year update report which is
scheduled to occur in March 2017. Director Croucher requested that staff
include the board in the process of determining the District’s target for per capita
water use per day as it could have an impact on water rates.
b) FOURTH QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM UPDATE
Engineering Manager Dan Martin provided an update on the District’s fourth
quarter of FY 2016 Capital Improvement Program. He indicated that the FY
2016 budget is divided into 80 projects totaling $11.8 million. The overall
expenditures through the fourth quarter are $10.6 million which is approximately
90% of the FY 2016 budget. Please reference the Committee Action notes
attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of Mr. Martin’s report.
In response to an inquiry from Director Robak, Mr. Martin indicated with regard to
the reservoir coatings, they have a projected life of between 15 and 20 years.
8
Staff closely monitors and inspects the tanks and, in general, the projected life of
the coatings have been close to the actuals.
REPORTS
12. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
General Manager’s Report
General Manager Watton presented information from his report which included
the Cal-Card oversight system, the annual employee recognition luncheon
scheduled on October 12, changes to the health care benefit premium rates,
potable and recycled water sales, an update on the City of San Diego’s Pure
Water Project cost allocation, the Air Pollution Control District inspections, and
water testing for lead and copper.
CWA Report
Director Croucher reported that the CWA board closed nominations for the
officers of the board. He indicated that Mr. Mark Muir from the City of Encinitas
was nominated Chair, Mr. Jim Madaffer from the City of San Diego was
nominated Vice Chair, and he was nominated Secretary. He stated that his
nomination to the office of Secretary would provide Otay WD input into the
leadership which will start with the board member appointments to Committees.
He stated that there is concern on CWA’s board with the project on energy and
CWA’s ability to opt out. They want to assure that this issue is addressed.
Another issue that is being discussed at CWA is the Carlsbad desalination plant’s
intake and the newly implemented regulations that focus not only on saving fish,
but also saving fish eggs and larvae. This will require additional funding to
address this intake issue. He also shared that CWA has linked to their website
the, “Live Water Smart,” website. He lastly reported on the lawsuit with MWD
that there was a motion to move the proceedings out of San Francisco and move
the proceedings to another location. The motion was denied.
13. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Croucher reported on the Pointe Fire that occurred in Spring Valley on
August 18, 2016. He indicated that he spoke with General Manager Watton
during the fire and was able to provide him an update. He stated that the
neighboring homes benefited from the District’s access road to the reservoir
because it created a barrier. He stated that the good things that Otay WD does
goes beyond delivering water sometimes.
Director Smith reported that besides the regular committee and board meetings
that he attends, he attended with President Thompson the initial meeting of the
Ad Hoc City of San Diego Matters Committee on August 1, 2016.
9
Director Robak indicated that he attended the Albondigas South County meeting
on September 2, 2016 where Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez was speaking.
He also shared that he met Mr. José Cerda, a new director at Sweetwater
Authority.
Director Lopez indicated that along with the regular committee and board
meetings that he attends, he attended a meeting of the Desalination Project
Committee on August 29, 2016. He also shared that he attended Casa
Familiar’s Abrazo where a farewell was bid to Ms. Andrea Skorepa the
organization’s Executive Director who would be retiring. He stated that she was
a strong supporter of the District’s opposition to the City of San Diego’s proposed
recycled water rate increase and she brought together community members to
voice their opposition as well. He indicated that the District has also been
meeting with elected officials and community members to answer their questions
and concerns regarding the District’s Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection
System Project.
14. PRESIDENT’S REPORT
President Thompson presented his report on meetings he attended during the
month of August 2016 (his report is attached).
15. CLOSED SESSION
The board recessed to closed session at 5:38 p.m. to discuss the following
matters:
a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9:
1 CASE
b) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
[GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9]
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COALITION OF SAN DIEGO v. SANDOVAL;
CASE NO. 34-2012-80001158-CU-WM-GDS
The board reconvened at 6:12 p.m. and General Counsel Shinoff reported that
the board met in closed session and took no reportable actions.
16. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson
adjourned the meeting at 6:12 p.m.
10
___________________________________
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
11
President’s Report
September 7, 2016 Board Meeting
A) Meetings attended during the Month of August 2016:
1) August 1: Attended a meeting of the District’s Ad Hoc City
of San Diego Matters Committee. Attendees: Director Smith,
General Manager Watton, Attorney Jeanne Blumenfeld.
2) August 3: OWD Regular Board Meeting
3) August 11: Attended the East Otay Mesa Property Owners
Association and Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
Meeting. Discussed the Recycled Water Temporary Moratorium
in Otay Mesa. Attendees: General Manager Watton and
Communications Officer Otero
4) August 12: Committee Agenda Briefing. Met with General
Manager Watton to review items that will be presented at
the August committee meetings.
5) August 18: Attended the CSDA Quarterly Dinner Meeting.
Dr. Steve Albrecht presented on Lessons Learned: 25 Years
in Workplace Violence Prevention. Attendees: General
Manager Watton, Communications Officer Otero, District
Secretary Cruz and Sr. Confidential Executive Secretary
Ramos-Krogman.
6) August 23: Attended the District’s Finance, Administration
and Communications Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and
made recommendation on items that will be presented at the
September board meeting.
7) August 29: Attended the District’s Desalination Project
Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and made recommendation on
items that will be presented at the September board
meeting.
8) September 2: Board Agenda Briefing. Met with General
Manager Watton and Attorney Jeanne Blumenfeld to review
items that will be presented at the September 7 Board
Meeting.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: P2267-
001103
DIV. NO. 3 & 5
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Award of a Construction Contract to Underground Pipeline
Solutions, Inc. for the 36-Inch La Presa Air-Vacuum Valve
Relocations Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
award a construction contract to Underground Pipeline Solutions, Inc.
(UPSI) and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement
with UPSI for the 36-Inch La Presa Air-Vacuum Valve Relocations
Project in an amount not-to-exceed $157,315 (see Exhibit A for
Project locations).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a
construction contract with UPSI in an amount not-to-exceed $157,315
for the 36-Inch La Presa Air-Vacuum Valve Relocations Project
(Project).
ANALYSIS:
The District owns and operates the 36-inch mortar lined and coated
steel main which is located in Jamacha Boulevard and in State Route
2
94, as shown in Exhibit A. The main, which was constructed in 1986,
conveys potable water from San Diego County Water Authority Flow
Control Facility 11 to the North District.
The existing potable air-vacuum valves that support the 36-inch main
are within vaults. Five (5) of the six (6) vaults are located in the
traveled way shoulders of Jamacha Road and State Route 94. The sixth
air-vacuum valve is located within a vault at the District’s
Regulatory site. The purpose of this Project is to relocate the air-
vacuum valves to a location that is out of the traveled way and to
raise the air-vacuum appurtenances out of the existing vaults and
above the existing grade. The relocations will improve the
operability and maintainability of these air vacuum valves by:
reducing staff’s exposure to traffic and mitigating confined space
associated with the vaults by raising the air vacuum valves. The
Project will also address concerns associated with the existing air
vacuum valves located in potentially flooded vaults during a main
break.
The award of the construction contract to UPSI includes the
relocation of the six (6) air-vacuum valves, including traffic
control, excavation, and restoration of the roadway and site
improvements.
Staff prepared the contract documents in-house together with
assistance from the District’s As-Needed Engineering Consultant. The
Project was advertised for bid on July 12, 2016 using BidSync, an
online bid solicitation website. The Project was also advertised in
the Daily Transcript. BidSync provided electronic distribution of
the Bid Documents, including specifications, plans, and addendums.
Staff performed outreach to more than twenty-five (25) contractors,
notifying them of the contracting opportunity and encouraging them to
register with BidSync as included in the District’s advertisement and
in the District’s website.
A Pre-Bid Meeting was held on July 21, 2016, which was attended by
two (2) contractors. One (1) addendum was sent out to all bidders
using BidSync on July 22, 2016 to address questions asked during the
bidding period and modify the Bid-Proposal form to add an Agency
Permit Fees allowance item in response to a bidder’s question. The
allowance amount for the Agency Permit Fees item included in Addendum
No. 1 was a preset amount of $2,000.00 established by the District
and did not require the bidders to develop a bid for that item.
Bids were publicly opened on August 2, 2016, with the following
results:
3
CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID AMOUNT
1 Underground Pipeline Solutions, Inc.
Alpine, CA $155,315.00
2 Ahrens Mechanical
San Diego, CA $230,870.00
3 Piperin Corporation
Vista, CA $165,200.00
4 California Building Evaluation &
Construction, Inc.
Anaheim, CA $211,470.00
The Engineer's Estimate is $175,000.
The evaluation process included reviewing all bids submitted for
conformance to the contract documents. During the review of the
bids, it was discovered that UPSI, the apparent low bidder, did not
use the updated Bid List Bid Proposal Form included in Addendum No.
1. As a result, the bid submitted by UPSI did not include the Agency
Permit Fees allowance item established by the District in the amount
of $2,000.00. All other aspects of the bid submitted by UPSI were in
conformance with the contract documents. UPSI did acknowledge
Addendum No. 1 as part of their bid package. As noted above, the
Agency Permit Fees allowance item included in Addendum No. 1 was a
preset amount established by the District and did not require the
bidders to develop a bid for that item. When the allowance item was
added to the bid submitted by UPSI, UPSI remained the apparent low
bidder, as noted in the table below.
CONTRACTOR
TOTAL BID
AMOUNT
ADJUSTMENT FOR
AGENCY PERMIT FEES
ALLOWANCE
ADJUSTED
TOTAL BID
AMOUNT
1 Underground
Pipeline Solutions,
Inc.
Alpine, CA
$155,315.00 $2,000.00 $157,315.00
2 Ahrens Mechanical
San Diego, CA $230,870.00 Included in bid $230,870.00
3 Piperin Corporation
Vista, CA $165,200.00 Included in bid $165,200.00
4 California Building
Evaluation &
Construction, Inc.
Anaheim, CA
$211,470.00 Included in bid $211,470.00
4
Staff’s review has concluded that the missing Agency Permit Fees
allowance from UPSI’s bid is a minor bid irregularity that when added
did not change the outcome of the bid results. As such, staff has
determined that UPSI is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
UPSI holds a Class A Contractor’s License which expires on March 31,
2018. Staff checked the references provided with UPSI’s bid
indicating a good performance record on similar past projects. The
proposed Project Manager has experience in San Diego County on
similar projects and received good references. A background search
of the company was performed via the internet and revealed no
outstanding issues. UPSI submitted the Company Background and
Company Safety Questionnaires, as required by the Contract Documents.
Staff verified that the bid bond provided by the State National
Insurance Company, Inc. is valid. Once UPSI signs the contract, they
will furnish the performance bond and labor and materials bond.
Staff will verify both bonds prior to executing the contract.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The total budget, as approved in the FY 2017 budget, is $735,000 for
CIP P2267. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, including this contract, is $716,497. See Attachments B
for budget details.
Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budget for CIP P2267 is sufficient to support
the Project.
Finance has determined that, under the current rate model, 100% of
the funding will be available from the Betterment Fund.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay
Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner”
and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the
forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable
rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
5
DM/RP:jf
P:\WORKING\CIP P2267 36-Inch La Presa Air-Vac Relocations\Staff
Reports\BD 10-05-16 Staff Report - Construction Contract Award to
Underground Pipeline Solutions.docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Budget Detail P2267
Exhibit A – Location Map
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2267-001103
Award of a Construction Contract to Underground Pipeline
Solutions, Inc. for the 36-Inch La Presa Air-Vacuum Valve
Relocations Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on September 15,
2016, and the following comments were made:
Staff recommended that the Board award a construction contract
to Underground Pipeline Solutions, Inc. (UPSI) and to authorize
the General Manager to execute an agreement with UPSI for the
36-Inch La Presa Air-Vacuum Valve Relocations Project in an
amount not-to-exceed $157,315.
Staff discussed the analysis and benefits of the Project and
noted that the purpose of the Project is to relocate the air-
vacuum valves to a location that is out of the traveled way and
to raise the air-vacuum appurtenances out of the existing vaults
and above the existing grade.
Staff discussed the selection process and indicated that the
results of the process are shown in the table at the top of page
3 of the staff report. It was highlighted that during the
review of the bids, it was discovered that UPSI did not use the
updated Bid List Bid Proposal Form included in Addendum No. 1.
As a result, UPSI’s bid did not include the Agency Permit Fee
allowance item established by the District in the amount of
$2,000. However, all other aspects of the bid submitted by UPSI
were in conformance with the contract documents.
Staff noted that UPSI did acknowledge Addendum No. 1 and when
the allowance item was added to their bid, the company remained
the apparent low bidder as noted in the second table shown on
the bottom of page 3 of the staff report.
Staff concluded that the missing Agency Permit Fee allowance
from UPSI’s bid was a minor bid irregularity that when added, it
did not change the outcome of the bid results. As such, staff
determined that UPSI is the lowest responsive and responsible
bidder.
In response to comments and a question from the Committee, staff
stated that the Project involves six (6) isolated construction
sites and the project is not linear in nature (See Exhibit A for
Project Locations); therefore, staff anticipates little impact
to the pavement surface within the Project.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated that
there have been no problems in the past with maintaining the
project sites. However, the Project is more of a strategic move
that will improve the safety of District staff by reducing their
exposure to traffic while operating and maintaining the air-
vacuum valves. The Project will also mitigate confined space
associated with the vaults by raising the valves above grade.
The Committee inquired if staff had any concerns with the air-
vacuum valves getting damaged by errant vehicles. Staff stated
that the response to a damaged air-vacuum would be treated in a
similar manner to a damaged fire hydrant whereas a control valve
would be at the site to shut off the lateral to avoid impacting
the system and allow staff to perform necessary repairs.
The Committee inquired if there were other locations within the
District’s service area that are similar to this Project. Staff
stated there are a few locations that will need similar work
which will be performed sometime in the future.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2267-001103
Award of a Construction Contract to Underground Pipeline
Solutions, Inc. for the 36-Inch La Presa Air-Vacuum Valve
Relocations Project
8/29/2016
Budget
735,000
Planning
Total Planning - - - -
Design 001102
Consultant Contracts 2,440 2,440 - 2,440 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC
1,280 1,280 - 1,280 EVEREST ENVIRONMENTAL INC
5,879 5,879 - 5,879 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY
Standard Salaries 53,894 53,894 - 53,894
Total Design 63,493 63,493 - 63,493
Construction
Consultant Contracts 8,760 8,760 - 8,760 DARNELL & ASSOCIATES INC
65,008 65,008 - 65,008 HDR ENGINEERING INC
Equipment Rental 55 55 - 55 TREBOR COMPANY, THE
For Ops Only - Contracted Services 2,022 2,022 - 2,022 KIRK PAVING INC
INFRASTRUCTURE EQUIPMENT & MATERIALS 1,147 1,147 - 1,147 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY
Infrastructure Equipment & Supplies 10,923 10,923 - 10,923 FERGUSON WATERWORKS
1,140 1,140 - 1,140 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD
152 152 - 152 ALLIED TRENCH SHORING SERVICE
11,416 11,416 - 11,416 CONSUMERS PIPE & SUPPLY CO
748 748 - 748 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SERVICES
2,250 2,250 - 2,250 RW LITTLE CO INC
1,461 1,461 - 1,461 C W MCGRATH INC
397 397 - 397 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO - DPW
10,011 10,011 - 10,011 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1082
1,157 1,157 - 1,157 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC
MOU Meals 116 116 - 116 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN
OTHER AGENCY FEES 593 593 - 593 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Professional Legal Fees 450 450 - 450 BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN LLP
Regulatory Agency Fees 1,640 1,640 - 1,640 CALTRANS
Salary Continuation Insurance 250 250 - 250 KISSINGER TRUCKING & EQUIPMENT
Service Contracts 5,200 5,200 - 5,200 HUDSON SAFE-T-LITE RENTALS
Water Loss 668 668 - 668
In-House Equipment & Inventory 30,808 30,808 - 30,808
Standard Salaries 209,281 209,281 30,000 239,281
Fixed Asset 660 660 - 660
INFRASTRUCTURE EQUIPMENT & MATERIALS 34 34 - 34 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO - DPW
Conversion Cost Type 44,344 44,344 - 44,344
157,315 - 157,315 157,315 Underground Pipeline Solutions, Inc.
- - 30,000 30,000 Contruction Management
- - 25,000 25,000 Contingency
Total Construction 568,004 410,689 242,315 653,004
Grand Total 631,497 474,182 242,315 716,497
Vendor/Comments
Otay Water District
p2267-36-Inch Main Pumpouts & Air/Vacuum Vent
Committed Expenditures
Outstanding
Commitment &
Forecast
Projected Final
Cost
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
36-INCH LA PRESA AIR-VACUUM VALVE RELOCATIONS PROJECTLOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT A
CIP P2267F
P:
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
\
P
2
2
6
7
-
3
6
-
I
n
c
h
L
a
P
r
e
s
a
A
i
r
V
a
c
R
e
o
l
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
-
F
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
A
!\
VICINITY MAP
NTSDIV 5
DIV 1
DIV 2
DIV 4
DIV 3
?ò
Aä%&s
?p
?ËPROJECT SITE
0 1,100550
Feet
AIR VAC #2
AIR VAC #1
JAM
A
C
H
A
B
L
V
D
SR-94 / CAMPO RD
T
R
A
C
E
R
D
AIR VAC #6
AIR VAC #3
AIR VAC #5
AIR VAC #4
JAMA
C
H
A
R
D
!\
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
NTSDIV 5
DIV 1
DIV 2
DIV 4
DIV 3
?ò
Aä%&s
?p
?Ë
F
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: P2534-001103
P2544-001103
DIV. NO. 3 & 5
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Award of a Construction Contract to Blastco, Inc. for the
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coatings & Upgrades
Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
award a construction contract to Blastco, Inc. (Blastco) and to
authorize the General Manager to execute a construction contract with
Blastco for the 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings &
Upgrades Project in an amount-not-to exceed $1,106,200 (see Exhibit A
for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a
construction contract with Blastco for the 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir
Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project in an amount-not-to
exceed $1,106,200.
2
ANALYSIS:
The 978-1 Reservoir is a 0.5 million gallon (MG) steel tank
originally constructed in 1959. The tank is located on Pence Drive
in unincorporated El Cajon. It is one of two tanks in the 978
pressure zone. The 978-1 was last recoated in 2000 on the interior
and 1996 on the exterior surfaces. The 850-2 Reservoir is a 3.1 MG
steel tank originally constructed in 1973. It is one of four tanks
in the 850 pressure zone. The 850-2 was last recoated on the
interior and exterior surfaces in 1996.
The District’s corrosion consultant, HDR, Inc. (HDR) completed a
Corrosion Control Program (CCP) in 2015 that addressed the
installation, maintenance, and monitoring of corrosion protection
systems for the District’s steel reservoirs and buried metallic
piping. The CCP included a reservoir maintenance schedule that
showed the 978-1 and the 850-2 Reservoirs were due to be recoated.
In addition to replacing the coatings of the reservoirs, structural
upgrades will be added to comply with the current American Water
Works Association (AWWA) standards, and the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration standards for both Federal (OSHA) and State
(Cal-OSHA) levels.
An in-service internal and external inspection was completed by HDR,
and the recommended coating and structural upgrades, developed with
input from engineering and operations staff, are as follows: replace
the coating on the interior and exterior surfaces, replace the
existing level indicators, install new roof railings, install a new
fall prevention device on the interior and exterior ladders, modify
anode access ports, replace all anodes, replace the roof vents,
relocate the existing roof hatches, install new safety cable
lanyards, and added tank penetrations for chlorination and sampling.
These upgrades will ensure compliance with AWWA, OSHA, and Cal-OSHA
requirements as well as upgrade antiquated equipment on the tank.
The Project was advertised on August 4, 2016 on the District’s
website and several other publications including the San Diego Daily
Journal. A Pre-Bid Meeting was held on August 17, 2016, which was
attended by eight (8) contractors. Two (2) addenda were sent out to
all bidders and plan houses to address questions and clarifications
to the contract documents during the bidding period. Bids were
publicly opened on August 25, 2016, with the following results:
3
CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID AMOUNT
1
Blastco, Inc.
Downey, CA $1,106,200.00
2
Advanced Industrial Services, Inc.
Los Alamitos, CA $1,123,100.00
3
West Coast Industrial Coatings, Inc.
Laguna Hills, CA $1,394,352.01
4
Abhe & Svoboda, Inc.
Alpine, CA $1,975,156.00
The Engineer's Estimate is $ 1,224,900. West Coast Industrial
Coatings, Inc. submitted a bid amount of $1,394,352.00, however,
there was a mathematical error in the bid, and the corrected bid
amount was $1,394,352.01.
The evaluation process included reviewing all bids submitted for
conformance to the contract documents. The lowest bidder, Blastco,
submitted a responsible bid and holds a Class A Contractor’s license
which expires on August 31, 2017. Blastco also holds a current QP-1
certification from the Society for Protective Coatings, which was also
a requirement. Staff checked references, and the response from other
agencies indicated Blastco has performed excellent on similar
projects. The proposed Project Manager has experience throughout
California on similar projects and received excellent recommendations.
The District has previously worked with Blastco on the 657-1 & 657-2
Reservoir Interior and Exterior Coating project, which was completed
on time and on budget. A background search of the company was
performed on the internet and revealed no outstanding issues with this
company. Blastco submitted the Company Background and Company Safety
Questionnaires as required by the Contract Documents. Staff verified
that Blastco and their sub-contractors are registered with the
Department of Industrial Relations as required by Senate Bill SB 854.
Staff has verified that the bid bond provided by The Hanover
Insurance Company is valid. Once Blastco signs the contract, they
will furnish the performance bond and labor and materials bond.
Staff will verify both bonds prior to executing the contract.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The total budget for CIP P2534, as approved in the FY 2017 budget, is
$715,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, are $670,875. See Attachment B-1 for the budget detail.
The total budget for CIP P2544, as approved in the FY 2017 budget, is
$1,070,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, are $1,022,208. See Attachment B-2 for the budget detail.
4
Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budget is sufficient to support the Project.
The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate
model, 100% of the funding will be available from the Replacement
Fund.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay
Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner”
and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the
forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable
rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
DM/RD:mlc
P:\WORKING\CIP P2534 & P2544 - 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Int-Ext Coating\Staff Reports\10-5-16, Staff
Report 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Coating.docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B-1 – Budget Detail for P2534 (978-1)
Attachment B-2 – Budget Detail for P2544 (850-2)
Exhibit A – Project Location for 978-1 & 850-2
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2534-001103
P2544-001103
Award of a Construction Contract to Blastco, Inc. for the
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coatings &
Upgrades Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on
September 15, 2016, and the following comments were made:
Staff recommended that the Board award a construction contract
to Blastco, Inc. (Blastco) for the 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir
Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project in an amount-not-
to exceed $1,106,200.
Staff discussed an analysis of the 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoirs,
which is provided on page 2 of the staff report.
It was noted by staff that an internal and external inspection
confirmed that both reservoirs are due for recoating and that
structural upgrades are also required to bring the reservoir up
to current Federal and State OSHA standards as well as AWWA
Standards.
The selection process was discussed by staff who indicated that
Blastco Inc. submitted the lowest responsive bid. The results
of the process are shown in the table provided on page 3 of the
staff report. Staff checked the company’s references, which
showed a good overall performance record.
Staff highlighted that Blastco has previously worked with the
District on the 657-1 & 657-2 Reservoir Project and that it was
completed on time and on budget.
The Committee inquired about the $3,804 expenditure for HDR
Engineering, Inc. that was listed under Planning in both Budget
Details (Attachments B-1 and B-2). Staff stated that the
expenditure was for the cost to hire a diver to inspect the
inside of the reservoir tanks.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff indicated
that there is an allowance of approximately $70,000 included in
the Project’s contract to cover the costs of unforeseen
structural repairs that may be discovered during interior
blasting operations at the 978-1 Reservoir.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
ATTACHMENT B-1 – Budget Detail for P2534
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2534-001103
P2544-001103
Award of a Construction Contract to Blastco, Inc. for the
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coatings &
Upgrades Project
Date Updated: 8/23/16
Budget
715,000
Planning
Standard Salaries 5,000 2,720 2,280 5,000
Consultant Contracts 3,804 - 3,804 3,804 HDR ENGINEERING INC
Standard Materials 75 47 28 75 STANDARD MATERIALS
Equipment Charges 100 40 60 100 EQUIPMENT CHARGES
Total Planning 8,979 2,807 6,172 8,979
Design
Standard Salaries 25,000 2,812 22,188 25,000
Equipment Charges 40 8 32 40 EQUIPMENT CHARGES
Total Design 25,040 2,820 22,220 25,040
Construction
Standard Salaries 120,000 663 119,337 120,000
Construction Contract 392,720 - 392,720 392,720 BLASTCO, INC.
Service Contracts 250 - 250 250 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Service Contracts 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 SPECIALTY INSPECTION
25,000 - 25,000 25,000 ALYSON CONSULTING-CM
750 - 750 750 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY
20,000 - 20,000 20,000 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION
Professional Legal Fees 1,000 - 1,000 1,000
Equipment Charges 2,500 53 2,447 2,500 EQUIPMENT CHARGE
Project Closeout 5,000 - 5,000 5,000 CLOSEOUT
Project Contingency 19,636 - 19,636 19,636 5% CONTINGENCY
Total Construction 636,856 716 636,140 636,856
Grand Total 670,875 6,343 664,532 670,875
Vendor/Comments
Otay Water District
P2534-978-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating
Committed Expenditures Outstanding
Commitment &
Projected Final
Cost
ATTACHMENT B-2 – Budget Detail for P2544
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2534-001103
P2544-001103
Award of a Construction Contract to Blastco, Inc. for the
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coatings &
Upgrades Project
Date Updated: 8/23/16
Budget
1,070,000
Planning
Standard Salaries 5,000 2,547 2,453 5,000
Consultant Contracts 3,804 - 3,804 3,804 HDR ENGINEERING INC
Total Planning 8,804 2,547 6,257 8,804
Design
Standard Salaries 20,000 3,319 16,681 20,000
Total Design 20,000 3,319 16,681 20,000
Construction
Standard Salaries 130,000 297 129,703 130,000
Construction Contract 713,480 - 713,480 713,480 BLASTCO, INC.
Service Contracts 60,000 - 60,000 60,000 SPECIALTY INSPECTION
25,000 - 25,000 25,000 ALYSON CONSULTING-CM
750 - 750 750 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY
20,000 - 20,000 20,000 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION
Equipment Fees 2,500 25 2,475 2,500 EQUIPMENT FEES
Professional Legal Fees 1,000 - 1,000 1,000
Project Closeout 5,000 - 5,000 5,000 CLOSEOUT
Project Contingency 35,674 - 35,674 35,674 5% CONTINGENCY
Total Construction 993,404 322 993,082 993,404
Grand Total 1,022,208 6,188 1,016,020 1,022,208
Vendor/Comments
Otay Water District
P2544-850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating
Committed Expenditures Outstanding
Commitment &
Projected Final
Cost
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & UpgradesLocation Map
EXHIBIT A
F
P:\WORKING\P2534 & P2544 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoirs Int-Ex Coating\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Location Map-Color.mxd
§¨¦8
§¨¦8
§¨¦8
ÃÅ94
ÃÅ125
ÃÅ94
ÃÅ125
ÃÅ94
0 5,0002,500
Feet
850-2 RESERVOIR
978-1RESERVOIR
CIP P2534CIP P2544
PROJECT SITE
PROJECT SITE
SR-94 / CAMPO RD
!\
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITENTS
DIV 5
DIV 1
DIV 2
DIV 4
DIV 3
?ò
Aä%&s
?p
?Ë
!\
PROJECT SITE
F
J A M A C H A
BLVD
J A M A C H A R D
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: October 5, 2016
PROJECT: DIV. NO.: ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Michael Kerr, Information Technology Manager
APPROVED BY:
Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF THE DISTRICT’S ENTERPRISE CONTENT AND RECORDS
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement
with ECS Imaging, Inc., for enterprise content management software
(ECMS) licensing, implementation, and migration, in an amount not-to-
exceed $185,265, and reassign an additional $75,265 to this project
from identified CIP savings.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To purchase and replace legacy records management software, which is
necessary for the creation, revision, approval, routing, consumption,
disposition, and general management of District electronic documents.
The new enterprise content management system (ECMS) will provide
additional essential features such as day-to-day document management,
web content management, digital asset management, collaboration,
scanning, and centralized storage repository for all District content.
ANALYSIS:
Digital and electronic content management and repository services are
essential to District operations. Over the past seven years, the
District has utilized the Hewlett Packard (HP) Trim solution as its
records management system. HP Trim lacks the multi-purpose data
management functions the District requires and has limited
collaboration and integration capabilities with other key enterprise
District systems. The District requires an ECMS that consolidates and
manages all District business documents, records, files, and
correspondence within a single repository, in order to efficiently
locate and operate the data. Continuing on the path of optimization and
efficiencies, the modern features of this enterprise content management
system will streamline the management and operation of our enterprise
electronic data, and further align and integrate District technology
services.
Background:
The District’s current content management solution, HP Trim, is at end-
of-life in its current revision and has served its single purpose
function. At the time of its purchase, ECM systems were better suited
for large organizations, with much larger budgets. The ECMS market has
evolved and expanded, to include a significant segment of similarly
sized organizations like the District.
The District’s current content management solution, HP Trim, is at end-
of-life in its current revision and has served its single purpose
function. Although limited choices at the time of its purchase, HP Trim
was deemed the best fit solution for the District’s records management
needs. The current HP Trim solution lacks essential ECMS features to
include content strategies, improved information architecture security,
and enterprise integration (see analysis below). The District currently
uses disparate systems to handle overall data management functions,
with records management being handled by the single purpose system, HP
Trim solution. In the area of public records requests, with the current
system, search and production efforts are often manual and time
consuming, and there is no web or internet feature for public viewing.
By implementing the ECMS, the District would automate and standardize
document structure, improve taxonomy, and enhance overall content
security. This would also streamline the availability of content to the
public and internal employees, thus reducing costly rework and time
consumption of records management and production function of public
records request.
Staff conducted extensive research of enterprise content management
systems and identified Laserfiche as one of the leaders in the industry
and small business segment. The adoption of the Laserfiche solution
includes a large number of Municipal Information Systems Association of
California (MISAC) members, to include many similarly sized agencies.
The cost, feature set, and architecture complements the District ECMS
needs. With growing enterprise content managements needs ranging from
file creation to legal disposal, the District seeks to replace its
single-purpose, end-of-life HP Trim solution with Laserfiche, a
comprehensive, multi-purpose ECMS solution.
Analysis and Selection Panel Recommendation:
Approximately two years ago, staff began planning for the addition of
ECM features to the existing records management solution, and conducted
a number of technical meetings with HP Trim. The upgrade included
software licensing, data preparation, configuration, training, and
maintenance. The project was originally budgeted for $110,000. Due to
corporate restructuring within Hewlett Packard software division and
the release of a major HP Trim solution upgrade, the original budgeted
amount was no longer valid. The new estimated cost for both HP Trim
records and enterprise content management system is now approximately
$200,000. Although the HP Trim solution had evolved to include many ECM
functions, the overall architecture and feature set was not
representative of the marketing documentation. The new HP Trim
enterprise solution would require additional support overhead in
comparison to the Laserfiche ECMS. The HP Trim functional features are
also not as rich and user-friendly, and on-going annual maintenance
cost are estimated to be $10,000 beyond that of the Laserfiche ECMS
solution. Lastly, the new Laserfiche ECMS solution will be maintained
by in-house staff.
Based on District’s needs, staff conducted an extensive analysis of
current and future needs based on functional and business requirements.
Staff solicited quotes for Laserfiche enterprise content management
system and services from three (3) firms electronically. The District
received the three (3) proposals identified below, and all three (3)
were deemed responsive.
Firm Location License
Cost
Implementation
Cost Total
McGrath
Companies, Inc.
1360 N. Baker St.
Stockton, CA, 95204 $127,000 $81,800 $208,800
ECS Imaging,
Inc.
5905 Brockton Ave,
Riverside, CA, 92506 $120,875 $64,390 $185,265
Ecofile, Inc. PO Box 385
Rocklin, CA 95677 $114,000 $75,000 $189,700
A panel of staff reviewed the submitted proposals, contacted references,
and conducted site visits with other agencies that have implemented the
Laserfiche solution. Staff concluded that ECS Imaging, Inc. was the
best and most cost-effective choice for the replacement and
implementation of the District’s new ECMS. In addition, ECS Imaging is
a preferred Laserfiche solution vendor, and the only vendor with staff
in San Diego.
Decision Analysis:
Staff evaluated proposals from the three (3) firms that were invited
for final review and conducted a decision analysis (results shown
below), which ranked ECS Imaging, Inc. as the highest overall firm based
on the evaluation criteria.
SELECTION PANEL ANALYSIS
(individual results for ECMS)
McGrath
Companies,
Inc.
ECS Imaging,
Inc.
Ecofile,
Inc.
EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHT SCORE TOTAL SCORE TOTAL SCORE TOTAL
Experience of Proposed
Staff 10 8 80 9 90 8 80
Approach To The Project 9 8 72 9 81 7 63
Capability To Perform 8 8 64 9 72 8 64
Cost/Pricing 9 7 63 8 72 7 63
Relevant Experience 6 8 48 10 60 8 48
GRAND TOTALS 327 375 318
Selection Recommendation:
Based on the above, staff recommends ECS Imaging, Inc. for ECMS software
licensing and implementation services.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Capital Totals:
The total available budget for CIP P2568, as approved in the FY 2017
budget, is $110,000. The $75,265 required balance will be reassigned
from identified FY 2017 CIP project savings.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
These items are in support of the District’s strategic plan objective,
Advance Business Processes and Operational Efficiencies through
Implementation of Information Technology.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – Statement of Work - Laserfiche Implementation Project
Plan
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF ENTERPRISE CONTENT AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM
COMMITTEE ACTION:
This item was presented to the Finance, Administration and
Communications Committee at a meeting held on September 13, 2016.
The following comments were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board approve an agreement with ECS
Imaging, Inc. for enterprise content management software (ECMS)
licensing, implementation, and migration, in an amount not-to-
exceed $185,265, and reassign an additional $75,265 to this
project from identified CIP savings.
Staff reviewed the information in the staff report.
A video was presented which provided an overview of the
Laserfiche ECMS software.
Staff indicated that the District’s current records management
system, HP Trim, is at end-of-life and must be upgraded. Based
on discussions with Hewlett Packard, the cost to upgrade HP Trim
would be approximately $200,000 and the upgrade would allow for
placing records and content management functions into one
centralized system.
Laserfische ECMS gives the District a multi-purpose (Enterprise
Content Management System) solution from the moment a record is
created to when it is disposed/destroyed. Some of the
enterprise features that were deemed essential are
standardization of file creation and storage, check in/out
function, electronic form creation and work-flow, single
repository for all content, content access via mobile devices,
enhanced usage auditing and content security, web feature for
public access, integration with District enterprise systems such
as SharePoint, Tyler Eden, Microsoft Office, and GIS,
centralized management, legal disposal of electronic documents,
and ability to support with in-house resources. It is utilized
by many agencies throughout California and its ongoing
maintenance and overhead costs are very low.
In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated
that the District started to research upgrading the existing
records management system (HP Trim) two (2) years ago. The HP
Trim system has been in use for approximately seven (7) years.
Staff indicated that the new proposed system, Laserfische ECMS,
was found to be a better solution and would be less costly than
upgrading the existing system.
It was indicated in response to another inquiry from the
Committee that the $185,265 would cover all required licensing
costs, modules with security workflow, integration and migration
of the District’s current records management data, training, and
maintenance. Ongoing maintenance cost was indicated to be
approximately $25,000 per year. Subsequent to the meeting staff
clarified that if the District stayed with the HP Trim system,
with added ECMS type features, the ongoing maintenance cost
would be approximately $35,000 per year. The District would
achieve a savings of $10,000 per year if it moved to the
proposed Laserfische ECMS system.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staff’s
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: October 5, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Compliance
Specialist
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
CIP./G.F. NO: D0028-
090277
DIV. NO. 2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
(August 2016) for the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors
(Board) approve the Water Supply Assessment and Verification
Report (WSA&V Report) dated August 2016 for the City of Chula
Vista University Innovation District Project, as required by
Senate Bills 610 and 221 (see Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board approval of the August 2016 WSA&V Report for the
City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project, as
required by Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 (SB 610 and SB
221).
ANALYSIS:
The City of Chula Vista submitted a request to the District for
a WSA&V Report, pursuant to SB 610 and SB 221. SB 610 and SB
221 require that, upon the request of the City or County, a
water purveyor, such as the District, prepare a water supply
2
assessment and verification report to be included in the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental
documentation. SB 610 requires a city or county to evaluate
whether water supplies will be sufficient to meet the projected
water demand for certain “projects” that are otherwise subject
to the requirement of the CEQA. SB 610 provides its own
definition of “project” in Water Code Section 10912.
SB 221 requires affirmative written verification from the water
purveyor of the public water system that sufficient water
supplies are planned to be available for certain residential
subdivisions of property. The requirements of SB 610 and SB 221
are addressed by the May 2016 WSA&V Report for this Project.
The WSA&V Report was prepared by the District in consultation
with Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., the San Diego County Water
Authority (Water Authority), and the City of Chula Vista (City).
Prior to transmittal to the City, the WSA&V Report must be
approved by the Board of Directors. An additional explanation
of the intent of SB 610 and SB 221 is provided in Exhibit B, the
City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project WSA&V
Report is provided as Exhibit C.
For the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District
Project, the City is the responsible land use agency that
requested the SB 610 and SB 221 water supply assessment and
verification reports from the District. The request for the
WSA&V Reports, in compliance with SB 610 and SB 221
requirements, was made by the City because the Project meets or
exceeds one or both of the following SB 610 and SB 221 criteria:
A proposed residential development of more than 500
dwelling units.
A proposed commercial office building employing more than
1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of
floor space.
A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the land
uses specified in SB 610.
A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent
to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500
dwelling unit project.
The City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project
is located along the north side of the Otay River Valley within
3
the Otay Ranch Development. The Project is planned to include a
State University site with education buildings, student and
faculty housing, commercial, recreation, and open space areas.
The Project proposes up to 10,066,200 square feet of development
and could include up to 20,000 students, 6,000 faculty/staff
members and 8,000 commercial employees. Up to 6,000 students
and 1,200 faculty/staff members could be housed onsite.
The expected potable water demands for the City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project are 840,688 gpd or about
941.7 AFY. This is 11.7 AFY higher than the demand estimate in
the District’s 2008 Water Resources Master Plan November 2010
Update, which estimated 930.0 AFY for the same parcels.
Recycled water is proposed to be used within the Project and the
estimated annual average usage is projected to be 159,255 gpd or
178 AFY.
The 11.7 AFY increase is accounted for through the Accelerated
Forecasted Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2015
Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). As documented in the Water
Authority’s 2015 UWMP, the Water Authority is planning to meet
future and existing demands, which include the demand increment
associated with the accelerated forecasted growth. The Water
Authority will assist its member agencies in tracking the
environmental documents provided by the agencies that include
water supply assessments and verifications reports that utilize
the accelerated forecasted growth demand increment to
demonstrate supplies for the development. In addition, the next
update of the demand forecast for the Water Authority’s 2020
UWMP will be based on SANDAG’s most recently updated forecast,
which will include the Project. Therefore, based on the
findings from the District’s 2015 UWMP and the Water Authority’s
2015 UWMP, this Project will result in no unanticipated demands.
The request for compliance with SB 221 requirements was made by
the City because the Project will exceed the SB 221 criteria of
a proposed residential development with more than 500 dwelling
units.
Pursuant to SB 610 and SB 221, the WSA&V Report incorporates by
reference the current Urban Water Management Plans and other
water resources planning documents of the District, the Water
Authority, and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California (Metropolitan). The District prepared the WSA&V
Report in consultation with Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., the
Water Authority, and the City, which demonstrates and documents
that sufficient water supplies are planned for and are intended
4
to be made available over a 20-year planning horizon under
normal supply conditions, in single and multiple-dry years to
meet the projected demand of the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project and other planned development
projects within the District.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The District has been reimbursed $8,000 for all costs associated
with the preparation of the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project WSA&V Report. The reimbursement was
accomplished via an $8,000 deposit the Project proponents placed
with the District.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
The preparation and approval of the WSA&V Report for the City of
Chula Vista University Innovation District Project supports the
District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and
wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District
in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the
General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront
in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates,
with a reputation for outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
Approval of a WSA&V Report for the City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project in form and content
satisfactory to the Board of Directors would allow the District
to comply with the requirements of Senate Bills 610 and 221.
LC-B/BK:jf
P:\WORKING\WO D0028 City of Chula Vista University Innovation District\Staff Report\BD 10-05-06-
16, Staff Report, City of Chula Vista University Innovation District WSA&V Report(LCB-BK).doc
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Exhibit A – Location Map
Exhibit B – Explanation of the Intent of SB 610 &
SB 221
Exhibit C – City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project WSA&V
Report
Exhibit D – Presentation
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
D0028-090277
Approval of Water Supply Assessment and Verification
Report (August 2016) for the City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on
September 15, 2016, and the following comments were made:
Staff recommended that the Board approve the Water Supply
Assessment and Verification Report (WSA&V Report) dated
August 2016 for the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project (Project), as required by
Senate Bills 610 and 221 (SB 610 & 221).
Staff provided a PowerPoint presentation to the Committee.
See Exhibit D of the staff report.
Staff stated that the City of Chula Vista submitted a
request to the District for a WSA&V Report for the Project
pursuant to SB 610 & 221. It was noted that Board approval
is required for submittal of the WSA&V Report to the City
of Chula Vista.
The Project’s description is provided on page 3 of the
PowerPoint presentation. It was noted that the Project’s
total water demand is 941.7 AFY of potable water and 178
AFY of recycled water. This is 11.7 AFY higher than what
was indicated in the 2010 update of the District’s 2008
Water Resources Master Plan. However, staff stated that
the increase in demand is accounted for through the AFG
demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP).
Staff stated that the WSA&V Report discusses the
development of sufficient and reliable water supplies to
meet the challenge of existing and future water supply
demands. The report also documents planned water supply
projects and the actions necessary to develop the supplies
for a 20-year planning horizon.
The PowerPoint presentation showed the Water Authority’s
supplies for years 2020 to 2040, which indicated a total
amount of 336,200 acre-feet by the year 2040. See page 5
of the presentation.
Page 6 of the PowerPoint presentation provides detail of
the Otay Water District’s projected balance of supply and
demand for years 2020 to 2040. Staff noted that the
information was based on data from the District’s 2015
Urban Water Management Plan.
Staff stated that based on the findings from the District’s
2015 UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, there are no
unanticipated demands for this project.
Staff noted that the state of the current water supply
situation is documented in the University Innovation
District WSA&V Report and shows that the District has met
the intent of SB 610 and SB 221.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated
that the larger University project site is outside of the
Lower Otay Reservoir drainage basin and therefore will be
able to use recycled water. The smaller project site
adjacent to the reservoir is in the same drainage basin as
Lower Otay Reservoir where the City of San Diego does not
allow recycled water use.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as an action
item.
1
EXHIBIT B
Background Information
The Otay Water District (District) prepared the updated August 2016 Water Supply
Assessment and Verification (WSA&V) Report for the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project at the request of the City of Chula Vista (City). The City’s
WSA&V request letter dated August 31, 2016 was received by the District on August 31,
2016 so the 90-day deadline for the District to provide the Board an approved WSA&V
Report to the City ends November 29, 2016.
The City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project is located within the
jurisdictions of the District, the San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority), and
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). See Exhibit A for Project
location. To obtain permanent imported water supply service, land areas are required
to be within the jurisdictions of the District, Water Authority, and MWD.
The August 2016 WSA&V Report for the City of Chula Vista University Innovation
District Project has been prepared by the District in consultation with Dexter Wilson
Engineering, Inc., the Water Authority, and the City, pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21151.9 and California Water Code Sections 10631, 10656, 10910, 10911,
10912, and 10915 referred to as Senate Bill (SB) 610 and Government Code Sections
65867.5, 66455.3, and 66473.7 referred to as SB 221. SB 610 and SB 221 amended
state law, effective January 1, 2002, intending to improve the link between information
on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties.
SB 610 requires that the water purveyor of the public water system prepare a water
supply assessment to be included in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
environmental documentation and approval process of certain proposed projects. SB
221 requires affirmative written verification from the water purveyor of the public water
system that sufficient water supplies are to be available for certain residential
subdivision of property. The requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 are addressed in the
August 2016 WSA&V Report for the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District
Project.
The expected potable water demands for the City of Chula Vista University Innovation
District Project are 840,688 gallons per day (gpd) or about 941.7 acre-feet per year
(AFY). This is 11.7 AFY higher than the demand estimate in the District’s 2010 Water
Resources Master Plan Update.
