HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-06-16 Board Packet 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
DISTRICT BOARDROOM
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY
July 6, 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
APRIL 6, 2016 AND MAY 4, 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 TO-
DAY'S AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A RE-
QUEST IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO
DISCUSS A PARTICULAR ITEM:
a) APPROVE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO CALTRANS UTILITY
AGREEMENT NUMBER 33622 FOR THE SR 11/125/905 CON-
NECTOR RAMPS BLOW OFF RELOCATION PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $847.79
b) APPROVE A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE CAROLLO ENGI-
NEERS, INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CON-
TRACT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT OF THE
870-2 PUMP STATION PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EX-
CEED $42,700
c) APPROVE A FIVE (5) YEAR AGREEMENT (THREE [3] YEARS
WITH TWO [2] ADDITIONAL YEARS AT THE DISTRICT’S OP-
TION) WITH ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. (ALLIANT)
2
FOR BENEFIT CONSULTING AND BROKER SERVICES IN AN
AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $148,480 AND IDENTIFYING AL-
LIANT AS THE DISTRICT’S BROKER OF RECORD
d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4309 UPDATING BOARD OF DIREC-
TORS POLICY NO. 22, DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND
PROCEDURE, TO CHANGE THE RANDOM TESTING PERCENT-
AGES FOR ALL EMPLOYEES SUBJECT TO THIS POLICY AND
REVISE THE DEFINITION OF SAFETY-SENSITIVE DUTIES
e) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4308 AMENDING BOARD OF DIREC-
TORS POLICY NO. 35, THE MEDICAL RESERVE FUND FOR
DISTRICT RETIREES, OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDI-
NANCES TO REFLECT THE CURRENT PROCESSES AND PRO-
CEDURES FOR THE MEDICAL RESERVE FUND
f) REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONSIDER
PLACING A PERMANENT MORATORIUM ON THE INSTALLA-
TION OF NEW RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES ON OTAY MESA
ACTION ITEMS
7. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) APPROVE THE WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT REPORT
DATED MAY 2016 FOR THE OTAY 250 SUNROAD EAST OTAY
MESA BUSINESS PARK SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT PRO-
JECT, AS REQUIRED BY SENATE BILLS 610 AND 221 (CO-
BURN-BOYD)
8. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4310 DECLARING AN END TO WA-
TER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2- SUPPLY ALERT CONDI-
TION (CAREY)
b) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 556 AMENDING SECTION 39, WATER
SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM, OF THE DISTRICT’S
CODE OF ORDINANCES (CAREY)
9. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
REPORTS
10. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
a) SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
3
11. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
12. PRESIDENT’S REPORT/REQUESTS
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
13. CLOSED SESSION
a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGA-
TION Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision
(d) of Section 54956.9:
1 CASE
RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
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 July 1, 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 Di-
rectors (Government Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on July 1, 2016.
/s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary
1
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
April 6, 2016
1. The meeting was called to order by President Thompson at 3:31 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Directors Present: Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, General Counsel Dan
Shinoff, Asst. General Manager German Alvarez, Chief of
Engineering Rod Posada, Chief Financial Officer Joe
Beachem, Chief of Administration and Information
Technology Adolfo Segura, 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 Lopez, and 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 the agenda.
5. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY 3, 2016
Director Smith indicated that he wished to clarify the comments he made in his
Director’s report regarding an agency in western Texas who developed a plan to
provide Direct Potable Reuse water to their customer from their wastewater
treatment plant. He stated that he wished to note that the plant has been
operational since April 2014.
A motion was made by Director Smith, seconded by Director Lopez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
2
Absent: None
to approve the minutes of the February 3, 2016 board meeting.
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.
CONSENT CALENDAR
7. 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 Smith 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) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 553 TO AMEND SECTION 26, WATER
RECYCLING PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES; SECTION
27, REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS FOR OBTAINING WATER
SERVICE; AND SECTION 31, TEMPORARY WATER SERVICE, OF THE
DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES; AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.
4298 TO AMEND POLICY NO. 10, REQUIREMENT OF APPROVAL FOR
A SPAGHETTI LINE, OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES
b) APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 7.2.8, BOARD
AUTHORIZED PURCHASES EXCEEDING THE GENERAL MANAGER’S
AUTHORITY, OF THE DISTRICT’S PURCHASING MANUAL TO CODIFY
CURRENT PRACTICES AND TO STREAMLINE THE PROCUREMENT
OF ANNUAL SERVICE AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS FOR
BOARD ADOPTED TECHNOLOGIES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND
SERVICES
c) APPROVE A NEW FIVE-YEAR SEWER BILLING SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WITH FIVE
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR OPTIONAL TERMS
ACTION ITEMS
3
8. BOARD
a) CONSIDER CASTING THE DISTRICT’S VOTE IN THE LOCAL AGENCY
FORMATION COMMISSION’S (LAFCO) 2015-2016 RUN-OFF
ELECTION FOR AN ALTERNATE DISTRICT MEMBER ON LAFCO’S
COMMISSION
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 cast the District’s vote for Ms. Judy Hanson.
b) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
There were no changes to the board meeting calendar.
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
9. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE
FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS:
a) SECOND QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM UPDATE REPORT
Engineering Manager Dan Martin provided an update on the District’s second
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 second quarter are $4.3 million which is approximately
36% of the FY 2016 budget. Mr. Martin stated that the District is on target as of
the second quarter for this year’s CIP expenditures. Please reference the
Committee Action notes attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of
Mr. Martin’s report.
Mr. Martin indicated in response to an inquiry from Director Thompson that the
15% increase in the cost for the interior and exterior coating project was for a
number of structural repairs that had been identified during the removal of the
reservoir coatings. He indicated that the board may recall that staff had
presented to the board six (6) or seven (7) months ago a request for structural
repairs and additional funding for the project. It was noted that it is difficult to
4
identify structural issues, especially in the roof, until the reservoir coating is
removed.
Director Smith inquired with regard to the goal of expending 80 to 85% of the
planned CIP if staff will be adding any projects to meet the goal. Engineering
Manager Martin indicated that staff has recently added the sewer rehabilitation
project with a cost of approximately $20 million to get closer to the District’s goal.
The project is just getting started and is expected to be completed in August
2016. He stated staff did enact that strategy and estimates that the District will
meet the goal of 80 to 85% this fiscal year.
Director Robak asked if staff could please provide more detail on the location of
the projects reported on within the presentation. Mr. Martin indicated that staff
would do so in future presentations. In response to another inquiry from Director
Robak, Mr. Martin indicated that the revenue from cell site antennae’s is
approximately $1.2 million. He noted that cell companies are being bought (ie.
Cricket was purchased by AT&T, etc.) and thus, we are seeing compression in
the market. Staff is in contact with all the major cellular companies to make them
aware of where District facilities are located should they wish to utilize them for
cell tower sites.
b) FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2016 MID-YEAR REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S
FY2015-2018 STRATEGIC PLAN
Chief of Administration and Information Technology Adolfo Segura presented the
mid-year update on the District’s fiscal year 2015 to 2018 Strategic Plan. Please
reference the Committee Action notes attached to staff’s report (Attachment A)
for the details of Mr. Segura’s report.
Director Robak inquired if the goal of 175 gallons per day (GPD) per Capita is a
valid goal as the District’s customers are already more than meeting this goal.
General Manager Watton indicated that this goal is set by the State which
requires that water use be reduced 20% by 2020. Director Croucher indicated
that the District is utilizing an industry standard and the board as a whole has not
requested that the District amend this goal. President Thompson suggested that
the goal include the State’s conservation mandate which requires the District’s
residential customers to reduce their use by 20% and now by 12% in comparison
to their 2013 water use. He stated that he would also like to see the previous
GPD per Capita for past years to allow the District to see the trend for per Capita
use.
REPORTS
10. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
General Manager Watton presented information from his report. He reported on
the District’s purchase orders and Cal-Card quarterly rebates, safety and
5
security, regional training facility, water treatment nitrification issues, CWA’s
seven day treated water shutdown, and the status of the District’s water
conservation target and purchases.
He also indicated that he has provided handouts on the dias. The first is
information from CWA on the water supply credits and the drought, and a CWA
presentation regarding Metropolitan Water District’s (MWD) proposed rates and
charges.
In response to an inquiry from Director Smith, General Manager Watton indicated
that staff has analyzed the need for an additional Construction Inspector and
determined that there is an increase in the workload in this area of the District
and that it is more cost effective to add a permanent position than to contract out
the needed services. Assistant General Manager German Alvarez noted that this
position is not a new fulltime equivalent position that has been added. The
position was created from a vacancy, a Systems Operator position was vacated
and deleted, as it was no longer required because of efficiencies created in the
Operations Division. In response to another inquiry from Director Smith, Chief of
Administration and Information Technology Segura indicated that the plan is for
Homeland Security to visit the District this summer. Staff is not yet certain of the
magnitude of their assessment, but they would be happy to report on the
outcome of their visit.
General Manager Watton indicated, in response to an inquiry from Director
Robak, that the State of Baja is planning to award the contract for the
Desalination Plant in May. It was noted that the Governor of Baja’s goal is to
have the desalination plant well underway before his term ends in 2018. In
response to another inquiry from Director Robak, General Manager Watton
indicated that there may not be enough sewer volume to the Chapman
Treatment plant to make the project cost effective. The study is expected to be
completed by Atkins by the end of the fiscal year.
Director Thompson inquired how the District is receiving its information on the
Rosarito Desalination Project. General Manager Watton stated that he has
periodic meetings with the officials of the State of Baja and the Engineering staff
have regular meetings with NSC Agua.
CWA Report
Director Croucher noted that CWA is coordinating a trip to MWD’s board meeting
on April 12, 2016 where MWD will discuss and vote on their proposed rate
increases. CWA is inviting interested Directors from the member agencies to
participate during the public comment portion of the meeting to address MWD’s
rate increases. President Thompson indicated that he plans on attending MWD’s
board meeting and address the board on their proposed rates. Director Croucher
noted that MWD still has not conformed with the findings in the CWA vs. MWD
lawsuit concerning their rates. CWA was also awarded attorney fees in the suit.
6
He shared that Folsom and Shasta Reservoirs have opened their flood gates.
They are not 100% full, but they are expecting more rain and they wish to control
flooding.
Director Croucher stated that it is expected that the State Water Resources
Control Board is expected to relax the drought restrictions. He indicated that the
other thing they are beginning to study is conservation’s effect on the
environment. Because southern California residents are reducing outdoor
watering, it is impacting trees and other plants in their community that depend on
that water. Residents may think they are just watering their home landscapes,
but that water is also relied upon by the trees and plants within their community.
11. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Smith reported, besides the regular meetings he attends (board and
committee meetings), he and President Thompson attended the City of Chula
Vista Interagency Water Task Force meeting on March 7 to discuss Sweetwater
Authority’s interest in another Water Conservation Garden location within their
service area and possible common water projects between our agencies (City of
Chula Vista, Sweetwater Authority and Otay Water District) that may include
recycled water.
Director Lopez reported that in addition to the regular meetings he attends (board
and committee meetings), he attended the Water Reliability Coalition reception
with Directors Thompson and Robak on March 31.
Director Robak indicated that he attended the Water Conservation Garden
(WCG) board meeting and they discussed whether an entrance fee should be
charged to visit the WCG. It was felt that an entrance fee should not be charged
as the Board wished to encourage the community to visit the WCG. The Garden
Board felt that conserved (saved) water is the lowest cost water and the WCG is
a good resource for the community to learn how to save water in their
landscapes. He noted that the cumulative water savings for each California
water agency was released by the State Water Resources Control Board and
Otay WD customers did well with 21.6% cumulative savings. He also shared that
he attended the Water Reliability Coalition reception.
12. PRESIDENT’S REPORT
President Thompson indicated with regard to the discussion at the WCG board
meeting of possibly implementing an entrance fee that he felt that the WCG
should instead suggest that visitors provide a voluntary fee. He felt visitors may
more freely place donations in a voluntary box. He noted that there would be
more discussion on this issue. He also shared that he felt the selection of the
new WCG Executive Director was positive for the Garden and lastly noted that
he has submitted a written report for the meetings he has attended during the
month of March 2016. His report is attached.
7
13. CLOSED SESSION
The board recessed to closed session at 5:03 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) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: PERIODIC AND
CUSTOMARY REVIEW IN DUE COURSE [GOVERNMENT CODE
§54957.6]
TITLE: GENERAL COUNSEL
The board reconvened at 6:17 p.m. and General Counsel Shinoff reported that
the board met in closed session and took no reportable actions.
14. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson
adjourned the meeting at 6:17 p.m.
___________________________________
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
8
President’s Report
April 6, 2016 Board Meeting
A) Meetings attended during the Month of March 2016:
1) March 2: OWD Regular Board Meeting
2) March 7: Attended a meeting of the Chula Vista Interagency
Task Force. Attendees: Director Smith and General Manager
Watton
3) March 14: Committee Agenda Briefing. Met with General
Manager Watton to review items that will be presented at
the March committee meetings.
4) March 17: Attended the District’s Finance, Administration
and Communications Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and
made recommendation on items that will be presented at the
April board meeting.
5) March 18: Attended a meeting of the Water Conservation
Garden
6) March 23: OWD Special Board Meeting to discuss the
Refinancing of the 2007 COPs.
7) March 31:
a. Board Agenda Briefing. Met with General Manager Watton
and General Counsel Dan Shinoff to review items that will
be presented at the April board meeting.
b. Attended the Water Reliability Coalition’s 3rd Annual
Spring Reception.
1
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
May 4, 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 Operations Pedro Porras, Chief of
Administration and Information Technology Adolfo Segura,
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
NOVEMBER 18, 2015 AND REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 2, 2016
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
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve the minutes of the special board meeting of November 18, 2015 and
regular board meeting of March 2, 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.
CONSENT CALENDAR
7. 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 7b, APPROVE A REIMBURSEMENT
AGREEMENT WITH BALDWIN & SONS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY, FOR A PORTION OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM PROJECT RECPL – 20-INCH, 680 ZONE, VILLAGE 2 –
HERITAGE/LA MEDIA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $265,994.40, and Director Robak
pulled 7f, ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4299 REVISING BOARD POLICY #05-A,
RECORDS POLICY AND PROCEDURES – RECORDS RETENTION AND
DESTRUCTION, INCLUDING MODIFYING THE POLICY TITLE TO, “#05-A
RECORDS RETENTION AND DESTRUCTION,” for discussion.
A motion was made by Director Croucher, 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 the following consent calendar items:
a) APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH KIRK PAVING IN AN AMOUNT NOT-
TO-EXCEED $200,000 FOR AS-NEEDED ASPHALT PAVING
SERVICES FROM JULY 1, 2016 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2017
c) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4300 AMENDING POLICY NO. 6, THE
ANNUAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, OF
THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO INCREASE THE
EFFICIENCY OF THE CIP PROCESS FOR BOARD APPROVED
PROJECTS
d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4301 AMENDING POLICY NO. 27, THE
INVESTMENT POLICY, OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCE
AND RE-DELEGATING AUTHORITY FOR ALL INVESTMENT RELATED
ACTIVITIES TO THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, IN ACCORDANCE
WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53607
3
e) APPROVE LIFTING THE TWO-DAY PER WEEK LIMIT ON OUTDOOR
IRRIGATION EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY; ALL OTHER MANDATORY
WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES UNDER THE LEVEL 2
DROUGHT ALERT WOULD REMAIN IN EFFECT
President Thompson presented item 7b for discussion:
b) APPROVE A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH BALDWIN &
SONS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, FOR A
PORTION OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT
RECPL – 20-INCH, 680 ZONE, VILLAGE 2 – HERITAGE/LA MEDIA, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $265,994.40
President Thompson inquired how this project fits in with the District’s existing
infrastructure and what the long term plans were. Engineering Manager Dan
Martin apologized that the location map is missing the existing facilities which is
likely prompting this question. He stated that this project is in Village 2 and is a
2000 foot “gap piece” that will connect an existing 20” main on Santa Victoria
Road to infrastructure in Heritage Road to Olympic Parkway. It will be part of the
regional recycled system for this area of the District.
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 staffs’ recommendation.
President Thompson presented item 7f for discussion:
f) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4299 REVISING BOARD POLICY #05-A,
RECORDS POLICY AND PROCEDURES – RECORDS RETENTION
AND DESTRUCTION, INCLUDING MODIFYING THE POLICY TITLE TO,
“#05-A RECORDS RETENTION AND DESTRUCTION”
Director Robak indicated that he felt the publics’ interest would be best served by
keeping records as long as possible and not necessarily what complies with the
law. Information Technology Manager Michael Kerr indicated that most of the
emails received by the District is transitory in nature, non-substantive
communications (spam, personal junk email, etc.) and do not quality as official
records. He stated the emails that are business related and should be
preserved, such as, contract and project discussions, etc. are kept and managed
as part of the District’s records retention program. All emails that are spam,
personal junk email, or non-substantive emails will be deleted when they reach
4
the 100 day threshold. General Counsel Shinoff added that in the absence of a
policy, all such non-substantive emails would need to be kept forever.
President Thompson indicated that the District’s Finance, Administration and
Communications Committee reviewed this item and the committee felt that
retaining the business related records and discarding non-substantive emails in a
timely manner made sense to the committee and protects the ratepayers from
costs associated with searching through thousands of non-substantive emails.
In response to an inquiry from Director Smith, staff indicated that substantive
emails would be filed by employees in the relevant project files, etc. Those
emails that are not filed would be deleted when they reach the 100 day threshold
and staff would no longer have access to those emails.
A motion was made by Director Smith, 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 staffs’ recommendation.
ACTION ITEMS
8. BOARD
a) ADOPT A POSITION OF SUPPORT ON ASSEMBLY BILL 2470
(GONZALEZ), RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF WATER SERVICE
TO TRIBAL LANDS OUTSIDE OF A WATER DISTRICT’S SERVICE
AREA
Communications Officer Armando Buelna indicated that staff is requesting that
the board adopt a position of support on Assembly Bill 2470 (AB 2470). The bill
was authored by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, its principal co-author is
State Senator Joel Anderson, and the bill is also co-authored by all the local
assembly representatives including Assemblymembers Toni Atkins, Brian Jones,
Shirley Weber, as well as Senators Marty Block and Ben Hueso.
He indicated that AB 2470 only applies to Sycuan tribal lands and would
authorize Sycuan to purchase water under the same conditions as other water
customers from a contiguous water district if certain conditions are met. Sycuan
would be required to make all required payments as if it were annexed into a
water district’s service area and would make payment a condition of service.
5
Sycuan is one of 18 federally recognized Tribal Nation Reservations in San
Diego County. Nearly all of the tribal reservations in the state were never
included within the boundaries of a neighboring water district.
Communications Officer Buelna stated that for years, Sycuan has been
interested in securing imported water service. By working directly with the state,
Sycuan is asking the state to recognize the unique government-to-government
relationship that exists between the tribe and the state.
He indicated this matter was not contemplated when the board adopted the 2016
Legislative Program. Assembly Bill 2470 was heard in the Assembly Local
Government Committee on April 21 and passed unanimously (8-0). It has been
referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee in which Assemblywoman
Gonzalez is the chair. If approved by the Appropriations Committee, it will go to
the full Assembly before June 3.
He stated that CWA, Otay, and Padre Dam have been actively working with the
author’s office to address issues and will continue to work closely with them as
the bill makes its way through the legislature. It is anticipated that a sideletter
agreement would be developed to address water service delivery between the
water district and Sycuan.
General Manager Watton indicated a copy of a letter to the chair of the Sycuan
Band of the Kumeyaay Tribe, Mr. Cody Martinez, is on the dias for each member
of the Board. The letter solidifies the information in the legislation which
indicates that the Tribe would pay all fees for water service as if they were a
customer seeking service in the customary way. He indicated that the Tribe
essentially had two objectives with this legislation:
1. They felt that they should not be required to go through the CEQA
process as it infringes on their Sovereignty (they have their own EPA,
chartered by the United States Federal Government).
2. They also felt that they should not have to go through the LAFCO
process as the process also infringes on their Sovereignty.
He noted that MWD is taking a neutral position on the legislation and CWA is
supporting the legislation.
In response to an inquiry from President Thompson, General Manager Watton
indicated that the District’s existing standby fee is by parcel and the District also
utilizes a government rate for non-parcel customers. The government rate
should suffice in this situation. He indicated that he did not know how CWA will
handle the fees, however, they do plan on accessing the parcel fee in some form.
The MWD did access another similar tribal customer. They had a calculation for
the present value of the fees and the tribe paid the fees upfront and in perpetuity.
President Thompson requested that staff review this item and assure that this fee
collection does not get lost as it is a situation that is outside the District’s normal
fee structure.
6
Director Robak inquired of General Counsel that if he received campaign
donations from Sycuan, would he need to recuse himself from voting on this
issue. General Counsel Daniel Shinoff indicated that he did not need to recuse
himself as he (Director Robak) would not benefit by voting to support Assembly
Bill 2470.
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 staffs’ recommendation.
b) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
Director Croucher indicated that he would be out-of-town on July 6, 2016 and
would not be available to attend the July 6 board meeting. President Thompson
indicated that he would be out-of-town on May 23, 2016 and would be unable to
attend the special board meeting scheduled on that day. Directors Robak and
Smith indicated that they would be out-of-town and would not be able to attend
the June 1 board meeting.
There were no changes to the board meeting calendar.
REPORTS
9. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
CWA Report
General Manager Watton indicated that CWA is continuing to provide comment
on MWD’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), sharing their concern that
MWD is developing a plan that would create more water supplies than the
member agencies actually need. He indicated that MWD reviews all Southern
California agencies’ resource projects and provides credit for the acre foot (AF)
that they develop. MWD is only providing a 20,000 AF credit for all Southern
California agencies. He noted that If the City of San Diego moves their Pure
Water Program forward, just a quarter of this project would provide the 20,000
AF. CWA feels that MWD’s assumptions for their UWMP is not reasonable and
could cause them to overbuild infrastructure, up to a million AF.
Director Croucher stepped off the dias at 4:18 p.m. and stepped back onto the
dias at 4:19 p.m.
7
General Manager Watton indicated that he and Director Croucher are also
closely monitoring the San Vicente Hydro Power Study as they do not feel that
CWA should go into the power business, but instead, lease the use of the lake
and the water to a power production company if the market place has interest.
He also reviewed the handouts which were on the dias for each member of the
board. The first was information on the Greensview Drive main break and the
declaration of an emergency to repair the break, a letter regarding the Salt Creek
Golf Course alternative development options, a picture of CWA’s member
agency representatives who attended MWD’s meeting on April 12, information on
the Citizens Water Academy, an article in the Water Desalination Report
regarding the Rosarito Beach Desalination Project bids, MWD’s Water Supply
Assessment Report, a Wall Street Journal Article regarding cities looking for new
ways to meet demand for water supplies, the Otay WD’s Standard & Poor’s
rating report, a CWA powerpoint presentation on MWD’s history, and a summary
of the Otay WD’s recycled water use and payment history with the City of San
Diego.
Director Croucher added, with regard to the Citizens Academy, that he would
forward an electronic copy of the application to District Secretary Cruz and if
Directors know anyone in the community who would have an interest in
attending, it would be a very worthwhile program to participate in. He also
indicated CWA received the medium sized agency Resource Efficiency Award
from the Utilities Association. He shared that he attended, as a CWA board
member, the Science Fair held in Balboa Park. He stated that it was very
impressive to see the new generation’s minds at work and the ideas they are
developing for the future. He suggested that the District notify the board when
the Science Fair is held again next year and that representatives from the District
attend the event. He lastly shared that CWA has produced a video, sponsored
by the Margaret Doe Charitable Trust, from the book, “To Quench a Thirst.” He
indicated that he would try to get a copy and have it shown at a future board
meeting.
General Manager’s Report
General Manager Watton also presented information from his report. He
reported on the District’s employee picnic scheduled on July 16, recruitments and
new hires, the budget workshop scheduled on May 23, the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report Award, the District’s landscape contest winner, the
refinancing of the 2007 Certificates of Participation, the Rosarito Beach
Desalination Project, an update on the City of San Diego’s Pure Water Project
cost allocation, an update of the Inspection Division’s status, testing for lead and
copper in the District’s water supply, the District’s customers conservation level.
Director Croucher indicated that he would like to see the results of the lead
testing in the water supply from the delivery point and at the end users point.
8
Director Smith inquired with regard to the Groundwater Basin Boundary
Modification where the City of San Diego is looking into the boundary of their
water rights, if we knew if it extends into the Otay Basin. Chief of Engineering
Posada indicated that the groundwater basin boundary does not address rights.
The purpose is to adjust the basin boundary to make it “Regional” and to include
more stakeholders (in addition to the City of San Diego, the Sweetwater
Authority, U.S. Navy, CalAm and Otay WD). It was noted that if the District did
not participate in the group, then the District would need to prepare its own Basin
Boundary Modification Management Program as required by the State’s
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). This would be very costly
and would also require input from all the stakeholders. General Manager Watton
added that the District has a concern when it comes to Pueblo Rights as it
pertains to the San Diego Formation Basin. It is not believed that Pueblo Rights
extends into the San Diego Formation Basin 1000 feet down. Director Smith
indicated that he brought this up because of the impact Pueblo Rights had on
Sweetwater Authority’s brackish water treatment program and inquired what
impact Pueblo rights would have to any diversification in groundwater that Otay
WD may have interest in developing in the future. General Manager Watton
indicated that Sweetwater Authority had settled their lawsuit with the City of San
Diego and stated, with respect to the Otay WD, it is still an open question.
Director Croucher indicated that he had some questions concerning this issue
and asked if this item could be agendized for closed session discussion
sometime in the future.
10. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Smith indicated that besides the regular and special meetings he attends
(board and committee meetings), he wished to share, along the same lines as
the next generation, that the College of Engineering at San Diego State
University has a design day every year where students are required to do a
Capstone Project, which is a complete report on a specific item (generally a real
project). One of the engineering student’s project was on the North City pipeline
from the North City Reclamation Plant (pure water) to the reservoir. He indicated
that the project also includes a complete preliminary design report, environmental
impact report, pipeline alignment and the cost. He stated that agencies and
consultants can become sponsors, engineers can become mentors to the
students, etc. He suggested that this is another event that the District can look to
sponsor in the future.
Director Lopez reported that he attended the District’s regular and special
meetings (board and committee meetings), which included the Ad Hoc Salt
Creek Golf Course Development Committee. He indicated that the committee
wished to assure that the full board is updated on the discussions regarding the
golf course and he felt the discussions have been excellent.
Director Robak indicated that a few years ago he had brought up the, “Yes to
tap,” movement and in 2008, at the United States Conference of Mayors, that
included the Mayors of the City of San Diego, San Francisco, etc., the city
9
mayors had committed to not have bottled water at their agencies with the
exception of emergencies. He indicated that he would like the Otay WD to make
this same commitment. He stated that he feels the District needs to set an
example and show belief in its product.
11. PRESIDENT’S REPORT
President Thompson presented his report on meetings he attended during the
month of April 2016. His report is attached. He also commended staff on the
successful outcome of the refinancing of the 2007 Certificates of Participation.
He suggested, because of the excellent interest rate the District received on the
bond refinancing, he would like the District to consider extending the refinancing
period to 30 years in similar cases in the future as any savings would help reduce
costs to ratepayers.
12. CLOSED SESSION
The board recessed to closed session at 5:07 p.m. to discuss the following
matter:
a) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: PERIODIC AND
CUSTOMARY REVIEW IN DUE COURSE [GOVERNMENT CODE
§54957.6]
TITLE: GENERAL COUNSEL
The board reconvened at 5:55 p.m. and President Thompson reported that the
board met in closed session and took no reportable actions.
13. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson
adjourned the meeting at 5:55 p.m.
___________________________________
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
10
President’s Report
May 4, 2016 Board Meeting
A) Meetings attended during the Month of April 2016:
1) April 4: Attending the District’s Special Board Meeting
for a workshop on the Actuarial Study.
2) April 6: OWD Regular Board Meeting
3) April 7:
a. Attended the City of Chula Vista’s First Friday Breakfast
b. Met with Halla Razak, City of SD Public Utilities
Director, for a meet and greet.
4) April 11: Attended the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment
Oversight Board Meeting
5) April 12: Attended MWD’s Board Meeting to speak during the
Public Comments portion of the meeting to comment on their
rates and request that they propose fair and lawful rates.
6) April 15: Committee Agenda Briefing. Met with General
Manager Watton to review items that will be presented at
the April committee meetings.
7) April 19: Attended the Council of Water Utilities Meeting
where Executive Director Julia Richards of the San Diego
River Conservancy presented.
8) April 20: Attended the District’s Finance, Administration
and Communications Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and
made recommendation on items that will be presented at the
May board meeting.
9) April 22: Attended the Community Leaders Out at Sea
Program as a representative of the District.
10) April 27: Attended the Desalination Project Committee
Meeting. Received an update on the desalination project.
11) April 29: Board Agenda Briefing. Met with Director
Lopez, General Manager Watton and General Counsel Shinoff
to review items that will be presented at the April board
meeting.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Jeff Marchioro
Senior Civil Engineer
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: P2453-
003102
DIV. NO. 2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Approve Second Amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement Number
33622 for SR 11/125/905 Connector Ramps Blow Off Relocation
Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
authorize the General Manager to execute a Second Amendment to
Caltrans Utility Agreement Number 33622 in the amount of $847.79 for
SR 11/125/905 Connector Ramps Blow Off Relocation Project (see
Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute a
Second Amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement Number 33622 in the
amount of $847.79 for SR 11/125/905 Connector Ramps Blow Off
Relocation Project.
2
ANALYSIS:
The District entered into two (2) separate Utility Agreement Numbers
33592 and 33622 with Caltrans on July 23, 2013 and October 10, 2014
which included reimbursements to the District in the amounts of
$961,521 and $74,000, respectively. First Amendments were executed
October 16, 2015 in the amounts of $439,088 and $69,118,
respectively. The District has prior and superior rights at four (4)
separate crossings associated with the SR-11 freeway starting at the
SR-905 freeway and ending at Enrico Fermi Drive. Caltrans will
reimburse the District for the total costs incurred by the District
minus Depreciation and Betterment of the existing assets.
Construction of the District’s relocations have been completed
through two (2) separate construction contracts with Coffman
Specialties, Inc. (Coffman) and TC Construction Co., Inc. (TC
Construction). Coffman’s work was formally accepted on June 3, 2016.
TC Construction’s work was formally accepted on June 22, 2015.
A Second amendment for Utility Agreement Number 33622 is required
since actual costs exceed the First Amended Utility Agreement amount.
Actual costs were underestimated when the First Amendment was
prepared. The total costs incurred by the District, minus
depreciation and betterment costs, are summarized in the table below.
A Second amendment for Utility Agreement Number 33592 is not needed.
Utility Agreement
No. 33592
(Sequence I)
Utility Agreement
No. 33622
(Blow off)
Total Project Cost (includes
Depreciation and Betterment) $1,455,135 $150,966
Caltrans Reimbursement
including Amendments -$1,400,609 -$143,9661
Depreciation $38,479 $7,000
Betterment $16,047 $0
Net District Cost $54,526 $7,000
1. includes $847.79 Second Amendment amount
Caltrans paid $1,510,976 in reimbursements to the District in FY
2016. A final reimbursement payment of up to $33,599 (difference
between the $1,510,976 that Caltrans paid to the District in FY 2016
and sum of both utility agreements, first amendments, and proposed
second amendment) is anticipated the first quarter of FY 2017.
3
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The total budget for CIP P2453, as approved in the FY 2017 budget, is
$4,000,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, accounting for relocations currently in construction are
$1,455,135 and $150,966, for Utility Agreements 33592 and 33622,
respectively. See Attachments B and C for budget details.
The District expects to spend the remaining $2,393,899 (difference of
$4,000,000 CIP budget, minus total expenditures, outstanding
commitments and forecast for relocations currently in construction)
on future relocations identified by Caltrans.
Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budget for CIP P2453 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 and Caltrans reimbursements.
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.
JM/BK:jf
P:\WORKING\CIP P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations\Staff Reports\BD 2016-07-06 Utility
Agreement Amendment 33622\BD 07-06-16 Staff Report Utility Agreement Second
Amendment.docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Budget Detail UA 33592
Attachment C – Budget Detail UA 33622
Exhibit A – Location Map
Exhibit B – Location Detail Map UA 33592
Exhibit C – Location Detail Map UA 33622
Exhibit D – Caltrans signed Amendment to Utility
Agreement UA 33622
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2453-003102
Approve Second Amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement
Number 33622 for SR 11/125/905 Connector Ramps Blow Off
Relocation Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on June 21, 2016,
and the following comments were made:
Staff recommended that the Board authorize the General Manager
to execute a Second Amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement
Number 33622 in the amount of $847.79 for SR 11/125/905
Connector Ramps Blow Off Relocation Project.
Staff indicated that the District entered into two (2) separate
Utility Agreements for SR-11 Utility Relocations Projects in
calendar years 2013 and 2014.
It was noted that the 2013 agreement included relocation of
three District water mains in various sizes and materials. The
2014 agreement included the relocation of a single 6-inch blow
off. First amendments to both agreements were executed in
October 2015.
Staff stated that a second amendment for the larger Utility
Agreement 33592 is not needed; however a second amendment for
the smaller Utility Agreement 33622 is needed because actual
costs exceeded the first amended agreement amount.
Staff stated that the District has prior and superior rights and
Caltrans will reimburse the District for the total costs
incurred minus Depreciation and Betterment of the existing
assets. A breakdown of Depreciation and Betterment costs, and
the net cost to the District, is provided on Page 2 of the staff
report.
Construction of the first two rounds of utility relocations are
complete. Staff noted that this Second Amendment to Caltrans
Utility Agreement Number 33622 will wrap up the paperwork needed
for final payment on both utility agreements.
It was indicated that future relocations associated with this
CIP are anticipated to include existing facilities in Alta Road
as Caltrans extends SR-11 to the new border crossing. Staff
stated that additional relocations may be needed at future SR
11/125/905 connector ramps.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2453-003102
Approve Second Amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement
Number 33622 for SR 11/125/905 Connector Ramps Blow Off
Relocation Project
Date Updated: 5/26/2016
Budget
4,000,000
Planning/Design/Construction, Utility Agreement Number 33592 (Sequence 1)
Standard Salaries 343,449 342,476 973 343,449 STAFF LABOR
Consultant Contracts 77,259 77,259 - 77,259 ATKINS
2,763 2,763 - 2,763 V & A CONSULTING ENGINEERS
970 970 - 970 ALTA LAND SURVEYING INC
4,901 4,901 - 4,901 NARASIMHAN CONSULTING SERVICES
2,561 2,561 - 2,561 CPM PARTNERS INC
35,400 35,060 340 35,400 ALYSON CONSULTING
Professional Legal Fees 121 121 - 121 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF
Service Contracts 1,382 1,382 - 1,382 US BANK
1,382 1,382 - 1,382 US BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT
2,985 2,985 - 2,985 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC
84 84 - 84 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Construction Contract 928,017 928,017 - 928,017 COFFMAN SPECIALTIES
48,843 48,843 - 48,843 REGENTS BANK (COFFMAN ESCROW)
5,018 5,018 - 5,018 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC
Total - Sequence 1 1,455,135 1,453,822 1,313 1,455,135
Reinbursement Agreement (961,521) CALTRANS UTILITY AGREEMENT
(439,088) CALTRANS AMENDMENT #1
(38,479) CLAIM LETTER DEPRECIATION
(16,047) BETTERMENT
(1,455,135) TOTAL
Otay Water District
p2453-SR-11 Utility Relocations
CommittedExpenditures
Outstanding
Commitment &
Forecast
Projected Final
Cost Vendor/Comments
Projected Final
Cost Vendor/Comments
ATTACHMENT C – Budget Detail
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2453-003102
Approve Second Amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement
Number 33622 for SR 11/125/905 Connector Ramps Blow Off
Relocation Project
Date Updated: 5/27/2016
Budget
4,000,000
Planning/Design/Construction, Utility Agreement Number 33622 (6-inch Blow Off)
Standard Salaries 56,863 56,863 - 56,863 STAFF LABOR
Consultant Contracts 3,786 3,786 - 3,786 ICF JONES & STOKES INC
13,480 13,480 - 13,480 DARNELL & ASSOCIATES
6,000 6,000 - 6,000 ALYSON CONSULTING
Parking and Tolls 12 12 - 12 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN
Professional Legal Fees 180 180 - 180 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF
Service Contracts 2,310 2,310 - 2,310 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC
96 96 - 96 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Construction Contract 1,986 1,986 - 1,986 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
66,253 66,253 - 66,253 TC CONSTRUCTION
Total - 6-inch Blow Off 150,966 150,966 - 150,966
Grand Total 150,966 150,966 - 150,966
Reinbursement Agreement (74,000) CALTRANS UTILITY AGREEMENT
(69,118) CALTRANS AMENDMENT #1
(848) CALTRANS AMENDMENT #2
(7,000) CLAIM LETTER DEPRECIATION
(150,966) TOTAL
Otay Water District
p2453-SR-11 Utility Relocations
Committed Expenditures
Outstanding
Commitment &
Forecast
Projected Final
Cost Vendor/Comments
Projected Final
Cost Vendor/Comments
?ò
Aä
?Ü
SEQUENCE I
Calzada de la Fuente
Siempre Viva Rd Enrico Fermi Dr
PROPOSED STATE ROUTE 11
Harvest Rd
Alta Rd
Sanyo Ave
Otay Mesa Rd
Airway Rd
Dornoch Ct
SEQUENCE II
Piper Ranch Rd
!VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
NTS
?ò
Aä
?Ë
;&s
DIV 5
DIV 1
DIV 2
DIV 4
DIV 3
?p F
P:\WORKING\CIP P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Exhibit A, Location Map, October 2015.mxd
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSR-11 UTILITY RELOCATIONSLOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT A CIP P2453F
0 1,000500Feet
FOR LOCATIONDETAIL SEEEXHIBIT B
FOR LOCATIONDETAIL SEEEXHIBIT C
SANYO AVE DORNOCH CT
!(1
!(3 !(2
EX 10" ACP
RELOCATED 10" PVC
EX 18" SCRW
EX 12" ACP
RELOCATED 18" STEEL
PROPOSED 12" PVC
EX 10" ACP
?Ü WEST BOUND
EAST BOUND
P:\WORKING\CIP P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Exhibit B, Location Detail Map, May 2016.mxd
OTAY WATER DISTRICTSR-11 UTILITY RELOCATIONS - SEQUENCE 1LOCATION DETAIL MAP UA 33592
EXHIBIT B CIP P2453F
0 15075Feet
NOTES1. EXISTING 10" ACP DISTRIBUTION MAIN REPLACED WITH 12" PVC DISTRIBUTION MAIN2. 18" STEEL TRANSMISSION MAIN REPLACED WITH 18" STEEL TRANSMISSION MAIN AND32" STEEL CASING AT LOWER ELEVATION.3. EXISTING 12" ACP REMOVED REPLACED WITH 12" PVC DISTRIBUTION MAIN.
Legend
Proposed SR-11
Relocated Waterline
Removed Waterline
Existing Waterline to Remain
?ò
Aä
Sanyo Ave
Otay Mesa Rd
Airway Rd
Piper Ranch Rd
Harvest Rd
Otay Mesa Rd
?Ü
REMOVED BLOW OFF
RELOCATEDBLOW OFF
PROPOSEDSR-11
P:\WORKING\CIP P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Exhibit C, Blowoff Relocation-Location Detail Map, May 2016.mxd
OTAY WATER DISTRICTPOTABLE 6-INCH BLOW OFF RELOCATIONLOCATION DETAIL MAP UA 33622
EXHIBIT C CIP P2453F
0 500250Feet
Exhibit D
Exhibit D
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Jeff Marchioro
Senior Civil Engineer
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: P2083-
001102
DIV. NO. 2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Third Amendment to Carollo Engineers, Inc. Professional
Engineering Services Contract for Design and Construction
Support of the 870-2 Pump Station Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
authorize the General Manager to execute a Third Amendment with
Carollo Engineers, Inc. (Carollo) for design and construction support
of the 870-2 Pump Station Project in an amount not-to-exceed $42,700
(see Exhibit A for Project location and Exhibit B for Project detail
map).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute a
Third Amendment with Carollo Engineers, Inc. (Carollo) for design and
construction support of the 870-2 Pump Station Project in an amount
not-to-exceed $42,700.
2
ANALYSIS:
On October 11, 2013, the District entered into an agreement in the
amount of $624,910 with Carollo for preliminary and final design and
construction support of the 870-2 Pump Station Project. The First
Amendment, in the amount of $29,000, for a three dimensional model of
the pump station building and associated mechanical and electrical
equipment, was executed June 16, 2014. The Second Amendment, in the
amount of $106,500, to perform additional surge analysis, prepare
cost estimates, design a new Roll (571-1) Reservoir outlet, and
perform additional survey and potholing work, was executed
October 15, 2015.
During concept development for the new Roll (571-1) Reservoir outlet,
an opportunity became apparent to add a new reservoir recirculation
pipe, and delete other improvements, with negligible impacts to
project costs and schedule. The current project includes a new
reservoir recirculation system comprised of existing piping, new
recirculation pumps, and a new pressure sustaining valve vault and
piping, on the north side of the reservoir, to maintain pressure at
the high point in the existing recirculation piping. The proposed
alternative reservoir recirculation system would include new
recirculation pumps and a new recirculation pipe through the bottom
of the reservoir. The proposed alternative reservoir recirculation
system would provide the following benefits compared to the current
project reservoir recirculation system:
Improved energy efficiency: The proposed alternative reservoir
recirculation system would improve energy efficiency by
eliminating the current project pressure sustaining valve to
maintain pressure in existing recirculation piping.
Operational flexibility: The proposed alternative reservoir
recirculation system would add the flexibility to recirculate
Roll (571-1) Reservoir and pump to or from the 624 Pressure Zone
simultaneously.
Build a future planned improvement now for no cost: The life
cycle cost of adding a new reservoir recirculation pipe to the
current project would be offset by deleting the pressure
sustaining valve accounting for future energy savings.
Avoid a more expensive reservoir recirculation pipe in the
future: The cost to build a dedicated recirculation pipe would
be substantially higher if not constructed together with the new
Roll (571-1) Reservoir outlet pipe as part of the current
3
project. There is little room to construct additional piping on
the east side reservoir in the future.
The Third Amendment includes the final design of the new reservoir
recirculation pipeline.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The total budget for CIP P2083, as approved in the FY 2017 budget, is
$17,000,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, are $2,790,579. See Attachment B for the budget detail.
Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budget for CIP P2083 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.
JM/BK:jf
P:\WORKING\CIP P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement\Staff Reports\2016-07-6 Carollo 3rd Amendment\BD-07-
06-16 Carollo 3rd Amendment (JM-BK).docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Budget Detail
Exhibit A – Location Map
Exhibit B – Project Detail Map
Exhibit C – Third Amendment
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2083-001102
Third Amendment to Carollo Engineers, Inc. Professional
Engineering Services Contract for Design and Construction
Support of the 870-2 Pump Station Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on June 21, 2016,
and the following comments were made:
Staff recommended that the Board authorize the General Manager
to execute a Third Amendment with Carollo Engineers, Inc.
(Carollo) for design and construction support of the 870-2 Pump
Station Project in an amount not-to-exceed $42,700.
Staff indicated that the District entered into an agreement with
Carollo to design the replacement pump station in 2013.
It was indicated that the first amendment for a 3-D model was
executed in June 2014 and that a second amendment for additional
surge analysis, design of a new reservoir outlet, and other work
was executed in October 2015.
Staff stated that while developing concepts for the new
Reservoir outlet, Carollo recommended an open trench cut through
the reservoir earthen structure. It was noted that geotechnical
borings completed specifically for the outlet pipe suggested
that tunneling was not feasible. As the team settled on an open
cut construction method, an opportunity became apparent to add a
new reservoir recirculation pipe and delete other improvements
with negligible impacts to project costs and schedule.
