HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-05-11 Board Packet (Part 2)AGENDA ITEM 7a
STAFF REPORT
October 5,2011ITYPEMEETING:
i SUBMITTED BY:
Regular Board
~f,'ted JBobKennedYi",,>V~.
Senior Civil Engineer
MEETING DATE:
PROJECTI
SUBPROJECT:
D0834-
090094
DIV.
NO.
2
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst.GM):
Rod Posada ~
Chief,Engineering
Manny Magan~~
Assistant Genera~anager,Engineering and Operations
I SUBJECT:__A_p_p_r_o_-v-_a_l_o_f_w_a_t_e_r__s_u_P_P~l~y_~A~S~S_e_s_s_m_e_n_t__R_e_
p
_o._r_t__{_J_U_l_
y
__2_0_1_1_)__f_O_r__--'~_the Pio pico Energy Center Project
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District)Board of Directors
(Board)approves the Water Supply Assessment Report (WSA Report)
dated July 2011 for the Pio pico Energy Center (PPEC)Project,
as required by Senate Bill 610 (see Exhibit A for Project
location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board approval of the July 2011 WSA Report for the
PPEC Project,as required by Senate Bill 610 (SB 610).
ANALYSIS:
The California Energy Commission (CEC)lS conducting an
environmental review of the proposed PPEC Project.SB 610
requires the agency conducting the environmental review to
evaluate whether total water supplies will meet the projected
water demand for certain "projects"that are otherwise subject
to the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).SB 610 provides its own definition of "project"in
Water Code Section 10912.The CEC submitted a request for a WSA
to the District pursuant to SB 610.In response to such
request,SB 610 requires that,upon request of the agency
conducting the environmental review,a water purveyor,such as
the District,prepare the water supply assessment to be included
in the CEQA documentation.
The requirements of SB 610 are addressed by the WSA Report for
the PPEC Project.Prior to transmittal to the CEC,the WSA
Report must be approved by the District Board.Additional
information of the intent of SB 610 is provided in Exhibit Band
the PPEC Project WSA Report is attached as Exhibit C.
For the PPEC Project,the CEC is the responsible agency that
requested the SB 610 water supply assessment from the District,
as the water purveyor for the proposed pio pico Energy Center
Project.The request for the WSA Report,in compliance with SB
610 requirements,was made by the CEC because the PPEC Project
meets or exceeds one or both of the following SB 610 criteria:
• A proposed industrial,manufacturing or processing plant or
industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons,
occupying more than 40 acres of land,or having more than
650,000 square feet of area.
• 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 PPEC Project is designed to use recycled water as its
primary source of cooling and process water.The PPEC Project
will use recycled water,if available,during construction and
operational periods.Since recycled water is currently not
available at the Project site and the Otay Mesa area in general,
the PPEC Project will rely on and use currently available
potable water provided by the District.The PPEC Project's
interim potable water demands exceed the thresholds contained in
the legislation enacted by SB 610 criteria of 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 and
therefore requires preparation of a WSA report.
The District,as the proposed water purveyor for the PPEC
Project,does not have to comply with the requirements of Senate
Bill 221 (SB 221)because the Project is an industrial
development and SB 221 applies to residential subdivisions.
2
Pursuant to SB 610,the WSA Report incorporates by reference the
current Urban Water Management Plans and other water resources
planning documents of the District,the San Diego County Water
Authority (Water Authority),and the Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California (MWD).The District prepared the WSA
Report in consultation with Atkins North America,Inc.and the
Water Authority 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 and in single and multiple dry years to meet the
projected demand of the PPEC Project and other planned
development projects within the District.
The PPEC Project calculated that the interim potable demand for
the PPEC plant operation is expected to be approximately 369
acre feet per year (ac-ft/yr),due to higher plant efficiency
using potable water.Approximately 1.5 ac-ft/yr of potable
demand will serve the PPEC Project administration building and
will not convert to recycled water.The total interim potable
demand,including 1.2 ac-ft/yr of irrigation,of 372 ac-ft/yr is
306 ac-ft/yr higher than the potable demand estimate in the Otay
Water District's 2008 Water Resources Master Plan,updated
November 2010 (2010 WRMP Update).However,the projected
permanent potable PPEC Project demand of 1.5 ac-ft/yr is 64.5
ac-ft/yr less than the potable demands included in the 2010 WRMP
Update.
MWD's Integrated Resource Plan (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.MWD's 2010 update to
the IRP (2010 IRP Update)includes a water supply planning
buffer to mitigate the risk associated with implementation of
local and imported supply programs.The planning buffer
identifies an additional increment of water that could
potentially be developed if other supplies are not implemented
as planned.As part of the establishment of the planning
buffer,MWD periodically evaluates supply development to ensure
that the region is not under-or over-developing supplies.If
managed properly,the planning buffer,along with other
alternative supplies,will help ensure that the Southern
California region,including San Diego County,will have
adequate supplies to meet future demands.
3
The County Water Authority Act,Section 5,Subdivision 11,
states 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 intent of the SB 610 legislation is that the land use
agencies and the water agencies coordinate their efforts in
planning for new development and thus plan for sufficient water
supplies to meet the needs.
As per the requirements of SB 610,if the water supply
assessment finds that the supply is sufficient,then the
governing body of the water supplier (District)must approve the
water supply assessment and deliver it to the lead agency (CEC)
within 90 days.The CEC's letter dated July 19,2011 requested
the WSA for the PPEC Project.The deadline for the District to
provide a Board approved WSA to the CEC is October 17,2011.An
extension can be requested to provide 30 additional days,if
necessary.
Pursuant to SB 610,if the water supply assessment finds overall
supplies are insufficient,the water supplier shall provide to
the lead agency "its plans for acquiring additional water
supplies,setting forth measures that are being undertaken to
acquire and develop those water supplies,"and the water
supplier governing body must approve the assessment and deliver
it to the lead agency within 90 days.If the water supplier
does conclude that additional water supplies are required,the
water supplier should indicate the status or stage of
development of the actions identified in the plans it provides.
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.
Once either of the two actions listed above are accomplished,
the District's SB 610 water supply assessment responsibilities
are complete.
SB 610 provides that if the SB 610 water supply assessment is
not received by the lead agency from the water supplier within
the prescribed 90 day period,and any requested time extension,
the lead agency may seek legal relief,such as writ of mandamus.
The CEC's request letter dated July 19,2011 was received by the
District July 19,2011 so the 90 day deadline for the District
to provide the WSA Report to the CEC is October 17,2011.If a
30 day extension is requested,the new deadline will be
November 16,2011.
4
Water supply agencies throughout California continue to face
cllmatological,environmental,legal,and other challenges that
impact water source supply conditions,such as the court ruling
regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta issues.Challenges
such as these are always present.The regional water supply
agencies,the Water Authority,MWD,and the District
nevertheless fully intend to have sufficient,reliable supplies
to serve the PPEC Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The District has been reimbursed $8,000 for all costs associated
with the preparation of the PPEC Project WSA Report.The
reimbursement was accomplished via an $8,000 deposit the Project
proponents placed with the District on February 8,2011.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
The preparation and approval of the PPEC Project WSA Report
supports the District's Mission statement,liTo provide the best
quality of water and wastewater services to the customers of the
Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,and efficient
mannerU and the District's Strategic Goal,in planning for
infrastructure and supply to meet current and future potable
water demands.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Approval of a WSA Report for the PPEC Project in form and
content satisfactory to the Board of Directors would allow the
District to comply with the requirements of Senate Bill 610.
General Manager
P:\WORKING\WO D0834 ~Apex Power Pio Pico Plant\Staff Report\BD
10-05-11,Staff Report,pio pico Energy Center WSA (BK-RP).doc
BK/RP:j f
Attachments:Attachment A -Committee Actions
Exhibit A -
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Project Location Map
Explanation of the Intent of SB 610
Pio Pico Energy Center WSA Report
Presentation
5
D0834-090094
ATTACHMENT A
Approval of Water Supply Assessment Report (July 2011)for
the Pio Pico Energy Center Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering,Operations,and ifla ter Resources Cammit tee
reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on September 28,
2011 and the following comments were made:
•Staff is requesting that the Otay Water District (District)
Board of Directors (Board)approve the July 2011 Water
Supply Assessment Report for the Pio Pico Energy Center
(PPEC),as required by Senate Bill 610.
•Staff indicated that Board approval for the submittal of
the WSA Report to the California Energy Commission is
required.It was noted that the District has approved four
(4)water supply assessments since the first of the year.
o Staff discussed the background of Senate Bills 610 and 221,
and indicated that SB 221 does not apply to this industrial
development project.
•Staff stated that the PPEC ProJect is a 300-megawatt (MW)
natural gas-fired power generating facility located within
the County of San Diego's East Otay Mesa community planning
area at the southeast corner of Alta Road and Calzada de la
Fuente.uExhibit A"was provided to the Committee that
showed the location of the project site.
•Staff indicated that the PPEC LLC has negotiated a power
purchase agreement with SDG&E and is expected to operate
approximately 4,000 hours per year (46%).Construction is
expected to start February 2013 and plant start up in May
2014.
•The PPEC Project is designed to use recycled water for
cooling.Staff indicated that recycled water is currently
not available and therefore the PPEC Project will rely on
potable water for cooling which is estimated to require 369
acre-foot per year (AFY).
•The onsite domestic use and sprinkler use will bring the
total interim potable water demand for this project to 372
AFY,and once recycled water is available to the site,the
rPEC Project will use 379 AFY of recycled water and less
than 2 AFY of potable water for onsite domestic use.
$Staff indicated that the WSA Report s~ates the following:
"The regional and local water supply agencies acknowledge
the challenges of supply and fully intend to develop
sufficient reliable supplies to meet demands.Water
suppliers recognize additional water supplies are necessary
and portfolios need to be reassessed and redistributed with
intent to serve existing and future needs.'!
•Staff indicated that the status of the current water supply
situation is documented in the WSA Report with the intent
that the water agencies plan to develop sufficient water
supplies to meet demands.Staff believes that the Board has
met the intent of SB 610 statute in that Land use agencies
and water suppliers have demonstrated strong linkage.
•It was noted that the PPEC Project WSA Report includes (4)
four other Otay Water District Planned Local Water Supply
Projects:
o Rancho Del Rey Groundwater Well (500-600 AFY)
o Rosarito Ocean Desalination Project (24,000-50,000 AFY)
o Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well (300-400 AFY)
o Otay Mesa Recycled Water Supply Link ProJect (400-800 AFY)
• A slido was presented that showed the Projected Balance of
Supply and Demand based on data from the District's 2010
Urban Water Management Plan.Staff indicated that it
projects the District demand for single dry year and
multiple dry years and is based on meeting the SBX 7-7
conservation goal of a 10%per capita reduction by 2015.
•Staff indicated that water demand and supply forecasts are
included in the planning documents of Metropolitan,Water
Authority,and the Otay Water District.
•Staff stated that the PPEC Project SB 610 WSA demonstrates
and documents that sufficient water supplies are planned
for and are intended to be available over the next 20
years.
•Staff indicated that the District received a copy of a
letter that was sent to Roger Bailey at the City of San
Diego from the Otay Mesa Property Owners Association in
support of the District's discussion with the City to
secure the quanticy of recycled water needed to meec the
District's peak demand at a reasonable cost.Staff noted
they received a copy of a similar letter sent to Roger
Bailey by the California Energy and Commission (see
attached letters).
•In response to a question by the Committee,staff indicated
that the PPEC Project will be another "peaker"plant
similar to the Calpine Power Plant and that both plants are
close in proximity at approximately one sub-
station/business lot away.
*In response to a question by the Committee,staff stated
that the PPEC project is using the newest technology
available to maximize the number of cooling cycles from
each gallon of water.
•In response to the Committee's inquiry about the Project's
land use,staff referred the Committee to page 19 of the
WSA Report for detailed land use information.
•The Committee recommended for staff to specify that
annexation of the project site is not required because it
already is within the Otay Water District's and the CWA's
jurisdictional boundaries.
Following the discussion,the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board as an action
item.
OMPOA
Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
September 23,2011
Mr.Roger Bailey
Utilities Director
The City of San Diego
9192 Topaz Way,MS 904A
San Diego,CA 92123
Mr.Bailey:
l...,'..J
h)
On behalf of the Olay Mesa Property Owners Association (OMPOA),I am writing to request your
assistance with issues affecting the timely implementation of recycled water pipelines in Olay Mesa.
The OMPOA consists of 15 property owners who have an interest in overseeing the timely development
of Otay Mesa.Over the past two years,the OMPOA has received several briefings from the Otay Water
District (OWD)on the status of recycled water projects in Otay Mesa.At our Association meeting on
August 4,2011,we received an update from David Charles and Bob Kennedy on the status of the
projects in Otay Mesa.It came to our attention that there are two primary issues that are delaying the
implementation of the project at this time:capacity constraints at the South Bay Reclamation Plant and
recycled water rates.
Capacity:
We understand that the City is in a contractual agreement with OWD to supply recycled water from the
South Bay Reclamation Plant.As it stands now,OWD cannot obtain the recycled water from the City
that it needs in order to meet summer peak demand.In order to resolve this issue,we urge you to work
with OWD to facilitate the construction of a sewer diversion structure to the South Bay Reclamation
Plant along with 2.5 miles of recycled lines in Chula Vista to accommodate the additional capacity that
OWD's customers require.Building the sewer diversion structure will provide the underutilized San
Ysidro Water Treatment Facility with additional sewer flow that will allow the facility to meet the
recycled water need of OWD,and it will still leave the facility with remaining capacity.Additionally,
construction of the missing 2.5 miles of 24"recycled line in Chula Vista will connect existing recycled
lines in Otay Mesa to recycled water,which in-turn will provide an additional benefit for businesses in
Otay Mesa,thereby creating additional jobs and tax base.
We are aware that in response to a forthcoming California Energy Commission condition on the Pio Pico
Energy Center (PPEC)project,PPEC has agreed to contribute $0.25M toward the construction of this
diversion structure and another $1.25M for a recycled water pipeline to supply recycled water to the
power plantj£the City and OWD can reach an agreement within the next 12 months on the terms
3111 Camino del Rio North,Ste.100
San Diego,CA 92108
OMPOA
Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
(quantity,quality and price)of the recycled water,We request that you coordinate with PPEC to
determine the feasibility of accepting this contribution and completing construction of these facilities
within one year.
Recycled Water Rates:
It is our understanding that the City commissioned Raftelis Financial Consultants to conduct the
"Recycled Water Pricing Study",which will be completed in the Fall of 2011,to recommend a pricing
structure for recycled water.The findings in this study will serve as the basis in establishing the price of
recycled water,which OWD and other districts will charge their ratepayers,As property owners and
developers,it is imperative that the rate that is established be reasonable and feasible to promote the
use of recycled water,
As developers,our members have installed 16,5 miles of purple pipe on the Mesa,which has yet to
realize its value,as it has not been connected to a recycled water source.Since the Association as a
whole has been a strong advocate ofOWD providing recycled water to the Mesa,we would like to see
the above issues resolved in a timely manner and see the completion of the recycled water network,To
that end,we request that you convene a meeting with OWD and City leadership to determine an
appropriate solution to this issue,
Additionally,since the OMPOA is actively following this issue,we would appreciate an update from the
City on the status of its negotiations with OWD in this regard,
We appreciate your attention to this important issue,If you have questions,please don't hesitate to
contact me at (619)696-8350 or ,Rob,Hixson\alcbre,com,
Sincerely,
Rob Hixson
Chairman,Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
Cc:Councilmember David Alvarez
Mayor Jerry Sanders
Mark Watton,OWD
David Charles,OWD
Bob Kennedy,OWD
Supervisor Greg Cox
Michael De La Rosa
3111 Camino del Rio North,Ste,100
San Diego,CA 92108
STATE OF CALIFORNIA -NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY
---'--------~----------------------~~--------_.._..____=--
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION
1516 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO,CA 95814-5512
www.energy.ca.gov
July 25,2011
Mr.Roger Bailey,Utilities Director
City of San Diego
9192 Topaz Way,MS 904A
San Diego,CA 92123
Subject:Otay Water District's Procurement of Reclaimed Water
Dear Mr.Bailey,
EDMUND G.BROWN JR.,Governor
On behalf of the California Energy Commission staff,I'd like to express our support for
the Otay Water District's (OWD)effort to procure additional reclaimed water from the
City of San Diego under your October 20,2003 Agreement to supply reclaimed water
from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant.
As part of the Natural Resources Agency,the Energy Commission works diligently to
uphold state water policies that require the use of reclaimed water in industrial
applications,such as thermal power plants which are under our exclusive permitting
authority.We are currently conducting an environmental review of the proposed Pio
Pica Energy Center (PPEC)which is a 300-megawatt (MW)power plant that proposes
to use reclaimed water supplied through existing infrastructure owned and operated by
the OWD.Understanding whether or not there is a reliable supply of reclaimed water for
PPEC's operation is a significant consideration in our environmental review.
Additionally,the Energy Commission previously permitted the Otay Mesa Generating
Station (OMGS)which is a 400MW,natural gas-fired power plant adjacent to the PPEC
site.The OMGS was approved to use potable water under a Condition of Certification
that requires the water supply to be switched to reclaimed water when reclaimed water
becomes available.As such,we again support any efforts by the City of San Diego to
supply more reclaimed water to the OWD under your October 20,2003 agreement.
Please feel free to call me at 916-654-3933 with any questions.Thank you.
Sincerely,
TERRENCE O'BRIEN,Deputy Director
Siting,Transmission,and
Environmental Protection Division
cc:Mayor Jerry Sanders
Councilmember David Alvarez,Council District 8
Mr.Mark Walton,General Manager,Otay Water District
""..,..
'"
PROJECT "11_"
SITE VICINITY MAP
'0oOCIII
CALZADA DE LA FUENTE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
PROJECT
SITE
I PASEO f(
IDE LA FUENi=-~~~\
\v--
!\\-============-~=============O=TA=Y=M=E=S=A=RO=A=D=::::JrI \I
«
I-iD
Ix;';J-
l-n::o0-w0=
u..u..«I-~I-Z«--'0-
ot.)
0::
o
0::
n::w~0-
XIt«I'<t"r')IX)oCll-....-t
o~~z~PIO PICO ENERGY CENTER[E
./LOCATION MAP D-0834-090094O":L-...L ...I
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
Background Information
The Otay Water District (District)prepared the July 2011 Water Supply Assessment Report
(WSA Report)for the Pio Pico Energy Center Project (PPEC Project)development proposal
at the request of the California Energy Commission (CEC).The CEC's WSA request letter
dated July 19,2011 was received by the District on July 19,2011 so the 90 day deadline for
the District to provide the Board approved WSA Report to the CEC ends October 17,2011.
The Pio Pico Energy Center LLC,A California Limited Liability Company submitted an
Application for Certification to the CEC seeking permission to construct and operate the
PPEC power generation facility.
The PPEC 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 July 2011 WSA Report for the PPEC Project has been prepared by the District in
consultation with Atkins North America,Inc.,the Water Authority,and the CEC 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.SB 610 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,counties,and other
regulatory agencies.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.
The requirements of SB 610 are addressed in the July 2011 WSA Report for the PPEC
Project.
The PPEC is a 300-megawatt (MW)natural gas-fired simple-cycle generating facility.The
project is proposed to be located within the East Otay Mesa community planning area of the
County of San Diego.The Project site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of
Alta Road and Calzada de la Fuente.The generating facility will utilize three General Electric
(GE)LMS100 natural gas-fired combustion turbine generators (CTGs).The Project will
interconnect to an existing substation that serves two (2)existing 230-kilovolt (kV)
transmission lines.This substation is located approximately 1,700 feet from the PPEC
Project.
The PPEC Project proposes to have a maximum annual capacity factor of approximately 46
percent or a maximum of 4,000 hours per year.Pio Pico Energy Center LLC has negotiated
a power purchase agreement (PPA)with San Diego Gas &Electric (SDG&E)which is
designed to directly satisfy the San Diego County area demand for peaking and load-shaping
generation,near-and long-term.
The PPEC Project is designed to use recycled water as its primary source of cooling and
process water.The PPEC Project will use recycled water,if available,during the
construction and operational periods.Since recycled water is currently not available at the
Project site and in Otay Mesa,the PPEC Project will rely on currently available potable water
provided by the District.
The PPEC Project proposes to use recycled water service once available at the Project site.
The recycled water demand for the proposed PPEC Project includes 378 ac-ft/yr for plant
operation and 1.2 ac-ft/yr for irrigation,for a total of 379 ac-ft/yr.
The PPEC Project calculated that the interim potable demand for the PPEC plant operation is
expected to be approximately 369 acre feet per year (ac-ftlyr),due to higher plant efficiency
using potable water.Approximately 1.5 ac-ft/yr of potable demand will serve the PPEC
Project administration building and will not convert to recycled water.The total interim
potable demand,including 1.2 ac-ft/yr of irrigation,of 372 ac-ft/yr is 306 ac-ft/yr higher than
the potable demand estimate in the Otay Water District's 2008 Water Resources Master
Plan,updated November 2010 (2010 WRMP Update).However,the projected permanent
potable PPEC Project demand of 1.5 ac-ftlyr is 64.5 ac-ft/yr less than the potable demands
included in the 2010 WRMP Update.
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 2010 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.
The new uncertainties that are significantly affecting California's water resources include:
•The Federal Court ruling on previous operational limits on Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta to protect the Delta species.Water agencies are still trying to determine what
effect the ruling will have on state water project deliveries.Actual supply curtailments
for MWD are contingent upon fish distribution,behavioral patterns,weather,Delta flow
conditions,and how water supply reductions are divided between state and federal
projects.
•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's October 9,2007 IRP Implementation Report acknowledges that significant challenges
in some resource areas will likely require changes in strategies and implementation
approaches in order to reach long-term IRP water supply targets.Significant progress in
2
program implementation is being realized in most resource areas.However,a further
examination of the uncertainty of State Water Project supplies,among other uncertainties,
will be required to assess the ability of achieving the long-term IRP targets.
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.MWD
is actively engaged in these processes and in October 2010,approved the update of their
IRP.An approved implementation strategy update may not be forthcoming for a year or
more.
The State Water Project (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.
As calculated by MWD,the Water Authority's current preferential right is 17.47%of MWD's
supply,while the Water Authority accounted for approximately 21 %of MWD's total revenue.
So MWD could theoretically take a 3.5%cut out of 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
3
the PPEC Project,along with existing and other planned development projects within the
District's service area.
If the regional water suppliers determine additional water supplies will be required,or in this
case,that water supply portfolios need to be reassessed and redistributed with the intent to
serve the existing and future water needs throughout Southern California,the agencies must
indicate the status or stage of development of actions identified in the plans they provide.
MWD's 2010 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 PPEC Project
WSA Report does not in any way guarantee water supply to the PPEC Project.
Alternatively,if the WSA 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.
So the best the District can do right now is to state 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 PPEC Project WSA Report,the 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 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 PPEC Project.
Some recent actions regarding water supply assessments and verification reports by entities
within Southern California are as follows:
•The City approved water supply assessment reports for both the La Jolla Crossings
Project and the Quarry Falls Project in September 2007.
•Padre Dam Municipal Water District approved a water supply assessment report for
the City of Santee's Fanita Ranch development project in April 2006.In October 2007,
a follow-up letter was prepared stating the current uncertainties associated with the
regional water supply situation.However,the letter concludes that sufficient water
exists over the long run in reliance upon the assurances,plans,and projections of the
regional water suppliers (MWD and Water Authority).
•The Otay Water District unanimously approved in July 2007 the Eastern Urban Center
Water Supply and Assessment Report.The Board also approved the Judd Company
4
Otay Crossings Commerce Park WSA Report on December 5,2007 and the Otay
Ranch L.P.Otay Ranch Preserve and Resort Project Water Supply Assessment and
Verification Report on February 4,2009.
•The Otay Water District approved water supply assessment and verification reports for
the City of Chula Vista Village 8 West Sectional Plan Area and Village 9 Sectional Plan
Area.The District also approved the water supply assessment report for the San
Diego-Tijuana Cross Border Facility and the Rabago Technology Park.
Water supplies necessary to serve the demands of the proposed PPEC Project,along with
existing and other projected future users,as well as the actions necessary to develop these
supplies,have been identified in the water supply planning documents of the District,the
Water Authority,and MWD.
The WSA 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 PPEC Project.The WSA 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 PPEC Project and the existing and other
planned development projects within the District.
Accordingly,after approval of a WSA Report for the PPEC Project by the District's Board of
Directors,the WSA Report may be used to comply with the requirements of the legislation
enacted by Senate Bills 610 as follows:
Senate Bill (SB)610 Water Supply Assessment:The District's Board of Directors
approved WSA Report may be incorporated into the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) compliance process for the PPEC Project as a water supply assessment report
consistent with the requirements of the legislation enacted by SB 610.The CEC,as lead
agency under the CEQA for the PPEC Project environmental documentation,may cite the
approved WSA Report as evidence that a sufficient water supply is planned and intended
to be available to serve the PPEC Project.
5
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT REPORT
the
Pio Pico Energy Center
Prepared by:
Bob Kennedy,P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer
Otay Water District
In consultation with
Atkins North America,Inc.
And
San Diego County Water Authority
July 2011
Otav Water District
\Vater Supply Asse.\'Smenf Report
Pio Pieo Energy Center
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
July 2011
Pio Pico Energy Center
Table of Contents
25
.........24
...24
.22
...38
..39
6.2.1.3
6.2.2
6.2
6.3
Executive Summary I
Section I -Purpose......5
Section 2 -Findings 6
Section 3 -Project Description...........................................9
Section 4 -Otay Water DistricL 10
Section 5 -Historical and Projected Water Demands 13
5.1 Demand Management (Water Conservation).19
Section 6 -Existing and Projected Supplies......................................22
6.I Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 20 to
Regional Urban Water Management Plan ..
6.1.2 MWD Capital Investment Plan ..
San Diego County Water Authority Regional Water Supplies.....
6.2.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for
Acquiring Additional Supplies .
6.2.1.2 All-American Canal and Coachella Canal
Lining Projects " ,..".......31
Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Project .....35
Water Authority Capital Improvement
Program and Financial Information
Otay Water District ...
6.3.I Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for
Acquiring Additional Supplies....39
6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies ...40
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies.........43
Section 7 -Conclusion:Availability of Sufficient Supplies....51
Source DOClll11enls ,.,,..,56
Appendices
Appendix A:Pia Pico Energy Center Vicinity Map
Appendix B:Pio Pico Energy Center Development Plan
Appendix C:Pio Pico Energy Center Water Balance
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pia Pic'o Energy Center
Otay Water District
'Water Supply Assessment Report
July 2011
Pio Pico Energy Center
Executive Summary
The Otay Water District (OWD)prepared this Water Supply Assessment Report (WSA
Report)at the request of the California Energy Commission (CEC)for the Pio Pico Energy
Center (PPEC)Project.The Pio Pico Encrgy Center,LLC submitted an Application for
Certification (AFC)to the CEC seeking pcrmission to construct and operate a powcr
generation facility.
PPEe Overview and Water Use
The PPEC Project is located within the jurisdictions of the OWD,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 OWD,Water Authority,and MWD.
The PPEC is a 300-megawatt (MW)natural gas-fired simple-cycle generating facility.The
project is proposed to be located within the East Otay Mesa community planning arca of the
County of San Diego.The Project site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of
Alta Road and Calzada dc la Fuente.The generating facility willutilizc three General
Electric (GE)LMS 100 natural gas-fired combustion turbine generators (CTGs).The Project
will interconnect to an existing substation that serves two existing 230-kilovolt (kY)
transmission lines.This substation is located approximately 1,700 feet I'rom the PPEC
Project.
The PPEC Project proposcs to havc a maximum annual capacity factor of approximately 46
percent or a maximum of 4,000 hours per year.Pio Pico Energy Centcr LLC has negotiated a
powcr purchase agreement (PPA)with San Diego Gas &Electric (SDG&E)which is
designed to dircctly satisfy the San Diego County area demand for peaking and load-shaping
generation,near and long term.
The PPEC Project is designed to use recycled water as its primary source of cooling and
process water.The PPEC Project will use recycled water,if available,during the construction
and operational periods.Since recycled water is currently not available at the Project site and
Otay Water District
Water Supply AssesslIzcnt Report
Plo Pico Energ}'Center
in Otay Mesa,the PPEC Projeet will rely on currently available potable water provided by
OWD.
The PPEC Project proposes to use recycled water service once available at the Project site.
The recycled water demand for the proposed PPEC Project includes 378 ac-ft/yr for plant
operation and 1.2 ac-ft/yr for irrigation,for a total of 379 ac-ft/yr.
Thc PPEC Project calculated that the interim potable demand for the PPEC plant operation is
expected to be approximately 369 acre feet per year (ac-ft/yr),due to higher plant efficiency
using potable water.Approximately 1.5 ac-ft/yr of potable demand will serve the PPEC
Project administration building and will not convert to recycled water.The total interim
potablc demand,including 1.2 ac-ft/yr of irrigation,of 372 ae-ft/yr is 306 ae-ft/yr higher than
the potable demand estimate in the Otay Water District's 2008 Water Rcsources Master Plan,
updated November 2010 (2010 WRMP Update).Howevcr,the projccted permanent potable
PPEC Project demand 01'1.5 ac-ft/yr is 64.5 ac-ft/yr less than the potable demands included in
the 2010 WRMP Update.
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 I'orecasts 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 SANDl\G forecast approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of
their Urban Water Management Plans (UWMP).Prior to the next forecast updatc,local
jurisdictions with land use authority may require water supply assessment and/or verification
reports for proposed land developments that are not within the OWD,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 usc
plans,typically result in creating higher demand and supply requirements than previously
anticipated.The OWD,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.
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.'fhe purpose and importance of the UWMP has
evolved since it was first required 25 years ago.State agencies and the public frequently use
Otav Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
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 Bill 610,linking water
supply sufficiency to large land-use development approval.Agencies must also have a
UWMP prepared,pursuant to the Act,in order to be eligible for state funding and drought
assistance.
MWD's 2010 IRP long term water plan offers a strategy to protect the region from future
supply shortages,with an emphasis on water-use efficiency through conservation and local
supply development.The 2010 IRP includes a planning buffer supply intended to mitigate
against the risks associated with implementation of local and imported supply programs and
['or the risk that future demands could he higher than projected.The planning buffer identifies
an additional increment of water that could potentially bc developed when nceded or if other
supplies are not fully implemcnted as planned.As part of implementation of the planning
buffer,MWD periodically evaluates supply development,supply conditions,and projected
demands to ensure that the region is not under or over developing supplies.Managed
properly,the planning buffer will help ensure that the southern California region,including
San Diego County,will have adequate water supplies to meet long-term future demands.
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.Challenges such as these essentially always will he present.
The regional water supply agencies,the Water Authority and MWD,along with OWD
nevertheless fully intend to have sufficient,reliable supplies to scrve demands.
In Section ES-5 of their 2010 RUWMP,MWD states that MWD has supply capacities that
would be sufficient to meet expected demands from 2015 through 2035.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 projccts,and in-region storage that enables the region to meet its water supply
needs.MWD's 2010 RUWMP identifies potential reserve supplies in the supply capability
analysis (Tables 2-9,2-10,and 2-11),which could be available to meet the unanticipated
demands such as those related to the PPEC Project.
The County Water Authority Act,Section 5 subdivision II,statcs that the Water Authority
"as far as practicable,shall provide each of its member agencies with adequate supplies of
water to n1cet their expanding and increasing needs."
As part of preparation of a written water supply assessment report,an agcney's shortage
contingency analysis should be considered in detcrmining sufficiency of supply.Section II
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
3
Dray Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
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 aetions 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
suppl ies.