The 11.7 AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated Forecasted
Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2015 Urban Water Management
Plan (UWMP). As documented in the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, the Water
Authority is planning to meet future and existing demands, which include the demand
increment associated with the accelerated forecasted growth. The Water Authority will
assist its member agencies in tracking the environmental documents provided by the
agencies that include water supply assessments and verifications reports that utilize the
2
accelerated forecasted growth demand increment to demonstrate supplies for the
development. In addition, the next update of the demand forecast for the Water
Authority’s 2020 UWMP will be based on SANDAG’s most recently updated forecast,
which will include the Project. Therefore, based on the findings from the Otay WD’s
2015 UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, this Project will result in no
unanticipated demands.
The District currently depends on the Water Authority and the MWD for all of its potable
water supplies and regional water resource planning. The District’s 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP) relies heavily on the UWMP’s and Integrated Water
Resources Plans (IRPs) of the Water Authority and MWD for documentation of supplies
available to meet projected demands. These plans are developed to manage the
uncertainties and variability of multiple supply sources and demands over the long-term
through preferred water resources strategy adoption and resource development target
approvals for implementation.
MWD, in January 2016, approved the update of their Integrated Water Resources Plan
(IRP). The 2015 IRP Update describes an adaptive management approach to mitigate
against future water supply uncertainty. The new uncertainties that are significantly
affecting California’s water resources include:
The State Water Project (SWP) supplies which are affected by a changing
climate and the operational constraints in the ecologically struggling Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta.
Periodic extended drought conditions.
These uncertainties have rightly caused concern among Southern California water
supply agencies regarding the validity of the current water supply documentation.
MWD is currently involved in several proceedings concerning Delta operations to
evaluate and address environmental concerns. In addition, at the State level, the Delta
Vision and Bay-Delta Conservation Plan processes are defining long-term solutions for
the Delta.
The SWP represents approximately 9% of MWD’s 2025 Dry Resources Mix, with the
supply buffer included. A 22% cutback in SWP supply represents an overall 2% (22%
of 9% is 2%) cutback in MWD supplies in 2025. Neither the Water Authority nor MWD
has stated that there is insufficient water for future planning in Southern California.
Each agency is in the process of reassessing and reallocating their water resources.
Under preferential rights, MWD can allocate water without regard to historic water
purchases or dependence on MWD. Therefore, the Water Authority and its member
agencies are taking measures to reduce dependence on MWD through development of
additional supplies and a water supply portfolio that would not be jeopardized by a
preferential rights allocation.
3
As calculated by MWD, the Water Authority’s current preferential right is 18.27% of
MWD’s supply, while the Water Authority accounted for approximately 22% of MWD’s
total revenue. So MWD could theoretically cut back the Water Authority’s supply and
theoretically, the Water Authority should have alternative water supply sources to make
up for the difference. In the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP, they had already planned to
reduce reliance on MWD supplies. This reduction is planned to be achieved through
diversification of their water supply portfolio.
The Water Authority’s Drought Management Plan (May 2006) provides the Water
Authority and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to engage when
faced with a shortage of imported water supplies due to prolonged drought conditions.
Such actions help avoid or minimize impacts of shortages and ensure an equitable
allocation of supplies throughout the San Diego County region.
The Otay Water District Board of Directors could acknowledge the ever-present
challenge of balancing water supply with demand and the inherent need to possess a
flexible and adaptable water supply implementation strategy that can be relied upon
during normal and dry weather conditions. The responsible regional water supply
agencies have and will continue to adapt their resource plans and strategies to meet
climatological, environmental, and legal challenges so that they may continue to provide
water supplies to their service areas. The regional water suppliers (i.e., the Water
Authority and MWD), along with the District, fully intend to maintain sufficient reliable
supplies through the 20-year planning horizon under normal, single, and multiple-dry
year conditions to meet projected demand of the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project, along with existing and other planned development projects
within the District’s service area.
If the regional water suppliers determine additional water supplies will be required, or in
this case, that water supply portfolios need to be reassessed and redistributed with the
intent to serve the existing and future water needs throughout Southern California, the
agencies must indicate the status or stage of development of actions identified in the
plans they provide. MWD’s 2015 IRP update will then cause the Water Authority to
update its IRP, which will then provide the District with the necessary water supply
documentation. Identification of a potential future action in such plans does not by itself
indicate that a decision to approve or to proceed with the action has been made. The
District’s Board approval of the Approval of Water Supply Assessment and Verification
Report (August 2016) for the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project
WSA&V Report does not in any way guarantee water supply to the Project.
Alternatively, if the WSA&V Report is written to state that water supply is or will be
unavailable; the District must include, in the assessment, a plan to acquire additional
water supplies. At this time, the District should not state there is insufficient water
supply.
4
At the present time, based on the information available, the District is able to clearly
describe the current water supply situation clearly, indicating intent to provide supply
through reassessment and reallocation by the regional, as well as, the local water
suppliers. In doing so, it is believed that the Board has met the intent of the SB 610
statute, that the land use agencies and the water agencies are coordinating their efforts
in planning water supplies for new development.
With District Board approval of the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District
Project WSA&V Report, the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project
proponents can proceed with the draft environmental documentation required for the
CEQA review process. The water supply issues will be addressed in these
environmental documents, consistent with the WSA&V Report.
The District, as well as others, can comment on the draft EIR with recommendations
that water conservation measures and actions be employed on the City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project.
Some recent actions regarding water supply assessments and verification reports by
Otay Water District are as follows:
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Otay Ranch
Village 2 Specific Plan Amendment Project on October 2, 2013.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Otay Ranch
University Villages Project on November 6, 2013.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Otay Ranch
Resort Village Project on May 7, 2014.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Otay Ranch
Planning Area 12 Freeway Commercial Project on April 1, 2015.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Otay 250
Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project on
July 6, 2016.
Water supplies necessary to serve the demands of the proposed City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project, along with existing and other projected future
users, as well as the actions necessary to develop these supplies, have been identified
in the water supply planning documents of the District, the Water Authority, and MWD.
The WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing
water supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, or agreements relevant
to the identified water supply needs for the proposed City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project. The WSA&V Report demonstrates and documents that
sufficient water supplies are planned and are intended to be available over a 20-year
5
planning horizon, under normal conditions and in single and multiple-dry years, to meet
the projected demand of the proposed City of Chula Vista University Innovation District
Project and the existing and other planned development projects within the District.
Accordingly, after approval of a WSA&V Report for the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project by the District's Board of Directors, the WSA&V Report may
be used to comply with the requirements of the legislation enacted by Senate Bills 610
and 221 as follows:
Senate Bill (SB) 610 Water Supply Assessment: The District's Board of Directors
approved WSA&V Report may be incorporated into the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) compliance process for the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project as a water supply assessment report consistent with the
requirements of the legislation enacted by SB 610. The City of Chula Vista, as lead
agency under the CEQA for the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District
Project environmental documentation, may cite the approved WSA&V Report as
evidence that a sufficient water supply is planned and intended to be available to
serve the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project.
Senate Bill (SB) 221 Water Supply Verification: The District's Board of Directors
approved WSA&V Report may be incorporated into the City of Chula Vista University
Innovation District Project as a water supply verification report, consistent with the
requirements of the legislation enacted by SB 221. The City, within their process of
approving the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project, may cite the
approved WSA&V Report as verification of intended sufficient water supply to serve
the Project.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT AND
VERIFICATION REPORT
for the
City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project
Prepared by:
Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Compliance Specialist
and
Bob Kennedy, P.E.
Engineering Manager
Otay Water District
In consultation with
Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc.
And
San Diego County Water Authority
August 2016
EXHIBIT C
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
August 2016
University Innovation District Project
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1
Section 1 - Purpose .................................................................................................................... 5
Section 2 - Findings ................................................................................................................... 6
Section 3 - Project Description ................................................................................................ 9
Section 4 – Otay Water District ............................................................................................. 10
Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water Demands ........................................................ 13
5.1 Demand Management (Water Conservation) ................................................. 18
Section 6 - Existing and Projected Supplies ......................................................................... 21
6.1 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan ......................................................................................... 21
6.1.2 MWD Capital Investment Plan .......................................................... 23
6.2 San Diego County Water Authority Regional Water Supplies ................ 23
6.2.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring Additional
Supplies ............................................................................................. 24
6.2.1.2 All-American Canal and Coachella Canal Lining Projects .. 31
6.2.1.3 Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Project ............................... 35
6.2.2 Water Authority Capital Improvement Program and Financial
Information ........................................................................... 38
6.3 Otay Water District ...................................................................................... 39
6.3.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring Additional
Supplies ............................................................................................. 39
6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies ........................................... 40
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies ...................................................... 43
Section 7 – Conclusion: Availability of Sufficient Supplies ................................................ 51
Source Documents ................................................................................................................... 56
Appendices
Appendix A: University Innovation District Project Vicinity Map
Appendix B: University Innovation District Project Development Plan
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
1
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
August 2016
University Innovation District Project
Executive Summary
The Otay Water District (Otay WD) prepared this Water Supply Assessment and Verification
Report (WSA&V Report) at the request of the City of Chula Vista (City) for the University
Innovation District Project. The City is having an environmental impact report (EIR)
prepared for the development of this project.
University Innovation District Project Overview and Water Use
The University Innovation District Project is located within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD,
the San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority), and the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California (MWD). To obtain permanent imported water supply service,
land areas are required to be within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and
MWD.
The City is having an EIR prepared for development of the 383.8 acre site (University
Innovation District Project). The land use plan proposes a State university to serve
approximately 20,000 students. The project is located within the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan along the north side of the Otay River Valley.
The expected potable water demand for the University Innovation District Project is 840,688
gallons per day (gpd) or about 941.7 acre feet per year (AFY). This is 11.7 AFY higher than
the projected demands in the District’s 2008 Water Resources Master Plan updated November
2010 (WRMP Update) which estimated 930.0 AFY for the same parcels. Recycled water is
proposed to be used within the project and the estimated annual average usage is projected to
be 159,255 gpd, or 178 AFY.
The 11.7 AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated Forecasted
Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP. As documented in the
Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, the Water Authority is planning to meet future and existing
demands which include the demand increment associated with the accelerated forecasted
growth. The Water Authority will assist its member agencies in tracking the environmental
documents provided by the agencies that include water supply assessments and verifications
reports that utilize the accelerated forecasted growth demand increment to demonstrate
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
2
supplies for the development. In addition, the next update of the demand forecast for the
Water Authority’s 2020 UWMP will be based on SANDAG’s most recently updated forecast,
which will include the Project. Therefore, based on the findings from the Otay WD’s 2015
UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, this project will result in no unanticipated
demands.
The Water Authority’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) provides for a
comprehensive planning analysis at a regional level and includes water use associated with
accelerated forecasted development as part of its municipal and industrial sector demand
projections. These housing and commercial units were identified by the San Diego
Association of Government (SANDAG) in the course of its regional housing needs
assessment, but are not yet included in existing general land use plans of local
jurisdictions. The demand associated with accelerated forecasted residential development is
intended to account for SANDAG’s land-use development currently projected to occur
between 2035 and 2050, but has the likely potential to occur on an accelerated
schedule. SANDAG estimates that this accelerated forecasted residential and commercial
development forecasted could occur within the planning horizon (2020 to 2040) of the 2015
UWMP. This land-use is not included in local jurisdictions’ general plans, so their projected
demands are incorporated at a regional level. When necessary, this additional demand
increment, termed Accelerated Forecasted Growth, can be used by member agencies to meet
the demands of development projects not identified in the general land use plans.
Planned Imported Water Supplies from the Water Authority and MWD
The Water Authority and MWD have an established process that ensures supplies are being
planned to meet future growth. Any annexations and revisions to established land use plans
are captured in the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) updated forecasts for
land use planning, demographics, and economic projections. SANDAG serves as the
regional, intergovernmental planning agency that develops and provides forecast information.
The Water Authority and MWD update their demand forecasts and supply needs based on the
most recent SANDAG forecast approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of
their UWMP’s. Prior to the next forecast update, local jurisdictions with land use authority
may require water supply assessment and/or verification reports for proposed land
developments that are not within the OTAY WD, Water Authority, or MWD jurisdictions (i.e.
pending or proposed annexations) or that have revised land use plans with either lower or
higher development intensities than reflected in the existing growth forecasts. Proposed land
areas with pending or proposed annexations, or revised land use plans, typically result in
creating higher demand and supply requirements than previously anticipated. The OTAY
WD, Water Authority, and MWD next demand forecast and supply requirements and
associated planning documents would then capture any increase or decrease in demands and
required supplies as a result of annexations or revised land use planning decisions.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
3
An important planning document utilized by MWD, the Water Authority and OTAY WD is
the Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) which describes an agency’s long term water plan.
MWD’s 2015 IRP offers an adaptive management strategy to protect the region from future
supply shortages. This adaptive management strategy has five components: achieve additional
conservation savings, develop additional local water supplies, maintain Colorado River
Aqueduct supplies, stabilize State Water Project supplies, and maximize the effectiveness of
storage and transfer. MWD’s 2015 IRP has a plan for identifying and implementing
additional resources that expand the ability for MWD to meet future changes and challenges
as necessary to ensure future reliability of supplies. The proper management of these
resources help to ensure that the southern California region, including San Diego County, will
have adequate water supplies to meet long-term future demands.
Another important planning document is the UWMP. The California Urban Water
Management Planning Act (Act), which is included in the California Water Code, requires all
urban water suppliers within the state to prepare an UWMP and update it every five years.
The purpose and importance of the UWMP has evolved since it was first required 25 years
ago. State agencies and the public frequently use the document to determine if agencies are
planning adequately to reliably meet future demands. As such, UWMPs serve as an important
element in documenting supply availability for the purpose of compliance with state laws,
Senate Bills 610 and 221, linking water supply sufficiency to large land-use development
approval. Agencies must also have a UWMP prepared, pursuant to the Act, in order to be
eligible for state funding and drought assistance.
MWD’s 2015 UWMP Findings state that MWD has supply capabilities that would be
sufficient to meet expected demands from 2020 through 2040. MWD has plans for supply
implementation and continued development of a diversified resource mix including programs
in the Colorado River Aqueduct, State Water Project, Central Valley Transfers, local resource
projects, and in-region storage that enables the region to meet its water supply needs. MWD’s
2015 UWMP identifies potential reserve supplies in the supply capability analysis (Tables 2-
4, 2-5, and 2-6), which could be available to meet the unanticipated demands such as those
related to the University Innovation District Project.
The County Water Authority Act, Section 5 subdivision 11, states that the Water Authority
“as far as practicable, shall provide each of its member agencies with adequate supplies of
water to meet their expanding and increasing needs.”
As part of preparation of a written water supply assessment report, an agency’s shortage
contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of supply. Section 11
of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP Update contain a detailed shortage contingency
analysis that addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought management.
The analysis demonstrates that the Water Authority and its member agencies, through the
Integrated Contingency Plan, Emergency Storage Project, and Water Shortage and Drought
Response Plan are taking actions to prepare for and appropriately handle an interruption of
water supplies. The Water Shortage and Drought Response Plan, provides the Water
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
4
Authority and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to take when faced with a
shortage of imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply
shortfall conditions. The actions will help the region avoid or minimize the impacts of
shortages and ensure an equitable allocation of supplies.
Water supply agencies throughout California continue to face climate, environmental, legal,
and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions, such as the court rulings
regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta issues and the current ongoing drought
impacting the western states. Even with these ever present challenges, the Water Authority
and MWD, along with Otay WD fully intend to have sufficient, reliable supplies to serve
demands.
Otay Water District Water Supply Development Program
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the University Innovation District
Project will be required to participate in the water supply development program being
implemented by the Otay WD. This is intended to be achieved through financial participation
in several local and/or regional water supply development projects envisioned by the Otay
WD. These water supply projects are in addition to those identified as sustainable supplies in
the current Water Authority and MWD UWMP, IRP, Master Plans, and other planning
documents, and are in response to the regional water supply issues. These new water supply
projects are not currently developed and are in various stages of the planning process.
Imported water supplies along with the development of these additional Otay WD water
supply development projects supplies are intended to increase water supplies to serve the
University Innovation District Project water supply needs and that of other similar
development projects. The Otay WD water supply development program includes but is not
limited to projects such as the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project, the
Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well project, the North District Recycled Water Supply
Concept, and the Rosarito Ocean Desalination Facility project. The Water Authority and
MWD’s next forecasts and supply planning documents would capture any increase in water
supplies resulting from any new water resources developed by the Otay WD.
Findings
The WSA&V Report identifies and describes the processes by which water demand
projections for the proposed University Innovation District project will be fully included in
the water demand and supply forecasts of the Urban Water Management Plans and other
water resources planning documents of the Water Authority and MWD. Water supplies
necessary to serve the demands of the proposed project, along with existing and other
projected future users, as well as the actions necessary and status to develop these supplies,
have been identified in the University Innovation District project WSA&V Report and will be
included in the future water supply planning documents of the Water Authority and MWD.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
5
This WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing water
supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, water supply projects, or
agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed University
Innovation District project. The WSA&V Report demonstrates and documents that sufficient
water supplies are planned for and are intended to be available over a 20-year planning
horizon, under normal conditions and in single and multiple dry years to meet the projected
demand of the proposed University Innovation District project and the existing and other
planned development projects to be served by the Otay WD.
Accordingly, after approval of a WSA&V Report for the University Innovation District
project by the Otay WD Board of Directors (Board), the WSA&V Report may be used to
comply with the requirements of the legislation enacted by Senate Bills 610 and 221 as
follows:
1. Senate Bill 610 Water Supply Assessment: The Otay WD Board approved WSA&V
Report may be incorporated into the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) compliance process for the University Innovation
District project as a water supply assessment report consistent with the requirements
of the legislation enacted by SB 610. The City as lead agency under CEQA for the
University Innovation District project EIR amendment may cite the approved
WSA&V Report as evidence that a sufficient water supply is planned for and is
intended to be made available to serve the University Innovation District project.
2. Senate Bill 221 Water Supply Verification: The Otay WD Board approved WSA&V
Report may be incorporated into the City’s Tentative Map approval process for the
University Innovation District project as a water supply verification report, consistent
with the requirements of the legislation enacted by SB 221. The City, within their
process of approving the University Innovation District project’s Tentative Map, may
cite the approved WSA&V Report as verification of intended sufficient water supply
to serve the University Innovation District project.
Section 1 - Purpose
The City of Chula Vista is having an environmental impact report (EIR) prepared for the
development of the 383.8 acre parcel (University Innovation District Project). The project is
located within the Otay Ranch General Development Plan along the north side of the Otay
River Valley. The City requested that the Otay WD prepare a Water Supply Assessment and
Verification (WSA&V) Report for the University Innovation District Project. The University
Innovation District Project description is provided in Section 3 of this WSA&V Report.
This WSA&V Report for the University Innovation District project has been prepared by the
Otay WD in consultation with Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., the Water Authority, and the
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
6
City pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and California Water Code Sections
10631, 10656, 10910, 10911, 10912, and 10915 referred to as Senate Bill (SB) 610 and
Business and Professions Code Section 11010 and Government Code Sections 65867.5,
66455.3, and 66473.7 referred to as SB 221. SB 610 and SB 221 amended state law, effective
January 1, 2002, intending to improve the link between information on water supply
availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 requires that
the water purveyor of the public water system prepare a water supply assessment to be
included in the CEQA documentation and approval process of certain proposed projects. SB
221 requires affirmative written verification from the water purveyor of the public water
system that sufficient water supplies are to be available for certain residential subdivisions of
property prior to approval of a tentative map. The requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 are
being addressed by this WSA&V Report.
The City also requested, since the requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 are substantially
similar, that Otay WD prepare both the water supply assessment and verification
concurrently.
This WSA&V Report evaluates water supplies that are planned to be available during normal,
single dry year, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year planning horizon to meet
existing demands, expected demands of the University Innovation District Project, and
reasonably foreseeable planned future water demands to be served by Otay WD. The Otay
Water District Board of Directors approved WSA&V Report is planned to be used by the City
in its evaluation of the University Innovation District Project under the CEQA approval
process procedures.
Section 2 - Findings
The City of Chula Vista is having an EIR prepared for the development of the 383.8 acre
parcel (University Innovation District Project). The Otay WD prepared this WSA&V Report
at the request of the City for the University Innovation District Project.
The University Innovation District Project is located within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD,
the Water Authority, and MWD. To obtain permanent imported water supply service, land
areas are required to be within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD
to utilize imported water supply.
The expected potable water demand for the University Innovation District Project is 840,688
gallons per day (gpd) or about 941.7 acre feet per year (AFY). This is 11.7 AFY higher than
the demand estimate in the District’s WRMP Update which estimated 930.0 AFY. Recycled
water is also proposed to be used on the project and is projected to be an average of 159,255
gpd, or 178 AFY.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
7
The 11.7 AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated Forecasted
Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP. As documented in the
Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, the Water Authority is planning to meet future and existing
demands which include the demand increment associated with the accelerated forecasted
growth. The Water Authority will assist its member agencies in tracking the environmental
documents provided by the agencies that include water supply assessments and verifications
reports that utilize the accelerated forecasted growth demand increment to demonstrate
supplies for the development. In addition, the next update of the demand forecast for the
Water Authority’s 2020 UWMP will be based on SANDAG’s most recently updated forecast,
which will include the Project. Therefore, based on the findings from the Otay WD’s 2015
UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP, this project will result in no unanticipated
demands.
The Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP Update provides for a comprehensive planning analysis
at a regional level and includes water use associated with accelerated forecasted development
as part of its municipal and industrial sector demand projections. These housing and
commercial units were identified by the SANDAG in the course of its regional housing needs
assessment, but are not yet included in existing general land use plans of local
jurisdictions. The demand associated with accelerated forecasted residential development is
intended to account for SANDAG’s land-use development currently projected to occur
between 2035 and 2050, but has the likely potential to occur on an accelerated
schedule. SANDAG estimates that this accelerated forecasted residential and commercial
development forecasted could occur within the planning horizon (2020 to 2040) of the Water
Authority’s 2015 UWMP. This land-use is not included in local jurisdictions’ general plans,
so their projected demands are incorporated at a regional level. When necessary, this
additional demand increment, termed Accelerated Forecasted Growth, can be used by member
agencies to meet the demands of development projects not identified in the general land use
plans.
The Water Authority and MWD have an established process that ensures supplies are being
planned to meet future growth. Any annexations and revisions to established land use plans
are captured in the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) updated forecasts for
land use planning, demographics, and economic projections. SANDAG serves as the
regional, intergovernmental planning agency that develops and provides forecast information.
The Water Authority and MWD update their demand forecasts and supply needs based on the
most recent SANDAG forecast approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of
their urban water management plans. Prior to the next forecast update, local jurisdictions may
require water supply assessment and/or verification reports for proposed land developments
that are not within the Otay WD, Water Authority, or MWD jurisdictions (i.e. pending or
proposed annexations) or that have revised land use plans with lower or higher land use
intensities than reflected in the existing growth forecasts. Proposed land areas with pending
or proposed annexations, or revised land use plans, typically result in creating higher demand
and supply requirements than anticipated. The Otay WD, the Water Authority, and MWD
next demand forecast and supply requirements and associated planning documents would then
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
8
capture any increase or decrease in demands and required supplies as a result of annexations
or revised land use planning decisions.
This process is utilized by the Water Authority and MWD to document the water supplies
necessary to serve the demands of the University Innovation District project, along with
existing and other projected future users, as well as the actions necessary to develop any
required water supplies. Through this process the necessary demand and supply information
is thus assured to be identified and incorporated within the water supply planning documents
of the Water Authority and MWD.
This WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing water
supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, proposed water supply projects, and
agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed University
Innovation District Project. This WSA&V Report incorporates by reference the current
Urban Water Management Plans and other water resources planning documents of the Otay
WD, the Water Authority, and MWD. The Otay WD prepared this WSA&V Report to assess
and document that sufficient water supplies are planned for and are intended to be acquired to
meet projected water demands of the University Innovation District Project as well as existing
and other reasonably foreseeable planned development projects within the Otay WD for a 20-
year planning horizon, in normal supply years and in single dry and multiple dry years.
The Otay Water District 2015 UWMP includes a water conservation component to comply
with Senate Bill 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX 7-7), which became effective
February 3, 2010. This new law was the water conservation component to the Delta
legislation package, and seeks to achieve a 20 percent statewide reduction in urban per capita
water use in California by December 31, 2020. Specifically, SBX 7-7 from this Extraordinary
Session requires each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets to help
meet the 20 percent reduction goal by 2020 (20x2020), and an interim water reduction target
by 2015.
Otay WD adopted Method 1 to set its 2015 interim and 2020 water use targets. Method 1
requires setting the 2020 water use target to 80 percent of baseline per capita water use target
as provided in the State’s 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. The Otay WD 2015 target was
172 gpcd which it met (2015 actual was 124 gpcd) and the 2020 gpcd target (80 percent of
baseline) is 153 gpcd. The Otay WD’s recent per capita water use has been declining and
current water use already meets the 2020 target as calculated using Method 1. This recent
decline in per capita water use is largely due to drought water use restrictions, increased water
costs, and economic conditions. However, Otay WD’s effective water use awareness
campaign and enhanced conservation mentality of its customers will likely result in some
long-term carryover of these reduced consumption rates.
Based on a normal water supply year, the five-year increments for a 20-year projection
indicate projected potable and recycled water supply is being planned for and is intended to be
acquired to meet the estimated water demand targets of the Otay WD (42,720 acre-feet (ac-ft)
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
9
in 2020 to 57,582 ac-ft in 2040) per the Otay Water District 2015 UWMP. Based on dry year
forecasts, the estimated water supply is also being planned for and is intended to be acquired
to meet the projected water demand, during single dry and multiple dry year scenarios. On
average, the dry-year demands are about 6.64 percent higher than the normal year demands.
The Otay WD recycled water supply is assumed to be drought-proof and not subject to
reduction during dry periods.
Together, these findings assess, demonstrate, and document that sufficient water supplies are
planned for and are intended to be acquired, as well as the actions necessary and status to
develop these supplies are and will be further documented, to serve the proposed University
Innovation District Project and the existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned
development projects within the Otay WD in both normal and single and multiple dry year
forecasts for a 20-year planning horizon.
Section 3 - Project Description
The University Innovation District Project is located along the north side of the Otay River
Valley within the Otay Ranch Development. Refer to Appendix A for a vicinity map of the
proposed University Innovation District Project. The project is proposed to be located on
383.8 acres within the City of Chula Vista Otay Ranch General Development Plan. Although
the proposed development is located within the municipal boundaries of the City and subject
to the City’s land use jurisdiction, the Otay WD is the potable and recycled water purveyor.
The University Innovation District Project is within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, the
Water Authority, and MWD.
The University Innovation District Project is planned to include a State university site with
education buildings, student housing, faculty housing, commercial, recreation, and open space
areas. The project proposes up to 10,066,200 square feet of development and could include
up to 20,000 students, 6,000 faculty/staff members, and 8,000 commercial employees. Up to
6,000 students and 1,200 faculty/staff members could be housed onsite. Refer to Appendix B
for the proposed development plan of the University Innovation District project.
The City has discretionary authority on land use decisions for the University Innovation
District Project and can establish actions and/or permit approval requirements. The projected
potable water demands associated with the University Innovation District Project have
considered the anticipated City discretionary actions and/or permit approvals and are
incorporated into and used in this WSA&V Report. The water demands for the proposed
University Innovation District Project are included in the projected water demand estimates
provided in Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water Demands.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
10
Section 4 – Otay Water District
The Otay WD is a municipal water district formed in 1956 pursuant to the Municipal Water
District Act of 1911 (Water Code §§ 71000 et seq.). The Otay WD joined the Water
Authority as a member agency in 1956 to acquire the right to purchase and distribute imported
water throughout its service area. The Water Authority is an agency responsible for the
wholesale supply of water to its 24 public agency members in San Diego County.
The Otay WD currently meets all its potable demands with imported treated water from the
Water Authority. The Water Authority is the agency responsible for the supply of imported
water into San Diego County through its membership in MWD. The Water Authority
currently obtains about half of its imported supply from MWD, but is in the process of further
diversifying its available supplies.
The Otay WD provides water service to residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural
customers, and for environmental and fire protection uses. In addition to providing water
throughout its service area, Otay WD also provides sewage collection and treatment services
to a portion of its service area known as the Jamacha Basin. The Otay WD also owns and
operates the Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) which has an
effective treatment capacity of 1.2 million gallons per day (mgd) or about 1,300 acre feet per
year to produce recycled water. On May 18, 2007, an additional source of recycled water
supply of at least 6 mgd, or about 6,720 acre feet per year, became available to Otay WD from
the City of San Diego’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP).
The Otay WD jurisdictional area is generally located within the south central portion of San
Diego County and includes approximately 125 square miles. The Otay WD serves portions of
the unincorporated communities of southern El Cajon, La Mesa, Rancho San Diego, Jamul,
Spring Valley, Bonita, and Otay Mesa, the eastern portion of the City of Chula Vista and a
portion of the City of San Diego on Otay Mesa. The Otay WD jurisdiction boundaries are
roughly bounded on the north by the Padre Dam Municipal Water District, on the northwest
by the Helix Water District, and on the west by the South Bay Irrigation District (Sweetwater
Authority) and the City of San Diego. The southern boundary of Otay WD is the international
border with Mexico.
The planning area addressed in the 2008 Otay WD WRMP Update and the Otay WD 2015
UWMP includes both the land within the jurisdictional boundary of the Otay WD and those
areas outside of the present Otay WD boundaries considered to be in the Area of Influence of
the Otay WD. Figure 3-1 contained within the Otay WD 2015 UWMP shows the
jurisdictional boundary of the Otay WD and the Area of Influence. The planning area is
approximately 143 square miles, of which approximately 125 square miles are within the
Otay WD current boundaries and approximately 18 square miles are in the Area of Influence.
The area east of Otay WD is rural and currently not within any water purveyor jurisdiction
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
11
and potentially could be served by the Otay WD in the future if the need for imported water
becomes necessary, as is the case for the Area of Influence.
The City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, and the County of San Diego are the three
land use planning agencies within the Otay WD jurisdiction. Data on forecasts for land use
planning, demographics, economic projections, population, and the future rate of growth
within Otay WD were obtained from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).
SANDAG serves as the regional, intergovernmental planning agency that develops and
provides forecast information through the year 2050. Population growth within the Otay WD
service area is expected to increase from the 2015 figure of 217,339 to an estimated 285,340
by 2040. Land use information used to develop water demand projections are based upon
Specific or Sectional Planning Areas, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-
regional Plan, East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Area, San Diego County Community Plans, and
City of San Diego, City of Chula Vista, and County of San Diego General Plans.
The Otay WD long-term historic growth rate has been approximately 4 percent. The growth
rate has significantly slowed due to the current economic conditions and it is expected to slow
as the inventory of developable land is diminished.
Climatic conditions within the Otay WD service area are characteristically Mediterranean
near the coast, with mild temperatures year round. Inland areas are both hotter in summer and
cooler in winter, with summer temperatures often exceeding 90 degrees and winter
temperatures occasionally dipping to below freezing. Most of the region’s rainfall occurs
during the months of December through March. Average annual rainfall is approximately
12.17 inches per year.
Historic climate data were obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center for Station
042706 (El Cajon). This station was selected because its annual temperature variation is
representative of most of the Otay WD service area. While there is a station in the City of
Chula Vista, the temperature variation at the City of Chula Vista station is more typical of a
coastal environment than the conditions in most of the Otay WD service area.
Urban Water Management Plan
In accordance with the California Urban Water Management Planning Act and recent
legislation, the Otay WD Board of Directors adopted an UWMP in June 2016 and
subsequently submitted the plan to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR).
As required by law, the Otay Water District 2015 UWMP includes projected water supplies
required to meet future demands through 2040. In accordance with Water Code Section
10910 (c)(2) and Government Code Section 66473.7 (c)(3), information from the Otay WD
2015 UWMP along with supplemental information from the Otay WD WRMP Update have
been utilized to prepare this WSA Report and are incorporated herein by reference.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
12
The state Legislature passed Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX
7-7) on November 10, 2009, which became effective February 3, 2010. This new law was the
water conservation component to the Delta legislation package and seeks to achieve a 20
percent statewide reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020.
Specifically, SBX 7-7 from this Extraordinary Session requires each urban retail water
supplier to develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20 percent reduction goal by 2020
(20x2020), and an interim water reduction target by 2015.
The SBX 7-7 target setting process includes the following: (1) baseline daily per capita water
use; (2) urban water use target; (3) interim water use target; (4) compliance daily per capita
water use, including technical bases and supporting data for those determinations. In order
for an agency to meet its 2020 water use target, each agency can increase its use of recycled
water to offset potable water use and also step up its water conservation measures. The
required water use targets for 2020 and an interim target for 2015 are determined using one of
four target methods – each method has numerous methodologies.
In 2015, urban retail water suppliers were required to report interim compliance followed by
actual compliance in 2020. Interim compliance is halfway between the baseline water use and
2020 target. Baseline, target, and compliance-year water use estimates are required to be
reported in gallons per capita per day (gpcd).
Failure to meet adopted targets will result in the ineligibility of a water supplier to receive
grants or loans administered by the State unless one (1) of two (2) exceptions is met.
Exception one (1) states a water supplier may be eligible if they have submitted a schedule,
financing plan, and budget to DWR for approval to achieve the per capita water use
reductions. Exception two (2) states a water supplier may be eligible if an entire water service
area qualifies as a disadvantaged community.
Otay WD adopted Method 1 to set its 2015 interim and 2020 water use targets. Method 1
requires setting the 2020 water use target to 80 percent of baseline per capita water use target
as provided in the State’s 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. The Otay WD was well below
its required 2015 target of 172 gpcd, with an actual 2015 gpcd of 124. The 2020 gpcd target
which is 80 percent of baseline is 153 gpcd.
The Otay WD’s recent per capita water use has been declining to the point where current
water use already meets the 2020 target for Method 1. This recent decline in per capita water
use is largely due to drought water use restrictions, increased water costs, and poor economic
conditions. However, Otay WD’s effective water use awareness campaign and enhanced
conservation mentality of its customers will likely result in some long-term carryover of these
reduced consumption rates beyond the current drought period.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
13
Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water Demands
The projected demands for Otay WD are based on Specific or Sectional Planning Areas, the
Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan, the East Otay Mesa Specific Plan
Area, San Diego County Community Plans, and City of San Diego, City of Chula Vista, and
County of San Diego General Plans. This land use information is also used by SANDAG as
the basis for its most recent forecast data. This land use information was utilized for the
preparation of the Otay Water District WRMP Update and Otay Water District 2015 UWMP
to develop the forecasted demands and supply requirements.
In 1994, the Water Authority selected the Institute for Water Resources-Municipal and
Industrial Needs (MAIN) computer model to forecast municipal and industrial water use for
the San Diego region. The MAIN model uses demographic and economic data to project
sector-level water demands (i.e. residential and non-residential demands). This econometric
model has over a quarter of a century of practical application and is used by many cities and
water agencies throughout the United States. The Water Authority’s version of the MAIN
model was modified to reflect the San Diego region’s unique parameters and is known as
CWA-MAIN.
The foundation of the water demand forecast is the underlying demographic and economic
projections. This was a primary reason why, in 1992, the Water Authority and SANDAG
entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) in which the Water Authority agreed to
use the SANDAG current regional growth forecast for water supply planning purposes. In
addition, the MOA recognizes that water supply reliability must be a component of San Diego
County’s regional growth management strategy required by Proposition C, as passed by the
San Diego County voters in 1988. The MOA ensures a strong linkage between local general
plan land use forecasts and water demand projections and resulting supply needs for the San
Diego region.
Consistent with the previous CWA-MAIN modeling efforts, on October 15, 2013, the
SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the Series 12: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. The
2050 Regional Growth Forecast will be used by SANDAG as the foundation for the next
Regional Comprehensive Plan update. SANDAG forecasts were used by local governments
for planning, including the Water Authority 2015 UWMP update .
The municipal and industrial forecast also included an updated accounting of projected
conservation savings based on projected regional implementation of the California Urban
Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best Management Practices and SANDAG
demographic information for the period 2015 through 2040. These savings estimates were
then factored into the baseline municipal and industrial demand forecast.
A separate agricultural model, also used in prior modeling efforts, was used to forecast
agricultural water demands within the Water Authority service area. This model estimates
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
14
agricultural demand to be met by the Water Authority’s member agencies based on
agricultural acreage projections provided by SANDAG, crop distribution data derived from
the Department of Water Resources and the California Avocado Commission, and average
crop-type watering requirements based on California Irrigation Management Information
System data.
The Water Authority and MWD update their water demand and supply projections within
their jurisdictions utilizing the SANDAG most recent growth forecast to project future water
demands. This provides for the important strong link between demand and supply projections
to the land use plans of the cities and the county. This provides for consistency between the
retail and wholesale agencies water demand projections, thereby ensuring that adequate
supplies are and will be planned for the Otay WD existing and future water users. Existing
land use plans, any revisions to land use plans, and annexations are captured in the SANDAG
updated forecasts. The Water Authority and MWD update their demand forecasts based on
the SANDAG most recent forecast approximately every five years to coincide with
preparation of their urban water management plans. Prior to the next forecast update, local
jurisdictions may require water supply assessment and/or verification reports consistent with
Senate Bills 610 and 221 for proposed land use developments that either have pending or
proposed annexations into the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD or that have revised
land use plans than originally anticipated. The Water Authority and MWD’s next forecasts
and supply planning documents would then capture any increase or decrease in demands
caused by annexations or revised land use plans.
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the University Innovation District
Project proponents are required to participate in the development of alternative water supply
project(s). This can be achieved through payment of the New Water Supply Fee adopted by
the Otay WD Board in May 2010. These water supply projects are in addition to those
identified as sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD UWMP, IRP,
Master Plans, and other planning documents. These new water supply projects are in
response to the regional water supply issues related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
the current ongoing western states drought conditions. These additional water supply projects
are not currently developed and are in various stages of the planning process. A few
examples of these alternative water supply projects include the Middle Sweetwater River
Basin Groundwater Well project, the Otay WD Desalination project, and the Rancho del Rey
Groundwater Well project. The Water Authority and MWD next forecast and supply
planning documents would capture any increase in water supplies resulting from verifiable
new water resources developed by the Otay WD.
In addition, MWD’s 2015 UWMP identified potential reserve supplies in the supply
capability analysis (Tables 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6), which could be available to meet any
unanticipated demands. The Water Authority and MWD’s next forecasts and supply planning
documents would capture any increase in necessary supply resources resulting from any new
water supply resources.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
15
Demand Methodology
The Otay WD water demand projection methodology in the WRMP Update utilizes a
component land use approach. This is done by applying representative values of water use to
the acreage of each land use type and then aggregating these individual land use demand
projections into an overall total demand for the Otay WD. This is called the water duty
method, and the water duty is the amount of water used in gallons per day per acre per year.
This approach is used for all the land use types except residential development where a
demand per dwelling unit was applied. In addition, commercial and industrial water use
categories are further subdivided by type including separate categories for golf courses,
schools, jails, prisons, hospitals, etc. where specific water demands are established.
To determine water duties for the various types of land use, the entire water meter database of
the Otay WD is utilized and sorted by the appropriate land use types. The metered
consumption records are then examined for each of the land uses, and water duties are determined for
the various types of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses. For example
the water duty factors for commercial and industrial land uses are estimated using 1,785 and 893
gallons per day per acre (gpd/acre) respectively. Residential water demand is established based on
the same data but computed on a per-dwelling unit basis. The focus is to ensure that for each of the
residential land use categories (very low, low, medium, and high densities), the demand criteria
used is adequately represented based upon actual data. This method is used because
residential land uses constitute a substantial percentage of the total developable planning area of the
Otay WD.
The WRMP Update calculates potable water demand by taking the gross acreage of a site and
applying a potable water reduction factor (PWRF), which is intended to represent the
percentage of acreage to be served by potable water and that not served by recycled water for
irrigation. For industrial land use, as an example, the PWRF is 0.95 (i.e., 95% of the site is
assumed to be served by potable water, 5% of the site is assumed to be irrigated with recycled
water, if available). The potable net acreage is then multiplied by the unit demand factor
corresponding to its respective land use. This approach is used in the WRMP Update for all
the land use types except residential development where a demand per dwelling unit is
applied. In addition, commercial and industrial water use categories are further subdivided by
type including separate categories for golf courses, schools, jails, prisons, hospitals, etc.
where specific water demands are allocated.
Otay Water District Projected Demand
By applying the established water duties to the proposed land uses, the projected water
demand for the entire Otay WD planning area at ultimate development is determined.
Projected water demands for the intervening years were determined using growth rate
projections consistent with data obtained from SANDAG and the experience of the Otay WD.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
16
The historical and projected potable water demands for Otay WD are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Historical and Projected Potable Water Fiscal Year Demands (acre-feet)
Water Use Sectors 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Single Family 17,165 16,228 17,072 19,806 20,752 20,649 23,224
Multi-Family 3,605 3,460 5,557 6,732 7,342 7,585 8,837
Commercial, Industrial
& Institutional 4,110 4,953 6,577 7,949 8,653 8,923 10,378
Landscape 3,732 4,079 4,400 4,600 4,700 4,900 5,200
AFG* - University I. D. 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7
AFG – PA 12 46 46 46 46 46
AFG – Otay 250 836 836 836 836 836
Near-term Annexations 2,973 2,973 2,973 2,973 2,973
Other 2,563 1,578 470 470 470 470 470
Totals 31,175 30,298 37,943 43,424 45,784 46,394 51,976
Source: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP.
*Accelerated Forecasted Growth Increment
University Innovation District Project Projected Water Demand
Using the land use demand projection methodology noted above, the projected potable water
demand for the proposed University Innovation District Project is shown in Table 2. The
projected potable water demand is 840,688 gpd, or about 941.7 ac-ft/yr. This potable demand
is 11.7 AFY more than was projected for these parcels by the Otay WD WRMP. Recycled
water demand projections are provided in Table 3. The projected recycled water use for the
project is 159,255 gpd, or 178 AFY.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
17
Table 2
University Innovation District Project Projected Potable
Water Annual Average Demands
Description Gross
Acreage
Potable
Water
Factor
Net Potable
Acreage/
Capita
Unit Rate Average
Demand
T-1: Future Development 99.8 80% 79.84 1,785 gpd/ac 142,514
T-2: Campus Vista 26.4 80% 21.12 1,785 gpd/ac 37,699
T-3: Campus Commons 29.0 80% 23.20 1,785 gpd/ac 41,412
T-4: Town Center 33.6 80% 26.88 1,785 gpd/ac 47,981
T-5: Urban Core 25.3 80% 20.24 1,785 gpd/ac 36,128
T-6: District Gateway 20.0 80% 16.00 1,785 gpd/ac 28,560
SD: Lake Blocks 5.2 100% 5.20 1,785 gpd/ac 9,282
O-1: Habitat Conservation 41.1 0% 0.00 0 0
O-2: Common Space 39.5 80% 31.60 1,785 gpd/ac 56,406
O-3: Pedestrian Walk 14.5 80% 11.60 1,785 gpd/ac 20,706
ROW: Right of Way 49.3 0% 0.00 0 0
Students in Housing --- 100% 6,000 50 gpd/stdnt 300,000
Faculty in Housing --- 100% 1,200 100 gpd/fclty 120,000
Total 383.8 840,688 gpd
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
18
Table 3
University Innovation District Project Projected Recycled
Water Annual Average Demands
Description Gross
Acreage
Recycled
Water
Factor
Net Recycled
Acreage/
Capita
Unit Rate Average
Demand
T-1: Future Development 99.8 20% 20.0 2,155 gpd/ac 43,100
T-2: Campus Vista 26.4 20% 5.3 2,155 gpd/ac 11,422
T-3: Campus Commons 29.0 20% 5.8 2,155 gpd/ac 12,499
T-4: Town Center 33.6 20% 6.7 2,155 gpd/ac 14,439
T-5: Urban Core 25.3 20% 5.1 2,155 gpd/ac 10,990
T-6: District Gateway 20.0 20% 4.0 2,155 gpd/ac 8,620
SD: Lake Blocks 5.2 0% 0 2,155 gpd/ac 0
O-1: Habitat Conservation 41.1 0% 0 0 0
O-2: Common Space 39.5 20% 19.75 2,155 gpd/ac 42,561
O-3: Pedestrian Walk 14.5 20% 7.25 2,155 gpd/ac 15,624
ROW: Right of Way 49.3 0% 0 0 0
Total 383.8 159,255 gpd
5.1 Demand Management (Water Conservation)
Demand management, or water conservation is a critical part of the Otay Water District 2015
UWMP and its long-term strategy for meeting water supply needs of the Otay WD customers.
Water conservation is frequently the lowest cost resource available to any water agency. The
goals of the Otay WD water conservation programs are to:
Reduce the demand for more expensive, imported water.