Staff highlighted that the new recirculation pipe would improve
energy efficiency by eliminating the current project pressure
sustaining valve to maintain pressure in the existing
recirculation piping. It would also provide operational
flexibility to recirculate Roll (571-1) Reservoir and pump to or
from the 624 Pressure Zone simultaneously. In addition, building
a new recirculation pipe now would eliminate the need to build
it in the future. The life cycle cost of adding a new reservoir
recirculation pipe to the current project would be offset by
deleting the pressure sustaining valve accounting for future
energy savings. Overall, the cost to build a dedicated
recirculation pipe would be significantly higher if not
constructed together with the new reservoir outlet pipe as part
of the current project. Staff indicated that there is little
room to construct additional piping on the east side reservoir
in the future.
The Committee inquired about the large, deeply buried surge tank
discussed in the staff report for Carollo’s second amendment
presented to the Committee in September 2015 and full Board in
October 2015. Staff indicated that replacing the existing
reservoir outlet pipe with a larger diameter (66-inch rather
than 42-inch) and thicker wall steel eliminated the need for a
suction surge tank for Phase I. Phase I will include a single
surge tank on the discharge side of the pump station only.
Phase II to pump from Roll Reservoir to the 624 Pressure Zone
will require another discharge surge tank in the future.
The Committee inquired about the Operation Department’s need to
recirculate the Roll reservoir. Operation’s staff members
stated that reservoir recirculation is needed to maintain water
quality considering its large size. The reservoir’s original
purpose was agricultural rather than potable water.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated that
the reservoir will be recirculated as-needed based on monitoring
chlorine residuals entering the pump station.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2083-001102
Third Amendment to Carollo Engineers, Inc. Professional
Engineering Services Contract for Design and Construction
Support of the 870-2 Pump Station Project
Date Updated: 5/26/2016
Budget
17,000,000
Planning
Consultant Contracts 13,123 13,123 - 13,123 ICF JONES & STOKES INC
17,094 17,094 - 17,094 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES INC
Service Contracts 164 164 - 164 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Standard Salaries 83,128 83,128 - 83,128
Fixed Asset 580,444 580,444 - 580,444
Total Planning 693,954 693,954 - 693,954
Design 001102
Consultant Contracts 14,068 14,068 - 14,068 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL
20,022 20,022 - 20,022 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND
4,850 4,850 - 4,850 BURKETT & WONG ENGINEERS INC
640,177 404,584 235,593 640,177 CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC
5,000 - 5,000 5,000 THE WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION
- 136 (136) - WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE
Regulatory Agency Fees 3,694 3,694 - 3,694 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
Standard Salaries 352,833 352,833 175,000 527,833
Supplier Contracts 5,350 5,350 - 5,350 INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS INC
20,000 - 20,000 20,000 BID DOC DISTRIBUTION
42,700 - 42,700 42,700 Carollo 3rd Amendment
Total Design 1,108,693 805,536 478,157 1,283,693
Construction
Consultant Contracts 120,233 - 120,233 120,233 CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC
17,623 17,623 - 17,623 RBF CONSULTING
835,834 9,598 826,237 835,834 MICHAEL BAKER INT'L INC
Professional Legal Fees 280 280 - 280 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF
Service Contracts 119 119 - 119 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Standard Salaries 13,843 13,843 500,000 513,843
- - 13,500,000 13,500,000 Future Construction Contract
Total Construction 987,932 41,463 14,946,469 14,987,932
Grand Total 2,790,579 1,540,953 15,424,626 16,965,579
Vendor/Comments
Otay Water District
p2083-PS - 870-2 Pump Station
Committed Expenditures
Outstanding
Commitment &
Forecast
Projected Final
Cost
OTAY WATER DISTRICT870-2 PUMP STATIONLOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT A
CIP P2083F
P:\WORKING\CIP P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Exhibit A, Location Map, May 2016.mxd
ROLLRESERVOIR(571-1)
LOW HEADPUMP STATION
HIGH HEADPUMPSTATION
FOR PROJECT DETAILSEE EXHIBIT B
ACCESS FROMALTA RD
OWD PROPERTY LINE(APPROX)
FirearmsTrainingFacility
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
NTSDIV 5
DIV 1
DIV 2
DIV 4
DIV 3
!\
?ò
Aä
?Ë
;&s
?p F
0 250125
Feet
OTAY WATER DISTRICT870-2 PUMP STATIONPROJECT DETAIL MAP
EXHIBIT B
CIP P2083F
P:\WORKING\CIP P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Exhibit B, Project Detail Map, May 2016.mxd
0 10050
Feet
Legend
ExistingEasementOWD
ExistingParcelOWD
ExistingEasementSDGE
ProposedStructure
ProposedWater
ProposedStormDrain
ProposedSewer
ProposedGas
ProposedSiteCivil
ExistingWaterOWD
1
P:\WORKING\CIP P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement\Agreements-Contracts-RFPs\Civil Consultant\New Selection
(Carollo)\Agreement\Amendments\third amendment\Third amendment to Carollo agreement.doc
THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND
CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC. RELATIVE TO
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
FOR THE 870-2 PUMP STATION PROJECT
This Third Amendment (“Amendment”) to the original Agreement for Preliminary and
Final Design and Construction Support Services is made and entered into as of the _____ day
of July, 2016, by and between OTAY WATER DISTRICT ("District"), and CAROLLO
ENGINEERS, INC., a California corporation, ("Consultant").
R E C I T A L S
A. District and Consultant entered into that certain Agreement for Professional
Services dated October 11, 2013, (the "Original Agreement"), under which Consultant agreed to
provide the services therein described in connection with the District’s 870-2 Pump Station
Project (the “Services”). The Original Agreement was amended on June 16, 2014 (the
“Amended Original Agreement”) and on October 15, 2015 (the “Second Amended Original
Agreement”).
B. The Second Amended Original Agreement is due to expire on June 30, 2019,
and the Services are 53% complete.
C. The Consultant has requested an increase in the Second Amended Original
Agreement amount to design a new reservoir recirculation pipe as requested by the District.
D. District and Consultant desire to enter into this Third Amendment to increase the
compensation to Consultant for the additional services requested and to amend certain specific
terms and conditions of the Second Amended Original Agreement as indicated below,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises and
covenants hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows:
Exhibit C
1. Exhibit A to the Original Agreement, Exhibit A to the First Amendment, and
Exhibit A to the Second Amendment, setting forth the Services to be provided by Consultant, is
hereby amended and supplemented by the Consultant’s letter proposal dated May 25, 2016,
attached to this Amendment and incorporated herein by reference.
2. The parties agree that the aggregate amount paid by the District to the
Consultant for the Services rendered by Consultant in excess of the Original Agreement, as
amended by the First and Second Amendments, shall not exceed Forty Two Thousand Seven
Hundred Dollars ($42,700). Accordingly, the total compensation paid by the District for Services
described in the Original Agreement, as amended by the First and Second Amendment, and
this Third Amendment shall not exceed Eight Hundred Three Thousand One Hundred Ten
Dollars ($803,110).
3. The parties agree that all terms and conditions of the Original Agreement, as
amended by the First and Second Amendments, not modified or amended by this Amendment,
including without limitation all indemnity and insurance requirements, are and shall remain in full
force and effect.
4. This Third Amendment is subject to the venue, choice of law and interpretation
provisions of the Original Agreement.
Exhibit C
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the
day and year first above written.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
By: ____________________________
Mark Watton
Its: General Manager
Date: ___________________________
CONSULTANT:
Carollo Engineers, Inc.
5075 Shoreham Place, Suite 120
San Diego, CA 92122
By:
Name: Jeff Thornbury
Its: Vice President
Date:
Approved as to form:
By: _______________________
General Counsel
Approved as to form:
By: _______________________
Its: _______________________
P:\WORKING\CIP P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement\Agreements-Contracts-RFPs\Civil Consultant\New Selection (Carollo)\Agreement\Amendments\third amendment\Third amendment to Carollo agreement.doc
Exhibit C
| Cover_letter_30_inch_recirc_v2.docx 5075 Shoreham Place, Suite 120, San Diego, California 92122
P. 858.505.1020 F. 858.505.1015
carollo.com
May 25, 2015
Mr. Jeff Marchioro, Project Manager
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, California 91978-2004
Subject:Proposal for New Recirculation Pipeline and Design Changes for 870-2 Pump Station
Dear Mr. Marchioro:
Carollo Engineers (Carollo) is submitting the following proposal for a new recirculation pipeline at
the proposed 870-2 Pump Station (PS). This new line would be routed through the reservoir in lieu
of the current design that shows the 30-inch recirculation pipeline on the east side of Roll Reservoir
along the access road. The advantage of the proposed alignment would be that the pump station as
part of Phase 1 could simultaneous recirculate Roll Reservoir and also pump to or from Zone 624. In
the current design, either recirculation or pumping from Zone 624 can be selected. Both cannot be
accomplished at the same time due to both scenarios using the same pipeline.
Scope of Work
This work includes development of plans, specifications, and construction cost estimates specific to
the proposed recirculation line. Design details include the following:
x Demolition and relocation of any small diameter (< 12") piping along new recirculation line.
x Pipeline design of new recirculation line (30-inch or 36-inch).
x Tie-in details for start and finish of the recirculation line.
x Update of current design (civil, mechanical, structural and E&IC sheets) for items related to
the recirculation line.
x Revise pump selection based on new system hydraulics. Current design flow (17,000 gpm total)
will be maintained. Current piping layout inside the pump station will remain unchanged. The
two recirculation pumps will be designed to deliver 8,500 gpm (each).
Deliverables
Deliverables for this work include the following:
60%: Preliminary plan and profile.
90%: Plan and profile sheet, additional details, specifications, and cost estimate
100%: Plans, specifications and cost estimate.
Final: Plans and specifications.
Third Amendment - Exhibit A
Mr. Jeff Marchioro
Otay Water District
May 24, 2016
Page 2
| Cover_letter_30_inch_recirc_v2.docx
carollo.com
Schedule
The work for this task can be integrated into the current project schedule and maintain the goal of
completing a bid set by the end of 2016. The new date (Dec. 22) for the Final Design Deliverable
represents a shift of approximately 1 month from the current project schedule.
The new date (Aug. 25) for the 90% Design Deliverable shifted approximately 2 months from the
current project schedule. This shift is needed to fully integrate all the changes and perform QA/QC
on the deliverable. The 90% deliverable will be all inclusive of the new recirculation line, new suction
line and pump station. Details of the revised schedule are listed below.
Item Date
60% Design Deliverable (Recirculation Line) July 19, 2016(1)
90% Design Deliverable (870-2 PS & Recirculation Line) Aug. 25
Review Workshop (90% Design) Sept 16 - Sept 21 (date TBD)
100% Design Deliverable Nov. 16
Final Design Deliverable Dec. 22
Note:
(1) Assumes NTP of July 6 for the new recirculation line.
Budget
Based on the above Scope of Work, the fee to complete this work is $42,700. The original contract
fee schedule (2013) has been used.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide continuing service to Otay Water District on this important
project. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Jim Meyerhofer if you have any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC.
Jeff Thornbury, P.E.
Vice President
Jeff Thornbury, P.E.
Third Amendment - Exhibit A
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO.: All
SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Williamson, Human Resources Manager
APPROVED BY:
Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVE THE SELECTION OF ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. FOR
BENEFIT CONSULTING SERVICES AND AS THE DISTRICT’S BROKER OF
RECORD
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter
into a five (5) year agreement (three [3] years with two [2] additional
years at the District’s option) with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.
for benefit consulting and broker services and identify Alliant as the
District’s Broker of Record in an amount not-to-exceed $148,480.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a
five (5) year agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. for
benefit consulting and broker services and identify Alliant as the
District’s Broker of Record in an amount not-to-exceed $148,480.
ANALYSIS:
In 2012, the District and Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. (Alliant)
entered into a three (3) year agreement with up to two (2) options to
renew. The District is completing the fourth year of this agreement. In
an effort to continue with best practices and to validate that the
District is receiving the best available benefit consulting services at
a competitive price, the District solicited bids once again for benefit
consultants in February 2016. Since labor negotiations will be occurring
2
next year, the District began the RFP process one (1) year ahead of
schedule.
The District uses benefit consultant services to perform a full range
of services related to the design, bidding, implementation,
maintenance, renewal, communication, and improvement of the District’s
group health, dental, life insurance, long-term disability programs and
flexible benefits program.
The District sent an RFP to nine (9) reputable benefit consulting firms
and received responses from the following five (5) firms:
Alliant Insurance Services
Barney & Barney
Keenan & Associates
Living Benefits, Inc.
WSP Corporate Benefits and Insurance Services, Inc.
The proposal received by Barney & Barney was reviewed, however it was
not rated due to their fee structure being outside of the competitive
range and exceeding the District’s budgeted allotment.
The other four proposals were jointly reviewed and rated by a four-
person panel (Attachment B). The written proposal review included
evaluation on the following criteria:
Written Proposal Criteria Maximum Points
Perceived ability of Consultant to negotiate a
benefits program that meets the needs of the District. 15
Consultant’s knowledge and/or technical support
related to the implementation of Online Benefits Open
Enrollment.
10
Consultant’s and other assigned staff’s availability
and accessibility including the location of the office
that will be servicing the District’s account. 20
Qualifications, background, and experience of
Consultant and staff and team composition. 15
Consultant’s ability to provide proactive support to
the District’s Human Resources function including
dissemination of current general and legal updates as
well as time-sensitive insurance carrier information.
20
Completeness, addressed requested information,
readability. 10
Proposed fees as compared to level of effort expended. 10
Total 100
After evaluating the firms’ written responses, the panel invited four
firms for an oral interview (Alliant, Keenan & Associates, Living
Benefits, and WSP Corporate Benefits and Insurance Services, Inc.). The
criteria used to evaluate the firms during the oral interview were based
on the following:
3
Oral Interview Criteria Maximum Points
Demonstration of having powerful leverage and
influence in the insurance market.
20
Ability to provide creative or unique solutions to
clients.
20
Ability to communicate and deal effectively and
professionally with all levels of the organization.
Approachability.
20
Ability to ensure accuracy of the data collected and
analysis given to the District.
20
Total 80
Based on the overall evaluation, which included a review and rating of
proposals, interviews, references, and overall best value, staff
recommends contracting with Alliant. While all consultants evaluated
are reputable firms, Alliant scored exceptionally well in all categories
being evaluated demonstrating their expertise and knowledge in the
health insurance industry and their capability in offering robust
leverage in the marketplace, cost-saving solutions to the District, and
the ability to provide comprehensive resources.
As an additional benefit, Alliant currently serves as the benefits
consultant to the CSAC/SDRMA Medical pool of which the District is a
member. Their transparent relationship has proven to be invaluable and
should continue to strengthen communication and legal compliance
regarding benefit-related topics for the District. Moreover, continuing
with Alliant should result in efficiencies as there will be no loss of
staff time in onboarding a new consultant.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The annual cost of the agreement is $29,000 for each of the first three
(3) years and will not exceed $148,480 over five (5) years. Funding for
this expenditure is provided through the operating budget and the FY17
budget, which includes $35,000.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Provide enhanced value by directing and managing financial issues that
are critical to the District.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments: Attachment A - Committee Action Report
Attachment B - Summary of Proposal Rankings
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
APPROVE THE SELECTION OF ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES FOR
BENEFIT CONSULTING SERVICES AND AS THE DISTRICT’S BROKER OF
RECORD
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this
item at a meeting held on June 22, 2016 and the following comments were
made:
Staff is requesting that the board approve a five (5) year
agreement (three [3] years with two [2] additional years at the
District’s option) with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. (Alliant)
for benefit consulting and broker services in an amount not-to
exceed $148,480 and identifying Alliant as the District’s Broker of
Record.
Staff reviewed the information presented in the staff report.
It was indicated that Alliant has done a great job for the District
over the four (4) years that they have served as our benefits
broker. Alliant has assisted the District in changing its short-
term and long-term disability insurance and life insurance
providers which has saved the District money. They have also been
very helpful in the administration of healthcare reform.
In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that
Alliant provides broker services to 300 cities, 300 counties and
over 900 special districts. The District had checked their
references which included the City of Encinitas, San Dieguito Water
District, City of Santee, College of the Desert, etc.
Staff stated that Alliant has been in business since 1925 and they
have offices throughout the State of California and in Downtown San
Diego. They were formerly known as Robert F. Driver Co.
The Committee commented that one of the scoring criteria is the
vendor’s ability to provide creative or unique solutions and
inquired if staff could provide an example of such a solution that
Alliant has provided over the last three (3) years. Staff
indicated that Alliant had presented some ideas related to the
healthcare excise tax to be implemented in 2018 and they provided
some suggestions on the implementation of Obama Care related to the
“Cadillac Tax” which has now been extended to 2020. They also are
the only provider that will refund 20% of their broker service fee
if the District is not satisfied with their services.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
Negotiation
Skills
Online Benefits Open
Enrollment Staff Availability
Qualifications,
Background, &
Experience
Proactive Support with
Legal &Time-Sensitive
Insurance Carrier
Information
Completeness of
Proposal
INDIVIDUAL
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
AVERAGE SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
Proposed
Rates**
TOTAL -
WRITTEN
15 10 20 15 20 10 90 10 100
Rater 1 15 10 20 12 20 10 87
Rater 2 15 10 20 14 20 9 88
Rater 3 14 9 18 15 19 10 85
Rater 4 14 9 18 14 18 8 81
Rater 1 15 10 15 12 20 10 82
Rater 2 15 9 18 14 18 10 84
Rater 3 14 9 18 14 18 9 82
Rater 4 13 9 15 14 18 8 77
Rater 1 10 8 15 12 15 8 68
Rater 2 12 9 15 13 15 9 73
Rater 3 11 7 14 11 14 6 63
Rater 4 11 7 11 13 15 6 63
Rater 1 15 10 15 12 15 8 75
Rater 2 15 8 15 13 16 8 75
Rater 3 12 8 14 12 15 7 68
Rater 4 10 7 10 12 14 6 59
Leverage in the
Insurance Market
Place
Creative or Unique
Solutions
Communication
Skills &
Approachability
Accuracy of Data
Collected &
Analysis
INDIVIDUAL TOTAL -
ORAL
AVERAGE
TOTAL ORAL TOTAL SCORE REFERENCES
20 20 20 20 80 180 Poor/Good/ Excellent
Rater 1 20 18 20 18 76
Rater 2 18 14 18 16 66
Rater 3 18 18 20 18 74
Rater 4 18 16 18 18 70
Rater 1 20 18 20 16 74
Rater 2 16 14 14 14 58
Rater 3 18 18 20 16 72
Rater 4 18 18 18 18 72
Rater 1 16 16 14 16 62
Rater 2 10 12 16 10 48
Rater 3 9 12 12 12 45
Rater 4 12 14 16 10 52
Rater 1 14 14 16 14 58
Rater 2 12 10 12 10 44
Rater 3 10 10 12 10 42
Rater 4 12 10 12 10 44
CONSULTANT
FEE RATE
(3 years with 2
option years)
SCORE
Barney & Barney*$213,818.00
Alliant $148,480.00 6
Keenan & Associates $157,363.00 5
Living Benefits $121,450.00 8
WSP Corporate Benefits $93,305.00 10 * Barney & Barney was not rated/interviewed due to the compensation fees being outside of the competitive range and exceeding the District's budgeted allotment.
WRITTEN
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS
Benefit Broker
Excellent
Keenan & Associates 81 5
MAXIMUM POINTS
Barney & Barney*NOT RATED
75
79
Alliant 85 6 91
WSP Corp. Benefits 69 10
Living Benefits
86
69 155
Living Benefits 67 8
COMPENSATION RATES (FEES) SCORING CHART**
MAXIMUM POINTS
Barney & Barney*
Alliant
Keenan & Associates
52
72
WSP Corp. Benefits
NOT INTERVIEWED
47 126
ORAL
127
163
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
PROJECT: DIV. NO. ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Williamson
Human Resources Manager
APPROVED BY:
Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION #4309 TO UPDATE BOARD POLICY #22, DRUG-FREE
WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution #4309 to update Board Policy #22, Drug-
Free Workplace Policy and Procedure, to change the random testing
percentages for all employees subject to this policy and revise the
definition of safety-sensitive duties.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To request that the Board adopt Resolution #4309 to update Board Policy
#22, Drug-Free Workplace Policy and Procedure.
ANALYSIS:
Consistent with the District’s Strategic Plan and Board Policy #44,
Review of Procedures, the District regularly reviews policies and
procedures to ensure they are streamlined and are clear and consistent
with applicable laws.
Based on recent changes to the Department of Transportation’s (DOT)
random drug and alcohol testing, the District made necessary updates to
our DOT Testing Human Resources Policy and Procedure to be in compliance,
District staff is recommending revisions to the attached policy, Drug-
Free Workplace Policy and Procedure, so that both policies are consistent
(Attachment C). Updates are detailed below and revisions are shown in
the attached strike-through version of the policy (Exhibit 1).
Drug-Free Workplace Policy and Procedure (Board Policy #22)
The Drug-Free Workplace (DFW) random testing policy currently requires
testing percentages at 50% drugs and 10% alcohol (of the pool of
employees per year) for safety-sensitive employees, however, recent
updates to the DOT regulations changed the minimum testing percentages
to 25% drugs and 10% alcohol for DOT employees (from 50% drugs and 10%
alcohol). Therefore, in order to make both policies consistent, the
District is recommending to lower the drug testing percentage for the
DFW to 25% to be consistent with DOT’s and to increase the alcohol
testing percentage to both DOT and DFW to 25%. By having the percentages
the same, at 25% drugs and 25% alcohol for both DOT and DFW policies,
employees would be tested for both drugs and alcohol while they are at
the testing facility and the drug and alcohol testing procedure would be
more efficient. The testing percentages would be changed to be the same
across the board for all employees (including management) that are
subject to either the DOT or DFW policy. Additional updates to the policy
include revisions to the definition of safety-sensitive duties to be in
line with the safety duties performed by employees. Updating the
definition has no impact on employees since employees performing these
safety-sensitive duties are already in the random drug testing pool.
The Association has agreed to the policy as presented and General Counsel
has reviewed the proposed updates.
Based on the above, it is recommended that the Board of Directors adopt
Resolution #4309 in support of the proposed revisions.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Optimize the District’s Operating Efficiency.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – Resolution #4309
Exhibit 1 – Drug-Free Workplace Policy and Procedure
Attachment C – Proposed Copy, Drug-Free Workplace Policy and Procedure
(Board Policy #22)
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION #4309 TO REVISE AND UPDATE BOARD POLICY
#22, DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on June 22, 2016 and the following
comments were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4309 to
amend Board Policy No. 22, Drug-Free Workplace Policy and Procedure,
to change the random testing percentages for all employees subject
to this policy and revise the definition of safety-sensitive duties.
Staff reviewed the information presented in the staff report.
Staff noted that language was also added which indicates that the
District’s policy would automatically be amended to match the
Department of Transporation’s (DOT) regulations should they revise
their regulations and increase/decrease their minimum testing
percentages.
It was indicated that the proposed changes to Policy No. 22 were
reviewed with the Employee Association and they had no concerns.
The District’s attorney also reviewed the changes.
The committee made the following suggested changes to the policy:
- Capitalize all defined terms.
- Clarify the term “substance” as it was felt that the policy
should be as specific as possible in what is meant by
substance.
- Include in the defined terms what constitutes an “observer”
versus “trained observer.”
- Revise 10.g, Refusal to Submit to Testing, under “Definitions”,
to indicate, “Any act or failure to act that is intended to
interfere with the testing or alter the results of the
testing.”
- Add to 11, Safety-Sensitive Duties, under “Definitions”
verbiage, in effect, indicating “Any work in and around or
involving high energy, pressure, or large equipment, where a
reasonable person would consider the work activity to be
dangerous and where a lack of attention to detail would result
in some form of bodily injury and/or death.”
- On page 12, first paragraph, it was indicated that the person
reporting the “reasonable suspicion” could be someone other
than an employee (it could be a customer, etc.). The Committee
suggested that the policy be revised to respond to such a
situation.
The committee discussed how the District would handle a situation
where there is reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity (“H” on
page 16). It was indicated that the District would access each
situation and will determine how to handle each based on the
circumstances, which could include reporting the activity to a law
enforcement agency.
It was indicated that staff would review the committee’s suggested
changes to the policy.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
1
RESOLUTION NO. 4309
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO
REVISE DISTRICT POLICY
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of Otay Water District
have established policies, procedures, ordinances, and
resolutions for the efficient operation of the District; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the District to establish
procedures to review policies, procedures, ordinances, and
resolutions periodically to ensure they are current and
relevant; and
WHEREAS, District staff has identified Board Policy #22,
Drug-Free Workplace Policy and Procedure, as requiring
revisions as per the attached strike-through copy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Directors of the Otay Water District amends the Board
Policies indicated above in the form presented to the Board
at this meeting.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 6th of
July, 2016.
__________________________
President
ATTEST:
___________________________
Secretary
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 1 of 20
A. Policy
The Otay Water District (“District”) has zero tolerance for the use
of controlled substances or the abuse of alcohol. Employees who are
under the influence of a drug or alcohol on the job compromise the
District’s interests and endanger their own health and safety as
well as the health and safety of others. The District prohibits the
use, possession, manufacture, distribution, or being under the
influence of alcohol or controlled substances by any District
employee while on District property or while on duty, except as
specified herein. Violation of this policy is an act of misconduct
meriting dismissal without prior warning or disciplinary action in
accordance with the District’s Discipline Policy and Procedures.
B. Exceptions
The following exceptions apply to this policy:
1. Events – Authorized Use of Alcohol
The General Manager or his/her designee, at his/her discretion,
may authorize the use of alcohol at a District event, subject
to any conditions he/she elects to impose.
2. Customary Use of Over-the Counter or Prescription Drugs
The exceptions set forth in this section do not extend to the
use of marijuana, or any product made or derived from
marijuana, regardless of whether the employee’s doctor
prescribes, recommends, or authorizes its use. With respect to
an employee, use of an over-the-counter drug, or a
prescription-only drug under a prescription for the employee,
in the manner prescribed, will not be treated as a violation of
this policy unless the drug has potential side effects which
impair the employee’s ability to perform any safety-sensitive
duty and/or the core duties of his/her position and the
employee has failed to notify his/her supervisor or Human
Resources of such side effects before performing duties while
under the influence of the drug. The District may require a
note from the employee’s doctor concerning authorization for a
prescription and/or the possible side effects of the prescribed
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 2 of 20
drugs. The District shall comply with all applicable laws
concerning the privacy of employees’ medical information.
With respect to an applicant, use of an over-the-counter drug,
or a prescription-only drug under a prescription for the
applicant, in the manner prescribed, will not disqualify the
applicant for employment if he/she satisfactorily explains such
use upon being informed of a positive test for controlled
substances. The District may require a note from the
applicant’s doctor concerning authorization for a prescription
and/or the possible side effects of the prescribed drugs.
C. Definitions
1. Accident:
a. Any accident, in which an employee is driving on District
business, and is at fault or suspected of having
significantly contributed to an accident. This shall apply
to employees covered by the Department of Transportation
(“DOT”) policy only if the accident is not subject to the
DOT policy.
b. Any accident, not involving the driving of a District
vehicle, that is reasonably believed by management or
credibly reported by another person to have been caused by
an on-duty employee and which results in serious physical
injury.
2. Controlled Substance:
a. Any drug or sSsubstance identified by section 40.85 of title
49 of the Code of Federal Regulations or sections 11054-
11058 of the California Health and Safety Code.
b. Any drug or substance.
3. Dilute Specimen: A specimen with creatinine and specific
gravity values that are lower than expected for human urine or
a specimen that is adulterated in any way.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 3 of 20
4. Drug Paraphernalia: This term has the same definition as is
used in section 11364.5(d) of the California Health and Safety
Code and applies only to paraphernalia deemed unlawful under
section 11364.5(d).
5. Manager/Management: A District employee who is designated as a
supervisor, manager, or executive.
6. Medical Review Officer: A person who is a licensed physician
and who is responsible for receiving and reviewing laboratory
results for substance tests and evaluating medical explanations
for certain test results.
7. Negative: A person is considered to have tested negative for a
substance if his/her substance test does not produce a positive
result.
8. Positive: A person is considered positive for alcohol if he/she
has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater at the
time he/she submits to testing. A person is considered positive
for a Ccontrolled Ssubstance if he/she has any amount of a
Ccontrolled Ssubstance at or above a “cutoff concentration”
specified in section 40.87 of title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations at the time he/she submits to testing.
9. Reasonable Suspicion: A reasonable suspicion exists that a
person is under the influence of a substance if a trained
observer (who has received the appropriate training to
recognize the signs and symptoms of drug and alcohol use)
reasonably comes to the conclusion that the person is under the
influence of a substance due to having personally observed,
with respect to the person, some or all of the effects
specified in Appendix A of this policy.
Additionally, a reasonable suspicion exists that a person is
under the influence of a substance if an observer has seen the
person use a substance.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 4 of 20
No one factor is sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion,
but an observer may make a reasonable assessment based on the
quantity, degree, and/or severity of applicable factors.
10. Refusal to Submit to Testing. Each of the following constitutes
a refusal to submit to testing:
a. Failing to immediately report for substance testing when
directed to do so;
b. Failing to complete the testing process (including signing
any forms necessary to authenticate or identify a
specimen);
c. Failing to provide an adequate amount of breath, saliva, or
urine for a test;
d. Failing to cooperate with any aspect of the testing
process, including but not limited to refusing to wash
hands when directed, being confrontational with testing
personnel, or failing to comply with instructions in a
“direct observation,” as that term is used in section
40.197 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations;
e. Using or wearing a prosthetic device to interfere with the
collection process;
f. Admitting to adulterating or diluting the specimen; or
g. Any act or failure to act that is intended to interfere
with the testing or alter the results of the testing.
11. Safety-Sensitive Duties: Duties which consist of any of the
following:
Operating any assigned District vehicle or equipment
(includes management and non-management employees);
High-voltage electrical work (600 volts or greater);
Work in “confined spaces,” as that term is defined in
District regulations or CalOSHA regulations;
Performing maintenance on any vehicle;
Loading, and unloading or attending any District vehicle or
equipment; or
Access to sensitive/classified information related to
emergency response, safety or security duties;.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 5 of 20
Participation in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response Confined Space Rescue Team;
Work performed at elevated or depth locations more than 4ft
above or below ground; or
Work involving the use or disposal of hazardous chemicals
as that term is defined in District regulations or Cal OSHA
regulations.
12. Serious Physical Injury: An injury to an employee that causes
the employee to be absent from work following an Aaccident or
which requires hospitalization of the employee.
13. Substance: Any substance containing alcohol or any Ccontrolled
Ssubstance.
14. Under the Influence: With respect to alcohol, a person is under
the influence at the time he/she is ordered to submit to
testing if he/she tests Ppositive for alcohol at the time
he/she submits to testing. With respect to Ccontrolled
Ssubstances, a person is under the influence at the time he/she
is ordered to submit to testing if he/she tests Ppositive for a
Ccontrolled Ssubstance at the time he/she submits to testing.
D. Conflicts with DOT Policy
As to applicants or employees to whom the DOT Policy applies, to
the extent this policy imposes a requirement that is less stringent
than the DOT Policy the more stringent requirements of the DOT
Policy will control.
E. Testing Procedures
When an employee or applicant is to be tested, the District shall
use the same testing procedures that are used for testing under the
DOT Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy, including the procedures for
testing a “split specimen,” as that term is defined in section 40.3
of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The service
providers shall comply with section 40.47 of title 49 of the Code
of Federal Regulations except they shall use a non-federal custody
and control form for applicants and employees.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 6 of 20
1. Alcohol Testing
Alcohol testing will be conducted using evidential breath
testing devices (“EBT”) approved by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration. A screening test must be
conducted first. If the result is an alcohol concentration
level of less than 0.02, the test is considered a Nnegative
test. If the alcohol concentration level is 0.02 or more, a
second confirmation test must be conducted. Alcohol testing
shall be accomplished by a laboratory certified by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
2. Controlled Substance Testing
a. The test must be conducted by analyzing the employee's
urine.
b. The urinalysis shall be done at a laboratory certified by
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
c. The urine specimen must be split into two bottles labeled
as "primary" and "split" specimen. Both bottles must be
sent to the laboratory.
d. If the urinalysis of the primary specimen tests Ppositive
for the presence of illegal, Ccontrolled Ssubstances, the
employee has 72 hours from time of notification to request
that the split specimen be analyzed by a different
certified laboratory.
e. The urine sample shall be tested for the following:
marijuana metabolites, cocaine metabolites, opiates,
amphetamines and phencyclidine (“PCP”);
f. If the test is Ppositive for one or more of the drugs
listed in subsection "e" above, a confirmation test must be
performed using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
analysis.
g. All drug test results will be reviewed and interpreted by
the Medical Review Officer before they are reported to the
District.
h. With all Ppositive drug tests, the Medical Review Officer
will contact the employee to determine if there is a
medical explanation for the Ppositive test result. If
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 7 of 20
documentation is provided and the Medical Review Officer
determines that there is a legitimate medical use for the
prohibited drug, the test result may be reported to the
District as Nnegative.
F. Testing
1. Persons Subject to Substance Screening
All applicants for employment, in conjunction with pre-
employment physical examination;
All employees reasonably suspected of using Ssubstances
while on duty or on District property or while working
while Uunder Tthe Iinfluence of Ssubstances;
All employees reasonably suspected of possessing,
manufacturing, or distributing Ssubstances while on duty or
on District property;
Any employee at fault or reasonably suspected of having
significantly contributed to an Aaccident while on duty;
Any employee who performs Ssafety-Ssensitive Dduties whose
name is selected for testing pursuant to the District’s
random testing policy procedure; or
Any District employee who applies for and is selected for a
position that will require the performance of Ssafety-
Ssensitive Dduties.
2. Pre-employment, Promotions and Transfer Physicals
All applicants for employment shall, as part of their pre-
employment physical examination, submit to a urine analysis or
other legally authorized testing methods as selected by the
District for Ssubstances.
Any District employee who applies for a position that will
require the performance of Safety-Sensitive Duties shall, as a
precondition to appointment to such position, submit to a urine
analysis or other legally authorized testing methods as
selected by the District for Ssubstances.
3. Random Testing of Managers and Safety-Sensitive Duty Employees
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 8 of 20
Each year the District shall randomly conduct Ssubstance tests
of employees who perform Safety-Sensitive Duties. Based on the
number of such employees employed by the District on January 1,
the District shall conduct by the following December 31, a
number of tests for Ccontrolled Ssubstances equal to 2550
percent of the total number of employees who perform Safety-
Sensitive Duties, or the minimum amount required by DOT
regulations, whichever is greater. Within the same time period,
the District shall randomly conduct a number of tests for
alcohol equal to 2510 percent of the same number of safety-
sensitive employees, or the minimum amount required by DOT
regulations, whichever is greater.
Each year the District shall randomly conduct Ssubstance tests
of managers who are not randomly tested as employees performing
Ssafety-Ssensitive Dduties. Based on the number of managers
employed by the District on January 1, the District shall
conduct by the following December 31 a number of tests for
Ccontrolled Ssubstances equal to 2510 percent of the total
number of such managers, or the minimum amount required by DOT
regulations, whichever is greater. Within the same time period,
the District shall randomly conduct a number of tests for
alcohol equal to 2510 percent of the same number of such
managers, or the minimum amount required by DOT regulations,
whichever is greater. Managers who perform Ssafety-Ssensitive
Dduties and who are included in the pool of Ssafety-Ssensitive
Dduty employees selected for random testing shall not be
included in the pool of non-Safety-Sensitive Duty managers who
are selected for random testing.
The General Manager will contract with a service provider to
perform the random selection of employee names for Ssubstance
testing and select the dates upon which the employees will be
tested. The service provider must ensure that every Safety-
Sensitive employee has an equal chance of being selected each
time a name is randomly drawn and that any employee whose name
is selected is not exempt from having his/her name selected in
any subsequent drawing in the same year.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 9 of 20
The service provider shall provide the selected names and dates
to the Safety and Security Specialist Administrator and/or
Human Resources Manager, who shall not disclose this
information to any other person except to the employee selected
for testing and the employee’s supervisor at the time that the
employee is required to submit to testing. If the employee is
absent from duty on a date that he/she has been randomly
selected for testing, an alternate name may be selected or
he/she may be required to submit to a test immediately upon
returning to work, without prior notice.
Upon being informed that he/she is required to submit to a
random test, the employee must report to the testing location,
as quickly as possible but no greater than one hour from being
informed, and complete the test as directed by personnel at the
testing location. Upon completing testing, the employee shall
report back to duty if his/her duty day has not yet concluded.
Random testing is separate from the other forms of testing
described in this policy. An employee who submits to a
Rreasonable Ssuspicion or post-Aaccident test does not satisfy
the requirement that he/she submit to a random test when
ordered.
4. Post-Aaccident Testing
If an employee is involved in an Aaccident that under this
policy requires that the employee submit to Ssubstance testing,
the employee’s supervisor shall immediately contact Human
Resources and the Safety and Security Specialist Administrator
to report the Aaccident and the necessity of testing. After
consultation with Human Resources, if it is determined that the
employee should be tested, then the supervisor shall direct the
employee to report to the testing location and complete the
test as directed by personnel at the testing location. The
supervisor shall arrange to transport the employee to the
testing location. Upon completing testing, the employee shall
report back to duty if his/her duty day has not yet concluded,
unless a Rreasonable Ssuspicion exists, based on the
observation of the employee’s supervisor and in consultation
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 10 of 20
with Human Resources, that the employee was Uunder the
Iinfluence of a Ssubstance at the time or shortly after the
Aaccident. If such a Rreasonable Ssuspicion exists, the
employee shall be released from duty for the remainder of the
day. The supervisor, in consultation with Human Resources,
thereafter shall determine on a day-to-day basis whether to
permit the employee to return to duty, until the results of the
test have returned. If an employee has been ordered to submit
to Ssubstance testing for post-Aaccident testing, and
Rreasonable Ssuspicion exists, the District may place the
employee on leave without pay pending the test results. If the
employee’s test results are Nnegative, the District shall
restore any salary lost by the employee for the days he/she was
on leave, as though the employee had reported for duty.
If the employee requires immediate medical assistance due to
the Aaccident, such that he/she is unable to report to the
testing location, the supervisor shall coordinate with the
hospital to conduct the test or require the employee to report
to the testing location as soon as is practicable.
The determination as to whether an employee is involved in an
Aaccident shall be made by the employee’s supervisor in
consultation with the Safety and Security Specialist
Administrator and Human Resources, based on the information
available to him/her. If it cannot be immediately determined
whether the employee was involved in an Aaccident, the
supervisor shall not order the employee to testing until a
determination can be made.
The following criteria apply when conducting drug and alcohol
tests due to an Aaccident:
a. A breath alcohol test must be administered as soon as
possible. Every effort should be made to ensure that a
breath alcohol test is performed within eight hours
following the Aaccident. If testing has not occurred within
eight hours, attempts to test should be discontinued.
However, if testing did not occur within eight hours, and
Rreasonable Ssuspicion existed at the time or shortly after
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 11 of 20
the Aaccident the employee may resume duties with his/her
next shift that begins after the eight hours have passed.
Prior to the employee’s return, management shall observe
the employee’s condition before the employee is allowed to
resume duties to ensure that there is no longer Rreasonable
Ssuspicion.
b. A drug screening test should be initiated prior to the 32nd
hour following an Aaccident.
c. The employee must remain readily available for testing or
he or she will be deemed to have refused the test (see
Refusal to Submit to Testing). This rule does not require
the delay of necessary medical attention for injured
persons following the Aaccident nor prohibit the employee
from leaving the scene to obtain assistance or necessary
emergency medical care.
d. An employee subject to post-Aaccident testing may not use
alcohol within eight hours following the Aaccident or
before an alcohol test, whichever comes first.
e. Testing will not be conducted on any deceased employee.
f. The results of a breath or blood test for the use of
alcohol or a urine test for Ccontrolled Ssubstances,
conducted by Federal, State, or local officials having
independent authority for the test, shall be considered to
meet the requirements of this policy provided such results
are obtained by the employer, and conform to the applicable
Federal, State or local requirements.
g. The potentially affected employee will not be allowed to
proceed alone to or from the collection site. Time spent in
complying with post-Aaccident testing is compensable.
h. Documentation of the activity being performed by the
employee that supports the determination to conduct post-
Aaccident testing should be prepared and signed by the
supervisor requesting the test within 24 hours of the
Aaccident or before the results of the drug test are
released, if possible.
5. Reasonable Suspicion Testing
If a supervisor, manager, the Safety and Security Specialist
Administrator, or other personnel has a Rreasonable Ssuspicion
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 12 of 20
that the employee is Uunder the Iinfluence of a Ssubstance
while on District property or on duty, he/she shall consult
with Human Resources of this observation to determine if
testing is appropriate. After consultation with Human
Resources, if it is determined that the employee should be
tested, a supervisor shall direct the employee to immediately
report for testing and complete the test as directed by
personnel at the testing location. The supervisor shall arrange
to transport the employee to the testing location. If the
person who advises Human Resources of the observation
Reasonable Suspicion is not the employee’s supervisor, Human
Resources must immediately notify the supervisor of the
Reasonable Suspicionthat the employee is reporting to Human
Resources and why, and the supervisor shall arrange to
transport the employee to the testing location. The
supervisor(s) witnessing the impairment must document the
specific observations upon which the Rreasonable Ssuspicion is
based.
Upon completing testing, the employee shall be released from
duty for the remainder of the day. The supervisor, in
consultation with Human Resources, thereafter, shall determine
on a day-to-day basis whether to permit the employee to return
to duty, until the results of the test have returned. If an
employee has been ordered to submit to Ssubstance testing for
Rreasonable Ssuspicion, the District may place the employee on
leave without pay pending the test results. If the employee’s
test results are Nnegative, the District shall restore any
salary lost by the employee for the days he/she was on leave,
as though the employee had reported for duty.
The following criteria apply when conducting drug and alcohol
tests due to Rreasonable Ssuspicion:
a. Alcohol
A breath alcohol test must be administered as soon as
possible. Every effort should be made to ensure that a
breath alcohol test is performed within eight hours. If
testing has not occurred within eight hours, attempts to
test should be discontinued and the employee may resume
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 13 of 20
duties with his/her next shift that begins after the eight
hours have passed. However, prior to the employee’s return,
management shall observe the employee’s condition before
the employee is allowed to resume duties to ensure that
there is no longer Rreasonable Ssuspicion.
b. Controlled Substances
A urinalysis test for Ccontrolled Ssubstances must be
administered as soon as possible. Every effort should be
made to ensure the urinalysis is performed within 32 hours
of the observation.
c. The employee may not proceed alone to or from the
collection site. The supervisor or other appropriate person
making the observation shall arrange to transport the
employee to the testing site.
d. Documentation to support the determination to conduct
Rreasonable Ssuspicion testing should be prepared and
signed by the person who made the determination within 24
hours of the determination or before the results of the
test are released, whichever is earlier, if possible.
6. Acknowledgment and Consent
Any employee subject to testing under this policy will be asked
to sign a form acknowledging the procedures governing testing,
and consenting to (1) the collection of a urine sample for the
purpose of determining the presence of alcohol or Ccontrolled
Ssubstances, and (2) the release to the District of medical
information regarding the test results. Refusal to sign the
agreement and consent form, or to submit to the drug test, will
result in the revocation of an applicant’s job offer, or will
subject an employee to discipline up to and including
termination.
7. Refusal to Submit to Testing
If an applicant refuses to submit to testing for any
Ssubstance, the applicant is disqualified for employment. If a
District employee who has applied for a position that requires
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 14 of 20
the performance of Ssafety-Ssensitive Dduties refuses to submit
to testing for any Ssubstance, the employee is disqualified for
such position.
