The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-15-11 EO&WR Committee PacketOTAY WATER DISTRICT ENGINEERING,OPERATIONS &WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING and SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY,CALIFORNIA Board Room TUESDAY February 15,2011 11:30 A.M. This is a District Committee meeting.This meeting is being posted as a special meeting in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2)in the event that a quorum of the Board is present.Items will be deliberated,however,no formal board actions will be taken at this meeting.The committee makes recommendations to the full board for its consideration and formal action. AGENDA 1.ROLL CALL 2.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURIS- DICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA DISCUSSION ITEMS 3.OCEAN DESALINATION OPINION SURVEY REPORT (REA &PARKER RESEARCH, INC.)[15 minutes] 4.REVIEW AND RECEIVE A SUMMARY OF THE DISTRICT'S CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES PRACTICES (RIPPERGER)[10 minutes] 5.FISCAL YEAR 2011 SECOND QUARTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UPDATE REPORT (KAY)[10 minutes] 6.SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE (WATTON)[10 minutes] 7.ADJOURNMENT BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING: Jose Lopez,Chair Gary Croucher All items appearing on this agenda,whether or not expressly listed for action,may be deliber- ated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda,and any attachments containing written information,are available at the District's website at www.otaywater.gov.Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting,or to any attachments,will be posted on the District's website.Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability that would require accommodation in order to enable you to participate in this meeting,please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meet- ing. Certification of Posting I certify that on February 11,2011 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regu- lar meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District,said time being at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section §54954.2). Executed at Spring Valley,California on February 11,2011. 2 AGE DA ITEM 3 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Regular Board Armando Buelna,~ Communications Officer MEETING DATE: W.O.lG.F.NO: March 2,2011 DIV.NO.All SUBJECT:Presentation of the Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report performed by Rea and Parker Research Inc. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive the Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report performed by Rea and Parker Research Inc. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To present the Board of Directors with the findings of the Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report performed by Rea and Parker Research Inc. BACKGROUND: The Otay Water District has conducted a statistically reliable telephone survey of its customers on the subject of ocean water desalination.The survey was performed by Rea and Parker Research Inc.for the purpose of validating earlier findings from focus group interviews on the subject of ocean water desalination.The telephone survey contacted 401 Otay Water District customers between November 11 and November 22,2010. In the telephone about desalinated water.They were survey,customers were asked their opinion ocean water as an alternate source of potable also asked a series of questions that tested the effectiveness of messages with regard to the ability of the messages to communicate the advantages of desalination.In addition,customer opinions were solicited about a proposed international project that would distribute desalinated water from a facility located in Rosarito Beach,Mexico. The sample size for this survey was selected to secure a margin of error not to exceed +/-4.9 percent at a 95 percent confidence level.This means that there is a 95%chance that the "true"opinions of all Otay Water District customers are within +/-4.9 percent of the observed results from this survey. Findings of the survey included the following: • A substantial proportion of customers feel that the development of desalinated water is a good way for the District to serve its customers. •Customers feel about one-half of the available water supply should be derived from desalination,including an ocean water desalination facility located in Rosarito Beach, Mexico. •Customers do have some concern about the safety and security of the pipeline in Mexico,and show some preference for a United States location instead of Mexico. Customers feel it would bolster the local economy and create U.S.based jobs. •More than half (54 %)favor pursuing an international agreement to purchase desalination ocean water from a Rosarito Beach facility.Thirty-four percent do not favor such an agreement,with 12%having no opinion. More significant findings from the survey are attached PowerPoint presentation (Attachment B) of the full report (Attachment C). included in the and in the body FISCAL IMPACT: The Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report validated the earlier findings from the focus group interviews.The results of this study will also be used to update the messages staff will use to communicate the benefits and opportunities available from ocean water desalination. JKJC#-j The cost of the Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report was $14,250 and was charged to CIP P2451.Budgeted funds are sufficient to cover the cost of this contract. LEGAL IMPACT: Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Statement B -Otay Water District Desalination Survey Findings C -Otay Water Desalination Survey Report ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT:Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance,Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this item at the meeting held on February 16,2011. Note: The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for board approval.This report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the committee prior to presentation to the full board. ATTACHMENT B Otay Water District Desalination Survey Findings ~A substantial proportion of cu~tomers feel that the develo_pment of desahnated water is a good way for the District to service its customers. ~Customers feel that about one-half of the avaiilable water supply should be derived from desalination,including an ocean water desalination facility in Rosarito Beach, Mexico. ~Customers are determined that the proce.ss of desalination not harm tlhe ocean. Desalination Survey Findings ~It is important that desalination achieve the objective of reducing our dependence on imported water. ~Customers do have some concern about the safety and security of the pipelline in Mexico. ~Customers also show some preference for a United States I,ocationinstead of Mexico that would bolster the local economy and create u.s. based jobs. ~Especially younger customers,Asians,and African-Americans Effective Messages ~Groups that most notably support a greater percentage of the water supply from desalination are: ~Females ~Middle income customers ~Customers with less than a college degree ~Latinos ..Renters ~Customers who already trust the District to provide a sufficient quantity of clean,safe,reliable water at a reasonable price. ~Important and effective messages: ~"Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis." ~"Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future." ~"Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department of Public Health." •Younger customers are more influenced by these messages Ever Used Desalinated Water? 100% 90% 80%- 70% 60% 50%No,67% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Experience with Desalinated Water Positive or Negative No Difference,46% Positive,53% Negative,1% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Desalination Important to Maintaining Reliable Water Supply 65% 52% .2010 [J 2009 Very Important Somewhat Important Not Very Important Not at All Important Don't Know 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 Mean Irnpo,rtance Ratings of Characteristics of Desalinated Water (1 =not important at all 7 =highest importance) Reduce dependence on imported water Successfully and extensively used world-wide Soft water Must not harm ocean 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 I Mean Effectiveness Ratings of Desalination Messages (1 =not at all effective 7 =very effective) Trusted,widely used way to increase water supply Eases potential Costs about the Ensures reliable, effects ofwater same as imported high quality supply crisis water for future Help region become independent of imported water suppliers 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Pursue International Agreelnent to Purchase Desalinated Ocean Water fronl Rosarito Beach Facility .2010 112()06 Favor Not Favor Don't Know Concerns about Location in Mexico vs.United States 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% •Much More Concerned •Somewhat More Concerned o Same Concern No Matter Location II No Concerns at All No,28% Prefer Desalination Plant in United States Even If 10-15 More Years are Required Don't Know,8% Reasons for Preferring United States Location Do Not Trust Mexico, 17% Help Local Economy, 18% Water Quality,9% America First-- Patriotism,8% Other,21% Jobs for United States, 27% Reliability/Security,6% Local Control,6% Crime in Mexico,2% Environment,2% Other,5% Favor Otay Water District Establishing Independent Water Source Don't Know,11 % No,24% Experienced International Tearn Increases Confidence Don't Know,11 % 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00- 2.00 1.00 Effectiveness Ratings for Messages Pertaining to Rosarito Beach (1 =not at all effective........7 =very effective) Close Monitoring by CA Department of Health Operator of Facility is Publicly-traded, Well-established Global Company 60% 50% 40% 30%- 20% 10% 0% Opinions about Mean Percentage of Household and Business Water that Should Come from Ocean Water Desalination o Initial Impression After Desalination Messages From Rosarito Beach Facility Desalinated Water is a Good Way for District to Serve Customers Don't Know,7% Yes,87% ATTACHMENT C Prepared for OTAYWATERDISTRICT REA& PARKER RESEARCH SuT'IItJh\farkn Rtstarth Economic Comu/fants Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley,CA 91978 Rea &Parker Research P.O.Box 421079 San Diego,CA 92142 www.rea-parker.com December,2010 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary iii Introduction and Methodology 1 Sample 2 Survey Findings 4 Demographics/Respondent Characteristics 4 Use ofDesalinated Water 6 General Opinion about Desalinated Water and the 12 Desalination Process Testing of Desalination Messages 13 Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Beach Facility 18 Testing of Rosarito Beach Facility Messages 24 Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalinated Water 28 Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination 30 Conclusions 36 Appendices 37 Questionnaire 38 Frequencies and Open-Ended Responses 49 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 11 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Otay Water District 2010 Ocean Water Desalination Opinion Survey Executive Summary The Otay Water District elected to conduct a statistically reliable telephone survey among residential customers about the subject of desalinated water and the desalination process.The purpose ofthe survey was twofold:I)customers were asked about their opinion about desalinated water as an alternative source of water,and they were asked to test the effectiveness of messages with regard to the ability of the messages to communicate the advantages of desalination;and 2) customers were asked their opinion about a proposed international project that would pipe desalinated water to the Otay Water District from a desalination facility in Rosarito Beach,Baja California Norte,Mexico that would provide the District with an alternative source ofwater. This survey report has been divided into eight essential information components as follows: •Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics •Use ofDesalinated Water •General Opinion about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process •Testing ofDesalination Messages •Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Beach Facility •Testing ofRosarito Beach Facility Messages •Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalination Water •Relationship between Trust in the Otay Water District and Opinion about Ocean Water Desalination Use ofDesalinated Water •Three-fifths of the customers of the Otay Water District are familiar with the term "desalination."Among those who said they were familiar with the term,96 percent correctly indicated that it pertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to make it useable for households.Nearly 90 percent of District customers feel that ocean water desalination can be substantially important in maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply of water for San Diego County and Otay Water District residents. •This relatively high level of importance attributed to maintaining a reliable water supply was also exhibited by the District customers in the 2009 General Survey. •Customers indicated that they do not have very much experience in using desalinated water.About two thirds have never used desalinated water for any purpose to the best of their knowledge. •Among those who have used desalinated water,about three-fifths used it either on-board a ship while serving in the Navy or at a military base. •Over one-half (53 percent)of customers who used desalinated water had a positive experience and 46 percent ofcustomers stated that their use ofdesalinated water was not different from their use oftraditional water sources. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report iii Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 •It is important to note that only 1 percent of customers who used desalinated water had a negative experience. •Well over one-fourth (29 percent)regard taste as the dominant positive characteristic of desalinated water,with another one-fifth (18 percent)touting desalinated water as clean and pure. General Opinions about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process •Customers accorded the highest importance rating to the concern that the desalination process must not harm the ocean (rating of6.02 on a 7 point scale). •This concern is closely followed in importance by the notion that desalinated water is an alternative source of water that can reduce dependence on imported water and precipitation (rating of6.01 on a 7 point scale). •In an initial impression,customers were generally supportive of the notion that desalinated water should become a substantial portion ofthe District's water supply.The recommended mean percentage of the total percentage of domestic water supply that should come from ocean water desalination is 48 percent. Testing ofDesalination Messages •The message stating "Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis"has the greatest potential to communicate the advantages of desalination (overall rating of 5.94 on a 7 point scale). •This is closely followed by the message that "Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future"(overall rating of5.85 on a 7 point scale). •The opinion of customers regarding the percentage of water that should come from desalinated water was asked again after the desalination messages were tested.The mean percentage from this second iteration was 51 percent --consistent with and slightly increased from the initial impression of48 percent. Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility •More than half (54 percent)of the customers favor an international agreement to purchase desalinated water from the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility in Mexico.This is comparable to the percentage reported in the 2009 General Survey where 58 percent indicated that they favored such ajoint venture in Mexico. •Customers are expressing some concern about locating the desalination facility in Mexico rather than in the United States.The most concern is focused on the security and safety of the pipeline (47 percent much more concerned about the location in Mexico and 27 percent somewhat more concerned). •There is also notable concern about the quality of water from the facility located in Mexico (45 percent much more concerned about the Mexico location and 27 percent somewhat more concerned). •Over three-fifths ofcustomers (64 percent)prefer that the desalination project be built in the United States even if it took 10 -15 years or even longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get the US plant operational. •Customers prefer the location of the desalination plant in the United States for three primary reasons:create jobs for US residents (27 percent),the plant will help stimulate the local economy (18 percent),and there is lack of trust in the Mexican government (17 percent). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report iv Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 •Over three-fourths ofthe customers (77 percent)favor a plan such as this one that would establish an independent water source for the Otay Water District. •Over three-fifths (65 percent)have more confidence in the desalination project because an experienced team of international experts is involved. Testing ofRosarito Beach Facility Messages •It is clear that the most effective message specific to the Rosarito beach facility is that "Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department of Public Health"(rating of5.70 on a 7 point scale). •Of secondary importance is the message that "The operator ofthe Rosarito Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company"(4.81 on a 7 point scale). •After the two messages concerning the Rosarito Beach Facility were tested,customers were then asked to provide their opinion regarding the percentage of water available to the Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water produced at this project. The mean percentage of the water supply that comes from this third iteration is 45 percent - 6 percent lower than the mean percentage reported after testing the 5 desalination messages,but again still quite consistent with the overall pattern of favoring approximately halfofthe total supply from ocean water desalination. Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalinated Water •Customers of the Otay Water District demonstrate a high level of satisfaction with the District as their provider ofwater service.In fact,54 percent rate the Otay Water District as either excellent (24 percent)or very good (30 percent).These ratings are consistent with those expressed in the 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey. •Nearly 9 out of 10 customers (87 percent)feel that the development of desalinated water is a good way for the District to serve its customers.This further demonstrates the overall satisfaction with the District and shows confidence in the District's efforts to find alternative sources of water. Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination •Three-fourths of the customers have a substantial amount of trust in the ability of the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water for its customers (31 percent indicated a great deal of trust and 44 percent a good amount of trust).These ratings are slightly higher than the ratings in the 2008 and 2009 General Surveys. •One half of the District's customers (49 percent)have either a great deal of trust (17 percent)or a good amount oftrust (32 percent)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to obtain water at reasonable prices.These ratings represent a considerable increase in the trust level exhibited in the 2009 General Survey where 39 percent ofcustomers indicated either a great deal oftrust (10 percent)or a good amount oftrust (29 percent). •These aspects of trust are significantly related to opinions about desalination and the use of ocean water desalination to supplement the District's supply of water.Those customers who trust the District the most are also much more in favor of desalination in general and for the Rosarito Beach facility,in particular. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report v Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Introduction and Methodology In 1956,the Otay Water District was authorized by the State Legislature and gained its entitlement to imported water.Today,the District serves the needs of over 191,500 people by purchasing water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.The Otay Water District takes delivery of the water through several connections to large pipelines owned and operated by the San Diego County Water Authority.Since its inception,the Otay Water District also has collected and reclaimed wastewater generated within the Jamacha Drainage Basin and pumped the reclaimed water south to the Salt Creek Basin where it is used for irrigation and other non-potable uses.The District is considering alternative sources of water in order to reduce its dependence on imported water.To that end,it is seriously considering innovative ways to provide desalinated water to households and businesses in its service area. The desalinated water would comprise a portion of the overall water supply provided by the Otay Water District to its customers. The Otay Water District is considering a partnership with a consortium of international desalination construction companies,operations specialists,and financiers to bring desalinated ocean water to the District.The purpose of this project is to replace and supplement water that is currently purchased from the San Diego County Water Authority,which,in tum,purchases water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.The proposed project calls for building a desalination plant in Rosarito Beach,Baja California Norte,Mexico.The plant will be designed to produce 56,000 to 112,000 acre feet of desalinated seawater each year and would serve 112,000 to 224,000 households.It would be built adjacent to the Rosarito Beach Thermoelectric Plant and is scheduled for completion in 2013 or 2014. The desalination plant will be constructed by a company that has built and installed over 40%of all desalination plants in the Middle East.The project will be financed by a European-based bank that is one of the largest and most solvent infrastructure banks in the world.The plant will be operated by a company that has 30 years of experience operating desalination plants and water distribution systems in several Caribbean countries. The water will travel from the Rosarito Beach plant to the international border by way of a 24 mile pipeline.It would continue to travel another 3.2 miles by way of pipeline from the border to a pump station in Otay Mesa.The water would be held in a storage facility,where it would be tested to ensure that it meets or exceeds United States and California standards for water quality. As a first stage in eliciting input from its customers regarding desalination issues in general and the proposed Rosarito Beach facility in particular,two focus groups were conducted in April 2010.The focus Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report Rea &Parker Research December,2010 groups provided valuable information about customer opinions and perceptions regarding these desalination issues.This information was used in the development of a formal,statistically reliable telephone survey among the residential customers ofthe Otay Water District.The purpose ofthis survey was to obtain data in the following areas ofinterest: •Customers'knowledge ofdesalination •Customers'experience (if any)using desalinated water •Perceived advantages and disadvantages ofdesalinated water •Relative importance ofcharacteristics ofdesalinated water to customers •Issues and concerns about the proposed Rosarito Beach facility •Opinions about the effectiveness of certain test messages designed to communicate desalination issues to customers ofthe Otay Water District. •Opinions regarding the effectiveness of certain test messages designed to inform customers about the Rosarito Beach project and to demonstrate that this joint venture is a reasonable way to expand the water supply •Perceptions concerning the percentage of the Otay Water Districts'water supply that should come from desalinated water and from the Rosarito Beach facility •Perceptions of confidence and trust in the Otay Water District and the relationship between that trust and opinions about desalinated water Beyond these primary survey objectives,other purposes ofthe survey are as follows: •Obtain demographic data about the population for use in descriptive analysis and crosstabulations of data that can result in new,optimally targeted and tailored public awareness programs. •Compare the results of this survey with the results of surveys conducted by the District in previous years where the comparisons are appropriate and relevant. Rea &Parker Research was selected to conduct this study. Sample:The survey was conducted by a random telephone sample of401 respondents in order to secure a margin of error not to exceed +/-4.9 percent @ 95 percent confidence.This figure represents the widest interval that occurs when the survey question represents an approximate 50 percent-50 percent proportion of the sample.When it is not 50 percent-50 percent,the interval is somewhat smaller.For example,in the survey findings that follow,77.0 percent ofrespondent households favor the Otay Water District establishing an independent water source.This means that there is a 95 percent chance that the Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 2 Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 true proportion of the total population of the District's service area that favors an independent water source is between 72.1 percent and 81.9 percent (77.0 percent +/-4.9 percent). Survey respondents were screened to exclude those who have not been customers of the Otay Water District for at least one year.When respondents asked about who was sponsoring the survey,they were told "this project is sponsored by the Otay Water District,and it is about issues related to the water supply in the San Diego County region."This information was provided to 57 percent ofthe respondents. The survey was conducted in both English and Spanish.Spanish language respondents comprised slightly more than 1 percent of the survey population.The distribution of respondents according to gender was 54 percent male and 46 percent female. The survey was conducted from November 11,2010 to November 22,2010.Cooperation/participation among eligible respondents who were actually contacted was 73.6 percent (Table 1).The survey instrument is provided in the Appendix. Unknown Eli ibilit No Answer Bus Answerin Machine Not Home-Call Back Lan ua e Barrier Total Unknown Ineli ible N <1 ear Disconnect Refusal Fax/Wron Number Totallneli ible Total Attem ts 584 36 1425 439 53 2537 1 361 144 146 652 401 3,590 Coo eration Rate 73.6% This report is divided into eight essential information components as follows: Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 3 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 •Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics •Use ofDesalinated Water •General Opinion about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process •Testing ofDesalination Messages •Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility •Testing ofRosarito Beach Facility Messages •Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalinated Water •Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination Each section ofthe report begins with a very brief abstract,or summary of highlights within the ensuing section,in order to orient the reader to what is to follow. Charts have been prepared for each of these major components depicting the basic survey results. Subgroup analyses for different age groups,various levels of education,gender,home ownership/rental status,household size,residential tenure in the community,different income categories,and ethnicity of residents of the service area are presented in succinct bulleted format when statistical significance and relevance warrants such treatment. Frequency distributions as well as lists of open-ended responses to survey questions are contained in the Appendices. Survey Findings Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics Table 2 presents selected demographic and sampling characteristics of the survey respondents. Respondents are predominantly White (44 percent)and Hispanic/Latino (29 percent)and earn an annual median household income of$85,600 (36 percent earning $100,000 or more and 10 percent earning under $25,000).They have a median age of 53 years and have been customers ofthe Otay Water District for a median of 9 years.Among these respondents,58 percent possess a Bachelor's degree or more,with 12 percent having a high school education or less.Survey respondents are largely homeowners (85 percent) with a mean household size of3.67. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 4 Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 Table 2 Respondent Characteristics Characteristic 2010 2009 2008 2006 2005 Ethnicity White 44%55% 52%55%54% Hispanic/Latino 29%28%30%29%24% Asian/Pacific 15%8%8%9%15% Islander Black!African-8%6%6%6%5% American Native 4%3%4%1%2% American/Other Annual .. Household Income )Uedian $85,600 $75,700 $83,500 $77,500 $85,000 %over $100,000 36%26%30% 33%34% %under $25,000 10%8%5%6%2% Age 111edian 53 years 53 years 47 years 49 years 47 years Years Customer of Otay Water District Median 9 years 12 years 8 years 10 years -- Education High School or Less 12%17%22%22%14% At Least One Year College,Trade,30%32%28% 24%33% Vocational School Bachelor's Degree 41%39%33% 35%25% AtLeast One Year 17%12% 17%19%28% ofGraduate Work Own/Rent Home Owner 85%91%88%90%92% Renter 15%9%12%10%8% Persons Per Household Mean 3.67 3.28 2.88 3.27 3.43 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 5 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Respondent characteristics for the Customer Satisfaction surveys conducted in 2005, 2006,2008,and 2009 differ from the 2010 respondent characteristics in the current survey in the following fundamental ways: •Since 2006,the White population has declined and the Asian/Pacific Islander population has increased. •The median incomes in 2010 (current survey),2005 and 2008 are similar but the median income levels are lower in the 2006 and 2009 surveys. •The median age ofcustomers has shown a slight upward trend over the years. •The percentage of households earning an annual income over $100,000 was 36 percent in 2010 compared to 26 percent in 2009 and 30 percent in 2008. •Education level has increased,with 58 percent of respondents having a Bachelor's Degree or higher in contrast to earlier years that ranged from 50-to-54 percent. •The average household size in 2010 is higher than the average household sizes in all previous survey periods --2005,2006, 2008,and 2009. Use of Desalinated Water SUMMARY:Three-fifths of the customers of the Otay Water District are familiar with the term "desalination."Among those who said they were familiar with the term,96 percent correctly indicated that itpertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to make it useable for households.Nearly 90 percent of District customers feel that ocean water desalination can be substantially important in maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply of water for San Diego County and Otay Water District residents. Customers indicated that they do not have very much experience in using desalinated water. About two thirds have never used desalinated water for any purpose to the best of their knowledge.Among those who have used desalinated water,about three-fifths used it either on-board a ship while serving in the Navy or at a military base.Over one-half(53 percent)of customers who used desalinated water had a positive experience and 46 percent ofcustomers stated that their use ofdesalinated water was not different from their use oftraditional water sources.It is important to note that only 1 percent ofcustomers who used desalinated water had a negative experience.Well over one-fourth (29 percent)regard taste as the dominant positive characteristic of desalinated water,with another one-:fifth (18 percent)touting desalinated water as clean andpure. Chart 1 shows that 60 percent of the customers of the Otay Water District are familiar with the term "desalination."Among those who said they were familiar with the term,96 percent correctly indicated that it pertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to make it useable for households. Others incorrectly thought that the term "desalination"refers to the softening of the water,removing contaminants for drinking and other uses,and chemical purification to potable water. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 6 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 The following subgroups tend to be familiar with the term "desalination." •Older customers are more familiar with the term "desalination"than are younger customers (age 45 and over -70 percent;age 34 and under -34 percent). •Familiarity with the term increases with education (high school graduate or less -38 percent; some graduate work -74 percent). •Males (74 percent)are more familiar with the term than are females (43 percent). • Whites (73 percent)are more familiar with the term than are Latinos (54 percent),Asians (45 percent),and African-Americans (31 percent). •Familiarity with the term increases with income (under $25,000 -29 percent;$150,000 or more- 74 percent). •Homeowners (64 percent)are more familiar with the term than are renters (40 percent). •Smaller households are more familiar with the term than are larger households (1-2 persons -71 percent versus 5 or more persons -51 percent). •Longer term customers ofthe Otay Water District are more familiar with the term than are newer customers (customers of 10 years or more -70 percent;customers of fewer than 10 years -50 percent). Chart 1 Familiar with Term "Desalination" No (including Don't Know),40% 96%of those who indicated that they were familiar with the term "desalination"correctly indicated that it pertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to make it useable for households. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 7 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 2 indicates that a considerable proportion of District customers (88 percent)feel that ocean water desalination can be substantially important in maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply ofwater for San Diego County residents (52 percent -very important and 36 percent -somewhat important).This relatively high level of importance attributed to maintaining a reliable water supply was also exhibited by the District customers in the 2009 General Survey (86 percent). •Customers who have used desalinated water previously feel that ocean water desalination is very important to maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply of water for San Diego County residents more so than do those who have not used desalinated water (68 percent -users;47 percent -non- users). Chart 2 Desalination Important to Maintaining Reliable Water Supply 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Very Important Somewhat Important Not Very Important Not at All Important Don't Know Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 8 Rea &Parker Research December.2010 Customers indicated that they do not have very much experience in using desalinated water.For example,about two thirds (67 percent)have never used desalinated water for any purpose to the best of their knowledge (Chart 3).Among those who have used desalinated water,over three-fifths (61 percent) used it either on-board a ship while serving in the Navy (57 percent)or at a military base (4 percent). Another 13 percent have used desalinated water in other countries and 9 percent on a cruise ship (Chart 4). The following subgroups are more likely to have used desalinated water: •More educated customers are more likely to have used desalinated water than are lesser educated customers (at least one year of graduate school-42 percent and college graduates -30 percent versus less than a college graduate --23 percent). •Males (44 percent)are more likely to have used desalinated water than have females (9 percent). •Higher income customers are more likely to have used desalinated water than are lower income customers ($100,000 or more -37 percent and $50,000 and under $100,000 -28 percent versus under $50,000 --II percent). Chart 3 Ever Used Desalinated Water? 100% 90% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 0% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 9 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 4 Where Used Desalinated Water 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% On-board Ship in Other Country Cruise Ship Navy Middle East,Caribbean, Baja Califomla Military Base Other At resort,At home Chart 5 shows that over one-half (53 percent)of customers who have used desalinated water had a positive experience and 46 percent of customers stated that their use of desalinated water was not different from their use of traditional water sources.It is important to note that only 1 percent of customers who have used desalinated water had a negative experience.It is indicated in Chart 6 that well over one-fourth (29 percent)regard taste as a positive characteristic of desalinated water,followed by 18 percent who indicate that desalinated water is clean and pure.Others noted that desalinated water is plentiful (13 percent)and drinkable (11 percent).One fifth of those who have used desalinated water made general positive comments about desalinated water that revolve around the notion that it is not noticeably different from traditional water and that it has widespread use from cleaning and washing to drinking. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 10 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 5 Experience with Desalinated Water Positive or Negative No Difference,46% Positive.53% Negative,1% Chart 6 Positive Characteristics of Desalinated Water Taste Clean/Pure Plentiful Drinkable Low Cost Soft Better for Environment General Positive Remarks 0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 11 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 General Opinions about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process SUMMARY:Among various characteristics ofocean water desalination,on a 7 point scale where 1 is not at all important and 7 is of the highest importance,customers accorded the highest importance rating of characteristics to the concern that the desalination process must not harm the ocean (rating of6.02).This concern is closely followed in importance by the notion that desalinated water is an alternative source of water that can reduce dependence on imported water and precipitation (rating of 6.01).Older,more educated customers with some desalinated water experience find these characteristics to be ofparticular importance In an initial impression,customers were supportive ofthe notion that desalinated water should become a substantial portion of the District's water supply.The recommended mean percentage ofthe total domestic water supply that should come from ocean water desalination was 48 percent. Customers rated characteristics of desalinated water on a 7 point scale where 1 is not at all important and 7 is of the highest importance.According to Chart 7,the highest rating is associated with the concern that the desalination process must not harm the ocean (mean rating of 6.02 with 75 percent indicating a rating of 6 or 7).This concern is closely followed in ranking by the notion that desalinated water is an alternative source of water that can reduce dependence on imported water and precipitation (mean rating of6.01 with 72 percent indicating a rating of6 or 7).Customers are somewhat impressed that desalinated water is used extensively in other parts of the world (mean rating of 5.51 with 57 percent indicating a rating of 6 or 7.)Respondents are least influenced by desalinated water being soft water that eliminates the need for water softening measures (mean rating of5.15 with 48 percent indicating a rating of 6 or 7). It is noteworthy that each of these mean ratings is well above the scale midpoint of 4.0 demonstrating a good deal ofimportance pertaining to desalination issues. The following customer subgroups find certain characteristics of desalinated water to be particularly important.Mean importance ratings are on a scale of I to 7,where 1 =not at all important and 7 = highest importance.The pattern is clear that older,educated customers with some desalinated water experience find these characteristics to be ofparticular importance. Desalinated water reduces dependence on imported water •Older customers (6.36 -65 and over) •More educated customers (6.22 -at least one year ofgraduate school). •Higher income customers (6.34 --$150,000 and over). •Customers who have used desalinated water (6.26). Desalinated water is extensively used in other parts ofthe world. •Customers with a higher level of education (5.62 -college graduates and 5.61 --at least one year ofgraduate school). •Asians (5.90. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 12 Rea &ParkerResearch December.2010 •Customers who have used desalinated water (5.89). Desalinated water is soft water and eliminates the need for water softeners. •Customers with a higher level ofeducation (5.45 -college graduates) •Asians (6.04),Blacks (5.63),and Latinos (5.24)regard water softening as more important than Whites (4.61). •Customers who have used desalinated water (5.43). The desalination process must not harm the ocean. •Females are more concerned than males about the ocean (6.30 -females;5.79 -males). Chart 8 shows customers'initial impression ofa reasonable goal for the percentage of water used in the homes and businesses ofthe Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water.Customers are generally supportive of the notion that desalinated water should become a substantial portion of the District's water supply.The recommended mean percentage is 48 percent with 29 percent indicating a range of61 to 100 percent.About one fifth (22 percent)feel that less than 20 percent ofthe overall water supply should come from desalinated water. The following subgroups prefer to have a relatively substantial percentage ofthe total water supply derive from desalinated sources (preferences reflect initial impressions). •Middle income customers prefer that a greater percentage of the water supply come from desalinated sources more so than do lower income customers (53.1 percent --$50,000-$75,000 and 51.3 percent --$25,000 -$50,000 versus 34.8 percent -under $25,000). •Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"tend to prefer that a greater percentage ofthe water supply derive from desalinated sources than do those who are familiar with the term (52.5 percent-not-familiar;44.5 percent -familiar).This would imply that there is potential support for desalination among customers who are relatively new to the concept. Testing of Desalination Messages SUMMARY:Based on a scale of1 to 7,where 1 =not at all effective and 7 =very effective, customers feel that the message stating "Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis"has the greatest potential to communicate the advantages of desalination (overall rating of5.94).This is closely followed by the message that "Desalination ensures a reliable, high quality supply ofwater for the future (overall rating of5.85).The opinion ofcustomers regarding the percentage ofwater that should come from desalinated water was asked again after the desalination messages were tested.The mean percentage from this second iteration -51 percent --is slightly higher and generally consistent with the initial impression of 48 percent). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 13 Rea &Parker Research Decembef~2010 Chart 7 Mean Importance Ratings of Characteristics of Desalinated Water (1 •not Importantat all........7 •highest Importance) 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 Reduce dependence on Imported water Successfully and extensively used world-wide Soft water Must not harm ocean Chart 8 Initial Impression of Percentage of Household and Business Water that Should Come from Desalination (mean ::I 48%) 810/....100% 61%-80% 410/0-60% 210/0-40% 20%orI... 28% 0%5%10%15%20%25%30% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 14 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 9 indicates the customer ratings of5 messages that are designed to communicate the advantages of seawater desalination.The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7,where 1 is not at all effective and 7 is very effective.Customers feel that the message stating "Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis"has the greatest potential to communicate the advantages of desalination (overall rating of 5.94 with 71 percent indicating a 6 or 7).This is closely followed by the message that "Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future (overall rating of 5.85 with 67 percent indicating a 6 or 7). Customers regard the message that "The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water (overall rating of 5.23 with 67 percent indicating a 6 or 7)as least effective among the 5 test messages.It is noteworthy that customers view all 5 messages as effective with all mean ratings well above the midpoint of4. The characteristics of the customers that regard each desalination message as effective in communicating the advantages ofseawater desalination are summarized below. •Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply. o Older customers regard this message as particularly important (5.98 -65 and over versus 4.63 -18-24). o The newest customers as well as the longest term customers find this message effective (5.99 -15 or more years as customer and 5.81 -1-4 years as customer). o Asians (6.12)find this message most effective. o Customers who have used desalinated water (5.94). •Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis. o Newer customers find this message effective more so than do longer term customers (6.16 -1-4 years as customer;5.65 -10-14 years as customer). •The cost ofdesalinated water will be about the same as imported water. o Newer customers find this message effective more so than do longer term customers (6.16 -1-4 years as customer;5.65 -10-14 years as customer). •Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future. o Customers with higher levels ofeducation feel that this message is particularly effective (5.93 -college graduates and 5.99 --at least one year ofcollege). o Newer customers find this message effective more so than do longer term customers (6.06 -1-4 years as customer;5.62 -10-14 years as customer). Chart 10 again reports the opinion ofcustomers regarding the percentage ofwater that should come from desalinated water.Customers responded to this inquiry just after they rated the 5 desalinated messages. The mean percentage from this second iteration -51 --percent is slightly higher but generally consistent Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 15 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 with the initial impression (mean of48 percent).Also,over one-third (34 percent)indicate a percentage range of61 -100 percent -about 5 percent higher than demonstrated in the initial impression. The following subgroups prefer to have a relatively substantial percentage ofthe total water supply derive from desalinated sources (preferences expressed after testing desalination messages).In general, percentages are lower for better educated and more knowledgeable groups. •Females (54.4 percent)prefer that a greater percentage ofwater come from desalinated sources more so than do males (47.9 percent). •Middle income customers would like to have a greater percentage of the overall water supply derive from desalinated sources than do younger customers (58.3 percent -versus those with incomes under $25,000 =41.0 percent) •Customers with somewhat less education prefer that a higher percentage of water come from desalinated sources than do customers with more education (55.3 percent -at least one year of college;45.4 percent -at least one year ofgraduate work). •Renters (61.6 percent)prefer that a greater percentage of water be represented by desalinated sources than do owners (40.1 percent). •Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"would like to see a greater percentage of water come from desalination sources more so than those who are familiar with the term (57.7 percent -not familiar;46.6 -familiar). The following customer subgroups exhibit significant changes (from initial impression to opinion after hearing desalination messages)in their assessment ofthe percentage ofthe water supply that should come from desalinated sources. •Younger customers exhibit a greater change in percentage points from initial impression to opinion after desalination messages than do older customers (change of +13.57 percentage points -18-24 years ofage,change of +5.61 percentage points -25-34 years of age,and change of +5.34 percentage points -55-64 years of age versus -2.13 percentage points -65 and over. •Both the largest and smallest household sizes exhibit a smaller change in percentage points than do medium household sizes.For example,there is a change of +.38 percentage points for household sizes of 1-2 persons and a change of +1.52 percentage points for household sizes of5 or more.This contrasts with a change of+6.47 percentage points for household sizes of3-4 persons. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 16 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 9 Mean Effective ess Ratings of Desalination Messages (1 =not at all effectlve 7 =very effective) 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 8-7- 12% 3.00 2.00 1.00 Trusted,widely used way to increase water supply Eases potential Costs about the Ensures reliable, effects ofwater same as imported high quality crisis water supply for future Help region become independent of imported water suppliers Chart 10 After Hearing Desalination Messages:Percentage of Household and Business Water that Should Come from Desalinated Water (mean =51%) 27% 0% 19 21%-40% 61%-80% 41%·60% 81%-100% 20%or less 11III1J======::;r:=====:::;r===::::=::::;c::===~----:J------J--------J 0%5%10%15%20%25%30% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 17 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility SUMMARY:More than half (54 percent)ofthe customers favor an international agreement to purchase desalinated water from the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility.This is comparable to the percentage reported in the 2009 General Survey where 58 percent indicated that they favored such a joint venture in Mexico.Customers are expressing some concerns,however, about locating the desalination facility in Mexico rather than in the United States.The greatest amount ofconcern is focused on the security and safety of the pipeline (47 percent much more concerned about the location in Mexico versus locating it in the United States and 27 percent somewhat more concerned).There is also notable concern about the quality of water from the facility located in Mexico (45 percent much more concerned about the Mexico location and 27percent somewhat more concerned). Over three-fifths ofcustomers (64 percent)prefer that the desalination project be built in the United States even ifit took 10 -15 years or even longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get the US plant operational.Customers prefer the location of the desalination plant in the United States for three primary reasons:create jobs for us residents (27 percent),the plant will help stimulate the local economy (18 percent),and there is lack oftrust in the Mexican government (17percent).Over three-fourths ofthe customers (77percent)do favor the aspect ofthis plan that would establish an independent water source for the Otay Water District,and over three-jifths (65 percent)have more confidence in the desalination project given the experienced team ofinternational experts involved. Chart 11 shows that more than half (54 percent)ofDistrict customers favor an international agreement to purchase desalinated water from the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility in Mexico.This is comparable to the percentage reported in the 2009 General Survey where 58 percent indicated that they favored such a joint venture in Mexico.Both of these percentages well exceed the percentage recorded in the 2006 General Survey where 45 percent felt that such a joint venture in Mexico was a good idea. Chart 12 exhibits the concern that District customers are expressing about locating the desalination facility in Mexico rather than in the United States.The greatest degree of concern is focused on the security and safety ofthe pipeline (47 percent much more concerned about the location in Mexico than in the United States and 27 percent somewhat more concerned).There is also notable concern about the quality of water from the facility to be located in Mexico (45 percent much more concerned about the Mexico location and 27 percent somewhat more concerned).Lesser levels ofconcern are expressed about the reliability of water deliveries from Mexico and environmentaVecological impacts that could result from a location in Mexico.However,these issues still merit consideration since over three-fifths of District customers voice either much more concern or somewhat more concern about these issues regarding the Mexico location. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 18 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 60% 50% 40%- 30% 20% 10% 0% Chart 11 Pursue International Agreement to Purchase Desalinat d Ocean Water from Rosarito Beach Facility 2009'Only those 86%who thought that desalinated water was Importantw.re asked this favor,3S-k notIn for and 6% unsure. n 2010 and 2006,al respond.nts wer.asked this question. SCreening 2010 only for 88% who thought that desalinated water is important,thes. percentages that are com a to 2009 become 58%in favor,30%notIn favor and 12%unsure 12% Favor Not Favor Don't Know The following customer subgroups exhibit significant relationships regarding their concern about the location of the proposed desalination plant in Rosarito Beach.These subgroups are organized according to four specific characteristics/possible concerns of the plant/project.The mean concern ratings are based upon a four point scale where I =no concerns at all and 4 =much more concerned. •Quality ofthe water •Females are more concerned about the quality ofthe water (3.22 -females;2.74 -males). •Younger customers are more concerned about the quality of the water (3.26 -25-34 years of age versus 2.74 -65 and over). •Lower income customers are more concerned than middle-to-higher income customers (3.00 --$25,000 -$50,000 versus 2.68 --$75,000 -$100,000). •Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"have more concern (3.14 -not familiar;2.58 -familiar). •Customers who have not used desalinated water are more concerned (mean of 3.06 -non- user;mean of 2.80 -users). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 19 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 •Safety and security ofthe pipeline •Females (3.22)are more concerned about the safety ofthe pipeline than are males (2.84). •Reliability ofWater Deliveries •Females (3.00)are more concerned about the reliability of water deliveries than are males (2.68). •Environment/ecological impacts •Middle-aged customers are more concerned about the environment and ecological impacts than are older customers (2.88 --45 -54 and 2.83 -55-64 versus 2.38 -65 and over). •Asians (3.13)are more concerned about ecological impacts than are Whites (2.51). •Customers with lower income levels are more concerned about the environmental impacts than are customers with higher income levels (3.05 --$25,000 to $50,000 and 2.83 --$50,000 to $75,000 versus 2.37 --$100,000 to $150,000). •Longer term customers of the Otay Water District are more concerned about ecological impacts than are newer customers (2.96 -customers of 10-14 years versus 2.57 -customers of5-9 years). Chart 12 Concerns about Location in Mexico vs.United States 50%47% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 20 •Much More Concerned-r.....,_-II.SomewhatMore Concerned o Same Concern No Matter Location li.'I No Concerns at All Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 13 indicates that over three-fifths of customers (64 percent)prefer that the desalination project be built in the United States even if it took 10 -15 years or even longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get the US plant operational.Customers prefer the location of the desalination plant in the United States for three primary reasons:create jobs for US residents (27 percent),the plant will help stimulate the local economy (18 percent),and there is lack oftrust in the Mexican government (17 percent)(Chart 14). Chart 13 Prefer Desalination Plant in United States Even If 10-15 More Years are Required Don't Know,8% No,28% Chart 15 shows that over three-fourths of the customers (77 percent)favor this planned establishment of an independent water source for the Otay Water District. The following subgroups prefer that the plant be built in the United States as opposed to Mexico. •Younger customers (25-34 -79 percent versus 65 and over --46 percent) •Asians (95 percent)and Blacks (79 percent)versus Latinos (59 percent)and Whites (53 percent). •Customers not familiar with the term "desalination"(70 percent)versus those who are familiar with the term (61 percent). •Customers who have used desalinated water in the Navy or on a military base (80 percent)as opposed to those who have used desalinated water in various other places (54 percent) Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 21 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 The following subgroups encourage the Otay Water District to establish a source of water for its customers that is independent ofthe other agencies in the region. •Younger customers versus older customers (under 65 -80 percent;65 and over-61 percent). Chart 14 Reasons for Preferring United States Location Do Not Trust Mexico, 17% Help Local Economy, 18% Water Quality,9% America First- Patriotism,8% Other,21% Jobs forUnitedStates, 27% Reliability/Security,6% Local Control,6% Crime in Mexico,2% Environment,2% "Other,5% Chart 16 shows that over three-fifths (65 percent)have more confidence in the desalination project with the experienced team ofinternational experts involved. •Younger customers are more likely to have confidence in the Rosarito Project than are older customers with the involvement of the experienced team of international experts (under 35 years -77 percent versus 35 -64 years -66 percent and 65 and over-57 percent). •Latinos (77 percent)are most likely to feel confident with the presence of the international team, followed by Blacks (69 percent),and Whites and Asians (each 62 percent). •Renters (81 percent)versus owners (63 percent). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 22 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 15 Favor Otay Water District Establishing Independent Water Source Don't Know,11% Chart 16 Experienced International Team Increases Confidence Don't Know,11% No,24% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 23 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Testing Messages about the Rosarito Beach Facility SUMMARY:Two messages were tested concerning their ability to communicate effectively the advantages of the Rosarito Beach ocean water desalination facility to provide an alternative water source.The customer ratings ofthese messages are based upon a scale from 1 to 7,where 1 is not at all effective and 7 is very effective.It is clear that the more effective message is that "Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department of Public Health"(rating of 5.70).Ofsecondary importance is the message that "The operator ofthe Rosarito Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company" (4.81). After the two messages concerning the Rosarito Beach Facility were tested,customers were then asked to provide their opinion,once again,regarding the percentage ofwater available to the Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water produced at this project. Knowledge about the proposed desalination project in Mexico did not induce customers to change their opinion very much about the percentage of available water that should come from desalinated water at the Rosarito Facility.Specifically,the mean percentage ofthe water supply that comes from this third iteration is 45 percent -6 percent lower than the mean percentage reported after the testing ofthe 5 desalination messages and 3 percent lower than the initial opinion-all three iterations indicate support for approximately one-half of the District's water supply to comefrom the Rosarito beach desalination project. The District tested two messages that are being considered in an effort to inform its customers about the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility and to inform its customers that the construction and operation of the Rosarito Beach desalination project is a reasonable way to expand the water supply.Chart 17 displays the customer ratings of the two tested messages in terms of their ability to communicate effectively - ratings based on a scale of I to 7,where I is not at all effective and 7 is very effective.It is clear that the message that is rated as most effective is that "Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department of Public Health"(a rating of 5.70 with 67 percent indicating a score of 6 or 7). Of secondary importance is the message that "The operator of the Rosarito Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company"(a rating of4.81 with 42 percent indicating a score of 6 or 7). The following subgroups find the Rosarito Beach messages particularly effective.The ratings are on a scale from I to 7,where I =not at all effective and 7 =very effective. Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department ofPublic Health. •Newer customers of the Otay Water District find this message more effective than longer term customers (5.92 -customers of 1-4 years;5.39 -customers of10-14 years). •Customers who have not used desalinated water find this more effective than customers who have used desalinated water (5.83 -non-user;5.36 -user). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 24 Rea &Parker Research Decembel~2010 The operator of the Rosarito Desalination facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company. •Whites (4.98)and Latinos (5.18)find this message more effective than do Asians (4.30). •Longer term customers of the District find this message more effective than do newer customers (5.67 -customers of IS or more years and 5.39 -customers of 10-14 years versus 5.22 --5-9 years and 5.09 -1-4 years.) •Customers who have not used desalinated water find this message more effective than those who have (5.01-non-users;4.48 -users). Chart 17 Effectiveness Ratings for Messages Pertaining to Rosarito Beach (1 =not atall effective•.••••..7 =very effective) 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 Close Monitoring by CA Department of Operator ofFacility is Publicly-traded, Health Well-established Global Company After the two messages concerning the Rosarito Beach Facility were tested,customers were then asked to provide their opinion of the percentage of water available to the Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water produced at this project (Chart 18).Also,27 percent indicate a percentage range of61 -100 percent -5 percent lower than demonstrated in the impression after the second iteration Knowledge about the proposed desalination project in Mexico is does not alter the findings from the previous iterations ofthis question much at all.Specifically,the mean percentage ofthe water supply that comes from this third iteration is 45 percent - 6 percent lower than the mean percentage reported after the testing of the 5 desalination messages and 3 percent lower than the first iteration;however,all three indicate that approximately one-half of the Otay Water District water supply should come from this facility (Chart 19). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 25 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 18 Percentage of Household and Business Water that Should Come from Desalinated Water from Rosarito Beach Facility (mean =45%) 81%-100% 61%-80% 41%..60% 21%-40% 20%or less 0%5%10% 15%20%25%30%35% The following subgroups prefer to have a relatively substantial percentage of the total water supply derive from the Rosarito Beach facility. •Latinos (52.4 percent)prefer that a greater percentage ofthe water supply derive from desalinated water produced at the proposed Rosarito facility more so than do Whites (43.0 percent). •Middle income customers prefer that a greater percentage of water come from Rosarito Beach than do lower income customers (50.7 percent --$50,000 -$75,000 and 50.2 percent --$25,000 - $50,000 versus 32.1 percent -under $25,000). •Renters (54.0 percent)tend to prefer a greater percentage of water to come from Rosarito Beach than do owners (44.1 percent). •The newer customers (50.2 percent -customers from 1-4 years)and the longest term customers (52.5 percent -customers for IS or more years)prefer that a greater percentage of water come from Rosarito Beach than do customers of 10-14 years (38.8 percent). •Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"prefer a greater proportion of water to derive from Rosarito Beach than do those who are familiar with the term (51.2 percent -not- familiar;41.9 percent-familiar). The following customer subgroups exhibit significant changes (from opinions after hearing desalination messages to opinions after hearing Rosarito Beach project messages)in their assessment ofthe percentage ofthe water supply that should come from desalinated sources. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 26 Rea &Parker Research December.2010 •Older residents exhibit a positive change in percentage points while middle-aged customers exhibit negative changes in percentage points (change of+1.21 percentage points -65 and over versus a change in percentage points of -10.37 -55-64 years of age and a change of -7.61 percentage points -45-54 years of age. •Asians (-11.78 percentage point change)show a greater change (decline)in opinion than Whites (-3.41 percent change). •The longest term customers ofthe District exhibit a smaller change in percentage points than do those who have been customers for a shorter period oftime (a change of-0.11 percentage points- customers of 15 or more years versus a change of-8.09 percentage points -customers for 10-14 years). The following customer subgroups exhibit significant changes (from initial impression to opinion after hearing Rosarito Beach project messages)in their assessment of the percentage of the water supply that should come from desalinated sources. •Latinos show a positive change in percentage points (+3.18 percent)while Asians show a negative change (-5.69 percentage points). •Smaller household sizes show a positive change in percentage points while larger household sizes show a negative change (change of +2.15 percentage points -household sizes of 3-4 persons versus change of-4.67 -household sizes of 5 or more). •The newest customers in the District as well as the longest term customers exhibit a positive change in percentage points while others exhibit a negative change (change of+2.95 -customers of 1-4 years and a change of +2.05 -customers of 15 or more years versus a change of -5.80 percentage points for customers of 10-14 years.) Chart 19 Opinions about Mean Percentage of Household and Business Water that Should Come from Ocean Water Desalination Initial Impression After Desalination Messages From Rosarito Beach Facility Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 27 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use of Desalinated Water SUMMARY:Customers of the Otay Water District demonstrate a high level ofsatisfaction with the District as their provider of water service.In fact,54 percent rate the Otay Water District as either excellent (24 percent)or very good (30 percent).These ratings are consistent with those expressed in the 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey. Nearly 9 out of10 customers (87 percent)feel that the development ofdesalinated water is a good way for the District to serve its customers.This further demonstrates the overall satisfaction with the District and shows confidence in the District's efforts to find alternative sources ofwater. Chart 20 shows that customers of the Otay Water District demonstrate a high level of satisfaction with the District as their provider of water service.In fact,54 percent rate the Otay Water District as either excellent (24 percent)or very good (30 percent).These ratings are consistent with those expressed in the 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey.However,both the current survey and the 2009 survey demonstrate a slight decline in the level of confidence from the 2006 and 2008 surveys.For example,in 2008,63 percent of customers rated the Otay Water District as either excellent or very good. It is indeed quite possible that customers are still responding to the increase in water rates and/or restrictions in water use. •Lower income customers tend to express a decreased level of satisfaction with the Otay Water District as a water service provider than do all other customers(3.88 for those earning less than $25,000 per year versus 4.50 --$150,000 and over,4.62 --$100,000 -$150,000,4.80 --$75,000 - $100,000,and 4.75 --$50,000 -$75,000.The ratings are based on a 6 point scale where 1 =very poor and 6 =excellent). Nearly 9 out of 10 customers (87 percent)feel that the development of desalinated water is a good way for the District to serve its customers.This further demonstrates the overall satisfaction with the District and shows confidence in the District's efforts to find alternative sources ofwater (Chart 21). The following subgroups feel that having desalinated water as a portion ofthe water supply provided by the Otay Water District is a good way for the District to serve its customers. •Customers who earn $50,000 or more (96 percent)versus those who earn under $50,000 (82 percent). •Customers with household sizes of5 or more (99 percent)as opposed to all other household sizes (91 percent). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 28 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 20 Overall Satisfaction with Otay Water District as Water Service Provider 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% i.Excellent •Very Good IS Good 50%II Fair •Poor •Very Poor 30% 20% 2010 2009 2008 2006 Chart 21 Desalinated Water is a Good Way for District to Serve Customers Don't Know,7% Yes,87% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 29 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination SUMMARY:Three-fourths ofthe customers have a substantial amount oftrust in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water for its customers (31 percent indicated a great deal oftrust and 44 percent a good amount oftrust).These ratings are slightly higher than the ratings in the 2008 and 2009 General Surveys.One halfofthe District's customers (49 percent)have either a great deal of trust (17 percent)or a good amount of trust (32 percent)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to obtain water at reasonable prices.These ratings represent a considerable increase in the trust level exhibited in the 2009 General Survey where 39 percent of customers indicated either a great deal oftrust (10 percent)or a good amount oftrust (29 percent). The 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey demonstrated a significant relationship between the importance of desalination for maintaining a reliable water supply and confidence and trust in the ability ofthe District to provide a clean,safe water supply as well as the ability to obtain water at a reasonable price.The District decided to pursue this relationship more fully in the current 2010 Desalination survey.This section of the report pursues the relationship between customer trust in the District providing clean,safe water at a reasonable price and the importance of desalination. Chart 22 indicates that 75 percent ofOtay Water District customers have a substantial amount oftrust in the ability of the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water for its customers (31 percent indicated a great deal of trust and 44 percent a good amount of trust).Only 4 percent expressed a lack of trust (2 percent not much trust and 2 percent no trust at all).These ratings are slightly higher than the ratings in the 2008 and 2009 General Surveys where 72 percent and 68 percent respectively expressed some level of trust in the ability ofthe District to provide clean,safe water. •Customers who are college graduates (4.09)tend to have more trust than do those with one year ofcollege (3.77)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water.Ratings are based upon a scale of 1 to 5,where 1 =no trust at all,2 =not much trust,3 =some trust,4 =a good amount oftrust,and 5 =a great deal oftrust). Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 30 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 22 Trust in Ability of Otay Water District to Provide Clean,Safe Water 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2010 2009 2008 •Great Deal of Trust •Good Amount of Trust .SomeTrust •Not Much Trust •No Trust at All Chart 23 shows that nearly one half of the District's customers (49 percent)have either a great deal of trust (17 percent)or a good amount oftrust (32 percent)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to obtain water a reasonable prices -not much trust (7 percent)and no trust at all (6 percent).These ratings represent a considerable increase in the trust level from those exhibited in the 2009 General Survey where 39 percent of customers indicated either a great deal of trust (1 °percent)or a good amount oftrust (29 percent).In 2009,17 percent ofcustomers expressed not much trust in the ability ofthe District to obtain water at reasonable prices -10 percent more than who expressed this sentiment in the current survey. •Customers with middle-to-higher income levels have more trust than do those with lower income levels in the ability of the District to provide water at a reasonable price ($25,000-$50,000 ==3.18 versus $50,000 -$75,000 =3.80,and $75,000 -$100,000 =3.72,on a scale where 1 =no trust at all,2=not much trust,3 =some trust,4 = a good amount oftrust,and 5 =a great deal oftrust. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 31 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Chart 23 Trust In Otay Water District to Obtain Water at Reasonable Price 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Great Deal of Trust Good Amount of Trust Some Trust Not Much Trust No Trust at All Trust-based Significant Relationsbips Customers who have indicated that they have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water demonstrate more favorable opinions about desalination in general and about Rosarito Beach,specifically than do those who trust the District less to provide clean,safe water.In particular, •Positive experiences in using desalinated water (65 percent -good amount oftrust or a great deal oftrust versus -45 percent --some trust,not much trust,or no trust at all) •Favor an agreement with international companies to develop desalinated water (62 percent - a good amount of trust or a great deal of trust versus 36 percent -some trust,not much trust,or no trust at all) •Encourage Otay Water District to establish a source of water independent of the agencies in the region (80 percent -some trust,good amount of trust,or great deal of trust versus 33 percent - not much trust) •Feel that having desalinated water as a portion of the water supply is a good way for the Otay Water District to serve its customers (97 percent -good amount of trust or a great deal of trust versus 83 percent -some trust,not much trust,or no trust at all). Otay Water District Desalillatioll Survey Report 32 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 •Feel desalination is important in maintaining a reliable water supply (65 percent -great deal of trust versus 44 percent -some trust,not much trust,or no trust at all) •Prefer project in the United States (60 percent -great deal of trust or a good amount of trust versus 78 percent -some trust,not much trust,no trust at all). •Overall satisfaction with the District as water service provider (5.14 -great deal of trust versus 2.50 -no trust at all-scale 1-6) The same pattern applies to trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at reasonable prices. Customers who have indicated that they have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following significant relationships: •Favor an agreement with international companies to develop desalinated water (66 percent -good amount oftrust or a great deal of trust versus 46 percent -some trust,not much trust,no trust at all) •Encourage Otay Water District to establish a source of water independent of the agencies in the region (83 percent -some trust,good amount oftrust,or a great deal of trust versus 47 percent - not much trust) •Feel that having desalinated water as a portion of the water supply is a good way for the Otay Water District to serve its customers (96 percent -some trust,good amount of trust,or a great deal oftrust versus 76 percent -not much trust and no trust at all) •Feel desalination is important in maintaining a reliable water supply (68 percent --great deal of trust or good amount oftrust versus 45 percent). •Overall satisfaction with the District as water service provider (5.38 -great deal of trust versus 2.83 -no trust at all-scale 1-6) Characteristics ofDesalinated Water (significant relationships) Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water exhibit the following importance ratings with regard to characteristics of desalinated water-scale 1-7, with 7 being very important: •Desalinated water reduces dependence on imported water (6.16 -great deal of trust and 6.06 - a good amount oftrust versus 4.89 -not much trust) •The desalination process must not harm the ocean (6.17 -great deal of trust and 6.19 -good amount oftrust versus 5.58 --some trust,5.67 -not much trust,and 5.00 no trust at all) Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following importance ratings with regard to characteristics of desalinated water (same 1-7 scale): •Desalinated water reduces dependence on imported water (6.17 -great deal of trust and 6.21 - good amount oftrust versus 5.50 -not much trust) •The desalination process must not harm the ocean (6.23 -good amount oftrust versus not much trust -5.48 and 5.36-no trust at all) Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 33 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Testing of Desalination Messages (significant relationships) Customers who have a substantial amount oftrust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water exhibit the following ratings ofeffectiveness with regard to the testing of desalination messages (scale 1- 7,with 7 being very effective): •Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply (5.87 -great deal of trust and 5.75 -good amount oftrust versus 4.00 -no trust at all) •Desalination eases the potential effects ofa water crisis (6.10 -great deal of trust and 6.06 -good amount oftrust versus not much trust -5.10) •The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water (5.52 -good amount of trust and 5.29 -great amount oftrust versus 2.80 -no trust at all) •Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future (6.11 -great amount of trust and 5.95 -good amount oftrust versus 5.33 -not much rust and 5.14 -no trust at all) •Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water (5.83 -good amount oftrust,5.82 -great deal oftrust,and 5.68 -some trust versus 4.38 -no trust at all). Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of desalination messages (same 1-7 scale): •Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply (6.12 -great deal oftrust and 5.84 -good amount oftrust versus 4.91 -not much trust and 4.88 -no trust at all) •Desalination eases the potential effects ofa water crisis (6.31 -great deal oftrust and 6.22 -good amount oftrust versus 5.81-some trust,5.56 -not much trust,and 5.26 -no trust at all) •The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water (5.68 -great deal oftrust, 5.44 -good amount oftrust,5.11 -some trust versus 3.89 -no trust at all) •Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future (6.32 ---great deal of trust and 6.04 -good amount oftrust versus 4,48 -no trust at all) •Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water (6.12 -good amount oftrust versus 5.67 -some trust,5.54 -not much trust,and 5.30 -no trust at all) Issues and Concerns about Locating the Desalination Plant in Mexico Customers who have a diminished level of trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water exhibit the following significant relationships with regard to concerns about locating the facility in Mexico instead ofthe United States (scale 1-4,with 4 being much more concerned with Mexico location): •Water quality (3.67 -not much trust and 3.21-some trust versus 2.75 -great deal oftrust) •Safety and security ofthe pipeline (3.60 -not much trust versus 2.89 -great deal of trust) •Reliability ofdeliveries (3.60 -not much trust versus 2.89 - a great deal oftrust) Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 34 Rea &Parker Research Decembe/~2010 •Environmental/ecological issues (3.56 --not much trust versus 2.46 -great deal oftrust and 2.67 - a good amount oftrust) Customers who have a diminished level oftrust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following significant relationships with regard to concerns about locating the facility in Mexico (same 1-4 scale): •Water quality (3.43 -not much trust versus 2.75 -great deal oftrust) •Reliability of deliveries (2.92 -all levels oftrust (except great deal)versus 2.40 -a great deal of trust) •Environmental/ecological issues (2.81 -all levels of trust (except great deal)versus 2.39 -great deal oftrust) Testing of Rosarito Beach Facility Messages Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water Authority to provide clean,safe water exhibit the following significant ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of messages about the Rosarito Beach facility (scale 1-7,with 7 being very effective): •Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the CA Department ofPublic Health (6.13 -great deal of trust,5.84 -good amount oftrust,and 5.31 --some trust --versus 4.14 -no trust at all and 3.56 -not much trust). •The operator of the Rosarito Beach Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established, global company (5.33 -great deal of trust,4.93 -good amount of trust,and 4.49 -some trust versus 2.50 -no trust at all and 2.63 -not much trust). Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following significant ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of messages about the Rosarito Beach facility (same 1-7 scale): •Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the CA Department ofPublic Health (6.22 -great deal of trust and 6.02 -good amount of trust versus 4.54 -no trust at all and 4.92 -not much trust). •The operator of the Rosarito Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company (5.38 -great deal of trust 5.19 -good amount oftrust,and 4.69 -some trust versus 2.79 -no trust at all). Customers who have substantial trust in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water exhibit the following significant relationships regarding the recommended percentage of the overall supply of water customers feel should come from desalinated sources: •Initial impression:(53.7 percent -great deal oftrust versus 28.0 percent -not much trust) Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 35 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 •After testing desalination messages:(56.4 percent -great deal oftrust versus 49.7 -good amount oftrust,47.7 -some trust,38.9 not much trust,and 33.4 percent -no trust at all) •After testing messages about Rosarito Beach facility:(56.6 percent -great deal of trust versus 4.20 percent -no trust at all and 37.9 percent -some trust) Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following significant relationships regarding the recommended percentage of the overall supply ofwater customers feel should come from desalinated sources: •Initial impression:(52.8 percent -great deal oftrust versus 39.1 percent -not much trust) •After testing desalination messages:(56.3 percent -great deal of trust versus 40.0 percent -no trust at all) •After testing messages about Rosarito facility:(55.6 percent -great deal oftrust,49.6 percent- good amount of trust,and 38.0 -some trust versus 20.2 percent -no trust at all) Conclusions Consistent with previous surveys conducted by the Otay /Water District,there is a high level of satisfaction with the District as a provider of water service.Further,customers have considerable trust in the District to provide clear,safe water and to obtain water at a reasonable price. A substantial proportion ofcustomers feel that the development of desalinated water is a good way for the District to service its customers.Customers feel that about one-half ofthe available water supply should derive from desalinated sources,including an ocean water desalination facility in Rosarito Beach, Mexico.Customers are determined that the process of desalination not harm the ocean and that it is important that desalination achieve the objective of reducing our dependence on imported water. Customers do have some concern about the safety and security of the pipeline in Mexico and also show some preference for a United States location instead of Mexico that would bolster the local economy and create U.S.basedjobs. Trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water and to do so at reasonable prices is significantly related to opinions about desalination and the use of ocean water desalination to supplement the District's supply of water.Those customers who trust the District the most are also much more in favor of desalination in general and for the Rosarito Beach facility,in particular. Important and effective messages that customers responded most favorably to are the following: •"Desalination eases the potential effects ofa water crisis." •"Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future." •"Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department ofPublic Health." Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 36 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report APPENDICES Questionnaire Survey Frequencies 37 Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 Desalination Questionnaire Otay Water District October 2010 INT.Hello,my name is .I'm calling on behalf of the Otay Water District. We're conducting a study about some issues having to do with the water supply in the San Diego County region and we're interested in your opinions.[IF NEEDED:]Are you at least 18 years of age or older?[IF 18+HOUSEHOLDER !:ill!AVAILABLE NOW, ASK FOR FIRST NAME AND MAKE CB ARRANGEMENTS] VER.[VERSION OF INTERVIEW:]1 -VERSION A 2 -VERSION B* *=RESPONSE OPTIONS REVERSED ON VERSION B FOR ALL QUESTIONS INDICATED IC.Let me assure you that no names or addresses are associated with the telephone numbers,and all of your responses are completely anonymous.The questions take about eight minutes.To ensure that my work is done honestly and correctly,this call may be monitored.Do you have a few minutes right now? [IF ASKED ABOUT MONITORING:]My supervisor randomly listens to interviews to make sure we're reading the questions exactly as written and not influencing answers in anyway. TOP.[ONLY IF ASKED FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT TOPIC OR WHO'S SPONSORING IT?:]This project is sponsored by the Otay Water District,and it's about some issues related to the water supply in the San Diego County Region.[IF SPONSOR INFORMATION GIVEN TO RESPONDENT,"TOPIC"=1] CUST.How long have you been a customer of the Otay Water District?[IF LESS THAN ONE YEAR,THANK AND CODE NQR-RES] ____yEARS 0------·····>"NQR-RES" 99 -DK/REF,BUT AT LEAST ONE YEAR SEX.[RECORD GENDER OF RESPONDENT:] 1 -MALE 2 -FEMALE ••••••••••••••••••••••••••QUALIFIED RESPONDENT:QUOTAS CHECKED;DATA SAVED ••••••••••••-••••••••-••- LP.[IF INDICATED BY ACCENT:]Would you prefer that we speak in... 1 -English or 2 -Spanish? Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 38 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Use of Desalinated Water I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT DESALINATION. 1.Are you familiar with the term "desalination." 1.YES 2.NO (include OK/REF)[GO TO Q2] 01a.[IF 01 =1].How would you describe what desalination is? [NOTE:Code all responses that refer to making water for household use from ocean or other salty water as 1.List the rest verbatim.] [IF Q1 =1,THEN ADD "AS YOU INDICATED,"BEFORE READING NEXT SENTENCE] DESALINATION IS THE PROCESS OF MAKING DRINKING WATER AND WATER FOR OTHER HOUSEHOLD AND BUSINESS USES FROM OCEAN WATER.DESALINATION IS A PROCESS THAT FORCES WATER THROUGH A VERY FINE SCREEN THAT IS DESIGNED TO REMOVE OCEAN SALTS AND OTHER IMPURITIES FROM THE OCEAN WATER. 02.Do you believe that ocean water desalination can be important to maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply of water for San Diego County residents?[REVERSE 1-4] 4-Yes,very important 3-Yes,somewhat important 2-No,not very important 1-No,not at all important 9-DKIREF---[DO NOT READ-ONLY IF VOLUNTEERED] 03.To your knowledge,have you ever used desalinated water for any purpose? 1-Yes 2 -No (GO TO Q6) 9 -OK/REF [DO NOT READ](GO TO Q6) Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 39 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 04a-b.Where were you when you used desalinated water? [DO NOT READ--Want geographicallocation-one response only] 1.on-board ship in Navy 2.country or other location Q4b 3.military base in Q4b 4.other Q4b 05.Was your overall experience with desalinated water positive,negative,or did it make no difference from traditional water sources? 1.Positive (Go to Q5a) 2.Negative (Go to Q5b) 3.No difference (Go to Q6) 4.OK/REF [DO NOT READ](Go to Q6) Q5a.[IF Q5 =1]What did you like about the desalinated water that you used? [Go to Q6] Q5b.[IF Q5 =2]What did you dislike about the desalinated water that you used? Q6a-d.Please indicate how important the following characteristics of desalinated water are to you.Use a scale of 1 to 7,where 7 is of the highest importance and 1 is not important at all [RANDOMIZE] Characteristics of Desalinated Water Not at all Highest Important Importance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a.Desalinated water is an alternative source of water that can reduce our dependence on imported water and precipitation b.Desalinated water is extensively and successfully used in many parts of the world. c.Desalinated water is soft water and Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 40 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 eliminates the need for water softening measures d.The desalination process must not harm the ocean Q7.Just off the top of your head and whether you know much about desalinated water or not, what is your initial impression of a reasonable goal to set for the percentage of water used in Otay Water District homes and businesses that should come from desalinated water? Allow for volunteered response,but if needed,offer the following choices as Q7a and RECORD 999 for 07 1.80·100% 2.60·79% 3.40·59% 4.20·29% 5.less than 20% Testing of General Desalination Messages QBa-e.I would like to ask what you think of some messages that the Otay Water District is considering using in its effort to communicate the advantages of seawater desalination to its customers. On a scale of 1 to 7,where 7 is very effective and 1 is not at all effective,please rate the following messages in terms of their ability to communicate the advantages of seawater desalination.[RANDOMIZE] Desalination Messages Not at all Very Effective Effective 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a.Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply. b.Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis. c.The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water. d.Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future. e.Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water suppliers. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 41 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Qg.Now,after hearing these messages,what is your opinion of the percentage of water used in Otay Water District homes and businesses that should come from desalinated water? Q9a.Allow for volunteered response,but if needed,offer the following choices as Q9a and RECORD 999 for 09 1.80-100% 2.60-79% 3.40-59% 4.20-29% 5.less than 20% Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility I'd like to share some potential news with you.An ocean water desalination plant is tentatively planned for the City of Rosarito Beach in Mexico,and the Otay Water District has the opportunity to purchase some of that water starting in 2014 or 2015. This project would be financed and operated by international companies with considerable experience in ocean water desalination. The water would be piped through an underground pipeline from the Rosarito Beach north to the Otay Water District distribution facility,north of the border,where it would be tested and treated as necessary to meet the water quality standards of the District and the State of California. Q10.Based upon this information about the potential desalination project,do you think that you would be in favor of pursuing such an agreement with these international companies to develop additional supplies of water from desalination of ocean water? 1.Yes 2.No 3.DK/REF.[DO NOT READ] Q11.Please indicate if any of the following characteristics of the water from this potential desalination plant in Rosarito Beach cause you more concern than they would if the plant were located in the United States.Would you say that your level of concern is the same no matter where the plant is located,that you are somewhat more concerned with the Rosarito Beach location,that you are much more concerned with the Rosarito Beach Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 42 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 location or that you are not concerned at all regarding...[REVERSE Levels of concern and RANDOMIZE characteristics]. Characteristics No Same Concern-Somewhat Much More Concerns at no matter More Concerned all location Concerned 4 1 2 3 a.Quality of the water b.Safety and Security of the Pipeline c.Reliability of Water Deliveries d.Environmental/ Ecological Impacts Q12.Would you prefer that the project be built in the United States even if it took 10-15 or even more years longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get the US plant operational? 1.Yes 2.No [GO to 013] 3.OK/REF.[OO NOT READ][Go to Q13]. Q12a.[Q12 =1]What is the main reason that you want the plant located in the US? RECORD ONE RESPONSE··DO NOT READ RECORD Up to Two RESPONSES··DO NOT READ 1.Jobs 2.Spend money locally/help local economy 3.Do not trust Mexico 4.Crime in Mexico 5.Use for drug smuggling 6.Patriotism/America First 7.Other,_ Q13.The Otay Water District has taken the lead in this venture versus participation by a Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 43 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 broader group of regional water agencies.Do you like that the Otay Water District is establishing a source of water for its customers that is independent of the other agencies in the region? 1.Yes 2.No 3.OK/REF.[00 NOT READ] 014.How do you feel about working with an international team of desalination experts?Would you say that the experienced international team increases your confidence in the project? 1.Yes 2.No 3.OK/REF.[00 NOT READ] Testing Messages about the Joint Venture in Mexico 015a-b.I would like to ask you what you think about two more messages that the Otay Water District is considering in an effort to inform its customers about this project and to demonstrate to customers that the construction and operation of the Rosario Beach desalination project is a reasonable way to expand the water supply.On a scale of 1 to 7,where 7 is very effective and 1 is not at all effective,please rate the following messages. Rosarito Beach Messages Not at all Very Effective Effective 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a.Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the CA Department of Public Health. b.The operators of the Rosarito Desalination facility are a publicly-traded,well-established,global company. Q16.One last time and more specifically,what is your opinion of the percentage of water that is provided by the Otay Water District to the homes and businesses in the area that should come from desalinated water produced at this project? Allow for volunteered response,but if needed,offer the following choices as Q17a and RECORD 999 for Q17 1.80·100% Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 44 Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 2.60-79% 3.40-59% 4.20-29% 5.less than 20% Confidence in the Otay Water District 017.How much trust do you have in the ability of the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water to the district?Would you say...*[REVERSE] 5 - a great deal of trust, 4 - a good amount of trust, 3 -some trust, 2 --not much trust, 1 -no trust at all? 9 --not sure [INCLUDES OK/REF] 018.How much trust do you have in the Otay Water District to obtain this water for you at a reasonable price?Would you say...[REVERSE] 5 - a great deal of trust, 4 - a good amount of trust, 3 -some trust, 2 --not much trust, 1-no trust at all? 9 --not sure [INCLUDES OK/REF] 019:How would you rate your overall satisfaction with the Otay Water District as your water service provider?