Demonstrate continued commitment to the Best Management Practices (BMP).
Ensure a reliable water supply.
The Otay WD is signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Urban
Water Conservation in California, which created the California Urban Water Conservation
Council (CUWCC) in 1991 in an effort to reduce California’s long-term water demands.
Water conservation programs are developed and implemented on the premise that water
conservation increases the water supply by reducing the demand on available supply, which is
vital to the optimal utilization of a region’s water supply resources. The Otay WD
participates in many water conservation programs designed and typically operated on a shared
cost participation program basis among the Water Authority, MWD, and their member
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
19
agencies. The demands shown in Tables 1 and 2 take into account implementation of water
conservation measures within Otay WD.
As one of the first signatories to the MOU Regarding Urban Water Conservation in
California, the Otay WD has made BMP implementation for water conservation the
cornerstone of its conservation programs and a key element in its water resource management
strategy. As a member of the Water Authority, Otay WD also benefits from regional
programs performed on behalf of its member agencies. The BMP programs implemented by
Otay WD and regional BMP programs implemented by the Water Authority that benefit all
their member agencies are addressed in the Otay Water District 2015 UWMP. In partnership
with the Water Authority, the County of San Diego, City of San Diego, City of Chula Vista,
and developers, the Otay WD water conservation efforts are expected to grow and expand.
The resulting savings directly relate to additional available water in the San Diego County
region for beneficial use within the Water Authority service area, including the Otay WD.
Additional conservation or water use efficiency measures or programs practiced by the Otay
WD include the following:
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System
The Otay WD implemented and has operated for many years a Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition (SCADA) system to control, monitor, and collect data regarding the operation of
the water system. The major facilities that have SCADA capabilities are the water flow
control supply sources, transmission network, pumping stations, and water storage reservoirs.
The SCADA system allows for many and varied useful functions. Some of these functions
provide for operating personnel to monitor the water supply source flow rates, reservoir
levels, turn on or off pumping units, etc. The SCADA system aids in the prevention of water
reservoir overflow events and increases energy efficiency.
Water Conservation Ordinance
California Water Code Sections 375 et seq. permit public entities which supply water at retail
to adopt and enforce a water conservation program to reduce the quantity of water used by the
people therein for the purpose of conserving water supplies of such public entity. The Otay
Water District Board of Directors established a comprehensive water conservation program
pursuant to California Water Code Sections 375 et seq., based upon the need to conserve
water supplies and to avoid or minimize the effects of any future shortage. A water shortage
could exist based upon the occurrence of one or more of the following conditions:
1. A general water supply shortage due to increased demand or limited supplies. 2. Distribution or storage facilities of the Water Authority or other agencies become inadequate. 3. A major failure of the supply, storage, and distribution facilities of MWD, Water Authority, and/or Otay WD.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
20
The Otay WD water conservation ordinance finds and determines that the conditions
prevailing in the San Diego County area require that the available water resources be put to
maximum beneficial use to the extent to which they are capable, and that the waste or
unreasonable use, or unreasonable method of use, of water be prevented and that the
conservation of such water be encouraged with a view to the maximum reasonable and
beneficial use thereof in the interests of the people of the Otay WD and for the public welfare.
Otay WD continues to promote water conservation at a variety of events, including those
involving developers in its service area. In addition, Otay WD developed and manages a
number of its own programs such as the Cash for WaterSmart Plants retrofit program, the
Water Smart Irrigation Upgrade Program, and the Commercial Process Improvement
Program.
Otay WD is currently engaged in a number of conservation and water use efficiency activities.
Listed below are the current programs that are either on-going or were recently concluded:
Residential Water Surveys: 2,083 completed since 1994
Large Landscape Surveys: 205 completed since 1990
Cash for Water Smart Plants Landscape Retrofit Program: over 2,553,938 square feet
of turf grass replaced with water wise plants since 2003
Rotating Nozzles Rebated: 3,170
Residential Weather-Based Irrigation Controller (WBIC) Incentive Program: 355
distributed or rebated since 2004
Residential High Efficiency Clothes Washers: 11,364 rebates since 1994
Residential ULFT/HET Rebate Program: 22,376 rebates provided between 1991-2010,
1,425 since 2010.
Outreach Efforts to Otay WD Customers - the Otay WD promotes its conservation
programs through staffing outreach events, bill inserts, articles in the Otay WD’s
quarterly customer Pipeline newsletter, direct mailings to Otay WD customers, the
Otay WD’s webpage and through the Water Authority’s marketing efforts.
School Education Programs- the Otay WD funds school tours of the Water
Conservation Garden, co-funds Splash Labs, provides classroom water themed kits,
maintains a library of school age appropriate water themed books, DVDs, and videos,
and runs both a school poster contest and a water themed photo contest.
Water efficiency in new construction through Cal Green and the Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance
Focus on Commercial/Institutional/Industrial through Promoting MWD’s Save a Buck
(Commercial) Program in conjunction with the Otay WD’s own Commercial Process
Improvement Program
As a signatory to the MOU Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California, the Otay WD
is required to submit biannual reports that detail the implementation of current water
conservation practices. The Otay WD voluntarily agreed to implement the fourteen water
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
21
conservation Best Management Practices beginning in 1992. The Otay WD submits its report
to the CUWCC every two years. The Otay WD BMP Reports for 2011-2012 and 2013-2014
are included in the Otay Water District 2015 UWMP.
Section 6 - Existing and Projected Supplies
The Otay WD currently does not have an independent raw or potable water supply source.
The Otay WD is a member public agency of the Water Authority. The Water Authority is a
member public agency of MWD. The statutory relationships between the Water Authority
and its member agencies, and MWD and its member agencies, respectively, establish the
scope of the Otay WD entitlement to water from these two agencies.
The Water Authority through two delivery pipelines, referred to as Pipeline No. 4 and the
Helix Flume Pipeline, currently supply the Otay WD with 100 percent of its potable water.
The Water Authority in turn, currently purchases the majority of its water from MWD. Due
to the Otay WD reliance on these two agencies, this WSA&V Report includes referenced
documents that contain information on the existing and projected supplies, supply programs,
and related projects of the Water Authority and MWD. The Otay WD, Water Authority, and
MWD are actively pursuing programs and projects to further diversify their water supply
resources.
The description of local recycled water supplies available to the Otay WD is also discussed
below.
6.1 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2015 Urban
Water Management Plan
MWD has prepared its 2015 UWMP which was adopted on May 9, 2016. The 2015 UWMP
provides MWD’s member agencies, retail water utilities, cities, and counties within its service
area with, among other things, a detailed evaluation of the supplies necessary to meet future
demands, and an evaluation of reasonable and practical efficient water uses, recycling, and
conservation activities. During the preparation of the 2015 UWMP, MWD utilized the
previous SANDAG regional growth forecast in calculating regional water demands for the
Water Authority service area.
6.1.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring
Additional Supplies
MWD is a wholesale supplier of water to its member public agencies and obtains its supplies
from two primary sources: the Colorado River, via the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA),
which it owns and operates, and Northern California, via the State Water Project (SWP). The
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
22
2015 UWMP documents the availability of these existing supplies and additional supplies
necessary to meet future demands.
MWD’s IRP identifies a mix of resources (imported and local) that, when implemented, will
provide 100 percent reliability for full-service demands through the attainment of regional
targets set for conservation, local supplies, State Water Project supplies, Colorado River
supplies, groundwater banking, and water transfers. The 2015 update to the IRP (2015 IRP
Update) describes an adaptive management strategy to protect the region from future supply
shortages. This adaptive management strategy has five components: achieve additional
conservation savings, develop additional local water supplies, maintain Colorado River
Aqueduct supplies, stabilize State Water Project supplies, and maximize the effectiveness of
storage and transfer. MWD’s 2015 IRP Update has a plan for identifying and implementing
additional resources that expand the ability for MWD to meet future changes and challenges
as necessary to ensure future reliability of supplies. The proper management of these
resources help to ensure that the southern California region, including San Diego County, will
have adequate water supplies to meet long-term future demands.
In May 2016, MWD adopted its 2015 UWMP in accordance with state law. The resource
targets included in the preceding 2015 IRP Update serve as the foundation for the planning
assumptions used in the 2015 UWMP. MWD’s 2015 UWMP contains a water supply
reliability assessment that includes a detailed evaluation of the supplies necessary to meet
demands over a 20-year period in average, single dry year, and multiple dry year periods. As
part of this process, MWD also uses the current SANDAG regional growth forecast in
calculating regional water demands for the Water Authority’s service area.
As stated in MWD’s 2015 UWMP, the plan may be used as a source document for meeting
the requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 until the next scheduled update is completed in 5
years (2020). The 2015 UWMP includes a “Justifications for Supply Projections” in
Appendix A.3, that provides detailed documentation of the planning, legal, financial, and
regulatory basis for including each source of supply in the plan. A copy of MWD’s 2015
UWMP can be found on the internet at the following site address:
http://www.mwdh2o.com/PDF_About_Your_Water/2015_UWMP.pdf
The UWMP updates for both MWD and the Water Authority included the increase in demand
projections included in SANDAG’s Series 13 Update and from the projections from Otay
Water District WRMP Update.
Water supply agencies throughout California continue to face climate, environmental, legal,
and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions, such as the court rulings
regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the current western states drought
conditions. Challenges such as these essentially always will be present. The regional water
supply agencies, the Water Authority and MWD, along with Otay WD nevertheless fully
intend to have sufficient, reliable supplies to serve demands.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
23
6.1.2 MWD Capital Investment Plan
MWD prepares a Capital Investment Plan as part of its annual budget approval process. The
cost, purpose, justification, status, progress, etc. of MWD’s infrastructure projects to deliver
existing and future supplies are documented in the Capital Investment Plan. The financing of
these projects is addressed as part of the annual budget approval process.
MWD’s Capital Investment Plan includes a series of projects identified from MWD studies of
projected water needs, which, when considered along with operational demands on aging
facilities and new water quality regulations, identify the capital projects needed to maintain
infrastructure reliability and water quality standards, improve efficiency, and provide future
cost savings. All projects within the Capital Investment Plan are evaluated against an
objective set of criteria to ensure they are aligned with the MWD’s goals of supply reliability
and quality.
6.2 San Diego County Water Authority Regional Water Supplies
The Water Authority has adopted plans and is taking specific actions to develop adequate
water supplies to help meet existing and future water demands within the San Diego region.
This section contains details on the supplies being developed by the Water Authority. A
summary of recent actions pertaining to development of these supplies includes:
In accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act, the Water Authority
adopted their 2015 UWMP in June 2016. The updated Water Authority 2015 UWMP
identifies a diverse mix of local and imported water supplies to meet future demands. A
copy of the updated Water Authority 2015 UWMP can be found on the internet at:
http://www.sdcwa.org/sites/default/files/files/water-
management/water_resources/2015%20UWMP%20Final%2006222016.pdf
As part of the October 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA), the Water
Authority was assigned MWD’s rights to 77,700 acre feet per year of conserved water
from the All-American Canal (AAC) and Coachella Canal (CC) lining projects.
Deliveries of this conserved water from the CC reached the region in 2007 and
deliveries from the AAC reached the region in 2010. Expected supplies from the canal
lining projects are considered verifiable Water Authority supplies.
Deliveries of conserved agricultural water from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) to
San Diego County have increased annually since 2003, with 70,000 acre feet per year of
deliveries in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. The quantities will increase annually to 200,000
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
24
acre feet per year by 2021, and then remain fixed for the duration of the transfer
agreement.
Development of seawater desalination in San Diego County assists the region in
diversifying its water resources; reduces dependence on imported supplies; and provides
a new drought‐proof, locally treated water supply. The Carlsbad Desalination Project is
a fully operational seawater desalination plant and conveyance pipeline developed by
Poseidon, a private investor–owned company that develops water and wastewater
infrastructure. The Carlsbad Desalination Project, located at the Encina Power Station in
Carlsbad, began commercial operation on December 23, 2015, and can provide a highly
reliable local supply of up to 56,000 AF/YR for the region. Of the total Carlsbad
Desalination Plant production, Vallecitos Water District has a direct connection and a
contract to receive 4,083 AFY. Carlsbad MWD has agreed to a take or pay of 2,500
AFY but a direct connection has not been built.
Through implementation of the Water Authority and member agency planned supply projects,
along with reliable imported water supplies from MWD, the region anticipates having
adequate supplies to meet existing and future water demands.
To ensure sufficient supplies to meet projected growth in the San Diego region, the Water
Authority uses the SANDAG most recent regional growth forecast in calculating regional
water demands. The SANDAG regional growth forecast is based on the plans and policies of
the land-use jurisdictions with San Diego County. The existing and future demands of the
member agencies are included in the Water Authority’s projections.
6.2.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring
Additional Supplies
The Water Authority currently obtains imported supplies from MWD, conserved water from
the AAC and CC lining projects, an increasing amount of conserved agricultural water from
IID, and desalinated seawater from the Carlsbad desalination plant. Of the twenty-seven
member agencies that purchase water supplies from MWD, the Water Authority is MWD’s
largest customer.
Section 135 of MWD’s Act defines the preferential right to water for each of its member
agencies. Currently, the Water Authority pays about 22 percent of MWD's total revenue, but
has preferential rights to only 18.27 percent of MWD's water supply. Under preferential
rights, MWD could allocate water without regard to historic water purchases or dependence
on MWD. The Water Authority and its member agencies are taking measures to reduce
dependence on MWD through development of additional supplies and a water supply
portfolio that would not be jeopardized by a preferential rights allocation. MWD has stated,
consistent with Section 4202 of its Administrative Code that it is prepared to provide the
Water Authority’s service area with adequate supplies of water to meet expanding and
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
25
increasing needs in the years ahead. When and as additional water resources are required to
meet increasing needs, MWD stated it will be prepared to deliver such supplies. In Section
ES-5 of their 2015 UWMP, MWD states that MWD has supply capacities that would be
sufficient to meet expected demands from 2020 through 2040. MWD has plans for supply
implementation and continued development of a diversified resource mix including programs
in the Colorado River Aqueduct, State Water Project, Central Valley Transfers, local resource
projects, and in-region storage that enables the region to meet its water supply needs.
The Water Authority has made large investments in MWD’s facilities and will continue to
include imported supplies from MWD in the future resource mix. As discussed in the Water
Authority’s 2015 UWMP, the Water Authority and its member agencies are planning to
diversify the San Diego regions supply portfolio and reduce purchases from MWD.
As part of the Water Authority’s diversification efforts, the Water Authority is now taking
delivery of conserved agricultural water from IID, water saved from the AAC and CC lining
projects and desalinated seawater from the Carlsbad desalination plant. Table 4 summarizes
the Water Authority’s supply sources with detailed information included in the sections to
follow. Deliveries from MWD are also included in Table 4, which is further discussed in
Section 6.1 above. The Water Authority’s member agencies provided the verifiable local
supply targets for groundwater, recycled water, potable reuse and surface water, which are
discussed in more detail in Section 5 of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP.
Table 4
Projected Verifiable Water Supplies – Water Authority Service Area
Normal Year (acre feet)1
Water Supply Sources 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Water Authority Supplies
MWD Supplies 136,002 181,840 207,413 224,863 248,565
Water Authority/IID Transfer 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000
AAC and CC Lining Projects 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200
Regional Seawater Desalination 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Member Agency Supplies
Surface Water 51,580 51,480 51,380 51,280 51,180
Water Recycling 40,459 43,674 45,758 46,118 46,858
Seawater Desalination 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000
Brackish GW Recovery 12,100 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500
Groundwater 17,940 19,130 20,170 20,170 20,170
Potable Reuse 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300
Total Projected Supplies 587,581 648,124 676,721 694,431 718,773
Source: Water Authority 2015 Urban Water Management Plan – Table 9-1.
1Normal water year demands based on 1960-2013 hydrology.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
26
Section 5.6.1 of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP also includes a discussion on the local
supply target for seawater desalination. Seawater desalination supplies represent a significant
local resource in the Water Authority’s service area.
The Carlsbad Desalination Project (Project) is a fully-permitted seawater desalination plant
and conveyance pipeline designed to provide a highly reliable local supply of up to 56,000
acre-feet (AF) per year for the region. In 2020, the Project would account for approximately
8% of the total projected regional supply and 30% of all locally generated water in San Diego
County. The project became operational in late 2015 and it more than doubles the amount of
local supplies developed in the region since 1991. The desalination plant itself was fully
financed, built, and is being operated by Poseidon. The Water Authority purchases water
from the plant under a water purchase agreement. The new pipeline connecting the
desalination plant with the Water Authority’s Second Aqueduct is owned and operated by the
Water Authority, but Poseidon had the responsibility for design and construction through a
separate Design-Build Agreement. The Water Authority was responsible for aqueduct
improvements, including the relining and rehabilitation of Pipeline 3 to accept desalinated
water under higher operating pressures, modifications to the San Marcos Vent that allows the
flow of water between Pipelines 3 and 4, and improvements at the Twin Oaks Valley Water
Treatment Plant necessary to integrate desalinated water into the Water Authority’s system
for optimal distribution to member agencies.
The Water Authority’s existing and planned supplies from the IID transfer, canal lining, and
desalination projects are considered “drought-proof” supplies and should be available at the
yields shown in Table 4 in normal water year supply and demand assessment. Single dry year
and multiple dry year scenarios are discussed in more detail in Section 9 of the Water
Authority’s 2015 UWMP.
As part of preparation of a written water supply assessment and/or verification report, an
agency’s shortage contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of
supply. Section 11 of the Water Authority’s 2015 UWMP contains a detailed shortage
contingency analysis that addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought
management. The analysis demonstrates that the Water Authority and its member agencies,
through the Emergency Response Plan, Emergency Storage Project, and Drought
Management Plan (DMP) are taking actions to prepare for and appropriately handle an
interruption of water supplies. The DMP, adopted in May 2006, provides the Water Authority
and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to take when faced with a shortage
of imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply shortfall
conditions. The actions will help the region avoid or minimize the impacts of shortages and
ensure an equitable allocation of supplies throughout the San Diego region.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
27
6.2.1.1 Water Authority-Imperial Irrigation District Water Conservation
and Transfer Agreement
The QSA was signed in October 2003, and resolves long-standing disputes regarding priority
and use of Colorado River water and creates a baseline for implementing water transfers. With
approval of the QSA, the Water Authority and IID were able to implement their Water
Conservation and Transfer Agreement. This agreement not only provides reliability for the San
Diego region, but also assists California in reducing its use of Colorado River water to its legal
allocation.
On April 29, 1998, the Water Authority signed a historic agreement with IID for the long-term
transfer of conserved Colorado River water to San Diego County. The Water Authority-IID
Water Conservation and Transfer Agreement (Transfer Agreement) is the largest agriculture-to-
urban water transfer in United States history. Colorado River water will be conserved by
Imperial Valley farmers who voluntarily participate in the program and then transferred to the
Water Authority for use in San Diego County.
Implementation Status
On October 10, 2003, the Water Authority and IID executed an amendment to the original 1998
Transfer Agreement. This amendment modified certain aspects of the Transfer Agreement to be
consistent with the terms and conditions of the QSA and related agreements. It also modified
other aspects of the agreement to lessen the environmental impacts of the transfer of conserved
water. The amendment was expressly contingent on the approval and implementation of the
QSA, which was also executed on October 10, 2003. Section 6.2.1, “Colorado River,” contains
details on the QSA.
On November 5, 2003, IID filed a complaint in Imperial County Superior Court seeking
validation of 13 contracts associated with the Transfer Agreement and the QSA. Imperial
County and various private parties filed additional suits in Superior Court, alleging violations of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the California Water Code, and other laws
related to the approval of the QSA, the water transfer, and related agreements. The lawsuits were
coordinated for trial. The IID, Coachella Valley Water District, MWD, the Water Authority, and
state are defending these suits and coordinating to seek validation of the contracts. In January
2010, a California Superior Court judge ruled that the QSA and 11 related agreements were
invalid, because one of the agreements created an open-ended financial obligation for the state,
in violation of California’s constitution. The QSA parties appealed this decision and on July
2013, a Sacramento Superior Court judge entered a final judgment validating the QSA and
rejecting all of the remaining legal challenges. The judge affirmed all of the contested actions,
including the adequacy of the environmental documents prepared by the IID. In May 2015, the
state Court of Appeal issued a ruling that dismissed all remaining appeals.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
28
Expected Supply
Deliveries into San Diego County from the transfer began in 2003 with an initial transfer of
10,000 acre feet per year. The Water Authority received increasing amounts of transfer water
each year, according to a water delivery schedule contained in the transfer agreement. In 2012,
the Water Authority will receive 90,000 acre feet per year. The quantities will increase annually
to 200,000 acre feet per year by 2021 then remain fixed for the duration of the transfer
agreement. The initial term of the Transfer Agreement is 45 years, with a provision that either
agency may extend the agreement for an additional 30-year term.
During dry years, when water availability is low, the conserved water will be transferred
under IID’s Colorado River rights, which are among the most senior in the Lower Colorado
River Basin. Without the protection of these rights, the Water Authority could suffer delivery
cutbacks. In recognition for the value of such reliability, the 1998 contract required the Water
Authority to pay a premium on transfer water under defined regional shortage circumstances.
The shortage premium period duration is the period of consecutive days during which any of the
following exist: 1) a Water Authority shortage; 2) a shortage condition for the Lower Colorado
River as declared by the Secretary; and 3) a Critical Year. Under terms of the October 2003
amendment, the shortage premium will not be included in the cost formula until Agreement Year
16.
Transportation
The Water Authority entered into a water exchange agreement with MWD on October 10, 2003,
to transport the Water Authority–IID transfer water from the Colorado River to San Diego
County. Under the exchange agreement, MWD takes delivery of the transfer water through its
Colorado River Aqueduct. In exchange, MWD delivers to the Water Authority a like quantity
and quality of water. The Water Authority pays MWD’s applicable wheeling rate for each acre-
feet of exchange water delivered. Under the terms of the water exchange agreement, MWD will
make delivery of the transfer water for 35 years, unless the Water Authority and MWD elect to
extend the agreement another 10 years for a total of 45 years.
Cost/Financing
The costs associated with the transfer are financed through the Water Authority’s rates and
charges. In the agreement between the Water Authority and IID, the price for the transfer water
started at $258 per acre-feet and increased by a set amount for the first seven years. In December
2009, the Water Authority and IID executed a fifth amendment to the water transfer agreement
that sets the price per acre-feet for transfer water for calendar years 2010 through 2015,
beginning at $405 per acre-feet in 2010 and increasing to $624 per acre-feet in 2015. For
calendar years 2016 through 2034, the unit price will be adjusted using an agreed-upon index.
The amendment also required the Water Authority to pay IID $6 million at the end of calendar
year 2009 and another $50 million on or before October 1, 2010, provided that a transfer
stoppage is not in effect as a result of a court order in the QSA coordinated cases. Beginning in
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
29
2035, either the Water Authority or IID can, if certain criteria are met, elect a market rate price
through a formula described in the water transfer agreement.
The October 2003 exchange agreement between MWD and the Water Authority set the initial
cost to transport the conserved water at $253 per acre-feet. Thereafter, the price is set to be equal
to the charge or charges set by MWD’s Board of Directors pursuant to applicable laws and
regulation, and generally applicable to the conveyance of water by MWD on behalf of its
member agencies. The transportation charge in 2010 was $314 per acre-feet.
The Water Authority is providing $10 million to help offset potential socioeconomic impacts
associated with temporary land fallowing. IID will credit the Water Authority for these funds
during years 16 through 45. In 2007, the Water Authority prepaid IID an additional $10 million
for future deliveries of water. IID will credit the Water Authority for this up-front payment
during years 16 through 30.
As part of implementation of the QSA and water transfer, the Water Authority also entered into
an environmental cost sharing agreement. Under this agreement the Water Authority is
contributing a total of $64 million to fund environmental mitigation projects and the Salton Sea
Restoration Fund.
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The supply and costs associated with the transfer are based primarily on the following
documents:
Agreement for Transfer of Conserved Water by and between IID and the Water Authority (April
29, 1998). This Agreement provides for a market-based transaction in which the Water
Authority would pay IID a unit price for agricultural water conserved by IID and transferred to
the Water Authority.
Revised Fourth Amendment to Agreement between IID and the Water Authority for Transfer of
Conserved Water (October 10, 2003). Consistent with the executed Quantification Settlement
Agreement (QSA) and related agreements, the amendments restructure the agreement and
modify it to minimize the environmental impacts of the transfer of conserved water to the Water
Authority.
Amended and Restated Agreement between MWD and Water Authority for the Exchange of
Water (October 10, 2003). This agreement was executed pursuant to the QSA and provides for
delivery of the transfer water to the Water Authority.
Environmental Cost Sharing, Funding, and Habitat Conservation Plan Development Agreement
among IID, Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), and Water Authority (October 10, 2003).
This Agreement provides for the specified allocation of QSA-related environmental review,
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
30
mitigation, and litigation costs for the term of the QSA, and for development of a Habitat
Conservation Plan.
Quantification Settlement Agreement Joint Powers Authority Creation and Funding Agreement
(October 10, 2003). The purpose of this agreement is to create and fund the QSA Joint Powers
Authority and to establish the limits of the funding obligation of CVWD, IID, and Water
Authority for environmental mitigation and Salton Sea restoration pursuant to SB 654
(Machado).
Fifth Amendment to Agreement Between Imperial Irrigation District and San Diego County
Water Authority for Transfer of Conserved Water (December 21, 2009). This agreement
implements a settlement between the Water Authority and IID regarding the base contract price
of transferred water.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
Federal Endangered Species Act Permit. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued a
Biological Opinion on January 12, 2001, that provides incidental take authorization and certain
measures required to offset species impacts on the Colorado River regarding such actions.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Petition. SWRCB adopted Water Rights Order
2002-0016 concerning IID and Water Authority’s amended joint petition for approval of a long-
term transfer of conserved water from IID to the Water Authority and to change the point of
diversion, place of use, and purpose of use under Permit 7643.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Conservation and Transfer Agreement. As lead agency,
IID certified the Final EIR for the Conservation and Transfer Agreement on June 28, 2002.
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Draft Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement on the
Bureau of Reclamation's Voluntary Fish and Wildlife Conservation Measures and Associated
Conservation Agreements with the California Water Agencies (12/18/02). The U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service issued the biological opinion/incidental take statement for water transfer
activities involving the Bureau of Reclamation and associated with IID/other California water
agencies' actions on listed species in the Imperial Valley and Salton Sea (per the June 28, 2002
EIR).
Addendum to EIR for Conservation and Transfer Agreement. IID as lead agency and Water
Authority as responsible agency approved addendum to EIR in October 2003.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Conservation and Transfer Agreement. Bureau of
Reclamation issued a Record of Decision on the EIS in October 2003.
CA Department of Fish and Game California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit
#2081-2003-024-006). The California Department of Fish and Game issued this permit
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
31
(10/22/04) for potential take effects on state-listed/fully protected species associated with
IID/other California water agencies' actions on listed species in the Imperial Valley and Salton
Sea (per the June 28, 2002 EIR).
California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Permit. A CESA permit was issued by California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on April 4, 2005, providing incidental take authorization
for potential species impacts on the Colorado River.
6.2.1.2 All-American Canal and Coachella Canal Lining Projects
As part of the QSA and related contracts, the Water Authority was assigned MWD’s rights to
77,700 acre-feet per year of conserved water from projects that will line the All-American
Canal (AAC) and Coachella Canal (CC). The projects will reduce the loss of water that
currently occurs through seepage, and the conserved water will be delivered to the Water
Authority. This conserved water will provide the San Diego region with an additional 8.5
million acre-feet over the 110-year life of the agreement.
Implementation Status
The CC lining project began in November 2004 and was completed in 2006. Deliveries of
conserved water to the Water Authority began in 2007. The project constructed a 37-mile
parallel canal adjacent to the CC. The AAC lining project was begun in 2005 and was
completed in 2010. The lining project constructed a concrete-lined canal parallel to 24 miles
of the existing AAC from Pilot Knob to Drop 3.
In July 2005, a lawsuit (CDEM v United States, Case No. CV-S-05-0870-KJD-PAL) was filed
in the U. S. District Court for the District of Nevada on behalf of U.S. and Mexican groups
challenging the lining of the AAC. The lawsuit, which names the Secretary of the Interior as
a defendant, claims that seepage water from the canal belongs to water users in Mexico.
California water agencies note that the seepage water is actually part of California's Colorado
River allocation and not part of Mexico's allocation. The plaintiffs also allege a failure by the
United States to comply with environmental laws. Federal officials have stated that they
intend to vigorously defend the case.
Expected Supply
The AAC lining project makes 67,700 acre-feet of Colorado River water per year available
for allocation to the Water Authority and San Luis Rey Indian water rights settlement parties.
The CC lining project makes 26,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water each year available for
allocation. The 2003 Allocation Agreement provides for 16,000 acre-feet per year of
conserved canal lining water to be allocated to the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights
Settlement Parties. The remaining amount, 77,700 acre-feet per year, is to be available to the
Water Authority, with up to an additional 4,850 acre-feet per year available to the Water
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
32
Authority depending on environmental requirements from the CC lining project. For planning
purposes, the Water Authority assumes that 2,500 acre-feet of the 4,850 acre-feet will be
available each year for delivery, for a total of 80,200 acre-feet per year of that supply.
According to the Allocation Agreement, IID has call rights to a portion (5,000 acre-feet per
year) of the conserved water upon termination of the QSA for the remainder of the 110 years
of the Allocation Agreement and upon satisfying certain conditions. The term of the QSA is
for up to 75 years.
Transportation
The October 2003 Exchange Agreement between the Water Authority and MWD provides for
the delivery of the conserved water from the canal lining projects. The Water Authority pays
MWD’s applicable wheeling rate for each acre-foot of exchange water delivered. In the
Agreement, MWD will deliver the canal lining water for the term of the Allocation
Agreement (110 years).
Cost/Financing
Under California Water Code Section 12560 et seq., the Water Authority received $200
million in state funds for construction of the canal lining projects. In addition, $20 million
was made available from Proposition 50 and $36 million from Proposition 84. The Water
Authority was responsible for additional expenses above the funds provided by the state.
The rate to be paid to transport the canal lining water will be equal to the charge or charges set
by MWD’s Board of Directors pursuant to applicable law and regulation and generally
applicable to the conveyance of water by MWD on behalf of its member agencies.
In accordance with the Allocation Agreement, the Water Authority is responsible for a portion
of the net additional Operation, Maintenance, and Repair (OM&R) costs for the lined canals.
Any costs associated with the lining projects as proposed are to be financed through the Water
Authority’s rates and charges.
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The expected supply and costs associated with the lining projects are based primarily on the
following documents:
U.S. Public Law 100-675 (1988). Authorized the Department of the Interior to reduce seepage
from the existing earthen AAC and CC. The law provides that conserved water will be made
available to specified California contracting water agencies according to established priorities.
California Department of Water Resources - MWD Funding Agreement (2001). Reimburse
MWD for project work necessary to construct the lining of the CC in an amount not to exceed
$74 million. Modified by First Amendment (2004) to replace MWD with the Authority.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
33
Modified by Second Amendment (2004) to increase funding amount to $83.65 million, with
addition of funds from Proposition 50.
California Department of Water Resources - IID Funding Agreement (2001). Reimburse IID for
project work necessary to construct a lined AAC in an amount not to exceed $126 million.
MWD - CVWD Assignment and Delegation of Design Obligations Agreement (2002). Assigns
design of the CC lining project to CVWD.
MWD - CVWD Financial Arrangements Agreement for Design Obligations (2002). Obligates
MWD to advance funds to CVWD to cover costs for CC lining project design and CVWD to
invoice MWD to permit the Department of Water Resources to be billed for work completed.
Allocation Agreement among the United States of America, The MWD Water District of
Southern California, Coachella Valley Water District, Imperial Irrigation District, San Diego
County Water Authority, the La Jolla, Pala, Pauma, Rincon, and San Pasqual Bands of Mission
Indians, the San Luis Rey River Indian Water Authority, the City of Escondido, and Vista
Irrigation District (October 10, 2003). This agreement includes assignment of MWD’s rights
and interest in delivery of 77,700 acre-feet of Colorado River water previously intended to be
delivered to MWD to the Water Authority. Allocates water from the AAC and CC lining
projects for at least 110 years to the Water Authority, the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights
Settlement Parties, and IID, if it exercises its call rights.
Amended and Restated Agreement between MWD and Water Authority for the Exchange of
Water (October 10, 2003). This agreement was executed pursuant to the QSA and provides for
delivery of the conserved canal lining water to the Water Authority.
Agreement between MWD and Water Authority regarding Assignment of Agreements related to
the AAC and CC Lining Projects. This agreement was executed in April 2004 and assigns
MWD's rights to the Water Authority for agreements that had been executed to facilitate funding
and construction of the AAC and CC lining projects:
Assignment and Delegation of Construction Obligations for the Coachella Canal Lining Project
under the Department of Water Resources Funding Agreement No. 4600001474 from the San
Diego County Water Authority to the Coachella Valley Water District, dated September 8, 2004.
Agreement Regarding the Financial Arrangements between the San Diego County Water
Authority and Coachella Valley Water District for the Construction Obligations for the
Coachella Canal Lining Project, dated September 8, 2004.
Agreement No. 04-XX-30-W0429 Among the United States Bureau of Reclamation, the
Coachella Valley Water District, and the San Diego County Water Authority for the
Construction of the Coachella Canal Lining Project Pursuant to Title II of Public Law 100-675,
dated October 19, 2004.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
34
California Water Code Section 12560 et seq. This Water Code Section provides for $200
million to be appropriated to the Department of Water Resources to help fund the canal lining
projects in furtherance of implementing California’s Colorado River Water Use Plan.
California Water Code Section 79567. This Water Code Section identifies $20 million as
available for appropriation by the California Legislature from the Water Security, Clean
Drinking Water, Coastal, and Beach Protection Fund of 2002 (Proposition 50) to DWR for
grants for canal lining and related projects necessary to reduce Colorado River water use.
According to the Allocation Agreement, it is the intention of the agencies that those funds will be
available for use by the Water Authority, IID, or CVWD for the AAC and CC lining projects.
California Public Resources Code Section 75050(b) (1). This section identifies up to $36 million
as available for water conservation projects that implement the Allocation Agreement as defined
in the Quantification Settlement Agreement.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
AAC Lining Project Final EIS/EIR (March 1994). A final EIR/EIS analyzing the potential
impacts of lining the AAC was completed by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in March
1994. A Record of Decision was signed by Reclamation in July 1994, implementing the
preferred alternative for lining the AAC. A re-examination and analysis of these environmental
compliance documents by Reclamation in November 1999 determined that these documents
continued to meet the requirements of the NEPA and the CEQA and would be valid in the future.
CC Lining Project Final EIS/EIR (April 2001). The final EIR/EIS for the CC lining project was
completed in 2001. Reclamation signed the Record of Decision in April 2002. An amended
Record of Decision has also been signed to take into account revisions to the project description.
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program for Coachella Canal Lining Project, SCH
#1990020408; prepared by Coachella Valley Water District, May 16, 2001.
Environmental Commitment Plan for the Coachella Canal Lining Project, approved by the US
Bureau of Reclamation (Boulder City, NV) on March 4, 2003.
Environmental Commitment Plan and Addendum to the All-American Canal Lining Project
EIS/EIR California State Clearinghouse Number SCH 90010472 (June 2004, prepared by
IID).
Addendum to Final EIS/EIR and Amendment to Environmental Commitment Plan for the
All-American Canal Lining Project (approved June 27, 2006, by IID Board of Directors).
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
35
6.2.1.3 Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Project
Development of seawater desalination in San Diego County has assisted the region in
diversifying its water resources, reduce dependence on imported supplies, and provide a new
drought-proof, locally treated water supply. The Carlsbad Desalination Project is a fully-
permitted seawater desalination plant and conveyance pipeline developed by Poseidon, a
private investor–owned company that develops water and wastewater infrastructure. The
project, located at the Encina Power Station in Carlsbad, has been in development since 1998
and was incorporated into the Water Authority’s 2003 Water Facilities Master Plan and the
2015 UWMP. The Carlsbad Desalination Project has obtained all required permits and
environmental clearances and starting in late 2015 provides a highly reliable local supply of
48,000 to 56,000 acre-feet per year for the region.
Implementation Status
The Project has obtained all required permits and environmental clearances, including the
following:
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Discharge Permit
(Regional Water Quality Control Board)
Conditional Drinking Water Permit (California Department of Health Services)
State Lands Commission Lease (State Lands Commission)
Coastal Development Permit (California Coastal Commission)
IDE Technologies, a worldwide leader in the design, construction, and operation of
desalination plants, is the desalination process contractor for the Project.
On July 22, 2010, the Board approved a Term Sheet between the Water Authority and
Poseidon Resources that outlined the key terms and conditions that would be detailed and
incorporated in a comprehensive Water Purchase Agreement (WPA). Beginning in October
2011 and under the direction of the Board’s Carlsbad Desalination Project Advisory Group,
staff began developing and negotiating with Poseidon a WPA consistent with the July 22,
2010 Board approved Term Sheet. The July 2010 Term Sheet also identified specific
conditions precedent to Board consideration of the WPA.
On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority Board adopted a resolution approving the
Design-Build Agreement between the Water Authority and Poseidon. The Design-Build
Agreement established the commercial and technical terms for implementation of the
desalination product pipeline improvements. These improvements consisted of an
approximate 10-mile long, 54-inch diameter conveyance pipeline connecting the Desalination
Plant to the Water Authority’s Second Aqueduct. The pipeline was generally be constructed
within improved streets in commercial and industrial areas in the cities of Carlsbad, Vista, and
San Marcos. The Water Authority owns the Project Water Pipeline Improvements and has
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
36
assumed operational control of all pipeline improvements. This system was placed into
service in late 2015.
Expected Supply
The Project provides a highly reliable local supply of 48,000 to 56,000 acre-feet per year of
supply for the region, available in both normal and dry hydrologic conditions. In 2020, the
Project would account for approximately 10% of the total projected regional supply and 30%
of all locally generated water in San Diego County. The project more than doubles the
amount of local supplies developed in the region since 1991.
Transportation
On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority Board adopted a resolution approving the
Design-Build Agreement between the Water Authority and Poseidon. The Design-Build
Agreement establishes the commercial and technical terms for implementation of the
desalination product pipeline improvements. These improvements consisted of an
approximate 10-mile long, 54-inch diameter conveyance pipeline connecting the Desalination
Plant to the Water Authority’s Second Aqueduct. The pipeline was generally constructed
within improved streets in commercial and industrial areas in the cities of Carlsbad, Vista, and
San Marcos. The Water Authority owns the Project Water Pipeline Improvements and has
assumed operational control of all pipeline improvements.
The Water Authority was responsible for aqueduct improvements, including the relining and
rehabilitation of Pipeline 3 to accept desalinated water under higher operating pressures,
modifications to the San Marcos Vent that allows the flow of water between Pipelines 3 and
4, and improvements at the Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant necessary to integrate
desalinated water into the Water Authority’s system for optimal distribution to member
agencies.
Cost/Financing
The plant and the offsite pipeline is being financed through tax exempt government bonds
issued for the Water Authority by the California Pollution Control Financing Authority
(CPCFA). On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority Board adopted a resolution
approving agreements to accomplish tax exempt project financing through the CPCFA.
Based on current electricity cost estimates, the Water Purchase Agreement sets the price of
the water from the Carlsbad Desalination Project at $2,131 to $2,367 per acre foot in 2016.
The Water Authority’s water purchase costs would be financed through Water Authority rates
and charges. Poseidon is financing the capital cost of the Project with a combination of
private equity and tax-exempt Private Activity Bonds.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
37
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The expected supply and costs associated with the Carlsbad Desalination Project are based
primarily on the following documents:
Development Agreement between City of Carlsbad and Poseidon (October 2009). A
Development Agreement between Carlsbad and Poseidon was executed on October 5, 2009
Agreement of Term Sheet between the Water Authority and Poseidon Resources (July 2010).
The Water Authority approved the Term Sheet at its July 2010 Board Meeting. The Term
Sheet outlines the terms and conditions of a future Water Purchase Agreement with Poseidon
and allocates the resources to prepare the draft Water Purchase Agreement.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
Carlsbad Desalination Project Final EIR
The City of Carlsbad, acting as lead agency for Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Plant and
appurtenant facilities proposed by Poseidon (the “Project”) prepared an Environmental Impact
Report for the Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”), which the City of Carlsbad certified on June 13, 2006.
http://www.sdcwa.org/rwfmp-peir
Regional Water Facilities Master Plan EIR
On November 20, 2003, the Water Authority Board of Directors adopted Resolution No.
2003-34 certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No.
2003021052) for the Water Authority’s Regional Water Facilities Master Plan Project (the
“Master Plan EIR”), which evaluated, among other things, potential growth inducing impacts
associated with new water supplies to the region including, but not limited to, up to 150
million gallons per day (“MGD”) of new supplies from seawater desalination. This
certification included a 50 MGD plant located in the City of Carlsbad.
The environmental documents and permits are found at the following links:
http://www.sdcwa.org/rwfmp-peir
Sub regional Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP)
On December 8, 2010, the Board adopted Resolution No. 2010-18 certifying a Final
environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the San Diego County
Water Authority Subregional Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation
Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2003121012) (the “Habitat Conservation Plan EIR/EIS”),
which Plan was implemented on December 28, 201.
The environmental documents and permits are found at the following links:
http://www.sdcwa.org/nccp-hcp
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
38
Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant EIR
On September 8, 2005, the Board adopted Resolution No. 2005-31 certifying a Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant Project (State
Clearinghouse No. 20040071034) (the “Twin Oaks EIR”), which project was constructed as a
100 MGD submerged membrane water treatment facility, including treated water holding
tanks and distribution pipelines and other facilities, consistent with the conditions and
mitigation measures included in the Twin Oaks EIR.
http://www.sdcwa.org/twin-oaks-valley-treatment-plant-final-eir
Drinking Water Permit (October 2006). The California Department of Health Services
approved the Conditional Drinking Water Permit on October 19, 2006.
6.2.2 Water Authority Capital Improvement Program and Financial
Information
The Water Authority’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) can trace its beginnings to a
report approved by the Board in 1989 entitled, The Water Distribution Plan, and a Capital
Improvement Program through the Year 2010. The Water Distribution Plan included ten
projects designed to increase the capacity of the aqueduct system, increase the yield from
existing water treatment plants, obtain additional supplies from MWD, and increase the
reliability and flexibility of the aqueduct system. Since that time the Water Authority has
made numerous additions to the list of projects included in its CIP as the region’s
infrastructure needs and water supply outlook have changed.
The current list of projects included in the CIP is based on the results of planning studies,
including the 2010 UWMP and the 2013 Regional Water Facilities Master Plan. These CIP
projects, which are most recently described in the Water Authority’s Adopted Multi-Year
Budget, include projects valued at $3.50 billion. These CIP projects are designed to meet
projected water supply and delivery needs of the member agencies through 2035. The
projects include a mix of new facilities that will add capacity to existing conveyance, storage,
and treatment facilities, as well as repair and replace aging infrastructure:
Asset Management – The primary components of the asset management projects
include relining and replacing existing pipelines and updating and replacing metering
facilities.
New Facilities – These projects will expand the capacity of the aqueduct system,
complete the projects required under the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA),
and evaluate new supply opportunities.
Emergency Storage Project – Projects remaining to be completed under the ongoing
ESP include the San Vicente Dam Raise, the Lake Hodges projects, and a new pump
station to extend ESP supplies to the northern reaches of the Water Authority service
area.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
39
Other Projects – This category includes out-of-region groundwater storage, increased
local water treatment plant capacity, and projects that mitigate environmental impacts
of the CIP.
The Water Authority Board of Directors is provided a semi-annual and annual report on the
status of development of the CIP projects. As described in the Water Authority’s biennial
budget, a combination of long and short term debt and cash (pay-as-you-go) will provide
funding for capital improvements. Additional information is included in the Water
Authority’s biennial budget, which also contains selected financial information and
summarizes the Water Authority’s investment policy.
6.3 Otay Water District
The Otay Water District WRMP Update and the 2015 UWMP contain comparisons of
projected supply and demands through the year 2040. Projected potable water resources to
meet planned demands as documented were planned to be supplied entirely with imported
water received from the Water Authority. Recycled water resources to meet projected
demands are planned to be supplied from local wastewater treatment plants. The Otay WD
currently has no local supply of raw water, potable water, or groundwater resources.
The development and/or acquisition of potential groundwater, recycled water market
expansion, and seawater desalination supplies by the Otay WD have evolved and are planned
to occur in response to the regional water supply issues. These water supply projects are in
addition to those identified as sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD
UWMP, IRP, Master Plans, and other planning documents. These new additional water
supply projects are not currently developed and are in various stages of the planning process.
These local and regional water supply projects will allow for less reliance upon imported
water and are considered a new water supply resource for the Otay WD.