If an employee refuses to submit to testing for any Ssubstance,
the District may treat such refusal as an act of
insubordination. The District shall also impose the same
disciplinary action of dismissal for a refusal to test that it
would impose for a Ppositive test result, so as not to
encourage employees to refuse to test in the hope of avoiding
more severe disciplinary action. The District may immediately
place an employee on leave without pay if the employee refuses
to submit for testing.
8. Refusal to Authorize Disclosure of Results of Testing
If an applicant refuses to authorize the disclosure of the
testing results to the District, the applicant is disqualified
for employment. If a District employee who has applied for a
position that requires the performance of Ssafety-Ssensitive
Dduties refuses to authorize the disclosure of the test results
to the District, the employee is disqualified for such
position.
If an employee refuses to authorize the disclosure of results
of testing to the District, the District will impose the same
disciplinary action of dismissal for a refusal to authorize the
disclosure of results of testing, that it would impose for a
Ppositive test result, so as not to encourage employees to
refuse to authorize the disclosure of test results in the hope
of avoiding more severe disciplinary action.
9. Positive Test
If an applicant tests Ppositive for a Ccontrolled Ssubstance,
he/she shall be disqualified for employment unless he/she meets
the requirements for the over-the-counter/prescription drug
exception set forth in Section B(2) of this policy. If a
District employee who has applied for a position that requires
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 15 of 20
the performance of Ssafety-Ssensitive Dduties tests Ppositive
for a Ssubstance, the employee is disqualified for such
position.
If an employee tests Ppositive for a Ssubstance, the employee
shall not be returned to duty and shall not receive pay during
his/her absence until the employee requests that the split
urine specimen be tested and the test of that specimen is not
Ppositive for a Ssubstance.
This unpaid absence shall not be considered a disciplinary or
punitive action against the employee and any record of such
absence shall be maintained separately from the employee’s
personnel file. The absence is for the administrative and
safety interests of the District. This unpaid absence has no
effect on the District’s decision or ability to discipline an
employee for violating this policy.
If the Medical Review Officer determines that an employee’s
specimen is a Ddilute Sspecimen and the specimen is Ppositive
for a Ssubstance, the employee shall be considered to have
tested Ppositive for that Ssubstance. If a Ddilute Sspecimen
produces a Nnegative result then the employee shall be required
to submit to a second Ssubstance test, in the manner prescribed
in section 40.197 of title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. All such second tests shall be with “direct
observation,” as that term is used in section 40.197.
10. Request for Retest
If an employee tests Ppositive for any Ssubstance, the employee
may, within 72 hours of being notified of the Ppositive test
result, request of the Medical Review Officer that the split
specimen be tested. If the employee does not timely submit a
request, the employee shall be considered to have waived
his/her right to have the split specimen tested. The employee
shall pay for the cost of testing the split specimen. If the
employee is unable to pay this cost at the time of the request,
the District must ensure that the split specimen is tested even
if it means that the District may have to initially bear the
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 16 of 20
cost. The District may recover the cost from the employee at a
later time.
If a split specimen does not produce a Ppositive result for a
Ssubstance, the District shall restore any salary lost by the
employee as a result of an absence imposed because of the
Ppositive result on the first specimen. The employee shall be
considered to have not tested Ppositive for a Ssubstance. The
District shall also reimburse the employee for the cost of the
retest if the employee paid for the retest.
The District may not request that the split specimen be tested.
G. Employee Assistance Programs
The District may refer any employee, including an employee who is
dismissed because of a Ppositive test for a Ssubstance, to its
employee assistance program. If in any instance the District is
required to lawfully accommodate an employee’s disability related
to Ssubstance abuse, the District shall refer the employee to a
Ssubstance abuse professional.
H. Suspicion of Possession/Distribution/Manufacture of Controlled
Substances
If a supervisor has a Rreasonable Ssuspicion that an employee
unlawfully possesses or is distributing or manufacturing a
Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia on or in District
property, or while on duty, the supervisor must report this
suspicion to Human Resources.
1. For purposes of Section H only, “Rreasonable Ssuspicion” means
the following:
a. As to possession, the supervisor or a reporting credible
source must have seen a Ssubstance or item on the person of
the employee, in the employee’s work area, or in or on
District property assigned to the use of the employee that
a reasonable person would believe is a Ccontrolled
Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia, or have seen in any of
the same areas a container that a reasonable person would
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 17 of 20
believe contains a Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug
Pparaphernalia.
b. As to distribution, the supervisor must have seen the
employee convey to another person a Ssubstance or item that
a reasonable person would believe is a Ccontrolled
Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia, or have seen the
employee convey a container to another person that a
reasonable person would believe contains a Ccontrolled
Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia, or have received a
report of observation of the same from a credible source.
c. As to manufacture, the supervisor must have observed
conditions that a reasonable person would equate to the
manufacture of a Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug
Pparaphernalia, which may include the observation of smell,
appearance, or sound. The supervisor must also have
observed conditions that would attribute suspected
manufacture to the employee, such as observing these
conditions in the employee’s work area or in or on District
property assigned to the use of the employee. If the
conditions are observed on the person of the employee, the
supervisor must consider whether the employee reported to
duty in such condition instead of changing to such
condition while on duty, or have received a report of
observation of the same from a credible source.
2. After a report of a Rreasonable Ssuspicion has been made to
Human Resources, the Human Resources Manager must confer with
management representatives to consider whether the reported
observation constituted Rreasonable Ssuspicion, and decide what
steps to take in response to the reported observation.
a. If the decision is to take no further action, the matter
will be dismissed.
b. If the decision is to discuss the observation with the
employee, Human Resources and the supervisor will meet with
the employee to discuss the observation. If as a result of
the discussion, Human Resources and/or the supervisor
believe that a search is necessary, they will confer with
management representatives to determine whether to conduct
a search.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 18 of 20
c. If the decision is to conduct a search, the search must be
limited to a search of District property, such as the
employee’s work area (including desk drawers and file
cabinets), District vehicle or equipment, and District
facilities. The search may be performed by the Human
Resources representative or another person designated by
the Human Resources representative, which may include the
supervisor. The employee does not need to be present during
the search. If any material is retrieved that appears to
bear out the supervisor’s Rreasonable Ssuspicion, the Human
Resources representative must take possession of the
material.
d. If the decision is to conduct a search and the distribution
of Ccontrolled Ssubstances or Ddrug Pparaphernalia is
reasonably suspected, the search may include not only the
work area/equipment of the employee suspected of
distributing Ccontrolled Ssubstances or Ddrug
Pparaphernalia, but the work area/equipment of any employee
whom was observed receiving the item from the employee
suspected of distributing Ccontrolled Ssubstances or Ddrug
Pparaphernalia. The receiving employee is entitled to the
same rights as the distributing employee.
e. Any search of the person of the employee or personally-held
possessions of the employee, such as a briefcase, purse,
pocketbook, backpack or personal vehicle, must be conducted
by a law enforcement officer. If the decision to conduct a
search extends to these areas, Human Resources should
contact law enforcement to request such a search.
3. If the Human Resources representative takes possession of any
material as a result of the search, and the employee does not
confirm that it is a Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug
Pparaphernalia, the District shall contact the local law
enforcement agency and will forward the Ssubstance to have the
item tested/analyzed to determine if it is a cControlled
Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia. If a law enforcement
officer takes possession of an item as a result of a search,
and the employee does not confirm that it is a Ccontrolled
Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia, the District shall follow
up with the law enforcement agency to verify the item is a
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 19 of 20
Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia. The employee
shall not return to duty and shall not receive pay during
his/her absence until the law enforcement agency has verified
that the tested/analyzed item is not Ppositive for a
Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia. If the
tested/analyzed item does not produce a Ppositive result for a
Ccontrolled Ssubstance or Ddrug Pparaphernalia, the District
shall restore any salary lost by the employee as a result of
the absence.
I. Disciplinary Action
Disciplinary action for violations of this policy will be taken in
accordance with the District’s Discipline Policy and Procedures.
J. Accommodation of Individuals with Disabilities
Nothing in this policy shall be construed so as to relieve the
District of its lawful obligation to accommodate individuals with
disabilities.
K. Confidentiality
All alcohol and drug-testing records will be treated as
confidential.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 6/6/12
7/6/16
Page 20 of 20
APPENDIX A
INDICATION OF DRUG USE
REMEMBER THAT THESE SYMPTOMS ARE ONLY INDICATIONS. THEY MAY BE A SIGN
OF SOMETHING OTHER THAN DRUG OR ALCOHOL USE.
PHYSICAL
1. Increased pulse rate 10. Nasal sores
2. Weak and rapid pulse 11. Slowed respirations
3. Increased blood pressure 12. Shallow respiration
4. Increased body temperature 13. Cold and clammy skin
5. Constricted pupils 14. Chills and sweats
6. Dilated pupils 15. Cramps
7. Bloodshot eyes 16. Nausea
8. Water eyes 17. Convulsions
9. Runny nose
MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL
1. Increased alertness 10. Disorientation
2. Excitation 11. Visual illusions
3. Anxiety 12. Hallucinations
4. Irritability 13. Paranoia
5 Euphoria 14. Delirium
6. Increased emotionality 15. Irrational fears
7. Impaired attention 16. Panic
8. Impaired memory 17. Depressed mood
9. Altered perceptions
BEHAVIORAL
1. Slurred speech 8. Hyperactivity
2. Staggered gait 9. Agitation
3. Fatigue 10. Argumentative
4. Apathy 11. Hostility
5. Drowsiness 12. Tremors
6. Loss of appetite 13. Insomnia
7. Increased appetite
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 1 of 20
A. Policy
The Otay Water District (“District”) has zero tolerance for the use
of controlled substances or the abuse of alcohol. Employees who are
under the influence of a drug or alcohol on the job compromise the
District’s interests and endanger their own health and safety as
well as the health and safety of others. The District prohibits the
use, possession, manufacture, distribution, or being under the
influence of alcohol or controlled substances by any District
employee while on District property or while on duty, except as
specified herein. Violation of this policy is an act of misconduct
meriting dismissal without prior warning or disciplinary action in
accordance with the District’s Discipline Policy and Procedures.
B. Exceptions
The following exceptions apply to this policy:
1. Events – Authorized Use of Alcohol
The General Manager or his/her designee, at his/her discretion,
may authorize the use of alcohol at a District event, subject
to any conditions he/she elects to impose.
2. Customary Use of Over-the Counter or Prescription Drugs
The exceptions set forth in this section do not extend to the
use of marijuana, or any product made or derived from
marijuana, regardless of whether the employee’s doctor
prescribes, recommends, or authorizes its use. With respect to
an employee, use of an over-the-counter drug, or a
prescription-only drug under a prescription for the employee,
in the manner prescribed, will not be treated as a violation of
this policy unless the drug has potential side effects which
impair the employee’s ability to perform any safety-sensitive
duty and/or the core duties of his/her position and the
employee has failed to notify his/her supervisor or Human
Resources of such side effects before performing duties while
under the influence of the drug. The District may require a
note from the employee’s doctor concerning authorization for a
prescription and/or the possible side effects of the prescribed
drugs. The District shall comply with all applicable laws
concerning the privacy of employees’ medical information.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 2 of 20
With respect to an applicant, use of an over-the-counter drug,
or a prescription-only drug under a prescription for the
applicant, in the manner prescribed, will not disqualify the
applicant for employment if he/she satisfactorily explains such
use upon being informed of a positive test for controlled
substances. The District may require a note from the
applicant’s doctor concerning authorization for a prescription
and/or the possible side effects of the prescribed drugs.
C. Definitions
1. Accident:
a. Any accident, in which an employee is driving on District
business, and is at fault or suspected of having
significantly contributed to an accident. This shall apply
to employees covered by the Department of Transportation
(“DOT”) policy only if the accident is not subject to the
DOT policy.
b. Any accident, not involving the driving of a District
vehicle, that is reasonably believed by management or
credibly reported by another person to have been caused by
an on-duty employee and which results in serious physical
injury.
2. Controlled Substance:
a. Any drug or substance identified by section 40.85 of title
49 of the Code of Federal Regulations or sections 11054-
11058 of the California Health and Safety Code.
b. Any drug or substance.
3. Dilute Specimen: A specimen with creatinine and specific
gravity values that are lower than expected for human urine or
a specimen that is adulterated in any way.
4. Drug Paraphernalia: This term has the same definition as is
used in section 11364.5(d) of the California Health and Safety
Code and applies only to paraphernalia deemed unlawful under
section 11364.5(d).
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 3 of 20
5. Manager/Management: A District employee who is designated as a
supervisor, manager, or executive.
6. Medical Review Officer: A person who is a licensed physician
and who is responsible for receiving and reviewing laboratory
results for substance tests and evaluating medical explanations
for certain test results.
7. Negative: A person is considered to have tested negative for a
substance if his/her substance test does not produce a positive
result.
8. Positive: A person is considered positive for alcohol if he/she
has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater at the
time he/she submits to testing. A person is considered positive
for a Controlled Substance if he/she has any amount of a
Controlled Substance at or above a “cutoff concentration”
specified in section 40.87 of title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations at the time he/she submits to testing.
9. Reasonable Suspicion: A reasonable suspicion exists that a
person is under the influence of a substance if a trained
observer (who has received the appropriate training to
recognize the signs and symptoms of drug and alcohol use)
reasonably comes to the conclusion that the person is under the
influence of a substance due to having personally observed,
with respect to the person, some or all of the effects
specified in Appendix A of this policy.
Additionally, a reasonable suspicion exists that a person is
under the influence of a substance if an observer has seen the
person use a substance.
No one factor is sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion,
but an observer may make a reasonable assessment based on the
quantity, degree, and/or severity of applicable factors.
10. Refusal to Submit to Testing. Each of the following constitutes
a refusal to submit to testing:
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 4 of 20
a. Failing to immediately report for substance testing when
directed to do so;
b. Failing to complete the testing process (including signing
any forms necessary to authenticate or identify a
specimen);
c. Failing to provide an adequate amount of breath, saliva, or
urine for a test;
d. Failing to cooperate with any aspect of the testing
process, including but not limited to refusing to wash
hands when directed, being confrontational with testing
personnel, or failing to comply with instructions in a
“direct observation,” as that term is used in section
40.197 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations;
e. Using or wearing a prosthetic device to interfere with the
collection process;
f. Admitting to adulterating or diluting the specimen; or
g. Any act or failure to act that is intended to interfere
with the testing or alter the results of the testing.
11. Safety-Sensitive Duties: Duties which consist of any of the
following:
Operating any assigned District vehicle or equipment
(includes management and non-management employees);
Work in “confined spaces,” as that term is defined in
District regulations or CalOSHA regulations;
Performing maintenance on any vehicle;
Loading, unloading or attending any District vehicle or
equipment;
Access to sensitive/classified information related to
emergency response, safety or security duties;
Participation in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response Confined Space Rescue Team;
Work performed at elevated or depth locations more than 4ft
above or below ground; or
Work involving the use or disposal of hazardous chemicals
as that term is defined in District regulations or Cal OSHA
regulations.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 5 of 20
12. Serious Physical Injury: An injury to an employee that causes
the employee to be absent from work following an Accident or
which requires hospitalization of the employee.
13. Substance: Any substance containing alcohol or any Controlled
Substance.
14. Under the Influence: With respect to alcohol, a person is under
the influence at the time he/she is ordered to submit to
testing if he/she tests Positive for alcohol at the time he/she
submits to testing. With respect to Controlled Substances, a
person is under the influence at the time he/she is ordered to
submit to testing if he/she tests Positive for a Controlled
Substance at the time he/she submits to testing.
D. Conflicts with DOT Policy
As to applicants or employees to whom the DOT Policy applies, to
the extent this policy imposes a requirement that is less stringent
than the DOT Policy the more stringent requirements of the DOT
Policy will control.
E. Testing Procedures
When an employee or applicant is to be tested, the District shall
use the same testing procedures that are used for testing under the
DOT Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy, including the procedures for
testing a “split specimen,” as that term is defined in section 40.3
of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The service
providers shall comply with section 40.47 of title 49 of the Code
of Federal Regulations except they shall use a non-federal custody
and control form for applicants and employees.
1. Alcohol Testing
Alcohol testing will be conducted using evidential breath
testing devices (“EBT”) approved by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration. A screening test must be
conducted first. If the result is an alcohol concentration
level of less than 0.02, the test is considered a Negative
test. If the alcohol concentration level is 0.02 or more, a
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 6 of 20
second confirmation test must be conducted. Alcohol testing
shall be accomplished by a laboratory certified by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
2. Controlled Substance Testing
a. The test must be conducted by analyzing the employee's
urine.
b. The urinalysis shall be done at a laboratory certified by
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
c. The urine specimen must be split into two bottles labeled
as "primary" and "split" specimen. Both bottles must be
sent to the laboratory.
d. If the urinalysis of the primary specimen tests Positive
for the presence of illegal Controlled Substances, the
employee has 72 hours from time of notification to request
that the split specimen be analyzed by a different
certified laboratory.
e. The urine sample shall be tested for the following:
marijuana metabolites, cocaine metabolites, opiates,
amphetamines and phencyclidine (“PCP”);
f. If the test is Positive for one or more of the drugs listed
in subsection "e" above, a confirmation test must be
performed using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
analysis.
g. All drug test results will be reviewed and interpreted by
the Medical Review Officer before they are reported to the
District.
h. With all Positive drug tests, the Medical Review Officer
will contact the employee to determine if there is a
medical explanation for the Positive test result. If
documentation is provided and the Medical Review Officer
determines that there is a legitimate medical use for the
prohibited drug, the test result may be reported to the
District as Negative.
F. Testing
1. Persons Subject to Substance Screening
All applicants for employment, in conjunction with pre-
employment physical examination;
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 7 of 20
All employees reasonably suspected of using Substances
while on duty or on District property or while working
while Under The Influence of Substances;
All employees reasonably suspected of possessing,
manufacturing, or distributing Substances while on duty or
on District property;
Any employee at fault or reasonably suspected of having
significantly contributed to an Accident while on duty;
Any employee who performs Safety-Sensitive Duties whose
name is selected for testing pursuant to the District’s
random testing procedure; or
Any District employee who applies for and is selected for a
position that will require the performance of Safety-
Sensitive Duties.
2. Pre-employment, Promotions and Transfer Physicals
All applicants for employment shall, as part of their pre-
employment physical examination, submit to a urine analysis or
other legally authorized testing methods as selected by the
District for Substances.
Any District employee who applies for a position that will
require the performance of Safety-Sensitive Duties shall, as a
precondition to appointment to such position, submit to a urine
analysis or other legally authorized testing method as selected
by the District for Substances.
3. Random Testing of Managers and Safety-Sensitive Duty Employees
Each year the District shall randomly conduct Substance tests
of employees who perform Safety-Sensitive Duties. Based on the
number of such employees employed by the District on January 1,
the District shall conduct by the following December 31, a
number of tests for Controlled Substances equal to 25 percent
of the total number of employees who perform Safety-Sensitive
Duties, or the minimum amount required by DOT regulations,
whichever is greater. Within the same time period, the District
shall randomly conduct a number of tests for alcohol equal to
25 percent of the same number of safety-sensitive employees, or
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 8 of 20
the minimum amount required by DOT regulations, whichever is
greater.
Each year the District shall randomly conduct Substance tests
of managers who are not randomly tested as employees performing
Safety-Sensitive Duties. Based on the number of managers
employed by the District on January 1, the District shall
conduct by the following December 31 a number of tests for
Controlled Substances equal to 25 percent of the total number
of such managers, or the minimum amount required by DOT
regulations, whichever is greater. Within the same time period,
the District shall randomly conduct a number of tests for
alcohol equal to 25 percent of the same number of such
managers, or the minimum amount required by DOT regulations,
whichever is greater. Managers who perform Safety-Sensitive
Duties and who are included in the pool of Safety-Sensitive
Duty employees selected for random testing shall not be
included in the pool of non-Safety-Sensitive Duty managers who
are selected for random testing.
The General Manager will contract with a service provider to
perform the random selection of employee names for Substance
testing and select the dates upon which the employees will be
tested. The service provider must ensure that every Safety-
Sensitive employee has an equal chance of being selected each
time a name is randomly drawn and that any employee whose name
is selected is not exempt from having his/her name selected in
any subsequent drawing in the same year.
The service provider shall provide the selected names and dates
to the Safety and Security Specialist and/or Human Resources
Manager, who shall not disclose this information to any other
person except to the employee selected for testing and the
employee’s supervisor at the time that the employee is required
to submit to testing. If the employee is absent from duty on a
date that he/she has been randomly selected for testing, an
alternate name may be selected or he/she may be required to
submit to a test immediately upon returning to work, without
prior notice.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 9 of 20
Upon being informed that he/she is required to submit to a
random test, the employee must report to the testing location,
as quickly as possible but no greater than one hour from being
informed, and complete the test as directed by personnel at the
testing location. Upon completing testing, the employee shall
report back to duty if his/her duty day has not yet concluded.
Random testing is separate from the other forms of testing
described in this policy. An employee who submits to a
Reasonable Suspicion or post-Accident test does not satisfy the
requirement that he/she submit to a random test when ordered.
4. Post-Accident Testing
If an employee is involved in an Accident that under this
policy requires that the employee submit to Substance testing,
the employee’s supervisor shall immediately contact Human
Resources and the Safety and Security Specialist to report the
Accident and the necessity of testing. After consultation with
Human Resources, if it is determined that the employee should
be tested, then the supervisor shall direct the employee to
report to the testing location and complete the test as
directed by personnel at the testing location. The supervisor
shall arrange to transport the employee to the testing
location. Upon completing testing, the employee shall report
back to duty if his/her duty day has not yet concluded, unless
a Reasonable Suspicion exists, based on the observation of the
employee’s supervisor and in consultation with Human Resources,
that the employee was Under the Influence of a Substance at the
time or shortly after the Accident. If such a Reasonable
Suspicion exists, the employee shall be released from duty for
the remainder of the day. The supervisor, in consultation with
Human Resources, thereafter shall determine on a day-to-day
basis whether to permit the employee to return to duty, until
the results of the test have returned. If an employee has been
ordered to submit to Substance testing for post-Accident
testing, and Reasonable Suspicion exists, the District may
place the employee on leave without pay pending the test
results. If the employee’s test results are Negative, the
District shall restore any salary lost by the employee for the
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 10 of 20
days he/she was on leave, as though the employee had reported
for duty.
If the employee requires immediate medical assistance due to
the Accident, such that he/she is unable to report to the
testing location, the supervisor shall coordinate with the
hospital to conduct the test or require the employee to report
to the testing location as soon as is practicable.
The determination as to whether an employee is involved in an
Accident shall be made by the employee’s supervisor in
consultation with the Safety and Security Specialist and Human
Resources, based on the information available to him/her. If it
cannot be immediately determined whether the employee was
involved in an Accident, the supervisor shall not order the
employee to testing until a determination can be made.
The following criteria apply when conducting drug and alcohol
tests due to an Accident:
a. A breath alcohol test must be administered as soon as
possible. Every effort should be made to ensure that a
breath alcohol test is performed within eight hours
following the Accident. If testing has not occurred within
eight hours, attempts to test should be discontinued.
However, if testing did not occur within eight hours, and
Reasonable Suspicion existed at the time or shortly after
the Accident the employee may resume duties with his/her
next shift that begins after the eight hours have passed.
Prior to the employee’s return, management shall observe
the employee’s condition before the employee is allowed to
resume duties to ensure that there is no longer Reasonable
Suspicion.
b. A drug screening test should be initiated prior to the 32nd
hour following an Accident.
c. The employee must remain readily available for testing or
he or she will be deemed to have refused the test (see
Refusal to Submit to Testing). This rule does not require
the delay of necessary medical attention for injured
persons following the Accident nor prohibit the employee
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 11 of 20
from leaving the scene to obtain assistance or necessary
emergency medical care.
d. An employee subject to post-Accident testing may not use
alcohol within eight hours following the Accident or before
an alcohol test, whichever comes first.
e. Testing will not be conducted on any deceased employee.
f. The results of a breath or blood test for the use of
alcohol or a urine test for Controlled Substances,
conducted by Federal, State, or local officials having
independent authority for the test, shall be considered to
meet the requirements of this policy provided such results
are obtained by the employer, and conform to the applicable
Federal, State or local requirements.
g. The potentially affected employee will not be allowed to
proceed alone to or from the collection site. Time spent in
complying with post-Accident testing is compensable.
h. Documentation of the activity being performed by the
employee that supports the determination to conduct post-
Accident testing should be prepared and signed by the
supervisor requesting the test within 24 hours of the
Accident or before the results of the drug test are
released, if possible.
5. Reasonable Suspicion Testing
If a supervisor, manager, the Safety and Security Specialist,
other personnel has a Reasonable Suspicion that the employee is
Under the Influence of a Substance while on District property
or on duty, he/she shall consult with Human Resources of this
observation to determine if testing is appropriate. After
consultation with Human Resources, if it is determined that the
employee should be tested, a supervisor shall direct the
employee to immediately report for testing and complete the
test as directed by personnel at the testing location. The
supervisor shall arrange to transport the employee to the
testing location. If the person who advises Human Resources of
the Reasonable Suspicion is not the employee’s supervisor,
Human Resources must immediately notify the supervisor of the
Reasonable Suspicion, and the supervisor shall arrange to
transport the employee to the testing location. The
supervisor(s) witnessing the impairment must document the
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 12 of 20
specific observations upon which the Reasonable Suspicion is
based.
Upon completing testing, the employee shall be released from
duty for the remainder of the day. The supervisor, in
consultation with Human Resources, thereafter, shall determine
on a day-to-day basis whether to permit the employee to return
to duty, until the results of the test have returned. If an
employee has been ordered to submit to Substance testing for
Reasonable Suspicion, the District may place the employee on
leave without pay pending the test results. If the employee’s
test results are Negative, the District shall restore any
salary lost by the employee for the days he/she was on leave,
as though the employee had reported for duty.
The following criteria apply when conducting drug and alcohol
tests due to Reasonable Suspicion:
a. Alcohol
A breath alcohol test must be administered as soon as
possible. Every effort should be made to ensure that a
breath alcohol test is performed within eight hours. If
testing has not occurred within eight hours, attempts to
test should be discontinued and the employee may resume
duties with his/her next shift that begins after the eight
hours have passed. However, prior to the employee’s return,
management shall observe the employee’s condition before
the employee is allowed to resume duties to ensure that
there is no longer Reasonable Suspicion.
b. Controlled Substances
A urinalysis test for Controlled Substances must be
administered as soon as possible. Every effort should be
made to ensure the urinalysis is performed within 32 hours
of the observation.
c. The employee may not proceed alone to or from the
collection site. The supervisor or other appropriate person
making the observation shall arrange to transport the
employee to the testing site.
d. Documentation to support the determination to conduct
Reasonable Suspicion testing should be prepared and signed
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 13 of 20
by the person who made the determination within 24 hours of
the determination or before the results of the test are
released, whichever is earlier, if possible.
6. Acknowledgment and Consent
Any employee subject to testing under this policy will be asked
to sign a form acknowledging the procedures governing testing,
and consenting to (1) the collection of a urine sample for the
purpose of determining the presence of alcohol or Controlled
Substances, and (2) the release to the District of medical
information regarding the test results. Refusal to sign the
agreement and consent form, or to submit to the drug test, will
result in the revocation of an applicant’s job offer, or will
subject an employee to discipline up to and including
termination.
7. Refusal to Submit to Testing
If an applicant refuses to submit to testing for any Substance,
the applicant is disqualified for employment. If a District
employee who has applied for a position that requires the
performance of Safety-Sensitive Duties refuses to submit to
testing for any Substance, the employee is disqualified for
such position.
If an employee refuses to submit to testing for any Substance,
the District may treat such refusal as an act of
insubordination. The District shall also impose the same
disciplinary action of dismissal for a refusal to test that it
would impose for a Positive test result, so as not to encourage
employees to refuse to test in the hope of avoiding more severe
disciplinary action. The District may immediately place an
employee on leave without pay if the employee refuses to submit
for testing.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 14 of 20
8. Refusal to Authorize Disclosure of Results of Testing
If an applicant refuses to authorize the disclosure of the
testing results to the District, the applicant is disqualified
for employment. If a District employee who has applied for a
position that requires the performance of Safety-Sensitive
Duties refuses to authorize the disclosure of the test results
to the District, the employee is disqualified for such
position.
If an employee refuses to authorize the disclosure of results
of testing to the District, the District will impose the same
disciplinary action of dismissal for a refusal to authorize the
disclosure of results of testing, that it would impose for a
Positive test result, so as not to encourage employees to
refuse to authorize the disclosure of test results in the hope
of avoiding more severe disciplinary action.
9. Positive Test
If an applicant tests Positive for a Controlled Substance,
he/she shall be disqualified for employment unless he/she meets
the requirements for the over-the-counter/prescription drug
exception set forth in Section B(2) of this policy. If a
District employee who has applied for a position that requires
the performance of Safety-Sensitive Duties tests Positive for a
Substance, the employee is disqualified for such position.
If an employee tests Positive for a Substance, the employee
shall not be returned to duty and shall not receive pay during
his/her absence until the employee requests that the split
urine specimen be tested and the test of that specimen is not
Positive for a Substance.
This unpaid absence shall not be considered a disciplinary or
punitive action against the employee and any record of such
absence shall be maintained separately from the employee’s
personnel file. The absence is for the administrative and
safety interests of the District. This unpaid absence has no
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 15 of 20
effect on the District’s decision or ability to discipline an
employee for violating this policy.
If the Medical Review Officer determines that an employee’s
specimen is a Dilute Specimen and the specimen is Positive for
a Substance, the employee shall be considered to have tested
Positive for that Substance. If a Dilute Specimen produces a
Negative result then the employee shall be required to submit
to a second Substance test, in the manner prescribed in section
40.197 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
10. Request for Retest
If an employee tests Positive for any Substance, the employee
may, within 72 hours of being notified of the Positive test
result, request of the Medical Review Officer that the split
specimen be tested. If the employee does not timely submit a
request, the employee shall be considered to have waived
his/her right to have the split specimen tested. The employee
shall pay for the cost of testing the split specimen. If the
employee is unable to pay this cost at the time of the request,
the District must ensure that the split specimen is tested even
if it means that the District may have to initially bear the
cost. The District may recover the cost from the employee at a
later time.
If a split specimen does not produce a Positive result for a
Substance, the District shall restore any salary lost by the
employee as a result of an absence imposed because of the
Positive result on the first specimen. The employee shall be
considered to have not tested Positive for a Substance. The
District shall also reimburse the employee for the cost of the
retest if the employee paid for the retest.
The District may not request that the split specimen be tested.
G. Employee Assistance Programs
The District may refer any employee, including an employee who is
dismissed because of a Positive test for a Substance, to its
employee assistance program. If in any instance the District is
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 16 of 20
required to lawfully accommodate an employee’s disability related
to Substance abuse, the District shall refer the employee to a
Substance abuse professional.
H. Suspicion of Possession/Distribution/Manufacture of Controlled
Substances
If a supervisor has a Reasonable Suspicion that an employee
unlawfully possesses or is distributing or manufacturing a
Controlled Substance or Drug Paraphernalia on or in District
property, or while on duty, the supervisor must report this
suspicion to Human Resources.
1. For purposes of Section H only, “Reasonable Suspicion” means
the following:
a. As to possession, the supervisor or a reporting credible
source must have seen a Substance or item on the person of
the employee, in the employee’s work area, or in or on
District property assigned to the use of the employee that
a reasonable person would believe is a Controlled Substance
or Drug Paraphernalia, or have seen in any of the same
areas a container that a reasonable person would believe
contains a Controlled Substance or Drug Paraphernalia.
b. As to distribution, the supervisor must have seen the
employee convey to another person a Substance or item that
a reasonable person would believe is a Controlled Substance
or Drug Paraphernalia, or have seen the employee convey a
container to another person that a reasonable person would
believe contains a Controlled Substance or Drug
Paraphernalia, or have received a report of observation of
the same from a credible source.
c. As to manufacture, the supervisor must have observed
conditions that a reasonable person would equate to the
manufacture of a Controlled Substance or Drug
Paraphernalia, which may include the observation of smell,
appearance, or sound. The supervisor must also have
observed conditions that would attribute suspected
manufacture to the employee, such as observing these
conditions in the employee’s work area or in or on District
property assigned to the use of the employee. If the
conditions are observed on the person of the employee, the
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 17 of 20
supervisor must consider whether the employee reported to
duty in such condition instead of changing to such
condition while on duty, or have received a report of
observation of the same from a credible source.
2. After a report of a Reasonable Suspicion has been made to Human
Resources, the Human Resources Manager must confer with
management representatives to consider whether the reported
observation constituted Reasonable Suspicion, and decide what
steps to take in response to the reported observation.
a. If the decision is to take no further action, the matter
will be dismissed.
b. If the decision is to discuss the observation with the
employee, Human Resources and the supervisor will meet with
the employee to discuss the observation. If as a result of
the discussion, Human Resources and/or the supervisor
believe that a search is necessary, they will confer with
management representatives to determine whether to conduct
a search.
c. If the decision is to conduct a search, the search must be
limited to a search of District property, such as the
employee’s work area (including desk drawers and file
cabinets), District vehicle or equipment, and District
facilities. The search may be performed by the Human
Resources representative or another person designated by
the Human Resources representative, which may include the
supervisor. The employee does not need to be present during
the search. If any material is retrieved that appears to
bear out the supervisor’s Reasonable Suspicion, the Human
Resources representative must take possession of the
material.
d. If the decision is to conduct a search and the distribution
of Controlled Substances or Drug Paraphernalia is
reasonably suspected, the search may include not only the
work area/equipment of the employee suspected of
distributing Controlled Substances or Drug Paraphernalia,
but the work area/equipment of any employee whom was
observed receiving the item from the employee suspected of
distributing Controlled Substances or Drug Paraphernalia.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 18 of 20
The receiving employee is entitled to the same rights as
the distributing employee.
e. Any search of the person of the employee or personally-held
possessions of the employee, such as a briefcase, purse,
pocketbook, backpack or personal vehicle, must be conducted
by a law enforcement officer. If the decision to conduct a
search extends to these areas, Human Resources should
contact law enforcement to request such a search.
3. If the Human Resources representative takes possession of any
material as a result of the search, and the employee does not
confirm that it is a Controlled Substance or Drug
Paraphernalia, the District shall contact the local law
enforcement agency and will forward the Substance to have the
item tested/analyzed to determine if it is a Controlled
Substance or Drug Paraphernalia. If a law enforcement officer
takes possession of an item as a result of a search, and the
employee does not confirm that it is a Controlled Substance or
Drug Paraphernalia, the District shall follow up with the law
enforcement agency to verify the item is a Controlled Substance
or Drug Paraphernalia. The employee shall not return to duty
and shall not receive pay during his/her absence until the law
enforcement agency has verified that the tested/analyzed item
is not Positive for a Controlled Substance or Drug
Paraphernalia. If the tested/analyzed item does not produce a
Positive result for a Controlled Substance or Drug
Paraphernalia, the District shall restore any salary lost by
the employee as a result of the absence.
I. Disciplinary Action
Disciplinary action for violations of this policy will be taken in
accordance with the District’s Discipline Policy and Procedures.
J. Accommodation of Individuals with Disabilities
Nothing in this policy shall be construed so as to relieve the
District of its lawful obligation to accommodate individuals with
disabilities.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 19 of 20
K. Confidentiality
All alcohol and drug-testing records will be treated as
confidential.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND PROCEDURE 22 9/19/90 7/6/16
Page 20 of 20
APPENDIX A
INDICATION OF DRUG USE
REMEMBER THAT THESE SYMPTOMS ARE ONLY INDICATIONS. THEY MAY BE A SIGN
OF SOMETHING OTHER THAN DRUG OR ALCOHOL USE.
PHYSICAL
1. Increased pulse rate 10. Nasal sores
2. Weak and rapid pulse 11. Slowed respirations
3. Increased blood pressure 12. Shallow respiration
4. Increased body temperature 13. Cold and clammy skin
5. Constricted pupils 14. Chills and sweats
6. Dilated pupils 15. Cramps
7. Bloodshot eyes 16. Nausea
8. Water eyes 17. Convulsions
9. Runny nose
MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL
1. Increased alertness 10. Disorientation
2. Excitation 11. Visual illusions
3. Anxiety 12. Hallucinations
4. Irritability 13. Paranoia
5 Euphoria 14. Delirium
6. Increased emotionality 15. Irrational fears
7. Impaired attention 16. Panic
8. Impaired memory 17. Depressed mood
9. Altered perceptions
BEHAVIORAL
1. Slurred speech 8. Hyperactivity
2. Staggered gait 9. Agitation
3. Fatigue 10. Argumentative
4. Apathy 11. Hostility
5. Drowsiness 12. Tremors
6. Loss of appetite 13. Insomnia
7. Increased appetite
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Koeppen, Finance
Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY:
Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4308 Amending Policy 35, the Medical
Reserve Fund for District Retirees, of the District’s Code of
Ordinances
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution No. 4308 amending Policy 35, the
Medical Reserve Fund for District Retirees, of the District’s Code of
Ordinances.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To request that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4308 amending Policy
35, the Medical Reserve Fund for District Retirees, of the District’s
Code of Ordinances. The policy needs to be updated to reflect the
current processes and procedures for the medical reserve fund.
ANALYSIS:
As a normal course of business, the District reviews its policies to
ensure they are effective and efficient. During a recent review of
the District’s Policy No. 35, Medical Reserve Fund for District
Retirees, staff identified modifications to the policy that are
needed to correspond with the District’s current practices.
Policy No. 35 was adopted June 6th, 2000 and was intended to provide a
guideline for the prudent management of the District’s medical
reserve fund for retired employees and Board members. At the time of
adoption, the District created a medical reserve for the OPEB plan.
That reserve held the OPEB’s long-term financial obligation. Under
this policy the District managed the medical retirement fund.
On March 5, 2008, the Board of Directors approved Resolution 4117,
which, amongst other items, authorized the General Manager to enter
into an agreement with the California Public Employee’s Retirement
System (PERS) to fund Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) through
CalPERS. By entering into this agreement the District’s OPEB reserve
funds could be moved into the PERS program where they would earn a
higher rate of return than the District managed fund. Upon execution
of this agreement, the OPEB Trust was established and the related
District reserves were subsequently transferred to the OPEB Trust
maintained by CalPERS. Today, the medical reserve is funded for the
annual estimated retiree medical costs and depleted as the actual
retiree medical costs are incurred throughout the year. In addition,
the District has an actuarial valuation performed every two years.
This valuation is used to determine the District’s financial
obligations for OPEB which are reported to the Board of Directors.
The recommendations in the attachments reflect the current purpose of
the medical reserve fund and related practices. These practices
include the periodic actuarial valuation, reporting requirements, and
the annual funding of the OPEB reserve.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Demonstrate financial health through formalized policies, prudent
investing, and efficient operations.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
General Manager
Attachments:
A) Committee Action Form
B) Resolution No. 4308
Exhibit 1 – Policy 35 (Strike-through)
C) Proposed Policy 35
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Adopt Resolution No. 4308 Amending Policy 35, the Medical
Reserve Fund for District Retirees, of the District’s Code
of Ordinances
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on June 22, 2016 and the
following comments were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4308
to amend Board Policy No. 35, the Medical Reserve Fund for
District Retirees, to reflect the current processes and
procedures for the Medical Reserve Fund.
Staff reviewed the information presented in the staff report.
Staff indicated in response to an inquiry from the Committee
that this Medical Reserve Fund originally held the funds for
the actuarial value of Other Post Employee Benefits (OPEB)
which are now being held in an OPEB Trust Fund. This reserve
fund is an internal fund, separate from the OPEB Trust, for
retiree medical premiums. The amount in the Medical Reserve
Fund is equal to the annual retiree medical premium costs,
which are paid to the Special District Risk Management
Authority.
Because the policy’s purpose has changed, Policy No. 35 needs
to be amended to reflect this change.
Staff clarified that the retiree medical expenses is not
expensed through the operating budget. The operating revenues
fund the Medical Reserve Fund for retiree medical premiums for
one (1) fiscal year, which is authorized each year during the
budget process.
Staff further clarified that the funds are set aside for
retiree medical premiums and is not an expense, which is the
reason the funds are placed in a reserve. The Medical Reserve
Fund is an asset. It was noted that when the Medical Reserve
Fund is drawn down, it reduces an unfunded liability.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
RESOLUTION NO. 4308
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AMENDING POLICY 35
THE MEDICAL RESERVE FUND FOR DISTRICT
RETIREES OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF
ORDINANCES
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District Board of Directors has been
presented with an amended Policy 35 of the District’s Code of
Ordinances for the management of the Otay Water District; and
WHEREAS, the amended Policy 35 has been reviewed and
considered by the Board, and it is in the interest of the
District to adopt the amended policy; and
WHEREAS, the strike-through copy of the proposed policy is
attached as Exhibit 1 to this resolution; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by
the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District that the
amended Policy 35, incorporated herein as Attachment C, is hereby
adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
Otay Water District at a board meeting held this 6th day of July
2016, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Attachment B
Page 1 of 2
________________________
President
ATTEST:
____________________________
District Secretary
Page 2 of 2
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
MEDICAL RESERVE FUND FOR DISTRICT RETIREES 35 6/7/00 7/6/16
Page 1 of 2
PURPOSE:
This policy is intended to provide a guideline for the prudent
management of the District’s medical reserve fund for retired
employees and Board Members. The goal of this policy is to
establish the District’s reserve policy for the funding of the
OPEB Reserve and related CALPERS Trust, which is performed in a
manner intended to reduce the impact of medical expense on the
annual operating budget.
The ultimate investment goal is the enhancement of the economic
status of the reserve fund and the reduction of the impact of
medical expense on the annual operating budget.
OBJECTIVE:
The fundamental financial objective of the medical reserve fund
is to establish and receive contributions from the general fund
operating reserves, which will remain approximately at the level
necessary to meet the long-termannual obligation of the
District’s existing benefit package. The medical reserve fund
is designed to accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and
revenues to the fullest extent possible, and insure the
investment of moneys to the fullest extent possible.
The District will endeavor to make medical and dental coverage
available for retired individuals and their dependents as
described in the Memorandum of Understanding between the
District and the Employees’ Associations. Retired employees
will be eligible for continuation of coverage if they satisfy
both the age and years of service requirements at the point
full-time employment ceases.
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY:
Under authority granted by the Board of Directors, the General
Manager will administer the fund. The Department Head of
Finance will be responsible for establishing the fund in the
District's records with an initial deposit of $4,000,000,
provide reports, investing the fund balance to accrue interest
and provide the accounting for transactions.
Exhibit 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
MEDICAL RESERVE FUND FOR DISTRICT RETIREES 35 6/7/00 7/6/16
Page 2 of 2
REPORTING:
The Department Head of Finance Chief Financial Officer will
submit a report to the Board of Directors each year after the
completion of the District’s audit. This report will include
the beginning fund balance, all cash received and expended for
the fiscal year, and the closing balance as of June 30th. This
report will also include a complete description of the
investment of the reserve fund, the type of investments,
maturity dates and the average weighted yield.
PeriodicallyEvery two years, the District may request that will
have an actuarial evaluation completed report be completed to
determine the financial liability of the fund. A qualified
actuary, in accordance with the principles and procedures
established by the Actuarial Standards Board (ASB), should
perform the actuarial valuation. The Chief Financial Officer
will report the results of the actuarial evaluation to the Board
of Directors at least every five years. This report should
include the fund assets, projected funding and the projected
liability based on the most recent employee information.
Formatted: Normal
Formatted: Body Text
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
MEDICAL RESERVE FUND FOR DISTRICT RETIREES 35 6/7/00 7/6/16
Page 1 of 1
PURPOSE:
This policy is intended to provide a guideline for the prudent
management of the District’s medical reserve fund for retired
employees and Board Members. The goal of this policy is to establish
the District’s reserve policy for the funding of the OPEB Reserve and
related CALPERS Trust, which is performed in a manner intended to
reduce the impact of medical expense on the annual operating budget.