[REVERSE] 6---Excellent 5---Very Good 4-Good 3---Fair Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 45 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 2-Poor 1---Very Poor 7-DKJREF [DO NOT READ] 020.Do you feel that having desalinated water as a portion of the water supply provided by the Otay Water District is a good way for the District to serve its customers? 1.Yes 2.No 3.DK/REF.[DO NOT READ] ASK ALL: In closing,these questions are for comparison purposes only. PPH.How many persons,including yourself,live in your household? 99.DK/REF.[DO NOT READ] TEN.Is your residence owned by someone in your household,or is it rented? 1-0WN 2 -RENT/OTHER STATUS 3 -DK/REF.[DO NOT READ] EDU.What is the highest grade or year of school that you have completed and received credit for... 1 -high school or less, 2 -at least one year of college,trade or vocational school, 3 -graduated college with a bachelor's degree,or 4 -at least one year of graduate work beyond a bachelor's degree? Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 46 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 5 -DK/REF [DO NOT READ] AGE.Please tell me when I mention the category that contains your age... 1 -18 to 24, 2 -25 to 34, 3 -35 to 44, 4 -45 to 54, 5 -55 to 64,or 6 -65 or over? 7 -DK/REF.[DO NOT READ] ETH.Which of the following best describes your ethnic or racial background ... 1 -white,not of Hispanic origin; 2 -black,not of Hispanic origin; 3 -Hispanic or Latino; 4 -Asian or Pacific Islander; 5 -Native American;or 6 -another ethnic group?[SPECIFY:]_ 7 -DK/REF.[DO NOT READ] INC.Now,we don't want to know your exact income,but just roughly,could you tell me if your annual household income before taxes is... 1 -under $25,000, 2 -$25,000 up to but not including $50,000, 3 -$50,000 up to (but not including)$75,000, 4 -$75,000 up to (but not including)$100,000,or 5 -$100,000 up to but not including $150,000? Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 47 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 6 -OK/REF.[OO NOT READ] LAN.[LANGUAGE OF INTERVIEW:] Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 1 -ENGLISH 48 2 -SPANISH Rea &Parker Research Decembel~2010 Frequency Table Cumulative Percent 100.0 Familiar with term "desalination?"II Frequency frcent I Valid Percent I V8iidIYes I 240 I 60.0 I 6o.01r-------60-.-0 1 r116O~1 40.0/ rotal 1~1----1-00-.-0'-1-------1 100.0 Remove salts and impurities from water for household use Valid ,D_e_S_C"_"P_t_io_n_0-rf_d_es_a_I_ln_a_tion I Frequeocy Iperceo,P~~~o'I c~:~:~;e IIII Ir--Oth-er------,6~~1 r otal 1111,--------1 rissin9 Ir--NO Ans-wer--~~II Isystem I~II I~Total---',--163111-1 jOill I Other descriptions of desalinated water I Frequeo",Iperceo, Valid Cumulative Percent Percent FI ~~~I 98.0 Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 49 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 A purification method (probe)Nothing else I 1~-1 .31 98.3 Charcoal.Take the impurities out.Whatever II-iii 98.5 filtration systems you have,big plants near the sea Chemical purification to potable water ~j3~1 98.8 ICleaning the water isnt it?~j31 .31 99.0 It has something to do with using salt water.1111M3 probe-That is about it.Actually I think it has to do with converting salt water into drinking water. [same as drinking deionized water ~j3~1 99.5 ISOftening of the water ~j3~1 99.8 The removing of contaminates for drinking and IIIIotheruses. rotaI ~[100.01 1 I Importance ofocean water desalination Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid INo,not at all important I 14fT51 3.51 3.5 INo,not very important I 16~1 4.0 I 7.5 Ives,somewhat important I 144~1 36.01 43.5 Ives,very important I 207~1 51.81 95.3 IDK/REF I 19~1 4.81 100.0 r otal I~I 100.0 I Cumulative PercentValidPercent Ever used desalinated water?Ir Frequency IPercent Ivalid rs-I 104/'--26-.-0Ii------r------26-.-01 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 50 Rea &Parker Research December.2010 rl 266~1 66.51 92.5 10K/REF I 3°~1 7.51 100.0 ~~II 100.0 I I Where used desalinated water? I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid Ion-board ship in navy I 57~1 57.01 57.0 IOther country I 13~1 13'°1 70.0 IMilitary base I 4~1 4.01 74.0 Icruise ship I 9~1 9.0 I 83.0 IOther I 17~1 17.0 I 100.0 ITotal ~~I 100.0 I Missing 10K/REF ~~I I Isystem ir-ml I ITotal ~~I Irotal~II I I Countrywhere used desalinated water I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent ~I I 394~1 98.51 98.5 jAruba I 1~1 .31 98.8 IBaja California I 1~1 .31 99.0 Iisreal ~~I .31 99.3 Isaudi Arabia I 2~1 .51 99.8 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 51 Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 Saudi Arabia,Cabo San Lucas r 1~1_'31_10j'0 ;-IT-ot-a-I--------140011 100.0 I --------------- 100.0 Cumulative Percent location of MilitarybaseIIIFrequencyrPercentFercent I ~II 399~81 99.81--------=-9-=-'9.-:-"8' FI 1~1 .3l ITotal III 100.01-------1 I Other location I Frequency Ipercent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent vaiidl 1378~1 94.5[94.5 IAt a resort ~~I .31 94.8 Icruise ship 1-3~1 .8 I 95.5 Icruise ships r 1~j .31 95.8 I IHave a filter I 1~1 .31 96.0, IHave done it at work ~~I .31 96.3 IHome 1-1~1 .31 96.5I lin the house I 1~1 .31 96.8I IMY house ~131 .3i 97.0 Ion a boat I 1~1 .31 97.3 II Ion a boat cruise ~I .3 1 .31 97.5 Ion a cruise ship 1-1~1 .3/97.8 Ion a ocean cruise ~~r .31 98.0 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 52 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Ion a trip at a hotel I 1~1 .31 98.3I IpeoPle were giving it away I 1~1 .31 98.5 I Isan Diego,CA ~~I .31 98.8 Isanta Barbara,CA I 1~1 .31 99.0 Traveling by cruise ship to Alaska &IIII 99.3 back IUP in Del Mar 1-1~1 .31 99.5 Used for business on a project ~~I .31 99.8 IWhen I lived in Key West ~~l .31 100.0 rotal ~~~I Overall experience with desalinated water I 1 Frequency Iperce;1 Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid IPositive I 53~1 53.0 I 53.0 INegative I 1~r 1.0 I 54.0 I INa difference I 46r-m1 46.0 I 100.0 ITotal I~I 100.0 r I Missing iK/REF I 4~1 I Isystem III I ITotal ~~I IITotalI400~1 II Positives ofdesalinated water Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 53 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Itaste I 13,-3.3/28.9 1 42.2 ISOft I 1r .31 2.2\44.4 Ilower cost '---1'--'4.41 48.92 1 .5 drinkable I 5iu i-1u-1 60.0 betterfor environment I 1~1221 62.2 Iclean and pure I 81 2.of·17.81 80.0 II lather I 91~1 20.01 100.0 I rotal ~~31 100.0 I I IMiSSing \system i 355rsaB I I rotaI irao.ol I I Negatives ofdesalinated water I Frequency rercent IValid Percent .,Cumulative Percent IValid re-I 1~1 100.0 I 100.0 I IMiSSing /system III I ITotal 1400~1 I I Other positives ofdesalinated water L F Valid I Cumulat;,. Frequency percent!Percent I Percent Valid J I 355~~1 88.8 IAvailable -~~~I 89.0 ~~1-·31 .3 r 89.3 ICleaner ~~~I 89.5 ]Didn1t have salt ~~~I 89.8 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 54 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 /Free ~~~I 90.0 !GOOd clean water ~~~I 90.3 I did not have an opinion although the Ili-310 5 experience was positive I feel more comfortable with it on my skin and II~IIscalp.Taste is better I was on a ship cruise and I like the fact that we I 'I .31 .3 91.0 would not run out ofwater,and that the water Iwascomingfromthesea I Impurities removed and better tasting ~~~I 91.3 lit had no salt ~~~I 91.5 lit is plenty ofit I 1~~1 91.8 I It is really clean and pure.The water is cleaner I 'IIIthanthewaterwealreadyuseandgetnow. lit tasted good,quenched my thirst!~~I .31 92.3 lit tasted much better!Very good.I 1~~1 92.5 It tasted pretty good right out of the tap!~~~I 92.8 lit tastes a lot better.1'1~~1 93.0 lit was just as good ~~~I 93.3 lit was like regular water ~1--·3~1 93.5 lit was the purest water on earth I 1~1 .31 93.8 I"wasnhshard as Ihe water we have now from Ilf---:3,Ithe Colorado River.I Iit's good ~~~I 94.3 Ilt's just water 1 1 ,-.31 .31 94.5 IMainlYfor flavor coordinated I 1~~1 94.8 I [NO answer I 1 I .31 .31 95.0 I Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 55 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 INothing really.~~~I 95.3 Ipientiful ~~~I 95.5 Plentiful.The reverse osmosis can make up to 1 .3 .3 95.8 1500 gallons per hour.For a crew of400,we : could take a shower every day,nice and long. We didn't have to worry about running out of water. Plenty ofocean water,we won't run out of water.~~~I 96.0 /Positive,very good drinking water.~~~I 96.3 So I don't need to be buying water bottles,and It II~I is better for recycling. ITastes good.~~1-·31 96.8 IThat it is drinkable ~~~I 97.0 That we were using sea water and not regular I'II~water being that it was for a project and not drinking IThe flavor ~~~I 97.5 IThe purification of seawater ~~~I 97.8 rhe ship we had a reverse water osmosis unit ~~~I 98.0 rhe taste ~~~I 98.3 The taste of it is much more different than tap II~Iwater. Iwater bill would go down hopefully ~~3~1 98.8 We were able to use the water to take showers II~Iandtodothedishes. Without chemical background would not know II~Ithedifferences IYOU can use and drink the water from the ocean .~~~I 99.5 IYOUCOUlddrinkit ~~~I 99.8 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 56 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 100.0IYOUcoulduseit~~~I I;""'T-ot-a-I-------------~1100.01 100.0 ~ I Other negatives ofdesalinated water 1-Frequency1Percent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Valid I ~~I 99.81 99.8 It doesn't taste clean.It tastes a little I~~I 100.0 minerally. rotaI ~1100.0ll Importance:Desalinated water is an alternative source ofwater that can reduce our dependence on imported water and precipitation I I Frequency I Percent .1 Valid percent.1Cumulative Percent Valid INot at all Important I 7~1 1.81 1.8 1 2 I 5r-ol 1.31 3.1 1 3 I 12~1 3.11 6.2 1 4 I 19~1 4.91 11.1 1 5 I 66~1 17.1 I 28.2 1 6 I 8°~1 20.71 49.0 IHighest Importance I 197~1 51.0 I 100.0 rotal I 386~1 100.0 I !Missing 10K/REF I 14~1 I ITotal I 400~1 I Importance:Desalinated water is extensively and successfully used in many parts of the world Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 57 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent ,.-----I 14~1-421 4.2ValidINotatallImportant 1 2 I 111 2.81 3.3/7.6 IrI15r 3.81 4.5 r 12.1 I 1 4 I 27~1 8.21 20.2 1 5 I 76~1 23.0 I 43.2 I 1 6 I 61 1 15.3'1 18.4 1 61.6 /Highest Importance I 127~1 38.41 100.0 rotaI ~~I 100.0 I IMissing 10K/REF irml II ITotal I~I I Importance:Desalinated water is soft water and eliminates the need for water softening measures I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid INot at all Important ,29j7.31 8.41 8.4 1 2 I 12~1 3.51 11.8 1 3 I 23~1 6.61 18.5 1 4 I 32~1921 27.7 1 5 I 83~1 24.0 I 51.7 /6 I 53j13~1 15.3/67.1 IHighest Importance I 114 r 28.51 32.91 100.0 rotal I~I 100.0, IMissing 10 K/REF r-s4il j Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 58 Rea &Parker Research December,20I0 I~I Importance:The desalination process must not harm the ocean I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Valid INot at all Important -I 18~1 4.71 4.7 1 2 I 5r-ol 1.31 6.0I 1 3 I 13~1 3.4f 9.4 1 4 120~1 5.2f 14.6 I 1 5 I 39~1 10.21 24.7 r I 53 1 13.31 13.81 38.5 IHighest Importance I 236~1 61.51 100.0 ITotal ~~l 100.0 I IMiSSing 10K/REF I~l II ITotal I~I II q7 and q7arec combined I Valid Percent Cumulative PercentFrequencyIPercent Valid -r-,81~1221 2.2 rl 31 .8,.8i 3.0 13~6!rl 2~1 .6 1 -Ir--,6~1 1.71 5.31 rl 1~1~1 5.5 ri 21 .5 1 .6 r 6.1 Irl1I .31 .3i 6.4 I --l Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 59 Rea &Parker Research December.20/0 ri 21~1 5.81 12.2 1 15 I 6~1 1.71 13.9 Irl 31~1 8.6 1 22.4 rl 22~1~1--28.5 rl 33'~1 9.11 37.7 1 33 I 11~1 .3 38.0 rl 4~1 1.1 39.1 FO-l 16~1 4.4 43.5 rf 87~1 24.1 67.6 r60 I 15~1 -4.2 71.7 I I 165 r 3~81 .8 72.6 I I 170 I 24[M1 6.61 79.2 Irl 14~1 3.91 83.1 rl 18~1 5.01 88.1 r 85 I 2~i--~1 88.6 rl 7~1 1.9 f 90.6 ri-34~1 9.41 ._- 100.0 rotal-III 100.0r- - IMiSSing Isystem I 39~1 I ITotal I 4001 1 J I I I Effectiveness:Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent ~INotatalleffective I 12~1 3.21 3.2 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 60 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 I /2 I 11~r 3.01 6.2 1 3 I 15~1 4.11 10.3 1 4 I 33~1 8.91 19.2 1 5 I 78~1 21.1 I 40.3 I 1 6 I 68r-m1 18.41 58.6 Ivery effective I 153~1 41.41 100.0 !Total III 100.0 III IMiSSing 10K/REF II 7.51 I rotal I~I I Effectiveness:Desalination eases the potential effects ofthe water crisis I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid INot at all effective I 13~1 3.41 3.4 1 2 I 6~1 1.61 5.0 1 3 I 11~1 2.91 7.9 1 4 I 17~1 4.5/12.3 /5 I 61~1 16.0 I 28.3 1 6 ,79~1 20.71 49.1 Ivery effective I 194~1 50.91 , 100.0 rotal I~I 100.0 I --Missing OK/REF 19 4.8Fc-I_I~IIrotalI~I ,------ Effectiveness:The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported waterJ Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 61 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid INot at all effective I 28~1 7.9:1 7.9 1 2 I 16~1 4.51 12.4 1 3 I 17~1 4.81 17.2 1 4 32~1 9.01 26.3 15 76~1 21.51 47.7 /6 61~1 17.2/65.0 Ivery effective 124~1 35.01 100.0 ITotal ~~I 100.0 I IMiSSing 10K/REF III I ITotal I~I I Effectiveness:Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid INot at all effective I 12~1 3.11 3.1 1 2 I 6~1 1.61 4.7 13 I 17~1 4.51 9.2 1 4 I 18~1 4.71 13.9 15 I 73~1 19.21 33.1 1 6 I 67~1 17.61 50.7 Ivery effective I 188~1 49.31 100.0 ITotal ~II 100.0 I IMiSSing 10K/REF I~I I Gtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 62 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 ITotal I~I Effectiveness:Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water suppliers I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Ftat all effective I 17 1 4.31 4.51 4.5 II \2 I sl 2.0 I 2.1\6.6 IrI141 3.51 3.71 10.3 II \4 I 23 1 5'sl 6.11 16.4 1 5 I 76~1 20.1i 36.4 1 6 I 61 I 15.31 16.11 52.5 I Ivery effective I 1S0~1 47.51 100.0 rotal I~I 100.0 I IMiSSing IDK/REF I~l I rotal I~I I I q9 and q9arec combined I IFrequency Iper~e~~1 Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid 10 I 7J1~1 1.91 1.9 I 11 I 3~1 'sl 2.7 I 14 I 1~1 .31 3.0 Irl 1°~1 2.71 5.S r-I 2~1 .5 1 6.3 r I 21~1 .5/6.9 rl 19~1 5.21 12.1 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 63 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 [15 ro 6~f 1.6/13.7 rr 191-~1 5.2,19.0 ri-20 1 5.01 5.51 24.5 r-i 32 1 8.01 8.81 33.2 II ri 1r .31 I 33.5.31 !rl 4~1 1.1 I 34.6 Ir--'17 1 4.31 4.71 39.3 rl 3~1 .81 40.1 Irl78~1 21.41 61.5 Ir-r 1I .31 .31 61.8 !I FI 1~1 .31 62.1 r-I 1~1 .3i 62.4 1 60 I 14~1 3.81 66.2 rl 4~1 1.1 I 67.3 rl 21-~1 5.81 73.1 rl 18~1 4.91 78.0 /80 r 27[M1 7.41 85.4 1 85 -I 3[.81 .81 86.3 ri 8~1 2.21 88.5 1 95 r 2~1 .51 89.0 ro--r--4°~1 11.0 I 100.0 rotal °1~TOI 100.0 I IMiSSing Isystem-II~I II Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 64 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 ITotal III Combined increase or decrease in percentage of desalinated water after messages about desalination I I Frequency IPercent .,Valid Percent rmulative Percent Valid rl 11 .31 .31 .3 r'l 1~1 .3 r .6 /-70 1 2~1 .61 1.1 rl 3~1 .81 2.0 1-45 1 1j .31 .31 2.2Irl215 1 .61 2.8 rl 1~1 .31 3.1 rl 4~1 1.1 I 4.2 rl 5r-ol 1.41 5.6 PO-I 1°~1 2.81 8.4 1-18 I 1~1 .31 8.7 Irl 1,-.31 .31 9.0 rl 12~1 3.41 12.4 1-5 I 4~1 1.1 I 13.5 ri-1i-·3 1 .31 13.8 ri 1~1 .31 14.0 rl 192~1 53,91 68.0 rl 3~1 .81 68.8 rl 18~1 5.11 73.9 rl 18~1 5.11 78.9 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 65 Rea &Parker Research December,20/0 rl 9~1 2.51 81.5 rl 1~1 .31 81.7 rl 22~1 6.2:1 87.9 rl 6~1 1.71 89.6 rl 2°~1 5.61 95.2 rl 3r-z1 .81 96.1 rl 4~1 1.1/97.2 rl 1~1 .31 97.5 rl 2r-z1 .61 98.0 rl 2r-z1 .61 98.6 rl 1~1 .31 98.9 rl 2~1 .61 99.4 rl 1~1 .31 99.7 rl 1~1 .3/100.0 I~~I 100.0 I IMiSSing !system I 44~r Irotal~~I I Favor agreement with international companies to develop desal at Rosarito Beach I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative PercentraUdI-Yes--I 217~1 54.31 54.3 INa I 134~1 33.51 87.8 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 66 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 100.0loon't Know ITotal I 49 1 12.31 12.31111r----1-o-o-.oI-------1 Concern about location in Mexico:water quality I IFrequency fercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent- Valid INO concerns at all ~r-ml 17.31 17.3 Isame concern in U.S.or Mexico ~~I 14.0 I 31.3 Isomewhat more concerned ~~I 21.6 1 52.9 IMUCh more concerned ~~I 47.1 r 100.0 ITotal ~1-98.31 100.01 IMiSSing 10K/REF 111 I ITotal iro.ol I I I Concern about location in Mexico:safety and security of pipeline I rFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Valid INa concerns at all r 61~1 15.51 15.5 -i 49r-m1 12.4 1SameconcerninU.S.or Mexico 27.9 Somewhat more concerned ~r-ml 27.41 55.3 Much more concerned 1761 44.0 44.7 100.0r-ml ,I I-To-t-al---------~~I---1-0-0.