The supply forecasts contained within this WSA Report do consider development and/or
acquisition of potential groundwater, recycled water market expansion, and seawater
desalination supplies by the Otay WD.
6.3.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring Additional
Supplies
The availability of sufficient potable water supplies and plans for acquiring additional potable
water supplies to serve existing and future demands of the Otay WD is founded upon the
preceding discussions regarding MWD’s and the Water Authority’s water supply resources
and water supplies to be acquired by the Otay WD. Historic imported water deliveries from
the Water Authority to Otay WD and recycled water deliveries from the Otay WD Ralph W.
Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) are shown in Table 5. Since the year 2000
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
40
through mid-May 2007, recycled water demand has exceeded the recycled water supply
capability typically in the summer months. The RWCWRF is limited to a maximum
production of about 1,300 acre-feet per year. The recycled water supply shortfall had been
met by supplementing with potable water into the recycled water storage system as needed by
adding potable water supplied by the Water Authority. On May 18, 2007 an additional source
of recycled water supply from the City of San Diego’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant
(SBWRP) became available. The supply of recycled water from the SBWRP is a result of
completing construction and the operation of the transmission, storage, and pump station
systems necessary to link the SBWRP recycled water supply source to the existing Otay WD
recycled water system.
Table 5
Otay Water District
Historic Imported and Local Water Supplies
Calendar
Year
Imported Water
(acre-feet)
Recycled Water
(acre-feet)
Total
(acre-feet)
1980 12,558 0 12,558
1985 14,529 0 14,529
1990 23,200 0 23,200
1995 20,922 614 21,536
2000 29,901 948 30,849
2005 37,678 1,227 38,905
2010 29,270 4,090 33,270
2015 26,494 3,777 30,271
Source: Otay Water District operational records.
6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies
The availability of sufficient imported and regional potable water supplies to serve existing
and planned uses within Otay WD is demonstrated in the above discussion on MWD and the
Water Authority’s water supply reliability. The County Water Authority Act, Section 5
subdivision 11, states that the Water Authority “as far as practicable, shall provide each of its
member agencies with adequate supplies of water to meet their expanding and increasing
needs.” The Water Authority provides between 75 to 95 percent of the total supplies used by
its 24 member agencies, depending on local weather and supply conditions.
Potable Water System Facilities
The Otay WD continues to pursue diversification of its water supply resources to increase
reliability and flexibility. The Otay WD also continues to plan, design, and construct potable
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
41
water system facilities to obtain these supplies and to distribute potable water to meet
customer demands. The Otay WD has successfully negotiated two water supply
diversification agreements that enhance reliability and flexibility, which are briefly described
as follows.
The Otay WD entered into an agreement with the City of San Diego, known as the Otay
Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Agreement. The Otay WTP Agreement provides for raw
water purchase from the Water Authority and treatment by the City of San Diego at their
Otay WTP for delivery to Otay WD. The supply system link to implement the Otay
WTP Agreement to access the regions raw water supply system and the local water
treatment plant became fully operational in August 2005. This supply link consists of the
typical storage, transmission, pumping, flow measurement, and appurtenances to receive
and transport the treated water to the Otay WD system. The City of San Diego
obligation to supply 10 mgd of treated water under the Otay WTP Agreement is
contingent upon there being available 10 mgd of surplus treatment capacity in the Otay
WTP until such time as Otay WD pays the City of San Diego to expand the Otay WTP to
meet the Otay WD future needs. In the event that the City of San Diego’s surplus is
projected to be less than 10 mgd the City of San Diego will consider and not
unreasonably refuse the expansion of the Otay WTP to meet the Otay WD future needs.
The Otay WTP existing rated capacity is 40 mgd with an actual effective capacity of
approximately 34 mgd. The City of San Diego’s typical demand for treated water from
the Otay WTP is approximately 20 mgd. It is at the City of San Diego’s discretion to
utilize either imported raw water delivered by the Water Authority Pipeline No. 3 or local
water stored in Lower Otay Reservoir for treatment to supply the Otay WD demand.
The Otay WD entered into an agreement with the Water Authority, known as the East
County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program (ECRTWIP Agreement). The
ECRTWIP Agreement provides for transmission of raw water to the Helix WD R. M.
Levy WTP for treatment and delivery to Otay WD. The supply system link to implement
the ECRTWIP Agreement is complete allowing access to the regions raw water supply
system and the local water treatment plant. This supply link consists of the typical
transmission, pumping, storage, flow control, and appurtenances to receive and transport
the potable water from the R. M. Levy WTP to Otay WD. The Otay WD is required to
take a minimum of 10,000 acre-feet per year of treated water from the R.M. Levy WTP
supplied from the regions raw water system.
Cost and Financing
The capital improvement costs associated with water supply and delivery are financed
through the Otay WD water meter capacity fee and user rate structures. The Otay WD
potable water sales revenue are used to pay for the wholesale cost of the treated water supply
and the operating and maintenance expenses of the potable water system facilities.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
42
Written Agreements, Contracts, or Other Proof
The supply and cost associated with deliveries of treated water from the Otay WTP and the R.M.
Levy WTP is based on the following documents.
Agreement for the Purchase of Treated Water from the Otay Water Treatment Plant between the
City of San Diego and the Otay Water District. The Otay WD entered into an agreement dated
January 11, 1999 with the City of San Diego that provides for 10 mgd of surplus treated water to
the Otay WD from the existing Otay WTP capacity. The agreement allows for the purchase of
treated water on an as available basis from the Otay WTP. The Otay WD pays the Water
Authority at the prevailing raw water rate for raw water and pays the City of San Diego at a rate
equal to the actual cost of treatment to potable water standards.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District Regarding
Implementation of the East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program. The
ECRTWIP Agreement requires the purchase of at least 10,000 acre-feet per year of potable water
from the Helix WD R.M. Levy WTP at the prevailing Water Authority treated water rate. The
ECRTWIP Agreement is dated April 27, 2006.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District for Design,
Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility Modification.
The Otay WD entered into the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility Modification Agreement dated
January 24, 2007 with the Water Authority to increase the physical capacity of the Otay 14 Flow
Control Facility. The Water Authority and Otay WD shared the capital cost to expand its
capacity from 8 mgd to 16 mgd.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
The Otay WD acquired all the permits for the construction of the pipeline and pump station
associated with the Otay WTP supply source and for the 640-1 and 640-2 water storage
reservoirs project associated with the ECRTWIP Agreement through the typical planning,
environmental approval, design, and construction processes.
The transmission main project constructed about 26,000 feet of a 36-inch diameter steel
pipeline from the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility to the 640-1 and 640-2 Reservoirs project.
The Otay 14 Flow Control Facility modification increased the capacity of the existing systems
from 8 mgd to 16 mgd. CEQA documentation is complete for both projects. Construction of
both of these projects was completed October 2010.
The City of San Diego and the Helix Water District are required to meet all applicable federal,
state, and local health and water quality requirements for the potable water produced at the
Otay WTP and the R.M. Levy WTP respectively.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
43
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies
Wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal services provided by the Otay WD is limited to
a relatively small area within what is known as the Jamacha Basin, located within the Middle
Sweetwater River Basin watershed upstream of the Sweetwater Reservoir and downstream of
Loveland Reservoir. Water recycling is defined as the treatment and disinfection of
municipal wastewater to provide a water supply suitable for non-potable reuse. The Otay WD
owns and operates the Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility, which produces
recycled water treated to a tertiary level for landscape irrigation purposes. The recycled water
market area of the Otay WD is located primarily within the eastern area of the City of Chula
Vista and on the Otay Mesa. The Otay WD distributes recycled water to a substantial market
area that includes but is not limited to the U.S. Olympic Training Center, the Eastlake Golf
Course, Otay Ranch, and other development projects.
The Otay WD projects that annual average demands for recycled water will increase to 6,500
acre-feet per year by 2040. About 1,300 acre-feet per year of supply is generated by the
RWCWRF, with the remainder planned to be supplied to Otay WD by the City of San
Diego’s SBWRP.
North District Recycled Water Concept
The Otay WD is a recognized leader in the use of recycled water for irrigation and other
commercial uses. The Otay WD continues to investigate all viable opportunities to expand
the successful recycled water program into areas that are not currently served. One of these
areas is in the portion of the service area designated as the North District, located within the
Middle Sweetwater River Basin watershed upstream of the Sweetwater River. The close
proximity of the recycled water markets in the North District to the Otay WD source of
recycled water, the RWCWRF, means that the distribution system to serve this area could be
constructed relatively cost effectively. This makes the North District a logical location for the
expansion of the Otay WD recycled water system and market area.
The purpose of the North District Recycled Water System Development Project, Phase I
Concept Study, was to identify the feasibility of using recycled water in the North District and
to investigate and assess any limitations or constraints to its use. The Phase I study
components of the North District Recycled Water Concept encompassed the preparation of
six technical memorandums including the project definition, a discussion of the regulatory
process, a discussion of the protection of the watershed that would be affected by recycled
water use in the North District, identification of stakeholders, public outreach, and an
implementation plan.
Several opportunities that could be realized with the implementation of the use of recycled
water in the North District were identified. These include a reduction of demand on the
potable water system and maximizing recycled water resources which in turn minimizes
treated wastewater discharges to the local ocean outfall. Other opportunities are a possible
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
44
partnership with Sweetwater Authority to monitor any benefits and impacts of increased
recycled water use in the watershed and stakeholder outreach to resolve any water quality
concerns and to retain consumer confidence. Also identified were two major constraints
associated with the North District Recycled Water System Development Project. One
constraint is the water quality objectives for the Middle Sweetwater Basin that will affect the
effluent limitations for the recycled water produced at the RWCWRF. The effluent limit of
concern was total nitrogen. The RWCWRF underwent an upgrade in 2012 to enhance
nitrogen removal through the treatment process. The other major constraint is the cost of the
infrastructure needed to convey and store recycled water in the North District. These costs
are estimated to be in the range of $14 to $15 million dollars.
There are two additional phases proposed for the North District Recycled Water System
Development Project. Phase II would include further investigation of the issues identified in
Phase I as requiring further study. These include stakeholder outreach, regulatory issues, and
facility planning. The third phase of the effort would include the facility planning, permitting,
environmental compliance, design, and construction of the improvements necessary for
delivery of recycled water to the North District markets.
The estimated amount of imported water saved at full implementation of the North District
Recycled Water System Development Project is 1,200 acre-feet per year. This saved
imported water could then be used to offset new potable water demands.
Recycled Water System Facilities
The Otay WD has constructed recycled water storage, pumping, transmission, and distribution
facilities and will continue to construct these facilities to meet projected recycled water
market demands. The Supply Link project consisting of a transmission main, storage
reservoir, and a pump station to receive and transport the recycled water from the City of San
Diego’s SBWRP was completed in 2007 and recycled water deliveries began on May 18,
2007.
Cost and Financing
The capital improvement costs associated with the recycled water supply and distribution
systems are financed through the Otay WD water meter capacity fee and user rate structures.
The Otay WD recycled water sales revenue, along with MWD and the Water Authority’s
recycled water sales incentive programs are used to help offset the costs for the wholesale
purchase and production of the recycled water supply, the operating and maintenance
expenses, and the capital costs of the recycled water system facilities.
Written Agreements, Contracts, or Other Proof
The supply and cost associated with deliveries of recycled water from the SBWRP is based on
the following document.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
45
Agreement between the Otay Water District and the City of San Diego for Purchase of
Reclaimed Water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant. The agreement provides for the
purchase of at least 6,721 acre-feet per year of recycled water from the SBWRP at an initial price
of $350 per acre-foot. The Otay Water District Board of Directors approved the final agreement
on June 4, 2003 and the San Diego City Council approved the final agreement on October 20,
2003. Effective January 1, 2016, the City of San Diego raised the cost of recycled water 116% to
$754 per acre-foot.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
The Otay WD has in place an agreement with MWD for their recycled water sales incentive
program for supplies from the RWCWRF and the SBWRP. Also, the Otay WD has in place
an agreement with the Water Authority for their recycled water sales incentive program for
supplies from the RWCWRF and the SBWRP. The Water Authority sales incentive
agreement was approved by Water Authority on July 26, 2007 and by Otay WD on August 1,
2007. All permits for the construction of the recycled water facilities to receive, store, and
pump the SBWRP supply have been acquired through the typical planning, environmental
approval, design, and construction processes.
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (RWQCB) “Master
Reclamation Permit for Otay Water District Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Facility” was
adopted on May 9, 2007 (Order No. R9-2007-0038). This order establishes master
reclamation requirements for the production, distribution, and use of recycled water in the
Otay WD service area. The order includes the use of tertiary treated water produced and
received from the City of San Diego‘s SBWRP. Recycled water received from and produced
by the SBWRP is regulated by Regional Board Order No. 2000-203 and addenda. The City
of San Diego is required to meet all applicable federal, state, and local health and water
quality requirements for the recycled water produced at the SBWRP and delivered to Otay
WD in conformance with Order No. 2000-203.
6.3.1.3 Potential Groundwater Supplies
The Otay Water District WRMP Update, 2015 UWMP, and the 2015 Integrated Water
Resources Plan Update all contain a description of the development of potential groundwater
supplies. Over the past several years, Otay WD has studied numerous potential groundwater
supply options that have shown, through groundwater monitoring well activities, poor quality
water and/or insufficient yield from the basins at a cost effective level. The Otay WD has
developed capital improvement program projects to continue the quest to develop potential
groundwater resources. Local Otay WD groundwater supply development is currently
considered as a viable water supply resource to meet projected demands.
The development and/or acquisition of potential groundwater supply projects by the Otay WD
have been on hold in response to the regional water supply issues related to water source
supply conditions. Local ground water supply projects will allow for less reliance upon
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
46
imported water, achieve a level of independence of the regional wholesale water agencies, and
diversify the Otay WD water supply portfolio consistent with the Otay Water District 2015
IRP Update.
In recognition of the need to develop sufficient alternative water supplies, the Otay WD has
taken the appropriate next steps towards development of production groundwater well
projects.
There are three groundwater well projects that the Otay WD is actively pursuing to develop as
new local water supplies. They are known as the Middle Sweetwater River Basin
Groundwater Well, the Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well, and the Rancho del Rey
Groundwater Well projects.
Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well
The Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well is an additional water supply project
that was thoroughly studied and documented in the 1990s. The Middle Sweetwater River
Basin is located within the Sweetwater River watershed and that reach of the river extends
from Sweetwater Reservoir to the upstream Loveland Reservoir. The next step in
development of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well is the implementation
of a pilot well project. The ultimate objective of the Otay WD is to develop a groundwater
well production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of producing a
sustainable yield of potable water as a local supply.
The purpose of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot project is to
identify the feasibility of developing a groundwater resource production system and then
determine and assess any limitations or constraints that may arise. The Middle Sweetwater
River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot Project will accomplish six primary goals:
Update project setting
Update applicable project alternatives analysis
Prepare groundwater well pilot project implementation plan
Construct and test pilot monitoring and extraction wells
Provide recommendations regarding costs and feasibility to develop a groundwater
well production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of
producing a sustainable yield of potable water
Prepare groundwater well production project implementation plan and scope of work
The groundwater conjunctive use concept is described as the extraction of the quantity of
water from the groundwater basin that was placed there by customers of the Otay Water
District, Helix Water District, and Padre Dam Municipal Water District by means of their use
of imported treated water that contributed to the overall volume of groundwater within the
basin. An estimated quantity was developed to be approximately 12.5 percent of the total
consumption of the Otay WD customers within that basin, as measured by water meters. In
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
47
the 1994-1995 period, the quantity of water that was returned to the groundwater basin by
Otay WD customers was estimated to be 810 acre-feet per year. Currently, that 12.5 percent
quantity could be on the order of 1,000 acre-feet per year. A future scope of work will need
to addresses this concept while considering further development of the groundwater basin as
an additional supply resource. If it is deemed that a Middle Sweetwater River Basin
Groundwater Well Production Project is viable then the consultant will develop and provide a
groundwater well production project implementation plan, cost estimate, and related scope of
work.
Further development of the groundwater basin to enhance the total groundwater production
could be accomplished by the Otay WD by means of additional extraction of water from the
basin that is placed there by means of either injection and/or spreading basins using imported
untreated water as the resource supply. The existing La Mesa Sweetwater Extension Pipeline,
owned by the Water Authority, once converted to an untreated water delivery system, could
be the conveyance system to transport untreated water for groundwater recharge in support of
this conjunctive use concept. These two distinct water resource supply conjunctive use
concepts will be addressed so they may coexist and to allow for their development as separate
phases.
The scope of work to complete Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot
Project consists of many major tasks and is to address the groundwater supply concepts
outlined above. It is anticipated that the cost for the entire scope of work, will be on the order
of $2,000,000, which includes a contingency and may take up to one and a half years to
complete.
The primary desired outcome of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot
Project is for the engineering consultant to determine and make recommendations if it is
financially prudent and physically feasible to develop a Phase I groundwater well production
system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of producing a sustainable yield of
up to 1,500 ac-ft/yr of potable water for the Otay WD. If it is deemed that a Middle
Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Production Project is viable then the consultant
will develop and provide a groundwater well production project implementation plan and
related scope of work.
Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well
In early 2001 the Otay WD was approached by a landowner representative about possible
interest in purchasing an existing well or alternatively, acquiring groundwater supplied from
the well located on Otay Mesa. The landowner, National Enterprises, Inc., reportedly stated
that the well could produce 3,200 acre-feet per year with little or no treatment required prior
to introducing the water into the Otay WD potable water system or alternatively, the recycled
water system. In March 2001 authorization to proceed with testing of the Otay Mesa Lot 7
Groundwater Well was obtained and the Otay WD proceeded with the investigation of this
potential groundwater supply opportunity.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
48
The May 2001 Geoscience Support Services, Inc. completed for the Otay WD the preparation
of a report entitled, “Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation,” to assess the Otay Mesa Lot 7
Well. The scope of work included a geohydrologic evaluation of the well, analyses of the
water quality samples, management and review of the well video log, and documentation of
well pump testing. The primary findings, as documented in the report, formed the basis of the
following recommendations:
For the existing well to be use as a potable water supply resource, a sanitary seal must
be installed in accordance with the DDW guidelines.
Drawdown in the well must be limited to avoid the possibility of collapsing the casing.
Recover from drawdown from pumping is slow and extraction would need to be
terminated for up to 2 days to allow for groundwater level recovery.
The well water would need to be treated and/or blended with potable water prior to
introduction into the potable water distribution system.
The existing Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well, based upon the above findings, was determined not to be
a reliable municipal supply of potable water and that better water quality and quantity perhaps
could be discovered deeper or at an alternative location within the San Diego Formation.
The Otay WD may still continue to pursue the Otay Mesa groundwater well opportunity with
due consideration of the recommendations of the existing report. Based on the
recommendations of the investigation report, a groundwater well production facility at Otay
Mesa Lot 7 could realistically extract approximately 300 acre-feet per year.
Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well
In 1991, the McMillin Development Company drilled the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well
to augment grading water supplies for their Rancho del Rey development projects. Although
the well was considered a “good producer,” little was known regarding its water quality and
sustainable yield because the water was used solely for earthwork (i.e. dust control and soil
compaction). The well was drilled to 865 feet, with a finished depth of 830 feet and produced
approximately 400 acre-feet per year of low quality water for four years until its use was
discontinued in April 1995 when the well was no longer needed. McMillin notified the Otay
WD of its intent to sell off the groundwater well asset.
In 1997, the Otay WD purchased an existing 7-inch well and the surrounding property on
Rancho del Rey Parkway from the McMillin Company with the intent to develop it as a
source of potable water. Treatment was required to remove salts and boron, among other
constituents, using reverse osmosis membranes and ion exchange.
In 2000, having received proposals for the design and construction of a reverse osmosis
treatment facility that far exceeded the allocated budget, the Board of Directors instructed
staff to suspend the project until such time as it became economically viable.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
49
In January 2010, citing the rising cost of imported water and the Otay WD's interest in
securing its own water source for long-term supply reliability, the Board authorized Phase 1
for drilling and development of the Rancho del Rey Well.
On March 3, 2010, the Board adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and
a Notice of Determination was filed with the County of San Diego on March 5, 2010. In
September 2010, a new 12-inch production well was drilled to a depth of 900 feet through the
groundwater formation and into fractured bedrock. Testing showed the long-term yield of the
new well to be 450 gpm, higher than previous studies had estimated. Separation Processes,
Inc. (SPI), a highly qualified membrane treatment firm, was hired to conduct a detailed
economic feasibility study to confirm that the annualized unit cost of the new water source
was economically competitive with other sources. The economic study estimated the unit
cost of water to be $1, 500 to $2,000 per acre-feet for an alternative that utilizes a seawater
membrane for treating both salts and boron. When compared with the current imported
treated water rate from the Water Authority, and with the knowledge that this rate will
continually increase as MWD and the Water Authority raise their rates, the Rancho del Rey
Well project appears to be economically viable.
The Otay WD is continuing to pursue the Rancho del Rey groundwater well opportunity with
due consideration of the recommendations of the existing reports and plans to develop a
groundwater well production facility to extract approximately 500 acre-feet per year. For
water planning purposes, production of groundwater from the Rancho del Rey well is
considered “additional planned” for local supplies.
6.3.1.4 Otay Water District Desalination Project
The Otay WD is currently investigating the feasibility of purchasing desalinated water from a
seawater reverse osmosis plant that is planned to be located in Rosarito, Mexico, known as the
Otay Mesa Desalinated Water Conveyance System (Desalination) project. The treatment
facility is intended to be designed, constructed, and operated in Mexico by a third party. The
Otay WD’s draft Desalination Feasibility Study, prepared in 2008, discusses the likely issues
to be considered in terms of water treatment and monitoring, potential conveyance options
within the United States from the international border to potential delivery points, and
environmental, institutional, and permitting considerations for the Otay WD to import the
Desalination project product water as a new local water supply resource.
While the treatment facility for the Desalination project will not be designed or operated by
the Otay WD , it is important that the Otay WD maintain involvement with the planning,
design, and construction of the facility to ensure that the implemented processes provide a
product water of acceptable quality for distribution and use within the Otay WD’s system as
well as in other regional agencies’ systems that may use the product water, i.e. City of San
Diego, the Water Authority, etc. A seawater reverse osmosis treatment plant removes
constituents of concern from the seawater, producing a water quality that far exceeds
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
50
established United States and California drinking water regulations for most parameters,
however, a two-pass treatment system may be required to meet acceptable concentrations of
boron and chlorides, similar to the levels seen within the existing Otay WD supply sources.
The Desalination Feasibility Study addresses product water quality that is considered
acceptable for public health and distribution.
The Otay WD, or any other potential participating agencies, will be required to get approval
from the DDW in order to use the desalinated seawater as a water source. Several alternative
approaches are identified for getting this approval. These alternatives vary in their cost and
their likelihood of meeting DDW approval.
The Rosarito Desalination Facility Conveyance and Disinfection System Project report
addresses two supply targets for the desalinated water (i.e. local and regional). The local
alternative assumes that only Otay WD would participate and receive desalinated water, while
the regional alternative assumes that other regional and/or local agencies would also
participate in the Rosarito project.
On November 3, 2010, the Otay WD authorized the General Manager to enter into an
agreement with AECOM for the engineering design, environmental documentation, and the
permitting for the construction of the conveyance pipeline, pump station, and disinfection
facility to be constructed within the Otay WD. The supply target is assumed to be 50 mgd
while the ultimate capacity of the plant will be 100 mgd.
The Otay WD is proceeding with negotiations among the parties.
6.3.2 Otay Water District Capital Improvement Program
The Otay WD plans, designs, constructs, and operates water system facilities to acquire
sufficient supplies and to meet projected ultimate demands placed upon the potable and recycled
water systems. In addition, the Otay WD forecasts needs and plans for water supply
requirements to meet projected demands at ultimate build out. The necessary water facilities and
water supply projects are implemented and constructed when development activities proceed and
require service to achieve timely and adequate cost effective water service.
New water facilities that are required to accommodate the forecasted growth within the entire
Otay WD service area are defined and described within the Otay Water District WRMP Update.
These facilities are incorporated into the annual Otay WD Six Year Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) for implementation when required to support development activities. As major
development plans are formulated and proceed through the land use jurisdictional agency
approval processes, Otay WD prepares water system requirements specifically for the proposed
development project consistent with the Otay WD WRMP Update. These requirements
document, define, and describe all the potable water and recycled water system facilities to be
constructed to provide an acceptable and adequate level of service to the proposed land uses, as
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
51
well as the financial responsibility of the facilities required for service. The Otay WD funds the
facilities identified as CIP projects. Established water meter capacity fees and user rates are
collected to fund the CIP project facilities. The developer funds all other required water system
facilities to provide water service to their project.
Section 7 – Conclusion: Availability of Sufficient Supplies
The University Innovation District Project is currently located within the jurisdictions of the
Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD. To obtain permanent imported water supply service,
land areas are required to be within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and
MWD to utilize imported water supply.
The Water Authority and MWD have an established process that ensures supplies are being
planned to meet future growth. Any annexations and revisions to established land use plans
are captured in the SANDAG updated forecasts for land use planning, demographics, and
economic projections. SANDAG serves as the regional, intergovernmental planning agency
that develops and provides forecast information. The Water Authority and MWD update their
demand forecasts and supply needs based on the most recent SANDAG forecast
approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of their urban water management
plans. Prior to the next forecast update, local jurisdictions with land use authority may require
water supply assessment and/or verification reports for proposed land developments that are
not within the Otay WD, Water Authority, or MWD jurisdictions (i.e. pending or proposed
annexations) or that have revised land use plans with either lower or higher development
intensities than reflected in the existing growth forecasts. Proposed land areas with pending
or proposed annexations, or revised land use plans, typically result in creating higher demand
and supply requirements than previously anticipated. The Otay WD, Water Authority, and
MWD next demand forecast and supply requirements and associated planning documents
would then capture any increase or decrease in demands and required supplies as a result of
annexations or revised land use planning decisions.
MWD’s IRP identifies a mix of resources (imported and local) that, when implemented, will
provide 100 percent reliability for full-service demands through the attainment of regional
targets set for conservation, local supplies, State Water Project supplies, Colorado River
supplies, groundwater banking, and water transfers. The 2015 IRP Update describes an
adaptive management strategy to protect the region from future supply shortages. This
adaptive management strategy has five components: achieve additional conservation savings,
develop additional local water supplies, maintain Colorado River Aqueduct supplies, stabilize
State Water Project supplies, and maximize the effectiveness of storage and transfer. MWD’s
2015 IRP has a plan for identifying and implementing additional resources that expand the
ability for MWD to meet future changes and challenges as necessary to ensure future
reliability of supplies. The proper management of these resources help to ensure that the
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
52
southern California region, including San Diego County, will have adequate water supplies to
meet long-term future demands.
MWD adopted its 2015 UWMP, in accordance with state law, on May 9, 2016. The resource
targets included in the preceding 2015 IRP Update serve as the foundation for the planning
assumptions used in the 2015 UWMP. MWD’s 2015 UWMP contains a water supply
reliability assessment that includes a detailed evaluation of the supplies necessary to meet
demands over a 20-year period in average, single dry year, and multiple dry year periods. As
part of this process, MWD also uses the current SANDAG regional growth forecast in
calculating regional water demands for the Water Authority’s service area.
As stated in MWD’s 2015 UWMP, the plan may be used as a source document for meeting
the requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 until the next scheduled update is completed in 5
years (2020). The 2015 UWMP includes a “Justifications for Supply Projections” in
Appendix A.3, that provides detailed documentation of the planning, legal, financial, and
regulatory basis for including each source of supply in the plan.
In the Findings Section of the Executive Summary (Page ES-5) of their 2015 UWMP, MWD
states that MWD has supply capacities that would be sufficient to meet expected demands
from 2020 through 2040 under the single dry-year and multiple dry-year conditions. MWD
has plans for supply implementation and continued development of a diversified resource mix
including programs in the Colorado River Aqueduct, State Water Project, Central Valley
Transfers, local resource projects, and in-region storage that enables the region to meet its
water supply needs. MWD’s 2015 UWMP identifies potential reserve supplies in the supply
capability analysis (Tables 2-4, 2-5 and 2-6), which could be available to meet the
unanticipated demands.
The County Water Authority Act, Section 5 subdivision 11, states that the Water Authority
“as far as practicable, shall provide each of its member agencies with adequate supplies of
water to meet their expanding and increasing needs.”
As part of preparation of a written water supply assessment report, an agency’s shortage
contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of supply. Section 11
of the Water Authority’s 2015 Updated UWMP contains a detailed shortage contingency
analysis that addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought management.
The analysis demonstrates that the Water Authority and its member agencies, through the
Emergency Response Plan, Emergency Storage Project, Carlsbad Desalination Project, and
Drought Management Plan (DMP) are taking actions to prepare for and appropriately handle
an interruption of water supplies. The DMP, adopted in May 2006, provides the Water
Authority and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to take when faced with a
shortage of imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply
shortfall conditions. The actions will help the region avoid or minimize the impacts of
shortages and ensure an equitable allocation of supplies.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
53
The WSA&V Report identifies and describes the processes by which water demand
projections for the proposed University Innovation District Project will be fully included in
the water demand and supply forecasts of the Urban Water Management Plans and other
water resources planning documents of the Water Authority and MWD. Water supplies
necessary to serve the demands of the proposed University Innovation District Project, along
with existing and other projected future users, as well as the actions necessary and status to
develop these supplies, have been identified in the University Innovation District Project
WSA&V Report and will be included in the future water supply planning documents of the
Water Authority and MWD.
This WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing water
supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, water supply projects, or
agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed University
Innovation District Project. This WSA Report assesses, demonstrates, and documents that
sufficient water supplies are planned for and are intended to be available over a 20-year
planning horizon, under normal conditions and in single and multiple dry years to meet the
projected demand of the proposed University Innovation District Project and the existing and
other planned development projects to be served by the Otay WD.
Table 6 presents the forecasted balance of water demands and required supplies for the Otay
WD service area under average or normal year conditions. The total actual demand for FY
2015 was 30,271 acre feet. The demand for FY 2015 is 2,999 acre feet lower than the
demand in FY 2010 of 33,270 acre feet. The drop in demand is a result of the unit price of
water, the conservation efforts of users as a result of the prolonged drought, and the economy.
Table 6 presents the forecasted balance of water demands and supplies for the Otay WD
service area under single dry year conditions. Table 7 presents the forecasted balance of
water demands and supplies for the Otay WD service area under multiple dry year conditions
for the three year period ending in 2019. The multiple dry year conditions for periods ending
in 2025, 2030, and 2035 are provided in the Otay Water District 2015 UWMP. The projected
potable demand and supply requirements shown the Tables 6 and 7 are from the Otay WD
2015 UWMP. Hot, dry weather may generate urban water demands that are about 6.4 percent
greater than normal. This percentage was utilized to generate the dry year demands shown in
Table 7. The recycled water supplies are assumed to experience no reduction in a dry year.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
54
Table 6
Projected Balance of Water Demands and Supplies Normal Year Conditions (acre feet)
Description FY 2020 FY 2025 FY 2030 FY 2035 FY 2040
Demands
Otay WD Demands 47,328 54,771 57,965 59,279 65,913
Active Conservation Savings (2,111) (1,844) (1,585) (1,538) (1,587)
Accelerated Forecast Growth (AFG)
– Planning Area 12 46 46 46 46 46
AFG – Otay Sunroad EOM SPA 836 836 836 836 836
AFG University Innovation District 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7
Passive Conservation Savings (2,497) (4,497) (5,489) (6,040) (6,744)
Total Demand 43,613.7 49,323.7 51,784.7 52,594.7 58,475.7
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 37,943.7 43,423.7 45,784.7 46,394.7 51,975.7
Recycled Water Supply 5,670 5,900 6,000 6,200 6,500
Total Supply 43,613.7 49,323.7 51,784.7 52,594.7 58,475.7
Supply Surplus/(Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0
Table 7 presents the forecasted balance of water demands and supplies for the Otay WD
service area under single dry year and multiple dry year conditions from the Otay Water
District 2015 UWMP.
Table 7
Projected Balance of Water Demands and Supplies
Single Dry and Multiple Dry Year Conditions (acre feet)
Normal
Year
Single Dry
Year
Multiple Dry Years
FY 2011 FY 2017 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019
Demands
Otay WD Demands 37,176 38,749 38,844 40,378 42,430
Total Demand 37,176 38,749 38,844 40,378 42,430
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 33,268 33,877 33,972 35,240 37,026
Recycled Water Supply 3,908 4,872 4,872 5,138 5,404
Total Supply 37,176 34,639 38,844 40,378 42,430
Supply Surplus/(Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0
District Demand totals with SBX7-7 conservation target achievement plus single dry year increase as shown. The
Water Authority could implement its DMP. In this instances, the Water Authority may have to allocate supply shortages
based on it equitable allocation methodology in its DMP.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
55
Dry year demands assumed to generate a 7% increase in demand over normal conditions for a
single dry year. For multiple dry years an 8% increase in demand over normal conditions is
projected in the first year, 14% in the second year and 21% increase is projected in the third
year in addition to new demand growth.
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the University Innovation District
Project development proponents will be required to participate in the development of
alternative water supply project(s). This can be achieved through payment of the New Water
Supply Fee adopted by the Otay WD Board in May 2010. These water supply projects are in
addition to those identified as sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD
UWMP, IRP, Master Plans, and other planning documents. These new water supply projects
are in response to the regional water supply issues related to climatological, environmental,
legal, and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions, such as the court
rulings regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the current ongoing western states
drought conditions. These new additional water supply projects are not currently developed
and are in various stages of the planning process. The Otay WD water supply development
program includes but is not limited to projects such as the Middle Sweetwater River Basin
Groundwater Well project, the North District Recycled Water Supply Concept, the Otay WD
Desalination project, and the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well project. The Water
Authority and MWD’s next forecasts and supply planning documents would capture any
increase in water supplies resulting from any new water resources developed by the Otay WD.
The Otay WD acknowledges the ever-present challenge of balancing water supply with
demand and the inherent need to possess a flexible and adaptable water supply
implementation strategy that can be relied upon during normal and dry weather conditions.
The responsible regional water supply agencies have and will continue to adapt their resource
plans and strategies to meet climate, environmental, and legal challenges so that they may
continue to provide water supplies to their service areas. The regional water suppliers along
with Otay WD fully intend to maintain sufficient reliable supplies through the 20-year
planning horizon under normal, single, and multiple dry year conditions to meet projected
demand of the University Innovation District Project, along with existing and other planned
development projects within the Otay WD service area.
This WSA&V Report assesses, demonstrates, and documents that sufficient water supplies are
planned for and are intended to be acquired, as well as the actions necessary and status to
develop these supplies, to meet projected water demands of the University Innovation District
Project as well as existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned development projects
within the Otay WD for a 20-year planning horizon, in normal and in single and multiple dry
years.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
56
Source Documents
University Innovation District Project SB 610 and SB 221 Compliance request letter received
August 31, 2016.
CH2M and Otay Water District, “Otay Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan
Update”, May 2016.
City of Chula Vista, “Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan, The Otay Ranch
Joint Planning Project,” October 1993 amended June 1996.
Otay Water District, “2008 Water Resources Master Plan Update,” dated November 2010.
Atkins and Otay Water District, “Otay Water District 2010 Urban Water Management Plan,”
June 2011.
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., “Otay Water District Integrated Water Resources Plan,” March
2007.
Carollo and Otay Water District, 2015 Integrated Water Resources Plan Update, June 2015.
San Diego County Water Authority, “Final 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, June, 2016.
MWD Water District of Southern California, “2015 Urban Water Management Plan,” June
2016.
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., “Rosarito Desalination Facility Conveyance and Disinfection
System Project,” June 21, 2010.
PBS&J, “Draft Otay Water District North District Recycled Water System Development
Project, Phase I Concept Study,” December 2008.
NBS Lowry, “Middle Sweetwater River System Study Water Resources Audit,” June 1991.
Michael R. Welch, “Middle Sweetwater River System Study Alternatives Evaluation,” May
1993.
Michael R. Welch, “Middle Sweetwater River Basin Conjunctive Use Alternatives,”
September 1994.
Geoscience Support Services, Inc., “Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation,” May 2001.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
57
Boyle Engineering Corporation, “Groundwater Treatment Feasibility Study Ranch del Rey
Well Site,” September 1996.
Agreement for the Purchase of Treated Water from the Otay Water Treatment Plant between
the City of San Diego and the Otay Water District.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District regarding
Implementation of the East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District for
Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility
Modification.
Agreement between the Otay Water District and the City of San Diego for Purchase of
Reclaimed Water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
58
Appendix A
University Innovation District Project Vicinity Map
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
University Innovation District Project
59
Appendix B
University Innovation District Project Development Plan
Otay Water District
Board of Directors Meeting
October 5, 2016
Water Supply Assessment & Verification Report for the
City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District Project
EXHIBIT D
BACKGROUND
Senate Bills 610 and 221 became effective on January 1, 2002.
Primary intent: Improve the link between water supply
availability and land use decisions.
SB 610 requires a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) to
be included in the CEQA documents for a project.
SB 221 requires a Water Supply Assessment & Verification (WSA&V),
also included in the CEQA documents.
Board approval required for submittal of the WSA&V Report to the
City of Chula Vista.
2
City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District
Total Potable Water Demand – 941.7 AFY
(11.7 higher than 2010 Update of 2008 WRMP)
Total Recycled Water Demand – 178 AFY
3
Project Background
383.8 acre site planned for a State
University.
Includes education buildings,
student & faculty housing,
commercial, recreation, & open
space areas.
10,066,200 sq. ft. of development.
WSA & V Report
Acknowledges the challenges for regional and local water
supply agencies in meeting demands and that a
diversified portfolio is needed to serve existing and future
needs.
The Report documents planned water supply projects and
the actions necessary to develop the supplies.
Description of how water supply is planned and available
for the project and for existing and future development
over a 20‐year planning horizon, under normal and in
single‐dry and multiple‐dry years.
4
5
Water Authority Supplies
(acre feet)
Project 2020 ‐2025 2030 ‐2040
IID Water Transfer 190,000 200,000
ACC and CC Lining 80,200 80,200
Carlsbad Desalination 56,000 56,000
Total:326,200 336,200
Diversification
of
County Water Authority Supplies
Projected Verifiable Water Supply Projects
6
Otay Water District
Projected Balance of Supply and Demand
Source: Table 6 of the City of Chula Vista University Innovation District Project WSA&V Report.
Description FY 2020 FY 2025 FY 2030 FY 2035 FY 2040
Demands
Otay WD Demands1 47,328 54,771 57,965 59,279 65,913
AFG –Planning Area 12 46 46 46 46 46
AFG –Otay 250 Sunroad SPA 836 836 836 836 836
AFG –University Innovation District 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7
Active Conservation Savings (2,111) (1,844) (1,585) (1,538) (1,587)
Passive Conservation Savings (2,497) (4,497) (5,489) (6,040) (6,744)
Total Demands 43,613.7 49,323.7 51,784.7 52,594.7 58,475.7
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 37,943.7 43,423.7 45,784.7 46,394.7 51,975.7
Recycled Water Supply 5,670 5,900 6,000 6,200 6,500
Total Supply 43,613.7 49,323.7 51,784.7 52594.7 58,475.7
Supply Surplus/(Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0
1 Potable, recycled and near term-annexation demands.
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Historical & Projected
Potable Water Demands
Historical Projected (2015 UWMP)
CONCLUSION
Water demand and supply forecasts are included in the
planning documents of Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, San Diego County Water Authority,
and the Otay Water District.
Actions necessary to develop the identified water supplies
are documented.
The SB 610 & SB 221 WSA&V Report documents that
sufficient water supplies are planned for and available over
the next 20 years.
The Board has met the intent of the SB 610 and SB 221
statutes.
7
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Board of Directors approve Senate Bills 610 & 221
updated Water Supply Assessment & Verification Report dated
August 2016
for the
City of Chula Vista
University Innovation District
8
QUESTIONS?
9
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: October 5, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Mark Watton,
General Manager
W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO.
APPROVED BY:
Susan Cruz, District Secretary
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Board of Directors 2016 Calendar of Meetings
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
At the request of the Board, the attached Board of Director’s meeting
calendar for 2016 is being presented for discussion.
PURPOSE:
This staff report is being presented to provide the Board the
opportunity to review the 2016 Board of Director’s meeting calendar
and amend the schedule as needed.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
The Board requested that this item be presented at each meeting so
they may have an opportunity to review the Board meeting calendar
schedule and amend it as needed.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachment: Calendar of Meetings for 2016
G:\UserData\DistSec\WINWORD\STAFRPTS\Board Meeting Calendar 10-5-16.doc
Board of Directors, Workshops
and Committee Meetings
2016
Regular Board Meetings:
Special Board or Committee Meetings (3rd
Wednesday of Each Month or as Noted)
January 6, 2016
February 3, 2016
March 2, 2016
April 6, 2016
May 4, 2016
June 1, 2016
July 6, 2016
August 3, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 5, 2016
November 2, 2016
December 7, 2016
January 20, 2016
February 17, 2016
March 16, 2016
April 20, 2016
May 18, 2016
June 15, 2016
July 20, 2016
August 23, 2016
September 14, 2016
October 19, 2016
November 16, 2016
December 21, 2016
SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS:
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Wales Benham
Senior Accountant
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY:
Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2016 Board of Directors’ Expenses
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To present the Board of the Directors’ expenses for Fiscal Year 2016.
ANALYSIS:
The California Government Code Section 53065.5 requires special
districts, at least annually, to disclose any reimbursement paid by a
district within the immediately preceding fiscal year. This Staff
Report and attached documentation fulfills this requirement. (See
Attachment B for the Summary and C-H for Details.)
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
2
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Prudently manage District funds.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Compliance with state law.
Attachments: Attachment A Committee Action
Attachment B Director’s Expenses and per Diems
Attachment C-H Director’s Expenses Detail
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Fiscal Year 2016 Board of Directors’ Expenses
COMMITTEE ACTION:
This item was presented to the Finance, Administration and
Communications Committee at a meeting held on September 13, 2016. The
following comments were made:
Staff presented the expenses for each director from July 1, 2015
thru June 30, 2016. It was indicated that the total expenditures
for the fiscal year was $27,012.83 with a total of 259 meetings.
Staff stated that there was one correction made to the
presentation since it was published. The number of meetings paid
for Director Robak was corrected to 23 from 19 and the total
meetings paid for all Directors was 215.
Staff also indicated that the chart in the presentation shows the
historical expenses and per diems annually since 2000. The
historical figures were inflated to today’s dollars using a 2%
discount factor. Over the past five (5) years, the average
annual expense has been $25,744 which is a 53% reduction from the
prior 12 year average. Staff noted that this chart was also
updated and is different than the chart that was published with
the committee packet.
The Committee was very pleased that directors expenses have been
very cost effective.
The Committee requested that staff place the Board expense
information on the District’s website.
Following the discussion, the committee accepted the report and
recommended that it be presented to the full board as an informational
item.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS’
EXPENSES AND PER DIEMS
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
October 5, 2016
ATTACHMENT B
California Government Code Section 53065.5 and
Otay Water District’s Code of Ordinances Policy 8
require that staff present the expenses and per diems
for the Board of Directors on an annual basis:
•Fiscal Year 2016.
•The expenses are shown by Board member and
expense type.
•This presentation is in alphabetical order.
•This information is being presented to the Finance,
Administration, and Communications Committee
on September 13, 2016 and for the October 5, 2016
Board of Directors meeting.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD EXPENSES
July 1, 2015 - June 30, 2016
Croucher Lopez Robak Smith Thompson Total
Business Meetings $ - $ 75.00 $ 123.00 $ - $ 684.09 $ 882.09
Director's Fees 2,300.00 5,400.00 2,300.00 3,400.00 8,100.00 21,500.00
Mileage Business - 164.28 130.67 189.26 684.43 1,168.64
Mileage Commuting - 333.10 39.27 454.08 447.07 1,273.52
Conferences and Seminars - - - 325.00 637.56 962.56
Travel - - - - 1,226.02 1,226.02
Total $ 2,300.00 $ 5,972.38 $ 2,592.94 $ 4,368.34 $ 11,779.17 $ 27,012.83
Meetings Attended 24 73 33 35 94 259
Meetings Paid 23 54 23 34 81 215
*Cost shown in current dollars using a 2% discount rate.
Average $54,910 over prior 12 years Average $25,744 over last 5 years
The last 5 year average is a 53%
reduction from the
prior 12 year average.