Otay Water District Water Supply Development Progl'am
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply,the PPEC,LLC will be required to
participate in the water supply development program being implemented by the OWD.This
is intended to be achieved through financial participation in several local and/or regional
water supply development projects envisioned by the OWD.Thesc 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.These new additional water
supply projects are not currently developed and are in various stages of the planning process.
Imported water supplies along with the OWD water supply development projects supplies are
planned to be developed and are intended to increase water supplies to serve the PPEC Project
water supply needs and that of other similar situated development projects.The OWD water
supply development program includes but is not limited to projects such as the Middle
Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project,the North District Recyeled Water Supply
Concept,the Rosarito Ocean Desalination Facility project,and the Rancho del Rey
Groundwater Well project.The Water Authority and MWD's next I'orecasts and supply
planning documents would capture any increase in water supplies resulting from any new
water resources developed by the OWD.
Findings
This WSA Report for the PPEC Project has been prepared by the OWD in consultation with
Atkins North America,Inc.,the Water Authority,and the California Energy Commission
(CEC)pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Calilornia Water Code
Sections 10631, 10656,10657, 10910, 10911,10912,and 10915 referred to as Senate Bill
(SB)610.SB 610 amended state law,effective January 1,2002,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.The CEC
requested that OWD prepare a water supply assessment as per the requirements of SS 610.
The requirements of SB 610 are being addressed by this WSA Report
4
Olay Waler Dislrict
Water SlfPPI.V AssesslI1ent Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
The PPEC Project development concept exceeds the thresholds contained in the legislation
enacted by SB 610 and therefore requires preparation of a WSA report.The PPEC Project is
considered as an industrial development and is not a residential subdivision project of more
than 500 units and hence it is not subject to the requirements of Senate Bill 221 for
preparation of a Water Supply Verification Report.
The WSA Report identifies and describes the processes by which water demand projections
for the proposed PPEC 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 scrve the demands
of the proposed PPEC 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 PPEC
Project WSA Report and will be included in the future water supply planning documents of
the Water Authority and MWD.
This WSA Report includes,among other inlclI"1nation,an identification of existing water
supply entitlements,water rights,water service contracts,water supply projects,or
agreements rclevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed PPEC Project.This
WSA Report demonstrates,and doeuments 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 PPEC Project and
the existing and other planned development projects to be served by the OWD.
Accordingly,after approval of a WSA Report for the PPEC Project by the Otay Water District
Board of Directors (Board),the WSA Report may be used to comply with the requirements 01'
the legislation enacted by Senate Bill6l0 as follows:
Senate Bill 610 Water Supply Assessment:The Otay Water District Board approved
PPEC Project WSA Report may be incorporated into the Cal iCornia Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)compliance process for the PPEC Project as a water supply
assessment report consistent with the requirements of the legislation enacted by S8
6l0.The CEC,as lead agency under CEQA for the PPEC Project ErR,may cite the
approved WSA Report as evidence that a sufficient water supply is planned for and is
intended to be made available to serve the PPEC Project.
Section 1 -Purpose
Pio PIco Energy Center,LLC submitted an Application for Certification (AFC)to the
California Energy Commission (CEC)seeking permission to construct and operate a power
generation facility,the PIo Pico Energy Center (PPEC)Project,adjacent to the existing Otay
Mesa Generating Project.The CEC requested that the Otay Water District (OWD)prepare a
5
Otuy Water District
Water Supply Assessmelll Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Water Supply Assessment (WSA)Report for the PPEC Project.The PPEC Project
description is provided in Section 3 of this WSA Report.
This WSA Report for the PPEC Project has been prepared by the OWD in consultation with
Atkins North America,Inc.,the San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority),and
the CEC pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and California Water Code
Sections 10631,10656, 10910,1091 I,10912,and 10915 referred to as Senate Bill (SB)610.
SB 610 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 ami
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,The
requirements of SB 610 are being addressed by this WSA Report.
The PPEC Project is designed to usc recycled water as its primary source of cooling and
process water.The PPEC Project will use recycled water,if available,during construction
and operational periods,Since recycled water is currently not available at the Project site and
the Olay Mesa area in general,the PPEC Project will rely on and use currently available
potable water provided OWD.The PPEC Project's interim potable water demands exceed the
thresholds contained in the legislation enacted by SB 610 and therefore requires preparation
of a WSA report.The PPEC Project is considered as an industrial development and is not a
residential subdivision project of more than 500 units and hence it is not subject to the
requirements of Senate Bill221 for preparation of a Water Supply Verification Report.
This WSA Report evaluates water supplies that arc 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 PPEC Project,and reasonably foreseeable
planned future water demands to be served by OWD.The Otay Water District Board of
Directors approved WSA Report is planned to be used by the CEC in its evaluation of the
PPEC Project uncler the CEQA approval process procedures.
Section 2 -Findings
Pio Pico Energy Center,LLC submitted an Application for Certification (AFC)to the
California Energy Commission (CEC)seeking permission to construct and operate a power
generation facility,the Pio Pico Energy Centcr (PPEC)Project,adjacent to the existing Otay
Mesa Generating Project.The OWD prepared this WSA Report at thc rcqucst of thc CEC for
the PPEC Project.
The PPEC Project is located within the jurisdictions of the OWD,the Water Authority,and
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD).To obtain permanent
6
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
imported water supply service,land areas are required to be within the jurisdictions of the
OWD,Watcr Authority,and MWD to utilize imported water supply.
The PPEC Project is designed to use recycled water as its primary source of cooling and
process water.The PPEC Project will use recycled water,if available,during the construction
and operational periods.Since recycled water is currently not available at tbe Project site and
in Otay Mesa,the PPEC Project will rely on and use currently available potable watcr
provided by OWD.
The PPEC Project proposes to usc recycled water service once available at the Project site.
The recycled water demand for the proposed PPEC Project includes 378 ac-ft/yr for plant
operation and 1.2 ac-ft/yr for irrigation,for a total of 379 ac-ft/yr.
The PPEC Project calculatcd that the interim potable demand for plant operation is expected
to be approximately 369 acre feet per year (ae-ft/yr),due to higher plant efficiency using
potable water.Approximately 1.5 ac-ft/yr of potable demand will serve the PPEC Project
administration building and will not convert to recycled water.The total interim potable
dcmand,including 1.2 ac-ft/yr 01'irrigation,of 372 ac-ft/yr is 306 ac-ft/yr higher than the
projected potable demand cstimatc for the PPEC Project site in the Otay Water District's 2008
Water Resources Master Plan,updated November 2010 (2010 WRMP Updatc).However,the
projected permanent potable PPEC Project demand is 1.5 ac-ft/yr.This is 64.5 ae-ft/yr less
than the projected potable demand included in the 20I0 WRMP Update for the PPEC Project
site.
In evaluating thc availability of sutTiciem water supply,the PPEC project proponents are
required to participate in the dcvclopment of alternative water supply project(s).This can be
achieved through payment of the New Watcr Supply Fcc adopted by thc Otay Water District
Board in May 20 IO.These water supply projects arc in addition to thosc identified as
sustainable supplics 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 new 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 Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project,the
OWD 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
OWD.
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 usc plans
are captured in the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)updatedl'oreeasts for
land use planning,demographics,and economic projections.SANDAG serves as the
7
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energ)-'Center
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,localjurisclictions may
require water supply assessment and/or verification reports for proposed land developments
that are not within the OWD,Water Authority,or MWD jurisdictions (i.e.pending or
proposed annexations)or that have revised land use plans with lower or higher land usc
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 OWD,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 any proposed development project,along with existing and
other projected future users,as well as the actions necessary to develop any required water
supplies.Through this process the necessary demand and supply information is thus assured
to be identified and incorporated within the watcr supply planning documents of the Water
Authority and MWD.
This WSA Rcport includes,among other information,an identification 01'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 PPEC Project.This
WSA Report incorporates by reference the current Urban Water Management Plans and other
water resources planning documcnts of the OWD.the Water Authority,and MWD.The
OWD prepared this WSA Report to assess and document that sullicient water supplies arc
planned for and are intended to be acquired to meet projected water demands of the PPEC
Project as well as existing and other reasonably I'oreseeable planned development projects
within the OWD for a 20-year planning horizon.in normal supply years and in single dry and
multiple dry years.
The Otay Water District 2010 UWMP included a water conservation component to comply
with Senate Bill 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX 7-7),which became effective
February 3,20 IO.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 usc 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 20IS.
OWD has adopted Method I to set its 20 IS interim and 2020 water usc targets.Method I
requires setting the 2020 water use target to 80 percent of baseline per capita water use target
8
Dray Woter District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
as provided in the State's Draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan.The OWD 2015 target is
171 gpcd and the 2020 gpcd target at 80 percent of baseline is 152 gpccl.
The OWD's recent per capita water use has been declining to the point where current water
use already meets the 2020 target for Method I.This recent decline in per capita water use is
largely due to drought water use restrictions,increased water costs,and economic conditions.
However,OWD's effective water use awareness campaign and enhanced conservation
mentality of its customcrs willlikcly 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-ycar projection
indicate projected potable and recycled water supply is being planned for and is intended to bc
acquired to meet the estimated water demand targets of the OWD (44,883 acre-feet (ac-ft)in
2015 to 56,614 ac-ft in 2035 per the Otay Water District 2010 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 6.4 pereent higher than the normal year demands.
The OWD recycled watcr 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
plannedl'or 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 PPEC
Project and the existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned development projects
within the OWD in both normal and single and rnultiple dry year forecasts for a 20-year
planning horizon.
Section 3 -Project Description
The PPEC Project is located at the southeast corner 01'the intersection of Alta Road and
Calzada de la Fuente.Refer to Appendix A for a vicinity map of the proposed PPEC Project.
The project is proposed to be located on 9.99 acres within the East Otay Mesa community
planning area 01'the County of San Diego (County).Altl10ugh the proposed development is
located within the municipal boundaries of the County and subject to the County's land use
jurisdiction,the OWD is the potable and recycled water purveyor.The PPEC Project is within
the jurisdictions of the OWD,the Water Authority,and Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California (lvIWD).
The PPEC is a 300-megawatt (MW)natural gas-fired simple-cycle generating facility.The
generating facility will utilize three General Electric (GE)LMS 100 natural gas-fired
combustion turbine generators (CTGs).The Project will interconnect to an existing substation
9
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assess/nellt Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
that serves two existing 230-kilovolt (kY)transmission lines.This substation is located
approximately 1,700 feet from the PPEC Project.
The PPEC Project proposes to have a maximum annual capacity factor of approximately 46
percent or a maximum of 4,000 hours per year.Pio Pico Energy Center,LLC has negotiated a
power purchase agreement (PPA)with San Diego Gas &Electric (SDG&E)which is
designed to directly satisfy the San Diego County area demand for peaking and load-shaping
generation,near and long-tcrn1.
The CEC is the lead agency for licensing thermal power plants 50 megawatts and larger under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)and has a certified regulatory program
under CEQA.Under its certified program,the Energy Commission is exempt from having to
prepare an environmental impact report.Its certified program,however,does require
environmental analysis of the project,including an analysis of alternatives and mitigation
measures to minimize any significant adverse effect the project may have on the environment.
The Otay Water District (OWD)prepared this Water Supply Assessment Report (WSA
Report)at the request of the CEC for the PPEC Project.
The County has discretionary authority on land use decisions for thc PPEC Project and can
establish actions and/or permit approval requirements.The projected potable and recycled
water demands associated with the PPEC Project have considered the anticipated County
discretionary actions and/or permit approvals and are incorporated into and used in this WSA
Report.The water demands ['01'the proposed PPEC Project are included in the projected
water demand estimates provided in Section 5 -Historical and Projected Water Demands.
Section 4 -Otay Water District
The OWD is a municipal watcr district formed in 1956 pursuant to the Municipal Water
District Act 01'1911 (Water Code §§7lO00 et seq.).The OWD 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 ageney members in San Diego County.
The OWD 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 l'urther
diversifying its available supplies.
The OWD provides water service to residential,commercial,industrial,and agrieultural
customers,and for environmental and fire protection uses.In addition to providing water
throughout its service area,O'vVD also provides sewage collection and treatment services to a
10
Otav Wmer District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pi(}Pieo Energy Center
portion of its service area known as the Jamacha Basin.The OWD also owns and operates
the Ralph W.Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF)which has an effective
treatment capacity of 1.2 million gallons per day (mgd)or about 1,300 acre feet per year (ac-
ft/yr)to produce recycled water.On May 18,2007,an additional source of recycled water
supply of at least 6 mgd,or about 6,720 ae-ft/yr,became available to OWD from the City of
San Diego's South Bay Water Reelamation Plant (SBWRP).
The OWD jurisdictional area is generally located within the south central portion of San
Diego County and includes approximately 125 square miles.The OWD 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 OWD 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 OWD is the international
border with Mexico.
The planning area addressed in the Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update and the Otay
Water District 20 I0 UWMP includes both the land within the jurisdictional boundary of the
OWD and those areas outside 01'the present OWD boundaries considered to be in the Arca oC
[nfluence of the OWD.Figure I contained within the Otay Water District 2010 UWMP
shows the jurisdictional boundary of thc OWD and the Area of Influence.The planning area
is approximately 143 square miles,01'which approximately 125 square miles are within the
OWD current boundaries and approximately 18 square milcs arc in the Area 01'Influence.
The area east of OWD is rural and currently not within any water purveyor jurisdiction and
potentially could be served by the OWD in the future iI'the need for imported water beeornes
necessary,as is the case for the Area of fnfluence.
The City of Chula Vista.thc City 01'San Diego.and the County of San Diego are the three
land usc planning agencies within the OWD jurisdiction.Data on forecasts Cor land use
planning,demographics,economic projections.population.and the future rate of growth
within OWD 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 OWD
service area is expected to increase from the 20 I0 figure of approximately 198,616 to an
estimated 284,997 by 2035.Land use information used to develop water demand projections
are based upon Specific or Sectional Planning Areas.the Otay Raneh General Development
Plan/Sub-regional Plan,East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Area,San Diego County Community
Plans,and City of San Diego,City oC Chula Vista,and County of San Diego General Plans.
The OWD 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.
II
Dtay Water District
Water SlIpply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Climatic conditions within the OWD service area are characteristically Mediterranean near
the coast,with mild temperatures year round.Inland areas arc 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 sclected because its annual temperature variation is
representative of most of the OWD 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 OWD service area.
Urban Water Management Plan
In accordance with the California Urban Water Management Planning Act and recent
legislation,the Otay Water District Board of Directors adopted an UWMP in June 20 II and
subsequently submitted the plan to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR).
The Otay Water District 20 I0 UWMP is currently being reviewed by DWR.As required by
law,the Otay Water District 2010 UWiVIP includes projected water supplies required to meet
future demands through 2035.In accordance with Water Code Section 10910 (c)(2)and
Government Code Section 66473.7 (c)(3),information from the Otay Water District 2010
UWMP along with supplemental information from the Otay Water District 2010 WRMP
Update have been utilized to prepare this WSA Report and arc 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 ellectivc February 3,2010.This new law was the
v/ater conservation cornponent to the Delta legislation package and seeks to achieve a 20
percent statewide reduction in urban per capita water use in California by Decembcr 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:(I)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.[n order
for an agency to meet its 2020 water usc target,each agency can increase its use of recycled
water to offset potable water use and also step up its water conservation measures.The
['equ ired water use targets for 2020 and an interim target for 20 I5 are determined using one of
I'our target methods -each method has numerous methodologies.The 2020 urban water use
target may be updated in a supplier's 2015 UWMP.
12
Oray Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
In 20 IS,urban retail water suppliers will be 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 gaHons 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 (I)of two (2)exceptions is met.
Exception one (I)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.
OWD has adopted Method I to set its 2015 interim and 2020 water use targets.Method I
requires setting the 2020 water use target to 80 percent of baseline per capita water use target
as provided in the State's Draft 20x2020 Water Conservation PIau.The OWD 2015 target is
171 gpcd and the 2020 gpcd target at 80 percent of baseline is 152 gpcd.
The OWD's recent per capita water use has been declining to the point where current water
use already meets the 2020 target for Method l.This recent deeline in per capita water use is
largely due to drought watcr usc restrictions,increased water costs,and poor economic
conditions.However,OWD'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.
Section 5 -Historical and Projected Water Demands
The projectcd demands for OWD are based on Specific or Sectional Planning Areas,the Otay
Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan.the East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Area.
San Diego County Community Plans,and City of San Diego,City of Chula Vista,and County
of San Diego General Plans.Tbis land use information is also used by SANDAG as the basis
I'or its most recent I'orecast data.This land use information was utilized for the preparation of
the Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update and Gtay Watcr District 20 I0 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 usc I'or
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 usee!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 uniquc parameters and is known as
CWA-MAIN.
13
Otay Water District
Water Supply AssesslIlellt Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
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 February 26,2010,the
SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the Series 12:20S0 Regional Growth Forecast.The
20S0 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.
The municipal and industrial forecast also included an updated accounting of projected
conservation savings based on projected regional implementation of the California Urban
Wata Conservation Council (CUWCC)Best Management Practices and SANDAG
demographic information for the period 20 I0 through 203S.These savings estimates were
then factored into the baseline municipal and industrial demand forecast.
A separate agricultural model,also used in prior modeling efforts,was used to forecast
agricultural water demands within the Water Authority service area.This rnodel 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 t'rom
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 iVIWD 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 OWD 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 ot'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 OWD,Water Authority,and MWD or that have revised land
use plans than originally anticipated.The Water Authority and MWD's next forecasts and
14
Otav Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
supply planning documents would then capture any increase or decrease in demands caused
by annexations or revised land use plans.
The state of California Business and Professions Code Section I 10 I0 and Government Code
Sections 65867.5,66455.3,and 66473.7,are referred to as S8 221,requires affirmative
written verification from the water purveyor of the puhlie water system that sufficient water
supplies are to be available for certain residential subdivisions of property prior to approval of
a tentative map.SB 221 compliance does not apply to the PPEC Project,as it is an industrial
project and not a residential subdivision.
[n evaluating the availahility of sufficient water supply,the PPEC project proponents are
['equired to participate in the development 0['alternative water supply project(s).This can be
achieved through payment of the New Water Supply Fee adopted by the OWD Board in May
20 10.These water supply projects are in addition to those identified as sustainable supplies in
the current Water Authority and MWD UWMP,[RP,Master Plans,and other planning
documents.These new water supply projects arc in response to the regional water supply
issues related to 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.A few examples of these alternative water
supply projects include the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project,the
OWD Desalination project,and the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well project.The Water
Authority and M\VD next forecast and supply planning documents would capture any
increase in water supplies resulting from verifiable new water resources developed by the
OWD.
In addition,MWD's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan identified potential
reserve supplies in the supply capability analysis (Tables 2-9,2-10,and 2-11),which could be
available to meet any unanticipated demands,The Water Authority and MWD's next
['orccasts and supply planning documents would capture any increase in necessary supply
resources resulting from any new water supply resources,
Demand Methodology
The OWD water demand projection methodology in the 2010 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 OWD.This is called the water duty method,
and the water duty is the amount 0['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 speci he water demands are established.
15
Otay Water District
~V(lter Supply AsseSSfnent Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
To determine water duties for the various types of land use,the entire water meter database of
the OWD is utilized and sorted by the appropriate land use types.The metered consumption
records m'e then examined for each of the land uses,~md 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/aere)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 ofthe 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 OWD.
Given the unusual nature 01'the PPEC Project,the development of reasonable and supportable
estirnates of water demand in this instance merits a customized approach.After carefully
considering the proposed design and function of the facility,water use for the PPEC Project is
evaluated based on plant operation patterns and efficiency.
The 20 Ia 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).The potable net acreage is then multiplied by the unit demand factor corresponding to
its respective land use.This approach is used in the 2010 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 usc categories arc further subdivided by type
ineluding separate categories for geJlt'courses,schools,jails,prisons,hospitals,etc.where
specific water demands arc allocated,
Otay Water District Projected Demand
By applying the established water duties to the proposed land uses,the projected water
demand I'or the entire OWD planning area at ultimate development is determined.Projected
water demands for the intervening years were determined using growth rate projections
consistent with data obtained from SANDAG and the experience of the OWD.
The historical and projected potable water demands for OWD arc shown in Table l.
16
Otuy Wuter District
Wuter Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energ}'Center
Table 1
Histodcal and Projected Potable Water Fiscal Year Demands (acre-feet)
Source:Ota)'\Vater District 20 I0 U\VrvIP.
Water Use Sectors 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Single Family 21,n3 17,165 23.633 28.312 33,600 37.211 40,635
Multi-Family 3,095 3,605 3.444 4,126 4,897 5.4n 5.922
Comillercial &1,657 2.243 1,844 2.209 2.622 2,904 3,171
Institutional &2.262 1,867 2.518 3JI17 3,580 3.965 4,330
Landscanc 6.45[\3,732 10,134 12,141 14.408 15,957 17.425
Other 2.426 584 2,700 3235 3JtW 4.252 4,643
Unaccounted for 547 23 608 729 865 958 1J146
Totals 37,668 29,270 44,883 53,768 63.811 70,669 77,171'.
The historical and projected recycled water demands for OWD arc shown in Table 2,
Table 2
Historical and Projected Recycled Water Fiscal Year Demands (acre-feet)
Water Use Sector 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Landscape 4,090 4,000 4.400 5JI00 5.800 6.800 8.000
Totals 4.090 4,000 4,400 5,000 5,800 6.800 8,000
Source:Otay \Valcr District :W I()U\\'i\iIP.rable In.
PPEe Project Projected Water Demand
The PPEe Project's design consultant,Kiewit Power,Inc.(Kiewit).prepared water use
calculations for the PPEC Project under average,average high,summer high,pcak hour,and
peak average conditions based on recycled water quality data,The recycled water demands
are presented in gallon per minute (gpm)rates as well as gallons per day (gpd)and acre-feet
per year (ac-ft/yr).The PPEC Project is able to operate more efficiently using potable water
and Kiewit calculated that the interim potable plant demand would be 378 ac-ft/yr.Projected
potable water annual average demands for the PPEe Project,including administration
building use and irrigation,are presented in Table 3.
17
Otav Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Table 3.PPEC Facility Project Projected Potable Water Annual Average Demands
Demands Units Average
Annual
"Vater Required by Plant ac-ft/yr 369
Administration Building ac-ft/yr 1.5
Irrigation (SCX or acreage)ac ..ft/yr 1.2
Total ac-ft/yr 372
Thc PPEC Projcct is designed to use recycled water as its primary source of cooling and
process water.The PPEC Project will use recycled water,il'available,during construction
and operational periods.Since rccycled watcr is currcntly not available at the Project site and
in Otay Mesa,the PPEC Project will rely on and use currently available potable water
provided by OWD.The interim potable demand for the PPEC Project is expected to average
approximatcly 372 ac-n/yr,as shown in Table 3.
The Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update and20lO Urban Water Managcmcnt Plan
(UWMP)anticipated that the land area to be utilized for the PPEC Project would use both
potable and recycled water,but also identified the PPEC Project as a potential future user ot'
recycled water.
Table 4
PPEC Project Projected Recycled Water Average Demands
Demands Units Average Average
I
Summer Peak Average
High High Hour Annual
\\-'ater Rl'quin-:d hy'Plant I...._82.!2_'_.45)497 I 564 6SK 51"_..~._-"
gph 27.120 lYJ)2()I .n,~40 ,]9.4XO 30.S07
hours 1.100 1.600 I I .000 .100 4,000'
Annual Opl~ralion gallolls 29,X32,OOO 47,712,000 3.1,X40,000 I I,X44,OOO 123.22X,OOO
ac-ft/yr 92 146 104 36 378
gpd I .137,61 IIt---
Irrigation (5(;(of acreage)ae-rtfyr 1.2
Total ac-ftlyr 379
'I Permitted maximum hours of annual operation.
The water demands presented in Table 4 represent temperature-dependent operational periods
throughout the year.The "average annual"demand represents the water demands for the
PPEe Project over the course of the year,where the PPEC Project operates for a maximurn of
4,000 hours annually,A detailed water balance sheet is included in Appendix C.
18
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessrnent Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
The PPEC Project proposes to convert to recycled water service once available at the site.
The recycled water demand for the proposed PPEC Project,including irrigation,is 379 ac-
ft/yr.
The Oray Water District 2010 WRMP Update projected a potable water demand for the
project site based on currently approved land uses.Using the OWD unit demand factors,the
2010 WRMP Update potable demand for the PPEC Project site 9.99 acre parcel is expected to
be 59,338 gpd or about 66 ac-ft/yr.This is 317,429 gpd or 306 ac-ft/yr higher than the
potable demand estimate in the Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update as summarized in
Table 5.However,the projected permanent potable PPEC Project demand,\vhich assumes
that PPEC will ultimately rely on recycled \vater for process l1eeds,is 1.5 ac-ft/yr.This annual
volume is 64.5 ac-ft/yr less than the potable demands included il1 the 2010 WRMP Update.
Table 5
PPEC Project Projected Potable Water Demand/Supply Comparison
Otay Water District 20I()'vVRMP Update
Projection
Difference
59.:138
I
I
317,429
66
306
5.1 Demand lVlanagement fVVater Conservation)
Demand management or \vater conservation is a critical part of the Otay Water District 2010
UWMP and its long-term strategy t'or meeting \vater supply needs of the OWD customers.
Water conservation,is frequently the lowest cost resource available to any water agency.The
goals of the OWD water conservation programs are to:
$Reduce the demand for more expensive,imported water.
•Demonstrate continued commitment to the Best Managemel1t Practices (BMP).
*'Ensure a reliable water supply.
The OWD 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.
\Vater conservation programs are developed and implemented on the premise that \vater
conservation increases the water supply by reducing the demand on available supply,which is
19
Oray Water District
Water Sapply Assessrnent Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
vital to the optimal utilization of a region's water supply resources,The OWD 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 I and 2 take into account implementation of water
conservation measures within OWD.
As one of the first signatories to the MOU Regarding Urban Water Conservation in
California,the OWD has made BMP implementation for water conservation the cornerstone
of its conservation programs and a key element in its \vater resource rnanagernent strategy.
As a member of the Water Authority,OWD also benefits from regional programs performed
on behalf of its member agencies.The BMP programs implemented by OWD and regional
BMP programs implemented by the Water Authority that benefit all their member agencies
are addressed in the Otay Water District 2010 UWMP.In partnership with the Water
Authority,the County of San Diego,City of San Diego,City of Chula Vista,and developers,
the OWD 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 OWD.
Additional conservation or water use elliciency measures or programs practiced by the O'vVD
include the following:
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System
The OWD 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 I'unctions
provide for operating personnel to monitor the water supply source flow rates,reservoir
levels,turn on or oil 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 01'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 conscrve
water supplies and to avoid or minimize the effects of any !'uture shortage.A water shortage
could exist based upon the occurrence of one or more of the following conditions:
I.A general water supply shortage due to increased demand or limited supplies.
20
OlaV Water District
Water Suppl\'Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
2.Distribution or storage t'acilities of the Water Authority or other agencies become
inadequate,v ~
3.A major failure of the supply,storage,and distribution facilities of MWD,Water
Authority,and/or OWD.
The OWD water conservation ordinance finds and determines that the conditions prevailing in
the San Diego County area require that tbe available water resources be put to maximum
beneficial usc 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 01'the people 01'the OWD and 1'01'the public well'are.
OvVD eoutinues to promote water conservation at a variety of events,including those
involving developers in its service area.In addition,OvVD devcloped and manages a number
01'its own programs such as the Cash for WaterS mart Plants retrofit program,the vVater
Smart Irrigation LJ pgrade Program,and the Commercial Process Improvement Program.
OWD is currently engaged in a number of conservation and water usc efficiency activities
Listed below are the current programs that are either on-going Dr were recently concluded:
•Residential Water Surveys:1,349 completed since 1994
•Large Landscape Surveys:194 completed since 1990
•Cash for Water Smart Plants Landscape Retrofit Program:over 217,600 square I'eet of
turf grass replaced with water wise plants since 2003
•Rotating Nozzles Rebated:3,l70
•Residential Weather-Based Irrigation Controller (WBIC)Incentive Program:231
distributed or rebated since 2004
•Residential High E1Ticiency Clothes Washers:7,187 rebates since 1994
•Residential ULFT/HET Rebate Program:22,376 rebates provided between 1991-20 I0
•Outreach Efforts to OWD Customers -the OWD promotes its conservation programs
through staffing outreach events,bill inserts,articles in the OWD's quarterly eustomcr
Pipeline newsletter,direct mailings to OWD customers,the OWD's webpage and
through the Water AutllDrity's marketing elTorts.
•School Education Programs-tbe OWD 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 themcd 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 OWD's own Commercial Process
Improvement Program
21
Otay Wmer District
\.tV({fer Supply Assc,l;sment Report
Pio Pico Energ.v Center
As a signatory to the MOU Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California,the OWD is
required to submit biannual reports that detail the implementation of current water
conservation practices.The OWD voluntarily agreed to implement the fourteen water
conservation Best Management Practices beginning in 1992.The OWD submits its report to
the CUWCC every two years.The OWD EMP Reports for 2005 to 20 10,as well as the EMP
Coverage Report for 1999-2010,are included in the Otay Water District 2010 UWMP.
Section 6 -Existing and Projected Supplies
The OWD currently does not have an independent raw or potable water supply source.The
OWD is a member public agency of the Water Authority.The Water Authority is a member
public agency of iVIWD.The statutory relationships between the Water Authority and its
member agencies,and iVIWD and its mcmber agencies,respectively,cstablish the scope of the
OWD 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 OWD with 100 percent of its potable water.The
Water Authority in turn,currently purchases the majority of its water from MWD.Due to the
OWD reliance on these two agcncies,this WSA Report includes referenced documents that
contain information on the existing and projected supplies,supply programs,and related
projects of the Water Authority ami MWD.The OWD,Water Authority,aud MWD are
actively pursuing programs and projects to furthcr divcrsify their water supply resources.
The description of local recycled water supplies available to the OWD is also disclissed
below.
6.1 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2010 Regional
Urban Water Management Plan
In November 2010,iVIWD adopted its 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan
(RUWMP).The 2010 RUWiVIP 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 ot·the
2010 RUWMP,MWD also utilized the previous SANDAG regional growth forecast in
calculating regional water demands for the ,Vater Authority service area.
22
Otay Woter District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
6.1.1 AvaHabHity 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 t\VO primary sources:the Colorado River,via the Colorado River Aqueduct (eRA),
which it owns and operates,and Northern California,via the State Water Project (SWP).The
2010 RUWMP documents the availability of these existing supplies and additional supplies
necessary to meet future demands.
MWD's Integrated Resources Plan ORP)iclentifies a mix of resources (lmported andlocct1)
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 20 lO
update to the IRP (2010 IRP Update)includes a planning buffer supply intended to mitigate
against the risks associated with implementation of local and imported supply programs and
for the risk that future demands could be higher than projected.The planning buffer identifies
an additional increment of water that could potentially be developed when needed and if other
supplies are not fully implelnented as planned.As part of implementation of the planning
buffeL MWD periodically evaluates supply development,supply conditions,and projected
demands to ensure that the region is not under or over developing supplies.iVlanagecl
properly,the planning buffer will help ensure that the southern California region,including
San Dtego County,will have adequate water supplies to meet future demands.
In November 2010,MWD adopted its 2010 RUWMP in accordance with state law.The
resource targets included in the preceding 20 10 IRP Update serve as the foundation for the
planning assumptions used in the 2010 RUWMP.iVIWD's 2010 RUWMP contains a \'vater
supply reliability assessment that includes a detailecl evaluation of the supplles necessary to
meet demands over a 25-year period in average,single dry year,and multiple dry year
periods.As part of this process,MvVD also uses the current SANDAG regional growth
Corccast in calculating regional water demands for the Water Authority'S service area.