OBJECTIVE:
The fundamental financial objective of the medical reserve fund is to
establish and receive contributions from the general fund operating
reserves, which will remain approximately at the level necessary to
meet the annual obligation of the District’s existing benefit package.
The medical reserve fund is designed to accurately monitor and
forecast expenditures and revenues to the fullest extent possible.
The District will endeavor to make medical and dental coverage
available for retired individuals and their dependents as described in
the Memorandum of Understanding between the District and the
Employees’ Association. Retired employees will be eligible for
continuation of coverage if they satisfy both the age and years of
service requirements at the point full-time employment ceases.
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY:
Under authority granted by the Board of Directors, the General Manager
will administer the fund.
REPORTING:
Every two years, the District will have an actuarial evaluation
completed to determine the financial liability of the fund. A
qualified actuary, in accordance with the principles and procedures
established by the Actuarial Standards Board (ASB), should perform
the actuarial valuation. The Chief Financial Officer will report the
results of the actuarial evaluation to the Board of Directors. This
report should include the fund assets, projected funding and
liability based on the most recent employee information.
Attachment C
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: R2087-
001101
DIV. NO. 2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Permanent Moratorium on the Installation of New Recycled Water
Facilities on Otay Mesa
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
place a permanent moratorium on the installation of new recycled
water facilities on Otay Mesa (See Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To place a permanent moratorium on the installation of new recycled
water facilities on Otay Mesa.
ANALYSIS:
Currently, recycled water is not available on Otay Mesa. The
existing recycled water infrastructure on Otay Mesa is being
supplied with potable water. As the District has pursued expansion
of the District’s recycled water supply system to the Otay Mesa
area, the District has encountered a number of issues and risks,
when considered in total, challenge both the technical and financial
feasibility of delivering recycled water to Otay Mesa. On July 2,
2014, staff presented information to the Board on the uncertainty of
2
recycled water availability for Otay Mesa, the financial feasibility
considerations associated with anticipated recycled water rates from
the City of San Diego (City), the uncertainty of securing easements
to support the Otay Mesa Recycled Water Supply Link Project, and the
delivery horizon of Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) and/or Direct
Potable Reuse (DPR). As a result of the information presented to
the Board, the Board voted to place a temporary moratorium on the
installation of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa (see
Exhibit A for Project location).
Staff has focused on a number of efforts related to the temporary
moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities on
Otay Mesa since the last update was provided to the Board on
November 5, 2014. These efforts include the following:
Continued efforts with the City to discuss issues and
amendments to the agreements between the District and the City.
Meeting with representatives of the East Otay Mesa Property
Owners Association and the Otay Mesa Property Owners
Association.
Close out of Developer recycled water projects in the planning,
design, and construction phases on Otay Mesa.
Continued Efforts with the City of San Diego to Discuss Issues and
Amendments to the Agreements between the District and the City
Since the date the Temporary Moratorium was put in place by the
District in July of 2014, District staff has sent correspondence and
held meetings with the City staff regarding issues related to the
October 23, 2003 Agreement Between the Otay Water District and the
City of San Diego for Purchase of Reclaimed Water from the South Bay
Water Reclamation Plant ("Agreement"). District staff has presented
proposals regarding: the City’s recycled water rates, the “Take-Or-
Pay” requirement included in the recycled water Agreement, and
miscellaneous terms missing from the recycled water Agreement.
Although District staff has met with City staff to discuss the
issues and how they impact the delivery of recycled water to Otay
Mesa, these items remain unresolved. On November 17, 2015, the City
voted to raise the rate for recycled water from the then current
rate of $0.80/HCF ($348/AF) to a new Unitary Rate of $1.73/HCF
($753/AF). This new Unitary Rate was effective on January 1, 2016.
District staff has met with the City as recently as June 6, 2016 to
discuss the District’s proposals outlined above. In that meeting,
the City expressed no interest in revising the existing Agreement.
3
Meeting with Representatives of the East Otay Mesa Property Owners
Association and the Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
Staff met with representatives from the East Otay Mesa Property
Owners Association and the Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
(EOMPOA/OMPOA) back in December 2014 and provided an in-depth review
of the District’s financial analysis that supported the placement of
a temporary moratorium on the installation of new recycled water
facilities on Otay Mesa. Upon completion of the review, the
representatives from the EOMPOA/OMPOA thanked staff for the overview
and agreed with the financial analysis conclusions. As part of the
discussion, the EOMPOA/OMPOA representatives requested that the
District consider a one (1) year extension to the temporary
moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities on
Otay Mesa. It was explained that during the one (1) year extension,
the EOMPOA/OMPOA could focus on attracting businesses to Otay Mesa
that have a high demand for recycled water use. Additionally, the
EOMPOA/OMPOA representatives explained that the District could use
this time to seek funding opportunities that could offset the
capital costs of implementing recycled water infrastructure on Otay
Mesa.
During the Temporary Moratorium, the EOMPOA/OMPOA has been
supportive in lobbying for an equitable cost of supply for recycled
water from the City. The EOMPOA/OMPOA has also been actively
working to attract businesses to Otay Mesa. At this point, the
temporary moratorium has been in place for two (2) years, and to
date, staff is not aware of any additional businesses beyond those
included in the current planning efforts that would require heavy
use of recycled water. Additionally, staff has not identified
significant funding opportunities at the Federal, State, or Local
levels that could substantially offset the capital costs of
implementing recycled water infrastructure on Otay Mesa.
Staff has examined the potential of attracting businesses to Otay
Mesa that have a high demand for recycled water use in water
intensive manufacturing processes. It has been noted that the
disposal of the residual waste water generated by the manufacturing
processes may be a factor that limits opportunities for these types
of businesses on Otay Mesa.
Close-out of Developer Recycled Water Projects in the Planning,
Design, and Construction Phases on Otay Mesa
As noted in the November 5, 2014 update to the Board, District staff
completed a review of the Developer projects on Otay Mesa that are
affected by the temporary moratorium. In total, thirty (30)
projects were identified. These projects, which include both
4
private recycled water systems and public recycled water mains, were
found to be in various stages of project development ranging from
planning to construction. Since the last update to the Board, staff
has completed the close out of all Developer recycled water projects
that were in the planning and design phases on Otay Mesa. The
associated recycled water project Developer accounts have also been
closed out.
Staff has also worked cooperatively with Developers on active
recycled water projects that were in construction on Otay Mesa when
the temporary moratorium was put into place in July 2014. On those
active projects that were nearing completion, staff worked with the
Developers to allow the project to move forward to completion with
the knowledge that potable meters will be set on the newly
constructed infrastructure to serve the project locations. On
projects that were in the early stages of construction when the
temporary moratorium was placed, staff worked with the Developers to
implement changes on the project that would delete the recycled
water infrastructure and mitigate project impacts. At this time,
all recycled water construction projects have been closed out. As
of July 2014, only potable water meters have been purchased and set
on Otay Mesa for permanent service.
Otay Mesa Recycled Water Planning
As part of this update, in response to a previous Board inquiry,
this report provides a historical summary of the development and
planning efforts with respect to the District’s reclaimed water
system. This summary is included as Exhibit B to this report. The
summary includes a discussion of the foundational planning documents
that developed recycled water use projections for Otay Mesa.
As noted in Exhibit B, the District’s highest projection for
recycled water use on Otay Mesa was included in the 2002 Water
Resources Master Plan (WRMP) with an estimated use of 2,112 AF/Year.
In 2008, the WRMP was updated to lower projected use to 1,715
AF/Year. Since 2008, the District has reviewed a number of factors
that suggest a decline in the projected use of recycled water on
Otay Mesa. Projections for ultimate recycled water use on Otay Mesa
are estimated to be approximately 1,200 AF/Year and remain unchanged
from the last projection presented in July 2014. The District is
currently working on the development of an updated Water Facility
Master Plan (WFMP).
5
Summary Update of Factors Included in the Otay Mesa Recycled Water
Financial Analysis
In July 2014, when the Board approved the Temporary Moratorium on
the installation of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa, the
associated financial analysis considered factors including: the
estimated cost of supply from the City; the cost of recycled water
transmission main infrastructure; the estimated future demand of
recycled water on Otay Mesa; and the availability/expiration of
recycled water incentives to fund the infrastructure. The following
summarizes the current status of these factors:
Cost of Supply - In July of 2014, when the Board placed the
Temporary Moratorium on Otay Mesa, staff used a recycled water cost
of supply valued at $1.30/HCF ($566/AF) based on a 2013 proposed
zone rate for the South Bay. Using this cost of supply, it was
determined through the financial analysis that the payback period
for infrastructure was more than 70 years which is beyond the useful
life of the recycled water infrastructure. This rate was not
implemented by the City. The approved City’s rate of $1.73/HCF
($753/AF) is thirty-three percent greater than the assumed rate
included in the July 2014 analysis. Under this approved rate, the
payback period has been confirmed at a level that is more than 70
years which is beyond the useful life of the recycled water
infrastructure.
Infrastructure Cost – In July of 2014, the estimated cost for the
recycled water transmission main was $23.5 million. From February
2014 to February 2016, the “Engineering News Record Los Angeles
Construction Cost Index” has increased by 3.8 percent, indicating a
potential increase in the Otay Mesa recycled water transmission main
construction costs to $24.4 million. This potential cost increase
will also contribute to a longer payback period.
Recycled Water Demand – The projected Year 2035 demand for recycled
water on Otay Mesa remains unchanged at 1,200 Acre-Feet per year
since July 2014. Since this demand has not increased, the increased
cost of supply and cost of infrastructure would be distributed
across the same number of projected users.
Expiration of Recycled Water Incentives – Metropolitan Water
District (MWD) recycled water incentives are set to expire in 2025.
San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) recycled water incentives
are set to expire in 2026. No additional incentives have been
identified.
During the two (2) years of the Temporary Moratorium, greater
certainty has been realized with respect to the factors included as
6
part of the Otay Mesa Recycled Water Financial Analysis. The
current status of factors that contribute to the financial analysis
results in less feasibility and supports the staff recommendation to
place a permanent moratorium on the installation of new recycled
water facilities on Otay Mesa.
Net Present Value Loss
The District’s Finance staff prepared a recycled water financial
feasibility analysis for Otay Mesa based on anticipated costs of
water from the City’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP).
This analysis supports the conclusion regarding the unfeasibility of
expanding recycled water on Otay Mesa without a reliable and cost
effective water supply. The recycled water supply Agreement with
the City of San Diego expires at the end of 2026 and the District’s
expansion project would begin delivering recycled water to Otay Mesa
in 2020. With only six years remaining on the Agreement from the
time recycled water is able to be delivered to Otay Mesa, staff is
concerned about further expansion of the District’s recycled water
supply system to Otay Mesa given the uncertainty of the supply. In
addition to the City’s recycled water supply and pricing issues,
there are risks, that when combined, currently render this a costly
source of water. These risks include: the projected volume
associated with the level of CIP expenditures; potable versus
recycled water costs; ongoing incremental recycled operating costs;
and the expiration of Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California (MWD) and San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA)
credits in 2025 and 2026, respectively. Staff anticipates that
while the volume of water being delivered to Otay Mesa will level
off at approximately 1,200 AF/year, the ongoing incremental costs
associated with maintaining the recycled system will continue to
increase.
The table below, prepared by staff, summarizes the 70-year net
present value (NPV) financial analysis. Following the table is a
discussion regarding the assumptions contained in the analysis. In
total, staff estimates the expansion of recycled water to Otay Mesa
will result in a NPV loss, using a 3.29% discount factor, of $14.7
million over the next 70 years. The discount factor used was based
on the 30-year average Consumer Price Index for San Diego.
7
Year
Water
Cost
Benefit
CWA/MWD
Credit
Benefit
Take or
Pay
Benefit
Water
Revenues
Operating
Expense
CIP/Debt
Funding
Interest
Income
Net
Present
Value Loss
Total $35.3 $2.5 $1.5 ($15.1)($13.7)($15.9)($9.3)($14.7)
Otay Water District
Net Present Value of Otay Mesa Recycled Expansion
(in millions)
Water Volumes
The analysis estimates the Otay Mesa recycled expansion will
deliver 672 acre-feet of recycled water beginning in 2020 and
grow to a total demand of approximately 1,200 acre-feet per
year by 2035.
Water Cost Benefit
The water cost benefit of $35.3 million is the savings
generated through the purchase of lower cost recycled water
versus higher cost potable water. The amounts are based on the
FY 2017 budgeted amounts and the Fiscal Year 2017 six-year rate
model. The financial analysis reflects the City’s unitary
recycled rate of $753/AF, which was effective on January 1,
2016.
MWD/CWA Credit Benefit
The MWD/CWA credit benefit of $2.5 million represents credits
the District receives based on the volume of recycled water
sold on Otay Mesa. Currently, the District receives a combined
$385/AF credit from SDCWA and MWD for recycled water sales to
assist in the recovery of investments in the recycled system.
The District would receive an incremental increase of $2.5
million in credits due to the additional demand on Otay Mesa.
However, these credits will expire in 2025 and 2026, and their
continuation beyond that period is uncertain.
Take-or-Pay Benefit
The take-or-pay benefit of $1.5 million represents the
reduction in the take-or-pay penalty paid to the City due to
the additional recycled demand on Otay Mesa. The District is
8
currently unable to meet the recycled water contractual volume
with the City and as a result, pays for water it does not use.
In addition, the City has been unwilling to renegotiate the
current contractual volumes. Therefore, a benefit related to
the additional recycled water demand generated by expanding
recycled water on Otay Mesa has been included in the analysis.
Water Revenue Impact
The water revenue impact of ($15.1) million represents a
reduction in future revenues due to the sale of lower priced
recycled water versus higher priced potable water. The
District’s recycled water rates are 15% lower than potable
water rates; therefore, at similar volumes the sale of recycled
water generates 15% less revenues than potable water. If the
District were to move forward with expanding recycled water on
Otay Mesa, the District’s revenues over the 70-year period
would be negatively impacted by this amount.
Operating Expenses
There are an estimated ($13.7) million of incremental operating
expenses over the 70-year period related to the ongoing costs
of maintaining the recycled infrastructure on Otay Mesa. In
addition, there are incremental costs associated with cross-
connection testing and on-going inspections. The ongoing costs
of maintaining the recycled water infrastructure is based on an
average cost of maintenance of $0.37 per foot of pipeline for
an estimated 64.3 miles of pipeline on Otay Mesa. The net
present value of the maintenance costs total $8.1 million.
Cross-connection inspections occur annually and testing occurs
once every four (4) years. The average annual cost for
inspections and testing is $750 per meter. Staff has estimated
there would be 115 recycled meters on Otay Mesa resulting in a
total NPV inspection cost of $5.6 million.
CIP/Debt Funding (Net of Grants)
The total estimated NPV cost of the project including grant
funding and debt service costs is ($15.9) million. The
estimated CIP expenditure for the expansion of the recycled
water system to the Otay Mesa is approximately $23.5 million
through 2025. The District anticipates it could potentially
fund the project with a state revolving fund loan and recoup up
to 25% of the recycled water project expenditures. Staff
completed the analysis assuming both the state revolving fund
loan and grants were obtained. However, there is some risk
9
since grant reimbursements are not guaranteed. Failure to
obtain grant funding would further degrade the financial
feasibility of recycled water on Otay Mesa.
If the District is able to fund 25% of the CIP through grants,
the CIP cost per annual acre-feet of supply would be $14,414.
This is 69% higher than the cost of obtaining recycled water
from the City. The District has invested approximately $25.6
million, net of grants, to obtain the current 3,000 acre-feet
per year from the City’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant
(SBWRP). The District estimates the investment in the
connection to the SBWRP will be recouped by 2026. This
recoupment is mainly due to the CWA/MWD credits and the City’s
recycled water rate of $348/AF from 2006 to 2015. The benefit
these two (2) items would have provided to the expansion of
recycled water on Otay Mesa is reduced, due to the expired
credits from the CWA/MWD and the City’s increased recycled
water rate of $753/AF.
Interest Income
The negative interest income of $9.3 million represents the
lost interest earnings over the 70-year period as a result of
the overall negative cash flow associated with the expansion of
recycled water on Otay Mesa moving forward. On a stand-alone
basis, there is not enough of an operational financial benefit
to service the associated debt, which results in a negative
cash flow. Staff is assuming an initial interest income rate
of 0.79% in 2016 and has gradually increased the rate to
approximately 3.98% by 2030, which is the average interest
earnings rate for the District over the last 23 years.
Sensitivity Analysis
To determine the sensitivity of the financial analysis, staff
evaluated the financial feasibility under multiple pricing and
demand scenarios. Staff evaluated the financial feasibility of
recycled water on Otay Mesa, based on the current City’s unitary
rate of $753/AF and a zone rate of $510/AF. As part of each
analysis, staff determined the level of demand that would be
required for the expansion of the recycled system on Otay Mesa to be
financially feasible. To be financially feasible under unitary
pricing, the ultimate demand on Otay Mesa would need to be at least
3,200 acre-feet per year by 2035. To be financially feasible under
zone rate pricing, the ultimate demand would need to be at least
1,900 acre-feet per year by 2035. Based on a projected annual
10
demand of 1,200 acre-feet, expansion of recycled water on Otay Mesa
would not be financially feasible.
Avoided San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) Capacity Fees on
Recycled Meters
The District has not collected SDCWA capacity fees on meters set and
designated as future recycled water meters in anticipation that
recycled water would be available on Otay Mesa. The value of the
avoided SDCWA fees, based on an analysis of SDCWA capacity and
treatment fees that would have been due at the time of meter
purchase, totals $1,340,684.00.
Review and assessment of existing District maintained recycled water
facilities on Otay Mesa
Additional review of the existing recycled water infrastructure on
Otay Mesa has confirmed that the recycled water mains have been
tested to potable standards. The District maintains interconnection
facilities which includes backflow prevention devices at twenty-four
locations on Otay Mesa. These devices connect the recycled water
mains to the existing potable mains and were put into place in order
to provide a water supply. The District maintained backflow
prevention devices were scheduled to be removed once recycled water
was made available on Otay Mesa.
As indicated in the November 5, 2014 Board report which provided an
update on the Temporary Moratorium of new recycled water facilities
on Otay Mesa, a significant majority of the recycled water
infrastructure on Otay Mesa has been placed into service and is
currently serving water to active recycled water meters. In total,
less than 1.4 percent of the 16.4 miles of recycled water mains are
not charged with water. Should a permanent moratorium on the
installation of new recycled water facilities be placed on Otay
Mesa, the existing recycled water infrastructure can remain
functioning as it does today providing water to the District’s
customers until an evaluation of alternative use is completed and a
strategy is implemented. That evaluation will focus on a
reassignment of facilities to convert the “recycled” infrastructure
to “potable” infrastructure. That infrastructure could provide
redundancy to enhance reliability on Otay Mesa.
Next Steps
Next steps pending Board approval of a permanent moratorium on the
installation of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa include
the following:
11
Discussions will be initiated with SDCWA regarding applicable
capacity fees associated with changing meter designations from
recycled water to potable water meters.
The approved Fiscal Year 2017 budget includes a Capital
Improvement Program project (R2123) to evaluate alternative
uses for the recycled waterlines installed on Otay Mesa. Work
on this project in FY 2017 will consist of hydraulic modeling
to access the potential for alternative use.
Update the District’s Water Facility Master Plan (WFMP) to
reflect a Permanent Moratorium on the installation of new
recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Overall, it has been determined that the financial benefits of a
permanent moratorium outweigh the identified financial costs. There
are financial costs associated with a permanent moratorium. Those
costs include potential reimbursement of $950,000 in grant funds
that were received from the United States Bureau of Reclamation
(USBR) and SDCWA capacity fees.
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 District’s Vision, “A District that is innovative in
providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for
outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
DM/RP:
P:\WORKING\CIP R2087\Staff Reports\BD 07-06-16\BD 07-06-16 Staff Report Otay Mesa Recycled Water
Permanent Moratorium.docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Exhibit A – Project Location Map
Exhibit B – Otay Mesa Recycled Water Planning
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
R2087-001101
Permanent Moratorium on the Installation of New Recycled
Water Facilities on Otay Mesa
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed this
item at a meeting held on June 22, 2016 and the following comments were
made:
Staff is requesting that the Board consider placing a permanent
moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities in
the Otay Mesa.
Staff reviewed the information presented in the staff report.
In response to an inquiry from the Committee, it was indicated that
there are 230 meters which will be impacted by the San Diego County
Water Authority (CWA) capacity fees should their designation be
changed from recycled water to potable water meters.
It was noted that along with the capacity fees that would be due to
CWA, there is also a liability from the United States Bureau of
Reclamation (USBR) for grant money provided under Title XVI that will
likely need to be returned. These funds have been factored into this
staff report’s analysis.
Staff indicated in response to another inquiry from the Committee
that the Developers paid for the construction of the recycle water
facilities when they built the commercial developments in the Otay
Mesa.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation
and presentation to the full board on the consent calendar.
EXHIBIT B
OTAY MESA RECYCLED WATER PLANNING
July 6, 2016
This report summarizes efforts by the Otay Water District with respect to recycled water
use projections for Otay Mesa. The District’s involvement with recycled (reclaimed)
water dates back to as early as 1963 when the Board initiated a policy of advanced
planning for water and sewer facilities within the District. A staff report submitted to the
Board of Directors on October 19, 1994 contains a summary of the history of sewer and
the development of the District’s reclaimed water system from the 1960’s through 1994.
This staff report is attached as Attachment 1 to this report.
Since 1994, the District has completed a number of planning documents to guide the
development of water infrastructure. They are outlined as follows:
Otay Water District Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) - dated April 1995
In April of 1995, Montgomery Watson developed the “Otay Water District Water
Resources Master Plan.” This document included an update to the reclaimed water
distribution plan developed in 1991 and refined assumptions and analysis made to
reflect policy and land use changes. The specific tasks included in the April 1995
WRMP included determining water demand for the Central and Otay Mesa areas using
the established market assessments, but adjusting the acreage of usage or unit
demand where appropriate. Chapter 11 of the April 1995 WRMP included a table
(Table 11-4 shown below) that provided “Projected Reclaimed Water Demands for Otay
Mesa.” The demand shown in the Table 11-4 represents projected ultimate demand
using planning criteria.
2
The anticipated land use for Otay Mesa included industrial areas, commercial areas,
and projected use at the R.J. Donovan State Prison and East Mesa Detention Facility,
as noted in Table 11-4 of the 1995 WRMP. It was anticipated that recycled water would
be used for landscaping needs for these land uses. In total, the projected demand for
Otay Mesa in the April 1995 WRMP was 999,263 gallons per day (1,119 AF/Year).
Report for Utilization of Recycled Water Irrigation for Single and Multiple Family
Residential Developments – dated April 1997
In April of 1997, Daniel Boyle Engineering, Inc. developed a report for “Utilization of
Recycled Water Irrigation for Single and Multiple Family Residential Developments for
the Otay Water District.” The purpose of the report was to update the projected
recycled water demands included in the District’s WRMP to incorporate additional uses
including single family residential landscaping and toilet and urinal flushing at the R.J.
Donovan State Prison and East Mesa Detention Facility. Section 2 of the April 1997
report included Table 2.3, “Projected Annual Demands” for the Otay Mesa System, as
shown below.
3
In total, the projected demands for Otay Mesa in the April 1997 report for “Utilization of
Recycled Water Irrigation for Single and Multiple Family Residential Developments” was
1,230,000 gallons per day (1,377 AF/Year).
4
Otay Water District Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) - dated August 2002
In August of 2002, District staff developed the “2002 Otay Water District Water
Resources Master Plan.” This document updated the reclaimed water distribution plan
included in the “1995 Otay Water District Water Resources Master Plan” developed by
Montgomery Watson. In the 2002 WRMP, the projected demand for recycled water on
Otay Mesa was updated to include the use of recycled water for State Route 125, State
Route 905, the Future State Route 11 Border Crossing, and a future power plant.
Table 11-5, Summary of Projected Recycled Water Annual Average Day Demands,
included projected ultimate demand for recycled water on Otay Mesa which totaled
1,886,130 gallons per day (2,112 AF/Year). A breakdown of the demand by land use
included in the 2002 WRMP is shown in the table below:
5
Otay Water District Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) - dated August 2008
In October 2008, PBS&J developed the “2008 Otay Water District Water Resources
Master Plan.” This document updated the projected use of recycled water that was
included in the 2002 WRMP. Ultimate projected recycled water demands in Otay Mesa
were generated using projects with a Sub Area Master Plan (SAMP), recycled water
meters currently charged with potable water, and general future land use categories.
Future land uses were based on the existing Otay Mesa Community Plan and the East
Otay Mesa Specific Plan. The typical land use types identified consisted of parks,
commercial and industrial development, freeways, street and highway corridor
landscapes, multi-family residential development, public and community purpose
facilities. The projected recycled water demand for Otay Mesa is summarized in Table
5-3 from the 2008 WRMP, as shown below.
The 2008 WRMP lowered the projected use for recycled water for all land use types
including industrial, commercial, State Highway facilities, and the planned
correctional/detention facilities. In general, the updated projection for Otay Mesa was
lowered by approximately 19 percent from the 2002 WRMP projections to 1,531,763
gallons per day (1,715 AF/Year). It is noted that this report was developed 8 months
after the District began acquiring recycled water from the City of San Diego and
implementing use in the Central area of the District. Since that time, the District has
gained experience with a larger recycled water customer base and that experience has
been applied to forecast recycled water projections.
6
Events that have influenced Recycled Water Usage and Land Use Development
Since January of 2007, there have been events that have influenced the use of
recycled water in the District, including the following:
Nationwide Economic Recession - The recession which started in December of 2007
and peaked in June of 2009 impacted development in the District, including Otay Mesa.
The recession essentially brought development on Otay Mesa to a stop. Recessionary
use of recycled water also declined as individuals had less discretionary funds for items
like water for irrigation. The reduced use of recycled water mirrored reductions in
potable water use during this time. Recovery from the recession was only recently
achieved in the last few years.
Conservation – In recent years, agencies including the City of San Diego and the
County of San Diego have made revisions to allowable plant types used in
developments to encourage water conservation. Additionally, the conservation
message encouraged by all water agencies has influenced users of recycled water to
also use less water.
Changes to Landscape Usage – The WRMP updates performed in 2002 and 2008
anticipated Caltrans to be a long-term user of recycled water for landscaping
implemented as part of the new freeway construction at State Route 125, State Route
905, and the new Border Crossing. Caltrans’ current practice is to apply irrigation for a
limited period of years to establish planting for erosion control and then pull the meters
after a period of seven (7) years. As such, Caltrans can no longer be considered a
permanent user of recycled water for planning purposes.
Future Projections for Otay Mesa/Updated WRMP
The District’s highest projection for recycled water use on Otay Mesa was included in
the 2002 WRMP with an estimated use of 2,112 AF/Year. In 2008 the WRMP was
updated to lower projected use to 1,715 AF/Year. Since 2008, the District has reviewed
a number of factors that suggest a decline in the projected use of recycled water on
Otay Mesa, including conservation and Caltrans landscaping as noted above. Current
projections for ultimate recycled water use on Otay Mesa are estimated to be
approximately 1,200 AF/Year. The graph below shows the ultimate projections for
recycled water use on Otay Mesa included in the planning documents between 1995
and 2014. Projections for recycled water on Otay Mesa have remained unchanged
since 2014.
7
AGENfll ITEM
STAFF REPORT
TYPEMEETING Regular Board MEETINGDATE 10/19/94wASUBMITTED BY: Tim Stanton^^//£y— WONCVGFNO.
SUBJECT. History of Sewer - Reclaimed Water System
POHPOSE;
This is an informational report in response to your Board'srequest for a review of the history of the Ralph W. ChapmanWater Recyling Facility (RWCWRF) and the associated sewerand reclaimed water system.
BACKGROPKD
There have been several staff reports to the Board regardingthe rates charged for, and cost of producing, reclaimedwater. At the September 7, 1994 Board meeting, EastLakeCountry Club Vice President, Dave Kuhn requested that theBoard lower the rates for reclaimed water to 50% of thedomestic water rates. He felt that this would moreappropriately reflect the true cost of reclaimed water, bean incentive for more use by others, and reflect moreclosely what other agencies are charging.
Staff had evaluated the cost of reclaimed water and reportedto your Board that current rates are only now starting torecover the cost of constructing, operating and maintainingthe reclaimed system. As illustrated in Exhibit A, a breakeven analysis was created by Padre Dam for their reclaimedsystem and their break even occurs in the year 2000.
Regarding the reclaimed water rates charged by otheragencies, Exhibit B is a list of rates charged by otheragencies for reclaimed water. This list illustrates someare charging potable rates, but there is a wide variationfrom 47% to 100% of potable rates.
Your Board asked staff to study the matter further, startingwith a report on the history of the sewer and reclaimedsystem.
Staff proposes to meet your Board's request using thefollowing approach:
« Review history and present in a staff report to yourBoard.
• Retain an engineering consultant to prepare a revisedsewer and reclaimed system master plan to be complete by1/30/95.
• Retain a rates consultant to develop rates from themaster plan, work to be completed in parallel with MasterPlan.
• Present a staff report to your Board on the results ofthe Master Plan and rates study in February 1995.
This report presents the history of the sewer and reclaimedsystem as available in existing documents, staff reports toyour Board, letters and memos in file and a bond prospectus.
The history of Otay Water District's involvement in sewerand reclaimed water dates back to 1963 when your Boardinitiated a policy of advanced planning for water and sewerfacilities within the District. Exhibit C is a detailedsummary of events following that decision. The followingare a few of the major highlights.
1965 Failed septic tanks that could drain to SweetwaterLake led to a County study that concluded in-basin wastewater treatment was the most practicaland economical solution.
1968 70,000 gpd Hillsdale Treatment Plant constructed,secondary reclaimed water used at Valhalla HighSchool for irrigation, and on a local tree farm.
1971 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)required reclaimed water not be used in theJamacha Basin, as it might degrade basin waterquality. Solution was to pump 750 feet over aridge to the Use Area, then use to irrigate farmsimmediately downstream of site. Consideration wasalso given to a plant below Sweetwater Lake anduse of reclaimed water in the regional park.
1972 Phase I of in-basin reclamation projectconstructed consisting of Calavo and Hillsdaleoutfall sewers and Steele Canyon Pump Station.Interim connection to Metro was provided throughSpring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD).
1978 General Obligation Bonds issued in ID 18 for$7,300,000 to fund RWCWRF. Projected sewer flowsof 1.3 mgd by 1984, current level was 300,000 gpd.Potential revenue from reclaimed water projectedto be $130,000 per year.
1980 Construction began on the RWCWRF and completed inlate 1980, capacity 1.3 mgd. Purchased 524 acresin the Use Area and built ponds for $1.7 millionto use reclaimed water.
1989 Study determines plant can only produce 0.58 mgdof Title 22 water.
1989 Upgrade of plant to 1.3 mgd of Title 22 reclaimedwater estimated to cost $5.76 million. Plantcould be increased to 4.5 mgd in future. Thepotential market for reclaimed water is 6.5 mgd,2.0 mgd to be the combined use by Olympic TrainingCenter and EastLake.
1989 10/23/89 letter of intent from EastLake to takereclaimed water, Exhibit D. Their EIR alsoaddressed use of reclaimed water.
1990 Board approved that reclaimed water capacity feesand approved monthly service charges for reclaimedwater should be the same as potable water.
1990 Board workshop on RWCWRF upgrade. Consultantrecommended upgrade plant to 1.3 mgd and retain1.2 mgd in Metro as the best economic decision.Board approved construction contract for upgrade,for $4,809,000.
1992 Modifications to RWCWRF completed.
The following table represents the approximate cost of allsewer and reclaimed water facilities built to date:
Collection systemUse Area & StorageOriginal plant (JBWRF)Upgrade plant (JBWRF)Use Area pond liningRancho San Diego P.S.Total
$13.2 M
$ 1.7 M
$ 6.6 M$ 7.5 M$ 1.8 MS 0.8 M
$30.8 M
Since 1965, seven studies were done to evaluate the mostcost effective solution to sewage management in the JamachaBasin, and all but one concluded that the RWCWRF was themost economical solution. Each study assumes there wouldultimately be some reuse of the reclaimed water resulting ina revenue stream. Studies were conducted by consultants in1966, 1969, 1973-(2), 1974, 1990 and 1994.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends your Board accept this informational reporton the history of the sewer and reclaimed system, andapprove staff to:
• Retain an engineering consultant to prepare a revisedsewer and reclaimed system master plan to be complete by1/30/95 for an amount not to exceed $50,000.
• Retain a rates consultant to develop rates from themaster plan, work to be completed in parallel with masterplan for an amount not to exceed $25,000.
• Report back to your Board at the second meeting inFebruary, 1995.
TNS/mds
Attachments
Value Per Acre-Foot
mxiro
H
ro
CD
m<CD
ID
GO
GO
CD
A A L 1 - page 1
COMPARISON OF POTABLE AND RECLAIMED WATER RATES FOR SELECTED SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES
Agency
Carlsbad Municipal Water District
City of Burbank
Central Basm Municipal Water District
Fallbrook Public Utility District
City of Glcndale
Irvine Ranch Water District
Las Virgenes Municipal Water District
City of Long Beach
Los Angeles Dept of Water and Po'*cr
City of Occansidc
Rale Class
Commerc lal In J u stnal
Commercial /Industrial
Wholesale
0-25 AF/month
25- 50 AF/month
50 - 100 AF/month
100* AF/month
Agricultural
Commercial/ Industrial
Landscape Irrigation
(% of base month use)
0 - 1005
101 - nor,
in - 120<-,
1215-
Commercial/Industrial
1 - 12HCF
13 - 24 HCF
25 - 100 HCF
100- HCF
Commercial 'Industrial
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial /Industrial
Trw'ed Walrr
Rate
$1 67/HCF
($727 AF)
$1 32.HCF
(557S/AF)
$42S/AF (2)
$!. 55/1.000 gal
(S505/AF)
5I.76/HCF
(S767/AF)
$0 61/HCF
(S266/AF)
$1 22'HCF
(S531/AF)
$244;HCF
(S1.063/AF)
J488/HCF
(S2.126/AF)
Zone 2 (4)
$1 10/HCF
(S479/AF)
S1.40/HCF
(5610/AF)
$1 94/HCF
(S845/AF)
J2.58/HCF
(S1.124/AF)
51.28 HCF
(S558/AF)
S1.74/HCF
(S758/AF)
I1.33/HCF
(J579/AF)
Reclaimed Water
Reclatmed Water Rate as % of
Rale Treated Water Rate
$1 67 HCF !OQT
($727. AF;.
JO 976 HCF 74<J
($425. AF)
$260; AF (2! 6 IT
$240/AF (2) 567,
$220/AF(2) Si''-
$200, AF (2i 47';
$1 24/1.000 fa! 80^,
(S404'AF)
$1.32HCF 75=;
(S575/AF)
$0 55/HCF (3) 90T,
($240/AF)
$1 10/HCF (3i 90<",
($479/AFj
S220/HCF(3i 90T,
(595S/AFJ
$4 40/HCF (3) 9055
(S1.917/AF)
Zone 2 (4)
$069/HCF 63s;
($30I/AFi
$0.95HCF 68 ft
($414'.\F)
$1 23 HCF 63"?
(S536/AF)
$1 70/HCF 665
(S741/AF)
J0.716/HCF 5f,<-< (5j
($312/'AF)
$0.91, HCF 52%
($396/AF)
$i 04/HCF 78S
($453.' AF)
EXHIBIT B
COMPARISON OF POTABLE AND RECLAIMED WATER RATES FOR SELECTED SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES
Agency
Otay Water District
Rtmona Municipal Water District (6)
Sar.u Margarila Water District
South Coast County Water District
West Basin Municipal Water District
Vista Irrigation District
Rau: Class
Commercial/Industrial
Commercial/lnd u r rial
Agricultural (7)
Non-DomesUc Irrigation
1 - 33 HCF
34-70 HCF
71- HCF
flxci charge
Comnerc:al/Indur^:£l
Wholesale to WBMWD
Sen-ice Area
0-25 AF/month
25- 50 AF/monih
50-100 AF/oomh
100-200 AF/raor.th
200- AF/eonth
Agricultural
Treated Waler
Rat£
S1.67/HCF
(S727/AF)
'.i 599/HCF
(S697/AF)
S1.493/HCF
(S650/AF)
District 1 (S)
S1.45/HCF
(J632/AF)
5L81/HCF
(S788/AF)
$2.26/'HCF
(SS84/AF)
$3.17/raonth
S1.90/HCF
(SS:S/AF)
S434/AF (2)
J1.35/HCF
(S588/AF)
Reclaimed Water
Rale
S1.67/HCF
(S727/AF)
Jl. 599/HCF
(S697/AF)
S1.493/HCF
(S650/AF)
District 1 (8)
S1.45/HCF
(S632/AF)
J1.81/HCF
(S78S/AF)
J2.26/HCF
(S984/AF)
S3 1 7/month
JI.52/HCF
(S662/AF)
S280/AF (2)
S260/AF (2)
S240/AF (2)
S220/AF (2)
S200/AF (2)
S1.01/HCF(9)
(Si40/AF)
Reclamed Waicr
Rile u * of
Treated WUCT Rate
IOCS
1005
1005
1005
100*
IOCS
1005
SOS
655
60%
555
515
465
75%
(1) For non-city facilities only.
(2) Proposed FY 95 rates. Reclaimed water users in the CB/WBMWD service district also pay a fixed stand-by charge.
(3) Reclaimed water rates are for summer (May - November) usage only. Users pay i flat raie of SQ.55/HCF during the
winter (December - April).
(4) Rates for each lone vary depending on distance, ekviuon and pumping requirements.
(5) Rates set on a cost recovery basis.
(6) Agency also sells tertiary effluent from the San Vicer.te Plant to a single user for S20/AF. This rate was established pursuant to an
agreement under which the user funded certain related capital improvements.
(7) Untreated water rate.
(8) Rates for each improvement district vary depending an distance, elevation and pumping requirements.
(9) Agency distributes reclaimed water from the Shadowridge Plant for the Buena Sanitation District. Rates are established pursuant to a
long-term development agreement.
SUMMARY OF SEWER AND RECLAIMED WATER HISTORY
1963 Your Board initiated a policy of advanceplanning for water and sewer facilitieswithin the District.
1965 Failure of septic tanks which drained toSweetwater Lake led to study of alternativesto sewage treatment. County conducted a studythat concluded in-basin waste water treatmentwas the most practical and economicalsolution.
1966 OWD consultant reconfirmed county findings.
1968 70,000 gpd Hillsdale Treatment Plantconstructed, reclaimed water used at ValhallaHigh School for athletic field and to water"Future Farmers of America" evergreen trees.Discharge limited to 30,000 pd.
1969 A more in-depth study of in-basin treatmentvs use of Metro completed. Study concludedin-basin was most cost effective.
1970 Pre certification report submitted forJamacha Basin Waste water ReclamationFacility (JBWRF).
1971 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)required reclaimed water should not be usedin the Jamacha basin, since it might degradebasin water quality. Solution was to pump 750feet over a ridge to the Use Area. Then useto irrigate farms immediately downstream ofsite. Consideration was given to a plantbelow Sweetwater Lake, but a sewer pipelinealong the lake was a concern due to potentialfailure during an earthquake.
1972 Phase I of in-basin reclamation projectconstructed. Calavo and Hillsdale outfallsewers and Steele Canyon Pump Station built.Interim connection to Metro through SVSD.Partial funding federal and state grants.
1973 Rancho San Diego project study concludesocean outface via Metro is preferredalternative.
EXHIBIT C
1973 Study by OWD economic consultant reaffirmsin-basin treatment is most economicalsolution.
1974 OWD consulting engineer revised preliminarydesign, and concludes in-basin solution ismost economical.
1977 Hirsch & Koptionak perform design.
1978 General Obligation Bonds issued in ID 18for $7,300,000. Projected sewer flows of 1.3agd by 1984, with current flows at 300,000gpd. Potential revenue from reclaimed waterprojected to be $130,000 per year.
1980 Purchased 525 acres in the Use Area
1980 Construction JBWRF, completed late1980. Capacity 1.3 mgd.
1982 Reverse osmosis and filtration units added tomeet Title 22.
1989 Study determines plant can only produce 0.58mgd of Title 22 water.
1989 Modified ground water quality objectivessouth of Use Area allows use ofundemineralized effluent. This eliminatesneed for RO system.
1989 Delivery of secondary effluent forconstruction water to EastLake.
1989 Study to upgrade plant to 1.3 mgd ofTitle 22 completed. Plant could be expandedto 2.6 mgd for an additional $5 million.Site will accommodate a 4.5 mgd plant.
1989 10/23/89 letter of intent from EastLake totake reclaimed water. Their EIR alsoaddressed use of reclaimed water.
1989 Consultant's study concludes:It is cost effective to expand plant.Modification cost estimated at $5,759,370,and ponds at $2,303,000.There is a potential market for 6.5 mgd ofreclaimed water, EastLake & OTC combineddemand is 2.0 mgd.
1990 Board approved reclaimed water capacity feesand monthly service charges that are to bethe sane as potable water rates.
1990 Workshop on JBWRF upgrade. Consultantpresents conclusion that upgrade plant to1.3 mgd and retaining 1.2 mgd in Metro is thebest economic decision.
1990 OWD Board approved construction contract forJBWRF upgrade, for $4,809,000.
1992 Modifications to JBWRF completed.
1994 Consultant study of JBWRF expansion vs use ofMetro concludes that expansion will be mostcost effective alternative depending onoutcome of San Diego's consent decree.
October 23, 1989
Mr. Jar.es Feasley
Design Division Manager
OTA:T WATER DISTRICT10595 Ja-acha Blvd.Spring Valley, CA S3Q7S
Dear Ji-:
EastLake is c-rrer.tly i-pler.er.tirg the use cf
reclair. water withir. The Graer.s, cur newestccrr.rvur.ity. Tr.e use c: tne reclai— water ce~anwith the grading cf the Greens and will be usedfor irricaticn within the project's coif course,parks, corjr.cn areas, and schools. We arecontinuing cur cc:rj;it:T.er.t to the use cf reciain
water by utilizing it wherever possible within thefuture ccnnunities of EastLake.
E/1STL/1KE
Crv:LO?M£NTCOMPANY
Ir. addition, the Oly—ric Training Facility loca.ec
witi-.ir. EastLaXe is planning to use reclairs waterex-ensively in the irrigation cr the clavi-c fieldar.c. the ccr-r.on areas.
EastLake is looking forward to working with theOtay Watar District in implementing the use cfreclain water, where feasible, ir. an effort tcconserve the use cf the cctable water su-cr:lv.
William T. Ostre-Prcject Manager
WTO: cr.d
Ecstlcke Business Center9CO L=ne AvwnueSuite 1OCCnuo vino. OV 92O1J(619) 471-C1J7f*X (615) 42i.U3C
EXHIBIT D
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Compliance
Specialist
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
CIP./G.F. NO: D0362-
090230
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
(May 2016) for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business
Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors
(Board) approve the Water Supply Assessment Report (WSA&V
Report) dated May 2016 for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 May 2016 WSA&V Report for the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment Project, as required by Senate Bill 610 and Senate
Bill 221 (SB 610 and SB 221).
ANALYSIS:
The County of San Diego submitted a request to the District for
an updated 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. The original WSA&V Report for the Otay 250
Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project was approved by the District Board of Directors in March
2013. An updated WSA&V Report is needed because of changes in
the configuration of the Project and in the Project’s potable
water demands. 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 County of San Diego
(County).
Prior to transmittal to the County, 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,
East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment Project WSA&V Report is
provided as Exhibit C.
For the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific
Plan Amendment Project, the County 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 County 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.