Board of Directors’ Expenses and Per Diems*
Fiscal Years 2000 - 2016
$1
4
1
,
0
0
1
$6
5
,
9
4
3
$9
0
,
6
7
1
$5
7
,
6
3
0
$6
0
,
2
1
1
$3
8
,
0
8
7
$3
6
,
6
4
6
$3
1
,
8
3
4
$4
1
,
9
6
6
$4
6
,
8
4
2
$2
2
,
6
1
9
$2
5
,
4
7
8
$1
7
,
1
2
0
$2
7
,
9
1
2
$2
8
,
6
0
1
$2
7
,
5
3
4
$2
7
,
5
5
2
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Jul-15I
GARY D. CROUCHER (DETAILED IN SECTION D):5214 Business Meetings $ -5281 Director's Fees 200.0052ll Miløge - Business52ll Milage - ComutinS -5213 Seminûrs and conf€renc€s5212 Travel
Aue-15,
zoo.oo
Sep-15
3
200.00
:
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
ADMINISTRATTVE EXPENSES. BOARI)
July 1, 2016 -June 30, 2016
Oct-15 NoY-15
5
Dec-15
6
J¡n-16
7
200.00 100.00 200.00 100.00
ATTACHMENT C
Feb-16 Mar-ló Aor-16 Mav-16 Jun-ló Totsl
100.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 t00.00 2,300.00
E 121l10
$$$
I
$$$$
Tot¿l 200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $100.00 $ 200.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 300.00 $300.00 $ 300.00 $ 100.00 $2,300.00
JOSE LOPEZ (DETAILED IN SECTION E):
52t4
52Et
521 I52tl
52t3
52t2
Business Meetings
Directot's Fffi
Mileage - Business
Milæge-Comuting
Seminæ md Conferences
Tmvel
Total
$
200.00
I 1.50
500.00
23.00
I 1.50
50.00
800.00
42.55
46.00
500.00
32.40
300.00
24.30
2t.60
25.00 $
700.00
ó.48
43.20
500.00
43.20
300.00
21.60
$$$$$$$$?5.00
5,400.00
164.2t
333.10
500.00
34.50
I 1.50
300.00
13.80
23.00
500.00
46.00
3.45
300.00
ló.20
21.60
$$ 534.50$ 546.00$ 938.55$ 336.80$ 549.45$ 532.40$ 337.80$ 345.90î 774.68 $ 543.20$ 321.ó0$ 5,972.38
MAR¡( ROBAK (DETAILED IN SECTION Ð:
5214
5281
52n
52tt
52t3
5212
Business Meetings
Dirætor's Fees
Mileage - Business
Mileage - Comuting
Seminm md Conferenm
Travel
Total
$ 30.00 $
300.00
14.95
20.00
400.00
37.95
2.30
18.00 $
300.00
2 1.85
2.30
100.00
3.24
2.t6
200.00
t9.44
4.32
$5s.00 $
400.00
23.00
2.30
300.00
t2.96
4.32
200.00
6.48
4.32
$$$$$$123.00
2,300.00
t30.67
39.27
100.00
3.45
2.30
2.30
$135.75 $ 3t7.25 :i 105.40 s 3l?.28 s 223.16 S $s 2.s92.94
OTAY WATERDISTRICT
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES . BOARI)
July 1, 2016 -June 30,2016
Jul-15 Aus-15 Seo-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jsn-16 Fcb-16 Mar-16 Apr-ló Mav-16 Jun-16
TIM SMITH (DETAILED IN SECTION G)5214 Business Meetings5281 Directot's Fe.€s521I Mileage - Business52ll Mileage - Comuting5213 Seminm md Conferenæs5212 Travel
Total
$
300.00
48_30
200.00
27.60
300.00
37.95
200.00 300.00
'19.35
300.00
35.64
400.00 200.00
45.36
Total
3,400.00
t89.26
454.08
325.00
s $$$$$$$
300.00
57.50
27.60
300.00
13t.76
2s.92
300.00
38.88
300.00
38.8848.ó0
325.00
$ 348.305 227.60 $ 337.95$ 200.00$ 379.35$ 38s.10$ 457.ó8$ 335.64$ 773.60$ 338.88$ 338.885 245.36 $ 4,368.34
MITCHELL THOMPSON (DETAILED IN SECTION II):5214 Business Mætings $ - $5281 Directo/s F€es 300.0052ll Mileage - Business 12.0852ll Mileage - Conunuting 29905213 Seminars md Conferences5212 Travel
30.00 $
1,000.00
85.68
14.95
42.56
22.09
500.00
10.93
44.85
900.00
92.88
42.t2
ó00.00
37.26
2E.08
700.00
37.26
42.t2
250.00 $
s9s.00
50.00 $
900.00
103.50
59.80
2s0.00 $
600.00
48.88
44.85
25.00 $
r,000.00
r24.74
56.16
26.00
800.00
70.74
56.16
31.00 $
800.00
60.48
28.08
ó84.09
8,100.00
684.43
447.07
63'1.56
$$
Total
Business Meetings
D¡rectorrs Fæs
Miluge - Buslness
Mileage - Commuting
Semln¡rs ¡nd Confcrences
Tr¡vel
Totsl
30.00 s
2,300.00
r22.48
79.15
42.56
305.00 $
1,700.00
85.68
149.50
$13.30 s
120.00 s
2,500.00
r84,00
108,10
66s.34
1100.00
56.70
87.48
919.56
TOTALS:
52t4
s28l52ll
5211
5213
5212
$$$$$
l,0o0.oo
r2.08
89.70
280,00 $
1,000.00
26.45
41.40
595.00
40.09 $
1,800.00
93.73
t20.75
I,E00.00
224.64
100.44
2,000.00
74.s2
tt6.64
325.00
$.00 $
2,500.00
150.66
142.56
26,00 $
2,100.00
77.22
t42.56
31.00 $
1,400.00
ó0.48
9s.04
882.09
21,500.00
1,168.64
t,273.52
962.s6
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DTRECTOR'S NAME CROUCHE& GARY ATTACHMENT D
SECTION DAccount Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee
Director's Fee Total
7/2212Ot5
7l2A/2Or.5
8/11/20rs
8/13/2015
9l21aüts
9123/zots
LA/7/20r5
tol2alzots
LLltalzots
t2/Lsl2ors
12/tAl2l¡rs
t /19/20\6
2/L2/2016
3/212Ot6
3/ts/2sr6
3/23/2Ot6
4l412Ot6
4/6l2O,.64lrsl2ot6
5/412Ot6
5/L7/r,OL.6
sl23f 2at6
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
MEETING WITH TONNI ATKINS TO DISCUSS DROUGHT, DESAL
AND WATER ISSUES
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
LAFCO SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADVISORY
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
eÑcIrueTruruG, oPERATIoNS AND WATER coMMITTEE MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
6I112016 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
$100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
1oo.o0
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
2,30O.0O
Grand Total $ 2,30O.OO
F:/JUNl6Croucher Page 3 of Pages 14 Printed Date: SnnO16
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSESFOR THE PERTOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30.,2Ot6
DIRECTOR'S NAME: LOPEZ, JOSE
ATTACHMENT E
SECTION EAccount Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee 7 /L7 l2OLs
7 /2L/2OL5
8/7/2OL5
slL3/2Ot5.
8/2sl2OLs
8/26/2OL5
fJl2A/zALs
9/2/2OLs
9la/2Or.5
slL5/2,OL5,
s/2sl2Lts
s/2s/2ors
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA BRIEFING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA BRIEFING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
MEETING WITH COUNCILMAN MIESEN . RECYCLED WATER
RATES
MEETING WITH SAN DIEGO COUNCIL MEMBER EMERALD -
RECYCLED WATER RATES
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA BRIEFING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
MEETING WITH SAN DIEGO CITY COUNCILWOMAN ZAPF
SAN DIEGO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA BRIEFING
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY DESAL GROUND BREAKING
$100.00
1oo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
1oo.0o
LO/6/2AL5
to/7/2015
LOlL3 l2p.L5¡
LO/L6!2ßL5
LO/r.9/2OL5
to/2Ll2oL5
LO/27 l20rs
ta/28/2Or5
tr/412f/L5
tLlL7 l20t5
tL/ra/2aL5,
AD HOC SALT CREEK GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE BOARD WATER RATE RESOLUTION
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA BRIEFING
DESAL PROJECT COMMITTEE MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING WITH GM COUNSEL
UNIVISION TV INTERVIEW WITH MAYOR MARY SAI-AS
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SAN DIEGO CIW COUNCIL. WATER RATES PRESENTATION
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
100.00
100.00
1oo.oo
10o.oo
100.00
100.00
loo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
F:/JUNl6Lopez Page 4 of Pages 14 Printed Date: 91712016
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: LOPEZ, JOSE
ATTACHMENT E
SECTION EAccount Name
Director's Fee
Date
r2.1412ßL5iz,lz/zots
L2/8/2ALs
L2lL4/20L5tilts/zotstl6/2O16t/tL/7ßL6tlLs/2oL6L/2A/2At6
r/3o/2CIt62/3120t6
2/L6t2Ot62/L7/20L6
3/2/2OL6sltT/20'.6
3/:,1./24164/4/20L6
Descriptions
COMMITTEE UÊTTIruE AGENDA BRIEFING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE
MEETING
BUD LEWIS DESAL PLANT OPENING CEREMONIES
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SALT CREEK AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
CROSS BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL FORUM - PRESENT OTAY
WATER DISTRICJ DESAL PROJECT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEEÏING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
WATER RELIABILITY COALITION
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING - ACTUARIAL
STUDY WORKSHOP4/6/2016 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
Amount
1oo.oo
1oo.oo
10o.oo
100.00
100.00
1oo.oo
100.óo
100.00
100.00
10o.oo
1oo.oo
1oo.0o
10o.oo
4lt5/2OL6
4/Ls/2A':6
4/2Al2OL6
4/27/2OL64/2s/2A'.6
s/2/2A'L6s/4/2Ot6
5lL8/2OL6
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
DESAL PROJECT COMMITTEE MEETING
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING
AD HOC SALT CREEK GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTMTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
100.00
10o.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
10o.oo
1oo.0o
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
F:/JUNl6Lopez Page 5 of Pages 14 Printed Date: 9n12016
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY - BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: LOPEZ, JOSE
ATTACHMENT E
SECTION EAccount Name
Director's Fee
Date
s/23/zlJt6
s/27 /2AL6
6/r/24t6
6/!7 /2OL6àtzet)oiø
Director's Fee Total
Mileage - 7/2tl20t'5Commuting8/3t/2Ot5slso/2oL5
LO/31/2Otsr'.lsa/2or,sL2/3t/zotstlso/2ot6
2/2912OL63/3r.l2At64/30l2Ot6s/3tl2oL6
6/30l2OL6
Mileage - Commuting Total
Business meetings tO/22/2Ol'54/tel2at6
Business meetings Total
Mileage - Business Al31/2OLse/30/zots
ralgL/2oL3
tr/30/2ot5tzláttàsts
2/2s/2At"6
3l3L/2A,.6
4/30/20'6'
mlleagé - eusinèCs ióia¡
Descriptions
BUDGET WORKSHOP
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
MEETING - JULY 2L,2OT5
MEETING - AUGUST L3,2Ot5
MEETING - SEPTEMBER 02, 2015
MEETING - OCTOBER 6,7, Lg & 21, 2015
MEETING - NOVEMBER 4, & 18,2015
MEETING - DECEMBER 7,8, 14, & 15, 2015
MEETING - JANUARY 6, LL, & 20,2016
MEETING - FEBRUARY 3 & 16, 2016
MEETING - MARCH 2&L7,20L6
MEETING - APRIL 4,6,20, &.27 ,2016
MEETING - MAY 2,4, L8 &.23,20L6
MEETING - JUNE t &.22, 2Ot6
ATTENDED THE RIBBONS AND SHOVELS AWARDS BANQUET
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
MEETING - AUGUST 7, 25, 26, &28, 2OL5
MEETING - SEPTEMBER 8, 15,28, & 29 2015
MEETING - OCTOBER 6, !3, L6,27, & 28, 2015
Amount
loo.oo
100.00
100.00
loo.oo
100.00
5,4OO.OO
11.50
11.50
11.50
46,00
23.00
46.00
32.40
2L.60
2L.60
43.20
43.20
2t.60
333.10
50.00
25.00
75.OO
MEETING
v¡erirruc
MEETING
MEETING
MEETING
NOVEMBER L7,2OL5
DECEMBER 4,2OL5
FEBRUÁRY 4,2OL6
MARCH 3L,2OL6
APRIL 15, & 29 ,20L6
23.00
34.50
42.55
13.80
3.45
16.20
24.30
6.48
164.28
Grand Total $ 5,972.38
F:/JUNl6Lopez Page 6 of Pages 14 Printed Date: 9n12016
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY - BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSESFOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR,S NAME: ROBAK, MARK ATTACHMENT F
SECTION FAccount Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee alL3/z0tå.s/z/zoti
s/22,/2At5
s¡ü¡iotà
to/7 /2or5
tol1.5l2oL5
to/2r/zors
LO/27 /zOLs
tt/4/2oL5,ir/rslrors
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
100.00
rbo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
roó.0ó
$
rrruÁ¡rde ¡ruó ¡o pr iñrsf nalve com u irree M EETIN G
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SDCWA SYMPOSIUM AT USD - DISCUSSED DROUGHT AND EL
NINO
CONSERVATION ACTION COMMITTEE PRESENTATION BY AUTHOR
CHARLES FISHMAN AT SDG&E INNOVIATIONS CENTER
EAST COUNTY CHAMBER GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS AND LAND USE
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN JPA BOARD MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN FRIENDS BOARD MEETING
CSDA QUARTERLY DINNER LAFCO PRESENTATIONS
tr/fl/2ar"5tLÍt9/2A'.5
t2/a/2ot5
',2/t4/aÙr",sf 2,/f 5/2015
MEET WITH SDCWA JASON FOSTER'CONSERVATION
COMMITTEE MEETING
DEDICATION - CARLSBAD DESAL PI4NT
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
100.00
100.00
100.00ACTION
2/r/2Ot6
3/2/2OL6
3lral20r.6
3/23/2016
4/4l2016
4/6/2OL6
s/4/2OL6
5/2t/2At"6
REGUIAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN JPA BOARD MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
100.00
100.00
iôo.oo
1oo.o0
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
1oó.00
213OO.OODirector's Fee Total
F:/JUNl6Robak Page 7 of Pages 14 Print€d Date: 9n12016
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY I, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: ROBAIç MARK ATTACHMENT F
SECTION FAccount Name
Mileage - Commuting
Mileage - Commuting Total
Business meetings
Business meetings Total
Mileage - Business
Mileage - Business Total
Descriptions
MEETING - AUGUST 13, 2015
MEETING - SÈpreMBrn 2,22 &.23 2OL5
MEETING - OCTOBER 7,2OT5
MEETING - NOVEMBER 4,20L5
MEETING - DECEMBER 15,2015
MEETING - FEBRUARY E, )Ot6
MEETING . MARCH 2,20T6
MEETING - MARCH 23,20L6
MEEING-APRIL4&6,2016
Date
811.?/2015
e/30/2015
t2/L6/2OL5
r2l1S/20r5
t2/20/2Ar5
2/2A/2Aß
Amount
2.30
t4.95
2.30
2.30
,/2/2At6
3123120t6
4/30/20'.6
2.30
2.L6
2.,L6
2.L6
4.32
4.iz5/3L/2Ot6 MEETING - MAY 4 &.23,20L6
SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY MEETING
SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY MEETING
CSDA DINNER MEETING
SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEETING
SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEETING
39.27
8/24/2OL5IotzitzoiittltslzotsttlßjzoLy¡
li,/si¡i.oits
al30/2aL5
s/il2ots
t2/ t7 /2Ar5
t2/ls/zors
t2/2LliÛrï
2/2A/2OL6
?/2/2Ot6
3/ta/2aß
3/2?/2Ot6
4/30/10r.6
itittzorc
30.00
20.ôo
io.oo
z5.oo
18.00
r23.OO
MEETING -
MEETiNG.
MEETING -
MEETIÑG.
MEETIÑG -
MEETING - FEBRUARY 3,2OL6
MEETING - MARCH 2,2016
MEETING - MARCH 18,2016
MEETING - MARCH 23,2OL6
MEETING - APRIL 4 & 6, 2OL6
MEETING - MAY 4 &.23t 2OL6
AUGUST 13, 2015
SrpreMeen z, zols
ocToBER 7, 15 & 2t,2OL5
NOVEMBER t6, L7, & 19, 2015
DECEMBER 5, 8, & t4,2Ot5
3.45
2.30
iz.gs
23.00
zr.es
3.24
3.24
6.48
3.24
t9.44
6.48
130.67
Grand Total * 2,592.94
F:/JUNl6Robak Page 8 of Pages 14 Printed Date: 9n12016
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY - BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY I, 2OI5 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: SMITH, TIM ATTACHMENT G
SECTION GAccount Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee 7/22/20'"5
7!27!20.15
7/2l8.!iAts
8/Lt/2Or5
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
CHULA VISTA INTERAGENCY . DISCUSS WATER ISSUES WITH CHULAVISTA AND SWEETWATER
MEETING WITH TONNI ATKINS TO DISCUSS DROUGHT, DESAL AND
WATER ISSUES
ENGINEERING, OPERATTONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
PROJECT GROUND BREAKING OF SWEETWATER FACILIW
REGUI-AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIREfiORS MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CHULA VISTA INTERAGENCY. MEETING TO DISCUSS COMMON WATER
AGENCY GOALS
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
DEDICATION - CARLSBAD DESAL PI.ANT
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.008/r3/20159/2/2Ot59l22l2At5g/29/2l0rsi,atitziìliß/2A/zotsß/412At5ir,/ß/zaisittda¡iots
t2lal2ot5t2/t4lzotst2/ts/zot5tl6/2CIt6
t/r.s120i.6
Li26/2OL6
100.00
100.00
rôo.oo
100.00
ioo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
roo.oó
REGUI-AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE
AWWA POTABLE REUSE SYMPOSIUM
MEETING
100.00
1oo.oo
100.00
ioo.oò
100.00
10o.oo
F:/JUNlosmith Page I of Pages 14 Printed Date:9/22016
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY - BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERXOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH ¡UNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: SMITH, TIM ATTACHMENT G
SECTION GAccount Name
Director's Fee
Director's Fee Total
Date
2/2/20;ß
2/3/2Ot6
2lt2/20r,6
312/20t6
3/7/2ALú"
3ltsl2ar.6
3/23/2016
41412016
4,16/rat6
4/re/2o16
sl +/zorc
sltT l2at6sjätzoie6/2'120t66/2sl2Ot6
COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE
Amount
1oo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
1o0.oo
100.00
ioo.oo
100.00
100.00
Descriptions
DISCUSS WATER AND WÂSTEWATER PiOJECT INTEREST IN CHULA VISTA
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CHULA VISTA INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS AND WATER COMMITTEE MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS
BUDGET WORKSHOP
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS
MEETING
MEETING
SWEETWATER AUTHORIW - PREPARE FOR CHULA VISTA INTERANGENCY
TASK FORCE MEETING
3,400.oo
Mileage -7l25l2OL5 MEETING - JULY 22, 27 8128, 2OL5 48.30
8/31/20159/30/20rstojitlzarc
MEETING - AUGUST 11 & 13, 2015
MEETING - SEPTEMBER 2,22 &.29,2OL5
MEETING - OCTOBER 7, L4 &.20, 2Ot5
27.60
37.95
4L.40tt/30/201stz¡ztf zarst/3t/2016
z,tis¡zaL,ç
3/3tl2Ot6
4/30/2Ot6
ilztlzpio"
Mileage - Gommuting Total
Mileage - Business L2/31/2AL5.
r/i¡t/2016
Mileage - Business TotalGonferencesand LZll-tlzÛLsSeminarsConferences and Seminars Total
- NOVEMBER 4, 18, & 30, 2015
- DECEMBER 8, 14, & 15, 2015
- JANUARY 6 & 19, 2016
- FEBRUARY 2,3, &.!2,2Ot6
MARCH 2,7, L58..23,20L6
APRIL 4, 6 & 19, 2016
MAY 4, t7 &.23,2OL6
37.95
27.6A
25.92
35.64
MEETING
MEETING
NÈer¡ruc
48.60
38.88
38.88
454.O8
MEETING - DECEMBER L4,2OL5
MEETING . JANUARY 26,2Ot6
AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION POTABLE REUSE CONFERENCE
57.50
131.76
189.26
325.00
izÈ.oo
Grand Total $ 4,368.34
F:/JUN l65mith Page l0 of Pages 14 Printed Datê: 9tl2016
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERTOD JULY t, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: THOMPSON, MITCHELL ATTACHMENT H
SECTION HAccount Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee 7 /t7 l2OLsi¡zitzpti
7 /27 /2Ot5
el2/20'se/3/to15slà/zoL,s
e/9/20ts
9ltslzotss/2rÍ2oL5
sl22/2.Orse/2?/20ts
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA BRIEFING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
önuU VISTA INTERAGENcY - DIScUSS WATER ISSUEs WITH cHULA
VISTA AND SWEETWATER
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
PSAR COMMITTEE MEETING INFORM PUBLIC OF WATER ISSUES
MEETING WITH COUNCILÍ\4AN ALVÀREZ - TO DISCUSS RECVCLED WATER
RATES
MEETING WITH COUNCILMAN MIESEN - PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
LOCAL ISSUES9/I4/2Aß CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
100.00
ióo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
ióo.oo
100.00
9/24/2Or5tolt/2ot5
,olsl2ot5
LA/6/20Ls
LO/7l2Ûts
ío/to/zots
LO/17 lz0t9
to/Ls/zots
,"o/2' /?;ats
to/zel20ts
tt/2/zots
Lr/4/a0rs
rl,¿1Ol2015
11/16/2015
Lt/L7 lzots
SAN DIEGO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CSDA CONFERENCE
CSDA CONFERENCE
CSDA CONFERENCE
CSDA CONFERENCE
psÀR GovERÑMENT AFFATRS com¡vrrrrÈe MEETTNG- pRESENT & sEEK
SUPPORT ON RECYCLED WATER ISSUE
MEET WITH SWEETWATER BOARD MEMBER J. PRECIADO
MEFNNG WITH B. MCWETHY DISCUSS SALT CREEK GOLF COURSE
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CWA LEGISLATIVE ROUNDTABLE
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN ANNUAL GALA EVENT
DESAL PROJECT COMMITTEE MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
PRESS CONFERENCE RECYCLED WATER ISSUE
AD HOC GM REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
INTERVIEW WITH CHANNEL 10 - RECYCLED WATER ISSUE
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN JPA BOARD MEETING
SAN DIEGO C¡TY COUI.¡CII- MEETING
100.00
1oo.oo
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
1oo.0o
F:/JUNl6Thompson Page 11 ofPages 14 Printed Date: Sn12016
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSESFOR THE PERIOD JULY l, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30,2Ot6
DIRECTOR'S NAME: THOMPSON, MITCHELL ATTACHMENT H
SECTION HAccount Name
Director's Fee
Date
r1/r8/20rs
t2l4/2Ûr,s
t217 /20Ls
,.2/t4/20rs
121r5/2015
L2/24/2Ot5
t/6/2Ot6
L/A/2Ot6
L/tt/2016
tlt4/2at6
r/1s/2016
rlt9/2at6
r/2a/2016
tl2s/2016
1/3O/20r6
2/2/2Ot6
2/3l2Ot6.
2/'6/20r.6
2lt7/2Ot6
i/zs/zsta
Amount
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
ioo.oo
100.00
100.00
roo.oo
r.oo.oo
1oo.0o
100.00
100.00
1oö.00
ioo.oo
loo.oo
roo,óo
roo.oo
2126/2016 BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING - DISCUSS BOARD MEETING WITH GM
Descriptions
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
DEDICATION - CARLSBAD DESAL PI-ANT
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ETHICS TRAINING REQUIRED BY LAW
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
DISCUSS RECYCLED WATER ISSUES WITH CITY OF SAN DIEGO
SALT CREEK AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING
DISCUSS RECYCLED WATER ISSUES WITH CITY OF SAN DIEGO
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
CH U I.A VISTA REDEVELO PM E NT OVERSIGHT COM M ITTEE
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING - DISCUSS BOARD MEETING WITH GM
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY - DISCUSS CHULA VISTA INTERANGENCY TASK
FORCE ISSUES
RÊGUI-AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMIfiEE MEETING
CROSS BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL FORUM - PRESENT OTAY WATER
DISTRICT DESAL PROJECT
STATE OF THE COUNry ADDRESS - REPRESENT OTAY WATER DISTRICT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
CHULA VISTA INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN JPA BOARD MEETING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING
SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
3/2/2Ot6t'¡tl)oiàtlslzati
s;/ti lzot6
3/ls/2of.6
eizi¡zoi6
àtit/zoto
t¡1¡iorc
F:/JUN l6Thompson Page 12 of Pages 14 Printed Oate: 9nl2ï16
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY - BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2Ot6
DIRECTOR'S NAME: THOMPSON, MITCHELL ATTACHMENT H
SECTION HAccount Name
Director's Fee
Director's Fee Total
Mileage -Commuting
Date
4/6/2Ot6
4/7/2Ot6
4/1r/20r6
4/t2/2016
4/t5/20'.6
4/ts/rot6
4/20/2OL6
4127/20'.6
4/29/2016
s/2/2OL6
s/3/2Ot6
siq/zatè
s/5/20¡6
s/6l20'.6
51t2,/2oi6
slrs/2oi6
5/rs/20'.6
6/r/20tö
618/20L6
6.19l2at6
oliét2src
ølitlzors
Descriptions
REGUI.AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
MEETING WITH HALLY RAZAK CITY PUBLIC UTTLITIES DIRECTOR
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
MWD BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
COUNCIL OF WATER UTTLITIES
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
DESAL PROJECT COMMITTEE MEETING
BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING
AD HOC SALT CREEK GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT
STATE OF THE CITY OF CHULA - REPRESENT OTAY WATER DISTRICT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIREfiORS MEETING
DOCUMENT SIGNING - BOND DOCUMENTS
CHICANO FEDERATON ANNUAL UNITY LUNCH
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETIÑG
CSDA QUARTERLY MEETING
REGUI-AR BOARD OF DIRECTORS UEENruC
WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN JPA BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CHULA VISTA DEVELOPMENT FORUM
t"tÈfl'lf{c w¡rn c¡q & G. HALBERT cITy oF cHULA vISTA
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING
MEET WITH JPA MEMBERS & WATER CONSERVAÏON EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR
MEETING WITH SWA - DISCUSS ISSUES FOR INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE
7/3I/2OI5 MEETING . JULY 2I &.2312OL5
6/22/20T6 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Amount
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
löo.oo
100.ö0
100.00
100,00
100.00
100.00
1oo.o0
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
6/27/2OL6
6/2s/2At6
9/212Or3
ß13r"/2aL5Ittiotzstst2/31/20L5r/?t/20t62/2e/2Ot6
8,1OO.0O
29.90
MEETING - SEPTEMBER 2,2OL5
MEETING - OCTOBER 6,7, Lg & 21, 2015
MEETING - NOVEMBER 2,4 &.L8,20t5
MEETING - DECEMBER 7, L4&.15,2015
MEETING - JANUARY 6, 11 & 20,2OL6
MEETING - FEBRUARY 3 & 16, 2016
14,95
59.80
44,85
44.85
42.L2
28.08
F:/JUNl6Thompson Pagê 13 of Pages 14 Printed Date: 9n12016
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSUMMARY. BOARD OF DIRECÎORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2Or5 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016
DIRECTOR'S NAME: THOMPSON, MITCHELL ATTACHMENT H
SECTION HAccount Name
Mileage -
Date
3/3t/2At6
Descriptions
MEETING - MARCH 2, L7 &.23,2016
MEETING - APRIL 4, 6, 20 & 27,2016
MEETING - MAy ?f 31 4,5! 6t t2, 18 & 19, 2016
MEETING - JUNE L &. 22, 20t6
CASA FAMILIAR ABRAZO AWARDS
CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICT MEETING
ATTENDED THE RIBBONS AND SHOVELS AWARDS BANQUET
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE FOUNDATION LUNCHEON
OTAY MESA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES
REGISTMTION FOR CHUI.A VISTA MAYOR'S FIRST FRIDAY BREAKFAST
PARKING FEE FOR CHICANO FED EVENT - WYNDAM BAYSIDE
REGISTRATION FOR CHULA VISTA MAYOR'S FIRST FRIDAY BREAKFAST
ALBONDIGAS LUNCHEON
7/31/2015 MEETING - JULY L7 &.27,2Or5
Amount
4/3012016513t{2OL6
Miteage - commut¡nn roa"T/to/'otuBusiness A/2L/2O',5meetinss glrt 2ot'
ro/?2/?o15
trl6/20r.5
12l18/20r.5
4/rs/2ot6
5/6/2A16
6/3l2Ot6
Business meetings Total
Mileage -Business 9!3A/201stalst /¡;a'.5n/30/2at5,2l3tl2ot5t/31/20r.6
2/2A/2OL63/3t/20L64/30/2016s/31/70166l30/2416
Mileage - Business Total
Conferencesand Seminars 9/20/2OL5
9/24/?Ots
Conferences and Seminars TotalTravel gltg/zÛl.í9Í22/2AL59/24/2Or,S
Travel Total
SEPTEMBER 3,8,9, 14, t5,20-24
ocToBER 1,5,6, 16,22 & 28, 2015
NOVEMBER 10, 16, &.t7,20L5
DECEMBER4&18,2015
JANUARY 8, L4, L5, t9,25, & 30, 2016
FEBRUARY 2, t7,25 &.26,20L6
MARCH 7, 14, L8 & 31, 2016
APRIL 7, LL, L2, 15, 19, 22 &.29,20L6
MAY 3,6,7, L2, & 19,2016
JUNE 1, 8, g, L6, L7,22,27 &.2g,2Ot6
42.L2
5o.io56.16
28.08447.O7
250.00
30.00
s0.00
250.00
22.09
25.00
16.00
10.00
16.00
1s.ó0
684.O9
12.08
MEETING
MEETING
MEETING
MEETING
MEETING
MEETING
MEETIÑG
MEETING
MEETING
MEETING
85.68
103.50
48.88
10.93
92.88
37.26
3J.26
t24.74
70.74
60.48
684.43
DINNER - MONTEREY CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTR¡CT SEMINAR SEPTEMBER 2L - 24,2015
LUNCH - MONTEREY CALIFORNIA
AIRL¡NE TICKET TO OAKLAND CALIFORNIA
GASOLINE USED - MONTEREY CALIFORN.IAAIRLINE TICKET TO S4N JOSE CALIFORNIA
LODGING - CITY OF MONTEREY ON SEPTEMBER 20-24, 2015
PARKING - CITT OF MONTEREY SEPTEMB-ER 2T.2!,20L5
RENTAL CAR TO DRIVE TO MONTEREY CALIFORNIA
36.00
s95.006.56
637.56
71.0025.60182.00764.20
L7.75
L65.47
Lt226,O2
Grand Total g t1,779.t7
F:/JUNl6Thompson Page 14 of Pages 14 Printed Date: 9n12016
Fay '[o: Garv Crouchen
ftøoCIo^ tø7üÇt)" ztt/ " íp"r¡tt *oa ûü
EXHIBIT B
OTAY WATER DTSTRICT
ECIAR.D OF DTRECTORS
PER.-DTEM ANÐ MTX,EAGE CLAIM FCIRM
Period Covened:
Emnployee Nu¡srûhen: 70n f Fnorm vlrøl rf ro: Øf te I 15
OTAY
rTEMI DA'ITE MEE'flENG PUR.POSE / ISSUES
ÐISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOlvlE to OWDOWD tô HOME
MILEAGE
OTHER
f _ocaTroNs
n tlu-L^,,*i[¿åv C Lþ*,i&¡,-ù.ì tl*\Éarr\#nrlt *,!,'*o t,,/ brakz,,¿ l\\Lln,ê-B'/l Co^¡ *,rîr J *\o G**',rQì è
4 Ø'{3 €oq"c,Y&nrt*v €"",^I ê-
5
6
7
E
I
n0
nI
i,t
13
14
15
16
ll .*
I
Y,Ñ
4,xj i1,3. tJü=
4û'J. üü*
1,7
t8
Toûal lMeetimg Fen Dfierm:($!00 pen mneetimg)
u 4Òo
Toûan Mileage Claiueed: -gÌ rmiÃes
GM Receipt:
FOR OF'F.ECE {JSE: TCITAÍ, MTT,EAGE REIMEURSEMENT
()
'l1
. ,ii
.ç
Ðate:
OTAY frøOöô" t Ø3ooD. Z/p / " 5A8/ô/ Jcpa. aO
EXHIBIT B
OTAV WATER. DISTRTCT
EOIIR.D OF ÐilRECTOR.S
PER,-DXEM AND MII.EAGE CI.ATM FOR,IVT
Fay To: Ganv Crouahen Feniool Covened:
E,mnployeeNumhen: 7CI1n Fnom: hff t, lot tn,, A' 1,zu(
Dare: plalfs
Total lMeetimg Fen Dieml:
($tr00 pen meetñmg)
$3eso.-
Total Míleage Cfiaimed:miåes
GM Receipt;ll
Jû,
It'
NTEIM D.AlTE IMEETTI\G PIJR,FCISE I ISSUES
DISCUSSEÐ
IMILAAGE
HONIE to O\üDOWD to HOME
M{LE,AGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
1l lfz g"^" ù ?¿qr.-o" &tq'L
'ì qlz>(pu.,,,c¿è Ft¡'nnuÉ / Aù-""'^-
rl 1lu,l*,r^u"[t n ñr lnt\hfr b.rrv rlv¡rrù 3v¿,..òl^u
¿l uj fr
"r'A'ù
?)etrû¿ ß""'U \
v
6
7
E
I
n0
n1
\2
13
T4
15
r6
[7
18
FOR CIF.FXCE [JSE: TCITAI, MNLEAGE REIME{JRSEMENT:
A6çctp- tø'ãcoÕ z-/{2t" ç78tÕ//H)U- L/L/
EXHIBIT B
Pay To: Gany Cnouchen
OTAY trryATER. DISTR,ICT
EOARD OF'DTR,ECTOR.S
PER,.DTEM AND MIT,EAGE CLATM F'CIR,M
Peniod Covened:
EmpiloyeeNu¡r¡hen: 701¡Frorm: fu 4 ,.^l{
To:r,î-t.rJ i
OTAY
NTEM ÐATE MEET[NG PURPOSE / ISSUES
DTSCUSSED
MTLEAGE
HOIVIE ro OWD
O'WD toHOME
IVTIT,EAGE
OTHÊRLOCATIONS
I \ul7ø {"*,9" vÜ Lgunn ...{¿å4tll ,,ç,Épar*,- 6¿i'rn u, ?-rro"À, \ffr"-¿huq
?
t \l
4
6
7
$r Û'f
¿. x,
i ü,J . U¿=/2úrj, t-lr,r*
tl-x
E
I
no
nt
A2
î3
14
15
î6
17
18
Tota[ Meetímg Fen Diem:
($10CI pen mreeûimg)
Toûa[ Mi[eage Clairmed:
s '?*çe)úv,,
{
\q
Ø miles
ù
fuÅrffi Date:GM Receipt:
n'OnOrr'¡CE USE: TOTAL MII,EAGE REIMBIJR.SEMENT: $
I9
OTAY EXJIIBIT B
Fay -fo: Gary Cronacilaer
OTA Y !V¡\TER. ÐISTR,XCT
ECIARD OF DM,XCTORS
PER-D¡EM AND MI¡,E¡\GE C["¿\illll FOR.I]I
Peníod Crovenerd:
EmpfoyeeNumhen: 7tl\l
/trÍr{,r-
çJ uLs To:zTJLL
ill,Ð
1
Fn'orm
Ë æTroüan Meetimg Fen Diem:
(Sn00 per mneeûimg)
T,otafl Mineagre Cûaimned;måBes
ú
GNÍ Rreceñpt:f -''.\'r'
llt'l þt/
PUNPCISE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
r$XI,EAGE
HoivlE to OWD
Ou/D to HOùÍE
MT[,EAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
ilTEM DATE MEETING
wÁç %ø>âttf."* &q,¿þ
-a.þ T{r8 l-Ás&t L^dFC')p*r*v Þtsfø¿u fð,,,Wffiti.tt
4
(6
7
E
I
1t&
ÉÍ
12,
t3
14
15
16
C'+
!;2(
,"rtr.i:¿
n7
'tE
FOR OF'F'[CE USE: TCITAL IVIILEAGE RÐ{ìV{B{JR.SEMENT:
Date: I IL
,ll1
OTAY
aty'-'
ErnnptoyeeNn¡mhen: 70nl
Fay To: Gary Cnouruhen
O'[AY WA.TER, ÐTSTR,NCT
ßCIARD OF DIR.ECTOR.S
PER-DIEIVI ¡\t\Ð MILEAGE CLAiliU FORlvI
Períod Coven'ecil:
Fnom:
EX}IIBTT.S
L.lu- þ n'' 3 -L- lb
Sügmatune)
Totnü Meetimg Fen Ðiem:
(S100 pen mneetinag)
$
T,oûa[ Mileage Clairmed :rniles
GIVtr Receipt:
tu
()
I4.I ,llVü
MiLEAGT
HOME to OV/D
O1ÀiD ro HOùIE
MXI,EAGE
OT1TERLOCATIONS
NTEM DATE i}iEETTNG PURPOSE / ISSUES
ÐTSCT.]SSED
?-úvL ( o,r,rn't r>f^a, ()Vtr*¡10,'! ?tof ro (w l¡r,uI
",?lz &*rd I
4
6
7
s
9
Í{}
tn ñ,n*
{^iúÉ -<-- J,¿.i{p1{*
æ<t, t##rG¡ð
Ê7
XE
FOR OFFICE USE: '[O-fAL iVlI[,EAGg REIMEIjRSEùtrEITT: $
Daüe:tblt.
J/
OTAY rcÞ:I lb3otsç
OTAY lryATER ÐISTRICT
EO¡I,RD 0F DIR.ECTOR,S
PER,-D[ÐÙ[ AND MII,EAGE CLAIM F'OR.M
Feniod Covered:
?-/ü/" \ ¿l/-9/ íùûü-UU
EXHIBIT B
Pay To: Gary Cnouchen
ErmployeeNurmhen: 701n
Total Meetimg Fer Diern:
($100 per meetímg)
s jc)u -
Tota! Mileage Claimed:miles
GM R.eceipt:
Fnon¡: 3- ttt -{G rotL{-(r " tb
{
MIN,EAGE
HOlvfE to OwDôl,VD 1ô HOIVIE
MTI,EAGE
OTHERt-ocÀT1ôNs
ITEM ÐATE MEETTNG PURPOSE i TSSUES
DISCUSSEI}3l$ln 0 (o*r¿,twß
Ê-o¿LrÀr €"çå33lzt
!¡'.18lflEt¡E¡r t&L**-..o." ß qñd¡ ,v/x '4**u3 t
4
6
7
E
9
r0
t1
t2
13
l4
15
I It6üv,,{)17 ntz I1E
FOR OF.FTCE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMtsUR,SEIVTENT: $
Date:'l
OTAY F9 ü ö {" I b 7 üoÕ' v/ o/ - Çz (/ t/ Vaâ.oË)EXHIBIT B
OTAY WATER DTSTR.ICT
BCIARD OF DIR,ECTORS
PER-ÐNEM AND MilI,EA.GE CLAIM F'OA,M
Fay To: Ganv Cnoucl¡en Period Covened:
Frorn:I To: gEnaployeeN¡¡mhen: 7CI11 +
ã
{{$Total Meeticrg Per Diem:
($100 per meetíng)
Total Mileage Clairmed:miles
GM ReceÍpt:
$
ITEM MTI,EAGE
HOì}IE to OWDOWDto HOME
MII,EAGB
OTHERLOCATIONS
DATFd MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DTSC[JSSED
4
4
6 rll0t
I ßon -
I
t0
11
t2
13
t4
15
16
17
ì*':
?ât\Ø
':)'l
)l:) -)
18
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAI, MILEAGE RETMBURSEIMENT;
Date:
OTAY n/9 uuLl ' / /9 ?L¿¿¿c¿ 7/ L// .9ë o t t'3 t
OTAY WATER. DTSTR,NCT. tsOAR,Ð OF DIR.ECTOR,S
PER-DXEIYT AND IVfitrLEAGE CLAIM FORM
¿-- vV
EXHIBIT B
Pay To: Gany Crouclaen
ErmployeeNu¡mhen: 7CI1n
Total Meetimg FeE Diem:
($10CI per meetimg)
Total Mileage Claimed:Æ rnËles
GM Receipt:
$,Wil
Peniod Covened:
From:l/nlru ro: t"/,/lø
TTEM DATE iV¡EETTNG PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MII,EAGE
HOtvIE to O'ùrDOWDlOHOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
L ll tt L**it¿l 2-ó {srr1ty1rff¿¿ /
a,6 lzs Él¿e,''nu 7-g*-L vJnLSt"op /
J tu
q \
5
1$,,-'u.+
j.><
itit'JJ"iJ-
)'J .i " ,J i_l r,<
[J . ,i.
6
7
E
9
10
1t
t2
13
t4
15
x6
77
IE
FOR, OF'FTCE [JSE; TOTAL MII,EAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $f
Date:r"lzltv
OTAY
*øosO . t65oa0 - 2t o { - SAYtt{
Maoa' {'ø5ooo - e(ar -'9ârr o¿
OTAY WATER DTSTRICTBOARI' OF DIR,ECTORS
PER-DTEM AND IVTILEAGË CLATM FORM
-Stao"Ðtñ " *"o*r""
Period Covered:
From: O7l0lll5 To: 07ßllts
Pay To: JoseÀLonez
Employee Number: 7{ll0
Total Meeting Per Diem:
{S1ü} per meeting}
$200
Toúel Mileege Claimed: 20 miles
GM Reciept;
a
(
b
ITIM D.A.TE MEETING PUR'POSE / TSSUAS
DISCUSSED
MILAAGE}&lEloOr#ÐÕI'D ú I,Í'MË
MTLEAGE{'IHENf.ocÁTK)¡ts
1 07117 owD Committee Agenda Briefings
2.vnt A owD Finance & Admin Committee Meeting 2A
3-owx tY owD Qtav District Employee's Picnic (No Charee)
4.
5.
6.
?0 . xt'i Í5,2.'ll,5ij¡t+__-ntjlc o3L
2'x
I ülJ ":2üi:,rJJr¡PØfu"n
7
&
9-
10.
11.
t2-
13.
14.
15.
16.
t7
18.
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MTLEAGE REIMBTJRSEMENT:
Ilate:
\4.
CITAY
hçc)û t '
tþ orst'"
Pay To: Jose A. Lopez
Employee Number: 7010
Total Meeting Per Diem;
(S100 per meeting)
$500
Totâl Mileage Claimed: 60
,fOD? . Z1 o t' Ç?51 /,11t
/t9 VuPO' 2'l P l' flt/ -t 2-âzs¿t ë ¿/l/ t-a
EXHIBIT B
From: 08/0U15 To: 08/30ns
Signature)
Date: I
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORSPER.DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
miles
GM Reciept:
Jù ^,(
';ñ
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MITBAGEllOM[ ro 0WÞôWD rô lìalMË
MILEAGE
OTHERLoc^lroNs
1..08/7 owD Boæd Agenda Briefinge )
I owD08/r3 Regular Board Meeting 20
3.08t21 owD Casa Familiar Ablazo's Awards (No Charse))
4.08125 owD CV Councilman Miesen - Recycle Water Rates 10
5.08t2s owD CV Councilman McCann - Rec. Water (No Cftarge)
6.08126 owD SD Councilmember Emerald - Recycle Water Rates 20
/r.08/28 ou/D Board Agenda Briefing 5
8.
9.
10.
ll.
t2.
13.
14.
15.
r6.
l't.
18
$t+
.)
\\'Èa-rcG-
)f.3ñ-¿-7
Õ
x!! {attl,* - .1.
,:l :
.'-{ :r -4¡ ilJ {J
:.Ji"-i
=
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $
?
OTAY AønOC tg?a¿)0 'Z/ol- 5? 8t /)gflitt.t>àEXHIBIT B
Pay To:Jose A. Lopezfu uta^/ürrp¿,¿¿, 7-/tI - f ?"rrrl?"u"rro,
OTAY WATER DISTRICTBOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER.DIEM ÀND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM lt rz)
From: 09/01/15 To: 09/3li1s
4'*<-
(Director's
Employee Number: 701û
:{ \-' -}1ì
i! l-.
1:
':}.:l.])
"-i -! -ì
-:r .-
* :',
J.
t:
\tc>
+-
'.a
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
$500
Total Mileage Claimed: ¡O miles
GM Reciept:I
,lù /rít'
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOS& I ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MTLEÄGE
HOME ro OWDOWD lo HOME
MILEACE
OTHERLocATroNs
I a9/02 owD Regular Board Meetinq 2A
222.09/08 owD SD Citv Councilwoman Zapf
3.09/08 owD SD Ciry Councilman Sherman CNo Charee))
4.09108 owD SD Citv Councilmember Cate (No Charse)
5.09/08 owD SD Citv Councilmember Todd Gloria (No Cfharge)
San Dieeo Citv Council meetine 226.09/l 5 OWD
7 09/15 owD CommitteeAgenda Briefing (No Cflrarge)
lô&09/29 owD Sweetwater Authrity Desal -qround breaking
69.a9t28 owD Boa¡d Agenda Briefing
10.
lt.
t2.
t3.
l4
15.
t6,
t7.