As stated in MWD's 20 [0 RUWMP,the plan may be used as a source document for meeting
the requirements of 5B 6[0 and SB 221 until the next scheduled update is completed in 20 IS.
The 20 10 RUWMP includes a "Justifications for Supply Projections"in Appendix A.3,that
provides detailed documentation of the planning,legal,financial,and regulatory basis for
inclucltng each source of supply in the plan.A copy of MWD's 2010 RUWMP can be found
on the internet at the follo\Ning site address:
11ft@~::::y~y.[l·!.~~A cil.\2.Q:£i)!I!!J.Il'~~!.b2.2/pgg~>(\i(LL[1'\\,c\(~{D<_LLYV·\:IELKlLY:,it'\:JP__2QJ.(L.l2!JJ
The UWMPs for both MWD and the Water Authority will include the increase in demand
projections included in SANDAG's Series 12 Update and from the projections from Otay
Water District 2010 WRMP Update.
23
Otay Woter District
Water Supply Assess/nent Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Water supply agencies throughout California continue to face clin1ate,environmental,legal,
and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions.such as the court rulings
regarding the Sacrarnento~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 OWD nevertheless fully intend
to have sufficient,reliable supplies to serve demands.
6,1.2 lVI"VD Capital Investment Plan
MWD prepares a Capital fn vestment 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 rnvestment 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 'Vater Supplies
The Water Authority has adopted plans and is taking specific actions to develop adequate
water supplies to help meet existing and future vl/ater demands \vithin 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:
9 In accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act.the Water Authority
adopted their 2010 UWMP in June 20 l (.The updated Water Authority 20 to UWlVlP
identifies a diverse mix of local and imported \vater supplies to meet future demands.A
copy of the updated Water Authority 2005 UWMP can be t'ound on the internet at
httf)://\\-'\-V \·v .sclc\.\,'a~ors~/2{)1(j··u rb~tn,-\\-'atcr--rnana.:zcfucnt--·)lan~""~1"_."..._~.......••..........._.._.__._"._._..__..__.~.....~.•_.~__.•~._."._.•...l__.__.._
III As part of the October 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA),the Water
Authority was assigned MWD's rights to 77,700 ac-Ct/yr of conserved water from the
All-American Canal (AAC)and CoacheHa 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 veriflable Water Authority supplies.
24
Ota)'Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Ener,gy Center
•Deliveries of conserved agricultural water from the Imperial Irrigation District (lID)to
San Diego County have increased annually since 2003,with 70,000 ac-ft of deli veries in
Fiscal Ycar (FY)2010.The quantities will incrcase annually to 200,000 ac-ft/yr by
2021,then remain fixed for the duration of the transfer agreement.
Through implementation of the Water Authority and member ageney planned supply projeets,
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 I'rom
the AAC and CC lining projects,and an incrcasing amount of conserved agricultural water
from lID.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.As calculated by I'vIWD,the Water Authority's preferential right as of June 30,
2010 is 17.47 percent of MWD's supply,while the Water Authority accounted for
approximately 21 percent of MWD's water sales.Under preferential rights,MWD could
allocate water without regard to historic watcr purchases or dependcnee on M'ND.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 preCerential 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.
\Vhen and as additional water resources are required to meet increasing needs,MWD stated it
will be prepared to deliver sueh supplies.In Section ES-5 of their 2010 RUWMP,MWD
states that iVIWD has supply capacities that would be sufficient to meet expected demands
I'rom 20IS through 2035.iVIWD 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 tbat enables the region to meet its water supply needs.
25
Ota)'Water District
Water Sapplv Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
The Water Authority has made large investments in MWD's facilities and will continue to
includc 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 Watcr Authority is now taking
delivery of conserved agricultural water from lID and water saved from the AAC and CC
lining projects.The CC lining project is complete and the Water Authority has essentially
completed construction of the AAC lining project.Table 6 summarizes the Water Authority's
supply sources with detailed information included in the sections to follow.Deliveries from
MWD are also included in Table 6,whicll is further discussed in Section 6.I above.The
Water Authority's member agencies provided the verifiable local supply targets for
groundwater,groundwater recovery,recycled water,and surface water,which are discussed in
more dctail in Section 5 of the Water Authority's 20I0 UWMP.
Table 6
Projected Verifiable Water Supplies -Water Authority Service Area
Normal Year (acre feet)
Water Supply Sources 20t5 2020 2025 2030 2035
VVater Authority Supplies
MW!)Supplies .1SK.1 K9 2.10.60 I 259.694 293,239 32.1,838
\Vater Authority/UD Transfer 100.000 190.000 200.000 200.000 200.000
AAC and CC Lining Projects KO.200 KO.200 KO.200 KO.200 KO.200
Proposed Regional Seawater
Desalination 0 56.000 56.000 56.000 56.000
l\Iember Agency Supplies
Surface \\/ater 4K.206 47.9cW cl7.K7K 47.542 47.2K9
\OVateI'Rcc),'cling 33.660 43.728 46.603 4K.27K 49.098
CJround\vatcr I I .7 I0 I I.100 12.100 12.K40 12.K40
Ground\\/atcr Recovery 10..120 15.520 15,520 15.520 15.520
Total Projected Supplies 647.2K5 675.089 717,995 753,619 785,685
Source:Water Authonty 20 I0 Urban \Vater r'v'fanagement Plan --1 able 9-1.
Section 5 of the Water Authority's 20 I0 UWMP also includes a discussion on the local
supply target for seawater desalination.Seawater desalination supplies represent a significant
future local resource in the Water Authority's scrviec area.The \Vater Authority is pursuing
the purchase of a water supply from the Carlsbad Desalination Project,a fuJJy-permitted
private desalination project at the Encina Power Station site located in the City of Carlsbad.In
2010,the Water Authority's Board of Directors approved a Term Sheet between the Water
Authority and the private investor-owned company.Poseidon Resources (Poseidon).and
directed staff to prepare a draft Water Purchase Agreement based on its provisions.The
Water Authority's water purchase agreement with Poseidon is expected to include water
purchase price,aJJocation of risk and options to eventuaJJy purchase the projeet's pipeline and
26
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Ph:o Energy Center
the entire dcsalination plant.Beforc negotiations begin on a final agreement,Poseidon must
secure sufficient financial commitments from privatc investors to meet requircments for fully
funding project construction.In addition,Poseidon must execute all agreements for
construction and operation of the project and finalize the documents needed to finance the
project in the bond market.
The Water Authority's existing and planned supplies from the lID transfer and canal lining
projects are considered "drought~proo["supplies and should be available at the yields shown
in Table 6 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 tile Water Authority's 2010
UWMP.
As part of preparation of a written water supply asscssmcnt and/or verification report,an
agency's shortage contingency analysis should be considered in dctermining sufficiency of
supply.Scction 11 of the Water Authority's 2010 UWMP contains a detailed shortage
contingcncy analysis that addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought
management.The analysis demonstrates that the Watcr Authority and its member agencies,
through the Emergency Response Plan,Emergency Storage Project,and Drought
Management Plan (DMP)arc 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 takc whcn faced with a shortage
0['imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply shol'tl'all
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
The QSA was signed in October 2003,and resolves long-standing disputes regarding priority
and usc of Colorado River water and creates a baseline for implementing water transfers.\Vith
approval of the QSA,thc Water Authority and lID were able to implement tbeir Water
Conservation and Transl'er Agreement.This agreemcntnot only provides reliability for thc San
Dicgo region,but also assists California in reducing its usc 01'Colorado River water to its legal
allocation.
On April 29,1998,the Water Authority signed a historic agreement with lID for the long-term
transtCr ofconscrvcd Colorado River water to San Diego County.The Water Authority-lID
Water Conservation and Transfcr Agreemcnt (Transfer Agreemcnt)is the largest agriculture-to-
urban water transfer in Unitcd States history.Colorado River water will be conserved by
Imperial Valley Carmel's who voluntarily partieipatc in the program and then transtCrrcd to the
Water Authority for usc in San Diego County.
27
Otay Water District
Water Sapply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Implementation Stutas
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,lID 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
thc California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),the California Water Code,and other laws
related to the approval of the QSA,the water transl'er,and related agreements.The lawsuits were
coordinated for trial.The lID,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 II 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
Deliveries into San Diego County I'rom the transfer began in 2003 with an initial transfer of
10,000 AF.The Water Authority recei ved increasing amounts of transfer water each year,
according to a water deli very schedule contained in the transt"er agreement.[n 20 I0,the Water
Authority received 70,000 i\F.The quantities will increase annually to 200,000 AF 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,tbe conserved water will be transl'erred
under flO's Colorado River rights,which arc among the most senior in the Lower Colorado
River Basin.Without the protection of these rights,the Water Authority could suffer delivery
cutbacks.[n recognition for the value of sueh reliability,the 1998 contract required the Water
Authority to pay a premium on transl'er water under defined regional shortage circumstances.
The shortage premium period duration is the period of consecutive days during which any of the
following exist:I)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.
28
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Tra/tsporiatiOl1
The Water Authority entered into a water exchange agreement with MWD on October to,2003,
to transport the Water Authority-lID 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.[n exchange,MWD delivers to the Water Authority a like quantity
and quality of water.The Water Authority pays MWD's app[icable wheeling rate for each acre-
foot 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 erect to
extend the agreement another 10 years for a total of 45 years.
CostlFillWICi,lg
The costs associated with the transfer are financed through the Water Authority's rates and
charges.In the agreement between the Water Authority and lID,the price for the transfer water
started at $258/AF and increased by a set amount [()r the Ilrst seven years.[n December 2009,
the Water Authority and lID executed a fit'th amendment to the water transfer agreement that sets
thc price per acre-foot for transfer water for calendar years 2010 through 2015,beginning at
S405/AF in 20 [0 and increasing to $6241AF in 2015.For calendar years 20 l6 through 2034,the
unit price will be adjusted using an agreed-upon index.The amendment also required the Water
Authority to pay lID $6 million at the end of calendar year 2009 and another S50 million on or
before October 1,2010,provided that a transfer stoppage is not in effect as a result of a court
order in the Q$A coordinated cases.Beginning in 2035,either the Water Authority or lID can,if
certain criteria are Inet,elect a market rate price through a formula described in the water transfer
agrccrl1cnt.
The October 2003 exchange agreement between MWD and the Water Authority set the initial
cost to transport the conserved water at S253/AF.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 iVIWD on behalf of its member agencies.
The transportation charge in 20 I0 was $3 14/AF.
The Water Authority is providing $lO million to help offset potential socioeconomic impacts
associated with temporary land fallowing.lID will credit the Water Authority for these funds
during years 16 through 45.[n 2007,the Water Authority prepaid IID an additional SIO million
for future deliveries of water.lID will credit the Water Authority for this up-front payment
during years l6 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 \Nater Authority is
contributing a total of $64 million to fund environmental mitigation projects and the Salton Sea
Restoration Fund.
29
Ow.v Water District
Water Sapply Assessment Repart
Pio Pico Energy Center
Written Contruets or Other Proot'
The supply and costs associated with the transfer are based primarily on the following
documents:
Agreement for Transfer of Conserved Water bv and between lID and the Water Authority (April
29,1998).This Agreement provides for a market-based transaction in which the Water
Authority would pay 110 a unit price for agricultural water conserved by IID and transferred to
the Water Authority.
Revised Fourth Amendment to Agreement between lID 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 01'
Water (October 10,2003).This agreement was executed pursuant to the QSA and provides I'or
delivery of the transfer water to the Water Authority.
Environmental Cost Sharing,Funding,and Habitat Conservation Plan Development Agreement
among lID,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.
Quantil~cation Settlement Agreement Joint Powers Authority Creation and Funding Agreement
(October to,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,lID,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 Transl'er of Conserved Water (December 21,2009).This agreement
implements a settlement between the Water Authority and lID regarding the base contract price
of transferred water.
Federal,Stale,alld Local Permits/Approved.l·
Federal Endangered Species Aet Permit.The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)issued a
Biological Opinion on January 12,200 I,that provides incidental take authorization and eertain
measures required to ofl\et species impaets on the Colorado River regarding such actions.
30
Otoy Woter District
Woter Sup!}ly Assess/nellt Report
Pio Pieo Energy Center
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)Petition,SWRCB adopted Water Rights Order
2002-0016 concerning no and Water Anthority's amended joint petition for approval of a long-
term transfer ofconserved water from lID to the Water Authority and to change the point of
diversion,place 01'usc,and pmpose of use under Permit 7643,
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)for Conservation and Transfer Agreement.As lead agency,
lID certified the Final E[R for the Conservation and Transfer Agreement on June 28,2002,
U,S,Fish and Wildlife Service Draft Biological Opinion and Incidental Takc Statement on the
Bmeau of Reclamation's Voluntarv Fish and Wildlife Conservation Measures and Associated
Conservation Agreements with the California Water Agencies (12118/07).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 nD/other California water
agencies'actions on listed species in the Imperial Valley and Salton Sea (per the June 28,2002
EIR),
Addendum to E[R for Conservation and Transfer Agreement.IlD as lead agency and Wmer
Authority as responsible agency approved addendum to E[R in October 2003,
Environmental Impact Statement (E[S)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
#708 [-2003-024-006),The California Departmcnt of Fish and Game issued this permit
(10/22/04)for potential take effects on state-listed/fully protected species associatcd with
[ID/other California water agencies'actions on listed species in the Imperial Valley and Salton
Sea (per the June 28,2002 EIR),
California Endangered Species Act (CESA)Permit.A CESA permit was issucd by Calilc)rnia
Department of Fish and Garne (CDFG)on April 4,2005,providing incidental take authmization
t(,r 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-IVyr of conserved water from projects that will line the All-American Canal (AACJ
and Coachella Canal (CC),The projects will reduce the loss of water that currently occurs
through seepage,and the conserved water will be delivered to the Water Authority,This
conserved water will provide the San Diego region with an additional 8,5 million acre-feet
over the IIO-year life of thc agreement.
Implementation Statas
31
Otav Water District
\Voter Supply Assess/nellt Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
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-milc
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 S!lltes,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 SlIpply
The AAC lining project makes 67,700 AI"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 AI"of Colorado River water each year available for
allocation.The 2003 Allocation Agreement provides for 16,000 ae-ft/yr of conserved canal
lining water to be allocated to the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Parties.The
remaining amount,77,700 ac-ft/yr,is to be available to the Water Authority,with up to an
additional 4,850 ac-ft/yr available to the Water Authority depending on environmental
requirements from the CC lining project.For planning purposes,the Water Authority
assumes that 2,500 AI"of the 4,850 AI"will be available each year for delivery,for a total 01'
80.200 ac-I't/yr of that supply.According to the Allocation Agreement,lID has call rights to a
portion (5,000 ae-ft/yr)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 1'01'up to 75 years.
TrilIIS!'O/,!11tiO!1
The October 2003 Exchange Agreement between the Water Authority and MWD provides I'or
the delivery of the conserved water I'rom the canal lining projects.The Water Authority pays
MWD's applicable wheeling rate for each acrc-foot of exchange water delivered.In the
Agreement,MWD will deliver the canal lining water for the term of the Allocation
Agreement (110 years).
CostlFino/lcing
Under California Water Code Section 12560 et seq.,the Water Authority received $200
million in state funds 1'01'construction of the canal lining projects.fn addition,S20 million
Otay Water District
WUler Supply Assessnzcnt Report
Pio Pico Encrg}'Center
was made available from Proposition SO 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.
Writlen Conlmels or Olher Proof"
The expected supply and costs associatcd 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 wi II be made
available to specified California contracting water agencies according to established priorities.
Calit'ornia Department of Watcr Rcsources -MWD Funding Agreement (700 I ).Reimburse
MvVD 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 583.65 million,with
addition of funds from Proposition SO.
California Department of Water Resources -IID Funding Agreement (200 I ).Reimburse lID for
project work necessary to construct a lined AAC in an amount not to exceed 5126 million.
MWD -CVWD Assignment and Delegation of Design Obligations Agreement (1002).Assigns
design ol'the CC lining project to CVWD.
MWD -CVWD Financial Arrangements Agreement for Design Obligations (2002).Obligatcs
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 Vallev 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 Rev River Indian Water Authoritv,the Citv of Escondido.and Vista
Irrigation District (October 10,20(3).This agreement includes assignment of MWD's rights
and interest in delivery ot"77,700 acre-feet of Colorado Ri ver water previously intended to be
delivered to MWD to the Water Authority.Allocates water ti'om the AAC and CC lining
33
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
projects for at least 110 years to the Water Authority,the San Luis Rcy Indian Water Rights
Settlement Parties,and lID,if it exercises its call rights.
Amended and Restated Agreement between i\!lvVD and Water Authority l~)r the Exchange of
Water (October 10,2003).This agrcement was executed pursuant to the QSA and provides for
delivery of the conserved canal lining water to the Water Authority.
Agreement between i\!lWD and Water Authority regarding Assignment 01'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 facilitatc funding
and construction of the AAC and CC lining projects:
Assignment and Delegation of Construction Obligations for the Coachclla Canal Lining Project
under the Department of Water Resources Funding Agreement No.4600001474 from the San
Diego Countv Water Authoritv to the Coachclla Valley Water District.dated September 8,2004.
Agreement Regarding the Financial Arrangements between thc San Diego County Water
Authority and Coachella Valley Water District for the Construction Obligations for the
Coachella Canal Lining Project.dated September 8.7004.
Agreement No.04-XX-30-W0429 Among the United States Bureau of Reelamation.the
Coachella Vallev Water District.and the San Diego County Water Authority for the
Construction of the Coachella Canal Lining Project Pursuant to Title fl of Public Law 100-675,
dated October 19,7004.
California Water Code Section 17560 ct seq,This Water Code Section provides for S200
million to be appropriated to the Department of Water Rcsources to help fund the canal lining
projects in furtherance of implementing Calit'ornia's Colorado River Water Use Plan.
California Water Code Section 79567.This Water Code Section identifies S20 million as
available for appropriation by the California Lcgislature 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 Agrccmcnt,it is the intention of thc agcncies that those ['unds will be
available for use by the Water Authority,flD,or CVWD for the AAC and CC lining projects.
California Public Rcsources Code Section 75050(b)(l).This section identifies up to S36 million
as available for water conservation projects that implement thc Allocation Agreement as defincd
in the Quantification Settlcment Agreement.
Federal,State,alid Lowl Penn!t,/Appravals
AAC Lining Project Final EIS/EIR (March 1994).A final EIRJE1S analyzing the potential
impacts of lining the AAC was completed by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation)in March
34
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
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 ElR/EIS for the CC lining project was
completed in 200 I.Reclamation signed the Record of Decision in Apri I 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
111990020408:prepared by Coachella Valley Water District,Mav 16,)001.
Environmental Cornmitment Plan for the Coachella Canal Lining Project.approved by the US
Bureau of Reclamation (Boulder City,NV)on March 4,)003.
Environmental Commitment Plan and Addendum to the All-American Canal Lining Project
EIS/EIR California State Clearinghouse Number SCH 90010477 (June 2004,prepared by
{[D).
Addendum to Final EISIEIR and Amendment to Environmental Commitment Plan for the
All-American Canal Lining Project (approved June 27,)006,by IID Board of Directors).
6.2.1.3 Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Project
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 currently being developed by
Poseidon,a private invcstor-o\vncd company that develops \vater and \\'i1stcvv't1tcr
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 Watcr
Facilities Master Plan and the 2010 UWMP.The Carlsbad Desalination Project has obtained
all required permits and environmental clearances and,when completed,will provide a highly
rcliable local supply of 56,000 ac-ft/yr I'or the region.
Implementation Stotus
Thc 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)
35
Otay Water District
Water Suppf.v AS.I,'CSSnlcn[Report
Pio Pica Energ,)'Center
•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
In July 2010,the Water Authority Board approved a Term Sheet between the Water Authority
and Poseidon and directed stafl'to prepare a Water Purchase Agreement based on its
provisions,Prior to the Water Authority engaging (in 2010)as a potential purchaser of all the
water produced by the Project,Poseidon was pursuing a project structure wherc ninc local
water agencies had signed water purchase agrccments.Ultimately,that project structure was
found to be financially infeasible and the Water Authority was asked to step into the role of
purchaser of the supply.Key terms for a potential Water Purchase Agreement between the
Water Authority and Poseidon include the following:
•The term of the agreement will be for 30 years once commercial operation bcgins,
subject to early buyout provisions beginning at 10 years.
•The Water Authority will shift the risks associated with the design,permitting,
('inancing,construction,and operation of the Project to Poseidon.
•The pricc for water will be based on the actual cost of production.
•There will be the option to buy the entire plant beginning 10 years after the start date
I'or commercial operation at a price to be specified in the water purchase agreement,as
well as the right to purchase the plant at the end of the 30-year water purchase
agreement term for S I.This ensures eventual public ownership of the plant securing
long-term price certainty and regional public benefit from ratepayers'past investments
in the plant through 30 years of water purchase payments.
Expected SUI'ply
When completed,the Project will provide a Ilighly reliable local supply of 56,000 ac-ft/yr of
supply for the region,available in both normal and dry hydrologic conditions.
TrOilsportati{!II
A 54-inch pipeline will be constructed to convey product water from the desalination plant
10.5 miles east to the Water Authority's Second Aqueduct The water will be then be
convcycd 5 miles north to the Water Authority's Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant
facility,where it will be blended with treated imported water and subsequently distributed
into the Water Authority's existing aqueduct system.
CostlFillalleillg
36
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energ.v Center
The Term Sheet between the Water Authority and Poseidon provides the basis for a potential
purchase agreement whereby the Water Authority would purchase the entire output from the
Project at a price based on the cost of production.A prcliminary September 20 I0 unit cost
estimate was S 1.600/AF.The Water Authority's water purchase costs would be financed
through Water Authority rates and charges.If the water purchase agreement is approved by
the Water Authority Board,Poseidon plans to f'inance the capital cost of the Project with a
combination of private equity and tax-exempt Private Activity Bonds.
Written COlltmcts or Other Proof'
The expected supply and costs associated with the Carlsbad Desalination Project arc bascd
primarily on the following documents:
Development Agreement between City of Carlsbad and Poseidon (October 2009).A
Development Agreement between Carlsbad and Poseidon was executed on October 5.2009
Agreement of Term Sheet between the Water Authority and Poseidon Resources (J uly 20 I0).
The Water Authority approved the Term Sheet at its July 20 I0 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.
Fedeml.State,(lnd Lout!PermitslApprovct!.\·
Carlsbad Desalination Project Final EIR (June 2006).The City of Carlsbad certit'ied the Final
EIR and the final Notice of Determination for the project was signed on June 14,2006.
NPDES Discharge Permit (August 2006).The Regional Water Quality Control Board issues
the NPDES Discharge Permit for the project on August 16,2006.
Drinking Water Permit (October 2(06).The California Department of Health Services
approved the Conditional Drinking Water Permit on October 19,2006.
Coastal Development Permit (November 2007).Tbe California Coastal Commission
approved,witb conditions,the Coastal Development Permit on November 15,2007.The
Coastal Development Permit allows construction and operation of the project in the Coastal
Zone.
State Lands Commission Lease Application (August 2008).Amends lease of land by Cabrillo
Power I LLC (Cabrillo)from the State Lands Commission for the lands where the project will
be constructed.Cabrillo and Poseidon entered into agreement on July 1,2003,authorizing
Poseidon to usc those lands to construct tbe project.
37
Owv Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Addendum to Final ElR (September 2(09).An Addcndum to thc Final EIR was certit"icd by
the City of Carlsbad and Notice of Determination for the Addendum was signed on
Scptember 15,2009.The Addendum modil'ied water convcyance pipeline alignments.
6.2.2 Water Authority Capital Improvement Program and Financial
Information
The Water Authority's Capital Improvement Program (Crp)can trace its beginnings to a
report approved by the Board in 1989 entitled,The Water Distribution Plan,a Capital
Improvement Program through the Year 2010.The Water Distribution Plan included ten
projects designed to increase the capacity of thc 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
inl'rastructurc 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 2005 UWMP and the 2002 Regional Water Facilities Master Plan.These CIP
projects,which are most recently described in the Water Authority's Adoptcd Multi-Year
Budget,include projects valued at 53.50 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 01'new I'acilities that will add capacity to existing conveyance,storage,and
treatrnent facilities,as weU 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 tnctcring
facilities.
•New Facilities -These projects will expand the capacity of the aqueduct systenl,
complete the projects required under the Quantification Settlement Agreement (Q5A),
and evaluate new supply opportunities.
$Ernergency Storage Project -Projects rernaining to be cornpletcd under the ongoing
ESP include the San Vicente Darn Raise,the Lakc 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 capaeity,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 projeets.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
I'unding for capital improvements.Additional inl'ormation is included in the Water
38
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessmellt Report
Pin Pieo Energy Center
Authority's biennial budget,which also contains selected financial information and
summarizes the Water Authority's investment policy.
6.3 Otay Water District
The Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update and the 2010 UWMP contain comparisons of
projected supply and demands through the year 2035.Projected potable water resources to
meet planned demands as documented were planned to be supplied entirely with imported
water received from the 'Water Authority.Reeyeled water resources to meet projected
demands are planned to be suppliedl'rom local wastewater treatment plants.The OWD
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 OWD 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,lRP,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 Cor less reliance upon imported
water and are considered a new water supply resource Cor the OWD.
The OWD expansion 01'the market areas for the usc of recycled water within the watersheds
upstream 01'the Sweetwater Reservoir and the Lower Otay Reservoir,and Otay Mesa will
increase recycled water use and thus require less dependence on imported water for irrigation
purposes.
The supply (Jrecasts contained within this WSA Report do consider development and/or
acquisition of potential groundwater,recycled water market expansion,and seawater
desalination supplies by the OWD.
6.3.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring
Additional Supplies
The availability 01'sufficient potable water supplies and plans for acquiring additional potable
water supplies to serve existing and future demands of the OWD 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 OWD.Historic imported water deliveries from the
Water Authority to OWD and recycled water deliveries from the OWD Ralph W.Chapman
Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF)are shown in Table 7,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 ac-ft/yr.The recycled water supply shortfall had been met by supplementing
39
Dwy Water District
Wmer Supply Assessment Report
Plo Pico Energy Center
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 OWD
recycled water system.
Table 7
Otay Water District
Historic Imported and Local Water Supplies
Calendar Imported Water Recycled Water Total
Year (acre-feet)(acre-feet)(acre-feet)
1980 12.558 0 12.558
1985 14.529 0 14.529
1990 23.200 0 23.200
1995 20,922 614 21536
2000 29,901 94S ,;0,849
2005 37.678 1.227 38,905
2010 29.270 4.090 ,'3.270
Source:Utay \Vater District operational records.
6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies
The availability of sulTicient imported and regional potable water supplies to serve existing
and planned uses within OWD is demonstrated in the above discussion on MWD and the
Water Authority's water supply reliability,The County Water Authority Act,Section 5
subdivision II,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 OWD was 29,270 ac-ft of supply from the Water Authority.An additional
4,090 ae-ft of recycled water was provided from the City of San Diego and from OWD's
Ralph W.Chapman Water Reclamation Facility.The total baseline demand for potable water
within the OWD is expected to increase to about 77,l71 ac-ft by 2035 as per the Otay Water
District 2010 UWMP.
Potable Water System Facilities
The OWD continues to pursue diversification of its water supply resources to increase
reliability and flexibility.The OWD also continues to plan,design,and construct potable
water system facilities to obtain these supplies and to distribute potable water to meet
40
Otav Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pica Energ)'Center
customer demands.The OWD has successfully negotiated two water supply diversification
agreements that enhance reliability and flexibility,which are briefly described as follows.
•The OWD entered into an agreement with the City of San Diego,known as the Otay
Water Treatmcnt 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 OWD.The supply system link to implement the Oray WTP
Agreement to access the regions raw water supply system and the local water treatment
plant became fully operational in August 200S.This supply link consists of the typical
storage,transmission,pumping,now measurement,and appurtenances to receive and
transport the treated water to the OWD system.The City of San Diego obligation to
supply [0 mgd of treated water under the Otay WTP Agreement is contingent upon there
being available [0 mgd ofsurplus treatment capacity in the Otay WTP until such time as
OWD pays the City of San Diego to expand the Otay WTP to meet the OWD future
needs.In the event that the City 01'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 OWD future needs.The Otay WTP existing rated capacity is
40 mgd with an actual cffective 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 OWD demand.
•The OWD 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 ofraw water to the Helix WD R.M.
Levy WTP for treatmcnt and delivery to OWD.The supply system link to implement the
ECRTWTP Agreement is complete allowing access to the regions raw water supply
system and the local water treatment plant.This supply link consists 01'the typical
transmission,pumping,storage.flovv control,and appurtenances to receive and transport
the potable water from the R.iVI.Levy WTP to OWD.The OWD is required to take a
minimum ot'10,000 ac-I't/yr of treated water from the R.iVI.Lcvy WTP supplied from the
regions raw \vatcr systcln,
Cost (llld FiJlaJlcing
Thc capital improvement costs associated with water supply and delivery are financed
through the OWD watcr mctcr capacity l'ee and user rate structures.The OWD potable water
sales revenue are used to pay for the wholesale cost of the trealed water supply and the
operating and maintenance expenses of the potable water system facilities.
41
Dtay Water District
\tVater Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Written Agreements,Contracts,or Other Prool
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.
Agrcement for the Purchase of Treated Water from the Otay Water Treatment Plant between the
Citv of San Diego and the Otay Water District.The OvVD entered into an agreement dated
January II,1999 with the City of San Diego that provides for 10 mgd of surplus treated water to
the OWD 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 OWD 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 Countv Water Authority and Otay Water District Regarding
lmplcmentation of the East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program.The
ECRTWlP Agreement requires the purchase of at least 10,000 ae-ft per year of potable water
from the Helix WD R.M.Levy WTP at the prevailing Water Authority treated water ratc.The
ECRTWIP Agreement is dated April 27,2006.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District !'or Design,
Construction,Operation,and Maintenance of the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility Modification.
The OWD 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 OWD shared the capital cost to expand its capacity
!'rom 8 mgd to 16 mgd.
Fedeml.Stale,and Local Penn/ts/Approvals
The OWD acquired all the permits !'or the construction of the pipeline and pump station
associated with the Otay WTP supply source and !'or thc 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 20 IO.
The City o!'San Diego and the Helix Water District arc 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.
42
Dlay WaleI'District
~Voter Suppl.v Assessl1zcnt Report
Pio Pica Energy Center
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies
Wastewater collection,treatment,and disposal services provided by the OWD 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 OWD
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 OWD is located primarily within the eastern area of the City of Chula Vista
and on the Otay Mesa.The OWD 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 OWD projects that annual average demands for recycled water will increase to 8,000 ac-
ft/yr by 2035.About 1,300 ac-ft/yr of supply is generated by the RWCWRF,with the
remainder planned to be supplied to OWD by the City of San Diego's SBWRP.
North District Recycled Water Concept
The OWD is a recognized leader in the use of recycled water for irrigation and other
commercial uses.The OWD continues the quest 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 OWD source 01'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 01'the OWD recycled water system and market area.
The purpose of the North District Recycled Water System Development Project,Phase I
Concept Study,is 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 afCected 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 wcre identified.Thcse include a reduction 01'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
43
Gilly Water District
Wmer Supply Assessment Report
Pia Pico Energy Center
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.At this time,the
effluent limit that is ofconcern is total nitrogen.An examination as to how the treatment
process might be modified to enhance nitrogen removal and a design is underway to remedy
the total nitrogen issue.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 S14 to S 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
dclivery 01'recycled water to the North District markets.
The estimated amount of imported water saved at full implcmcntation of thc North District
Recycled Water System Devclopment Project is 1,200 ac-ft/yr.This savcd imported watcr
could then be used to offsct ncw potable water demands.