3
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment Project is located within the East Otay Mesa Specific
Plan of the County’s General Plan along the north side of Otay
Mesa Road, just east of State Route 125. The Project is
proposed to be located on 237.2 acres. The Project proposes up
to 3,158 residential dwelling units, 1,389,564 square feet of
Technology Park and 84,842 square feet of retail commercial
development. The 2013 WSA&V Report did not anticipate any
residential dwelling units.
The expected potable water demands for the Otay 250 Sunroad East
Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project are
1.018 million gallons per day (MGD) or about 1,140.7 acre-feet
per year (AFY). This is 836.4 AFY higher than the demand
estimate in the District’s 2008 Water Resources Master Plan
Update (304.3 AFY) for the same parcels. However, that estimate
did not include any residential use for the property. Recycled
water from the District is not available for the East Otay Mesa
area.
The 836.4 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 2010 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 2015
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
2010 UWMP, this Project will result in no unanticipated demands.
The request for compliance with SB 221 requirements was made by
the County because the Project will exceed the SB 221 criteria
4
of a proposed residential development subdivision of 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 County, which demonstrates and
documents that sufficient water supplies are planned for and are
intended 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 East Otay Mesa Specific Plan
Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay
250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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
5
P:\WORKING\WO D0362 Sunroad Otay Tech Centre\Staff Report\BD 07-06-16, Staff Report, Otay 250
Sunroad EOM SPA 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 – Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project WSA&V Report
Exhibit D – Presentation
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
D0362-090230
Approval of Water Supply Assessment and Verification
Report (May 2016) for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on June 21,
2016, and the following comments were made:
Staff recommended that the Board approve the Water Supply
Assessment Report (WSA&V Report) dated May 2016 for the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment Project, as required by Senate Bills 610 and 221.
Staff stated that the County of San Diego submitted a
request to the District for an updated WSA&V report for the
project pursuant to SB 610 and SB 221. It was noted that
the primary intent of these bills is to improve the link
between water supply availability and land use decisions.
It was highlighted that SB 610 and SB 221 requires the
District to prepare the assessment and verification reports
to be included in the project’s CEQA documentation and that
Board approval is required for submittal of the WSA&V
report to the County of San Diego.
The Otay 250 Project is located in the Otay Mesa area of
San Diego County and is located along the north side of
Otay Mesa Road, just east of State Route 125. It will be
located on 237.2 acres and has multi-family residential
dwelling units, a technology park and retail/commercial
space. The District approved a WSA for the Project in
2013, but that assessment did not include a residential
component. The current project includes 3,158 dwelling
units.
Staff indicated that overall the total water demand of the
project is 1,140.7 AFY of potable water. This is 836.4 AFY
higher than the 2013 report that was previously approved by
the Board in January 2009. The increase in demand is
accounted for through the AFG demand increment of the Water
Authority’s 2010 UWMP. Based on the findings of the
District’s 2015 UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP,
the Project will not result in any unanticipated demands.
Staff highlighted that recycled water is not available in
this area of the District.
The WSAV 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.
A table was presented to the Committee that showed the
Water Authority’s supplies through year 2040, and an
illustration of the Otay Water District’s balance of supply
and demand based on data from its 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan. Staff stated that based on the findings
from the District’s 2015 UWMP and the Water Authority’s
2010 UWMP, there are no unanticipated demands for this
project.
Staff stated that water demand and supply forecasts are
included in the planning documents of Metropolitan, Water
Authority, and the Otay Water District and the actions
necessary to develop the identified water supplies are
documented.
The state of the current water supply situation is
documented in the updated WSA&V report and shows that the
District has met the intent of SB 610 and SB 221.
The Committee inquired about the County’s requirements for
land use in this area. Staff stated that the County’s
Master Plan was strictly for light industrial development.
It is believed that the developer convinced the County that
the area was a good place to develop residential homes.
The County agreed and recommended that the developer
resubmit a development plan that included the 3,158
residential units.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated
that an analysis had been done to determine if providing
recycled water to the project area would be cost effective.
It was indicated that it would cost approximately $30
million for the project’s pipelines and infills; therefore,
staff determined that it would not be cost effective for
the District based on the quantity of recycled water needed
for existing and future development and the investment in
infrastructure that would be required.
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 May 2016 Water Supply
Assessment and Verification (WSA&V) Report for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project at the request of the County of
San Diego (County). The County’s WSA&V request letter dated May 16, 2016 was
received by the District on May 16, 2016 so the 90-day deadline for the District to
provide the Board an approved WSA&V Report to the County ends August 13, 2016.
The Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
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 May 2016 WSA&V Report for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business
Park Specific Plan Amendment Project has been prepared by the District in consultation
with Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., the Water Authority, and the County, 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 May 2016 WSA&V Report for the Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project.
The expected potable water demands for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project are 1.018 million gallons per day
(MGD) or about 1,015 acre-feet per year (AFY). This is 836.4 AFY higher than the
demand estimate in the District’s 2010 Water Resources Master Plan Update.
The 836.4 AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated
Forecasted Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP. As
documented in the Water Authority’s 2010 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
2
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 2010 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 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, 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 (May 2016) for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific
Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project WSA&V Report, the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Hawano Project
on March 7, 2012.
The Board approved the water supply assessment reports for the Sunroad Otay
Plaza and Otay Tech Center Projects on March 6, 2013.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report 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.
Water supplies necessary to serve the demands of the proposed Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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.
5
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project. The WSA&V Report
demonstrates and documents that sufficient water supplies are planned 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 Otay
250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project and the
existing and other planned development projects within the District.
Accordingly, after approval of a WSA&V Report for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project as a water supply assessment
report consistent with the requirements of the legislation enacted by SB 610. The
County of San Diego, as lead agency under the CEQA for the Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project.
Senate Bill (SB) 221 Water Supply Verification: The District's Board of Directors
approved WSA&V Report may be incorporated into the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project as a water supply verification
report, consistent with the requirements of the legislation enacted by SB 221. The
County, within their process of approving the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project, may cite the approved WSA&V
Report as verification of intended sufficient water supply to serve the Project.
EXHIBIT C
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT AND
VERIFICATION REPORT
for the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project
D0362-090230
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
May 2016
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment Project
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
May 2016
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1
Section 1 - Purpose .................................................................................................................... 6
Section 2 - Findings ................................................................................................................... 7
Section 3 - Project Description .............................................................................................. 10
Section 4 – Otay Water District ............................................................................................. 11
Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water Demands ........................................................ 14
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 ....... 34
6.2.2 Water Authority Capital Improvement Program and Financial
Information ........................................................................... 39
6.3 Otay Water District ...................................................................................... 40
6.3.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring Additional
Supplies ............................................................................................. 40
6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies ........................................... 41
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies ...................................................... 44
Section 7 – Conclusion: Availability of Sufficient Supplies ................................................ 52
Source Documents ................................................................................................................... 57
Appendices
Appendix A: Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project Vicinity Map
Appendix B: Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project Development Plan
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
1
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
May 2016
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific
Plan Amendment 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 County of San Diego (County) for the Otay
250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project. Sunroad Otay
Partners, LP submitted an entitlement application to the County for the development of the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project. Otay
WD approved a Water Supply Assessment Report for the project dated January 2013, but the
project is processing a Specific Plan Amendment and Tentative Map that affects the majority
of the project and includes the addition of a residential component to the project.
East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment Project Overview and Water Use
The Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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.
Sunroad Otay Partners, LP submitted an entitlement application to the County for the
amendment to the development plan for the 237.2 acre parcel (Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project). Planning Area L is not part of the
Specific Plan Amendment and Tentative Map being processed for the project as no land uses
are being proposed in this planning area, but it has been included as part of the project for this
analysis so that the project can be more readily compared to previous studies prepared for the
project which included this area. The land use plan proposes mixed use
commercial/residential and technology business park. The project is located within the East
Otay Mesa Specific Plan of the County’s General Plan along the north side of Otay Mesa
Road, just east of State Route 125.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
2
The County entitlement actions (and planning reference numbers) are General Plan
Amendment (PDS2015-GPA-15-008); Specific Plan Amendment (PDS2015-SPA-15-001); A
Tentative Map (PDS2015-TM-5607); a Rezone (PDS2015-REZ-15-007); and the certification
of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (PDS2015-ER-15-98-190-13G).
The expected potable water demand for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project is 1,018,296 gallons per day (gpd) or about 1,140.7 acre
feet per year (AFY). This is 836.4 AFY higher than the projected demands in the District’s
2008 Water Resources Master Plan updated November 2010 (WRMP Update) which
estimated 304.3 AFY for the same parcels, but did not anticipate any residential use for the
property. The January 2013 WSA that was approved for the project (then referred to as the
Otay Tech Centre) estimated a total potable water use of 178.7 AFY. Recycled water is not
anticipated to be supplied to the East Otay Mesa area from Otay WD.
The 836.4 AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated Forecasted
Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP. As documented in the
Water Authority’s 2010 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 2010 UWMP, this project will result in no unanticipated
demands.
The Water Authority’s 2010 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 (2015 to 2035) of the 2010
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
3
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.
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
4
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
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 2010 UWMP and its Draft 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 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
5
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business
Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
6
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment project as a water supply
assessment report consistent with the requirements of the legislation enacted by SB
610. The County as lead agency under CEQA for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment project.
2. Senate Bill 221 Water Supply Verification: The Otay WD Board approved WSA&V
Report may be incorporated into the County’s Tentative Map approval process for the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment project as
a water supply verification report, consistent with the requirements of the legislation
enacted by SB 221. The County, within their process of approving the Otay 250
Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment project’s Tentative
Map, may cite the approved WSA&V Report as verification of intended sufficient
water supply to serve the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific
Plan Amendment project.
Section 1 - Purpose
Sunroad Otay Partners, LP submitted an entitlement application to the County for the
development of the 237.2 acre parcel (Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project). The project is located within the East Otay Mesa Specific
Plan of the County’s General Plan along the north side of Otay Mesa Road, just east of State
Route 125. The County requested that the Otay WD prepare a Water Supply Assessment and
Verification (WSA&V) Report for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project. The Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project description is provided in Section 3 of this WSA&V
Report.
This WSA&V Report for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment project has been prepared by the Otay WD in consultation with Dexter Wilson
Engineering, Inc., the Water Authority, and the County 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
7
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 County 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 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project, and reasonably foreseeable planned future water demands
to be served by Otay WD. The Otay Water District Board of Directors approved WSA Report
is planned to be used by the County in its evaluation of the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project under the CEQA approval process
procedures.
Section 2 - Findings
Sunroad Otay Partners, LP submitted an entitlement application to the County for the
development of the 237.8 acre parcel (Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project). The Otay WD prepared this WSA Report at the request
of the County for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment Project.
The Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project is 1,018,296 gallons per day (gpd) or about 1,140.7 acre
feet per year (AFY). This is 836.4 AFY higher than the demand estimate in the District’s
WRMP Update which estimated 304.3 AFY. It is also higher than the potable water demand
from the January 2013 WSA (for the project that was then referred to as Otay Tech Centre)
which estimated 178.7 AFY.
The 836.4 AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated Forecasted
Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP. As documented in the
Water Authority’s 2010 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
8
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 2010 UWMP, this project will result in no unanticipated
demands.
The Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP and its Draft 2015 UWMP Update provide 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 (2015 to 2035)
of the Water Authority’s 2010 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
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment project, along with existing and other projected future users, as
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
9
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 Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project. This WSA 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 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 Otay 250
Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 is
172 gpcd which it met (2015 actual was 124 gpcd) and the 2020 gpcd target at 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 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)
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
10
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 Otay 250
Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project is
located along the north side of Otay Mesa Road, just east of State Route 125. Refer to
Appendix A for a vicinity map of the proposed Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business
Park Specific Plan Amendment Project. The project is proposed to be located on 237.2 acres
within the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan of the County of
San Diego (County) General Plan. Although the proposed development is located within the
municipal boundaries of the County and subject to the County’s land use jurisdiction, the
Otay WD is the potable and recycled water purveyor. The Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project is within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD,
the Water Authority, and MWD.
The Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project is
planned to include mixed use commercial/residential and technology park planning areas.
Although no land use changes are proposed within Planning Area L and it is not a part of the
proposed Specific Plan Amendment or Tentative Map, this planning area has been included in
this analysis to allow for comparison of the project to previous planning studies and planned
water demands for the project. The project proposes up to 3,158 residential dwelling units,
1,389,564 square feet of technology park, and 84,842 square feet of retail commercial
development. Refer to Appendix B for the proposed development plan of the Otay 250
Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment project.
The County has discretionary authority on land use decisions for the Otay 250 Sunroad East
Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project and can establish actions and/or
permit approval requirements. The projected potable water demands associated with the Otay
250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project have
considered the anticipated County discretionary actions and/or permit approvals and are
incorporated into and used in this WSA&V Report. The water demands for the proposed
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
11
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 AFY to
produce recycled water. On May 18, 2007, an additional source of recycled water supply of
at least 6 mgd, or about 6,720 AFY, 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 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 Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
12
Otay WD is rural and currently not within any water purveyor jurisdiction 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 2010 figure of 200,704 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).
The Otay Water District 2015 UWMP is currently being reviewed by 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
13
with supplemental information from the Otay WD WRMP Update have been utilized to
prepare this WSA Report and are incorporated herein by reference.
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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
14
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park 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 2010 UWMP and their 2015 UWMP update
(currently in draft form).
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 2010 through 2035. These savings estimates were
then factored into the baseline municipal and industrial demand forecast.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
15
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
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
16
documents would capture any increase in necessary supply resources resulting from any new
water supply resources.
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
17
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.
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
Residential
17,165 16,228 17,072 19,806 20,752 20,649 23,224
Multi-Family
Residential
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* 697 697 697 697 697 697
AFG – PA 12 46 46 46 46 46
AFG - EOM 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 30,995 38,628 44,109 46,469 47,079 52,661
Source: Otay Water District 2015 UWMP.
*Accelerated Forecasted Growth Increment
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
Projected Water Demand
Using the land use demand projection noted above, the projected potable water demand for
the proposed Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project is shown in Table 2. The projected potable water demand is 1,018,296 gpd, or about
1,140.7 AFY. This potable demand is 836.4 AFY more than was projected for these parcels
by the Otay WD WRMP and 962.0 AFY more than was projected in the January 2013 WSA
for the project (then called Otay Tech Centre). Recycled water is not anticipated to be
supplied to the East Otay Mesa area.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
18
Table 2
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
Projected Potable
Water Annual Average Demands
Location (Land Use) Gross
Acreage
Potable
Water
Factor
Net Potable
Acreage/Units Unit Rate Average
Demand
Tech Park Area* 63.8 100% 63.8 893 gpd/ac 56,973
Commercial 7.8 100% 7.8 1,785 gpd/ac 13,923
Residential 110.9 100% 3,158 300 gpd/unit 947,400
Open Space 54.7 0 0 0 0
Total 237.2 1,018,296 gpd
*Includes Planning Area L to be consistent with previous studies. Planning Area L is not part of the current SPA
Amendment and Tentative Map being processed through the County of San Diego.
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
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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
19
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.
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 Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
20
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
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
21
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 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
2015 UWMP documents the availability of these existing supplies and additional supplies
necessary to meet future demands.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
22
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 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 will include 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 2010 UWMP in June 2011. The updated Water Authority 2010 UWMP
identifies a diverse mix of local and imported water supplies to meet future demands. A
copy of the updated Water Authority 2010 UWMP can be found on the internet at:
http://www.sdcwa.org/2010-urban-water-management-plan.
The Water Authority’s draft 2015 UWMP can be found at the following site address:
http://www.sdcwa.org/sites/default/files/files/publications/2015%20UWMP%20-
%20Public%20Review%20Draft%20(4-29-2016).pdf
As part of the October 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA), the Water
Authority was assigned MWD’s rights to 77,700 AFY 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 AFY of deliveries
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
24
in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. The quantities will increase annually to 200,000 AFY 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 AFY for the region. Of the total Carlsbad
Desalination Plant production, 6,000 AF is considered a “member agency local supply”.
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
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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
25
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 2010 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 2010 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 130,897 164,855 183,578 202,042 226,713
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 41,166 44,381 46,465 46,825 47,565
Seawater Desalination 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000
Brackish GW Recovery 12,100 12,507 12,507 12,507 12,507
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 583,183 631,853 653,600 672,324 697,635
Source: Water Authority Draft 2015 Urban Water Management Plan – Table 9-1.
1Normal water year demands based on 1960-2013 hydrology.
Section 5.6.1 of the Water Authority’s Draft 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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
26
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 50,000 ac-
ft 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 5 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 2010 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 2010 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.
6.2.1.1 Water Authority-Imperial Irrigation District Water Conservation
and Transfer Agreement
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
27
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 are
continuing to seek validation of the contracts. The appeal is currently pending in the Third
District Court of Appeal. A stay of the trial court judgment has been issued during the appeal.
Implementation of the transfer provisions is proceeding during litigation.
Expected Supply
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
28
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 ac-ft
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 ac-ft 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 ac-ft for transfer water for calendar years 2010 through 2015, beginning at
$405 per ac-ft in 2010 and increasing to $624 per ac-ft 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 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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
29
The October 2003 exchange agreement between MWD and the Water Authority set the initial
cost to transport the conserved water at $253 per ac-ft. 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 ac-ft.
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,
mitigation, and litigation costs for the term of the QSA, and for development of a Habitat
Conservation Plan.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
30
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
(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).
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
31
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 ac-ft 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 ac-ft
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 ac-ft 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 ac-ft of Colorado River water each year available for
allocation. The 2003 Allocation Agreement provides for 16,000 AFY of conserved canal
lining water to be allocated to the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Parties. The
remaining amount, 77,700 AFY, is to be available to the Water Authority, with up to an
additional 4,850 AFY available to the Water Authority depending on environmental
requirements from the CC lining project. For planning purposes, the Water Authority
assumes that 2,500 ac-ft of the 4,850 ac-ft will be available each year for delivery, for a total
of 80,200 AFY of that supply. According to the Allocation Agreement, IID has call rights to
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
32
a portion (5,000 AFY) 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.
Modified by Second Amendment (2004) to increase funding amount to $83.65 million, with
addition of funds from Proposition 50.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
33
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 ac-ft 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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).
6.2.1.3 Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Project
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
35
Development of seawater desalination in San Diego County will assist 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
2010 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 ac-ft 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, was selected by Poseidon to be 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
assumed operational control of all pipeline improvements.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
36
Expected Supply
The Project provides a highly reliable local supply of 48,000 to 56,000 ac-ft per year of
supply for the region, available in both normal and dry hydrologic conditions. 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 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.
A preliminary September 2012 unit cost estimate was $2,300/AF. 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.
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The expected supply and costs associated with the Carlsbad Desalination Project are based
primarily on the following documents:
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
37
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
38
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
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
39
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.
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
40
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
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 AFY. 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
essentially completing construction and commencement of operations 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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
41
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
2011 30,158 3,880 34,038
2012 31,268 4,155 35,423
2013 31,844 4,390 36,234
2014 33,409 4,595 38,004
2015 31,175 4,340 35,515
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. In calendar year
2010 the supply to Otay WD was 29,270 ac-ft of supply from the Water Authority. An
additional 4,090 ac-ft of recycled water was provided from the City of San Diego and from
Otay WD’s Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility. The total baseline demand for
potable water within the Otay WD is expected to increase to about 51,082 ac-ft by 2040 as per
the Otay Water District 2015 UWMP.
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
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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
42
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 AFY 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
43
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 AFY 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
44
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 8,000
AFY by 2035. About 1,300 AFY 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
partnership with Sweetwater Authority to monitor any benefits and impacts of increased
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
45
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 AFY. 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
46
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 AFY 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.
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 Otay Water District 2007
Integrated Water Resources Plan (currently being updated, to be finalized in June, 2016) 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 evolved and have been resurrected 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 imported water, achieve a level of independence of the regional wholesale
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
47
water agencies, and diversify the Otay WD water supply portfolio consistent the Otay Water
District 2007 IRP (currently being updated, to be finalized in June, 2016).
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
the 1994-1995 period, the quantity of water that was returned to the groundwater basin by
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
48
Otay WD customers was estimated to be 810 AFY. Currently, that 12.5 percent quantity
could be on the order of 1,000 AFY. 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 AFY 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 AFY 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
49
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 CDPH 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 AFY.
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 AFY 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
50
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 ac-ft 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 AFY. For water planning
purposes, production of groundwater from the Rancho del Rey well is considered “additional
planned” for local supplies. During preparation of this 2010 UWMP, the Otay WD has
contracted for design services for the wellhead treatment facilities.
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 likely not be designed or
operated by the Otay WD as the lead agency, 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
51
treatment plant removes constituents of concern from the seawater, producing a water quality
that far exceeds 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 CDPH 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 CDPH 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
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
52
constructed to provide an acceptable and adequate level of service to the proposed land uses, as
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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
53
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 2010 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
54
The WSA&V Report identifies and describes the processes by which water demand
projections for the proposed Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment 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 Otay
250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project WSA 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 Otay 250 Sunroad
East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 30,299 acre feet. The demand for FY 2015 is 876 acre feet lower than the demand
in FY 2010 of 31,175 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 2018. 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
55
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
Accelerated Forecast Growth (AFG) –
Planning Area 12 46 46 46 46 46
AFG – Otay Sunroad EOM SPA 836 836 836 836 836
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 Demand 43,602 49,312 51,773 52,583 58,464
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 37,050 42,530 44,891 45,501 51,082
Water Authority AFG Increment 882 882 882 882 882
Recycled Water Supply 5,670 5,900 6,000 6,200 6,500
Total Supply 43,602 49,312 51,773 52,583 58,464
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 as 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 2017 FY 2017 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019
Demands
Otay WD Demands 37,176 38,749 38,844 40,378 42,430
Total Demand 32,304 38,749 38,844 40,378 42,430
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 32,304 33,877 33,972 35,240 37,026
Recycled Water Supply 4,872 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
56
Dry year demands assumed to generate a 6.4% increase in demand over normal conditions for
each year in addition to new demand growth.
Table 7 also 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.
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project, along with existing and other planned development projects within the Otay WD
service area.
This WSA 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 Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay
Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment 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
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
57
Source Documents
County of San Diego, Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment Project SB 610 and SB 221 Compliance request letter received May 16, 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.
County of San Diego, “East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Area,” adopted July 27, 1994.
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.
San Diego County Water Authority, “DRAFT 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, April,
2016.
San Diego County Water Authority, “Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update,” May
2011.
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.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
58
Geoscience Support Services, Inc., “Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation,” May 2001.
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
East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment Project
59
Appendix A
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment
Project Vicinity Map
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment Project
60
Appendix B
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan Amendment Project
Development Plan
Otay Water DistrictBoard of Directors Meeting
July 6, 2016
Water Supply Assessment & Verification Report Update
for the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project
EXHIBIT D
SB 610 & SB 221 Compliance
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 County of San Diego.
2
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa
Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project
3
Land Use for Project
•Tech Park –63.8 acres
•Commercial –7.8 acres
•Multi-family
Residential –3,158 units
•Open Space –54.7 acres
Changes since the 2013 WSA&V
Potable water demand has increased to 1140.7 AFY,
836.4 AFY higher than 2013 report.
Land Use has changed, 2013 Report did not include a
residential component. Project now includes 3,158
dwelling units.
2013 Report assumed recycled water would be available
for irrigation.
4
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.
5
6
Water Authority Supplies
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
Verifiable Projects
7
Otay Water District
Projected Balance of Supply and Demand
Source: Table 6 of the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment 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
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 43,602 49,312 51,773 52,583 58,464
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 37,050 42,530 44,891 45,501 51,082
Water Authority AFG Increment 882 882 882 882 882
Recycled Water Supply 5,670 5,900 6,000 6,200 6,500
Total Supply 43,602 49,312 51,773 52,583 58,464
Supply Surplus/(Deficit)0 0 0 0 0
1 Potable, recycled and near term-annexation demands.
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.
8
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Board of Directors approve Senate Bills 610
& 221 updated Water Supply Assessment &
Verification Report dated May 2016 for the
Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park
Specific Plan Amendment Project
9
QUESTIONS?
10
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Andrea Carey, Customer
Service Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY:
Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4310 Declaring an End to Water Shortage
Response Level 2
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution No. 4310 declaring an end to Water
Shortage Response Level 2.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To request that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4310 declaring an end
to the District’s Water Shortage Response Level 2. This action will
take the District out of all Water Shortage Response Levels. By
amending Section 39, we will also be in compliance with the Governor
of California’s Executive Order B-37-16. (See Staff Report “Adopt
Ordinance No. 556 Amending Section 39, Water Shortage Response
Program, of the District’s Code of Ordinances” dated July 6, 2016.)
ANALYSIS:
On August 6, 2014, the Board of Directors voted to declare a Water
Shortage Response Level 2 in response to unprecedented drought
conditions in the State of California.
Since that time, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has
put forth emergency conservation regulations for all urban water
suppliers in order to address the drought conditions in the state.
Beginning May 5, 2015, the SWRCB implemented mandatory conservation
targets for all urban water suppliers. At this time, Otay’s
conservation target was 20% of 2013 levels. Customers responded and
exceeded conservation efforts averaging 26% from June through October
2015. In February 2016, the SWRCB adopted revised emergency
regulations. The revisions included credits for agencies in warmer
weather, credit for growth since 2013, and credit for those with new,
local, drought-resilient supply. With the certification of the
Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant as a drought-resilient
supply, San Diego water agencies were able to reduce their
conservation target by the maximum 8% which lowered Otay’s target
from 20% to 12%.
On May 18, 2016, the SWRCB replaced its state mandated conservation
target method with a supply-based approach. Now, urban water
suppliers may self-certify their supply conditions based on three
additional dry years. In San Diego, the San Diego County Water
Authority (CWA) has been allowed to certify supply sufficiency for
all member agencies. On June 9, 2016, CWA confirmed that its member
agencies have sufficient water supplies to meet demands even during
three additional dry years and will not be subject to state mandated
water-use reductions through January 2017.
In addition to an elimination of the state mandated water-use
reductions, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
also ended its supply allocations in May 2016. On May 26, 2016 CWA
rescinded its Drought Management Plan Stage 2 and instead is working
to establish a public awareness campaign to ensure a continued
community focus on drought awareness and a commitment to water use
efficiency throughout the county.
Given the current level of supply reliability, staff deems it
appropriate to end Water Shortage Response Level 2. Certain water
conservation practices remain in effect at all times such as
preventing water waste and repairing all leaks within 48 hours. In
addition, the District’s leak notification process and water
conservation website will continue to be used to communicate the
importance of long-term water use efficiency.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Increase in water usage will have a positive effect on the District’s
revenues; however, it is unknown at this time what the increase will
be.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Actively manage water supply and demand.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments:
Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Resolution No. 4310
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Adopt Resolution No. 4310 Declaring an End to Water
Shortage Response Level 2
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on June 22, 2016 and the following
comments were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4310
declaring an end to Water Shortage Response Level 2.
Staff reviewed the information presented in the staff report.
It was indicated that the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) has allowed San Diego County Water Authority (CWA) to gather
the documentation to self-certify their supply conditions. The
handouts provided today are the documents put together by CWA and
signed by each of the member agencies to seek 0% conservation level
and provides the data supporting this level of conservation.
In response to an inquiry from the Committee, it was indicated that
some of the member agencies listed on the last handout show they
have a higher potable water supply than their demand as their supply
reflects water that the agency directly contracts from the Carlsbad
Desalination Plant or the agencies’ own developed local supplies
like well water, etc.
The committee noted that SWRCB allowing self-certification was the
result of the continuous efforts of the San Diego region to work
with the SWRCB to allow each region to determine their own
conservation needs based on local supplies.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as an action item.
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 4310
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT
DECLARING AN END TO THE DISTRICT’S
WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District Board of Directors had
declared a Water Shortage Response Level 2 on August 6, 2014 in
response to unprecedented drought conditions in the State of
California; and
WHEREAS, on May 18, 2016 the State Water Resources Control
Board replaced its state mandated conservation target method with
a supply-based approach; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego County Water Authority (CWA) has been
allowed to certify supply sufficiency for all member agencies and
on June 9, 2016, CWA confirmed that its member agencies have
sufficient water supplies to meet demands even during three
additional dry years and will not be subject to state mandated
water-use reductions through January 2017; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) has ended its
supply allocations in May 2016; and
WHEREAS, CWA has rescinded its Drought Management Plan Stage
2 on May 26, 2016: and
WHEREAS, Section 39.09 of the District’s Code of Ordinances,
Procedures for Determination and Notification of Water Shortage
Response Level, states that the District’s Board may declare an
end to a Water Shortage Response Level by the adoption of a
resolution at any regular or special meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by
the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District that the Water
Attachment B
Page 2 of 2
Shortage Response Level 2 be declared ended effective immediately
upon adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
Otay Water District at a board meeting held this 6th day of July
2016, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
________________________
President
ATTEST:
____________________________
District Secretary
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: July 6, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Andrea Carey, Customer
Service Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY:
Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance No. 556 Amending Section 39, Water Shortage
Response Program, of the District’s Code of Ordinances
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Ordinance No. 556 amending Section 39, Water
Shortage Response Program, of the District’s Code of Ordinances.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To comply with the Governor of California’s Executive Order B-37-16
Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life.
ANALYSIS:
On May 9, 2016, Governor Brown signed Executive Order B-37-16 Making
Water Conservation a California Way of Life, to continue to promote
conservation during California’s multi-year drought. The Executive
Order directs state agencies to update temporary emergency water
restrictions and transition to more permanent long-term improvements
in water use.
In addition to allowing the State Water Resources Control Board to
adjust water conservation regulations through the end of January
2017, the Executive Order also permanently prohibits the following
practices that waste potable water:
1) Hosing off sidewalks, driveways and other hardscapes;
2) Washing automobiles with hoses not equipped with a shut-off
nozzle;
3) Using non-recirculated water in a fountain or other decorative
water features;
4) Water lawns in a manner that causes runoff, or within 48 hours
after measurable precipitation; and
5) Irrigating ornamental turf on public street medians.
Many of the items above are listed within the various shortage levels
in Section 39, Water Shortage Response Program, of the District’s
Code of Ordinances. Staff is proposing to move these items to an
existing list of permanent conservation practices within Section 39.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Actively manage water supply and demand.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments:
Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Ordinance No. 556
Exhibit 1- Section 39 Strike-through
Attachment C – Section 39 Proposed
Attachment D - Executive Order B-37-16
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Adopt Ordinance No. 556 Amending Section 39, Water Shortage
Response Program, of the District’s Code of Ordinances
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on June 22, 2016 and the following
comments were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Ordinance No. 556 amending
Section 39, Water Shortage Response Program, of the District’s Code
of Ordinances to comply with the Governor of California’s Executive
Order B-37-16, Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life.
Staff reviewed the information presented in the staff report.
The committee had no comments and supported staffs’ recommendation and
presentation to the full board as an action item.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 556
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT
AMENDING SECTION 39 WATER SHORTAGE
RESPONSE PROGRAM
OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Directors of Otay Water
District that the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 39,
Water Shortage Response Program be amended as per Exhibit 1 to
this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the new proposed
Section 39, Water Shortage Response Program (Attachment C) of
the Code of Ordinances shall become effective July 6, 2016.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting duly held this 6th
day of July 2016, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
________________________________
President
ATTEST:
__________________________
District Secretary
Attachment B
39-1
SECTION 39. WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM
39.01 DECLARATION OF NECESSITY AND INTENT
(a) This Section establishes water management
requirements necessary to conserve water, enable effective
water supply planning, assure reasonable and beneficial use
of water, prevent waste of water, prevent unreasonable use
of water, prevent unreasonable method of use of water
within the District in order to assure adequate supplies of
water to meet the needs of the public, and further the
public health, safety, and welfare, recognizing that water
is a scarce natural resource that requires careful
management not only in times of a water shortage, but at
all times.
(b) This Section establishes regulations to be
implemented during times of declared water shortages, or
declared water shortage emergencies. It establishes four
levels of actions to be implemented in times of shortage,
with increasing restrictions on water use in response to
worsening water shortage conditions and decreasing
available supplies.
(c) The Level 1 water shortage response condition
practices are voluntary and will be reinforced through
local and regional public education and awareness measures
that may be funded in part by the District. Beginning at
the level 2 Water Shortage Response Condition, the District
may implement water shortage pricing. When a water
shortage response Level 2 condition is declared, all
conservation practices and water-use restrictions may
become mandatory and increasingly restrictive in order to
attain escalating conservation goals.
(d) During a Water Shortage Response Level 3
condition or higher, the water conservation practices and
water use restrictions established by this ordinance are
mandatory and violations are subject to criminal, civil,
and administrative penalties and remedies specified in
Section 72 of this ordinance.
Exhibit 1
39-2
39.02 DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROGRAM
(a) The following words and phrases whenever used in
this Section shall have the meaning defined in this sub-
section:
1. “Grower” refers to those engaged in the
growing or raising, in conformity with recognized
practices of husbandry, for the purpose of commerce,
trade, or industry, or for use by public educational
or correctional institutions, of agricultural,
horticultural or floricultural products, and produced:
(1) for human consumption or for the market, or (2)
for the feeding of fowl or livestock produced for
human consumption or for the market, or (3) for the
feeding of fowl or livestock for the purpose of
obtaining their products for human consumption or for
the market. “Grower” does not refer to customers who
purchase water subject to the Metropolitan Interim
Agricultural Water Program or the Water Authority
Special Agricultural Rate programs.
2. “Water Authority” means the San Diego County
Water Authority.
3. “DMP” means the Water Authority’s Drought
Management Plan in existence on the effective date of
this Section and as readopted or amended from time to
time, or an equivalent plan of the Water Authority to
manage or allocate supplies during shortages.
4. “Metropolitan” means the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California.
5. “Person” means any natural person,
corporation, public or private entity, public or
private association, public or private agency,
government agency or institution, school district,
college, university, or any other user of water
provided by the District.
39-3
39.03 APPLICATION
(a) The provisions of this Section apply to any
person in the use of any water provided by the
District.
(b) This Section is intended solely to further the
conservation of water. It is not intended to
implement any provision of federal, State, or local
statutes, ordinances, or regulations relating to
protection of water quality or control of drainage or
runoff. Refer to the local jurisdiction or Regional
Water Quality Control Board for information on any
storm water ordinances and storm water management
plans.
(c) Nothing in this Section is intended to affect or
limit the ability of the District to declare and
respond to an emergency, including an emergency that
affects the ability of the District to supply water.
(d) The provisions of this Section do not apply to
use of water from private wells or to recycled water.
(e) Nothing in this Section shall apply to use of
water that is subject to a special supply program,
such as the Metropolitan Interim Agricultural Water
Program or the Water Authority Special Agricultural
Rate programs. Violations of the conditions of
special supply programs are subject to the penalties
established under the applicable program. A person
using water subject to a special supply program and
other water provided by the District is subject to
this Section in the use of the other water.
(f) In addition, customers are encouraged not to wash
down paved surfaces, including but not limited to
sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, tennis courts, or
patios, except when it is necessary to alleviate
safety or sanitation hazards.
At all times, the following practices shall be in effect:
1. Prevent water waste resulting from
inefficient irrigation, such as runoff or
overspray. Similarly, stop water flows
39-4
onto non-targeted areas, such as adjacent
property, non-irrigated areas, hardscapes,
roadways, or structures.
2. Serve and refill water in restaurants and
other food service establishments only
upon request.
3. Offer guests in hotels, motels, and other
commercial lodging establishments the
option of not laundering towels and linens
daily.
4. Use only re-circulated water in fountains
or other decorative water features.
5. Wash automobiles with a hose equipped only
with a positive shut-off nozzle.
3.6. IIrrigating ornamental turf on public
street medians only with reclaimed
recycled water.
7. Repair all water leaks within forty-eight
(48) hours (48) of notification by the
District unless other arrangements are
made with the General Manager or designee.
8. Irrigation is not allowed during a
rainstorm or for fourtyforty-eight (48)
hours after one-quarter inch or more of
rainfall is measured at Lindbergh Field.
4.9. No washing down of paved surfaces,
including but not limited to sidewalks,
drive ways, parking lots, tennis courts,
or patios, except when it is necessary to
alleviate safety or sanitation hazards.
39.04 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 1 – SUPPLY WATCH
CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 1 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Watch” condition. A Level 1
condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its
member agencies that due to water shortage or other supply
reductions, there is a reasonable probability there will be
39-5
supply shortages and that a consumer demand reduction of up
to 10 percent is required in order to ensure that
sufficient supplies will be available to meet anticipated
demands. The General Manager shall declare the existence
of a Level 1 and take action to implement the Level 1
conservation practices identified in this Section.
(b) During a Level 1 condition, the District will
increase its public education and outreach efforts to
emphasize increased public awareness of the need to
implement the following water conservation practices. The
same water conservation practices may become mandatory if
the District declares a Level 2 condition:
1. Irrigate residential and commercial
landscape before 10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only.
Customers are to water no more than three days a week
using the suggested watering schedule as found on the
District’s web page. New plantings and newly seeded
areas are exempt for 30 days.
2. Use a hand-held hose equipped with a
positive shut-off nozzle or bucket to water landscaped
areas, including trees and shrubs located on
residential and commercial properties that are not
irrigated by a landscape irrigation system.
3. Irrigate nursery and commercial grower’s
products before 10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only.
Watering is permitted at any time with a hand-held
hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle, a
bucket, or when a drip/micro-irrigation
system/equipment is used. Irrigation of nursery
propagation beds is permitted at any time. Watering
of livestock is permitted at any time.
4. Use re-circulated water to operate
ornamental fountains.
5. Wash vehicles, including but not limited to
motorcycles, farm equipment, trailers, boats and boat
engines and motorhomes using a bucket and a hand-held
hose with positive shut-off nozzle, mobile high
pressure/low volume wash system, or at a commercial
site that re-circulates (reclaims) water on-site.
Vehicle washing is limited to once per week.
39-6
6. Use recycled or non-potable water for
construction purposes when available.
39.05 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2 – SUPPLY ALERT
CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 2 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Alert” condition. A Level 2
condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its
member agencies that due to cutbacks caused by water
shortage or other reduction in supplies, a consumer demand
reduction of 11 to 20 percent is required in order to have
sufficient supplies available to meet anticipated demands.
The District Board of Directors may declare the existence
of a Level 2 condition and implement the Level 2
conservation practices identified in this section of the
ordinance. The District may decide to implement some or
all of the Level 1 practices.
(b) All persons using District water shall make every
effort to comply with Level 1 water conservation practices
during a Level 2, and also to comply with the following
additional conservation measures:
1. Limit residential and commercial landscape
irrigation to no more than three (3) days per week.
This section shall not apply to homeowner’s vegetable
gardens, fruit trees, commercial growers, or
nurseries.
2. Limit lawn watering and landscape irrigation
using sprinklers to no more than fifteen (15) minutes
per watering station per day. During the months of
November through April, landscape irrigation shall not
exceed seven (7) minutes per water watering station
per assigned day. Watering times may need to be
shortened to avoid run-off. This provision does not
apply to landscape irrigation systems using water
efficient devices, including but not limited to:
weather based controllers, drip/micro-irrigation
systems, rotating sprinkler nozzles and stream rotor
sprinklers.
3. Water landscaped areas, including trees and
shrubs located on residential and commercial
properties, and not irrigated by a landscape
39-7
irrigation system on the same schedule set forth above
by using a bucket, hand-held hose with positive shut-
off nozzle, or low-volume non-spray irrigation.
4. Irrigation is not allowed during a rainstorm
and for forty-eight hours after one-quarter inch or
more of rainfall is measured at Lindbergh Field. No
washing down of paved surfaces, including but not
limited to sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, tennis
courts, or patios, except when it is necessary to
alleviate safety or sanitation hazards.
39.06 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 3 – SUPPLY CRITICAL
CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 3 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Critical” condition. A Level
3 condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its
member agencies that due to increasing cutbacks caused by
water shortage or other reduction of supplies, a consumer
demand reduction of between 21 and 40 percent is required
in order to have sufficient supplies available to meet
anticipated demands. The District Board of Directors may
declare the existence of a Level 3 condition and implement
the Level 3 conservation practices identified in this
Section.
(b) All persons using District water shall comply
with Level 1 and Level 2 water conservation practices
during a Level 3 condition and shall also comply with the
following additional mandatory conservation measures:
1. Limit residential and commercial landscape
irrigation to no more than two (2) assigned days per
week on a schedule established by the General Manager
or designee and posted by the District. During the
months of November through April, landscape irrigation
is limited to no more than once per week on a schedule
established by the General Manager or designee and
posted by the District. This section shall not apply
to commercial growers or nurseries.
2. Water landscaped areas, including trees and
shrubs located on residential and commercial
properties, and not irrigated by a landscape
irrigation system on the same schedule set forth above
39-8
by using a bucket, hand-held hose with a positive
shut-off nozzle, or low-volume non-spray irrigation.
3. Stop filling or re-filling ornamental lakes
or ponds, except to the extent needed to sustain
aquatic life, provided that such animals are of
significant value and have been actively managed
within the water feature prior to declaration of a
water shortage response level under this Section.
4. Stop operating non-residential ornamental
fountains or similar decorative water features unless
recycled water is used.
5. Stop washing vehicles except at commercial
carwashes that re-circulate water, or by high
pressure/low volume wash systems. If a commercial car
wash cannot accommodate the vehicle because of the
vehicle size or type, such as RVs, horse trailers,
boats and commercial vehicles, customers will be
allowed to wash vehicles using a bucket and a hand-
held hose with positive shut-off nozzle, mobile high
pressure/low volume wash system.
(c) Upon the declaration of a Level 3 condition, the
District may suspend new potable water service and
statements of immediate ability to serve or provide potable
water service (such as, will serve letters, certificates,
or letters of availability) except under the following
circumstances:
1. A valid, unexpired building permit has been
issued for the project; or
2. The project is necessary to protect the
public’s health, safety, and welfare; or
3. The applicant provides substantial evidence
of an enforceable commitment that water demands for
the project will be offset prior to the provision of a
new water meter(s) to the satisfaction of the
District.
This provision shall not be construed to preclude the
resetting or turn-on of meters to provide continuation of
water service or to restore service that has been
interrupted.
39-9
(d) Upon the declaration of a Level 3 condition, the
District will suspend consideration of annexations to its
service area.
(e) The District may establish a water allocation for
property served by the District using a method that takes
into consideration the implementation of conservation
methods or the installation of water saving devices. If
the District establishes a water allocation, it shall
provide notice of the allocation by including it in the
regular billing statement for the fee or charge or by any
other mailing to the address to which the District
customarily mails the billing statement for fees or charges
for on-going water service. Following the effective date
of the water allocation as established by the District, any
person that uses water in excess of the allocation shall be
subject to a penalty for each billing unit of water in
excess of the allocation. The penalty for excess water
usage shall be cumulative to any other remedy or penalty
that may be imposed for violation of this Section.
39.07 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 4 – SUPPLY
EMERGENCY CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 4 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Emergency” condition. A
Level 4 condition applies when the Water Authority Board of
Directors declares a water shortage emergency pursuant to
California Water Code section 350 and notifies its member
agencies that Level 4 requires a demand reduction of more
than 40 percent in order for the District to have maximum
supplies available to meet anticipated demands. The
District shall declare a Level 4 in the manner and on the
grounds provided in California Water Code section 350.
(b) All persons using District water shall comply
with conservation measures required during Level 1, Level
2, and Level 3 conditions and shall also comply with the
following additional mandatory conservation measures:
1. Stop all landscape irrigation, except crops
and landscape products of commercial growers and
nurseries. This restriction shall not apply to the
following categories of use unless the District has
determined that recycled water is available and may be
lawfully applied to the use.