18.
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL TúILEAGE RETMBURSEMENT:c
Date: lO
t
þ,,h
OTAY
fuuü o
ü¿t (s
I P,t / rset ü
/ri qê¿'tü 'ziü/
;4-1 Q /"
ç28/ ü/flt, 17*,Ì¿:¿ ¿"drþ'ûüEXHIBIT B
Fay To: Jose A. Lopez
OTAY TYATEtrT DIST'RICT
BOARD OF''DINMCTORSPER-DIEM A,ND MXLEAGE CI.AIM FORM
Period Covered:
ErnptroyeeNurnber: 70X0
Tota¡
{$1û(
Totai Mileage Clairned: 152 miles
GM Reciept:
Fro¡n: 10/01/15 To: X0/31/X5
&a-e
s Signature)
':ÍJ'!1 '2 i) :i};:] i )a+
: '--1 '-a --f
.J !-i .-i.
,f
:{ 'ì -+..::,
f -_ì
:.1,:
é-¡\4-<
-)P<t2'-
:L ?I .l{-l -l .-1
i í'; 1l
rfa-+_
åã\<Íf '-t
úl v r<
\'y \J
,'l I
ITEM DATE MEET'TNG PUR.POSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MII,EA.GE
HOME to O\ilD
OVfD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHËR
LOCATIONS
241l0/06 owD AdHoc Salt Creek Golf Course Development
20J1A/06 owD AdHoc Salt Creek Golf Course [No Charge)
10107 owD Otay Vy'ater Regular Board Meeting 20J.
64.101 13 oI¡/D Southwestern College Board Water Rate Resolution
5.t0/14 owD Ðistrict Employee Recognition Luncheon fNo Charge)
10/16 OWD Committee Agenda Briefing General Manager 66.
Desalinization Proiect Committee Mte)2At0/19 owD
20ß10121OV/D Finance and Admin Committee Meeting
9.WN owD CV Ribbons and Shovels Event (No Charge)
10127 owD Board Aeenda Briefing Gl\{/Counsel 610.
Univision TV interview with Mavor Mary Salas 24ll.10/28 OV/D
8r2"t0/28 OWD Press Conference hosted Otay Water ßlo Charge)
la
l{.
t5.
lú.
t7,
18.
FOR. OFFXCE {JSE: TOTAL MILEAGE R.EIMBURSEMENT: $
Date: I I z
V
OTAY
TotalMilergeClaimed: &miles
GM Reciept;
ÐilIIBM BÍlil ¿-){-"}
Pcriod Covcred:
Flom: f ffiUls To: nf3ú,rß
@irector's
/$b d'¿',t"",-
ñ* ,; {ut "
/ì& ¿/Ü¿s¿> - &,rt.' /' 2e't' L- {2l ç" t. 9*P// 7-i/"\¿/üUé¿ e
OTAY \trATER DISTRICTBOARITOF'DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FQRTVI
\¿v v ç u"
I
Pay To: Josc.{.. Lopez
EmployceNumher: 70t0
t
:)r
-\4
3
.¿- -1-
c):
1'.)-'J :iJ
)¿,
ll.:)
.Þ"æ'"É2i+,:f
vil'_) -)
'-t .tì-+6:
\_-:ùì.<è> i)
Total MeetingPer Diem:
($l{10 per meeting}
s300
Date:
-4
MILEAGErio|vßþowÞôwDbil*tË
MILEAGEûfwtLOCÃÏXtr{S
ITEM DATE MEETINC PURPOSE I ISSUES
DISCTJSSED
2AOtav lVater Reeular Board MeetineL1u4OTVD
24L.,WV owD San Dieso City Council -Water Rates pressntation
Otav Water Soecial Boa¡d Meetins 203.ly#u"owD
tL
5.
6.
7,
8.
9-
10.
11.
12,
13.
t1
t5.
16.
t7.
18.
FOR. OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILE,AGE REIMBURSEMENT:lI jÉtt r'i nNü"i¡
vw\
w W90a¿;'
lkgoutt"
JK?
ìâU9
vuuLt - -/-/Ls/ ;, 4ï7¿f / ¿-J/
¿/ 0 t )#r r#^?"!; "i{#{' z 2(/C"'t-',<-',EXHIBIT Bfu"u ¿)
Pêriod Covered:
From: Lznlns To: lzlslllí
BOARD OF'DIRECTORSPER.DIEM AI{D MILBAGE CLAIM F'ORM
Pay To: JoseA.Lonez
Employee Number: 7010
MILEÂGEHOMEbOIVDôUrD rô HC,MÊ
MILEACE
OTTIERLocAlÍoNS
I}ATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSEDITEM
6Committee Aeenda Bdefingl.t2{4 owD
20t12nowDFinance/Admin Committee Meeting
20t2l8owDEne/Ops Committee Meeting3-.
2ABud Lewis Desal Plant Opening Ceremonies4-t2/14 owD
Board Aeenda Briefins fNo Charse)tzns owD{
20Special BoardMeeting6.l2l15 owD
7
*
#
ßf'
ffi
ffi
ffi
ffi
rs
ffi
ffi
r¿
O
!')a)
':l
'.Jfr' .i8?^X -1-c)
;*-
Õ ¡ l)íl'i1 Õl
-i)cje3ì
X "\Cril¡.ì*.f !.í1 r,ta3êgÐ
+++-i-O,:Õ-Oili:ÐC)atat
:3.1 f.l ftl i"ri
ffi
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($1{Ð per meeting}
$s00
Total Mileage Claimed: 86 miles
Signature)
GMReciept:Date:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $-
'1,*1n
v\16\
OTAY
Fay To: .nose A. [..opez
Emrployee Numher: 70n0
Total Meeting Fer Diem:
($X00 pen meeting)
s500
Tota[ Mileage Claimed: 60
f7/? C) tJ v * I r'? kl t'¿L¿r"r' " ¿'
fu c,uts / & áltltlp ' p/a /" fz'tt p7'--
OTÁ.Y WATER. DISTR.ICTBOARD OF DNR.ECTONR.S
PER..D]IEI\{ AIYÐ IVINN.EAGB CLATfrI F'OR.M
32 4AEXHIBIT B
Feniod Covered:
Fnom: 01/01i16 To: 01i3Xl16
@inector's Signature)
miles
ffiGM Reciept:
,)ú)/\Jtld"
MXN.EAGE
HOME toOWDO'ilT) tô HOME
MTLEAGE
OTHERLOCATTONS
DA.TE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCÏ.ISSED
IlTE]VI
20OWD \i Resular Board Meeting1.01/06
01/07 JPA Metro Wastewater Commission (No Charge),,
2AawD /Salt Creek Ad Hoc Committee3.01/11
0r/19 /o\Ã/D COWU Council on Water Utilities4"
200t/20 OWD /Finance/Admin Cornmittee5.
Board Aeenda Briefing6.0U30 /OiVD
7
a
t'
n
il.
tt
l¡.
n
E
É
17.
f
"-t")
)P¿t-a>-^n&
v.&
=¿è'tu€
'.:l
\
-l "-r:) '-'),* .¡
:< rt \r
a:4.!
+L¡-l -l
j-) I
::) 1 -f
:..J ,r.t -J
It
FOX{ OFFXCE [ISE: TOT.A,I MW,EA.GE REIMB{JRSETTIENT: $
Date:,rb
t\/r
w /'l¿ d\¿'¿)
To: Josc A. Lonez
/ 4-/ '7 L'r'4?r ? ' ' ¿ -i 4 .rcaü . z-/ ü I "þ 2t / o 2-
OTAY TryATER DTSTRICT'BOARDOF DTRECTORSPER.DIEM ANÞ MTLEAGE CLAIM FORM
-¿ ç ø .' 9-' ..^Z-/- 4't)EXHIBTT B
Perfuod Covercd::
From: 0A0Uß To: 02129/16
/ J tJ tr' L.'ç'
Pay
Ernployce Number: 7010
')ì
f -l)
:l
-*
.:)
.1+t3
.\ç
3
åf-I")l=
'I -l
.Y:)
';\
-f .-f _:)
--3--,i
.lC
Total Moeting Pcr Dicn:
($100 pcr mceting}
$300
Totat Miteoge Cl¡imed¡ 70 uilcs
Gltl Raciept:
a¡à(ß-<
(Ðireetor's Signaturei
D¡te:I
MILEACEHOMÉroOryDlrwD h fLlMli
MTLEAGE
OTHSRLOCATIÓNß
MEETTNG PUR.FÛSE / TSSUES
DISC{'SSED]TEM DÅTE
2ARssulâr Board Meclíns1.t2t03 öv/Þ
30azla4Jp.d fuleï¡o Wastervater Csmmission (No Charge)z,
2ÐFimnceand Adtah Conmittee fleotiflÊ!"--021t6 oltrD
Ð2117 CÏLA CommissionMaxicoln#rrød,tanrjE ttf ,fi nffrcl\tt t .'r" raqYt?4.
3.
6.
7
ß.
;-
n,
&E
tL
ut.
Tâ
ßË
w.
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILËAGE Ê.EIùíSURSEU,IENT¡
Pay To: Jose LopeZ
Emplo]¡ee Number: 7010
Totatr Meeting Fen Diem:
($tr00 per meeting)
$300
Total Mileage Claimed: 85 rniles
GlVtr Receipt:
FOll OFFICE USE: TOTAL MtrLEAGE REIMBURSEÛIENT:
OTAY WATETTDISTRICT
ÐO,ARD OF'DTR,ECTOR.S
PER.-DIOM AND Ftrru,E¿,GE CI,A¡NA T'ONiVT
Period Covered:
EXHÏBIT B
From: 03/0L/X6 To: û3131116
rl'f'--ii*
Signature)
MILEAGE
OTHËR
LOCATÍONS
MILEAGE
HOMEto OwDOWD to HOME
MEETING PT'RPOSE i ISSUES
DISCUSSED
ITEM DATE
¿vfß/a2 REGULAR BOARD ÌVTEETINGûr.'vÐ,y 2003/17 owÐ FINANCC ADMIN, & COM. COMMITTEE MTG
aBOARD AGENDA BR-IEFiN-G (No Charge)t3/31 OIVD
3903/31 IVRC WATER RELIABILITY COALITION
TNSTRUCTTONS ON REYERSE
Date:5
OTAf
-24ç-v '/7 {-/t¿/ t/ é--/ Lt / " > ¿'r / ry // þ 7pça " s-¿ü /. -52¡¿ ttz-ült t:)EXHrBrr uf â ?'û
OTAY WATER.DISTR.ICT
BOARI} OF'DIR-ECTORS
PER.-DNEM ANÐ MtrLEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:Pay To: Jose Lopez
Employee Number: 7010
Total Meeting Fer Diem:
(S100 per meeting)
$700
Total Mileage Claimed: 96
From: 0410111,6 To: A4ß0116
miles eúo
s Signature)
&itt $GM Receipt:Date:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAI- MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: S--
6
MILEAGE
OTHER
LOCATIONS
MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOWD to HOME
PURPOSE / ISSIIES
DISCUSSED
ITEM DATE MEETING
20owDACTURIAL STUDY WORKSHOP /speci{ bdW04104
2004/06 owD REGULARBOARD MEETING
04/07 JPA sD METRO COMMISSION (NIO CHARGE)
6UWIJCOIVIMITTEE AGENDA BREIFINGa4lß
04119 COWU COLINCIL ON V/ATER UTILITIES
20a4120owDFINANCC AÐMIN, & COM. COMMITTEE MTG
20
DESAL COMMITTEE MEETING041270wD
604/29 owD BOARÐ AGENDA BRIEFING
.Y-l
.1-rè
q,¿.5.5
;-*€
f,
.v,
-
)i rì 'í
_))-l --ì
)a ll '(
::r :1, I'j
:-) I ''l
TNSTR.UCTIONS ON R.EVERSE
y'zJ/rt
('
OTAY ft¡þ¿;{ " ì
fuÐüu / /3 ¿¿a4t0/'/i q&'li{'3¡ü ¿
.4r p "¿'
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
4-"? y ,/ Lr,/ -/tt(/ {rc./2:?/ ¡ crff n #3 2()
From: 05101116 To: 05131116
.2^ --
Signature)
Pay To: Jose Lopez
Employee Number: 7010
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
$500
Total Mileage Claimed: 80 miles
GM Receipt:
FOR OFF.ICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:
ITEM DATE MEETING PTIRPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MILEAGE
HOME to OWD
OWD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHER
LOCATIONS
os/02 owD ADHOC SALT CREEK COMMITTEE 20
asl04 owD REGIILAR BOARD MEETING 20
0s/06 CFU CHICANO FEDERATION LUNCI{EON (NO CHARGE)
05ii8 OÏVD FiNANCC ADMIN, & COM. COMMITTEE MTG 20
05/23 owD BUDGET WORKSHOP SPECIAL MEETING 20
05/25 JPA METRO COM. FINANCE COMMITTEE (lt{o Charge)
05127 owD BOARD AGENDA BRIEFING
l')t\3i*-'J
:.tr'f
- 1 -ü-]l'n
e:fl
-l -)l1f
-iì
INSTRUCTIONS ON REYERSE
Date:,(I ,W
OTAY
fl/2U L't'' / /:'/V'd)L! L/
Êryu0Lj i,& {¿'¿'ø
t1 ,/ J /L),/ çtç-L/ LtL''"¿?t¡üktet, #' 't
¿r/_{ {/ /'?'l Û I
OTAY IYATER. DNSTR.ICT
BOA-RD OF ÐIRECTORS
PER.-DIEM AI{D MILEAGE CLAIM F'ORM
Pay To Jose Lopez Period Covered:
Employee Number: 7010 From: 06/01/16 To: 06ßAfi.6
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
$300
Total Mileage Claimed: 40 miles
é*u
Signature)
GM Receipt:Ðate:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAI, MILEAGE REIMtsUR.SEMENT: $
-
fr\V
1T
MILEAGE
HOtvIÊto OWDOWD TOHOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
MEETING PTIRPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
ITEM DATE
2006/01 owD REGLILARBOARD MEETING
06/02fi rJPA METRO COMMISSiON G\rO CHARGE)
COMMITTEE AGENDA BRTEFING0611!//owD
¿vo-wD FINANCC ADMIN, & COùI, COMMITTEE lvfTG06/22
)t-
:)
^lí:]a
4'-c\z *,.4\/-/q-ca<F
I
]¿
_)
"á,)
:.< 'i
.li
'-f l
1lì:.i .\
I i't .-3
1").-
INSTRI]CTIONS ON REVERSE
lc
OTAY
þ6 t:ób trâ 51)¿)()" "-/0 /. 5z,r / ö/
OTAY WATER DISTRICTBOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORMfu ()¿){) - tfb çt¿ctu ' ?-'/ p"!^u'."T,k/ I o z-
From: 3-16-16 To: 8-31-15
3217 Fair Oaks Lane, Spring Valley, CA91978
$700
/þa,óu
z?2
Pay To: Mark Robak
Employee Number:7014
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:168
GM Approval:
'ru'¿ lH,miles
lrá H ,þt (Director's Signature)<,-
,Date:frl2
rl/ry
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOME to OWD
Orùr'D to HOME
MILEAGE
OTI.IERLOCATIONS
I 4-l Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
2 4-t8,lt9 MWD Trip Hoover Dam and Colorado River facilities
No Charge 0 38
4-22 Encina Vy'astewater Plant Tour of facility - No Charge 0 0
4 4-27 Congressional Luncheon Discussion of issues, including water
No Charge 0 0
5 4-29 Special Otay Board Meeting District's drought and
water conservation efforts 4 6
6 5-6 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
7
8
9
5-9 Water Conservation Garden 2nd Annual Butterfly Festival - No Charge 0 0
5-19 AV/V/A Desalination
Workshop
Desalination Issues and
Technology Trends - No Charge 0 32
s-19 Special Otay Board Meeting District's fiscal year 2015-2016
operating and capital budget 4 6
l0 5-20 Lake Jennings Tour ofcampground to give feedback on
improvements - No Charge 0 0
1l 6-12 Water Conservation Garden Grand Opening of Native Habitat Garden
No Charge 0 0
t2 6-16 Finance, Administration &
Communications Committee General District Business 0 l0
13 6-24 Special Otay Board Meeting Discussion and tour of the
Salt Creek Golf Course - No Charge 0 28
l4 6-24 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
l5 6-24 Chaldean American Chamber
of Commerce
Presentation ofwater issues by
local water districts - No Charge 0 0
16 7-1 8 Otay Employee Picnic
Santee Lakes Annual summer picnic - No Charge 0 0
t7 8-13 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
18 8-20 Water Conservation Garden SDEC Chamber of Commerce "Wine &
Beer in the Garden" Event - No Charge 0 0
24 144
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $
ts
Y þ
OTAY
M 0o e" I rÒ52ëo' 2-/a/-
POO^ ¡ /þ57ÔÕ" 2/P/'€78/ e /tfz // 2_/ ooÓ'0 ÕÒ"90
Pay To: Mark Robak
Employee Number: 7014
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 172
OTAY \ryATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
From: 9-1-15
"þ*urgÅ-
To: 12-31-15
3217 Fair Oaks Lane, Spring Valley, CA 91978
tw
Yw"
i"l'v
ft4srr{{cd l,0oÒ.-
miles 'f'û'¿ M
rIMYKGM Approval:, .., , .,,. ,, (6^aq àt¿s hlVwal 421Û tuØtñæ)
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOMEto OWD
O\ryD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHER
LOCATIONS
I t0-7 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
2 10-14 Otay Employee Recognitìon
Luncheon
Annual event recognizing employees
NO CHARGE 0 0
-t 10- l5 SDCV/A Symposium at USD Discussed Drought and El Nino 0 24
4 l0-15 SCEDC Elected Officials
Reception at Living Coast
Reception and advocacy on behalfofDistrict-NO CHARGE 0 0
5 t0-17 Water Conservation Garden Enchanted Garden Gala
NO CHARGE 0 0
6 10-18 Jamulfest Annual community event-NO CHARGE 0 0
7 t0-21 Conservation Action
Committee
Presentation by author Charles Fishman at
SDG&E Innovations Center 0 26
8 t0-27
EC Chamber Government
Affairs & Land Use
I nfr astructure Committee
Discuss endorsement for zonal rates of
recycled water 0 l0
9 t0-27 Water Conservation Garden SDG&E Technology ReceptionNO CHARGE 0 0
l0 11-4 EC Chamber Land Use &
Infrastructure Committee
Discuss sndorsement for zonal rates of
recycled water - NO CHARGE o o
/tt tt-4 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
12 I l-16 Water Conservation Garden JPA Board Meeting 0 t2
l3 rt-17 Water Conservation Garden Friends Board Meeting 0 t2
t4 I l-19 CSDA Quarterly Dinner LAFCO Presentations 0 l0
l5 l2-8 Meet with SDCWA
Jason Foster
Discuss Conservation Action Committee
and ideas for reinvigorating it 0 20
r6 t2-14 SDCWA Carlsbad
Desalination Plant Dedication Ceremony and reception 0 t2
l7 t2-1s Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
12 w
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $
Date:
(Director's Signature)
n ,fù "lvíï[l'
OTAY
nr':r'{¿'t>/v /ö.:'"ftþett/' lø- Ðëâ ' 'ø/P/' A*// ç %il.r>atv U GU
Pay To: Mark Robak
Employee Number: 7014
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:106
3217 Fair Oaks Lane, Spring Valley' CÀ 91978
swl wþ.-w
OTAY \ryATER, DISTTIICT
BOAR.D OF'DTRECTORS
PER.-DNEM ANÐ MtrLE,A.GE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
From: 1-1-16
miles
To: 5-31-16
4tu¿ ul
AcrþtÐlGM ArFËrr/¡I:
FOR. OFFTCE {,Ð, ,4,,6út
MILEAGE
HOMEto OlvD
O'Jr'D to HOMË
MII-EAGE
OTHER
LOCATIONS
DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
ITEM
64General District Business1Monthly Otay Board Meeting
64General District Business2
J
3-2 Monthly Otay Board Meeting
0 12JPA Board Meeting3-1 8 Water Conservation Garden
00Government Affairs & Infrastructure
Land Use Committee - NO CHARGE4t- zz East County Chamber
4 63-ZJ Special Otay Board Meeting Issuance of Otay Water District 2016
Water Revenue Refunding Bonds5
00Presentation of awards for projects
NO CHARGE63-31 San Diego Water Supply
Mixer
00SDCTA Executive Director speaking
NO CHARGE74-l South Counfy Albondigas
4 .''6Workshop On Other Post EmPloYee
BenefitsI4-4 Special Otay Board Meeting
4z/6r'+General District Business4-6 Monthly Otay Board Meeting9
24¿0Spoke about Marketing
& Pure Vy'ater project104-7 Metro JPA Meeting
6v.4t/General District Businessl15-4 Monthly Otay Board Meeting
0 o5-12 CSDA Scholarship
Presentations Helix Water District - NO CHARGE12
6 t'/4//Special Otay Board Meeting General District Business/tz 5-23
28 78
USE:
Date:
s Signature)
OTAY *øOaü " /,øì ûüt ' "L/t /" SzEld ¡
*ø p7tt', l,b lüoa" '?2"¿:'/" îPl¡¿>z-3co'¿sö
49"so
Pay To: Tim Smith J
tls, /ttEmployee Number: 1845
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AI\D MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
From:
?ôÒ
, lF ro:
ãJ,t
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:
$
sL+miles
(Director's Signature)
GM Receipt:Date:
FOROFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $
ITEM DATE
MV
MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOWDtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
1t qNs Éfu,oPrWß cãP.nlllea Qtscass Êvø, %,v(i+eî'ç& gql z+
Vøt"Ch'l¡ titsla.lh*rqçv¡at7 $îs ¿¿ s¡ ¡¡o!:¡'.sri*s,¡/ ¿v .¡nodr*lr zô'27/1,-øls Grrri A.tkiw Yhs ¡ss f Orvçlu*, CI a"ll,þ{tr'r'¡re Llô
V
i+
{f
.,t \
.3
rô-tr:]
_'q).;Þã,å
leñå
1-
\xil¡Ê.,Jif^t .' .:)
l"ì r--ì3i:.- ¡.l
+++-Ì ,3 -?3Õ{f
{fil {]f.J {\l {t
\x !l .!f5 ¡l :-.l,:] :.n ;.{ìr\t+tn:a';t . \:1.
INSTRUCTIONS ON RE\rERSE
OTAY frúL' -Q " I )bl t)ö o " Uo t- 5'"'J : ?'Woot) iø t 0a0 - 7to / "' a'Do L'7<t o"a¿227"þO
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
flÍ', (-I,AIM F'ORMPER-DIEM AND
Pay To; Tim Smith
Emplovee Number: 1845
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 4e
ølt ls sþlts
Period Covered:
From:To:
$ z.rJ,ö
miles
GM Receipt:
FOROFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT .q
69.ñv
(Director's Signature)
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOME to OWD
OWD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
I Øirls Êvg,,^4f , V^' Y- CømøclëeN ^g¿1ñ!c
9\9¿'Asr El1¡ft a?tNß r.Erv\^f&*A<-6àr'á^Í'ßùvd Aq 2+
L rlvls Ãug" 9"aá wþ M/r"{-ht/ 6'"Å t/t+g z+
!xilì*r ,lf i3
,: .-:ì?.-J\l
il
-!- +
'-f -:f
.l(,:]
L
!
)< '>"
r:*,
---i ¡ -"i
åd
>f:È¿^./¿- nr.¿én3
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
Date:î
'#ñ
OTAY ft{ a,4}(), t û ¡ ¿2oâ . ?-/ e/ - 5 2-l/ ê Ifuauê" / ø/ oaê' Uë/- 52' ë2
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
SCIa.a83 7,¿lf
qlt ls ro: tlz"f ¡s'From:
Pay To: Tim Smith
Employee Number: 1845
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:6,6 miles
GM Receipt:
. : .. EOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:
S?M
tu¿û(Direõtor's Signaiure)tl
q
MILEAGE
HOME tO OWDOWD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
?e2.t\" ßo",4W 21tqlz-lts UNÅ[\/\b2tlultçÇry, of rthlß MÜ Rr-z,lo,r C-*vv¡lþæ- flh z+Pe*^ffi@tr*IB3ilnltsReyryt!'.0ft,W ,,..!|Jrry ql vac /
+(..,s i+
\,atq)
\-é.\' a_ ".,?'>)aùr
t:G-
x \.r3'i!.-3 T1 .ir''C r> t.ri_¡ \r ';t
v !t i,-...)iJi* i:) ..f
,f::)'-')
- l.ì
.LL^L
\V \! -
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
Date:
, W,Nu9,o^(
It""
OTAY #e t4(;. tlbtüü0" 'Z/o/ 9¿l/¿2/
t4haQo" let Qtc) ' Ztt / 57// o 2-
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
From:
(Director's Signature)
?eO 0 (2
q t qo
,il \<
Pay To: Tim Smith
Employee Number: 1845
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: '7f miles
GM Receipt:
FOR. OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: $
pf tlß þbtl tsTo:
s ?þð
\/
M\'N
MILEAGE
HOMEto OWDO$D to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHER
LOCATIONS
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
"æYffiLmat+\\7 z+I t"lils O+¡y ßøÅnrþp(xls G+"\ €wpày- fuco1\,þwY!^MAr*24-2 Lq,,ø lr4s 7ry, ola,V,r(\ C',,,*tWe W*,W1keì,kh
ìê
;l
rS-+,\è*å --)?
. ._.) .).ld rl) ,.-f
'-f -f':) :f
,.L ..ç L
.::i:)
,*\.,::ìf.-.,) i i --j'
-' .Ì 'j-¡ ,-
':)
è-iÞ-¿Ð\/¿-4
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
Date:z t5
OTAY ftøo,*M pro= i tb ¡ 9ur). Z/ts / - Ç28 14 i
I b ¡ Üu Ö êtO /'. 67' 3'Z-
OTAY WATERDISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
Top" {) (}a?"/t{
Pay To: Tim Smith
Employee Number: 1845
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
$
Total Mileage Claimed:6b miles
GM Receipt:
- FOB,QI,FICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT .ç
From: *ft f fS ro:
tJ*(Director's Signature)
Dare:
"pl*l ø{l
MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOWDtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTIIERLOCATIONS
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
*¡ ¿lr-lIuf* fi:' h,4t++rily Baoø{ it4j"l Rø,)tqr Bdr¡n( ht*3
B*rÅ r"4.t- F l.v,ta,þsb"f 7+,þ ulrøis' Sçtaql ßv"øl bú
ulvls CV,'tu*e¡ hyw.¡ N¡Y:,rty:!".*,,t.1:'f t*.ç*y"!,h lll/:4
I lu
-)+
a()^'f,
'{f,'.O
t¿
Õ
>'*
;:-Çì¿àã(?
/-a .å-
-
!
ift?3
.)t))i
+++ali)'3 ;l) f,
-+ -tr .o
II
I
,¡í)'jl,:) I'l 1l.i!
\J -- I\J . :'¡'ìÕ
INSTRUCTIONS ON RE\rERSE rJV ^^,J\vu ' \.1
þü'
fiAY
ft,Ø uuu '/8 ) ta,he¡- 128/t /o /& ¿ aoû h¿Pl'FP//üz-7pa.aÒzv.áÐ EXHIBIT B
OTAY TYATDRDISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER.I}MM A¡ID MILEAGE CII\IM FORJVI
PavTo:fr,u st*Jh
Emolo)¡eeNrmrber:r #45'From: f{r/rS' ro: tLþilç
Pe¡iod Covered:
TotalMest¡ng PerDiem:($lfi) per meeting)
s ?oÕ
Toúel Mileege Claimed:miles
GMRecnipt:
FIOR. OFTTCE USE: TOTAL MIIÆAGE REIMBURSEMENT:
: ,.i : .,
lrlø
(Ilirectorrs Signaturc)Jv
\'l\
MILEAGE¡roirBbowiDowDbtrqdE
MITEAGE
ÛISERLæÂ-[¡ON¡¡
TTEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSTJES
DISCUSSED
z+tJ4ø'Erw¡tF¡Wtr ¡,1¿¿{-ib Vs#Å,#þ,*iÅ"!"I k:a ,a)z p/tqlv P"ö.\*iùF ø{#b(#o*,f*e'NuWWo laa -
t "YsrLWtu?l 243Itl¡:,'l¡s Gpu"4, W
-t¿)
çi
-*
.O
)Ê
a-l
ô.t(fO2
r
+-g:>
\
.()l)ìfi C) 'f
-a)A ':)r lr\
++.3C xrl +
1c t.¡ \
à\ç- \-)
#f /Pa
Date:.\v
-5r:.çr-=r--'ÅÞa- :P.jÀ ffT2uau , / lu / Lt ç/ u/
{ffior}tt ' /É' t t} {2¿}7t¿:/"5f"-//PZ-25'*/ LEXT.iIBIT B
PavTo:ñ*^ S*;")çt
E,mployeeNr¡mber: I *rtç
Total Mccting Pcr ï)iem:
(S1{10 per mccling)
TotelMilcrgsCl¡inned: ZqZ
llulrw
OTAY-WATERÐXSTRXCT
BOAND OFI}INECNDRS
PER-DIF,rII A,iri;) .ìÍILEAGE CIIIEII FOR,IÍ
Feriod Covered:
From:
$ ?dc}
#r lsa t{zE ltLTo:
mils
fl)irtctor's
GMReccipt:kc:
W
MII,EAGEltoMEb OWDO\lDtoSOME
MILEAçE
OIEERLOCATIONS
PTIRPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
DATE MEETINGITEM
z+É¿y"ttr *'T+t þ Øu4rÅvþtf o{ttt t3*ú"{ MbI n%^k#:,Hfu 2¿{r/tqldt eVW*ffr**" ¿l'¡r+.*e
¿,tvtSv*rp,9..¡,n "pn or {*rf{.tq}if ,,¿ale+ ywt és, Ircr<f,na6a=fItlwttt"Pøf&"ç.'æ qþ^pclørr {þ"J tu*\{h}
rË
\#4,^,+trãÐ-j--r 4./a:Þ-
,,,,\
:l l ':ìÈ 1¡
-l- -L
':) l
-i îJ
.:)1r.l :i :l
-i ,-f
,J)'!
L\àå=Ðæ
FOR OFITCE USß: TOTAL ITIILEAGE REIIIIBURSEMII\T: $-
ítl U
wb 0óo,tryttüoa.
î: ,* - . ,*, .-."-1.i. 1 :.1-'
ñ^ (*&
Í tbt?Qü' 2-/¿P Í' 5zl t u /
f ørQ&u' Z¡at't56zt/ t%
OTAY WATERI}ISTRICT
BOåADOFrrInDClonS
FEN.I'TEM ¡II' MILEAGE CI.AIM I1ONM
Feriod Covered:
2 UU. L/ LJ
Pav To:
EXT.{IBIT B3ç þA
i------.$t
1I
!
Enolovee Nr¡mber:[ø45
TobXMscting PcnDicm:(itrfi}per mccting)
Ct z{zv /ttFrom:
åL.!-l-l-r
-a .-F
)
/\ ll
.al )l-l
-'+
r:)lf
l,J
)<|l_4I 'f 'rï
.Jn
al.-
$3oc
Totel lttilceg: Chirrod¡nÍþ¡
GMRccaipt:
ee
(IlÍrcctor's S[Etrrc)
PURPOSE / ISSUES
D¡SCUSSED
MILEAGEqoEbowD
OrfÐbEOME
MILEAGE
(ÍIEERI.æATISI.6
DATE MEETINGITEM
Û'E¿*g <iryârwrt^ Wø¿n/ld+tw"ff"fuw-t*I¿ o*r { ¿ h,t^Vìrtr.rtzíz,lw S"¡¿øl*"llr r*U¡^F+v"¡t lþ1ffi ¡a^øt**y A*{rrh .lü¿-1-ilzJzlftil1+h\r g^Å ft^+sz k+ltr'þÙç,ûgs,wï. {ftöllçAifu .+;^; iL/,¿*-^ u\¿A,F 7\z/t itt'€wpfr#& ù##he?
€+--
=rg-
t-*
Ës:* L:J
].¿;T {
t ¿¿J c-
¡r
FIOR OFT'ICI USE: ÎOTAL MILEAGE ßEIMBURSIDMEIìI'I:
I)rúc:,/g,
g,1"IJ
I ll.t v- v)od- /þ/ooo ' z¡al "T¿l) ¿ L 4y bD't I vvv
EXEIBTT B
PsvTo:ñv^ S^rftr
EmnloveeNr¡mber:lB'ts
Tohl Mceting Per l)iem:($lfl) per meeting)
TotdMilcege€ll¡imcd:qa mÍlæ
GMRcceipt:
F1OR OEFIۧ USE: TOTAL MII"EAGE REIMBf]RSEMENT:
OTAY WATERDISTRICT
BOÂRDOTIDINECNONSæ
PAR-DIEM ^AI{D MILEAGE CT"AIM Í1ORM
P€riod Cover€ú
Fron:
$4oa
@iructofr
zh lß To:zftltL
'... .: .
MII.Eâ.G.8
CIEERulc^flos¡
PTIRPOSE / ISSTJES
p,IsçussEp lvflI.EAGEt(n¡EbOSrtO?DþR,IIE
ITEM DATE MEEIÎ.IG
WJ*lnlhV ø\,î|f'tb 2+z/ilta 4.y Mn\lg-,^tuþ
l8Ct{-. a(CL."t'. Vlff+l^#¡¡e¿nlT¡kte@ Cßz¿t4r"{rVtfa
^41,v¡.1¿rw#t/\tLzþlu
7t+B¡,rr¡teqfukcry*rc ka,iw,rltly *WßÌK3slsi(L WÈ{Æþ(,ffia-2J+glsl¿olqy fOea"l g*|ryrt
n()c
Dtt
*aotÊ
o
-fC)O
X "\3sa)?ÎYD(){)ñ {¡l
xrltF. OCI
OOcÐ
++++cc(?cÐOOOtaSú'+-fû.t r ôl îl
È''>
ß
Ilatel
ti"* *;:'.{: î:,:r_i . : ;. ;;
.:' -f -. -
{7rvL)uL)
L/ {./ U
I t:t/ UL) L)
/ ,4 ¡ 12 ¿)¿)
OTAY WATTR DISTRICT
BOARI' OFI'IRECTORS
PER.I'IEIìI A¡II} MILIAGE CLAIM FONM
Period Covered:
From:
$?oÕ
6J,#
@irectot's Sig.t¡rc)
,?-/ Ql. g7 < / öj / -./v* s v
2-¿g t. 5î7, , ¿) >- EX¡{iBr? :.ss øfr
PavTo:'1írv" {,,u ,r-{ h
Emolovee Nr.rmben lgrfs
Totat Mecting PerDiem:
($l{Xl por mccting)
Total Mileege Cl¡imcd:*7L milcs
GMReceipt:
,¡l tfrc To:4lz.lt L
*ù{
fnuv{.3
DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MILEAGEsotÆbowÐOIVDToFO*{E
MILEAGE
oleˡ.LOCAIIOIs
MEM
z+I vbhb Clw ßo^p\ l^lh Res'W ftl+hff *V $""çÅ v*5 .>*¿-4lslu ør*it* tvri-¡{3g
spuxl&k^,!t'i zl-?Ylqlr-Sgeri,t\{\o',d \u*oj I
-\1.
':f )
1J
'-f\.<.èl
àñÇ -)a)
l^.cè +5?
e .-)::¡¡ I .)
"-l I
\
) 't _J
"):-r_))
_J -i -i
F'OR O¡T'ICE USt: TOTAL MIL,EAGE REIMBURSEMEITIT:
Ilate:
tt/
¿lo fi:1-
freü )ftø ttt
P4vTo:*{'ryvt 5*;1 h
EmoloveeNumben loo4s
Total Mecting Per l)icm:
($1{X} per mecting)
Total Mileage Çhirncd: 7 Z
iñ/Ðt()' z-/ L)t'/ þ ¡ üü¿)' 'Lto t'tî2 t æú?sn =lf t'{à
s'/r I b slztl tt
r' é- ð / L./ ,/ pÞ{.t rzcz
To:
OTAY \TATERI}ISTRICT
BOARDOFI}INECIORS
PER.DIEilT AITD IÍII.,EAGE CIIUM FIOR}T
Period Covere.d:
From:
s '7oa
mÍlcs
ú"ÅãÇ(Ilircc'tofr Signrh¡c)
GMRcccipt:D¡úe:
MILEAGEH(EÆbOVDowDþrcr¡Ê
MILEAGE
oüm.r-ocAfrorll3
PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
ITEM DATE MEETING
L+kf¿lr*f f,'\+h\¡' VmtdL tv¡y,I sl+{ru t'\+ht{ ßow{ W z+wffi,ffi'¡ffi,*r wY/2 slnllL ¿"1¡.¡voter fv\*5 yl8,Åfrl wú A¡^nøl e*tyf\3 çlatlu
+If
ti
.]t:)
\
*æ
--):'f ?
ti:f1
\:< ti _+-þ ¿ _È-ì:lls-:
FOR OFFICE USE: ÎOTAL MIf,,EAGE REIMBURSEMDNT; S-
uÐ,n,tv{rKM
/ t./ t4?/ç ,* / ty' / L-' L./ L) - ¿- / L) 1 t2 ,r,/ )
Period Covered:
From:
¿f-//V L'
To:
¿3 ú'j
EX.EÌXBÏ? :
.1;¡ ' l; -ì i-
r ì:
)¿.)t) il'-nL)1,{.} 2 /L,./ f "7,t,,- ¿*
OÎAY I¡YATERDISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECTOtrIS
PER.DIEIIÍ A¡ID MILEAGE CIITIM FIONM
PavTo:-f ./'lr Yh, )h
EmoloveeNumbel:tGt-ts
Total Mceting Per l)iem:
($l{X} per mccting)
Total Mileege C!¡irncd:r{L ¡nilcs
GMReceipt:
ç/ t /tt'6l¡- I tu
I\:rur/J
r-j
t .i ) ' ..-t,i a
i:,i) '' t'/
ü . 21Xtl
'ilþ
l,'..|"'t.,jü:<
i¡ .)- ' :.i ¿::
'i -'a'2¿'¿ i;'$2oo
t&7*
@ircetot'r
ltr ù/¿ri,V
q/i
fl
TEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MILEAGEEOI'Eþ OWDowDbEoriE
MILEAGE
SIIIEN.r,ocAlror€ÐV, opun, vr"þr k*$fiEttølzrll"Eô&v,t t- G¡nwirllce ,zì+
¿6lrzl{ø St e""{-,- ',tl4r Ñ..ø*til'y Ywþ.,?,#"r'tu/r€,
FOR OÍT'ICE USE: TOTAL MIL,EACE REIMBUR.SEMEIIIf,;
Ira¡c: 7
þ4{ru
OTAY
Itæt;' ibLtuo L/ü/"4¿-õ/u /
?,-¡P l' 57¡t Ð"2'üó)û / (p >Ø{)vüL) ua,{L? ?ü
Pay To: Mitchell Thompson
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM F'ORM
Period Covered:
Employee Number: 1807 From: 7lll20l5 To: 7l3ll20l5
X ',\
1i-'
iil o iìJa
.g
l.,t
å-Líf {l
1' ^ ì
Jå
Õ
xil lt.t,;)irlrlJa)
Õ.;.t
a,:
_J<+
(:
è,-'5t_eù
Þ-
)f¡l .x\
ù'looTotal *
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 52 miles
GM Receipt:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:
21
(Director's Signature)
Date: 712712015
$I
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
PURPOSE / ISSIIES
DISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOMÊ to OWD
OWDto HOME
ITEM DATE MEETING
.l ? ./7lt7lts Pre-agenda Mtg*Review Agenda1
)6,,7 D1/1\FÂ,çC Cnmm Mfo*Renreqent OWI)
fìiccrrqq Sent ? fornm on drnnshf 26 '/3 7 /)711 5 MeeIwSCEDC&PSAR s/4 7/27/15 Tnfer eoencw TasL Fnrce*A oendn
5
6
7I
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
{^,
1
OTAY
fi6a oë - lt3?-o¿2 ö. 7-/ /2 I ' 5 78 / ä /hgpO/ /t'z'oeø'Z¿et'fZtt L 7t 0/s0 CIô/q qf
From: 9lll20l5 To: 913012015
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:Pav To: Mitchell Thompson
Emplovee Number: 1807
Total $1,000 *
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 26 miles
GM Receipt:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:e
-:¡-
;,
I
ã\c>.
,-:,r
.:f
.-_l
ìt. >.<'¡-l':n'i t, | ;ìu-.\¿
\ il, ''I ò
zI 149
(Director's Signature)
Date: 10/212015
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOME IO OWD
OWD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
I 912115 OWI) Rnard Mto*A oenrle 26
2 a/?/1\PSAR Comm Mfø re wafer*Tnform nrhlic nf locnl water iqqueq 4
3 q/R/15 Mtg w/ Coucilman DavidAlwarez Citv nf SDx Tliccrrcc R ecwclerì wafer issrres 27
4 9/9/15 CV Rep S Miessen, public
meetins on locnl issres*Renreqenf OWD 10
5 9114115 CV Redev OversightCnmm*Â oenrla 9
6 9l20l1s-s/)4/15 CSDA Conference 14 r{nvql*A oen¿in 62
7 9/1sl1s ST) Cifr¡ Cnrrnnil N,,feefino*llenr¡nlcrl \¡¡cfêr râfec 27I
9D8,115 CV Overqiohf Cnmm Si on C)rioinrl resolrtion 1n
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
OTAY
þPP ¿) 0 " I þ ?-'oaû' -z/p 1,.frúpp rs' i ø 7/ rpt ,
Itl/ P /
fJ// t2:2-loO ¿e C;
f4 lù
Pay To: Mitchell Thompson
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
Employee Number: 1807
Total $
GM Receipt:
FOR O
From: l0/ll20l5 To: 10/3112015
¡1.
($100 per
Total Mileage Claimed: 104
180
miles
{v^,
\r/
\/
"r;j: ii .¡.;., ;r (Director's Signature)
Date:
a]
:< ll i*..]JJ
lfrl.:) :l,- i-1
qr=!*. --)
xil+:af:l
t,lvi
:'lf,-]
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOWDtoHOME
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
J4t0/Ut5 PSAR Govt Affl'¿irs Comm*Present & Seek support on recycled
water issue.
82I Oi5l1 s Meet with Sweetwater BdMemher I Þreeicdn*Recvcled Water Tssue
3226310t6t1\ Meelino w R McWethv*T)iscnss Sølt Creek Golf Course
l64t0/6/ts Ad Hoc Salt Creek DevCnmm*lliscuss meeJinp earlier in dav
26Ã oc¡¡lq510/7115 OrüD Board MeeÌing*
256Þ¡rhlic meefinot0/2115 SCFDC F.con Summif
357l0/16t75 a\tr/Â I eoíclolir¡e Rn¡¡ri¡l+ohle*Ã, oc¡¡lc
?¿.R 10'/l711s Water Conservation Garden¡nrrql Gqlq Fvenf*F'rrnrl micer fôr \f,/eter Conser"v Garden
)6o1Mlqt1aIleeqlinaf inn Sr¡hnnmmittee*Ãomåa
)610l0/2U15 FA&C Committee*A oe.nrla
l81lt0/22/t5 City of CV Ribbons &Shnwelc Awerd Ewenf Represent District
9t2t0/28/ts Press Conference - RecycledV/nfer [csrê*'Address Media re issue
æ
t0tst/201s
OTAY
fT2ü tt u' / /p '¿-ç¿¿ (/ 'ü0ü lf? zaad Zi ¿p /" 96z/ / b z* qq ff
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER.DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
qL.2/"'û4r'v
Pay To: Mitchell Thomnson
Emplovee Number: 1807
OWD Rd Mto*
Total $600 *
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 78
Period Covered:
From: lll1l20l5 To: lll30/2015
xI"
f 'í\ ;Ð.ilr
l-r-f,
,3
¿4\ ci"áã)L-?
.lt
-!