Reeve/ed Water System Facifities
The OWD has and continues to construct recycled water storage,pumping,transmission,and
distribution ['acilities to meet projected recycled watcr markct demands,For nearly 20 years,
millions of dollars of capital improvements have been constructed,The supply link consisting
of a translnission main,storage reservoir,and a pump station to receive and transport the
recycled water from the City of San Diego's SBWRP are complete and recycled water
deliveries began on May 18,2007,
Cost ol/(f Financing
The capital improvement costs associated with the recycled water supply and distribution
systems are financed through the OWD water meter capacity I'ee and user rate structures,The
OWD recycled water sales revenue,along with MWD and the Water Authority's recycled
water sales incentive programs are used to help offset the costs I'or the wholesale purchase and
production of the recycled water supply,the operating and maintenance expcnses,and the
capital costs of thc rccycled water system facilities.
Written Agreements,Contracts,or Other Proof
The supply and cost associated with dcliveries of recycled water from the SBWRP is based on
the following document.
44
Otay Waler District
Water Supply AssesslIlel1t Heport
Pia Pico Energy Center
Agreement between the Otav Water District and the City ofSan Diego for Purchase of
Reclaimed Water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant.The agrcement provides for the
purchase of at least 6,721 ac-ft per year of recycled water from the SBWRP at an initial price ot'
S350 per acre-foot.The Otay Water District Board of Directors approved the final agreemcnt on
June 4,2003 and the San Diego City Council approved the final agreement on October 20,2003,
Federal,Stute,and Loatl Perrnits/Approvals
The OWD has in place an agreement with MWD for their recycled water sales incentive
program for supplies from the RWCWRF and the SBWRP.Also,thc OWD has in place an
agreemcnt with the Water Authority for their recycled water sales incentive program for
supplies from the RWCWRF and the SBWRP.The Water Authority salcs incentive
agreement was approved by Water Autbority on July 26,2007 and by OWD on August I,
2007.All permits for tile 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 NCL R9-2007-(038),This order establishes master
reclamation requirements for the production,distribution,and use of recycled water in the
OWD service area.The order includes the usc 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 OWD in
conformance with Order No.2000-203,
6.3.1.3 Potential Groundwater Supplies
The Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update,2010 UWiVlP,and the Otay Water District
March 2007 Integrated Water Resources Plan (2007 IRP)both contain a description ot'the
development of potential groundwater supplies.Over the past several years,OWD has studied
numerous potential groundwater supply options that have shown,through groundwater
monitoring well activities,poor quality water and/or insufficient yicld from the basins at a
cost effective level.The OWD has developed capital improvement program projects to
continue the quest to develop potential groundwater resources.Local OWD groundwater
supply development is currently considered as a viable water supply resource to meet
projected dcmands.
The development aneVor acquisition of potential groundwater supply projects by the OWD
have evolved and have been resurrected in response to the regional water supply issues related
45
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pieo Energy Center
to water source supply conditions.Local ground water supply projects will allow for less
reliance upon imported water,achieve a level of independenee of the regional wholesale
water ageneies,and diversify the OWD water supply portfolio consistent the Otay Water
District 2007 IRP.
In recognition of the need to develop sufficient alternative water supplies,the OWD has taken
the appropriate next steps towards development of production groundwater well projects.
There are three groundwater well projects that the OWD 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 Swcetwater River
Basin is located within the Sweetwater River watershed and that reach of the river extends
from Sweetwater Reservoir to the upstream LovcIand 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 OWD is to develop a groundwater well
production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable 01'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
idcntify 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 Wel1 Pilot Project will accomplish six primary goals:
•Update project setting
•Update applicable project alternatives analysis
•Prepare groundwater wel1 pilot project implementation plan
•Construct and test pilot monitoring and extraction wel1s
•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
e 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 01'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 OWD customers within that basin,as measured by water meters.In the
46
OlOy Waler District
Water Supply AsseSSluent Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
1994-1995 period,the quantity 01'water that was returned to the groundwater basin by OWD
customers was estimated to be 810 ae-ft/yr.Currently,that 12.5 percent quantity could be on
the order of 1,000 ac-ft/yr.A I'uture scope of work will need to addresses this concept while
considering t'urther 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 01'work.
Further development of the groundwater basin to enhance the total groundwater production
could be accomplished by the OWD by means of additional extraction of water from the basin
that is placed there hy 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 eonjunctive use concept.These two distinct water resource supply conjunctive usc
concepts will be addressed so they may coexist and to allow tor their development as separate
phases.
The scope of work to complete Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot
Project consists 01'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
01'$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 I'easible to develop a Phase [groundwater well production
system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of producing a sustainable yield of
up to 1,500 ac-ft/yr of potable watcr for thc OWD.[I'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 scopc or'
work.
Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well
[n early 2001 the OWD 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 slated that the
well could produce 3,200 ac-ft/yr with little or no treatment required prior to introducing the
water into the OWD potable water system or alternatively,the recycled watcr system.[n
March 200 I authorization to proceed with testing 01'the Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well
was obtained and the OWD proceeded with the investigation 01'this potential groundwater
supply opportunity.
47
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
The May 200 I Geoscience Support Services,Inc.completed for the OWD the preparation of
a report entitled,"Otay Mesa Lot 7 Welllnvestigation,"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 OWD 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 ac-ft/yr.
Rancho del Rev Groundwater Well
In 1991,the McMillin Development Company drilled the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well
to augment grading water supplies for their Rancho del Rcy 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 ac-I't/yr 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 OWD of its intent to
sell off the groundwater well asset.
In 1997,the OWD 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,
Llsing reverse osrnosis membranes and lon exchange.
In 2000,having received proposals for the design und 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.
48
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
In January 2010,citing the rising cost of imported water and the OWD's interest in securing
its own water source for long-term supply reliability,the Board authorized Phase I for drilling
and development of the Rancho del Rey Well.
In September 20 I0,a new 12-inch production well was drilled to a depth of 900 fcet 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 Ceasibility 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 51,500 to 52,000 per ac-Ct for an altcrnative that utilizes a seawater
membrane for treating both salts and boron.When comparcd with the currcnt 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 OWD is continuing to pursue the Rancho del Rey groundwater well opportunity with due
consideration of the recommendations oC the existing reports and plans to develop a
groundwater well production facility to extract approximately 500 ac-Ct/yr.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,thc OWD
has contracted for dcsign services I~)r the wellhead treatment facilities.
6.3.1.4 Otay Water District Desalination Project
The OWD 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
t"acility is intended to be designed,constructed,and operatcd in Mexico by a third party.The
OWD's draft Desalination Feasibility Study,prepared in 2008,discusses the likciy 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 1'01'the OWD to import the
Desalination project product water as a new local water supply resource.
While the treatment I'acility for the Desalination project will likely not be designed or
operated by thc OWD as the lead agency,it is important that the OWD maintain involvement
with the planning,design,and construction 01'the I'acility to ensure that the implemented
processes provide a product water of acceptable quality for distribution and use within the
O'vVD's system as well as in other regional agencies'systems that may use the product water,
i.e.City of San Diego,the Water Authority,etc.A seawater reverse osmosis treatment plant
removes constituents of concern h·ol11 the seawater,producing a water quality that I'ar exceeds
established United States and California drinking water regulations for most parameters,
49
Owy Water District
Water Sapply Assessment Report
Pio PieD Enerl<.V Center
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 OWD supply sources.The
Desalination Feasibility Study addresses product water quality that is considered acceptable
for public health and distribution.
Thc OWD,or any other potential participating agencies,will be required to get approval from
the CDPH in order to use tbe desalinated seawater as a water source.Several alternative
approaches are identified for gelling 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 assumcs that only OWD would participate and reccivc desalinated water,while thc
regional alternative assumes that other regional and/or local agencies would also participated
in the Rosarito project.
On November 3,20 I0,the OWD authorized the General Manager to entcr 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 OWD.Tbe supply target is assumed to be 50 mgcl while the ultimate
capacity of the plant will be 100 mgcl.
The OWD is proceeding with negotiations among the parties to establish water supply
resource acquisition terms through development of a Principles of Understanding document.
6.3.2 Otay Water District Capital Improvement Program
The OWD plans,designs,constructs,and operates water system facilities to acquire sufficient
supplies and to meet projected ultimate demands placed upon the potable and recyeled water
systems.III addition,the OWD 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 etlective water service.
New water facilities that are required to accommodate the forecasted growth within the entire
OWD service area arc defined and described within the Otay Water District 20 I()WRMP
Update.These facilities arc incorporated into the annual OWD Six Year Capital Improvement
Program (C!P)for implementation when required to support development activities.As major
development plans are formulated and proceed through the land use jurisdictional agency
approval processes,OWD prepares water system requirements specifically for the proposed
development project consistent with the Otay Water District 2010 WRMP Update.These
requirements document,define,and describe all the potable water and recycled water system
facilities to be constructed to provide an acceptable and adequatc level of service to the proposed
50
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
land uses,as well as the financial responsibility of the ['aciEties required for service.The OWD
funds thc facilities identitled 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 PPEC Project is currently located within the jurisdictions of the OWD,Water Authority,
and MWD.To obtain permanent imported water supply service,land areas are requircd to be
within the jurisdictions of the OWD,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 establishcdlanduse plans
are captured in the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)updated forccasts 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 witb preparation of
thcir 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 OWD,Water Authority,or MWD
jurisdictions (i.c.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 rcvised land use plans,
typically result in creating higher demand and supply requirements than previously
anticipated.Thc OWD,Water Authority,and MWD next demand forecast and supply
requirements and associ;1ted planning documents \vould then capture any increase or decrease
in dcmands and required supplies as a result of annexations or revised land use planning
decisions.
MWD's Integrated Resources Plan ORP)identifies a mix 01"resources (imported and local)
that,when implemented,will provide 100 percent reliability I"or full-scrvice demands through
the attainment of regional targets set for conservation,local supplies,State Water Project
supplies,Colorado Rivet·supplies,groundwater banking,and water transfers.The 2010
update to the IRP includes a planning buffcr supply intended to mitigate against the risks
associated with implementation 01'local and imported supply programs and I'or the risk that
future demands could be higher than projected.The planning buffer identifies an additional
increment of water that could potentially be developed when needed and if other supplies are
not I'ully implemented as planned.As part of implementation of the planning buffer,MWD
periodically evaluates supply development,supply conditions,and projected demands to
ensure that the region is not under or over developing supplies.Managed properly,the
5 I
Owy Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
PiG Pico Energy Center
planning buffer will help ensure that the southern California region,including San Diego
County,will have adequate water supplies to meet long-term future demands.
In Section ES-5 of their 2010 RUWMP,MWD states that MWD has supply capacities that
would be sufficient to meet expected demands from 2015 through 2035.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 2010 RUWMP identifies potential reserve supplies in the supply capability
analysis (Tables 2-9,2-10,and2-1 I),which could be available to meet the unanticipated
demands.
The County Water Authority Act,Section 5 subdivision II,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 0['a written water supply assessment report,an agency's shortage
contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of supply.Section I I
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 \Vater 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,adoptcd 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 ['egion avoid or minimize the impacts of shortages and ensure an
equitable allocation of supplies.
The WSA Report identifies and describes the processes by which watcr demand projections
['or thc proposcd PPEC Project will be fully included in the water demand and supply
['orecasts of the Urban Water Management Plans and other water resources planning
documents of the Water Authority and l\lIWD.Water supplies necessary to serve the demands
of the proposed PPEC Project,along with existing and other projected I'uture users,as well as
the actions necessary and status to develop these supplies,have been identified in the PPEC
Projcct WSA Report and will be included in the future water supply planning documents of
the Water Authority and MWD.
This WSA Report includes,among other information,an identification 01'existing water
supply entitlements,water rights,water service contracts,water supply projects,or
agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs ['or the proposed PPEC Project.This
WSA Report assesses,demonstrates,and documents that sul'ficient water supplies are planned
for and are intended to be available over a 20-year planning horizon,under normal conditions
52
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico En erg}'Center
and in single and multiple dry years to meet the projected demand of the proposed PPEC
Project and the existing and other planned development projects to be served by the OWD.
Table 8 presents the forecasted balance of water demands and required supplies for the OWD
serviec area under average or normal year conditions.The total actual demand for FY 20 10
was 33,270 acre feet.The demand for FY 20 lOis 5,635 acre feet lower than the demand in
FY 2005 of 38,905 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 9 presents the forecasted balance 01'water demands and supplies for the OWD service
area under single dry year conditions.Table 10 presents the forecasted balance of water
demands and supplies for the OWD service area under multiple dry year conditions for the
three year period ending in 2018.The multiple dry year conditions for periods ending in
2023,2028,and 2033 are provided in the Otay Water District 20 I0 UWMP.The projected
potable demand and supply requirements shown the Tables 8,9,and 10 are from the Otay
Water District 2010 UWMP adjusted to reflect the additional 372 ae-ft/yr 01'potable water
demand for the PPEC Project.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 Tables 9 and 10.The recycled water supplies are assumed to experience
no reduction in a dry year.
Table 8
Projected Balance of Water Demands and Supplies Normal Year Conditions (acre feet)
Description FY 2015 FY 2020 FY 2025 FY 2030 FY 2035
Demands
O\VD Demands 44.88.1 53.768 63.81 1 70.6W 77.171
1 PPECProjl'cl Demand [ncrcasc 372 '},72 172 372 I 7-,72III
Additional Conservation Target (372)I (7.8101 (14.3681 (18.2671 I (20,929)
Tutal Demand 44.XS3 I 46..121 40.815 52.774 56.614-!Supplies
\Vater Authority Supply 40.48.1 41.321 44J115 45.074 48.614 I
Recycled \Valer Supply·,1.400 5.000 5,800 6.800 8.000 !
Total Supply 44.883 46.121 40.815 I 52.774 56.614
Supply Surplus/(Deficit)()()()()()
Table 9 presents the foreeasted balance of water demands and supplies for the OWD service
area under single dry year and multiple dry year conditions as from the Otay Water District
20 I0 UWMP.The PPEC Project proposes to bave a maximum annual capacity I'actor of46
percent or a maximum 01'4,000 hours per year so their demands do not need adjustment 1'01'
multiple dry year conditions.
53
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessmellt Report
Pio Pica Energy Center
Table 9
Projected Balance of Water Demands and Supplies
Single Dry and Multiple Dry Year Conditions (acre feet)
I
Normal Single Mnltiple Dry YearsYearDryYear
FY 2ii15FY2011FY2012FY2013{lY 2014
Demands
O\VD Demands 37.176 41.566 43.614 46385 I 50.291
PPEe Project Demand Increase 372 I 372
Additional Conservation Target (372)(377)
Total Demand 37.176 41.566 43.614 46385 50.291
SUpl)!ies
vVater AUlhority Supply 33.268 37.535 39.460 47.108 45.891
Recycled \Vater Surrdy .1,901i 4.031 4.154 4.277 4.400
Total Supply 37.176 41.566 43.614 46385 50.291
Supply Snrplns/(Deficit)0 0 0 0 0
District Demand totals with SBX7~7 conservation target achievement plus single elry year increase as shown.
The \-Vater i-\lllhority could implement its Di'vlP.In this installces.the \Vatcr Aut!1urity may'have to alloctlte supply
shortages based on it c(juitahk allocation methodology in its Di\'lP.
Dry year demands asslllned to generale a 6.4Cfr increase in demand over normal conditions for each year in
addition to new'demand growth.
Table 9 also presents the t'orecasted balance of water demands and supplies for the OWD
service area under multiple dry year conditions for the three year period ending in 201 S.
[n evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply,the PPEC 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 OWD Board in May 2010.These water supply projects are in addition to tbose 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 respouse 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 OWD 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 OWD 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 t'rom
any new water resources developed by the OWD.
The OWD acknowledges the ever-present challenge of balancing water supply with demand
and the inherent need to possess a flexible and adaptable water supply implementation
S4
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energ}'Center
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 OWD
fully intend to maintain sufficient rcliable supplies through the 20-year planning horizon
under normal,single,and multiple dry year conditions to meet projected demand of the PPEC
Project,along with existing and other planned development projects within the OWD 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 PPEC Project as well as
existing and othcr reasonably foreseeable planned development projects within the OWD for
a 20-year planning horizon,in normal and in single and multiple dry years.
55
Otay Water District
Water SUP!J!y Assessment Report
Ph}Pico Energy Center
Source Documents
California Energy Commission,July 19,2011 Letter Request for Production of a Water
Supply Assessment.
City of Chula Vista,"Gtay 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 Spccilic PI,m Arca,"adopted July 27,1994,
Gtay Watcr District,"2008 Water Resources Master Plan Update,"dated November 201D,
Atkins and Otay Water District,"Otay Water District 2010 Urban Water Management Plan,"
June 201 \,
Camp Dresser &McKee,[ne""Otay Water District Integrated Water Resources Plan,"March
2007
San Diego County Watcr Authority,"Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update,"May
20 II.
MWD Watcr District of Southern California,"Regional Urban Water Management Plan:'
November 2010.
Camp Dresser &McKcc,[nc.,"Rosarito Desalination Facility Conveyance and Disinfection
System Project,"June 21,20 10.
PBS&J,"Draft Otay Water District North District Rccycled Water System Development
f'roject,Phase I Concept Study,"December 2()08.
NBS Lowry,"Middle Sweetwater River System Study Water Resources Audit,"June 1991.
Michael R.Welch,"Middle Sweetwater River System Study Alternatives Evaluation,"May
1993.
Michael R.Welch,"Middle Sweetwater River Basin Conjunctive Use Alternatives,"
September 1994.
Geoscience Support Services,Inc.,"Gtay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation,"May 200 \,
Boyle Engineering Corporation,"Groundwater Treatment Feasibility Study Ranch del Ray
Well Site,"September 1996.
56
Dray Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Agreement for the Purchase of Treated Water from the Olay 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 rcgarding
Implementation of the East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program.
Agreement betwecn 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 betwecn the Otay Water District and the City of San Diego for Purchase of
Reclaimed Watcr from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant.
57
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pio Pico Energy Center
Appendix A
PPEC Project Vicinity Map
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
PPEC PPOJECT VICI~IITY MAP
APPENDIX A
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment Report
Pia Pico Energy Center
Appendix B
PEe Project Development Plan
;:;:1:-'
I~
CZ
zo I.::'
I~
>-S~~c:".':;;,-Ii,1'1j'I !II
~,0 ~'l.i,I'!~!Ii ~!nil .j 111 !l!!iu-Ii l!I IU 'II I ~~s i~d1'1 "hi!'1-i-'~hi'l ~.I'!.III i!~II!IHII !
e,I,l Ii HI I!• il I
2
CASE ISO A\erOige Sl"lmm~r Pe~k Peaf;Day NOles
H'gh HliJh Hour A\,,pr;::lO~1;'All Fin"',;;,r"rl i~(li::l~'pui in C,PM
,Ambient Tem;leratllfe 59 70 80 93 82 i)Ba~ed on GE APPS pertorm8~ce
IN..,BUb Temperature S\60 ,,3 65 63 :::'Ult'afihe-c r~Ci.i:ry 'ate-g'5</.
Relatve Humidll~'%60 57 ).9 22 38 <:)RO 1st Pass Reco"ery Rate 75%
A'Ylbien'r'rea~1Jra 14 :),6 1'1,;;'6 '14,~oO 14..:]1,j 14 ~)RO 2nd :>aiS5 Reco.er~Rata 85'::-~
Gross Turbine OlJlpUI,MIN 1043 1024 101,0 993 100.7 E)Overall RO Reca'it!ry Rail!!72(i/,
Inlel A r Cooter S-~lU5 U1t Un Un Un (Jr I J (;O-)lIng Sysl"rn Onfl OD010~i
Descr.ption CTsIn ser.'lcc 3 3 3 3 3 E)Serl/lce WOller Use gpm 5
A waler Kequl1ecl by rian 4:JL 49'5i>4 ti~tl ::;73 ~j Annual Gapacily t-~ctor 40"/,
B Required Malle,;p 10Cool.nq System 215 In 177 185 172 1:)Anl1ual WOller Savings 53~,~
C Servce Vlialer Flow 5 98 167 259 182 compa cd 10 '00%e...ap-)raliv~coomg
D ServicewBlell0 evap cooler~0 93 162 254 177 11'1 Op~rati~hours are estirTlalec
E Wasl1down h,se use 5 5 5 5 5 :0 maXimize <JperaIJo illh'gh(H lerrperatures
F1 LJF ~vstem Ff!F.n ?-,'P ??:',,~?1!'i "IA
F2 UF S)'slem Back:w~sl1 12 11 11 11 11
T OiliVJ3terSlOP Efflue...t 10 H 1$1$lB
F3 RO Syslen)Feed 22D 211 208 204 2DB
C RO Poo;;1 (llIcl Fbw 2-411 23~23'4 :?30 234
H RO Pass 2 Inlel fbw 166 17S 176 173 175
I RO Pll:S:S 2 R:::,!::t;;llo P<-J5S 1 2tl ,2 T 26 26 26
J RO Product Water 158 152 149 147 149
~KU reJe::ts 62 ::>9 ~9 08 :.8
K PotablE!wate'lo admu):Jldg 2 Z 2 .2 2
L ,DemineraIzed 'Nate'Flo\',158 152 1~9 147 149
Iv!D~m.n -",altH10 evap cO:Jters 0 0 0 'J 0
N NOx injection 158 152 1~9 147 149
0 Evap coolerevapo,dbon 0 19 3-2 51 35
Evap ccoler Cycles ofConc::enl'dliOn 125 i 25 U5 1,25 125 1 1t;.•,u..J~IoF.:I I "FF I C",,"I 'I,~,~m
p F""I"II'II~tM~~O('llo:?r bIi)w:iow~0 7~no 203 142 ~'IO "t:-)E~Ei<C,iGEtlTEFlE~ap ecoler -olal lilakeup 0 93 1&2 25-<l 177 I
Eo,Qp C:CQIQr 1T\.lq~~p d'lmln fraclKl'\0°;'Do;.0% 0%O~l.~"JDlfGO:::~lItH'c~a ,Inler::ool.er o;;lndens.ation 0 2d 35 43 36
Ii lelll f<CJo;;IIOIl (MMDIUr'hri 1UJ 123 124 120 124 ~'.IN::11:1:,1 ~1,"""Lt.C'rCl!:;Percenl Dry Cooling 71~~63%55%46%54%
R Co-o~nQ 5Y5tem EvaJorallon 19'\25~311 385 322
CHllingSystfrm C'rdes of Ccncen:ralJC1n 3.25 ~.OiJ 4.50 ":.75 4.75 ~~'KiewituG.,ol'nQ System Bb.....dcr.·,n 85 B'i 89 103 8.6
CCiol.ng System Total ~,1ak~uJ 277 33)41)0 188 408 ~1 Rr!Orc:r~l...j
V vvastewa1er ~IOW 104 103 11)7 121 104 _~.h~I(an~i:l~~1~
Annual wA-ER a~LA..c.s F.-DW ~:;'LUE:;Annual Operation hours 1.100 1.60)1000 300 ',000
W~!f!r liMn A~r~.fj ~?147 1114 1Fi 17R b\'I::l'[l:!')..;..'1.....13 NU"'l!:;.-l
W~!er Saved,con'pared to A::re·ft 139 173 n 23 42.7 !.jt);,r,
100~.eO/3poI31,vQ cooh,g ~/o 60"~5A%1171%3(i%53{~"r"'I"·.........Figure 3.5-38
W~5teViaterDisposal A:;re-fj 21 3)20 7 78 .J.:~~J.:l"·Htl .
Otay Water District
Board of Directors Meeting
October 5,2011
Background
Senate Bills 610 and 221 became effective on January I,
2002,with the primary intent to improve the link between
water supply availability and land use decisions.
Pia Pica Energy Center
•300 Megawatt Natural Gas Fired Power Generating Facility
•Operate up to 4,000 Hours a Year
Pio Pico Energy Center
•Plant Startup May 2014
•Interim Potable Demand of 369 AFY until Recycled Water is
Available
PPEC Project Water Supply Assessment
•The regional and local water sup~ly agencies
acknowledge the challenges and fully intend to
develop sufficient,reliable supplies.to meet
demands•
•
PPEC Project Water Supply Assessment
•The WSA Report documents the planned water
supply projects and the actions n.ecessary to
develop the supplies.
Otay Water District
Planned Local Water Supply Projects
d
Otay Water District
tdBI fS I dD•p rOlec e a ance 0 UDllllvan eman
Normal Single Multiple Dry YearsYearDryYear
FY 2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
Demands
Otay Water District Demands 37,176 41,566 43,614 46,385 50,291
PPEC Project Demand Increase 372 372
Additional Conservation Target .(372)(372)
Total Demand 37,176 41,566 43,614 46,385 50,291
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 33,268 37,535 39,460 42,108 45,891
Recycled Water Supply 3,908 4,031 4,154 4,277 4,400
Total Supply 37,176 41,566 43,614 46,385 50,291
Supply Surplus/(Deficit)0 0 0 0 0
Table 9 of PPEC WSAReport
District Demand totals with SBX7-7 conservation target achievement with single dry
year and multiple dry year increase as shown.The Water Authority could implement its
DMP.In these instances,the Water Authority may have to allocate supply shortages based on
the equitable allocation methodology in its DMP.
..:i:;~I IS
t
•
•
•
Conclusion
•
2)
Conclusion continued
Staff Recommendation
Questions?
AGENDA ITEM 8a
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:RIB d M t'egu ar oar ee lng
SUBMITTED BY:Mark '(,I)at ton!
MEETING DATE:
W.O./G.F.NO:
October 51 2011
DIV,NO.
SUBJECT:
General Manager
Board of Directors 2011 Calendar of Meetings
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
At the request of the Board l the attached Board of Directorls meeting
calendar for 2011 is being presented for discussion.
PURPOSE:
This staff report is being presented to provide the Board the
opportunity to review the 2011 Board of Directorls meeting calendars
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.
Attachments:Calendar of Meetings for 2011
Board of Directors,\Vorkshops
and Committee Meetings
2011
Regular Board Meetings:
January 5,2011
February 2,20 II
March 2,2011
April 6,2011
May 4,2011
June 1,2011
July 15,2011
August 10,20 I I
September 7,2011
October 5,2011
November 2,2011
December 7,2011 (Canceled)
Board Workshops:
Budget Workshop:Monday,May 16,2011
Special Board or Committee Meetings (3'<1
Wednesday orEaeh Month or as Noted)
January 19,2011
February 16,2011
March 16,2011
April 20,2011
May 18,2011
June 15,2011
July 20,2011
August 17,20 I I
September 21,2011
October 19,2011
November 16,2011
G:""L'scrDnln\.DislSCC\,WINWORD"",STAi"RPTS\Bocm!['vleeting Cakndar Attach /\for 2011 9-7-11.doc
Page I of I
AGENDA ITEM 9a
STAFF REPORT
W.O.lG.F.NO:
MEETING DATE:TYPE MEETING:Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY:Gary Stalker,System
Operations Manager
APPROVED BY:Pedro Porras,Chief of Operations
(Chief)
./
October 5,2011
DIV.NO.
APPROVED BY:
(Asst.GM):
SUBJECT:
Manny Magana,Assistant General Manager,Engineering and
Water operations~
Regional Power Outage sJJmary Report
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
This is an informational item and requires no Board action.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment "A"
PURPOSE:
This is to inform the Board of the District's experiences and actions
taken during the regional power outage on September 8,2011.
ANALYSIS:
The power was out for approximately 10 hours at the main headquarters
building and from six to twelve hours at other District facilities.
Water service was maintained at normal pressures throughout the
District's service area during the outage.District staff responded
as needed and back-up staff were designated to come in as relief.
Seventeen staff from Water Operations and the safety and security
administrator worked after-hours to monitor potential effects due to
the outage.The power outage did bring forth some potential areas of
improvements in our emergency power systems that need to be
evaluated.Some of these issues were already recognized and equipment
has been budgeted this fiscal year to improve them.
The primary issue was that the SCADA system radio communications l;Jere
largely offline because long term back-up power equipment has not been
purchased for the new Ethernet radio system.Two water systems
operators visually checked reservoir levels and manually started pumps
where necessary_Most of the new Ethernet radios were initially
installed with small UPS batteries to handle short localized power
outages of up to 30 minutes.Larger battery back-up was to be added
later once the combined power needs for operations,security,and
other IT equipment was determined.The present plan is to connect
SCADA radios at pump stations,and reservoirs near pump stations,to
the emergency generators to provide considerably longer back-up time.
In addition,a three day emergency battery back-up will be supplied at
remote reservoir sites so that the reservoir level signals will be
tranamitted to the pump station.These batteries can be recharged
using small portable generators during more extended emergencies.
Staff is also evaluating partnering ~lith cellular site companies to
use power from their generators as back-Up power for radios.Many
reservoirs have cellular sites on or adjacent to them that have
generator power.
The District's major computer systems stayed up in the headquarters
building and most workstations were back online within a few minutes
when the back-up generator kicked in.A UPS failure was detected in
the first floor switch-room,but its impact was minor.The cellular
communications ~Iere impacted and spotty initially,but our internet
and radio systems worked well.
The generator in the Operations Center/EOC also kicked in immediately
and kept systems on-line.When SDG&E power was restored,the
automatic transfer switch IATS)for this generator did not work
properly and power had to be manually switched back to the grid by one
of our electricians.The pump electric supervisor will have the ATS
tested.In addition,one generator was previously evaluated to power
both the Warehouse and fuel island.This generator was budgeted for
this fiscal year and the purchase of it will be expedited.
All of the permanently installed back-up generators for the pump
stations functioned properly.Fleet maintenance staff topped off fuel
as needed and the District has enough fuel on-hand to normally operate
all pump stations for approximately eight days during high demand
periods.In addition,during extended power outages,demands are
expected to be lower than normal due to loss of power to dishwashers,
washing machines and sprinkler systems controllers.Two portable
generators needed to be manually wired to pump stations because the
Air Pollution Control District does not allow portable generators to
be continually connected at a facility.Permanent generators have been
budge'ted this fiscal year for these two pump stations.
The treatment plant's back-up generator started properly but
overheated and shutdown due to being overloaded,which also shutdown
the treatment plant.After non-critical load was shed,the generator
was restarted and continued operating to power the aeration blowers
and lighting.It was decided not to restart the plant during the
outage while flows were diverted to Metro.The District has already
purchased a larger generator for the plant,which will be installed
during the low recycled water demand period this winter.
Other improvements that could be made to be more efficient during
similar emergencies are:
•Add generator fuel level readings to SCADA so staff does not need
to manually check fuel levels.
•Add battery powered emergency lights at the Operations Center/SOC
and Treatment Plant office,in case a generator does not function
properly.
~Evaluate emergency access to facilities with electric gates.
Some electric gates are not powered by a generator and do not
have convenient alternative entry.Also evaluate emergency
access to gated communities that have District facilities within.
•Identify stores that have emergency back-up power and would
likely remain open in emergencies.
•The County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services'WebEOC
website was monitored and was useful for information updates and
requests for mutual aid from other agencies.The San Diego
County Water Authority has staff at this EOC.The District did
not receive any requests for mutual aid,such as equipment or
staffing.The Sweetwater Authority took 5,250 gallons of water
through an interconnection that automatically opens when their
water pressure gets low in the Naples/Oleander area of Chula
Vista.
In short,this outage was a good test for the District's emergency
response and communications.The District maintained full service to
customers and the improvements/upgrades mentioned above will be
further evaluated.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Meets the District's strategy to "Improve business functionality by
cons~antly improving the efficiency and effectiveness of important
business processes N
•
LEGAL IMPACT:
Not applicable.
m.~
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
COMMITTEE ACTION:
ATTACHMENT A
Regional Power Outage Summary Report
The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a Committee Meeting held on September 28,2011 and the
follo1"tJing comments 'i'Jere made:
•Staff indicated that the purpose of the Regional Power Outage
Summary Report is to inform the Board of the District's
experiences and actions taken on September 8,2011,during the
power outage.