39-10
A. Maintenance of trees and shrubs that
are watered on the same schedule as noted in the
Level 3 Condition, by using a bucket, hand-held
hose with a positive shut-off nozzle, or low-
volume non-spray irrigation;
B. Maintenance of existing landscaping
necessary for fire protection as specified by the
Fire Marshal of the local fire protection agency
having jurisdiction over the property to be
irrigated;
C. Maintenance of existing landscaping for
erosion control;
D. Maintenance of plant materials
identified to be rare or essential to the well
being of rare animals;
E. Maintenance of landscaping within
active public parks and playing fields, day care
centers, school grounds, cemeteries, and golf
course greens, provided that such irrigation does
not exceed two (2) days per week according to the
schedule established under the District’s Level 3
Condition;
F. Watering of livestock; and
G. Public works projects and actively
irrigated environmental mitigation projects.
2. Repair all water leaks within twenty-four
(24) hours of notification by the District unless
other arrangements are made with the District.
(c) The District may establish a water allocation for
property served by the District. If the District
establishes water allocation it shall provide notice of the
allocation by including it in the regular billing statement
for the fee or charge or by any other mailing to the
address to which the District customarily mails the billing
statement for fees or charges for on-going water service.
Following the effective date of the water allocation as
established by the District, any person that uses water in
39-11
excess of the allocation shall be subject to a penalty for
each billing unit of water in excess of the allocation.
The penalty for excess water usage shall be cumulative to
any other remedy or penalty that may be imposed for
violation of any provision of this Section.
39.08 CORRELATION BETWEEN DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN (DMP)
AND WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVELS
(a) The correlation between the Water Authority’s DMP
stages and the District’s water shortage response levels
identified in this Section of the Code of Ordinance is
described herein. Under DMP Stage 1, the District would
implement Water Shortage Response Level 1 actions. Under
DMP Stage 2, the District would implement Water Shortage
Response Level 1 or Level 2 actions. Under DMP Stage 3,
the District would implement Water Shortage Response Level
2, Level 3, or Level 4 actions.
(b) The water shortage response levels identified in
this Section correspond with the Water Authority DMP as
identified in the following table:
Water Shortage
Response Levels
Use
Restrictions
Conservation
Target
DMP
Stage
1 - Supply Watch Voluntary Up to 10% Stage 1
or 2
2 - Supply Alert Mandatory 11 to 20% Stage 2
or 3
3 - Supply Critical Mandatory 21 to 40% Stage 3
4 - Supply
Emergency
Mandatory Above 40% Stage 3
39.09 PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINATION AND NOTIFICATION OF
WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL
(a) The existence of a Water Shortage Response Level
1 condition may be declared by the General Manager upon a
written determination of the existence of the facts and
circumstances supporting the determination. A copy of the
written determination shall be filed with the Clerk or
Secretary of the District and provided to the District
Board of Directors. The General Manager may publish a
notice of the determination of existence of Water Shortage
Response Level 1 condition in one or more newspapers,
including a newspaper of general circulation within the
39-12
District. The District will also post notice of the
condition on their website.
(b) The existence of Water Shortage Response Level 2
or Level 3 conditions may be declared by resolution of the
District Board of Directors adopted at a regular or special
public meeting held in accordance with State law. The
mandatory conservation measures applicable to Water
Shortage Response Level 2 or Level 3 conditions shall take
effect on the tenth (10) day after the date the response
level is declared. Within five (5) days following the
declaration of the response level, the District shall
publish a copy of the resolution in a newspaper used for
publication of official notices.
(c) The existence of a Water Shortage Response Level
4 condition may be declared in accordance with the
procedures specified in California Water Code sections 350
to 352 as note below:
350. The governing body of a distributor of a public water
supply, whether publicly or privately owned and including a
mutual water company, may declare a water shortage emergency
condition to prevail within the area served by such distributor
whenever it finds and determines that the ordinary demands and
requirements of water consumers cannot be satisfied without
depleting the water supply of the distributor to the extent that
there would be insufficient water for human consumption,
sanitation, and fire protection.
351. Except in event of a breakage or failure of a dam, pump,
Pipe line or conduit causing an immediate emergency, the
declaration shall be made only after a public hearing at which
consumers of such water supply shall have an opportunity to be
heard to protest against the declaration and to present their
respective needs to said governing board.
352. Notice of the time and place of hearing shall be published
pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code at least seven
days prior to the date of hearing in a newspaper printed,
published, and circulated within the area in which the water
supply is distributed, or if there is no such newspaper, in any
newspaper printed, published, and circulated in the county in
which the area is located.
The mandatory conservation measures applicable to Water
Shortage Response Level 4 conditions shall take effect on
the tenth (10) day after the date the response level is
declared. Within five (5) days following the declaration
of the response level, the District shall publish a copy of
the resolution in a newspaper used for publication of
39-13
official notices. If the District establishes a water
allocation, it shall provide notice of the allocation by
including it in the regular billing statement for the fee
or charge or by any other mailing to the address to which
the District customarily mails the billing statement for
fees or charges for on-going water service. Water
allocation shall be effective on the fifth (5) day
following the date of mailing or at such later date as
specified in the notice.
(d) The District Board of Directors may declare an
end to a Water Shortage Response Level by the adoption of a
resolution at any regular or special meeting held in
accordance with State law.
39-1
SECTION 39. WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM
39.01 DECLARATION OF NECESSITY AND INTENT
(a) This Section establishes water management
requirements necessary to conserve water, enable effective
water supply planning, assure reasonable and beneficial use
of water, prevent waste of water, prevent unreasonable use
of water, prevent unreasonable method of use of water
within the District in order to assure adequate supplies of
water to meet the needs of the public, and further the
public health, safety, and welfare, recognizing that water
is a scarce natural resource that requires careful
management not only in times of a water shortage, but at
all times.
(b) This Section establishes regulations to be
implemented during times of declared water shortages, or
declared water shortage emergencies. It establishes four
levels of actions to be implemented in times of shortage,
with increasing restrictions on water use in response to
worsening water shortage conditions and decreasing
available supplies.
(c) The Level 1 water shortage response condition
practices are voluntary and will be reinforced through
local and regional public education and awareness measures
that may be funded in part by the District. Beginning at
the level 2 Water Shortage Response Condition, the District
may implement water shortage pricing. When a water
shortage response Level 2 condition is declared, all
conservation practices and water-use restrictions may
become mandatory and increasingly restrictive in order to
attain escalating conservation goals.
(d) During a Water Shortage Response Level 3
condition or higher, the water conservation practices and
water use restrictions established by this ordinance are
mandatory and violations are subject to criminal, civil and
administrative penalties and remedies specified in Section
72 of this ordinance.
Attachment C
39-2
39.02 DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROGRAM
(a) The following words and phrases whenever used in
this Section shall have the meaning defined in this sub-
section:
1. “Grower” refers to those engaged in the
growing or raising, in conformity with recognized
practices of husbandry, for the purpose of commerce,
trade, or industry, or for use by public educational
or correctional institutions, of agricultural,
horticultural or floricultural products, and produced:
(1) for human consumption or for the market, or (2)
for the feeding of fowl or livestock produced for
human consumption or for the market, or (3) for the
feeding of fowl or livestock for the purpose of
obtaining their products for human consumption or for
the market. “Grower” does not refer to customers who
purchase water subject to the Metropolitan Interim
Agricultural Water Program or the Water Authority
Special Agricultural Rate programs.
2. “Water Authority” means the San Diego County
Water Authority.
3. “DMP” means the Water Authority’s Drought
Management Plan in existence on the effective date of
this Section and as readopted or amended from time to
time, or an equivalent plan of the Water Authority to
manage or allocate supplies during shortages.
4. “Metropolitan” means the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California.
5. “Person” means any natural person,
corporation, public or private entity, public or
private association, public or private agency,
government agency or institution, school district,
college, university, or any other user of water
provided by the District.
39-3
39.03 APPLICATION
(a) The provisions of this Section apply to any
person in the use of any water provided by the
District.
(b) This Section is intended solely to further the
conservation of water. It is not intended to
implement any provision of federal, State, or local
statutes, ordinances, or regulations relating to
protection of water quality or control of drainage or
runoff. Refer to the local jurisdiction or Regional
Water Quality Control Board for information on any
storm water ordinances and storm water management
plans.
(c) Nothing in this Section is intended to affect or
limit the ability of the District to declare and
respond to an emergency, including an emergency that
affects the ability of the District to supply water.
(d) The provisions of this Section do not apply to
use of water from private wells or to recycled water.
(e) Nothing in this Section shall apply to use of
water that is subject to a special supply program,
such as the Metropolitan Interim Agricultural Water
Program or the Water Authority Special Agricultural
Rate programs. Violations of the conditions of
special supply programs are subject to the penalties
established under the applicable program. A person
using water subject to a special supply program and
other water provided by the District is subject to
this Section in the use of the other water.
At all times, the following practices shall be in effect:
1. Prevent water waste resulting from
inefficient irrigation, such as runoff or
overspray. Similarly, stop water flows
onto non-targeted areas, such as adjacent
property, non-irrigated areas, hardscapes,
roadways, or structures.
39-4
2. Serve and refill water in restaurants and
other food service establishments only
upon request.
3. Offer guests in hotels, motels, and other
commercial lodging establishments the
option of not laundering towels and linens
daily.
4. Use only re-circulated water in fountains
or other decorative water features.
5. Wash automobiles with a hose equipped only
with a positive shut-off nozzle.
6. Irrigating ornamental turf on public
street medians only with recycled water.
7. Repair all water leaks within forty-eight
hours (48) of notification by the District
unless other arrangements are made with
the General Manager or designee.
8. Irrigation is not allowed during a
rainstorm or for forty-eight (48) hours
after one-quarter inch or more of rainfall
is measured at Lindbergh Field.
9. No washing down of paved surfaces,
including but not limited to sidewalks,
driveways, parking lots, tennis courts, or
patios, except when it is necessary to
alleviate safety or sanitation hazards.
39.04 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 1 – SUPPLY WATCH
CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 1 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Watch” condition. A Level 1
condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its
member agencies that due to water shortage or other supply
reductions, there is a reasonable probability there will be
supply shortages and that a consumer demand reduction of up
to 10 percent is required in order to ensure that
sufficient supplies will be available to meet anticipated
demands. The General Manager shall declare the existence
of a Level 1 and take action to implement the Level 1
conservation practices identified in this Section.
39-5
(b) During a Level 1 condition, the District will
increase its public education and outreach efforts to
emphasize increased public awareness of the need to
implement the following water conservation practices. The
same water conservation practices may become mandatory if
the District declares a Level 2 condition:
1. Irrigate residential and commercial
landscape before 10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only.
Customers are to water no more than three days a week
using the suggested watering schedule as found on the
District’s web page. New plantings and newly seeded
areas are exempt for 30 days.
2. Use a hand-held hose equipped with a
positive shut-off nozzle or bucket to water landscaped
areas, including trees and shrubs located on
residential and commercial properties that are not
irrigated by a landscape irrigation system.
3. Irrigate nursery and commercial grower’s
products before 10 a.m. and after 6 p.m. only.
Watering is permitted at any time with a hand-held
hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle, a
bucket, or when a drip/micro-irrigation
system/equipment is used. Irrigation of nursery
propagation beds is permitted at any time. Watering
of livestock is permitted at any time.
5. Wash vehicles, including but not limited to
motorcycles, farm equipment, trailers, boats and boat
engines and motorhomes using a bucket and a hand-held
hose with positive shut-off nozzle, mobile high
pressure/low volume wash system, or at a commercial
site that re-circulates (reclaims) water on-site.
Vehicle washing is limited to once per week.
6. Use recycled or non-potable water for
construction purposes when available.
39-6
39.05 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2 – SUPPLY ALERT
CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 2 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Alert” condition. A Level 2
condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its
member agencies that due to cutbacks caused by water
shortage or other reduction in supplies, a consumer demand
reduction of 11 to 20 percent is required in order to have
sufficient supplies available to meet anticipated demands.
The District Board of Directors may declare the existence
of a Level 2 condition and implement the Level 2
conservation practices identified in this section of the
ordinance. The District may decide to implement some or
all of the Level 1 practices.
(b) All persons using District water shall make every
effort to comply with Level 1 water conservation practices
during a Level 2, and also to comply with the following
additional conservation measures:
1. Limit residential and commercial landscape
irrigation to no more than three (3) days per week.
This section shall not apply to homeowner’s vegetable
gardens, fruit trees, commercial growers, or
nurseries.
2. Limit lawn watering and landscape irrigation
using sprinklers to no more than fifteen (15) minutes
per watering station per day. During the months of
November through April, landscape irrigation shall not
exceed seven (7) minutes per water watering station
per assigned day. Watering times may need to be
shortened to avoid run-off. This provision does not
apply to landscape irrigation systems using water
efficient devices, including but not limited to:
weather based controllers, drip/micro-irrigation
systems, rotating sprinkler nozzles and stream rotor
sprinklers.
3. Water landscaped areas, including trees and
shrubs located on residential and commercial
properties, and not irrigated by a landscape
irrigation system on the same schedule set forth above
39-7
by using a bucket, hand-held hose with positive shut-
off nozzle, or low-volume non-spray irrigation.
39.06 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 3 – SUPPLY CRITICAL
CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 3 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Critical” condition. A Level
3 condition applies when the Water Authority notifies its
member agencies that due to increasing cutbacks caused by
water shortage or other reduction of supplies, a consumer
demand reduction of between 21 and 40 percent is required
in order to have sufficient supplies available to meet
anticipated demands. The District Board of Directors may
declare the existence of a Level 3 condition and implement
the Level 3 conservation practices identified in this
Section.
(b) All persons using District water shall comply
with Level 1 and Level 2 water conservation practices
during a Level 3 condition and shall also comply with the
following additional mandatory conservation measures:
1. Limit residential and commercial landscape
irrigation to no more than two (2) assigned days per
week on a schedule established by the General Manager
or designee and posted by the District. During the
months of November through April, landscape irrigation
is limited to no more than once per week on a schedule
established by the General Manager or designee and
posted by the District. This section shall not apply
to commercial growers or nurseries.
2. Water landscaped areas, including trees and
shrubs located on residential and commercial
properties, and not irrigated by a landscape
irrigation system on the same schedule set forth above
by using a bucket, hand-held hose with a positive
shut-off nozzle, or low-volume non-spray irrigation.
3. Stop filling or re-filling ornamental lakes
or ponds, except to the extent needed to sustain
aquatic life, provided that such animals are of
significant value and have been actively managed
within the water feature prior to declaration of a
water shortage response level under this Section.
39-8
4. Stop operating non-residential ornamental
fountains or similar decorative water features unless
recycled water is used.
5. Stop washing vehicles except at commercial
carwashes that re-circulate water, or by high
pressure/low volume wash systems. If a commercial car
wash cannot accommodate the vehicle because of the
vehicle size or type, such as RVs, horse trailers,
boats and commercial vehicles, customers will be
allowed to wash vehicles using a bucket and a hand-
held hose with positive shut-off nozzle, mobile high
pressure/low volume wash system.
(c) Upon the declaration of a Level 3 condition, the
District may suspend new potable water service and
statements of immediate ability to serve or provide potable
water service (such as, will serve letters, certificates,
or letters of availability) except under the following
circumstances:
1. A valid, unexpired building permit has been
issued for the project; or
2. The project is necessary to protect the
public’s health, safety, and welfare; or
3. The applicant provides substantial evidence
of an enforceable commitment that water demands for
the project will be offset prior to the provision of a
new water meter(s) to the satisfaction of the
District.
This provision shall not be construed to preclude the
resetting or turn-on of meters to provide continuation of
water service or to restore service that has been
interrupted.
(d) Upon the declaration of a Level 3 condition, the
District will suspend consideration of annexations to its
service area.
(e) The District may establish a water allocation for
property served by the District using a method that takes
into consideration the implementation of conservation
methods or the installation of water saving devices. If
the District establishes a water allocation, it shall
39-9
provide notice of the allocation by including it in the
regular billing statement for the fee or charge or by any
other mailing to the address to which the District
customarily mails the billing statement for fees or charges
for on-going water service. Following the effective date
of the water allocation as established by the District, any
person that uses water in excess of the allocation shall be
subject to a penalty for each billing unit of water in
excess of the allocation. The penalty for excess water
usage shall be cumulative to any other remedy or penalty
that may be imposed for violation of this Section.
39.07 WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 4 – SUPPLY
EMERGENCY CONDITION
(a) A Water Shortage Response Level 4 condition is
also referred to as a “Supply Emergency” condition. A
Level 4 condition applies when the Water Authority Board of
Directors declares a water shortage emergency pursuant to
California Water Code section 350 and notifies its member
agencies that Level 4 requires a demand reduction of more
than 40 percent in order for the District to have maximum
supplies available to meet anticipated demands. The
District shall declare a Level 4 in the manner and on the
grounds provided in California Water Code section 350.
(b) All persons using District water shall comply
with conservation measures required during Level 1, Level
2, and Level 3 conditions and shall also comply with the
following additional mandatory conservation measures:
1. Stop all landscape irrigation, except crops
and landscape products of commercial growers and
nurseries. This restriction shall not apply to the
following categories of use unless the District has
determined that recycled water is available and may be
lawfully applied to the use.
A. Maintenance of trees and shrubs that
are watered on the same schedule as noted in the
Level 3 Condition, by using a bucket, hand-held
hose with a positive shut-off nozzle, or low-
volume non-spray irrigation;
B. Maintenance of existing landscaping
necessary for fire protection as specified by the
Fire Marshal of the local fire protection agency
39-10
having jurisdiction over the property to be
irrigated;
C. Maintenance of existing landscaping for
erosion control;
D. Maintenance of plant materials
identified to be rare or essential to the well
being of rare animals;
E. Maintenance of landscaping within
active public parks and playing fields, day care
centers, school grounds, cemeteries, and golf
course greens, provided that such irrigation does
not exceed two (2) days per week according to the
schedule established under the District’s Level 3
Condition;
F. Watering of livestock; and
G. Public works projects and actively
irrigated environmental mitigation projects.
2. Repair all water leaks within twenty-four
(24) hours of notification by the District unless
other arrangements are made with the District.
(c) The District may establish a water allocation for
property served by the District. If the District
establishes water allocation it shall provide notice of the
allocation by including it in the regular billing statement
for the fee or charge or by any other mailing to the
address to which the District customarily mails the billing
statement for fees or charges for on-going water service.
Following the effective date of the water allocation as
established by the District, any person that uses water in
excess of the allocation shall be subject to a penalty for
each billing unit of water in excess of the allocation.
The penalty for excess water usage shall be cumulative to
any other remedy or penalty that may be imposed for
violation of any provision of this Section.
39-11
39.08 CORRELATION BETWEEN DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN (DMP)
AND WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVELS
(a) The correlation between the Water Authority’s DMP
stages and the District’s water shortage response levels
identified in this Section of the Code of Ordinance is
described herein. Under DMP Stage 1, the District would
implement Water Shortage Response Level 1 actions. Under
DMP Stage 2, the District would implement Water Shortage
Response Level 1 or Level 2 actions. Under DMP Stage 3,
the District would implement Water Shortage Response Level
2, Level 3, or Level 4 actions.
(b) The water shortage response levels identified in
this Section correspond with the Water Authority DMP as
identified in the following table:
Water Shortage
Response Levels
Use
Restrictions
Conservation
Target
DMP
Stage
1 - Supply Watch Voluntary Up to 10% Stage 1
or 2
2 - Supply Alert Mandatory 11 to 20% Stage 2
or 3
3 - Supply Critical Mandatory 21 to 40% Stage 3
4 - Supply
Emergency
Mandatory Above 40% Stage 3
39.09 PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINATION AND NOTIFICATION OF
WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL
(a) The existence of a Water Shortage Response Level
1 condition may be declared by the General Manager upon a
written determination of the existence of the facts and
circumstances supporting the determination. A copy of the
written determination shall be filed with the Clerk or
Secretary of the District and provided to the District
Board of Directors. The General Manager may publish a
notice of the determination of existence of Water Shortage
Response Level 1 condition in one or more newspapers,
including a newspaper of general circulation within the
District. The District will also post notice of the
condition on their website.
(b) The existence of Water Shortage Response Level 2
or Level 3 conditions may be declared by resolution of the
39-12
District Board of Directors adopted at a regular or special
public meeting held in accordance with State law. The
mandatory conservation measures applicable to Water
Shortage Response Level 2 or Level 3 conditions shall take
effect on the tenth (10) day after the date the response
level is declared. Within five (5) days following the
declaration of the response level, the District shall
publish a copy of the resolution in a newspaper used for
publication of official notices.
(c) The existence of a Water Shortage Response Level
4 condition may be declared in accordance with the
procedures specified in California Water Code sections 350
to 352 as note below:
350. The governing body of a distributor of a public water
supply, whether publicly or privately owned and including a
mutual water company, may declare a water shortage emergency
condition to prevail within the area served by such distributor
whenever it finds and determines that the ordinary demands and
requirements of water consumers cannot be satisfied without
depleting the water supply of the distributor to the extent that
there would be insufficient water for human consumption,
sanitation, and fire protection.
351. Except in event of a breakage or failure of a dam, pump,
Pipe line or conduit causing an immediate emergency, the
declaration shall be made only after a public hearing at which
consumers of such water supply shall have an opportunity to be
heard to protest against the declaration and to present their
respective needs to said governing board.
352. Notice of the time and place of hearing shall be published
pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code at least seven
days prior to the date of hearing in a newspaper printed,
published, and circulated within the area in which the water
supply is distributed, or if there is no such newspaper, in any
newspaper printed, published, and circulated in the county in
which the area is located.
The mandatory conservation measures applicable to Water
Shortage Response Level 4 conditions shall take effect on
the tenth (10) day after the date the response level is
declared. Within five (5) days following the declaration
of the response level, the District shall publish a copy of
the resolution in a newspaper used for publication of
official notices. If the District establishes a water
allocation, it shall provide notice of the allocation by
including it in the regular billing statement for the fee
or charge or by any other mailing to the address to which
the District customarily mails the billing statement for
39-13
fees or charges for on-going water service. Water
allocation shall be effective on the fifth (5) day
following the date of mailing or at such later date as
specified in the notice.
(d) The District Board of Directors may declare an
end to a Water Shortage Response Level by the adoption of a
resolution at any regular or special meeting held in
accordance with State law.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: July 6, 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 7-6-16.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 17, 2016
September 21, 2016
October 19, 2016
November 16, 2016
December 21, 2016
SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS:
STAFF REPORT
TYPE
MEETING:
Regular Board
MEETING
DATE:
July 6, 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:
Purchasing and Facilities:
Annual Fuel Island and Underground Storage Tank (UST)
Inspections – The County of San Diego Department of
Environmental Health (DEH) inspected the District’s fuel island
and UST’s, including documentation and training records. They
observed the annual fuel island test conducted by Jenal
Engineering Inc., the District’s designated operator. DEH found
that all is in order and that the fuel island is operating as
designed and in a safe manner.
Doing Business with Otay Water District – In an effort to
encourage the participation of disadvantaged businesses and in
compliance with Policy 31, the District sponsors the San Diego
Contracting Opportunities Center (SDCOC), a program of
Southwestern College, to host two “Doing Business with Otay
Water District” workshops each year. The latest was completed
June 2 at SDCOC’s Mission Valley location and was attended by 26
small businesses. Twenty evaluation forms were completed with
an average rating of “Very Good.”
Human Resources: Required IRS Reporting Related to Health Care Reform – HR staff
is working with our vendor, Employee Benefits Specialist, on the
newly required tax forms related to health care reform
(1095c/1094c). EBS completed the required filing of the 1094c
to the IRS during the month of June.
2
Recruitments/New Hires:
o The District is in the selection stage of recruiting a
Construction Inspector I/II.
o The District is preparing to recruit a Communications
Assistant and a Senior Buyer.
o The new Communications Officer started on June 22, 2016.
Safety & Security:
Safety Training/Meetings – Staff attended/completed the
following:
o Water Utility Safety Managers Association (WUSMA) Quarterly
Meeting – The meeting was hosted by the Helix Water District.
Atlas Claims Investigation shared their Workers Compensation
claim Investigation process and their services.
o Water Agency Emergency Collaborative (WAEC) Quarterly Meeting
– The meeting was hosted by the County of San and Diego San
Diego Water Authority. Guest Speakers included U.S. FBI, Cyber
Crime Division Special Agents Nicholas Arico & Brian Nielsen.
Topics included:
Current cyber threats in San Diego
Cybersecurity challenges unique to SCADA networks
FBI Proactive Detections Program
Infraguard
o WebEOC Monthly Meeting – This month’s exercise consisted of
“Under Status Boards, create a POD – Point of Dispensing
Status.”
Topics for FY16-17 have been shared and scheduled with the
Committee.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING:
Enterprise SCADA System – Staff recently completed the migration
and deployment of the District’s new industrial supervisory
control and data acquisition (SCADA) management system, GE-iFix.
The new system provides Operators with enhanced data management
functions, analytics, activity and power trending of each
component, monitoring and controls, centralized alarm management,
access via mobile devices, and greater enterprise visibility for
operations management. In addition, end-user and administrative
technical training was conducted.
Tyler Cashiering Solution- Staff completed the implementation of
the District’s new cashiering system. The new solution improves
overall cashiering services, meets compliance for new credit card
reader (chip) technology, and improves the overall security with
PCI/PA-DSS compliance. Also, the solution offers enhancements to
batch processing activities, streamlining of the data collection
process, single point of entry for data input, and improved
interface features for Customer Service staff. Training is
3
currently underway, with production usage set to go live during
the 2nd week of July.
FINANCE:
Collection Agency Change – The District has recently changed its
2nd phase collection agency to Financial Credit Network. This 2nd
phase collection agency is used for customers who have moved and
left a balance due with no forwarding address on file with the
District. On average, the District sends approximately 350
accounts a year to its 2nd phase collection agency. After
soliciting bids from multiple agencies, staff selected Financial
Credit Network based on their ability to meet the Department’s
requirements, feedback from current customers, and lower fees.
The District will save 15% using Financial Credit Network.
Financial Reporting:
o For the nine months ended May 31, 2016, there are total
revenues of $76,383,598 and total expenses of $76,111,233. The
revenues exceeded expenses by $272,365.
o The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the
Investment Portfolio Details as of May 31, 2016 total
$83,800,773 with an average yield to maturity of 0.80%. The
total earnings year-to-date are $609,594.
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.
Due to the presence of cultural resources (artifacts) found at
several work sites, the project was delayed such that Pipeline
Inspection and Condition Analysis Corporation (PICA) will return
to inspect the lower 12,000 feet of force main and construction
of force main improvements in December 2016. Blow off
replacements, cathodic protection system rehabilitation, and
other improvements were publicly advertised for construction bid
in late May 2016 to prepare for the upcoming winter work window
scheduled for October 1, 2016 through January 15, 2017. A third
amendment to PICA’s agreement was executed June 22, 2016 in the
amount of $18,000 related to work completed in January 2015. A
fourth amendment to PICA’s agreement will be negotiated pending
the outcome of the public bid opening and award of the separate
construction contract for blow off replacements. (R2116)
SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations: This project consists
of the relocation of existing pipelines in Sanyo Avenue and
utility easements and is currently in the construction phase.
4
The contractor, Coffman Specialties Inc., has completed
relocation of the 10-inch, 12-inch, and 18-inch mains and these
mains have been tied into the system. The construction contract
was accepted on June 3, 2016. A final reimbursement payment to
both Caltrans Utility Agreement Numbers 33592 and 33622 will be
processed after execution of second amendment to Caltrans Utility
Agreement Number 33622. The overall project is within budget and
on schedule. (P2453)
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. The overall project reached substantial completion on
December 3, 2015 (beyond the approved contract date). A credit
change order to complete the assessment of liquidated damages
associated with the project’s late delivery was processed
unilaterally, as approved by the Board in February 2016. Punch
list items that consisted of final administrative deliverables
were resolved and contract acceptance was processed and a Notice
of Completion 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 has
been notified that three (3) of the Stop Payment Notices have
been resolved. In accordance with applicable State law, the
District is withholding funds and retaining contract bonding
until the District is notified of resolution associated with the
remaining Stop Payment Notice. The project is within budget.
(P2531, P2532, P2535)
624 Pressure Zone Pressure Reducing Stations (PRSs) and 944-1R
Pressure Reducing Station No. 3 Improvements Projects: This
construction project consists of improvements from two (2)
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects, P2541 and R2110. The
CIP P2541 improvements will provide two (2) PRSs feeding the 485
Pressure Zone and 458 Pressure Zones from the 624 Pressure Zone
(Terra Nova Drive 624/485 PRS and Sequoia Street 624/458 PRS,
respectively) to improve fire flow and enhance system
reliability. The CIP R2110 improvements include retrofit of an
existing PRS vault (944-1R PRS No. 3) with a sump pump,
ventilation system, and hatch drain improvements to mitigate
water intrusion. Construction of the project facilities was
substantially completed in April 2016 and the facilities have
been placed into service. The project is within budget and the
contract was accepted by the District on May 26, 2016. (P2541,
R2110)
5
Rosarito Desalination: Consolidated Water Company (CWCO) has
emerged as the top-ranked of three (3) bidders for the seawater
desalination plant at Playas de Rosarito, Mexico. Based on
evaluations of its technical and commercial proposal by the State
of Baja California, the consortium, which includes CWCO, its
Mexican subsidiary, NSC Agua, Degrémont and NuWater S.A.P.I.
received 99 out of a possible 100 total points. CWCO expects to
finalize a definitive public-private partnership agreement with
the State within the next 60 days. The first phase is expected
to be operational by the end of 2019. The second phase is to be
commissioned by 2024. At the end of the 37-year operating
period, the plant and pipeline will be handed over to the State.
For more information, see attached Water Desalination Report
dated June 20, 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 May 12,
2016, the draft EIR/EIS went out for the 45-day public review
period. All comments on the EIR/EIS were postmarked by June 23,
2016. (P2451)
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. Work consisting of
removal of the interior coating of the 711-2 Reservoir began in
June 2016. The project is within budget and on schedule to be
completed in September 2016. (P2529 & P2530)
Operations Yard Property Acquisition Improvements:
This project consists of the construction of an approximate
27,700 square-foot asphalt concrete parking lot, including storm
drainage facilities, chain-link fence, and area lighting. This
project reached substantial completion in June 2016. It is
anticipated that contract acceptance will occur in early July
2016. The project is within budget. (P2537)
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. Removal and replacement of the interior floor coating
6
was completed in June 2016. Work to remove and replace the
exterior coating also began in June 2016. The project is within
budget and on schedule to be completed in August 2016. (P2545)
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. Work to
replace the sewer located within easements at the Singing Hills
Mobile Estates (north of Hillsdale Road) was completed in June
2016. Sewer replacement work located within and adjacent to
Julianna Street will begin in June 2016. The project is within
budget and construction is anticipated to be completed in
September 2016. (S2033)
Water Facilities Master Plan Update: This project will update
the District’s existing Water Resources Master Plan that was
previously updated in October 2008 and revised in May 2013.
Staff received and is currently reviewing the consultant’s
(Atkins) 90% draft submittal and coordinating the draft CIP list
with developer project lists and associated District CIP upsize
projects. Atkins delivered the first administrative draft
Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) on May 4, 2016. The
final PEIR should be ready for Board consideration before the end
of the year. (P1210)
As-Needed Electrical Engineering Design Services Consultant
Selection: As-needed consultants are used to support the
District’s CIP in a timely and efficient manner. The current
Electrical Engineering Consultant has completed 85% of their
current contract. Six (6) qualified consultants responded to the
advertisement for Electrical Engineering Consultant and were sent
the Request for Proposal (RFP) on May 18, 2016. On June 9, 2016,
four consultants provided proposals. The proposals were reviewed
per Policy 21, and BSE Engineering received the highest score.
Staff checked BSE Engineering’s references and performed an
internet search on the company. The references were found to be
excellent, and the internet search did not find any outstanding
issues. The term of the selected Consultant will be from FY
2017-2019 for an amount not to exceed $125,000. This item is
scheduled to be presented to the July 2016 Committee/ August 2016
Board.
Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) Indirect
Potable Reuse/Direct Potable Reuse (IPR/DPR) with Sweetwater
Authority: Staff from both the District and Sweetwater Authority
(SWA) continue to meet to discuss the major issues associated
with an IPR/DPR project. Staff has retained Atkins Global and
Michael Welch to prepare a high level report identifying the
7
needed upgrades to the RWCWRF, the regulatory issues of an
IPR/DPR project, and to produce a rough planning level cost per
acre-foot for the product water delivered to SWA’s Reservoir. A
second draft report was reviewed by staff from both agencies and
the comments forwarded to Atkins on June 22, 2016. It is
anticipated that a final report will be completed by the
beginning of July 2016.
Recycled Water Fire Hydrant Installations: This project consists
of installing fire hydrants/filling stations on the recycled
water system for fire suppression. The project includes meeting
Title 22 requirements, obtaining regulatory approval,
establishing protocol, and site selection. On April 13, 2016, a
fill station was constructed at the end of Hunte Parkway. The
facility is a locked enclosure within a District easement with
easy access to fire department trucks and street sweepers. Staff
submitted the project to be enrolled in Order WQ 2014-0090-DWQ,
General Waste Discharge Requirements for Recycled Water Use
(General Order). On April 13, 2016, the District submitted an
amendment to the existing permit to update the Rules and
Regulations for Recycled Water Use and submitted a program for
training for review and approval by the Regional Board, DDW, and
the County DEH. The final step is to receive approval for the
Amendment and training program (Documents). To date, the
District has only received minor comments from DDW and the RWQCB.
Once all comments are received, the final Documents will be
submitted prior to the July 12, 2016 deadline. (R2122)
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Update: The plan identifies
potential potable water and recycled water supply sources
required to serve our customers at build-out conditions. On
March 2, 2016 the Board awarded a contract to Carollo Engineers,
Inc., to prepare the 2015 IRP Update. A workshop with staff was
held on October 6, 2015 to go over the impact conservation has
had on water demand projections and an informational update was
presented to the Board on March 2, 2016. New demand projections
based on the water demands for calendar year 2015 have been
incorporated into the plan and a final draft was presented to
staff for review and comment on June 24, 2016. The final plan
was completed June 30, 2016 and will be presented to the Board in
August 2016. (P1210)
Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) Facility
Master Plan: On February 29, 2016 the District issued a Task
Order to Atkins U.S., Inc. 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 Atkins will draw upon their expertise to identify
8
additional work that would improve the operation of the facility.
Improved instrumentation to improve automation is also being
studied. The final plan will be completed in September 2016 and
will be used for prioritizing future CIP projects. (R2119)
For the month of May 2016, the District sold 6 meters (34.5
EDUs), generating $327,326 in revenue. Projection for this
period was 14 meters (21 EDUs), with budgeted revenue of
$190,542. Total revenue for Fiscal Year 2016 is $3,958,458
against the annual budget of $2,286,500.
The following table summarizes Engineering's project purchases
and Change Orders issued during the period of May 21, 2016
through June 24, 2016 that were within staff signatory authority:
Date
Action
Amount
Contractor/
Consultant Project
6/9/16 P.O. $4,754.90
Layfield
Environmental
Systems
711-3 Reservoir and
870-1 (Upper)
Reservoir (P2561 and
P2563)
6/8/16 P.O. $1,315.29 Mayer
Reprographics
14-Inch Force Main
Rehabilitation (P2508
and R2116)
Water System Operations (reporting for April):
On May 25, the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) conducted an
inspection of District equipment. A combination of 18 gensets, pump
engines, and portable equipment were reviewed and no violations
were noted.
The first round of special lead and copper sampling was completed
and analyzed. All 40 homes that were sampled were below the Action
Levels for lead and copper. The Action Level for lead is 15 ppb and
the Action Level for copper is 1.3 ppm. There were non-detectable
levels of lead and the 90th percentile of samples analyzed were 0.26
ppm for copper. The water quality parameters that were taken at 6
sites in the distribution system all came back within normal
parameters. We will be officially informing the State Water
Resources Control Board of our findings and mailing the individual
results to the participating homes this week. All of these results
are consistent with previous lead and copper sampling requirements.
The next round of this special sampling will occur prior to
September 30.
On June 8, a break occurred on the 18-inch concrete cement pipe
(CCP) that runs from the Regulatory site and services the Rancho
9
San Diego Shopping Center and other services along Campo Rd. for a
total of 36 meters. Considering the number and location of services
affected, the main was repaired on the evening of Thursday, June 9,
going into the morning of Friday, June 10. Water trailers were
strategically placed during the shutdown for customers affected.
All water services were restored by noon on Friday, June 10.
State Conservation Mandate – On May 18th, the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) voted to revise the current emergency drought
mandate and allow suppliers to self-certify their supply
reliability based on a three-year drought outlook. On June
22nd, Otay submitted certification data to the SWRCB, which showed
the District has enough supply to meet demand for the next three
years, and therefore, will not be subject to state-mandated water-
use reductions through January 2017. However, Otay will still need
to report monthly potable water use to the state. Otay customers
used 23% less water in May 2016 as compared to May 2013. Overall,
since the mandate went into effect in June 2015, Otay customers
have conserved a total of 19%.
The May potable water purchases were 2,242.8 acre-feet which is
0.6% above the budget of 2,229.9 acre-feet. The cumulative
purchases through May were 22,959.8 acre-feet which is 8.6% below
the cumulative budget of 25,110.8 acre-feet.
10
The May recycled water purchases and production were 298.3 acre-
feet which is 3.6% below the budget of 309.5 acre-feet. The
cumulative production and purchases through May were 3,343.2 acre-
feet which is 3.8% below the cumulative budget of 3,475.7 acre-
feet.
11
Potable, Recycled, and Sewer (Reporting up to the month of May:
Total number of potable water meters is 49,527.
Recycled water consumption for the month of May is as follows:
o Total consumption was 355.69 acre-feet or 115,806,856 gallons
and the average daily consumption was 3,735,705 gallons per day.
o Total cumulative recycled water consumption since July 1, 2015
is 3125.5 acre-feet.
o Total number of recycled water meters is 710.
Wastewater flows for the month of May were as follows:
o Total basin flow, gallons per day: 1,568,323. This is an
increase of 2.04% from May 2015.
o Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro, gallons per
day: 518,587.
o Total Otay flow, gallons per day: 1,049,710.
o Flow Processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility,
gallons per day: 979,677.
o Flow to Metro from Otay Water District was 70,000 gallons per
day.
By the end of May there were 6,101 wastewater EDUs.
Attachment: Water Desalination Report dated June 20, 2016
WNTER DESATINATION REpOnT
The international weekly for desalination and advanced water treatment since 1965
Volume 52, Number 25
Mexico
DEVETOPER PICKED FOR MEGA-SWRO
A consortium led by Consolidated Water Company (CWCO)
has emerged as the top-ranked of three bidders for the 100
MGD (378,500 m3ld) Rosarito seawater desalination plant
at Playas de Rosarito, Baja California, Mexico. Based on
evaluations of its technical and commercial proposal,
the consortium-which includes CWCO, its Mexican
subsidiary NSC Agua, Degrémont and NuWater S.A.P.I.-
was awarded 99 out of a possible 100 total points.
The project will be constructed in two equal 50 MGD
phases. The prices were quoted in Mexican pesos (MXN),
and based on the public bid documents, úIrDR has calculated
the water tariff at MXNI 14.47lm3 ($0.82lm3; 53.10/kgal) for
the first phase, and MXN 13.591m3 (50.721m3; $2.73lkgal)
when both phases are operational.
According to CWCO CEO Rick McTaggart, the consortium
expects to finalize a definitive public-private partnership
agreement with the State within the next 60 days. The first
phase is expected to be operational by the end of2019. The
second phase is to be commissioned, and the drinking water
delivery pipeline extended, by 2024. At the end of the 37-
year operating period, the plant and pipeline will be handed
over to the State.
Nasdaq-listed CWCO and NSC Agua began developing
the project more than six years ago, and the estimated $40
million development costs include acquiring a20ha (49.5-
acre) site adjacent to Comisión Federal de Electricidad's
(CFE) Rosarito Power Station. The strategic location will
enable the desal plant to use some elements of the power
plant's seawater intake and outfall.
The team has weathered several changes during the past six
years, including last year's selection of Degrémont over its
original EPC/O&M partner, and having to adapt to the State
of Baja California's new Asociaciones Público Privadas
(APP), or public-private partnership, legislation.
"The legislation required us to submit a detailed project
proposal complying with the new requirements to the
APP Committee for review and authorization. After the
authorization was granted, the State was then required to
publicly tender the project. Despite our level of effort and
20 June 201 6
the development expenses we had already incurred, the
State could still have awarded the project to another party or
cancelled the tender process," explained McTaggart.
"This is by far the biggest development project that we have
undertaken and I'm very pleased to have had such strong
board support. We were fortunate to put together a formidable
internal team and partner with a very experienced technical
provider. It took perseverance to get this far and we are now
looking forward to building a truly world-class project to
serve this water-stressed region."
Editor's note.' For one CWCO board member, the Rosarito project
will surely provide a twinge of déjà vu. Wil Pergande, the CWCO
and NSC Agua board chairman, was an engineer with Wisconsin-
based Aqua-Chem in 1968 when it commissioned a 7.5 MGD
(28,387 m3/d) thermal desal plant in Rosarito. At the time, the
44-stage MSF installation was the world's largest seawater desal
plant.
Texas
SWRO MoRPHS INTo PoTABIE REUsE PRoJEcT
Padre Island is the world's longest barrier island. Stretching
115 miles (184km) from Corpus Christi in the north to the
Mexican border in the south, the island averages only 1.8
miles (3km) wide and is separated from the Texas coast by
the hypersaline Laguna Madre. The Laguna Madre Water
District (LMWD) provides water and wastewater services
for the city of South Padre Island and four other nearby
coastal communities.
Throughout its history the LMWD has depended on the
Rio Grande River as its sole water supply source. But along
with growth in development, a 1990s drought resulted in the
over-allocation of surface water supplies. The Rio Grande's
water was subject to allocations, and at times, its irrigation
supply was completely shut off.
In 1995, LMWD conducted a seawater desal pilot study
with assistance from the Texas Water Development Board
(TWDB). However, the study concluded that seawater desal
was not as cost-effective as continuing to rely on the Rio
Grande, and since 2004, the LMWD's supply has been
augmented by purchasing BWRO from Southmost Regional
Water Authority.
GM,
I
Tom Pankratz, Editor, P.O.8ox75064, Houston,Texas 77234-5064 USA
Telephone: +1-281-857-6571, www.desalination.com/wdr, email: tp@globalwaterintel.com
o 2016 Media Analytics. Published in cooperation with Global Water lntelligence.
WATER DESALINATION REPORT - 20 June 2016 Page 2
25 mi
Ëfi
<e {l
'll
Laguna Madre
WTP 2
lnitial Potable Reuse Plan
MF-RO
Cunent Discharge
Following a second SWRO pilot study that concluded in
2010, there was an attempt to finance a full-scale, I MGD
(3,785 m3ld) SWRO plant with a $15.66 million bond sale
in July 201 1 . However, before a site could be purchased and
permitted, the District decided to look into rehabilitating
and upgrading its existing wastewater treatment facilities to
produce high-quality reclaimed water.
According to Charles Ortiz, the District's engineer, the
LMWD is now moving ahead with a multi-phase potable
reuse project, and last week, the TWDB approved $5.8
million of flnancial assistance from the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund to finance the first phase of that project.
Ortiz told WDRThat the funding will be used to rehabilitate
the 42-year-old Port Isabel WWTP by replacing the existing
headworks and upgrading aeration basins and controls to
provide a better, more consistent effluent quality. The design
is currently 60 percent complete and the work itself, which
is expected to begin this November and take 12 months
to complete, will be followed by another 12 months of
sampling and characterization of the 1,500 mg/L (est) TDS
effluent. The construction of an advanced treatment MF/RO/
AOP facility is expected to be completedin2020.
Füonfida
Tnro or BWR0 PRoJECTS APPRovEn
After considering five water supply projects in central
Florida's Polk County, the Polk Regional Water Cooperative's
board of directors voted to seek funding on three water
supply projects. The projects have a total capital cost of
$620 million and will produce 47 MGD (177,895 m3ld).