åJ-L--r .l al
:,: !5 !.O
JÓ
:l
n+F
?'f,.-r "1'- 13 +óà\¿/¿-Þ
85
miles
._r. -: _ j i_: .- ...: r ':.. ,", ,-.. . ,,, : li.:-... ,
l,t,-'ütd{
(Director's Signature)
Date: ll/1812014GM Receipt:
FOROFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT; $
'\(
h'*)tt
DATE MILEAGE
IIOME to OWDOWDtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTITERLOCATIONS
ITEM MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
l//tt/2/ts Agenda 26AdHoc Subcomm GM Perf
Review*
2 11 /Ã/1 <l)WTl Elnqr¡l l\fto*A oendc )6
3 -t-t ll fi/1 5 fnterview wifh Channel 1O*Recvcled wøter issue ,,<
4 tl/16/15 Woïar ñnncen¡ l-lar¡le¡ TÞ A *A oa¡¡lq 35
5
6 tl/17/1s SD Cifv Cnrrncil Mlo*Recvcled W¡fer Tsqre 25
7 1t/18/ts
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
,jt
\4i
Pay To: Mitchell Thompson
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER.DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
Employee Number:
REVISED
1807 From: l2lll2015 To: l2l3ll20l5
)L
\.1) !n
-.l !ç<f..la) '1,-'-'l'-'"íl
3')
.'Ð
_q))
ì-
++-LÃ.--rJ :-¿ '¿.ã--ì'tJ¿
,Iì.c r.t 1.,)
^ r Ãr .1I
\ !\¡ -{ -v
a\.'ãè-2'Éç
O
\\èkC>
Total $500 *
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 78 miles
GM Receipt:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:ß
19
(Director's Signature)
Date: 1212412015
Y,n
\
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE I ISSUES
DISCUSSED
MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDoWDtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
1 t2/4n5 Pre-agenda Mtg*Agenda i corrrÅi tY¿ Wfu-bn ú øt 13
2 1).t't tl5 FA.C¡C Comm Mfox Asenrla )6
3 1t tl Ln<l-crlchqr{ I)ccql ¡le¡f icatinn *l-\tr/'Â. Ijr¡enf 26
4 t2l15n5 Snecinl RrI Mfo*A oen¡ln 26
5 1).t"t*t"ts Otay Mesa Chamber Brealdast Renresenf C)WD 6
6 12t24n5 Ffhics Trainino*Renrrircr{ }rr¡ ler¡¡
7
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE ú/v
OTAY
2¡ê /, *,¿l/A/Z-¿ç1, áí2-//G2*7AU QQ42,¡ ?*
OTAY \ryAT'ER DISTRICT
BOAR.D OF DTRECTOR.S
PER.-DIEM AND MIT.ÐAGE CL.A.TM FOR.M
Period Covered:Pay To: Mitchell Thompson
Employee Number: 1807
Total $900 *
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed: 78
GM Receipt:
From: 1/112016 To: 1/3112016
miles
172
JV,*\
\T"il\I
(Ðirectoros Signature)
Date:1
r( ',\'::.
j-r I'fl'- .l'r
s .L .L-_' :) _-ì-l l:)
\r +-è
MILEAGE
HOME to OWD
OWÞ to HOME
MILEAGE
OTIIERLOCATIONS
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSTIES
DISCUSSED
261t/6/16 OWD Board Mtg*Agenda
26,1 /R/16 ô1cw ì\.dece Chamher*Discuss recycled water issues with CityofSl-)
1631/11116 Salt Creek Ad FInc Comm*A senda
¿.Å.
Discuss recycled water issues with Citynf (fìÀ1 /1 4t16 Otay Propefy OwnersAssociation*"
t251 /1 \116-l\feet r¡¡ith fìì\rf*l-nmmifiee A oendn Rriefinø
686"t l"l9/16 Í-CIWTT N;feefino*A oen¿{n
A oe¡Åq t671/20/16
FA&-.C. Comm Mfø*
'10R
t/2s116 CV Redevelopment Oversight
f-nmm*Â oenrlq
12Board AeendaBriefins91/30n6 Meet with GM*
FOROF'F'[CE USÐ: ?
- Ç51l_si< \)á-
6
OTAY
FfrS
Pay To: Mitchell Thompson
Employee Number: 1807
$600 *
Mileage Claimed: 52 miles
FOR OFFICE USE: TOT'A[, MILE.AGE REIIVÍB{.JRSEMENT:
ULl tl' I 12 ¿r-(¿"/L/L/ " tëú,/' v r ' -/ -if/ Lzltü Í & a-r;ua" Z¡P¿' 52¡¡ ü"u zü pØ
OTAY WATER. DTSIIR,ICT
BOARD OF'ÐtrR.ECT'ORS
FER.DNEM AND MIN.EAGE CT.AIM F'ORM
Period Covered:
;fa'3
From: 2lU2A16 To: 212912016
..i
o --i' --.ìr..¡ rì ,_l
Jìf,
.!
-L-t\! i -.!-3-f
:)1l:f-_'f ¿¿,il-
,1='
1
àãe
TotalS*ot
Ç"i",--€
I
CE<-=èÈ,
69(t=crÈfa¡ËsÈQsff?re.3
(Director's Signature)
GM Receipt:
'/çjl
MILEAGE
HOME to OwDOWD to HOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
ITEM DATE
262/3/16 Board Mte*AgendaL
I2)lt/16 Sweetwâfer Alrthrilv*
Discuss CV Interagency Task Force
Tssues
22Present OWD Desal ProìectJ2 /1"7 t15
Cross Border EnvironmentalFonrm*
26trA¿'l- l'nmmiffce*A oenr{¡4 2/16/15
262/25/16 State of the County Address*Renresent OWf)
1362/26t16 Bd Agenda Briefing*l)iscuss uncoming Rd Mts w GM
7
TNSTR.UCTIONS ON RE\TER.SE
Date:2t26t2016
I LP
OTAY
fuoo? ./ê %)ó - 2uÒ/, 5zt t o I
@ooa fb Z üao. 2a t. 51"-//a z-
OTAY \ryATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEMA¡ID MILEAGE CLAIM F'ORM
Period Covered:
From: 3/l/2016 To: 313112016
7óo-0Ò
lz t?/
6S
Pay To: Mitchell Thomoson
Employee Number: 1807
TotaI
($100
Der
$700 È
Total Mileage Claimed: 78
GM Receipt:
FOR OFFICE USE: TOTAL MILEAGE
f
Ðac
\ë=t
(f
\
. ._) .-)
Õ'lÕ:)-ì-
\
.J!.U,J5l-
]30lJì-$
*a3
Ð
+++33?-c,3\ (o\oic+ 3JNî-¡'ø./¿^?
miles
@irectoros Signature)
û/
6
tl
tì,lV
' : .;, 1'; :i- ' ¡ i:.; 'j:Iil
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSI]ES
DISCUSSED MILEAGEIIOMEto OwDOWÞtoHOME
ITEM
26I3/Aß Board Mtet Agenda
8L?17116 CV fnfe¡eoerrcw TacL F'nrcet Asen¡la
Review Items coming beforennmniffecc t33-1/'14116 Commitfee Açende Rriefino*
4¿r+v3/1,6/16.E ^2rî l-nnmitfec*Acn¡lq 26
3553lWMConservation Garden JPA*À oen¡{¡
266.2 3/23/t6 Special Bd Mte*Aoenrla
3/31/16 El¡l Âoa¡¡lo Elri¡ffnc*ReviewBd Aeenda l37
INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE
Date:3t3u2016 ñ
OTAY
ftlaaC- "/ø u2ô0' ?¿ ë / - Tz" \- / ¿t/ep2' /b z-aôÐ' 7t'ç / " I z¡ t a >
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER.DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
/loab'o()â7" t?
Pay To: Mitchell Thompson
Emplovee Number: 1807
Total
($1oo
Der
$1,000 *
Total Mileage Claimed: 104
GM Receipt:
FOROFFICE
Period Covered:
From: 4/1/2016 To: 4/3012016
263
miles
¡J
@irector's Signature)
Date: 4129/2016
2.-
)< iÌ ìt' f Í).l :f (f
:l .t:f :)_?+àè.
.2
líì-
if f ',1
2r:)
l
++-r+
J)l):f ,r:) '-:) :)at\C 13 '3 ,.,,f
-! -! .! .{
ITEM DATE MEETING PI.IRPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOìTDtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTHERLOCATIONS
L 3/31/16 ?tWater Reliabiliry Coalition Pure water issues
2 L/1/'t6 Fircl E'ridqr¡ Flreql¿fecf lVfn¡fhk¡ nnmnrrnifr¡ meafin o 8
3 414/'16 Snecial Roerd Mia *A oe¡da 26
4 4/6/16 26Ronr¡l Mfo*A oendn
J 4/7/16 Mtg with Halla Razak, CityPnhliî I Tfilifiêc f)irentnr*36lnfroducforv mfp
,k 4/12/16 MWDBdMte*AoenÃc 601^/10tl6
4/1s/16 t0
ÁR
Comm AgendaBriefingtCO\Ãi'II Mte*Review Committee Agendas
A oen¡lø
*4/20/16 F AP¡A l-nmmi+fea l\rffc*)6,Aoe.nda
I 4D2.116 Commr¡nifv leederc fn Sea Prnøcñ qnonsnreã hw ITS Nnw ?t
l0 4/29/t6 10Bd Agenda Briefing*ReviewRd Aoen¡la
11 4/27/16 Desalination CommitteeMeefino*26Agenda
12 4/lt/t6 CV Redev Oversight Comm*Asenda I
_.ñ
\ås"à*a+l
tttira-r'Lrv ,.:<æ- -44¿aa'/áæa' v>ia/'h ^tta _%-/(?
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRJCTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:Pav To: Mitchell Thomoson
Employee Number: 1807
Total
($1oo
Der
$800 *
Total Mileage Claimed: 104
GMReceipt:
FOROFFICE USE: 'l
From: 5/l/2016 To: 5ß1n0rc
1?1
miles
tl v
r\\q@irector's Signature)
Date:st3t t2016
J+b xillÈ3'f!C
'-i' 3 \c'- !l
-x
-
. -)1,3 1(f ????
"t '.Ð '.3 :t_ til tJ fl t.J
àè
,* \ r{". C()
:) :l
-ll
MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOT'DtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTI{ERLOCAT1ONS
DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED
ITEM
26s/2/16 Ad Hoc Salt Creek*AgendaI
t0tlp¡reccnf fl\l/Tl2<la/16 State of the City for ChulaVicfq*
26Â oenÁa3s/¿'116 Roar¡l Mlo *
2645/5/16 Eìnn¡l Ïlocrrmentc*T)nnlmenf Siønino
365s/6/16 Chicano Federation AnnualIlnifv Lrnch*Renrese.nf OWT)
36l-nnfecf Irrdoe nn hehelf nf f)WT)6 s/7/16 International Paella Contest
lo7\/'tt/1ß l-ommiftec Âoen¿l cRrieffno*A oerr¡la
)6Rsl'19,/16 F,A,e¡a llnmmiftee Mfq*Aserrda
3lf-Sll ôr¡¡rferk¡ l\Ãto*AoendaI5/19/16
R10\tÃt16 First Friday Breakfast llommrnifv Meefino
11
t2
OTAY
Pay To: Mitchell Thomnson
rT /r, (y't/* |o00. t tt ?-¿2ëa " 2t e r" 2g¡ .
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OT'DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
'-', ,,- ?- ø ''Ì) ø
From: 6/l/2016 To: 613012016Employee Number: 1807
Total $800 x
($1oo
DerTotal Mileage Claimed:
GM Receipt:
FOROFFICE USE: Tr
112
\t miles
'/v l)
(,q"
¿;-'' --lìL i-t :i,\O
\èh
\
)<il+
.n3a)
\i
xrl+.'3C)
i: 1):f
-i3
)e++. i)af3'ì-r
,- r^
ù.ò.d à_tç
@irector's Signature)
Date; 6130/2016
-:¿3
]J
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE / ISSUES
DISCUSSED MILEAGE
HOMEtoOWDOWDtoHOME
MILEAGE
OTHÊRLOCATIONS
I 6/1/16 OWD Board Mtg*Agenda 26
,Ál2l"t 8First Fridev Rreakfasf Mnnthlv cnmmnnifv meefino/,6t9,tl6 \tr/afer l-nncerc fP * ocn¡lq 32
l04 6/9/16 City of
Chrrla Viqfe f)evelnn Fonrm*Renrecenf ôWT)
5 6/16/16 t0Mtg with GM & G. Halbert,Citv of CV*lìiscllss v¡rio¡¡s fonics
6.6/17/16 Comm ittee Aeenda Briefing*Tler¡ierv l-nmm ifiee  ce¡rfae l0
7 6/?)/16 F'A&C Commiffee Mtq*A oende 26
r 6l)1/1Ã 7'Meet with JPA members &Wafer Conserv Exec Direcfor*f)iscuss firfrrre firndinø of Garden
o 6D9/16 Meefino wi+h SWÂ*Discuss issues for Interagency TaskFnrce 10
10
11
12
,f
STAFF REPORT
TYPE
MEETING:
Regular Board
MEETING
DATE:
October 5, 2016
SUBMITTED
BY:
Mark Watton
General Manager
W.O./G.F.
NO:
N/A DIV.
NO.
N/A
APPROVED BY:
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: General Manager’s Report
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
Human Resources: Benefits – Our benefits consultant compared rates for our life
insurance plans since the District is at the end of a three-year
rate guarantee with CIGNA. Our consultant was able to secure a rate
pass for an additional three-year time period at a competitive
rate. The District plans to continue with CIGNA for at least one
year, which is within the GM’s Authority. The District will
compare rates for both our Life Insurance and Short/Long Term
Disability benefits next year as there may be economies of scale by
combining both programs with the same provider. As required,
findings will be presented to the Board prior to the 2018 benefit
plan year.
Recruitments/New Hires - The District is in the selection phase for
the following recruitments: Communications Assistant and Utility
Worker. The Senior Procurement and Contracting Specialist started
during the month of September. These positions are critical to
District operations.
Safety & Security:
Emergency Preparedness -- Staff completed the monthly WebEOC
exercise, which consisted of updating the District’s Mutual Aid
Resources list.
District 14 Emergency Response Procedures – Designated department
staff is currently working on finalizing the 14 District Emergency
Response procedures. The 14 District Emergency Procedures are part
2
of the District’s Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan. They
provide response, mitigation and recovery instructions on how and
what the District response will be when faced with these types of
emergency conditions. These are prepared at the departmental level.
Safety Meetings - Staff attended the 3rd quarter Water Utility
Safety Managers Association (WUSMA) and Water Agencies Emergency
Collaborative (WAEC) meetings hosted at the Santa Fe Irrigation
District. Topics discussed included Department of Homeland
Security’s Regional Resilience program, and WebEOC and ICS training
through the County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services.
InfraGard San Diego – The District’s Safety & Security Specialist,
Oscar Ramirez, has been appointed as the Water Sector Chief for
InfraGard San Diego (replacing Kyle Swanson). InfraGard’s mission
is to mitigate criminal and terrorist threats, risks, and losses
for protecting the San Diego region’s critical infrastructure and
people.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING:
Mobile Device Evaluation – Staff is currently evaluating Sprint
Mobile Network as the District’s preferred vendor for mobile device
and telecommunications services. Over the past several weeks,
staff has been evaluating Sprint’s overall performance to include,
network reliability, application responsiveness, and cost
savings. Sprint issued several test devices to District staff in
order to evaluate their services and provide feedback during this
test period. Staff will produce a high-level summary report
featuring key service findings at the end of the month.
Email Retention Schedule - Staff is preparing for the new recently
approved email retention policy to begin. The new policy will
reflect a change from the current 13-month retention from data of
email origination to 100 days. The policy will begin the removal of
emails from District users’ inbox on Saturday, October 8th. This
policy will automatically purge all of staff’s emails within their
respective ‘‘Inbox’’ and ‘‘Deleted Items’’ folders that are 100 days
or older.
FINANCE:
Capacity Fee Study – Staff is working with HDR Engineering to
complete a study of water and sewer capacity fees.
FY 16-17 Budget Book – Staff has completed preparation of the FY
16-17 budget book and has submitted it to the GFOA and CSMFO award
programs.
3
Financial Reporting:
o For the second month ending August 31, 2016, there are total
revenues of $18,617,866 and total expenses of $16,176,342. The
revenues exceeded expenses by $2,441,524.
o The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the
Investment Portfolio Details as of August 31, 2016 total
$82,001,126 with an average yield to maturity of 0.93%. The
total earnings year-to-date are $136,101.
ENGINEERING AND WATER SYSTEM OPERATIONS:
Engineering:
927 Zone, Force Main Assessment and Repair Project: This Project
consists of inspection, condition assessment, and repair of the
existing Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) 1980
era, 16,000 feet long, 14-inch diameter steel force main. Pipeline
Inspection and Condition Analysis Corporation (PICA) will return to
inspect the lower 12,000 feet of force main in December 2016. A
Notice to Proceed was issued to Charles King, Inc. on August 18,
2016 to allow time for submittal review and materials procurement
ahead of the planned work in October 2016. A fourth amendment to
PICA’s agreement was approved, including coordination of work with
Charles King’s construction contract award, delays due to cultural
resources (artifacts) found at several sites, and a credit for
removal and reinstallation of valves and dewatering the main. The
overall project is within budget and on schedule. (R2116)
36-Inch Main Pumpouts and Air/Vacuum Ventilation Installations:
This project consists of inspection, repairs, and improvements to
the District’s La Presa 36-Inch Pipeline between San Diego County
Water Authority Flow Control Facility Number 11 and the District’s
Regulatory site. Formal bids to relocate six (6) existing
air/vacuum valves from underground vaults to above ground locations
were opened August 2, 2016. Award is scheduled for the October 5,
2016 Board Meeting. The project is within budget and on schedule
to be completed in February 2017. (P2267)
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades:
This project consists of removing and replacing the interior and
exterior coatings of the 978-1 0.5 MG Reservoir and the 850-2 3.1
MG Reservoir, along with providing structural upgrades, to ensure
the tanks comply with both State and Federal OSHA standards as well
as the American Water Works Association and the County Health
Department standards. Formal bids were opened August 25, 2016.
Award is scheduled for the October 5, 2016 Board Meeting. The
project is within budget and on schedule to be completed in June
2017. (P2534 & P2544)
4
944-1, 944-2, & 458-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings &
Upgrades: This project consists of removing and replacing the
interior and exterior coatings of the 944-1 0.3 MG Reservoir, the
944-2 3.0 MG Reservoir, and the 458-2 1.8 MG Reservoir, along with
providing structural upgrades to ensure the tanks comply with both
State and Federal OSHA standards as well as the American Water
Works Association and the County Health Department standards. A
Notice of Completion for the project was recorded with the County
of San Diego on May 5, 2016. The District has received a total of
four (4) Stop Payment Notices from subcontractors on the project.
The District was notified that three (3) of the Stop Payment
Notices have been resolved. In accordance with applicable State
law, the District withheld funds and retained contract bonding for
the final Stop Payment Notice which was filed by Crosno
Construction Inc. Olympus & Associates Inc., Crosno Construction
Inc., and the District entered into an agreement to resolve the
final Stop Payment Notice. All commitments required by the
agreement have been completed by all parties including the
District’s receipt of a release for the remaining Stop Payment
Notice. This issue is now closed. The project is within budget.
(P2531, P2532, P2535)
711-1 & 711-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades:
This project consists of removing and replacing the interior and
exterior coatings of the 711-1 3.1 MG Reservoir and the 711-2 2.3
MG Reservoir, along with providing structural upgrades, to ensure
the tanks comply with both State and Federal OSHA standards as well
as the American Water Works Association and the County Health
Department standards. The contractor, Advanced Industrial
Services, Inc., has completed the work on the 711-1 Reservoir and
the reservoir has been placed into service. The contractor also
completed all work on the 711-2 Reservoir. The test results of the
newly filled reservoir indicated that the water met all
requirements of the State of California and as a result, the 711-2
Reservoir was placed into service on September 19, 2016. The
remaining items on the project consist of punch list work. The
project is within budget and contract acceptance is anticipated in
October 2016. (P2529 & P2530)
980-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades: This
project consists of removing and replacing the interior and
exterior coatings of the 980-1, 5.0 MG, Reservoir, along with
providing structural upgrades, to ensure the tank complies with
both State and Federal OSHA standards as well as the American Water
Works Association and the County Health Department standards. The
contractor, Advanced Industrial Services, Inc., completed the work
on the 980-1 Reservoir and the reservoir was placed into service in
August 2016. The project is within budget and contract acceptance
is anticipated in October 2016. (P2545)
5
Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation – Phase 1: This project
consists of sewer system improvements at fourteen (14) locations
within the Rancho San Diego Basin. The work includes replacement of
approximately 3,250 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer main and the
installation of four (4) new manholes. The contractor, Transtar
Pipeline, Inc., has installed sewer along Hillsdale Road, Juliana
Street, Donahue Drive, Paseo Grande, and Vista Grande Road with
final paving and punch list work pending. Sewer replacement work
located within Tina Street is currently under construction. The
project is within budget, however, the construction is behind
schedule as a result of a late start by the contractor and slow
contractor progress. It is anticipated that construction will be
completed in November 2016. The contractor has been notified that
the project is subject to liquidated damages associated with late
delivery. (S2033)
Hillsdale Road Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Replacement: On
June 23, 2016, the District issued a Task Order to Psomas to design
about 4,000 feet of new potable water pipeline and replacement of
two segments of sanitary sewer located in Hillsdale Road between
Jamacha Road and Vista Grande Road. A draft of the Preliminary
Design Report was submitted to the District on August 12, 2016,
with comments returned to Psomas on September 1, 2016. Design is
scheduled to be completed in the Spring of 2017. Caltrans’
approval of the traffic control plans on Jamacha Road will be
required as well as County of San Diego permits. (P2573, S2048)
Water Facilities Master Plan Update: This project will update the
District’s existing Water Resources Master Plan that was last
updated in October 2008 and revised in May 2013. The draft Program
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) 45-day public comment period
ended September 17, 2016. The final PEIR and Water Facilities
Master Plan Update will be ready for Board consideration before the
end of the calendar year. (P1210)
Pure Water Cost Allocation Update: On September 21, 2016, the City
of San Diego presented at the Metro Wastewater Technical Advisory
Committee (Metro TAC) information on the first phase of the Pure
Water Program to construct a pump station, pipeline, expanded
wastewater treatment at the North City Water Reclamation Plant from
30 MGD to 52 MGD, 30 MGD advanced water purification facility, and
conveyance pipeline to Miramar Reservoir. This was the second of
several meetings to present the framework for the project cost
allocation between the Metro Wastewater and the City of San Diego
Water Departments. The total estimated cost allocation of the
project for the Metro Wastewater portion of the project is
estimated to be $405 million over the next six years.
Approximately 33.56% of this cost ($135.7 million) was identified
by the City to be the responsibility of the participating agencies
6
in addition to the cost for wastewater treatment O&M and other
normal year capital cost. The projected agency contributions for
O&M, debt service, Metro baseline CIP projects, and for this first
phase of the Pure Water project, was estimated by the City of San
Diego. The District portion for FY 2017 is estimated to be between
$765,000 and $845,000, increasing each year. The peak contribution
is estimated for FY 2020 to be between $1.2 and $1.5 million. By
FY 2022, the estimate is between $819,000 and $1 million. The
range estimates are based on various scenario’s outcomes for O&M
costs, financing proceeds, baseline CIP spending, Pure Water
expenditures, and participating agency allocations based on
sampling. The total wastewater program capital cost for the full
Pure Water Program is projected to be $1.0 billion to $1.5 billion.
Attached is the range of costs for the District and all other
participating agencies.
Governor’s Executive Order B-37-16: Executive Order B-37-16,
Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life, was signed by
the Governor on May 9, 2016, which directs state agencies to update
temporary emergency water restrictions and transition to permanent,
long-term improvements in water use by developing a proposal, by
January 2017, for mandatory reduction in potable urban water usage,
new water use targets that build upon SBX 7-7 targets, prohibit
practices that waste potable water, minimize water system leaks,
and improve water system management. The state agencies shall also
strengthen requirements for Urban Water Shortage Contingency Plans,
improve agricultural water use efficiency and drought planning,
develop methods to ensure compliance with the provisions of this
Executive Order, and, if necessary, enforcement action by the State
Water Resources Control Board to address non-compliant water
suppliers.
Groundwater Basin Boundary Modification: The City of San Diego
filed an application with the California Department of Water
Resources (DWR) for a scientific-based modification to the
boundaries of the San Diego Formation Groundwater Aquifer. DWR
will publish the final basin boundary modifications, which is
expected later this year. The District will have two (2) years to
establish a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) or to form a
Joint Powers Authority (JPA) with other stakeholders. The District
will have five (5) years from the classification date to submit a
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to DWR. A GSP may be a
single plan for the entire basin developed and implemented by one
GSA or it could be a single plan covering the entire basin
developed and implemented by multiple GSAs. An alternative,
subject to Water Code Section 10727.6, multiple GSP implemented by
multiple GSAs would need to be coordinated pursuant to a single
coordination agreement that covers the entire basin.
7
San Diego County Sanitation District Meetings: Staff from the
District and the County have been meeting periodically since
September 11, 2013 to discuss common issues and to develop a plan
to coordinate the maintenance work of both agency’s wastewater
collection systems that are within the same geographic area known
as the Jamacha Sewer Basin. Both agencies have to have dual
maintenance staff and equipment working in close proximity and both
agencies have discussed the possibility of entering into an
agreement for the maintenance of each other’s facilities in the
basin as a way to operate more efficiently and effectively. On
September 8, 2016, the District requested the County to estimate
the cost to have the County maintain the District’s wastewater
collection system to see if this was worth discussing in more
detail at a future meeting, as little interest has been expressed
to date. Staff will continue to meet with the County to look for
ways to operate more efficiently in the Jamacha Sewer Basin.
Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) Facility
Master Plan: On February 29, 2016, the District issued a Task
Order to Arcadis to prepare a Master Plan for the RWCWRF to develop
a phased approach to implement improvements with prioritizing
identified improvements considering the needs, overall costs, long-
term payback on investment, and other factors. The District
assembled a list of projects to begin the study, but Arcadis will
draw upon their expertise to identify additional work that would
improve the operation of the facility. Improved instrumentation to
enhance the operation and automation is also being studied. A
draft of the master plan was submitted to the District at the end
of July 2016, with comments returned to Arcadis at the end of
August 2016. The final plan is expected to be completed in a few
weeks and will be used for prioritizing future CIP projects.
(R2119)
Rosarito Desalination: NSC Agua, a subsidiary of Consolidated
Water Company (CWCO), has finalized a 40-year definitive public-
private partnership agreement with the State of Baja California on
August 25, 2016. District staff and representatives from NSC Agua
continue to coordinate on complying with the California Water
Resources Control Board Drinking Water Program regulatory
requirements related to source water quality testing. On September
7, 2016, the Board certified the EIR/EIS. After certification of
the EIR/EIS, the next step is the determination by the State
Department as to whether the project is in the National Interest,
and if so, the issuance of a Presidential Permit for the conveyance
of the water across the US-Mexico border. Notice of the 30-day
public comment period was published in the Federal Register on
September 14, 2016. Federal agencies have 90-days to comment on
whether they feel the project is in the National Interest. After
this 90-day period, the State Department will issue a Record of
8
Decision/National Interest Determination and there will be an
additional 15-day comment period. If it is determined that the
project will be in the National Interest, the Presidential Permit
will be issued by December of 2016 or the beginning of 2017. An
update of the project was presented to the Desalination Committee
on August 29, 2016. (P2451)
For the month of August 2016, the District sold 7 meters (13.5
EDUs), generating $128,775 in revenue. Projection for this period
was 9.7 meters (28.5 EDUs), with budgeted revenue of $270,175.
Total revenue for Fiscal Year 2017 is $375,916 against the annual
budget of $3,242,100.
Water System Operations (reporting for August):
Utility Maintenance staff performed a planned repair of the 30-inch
CMLC “A” line on Alta Road on August 10, with assistance from a
contracted welder. This line is one of the two primary supplies to
the Otay Mesa area. Staff is currently coordinating a planned
shutdown and inspection of the “B” line this fall.
On August 16, as part of the District’s continued emergency planning
efforts Fleet, Pump Electric, SCADA and Treatment Plant staff
coordinated and installed a new genset at the Russell Square Sewer
Lift Station.
A brush fire started on August 17 in the canyon near the 850-2 and 4
tanks on Ledge Avenue in Spring Valley. The tanks were fully
functional and SCADA communications were never lost. The fire was
rapidly contained by the Fire Department and no structural damage
occurred to the tanks. Chlorine residuals taken at the tanks
indicated to be normal. Fire retardant had to be removed from the
top and side of the 850-4 tank. A Water Systems Lead operator and
the disinfection staff worked on August 18 and part of August 19 in
removing fire retardant from the area in and around the reservoirs.
On August 17, Helix Water District requested an emergency flow
change due to filtration problems. All flow on flow control facility
No. 14 were dropped and put on flow control facility No. 11. Flows
on flow control facility No. 14 were reinstated on August 18.
On August 24, an emergency shutdown was performed at the 800 block
of Sacramento Avenue in Spring Valley. Twenty-eight residential
meters were affected for approximately one hour while Utility
Maintenance performed repairs. A 1.5-inch copper blow off failed
while it was crimped for repairs.
On September 1, the City of San Diego requested water deliveries via
the emergency interconnect located in Otay Mesa Road near Cactus
9
Road. The emergency interconnect was opened that day and closed on
September 2 with a total usage of 157,000 gallons. This will be
credited to the District via the San Diego County Water Authority
under treated exchange per the current agreement with the City of
San Diego.
On September 12, staff received confirmation that test results for
the second and final round of the special “Lead and Copper Sampling”
are all in compliance.
Purchases and Change Orders:
The following table summarizes purchases and Change Orders issued
during the period of August 30, 2016 through September 23, 2016
that were within staff signatory authority:
Date
Action
Amount
Contractor/
Consultant Project
9/6/16 P.O. $2,400.00 Marilyn Shepard
NASSCO
PACP/MACP//LACP
Training for IT
(aa000)
9/8/16 P.O. $5,000.00 Gillingham Water
Planning
Evaluate Water
Supply
Reliability
(P1210)
9/13/16 P.O. $45,000.00 Michael Keagy Real
Estate
Appraisal
Services
(Various)
9/13/16 Fourth
Amendment ($39,165.00) PICA
RWCWRF 14-Inch
Force Main
(R2116)
9/14/16 C.O. $1,025.00
Advanced
Industrial
Services
980-1 Reservoir
(P2545)
9/21/16 P.O. $5,000.00 1903 Solutions LLC
Professional
Consulting
Services for
Networking,
Storage, and
Security (aa000)
9/23/16 P.O. $750.00 Chicago Title Tile Report
(D0914-090285)
9/23/16 P.O. $1,296.00 California
Surveying Drafting
GPS Pathfinder
and TerraSync
Office Software
(P1000)
10
Water Conservation and Sales:
Water Conservation – August 2016 usage was 15% lower than August 2013
usage. Since the State’s Conservation Mandate began in June 2015,
customers have saved an average of 19%.
11
Potable Water Purchases - The August potable water purchases were
2,948.6 acre-feet which is 11.2% above the budget of 2,652.2 acre-
feet. The cumulative purchases through August were 5,840.2 acre-feet
which is 10.0% above the cumulative budget of 5,308.5 acre-feet.
Recycled Water Purchases - The August recycled water purchases and
production were 514.6 acre-feet which is 18.3% above the budget of
435.1 acre-feet. The cumulative production and purchases through
August were 1,034.1 acre-feet which is 16.5% above the cumulative
budget of 887.8 acre-feet.
12
Potable, Recycled, and Sewer (Reporting up to the month of August):
Total number of potable water meters is 49,557.
Recycled water consumption for the month of August is as follows:
Total consumption was 507.5 acre-feet or 165,295,284 gallons and
the average daily consumption was 5,332,106 gallons per day.
Total cumulative recycled water consumption since July 1, 2016 is
1047.2 acre-feet.
Total number of recycled water meters is 710.
Wastewater flows for the month of August were as follows:
Total basin flow, gallons per day: 1,555,355. This is an
increase of 2.22% from August 2015.
Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro, gallons per
day: 514,130.
Total Otay flow, gallons per day: 1,041,290.
Flow Processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility,
gallons per day: 947,968.
Flow to Metro from Otay Water District was 93,323 gallons per
day.
By the end of August there were 6,104 wastewater EDUs.
S3,ooo,ooo
52,soo,ooo
S2,ooo,ooo
Sl,soo,ooo
51,ooo,ooo
Ssoo,ooo
-Ssoo,ooo
-S1,ooo,ooo
-51,s00,000
5o
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
NET REVENUES AND EXPENSES
FOR TWO MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 31, 2016
YTD Actual Net Revenues
YTD Budget Net Revenues
YTD Variance in Net Revenues
JAN FEBIULAUGSEPocTNOVÞEC
The year-to-date actual net revenues through August were positive of S1,152,338.
MAR APR JUNE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
FORTWO MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 3I,2016
,A.ctual Budget
$
REVENUES:
Potable Water Sales
Recycled Water Sales
Potable Energy Charges
Potable System Charges
Potable MWD & CWA Fixed Charges
Potable Penalties
Total Water Sales
Sewer Charges
Meter Fees
Capacity Fee Revenues
Non-Operating Revenues
Tax Revenues
Interest
Total Revenues
EXPENSES:
Potable Vy'ater Purchases
Recycled Water Purchases
CWA-lnfrastructure Access Charge
CWA-Customer Service Charge
CV/A-Reliability Charge
CWA-Emergency Storage Charge
MWD-Capacity Res Charge
MWD-Readiness to Serve Charge
Subtotal Water Purchases
Power Charges
Payroll & Related Costs
Material & Maintenance
Administrative Expenses
Legal Fees
Transfer to General Fund Reserve
Expansion Reserve
Bstterment Reserve
Replacement Reserve
Transfer to Sewer General Fund
OPEB Trust
New Supply Reserve
Total Expenses
9,760,414 $
2,467,041
587,077
2,212,230
2,196,797
129,18s
8,566,900 $
2,097,100
543,300
2,206,600
2,182,000
1 80,1 00
YTD
Variance
Exhibit A
Yar o/o
13.9%
17.60/o
8.lo/o
0.3%
0.2o/o
(28.3%)
1,193,514
369,941
43,777
5,630
4,797
(s0,9ls)
17,342,734 15,776,000 1,566,734 9.9o/o
5ll,l45
7,989
248,044
396,630
86,227
25,098
514,200
I 1,000
208,000
327,100
63,700
26,200
(3,055)
(3,011)
40,044
69,530
22,527
(1,102)
(0.60/o)
(27.4%)
79.30/o
2t.3%
35.40/o
(4.2o/o)
$ 18,617,866 $ 16,926,200 $ 1,691,666
(614,533)
(120,703)
(86)
(e8)
(84)
58
(74)
53,240
10.0o/o
(9.9o/o)
(22.9o/o)
(0.0%)
(0.0%)
0.0%
0.0%
(0.0%)
20.1%
$6,803,833 $
648,303
322,286
291,098
316,684
767,343
160,074
211,360
6,189,300 $
527,600
322,200
291,000
316,600
767,400
160,000
264,600
9,520,981 8,838,700 (682,281) (7.7%)
603,546
3,005,379
400,384
616,952
50,000
247,100
682,300
577,700
77,400
228,600
160,200
589,400
3,o15,ooo
450,336
722,812
41,667
247,100
682,300
577,700
77,400
228,600
160,200
(t4,146)
9,621
49,952
105,860
(8,333)
(2.4%)
0.3%
ll.lo/o
14.6%
(20.0%)
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
0.0%
0.0%
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
0.0o/o58005800
Annual
Budget
$ 44,450,600
8,900,300
2,164,200
12,204,600
12,535,200
884,000
8l, t 3 8,900
2,918,900
66,200
l,24g,2oo
2,179,300
4,033,100
156,900
$ 91,741,500
$ 31,271,300
3,615,900
1,976,400
1,714,200
1,949,000
4,579,800
988,800
l,42g,ooo
47,422,400
2,939,000
20,899,900
3,456,300
4,900,100
250,000
1,492,500
4,093,600
3,466,400
464,500
1,371,800
961,000
35,000
$
$
91,741,500
F:/MORPT/FS2017-0816 912612016 1:31 PM
$
$
16,176,342 $
2,441,524 $
15,637,014 $
1,289,186 $
(539,328)
1,152,338
(3.4%)
EXCESS REVENUES(EXPENSE)
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO REVIEW
August 31,2016
INVESTMENT OVERVIE\il & MARKET STATUS:
The federal funds rate has remained constant for over 5 years. On December 16, 2015, at the Federal Reserve Board's regular scheduled
meeting, the federal funds rate was increased from 0.25Yo to 0.500Á" in response to the nation's gradual economic improvement. The
Committee judges that there has been considerable improvement in labor market conditions this year, and it is reasonably confìdent that
inflation will rise, over the medium term, to its 2 percent objective. The stance of monetary policy remains accommodative after this
increase, thereby supporting further improvement in labor market conditions and a return to 2 percent inflation. There have been no further
changes made to the federal funds rate at the Federal Reserve Board's subsequent regular meetings, the most recent of which was held on
September 21,2016. In determining the timing and size of future adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, they went on to
say: "the Committee will assess realized and expected economic conditions relative to its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent
inflation. This assessment will take into account a wide range of information, including measures of labor market conditions, indicators of
inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings onfinancial and international developments. In light of the current shortfall of
inflationfrom 2 percent, the Committee will carefully monitor øctual and expected progress toward its inflation goal. The Committee
expects that economic conditions will evolve in a manner that will waruqnt only gradual increases in the federal funds rate; the federal
funds rate is likely to remain, for some time, below levels that are expected to prevail in the longer run. However, the actual path of the
federal funds rate will depend on the economic outlook as informed by incoming data. "
The District's overall effective rate of return at August 31,2016 was 0.93%, which was two basis points lower than the previous month.
At the same time the LAIF return on deposits has improved over the previous month, reaching an average effective yield of 0.6l4Yo for the
month of August 2016. Based on our success at maintaining a competitive rate of return on our portfolio during this extended period of
low interest rates, no changes in investment strategy regarding returns on investment are being considered at this time. The desired
portfolio mix is important in mitigatingany liquidity risk from unforeseen changes in LAIF or County Pool policy.
In accordance with the District's Investment Policy, all District funds continue to be managed based on the objectives, in priority order, of
safety, liquidity, and return on investment.
PORTFOLIO COMPLIANCE: August 31,2016
Investment
8.01: Treasury Securities
8.02: Local Agency Investment Fund (Operations)
8.02: Local Agency Investment Fund (Bonds)
8.03: Federal Agency Issues
8.04: Certificates of Deposit /
8.05: Short-Term Commercial Notes
8.06: Medium-Term Commercial Debt
8.07: Money Market Mutual Funds
8.08: San Diego County Pool
12.0: Maximum Single Financial Institution
State Limit
t00%
$65 Million
t00%
t00%
30%
25%
30%
20%
r00%
r00%
Otay Limit
100%
$65 Million
t00%
100%
ts%
t0%
t0%
t0%
t00%
s0%
Otav Actual
0
$8.94 Million
0
70.37%
.10%
0
0
0
r6.34%
2.29%
Target: Meet or Exceed 100o/o of LAIF
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Performance Measure FY-1 7
Return on lnvestment
Month
n LAIF rOtay o Difference
at
tro
E
oo
c
Êoc
J
oÉ,
3rd
Qtr
FY I6
Apt
FYI6
May
FYI6
Jun
FYI6
4th
Qtr
FYI6
July
FY I7
Aug
FY17
Apr
FYI5
May
FYI5
June
FYI5
4th
Qtr
FYI5
July
FYI6
Aug
FYI6
sep
FY16
lst
Qtr
FYI6
Oct
FYI6
Nov
FYI6
Dec
FY16
2nd
Qtr
FYI6
Jan
FYI6
Feb
FYI6
Mar
FYI6
0.37 0.40 0.38 0.45 0.47 0.51 0.47 0.53 0.55 0.58 0.55 0.59 0.ó ITLAIF0.28 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.36
0.96 0.91 0.95 0.920.73 0.75 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.76 0.79 0.79 0.78 0.80 0.85 0.87 0.84 0.87 0.89IOtay0.71 0.73 0.76
0.36 0.37 0.34 0.34 0.38 0.35 0.36 0.31tr Difference 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.44 0.43 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.40 0.42 0.39 0.40 0.35 0.38
Otay Water District
fnvestment Portfolio: o8/ gr/ zot6
1,963,998
2.39'
s57,733,637
70.37yo
Total Cash and lnvestments: 582,048,478
22,350,843
27.24o/o
tr Banks (Passbook/Checking/CD)lPools (LAIF & County)trAgencies & Corporate Notes