@ It was noted that the District's water services was maintained at
normal pressures throughout its service area during the outage.
However,staff indicated that the power outage did bring forth
some potential areas of improvements in the District's emergency
power systems that need to be evaluated.Staff discussed those
areas in need of improvements,
•Staff highlighted that no spills were reported in the District's
serVlce area and also noted that its customers did not have to
boil water.The Committee stated that it was nice to hear that
the District was well-prepared during the regional power outage
and continued to maintain service to its customers.
•It was discussed that staff monitored the County of San Diego
Office of Emergency Services'WebEOC to obtain useful information
updates and to see if requests for mutual aid from other local
agencies were needed.Staff noted that the District did not
receive any mutual aid requests,but did indicate that ehe
Sweetwater Authority took 5,250 gallons of water through an
interconnection in the Naples/Oleander area of Chula Vista that
automatically opens when their water pressure gets low.
•In response to a question by the Committee,staff stated that the
District has thirty-two (32)interconnections where it is able to
receive water from or supply water to other agencies.The
Committee inquired if a potential cross-contamination could occur
within those interconnections while the other agency is under a
Boil Water Order.Staff stated that it would be unlikely since
the other agencies pressure would be lower thaD ours.However,
staff indicated that they \wuld research the potential impacts of
receiving water supply from other local agencies through its
interconnections and will also provide the location of the
District's interconnections at the Board meeting.
2"ollo\tIing the discusS,J"OD,the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board as an informational
item.
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 8b
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITIED BY:
Board Meet~~~___~d::hZJoseph-I(:-Seac ern,
Chief Financial Officer
MEETING DATE:
W.O.JG.F.NO:
October 5,2011
DIV.NO.All
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
German Alvare~stant General Manager,,inanee and
Administration
Retiree Healthcare Benefits -Substantiation of the Actuarial
Report and Validation that the Enhancement of the Retiree
Healthcare Benefits is Fully Funded by Employee Contributions
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
This staff report is an informational item that provides
additional findings to the Board of Directors regarding the
recent enhancement to the retiree healthcare benefits:
1)The peer review by Milliman,Inc.of the 2011 actuarial
study performed by Bartel Associates,LLC.
2)The results of the net savings calculation by Bartel
Associates,LLC of the retiree healthcare benefits.
3)Statement by John Bartel on the proper use of an actuarial
study.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
N/A
PURPOSE:
To provide the Board of Directors with the findings of the peer
review of the recent actuarial study;the results of the net
savings calculation by Bartel Associates,LLC;along with an
explanation of the proper use of an actuarial study.
ANALYSIS:
SUMMARY
The Board of Directors has approved the enhancement of the
retiree medical plan after reviewing the anticipated savings
that result from the employee proposal to pay additional costs
of the CalPERS retirement plan.This action has been highly
criticized by Lani Lutar of the San Diego Taxpayers Association.
The District has since validated the financial information by
hiring an independent professional actuary to perform a peer
review,and retaining the District's existing actuary to
validate staff's projections of the anticipated savings.Staff
has reviewed both the reports and concludes that they clearly
confirm that the Board's decision was fiscally sound.
BACKGROUND
The District employees approached the Otay Water District Board
of Directors with a proposal which was effectively cost neutral
to the District.The proposal was that the employees would pay
an additional amount toward the CalPERS retirement plan,
relieving the District of this expense,and in return the
District would provide an enhancement to the retiree healthcare
benefits.The employees made this proposal which would reduce
their take home pay,an immediate sacrifice,for the opportunity
to receive an improved retirement in the event they retire with
the required age and years of service.
This plan went through various iterations.In order to insure
that the plan would not cause the District's ratepayers any
additional financial burden,the proposed annual payment by the
employees was set at a rate that exceeded the annual cost of the
enhancement.The District hired the actuarial firm of Bartel
Associates,LLC,a well respected firm,to calculate the cost of
the existing retiree healthcare benefits and various plan
proposals.The change in the annual cost was then compared,by
District staff,with the cost of the projected annual payment by
employees.For each of the various levels of enhancement
considered by the employees,the additional payment by employees
was set at a rate that would exceed the annual cost of the
enhancement.The employees then had to consider if this future
benefit was worth the immediate sacrifice of take home pay.The
decision by the various employee groups was far from unanimous
but in the end it was approved by the employee associations and
the request went to the Board.
It is understood that over time,some assumptions will prove to
be higher or lower than originally estimated.In the event that
this causes the cost of the enhancement to exceed the payments
by the employees,the District is able to renegotiate the
benefit level or the payment,or both.This is the ultimate
protection of the intended cost neutrality of this agreement.
The employees of the District are very appreciative that the
Board of Directors was willing to look at the merits of this
decision and support the employees'willingness to sacrifice
current take home pay for the hope of a more stable retirement.
SUBSTANTIATION OF ACTUARIAL REPORT
The merits of this decision are based on the overall cost of the
changes to the retiree medical plan which were determined by an
actuarial study.The Taxpayers Association has highlighted Tier
III,a subset of employees,who had a very small medical
retirement benefit and who would therefore receive the greatest
benefit of this enhancement.The cost of this benefit prior to
the enhancement was very small,with approximately 97%of all
plans evaluated by the actuaries providing a greater benefit.
The cost of the benefit after the enhancement was more in line
with a typical plan coming in at the 62nd percentile of all plans
evaluated by the actuaries.The change in Tier III is
significantly greater than the overall enhancement of the plan.
The Taxpayers Association's focus on this subset of employees
misrepresents the entirety of the Board's action.The District,
in order to accurately reflect the action,recognizes the
employee contribution,and that this contribution is greater
than the increased cost of the benefit.The employee
contribution must be considered in order to have a complete
evaluation of the employees'proposal.
At the August 10,2011 Board Meeting,numerous questions were
raised regarding the legitimacy of the actuarial report.
Someone in the audience recommended that the District use
another actuarial firm,which they specifically referenced,to
confirm the cost information.The District hired this firm,
Milliman,Inc.,who has an exceptional reputation,to perform an
independent peer review of the study by Bartel Associates,LLC.
The results of this review are very positive and can be
summarized by this quote from their report:
"Since the plan participates in the California Employers'
Retiree Benefit Trust Fund (CERBT),many of the
assumptions and methods must conform to the CalPERS OPEB
assumption model.Based on our review of the reports,the
valuation does conform to this requirement.Where the
CalPERS OPEB assumption model allows for some latitude,
the assumptions described in the report seemed reasonable
and conformed to GASB 45 requirements and actuarial
standards of practice."
This report is a substantiation of the quality of information in
the Bartel Associates,LLC report and gives even greater
assurance that the information used by District staff and the
Otay Board of Directors is accurate and fairly assess the cost
of the retirement medical plan enhancements.
VALIDATION OF NET SAVINGS
In an effort to substantiate the position that the Board's
support of the employee's proposal would not burden the
District's ratepayers,the District engaged Bartel Associates,
LLC to do a separate calculation of the savings.The actuary
used a more complicated and detailed approach to measure the
projected net savings.The result of their study shows an
annual net savings following a net cost in the first year.The
net cost in the first year is a result of the 2 year phasing in
of employee contributions.In the second year and in all
subsequent years there is a net savings.This savings begins at
approximately $140,000 and increases steadily in all future
years.The results of the Bartel Associates,LLC calculation
validate that the enhancement to the retiree healthcare benefits
is fully funded by employee contributions.This net savings
adds a measure of security and protection to the ratepayers,
ensuring that they will not be burdened financially by this
decision.
USE OF THE ACTUARIAL STUDY
In conversations with the District's actuary they have stated
that it would be misleading to focus on just one subset of the
employees to characterize the Board's action as a whole.The
District's approach has always been to use the entire report
which reflects the entire change.The Taxpayers Association's
portrayal of the Board's action is focused on only one group of
employees,which is a misrepresentation.The Taxpayers
Association also ignores the employee's additional contribution
to CalPERS.
The Otay Water District Board used sound information that has
been validated and substantiated.The Otay Water District's
Board of Directors also retains the ability to modify the
agreement as future situations demand.The Board's decision has
not added to the financial burdens of the ratepayers.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None as this is an information report only.This report is
further support that the action by the Board of Director's was
based on sound financial information and added no cost to the
ratepayers.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Sound financial decisions.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
General
Attachments:
A)Bartel Associates Net Savings Calculation
B)Bartel Associates Memorandum
C)Retiree Healthcare Benefits Presentation
t IIUTLl'1\II !!
ATIACHMENTA
OT y W TER DISTRICT
RETIREE HE LTHC RE PLAI
June 30,201 I GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation
CalPERS Savings Versus aPEB ARC Increase
Bartel Associates,LLC
John E.Bartel,President
Joseph R.D'Onofrio
Adam Zimmerer
September 30,2011
CONTENTS
Topic Page
Methods &Assumptions
Savings Projections
Projected Payroll
3
5
METHODS &ASSUMPTIONS Ir-I----,
•CalPERS Member Contributions
CalPERS Unrepresented Represented
Member Rate 7/15/11 7/1112 8/15/11 7/1112
ew Rate 4.50%8.00%5.25%8.75%
Prior Rate 1.00%1.00%1.00% 1.00%
Savings 3.50%7.00%4.25%7.75%
•OPES ARC Increase (OOO's)
Unfunded Annual
Actuarial Required
Accrued ormal VAAL Contribution
Plan Design Liability Cost Amortization (ARC)
ew Plan $10,419 $640 $673 $1 313
Prior Plan 5.478 145 350 495
Increase 4,941 495 323 818
~September 30,20 II
METHODS &ASSUMPTIONS Ir-I-_
•OPES Annual Required Contribution
•ARC projection assumes funding contribution equals ARC each year
•Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability fully funded in 26 years
•Assumptions
•District payroll estimate for 20 L1/12:
~Unrepresented -$5,021 100
~Represented -57,704,600
•Payroll increases 3.75%for 2012/13 and 3.25%per year thereafter
•Present value uses a discount rate of4.5%
•Other assumptions same as June 30,2011 actuarial valuation
~September 30,20 II 2
SAVINGS PROJECTIONS I'---1------,
CalPERS Savint!s vs OPEB ARC Increase Proiection
(Amounts in OOO's)
Present
Fiscal CalPERS OPEB Value of
Year Contribution ARC Annual Cumulative Cumulativf
End Savings Increase Savings Savings Savings
2012 $457 $818 $(361)$(361)(361)
2013 984 845 140 (222)(228)
2014 1,016 872 144 (78)(96)
2015 1,049 900 149 71 35
2016 1083 930 154 225 163
2021 1,271 1,091 180 1,071 785
2026 1,492 1,280 212 2,064 1,370
2031 1,750 1 502 248 3,230 1,921
2036 2,054 1,762 291 4,597 2,440
2041 2,410 1,251 1,158 9,317 3856
2046 2,828 1,468 1,359 15,699 5,415
~September 30,20 II 3
..
SAVINGS PROJECTIONS
1""--1---.,
CalPERS Savings vs OPEB ARC Increase
3,000 ,-------------------------,
-PERS MemberContnbulion Savings
2.500 -OPEB A RC Increase
>;
.;:2.000
~
'-Q
.;I 500c:u'":::I<:>~1000
500 .
204620412036203120262021
o+--r-r-~-.-r-,--,---r-.--r--.--r--r-,-,-.,....,-r-~-.-r-,-----,,.,--...-r--.--r-r-~...,...-{
2012 2016
~September 30,20 I I
Fiscal Year Ending
4
.'
PROJECTED PAYROLL
Pavroll Projection
(Amounts in OOO's)
1'--1--
Fiscal Unrepresented Represented Total
Year CalPERS CalPERS CalPERS
End Payroll Payroll Payroll
2012 5021 S 7 705 $12726
2013 5209 7994 13203
2014 5379 8253 13632
2015 5554 8,522 14,075
2016 5734 8798 14532
2021 6728 10324 17,053
2026 7895 12 115 20,010
2031 9264 14215 23,480
2036 10,871 16,681 27,551
2041 12,756 19,573 32,329
2046 14,968 22,967 37,935
~September 30,20 II 5
ATIACHMENT B
RTEL
Date:
To:
From:
Cc:
Re:
October 4 2011
Mark Watton,General Manager,Otay Water District
John E.Bartel President,Bartel Associates,LLC
Joseph R.D Onofrio,Bartel Associates,LLC
Retiree Medical Benefit Study
Bartel Associates has completed an analysis of the retiree medical benefit plan changes
approved by the District s Board of Directors on August 10 2011,including a
projection of the cost impact of those changes as compared to the savings expected as
the District phases out paying its employees'CalPERS member contributions.A copy
ofour discussion outline summarizing anticipated net District savings is attached.This
memo summarizes information contained in this report and provides the District a brief
response to comments made by Mr.Chris Cate representing the San Diego Taxpayers
Association (SDCTA).
Cost Versus Savings Projections
For 20III12,when the transition to the employees paying their CalPERS member
contributions is only partially phased in,the District's CalPERS member contribution
savings is less than the retiree medical plan change cost,resulting in a net cost increase
to the District of approximately $361,000.However,there is a net savings to the
District ofapproximately $140,000 in 2012/13 when the member contributions are
entirely paid by the employees,effective in the middle of the year.This net avings
increases steadily to approximately $300,000 in 25 years for 2036/37.Beginning with
2037/38 the net savings increases dramatically to over 51 million annually becau e the
initial Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability is paid off,resulting in a much lower
retiree medical Annual Required Contribution.Discounting projected savings results in
a present value (in today s dollars)ofapproximately $1.9 million after 20 years and
2.4 million after 25 years.Projected net avings,ofcourse would be much higher
using longer projection periods.
Comments on SDCTA Transcripts
We reviewed transcripts of comment made by Mr.Chris Cate ofthe SDCT at the
August 10,2011 and September 7 2011 Board ofDirectors'meetings and have the
following comments:
•[n general,Mr.Cate s calculations are accurate.
•Mr.Cate appears to under tand the basics and basis ofour benefit change
study
•However Mr.Cate:
•Takes our study results out ofcontext,and
•Does not consider:
o The retiree medical plan in total.o How the District's results compare with other agencies throughout
California both before and after the benetit change.
-III 11",.eI \"·flU''.~LIII,'1111 ·~'''l ,\I.It"".C:lltf"mi,\')+-+112
maiN:(,"il'/177-I (d III •fax:(,)(Ii \I)?,1I;7 •web:'\'\\'\\.b:lff~I-.lS""L·t.\t"S,':llfll
Date:
To:
From:
Page:
October 4,2011
Mark Watton
John E.Bartel
2
o Whether or not the District's contribution policy impacts his analysis,
including the District's funded status.
We believe Mr.Cate has taken the results of our analysis out ofcontext.A more
reasonable reading ofour report results in the following conclusions:
•Tier 1II retiree medical benefits before the benefit changes were much lower than
our other California public agency clients.Comparing results with other Bartel
Associates clients,we found:
•Approximately 3%ofour clients have a lower normal cost and approximately
97%of our clients have a higher normal cost than District tier III employees had
before the benefit changes.
•Approximately 62%ofour clients have a lower normal cost and approximately
38%of our clients have a higher normal cost than District tier III employees
have after the benefit changes.
•District retiree medical benefits after the plan change in total for all Tiers were
reasonable compared to other California public agencies.Comparing results with
other Bartel Associates clients,we found:
•Approximately 23%ofour clients have a lower normal cost and approximately
77%ofour clients have a higher normal cost than all District employees had
before the benefit changes.
•Approximately 61 %ofour clients have a lower normal cost and approximately
39%ofour clients have a higher normal cost than all District employees have
after the benefit changes.
•Total District retiree healthcare costs increased from 4.0%ofpay to 10.6%ofpay.
Comparing results with other Bartel Associates clients we found:
•Approximately 32%ofour clients have a lower Annual Required ContIibution
(ARC)and approximately 68%ofour clients have a higher ARC than the
District had for all employees before the benefit changes.
•Approximately 53%ofour clients have a lower Annual Required Contribution
(ARC)and approximately 47%ofour clients have a higher ARC than the
District has for all employees after the benefit changes.
Please call Joe D'Onofrio (650/377-1610)or me (650/377-1601)with any questions
about our analysis.
o:\c1ients\otay water disirict\opeb\20 II\reports\ba otaywd I1-10-04 memo.doc
+11 1\",.,,1 \l;VI1I1C·.~lIirl'-1+.1 -~:lIl ,\I.,rcl).(:"l,tl>nll.,';)+-(('2
main:(>,),),Til-I (.(111 -fax:(.SI>,!3+:i-SlI'i7 -web:\\'\n\.1>:lJTl·j-:t'S"C1:IIL".CI>lIl
Purpose of the Presentation
o Substantiation of the current actuarial report.
o Validation that the enhancement of the retiree
healthcare benefits is fully funded by increased
employee contributions.
o Highlight the proper use of an actuarial report.
Background
-"-----------------------........-------........................................
o Employee groups proposed a payroll deduction to pay a
greater share of the PERS retirement cost,in return for an
enhancement to the retiree healthcare benefits.
o Bartel Associates,LLP,was hired to calculate the added cost
of the retiree medical.
o The payroll deduction was set at an amount greater than the
added cost of the retiree healthcare benefits.
o The Board approved the proposal based on an
understanding that the customers would not be negatively
impacted by this change.
Proposal Swaps Equivalent Pension Costs
for etirement Medical Costs
Pension Costs
Removed from Operating Budget
Retiree Healthcare Costs
Added to Operating Budget
Taxpayers Assoc·ation C(ticism
D TPA questioned the legitimacy of the Actuarial Study.
D This independent third party peer review substantiates
the Bartel Associates actuarial study.
axpayers Associa ion Criticism
o TPA questioned the legitimacy of the net savings as
calculated by district staff.
o This challenges the District's assertion that the customers will
not be financially harmed.
D Bartel Associates was hired to recalculate the net savings
using actuarial methods.
The results validated that the enhancement to the retiree
healthcare benefits is fully funded by the employee contribution.
The annual net savings beginning in 201 3,as calculated by Bartel
Associates,lLC,is $140,000 and projected to increase over time.
Proper Use of an Actuarial Study
D To use a subset of the employees to characterize the
Board's action is misleading.
D The Taxpayers Association pulled a subset of
employees and used this to represent the Board's
action.
Proper Use of the Actuarial Report
Actuarial study
covers All Three
categories of
employees
Taxpayers'approach
only looks at Tier III
which misrepresents
the Board's action
, A proach ~L "Taxpayers P -V
The District's
approach takes
into account all
changes to all tiers
Conclusion
________________________...;."",0;;.,...................
The employees will pay for the cost of enhancement.
y The actuarial study has been substantiated.
>-The net savings has been verified to fully fund the
cost of the enhancement.
y The criticisms are without merit and are a result of
the misuse of the actuarial study.
AGENDA ITEM 9b
STAFF REPORT
Regular BoardTYPEMEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:."nAliceIvIendez-Schomer,qw';
IfCustomerServiceManager ../
MEETING DATE:October 5,2011
W.O.lG.F.NO:DIV.NO.All
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
f.Joseph R.Beachem,Chief Fin~ncial 0 cer
Ccrmon 1I1~Ssistant General Manager,Administration and
Finance
Informational Item Regarding Customer Notices of the Approved
Water and Sewer Rate Increases Effective January 1,2012
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
Informational item regarding customer notices of the approved
water and sewer rate increases effective January 1,2012.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To present to the Board the attached notices that will be mailed
to customers in November outlining the approved January 1,2012
water and sewer rate increases.
ANALYSIS:
At a Special.Board meeting hel.d on May 16,2011,the Board
approved the Fiscal Year 2011~2012 Operating and Capital Budget.
At that time,the Board also approved an average water rate
increase of 7.7%and an average sewer rate increase of 7.5%.At
that meeting draft copies of the rate increase notices were
provided.
The District has always sent notices of rate increases to its
customers to ensure that customers are wel.l informed of rate
changes.Not only are these notices customary but they are now
required by Proposition 218.The attached notices of the rate
increases effective January 1,2012,will be inserted in the
monthly customer bills beginning November 8th running through
November 28,2011.
The following table outlines the seven different notices and the
quantity that the District's bill print vendor will insert into
the customer bills and mail.A small amount of these notices
will be printed and mailed by Otay staff.
Type of Notice Quantity I
Residential Water 39,973 I
Residential Sewer 1,124 I
Public and Commercial \JI1ater 871
Commercial Sewer 35
lVJaster lVJetered Water 232 I-"--.,
Recycled Water 91 ,
Ie----.-Landscape,Ag.,Construction IJ\1ater 466
Notices will be mailed in November to ensure that all customers
will receive this notice at least 30 days prior to when service
will be priced at the new rates.Proposition 218 requires a
minimum notice period of 30 days.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Ensure financial health through formalized policies,long-term
financial planning,and efficient operations.
LEGAL IMPACT:
N
Attachments:
A)CO~lliittee Action Form
B)Residential Water Rate Increase Notice
C)Residential Sewer Rate Increase Notice
0)Public and Commercial Water Rate Increase Notlce
E)Commercial Sewer Rate Increase Notice
F)Master Metered Water Rate Increase Notice
G)Recycled Water Rate Increase Notice
H)Landscape,Agricultural and Construction Water Rate
Increase Notice
ATTACHMENT A
Informational Item Regarding Customer Notices of the
Approved Water and Sewer Rate Increases Effective
SUBJECT/PROJECT:January 1,2012
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,Administration,and Communications Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on September 19,2011.The
following comments were made:
•Staff presented the customer notices of the water and sewer
rate increases,approved at the May 2011 board meeting,
that will become effective January 1,2012.
•The notices are scheduled to mail to the District's
customers in November 2011,beginning November 8 and
through the end of the month,to comply with the 30-day
notice requirement.
•It was noted that the notices were also included with the
May 2011 budget workshop board materials and are very
similar to the notices that have been utilized since 2007.
The notices have just been updated to reflect the current
rate information.
•The board approved a 5-year rate increase plan under
Proposition 218 as allowed by State law and the District is
in the 3 rd year of the plan.The increases are well within
the boundaries identified in the rate increase plan which
was adopted in 2009.
•The District would remain in the lower third in comparison
to other San Diego County water agencies in terms of the
cost of water service (lowest cost provider)with the
implementation of this increase.
•It was noted that the District's water rate increase of
7.7%is less than the District's wholesaler (CWA)increase
of 9.97%.
Following the discussion the committee supported presentation to
the full board as an informational item.
Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\FIN&~CE\Comu~tgCustNoticesl00511.doc
Dear Customer,
Notice of Residential
Water Rate Increase
ATTACHMENT B
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
www.otaywater.gov
An overall rate increase of 7.7%was approved by the Otay Water District's (the "District")Board of
Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in May 2011.This action is necessary
due to higher costs from wholesale water suppliers.The rate increase herein noticed is a 100%pass-
through to those suppliers.The new water rates and charges will apply to water billed beginning Febru-
ary 1,2012 and,depending on your billing cycle,may apply to water usage as early as the beginning of
January 2012.This letter serves as a 30-day notice of rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.To continue providing reliable high-quality water
services,the District must implement rate increases and must pass-through to its customers higher costs
from suppliers including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD),San Diego County
Water Authority (CWA),and the City of San Diego.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates to obtain new and more reliable supplies of water.These
include more reliable emergency supplies,agricultural to urban water transfers,canal lining projects that
conserve water in Imperial County and transfer that water to end users in San Diego County,as well as
new potential sources of water.In addition,rate increases cover the higher cost of acquiring imported
water from the Colorado River and Northern California.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates by 9.97%in January 2012,but by cutting internal costs,
including reducing the number of full-time employees and efficiency programs such as automated meter
reading and online billing services,the District is able to absorb a significant amount of those costs and
pass-through a smaller rate increase to its customers.
On August 24,2009,the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compliance with applicable
provisions of law.This increase is within the limits contemplated in that five-year schedule of rates.
Customers interested in learning ways they can reduce their water usage to minimize the effects of
the higher cost of water can visit the District's Conservation page at www.otaywater.gov.Additionally,the
Water Conservation Garden located in Rancho San Diego offers various conservation exhibits and
classes.To learn more about the Garden,visit www.thegarden.org.For more information about the
District,please go to www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater,gov.
$120
$100
$80
$60
$20
SURVEYOF MEMBERAGENCYWATER RATES
15 Unit Water Use and 3/4-Residential Meter
Projected Rates Effective January 2012
Notice of Residential and
Multi-Residential Sewer
Rate Increase
ATTACHMENT C
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
619-670-2222
www.otaywater.gov
NOTICE OF INCREASED SEWER RATES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE ON
SEWER SERVICE BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2012
Dear Customer,
An overall rate increase of 7.5%was approved by the Otay Water District's (the "District")Board
of Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in May 2011.One hundred
percent of this increase is the result of higher service rates for wastewater disposal from the City of
San Diego.The new sewer rates and charges will apply to service billed beginning February 1,2012
and,depending on your billing cycle,may apply to service as early as the beginning of January
2012.For a typical residential sewer customer whose water usage is approximately 15 units per
month your sewer bill will increase by $1.96 per month.This letter serves as a 30-day notice of
rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.Your sewer bill reflects only those charges
sufficient to support your sewer service.To continue providing sewer services,the District must
adjust its rates for service,implement certain rate increases and pass-through higher costs to its
customers based on rate changes from the District's sewage treatment and disposal providers.
Though the County of San Diego has decreased its rates for service,this positive action was offset
by a 9.4%increase from the City of San Diego.
On August 24,2009 the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compliance with
applicable provisions of law.The sewer rate increase is within the limits contemplated in the five-
year schedule of rates.
For its part,the District has worked diligently to reduce internal costs to minimize the impact of
higher costs from sewage treatment providers.The chart below shows how the District's sewer rates
compare to other agencies in San Diego County.For more information,please visit
www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater.gov.
$140
$120
$100
SewerRate Comparison ofSewer Providers in San Diego County
15UnitWater Use and %"Residential Meter
Projected Rates EffectiveJanuary2012
Water-consumplionbasedsewerrate
o Flatsewerrate
o OtayWaterDistrict
(ConsumplionBasedRate)
Notice of Public and
Commercial Water
Rate Increase
ATTACHMENT D
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
619-670-2222
V'NIW.otaywater.gov
NOTICE OF INCREASED WATER RATES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE
ON WATER USAGE BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2012
Dear Customer,
An overall rate increase of 7.7%was approved by the Otay Water District's (the
"District")Board of Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in
May 2011.This action is necessary due to higher costs from wholesale water suppliers.
The rate increase herein noticed is a 100%pass-through to those suppliers.The new
water rates and charges will apply to water billed beginning February 1,2012,and
depending on your billing cycle,may apply to water usage as early as the beginning of
January 2012.This letter serves as a 3D-day notice of rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.To continue providing reliable high-
quality water services,the District must implement rate increases and must pass-
through to its customers higher costs from suppliers including the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California (MWD),San Diego County Water Authority (CWA),and
the City of San Diego.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates to obtain new and more reliable supplies
of water.These include more reliable emergency supplies,agricultural to urban water
transfers,canal lining projects that conserve water in Imperial County and transfer that
water to end users in San Diego County,as well as new potential sources of water.In
addition,rate increases cover the higher cost of acquiring imported water from the
Colorado River and Northern California.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates by 9.97%in January 2012,but by cutting
internal costs,including reducing the number of full-time employees and efficiency
programs such as automated meter reading and online billing services,the District is
able to absorb a significant amount of those costs and pass-through a smaller rate
increase to its customers.
On August 24,2009 the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compli-
ance with applicable provisions of law.This increase is within the limits contemplated in
that five-year schedule of rates.
Customers interested in learning ways they can reduce their water usage to
minimize the effects of the higher cost of water can visit the District's Conservation page
at www.otaywater.gov.Additionally,the Water Conservation Garden located in Rancho
San Diego offers various conservation exhibits and classes.To learn more about the
Garden,visit www.thegarden.org.For more information about the District,please go to
www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater.gov.
Dedicated to Community Service
ATTACHMENT E
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
www.otaywater.gov
Notice of Commercial
Sewer Rate Increase
NOTICE OF INCREASED SEWER RATES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE ON
SEWER SERVICE BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2012
Dear Customer,
An overall rate increase of 7.5%was approved by the Olay Water District's (the
"District")Board of Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in
May 2011.The new sewer rates and charges will apply to service billed beginning February
1,2012 and,depending on your billing cycle,may apply to service as early as the beginning
of January 2012.This letter provides a 30-day prior notice of rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.Your sewer bill reflects only those
charges sufficient to support your sewer service.To continue providing sewer services,the
District must adjust its rates for service,implement certain rate increases and pass-through
higher costs to its customers based on rate changes from the District's sewage treatment
and disposal providers.For instance,while the County of San Diego decreased its rates for
service,this positive action was offset by a 9.4%increase from the City of San Diego for
wastewater disposal.
On August 24,2009 the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compliance with
applicable provisions of law.The rate increases herein noticed reflect a pass-through
increase of 7.5%.One hundred percent of this increase is the result of higher service rates
for wastewater disposal from the City of San Diego.The sewer rate increase is within the
limits contemplated in the five-year schedule of rates.
For its part,the District has worked diligently to reduce internal costs to minimize the
impact of higher costs from public sewage treatment and disposal agencies.For more
information,please visit www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater.gov.
Dedicated to Community Service
Notice of Master Metered
Water Rate Increase
ATTACHMENT F
OtayWater District 2554
Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
www.otaywater.gov
NOTICE OF INCREASED WATER RATES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE ON
WATER USAGE BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2012
Dear Customer,
An overall rate increase of 7.7%was approved by the Otay Water District's (the
"District")Board of Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in
May 2011.This action is necessary due to higher costs from wholesale water suppliers.
The rate increase herein noticed is a 100%pass-through to those suppliers.The new
water rates and charges will apply to water billed beginning February 1,2012 and
depending on your billing cycle may apply to water usage as early as the beginning of
January 2012.This letter serves as a 3D-day notice of rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.To continue providing reliable high
-quality water services,the District must implement rate increases and must pass-
through to its customers higher costs from suppliers including the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California (MWD),San Diego County Water Authority (CWA),and
the City of San Diego.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates to obtain new and more reliable supplies
of water.These include more reliable emergency supplies,agricultural to urban water
transfers,canal lining projects that conserve water in Imperial County and transfer that
water to end users in San Diego County,as well as new potential sources of water.In
addition,rate increases cover the higher cost of acquiring imported water from the
Colorado River and Northern California.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates by 9.97%in January 2012,but by cutting
internal costs,including reducing the number of full-time employees and efficiency
programs such as automated meter reading and online billing services,the District is
able to absorb a significant amount of those costs and pass-through a smaller rate
increase to its customers.
On August 24,2009,the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compli-
ance with applicable provisions of law.This increase is within the limits contemplated in
that five-year schedule of rates.
Customers interested in learning ways they can reduce their water usage to
minimize the effects of the higher cost of water can visit the District's Conservation page
at www.otaywater.gov.Additionally,the Water Conservation Garden located in Rancho
San Diego offers various conservation exhibits and classes.To learn more about the
Garden,visit www.thegarden.org.For more information about the District,please go to
www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater.gov.
Dedicated to Community Service
Notice of
Recycled Water
Rate Increase
ATTACHMENTG
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
www.otaywater.gov
NOTICE OF INCREASED WATER RATES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE
ON WATER USAGE BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2012
Dear Customer,
An overall rate increase of 7.7%was approved by the Otay Water District's (the
"District")Board of Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in
May 2011.The action is necessary due to higher costs from wholesale water suppliers.The
rate increase herein noticed is a 100%pass-through to those suppliers.The new water
rates and charges will apply to water billed beginning February 1,2012 and,depending on
your billing cycle,may apply to water usage as early as the beginning of January 2012.