Two of the projects would employ wellfields to supply water
by tapping a lower Floridan brackish aquifer and a third
would increase aquifer storage by damming sections of the
Peace Creek drainage canal to create up to five reservoirs.
The selected projects are
Project Capacity,
MGD (m3/d)
Preliminary
Capital Cost
Production cost
$/kgal ($/m3)Source
Peace Creek
lntegrated
5
(18,925)$1 20,885,1 1 5 $2.02 ($0 53)Surface
water
West Polk
County
15
(56,775)$169,031,000 $3.03 ($0 80)Aquifer
Southeast
Wellfield
30
(1 1 3,550)$329,853,000 $2.e7 ($0.7e)Aquifer
The project costs include the costs of transmission and
distribution mains, wellfields and concentrate disposal.
The project schedule calls for project technical
memorandumsto be completed in October2016, with project
implementation agreements in place by the end of the year
and final implementation agreements due on 30 April 2017.
Tee hmoIogy
FO pIpEns AGAIN CoNSIDER FERTIGATIoN
Fertigation is the process by which fertilizers are delivered
through the irrigation water, rather than being applied
independently, enabling a highly accurate nutrient supply to
plants. Small and frequent applications of exact amounts of
fertilizers increases nutrient uptake efflciency and minimizes
nutrient losses.
ln 1970, University of Arizona Professor John Kessler
first proposed a method of fertigation employing an
unpressurized osmotic process using RO-type membranes to
convert brackish water into fertilizer-rich irrigation water.
To explicitly distinguish the process from the pressurized
'reverse osmosis' process, he called the process 'forward
osmosis' and referred to its agricultural application as
'fertilizer-driven forward osmosis' (FDFO).
A year lateq Kessler and graduate student Chuck Moody
began to investigate the use of FDFO, and their work was
summarized in Moody's 1977 PhD dissertation. The work
showed that for the high water use of open-field agriculture
and the modest amount of fertilizer needed, FDFO could
produce only one percent of the needed irrigation water. It
wasn't until about 2007-which was concurrent with the
increase of interest in FO-that FDFO was again seriously
considered as a potential fertigation method.
Since then, it has become a popular research fopic. WDR
has reviewed numerous papers on the subject, looking
unsuccessfully for commercially viable fertigation
approaches. Two recent online joumal papers on the subject
caught WDR'r attention. "Fertilizer drawn forward osmosis
process: Pilot-scale desalination of mine impaired water
for fertigation" was published in the Joumal of Membrane
Proposed
ri¡l,l'í:
i ¡l:li.
WIP1 I t,i.;ì r¡: l
Port lsabel
WWTP
WATER DESALINATION REPORT - 20 June 2016 Page 3
Science and "Selection of suitable fertilizer draw solute
for a novel fertilizer-drawn forward osmosis-anaerobic
membrane bioreactor hybrid system" was published in
Bioresource Technology. Both articles were authored by
researchers from the University of Technology, Sydney
(UTS), Korea University and King Abdullah University of
Science and Technology (KAUST).
Municipal
Wastewater Hydroponic
Greenhouse
Fertilizer
Sludge for soil
amelioration
Fertilizer-drawn FO MBR (AnFDFOMBR)Process Flow Diagram
While the quality of the research was excellent, both articles
suffered from their absence of atechno-economic evaluation.
One could question how it is still possible to attract funding
for research ofan applied engineered system that has not yet
been proven economically viable after so many years?
According to the Smart Fertilizer Management website,
the TDS concentration of irrigation water after adding all
of the suggested nutrients for common, hydroponically-
grown crops is approximately 1,000 mg/L, with a very low,
practically negligible, osmotic pressure. For the FDFO
systems to be efficient, it would seem that the process would
have to produce a dilute draw solution that is much more
concentrated than 1,000 mg/L.
tItDR asked Professor Tzahi Cath from the Colorado School
of Mines if such an FDFO system could be efficient if the
process were to produce such a dilute draw solution. He
said, "I believe that the effiuent-diluted draw solution would
have to be much more concentrated, otherwise the water flux
from the wastewater into the dilute draw solution will be
practically zero, if not in the opposite direction [i.e., reverse
diffusionl.
"In my experience-and regardless of what is claimed-the
reverse nutrient flux from the draw solution into the impaired
water FDFO feed is a problem, and even if it may be low,
it will continue to represent a source of inefficiency and
consequently a cost burden on the farmer while overloading
nutrients into the anaerobic MBR," said Cath.
Separation Systems Technology's Bob Riley developed
the membranes for the original FDFO tests done at the
University of Arizona in the 1970s. Last week, Riley told
WDRthatbased on his previous work, FDFO fertigation was
not proven to be cost-effective then, and he has seen nothing
to indicate that things have changed significantly.
As a system's complexity grows, so should the advantage that
it offers, either in terms of cost, performance or reliability.
Unfortunatel¡ the reverse is usually true. In most cases,
each additional unit process added to an engineering system
results in another potential point of failure, which requires
increased redundancy to ensure reliability, and therefore,
additional cost.
In most cases, irrigation water must have a low production
cost, and the farmers who use it are usually not experienced
water treatment plant operators familiar with complex
treatment systems. For them, the best system is also usually
the simplest.
FDFO still seems to have a ways to go to prove itself as a
practical agricultural alternative.
Company News
MUSrC* ACCOMPANIMENT
Pall Corporation is showcasing its newly branded Aria
portfolio at this week's AWWA s Annual Conference &
Exposition in Chicago. According to Lisa Marchewka,
the vice president of global strategic marketing, its Aria
products have been categorized according to three distinct
customer needs: packaged plants, custom large plants and
mobile solutions.
Aria Portfolio Description Capacity
Fit Pre-engineering package
MF/UF systems
up to 3+ MGD
(11,355 m3/d)
Flex Flexible, customizable
systems
3 to >100 MGD
>378,500 m3/d)
Fast Rapidly deployable mobile
systems
up to 1 MGD
(3,785 m3/d)
Pall's harmonious new lineup
Continuing with a musical theme, Pall added a new line of
mobile RO systems to be known as ImprorM (intelligent
maximum performance leverse osmosis). The mobile trailers
are designed to produce 700 gpm (2,815 m3ld) of permeate
and will be used exclusively in the Americas.
Marchewkatold lltDRLhatthe Impro line utilizes Desalitech's
CCD (Closed Circuit Desalination) process, which operates
at BWRO recoveries of 80 to 95 percent.
Last week, Pall sold its fi rst combined Aria+Impro installation
to a Latin American customer for use in an industrial facility.
6qt(l).=O(ug0)ogiq
a.gco
Co
fıØ
=c)
=c
q)
.NÈ(l)lL
èo;oo=
oðc.oo
=Eoa
AnFDFOMBR
WATER DESALINATION REPORT - 20 June 2016 Page 4
California
DES¡I PTANT FACToRS IN COUNTY BOND RAIING
On 25 Ma¡ S&P Global Ratings (formerly Standard &
Poor's Ratings Service) upgraded the San Diego County
Water Authority's (SDCV/A) senior lien credit rating to
AAA, the highest offered by S&P. Less than two weeks later,
the move resulted in a lowering of the Authority's flnancing
costs, saving ratepayers $63.2 million on a $340 million
bond sale.
According to Bob Yamada, SDCWA's director of water
resources, the upgraded financial rating reflects the
Authority's ability to sustain a reliable water supply, provide
predictable rates and store water during five years ofdrought
conditions. In a statement, S&P specifically mentioned
the successful integration of the 50 MGD (189,250 m3ld)
Carlsbad Desalination Plant-SDCWA s newest water
supply-as a factor in its decision.
Meanwhile, the SDCWA and Poseidon Water were honored
for maximizing cost-effectiveness by "stretching taxpayer
dollars through cooperation between the public and private
sectors" by the San Diego County Taxpayers Association at
last week's Annual Golden Watchdog & Fleece Awards.
Southeast US
SEDA ANNoUNcES ANNUAI, AwARDS
At the Southeast Desalting Association's (SEDA) recent
Annual Spring Symposium in Bonita Springs, Florida, the
following award winners were announced:. Outstanding Membrane Plant, large plant: Cape Coral
North BWRO Plant, Cape Coral, Florida
. Outstanding Membrane Plant. smallplant: Pinewoods
Vy'ater Treatment Plant, Lee County, Florida
. Outstanding Membrane Plant Operator: Richard
"Todd" Ellison, chief operator, Palm Beach County
Water Utilities, West Palm Beach, Florida
. Vendor of the Year:Avista Technologies
. Educator of the Year: John Potts, Kimley-Horn &
Associates, Inc.
. Lifetime Achievement Award: Jim Harn, Ham R/O
Systems
. Distinguished Service Award: Jason Baile¡ Avista;
Rick Chamness, City of Boca Raton; Tony Fogel,
Town of Jupiter Utilities; Charlie McAllister, FEDCO
. Presidential Recognition Award: Jason Baile¡ Avista
IN nnrnr
Singapore's Hyflux announced that it has achieved financial
close for the non-recourse project financing of 200,000 m3ld
(52.8 MGD) SWRO plant Qurayyat Independent Water
Project (IWP) in the Sultanate of Oman. Financing of the
$185 million facility will include an innovative fixed-to-
floating rate term loan. Under the water purchase agreement,
the plant will supply water to Oman Power and Water
Procurement Company for a2Ù-year period. Construction of
the project began in lafe 2015 and the plant is scheduled to
start commercial operation inMay 2017 .
Brazil's upper house approved a legislative initiative to
assign BRL200 million (S60 million) from the federal
budget to develop desalination capacity in the country's dry
northeast. The initiative still requires approval by the lower
house.
Elsevier's journal Desalínation has announced that the
publication's Impact Factor-a metric that indicates the
frequency with which an average journal article has been
cited-has increased to 4.412. Professor Nidal Hilal is
editor-in-chief.
Minnesota-based Wigen Water Technologies has received
ISO 9001 certification for quality management systems.
The 1.5-year accreditation process required the company to
establish nearly 80 new policies and procedures.
Energy Recovery, Inc reports that it has been awarded a
$2.4 million contract to supply its pX energy recovery
technology for three SV/RO projects in North Africa. The
plants have a combined production capacity of 95,000 m3ld
(25 MGD), and all of the units are expected to ship before
the end of this year.
The Northwest Membrane Operator Association (NWMOA)
will hold a technology transferworkshop Iitled" Membrane s
Impact the Pacific Northwest: Water, l4/astewater and Reuse
Te chnol o gi e s and Applic ati ons" in Vancouver, Washington,
on 72-14 July. For more information, visit http://tin),url.
comlzesr732.
Oman's OPIVP has issued an RFP for financial
and commercial advisory services relating to the
tendering of a neq 325,000 m3/d (86 MGD) IWP
project. Offers must be submitted by 17 July 2016. The
additional capacity is expected to come online in 2021.
Rate for one year: f305 or US$550. Subscribe and renew online at: www.desalination.com/wdr Reproduction or electronic
distribution is forbidden. Subscribers may circulate their copy on their immediate premises. To email or create additional
copies for other offrce locations, contact Jake Gomme (jg@globalwaterintel.com) to arrange a site license.
s2,000,000
Sl,soo,ooo
s1,000,000
s500,000
-s500,000
-$1,000,000
-s1,500,000
-s2,000,000
$o
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
NET REVENUES AND EXPENSES
FOR ETEVEN MONTHS ENDED MAY 31,2016
YTD Budget Net
Revenues
YTD Actual Net
Revenues
YTD Variance in
Net Revenues
AUG SEP ocr NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR
The year-to-date actual net revenues through May were positive 5272,365, which is $2,777 below the year-to-date budgeted negat¡ve
net revenues of 5269,588.
JUL MAY JUNE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
FOR ELEVEN MONTHS ENDED MAY 3I,2016
Actual Budget
36,761,200
7,940,100
2,025,400
12,204,000
10,836,500
790,700
YTD
Variance
Exhibit A
Yar t/o
(10.2%)
(s.0%)
(s.s%)
0.7o/o
(0.7o/o)
(9.4o/o)
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 Water 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
Expansion Reserve
Betterment Reserve
Replacement Reserve
New Supply Fee
OPEB Trust
Sewer Replacement
Total Expenses
EXCESS REVENUES(EXPENSE)
2,g3g,lo0
60,700
1,040,200
l,6gl,1oo
3,g3o,4oo
144,400
(43,031)
14,1 I 1
320,027
154,840
33,847
(36,873)
$33,029,603 $
7,539,567
1,914,957
12,286,901
10,758,587
716,16l
$(3,731,s97)
(400,533)
(1 10,443)
82,901
(77,e13)
(74,539)
66,245,776 70,557,900 (4,312,124) (6.1%)
2,895,069
74,811
1,360,227
1,835,940
3,964,247
107,527
(1.5o/o)
23.2o/o
30.\Vo
9.2Yo
0.9%
(25.5o/o)
$ 76,383,598 $ 80,252,800 $ (3,869,202) (4.8%)
$26,480,179 $
1,835,555
1,769,705
1,632,648
791,710
4,298,001
803, l 66
1,454,983
28,905,600 $
1,578,250
1,770,200
1,632,300
792,000
4,298,100
739,200
1,648,900
2,425,421
(257,305)
495
(348)
290
99
(63,966)
193,917
8.4Yo
(16.3%)
0.0o/o
(0.0%)
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
(8.7%)
ll.ïYo
5.60/o39,065,948 47,364,550 2,298,602
2,494,931
18,032,122
2,698,15r
3,730,958
228,324
2,471,200
2,200,000
3,135,900
32,100
922,200
1,099,400
2,797,900
18,091,550
3,268,790
4,637,266
229,167
2,471,200
2,200,000
3, I 35,900
32,100
922,200
1,099,400
302,969
59,428
570,640
906,309
843
10.8o/o
0.3o/o
17.5o/o
19.5Vo
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0o/o
0.0%
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
$
$
76,171,233 $
272,365 $
80,250,023 $
2,777 $
4,l3g,7go
269,588
5.2%
Annual
Budget
s 41,344,900
9,1r6,000
2,3ll,3oo
13,292,300
11,946,600
888,600
78,899,700
3,206,300
66,200
1 ,l34,goo
1,873,600
3,gg7,goo
157,500
$ 89,236,000
s 32,332,100
1,705,800
l,g31,4oo
1,777,900
950,400
4,681,800
806,400
1,798,800
45,984,500
3,112,800
20,381,000
3,612,800
5,137,800
250,000
2,695,900
2,400,000
3,421,000
35,000
1,006,000
1,199,300
$
$
89,236,000
F:/MORPT/FS20l6-0516 612712016 12:25 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO RE VIE\ry
May 31,2016
INVESTMENT OVERVIEW & 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 confident 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 atthe Federal Reserve Board's subsequent regular meetings, the most recent of which was held on
June 15, 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 a,s,se.rJ realized and expected economic conditions relqtive 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
ìnflationfrom 2 percent, tlte Committee will carefully monitor actual and expected progress toward its inflation goal. The Committee
expects that economic conditions will evolve in a manner that will warrant 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 May 31,2016 was 0.80%, which was one basis point higher 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 0.5 52Yo for the
month of May 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 retums on investment are being considered at this time. The desired portfolio
mix is important in mitigating aîy 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: May 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
100%
$65 Million
100%
100%
30%
25%
30%
20%
r00%
100%
Otay Limit
100%
$65 Million
r00%
t00%
t5%
r0%
t0%
r0%
100%
s0%
Otay Actual
0
$4.93 Million
0
72.65%
.t0%
0
0
0
19.66%
t.72%
Target: Meet or Exceed 100% of LAIF
't.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
oc(¡,tr
u,o)
E
Êoc
J
oú,
Performance Measure FY-1 6
Return on lnvestment
Month
sLAlF lotay trDifference
Jan
FYI6
Feb
FYI6
Mar
FYI6
3rd
Qtr
FY16
Apr
FYI6
May
FYI6
Jan
FYI5
Feb
FYI5
Mar
FYI5
3rd
Qtr
FYI5
Apr
FYI5
May
FYI5
June
FYI5
4th
Qtr
FY I5
July
FYIó
Aug
FYI6
Sep
FYI6
lst
Qtr
FYI6
Oct
FYI6
Nov
FYI6
Dec
FYI6
2nd
Qtr
FYIó
¡LAIF 0.26 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.36 0.37 0.40 0.38 0.45 0.47 0.51 0.47 0.53 0.550.27 0.28 0.27 0.28
¡Otay 0.69 0.78 0.70 0.72 0.71 0.73 0.76 0.73 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 0.89
0.35 0.38 0.36 0.37 0.34 0.34trDifference0.43 0.51 0.42 0.45 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.44 0.43 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.40 0.42 0.39 0.40
Otay Water District
Investment Portfolio: o5l Br/ zol^6
1,520,460
1.81,/"
$60,932,988
72.650/0
21,417,952
25,54.
Total Cash and lnvestments: 583,871,400
tr Banks (Passbook/Checking/CD)lPools (LAIF & County)trAgencies & Corporate Notes
lnvestments Par
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
May 31, 2016
Market
Value
Book
Value
%oÍ
Portfol¡o Tefm
Days to
Matur¡ty
YTM
360 Equ¡v.
YTM
365 Equiv.Value
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Cert¡f¡cates of Deposit - Bank
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (lAlF)
San Diego County Pool
lnvestments
56,935,000.00
4,000,000.00
81,833.21
4,930,235.92
16,487,715.90
56,892,966.75
4,000,020.00
8l,833.21
4,931,325.80
16,456,000.00
56,934,672.22
3,998,316.19
81,833.21
4,930,235.92
16,487,715.90
69.07
4.85
0.10
5.98
20.00
746
192
600
1
1
935
759
731
1
1
1.061
0.610
0.030
o.544
0.617
0.919
1.076
0.618
0.030
o.552
0.626
82,434,785.03 82,362,145,76 82,432,773.44 100.00%684 526 0.931
Cash
PassbooUCheckino(not included in yield calculations)
Total Cash and lnvestments
1,438,626.76 1,438,626.76 1,438,626.76 0.365 o.371
83,873,411.79 83,800,772.52 83,871,400.20 526684 0.919 0.931
Total Earnings May 3l Month Ending Físcal Year To Date
Current Year 63,957.48 609,594.28
Average Daily Balance 84,928,613.25 82,458,940.40
Effective Rate of Return 0.89% 0.80%
6 - z-l -l¿
Report¡n g per¡od 05/01 /20 16-05131 12016
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15:44
Run Date: 06/'16/2016 - 15:44
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM1) 7.3.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
CUSIP lnvestmènt #lssuer
Average
Balance
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - lnvestments
May 31, 2016
Purchase
Date Par Value Market Value
StatedBookValue Rate
Page 1
YTM Days to Matur¡ty
360 Maturity Dates&P
31 34G5A47
31 33EELRg
3 I 33EEXC9
3136G23G0
3134G8NM7
3134G8\
^/i/53 t 34G7XJ5
3134G7875
3 1 33EEYE4
3 I 3048547
31 3047H73
3134G9AF4
31 30A5680
3134G6V264
3134G8X42
3133EGBGg
3136G2Lz.8
3135G0G64
3134G9G87
31 36G2R665
31 30A6UZ8
3 1 30A72G9
3't 34G8KL2
3136G22W0
3136G22W0
31 34G8Q44
3134GgA\^r/
3134G82M4
3130A7WK7
06t3012014
01t27t2015
0412012015
0811512014
03t29t2016
0412712016
0911812015
0912912015
0411612015
0512612016
03t29t2016
0412612016
0510412015
0612912015
0412712016
05t23t2016
09t28t2015
1013012015
05t02t2016
1111912015
1212812015
0112912016
0212612016
0212612016
0212612016
0312912016
0412612016
0412912016
0512412016
2,000,000.00
1.999.672.22
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
1,200,000.00
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
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1213012016
0112712017
0410612017
0811512017
0912912017
10t27t2017
12t18t2017
12t29t2017
0111612018
0212612018
0312912018
0412612018
05t04t2018
0612912018
07t27t2018
0812312018
09t2812018
1012912018
1110212018
1111912018
12t24t20't8
0112912019
0?/26t2019
0226t2019
022612019
0312912019
04t26t2019
0412912019
05t24t2019
Federal Agency Issues- Callable
2301
2317
2323
2304
2345
2349
2331
2332
2320
2355
2346
2350
2325
2326
2348
2354
2330
2336
2353
2334
2338
2339
2340
2342
2343
2344
2347
2351
2352
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Fârm Credit Bânk
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federâl Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loân Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Fannie Mae
Fannie Mae
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Fannie Mae
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Subtotal and Average
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
1,200,000.00
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
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,003,380.00
I,997,880.00
I,997,860.00
2,000,580.00
1,999,220.00
1,995,640.00
1,999,040.00
2,000,800.00
I,994,500.00
1,996,640.00
1,998,920.00
1,995,800.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,220.o0
1,994,200.00
1,994,420.00
2,000,840.00
1,996,060.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,860.00
2,003,580.00
2,002,260.00
2,000,900.00
1,030,051.50
2,705,',135.25
1,993,200.00
1,991,120.00
1,998,960.00
2,000,900.00
0.650
0.625
0.690
1.050
0.850
0.850
1.000
1.016
1.000
0.900
1.000
1.050
1.120
1.250
1.000
1.000
1.250
1.100
1.200
1.1 50
1.375
1.500
1.300
1.125
1.125
1.350
1.150
1.300
1.250
AA
AA
AA
AAA
AA
AA
AA
0.641
0.616
0.681
1.036
0.838
0.838
0.986
1.002
0.986
0.888
0.986
1.036
1.105
1.233
0.986
0.986
1.233
1.085
1.184
1.134
1.356
1.479
1.282
1.110
1.110
1.332
1.134
1.282
1.233
212
240
309
440
485
513
565
576
594
635
666
694
702
758
786
813
849
880
884
901
940
972
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,031
1,059
1,062
1,087
54,418,523.70 56,935,000.00 56,892,966.75 56,934,672,22 1.061 746
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
3135G0YE7
31 33EEC73
2286
2329
Federal National Mortage Assoc 0.625
0.550
0.558
AA 0.661
86 08/26/2016
299 0312712017
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0
04to1t2014
0612612015
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,700.00
1,999,320.00
2,O00,275.14
1,998,041.05
Run Dâle: 06/16/2016 - l5:47
Federâl Farm Credit Bank
Report Ver. 7.3.5
CUSIP lnvesûnent #lssuer
Avefage
Balance
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
May 31, 2016
Purchase
Dete Par Value Market Value
StatedBookvalue Rate
Page 2
YTM Days to MaturityS&P 360 Matur¡ty Date
Subtotal and Average 3,998,268.75 4,000,000.00 4,000,020.00 3,998,316.19 0.610 192
Certificates of Deposit - Bank
2050003183-7 2341 0112212016 81,833.21 81,833.21Californiâ Bank & Trust
Subtotal end Average 81,833.21 81,833.21 81,833.21 81,833.21
81,833.21 0.030 0.030 600 0112212018
0.030 600
LAIF
LAIF BABS 2O1O
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAIF)
9001
9012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STAÏE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Average
07to1t2015
4,930,235.92
0.00
4,931,325.80
0.00
4,930,235.92
0.00
0.552
0.267
0.544
0.263
7,227 ,010,11 4,930,235.92 4,93r,325.80 4,930,235,92 0.544
San Diego Gounty Pool
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7 16,487,715.90 16,456,000.00 16,487,715.90 0.626 0.617San Diego County
Subtotal and Average r6,487,715.90 16,487,715.90 16,456,000.00 16,487,715.90 0.617
Total and Averege 84,928,613.25 82,434,785.O3 82,362,145.76 82,432,773.44 0.919 526
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0Run Dâte: 06/16/20'16 - 15:47
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Cash
May 31 ,2016
Page 3
CUSIP lnvesfnent #lssuer
Average
Balence
Purchase
Date Par Value Market Value
StatedBookVafue Ratê
YTM Daysto
360 Matur¡tys&P
Union Bank
UNION MONEY
PETTY CASH
UNION OPERATING
PAYROLL
RESERVE-10 COPS
RESERVE-10 BABS
UBNA.2O1O BOND
UBNA-FLEX ACCT
9002
9003
9004
9005
901 0
901 1
901 3
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
Average Balance
0710112015
07t01t2015
07t01t2015
I 0,005.66
2,950.00
1,332,314.07
27,420.16
2,263.1',|
5,943.46
0.00
s7,730.30
10,005.66
2,950.00
1,332,314.O7
27,420.16
2,263.11
5,943.46
0.00
57,730.30
0.010
0.000
0.395
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.000
I 0,005.66
2,950.00
1,332,314.07
27,420.16
2,263.11
5,943.46
0.00
57,730.30
0.0't0
0.400
0.010
0.010
0.00
Total Cash and lnvestÍnents 84,928,613.25 83,873,411.79 83,800,772.52 83,871,400.20 0.919 526
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0Run Dãte: 06/16/2016 - 15:47
Month End
GASB 31 Compliance Detail
Sorted by Fund - Fund
May 1, 2016 - May 31, 2016
Adjustment in Value
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
lnvestment
Class Matur¡ty Beginning
lnvested Value
Purchase
of Principal
Addition
to Pr¡ncipal
Redemption
of Pr¡ncipal
Amort¡zation
Adjustment
Change in
Markèt Value
Ending
lnvested ValueDate
Fund: Treasury Fund
LAIF 9001
UNION MONEY 9OO2
PETTY CASH 9OO3
UNION OPERATING 9OO4
PAYROLL 9OO5
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7
RESERVE-IOCOPS 9O1O
RESERVE-IOBABS 901I
LAIF BABS 2O1O 9012
UBNA.2O1O BOND 9013
UBNA-FLEXACCT 9014
3135G0YE7 2286
3134G5A47 2301
3136G23G0 2304
3133EELR9 2317
3133EEYE4 2320
3133EEXC9 2323
3130A52G3 2324
3'130A5680 2325
3134G6V264 2326
3133EEC73 2329
3136G2L28 2330
3134G7XJ5 2331
3134G7875 2332
3136G2R665 2334
3134G76C0 2335
3135G0G64 2336
3130A6U28 2338
3't30A72G9 2339
3134G8KL2 2340
6,631 ,701.60
2,010,002.31
2,950.00
893,741.81
27 ,891.35
16,475,000.00
2,262.81
5,942.56
0.00
0.00
15,897.20
2.001,420.OO
2,004,680.00
2,001,280.00
1,998,580.00
1,997,080.00
1,998,860.00
2,000,060.00
1,200,012.00
2,000,000.00
1,997 ,842.51
2,000,000.00
2,000,120.00
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
4,931,325.80
I 0,005.66
2,950.00
1,332,314.07
27,420.16
16,456,000.00
2,263.11
5,943.46
0.00
0.00
57,730.30
2,000,700.00
2,003,380.00
2,000,580.00
I,997,880.00
1,994,500.00
1,997,860.00
0.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,998,041.05
2,000,000.00
1,999,040.00
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
99
oo
oo
oo
99
oo
99
99
oô
99
oô
99
oo
oo
99
99
ôo
99
ôo
99
99
99
99
99
oo
99
oô
99
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Amorlized
Amortized
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Amort¡zed
Amort¡zed
Amortized
Amortized
Amort¡zed
0812612016
12t30t2016
0811512017
0112712017
0111612018
0410612017
05t1112018
05t0412018
06t29t2018
03t27t2017
09t2812018
1211812017
12t29t2017
1111912018
1112312018
1012912018
12t2812018
01t2912019
0212612019
3,700,000.00
6,O29,225.66
0.00
1,188,650.61
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.90
0.00
0.00
50,000.00
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
5,400,000.00
8,029,222.31
0.00
750,078.35
471.19
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8,166.90
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
0.00
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
I 98.54
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-375.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-1 9,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-720.00
-1,300.00
-700.00
-700.00
-2,580.00
-l,000.00
-60.00
-12.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-1,080.00
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
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 06/1612O16 15:44
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
GD (PRF_GD) 7.1.1
ReportVer. 7.3.5
Run Þate: 06/16/2016 - 15:44
Month End
GASB 3l Compl¡ance Deta¡l
Sorted by Fund - Fund
Adjustment ¡n value
Page 2
Ending
lnvested ValueCUSIPlnvestment# Fund
lnvesÍnent
GIass Maturity
Date
Beginn¡ng
lnvested Value
Purchase
of Princ¡pal
Addition
to Princ¡pal
Redemption
of Principa¡
Amort¡zat¡on
Adjustment
Change in
Market Value
Fund: Treasury Fund
20500031 83-7
3136G22W0
3136G22W0
3 I 34G8Q44
3134G8NM7
31 3047H73
3134G94W
3134G8X42
3134G8WW5
3134G9AF4
3l34G8ZM4
313047WK7
3134G9G87
3133EGBG9
3't 3048547
Amortized
Amort¡zed
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Vâlue
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fa¡r Value
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
01t22t2018
0212612019
02t26t2019
03t29t2019
09t29t2017
0312912018
0412612019
0712712018
101?712017
0412612018
0412912019
0512412019
'1110212018
0812312018
o212612018
81,833.21
I,030,000.00
2,705,973.80
1,998,220.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,980.00
1,999,120.00
1,999,460.00
2,000,020.00
2,000,140.00
I,999,980.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-838.55
-5,020.00
0.00
-2,060.00
-8,000.00
-5,260.00
-4,380.00
-4,340.00
-1,020.00
900.00
0.00
-5,580.00
-3,360.00
81,833.21
1,030,000.00
2,705,135.25
1,993,200.00
2,000,000.00
1,998,920.00
1,991, f20.00
1,994,200.00
1,995,640.00
1,995,800.00
1,998,960.00
2,000,900.00
2,000,000.00
1,994,420.00
1,996,640.00
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
99
99
99
99
oô
oô
99
99
oo
oo
ôo
oo
oô
99
99
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
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
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
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Subtotal 83,081,051.16 8,000,000.00 10,967,877.47 18,187,938.75 198.54 -66,486.35 83,794,702.07
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15.44
Total 83,081,05f.16 8,000,000.00 10,967,877.47 18,187,938.75 r98.54 -66,486.35 83,794,702.07
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
GD (PRF_GD) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 06/16/2016 - 15:44
Month End
Activity Report
Sorted By lssuer
May l, 2016 - May 31, 2016
Par Value Par Value
CUSIP lnvestment #
Percent
lssuer of Portfolio
Beginning
Balancê
Current
Râte
Transaction
Date
Purchases or
Deposits
Redemptions or
VVithdrawals
Ending
Balance
lssuer: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Union Bank
UNION MONEY
UNION OPERATING
PAYROLL
RESERVE-10 COPS
RESERVE-10 BABS
UBNA-FLEX ACCT
9002
9004
9005
901 0
901 I
9014
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
0.010
0.400
6,029,225.66
1,188,650.61
0.00
0.30
0.90
50,000.00
8,029,222.31
750,078.35
471.19
0.00
0.00
8,166.90
0.010
0.010
Subtotal and Balance 2,9s8,688.04 7,267,877.47 8,787,938.75 1,438,626.76
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF 0.552 3,700,000.00 5,400,000.009OO1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Balance
lssuerSubtotal 7.593%
6,630,235.92
9,588,923.96
3,700,000.00 5,400,000.00 4,930,235.92
10,967 ,877.47 14,187,938.75 ô,368,862.68
lssuer: California Bank & Trust
CeÉificates of Deposit - Bank
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
81,833.21
0.098%81,833.21
81,833.21
0.00 0.00 81,833.21
lssuer: Fannie Mae
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
6,000,000.00
7.154%6,000,000.00
6,000,000.00
0.00 0.00 6,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Farm Gredit Bank
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15:44
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 06/16/2016 - 15:44
Month End
Actívity Report
May 1,2O16-May31,2016
Page 2
Par Value Par Value
CUSIP lnvestment #
Percentlssuer of Portfolio
Current
Rate
Transaction
Date
Purchases or Redemptions or
\i\äthdrawãls
Beginning
Balance Deposils
End¡ng
Balance
lssuer: Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
3133EGBG9 1.000 0512312016 2,000,000.00 0.002354 Federal Farm Credit Bank
Subtotal and Balance 6,000,000.00 2,000,000,00 0.00 8,000,000.00
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00
11.9230/"8,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 10,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
31 30452G3
313047WK7
31 3048547
2324
2352
zJ55
1.050
1.250
0.900
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
05n112016
05t2412016
05t26t2016
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
Subtotal and Balance
lssue¡Subtotal 13.353%
9,200,000.00 4,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 11,200,000.00
9,200,000.00 4,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 I 1,200,000.00
lssuer: Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
31 34G76C0
31 34G9G87
2335
2353
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
1.200
't.200
05t23t2016
0510212016
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
Subtotal and Balance
lssuerSubtotal 30.999%
26,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 26,000,000.00
26,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 26,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Subtotal and Balance 5,735,000.00 5,735,000.00
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Subtotal and Balance
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15:44
2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date:06/16/2016 - l5:44
Month End
Activity Report
May 1, 2016 - May 31, 20'16
Page 3
Par Value Pat Valrre
CUSIP lnvestment #
Percent
lssuer of Portfol¡o
Transaction
Date
Purchases or
Depos¡ts
Redemptions or
W¡thdrawals
Beginning
Belance
Current
Rate
End¡ng
Balence
lssuerSubtotal 9.222%7,735,000.00 0.00 0.00 7,735,000.00
lssuer: San Diego County
San Diego County Pool
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
16,487,715.90 16,¡t87,715.90
19.658%16,487,715.90 0.00 0.00 16,487,715.90
Total 100.000%83,093,473.07 18,967,877 .47 18,187,938.75 83,873,411.79
Data Updated: SET_ME8: O611612O16 15:44
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Ðate: 06/16/2016 - 15:44
Month End
Duration Report
Sorted by Investment Type - lnvestment Type
Through 0513112016
lnvestment
Class
Book
Value Value
Market
Value
Current
Rate
Par YTM Current360 Yield
Matur¡ty/ Modified
Call Date Durat¡onSecuritv lD lnvestment# Fund lssuer
3134G5447
3l 36G23G0
31 33EELRg
3133EEYE4
3133EEXC9
3't 30A5680
3134G6V264
3136G2t28
31 34G7XJ5
31 34G7875
31 36G2R665
31 35G0G64
3 I 30A6UZ8
3130472G9
31 34G8KL2
3136G22W0
3136G2ZWO
3l34G8Qrl4
3134G8NM7
313047H73
3t34GgA\^r/
3134G8X42
3134G8WW5
3l 34G9AF4
3134G8Z.114
313047WK7
3r34G9G87
3I33EGBG9
31 30485A7
2301
2304
23'17
2320
2323
2325
2326
2330
2331
2332
2334
2336
2338
2339
2340
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Amort
Amort
Fair
Amort
Amori
Amort
Amort
Amort
Amorl
Amort
Fa¡r
Fair
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fa¡r
Fair
Fa¡r
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fa¡r
Fair
0.641
1.036
0.616
0.986
0.681
'1.105
1.233
1.233
0.986
't.002
1.134
1.085
1.356
1.479
1.282
1.1 10
1.1 10
1.332
0.838
0.986
1.134
0.986
0.838
1.036
1.282
1.233
1.184
0.986
0.888
0.358
1.026
0.788
1.172
0.817
1.120
'1.245
1.232
1.031
0.991
1j32
1.183
1.304
't.457
1.283
1.123
1j23
1.473
0.880
1.030
1.306
't.137
1.007
1.162
1.318
1.235
1.200
't.127
0.998
99
99
99
99
99
oo
99
oo
99
99
99
99
99
oo
99
99
99
oo
99
99
oo
99
99
99
oo
99
99
99
99
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loân Mortgage
Fannie Mae
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Fann¡e Mâe
Fannie Mâe
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bânk
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal National Morlage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loân Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,999,672.22
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
I,200,000.00
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
2,000,000.00
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
1,200,000.00
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
2,000,000.00
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
2,003,380.00
2,000,580.00
1,997,880.00
1,994,500.00
1,997,860.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,220.00
2,000,840.00
I,999,040.00
2,000,800.00
2,000,860.00
1,996,060.00
2,003,580.00
2,OO2,260.00
2,000,900.00
1 ,030,051.50
2,705,135.25
I,993,200.00
1,999,220.00
I,998,920.00
1,991, 1 20.00
1,994,200.00
1,995,640.00
'1,995,800.00
1,998,960.00
2,000,900.00
2,000,000.00
1,994,420.00
I,996,640.00
.6500000
1.050000
.6250000
1.000000
.6900000
1.1 20000
1.250000
1.250000
1.000000
1.016125
1 .1 50000
I .1 00000
L375000
1.500000
1.300000
1.1 25000
1.1 25000
1.350000
.8500000
1.000000
1.150000
1.000000
.8500000
1.050000
1.300000
1.250000
1.200000
1.000000
.9000000
1213012016 0.577
08t15t2017 1.191
0112712017 0.650
0111612018 1.601
0410612017 0.842
0510412018 1.897
0612912018 2.033
0912812018 2.280
12t1812017 1.524
12t29t2017 1.554
1111912018 2.422
10129t2018 2.369
12t28t2018 2.508
0112912019 2.586
0212612019 2.671
02t26120'19 2.679
0212612019 2.679
o3t29t2019 2.757
0912912017 1.315
0312912018 1.803
0412612019 2.841
0712712018 2.123
10t27 t2017 1.392
0412612018 1.876
04t29t20'19 2.844
05t24t2019 2.916
1110?i2018 2.375
0a1231201a 2.195
0212612018 1.717
Portfolio OTAY
NLI AP
DU (PRF_DU) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15:44
Run Date: 06/16/2016 - 15:44 Page 1
Month End
Durat¡on Report
Sorted by Investment Type - lnvestment Type
Through 0513112016
lnvestment
Cless
Market
Value
Current
Rate
Current
Yield
Book
Value
Par Matur¡ty/ Modified
Call Date DurationSecurltv lD lnvestment# Fund lssuer Value 360
3135G0YE7 2286
3133EEC73 2329
2050003183-7 2341
LA|F s001
LAIF BABS 2010 9012
SD COUNTY 9OO7
oô
99
99
oo
99
99
Federal National Morlage Assoc
Federal Farm Credit Bank
California Bank & Trust
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
San Diego County
Fair
Amort
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
2.000,275.14
1 ,998,041.05
81,833.21
4,930,235.92
0.00
16,487,715.90
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
4,930,235.92
0.00
16,487,715.90
2,000,700.00
I,999,320.00
81,833.21
4,931,325.80
0.00
16,456,000.00
.6250000
.5500000
.0300000
.5520000
.2670000
.6260000
0.558
0.661
0.030
0.544
0.263
0.617
0.555
0.592
0.030
0.552
0.267
0.626
0812612016
0312712017
o1l2z201a
0.235
0_818
1-640 T
0.000
0.000
0.000
Report Total
t = Duration cån not be calculated on these investments due to ¡ncompletè Market price data.