Pâr
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
August 31,2016
Mârket
Value
Book
Value
%ot
Portfol¡o Term
Days to
Matur¡ty
YTilt
360 Equiv.
YTM
365 Equ¡v.lnvestments Value
Federal Agency lssue+ Callable
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Certificates of Deposit - Bank
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAIF)
San Diego County Pool
lnvestments
55,735,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
8,940,374.48
13,410,468.41
55,698,039.20
1,999,160.00
81,833.21
8,945,928.44
1 3,394,000.00
55,735,000.00
1,998,636.68
81,833.21
8,940,374.4A
13,410,46e.41
69.52
2.49
0.10
11.15
16.73
s32
640
731
1
1
785
207
508
1
1
1.044
0.661
0.030
0.606
0.892
0.959
1.058
0.670
0.030
0.614
0.904
80,167,676.10 80,118,960.85 80,166,312.78 100.00%552665 0.972
Cash
Passbooldcheckino(not included ¡n y¡eId calculations)
Total Cash and lnvestments
I,882, I 65.00 1,882,165.00 1,882,1 65.00 0.372 0.378
82,049,841.10 82,001,125.85 82,048,477.78 552665 0.959 o.972
Total Earnings August 3l Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Current Year 65,849.13 136,100.58
Average Daily Balance 84,418,973.57 85,863,575.55
Effective Rate of Return 0.92% 0.93%
Data Corporation. The investments provide sufficient liquidity to meet the cash flow requirements of the District for the next six months of expenditures.î-z 2-/ ê
Reporting period 08/01/2016-08131 12016
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 09:33
Run Dale: O9122f2O16 - 09:34
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM1) 7.3.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
August 31,2016
Market Value
StatedBookValue Rate
Page I
YTM Days to Maturity
360 Matur¡tv DateAverage
Balance
Purchase
Date Pår Value s&Plnvestment #lssuefCUSIP
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
3134G5A47 2301
3134G8NM7 2345
3134G8\ ^rus 2349
3134G9D38 2363
3133EEYE4 2320
313048547 2355
313047H73 2346
3134G9AF4 2350
3133EGJU0 2362
3130A8KR3 2358
3í34G8XA2 2348
3133EGBG9 2354
3135G0G64 2336
3t36G2R665 2334
3'I30A6UZ8 2338
3134G92R1 2360
3134G8Q44 2344
3I34G9AW 2347
3134G82M4 2351
3130A7WK7 2352
3133EGCZ6 2357
3í33EGGS8 2359
3134G9SL2 2356
3133EGJR7 2361
3136G33N3 2364
3136G33N3 2365
3136G33N3 2366
3136G34U6 2367
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Cred¡t Bank
Federâl Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Fanniê Mae
Fannie Mae
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federâl Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federâl Home Loan Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federâl Fârm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal National Morlage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
06t30t2014
03t2912016
0412712016
0612912016
0411612015
05t2612016
03t2912016
0412612016
07t0512016
0612312016
o4t2712016
0512312016
10t30t2015
1'111912015
1212812015
o6t2812016
03t29t2016
0412612016
0412912016
0512412016
06t0612016
o6t2712016
0612812016
071o512016
0813012016
08/30/2016
08/30/2016
08/30/2016
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2.000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2;000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,003,920.00
2,000,160.00
I,999,020.00
1,995,340.00
1,998,160.00
1,999,520.00
2,000,860.00
2,000,060.00
1,993,340.00
1,996,940.00
1,999,160.00
1,998,160.00
1.993,080.00
2,001,520.00
2,003,240.00
1,993,680.00
2,000,040.00
I,999,520.00
1,999,140.00
2,002,820.O0
2,002,960.00
1,995,480.00
2,002,120.00
1,995,680.00
1,028,681.60
2,701,537.60
1,997,440.00
1,996,460.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.650
0.850
0.850
0.700
1.000
0.900
1.000
1.050
0.820
0.820
1.000
1.000
1.100
1.150
1.375
1.000
1.350
1.150
1.300
1.250
1.300
1.200
1.300
1.020
1.125
1.125
1.125
1.125
0.641
0.838
0.838
0.690
0.986
0.888
0.986
1.036
0.809
0.809
0.986
0.986
1.085
1.134
1.356
0.986
1.332
1.134
1.282
1.233
1.282
1.184
1.282
1.006
1.110
1.1 10
't.110
1.'1 1 0
1213012016
09t29t2017
1012712017
1212912017
0111612018
02t2612018
03t2912018
0412612018
07t0512018
0710612018
0712712018
0812312018
10t29t2018
11t19t2018
12128120'18
1212812018
03t29t2019
0412612019
0412912019
0512412019
06/06i2019
06t27t2019
0612812019
0710512019
o812812019
08128120'19
08t2812019
o812812019
AA
AA
AAA
AAA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
120
393
421
484
502
543
574
602
672
673
694
721
788
809
848
848
939
967
970
995
1,008
1,029
1,030
1,037
I,091
1,091
1,091
1,091
Subtotal and Average 54,091,774.19 55,735,000.00 55,698,039.20 55,735,000.00 1.044 785
Federal Agency lssues - Goupon
31 33EEC73 2329 Federal Farm Credit Bank
Subtotal and Average
Data Updated: SET_ME8: O912212016 O9:33
0612612015 2,000,000.00 1,999,160.00 1,998,636.68 0.550 AA 0.661 207 0312712A17
1,998,636.68 0.661 207
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0
3,611,478.36 2,000,000.00 1,999,160.00
Run Date: 09/2212016 - 09:34
Report Ver. 7.3.5
CUSIP lnvestment #lssuer
Average
Balancê
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - lnvestments
August 31,2016
Purchase
Date Par Value fJlarket Value
StatedBookValue Rate
Page 2
YTM Days to Maturity360 Maturity Dates&P
Certificates of Deposit - Bank
2050003183-7 2341 o11222016 u,a33.21 81,833.21Câlifornia Bank & Trust
Subtotal and Average 81,833.21 8l,833.21 81,833,21 81,833.21
81,833.21 0.030 0.030 508 01t22t2018
0.030 508
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF 9OO1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LAIF BABS 2O1O 9012 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Average
07t01t20't6
8,940,374.48
0.00
8,945p28.44
0.00
8,940,374.48
0.00
0.614
o.267
0.606
0.263
9,766,180.93 8,940,374.48 8,945,928,44 8,940,374.48 0.606
San Diego Count¡r Pool
sÐ couNTY PooL 9007 13.410,468.41 13,394,000.00 13,410,468.41 0.904 0.892San Diego County
Subtotal and Average 13,410,468.41 13,410,468,41 13,394,000.00 13,410,468,41 0.892
Total and Average 84,418,973.57 80,167,676.r0 80,118,960.85 80,166,312.78 0.959 552
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0Run Date: 09/2212016 - 09:34
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Cash
August 31,2016
Page 3
CUSIP lnvesûnent #lssuer Belânce
Average Purchase
Date
StâtedVâlue Râte
YTM Daysto
360 MaturityPar Value Market Value Book s&P
Union Bank
UNION MONEY
PETTY CASH
UNION OPERATING
PAYROLL
RESERVE.IO COPS
RESERVE-10 BABS
UBNA-2OIO BOND
UBNA.FLEX ACCT
9002
9003
9004
9005
9010
901 I
90f3
9014
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Averege Balance
07t01t2016
0710112016
07t01t2016
10,009.16
2,950.00
1,776,099.39
27,861.29
8,057.82
21J62.26
0.00
36,025.08
10,009.16
2,950.00
1,776,099.39
27,861.29
8,057.82
21,162.26
0.00
36,025.08
10,009.16
2,950.00
1,776,099.39
27,861.29
8,057.82
21,162.26
0.00
36,025.08
0.010
0.400
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.395
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.00
Total Cash and lnvestments
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 0933
84,418,973.57 82,049,84r.10 82,001,l 25.85 82,048,477.78 0.959 552
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0Run Date: 09/222016 - 09:34
Month End
GASB 31 Gompliance Detail
Sorted by Fund - Fund
August 1,2016 -August 31,2016
AdjusÍnent in Value
CUSIP lnvesÍnent# Fund
lnvestment
Class Matur¡ty
Date
Beg¡nn¡ng
lnvested Value
Purchase
of Pr¡ncípal
Addit¡on
to Pr¡ncipal
Redemption
of Principal
Amortization
AdjusÍnent
Change in
Market Value
Ending
lnvested Value
Fund: Treasury Fund
3134G92R1 2360
3134G8KL2 2340
3134G9SL2 2356
3'.t34G5{47 2301
3134G9D38 2363
3134G8Q44 2344
3134G8NM7 2345
3134G82M4 2351
3134G9G87 2353
3134G9AF4 2350
3'134G8\ ^¡r/5 2349
3134G94W 2347
3134G8X42 2348
3136G34U6 2367
3136G33N3 2365
3136G23G0 2304
3136G33N3 2364
3136G33N3 2366
3136G22W0 2342
3136G22W0 2343
3135G0YE7 2286
313048547 2355
313047WK7 2352
3I30A8KR3 2358
313047H73 2346
313046U28 2338
UNION OPERATING 9OO4
UBNA-2010 BOND 9013
PETTY CASH 9OO3
PAYROLL 9OO5
99
99
99
99
99
99
oo
oÔ
oo
ôô
99
99
99
99
oo
ôo
99
99
ôo
oo
ôo
oô
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Fair Valuê
Amort¡zed
Amortized
Fair Value
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amorl¡zed
Fair Value
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amort¡zed
Amort¡zed
Amorlized
Amort¡zed
Amortized
12t28t2018
02t26t2019
06t28t2019
1213012016
1212912017
0312912019
0912912017
04t29t2019
11t02t2018
0412612018
1012712017
0412612015
0712712018
08t28t2019
oe12812019
0811512017
0812812019
0812812019
02t2612019
0212612019
o8t26t2016
0212612018
05t24t201s
07t0612018
0312912018
1212812018
1,999,180.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,005,060.00
1,998,720.00
2,000,520.00
2,000,000.00
2,001,380.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,280.00
2,000,360.00
2,001,940.00
2,001,440.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,300.00
0.00
0.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,595.10
2,000,460.00
2,000,160.00
2,005,440.00
1,999,760.00
2,002,700.00
2,000,000.00
941,320.46
0.00
2,950.00
27,861.29
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,705,000.00
0.00
I,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
I,388,768.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
553,989.45
0.00
0.00
0.00
-5,500.00
0.00
0.00
-1,140.00
-3,380.00
480.00
0.00
-2,240.00
0.00
-220.00
-1,340.00
-2,420.00
-2,280.00
-3,540.00
-3,462.40
-300.00
-1,318.40
-2,560.00
0.00
-595.10
-460.00
-640.00
-2,620.00
-2,820.00
-1,840.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,993,680.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,003,920.00
1,995,340.00
2,000,040.00
2,000,000.00
1,999,1 40.00
0.00
2,000,060.00
1,999,020.00
1,999,520.00
1,999,160.00
't,996,460.00
2,701,537 .60
0.00
'1,028,681.60
1,997,440.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,999,520.00
2,002,820.00
I,996,940.00
2,000,860.00
2,000,000.00
1,776,099.39
0.00
2,950.00
27,861.29
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 Ogi33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
GD (PRF_GD) 7.1.1
ReportVer. 7.3.5
Run Date: 0922/2016 - 09:34
Month End
GASB 31 Compliance Deta¡l
Sorted by Fund - Fund
Adjustnent ¡n Value
Page2
Ending
lnvested ValueCUSIPlnvestment# Fund
lnvestment
Cfass Maturity
Dãte
Beginning
lnvested value
Purchase
of Pr¡ncipal
Addition
to Pr¡ncipal
Redempt¡on
of Principal
Amort¡zãt¡on
Adjustment
Change ¡n
Market Value
Fund: Treasury Fund
RESERVE-IOCOPS 9O1O
LAIF BABS 2O1O 9012
UBNA.FLEXACCT 9014
UNION MONEY 9OO2
RESERVE-IOBABS 9OI1
LA|F 9001
3133EGJU0 2362
3133EGJR7 2361
3133EGGS8 2359
3í33EEC73 2329
3133EGCZ6 2357
3133EGBG9 2354
3133EEYE4 2320
2050003183-7 234'l
313sG0G64 2336
3136G2R665 2334
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7
2,263.76
0.00
42,782.77
2,025,006.69
5,945.58
5,343,692.04
1,997,660.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,320.00
1,998,438.14
2,005,680.00
2,000,460.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
'13,410,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
99
99
99
99
oo
ôô
ôo
ôo
99
99
ôo
99
99
99
99
99
oo
Amortized
Fair Value
Amorl¡zed
Amort¡zed
Amort¡zed
Fâir Value
Fair Value
Amorlized
Fa¡r Value
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Amort¡zed
Fa¡r Value
0710512018
0710512019
0612712019
o312712017
06t06t2019
0812312018
01l'16120'18
01t2212018
1012912018
11t19t2018
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1 98.54
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,236.40
-4,320.00
0.00
-4,840.00
0.00
-2,720.00
-2,300.00
-1,840.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-16,000.00
5,794.06
0.00
0.00
13,634,759.16
15,216.68
9,500,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6,757.69
15,649,756.69
0.00
5,900,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8,057.82
0.00
36,025.08
10,009.16
21,162.26
8,945,928.44
1,993,340.00
2,000,000.00
1,995,480.00
1,998,636.68
2,002,960.00
1,998,1 60.00
1,998,160.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1 3,394,000.00
83,639,509.04 7,735,000.00 24,544,538.28 33,845,503.83 198,54 -68,939.50 82,004,802.53
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 09:33
Total 83,639,509.04 7,735,000.00 24,544,538.28 33,845,503.83 198.54 -68,939,50 82,004,802.53
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
GD (PRF_GD) 7.I.1
R€port Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 09/222016 - 09:34
Month End
Activity Report
Sorted By lssuer
August 1, 2016 - August 3l, 2016
Percent
lssuer ofPortfolio
Par Value
Beginning Current
Rate
Transaction
Date
Purchases or
Depos¡ts
Redempl¡ons or
VMlhdrâwals
Par Value
Balancê
End¡ng
BalanceCUSIPlnvestment #
lssuer: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Union Bank
UNION MONEY
UNION OPERATING
RESERVE-10 COPS
RESERVE.IO BABS
UBNA-FLEX ACCT
9002
9004
901 0
901 I
9014
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
0.010
0.400
0.010
0.010
1 3,634,759.16
I,388,768.38
5,794.06
15,216.68
0.00
1 5,649,756.69
553,989.45
0.00
0.00
6,757.69
3,048,130.55 15,044,538.28 16,210,503,83 1,882,165.00Subtotal and Balance
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAlFl
LAIF 9OO1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Balance
lssuerSubtotal 13.190%
5,340,374.48
8,388,505.03
0.614 9,500,000.00 5,900,000.00
9,500,000.00 5,900,000.00 8,940,374.48
24,5M,538.28 22,110,503.83 ,t0,822,539,48
lssuer: California Bank & Trust
Certificates of Deposit - Bank
Subtotel and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
8r,833.21
0.100%81,833.21
8l,833.21
0.00 0.00 81,833.21
lssuer: Fannie Mae
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
4,000,000.00 4,000,000,00
4.875%4,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 4,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Farm Gredit Bank
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Subtotal and Balance
Data Updated: SET_ME8: O912212016 O9:33
12,000,000.00 12,000,000.00
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5Run Date: 09122/20 16 - 09:34
Month End
Act¡vity Report
August l, 2016 - August 31, 2016
Par Value
Page 2
Par Value
lnvestment #
Percent
lssuer of Portfolio
Beginning
Balancè
Cufrent
Rate
Transact¡on
Date
Purchases or
Depos¡ts
Redemptions or
\flithdrawals
Ending
BalanceCUSIP
lssuer: Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
2,000,000.00
17.063%14,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00 0.00 14,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00
12.188%10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 10,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
2340
2353
Federâl Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortqage
3134G8KL2
3134G9G87
1.300
1.200
0812612016
0810212016
0.00
0.00
2.000,000.00
2,000,000.00
Subtotal and Balance
lssuerSubtotal 26.813Y"
26,000,000.00 0.00 4,000,000.00 22,000,000.00
26,000,000.00 0.00 4,000,000.00 22,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
3136G23G0 2304
3136G22W0 2342
3I36G2ZW0 2343
3136G33N3 2364
3136G33N3 2365
3136G33N3 2366
3136G34U6 2367
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal Nalional Mortage Assoc
Federal Nalional Mortage Assoc
1.050
1.125
1.125
1.125
1.125
1.125
1.125
08t1512016
08t26t2016
08t2612016
08/30/2016
08/30i2016
08/30/2016
oa|3012016
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Subtotal and Balance 5,735,000.00 7,735,000,00 5,735,000.00 7,735,000.00
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
3l3sGoYE7 2286 Federal National Mortage Assoc 0.625 08t26t2016 0.00 2,000,000.00
Subtotal and Balancê
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 09122120'16 09:33
2,000,000.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Þale: 09/2212016 - 09:34
Month End
Activ¡ty Report
August 1, 2016 - August 31, 2016
Pâr Value
Page 3
Pa¡Vâlue
Percent Beginn¡ng Current Transaction Purchases or Redempt¡ons or Ending
CUSIP lnvestment # lssuer of portfolio Balancó Rete Date Deposits Wthdrawals Balance
lssuersubtotal 9,427% 7,735,000.00 7'735'000.00 7,735,000.00 7'735'000.00
lssuer: San Diego County
San Diego County Pool
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
13,410,468,41 13,410,468.41
16.3440/.13,410,468.41 0.00 0.00 13,410,468.41
Totâl f00.000%83,615,806.65 32,279,538.28 33,845,503.83 82,049,841.10
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 09i33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
ReportVer.7.3.5
Run Date: 09/2212016 - 09:34
Month End
Duration Report
Sorted by lnvestment Type - lnvestment Type
Through 0813112016
lnvestment Book
Value
Par Market CurrentVelue Rate
Maturity/ Mod¡fiedCurrent
Yieldsecuri6/ lD lnvestnent# Fund lssuer Cless Value 360 Call Date Duration
3134G5447
3133EEYE4
3136G2R665
3r35G0G64
3130A6U28
3134G8Q44
3134G8NM7
3130A7H73
3134G9AW
3134G8X42
3l34G8WW5
3134G94F4
3134G8z.M4
3130A7WK7
3133EGBG9
31 30A8547
3l 34G9SL2
3l33EGCZ6
31 30A8KR3
3133EGGS8
3134G92R1
3133EGJR7
3I33EGJUO
31 34G9D38
31 36G33N3
3136G33N3
31 36G33N3
3136G34U6
2301
2320
2334
2336
2338
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
99
oo
oo
ôô
oo
oo
ôô
oo
ôô
ôô
99
oo
99
99
oo
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Fannie Mae
Fannie Mae
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federâl Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federãl Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bânk
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgagè
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Fair
Fair
Amort
Amort
Amort
Fair
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fa¡r
Fa¡r
Fair
Fair
Fai¡
Amort
Fa¡r
Fair
Fair
Fair
Amort
Fair
Fah
Fa¡r
Fair
Fa¡r
Fair
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
I,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,003,920.00
I,998, I 60.00
2,001,520.00
1,993,080.00
2,003,240.00
2,000,040.00
2,000,160.00
2,000,860.00
1,999,520.00
1 ,999,1 60.00
1,999,020.00
2,000,060.00
I,999,140.00
2,002,820.00
I,998,160.00
1,999,520.00
2,002J20.00
2,002,960.00
1,996,940.00
I,995,480.00
1,993,680.00
I,995,680.00
I,993,340.00
I,995,340.00
1 ,028,681.60
2,701,537 .60
1,997 ,440.00
1,996,460.00
.6500000
1.000000
1.150000
1.'t00000
1.375000
L350000
.8500000
1.000000
1.1 50000
L000000
.8500000
1.050000
1.300000
1.250000
1.000000
.9000000
1.300000
1.300000
.8200000
1.200000
1.000000
1.020000
.8200000
.7000000
L125000
1.125000
1.1 25000
't.125000
0.641
0.986
1.134
1.085
1.356
1.332
0.838
0.986
1.134
0.986
0.838
1.036
't.282
1.233
0.986
0.888
1.282
1.282
0.809
1.184
0.986
1.006
0.809
0.690
1.110
1.1 10
1.1 10
1.1 10
o.257
1.068
1.115
1.263
1.304
1.349
0.843
0.973
1.159
1.022
0.893
1.048
1.317
1.198
't.047
0.948
1.262
1.246
0.904
1.282
1.138
1.O97
1.003
0.877
1.169
1.169
1.169
1. 185
1213012016
0111612018
1111912018
1012912018
1212812018
0312s12019
0912912017
03t29t2018
0412612019
0712712018
10t27t20't7
0412612018
o4t29t2019
0512412019
0812312018
0212612018
0612812019
06/06/201 I
0710612018
0612712019
12t2812018
0710512019
0710512018
1212912017
0812812019
08t28t2019
0812812019
oa|2812019
0.328
1.045
2.174
2.120
2.276
2.510
1.067
1.554
2.595
1.875
't.144
1.628
2.596
2.668
1.952
1.472
2.760
2.698
1.826
2.759
2.287
2.791
1.823
1.316
2.933
2.933
2.933
2.933
Data Updated : SET_ME8: 091221201 6 O9:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DU (PRF_DU) 7.1.r
ReportVer.7.3.5
Run Date: 09/22X2016 - 09:34 Page I
Month End
Duration Report
Sorted by lnvestment Type - lnvestment Type
Through 0813112016
lnvestment
Class
Book
Value
Per Market
Vâluê
Current
Reto
YTM Current360 Yleld
Matur¡ty/ Mod¡f¡ed
SecurltulD lnvestment# Fund lssuer Value Call Date Durâtion
3133EEC73 2329
2050003183-7 2341
LA|F 9001
LAIF BABS 2010 9012
sD couNry 9007
99
99
99
99
99
Federal Farm Credit Bank
California Bank & Trust
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
San Diego County
Amort
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
.5500000
.0300000
.6140000
.2670000
.9040000
0.661
0.030
0.606
o.263
0.892
0.624
0.030
0.614
0.267
0.904
0312712017
01t2212018
0.568
1.390 t
0.000
0.000
0.000
I,998,636.68
81,833.21
8,940,374.48
0.00
13,410,468.41
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
8,940,374.48
0.00
13,410,468.41
1,999,1 60.00
81,833.2'l
8,945,928.44
0.00
13,394,000.00
Report Total
t = Durat¡on can not be calculated on these investments due to ¡ncomplete Market price data.
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 09:33
80,166,312.78 80,167,676.10 80,fi8,960.85 0,987 1.477 t
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DU (PRF_DU) 7.1,1
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 09122/2016 - 09:34 Page 2
Month End
lnterest Earnings
Sorted by Fund - Fund
August 1,2016 -August 31,2016
Yield on Beginning Book Value
Adjusted lnterest Earn¡ngs
CUSIP fnvestmênt# Fund Type
Secur¡ty End¡ng
Per Value
Beginn¡ng
Book Value
End¡ng MaturityBookValue Date
CurrentAnnual¡zedRete Yield
Amort¡zat¡on/
Accret¡on
Adjusted lnterest
Earnings
lnterest
Earned
Fund: Treasury Fund
3134G92R1 2360
3134G8KL2 2340
3134G9SL2 2356
3',134o5447 2301
3134G9D38 2363
3134G8044 2344
3134G8NM7 2345
3134G82M4 2351
3134G9G87 2353
3134G94F4 2350
3134G8\ ^/v5 2349
3134G94W 2347
3134G8X42 2348
3136G34U6 2367
3136G33N3 2365
3'136G23G0 2304
3136G33N3 2364
3136G33N3 2366
3136G22W0 2342
3136G22W0 2343
3135G0YE7 2286
313048547 2355
313047WK7 2352
313048KR3 2358
313047H73 2346
3I30A6UZ8 2338
UNION OPERATING 9OO4
RESERVE-IOCOPS 9O1O
UNION MONEY 9OO2
99
oo
99
99
99
99
99
oo
99
99
99
99
oo
99
99
99
oo
oo
oo
99
oô
oo
99
99
99
oo
99
MC1
MC't
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MCl
MC1
MC1
MCl
MC1
MC1
MC1
MCl
MC1
MC1
MCI
MCl
MCl
MC1
FAC
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC'l
PA1
PA1
PAI
2,000,000.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,705,000.00
0.00
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,776,099.39
8,057.82
10,009.16
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,080.92
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
941,320.46
2,263.76
2,025,006.69
2,000,000.00'1212812018
0.00 0212612019
2,000,000.00 0612812019
2,000,000.00 1213012016
2,000,000.00 12t2912017
2,000,000.00 0312912019
2,000,000.00 0912912017
2,000,000.00 0412912019
0.00 1110212018
2,000,000.00 0412612018
2,000,000.00 10127 120'17
2,000,000.00 04126120'19
2,000,000.00 07 127 12018
2,000,000.00 0812812019
2,705,000.00 0812812019
o.00 08115t2017
1,030,000.00 0812812019
2,000,000.00 0812812019
o.o0 0212612019
0.00 0212612019
o.o0 08t2612016
2,000,000.00 0212612018
2,000,000.00 0512412019
2,000,000.00 07 10612018
2,000,000.00 03129120'18
2,000,000.00 121281201e
't,776,099.39
8,057.82
't0,009.16
1.000
1.300
1.300
0.650
0.700
1.350
0.850
1.300
1.200
1.050
0.850
1.150
1.000
1.125
1.125
1.050
1.125
1.1?5
1.125
1.125
0.625
0.900
1.250
0.820
1.000
1.375
0.400
0.010
0.0'10
0.981
1.318
1.276
0.638
0.687
1.325
0.834
t.¿to
1.217
1.030
0.834
1.128
0.981
0.570
0.570
1.065
0.570
0.570
1.141
1.141
0.575
0.883
1.226
0.805
0.981
1.349
0.982
0.016
0.005
1,666.67
1,805.56
2,166.67
1,083.34
't,'166.67
2,250.00
1,416.67
2,166.67
66.67
1,750.00
1,416.67
1,916.67
1,666.67
62.50
84.53
816.67
32.19
62.50
804.69
2,113.29
868.05
1,500.00
2,083.33
1,366.67
1,666.66
2,291.67
785,22
0.03
9.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-80.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,666.67
1,805.56
2,166.67
1,083.34
1,166.67
2,250.00
1,416.67
2,166.67
66.67
1,750.00
1,416.67
1,916.67
1,666.67
62.50
84.53
816.67
32.1 9
62.50
804.69
2,113.29
787.13
1,500.00
2,083.33
1,366.67
1,666.66
2,291.67
785.22
0.03
9.04
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 09 1221201 6 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
rE (PRF_|E) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 0922/2016 - 09:34
Month End
lnterest Earnings
August l, 2016 -August31,2016
Page 2
Adjusted lnterest Earn¡ngs
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
Secur¡ty
Type
End¡ng Beg¡nning
Book ValuePar Value BookValue Date
Ending Matur¡ty CurrentAnnualizedRate Yiêld
lnterest
Earned
Amortization/ Adjusted lnterestAccret¡on Earnings
Fund: Treasury Fund
RESERVE-lOBABS 9011
LAIF 9001
3133EGJU0 2362
3133EGJR7 2361
3133EGGS8 23s9
3133EEC73 2329
3133EGCZ6 2357
3133EGBG9 23s4
3133EEYE4 2320
2050003183-7 2341
3135G0G64 2336
3136G2R665 2334
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7
99
99
oo
99
99
99
99
oo
oo
99
99
99
oo
PA1
LA1
MC1
MC1
MCl
FAC
MC1
MC1
MCl
BCD
MC1
MCr
LA3
21J6226
8,940,374.48
2,000,000.00
2.000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,410,468.41
5,945.58
5,340,374.48
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,998,438.14
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,410,468.41
21J6226
8,940,374.48
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,998,636.68
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,410,468.41
07t0512018
0710512019
06t27t2019
03t27t2017
06/06/2019
0812312018
0111612018
01t22t2018
1012912018
1111912018
0.010
0.614
0.820
1.020
1.200
0.550
1.300
1.000
1.000
0.030
1.100
1.150
0.904
0.016
1.123
0.805
1.001
1.177
0.657
1.276
0.981
0.981
0.031
1.079
1.141
0.904
0.08
5,092.86
1,366.67
r,700.00
2,000.00
9'16.67
2J66.67
1,666.66
1,666.67
2.12
1,833.33
1,937.50
10,296.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
I 98.54
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.08
5,092.86
1,366.67
1,700.00
2,000.00
1,115.21
2,166.67
1,666.66
1,666.67
2.12
1,833.33
1,937.50
10,296.31
Subtotal 8f,983,004.73 83,540,731.65 81,981,641.41 0.975 65,731.51 117.62 65,849.13
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0912212016 09133
Total 81,983,004.73 83,540,731.65 81,981,641.41 0.975 65,731.51 117.62 65,849.13
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
tE (PRF_|E) 7.2.0
ReportVer. 7.3.5
Run Dâte: 09/2212016 - 09:34
Check Total
6,271.71
4,158.73
19,240.00
12,114.23
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
2046640 08/31/16 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 992451 08/11/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,920.89
992452 08/11/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,306.21
991787 08/04/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,168.86
991786 08/04/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 776.04
992363 08/10/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 566.66
991761 08/03/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 533.05
2046745 09/21/16 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 993451 08/25/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,320.61
993390 08/24/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,248.58
993046 08/18/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,056.49
993389 08/24/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 273.73
993452 08/25/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 259.32
2046710 09/14/16 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 7064 09/12/16 SHAREPOINT SERVICES (8/3/16-8/18/16)675.00 675.00
2046711 09/14/16 12174 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC 43 08/22/16 DISINFECTION SYSTEM (ENDING 7/29/16)31,692.66 31,692.66
2046641 08/31/16 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1416 08/04/16 DEVELOPER PLAN REVIEW (7/1/16-7/29/16)6,353.06 6,353.06
2046746 09/21/16 17534 AIDA HILL Ref002466738 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000203932 214.40 214.40
2046642 08/31/16 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 707312016 08/08/16 UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES (7/16/16-7/31/16)8,293.00 8,293.00
2046747 09/21/16 17532 ALBERTO ORTIZ Ref002466736 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000197661 9.54 9.54
2046671 09/07/16 17514 ALICE MARIN Ref002466557 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000203649 13.74 13.74
2046712 09/14/16 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM201655 08/08/16 MGMT/INSP (7/1/16-7/31/16)8,960.00
CM201654 08/08/16 MGMT/INSP (7/1/16-7/31/16)3,750.00
CM201653 08/08/16 MGMT/INSP (7/1/16-7/31/16)3,450.00
CM201656 08/08/16 MGMT/INSP (3/1/16-7/31/16)3,080.00
2046672 09/07/16 17510 ANA BEAL Ref002466553 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000161094 357.41 357.41
2046673 09/07/16 17516 ANGELA JOHNSON Ref002466559 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000204925 49.58 49.58
2046643 08/31/16 03492 AQUA-METRIC SALES COMPANY 0061864IN 08/15/16 LARGE SENSUS METERS 31,207.02 31,207.02
2046674 09/07/16 17507 ARTURO VILLEGAS Ref002466550 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000119417 130.00 130.00
2046713 09/14/16 07785 AT&T 000008542693 09/02/16 TELEPHONE SERVICES (8/2/16-9/1/16)6,189.59
000008412551 08/02/16 TELEPHONE SERVICES (7/2/16-8/1/16)5,924.64
2046714 09/14/16 17526 BARBARA JONES 3006083116 09/12/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 102.37 102.37
2046675 09/07/16 16559 BARNHART-REESE CONSTRUCTION CO Ref002466562 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000217562 2,745.70 2,745.70
2046748 09/21/16 17529 BEN WEST Ref002466733 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000087606 100.77 100.77
2046749 09/21/16 17536 BREANNA MCDANIEL Ref002466740 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000208030 13.26 13.26
Page 1 of 7
Check Total
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
735.00
887.00
46.00
1,075.00
2046750 09/21/16 17540 BRUCE MEYER Ref002466744 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223470 23.98 23.98
2046715 09/14/16 02989 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 16081602 08/16/16 DEBT STATEMENT 500.00 500.00
2046644 08/31/16 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 8060 08/05/16 SCANNING SERVICES 90.72 90.72
2046676 09/07/16 17504 CARRIE DANIELSON Ref002466546 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000019546 79.57 79.57
2046677 09/07/16 17520 CASEY WATSON Ref002466563 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000222227 45.95 45.95
2046716 09/14/16 17022 CASTLE ACCESS INC 0223092048 09/01/16 COLOCATION SERVICES 2,098.25 2,098.25
2046751 09/21/16 16746 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS INC 381050974 12/16/15 2015 UWMP UPDATE (10/31/15-11/27/15)2,243.64 2,243.64
2046678 09/07/16 17521 CHARLES SAROSY Ref002466564 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223475 235.37 235.37
2046752 09/21/16 15256 CIGNA GROUP INSURANCE / LINA 9267091016 09/10/16 AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (SEPT 2016)4,242.64 4,242.64
2046753 09/21/16 00446 CITY OF CHULA VISTA 982016 09/15/16 SPONSORSHIP 1,000.00 1,000.00
2046679 09/07/16 15365 CITY OF CHULA VISTA HARBORFEST 81116 08/16/16 SPONSORSHIP - HARBORFEST 2016 500.00 500.00
2046645 08/31/16 15616 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 0002080116 08/01/16 INTERNET CIRCUITS (AUG 2016)1,333.00 1,333.00
2046717 09/14/16 15616 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 0002090116 09/01/16 INTERNET CIRCUITS (SEPT 2016)2,641.94 2,641.94
2046718 09/14/16 05622 CORRPRO COMPANIES INC 391463 07/27/16 COATING INSPECTION (7/1/16-7/31/16)7,812.50 7,812.50
2046646 08/31/16 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1352071716 07/17/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (9/30/16-9/30/17)443.00
2785071716 07/17/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (9/30/16-9/30/17)292.00
2046647 08/31/16 02122 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 2016070505714 07/05/16 PERMIT FEES # 05714 (SEPT 2016-SEPT2017)529.00
2016070505774 07/05/16 PERMIT FEES # 05774 (SEPT 2016-SEPT 2017)358.00
2046680 09/07/16 00134 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO EIR090116 09/01/16 EIR FILING FEE 3,120.00 3,120.00
2046719 09/14/16 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWAROTAYMWD071608/17/16 EXCAVATION PERMITS (JULY 2016)3,280.70 3,280.70
2046754 09/21/16 07494 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1757936417A 09/14/16 SEWER SERVICE (7/1/15-6/30/16)157.06
2046681 09/07/16 02756 COX COMMUNICATIONS INC 6702082516 08/25/16
157.06
TELECOMM SVCS / METRO-E (8/24/16-9/23/16)5,091.14 5,091.14
2046682 09/07/16 17518 CRISTHA GOMEZ Ref002466561 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000216832 46.00 46.00
2046755 09/21/16 17537 ELIZABETH DONAHUE Ref002466741 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000216363 32.36 32.36
2046683 09/07/16 08023 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SPECIALISTS 0077186IN 07/31/16 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (JULY 2016)698.50 698.50
2046649 08/31/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6080615 08/08/16 LAB ANALYSIS (7/22/16-8/5/16)640.00
6080775 08/15/16 LAB ANALYSIS (7/30/16-8/5/16)435.00
2046720 09/14/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6081190 08/29/16 LAB ANALYSIS (8/12/16-8/24/16)495.00
Page 2 of 7
Check Total
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
980.00
1,500.00
1,101.49
15,383.99
852.65
4,779.00
6080984 08/22/16 LAB ANALYSIS (8/6/16-8/18/16)485.00
2046721 09/14/16 03725 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH 93177145 08/26/16 ENTERPRISE LICENSE/SUPPORT (7/26/16-7/25/17)53,996.00 53,996.00
2046684 09/07/16 14320 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL INC L0279662 08/31/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (8/9/16)800.00 800.00
2046722 09/14/16 14320 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL INC L0279092 08/26/16 LABORATORY ANALYSIS (8/17/16-8/18/16)1,110.00
L0279548 08/30/16 LABORATORY ANALYSIS (8/17/16)390.00
2046756 09/21/16 16469 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 067121 09/14/16 COFFEE SERVICES 700.28 700.28
2046650 08/31/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x835404 08/12/16 VEHICLE WASHING (8/12/16)291.60 291.60
2046723 09/14/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x840254 08/19/16 VEHICLE WASHING (8/19/16)200.88 200.88
2046757 09/21/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x845518 08/26/16 VEHICLE WASHING (8/26/16)136.19 136.19
2046685 09/07/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2466594 09/08/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100.00
2046758 09/21/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2466765 09/22/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100.00
2046724 09/14/16 03537 GHA TECHNOLOGIES INC 9878446 08/18/16 SOFTWARE SUPPORT 3,677.70 3,677.70
2046725 09/14/16 00101 GRAINGER INC 9209170514 08/26/16 INVENTORY 734.16
9207460222 08/25/16 INVENTORY 367.33
2046686 09/07/16 17523 GROSSMONT UNION HS DISTRICT Ref002466566 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000229637 1,658.74 1,658.74
2046687 09/07/16 17513 GUILLERMO VILLAREAL Ref002466556 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000186469 76.78 76.78
2046726 09/14/16 00174 HACH COMPANY 10064318 08/16/16 HACH ANNUAL SERVICE 12,740.00
10075929 08/23/16 HACH APA6000 REPAIR 1,342.99
10075898 08/23/16 HACH APA6000 REPAIR 1,301.00
2046727 09/14/16 14076 HDS WHITE CAP CONST SUPPLY 50004863205 08/17/16 SPEC-PLUG 1,110.03 1,110.03
2046651 08/31/16 02008 HELIX ENVIRONMNTL PLANNING INC 21 08/03/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (7/1/16-7/31/16)15,508.51 15,508.51
2046652 08/31/16 17484 HORTENCIA MACIAS 6802082616 08/26/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 143.38 143.38
2046653 08/31/16 13349 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES 2016070002 08/09/16 LAND SURVEYING (7/1/16-7/31/16)11,656.00 11,656.00
2046728 09/14/16 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0116625 08/16/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (7/1/16-7/29/16)533.75
0116626 08/16/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (7/1/16-7/29/16)318.90
2046688 09/07/16 17106 INSITE TOWERS DEVELOPMENT LLC 364008 09/01/16 ANTENNA SUBLEASE (SEPT 2016)1,593.00
35403407 07/01/16 ANTENNA SUBLEASE (JULY 2016)1,593.00
35403408 08/01/16 ANTENNA SUBLEASE (AUG 2016)1,593.00
2046689 09/07/16 17508 JAMES LAWLESS Ref002466551 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000125455 44.81 44.81
2046690 09/07/16 17522 JAZMEN WILLIAMS Ref002466565 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000224665 12.50 12.50
Page 3 of 7
Check Total
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
12,355.00
206.78
243.45
2046690 09/07/16 17522 JAZMEN WILLIAMS Ref002466565 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000224665 12.50 12.50
2046654 08/31/16 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 697591 08/11/16 CHEMICALS 1,837.80 1,837.80
2046691 09/07/16 17511 JENNIFER GRAF-HARRISON Ref002466554 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000168893 34.19 34.19
2046759 09/21/16 17533 JENNIFER LEWIS Ref002466737 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000203345 29.43 29.43
2046760 09/21/16 17530 JOSE SILVA Ref002466734 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000194438 75.00 75.00
2046692 09/07/16 17509 JUAN TELLO Ref002466552 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000154577 536.85 536.85
2046761 09/21/16 17535 JUSTIN ROBERTS Ref002466739 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000204026 5.12 5.12
2046655 08/31/16 14808 KOEPPEN, KEVIN 070116063017 08/29/16 AICPA MEMBERSHIP 255.00 255.00
2046693 09/07/16 17505 LATHAM LAWRENCE Ref002466547 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000032444 52.05 52.05
2046694 09/07/16 17517 LUSARDI CONSTRUCTION Ref002466560 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000207629 1,726.33 1,726.33
2046695 09/07/16 14946 MARILYN SHEPARD 20160826OTAY 08/26/16 TRAINING 2,400.00 2,400.00
2046696 09/07/16 17512 MARTIN MACIAS Ref002466555 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000176110 143.38 143.38
2046729 09/14/16 14364 MARTIN, DAN 49389090816 09/08/16 LICENSE RENEWAL REIMBURSEMENT 115.00 115.00
2046697 09/07/16 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 0012443IN 08/16/16 REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 1,223.85 1,223.85
2046698 09/07/16 16613 MISSION RESOURCE CONSERVATION 368 09/01/16 HOME WATER EVALUATION (AUG 2016)281.25 281.25
2046762 09/21/16 17528 NANCY ZITO Ref002466732 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000074999 135.82 135.82
2046763 09/21/16 17542 NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE Ref002466746 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000224761 251.08 251.08
2046699 09/07/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2466584 09/08/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,205.12 8,205.12
2046764 09/21/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2466755 09/22/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,305.12 8,305.12
2046730 09/14/16 02027 NTH GENERATION COMPUTING INC 29060H 08/24/16 VEEAM RENEWAL 7,755.00
29065H 08/24/16 VEEAM RENEWAL 4,600.00
2046656 08/31/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 855495381001 08/09/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 106.82
854901261001 08/03/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 70.71
854901359001 08/03/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 29.25
2046765 09/21/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 856928817001 08/12/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 145.09
859739270001 08/25/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 98.36
2046731 09/14/16 17527 OTERO, TENILLE 071116082216 09/08/16 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (7/11/16-8/22/16)112.66 112.66
2046657 08/31/16 01002 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY 309229 08/03/16 INVENTORY 4,152.38
309360 08/15/16 INVENTORY 3,996.00
Page 4 of 7
Check Total
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
10,286.78
118,639.86
123,843.40
309246 08/03/16 INVENTORY 2,138.40
2046766 09/21/16 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 092016 09/20/16 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 830.33 830.33
2046767 09/21/16 15948 PICA PIPELINE INSPECTION AND 103A 06/21/16 INSPECTION/CONDITION ASSESSMENT 18,000.00 18,000.00
2046768 09/21/16 03351 POSADA, ROD 091016091416 09/15/16 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (9/10/16-9/14/16)1,457.11 1,457.11
2046658 08/31/16 16208 POSM SOFTWARE LLC 1145 01/21/16 SOFTWARE SUPPORT 4,500.00 4,500.00
2046732 09/14/16 10819 PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE 161404 08/25/16 ANALYSIS PROGRAM (SEPT 2016-AUG 2017)7,500.00 7,500.00
2046769 09/21/16 07346 PRIME ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC 267 08/26/16 ELECTRICAL WORK 2,941.00 2,941.00
2046659 08/31/16 03613 PSOMAS 120964 08/11/16 AS-NEEDED DESIGN (7/1/16-7/28-16)1,026.25 1,026.25
2046733 09/14/16 03613 PSOMAS 120998 08/16/16 DESIGN SERVICES (ENDING 7/28/16)31,442.55 31,442.55
2046660 08/31/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2464865 08/25/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 197,512.18 197,512.18
2046734 09/14/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2466586 09/08/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 199,380.30 199,380.30
2046661 08/31/16 15647 RFYEAGER ENGINEERING LLC 16136 08/02/16 CORROSION/COATING INSP (7/1/16-7/31/16)9,812.50 9,812.50
2046735 09/14/16 00521 RICK POST WELD & WET TAPPING 11266 08/17/16 WELD REPAIRS ON 30" CMLC (8/10/16-8/11/16)1,996.00 1,996.00
2046770 09/21/16 05849 ROBERT DE GUZMAN Ref002466731 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000067942 71.83 71.83
2046700 09/07/16 17506 RODRIGO PAZ Ref002466549 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000075997 107.46 107.46
2046736 09/14/16 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000000 08/25/16 MWD SCWS - HEWS 1,100.00 1,100.00
2046701 09/07/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 082516 08/25/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)75,743.89
082416 08/24/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)33,727.35
082216 08/22/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)9,168.62
2046737 09/14/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 083116 08/31/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)92,803.66
082316 08/23/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)30,976.26
090116 09/01/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)63.48
2046771 09/21/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 090116a 09/01/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)280.89 280.89
2046772 09/21/16 17539 SANDRA RODRIGUEZ Ref002466743 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000222866 29.14 29.14
2046773 09/21/16 00419 SHAPE PRODUCTS 4005811 08/04/16 POTASSIUM IODIDE 1,412.43 1,412.43
2046774 09/21/16 17541 SLF IV MILLENIA LLC Ref002466745 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223920 2,088.98 2,088.98
2046775 09/21/16 17538 SSC SURGICAL SPECIALTIES CORP Ref002466742 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000216869 224.60 224.60
2046702 09/07/16 01460 STATE WATER RESOURCES 090116 09/01/16 ELAP AMENDMENT FEE 681.00 681.00
2046662 08/31/16 17487 STEPHANIE CHEN 08232016SC 08/29/16 FINGERPRINTING SERVICES 20.00 20.00
Page 5 of 7
Check Total
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
13,606.40
178.15
319.97
148,133.34
2046776 09/21/16 17531 STEVENS WHITESIDE Ref002466735 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000194985 276.64 276.64
2046777 09/21/16 03263 STRUNKS JR, DALE 09/06/16 09/19/16 SAFETY BOOTS 150.00 150.00
2046703 09/07/16 17515 SUMMER SINGER Ref002466558 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000203686 7.19 7.19
2046778 09/21/16 15974 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL Ben2466753 09/22/16 MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD 5,108.86 5,108.86
2046738 09/14/16 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 428170 08/23/16 UNLEADED FUEL 8,626.38
428171 08/23/16 DIESEL FUEL 4,980.02
2046663 08/31/16 14576 SWIATKOWSKI, KEITH 08252016KS 08/25/16 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 201.00 201.00
2046704 09/07/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2466596 09/08/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 184.61 184.61
2046779 09/21/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2466769 09/22/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 184.61 184.61
2046780 09/21/16 17543 THAD BARRIER Ref002466747 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000225955 35.75 35.75
2046664 08/31/16 16744 THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE 002838843 08/03/16 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY 331.80 331.80
2046705 09/07/16 11978 TOM LUM Ref002466548 09/01/16 UB Refund Cst #0000070092 99.81 99.81
2046781 09/21/16 17544 TOM THORNTON Ref002466748 09/20/16 UB Refund Cst #0000230140 38.70 38.70
2046665 08/31/16 17000 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 507312016 08/05/16 RSD SEWER REHABILITATION (ENDING 7/31/16)155,580.89 155,580.89
2046739 09/14/16 03261 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045167006 07/28/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES 3,939.97 3,939.97
2046706 09/07/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144345624 08/16/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/11/16-9/7/16)98.17
1144345721 08/16/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/12/16-9/8/16)79.98
2046740 09/14/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144373562 08/23/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/19/16-9/15/16)80.03
1144373561 08/23/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/19/16-9/15/16)79.98
1144373560 08/23/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/19/16-9/15/16)79.98
1144373559 08/23/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/20/16-9/16/16)79.98
2046782 09/21/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144406546 08/31/16
2046667 08/31/16 07674 US BANK CC20160822255 08/22/16
PATROLLING SERVICES (AUG 2016)110.00 110.00
148,133.34
PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/31/16-9/27/16)79.98 79.98
CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)
2046741 09/14/16 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 1396182 08/31/16
2046707 09/07/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2466590 09/08/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 14,803.12 14,803.12
2046708 09/07/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2466592 09/08/16 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 920.77 920.77
2046783 09/21/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2466761 09/22/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 13,989.43 13,989.43
2046784 09/21/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2466763 09/22/16 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 820.77 820.77
2046785 09/21/16 12686 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2466767 09/22/16 401A TERMINAL PAY 35,140.63 35,140.63
Page 6 of 7
Check Total
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 8/25/2016 - 9/21/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount
6,616.26
336.22
2046668 08/31/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 484116 08/15/16 ALARM MONITORING (SEPT 2016)1,548.92 1,548.92
2046709 09/07/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 456875a 02/09/16 SECURITY AND ACCESS UPGRADE 8,399.50 8,399.50
2046742 09/14/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 484573 08/17/16 ALARM FOR 980 1 & 2 RESERVOIR (07/13/16-07/29/16)10,661.66 10,661.66
2046786 09/21/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 485456 09/06/16 VIDEOFIED SECURITY CAMERA 1,987.15
485458 09/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (8/17/16)739.73
485466 09/06/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (8/18/16)671.94
485468 09/06/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (7/15/16)662.54
485467 09/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (8/17/16)575.04
485457 09/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (8/18/16)464.26
485460 09/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (8/25/16)422.21
485462 09/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (8/19/16)390.37
485461 09/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (8/23/16)363.02
485464 09/06/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (8/2/16)204.00
485469 09/06/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (8/2/16)136.00
2046669 08/31/16 15726 WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 2137 07/31/16 HYDRAULIC MODELING (ENDING 7/31/16)1,197.50 1,197.50
2046743 09/14/16 03781 WATTON, MARK 080216082616 09/08/16 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (8/2/16-8/26/16)212.76
070116072916 09/08/16 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (7/1/16-7/29/16)123.46
2046744 09/14/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 107633 08/25/16 BEE REMOVAL 350.00 350.00
2046670 08/31/16 14857 YSI INCORPORATED 654764 08/03/16 VISOLID 700 IQ PROBE 3,610.30 3,610.30
Amount Pd Total:1,477,200.65
Check Grand Total:1,477,200.65
Page 7 of 7