This letter serves as a 30-day notice of rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.To continue providing reliable high-
quality water services,the District must implement rate increases and must pass-through to
its customers higher costs imposed by water wholesalers,the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California (MWD),San Diego County Water Authority (CWA),and the City of San
Diego.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates to obtain new and more reliable supplies of
water.These include more reliable emergency supplies,agricultural to urban water
transfers,canal lining projects that conserve water in Imperial County and transfer that
water to end users in San Diego County,as well as new potential sources of water.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates by 9.97%in January 2012,but by cutting
internal costs,including reducing the number of full-time employees and efficiency
programs such as automated meter reading and online billing services,the District is able to
absorb a significant amount of those costs and pass-through a smaller rate increase to
customers.
On August 24,2009 the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compliance
with applicable provisions of law.This increase is within the limits contemplated in the five-
year schedule of rates.
Customers interested in learning ways in which they can reduce their water usage to
minimize the effects of this increase can visit the District's Conservation page at
www.otaywater.gov.Additionally,the Water Conservation Garden located in Rancho San
Diego is free to the public and offers various conservation exhibits and classes.To learn
more about the Garden,please visit www.thegarden.org.For more information about the
District,visit www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater.gov.
Dedicated to Community Service
Notice of Landscape,
Agricultural and Construction
Water Rate Increase
ATTACHMENT H
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
www.otaywater.gov
NOTICE OF INCREASED WATER RATES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE
ON WATER USAGE BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2012
Dear Customer,
An overall rate increase of 7.7%was approved by the Otay Water District's (the
"District")Board of Directors as part of the annual budget adoption process completed in
May 2011.This action is necessary due to higher costs from wholesale water suppliers.The
rate increase herein noticed is a 100%pass-through to those suppliers.The new water
rates and charges will apply to water billed beginning February 1,2012 and,depending on
your billing cycle,may apply to water usage as early as the beginning of January 2012.
This letter serves as a 30-day notice of rate increases.
The District is a revenue neutral public agency.To continue providing reliable high-
quality water services,the District must implement rate increases and must pass-through to
its customers higher costs from suppliers including the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California (MWD),San Diego County Water Authority (CWA),and the City of San
Diego.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates to obtain new and more reliable supplies of
water.These include more reliable emergency supplies,agricultural to urban water trans-
fers,canal lining projects that conserve water in Imperial County and transfer that water to
end users in San Diego County,as well as new potential sources of water.In addition,rate
increases cover the higher cost of acquiring imported water from the Colorado River and
Northern California.
Water wholesalers are raising their rates by 9.97%in January 2012,but by cutting
internal costs,including reducing the number of full-time employees and efficiency pro-
grams such as automated meter reading and online billing services,the District is able to
absorb a significant amount of those costs and pass-through a smaller rate increase to its
customers.
On August 24,2009 the District adopted a five-year schedule of rates in compliance with
applicable provisions of law.This increase is within the limits contemplated in that five-year
schedule of rates.
Customers interested in learning ways they can reduce their water usage to minimize
the effects of the higher cost of water can visit the District's Conservation page at
www.otaywater.gov.Additionally,the Water Conservation Garden located in Rancho San
Diego offers various conservation exhibits and classes.To learn more about the Garden,
visit www.thegarden.org.For more information about the District,please go to
www.otaywater.gov or contact us via email at info@otaywater.gov.
Dedicated to Community Service
AGENDA ITEM 10
STAFF REPORT
TYPE
MEETING:Regular Board
MEETING
DATE:October 5,2011
SUBMITTED
BY:
Mark Watton
General Manager
W.O./G.F.
NO:
N/A DIV.
NO.
N/A
SUBJECT:General Manager's Report
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
Human Resources:
e Benefits Review for Open Enrollment -HR staff lS preparing
for Open Enrollment that occurs during the month of October
each year.HR is working with IT to further streamline the
open enrollment process.Most information will be available
for review and submittal online and employees will only be
required to participate if a change is made or if they wish to
enroll in the flexible spending account.
HR staff is also working with our benefit consultant,Willis,
to conduct a review of all ancillary benefit plans to include
dental providers,short-term and long-term disability
carriers,employee assistance plans,COBRA and flexible
spending account administrators in preparation for Open
Enrollment.
Based on a review of the dental providers,it was decided to
change dental plan carriers to Delta Dental.Delta Dental is
considered a premier dental plan.While the change to this
plan was cost-neutral,with the expanded premier list of
dental providers,more employees will be able to take
advantage of discounted rates for dental services.More
information is included in the Open Enrollment materials.
Workers'Compensation New Company Nurse Program -Earlier this
month,SDRMA,the District's Workers'Compensation
Administrator,implemented a new nurse triage program called
"Company Nurse".This program is being provided at no charge
to Otay.By utilizing the professional nurse triage service,
the number of workers'compensation claim filed can be
reduced,which will in turn reduce costs for Otay.The way
the program works is that an injured employee will call a
toll-free "injury hotline ff number with their supervisor
present and receive an assessment from a triage nurse.Based
upon approved medical treatment protocols,the triage nurse
identifies a course of treatment and can refer the injured
employee to the most appropriate level of care,such as a
referral to an approved medical clinic or provide simple first
aid/self-care guidelines to the employee.
•New Hires/Promotions There were no new hires/promotions in
the month of September.
Safety and Security:
•Claims -The District processed the following claims:
o George Osper -Rejected claim for $2,169,for leak detection
and repair charges incurred due to a water leak at his
residence;leak was on customer's side of the meter.
o Lance Brady -Settled claim for $777.97,for repair charges
incurred due to tire and wheel damage caused as a result of
one of the District's missing valve lids.
o Bea Bastien Rejected claim for $3,324.37,for damage to
kitchen sink filtration unit as a result of a meter change-
out by Pacific Meter Services (Contractor);customer is
responsible for the installation,maintenance,and repair of
the customer's pressure regulator.
o Elizabeth Navarro Rejected claim for $475,for leak
detection and repair charges incurred due to a water leak at
her residence;leak was on customer's side of the meter.
Water Conservation and School Education:
•Outreach Events On
staffed a booth at the
Saturday,September 24 th,
"h39'Annual BonitaFest.
the District
•Water Conservation Phone Helpline The District created a
detailed phone helpline for our single-family customers which
has water conservation tips for both indoors and outdoors,and
in both English and Spanish.The helpline went live at the
end of September and is being used by District staff to help
answer frequently asked conservation questions.
•Chula Vista CLEAN (Green)Business Program The District
qualified this month as one of the first 100 CLEAN businesses
with the City of Chula Vista.As part of their centennial
2
celebration,the District will be presented with a certificate
at the October 11th City Council Meeting,and recognized during
the City of Chula Vista's Centennial Celebration on October
15 th at the Olympic Training Center.Chula Vista's CLEAN
Business Program is their equivalent of a Green Business
program that recognizes businesses for meeting or exceeding
standards set for water and energy efficiency,pollution
prevention,and solid waste reduction.
•School Program -To date,21 tours are scheduled with staff at
the Water Conservation Garden.Three tours were completed this
month involving 135 2nd and 3rd graders,and 30 adults from
Olympic View and Tiffany Elementary Schools.
Purchasing and Facilities:
•Purchase Orders -There were 119 purchase orders processed in
September 2011 for a total of $1,184,330.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING:
•Historic Power Outage -On September 8th ,the District,along
with the rest of San Diego County,experienced a 10-hour power
outage.The District's major computer systems stayed up in
the headquarters building and most work stations were back
online within a few minutes when the back-up generator kicked
in.A UPS failure was detected in the first floor switch
room,but its impact was minor.
•Asset Management The Asset Management program completed a
significant milestone this month.We now have "criticality
ratings U for all facilities.Criticality,along with condition
assessment,are key pieces of information for effective asset
management.Operations and Engineering lead the effort to
finalize these criticality ratings.Operations Staff is
engaged in collecting asset information and also in developing
an approach to condition assessment.
•New Facilities in GIS -GIS staff has put in place a program
that will add new facility types into the GIS database and
system.This program will provide more accurate information
for Engineering and Operations departments.GIS will also
collect the District's system meters,which provides water to
Otay from CWA and other water districts.
•Otay
with
the
Map for Board Room -GIS staff updated the Board Room map
the latest information,including a clearer definition of
Directors'boundaries.Staff also produced the same
3
version maps (smaller size)for the Board Conference Room and
the General Manager's Conference Room.
•EDEN Upgrade (Version 5.5)Staff successfully upgraded the
EDEN Billing and Financial applications to the 5.5 version.
The major functionality that is now available is Account Group
Billing.The Account Group Billing gives the District the
ability to provide a better way to print a single billing
statement for customers with multiple accounts in a group.
•Adobe Enterprise Agreement -Staff entered into
with Adobe that will enable us to place Acrobat
our desktops,laptops,and ToughBooks at a
savings to the District (retail $199,Adobe
license).
an agreement
X Pro on all
considerable
EA2 $56 per
•
FINANCE:
BlackBerry Enterprise Server Staff entered into
support and maintenance contract with Research
(RIM),the manufacturer of BlackBerry devices,for
critical BlackBerry server.
an annual
in Motion
our mission
•Annual AMR Testing Testing -Meter Reading staff has started
the annual comparison testing of AMR routes.From July
through the end of August,staff has tested 6 of the 15 routes
scheduled for this year,which equates to approximately 3,500
meters.These meters will be manually read and compared with
the automated readings.This is an annual process to ensure
the integrity of our metering system.
•FY 2011 Year-End Audit -With all of the public interest in
government financial issues during the last year,the outside
audit firm (Diehl,Evans)is looking at more audit areas in
more detail than previous audits.To make sure all questions
are answered correctly and in sufficient detail,staff has
discussed the timing of the final audited financial report
with the auditors and the current estimate is that it can be
completed in time for the October Committee and November Board
meetings.This is consistent with the previous four years
reporting to the Board.
•Banking Services In an effort to maintain optimal banking
services,staff will be preparing Requests for Proposals for
banking services and performing an evaluation of proposals
from interested and qualified banks.The District has a
highly integrated banking relationship,which will require
months of preparation and evaluation before a recommendation
can be made.
4
•Financial Reporting:
o The financial reporting for August 31,2011,is as follows:
for the two months ended August 31,2011,there are total
revenues of $15,469,337 and total expenses of $13,882,007.
The revenues exceeded expenses by $1,587,330.
o The financial reporting for investments for August 31,
2011,is as follows:the market value shown in the
Portfolio Summary and in the Investment Portfolio Details
as of August 31,2011,total $98,290,004.80 with an average
yield to maturity of .701%.The total earnings year-to-
date are $128,724.82.
ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS:
Engineering:
•Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well Development:The consultant,
Tetra Tech,Inc.,and the District reviewed draft preliminary
design report and 30%design drawings.Activities are underway
to secure a sewer discharge permit from the City of Chula
Vista,power supply from SDG&E,and other components.The
design is anticipated to be completed in the third quarter of
Fiscal Year 2012,with construction completed in the fourth
quarter of Fiscal Year 2013.(P2434)
•North District -South District Interconnections System:This
project consists of installing approximately 5.2 miles of 30-
inch diameter pipe from Proctor Valley Road in Chula Vista to
Paradise Valley Road in Spring Valley.The project is
currently in the early design phase with Lee &Ro,Inc.working
on the preliminary design report.Work includes surveying,
geotechnical,environmental,and community outreach.The EIR
public scoping meeting was completed on August 29,2011.
Several community outreach efforts have been completed
including meetings with politicians and/or their aids including
Mayor Cheryl Cox,Senator Juan Vargas,Congressman Bob Filner,
Assembly Member Ben Hueso,and County Supervisor Greg Cox and a
presentation to the Sweetwater Valley Civic Association A
meeting with City Council Member Patricia Aguilar has been
scheduled.The alignment study will be updated to address
comments received through community outreach efforts.(2511)
•657-1 &2 Reservoirs Coating:The contractor,Blastco,Inc.,
has completed the interior and exterior coating of the 657-1 and
657-2 Reservoirs.The 657-1 Reservoir is completed and in
service.After the 657-2 reservoir was recoated and filled with
water,~VOCff tests were performed and just recently passed.The
657-2 Reservoir is expected to be in service by October 2011.
5
Project is on budget and scheduled to be completed by October
2011.(P2505,P2506)
•944-1R Recycled Water Pump Station Upgrades &Enhancements:This
project consists of upgrading the 944-lR Pump Station with new
pumps,new pipe configurations,and electrical upgrades to keep
up with current and future recycled water demands.The
contractor,Sepulveda Construction,Inc.(Sepulveda),will start
mobilizing at the end of September.Project is scheduled to be
completed in June 2012.(R209l)
•Ralph W.Chapman Water Reclamation Facility Upgrade:This
project consists of an upgrade to the treatment plant to reduce
the nitrogen levels in the plant effluent.The upgrade includes
modifications to the aeration basins,the addition of energy-
efficient turbo blowers and replacement of corroded air piping,
a new cover for the filter backwash storage tank,a new filter
air scour system,and automation enhancements.The contractor,
NEWest Construction Company,Inc.,continues the investigation
of existing utilities and has exposed the existing aeration
piping for replacement.Construction is anticipated to be
completed in June 2012.(R2096)
•USBR Title XVI Funding:The United States Department of the
Interior Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)sent the District $370,000
per terms of our Title XVI Cooperative Agreement.These are
funds reallocated from other agencies who were unable to spend
their allocated funds before the end of USBR's Fiscal Year which
ended September 30,2011.Including the $370,000,the total
funding received by the District from USBR is $11,480,000.The
District still has about $400,000 pending from the USBR and it
is not certain when these funds will be received.
•For the month of August 2011,the District sold 58 meters (124
EDUs)generating $686,798 in revenue;which is 144%above
projection.Projection for this period was 23 meters (36.7
EDUs)with budgeted revenue of $281,350.Projected revenue from
July 1,2011 through June 30,2012 is $3,376,200 against a
budget of $994,527.
•For the month of August 2011,staff reviewed 9 potential
easement encroachments and will be gathering all the necessary
information prior to informing customers of the removal of the
encroachments.The above is part of an on-going program of
easement monitoring.
6
•Approximately 519 linear feet of both CIP and developer project
pipeline was installed in August 2011.The Construction
Division performed quality control for these pipelines.
The following table summarizes Engineering's project purchases and
Change Orders issued during the period of August 15 through September
22,2011 that were within staff signatory authority:
Date Action Amount Contractor/ProjectConsultant
Construction permit for
8/15/11 Check Request $9,705.00 City of Chula Geotechnical borings
Vista (P2511)
City of Chula Construction permit for
8/15/11 Check Request $4,000.00 Vista Hunte Parkway north of
Proctor Valley (P2514)
Electrical service at
8/29/11 Check Request $10,272.00 SDG&E Olympic Parkway and
Eastlake Parb"ay (R2091)
9/1/11 P.O.$5,000.00 HDR Engineering Temporary Labor Service
Inc.(R2091)
Del Rio Road/Gillispie
9/12/11 C.O.($10,895.31)LH Woods &Sons Drive Interconnections
(P2488/P2489)
9/22/11 P.O.$4,500.00 Keagy Real Estate Appraisal Fee (P2504)
Water Operations:
•The District has decided not to renew an agreement with the
County of San Diego to purchase power from microturbines
located at the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility.The
total cost for the District to purchase power from the County
has recently become more expensive than purchasing power
directly from SDG&E,primarily due to a standby demand charge
that SDG&E charges the District to supply power if the
microturbines fail.The original five-year agreement ended in
July,2011.
•Total number of potable water meters is 48,529.
7
•Potable sales in units are 5.4%above budget and recycled sales
in units are 6.4%above budget for July 2011.
Potable Water Purchases
12.000
10.000
8.000
6.000
4.000
2.000
Jul-11 Aug-11
-Purchases
-Budget
Sep-11
•The August 2011 potable water purchases were 3,457.8 acre-feet.
This is 2.3%less than budgeted water sales of 3,538.5,but
3.7%above budget cumulatively for the fiscal year.
•Recycled water consumption for the month of August is as
follows:
Total consumption was 561.4 acre-feet or 182,865,056 gallons
and the average daily consumption was 5,898,873 gallons per
day.
Total number of recycled water meters is 689.
Total recycled water consumption to date for FY 2012 is 1129.3
acre-feet.
•Wastewater flows for the month of August were as follows:
•Total basin flow,gallons per day:1,935,912.
•Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro,gallons per
day:640,770.
8
•
•
•
Total Otay flow,gallons per day:1,292,807.
Flow Processed at the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling
Facility,gallons per day:1,203,129.
Flow to Metro from Otay Water District,gallons per day:
92,013.00 .
•As of the end of August,there were 6,081 wastewater
connections/EDUs.
9
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
COMPAR<\TIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
FOR TWO MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 3I,20I I
Exhibit A
Annual YTD YTD YTD
Budget Actual Budget Variance Val'%
REVENUES:
\Vater Sales S 36,598,I 00 $8,330,150 S 8,09],900 S 238,250 2.9%
Energy'Charges 1,874,000 4]8,880 4]4,800 4,080 1.0%
System Charges 9,542,I 00 ],595,480 ],590,000 5,480 0.3%
M\\iD &CWA Fixed Charges 8,98 I ,500 1,386,007 1,382,400 3,607 0.3%
[)cnalties 913,100 I 10,799 136,300 (25,50I)(18.7%)
Total \Vater Sales 57,908,800 ",841,3I6 11,615,400 225,916 1.9%
Reclamation Sales 7,395,500 2,0]4,445 1,982,I00 32,345 1.6%
Sc\vcr Charges 2,336,000 387,603 388,300 (697)(0.2%)
Meter Fees 82,000 29,458 28,700 758 2.6%
Capacity Fee Revenues 1,044,000 ]82,420 180,000 2,420 1.3%
Betterment Fees for Maintenance 628,600 172,414 169,800 2,614 1.5%
Non-Operating Revenues 2,02 I ,600 307,85]309,400 (1,549)(0.5%)
Tax Revenues 3,839,600 73,536 80,100 (6,564)(8.2%)
Interest 158,300 18,995 20,400 (1,405)(6.9%)
Tml1sfcl'from OPEB 1,380,000 230,000 230,000 0.0%
Transfer from Betterment Reserve 30,000 5,000 5,000 (I.()%
Transfer from Replacement 120,000 20,000 20,000 0.0%
(Jeneral Fund Drmv Down 522,800 87,100 87,100 0.0%
Transfer from General Fund 595,000 99,200 99,200 0.0%
Total Revenues $78,062,200 S 15,469,337 $15,215,500 $253,837 1.7%
EXPENSES:
Potable Water Purchases S 27,793,I00 $6,1 I 1,214 $5,909,900 $(20],314)(3.4%)
Recycled Water Purchases 1,452,800 438,790 399,900 (38,890)(9.7%)
C \VA -j nfrastrudure Access Charge 1,756,900 286,126 286,200 74 0.0%
CWA-Customer Service Charge ],562,600 242,428 242,400 (28)(0.0%)
CWA-L·:rnergency Storage Charge 3,585,800 531,234 53],200 (34)(O'()%)
MWD-Capacity Res Charge 603,900 109,202 ]]0,800 1,598 1.4%
i\'1\VD-Readiness to Serve Charge 1,488,600 248,I02 248,000 (102)(0.0%)
Subtotal \Vater Purchases 38,243,700 7,967,096 7,728,400 (238,696)(3.1%)
Power Charges 2,440,900 525,343 524,200 (I,]43)(0.2%)
Payroll &Related Costs 18,119,600 2,764,946 2,785,74]20,795 0.7%
Material &Maintenance 4,300,000 607,522 609,667 2,]45 0.4%
Administrative Expenses 4,I 80,700 494,668 528,857 34,189 6.5%
Legal Fees 380,000 53,733 63,333 9,601 15.2%
Expansion Reserve 555,000 92,500 92,500 0.0%
Replacement Reserve 3,330,000 555,000 555,000 0.0%
Transfer to Snver Fund Reserve 786,800 13 I,100 13 I,I 00 0.0%
Transfer to General Fund Reserve 2,420,500 403,400 403,400 O.(}%
T'ransfer to Se\.ver Replacement 1,720,000 286,700 286,700 0.0%
Transfer to New Supply Reserve 1,585,000 264,200 264,200 0.0%
Total Expenses $78,062,200 S 13,882,007 S 13,708,898 S (173,109)(1.3%)
EXCESS REVENUES(EXPENSE)$$1,587,330 $1,506,602 S 80,728
F:lMORPT/FS2012-0811 9/26/2011 8:57 AM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO REVIEW
AUGUST 31,2011
INVESTMENT OVERVIEW &MARKET STATUS:
The federal funds rate has remained constant now for over 32-months.On December 16,2008,at the Federal Reserve Board's regular
scheduled meeting,the federal funds rate was lowered from 1.00%to "a target range ofbetween Zero and 0.25%"in response to the
nation's ongoing financial crisis,as well as banking industry pressure to ease credit and stimulate the economy.This marked the ninth
reduction in a row since September 18,2007,when the rate was 5.25%.There have been no further changes made to the federal funds
rate at the Federal Reserve Board's subsequent regular scheduled meetings,the most recent of which was held on August 9,2011.
They went on to say:"The Committee currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates ofresource utilization and a
subdued outlookfor inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal jimds rate at least
through mid-20B.
Despite the large drop in available interest rates,the District's overall effective rate ofretum at August 31st was 0.71 %,which was a
decrease of7 basis points (0.07%)from the prior month.At the same time the LAIF retum on deposits has fluctuated slightly over the
last several months,reaching an average effective yield of 0.41 % for thc month of August 20 II.Based on our succcss at maintaining
a competitive rate of retum on our portfolio during this extended period ofinterest rate declines,no changes in investment strategy are
being considered at this time.
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 retum on investment.
PORTFOLIO COMPLIANCE:August 31,2011
8.01:
8.02:
8.02:
8.03:
8.04:
8.05:
8.06:
8.07:
8.08:
12.0:
Investment
Treasury Securities
Local Agency Investment Fund (Operations)
Local Agency Investment Fund (Bonds)
Federal Agency Issues
Certificates ofDeposit
Short-Term Commercial Notes
Medium-Term Commercial Debt
Money Market Mutual Funds
San Diego County Pool
Maximum Single Financial Institution
State Limit
100%
$50 Million
100%
100%
30%
25%
30%
20%
100%
100%
Olav Limit
100%
$50 Million
100%
100%
15%
15%
15%
15%
100%
50%
Otav Aetual
o
$29.00 Million
4.13%
42.17%
0.08%
o
o
o
22.45%
1.61%
Target:Meet or Exceed 100%of LAlF
..1.60'EGlE 1.40UiGl>1.20.5
c0 1.00E::lQi 0.60a:
0.60
0.40 -
0.20
0.00
i1LAIF
1I0lay l.52
oDifference 0.91
0.56
1.35
0.79
0.56
I.OX
0.52
Performance Measure F-12
Return on Investment
0.59 0.41 0.45
0.92 0.g6 0.X5 O.gO
0.45 0.37 0.27 0.44 0.35
Month
G1LAIF 1I00ay DDifference
O.3g
0.78
0.40
0.41
0.71
0.30
$41,372,000
42.17%Otay Water District
Investment Portfolio:08/31/11
----$1,657,535
1.69%
$55,088,895
56.15%
OBank·(Pas 'book/Checking/CD)IiPool (LAlF &County o Agencie &Corporate ote
YTh1 YTM
360 Equiv.365 Equiv.
0.982 0.996
1.380 1.399
0.402 0.408
0.619 0.628
0.701 0.711
Investments
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
Certificates of Deposit -Bank
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
San Diego County Pool
Investments
Cash
Passbook/Checking
(not included in yield calculations)
Total Cash and Investments
p"
Value
41,372,000.00
79,108.00
33,058,761.92
22,030,133.52
96,540,003,44
1,578,427.40
98,118,430.84
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
August 31,2011
Market Book %of
Value Value Portfolio
41,452,591.33 41,371,598.25 42.85
79,108.00 79,108.00 0.08
33,110,878.07 33,058,761.92 3424
22,069,000,00 22,030,133.52 22.82
96,711,577.40 96,539,601.69 100.00°/..
------'_.._--------_._---------~----
1,578,427,40 1.578,427.40
98,290,004.80 98,118,029.09
TOnTI
881
730
1
1
379
379
Days to
Maturity
748
143
321
321
0.014
0,701
0.015
0.711
Total Earnin~s ~_~_gust 31 Month Ending Fiscal Y~~~J?:~~!~'...,',._
Current Year 60,988.88 128,724.82
Average Daily Balance 101,163,084.99 101,910,959.95
Effective Rate of Return 0.71%0.74%
I hereby certify that the investments contained in this report are made in accordance with the District Investment Policy Number27 adopted by the Board of Directors on September6,2006.The market
value information,provided by Interactive Data Corporation.The investments provide sufficient liquidity to meet the cash flow requirements ofthe District for the next six months of expenditures.
.-.".,-~~;;~:'-';~.~,c;;;;~:;:,;:?:-::;~-~:;;~:,f ,-,2.{-:,~//
Joseph Beachem,Chief FinancialOfficer
Reporting period 08/01/2011-08/3112011
Run Date 09/2012011 -10:44
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF]Ml)7.3.0
ReportVeL 7.3.2
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details -Investments
August 31,2011
Page 1
Local Agency InvestmentFund (LAIF)
LAIF 9001 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LAIF BASS2010 9012 STATE OF CALlF=O"R"N,,'A:-_
Stated YTM Days to Maturity
Par Value MarketValue Book Value Rate S&P 360 Maturity Date
2.000.000.00 2,003,520.00 2,000,000.00 1.125 AAA 1.110 816 11f25/2013
2,000,000.00 2,003,560.00 2,000,000,00 1.050 AAA 1.036 830 12/09/2013
2,000.000.00 2,000,160.00 2,000,000,DO 0.875 AAA 0.863 736 09/06/2013
2,000,000.00 2,002,320.00 2,000,000.00 0.875 0.863 851 12/30/2013
2,000,000.00 2,000,660.00 2,000,000.00 0.875 AAA 0.863 848 12/27/2013
2,000,000.00 2,001,200.00 2,000,000.00 0.900 AAA 0.888 880 01128/2014
2,000,000.00 2,000,740.00 2,000,000.00 0.650 AAA 0.641 707 08/08/2013
2,000,000.00 2,001,140.00 2,000,000.00 0.700 AAA 0.693 722 08/23/2013
2,000,000.00 2,015,080.00 1,999,59825 1.147 AAA 1.154 330 07f27/2012
1,030,000.00 1,037,766.20 1,030,000.00 1.125 AAA 1.109 330 07/27/2012
2,707,000.00 2.727,410.78 2,707,000.00 1.125 AAA 1.109 330 07/27/2012
2,000,000.00 2,006,760.00 2,000,000.00 1.100 AAA 1.085 714 08/15/2013
2,000,000_00 2,000,300.00 2.000,000.00 1.250 AAA 1.233 645 06/07/2013
2,000,000.00 2,001,080.00 2.000,000.00 1.350 1.332 753 09/23/2013
2,000,000.00 2,001,060.00 2,000,000,00 0.800 AAA 0.789 757 09/27/2013
2,000,000.00 2,001,240.00 2,000,000.00 1.000 AAA 0.986 860 01/08/2014
2,000,000.00 2,004,140.00 2,000,000.00 1.000 0.986 879 01/27/2014
2,000,000.00 2,001,960.00 2,000,000.00 1.000 AAA 0.986 880 01/28/2014
2,000,000.00 2,000,080.00 2,000,000.00 0.750 AAA 0.740 673 07105f2013
2,000,000.00 2,003,740.00 2,000,000.00 0.750 AA 0.140 907 02/24f2014
635,000.00 635,514.35 635,000.00 0.850 AAA 0.837 694 07/26/2013
1,000,000.00 1,003,160.00 2.000 AAA 1_973 1,700 04127f2016----------
41,372,000.00 41,452,591.33 41,371,598.25 0.982 748
-----------------------------------------
79,108,00 79,108,00 79,108,00 1.380 1.380 143 01/22/2012----------
79,108.00 79,108.00 79,108.00 1.380 143
------------------------------------
29,002,789.78 29,048,511,81 29,002,789.78 OA08 0,402
4.055.972.14 4,062,366,26 4,055,972.14 00408 OA02----------
33,058,761.92 33,110,878.07 33,058,761.92 0.402
22,030,133.52 22,069,000.00 22,030,133,52 0.628 0.619----------
22,030,133.52 22,069,000.00 22,030,133.52 0.619
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (pRF_PM2)7,3,0
Report Ver_7_3_2
07/01/2004
Purchase
Date
07/01/2004
04/2112010
01122/2010
05f25/2011
06/09/2011
06/06/2011
06/30/2011
06/27/2011
07/28/2011
08/08/2011
08/2312011
05/28/2010
05/27/2010
05/2712010
02/15f2011
03/0712011
03/23/2011
06/27f2011
07/08f2011
07/27/2011
07/28f2011
07/13f2011
08/24/2011
10/26/2010
04f27f2011
Average
Balance
79,108.00
34,497,471.60
46,130,451.93
17,997,875.46
Issuer
California Bank &Trust--------
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
San Diego County-----
Subtotal and Average
Subtotal andAverage
-------
9007
2121
2196
2197
2198
2201
2202
2208
2209
2210
2146
2148
2149
2183
2188
2190
2200
2204
2205
2206
2207
2211
2171
2192
Investment #
Subtotal andAverage
-----
2050003183-4
Subtotal andAverage
San Diego County Pool
313373QJ4
313373UD2
313373V25
313374ELO
3133747H7
313374T83
313374ZW3
3133755W3
3137EACK3
3137EACK3A
3137EACK3B
3134G1Y40
3134G15C4
3134G17L2
3134G2MC3
3134G2PE6
3134G2QPO
3134G2RKO
3134G2NR9
3134G2VD1
3136FPQG5
3136FRFMO
SO COUNTY POOL
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
Certificates of Deposit·Bank
CUSI?