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15:44
82,432,773.4 82,434,785.03 82,362,145.76 0.954 1.412 t
Portfolio OTAY
NLI AP
DU (PRF_DU) 7.1.1
Rôport Ver. 7.3.5
Run Dato: 06/16/2016 - 15:44 Page 2
Month End
lnterest Earnings
Sorted by Fund - Fund
May l, 2016 - May 31,2016
Yield on Beginning Book Value
Beginn¡ng
Book Value
Ending
Book Value
Adjusted lnterest Ealnings
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
Secur¡ty
Type
Ending
Par Value
Interest
Earned
Amort¡zation/
Accretion
Maturity CurrentAnnualizedDate Rate Y¡eld
Adjusted lnterest
Earnings
Fundr Treasury Fund
LAIF 9001
UNION MONEY 9OO2
UNION OPERATING 9OO4
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7
RESERVE.IO COPS 9O1O
RESERVE.IO BABS 9011
3135G0YE7 2286
3134G5447 2301
3136G23G0 2304
3133EELR9 2317
3133EEYE4 2320
3133EEXC9 2323
3130A52G3 2324
313045680 2325
3134G6V264 2326
3133EEC73 2329
3136G2L28 2330
3134G7XJ5 2331
3134G7875 2332
3136G2R665 2334
3134G76C0 233s
3135G0G64 2336
3130A6U28 2338
3130A72G9 2339
3'!34G8KL2 2340
2050003183-7 2341
3136G22W0 2342
3136G22W0 2343
3134G8044 2344
99
99
oo
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
ôô
oo
99
99
oo
99
ôô
99
oo
99
99
oô
ôô
99
99
99
99
LA1
PA1
PA1
LA3
PA1
PA1
FAC
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MCl
MCl
MC1
MC1
FAC
MC1
MCr
MC1
MC1
MC1
MCl
MCl
MCl
MC1
BCD
MC1
MCl
MC1
4,930,235.92
10,005.66
1,332,314.07
16,487,715.90
2,263.11
5,943.46
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
1,200,000.00
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
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
8 1,833.2'1
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
6,630,235.92
2,010,002.31
893,74't.81
16,487,715.90
2,262.81
5,942.56
2,000,372.25
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,999,630.56
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,597,842.51
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
81,833.21
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
0812612016
12t30t2016
0811512017
01t27t2017
o111612018
0410612017
o511112018
o5t04t2018
0612912018
03t27t2017
09128120'18
1211812017
12t29t2017
1111912018
1112312018
1012912018
12t28t2018
0112912019
02t26t2019
0112212018
o212612019
0212612019
0312912019
4,930,235.92
10,005.66
1,332,314.07
16,487,7't5.90
2,263.11
5,943.46
2,000,275.14
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,999,672.22
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,000.00
't ,998,041.05
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
81,833.21
I,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.602
0.003
0.921
0.626
0.010
0.010
0.556
0.638
1.030
0.638
0.981
0.677
1.065
1.099
1.226
0.657
1.226
0.981
ô ôo7
1,148
1.217
1.079
1.349
1.472
1.276
0.030
1.104
1.104
1.325
0.552
0.010
0.400
0.626
0.010
0.01 0
0.625
0.650
1.050
0.625
1.000
0.690
1.050
1.120
1.250
0.550
't.250
1.000
1.0'16
1.150
1.200
1.'100
1.375
1.500
1.300
0.030
1.125
1.125
1.350
3,388.1 I
5.05
699.06
8,766.04
0.02
0.05
1,041.66
1,083.34
1,750.00
1 ,O41.67
1,666.67
1,1 50.00
583.33
1,120.00
2,083.34
916.67
2,083.33
I,666.67
1,693.55
1,949.86
1,466.67
1,833.33
2,291.67
2,500.00
2,166.67
2.11
965.62
2,535.94
2,250.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-97.1'l
0.00
0.00
41.66
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
0.00
3,388.18
5.05
699.06
8,766.04
o.02
0.05
944.55
1,083.34
1,750.00
1,083.33
1,666.67
1,1 50.00
583.33
1,120.00
2,083.34
1,115.21
2,083.33
1,666.67
1,693.55
1,949.86
1,466.67
1,833.33
2,291.67
2,500.00
2,166.67
2.11
965.62
2,535.94
2,250.90
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 06h612O16 15:44
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
lE (PRF_lE) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Dâte: 06/16/2016 - 15:44
Month End
lnterest Earnings
May l, 2016 - May 31,2016
Beginning
Book Value
Page 2
Adjusted lnterest Earnings
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
Security
Type
Ending
Par Value
Ending
Book Value
Maturþ CurrentAnnualizedDate Rate Y¡eld
lnterest
Earned
Amort¡zation/ Adjusted lnterestAccret¡on Earnings
Fund: Treasury Fund
3134G8NM7
3130A7H73
3134G94W
3134G8X42
3134G8WW5
3134G94F4
3134G82M4
3130A7WK7
3134G9G87
3133EGBG9
313048547
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
oo
oo
99
MC1
MC1
MCI
MC1
MC1
MCl
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
0.850
1.000
1.150
1.000
0.850
1.050
1.300
1.250
1.200
1.000
0.900
0.834
0.981
1.128
0.981
0.834
1.030
1.276
1.109
1.176
0.901
0.760
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
2,000,000.00
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
0.00
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
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
09t29t2017
0312912018
0412612019
07t27t2018
1012712017
041261201e
04t29t2019
0512412019
1110212018
0812312018
0212612018
1,416.67
1,666.66
1,916.67
1,666.67
1,416.67
1,750.00
2,166.67
486.11
1,933.33
444.44
250.00
't,416.67
1,666.66
1,916.67
1,666.67
1,416.67
1,750.00
2,166.67
486.1 1
1,933.33
444.44
250.00
Subtotal 83,785,31 1.33 83,044,579.84 83,783,299.74 0.89f 63,814.39 143.09 63,957.¿t8
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 0611612016 15144
Total 83,785,31 1.33 83,044,579.84 83,783,299.74 0.89r 63,814.39 143.09 63,957.48
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
lE (PRF_lE) 7.2.0
Report Ver 7.3.5
Run Date: 06/'16/2016 - 15:44
Check #Check Total
144,186.25
3,924.00
17,990.00
16,750.00
UB Refund Cst #0000222682 39.60 39.60
CM201636 05/06/16 MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)600.00
2046095 06/15/16 17315 AMANDA MILLARD Ref002461797 06/13/16
CM201635 05/06/16 MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)1,920.00
CM201641 05/06/16 MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)1,320.00
CM201637 05/06/16 MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)2,850.00
CM201639 05/06/16 MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)2,700.00
MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)3,900.00
CM201640 05/06/16 MGMT/INSP (4/1/16-4/30/16)3,460.00
2045931 05/25/16 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM201638 05/06/16
CM201644 06/04/16 MGMT/INSP (5/1/16-5/31/16)1,220.00
CM201642 06/06/16 MGMT/INSP (3/1/16-5/31/16)340.00
CM201647 06/06/16 MGMT/INSP (5/1/16-5/31/16)3,150.00
CM201643 06/06/16 MGMT/INSP (3/1/16-5/31/16)1,230.00
CM201646 06/06/16 MGMT/INSP (5/1/16-5/31/16)3,450.00
CM201645 06/06/16 MGMT/INSP (5/1/16-5/31/16)3,150.00
47.21 47.21
2046139 06/22/16 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM201648 06/06/16 MGMT/INSP (5/1/16-5/31/16)5,450.00
UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES (5/1/16-5/31/16)7,804.00 7,804.00
2046094 06/15/16 17298 ALEX BUAN Ref002461780 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000004606
2046138 06/22/16 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 405312016 06/02/16
52.02
2045930 05/25/16 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 304302016 05/06/16 UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES (4/1/16-4/30/16)9,900.00 9,900.00
139.26 139.26
2045929 05/25/16 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9936179080 04/30/16 BREATHING AIR BOTTLES 52.02
BREATHING AIR BOTTLES 52.02 52.02
2046033 06/08/16 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9051391732 05/12/16 BREATHING AIR BOTTLES
131437765 05/11/16 AQUA AMMONIA 1,532.40
2046137 06/22/16 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9936893047 05/31/16
14,849.14 14,849.14
2046032 06/08/16 07732 AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC 131437766 05/11/16 AQUA AMMONIA 2,391.60
DISINFECTION SYSTEM 7,465.00 7,465.00
2046031 06/08/16 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1413 05/23/16 DEVELOPER PLAN REVIEW (4/2/16-5/13/16)
605312016 05/25/16 711-1 & 2 RESERVOIR (ENDING 5/31/1/6)23,132.50
2046030 06/08/16 12174 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC 40 05/10/16
49.84 49.84
2046136 06/22/16 13901 ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL SVCS INC 405312016 05/25/16 980-1 RESERVOIR (ENDING 5/31/16)121,053.75
SHAREPOINT SERVICES (5/5/16-5/31/16)1,250.00 1,250.00
2045996 06/01/16 17267 ADAM ANKERS Ref002460567 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000205697
2046029 06/08/16 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 6726 06/06/16
18,993.00
2046028 06/08/16 04070 ABACOR INC 19648 05/16/16 CP#18 TRUCK BED 9,982.00 9,982.00
Amount
2045928 05/25/16 15285 A & D FIRE SPRINKLERS INC SD1121 04/30/16 WAREHOUSE MIC INSTALLATION 18,993.00
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
Page 1 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
6,489.88
8,100.26
SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,033.78204614406/22/16 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI629674 06/02/16
BPI620193 04/28/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,410.76
BPI621985 05/05/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,230.54
SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,906.79
BPI622548 05/05/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,552.17
BPI623884 05/11/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 905.93
2045933 05/25/16 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI620372 04/28/16
2,660.68
BPI625849 05/19/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,920.42
BPI624341 05/12/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,002.85
UB Refund Cst #0000217551 21.63 21.63
2046039 06/08/16 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI626085 05/19/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE
2046102 06/15/16 17313 BRANDY ALVAREZ Ref002461795 06/13/16
3,135.00
2046101 06/15/16 16762 BHATE ENVIRONMENTAL 7400060916 06/09/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 1,448.83 1,448.83
71.69 71.69
2045999 06/01/16 15570 BEYOND IDEAS LLC OWD0417 05/09/16 WEBSITE CONSULTING 3,135.00
UB Refund Cst #0000197537 75.00 75.00
2045998 06/01/16 17273 BERNICE CARLETON Ref002460574 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223321
2046100 06/15/16 17303 BERNARD LEUTHE Ref002461785 06/13/16
95.00
2046143 06/22/16 06520 BENSKIN, RONALD 060816 06/16/16 SAFETY BOOTS 150.00 150.00
2,140.54 2,140.54
2046099 06/15/16 15932 BART JARVIS 2417061016 06/10/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 95.00
DESIGN SERVICES (2/1/16-4/3/16)1,810.00 1,810.00
2046038 06/08/16 00145 BARRETT ENGINEERED PUMPS 99617 05/19/16 SAMPLE PUMP
2046037 06/08/16 12810 ATKINS 1838029 05/17/16
180.00
2046142 06/22/16 07785 AT&T 000008149656 06/02/16 TELEPHONE SERVICES (5/2/16-6/1/16)5,899.59 5,899.59
31,201.89 31,201.89
2046098 06/15/16 11282 ASHTON, PATRICK 5455031616 06/13/16 BACKFLOW CERTIFICATE 180.00
LEGAL SERVICES (MAR 2016)24,892.05 24,892.05
2046036 06/08/16 17264 ARTIANO SHINOFF 214095 05/16/16 LEGAL SERVICES (APR 2016)
2045932 05/25/16 17264 ARTIANO SHINOFF 214034 05/12/16
16,548.89
2046097 06/15/16 17320 ARRIETA CONSTRUCTION, INC Ref002461802 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000224937 850.00 850.00
4,177.37 4,177.37
2046141 06/22/16 13171 ARCADIS US INC 0785778 05/16/16 AS-NEEDED DESIGN (ENDING 4/24/16)16,548.89
UB Refund Cst #0000224530 59.95 59.95
2046140 06/22/16 03492 AQUA-METRIC SALES COMPANY 0060928IN 06/01/16 INVENTORY
2046096 06/15/16 17319 APOLLO REALTY INVESTMENTS LLC Ref002461801 06/13/16
26.08
2046035 06/08/16 16743 ANGUS ASPHALT INC 5816220 05/31/16 ASPHALT REPAIRS 10,344.00 10,344.00
143.56 143.56
2045997 06/01/16 17265 ANDREW MCPHERRON Ref002460565 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000140045 26.08
2046034 06/08/16 06166 AMERICAN MESSAGING L1109570QF 06/01/16 PAGERS (MAY 2016)
Page 2 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
4,960.93
588.50
300.00
290.50
4,194.60
GARDEN TOUR (4/25/16)270.00 270.00204600306/01/16 02026 CHULA VISTA ELEM SCHOOL DIST AR045935 05/09/16
8.74
2046149 06/22/16 02026 CHULA VISTA ELEM SCHOOL DIST AR046109 06/01/16 GARDEN TOUR (5/24/16)270.00 270.00
2,046.00 2,046.00
2046002 06/01/16 17271 CESAR PEREGRINO Ref002460572 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000217748 8.74
UB Refund Cst #0000225013 2,046.00 2,046.00
2046001 06/01/16 17275 CCL CONTRACTING INC Ref002460576 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000225220
2046000 06/01/16 17274 CCL CONTRACTING INC Ref002460575 05/27/16
COLOCATION SERVICES (5/5/16-5/31/16)2,111.35
0223091097 05/01/16 COLOCATION SERVICES 2,083.25
2046044 06/08/16 17022 CASTLE ACCESS INC 0223091331 06/01/16
47.14
2046105 06/15/16 17309 CARRILLO PROPERTY INVS LLC Ref002461791 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000214633 105.97 105.97
17,458.30 17,458.30
2046104 06/15/16 17317 CARRILLO PROPERTY INVESTMENTS Ref002461799 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223775 47.14
UB Refund Cst #0000144005 83.86 83.86
2046148 06/22/16 15177 CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC 149284 05/27/16 870-2 PS (1/1/16-4/30/16)
2046103 06/15/16 17301 CAROL KROPP Ref002461783 06/13/16
REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES (6/1/16)255.50
8034 06/01/16 SCANNING SERVICES (5/31/16)35.00
8017 04/29/16 DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION & SCANNING 6.00
2046147 06/22/16 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 8035 06/02/16
REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES (4/28/16)255.50
8018 04/29/16 DESTRUCTION SERVICES (4/28/16)38.50
7976 01/29/16 SCANNING SERVICES (1/28/16)35.00
2045935 05/25/16 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 8019 04/29/16
8027 05/17/16 DESTRUCTION SERVICES (5/9/16-5/17/16)80.50
8026 05/17/16 SCANNING SERVICES (5/16/16)35.00
80.00 80.00
2046043 06/08/16 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 8029 05/20/16 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES (5/19/16)438.00
WETLANDS PERMIT 200.00 200.00
2046042 06/08/16 01243 CALIFORNIA-NEVADA SECTION 10406060616 06/06/16 CERTIFICATE RENEWAL
2046146 06/22/16 16995 CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER 062016 06/20/16
2,730.00
2045934 05/25/16 14112 BSE ENGINEERING INC 75400301 01/31/16 ELECTRICAL SERVICES (7/1/15-1/31/16)2,068.00 2,068.00
21,843.50 21,843.50
2046041 06/08/16 14112 BSE ENGINEERING INC 75400402 02/29/16 ELECTRICAL SERVICES (7/1/15-1/31/16)2,730.00
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (APR 2016)2,774.00 2,774.00
2046145 06/22/16 08156 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER 641602 06/14/16 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (SEP 2015-MAY 2016)
2046040 06/08/16 08156 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER 639285 05/20/16
BPI628694 05/26/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 867.20
BPI629823 06/02/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 720.89
SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,033.78
BPI627754 05/26/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,339.06
2046144 06/22/16 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI629674 06/02/16
Page 3 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
1,590.00
1,130.00
1,130.00
923.00
035163017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)446.00
040563017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)446.00
UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)2,253.00
089163017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)2,227.00
2003193E617440516 06/06/16 SHUT DOWN TEST (5/10/16)142.00
2046006 06/01/16 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 490863017 04/16/16
SHUT DOWN TEST (5/3/16)639.00
2003193E616460516 06/06/16 SHUT DOWN TEST (5/25/16)142.00
2046154 06/22/16 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 2003193E608290516 06/06/16
13,251.25
2046049 06/08/16 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWAROTAYMWD041605/16/16 EXCAVATION PERMITS (APR 2016)837.18 837.18
385.65 385.65
2045938 05/25/16 05622 CORRPRO COMPANIES INC 378988 04/30/16 COATING INSPECTION (4/1/16-4/30/16)13,251.25
NAOCL TANKS 12,611.70 12,611.70
2046048 06/08/16 12334 CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC DS1273580 05/31/16 TAPE STORAGE (MAY 2016)
2046047 06/08/16 02643 CORE-ROSION PRODUCTS C2016202 05/20/16
DATA SERVICES (APR 2016)605.00
81689957 04/30/16 DATA SERVICES (APR 2016)525.00
2046005 06/01/16 15049 CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS LLC 81689143 04/30/16
DATA SERVICES (MAY 2016)605.00
81692269 05/31/16 DATA SERVICES (MAY 2016)525.00
2046153 06/22/16 15049 CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS LLC 81691674 05/31/16
1,283.00
2046046 06/08/16 11056 CONCHAS, FREDERICK 06022016FC 06/06/16 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 564.84 564.84
23.49 23.49
2046152 06/22/16 15616 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 0002060116 06/01/16 INTERNET CIRCUITS (JUNE 2016)1,283.00
INTERNET CIRCUITS (MAY 2016)1,283.00 1,283.00
2046106 06/15/16 15616 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 0001060116 06/01/16 INTERNET CIRCUITS (MAY 2016)
2045937 05/25/16 15616 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 0002050116 05/01/16
84452 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/19/16)178.00
84453 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/28/16)178.00
84451 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/11/16)206.00
84449 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/4/16)178.00
340.00
84454 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/11/16)304.00
84450 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/11/16)206.00
LABORATORY ANALYSIS (APR 2016)999.00 999.00
2045936 05/25/16 04119 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC 84448 04/30/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (4/6/16)
2046004 06/01/16 00234 CITY TREASURER 1000167456 05/19/16
4,250.09
2046151 06/22/16 08895 CITY OF LA MESA 18556 06/21/16 FINGERPRINTING SERVICES 20.00 20.00
4,478.60 4,478.60
2046045 06/08/16 00446 CITY OF CHULA VISTA 051116 05/11/16 FULL COST RECOVERY - REIMBURSEMENT 4,250.09
2046150 06/22/16 15256 CIGNA GROUP INSURANCE / LINA 9267061016 06/22/16 AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (JUNE 2016)
Page 4 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
7,237.00
5,146.55
1,115.00
965.00
1,050.00
3,107.00
DI TANK EXCHANGES 270.24 270.24
L0262626 05/26/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (4/5/16)265.00
2045942 05/25/16 15396 EVOQUA WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 902621002 05/03/16
L0265882 05/25/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (5/3/16)265.00
L0253933 05/26/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (2/9/16)265.00
1,200.00
L0265737 05/24/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (5/10/16)800.00
L0267659 06/07/16 LEAD/COPPER ANALYSIS (5/18/16)312.00
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION 306.38 306.38
2046160 06/22/16 14320 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL INC L0266336 05/27/16 LEAD/COPPER ANALYSIS (5/18/16)
2045941 05/25/16 02259 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE 791691 04/26/16
LAB ANALYSIS (5/12/16-5/26/16)650.00
6060534 06/06/16 LAB ANALYSIS (5/20/16-5/25/16)400.00
2046159 06/22/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6051094 05/31/16
LAB ANALYSIS (4/15/16-4/28/16)485.00
6050548 05/09/16 LAB ANALYSIS (4/21/16-4/28/16)480.00
6050719 05/16/16 LAB ANALYSIS (4/29/16-5/5/16)445.00
2045940 05/25/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6050380 05/02/16
665.00
2046051 06/08/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6050931 05/23/16 LAB ANALYSIS (5/6/16-5/11/16)670.00
35.61 35.61
2045939 05/25/16 08023 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SPECIALISTS 0075561IN 04/30/16 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (APR 2016)665.00
UB Refund Cst #0000206433 96.01 96.01
2046109 06/15/16 17314 ELIZABETH RAMIREZ Ref002461796 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000221224
2046108 06/15/16 17304 DORIAN PRUITT Ref002461786 06/13/16
32.80
2046158 06/22/16 10338 DION AND SONS INC S83548 05/27/16 RED DYED DIESEL FUEL 5,014.18 5,014.18
4,960.59 4,960.59
2046007 06/01/16 17270 DAVID HAPPE Ref002460571 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000214737 32.80
BUSINESS MEETING 90.00 90.00
2046157 06/22/16 11797 D & H WATER SYSTEMS INC I20160433 06/01/16 MICRO2000 PARTS
06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000212241 13.61 13.61
2046156 06/22/16 00693 CSDA, SAN DIEGO CHAPTER 05192016 05/19/16
4,546.55
9601052916 05/29/16 INTERNET SERVICES (5/29/16-6/28/16)600.00
2046107 06/15/16 17305 CRAIG GIBSON Ref002461787
O & M CAPITAL REPLACEMENT (FY 2014-2015)389,669.00 389,669.00
2046050 06/08/16 02756 COX COMMUNICATIONS INC 6702052516 05/25/16 TELECOMM SVCS / METRO-E (5/24/16-6/23/16)
2046155 06/22/16 08479 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CA71962062016 06/10/16
278663017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)292.00
316963017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)292.00
029563017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)292.00
029663017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)292.00
029463017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)405.00
029763017 04/16/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (6/30/16-6/30/17)292.00
Page 5 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
4,996.38
116.64
784.56
3,050.07
5,241.62 5,241.62
2046166 06/22/16 00174 HACH COMPANY 9943293 05/24/16 HACH ANALYZERS 3,050.07
LANDSCAPING SERVICES (MAY 2016)8,909.50 8,909.50
2046010 06/01/16 12907 GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE INC 14232 05/02/16 MOWING SERVICES
02/01/16 SIGN POST 499.60 499.60
2046165 06/22/16 12907 GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE INC 14300 05/27/16
574.80
9115653025 05/16/16 INVENTORY 209.76
2046009 06/01/16 00101 GRAINGER INC 9013915278
GPS MODEMS 6,777.90 6,777.90
2046056 06/08/16 00101 GRAINGER INC 9114541759 05/17/16 INVENTORY
2045950 05/25/16 14948 GPS INSIGHT LLC 968834 05/01/16
1,979.10
2046112 06/15/16 17299 GLORIA LEGER Ref002461781 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000029730 75.00 75.00
4,200.00 4,200.00
2046055 06/08/16 10817 GEXPRO S113892569001 05/20/16 GE GLOBALCARE 1,979.10
GARDEN TOURS (APR 2016)3,500.00 3,500.00
2046164 06/22/16 13563 FRIENDS OF THE WATER 318 05/25/16 GARDEN TOURS (MAY 2016)
2045949 05/25/16 13563 FRIENDS OF THE WATER 310 04/30/16
100.00
2046008 06/01/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2461655 06/02/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100.00
1,313.84 1,313.84
2046111 06/15/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2461842 06/16/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00
VEHICLE WASHING (5/27/16)25.92 25.92
2045948 05/25/16 03703 FORCE FLOW 29551 05/09/16 ULTRASONIC SENSOR
2046163 06/22/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x777878 05/27/16
VEHICLE WASHING (5/20/16)64.80
x767737 05/13/16 VEHICLE WASHING (5/13/16)51.84
2046054 06/08/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x773034 05/20/16
135.00
2045947 05/25/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x756336 04/29/16 VEHICLE WASHING (4/29/16)220.32 220.32
1,994.55 1,994.55
2046162 06/22/16 02591 FITNESS TECH 10065 06/01/16 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE (JUNE 2016)135.00
COFFEE SERVICES 348.34 348.34
2045946 05/25/16 00035 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 3214562 05/09/16 LABORATORY SUPPLIES
2045945 05/25/16 16469 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 060615 05/19/16
99.00
2046053 06/08/16 16469 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 061710 06/03/16 COFFEE SERVICES 688.78 688.78
99.00 99.00
2046161 06/22/16 12187 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 9003400516 05/31/16 ONLINE DOCUMENTS (MONTHLY)99.00
INVENTORY 1,809.00 1,809.00
2045944 05/25/16 12187 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 9003400416 04/30/16 ONLINE DOCUMENTS (MONTHLY)
0552576 05/02/16 INVENTORY 206.06
2046052 06/08/16 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0552194 05/11/16
87.85 87.85
2045943 05/25/16 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0552185 05/04/16 INVENTORY 4,790.32
2046110 06/15/16 17302 FARZANEH BEARMAN Ref002461784 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000188331
Page 6 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
1,404.38
18,445.67
17,910.55
66.36
2046062 06/08/16 16996 JAUREGUI & CULVER INC 12174 05/13/16 FUEL MANAGMENT SYSTEM 2,800.00
712.50 712.50
2046113 06/15/16 17310 JAMES ECKIS Ref002461792 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000216068 66.36
EMAIL SERVICES (5/2/16-6/2/16)3,098.35 3,098.35
2046172 06/22/16 14737 IWATER INC 7439 06/01/16 GPS AND GEODATABASE SERVICES
2046061 06/08/16 13899 INTERMEDIA.NET INC 1606002773 06/01/16
226.00
2046171 06/22/16 02372 INTERIOR PLANT SERVICE INC 21172 05/20/16 PLANT SERVICES (MAY 2016)226.00 226.00
12,312.00 12,312.00
2045956 05/25/16 02372 INTERIOR PLANT SERVICE INC 19171 04/20/16 PLANT SERVICES (APR 2016)226.00
IMPLEMENTATION SERVICE 20,000.00 20,000.00
2046060 06/08/16 15368 INTEGRITY MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS 5845 05/19/16 SCRUBBER BLOWER
105465 05/03/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (APR 2016)2,062.31
2046170 06/22/16 13644 INNOVYZE INC 06062016 06/06/16
BILL PRINTING SERVICES (APR 2016)12,088.59
105289 04/29/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (APR 2016)3,759.65
2045955 05/25/16 08969 INFOSEND INC 105290 04/29/16
106624 06/02/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (MAY 2015)2,076.25
106822 05/31/16 PRINTING 1,867.53
BILL PRINTING SERVICES (MAY 2016)11,350.66
106440 05/31/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (MAY 2016)3,151.23
0114599 05/11/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (4/1/16-4/29/16)240.00
2046169 06/22/16 08969 INFOSEND INC 106441 05/31/16
6,596.99 6,596.99
2046059 06/08/16 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0114787 05/17/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (4/1/16-4/29/16)1,164.38
LAND SURVEYING (3/26/16-4/29/16)6,430.00 6,430.00
2046013 06/01/16 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0114796 05/01/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (4/1/16-4/29/16)
2045954 05/25/16 13349 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES 2016040002 05/05/16
375.00
2046012 06/01/16 06843 HI-TECH AIR CONDITIONING 37186 04/29/16 HVAC REPAIR 13,900.50 13,900.50
8,828.60 8,828.60
2046168 06/22/16 02096 HELIX WATER DISTRICT 06132016 06/16/16 ASCE WEBINAR 375.00
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (4/1/16-4/30/16)9,313.93 9,313.93
2046167 06/22/16 02008 HELIX ENVIRONMNTL PLANNING INC 19 06/06/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (5/1/16-5/31/16)
2045953 05/25/16 02008 HELIX ENVIRONMNTL PLANNING INC 18 05/05/16
10,355.08
2046011 06/01/16 17250 HEIDILYN MONSALUD Ref002460570 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000213212 89.34 89.34
262.15 262.15
2045952 05/25/16 10973 HDR ENGINEERING INC 22 04/15/16 CORROSION SERVICES (11/1/15-3/26/16)10,355.08
PREP & FILING OF DISCLOSURE ANNUAL RPTS 1,250.00 1,250.00
2045951 05/25/16 00201 HARRINGTON INDL PLASTICS LLC 004G5100 04/29/16 O-RINGS
2046058 06/08/16 03668 HARRELL & COMPANY ADVISORS LLC 051316 05/13/16
3,050.07
2046057 06/08/16 15370 HALAX2 INC 107 06/06/15 SOFTWARE PROGRAMMING 9,920.00 9,920.00
2046166 06/22/16 00174 HACH COMPANY 9943293 05/24/16 HACH ANALYZERS 3,050.07
Page 7 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
4,389.00
208,975.13
1,062.00
1,465.29
HOME WATER USE EVALUATION 125.00 125.00204606606/08/16 16613 MISSION RESOURCE CONSERVATION 365 06/01/16
3,500.00
2046018 06/01/16 17269 MICHAEL KUNG Ref002460569 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000208394 5.12 5.12
4,000.00 4,000.00
2045963 05/25/16 11876 MICHAEL D KEAGY REAL ESTATE 1125 04/27/16 APPRAISAL SERVICES (ENDING 4/26/16)3,500.00
PRESSURE TRANSDUCERS 3,008.52 3,008.52
2045962 05/25/16 17085 MENDEZ STRATEGY GROUP INC 716051 05/04/16 CONSULTANT SERVICES (APR 2016)
2045961 05/25/16 08403 MCR TECHNOLOGIES INC 35550 04/28/16
0011127IN 06/07/16 REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 80.00
0011069IN 06/03/16 REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 70.00
150.00 150.00
2046174 06/22/16 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 0010898IN 05/25/16 REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 1,315.29
INVENTORY 17,186.90 17,186.90
2046065 06/08/16 17294 MATHNASIUM OF RANCHO SD WEST 4314060616 06/06/16 CUSTOMER REFUND
2046064 06/08/16 05329 MASTER METER INC 151252 05/06/16
3,937.50
2046017 06/01/16 17272 MARY DUCHENE Ref002460573 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000217760 34.94 34.94
146.45 146.45
2046117 06/15/16 13749 LONDON GROUP REALTY ADVISORS 1207 06/01/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES 3,937.50
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 525.00 525.00
2045960 05/25/16 06263 LINTNER, JERRY 051616 05/23/16 SAFETY BOOTS
3963 05/26/16 GARDEN TOUR (05/09/16)236.00
2045959 05/25/16 15597 LEONARD H VILLARREAL 050716 05/07/16
3951 05/24/16 GARDEN TOUR (04/28/16)295.00
3960 05/26/16 GARDEN TOUR (05/02/16)236.00
1,721.35 1,721.35
2046016 06/01/16 02063 LA MESA - SPRING VALLEY 3950 05/24/16 GARDEN TOUR (04/27/16)295.00
ASPHALT PAVING SVCS (50% DEPOSIT)269,449.52 269,449.52
2046116 06/15/16 17321 KIRK PAVING INC Ref002461803 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000226176
6164 06/09/16 ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING 21,318.00
2045958 05/25/16 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 11437 05/19/16
600.00 600.00
2046173 06/22/16 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 6155 05/27/16 ASPHALT PAVING SVCS 187,657.13
UB Refund Cst #0000214562 557.71 557.71
2045957 05/25/16 11293 KENNY'S CLEAN SWEEP 050416 05/04/16 STREET SWEEPING SERVICE (5/4/16)
2046115 06/15/16 17308 JP GENERAL CONTRACTOR Ref002461790 06/13/16
39.83
2046015 06/01/16 17268 JOSUE CORDERO Ref002460568 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000207316 75.00 75.00
15.28 15.28
2046014 06/01/16 17266 JORGE NAVARRO Ref002460566 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000157855 39.83
CHEMICALS FOR TREATMENT PLANT 1,684.65 1,684.65
2046114 06/15/16 17311 JENNA STEPHENS Ref002461793 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000217199
12175 05/13/16 INTEGRITY TEST 1,589.00
2046063 06/08/16 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 688614 05/10/16
16996 JAUREGUI & CULVER INC 12174 FUEL MANAGMENT SYSTEM
Page 8 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
1,576.60
1,251.86
1,251.71
347.01
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (12/26/15-1/29/16)1,164.00 1,164.00
2046070 06/08/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 840349459001 05/18/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES
2046069 06/08/16 00761 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND 196586 05/10/16
700.00
2046176 06/22/16 00761 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND 198733 05/25/16 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (3/26/16-4/29/16)1,636.50 1,636.50
142.58 142.58
2046068 06/08/16 16505 NIGHTCLUBPOOL LLC 108 05/31/16 CONSULTING SERVICES 700.00
UB Refund Cst #0000214147 76.28 76.28
2045967 05/25/16 09713 NIEVES, RICARDO 05182016RN 05/19/16 SAFETY BOOTS
2046119 06/15/16 17307 NICOLAS ZAPIAIN Ref002461789 06/13/16
11,380.12
2045966 05/25/16 14856 NEXUS IS INC 433959 04/27/16 DATACENTER EQUIPMENT 3,927.86 3,927.86
9,880.12 9,880.12
2046019 06/01/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2461645 06/02/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 11,380.12
OPS YARD IMPROVEMENTS (ENDING 4/30/16)104,647.05 104,647.05
2046118 06/15/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2461832 06/16/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN
502594272 06/01/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 2.00
2045965 05/25/16 16956 MONTGOMERY CONST SVCS INC 404302016 05/02/16
502549651 05/24/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 105.06
502596857 05/31/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 105.06
502585829 05/30/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 121.62
502639810 06/06/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 117.99
UNIFORM SERVICES 401.99
502549652 05/24/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 397.99
502407791 05/03/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 12.00
2046175 06/22/16 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 502596858 05/31/16
502366385 04/26/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 105.06
502411498 05/03/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 105.06
502402689 05/02/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 121.62
502447109 05/09/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 110.14
UNIFORM SERVICES 401.49
502366386 04/26/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 396.49
502452843 05/10/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 4.00
2045964 05/25/16 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 502411499 05/03/16
502457255 05/10/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 105.06
502503892 05/17/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 105.06
502492900 05/16/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 121.62
502539551 05/23/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 121.62
399.49
502457256 05/10/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 398.99
502452833 05/10/16 UNIFORM SERVICES 320.76
HOME WATER USE EVALUATION 125.00 125.00
2046067 06/08/16 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 502503893 05/17/16 UNIFORM SERVICES
2046066 06/08/16 16613 MISSION RESOURCE CONSERVATION 365 06/01/16
Page 9 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
619.31
641.65
933.94
7,053.00
4,503.00
186,780.54
756.25 756.25
2045973 05/25/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2460422 05/19/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 186,780.54
JANITORIAL SERVICES (APR 2016)4,199.00 4,199.00
2046076 06/08/16 03613 PSOMAS 118145 05/18/16 DESIGN (ENDING 3/31/16)
05/01/16 JANITORIAL SERVICES (MAY 2016)4,199.00 4,199.00
2045972 05/25/16 13059 PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES 48858 04/01/16
2,549.00
15932 05/23/16 CABINET INSTALLATION 1,954.00
2046180 06/22/16 13059 PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES 49234
TRAVEL ADVANCEMENT (6/13/16-6/15/16)134.00 134.00
2046075 06/08/16 07346 PRIME ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC 15919 05/23/16 CONDUIT INSTALLATION
2046074 06/08/16 01715 PORRAS, PEDRO 061316061516 06/07/16
402.50
2046120 06/15/16 17318 PINTAR INVESTMENT COMPANY LP Ref002461800 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000224067 174.28 174.28
85.00 85.00
2046073 06/08/16 15081 PINOMAKI DESIGN 5252 05/16/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES 402.50
OUTSIDE SERVICES 340.00 340.00
2045971 05/25/16 15081 PINOMAKI DESIGN 5234 05/01/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES
2046179 06/22/16 15081 PINOMAKI DESIGN 5261 06/01/16
368.37
2046020 06/01/16 13122 PINNACLE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 36962 04/30/16 TAPE LIBRARY 14,106.76 14,106.76
54.10 54.10
2046072 06/08/16 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 060716 06/07/16 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 368.37
CPR/FIRST-AID/AED TRAINING (5/11/16 & 5/18/16)2,250.00 2,250.00
2045970 05/25/16 05497 PAYPAL INC 50382739 04/30/16 PHONE PAYMENT SVCS (APR 2016)
2046178 06/22/16 14183 PACIFIC SAFETY CENTER 72458 05/25/16
4,702.92
307748 05/17/16 INVENTORY 1,380.24
308010 05/11/16 INVENTORY 969.84
FUEL SYSTEM UPGRADE 56.55 56.55
2046071 06/08/16 01002 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY 308074 05/18/16 INVENTORY
842037451001 06/01/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 24.82
2045969 05/25/16 06856 ORPAK USA INC 47684 03/15/16
842037452001 06/01/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 151.19
841820823001 05/26/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.33
OFFICE SUPPLIES 471.93
842037209001 06/01/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 228.67
2046177 06/22/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 841542122001 05/26/16
836493139001 04/27/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 59.41
835634098001 04/21/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.23
OFFICE SUPPLIES 453.60
837048736001 05/03/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 71.41
2045968 05/25/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 837192351001 04/29/16
347.01
840349694001 05/18/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 162.33
839097797001 05/11/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 109.97
2046070 06/08/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 840349459001 05/18/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Page 10 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
141,579.77
4,345.50
1,387.81
2,057.07 2,057.07
2045980 05/25/16 02918 SOUTH BAY FOUNDRY INC 0161680IN 05/03/16 FRAME AND COVER W/LID 1,387.81
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (5/18/16)123.66 123.66
2045979 05/25/16 07783 SCRIPPS CENTER FOR EXECUTIVE 27185 04/30/16 EXECUTIVE PHYSICAL
2045978 05/25/16 07442 SCHULTZ, ALEXANDER 051816 05/18/16
UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)3,292.82
050316 05/03/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)1,052.68
2045977 05/25/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 051816 05/18/16
050316a 05/03/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)489.26
050416b 05/04/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)57.28
052616 05/26/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)3,469.47
052316 05/23/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)624.78
052516 05/25/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)48,068.03
051916 05/19/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)24,648.49
82,330.39
2046080 06/08/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 052516a 05/25/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)64,222.46
354.00 354.00
2046185 06/22/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 060516 06/05/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)82,330.39
MWD SCWS - HEWS 2,650.00 2,650.00
2046125 06/15/16 03231 SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY 183238 06/01/16 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
2045976 05/25/16 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000001404 04/27/16
600.00
2046079 06/08/16 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 201600399 06/02/16 ASSESSOR DATA (5/13/16)125.00 125.00
84.37 84.37
2046184 06/22/16 17322 RUE, JAMES 060716ROV 06/07/16 TRAINING 600.00
UB Refund Cst #0000217246 97.18 97.18
2046124 06/15/16 17306 ROYAL CLARK Ref002461788 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000213655
2046123 06/15/16 17312 ROSA BERNAL Ref002461794 06/13/16
440.00
2046122 06/15/16 04542 ROBAK, MARK 010116053116 06/02/16 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (1/1/16-5/31/16)38.67 38.67
3,355.42 3,355.42
2046183 06/22/16 00521 RICK POST WELD & WET TAPPING 11206 05/27/16 WELDING - INSPECTION (5/23/16)440.00
CAMPO ROAD SUPPORT (3/1/16-3/31/16)13,968.46 13,968.46
2046182 06/22/16 08972 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 0048907 05/31/16 CAMPO ROAD SUPPORT (4/1/16-4/30/16)
2045975 05/25/16 08972 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 0048456 05/02/16
1,042.20
2046078 06/08/16 00021 RCP BLOCK & BRICK INC 30822349 05/19/16 CONCRETE 1,802.51 1,802.51
62.39 62.39
2045974 05/25/16 00021 RCP BLOCK & BRICK INC 30801151 04/27/16 CONCRETE 1,042.20
BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 187,308.86 187,308.86
2046121 06/15/16 17316 RANDALL HARAGAN Ref002461798 06/13/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223553
2046181 06/22/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2461834 06/16/16
186,780.54
2046077 06/08/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2461647 06/02/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 186,780.53 186,780.53
2045973 05/25/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2460422 05/19/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 186,780.54
Page 11 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
15,750.00
96.74
CP ITEM #21 REPLACEMENT CLASS 4 TRUCK 116,002.00 116,002.00204608506/08/16 17293 TRANS WEST SAN DIEGO LLC TS0100 05/10/16
7,332.18
2046131 06/15/16 02736 TOYOTALIFT INC 111001574 06/10/16 FORKLIFT 26,182.44 26,182.44
3,564.00 3,564.00
2046024 06/01/16 15764 TOUGHRUGGEDLAPTOPS.COM 100009289 04/28/16 TOUGHPADS 7,332.18
SAFETY BOOTS 126.34 126.34
2045987 05/25/16 15398 TIMMONS GROUP INC 179337 04/12/16 CONSULTANT SERVICES (THRU 3/31/16)
2045986 05/25/16 14251 THORNTON, ZACHARY 052216 05/23/16
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (MAY 2016)70.74
050116053116a 06/06/16 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT (MAY 2016)26.00
2046130 06/15/16 14177 THOMPSON, MITCHELL 050116053116 05/31/16
89.69
2046084 06/08/16 13564 THE STAR-NEWS PUBLISHING CO 00042090 05/13/16 NOTICE 240.88 240.88
1,023.19 1,023.19
2045985 05/25/16 13564 THE STAR-NEWS PUBLISHING CO 00041818 05/06/16 NOTICE OF INTENT 89.69
BID 376.60 376.60
2046083 06/08/16 05421 THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO 84524 05/04/16 PAINT
2046189 06/22/16 16744 THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE 002716079 05/24/16
741.40
2045984 05/25/16 16744 THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE 002694509 05/05/16 PUBLIC NOTICE 519.60 519.60
122.50 122.50
2046082 06/08/16 16744 THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE 002702255 05/12/16 NOTICE 741.40
BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 184.61 184.61
2045983 05/25/16 17240 THE ALPINE SUN 00041821 05/05/16 NOTICE OF INTENT
06/16/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 184.61 184.61
2046023 06/01/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2461657 06/02/16
10,500.00
2654 06/02/16 SCADA UPGRADES 5,250.00
2046129 06/15/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2461844
UB Refund Cst #0000095329 33.99 33.99
2046188 06/22/16 02376 TECHKNOWSION INC 2653 05/27/16 SCADA UPGRADES
2046128 06/15/16 17300 SYLVIA MAYORQUIN Ref002461782 06/13/16
2,888.86
2046127 06/15/16 16610 SVPR COMMUNICATIONS 1104 04/01/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES 4,000.00 4,000.00
12,964.88 12,964.88
2046126 06/15/16 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 69771 05/20/16 RED DYED DIESEL FUEL 2,888.86
CERTIFICATION RENEWAL 80.00 80.00
2046187 06/22/16 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 424890 06/01/16 UNLEADED FUEL
2046186 06/22/16 05755 STATE WATER RESOURCES 27666061616 06/16/16
972.92
2045982 05/25/16 01460 STATE WATER RESOURCES LW1006184 04/04/16 WATER SYSTEM FEE (7/1/15-12/31/15)5,867.55 5,867.55
1,000.00 1,000.00
2046022 06/01/16 17276 SRM CONTRACTING & PAVING Ref002460577 05/27/16 UB Refund Cst #0000225255 972.92
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 800.00 800.00
2046021 06/01/16 03516 SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK 0001051916 05/19/16 PROPERTY DEDUCTIBLE
2046081 06/08/16 02963 SOUTH COUNTY ECONOMIC 1116-16 06/01/16
2045981 05/25/16 11618 SOUTH COAST COPY SYSTEMS 204768 05/06/16 COPIERS 13,351.00 13,351.00
Page 12 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
178.15
319.97
87,233.02
528.00
7,361.91
433.33
05/02/16 SECURITY AND ACCESS UPGRADE (4/22/16)962.22
340.00
472966 05/31/16 MONITORING SERVICES (5/27/16-6/30/16)93.33
2045992 05/25/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 468905
SECURITY & ACCESS UPGRADE (4/9/16-5/12/16)38,937.69 38,937.69
2046194 06/22/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 472970 05/31/16 SECURITY & ACCESS UPGRADE (5/20/16)
2046135 06/15/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 472306 05/13/16
CELLULAR & WIRELESS SVCS (4/22/16-5/21/16)5,703.78
9765799444 05/21/16 CELLULAR & WIRELESS SVCS (4/22/16-5/21/16)1,658.13
2046193 06/22/16 03329 VERIZON WIRELESS 9765799440 05/21/16
2,070.77
2046027 06/01/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2461653 06/02/16 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 2,270.77 2,270.77
14,853.21 14,853.21
2046134 06/15/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2461840 06/16/16 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 2,070.77
BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 14,928.56 14,928.56
2046133 06/15/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2461838 06/16/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN
05/12/16 FST POTABLE WATER ACTUATOR 2,335.96 2,335.96
2046026 06/01/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2461651 06/02/16
264.00
1253215 04/30/16 PATROLLING SERVICES (APR 2016)264.00
2046089 06/08/16 11606 USA BLUE BOOK 951526
POSTAGE FEE - PERMIT #700 7,377.30 7,377.30
2046088 06/08/16 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 1278961 05/31/16 PATROLLING SERVICES (MAY 2016)
2045991 05/25/16 08402 US POSTMASTER 051916 05/19/16
CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)87,233.02
1144082262 05/31/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/28/16-6/24/16)79.98
2046025 06/01/16 07674 US BANK CC20160523182 05/23/16
80.03
1144082267 05/31/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/27/16-6/23/16)79.98
1144082265 05/31/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/27/16-6/23/16)79.98
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/11/16-6/7/16)79.98 79.98
2046132 06/15/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144082271 05/31/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/27/16-6/23/16)
1144060788 05/25/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/20/16-6/16/16)79.98
2045990 05/25/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144013961 05/12/16
282.00
2046087 06/08/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144047809 05/23/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (5/19/16-6/15/16)98.17
327.00 327.00
2045989 05/25/16 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 420160492 05/01/16 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (MONTHLY)282.00
TRAVEL EXPENSES 1,863.92 1,863.92
2046192 06/22/16 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 520160493 06/01/16 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (MONTHLY)
2046191 06/22/16 03261 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045162866 06/07/16
48,332.67
2046086 06/08/16 15257 TRUESDALE, DENNIS 060616 06/06/16 TRAVEL ADVANCEMENT (6/12/16-6/17/16)673.71 673.71
4,275.00 4,275.00
2046190 06/22/16 17000 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 305312016 06/02/16 RSD SEWER REHAB PHASE 1 (THRU 5/31/16)48,332.67
CP ITEM #21 REPLACEMENT CLASS 4 TRUCK 116,002.00 116,002.00
2045988 05/25/16 17000 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 204302016 05/09/16 RSD SEWER REHABILITATION (ENDING 4/30/16)
2046085 06/08/16 17293 TRANS WEST SAN DIEGO LLC TS0100 05/10/16
Page 13 of 14
Check #Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 5/19/2016 - 6/22/2016
Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
2,743.74
16,087.05
575.00
STORAGE USAGE (MAY 2016)2,083.25 2,083.25
Amount Pd Total:3,099,862.42
Check Grand Total:3,099,862.42
2045995 05/25/16 15567 ZETTA INC INV00029578 05/01/16
21,581.66
MIQ/CR3 MODULE 699.60 699.60204609306/08/16 14857 YSI INCORPORATED 646082 05/23/16
115.00 115.00
2046196 06/22/16 17323 WILLA EDMONDS 062016 06/20/16 REMBURSEMENT 21,581.66
BEE REMOVAL 115.00 115.00
2046195 06/22/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 105476 05/28/16 BEE REMOVAL
2045994 05/25/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 104868 05/04/16
105347 05/23/16 BEE REMOVAL 115.00
104903 05/02/16 BEE REMOVAL 115.00
105170 05/14/16 BEE REMOVAL 115.00
105171 05/16/16 BEE REMOVAL 115.00
190.08 190.08
2046092 06/08/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 105043 05/11/16 BEE REMOVAL 115.00
HYDRAULIC MODELING (ENDING 4/30/16)922.50 922.50
2046091 06/08/16 03781 WATTON, MARK 050216052716 06/02/16 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (5/2/16-5/27/16)
2045993 05/25/16 15726 WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 1945 04/30/16
SECURITY & ACCESS UPGRADE (5/10/16-5/25/16)14,613.13
471983 05/15/16 MONITORING SERVICES (JUNE 2016)1,473.92
460640 03/02/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (2/26/16)68.00
2046090 06/08/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 472965 05/31/16
460643 03/02/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (2/8/16)100.40
460646 03/02/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (2/26/16)68.00
460645 03/02/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (2/24/16)228.90
460641 03/02/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (2/10/16)187.92
469158 05/06/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (4/20/16)394.65
460639 03/02/16 UTILITY MAINTENANCE CONDUIT (2/24/16)239.60
460644 03/02/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (2/24/16)494.05
Page 14 of 14