Run Date 09/2012011 •10:44
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details -Investments
August 31,2011
Page 2
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Average
Balance
Purchase
Date Par Value MarketValue
Stated
Book Value Rate S&P
YTM Days to
360 Maturity
Rem Date:09/201201 1 -10,44
Total and Average 101,163,084.99 96,540,003.44 96,711,577.40 96,539,601.69 0.701 321
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (pRF_PM2)7.3.0
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details -Cash
August 31,2011
Average Purchase
CUSIP Investment#Issuer Balance Date ParValue
Union Bank
UNION MONEY 9002 STATE OFCALIFORNIA 07/01/2004 10,047,26
PETTY CASH 9003 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 07101/2004 2,950.00
UNION OPERATING 9004 STATE OFCALIFORNIA 07/0112004 1,125,103.16
PAYROLL 9005 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 07f01f2004 350,824.90
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 04/20/2010 14,177.34
RESERVE-10 BASS 9011 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 04/20/2010 35,870.72
UBNA-2010 BOND 9013 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 04f20/2010 51.89
UBNA~FLEXACel 9014 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 01/01/2011 39,402.13
Average Balance 0.00
Total Cash and Investments 101,163,084.99 98,118,430.84
RUrl Date:0912012011 _10:44
Page 3
Stated YTM Days to
MarketValue Book Value Rate S&P 360 Maturity
10,047.26 10,047.26 0.050 0.049
2,950.00 2,950.00 0.000
1,125,103.16 1,125,103.16 0.020 0.020
350,824.90 350,824.90 0.000
14,177.34 14,177.34 0.000
35,870.72 35,870.72 0.001 0.001
51.89 51.89 0.147 0.145
39,402.13 39,402.13 0.000
98,290,004.80 98,118,029.09 0.701 321
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (pRF_PM2)7.3.0
OTAY
Activity Report
Sorted By Issuer
July 1,2011 -August 31,2011
ParValue Par Value
Percent Beginning Current Transaction Purchases or Redemptions or Ending
CUSIP Investment#Issuer ofPortfolio Balance Rate Date Deposits Withdrawals Balance
Issuer:STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Union Bank
UN10N MONEY 9002 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0.050 24,776,235.32 24,776,244.55
UNION OPERATING 9004 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0.020 888,147.24 649,685.78
PAYROLL 9005 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 350,000.00 22,959.81
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 5,793.75 0.00
RESERVE-10 BABS 9011 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0.001 15,227.78 0.00
UBNA-FLEX ACel 9014 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 50,000.00 22,340.63
Subtotal and Balance 964,254.08 26,085,404.09 25,471,230.77 1,578,427.40
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF 9001 STATE OF CAUFORNIA 0.408 13,733,803.66 16,500,000.00
LAIF BABS 2010 9012 STATE OF CAUFORNIA 00408 4,807.91 0.00
Subtotal and Balance 35,820,150.35 13,738,611.57 16,500,000.00 33,058,761.92
Issuer Subtotal 35.301%36,784,404.43 39,824,015.66 41,971,230.77 34,637,189.32
Issuer:California Bank &Trust
Certificates of Deposit ~Bank
Subtotal and Balance 79,108.00 79,108.00
Issuer Subtotal 0.081%79,108.00 0.00 0.00 79,108.00
Issuer:Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Agency Issuesw Callable
313371MR4 2174 Federal Home Loan Bank 0.700 08/22/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
313373CWO 2193 Federal Home Loan Bank 1.375 07/25/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
313373K27 2194 Federal Home Loan Bank 1.200 08/12/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
313373MC3 2195 Federal Home Loan Bank 1.200 08/12/2011 0.00 1,775,000.00
313373VVVO 2199 Federal Home Loan Bank 1,100 07/06/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
313374846 2203 Federal Home Loan Bank 1.000 07/08/2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
313374G46 2203 Federal Home Loan Bank 08/08/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
Run Date.09/20/2011 _1O~52
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DA(PRF_DA)7.2.0
"eporiVer.7.3.2
OTAY
Activity Report Page 2
July 1,2011-August31,2011
Par Value ParValue
Percent Beginning Current Transaction Purchases or Redemptions or Ending
CUSIP Investment#Issuer ofPortfolio Balance Rate Date Deposits Withdrawals Balance
Issuer:Federal Horne Loan Bank
Federal Agency Issuesw Callable
313374T83 2208 Federal Home Loan Bank 0.900 07/28/2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
313374ZW3 2209 Federal Home Loan Bank 0.650 08/08/2011 2,000.000.00 0.00
3133755W3 2210 Federal Home Loan Bank 0.700 08/23/2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
Subtotaland Balance 19,775,000.00 8,000,000.00 11,775,000,00 16,000,000.00
IssuerSubtotal 16.307%19,775,000.00 8,000,000.00 11,775,000.00 16,000,000.00
Issuer:Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Agency IssuesM Callable
3134G1MD3 2153 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1.100 07/22/2011 0.00 2,000,000,00
3134G1PK4 2158 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1.000 08/11f2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
3134G13K8 2185 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1.000 08/24/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
3134G12U7 2186 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 0.750 08/23f2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
3134G1487 2187 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1.350 08/23/2011 0.00 2,000,000,00
3134G2PE6 2204 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1.000 07/08/2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
3134G2QPO 2205 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1.000 07/27/2011 2,000,000.00 0,00
3134G2RKO 2206 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 1,000 07/28f2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
3134G2NR9 2207 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 0.750 07113/2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
3134G2VD1 2211 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 0.750 08/24/2011 2,000,000.00 0.00
Subtotal and Balance 23,737,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 23,737,000.00
IssuerSubtotal 24.192%23,737,OaO.Oo 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 23,737,000.00
Issuer:Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Agency IssuesM Callable
3136FPSK4 2172 Federal National Mortage Assoc 0.675 07/29/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
3136FP5X1 2182 Federal National Mortage Assoc 0.860 07/28/2011 0.00 2,000,000.00
Subtotal and Balance 5,635,000.00 0.00 4,000,000.00 1,635,000.00
IssuerSubtotal 1.666%5,635,000.00 0.00 4,000,000.00 1,635,000.00
Issuer:San Diego County
San Diego County Pool
SO COUNTY POOL
RUrI Date:0912012011 _10:52
9007 San Diego County 0.628 5,016,961.95 0.00
Portfolio OTAY
AP
OA{PRF_OA)7.2.0
Report Ver.73.2
OTAY
Activity Report
July 1,2011 ~August31,2011
Page 3
CUSIP Investment #
Percent
Issuer ofPortfolio
Par Value
Beginning
Balance
Current Transaction
Rate Date
Purchases or
Deposits
ParValue
Redemptions or
Withdrawals
Ending
Balance
Run Date:0912012011 "10:52
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 22.453%
Total 100.000%
17,013,171.57
17,013,171.57
103,023,684,00
5,016,961.95
5,016,961.95
62,840,977.61
0.00
0.00
67,746,230.77
22,030,133.52
22,030,133.52
98,118,430.84
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DA(PRF_DA)7.2.0
Report Ver.7.3.2
OTAY
GASB 31 Compliance Detail
Sorted by Fund -Fund
July 1,2011-August31,2011
Adjustment in Value
Investment Maturity Beginning Purchase Addition Redemption Amortization Change in Ending
CUSIP Investment#Fund Class Date Invested Value ofPrincipal to Principal ofPrincipal Adjustment MarketValue Invested Value
Fund:Treasury Fund
LAIF 9001 99 Fair Value 31,819,068.97 0.00 13,733,803.66 16,500,000.00 0.00 -4,360.83 29,048,511.81
UNION MONEY 9002 99 Amortized 10,056.49 0.00 24,776,235.32 24,776,244.55 0.00 0.00 10,047.26
PETTY CASH 9003 99 Amortized 2,950.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,950.00
UNION OPERATING 9004 99 Amortized 886,641.70 0.00 888,147.24 649,685.78 0.00 0.00 1,125,103.16
PAYROLL 9005 99 Amortized 23,784.71 0.00 350,000.00 22,959.81 0.00 0.00 350,824.90
SO COUNTY POOL 9007 99 Fair Value 16,992,478.65 0.00 5,016,961.95 0.00 0.00 59,559.40 22,069,000.00
2050003183-4 2121 99 Amortized 01/22/2012 79,108.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 79,108.00
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010 99 Amortized 8,383.59 0.00 5,793.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 14,177.34
RESERVE-10 BABS 9011 99 Amortized 20,642.94 0.00 15.227.78 0.00 0,00 0.00 35,870.72
LAIF BABS 2010 9012 99 FairValue 4,057,550.77 0.00 4,807.91 0.00 0.00 7.58 4,062,366.26
UBNA-2010 BONO 9013 99 Amortized 51.89 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 51.89
3137EACK3 2146 99 Fair Value 07/27/2012 2,015,920.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -840.00 2,015,080.00
3137EACK3A 2148 99 FairValue 07/27/2012 1,038,198.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -432.60 1,037,766.20
3137EACK3B 2149 99 Fair Value 07/27/2012 2,728,547.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1,136.94 2,727,410.78
3134G1Mo3 2153 99 Fair Value 01/22/2013 2,000,960.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -960.00 0.00
3134G1PK4 2158 99 Fair Value 02/11/2013 2,001,820.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -1,820.00 0.00
3136FPOG5 2171 99 Fair Value 07/26/2013 636,270.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -755.65 635,514.35
3136FPSK4 2172 99 Fair Value 04/29/2013 2.000,780.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -780.00 0.00
313371MR4 2174 99 Fair Value 05/22/2013 1,998,980.00 0.00 0,00 2,000,000.00 0.00 1,020.00 0.00
3136FP5X1 2182 99 Fair Value 01/28/2013 2,000,760.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -760.00 0.00
3134G1Y40 2183 99 Fair Value 08/15/2013 2,009,100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,340,00 2,006,760.00
3134G13K8 2185 99 Fair Value 05/24/2013 2,002,200.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -2,200.00 0.00
3134G12U7 2186 99 Fair Value 11/23/2012 2,001,040.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -1,040.00 0.00
3134G1487 2187 99 Fair Value 08/23/2013 2,002.820.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -2,820.00 0.00
3134G15C4 2188 99 Fair Value 06/07/2013 2,003,600.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3,300.00 2,000,300.00
UBNA-FLEX ACCT 9014 99 Amortized 11,742.76 0.00 50,000.00 22,340.63 0_00 0.00 39,402.13
3134G17L2 2190 99 Fair Value 09/23/2013 2,004,420.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3,340,00 2,001,080.00
3136FRFMO 2192 99 Fair Value 04/27/2016 1,006,570.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3,410.00 1,003,160.00
313373CWO 2193 99 Fair Value 10/25/2013 2,001,520.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -1,520,00 0.00
313373K27 2194 99 Fair Value 08/12/2013 2,001.920.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -1,920.00 0.00
313373MC3 2195 99 Fair Value 11/12/2013 1,776,810.50 0.00 0.00 1,775,000.00 0.00 -1,810.50 0.00
313373QJ4 2196 99 Fair Value 11/25/2013 2,006,360.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,840.00 2,003,520.00
Portfolio OTAY
AP
Run Date'09/20/2011 _10,53 GO (PRF_GD)7,1.1
Report Ver.7.3.2
OTAY
GA$B 31 Compliance Detail Page 2
Sorted by Fund -Fund
Adjustment in Value
Investment Maturity Beginning Purchase Addition Redemption Amortization Change in Ending
CUSIP Investment#Fund Class Date Invested Value of Principal to Principal ofPrincipal Adjustment MarketValue Invested Value
Fund:Treasury Fund
313373UD2 2197 99 Fair Value 12/0912013 2,005.440.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1,880.00 2,003,560.00
313373V25 2198 99 Fair Value 09/0612013 2,002,080.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1,920.00 2,000,160.00
313373WVO 2199 99 Fair Value 12/0612013 2,000,220.00 0.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 -220.00 0.00
3134G2MC3 2200 99 Fair Value 09/27/2013 1,996,780.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,280.00 2,001,060.00
313374ElO 2201 99 Fair Vallie 12/30f2013 1,993,300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9,020.00 2,002,320.00
3133747H7 2202 99 Fair Vallie 12/27f20n 1,997,800.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,860.00 2,000,660.00
313374G46 2203 99 Fair Value 01108f2014 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3134G2PE6 2204 99 Fair Value 01/08/2014 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,240.00 2,001,240.00
3134G2QPO 2205 99 Fair Value 01/27/2014 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,140.00 2,004,140,00
3134G2RKO 2206 99 Fair Value 01128/2014 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,960.00 2,001,960.00
3134G2NR9 2207 99 Fair Value 07105/2013 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.00 2,000,080.00
313374T83 2208 99 Fair Value 01/28/2014 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 1,200.00 2.001,200.00
313374ZW3 2209 99 Fair Value 08108/2013 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 740.00 2,000,740.00
3133755W3 2210 99 Fair Value 08/23/2013 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,140.00 2,001,140.00
3134G2VQ1 2211 99 Fair Value 02f24/2014 0.00 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,740.00 2,003,740.00
Subtotal 103,146,677.49 18,000,000.00 44,840,977.61 67,746,230.77 0.00 48,580.46 98,290,004.80
Total 103,146,677.49 18,000,000.00 44,840,977.61 67,746,230.77 0.00 48,580.46 98,290,004.80
Portfolio OTAY
AP
Run Date 09/2012011 -10:53 GO (pRF_GO)7.1.1
Report Vee 7.3.2
OTAY
Duration Report
Sorted by Investment Type -Investment Type
Through 08/31/2011
Security ID Investment#Fund Issuer
Investment
Class
Book
Value
Poe
Value
Market Current
Value Rate
YTM Current
360 Yield
Maturityl Modified
Call Date Duration
LAIF BASS 20109012
LAIF COPS07 9009
LAIF 9001
3134G2V01
3137EACK3A
3134G2RKO
3134G2QPO
3134G15C4
3134G2PE6
3134G2NR9
3134G17L2
3137EACK3B
3134G1Y40
3137EACK3
3134G2MC3
3136FRFMO
3136FPQG5
3133747H7
313373V25
313374T83
313373QJ4
3133755W3
313373UD2
313374ZW3
313374ElO
2050003183-4
2211
2148
2206
2205
2188
2204
2207
2190
2149
2183
2146
2200
2192
2171
2202
2198
2208
2196
2210
2197
2209
2201
2121
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Horne Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home loan Mortgage
Federal Home loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
California Bank &Trust
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,707,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,999,598.25
2,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
635,000.00
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
79,108.00
4,055,972.14
0.00
29,002,789.78
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,707,000.00
2,000,000,00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,000,000,00
635,000.00
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
79,108.00
4,055,972.14
0,00
29,002,789.78
2,003,740.00 .7500000
1,037,766.20 1.125000
2,001,960.00 1.000000
2,004,140.00 1.000000
2,000,300.00 1.250000
2,001,240.00 1.000000
2,000,080.00 .7498750
2,001,080.00 1.350000
2,727,410.78 1.125000
2,006,760.00 1.100000
2,015,080.00 1.147196
2,001,060,00 .8000000
1,003,160.00 2.000000
635,514.35 .8500830
2,000,660.00 .8750000
2,000,160.00 .8750000
2,001,200.00 .9000000
2,003,520.00 1.125000
2,001,140.00 .7000000
2,003,560.00 1.050000
2,000,740.00 .6500000
2,002,320.00 .8750000
79,108.00 1.380000
4,062,366.26 .4080000
0.00 1.530000
29,048,511.81 .4080000
0,740
1.109
0.986
0.986
1.233
0.986
0.740
1.332
1.109
1.085
1.154
0.789
1.973
0.837
0.863
0.863
0.888
1.110
0.693
1.036
0.641
0.863
1.380
0.402
1.509
0.402
0.674
0.291
0.959
0,913
1.242
0.973
0.748
1.323
0.291
0,925
0.313
0.774
1.929
0.807
0,861
0.871
0.875
1.045
0.671
0.971
0.631
0.825
1.380
00408
1.530
0.408
02124/2014
07/27/2012
0112812014
0112712014
06/07/2013
01/08/2014
07/05/2013
09/23/2013
07/27/2012
08/15/2013
07/27/2012
09/27/2013
04/27/2016
07/26/2013
12J27f2013
09/06f2013
01/28f2014
11/25/2013
08/23/2013
12/0912013
08/08/2013
12/3012013
01/2212012
2.453
0.899
2.372
2.369
1.730
2.317
1.826
2.014
0.899
1.930
0.901
2.048
4.380
1.882
2.290
1.987
2.376
2.194
1.960
2.233
1.920
2.299
0.389 t
0.000
0.000
0.000
Run Date.09/20/2011 -10:54 Page 1
Portfolio OTAY
AP
au (PRF_DU)7.1.1
Report VeL 73.2
QTAY
Duration Report
Sorted by Investment Type ~Investment Type
Through 08/31/2011
Security10 Investment#Fund Issuer
Investment
Class
Book.
Value
Pac
Value
Mark.et
Value
Current
Rate
YTM
360
Current
Yield
Maturityl Modified
Call Date Duration
SO COUNTY 9007 99 San Diego County Fair
Report Total
22,030,133.52
96,539,601.69
22,030,133.52
96,540,003.44
22,069,000.00 .6280000
96,711,577.40
0.619 0.628
0.644
0.000
0.863 t
t =;Duration can not be calculated on these investments due 10 incomplete Market price data.
RUrl Date:0912012011 "10:54 Page 2
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DU(PRF_DU)7.1.1
Report VeL 7.3.2
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITIED BY:
STAFF REPORT
Regular Board &--MEETING DATE:
Sean Prendergast,Finance~W.O.lG.F.NO:
Supervisor,Payroll &AP
APPROVED BY:Joseph Beachem,Chief Financial Officer
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:German Alvarez,Assistant General Manager
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:Accounts Payable Demand List
PURPOSE:
October 5,2011
DIV.NO.
Attached is the list of demands for the Board's information.
FISCAL IMPACT:
SUMMARY
CHECKS (2030263-2030557)
VOID CHECKS (1)
TOTAL CHECKS
WIRE TO:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA -SEWER CHARGES (BI-MONTHLY)
CITY TREASURER -METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE SYSTEM (QUARTERLY)
CITY TREASURER -RECLAIMED WATER PURCHASE (MONTHLY)
DELTA HEALTH SYSTEMS -DENTAL &COBRA CLAIMS (MONTHLY)
SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER WATER DELIVERIES (MONTHLY)
SPECIAL DIST RISK MGMT AUTH -INSURANCE PREMIUM (MONTHLY)
UNION BANK -CERT OF PARTICIPATION 2006 (ANNUAL)
UNION BANK -PAYROLL TAXES (MONTHLY)
TOTAL CASH DISBURSEMENTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the Board receive the attached list of demands.
Jb/Attachment
NET DEMANDS
$1,896,453.21
$(2,111.00)
$1,894,342.21
$2,947,021.94
$291,708.00
$313,477.36
$20,087.09
$3,449,629.50
$220,265.01
$401,723.64
$304,226.75
$9,842,481.50
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07J2011 TO 9/28f2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030495 09/28/11 10720 1060 TECHNOLOGY INC 2139 09/05/11 ADOBE CREATIVE 1,345,80 1,345.80
2030263 09/07/11 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 887237 08/16/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,253.68
887398 08/18/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,134.69
887121 08/16/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 900.35
887397 08/18/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 608.83
887122 08/16/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 420.46 5,318,01
2030339 09/14/11 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 887759 08/23/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,466.72
887893 08/25/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,556.27
887891 08/25/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,094.32
887712 08/22/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 743.38
887713 08/22/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 672.74
887892 08/25/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 575.19
886836 08/11/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 522.50 7,631.12
2030404 09/21/11 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 888252 08/30/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,770.57
888563 09/01/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,328.66
888148 08/29/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 920,53
888568 09/01/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 814,02
888149 08/29/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 736,66
888567 09/01/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 595,38
888564 09/01/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 561,73
888566 09/01/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 345,34 8,072.89
2030496 09/28/11 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 889011 09/08/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,323.06
889010 09/08/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 540.43
888907 09/07/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 275.83 2,139.32
2030340 09/14/11 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 2857 08/23/11 TEMPORARY LABOR 7,395.00 7,395,00
2030497 09/28/11 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 2889 09/06/11 TEMPORARY LABOR 6,885.00
2885 09/02/11 TEMPORARY LABOR 4,375.00 11,260,00
2030264 09/07/11 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1021 08/12/11 PLAN CHECKING 4,858.18
1108 08/12/11 DEVELOPER PLANCHECKS 1,683.23 6,541.41
2030341 09/14/11 01884 AEP (ASSN OF ENVIR PROF'LS)003192 09/14/11 REGISTRATION FEE 50.00 50.00
2030265 09/07/11 00132 AIRGAS WEST INC 103372722 08/15/11 BREATHING AIR 174,86 174.86
2030405 09/21/11 00132 AIRGAS WEST INC 103870759 08/31/11 BREATHING AIR 31,35 31.35
2030498 09/28/11 13208 AUS ELECTRIC MOTORS 3490 08/16/11 PUMP REBUILD 8,706.50 8,706.50
2030342 09/14/11 02362 ALUED WASTE SERVICES #509 0509004465391 08/25/11 TRASH SERVICES (SEPT 2011)1,011.92
0509004466634 08/25/11 ASBESTOS CONTAINER (AUG 2011)233.62
0509004467271 08/25/11 TRASH SERVICES TP (SEPT 2011)169.13 1,414,67
Page 1 of 15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9107/2011 TO 9/28f2011
Check #Dale Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Tolal
2030499 09/28/11 12911 ALTA LAND SURVEYING INC 11210003 09/09/11 SURVEYING SERVICES (6/13/11-7/1/11)1,406.25 1,406.25
2030406 09/21/11 02572 ALVAREZ,GERMAN F 003210 09/21/11 COMPUTER LOAN 681.42 681.42
2030500 09/28/11 10831 AMERICAN BACKFLOW PREVENTION R11830711 07/29/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 75.00
R11840711 07/29/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 75.00 150,00
2030407 09/21/11 06166 AMERICAN MESSAGING L1109570Ll 09/01/11 PAGER SERVICES (AUG 2011)189.53 189,53
2030501 09/28/11 00315 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL 1041570131 09/06/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 250.00 250,00
2030408 09/21/11 00107 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSN 7000379137 08/29/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 95.00 95,00
2030266 09/07111 06165 ANITA FIRE HOSE COMPANY ETC 14463 08/15/11 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 74.50 74,50
2030267 09/07/11 08967 ANTHEM BLUE CROSS EAP 40990 08/25/11 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE (SEPT 2011)118.59 118.59
2030343 09/14/11 12175 APPLE INC 003190 09/06/11 COMPUTER LOAN 2,204.51 2,204.51
2030344 09/14/11 03492 AQUA-METRIC SALES COMPANY 00392451N 08/22/11 OMNI METERS 6,737.22 6,737.22
2030268 09/07/11 13298 ARROW AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER 003176 09/02/11 REFUND WIO 00731-090056 190,87 190.87
2030318 09/14/11 13311 ASHLEY NEWTON REF002416599 09/13/11 US REFUND CST#0000173197 23,20 23.20
2030269 09/07/11 05758 AT&T 082164572808251'09/07/11 INTERNET BANDWIDTH 2,253,68 2,253.68
2030270 09/07/11 05758 AT&T 61942256050811 08/20/11 PHONE SVC (INTERAGENCY WTR MTR CONN)41.44 41.44
2030409 09/21/11 05758 AT&T 33784130450911 09/07/11 PHONE SERVICE (HI HEAD P/S-SCADA)31.38 31,38
2030410 09/21/11 07785 AT&T 000002626531 09/02/11 PHONE SERVICES 6,006.22
000002690962 09/02/11 PHONE SERVICES 153.27 6,159.49
2030271 09/07/11 08330 AT&T INTERNET SERVICES 8547826250811 08122/11 INTERNET BANDWIDTH 1,560.00 1,560,00
2030319 09/14/11 13316 ATLANTIC &PACIFIC REAL ESTATE REF002416604 09113/11 UB REFUND CST#0000176142 54.77 54,77
2030479 09/28/11 13336 ATLANTIC &PACIFIC REAL ESTATE Ref002416886 09/27/11 US Refund Cst #0000174029 139.26 139.26
2030480 09/28/11 13340 ATLANTIC &PACIFIC REAL ESTATE Ref002416890 09/27/11 US Refund Cst #0000177294 59.01 59.01
2030320 09/14/11 13308 AnOR SIMAAN REF002416596 09/13/11 US REFUND CST$0000172017 54.63 54.63
2030272 09/07/11 06285 BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC 11559 08/16/11 CONSULTING SERVICES 825,00 825.00
2030481 09/28/11 13330 BASIMA BAHUR Ref002416880 09/27/11 US Refund Cst #0000034264 33.21 33.21
2030345 09/14/11 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI128611 08/25/11 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,409.40 2,409.40
Page 2 of15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES9f07/2011 TO 9/ZBf2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030346 09/14/11 03721 BULLET LOGISTICS INC 08311103350 08/31/11 COURIER SERVICE 31,90 31.90
2030502 09/28/11 13345 BURGUENO-GOMEZ,MARIANA 003216 09/26/11 COMPUTER LOAN 1,482,65 1,482.65
2030411 09/21/11 13322 BUSTAMANTE &ASSOCIATES LLC 020711 08/01111 CONSULTANT SERVICES (JULY 2011)3,500.00
030811 08/31/11 CONSULTANT SERVICES (AUG 2011)3,500,00 7,000.00
2030347 09/14/11 02989 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 11090111 09/01/11 DEBT STATEMENT 475,00 475.00
2030412 09/21/11 01004 CALOLYMPIC SAFETY 091427 08/30/11 CAL-GAS &BATTERY 562.30 562.30
2030413 09/21/11 13326 CALPERS EDUCATIONAL FORUM 003211 09/21/11 REGISTRATION FEE 300,00 300.00
2030348 09/14/11 04071 CAPITOL WEBWORKS LLC 24173 07/31/11 ELECTRONIC FILING FEE 45.00 45.00
2030414 09/21/11 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 7380 09/01/11 RECORD SERVICES (AUG 2011)551.20
7379 09/01/11 RECORDS SUPPORT (AUG 2011)339.00 890.20
2030503 09/28/11 04653 CARO,PATRICIA 003215 09/26/11 TUITION 400.00 400,00
2030415 09f21/11 09801 CENTERBEAM INC 15341 08/30/11 TEMPORARY LABOR 8,390.50
15340 08/30/11 TEMPORARY LABOR 1,552.00 9,942.50
2030504 09/28/11 01788 CHAVARELA,GERARDO 003217 09/20/11 CERTIFICATE RENEWAL 100.00 100.00
2030349 09/14/11 11875 CITRIX SYSTEMS INC 91210675 08/21/11 LICENSE RENEWAL (ANNUAL)4,728.75 4,728.75
2030416 09/21/11 04119 CLARKSON LAB &SUPPLY INC 57510 08/31/11 BACTERIOLOGICAL SERVICES 312.00
57511 08/31/11 BACTERIOLOGICAL SERVICES 312.00
57512 08/31/11 BACTERIOLOGICAL SERVICES 312.00
57509 08/31/11 BACTERIOLOGICAL SERVICES 144.00 1,080,00
2030505 09/28/11 04398 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 003222 08/18/11 REGISTRATION FEE 55.00
003221 09/27/11 REGISTRATION FEE 55.00
003220 09f26/11 REGISTRATION FEE 55.00 165,00
2030417 09/21/11 03706 CONSUMERS PIPE &SUPPLY S1172696001 08/29/11 WHSE SUPPLIES 2,275.58 2,275,58
2030418 09/21/11 12334 CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC DS1245628 08/31/11 BACKUP TAPE STORAGE (AUG 2011)279.18 279.18
2030321 09/14/11 13312 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO REFOO2416600 09/13/11 US REFUND CST#0000173857 1,969.97 1,969.97
2030322 09/14/11 13313 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO REF002416601 09/13/11 UB REFUND CST#0000173858 1,969.97 1,969.97
2030419 09/21/11 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH120022D11 09/02/11 SHUT DOWN TEST 1,278,00
DEH120016D11 09/02/11 SHUT DOWN TEST 781,00 2,059.00
2030506 09/28/11 11286 CPM PARTNERS INC 11069 08/31/11 SCHEDULING SERVICES (AUG 2011)12,805,00 12,805.00
Page 3 of15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07/2011 TO 9/28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030273 09/07/11 00223 C W MCGRATH INC 39950 08/15/11 CRUSHED ROCK 42.43 42.43
2030274 09/07/11 12674 CITY OF CHULA VISTA 071 060PU0040811 08/17/11 UTILITY PERMITS (MAY,JUNE &JULY 2011)2,100.00 2,100,00
2030275 09/07/11 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 13093430 08/05/11 TONER 1,843.60
13055990 07/22/11 TONER 537.65 2,381.25
2030276 09/07111 11510 CONFERENCE CALL,COM 2670678990 08/31/11 CONFERENCE CALLING SERVICE (AUG 2011)105.65 105.65
2030277 09/07/11 03624 COPY LINK INC AR128187 08/17/11 COPIER MAINTENANCE 742.71
AR128188 08/17111 COPIER MAINTENANCE 371.35 1,114.06
2030323 09/14/11 13301 DAN DREDLA REF002416589 09/13111 us REFUND CST#0000050930 86.34 86.34
2030324 09/14/11 13306 DANIEL OJEDA REF002416594 09/13/11 us REFUND CST#0000161550 22.43 22.43
2030350 09/14/11 07680 DELTA HEALTH SYSTEMS P110908 09/08/11 HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (AUG 2011)1,628.40 1,628.40
2030325 09/14/11 13320 DENNIS DILLON REF002416608 09/13/11 US REFUND CST#0000181775 75.94 75.94
2030420 09/21/11 00319 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 303820911 09/14/11 CERTIFICATE RENEWAL 70.00 70.00
2030482 09/28/11 13343 DESIGN BUILD GENERAL Ref002416893 09/27/11 US Refund Cst #0000183260 1,865.20 1,865.20
2030421 09/21/11 02519 DIEHL EVANS &COMPANY LLP 70433 08/31/11 AUDIT SERVICES 13,200.00 13,200.00
2030507 09/28/11 03417 OIRECTV 16051180988 09119/11 SATELLITE TV (9/18/11-10/17/11)6.00 6,00
2030278 09/07/11 13295 DMSD FOODS INC 003179 09/02/11 REFUND WIO 00810-060050 2,317.47 2,317.47
2030351 09/14/11 03152 DRIES,ROSEMARY 003191 09106/11 TUITION 3,000.00 3,00000
2030352 09/14/11 02447 EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION 1554580811 08/31/11 RECYCLING SERVICES 90.00 90.00
2030353 09/14/11 08023 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SPECIALISTS 00538381N 08/31/11 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (AUG 2011)562.50 562.50
2030422 09/21/11 00331 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 925023840911 09/08/11 UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (APR -JUN 2011)11,357,20 11,357.20
2030279 09/07/11 04467 ENGINEERING &GENERAL 003182 09/01/11 MEMBERSHIP MEETING 50.00 50.00
2030423 09/21/11 04467 ENGINEERING &GENERAL 003207 09/20/11 MEMBERSHIP MEETING 50.00 50.00
2030280 09/07/11 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 1080310 08/15/11 LABORATORY SERVICES 445.00 445,00
2030354 09/14/11 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 1080470 08/22/11 LABORATORY SERVICES 765.00 765,00
2030424 09/21/11 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 1080645 08/29/11 LABORATORY SERVICES 830.00 830,00
Page4 of15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES9f07/2011 TO 9128/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030508 09/28111 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 1090050 09106111 LABORATORY SERVICES 670.00
1090491 09/26111 LABORATORY SERVICES (9/10/11-9/16111)470,00 1,140.00
2030483 09/28111 13342 FAS-AHM UTILITIES LLC Ref002416892 09/27/11 US Refund Cst #0000182746 75,00 75.00
2030281 09/07111 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1083 0384001 08/08111 INVENTORY 7,294.41
0383895 08/17/11 WATER SYSTEM PARTS 1,250.98
0384383 08/15/11 HYDRANT PARTS 1,150.49
0384252 08/17/11 METER GASKETS 759.64
03843911 08/16/11 INVENTORY 128.66 10,584.18
2030355 09/14/11 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1083 0386089 08/25/11 INVENTORY 1,343.65
0385538 08/23/11 STEEL PIPE 254.24 1,597.89
2030425 09/21/11 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1083 0384338 08/31/11 CLAVAL PARTS 8,464.14
0385550 08/30/11 GASKETS 445.83 8,909.97
2030509 09/28/11 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #1083 0386873 09/07/11 INVENTORY 1,602.24
0387249 09/07/11 RIDGID CUTTER 168.09
0386900 09/07/11 TRUCKTOOLS 90.51 1,860.84
2030484 09128/11 13341 FIELD ASSET SERVICES Ref002416891 09127/11 US Refund Cst #0000177870 21.91 21,91
2030426 09121/11 12187 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 90034081 08131/11 ONLINE DOCUMENTS (AUG 2011)49.00 49,00
2030282 09107/11 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES -SO 138334 08116/11 COFFEE SUPPLIES 278.16 278,16
2030427 09121/11 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES -SO 142452 09/01/11 WATER FILTERS 484.39
140187 08130/11 COFFEE SUPPLIES 424.41 908,80
2030428 09/21/11 11962 FLEETWASH INC 3655889 08112/11 VEHICLE WASH 483.99
3621337 07101/11 VEHICLE WASH 385.44
3626290 07108/11 VEHICLE WASH 306.60
3653829 08105/11 VEHICLE WASH 153.30
3661128 08119/11 VEHICLE WASH 65.70
3661131 08/19/11 VEHICLE WASH 65.70 1,460.73
2030510 09/28/11 11962 FlEETWASH INC 3677123 09/02/11 VEHICLE WASH 244.19 244.19
2030356 09/14/11 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2416649 09/15/11 BI-WEEKlY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 190.00 190.00
2030357 09/14111 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2416651 09/15111 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 466,56 466.56
2030511 09/28/11 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Sen2416925 09/29/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROll DEDUCTION 190,00 190.00
2030512 09/28/11 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2416927 09/29/11 BI-WEEKlY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 466,56 466.56
2030358 09/14/11 07224 FRAZEE INDUSTRIES INC 027113979 08/24/11 HYDRANT PAINT 860,95 860.95
Page 5 of 15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07f2011 TO 9/28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030283 09/07/11 03094 FUllCOURT PRESS 22812 08/05/11 PRINTING 1,505.37 1,505.37
2030326 09/14/11 13314 GOLD KEY FINANCIAL INC REF002416602 09/13/11 US REFUND CST#0000174205 75.00 75.00
2030359 09/14/11 00131 GOVERNMENT FIN OFFICERS ASSN 0152001 08/24/11 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 580.00
0116854S 08/24/11 SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL 265.00 845,00
2030284 09/07/11 00101 GRAINGER INC 9614345974 08/18/11 MAINTENANCE PARTS 200.93
9613634840 08/17/11 PAINT 184.77
9614345982 08/18/11 THERMOSTATS 59.19 444.89
2030360 09/14/11 00101 GRAINGER INC 8617393476 08/22/11 HARDWARE 158.83 158,83
2030429 09/21/11 00101 GRAINGER INC 9622030147 08/26/11 TAMPER PROOF SCREWS 42.63 42.63
2030513 09/28/11 00101 GRAINGER INC 9629214504 09/06/11 ELECTRICAL MATERIAL 699.73
9631023133 09/08/11 TRUCK TOOLS 260.37
9628664576 09/06/11 BIRD X ADHESIVE 165.91 1,126.01
2030430 09/21/11 03773 GTC SYSTEMS INC 32158 08/31/11 CITIRX SUPPORT (AUG 2011)2,066.06 2,066.06
2030327 09/14/11 13300 GUADALUPE ARIAS REF002416588 09/13/11 UB REFUND CST#0000042147 60.83 60.83
2030402 09/16/11 08968 GURROLA,MICHAEL 003197 09/15/01 ACH DEPOSIT RETURNED 2,115.61 2,115.61
2030431 09/21/11 02630 HAAKER EQUIPMENT COMPANY C82684 CREDIT MEMO (91.11)
C82462 08/29/11 PARTS 254.42
C82441 08/17/11 PARTS 206.73
C82456 08/29/11 PARTS 97.28 467.32
2030361 09/14/11 00174 HACH COMPANY 7389737 08/23/11 WATER SYSTEM PARTS 1,177.76 1,177.76
2030432 09/21/11 00174 HACH COMPANY 7402654 09/01/11 HACH ANALYZERS 1,873,38 1,873.38
2030485 09/28/11 13329 HAROLD COSSUTO Ref002416879 09/27/11 UB Refund Cst#0000027593 34,26 34.26
2030433 09/21/11 00169 HAWTHORNE POWER SYSTEMS PS100200405 08/16/11 BLOCK HEATER 1,709,36 1,709.36
2030362 09/14/11 06640 HO SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTO 3385282 08/23/11 AIR VAC PARTS 1,566.47 1,566.47
2030285 09/07/11 10973 HDR ENGINEERING INC 311493H 08105/11 TEMPORARY LABOR 612.50 612.50
2030328 09114/11 13319 HEARTLAND ASSOC REF002416607 09/13/11 US REFUND CST#0000177999 104.17 104,17
2030363 09/14/11 04799 HELIX WATER DISTRICT 003189 09/14/11 WEBHOSTING (WTR AGENCY STD)225.00 225,00
2030364 09/14/11 08610 HENRY BROS ELECTRONICS INC 13070111 08/23/11 ELECTRICAL BOX ACCESS PANEL 4,674.49 4,674.49
2030365 09/14/11 00713 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 49866512 08/03/11 PROCESSORS &MEMORY 18,969.12 18,969,12
Page6of15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07/2011 TO 9/28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030434 09/21/11 00713 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 66564135 05125/11 CONSULTANT SERVICES (APR 2011)2,000.00
66564149 05125/11 CONSULTANT SERVICES 111.00 2,111,00
2030514 09/28/11 00713 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 66564135 05/25/11 CONSULTANT SERVICES (APR 2011)2,000.00 2,000.00
2030286 09/07/11 06540 HORIZON CRANE SERVICE LLC 5898 08/16/11 CRANE RENTAL 742.50 742.50
2030366 09/14/11 12335 HP ENTERPRISE SERVICES LLC U2829307 08/03/11 CREDIT CARD SERVICES (JULY2011)1,974.00 1,974.00
2030367 09/14/11 01649 IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC 253473825 08/17/11 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 3,000.15 3,000.15
2030435 09/21/11 01649 IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC 253473826 08/17/11 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 165.02 165.02
2030436 09/21/11 08969 INFOSEND INC 52866 08/31111 POSTAGE(AUG 2011)16,294.85
52865 08/31/11 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (AUG 2011)6,323.00 22,617.85
2030437 09/21111 02372 INTERIOR PLANT SERVICE INC 39177 08/31111 PLANT SERVICES (AUG 2011)186.00 186.00
2030486 09/28111 13331 JAECHO LEE Ref002416881 09/27111 US Refund Cst #0000088996 147.87 147.87
2030438 09/21111 03077 JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA INC SOO08110192 08/01/11 JANITORIAL SERVICES (AUG 2011)1,101.10 1,101.10
2030329 09/14111 13310 JAVIER RAMIREZ REF002416598 09/13111 US REFUND CST#0000173162 25,36 25.36
2030330 09/14/11 13307 JAYNALYNN MEDEIROS REF002416595 09/13111 UB REFUND CST#0000168345 64,01 64.01
2030287 09/07111 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 518160 CREDIT MEMO (3,000,00)
519708 CREDIT MEMO (3,000,00)
517936 08/10111 CHLORINE TP 4,837,80
519561 08/24/11 CHLORINE TREATMENT PLANT 4,837.80 3,675.60
2030515 09/28/11 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 521945 CREDIT MEMO (3,000,00)
521891 09/08111 CHLORINEITREATMENT PLANT 4,837.80
510842A 06/22/11 CHLORINE TREATMENT PLANT 36.00 1,873.80
2030331 09/14111 13309 JENNIFER RAMIREZ REF002416597 09/13/11 US REFUND CST#0000172298 130,84 130.84
2030487 09/28/11 13334 JOHN HASKETT Ref002416884 09/27/11 US Refund Cst#0000172922 23.45 23.45
2030439 09/21/11 02533 JOHNSON,ERIC J 003203 09/09/11 SAFETY BOOTS 150.00 150.00
2030288 09/07/11 03172 JONES &STOKES ASSOCIATES INC 0081001 08/15/11 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 5,567.83
0080995 08/15/11 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 1,242.75 6,810,58
2030516 09/28/11 03172 JONES &STOKES ASSOCIATES INC 0081497 09/06/11 P1253 SAN MIGUEL HABITAT MGMT AREA 8,513.40 8,513.40
2030440 09/21/11 02449 JOSEPH G POLLARD CO INC 13078151N 08131/11 TRUCK TOOLS 675.62 675,62
Page 7 of 15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07/2011 TO 9128/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030517 09/28/11 02449 JOSEPH G POLLARD CO INC 13082911N 09/08/11 TRUCK TOOLS 55.15 55.15
2030518 09/28/11 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 4898 09/06/11 PAVING SERVICES 7,584,50
4899 09/06/11 PAVING SERVICES 3.498,00 11,082.50
2030441 09/21/11 04996 KNOX ATTORNEY SERVICE INC 641007 08/31/11 DELIVERY SERVICES (AUG 2011)324,50 324.50
2030289 09/07/11 12276 KONECRANES INC SDG00603579 08/18/11 HOIST INSPECTION 450.00
8DG00603672 08/18/11 HOIST PARTS 155.16 605.16
2030368 09/14/11 12276 KONECRANESINC SDG00604959 08/23/11 CRANE INSPECTIONS 360.00 360.00
2030332 09/14/11 13318 KRISTINE SLEAD REF002416606 09/13/11 UB REFUND C8T#0000171614 75.00 75.00
2030488 09/28/11 13333 KYLE EDMONDSON Ref002416883 09/27/11 UB Refund Cst #0000169559 75.00 75,00
2030442 09/21/11 06497 LAKESIDE LAND COMPANY 250685R 06/01/11 LANDFILL 45.48
254369R 08/31/11 LANDFILL 44.37 89,85
2030290 09/07/11 13297 LAND SOUTH LLC 003171 09/02/11 REFUND WIO 00818-090087 1,857.31 1,857.31
2030369 09/14/11 03607 LEE &RO INC LR14342 08/22/11 INTERCONNECTION 80,160.08 80,160.08
2030519 09/28/11 03607 LEE &RO INC LR14402 09/02/11 SERVICES FOR PERIOD (8/1111-8/26/11)35,002.81
LR14401 09/01/11 DESIGN SERVICES (8/1111-8/26/11)15,701.02 50,703.83
2030370 09/14/11 00627 LEWIS &LEWIS ENTERPRISES 1008611000 08/23/11 SURVEY TOOLS 127.60 127.60
2030371 09/14/11 05220 LOGICALIS INTEGRATION SOLUTION S134736 06/30/11 CONFIGURATION ASSISTANCE (JUNE 2011)1,155.00
S135026 07/31/11 2010 EXCHANGE UPGRADE (JULY 2011)262.50 1,417.50
2030443 09/21/11 05220 LOGICALIS INTEGRATION SOLUTION S135416 08/31/11 2010 EXCHANGE UPGRADE 175,00 175.00
2030333 09/14/11 13315 LPS FIELD SERVICES INC REF002416603 09/13/11 UB REFUND CST#0000175106 75.00 75.00
2030489 09/28/11 13337 LPS FIELD SERVICES INC Ref002416887 09/27/11 UB Refund Cst#0000175377 43.48 43.48
2030520 09/28/11 03385 MAGANA,MANNY 003219 09/22/11 REGISTRATION FEE 435,00
15970911 09/23/11 TRAVEL EXPENSES (9/11/11-9/14/11)222.00 657.00
2030372 09/14/11 00628 MANHATTAN NATIONAL LIFE 003188 08/22/11 VOLUNTARY LIFE INSURANCE (SEPT 2011)330.94 33094
2030444 09/21/11 00628 MANHATTAN NATIONAL LIFE 003212 09/21/11 VOLUNTARY LIFE INSURANCE (OCT 2011)330.94 330,94
2030445 09/21/11 02902 MARSTON+MARSTONINC 201192 08/29/11 COMMUNITY OUTREACH (AUG 2011)14,809.84
201191 08/29/11 COMMUNITY OUTREACH (AUG 2011)510.00 15,319,84
2030291 09/07/11 05329 MASTER METER INC 01892251N 08/17/11 INVENTORY 183,669.65 183,669.65
2030292 09/07/11 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 00661521N 08/16/11 REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 1,442.28 1,442.28
Page 8 of15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07/2011 TO 9f28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030446 09/21/11 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 0066541 08/31/11 REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 46.50 46.50
2030373 09/14/11 01183 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 93648365 08/23/11 MAINTENANCE PARTS 532.37 532.37
2030521 09/28/11 01183 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 94805158 09/07/11 COMBO LOCK 893.16 893.16
2030490 09/28/11 13339 MCMILLIN REALTY Ref002416889 09/27/11 UB Refund Csi #0000176726 65.64 65.64
2030293 09/07/11 12016 MTGL INC 0034244 08/18/11 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 6,130,00 6,130.00
2030522 09/28/11 03623 MWHAMERICAS INC 1418476 09/07/11 RWCWRF UPGRADE (7/30/11-8f26/11)6,518.48 6,518.48
2030334 09/14/11 13305 NAOMI BUNNELL REF002416593 09/13111 UB REFUND CST#0000159876 75,00 75.00
2030447 09/21/11 12908 NARASIMHAN CONSULTING SERVICES 03903 08/31f11 SERVICES FOR PERIOD 6118/11 TO 8/26/11 19,607.50
03902 07/27f11 SERVICES FOR PERIOD 5/21f11-6/17/11 6,114,00 25,721.50
2030374 09/14/11 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2416639 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 10,152,70 10,152.70
2030523 09/28/11 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2416915 09/29/11 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 10,133.08 10,133.08
2030448 09/21/11 09884 NATIONAL SAFETY COMPLIANCE INC 50722 08/31/11 RANDOM DRUG TESTING (AUG 2011)639.50 639.50
2030491 09/28/11 13332 NICHOLE SMILEY Ref002416882 09/27/11 UB Refund Cst #0000159775 78.25 78.25
2030375 09/14/11 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 576660645001 08/25/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 199.61
576659733001 08/25/11 SUPPLIES 99.74
575763529001 08/19/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 27.70
575763326001 08/23/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 6.47 333.52
2030449 09/21/11 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 576839111001 08/26/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 440.47
577417035001 09/01/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 86.99 527.46
2030524 09f28/11 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 579988149001 CREDIT MEMO (17.19)
577681402001 09/02/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 141.09
577681815001 09/02/11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 22.05 145,95
2030294 09f07/11 03149 ON SITE LASER LLC 45929 08/15/11 MAINTENANCE KIT 332.99 332,99
2030450 09/21/11 03149 ON SITE LASER LLC 45942 08/16/11 FUSING ASSEMBLY 69.00 69.00
2030295 09/07/11 02334 OTAY LANDFILL 011206 08/15111 WASTE DISPOSAL 83.03 83.03
2030296 09/07/11 13296 OTAY RANCH FOURTEEN LLC 003178 09/02/11 REFUND W/O 00590-010251 6,297.98 6,297.98
2030376 09/14f11 03101 OTAYWATER DISTRICT Ben2416641 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 707.00 707.00
2030525 09/28f11 03101 OTAYWATER DISTRICT Ben2416917 09/29/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 707.00 707.00
Page 9 of 15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07/2011 TO 9f28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030297 09/07/11 01002 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY 148110 08/16/11 INVENTORY 10,559.50
148109 08/16/11 INVENTORY 9,208.68
148119 08/16/11 INVENTORY 96.98 19,865.16
2030377 09/14/11 01002 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY 148425 08/19/11 INVENTORY 4,609.55 4,609.55
2030451 09/21/11 01002 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY 148756 08/31/11 INVENTORY 3,742.08 3,742.08
2030452 09/21/11 05497 PAYPAL INC 13221597 08/31/11 PHONE PAYMENT SERVICES (AUG 2011)54.10 54.10
2030378 09/14/11 03790 PENHALL COMPANY 28618 08/19/11 SAWCUTTING SERVICES 200.00 200.00
2030379 09/14/11 03180 PERFORMANCE METER INC 00187041N 08/25f11 METER REPAIR 2,600.53 2,600.53
2030298 09/07/11 11333 PETER JON SNELL 003181 09/02/11 REFUND WfO D0403-090102 1,602.77 1,602.77
2030380 09/14/11 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 003194 09/13/11 PETTY CASH 152.00 152.00
2030526 09/28/11 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 003224 09/27/11 PETTY CASH 637.50 637.50
2030381 09/14/11 13122 PINNACLE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 33521 08/24/11 HARD DRIVE 786.58 786.58
2030527 09/28/11 00053 PITNEY BOWES INC 545650 09/03/11 PSD RENTAL (OCT,NOV &DEC 2011)206.88 20688
2030299 09/07/11 01733 PRICE TRONCONE &12423 08/10/11 SITE RENTAL (QUARTERLY)4,128.00 4,128.00
2030382 09f14/11 07346 PRIME ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC 9678 08/24/11 ELECTRICAL SERVICES 1,559.00 1,559.00
2030453 09/21/11 13059 PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES 26966 08/01/11 JANITORIAL SERVICES (AUG 2011)3,504.00 3,504.00
2030403 09f16/11 12773 PRM CONSULTING 20111050WD 08f05/11 REDISTRICTING PROJECT (JULY 2011)7,000.00 7,000.00
2030300 09/07/11 02476 PROGRESSIVE BUS PUBLICATIONS 04445406 08/19/11 MANAGER'S LETTER SUBSCRIPTION 130.00 130.00
2030383 09f14/11 03237 PROGRESSIVE MAPPING 4673 08f19/11 AUTOCAD TEMPLATE 1,500.00
4658 07/27/11 GIS CONSULTING 973.75 2,473.75
2030301 09f07/11 06641 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 30202244 08f18/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 349.15
30202243 08/18/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 197.34
30202245 08f18/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 168.70
30201605 08/16/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 111.33
30202246 08/18/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 60.57
30201604 08/16/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 54.20 941.29
2030384 09/14/11 06641 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 30203771 08/25/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 349.15
30203772 08/25f11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 168.70
30203126 08/23/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 111.33
30203773 08/25/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 66.51
Page 10of 15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9f07/2011 TO 9/28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
30203125 08/23/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 50.20 745.89
2030454 09/21111 06641 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 30205202 09/01/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 36315
30203770 08/25/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 197.34
30205201 09/01/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 197.34
30205203 09/01111 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 168,70
30204535 08/30/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 111,33
30196176 07/21111 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 100,51
30205204 09/01/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 58,50
30204534 08/30/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 54,20 1,251.07
2030528 09/28/11 06641 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 30206831 09/08/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 347,15
30206830 09/08/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 197,34
30206832 09/08/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 168,70
30206134 09/06/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 111,33
30206833 09/08/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 66.44
30206133 09/06/11 UNIFORMS,TOWELS &MATS 50,20 941.16
2030302 09/07/11 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2416400 09/01/11 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 154,519,26 154,519.26
2030455 09/21/11 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2416635 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 154,12003 154,120.03
2030492 09/28/11 13335 RANCHO BUENA VISTA REAL ESTATE Ref002416885 09/27/11 UB Refund Cst#0000173533 75.00 75.00
2030456 09/21/11 12017 RICK ALEXANDER COMPANY,THE EOOOO01 09/01/11 CONSULTING SERVICES 1,304,00 1,304.00
2030303 09/07/11 01342 R J SAFETY SUPPLYCO INC 29134701 08/12/11 SAFETY SUPPLIES 424,54
29134702 08/17111 SAFETY SUPPLIES 37,35 461.89
2030493 09/28/11 13328 ROBERTJENNINGS Ref002416878 09/27/11 UB Refund Cst#0000003963 12982 129.82
2030529 09/28/11 06412 ROMERO,TANYA 003214 09/26/11 TumON 664,88 664.88
2030530 09/28/11 13344 RONALD CUMFORD &MARIA CUMFORC 003223 09/27/11 CUSTOMER REFUND 218,35 218.35
2030457 09/21/11 00217 RW LITTLE CO INC 103755 08/09/11 POWDER COATING 550,00 550.00
2030304 09/07/11 00362 RYAN HERCO PRODUCTS CORP 7183523 08/18/11 WATER SYSTEM PARTS 1,013,55 1,013.55
2030385 09/14/11 13204 SAIC ENERGY ENVIRONMENT &05451 08/09/11 LEGAL SERVICES 17,660.08 17,660.08
2030305 09/07/11 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 8055 08/12/11 WELDING 680.00 680.00
2030531 09/28/11 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 8078 09/06/11 WELDING 680.00 680.00
2030532 09/28/11 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 2011071 09/07/11 ASSESSOR DATA 125.00 125,00
2030533 09/28/11 00247 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 268815 09/08/11 BID ADVERTISEMENT 74.50 74.50
Page 11 of 15
OTAYWATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/0712011 TO 9f28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030386 09f14/11 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS &ELECTRIC 003184 09f06/11 UTILITYEXPENSES 71,753.47
003187 08f29/11 UTILlTYEXPENSES 54,195.44
003186 08f25/11 UTILlTYEXPENSES 45,563.52
003185 08f24/11 UTILITYEXPENSES 27,451.39 198,963.82
2030335 09/14/11 13317 SAN DIEGO REALTY REF002416605 09/13f11 UB REFUND CST#0000176210 57.06 57.06
2030458 09/21/11 12080 SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE LLC 241402 08/31/11 ADVERTISING SERVICES (JUNE-AUG 2011)289.44 289,44
2030534 09/28/11 12080 SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE LLC 0010551484 09/08f11 BiD ADVERTISEMENT 291,60 291.60
2030387 09/14f11 07676 SAN MIGUEL FIRE PROTECTION 003000 06/28f11 TEMPORARY LABOR (JUNE 2011)6,626,26 6,626.26
2030535 09/28f11 07676 SAN MIGUEL FIRE PROTECTION 003202 09/08f11 TEMPORARY LABOR (JULY 2011)6,827.85 6,827.85
2030459 09/21f11 12333 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION 8102964485 08/01/11 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE (AUG 2011)449.01 449.01
2030494 09/28/11 13338 SCOTT PROPERTIES Ref002416888 09/27111 US Refund Cst #0000176174 31.14 31.14
2030306 09/07f11 11516 SIEMENS INDUSTRY INC 900313444 08/15/11 INJECTOR ASSEMBLY 954.82 954.82
2030336 09/14/11 13304 SIERRA PACIFIC WEST INC REF002416592 09/13f11 US REFUND CST#0000159086 1,740.35 1,740.35
2030536 09/28f11 02660 SILVA,GABRIEL 003218 09/23/11 SAFETY BOOTS 146.79 146.79
2030460 09/21/11 12995 SILVA-SiLVA INTERNATIONAL 1108 09/10/11 CONSULTING SERVICES (AUG 2011)4,000.00 4,000,00
2030461 09/21/11 12281 SIR SPEEDY PRiNTING 46324 07/21/11 BUSINESS CARDS 38.63 38,63
2030537 09/28/11 00258 SLOAN ELECTRIC COMPANY 0160481 08/19/11 PUMPS &MOTORS 711-1 201,809,46
0059563 09/02/11 GEARBOX REPAIR 1,071.00 202,880,46
2030307 09f07/11 03592 SOFTCHOICE CORPORATION 2780293 08/16/11 ADOBE UPGRADE 14,653.75
2779757 08f16/11 ANNUAL LICENSE 619.77 15,273.52
2030462 09f21/11 03592 SOFTCHOICE CORPORATION 2759019 07/21/11 SOFTWARE LICENSES (ANNUAL)78,489.77 78,489.77
2030337 09f14/11 13302 SONIA GOMEZ REF002416590 09f13/11 UB REFUND CST#0000085203 67.52 67.52
2030308 09/07/11 11618 SOUTH COAST COPY SYSTEMS AR90146A 07119/11 COPIER MAINTENANCE 531.65
AR90145A 07f19J11 COPIER MAINTENANCE 31.74 563.39
2030388 09f14111 11618 SOUTH COAST COPYSYSTEMS AR92666 09/02111 COPIES OVERAGE 3,762.89 3,762.89
2030463 09/21f11 03103 SOUTHCOASTHEATING &C46753 08/11f11 AC MAINTENANCE (AUG 2011)1,068.00 1,068.00
2030309 09/07/11 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 889073 08/18/11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 98,15
888469 08/10f11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 79,96 178.11
Page 12 of 15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN OATES 9/07/2011 TO 9/28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030464 09/21/11 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 890142 08/29/11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 79.96
889903 08/26/11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 79,96
889904 08/26/11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 79.96
889902 08/26/11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 79.96 319,84
2030538 09/28/11 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 891383 09/08/11 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (9/7111-10/4/11)79.96 79.96
2030389 09/14/11 03516 SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK AD1112004886000 09/06/11 AUTO LIABILITY DEDUCTIBLE 1,000.00 1,000,00
2030465 09/21/11 06510 SPRINT NEXTEL 901500243060 09/12/11 WIRELESS SERVICES (AUG 2011)3,520.81 3,520,81
2030390 09/14/11 06281 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT Ben2416657 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 415.38 415,38
2030391 09/14/11 06299 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT Ben2416645 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 237.69 237,69
2030392 09/14/11 06303 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 8en2416653 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 802.15 802,15
2030539 09/28/11 06281 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT Ben2416933 09/29/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 415.38 415,38
2030540 09/28/11 06299 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT Ben2416921 09/29/11 81-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 237.69 237,69
2030541 09/28/11 06303 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT Ben2416929 09/29/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 802.15 802,15
2030393 09/14/11 02261 STATE STREET BANK &TRUST CO Ben2416637 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 5,632.68 5,632,68
2030542 09/28/11 02261 STATE STREET BANK &TRUST CO Ben2416913 09/29/11 81-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 5,810.78 5,810.78
2030543 09/28/11 11749 STEPHEN V MCCUE 003225 09/02/11 LEGALSERVICES (AUG 2011)20,114.35 20,114.35
2030310 09/07/11 03738 STEVEN ENTERPRISES INC 02745171N 08/17/11 CARRIER STRIPS 669.31 669.31
2030466 09/21/11 03738 STEVEN ENTERPRISES INC 0275072IN 08/30/11 RE-STOCKING FEE 77.20 77.20
2030311 09/07/11 07678 STREAMLINE FORMS &GRAPHICS 37108 08/16/11 TAGS 289.85
37092 08/12/11 PRE-INSPECTION FORMS 92.67 382.52
2030544 09/28/11 07678 STREAMLINE FORMS &GRAPHICS 37161 09/07111 FORMS 139.00 139.00
2030467 09/21/11 13325 SUNROAO ENTERPRISES 003209 09/15/11 WIO REFUND D0262-XX8821 8,208.18 8,208.18
2030545 09/28/11 06841 SUPERIOR ENVIRONMENTAL 1108018 08/01/11 CLEANING SERVICES 725.00 725.00
2030338 09/14/11 13303 SUSAN STROUD REF002416591 09/13/11 U8 REFUND CST#0000091331 9.24 9.24
2030312 09/07/11 11872 TESTO INC 9100095601 07/01111 REPAIR ANALYZER 1,506,00 1,506.00
2030468 09/21/11 02975 TETRA TECH INC 50478560 08/15/11 FOR SERVICES ENDING 7129111 59,048,23 59,048.23
2030546 09/28/11 07365 TOTAL FILTRATION SERVICES INC PSV811920 08/10/11 BLOWER CARTRIDGES 215.66 215.66
Page 13 of 15
DTAYWATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/0712011 TO 9/2812011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030469 09/21/11 03074 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE INC 1035963 08/09/11 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1,366.50 1,366,50
2030547 09/28/11 03074 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE INC 1040080 09/08/11 MESSAGE BOARD 16,841.40 16,841.40
2030470 09/21/11 12084 TRIACTIVE INC SITRI1166 07/29/11 SOFTWARE SUPPORT (APR-JUNE 2011)179,28 179.28
2030471 09/21/11 03261 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 54071 08/31/11 SUPPORT RESOURCE 3,000,00 3,000.00
2030472 09/21/11 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 820110474 09/01/11 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (AUG 2011)352,50 352.50
2030548 09/28/11 03563 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES INC 097252 09/05/11 WATER METER BOX CLEANOUT MAINTENANCE 2,866,50 2,866.50
2030313 09/07/11 00350 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 104339510911 09/06/11 REIMBURSE POSTAGE MACHINE 2,100.00 2,100.00
2030394 09/14/11 08262 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC 95125726001 08/23/11 CONCRETE 177.79 177,79
2030473 09/21/11 08262 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC 95297246001 09/01/11 CONCRETE 222.24
95271681001 08/31/11 CONCRETE 139.00
95298284001 09/01/11 CONCRETE 44.45 405,69
2030549 09/28/11 08262 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC 95340676001 09/06/11 CONCRETE 177.79 177.79
2030395 09/14/11 05417 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT Ben2416655 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100,00
2030550 09/28J11 05417 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT Ben2416931 09/29/11 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100.00
2030551 09/28J11 07662 UNITEDHEALTHCARE SPECIALTY 112710000110 09/28J11 AD&D &SUPP LIFE INS (OCT 2011)5,656.04 5,656.04
2030552 09/28/11 03212 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE Ben2416909 09/29/11 MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD 8,730.02 8,730.02
2030396 09/14/11 07674 US BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT 003193 08/22/11 DISTRICT EXPENSES (CAL CARD)7,797.85
003195 08/22/11 DISTRICT EXPENSES (CAL CARD)125,00 7,922.85
2030474 09/21111 07674 US BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT 003206 08/22/11 DISTRICT EXPENSES (CAL CARD)15,860.65
003205 08/22/11 DISTRICT EXPENSES (CAL CARD)1,219.79
003204 08/22/11 DISTRICT EXPENSES (CAL CARD)76.00 17,156.44
2030397 09J14/11 11188 US CONCRETE 0149430lN 08/23/11 INVENTORY 9,969.55 9,969.55
2030553 09128/11 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 362012 08/31/11 SECURITY SERVICES (AUG 2011)461.20 461.20
2030554 09/28/11 13048 V &A CONSULTING ENGINEERS 12899 08/26/11 CORROSION SERVICES (7/30/11-8126/11)3,452.00 3,452,00
2030398 09/14/11 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2416643 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,043.78 8,043.78
2030399 09/14/11 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2416647 09/15/11 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 1,085.58 1,085.58
2030555 09/28/11 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2416919 09/29111 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,202,12 8,202.12
Page 14of15
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CHECK REGISTER
FOR CHECKS 2030263 THROUGH 2030557
RUN DATES 9/07/2011 TO 9/28/2011
Check #Date Vendor Vendor name Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total
2030556 09/28/11 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Sen2416923 09/29/11 SI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 953.98 953.98
2030400 09/14/11 03329 VERIZON WIRELESS 1006296328 08/21/11 WIRELESS SERVICES 8,930.39 8,930.39
2030314 09/07/11 13294 VIRGINIA M WOODHULL 003180 09/02/11 REFUND WIO 00842-090098 222.55 222.55
2030401 09114/11 03588 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 46693595 08/22/11 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 1,042.42 1,042.42
2030475 09/21/11 01995 WASCO PRODUCTS INC 625749 07/18/11 REPAIR PART 94.92 94.92
2030476 09121/11 07595 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 855899700 09/01/11 VALVE ACTUATOR 45.80
855531802 09/01/11 VALVE ACTUATOR 31.52 77.32
2030557 09128/11 07595 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 856267000 09/07/11 ELECTRICAL MATERIAL 754.25
855531801 09/01/11 VALVE ACTUATOR 542.64
324929000 09102/11 VALVE ACTUATOR 71.12
856268301 09/07/11 VALVE ACTUATOR 38.79 1,406,80
2030315 09/07/11 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 70503 08117/11 BEE REMOVAL 115.00 115,00
2030316 09/07/11 00125 WESTERN PUMP INC 01051511N 08/18/11 APCo TESTING 400.00 400,00
2030477 09/21/11 00125 WESTERN PUMP INC 01056161N 08/31/11 CLOCK GAUGES 3,115.10 3,115.10
2030317 09/07/11 03692 WESTIN ENGINEERING INC 669 08/17/11 PROJECT CONSULTING 29,122.82 29,122.82
2030478 09121/11 09149 WILLIS RISK AND INSURANCE 0234019 09101/11 BENEFITS CONSULTING (QUARTERLY)9,282.75 9,282.75
1,896,453.21 1,896,453.21
Page150f15