-0 ,-----1 FgIOK/REF ,-61 1 I rotal iro.ol ,------1 Concern about location in Mexico:reliability ofwater deliveriesI 1---------------rF-r-eq-u-e-n-c-y IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 67 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Valid INO concerns at all ~~I 20.6/20.6 Same concern in U.S.or Mexico ~~I 14.71 35.2 Somewhat more concerned I 104~1 26.71 62.0 !MUCh more concerned ---~r-ml 38.0 I 100.0 ITotal ~IIOO'OI !MiSSing 10K/REF I~I r ITotal 1~1 -I I Concern about location in Mexico:environmental/ecological impacts I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Valid INO concerns at all ~~I 22.31 22.3 Isame concern in U.S.or Mexico I 65~1 16.91 39.2 Isomewhat more concerned I 100~1 26.0 I 65.2 I I IMUCh more concerned ~~I 34.8 1 100.0 ITotal ~~I 100.0 I IMiSSing 10K/REF 1 1511 I !Total I 400~r I Prefer project in U.S.even iftook additional 10-15 years? I IFrequency Frcent Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid IYes ~8~'64.51 64.5 INO I 111r-m1 27.81 92.3 loon't Know I 31~1 7.8l 100.0 ,al III 100.0I Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 68 Rea &Parker Research December,20/0 I Reason #1 for preferring plant in U.S. I Frequency IPereent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Valid !JObS ~~I 30.71 30.7 Spend money locally/help local I~II 43.8 economy jDo not trust Mexico ~~I 17.1 I 61.0 )Crime in Mexico ~~I 2.01 62.9 Ipatriotism/America first ~~I 6.41 69.3 IControl ~~I 7.61 76.9 Iwater Quality ~~I 8.4/85.3 !Reliability-Security ~~I 6.41 91.6 /Environment ~~I 2.01 93.6 IOSHA standards ~~I .41 94.0 INational Security ~~I .41 94.4 lather ~~I 5.61 100.0 rotaI ~I~I Missing IDK/REF ~~II Isystem ~~II iotal III1 ITotal ~~II I Reason #2 for preferring plant in U.S. I Frequency Ipereent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 69 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Valid IJObS ~I 5.81 18.41 18.4 Spend money locally/help local II 831 1 44.8 economy IDO not trust Mexico I 21~1 16.8 r 61.6 Icrime in Mexico j3~1 2.41 64.0 IWiII use for drug smuggling j1~1 .81 64.8 IPatriotism/America first ~r~1 11.21 76.0 IControl r-sr-o\4.01 80.0 IwaterQuality I 11~1 8.81 88.8 , IReliability-security rs~1 6.41 95.2 IEnvironment I 1~1 .81 96.0I IOSHA standards j1~1 .81 96.8 lather ~1-1~1 3.21 100.0 ITotal II 31.3~1 Missing IDK/REF ~r-oll !system rmil I - rotal---i-275[68.8 1 1 ITotal III/ I Other reason for preferring plant in U.S. Frequency IPercent Valid I CumulativeI Percent I Percent II ~r-m~1 73.8 Accessible to the environmental laws of the 11'11USandsecurity IAccountability and safer j1~1·31 74.3 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 70 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 America has higher quality standards.~~[.31 74.5 Because of safety and would feel more safe IIII-maboutthewaterbeingcleaner !Better control and inspection is better 1-1~'.31 75.0 IIBetterqualityintheU.S.~~I .31 75.3 California has higher standards than any IIII~other state Cheaper to produce over here and purity of 1-'1311~water ICleaner water I 1~~r 76.0 IControl 1--2~r .51 76.5 IControl and quality ~1-·3~1 76.8 IControl and Responsibility ~~~I 77.0 IControl and security ~~~I 77.3 IControl over quality of water 1-11~~1 77.5 Icost measures only r 1I .3~1 77.8 I Icost would be less ~r-·3~1 78.0 Developing technology here rather than r T-311~abroad Do not want to pay foreign countries for 1113r~B~resources Easier to monitor here ~~~I 78.8 IEconomic impact ~~3~1 79.0 !Environmental concerns ~1-·3~179.3 IEnvironmental reasons 1-1~~1 79.5 IEventuallYthere should be one built here r 11-·3~1 79.8 !For security ofthe community in case they I 1~1 .3[80.0 Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 71 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Icontaminate r-~r-I ror us customers should be built in the US ~~~I 80.3 IGuarantee waterand safety ~~~I 80.5 Guidelines and the regulations,security of ~~~ntheproject IHave our own,independent supply ~~~I 81.0 I like it built here to keep it here in the US ~~~I 81.3 I trust the water qualny more in the US there r-'~I~ is a lot ofcorruption in Mex I'm concerned about Mexico standards ~~~I 81.8 I'm concerned about the sewage in Rosarito.~~~I 82.0 Ifits water people are drin~ng n;sa concem r-'~II if it's coming from Mexico Independence and reliability ofthe water ~~~I 82.5 It would be better to be controlled by the US r-'~IIthaninternational It would be nice to have it close by and we r-'~IIcanbeselfsufficient lit would be safer and cleaner ~~~I 83.3 IMaintenance and easy access ~~~I 83.5 IManaged well ~~~I 83.8 IMore control ~~~I 84.0 IMore control here ~~~I 84.3 IMore control if in our own country ~~~I 84.5 More control over what is in the backyard ~~~I 84.8 More local control and not having to do with r-'~IIanothergovernmentbureaucracy. Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 72 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 IMore reliable I 11~1-~1 85.3I More restrictions here than in other I '111-85.5 countries as far as safety goes. (More trust I 11-·3~1 85.8 IMy whole concern is the pipeline j1f I .31 86.0.31 I INational security I 1l--·3~1 86.3 I INeed to invest in our own infrastructure I 1~~1 86.5 I II IOSHA laws more strict I 1~~1 86.8 IOSHA standards j1~3r .3/87.0 Oursystem;s much more reHabl.and safelyIllr---.r7.3 concerns /QUality and safety 1-1 1 .31 .31 87.5II IQUality control f3~8r .8 1 88.3 Quality in the water,concerned about ,-1111-sB5Mexicoandlowstandards IQUality ofwater security 1 1 1 .31 .31 88.8 !Regulations j1~~1 89.0 Isafer ~~I .51 89.5 lSafety ~~I 1.0 I 90.5, /safety and cleanliness ofthe water j1~~1 90.8 Isafety and full control j1~~1 91.0 Isafety and quality ~-I-~I .31 91.3 Isafety and security I 1~1-·31 91.5 , /safety environmental impact 1--1~1 .31 91.8 I I Safety of the water and no food and drink i--'Ir 31 92.0 regulations Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 73 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 92.3 93.5 I Isanitation ~~~I l,-s-ec-u-rit-y-----------~j1~~I----93-.-31 Isecurity and quality ~1~1-:31 Security of the water supply 1-1 1 .3~1 93.8 Isecurity quality j1-~~1 94.0 ,Isewage spillage -~~~I 94.3 So the agents can monitor the quality of the I 11 '1 31waterI So we remain independent ofoutside 1111948 sources. IStandards and quality ~I .3~r 95.0 IStandards are higher 1-1~~1 95.3 lstricter guide lines and safety ~~~I 95.5 IStricter regulations ~I~~I 95.8 I Stringent rules and regulations more II~IIoversight Isupervision ~~~I 96.3 IsupposedlY more responsible ~~[.31 96.5 The lack of water supply,our lack of water Illr~supply [The standards would higher ~~~I 97.0 They have better inspection ofthe water in IIII 97.3 the US than in Mexico ITO be handled in U.S ~I .3~1 97.5 ITrust the quality of the water more ~13~1 .97.8 Water quality in Rosarito is really bad.~r-·3~1 98.0 Iwater safety and more research and I 1~1 .31 98.3 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 74 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Idomestic water would more cost effective Ilf I We have better monitoring and we put I '11 98,5 fluoride and different chemicals in wat I /we might run out of water I 1~~1 98.8I Iwe need the industry here I'~,.31 99.0 I Iwe should monitor and govern our selves I'~~I 99,3 Iwe would have more control of it 1-1~~1 99,5 We would have more control over the IIIIstandards&quality ofthe water. Iwe'd control of it I'~I .31 100.0 ITotal ~1100.0~1 Like OWO establishing water source indedendent of other water agencies I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid IYes I 309j77.3i 77,4/77.4 I Ir-,481 12.0 I 12.0 I 89,5 loon't Know I 42~1--10.51 100.0 ITotal III 100.0 I IMissing Isystem I 11~1--1I I I~I I Experienced international team increases confidence? I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid /Yes I 261~1 65,31 65.3 INO I 94r-m1 23.51 88.8 loon't Know I 45r-m,11.31 100.0 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 75 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 400I 100.0 I 100.0I r Effectiveness:Desalinated waterwill be closely monitored by CA Dept.of Public Health r- fequency frcent IValid Percenti_-Cumulative Percent Valid INot at all effective I 32~1 8.3/8.3 1 2 I 9~1 2.31 10.6 1 3 I 15~1T91 14.5 1 4 I 18~1 4.7/19.2 15 I 52~1 13.51 32.6, 1 6 I 47rmi12.21 44.8 Ivery effective I 2131 53.3/55.21 100.0 rotal ~~I 100.0I I Missing OK/REF 14 3.5I~I I '-To-ta-'-------r--4-O-Oil-----i Effectiveness:Operator ofRosarito Desalination facility is public traded,well- established global company I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Valid /Not at all effective I 52~1 14.61 14.6 1 2 I 1°~1 2.81 17.4 1 3 I 25,-6.3/7.0 I 24.4 1 4 I , 9.S/11.0I39 1 35.4 15 I 79~1 22.21 57.6 1 6 I 43j 10.8/12.11 69.7 Ivery effective I 108~1 30.31 100.0 I Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 76 Rea &Parker Research December,20I0 356~1 100.01 '--441~1 Ir---I 40011-1 I q16 and q16arec combined I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid rl 29 1 7.31 8.01 8.0 rl 6~1 1.71 9.7 rl 11~1 .3 r 9.9 rl 1~1 .31 10.2 rl 1I .31 .31 10.5 Irl8j2'ol 2.21 12.7 rl 11~1 .31 13.0 rl 2~1 .61 13.5 rl 1r .31 .3/13.8 rl20~1 5.51 19.3 r5 r 4~1 1.1 1 20.4 rl 19~1 5.2/25.7 rl 14 1 3.51 3.91 29.6 130 I 3°~1 8.31 37.8 Irl 1~1 .31 38.1 rl 4~1 1.1 I 39.2 rl 14~1 3.91 43.1 rl 5~1 1.41 44.5 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 77 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 rl 9°~1 24.91 69.3 rl 1~1 .3\69.6 rl 14~1 3.91 73.5 rl 2~1 .6/74.0 rl 17~1 4.71 78.7 rl 1°~1 2.81 81.5 rl 1~'.31 81.8 rl 1~1 .31 82.0 rl 22~1 6.11 88.1 rl 1~1 .31 88.4 rl 14~1 3.91 92.3 rl 1~1 .31 92.5 rl 27~1 7.51 100.0 IIII 100.01 FFIII I rotal ~~I I Combined increase or decrease in percentage of desalinated water after messages about Mexico I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Valid rl 5~1 1.41 1.4r-'1~1 .31 1.7 rl 1~1 .3 )2.0 rl 1~1 .31 2.3 rl 1~1 .31 2.6 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 78 Rea &Parker Research Decembel~2010 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report I .31 .31 2.8 I I ~I .61 3.4 ~I .3 1 3.7 ~I~I 6.0 I .31 .3i 6.3 I ~I .61 6.8 ~I 1.1f 8.0 I ~I 1.71 9.7 ~I .3 1 9.9 ~I 2.81 12.8 3.51 4.0 I 16.8 .31 .31 17.0 1.31 1.4/18.5 4.0 I 4.51 23.0 '---1--.3 .3 23.3 .31 .31 23.6 2~81 3.11 26.7 .31 .31 27.0 .5/.6r--27.6I 51,Oi 58.01 85.5 ~I .3"1 85.8 2.31 2.6,88.4 --.31 .31 88.6 4.81 5.41 94.0 -- 79 Rea &Parker Research December,20/0 I .3/94.3 I .31 94.6 I 1.1 I --95.7 I .3 1 -96.0 I .31 96.3 I .61 96.9 1 .31 97.2 I .91 98.0 I 1.1 1 99.1 I .3/99.4 I .31 99.7 I .31 100.0 100.0 1 .3 rl 1~rl 1f r--'----4~rl 1~rl 1~ 135 I 2~ rl 1~ rl 3~ri 4~ rl 1~ rl 1~rs-,1~ II 352~1 FFI 48~1rotalI40011..---- Combined increase or decrease in percentage of desalinated water from beginning to end I I Frequency I Percent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent Valid rl 2~1 .6/.6 rl 1~1 .31 .9 ri 1~r .3,'1.1 rl 3~1 .9/2.0 rl 2~1 .61 2.6 rl 1~1 .31 2.9 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 80 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 rl 1~1 .31 3.2 rl 1~1 .31 3.4 rl 11~1 3.21 6.6 rl 2~1 .61 7.2 rl 1~1 .31 7.5 rl 3~1 .91 8.3 rl 1~1 .31 8.6 rl 1~1 .31 8.9 rl 6~1 1.71 10.6 rl 6~1 1.7/12.4 rl 14~1 4.01 16.4 rl 1~1 .31 16.7 rl 5~1 1.41 18.1 rl 11~1 3.21 21.3 rl 1~1 .31 21.6 rl 2~1 .61 22.1 rl 1~1 .31 22.4 rl 1~1 .31 22.7 rl 168~'48.3/71.0 rl 14~1 4.01 75.0 rl 27~1 7.81 82.8 rl 2~1 .6/83.3 rl 1~1 .31 83.6 rl 19~1 5.51 89.1 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 81 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 rl 6~1 1.71 90.8 Irl11~1 3.21 94.0 rl 3r--·8i--·9!94.8 rl 4~1 1.11 96.0 rl 1~1 .31 96.3 rl-1~1 .31 96.6 FI 3~1 .9 1 97.4 rl 1~1 .31 97.7 rl 1I .31 .31 98.0 rl 1~1 .31 98.3 r-I 51 1.31 1.41 99.7 r-'1~1 .31 100.0 F'i 348r-m1 100.0 I jMissing F~f 13.0 I I ITotal ~~I I I Trust OWO to provide clean,safe water to district? I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid INa trust at all I 8~1 2.1 I 2.1 INot much trust I 1°~1 2.6 1 4.6 Isome trust I 8°~1 20.6i 25.3 IGOOd amount of trust I 169r-mi43.6!68.8 IGreat deal of trust I 121 I 30.31 31.21 100.0 IrotaI~~I 100.0 I Otay Water District Desalination SunJey Report 82 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 IMiSSing IOK.REF III I-To-ta-I-----=-------r 400 1100.0,----......-------1 Trust in OWO to obtain water at reasonable price 83.2 12.9 Valid ,Freque~;-I Percent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent I'N-o-t-ru-s-ta-t-a-II----rl---~2-31-5:81 6.0 I 6.0 INot much trust I 26 1--6.5 1 6.81 Isometrust I 144~1 37.81'-------5-0-.7 I~G-o-o'd-a-m-o-u-nt-o~f-tru-st-I 124'~~T51 IGreat deal of trust I 64 ~I 16.81r------10-0-.0-1 '-T-ot-a-I------I~I 100.01 FFF III ,--I ITotal Ilf 1-- I Overall satisfaction with OWO as water service provider I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid Ivery poor I 8~1 2.01 2.0 I Ipoor I 9~1 2.31 4.3 IFair I 43~1 10.91 15.3 IGOOd I 121 I 30.31 30.8 1 46.1 Ivery Good I 116r-mi 29.51 75.6 I fce"ent I 96~1 24.4 1 100.0 I~~'100.0 I !MiSSing 10K/REF II 1.81 II Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 83 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 93.0 Desalinated water is a good way to serve customers? IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent i-V-al-id-lrY-es---,348~'1 87.01 87.0 INO I 241~1 6.01 ,-o-on-'t-K-n-ow-l 28 ~l 7.01------1-00-.0-1 IIII 100.01 I Persons per household I fFreqUency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent 'Valid rl 24~1 6'°1 6.0 1 2 I 87~1 21.91 28.0 rl 61 r 15.31 15.41 43.3 I rl 113 1 28.31 28.51 71.8 I ri 67~1 16.9/88.7 rl 31'---7.8!7.81 96.5 rl 10!2.51 2.51 99.0Irl3~1 .81 99.7 rl 11~1 .31 100.0 II 3971 1 100.0I IMiSSing 10K/REF I~I I ITotal III I Own/rent Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 84 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid lawn I 339~1 85.41 85.4 IRenUOther I 58~1 14.61 100.0 IT-397~1 100.0 I IMiSSing IDK/REF I~I I ITotal ~~I I I Highest grade/year ofschool completed Fmquency IPe",enl Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Valid IHi9h school or less ~J1UI 11.61 11.6 At least one year of college,trade or ~~~Ivocationalschool IBachelor'S degree ~~I 41.51 83.0 At least one year ofgradutae work ~~I 17.0 I 100.0 ITotal ~III IMiSSing JDK/REF r~11 ITotal ~~I' I Age I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid 1 18-24 I 9~1 2.31 2.3 1 25-34 I 47~1 12.0 I 14.2 1 35-44 I 100~1 25.41 39.7 1 45-54 I 112~1 28.51 68.2 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 85 Rea &Parker Research December.2010 \55-64 I 71j17Zj 18.11 86.3 165 and over I 54~1 13.71 100.0 ITotal ~~I 100.01 IMiSSing 10 K/REF ~~I I ITotal I~I I I Ethnicity I ·1 Frequency IPercent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid IWhite,not of Hispanic origin I 165~1 44'°1 44.0 IBlack,not of Hispanic origin I 29r-u1 7.71 51.7 IHispanic orLatino I 107~'28.5/80.3 IASian or Pacific Islander I 58~1 15.51 95.7 INative American I 6~1 1.61 97.3 lotherethnic group 1 1°~1 2.7!100.0 rotal ~~I 100.0 I /MiSSing 10K/REF ~~I IrotalI~I I I Annual household income I FrequencyIPercent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Valid lunder $25,000 ~~I 5.21 5.2 $25,000 up to but not including IIII 17.6 $50,000 $50,000 up to but not including I1II 39.7 $75,000 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 86 Rea &ParkerResearch December,2010 $75,000 up to but not including ~I~l 63.9 $100,000 1$100,000 but not including $150,000 ~~I 25.81 89.7 1$150,000 or more ~~I 10.31 100.0 !Total II~I IMiSSing 10K/REF ~~IIrotal~~II I Sex ofrespondent I IFrequency IPercent·Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent validre-I 217~1 54.31 54.3 FI 183~1 45.81 100.0 rl~1 100.0 I I How long customer of OWO I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent Valid 1 1 I 32~1 8.11 8.1 1 2 I 27~1 6.81 14.9 1 3 I 17~1 4.31 19.1 1 4 I 14~1 3.51 22.7 1 5 I 23~1 5.81 28.5 )6 I 24~1 6.0 I 34.5 1 7 I 17~1 4.31 38.8 1 8 1 32~1 8.11 46.9 1 9 I 19~1 4.8/51.6 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 87 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 /10 I 56~1 14.1 I 65.7 1 11 I 17~1 4.31 70.0 1 12 I 24~1 6.01 76.1 1 13 I 1°~1 2.5/78.6 1 14 I 1°~1 2.51 81.1 1 15 1 11~1 2.81 83.9 1 16 I 2~1 .5/84.4 1 17 I 4~1 1.01 85.4 1 18 I 1~1 .31 85.6 1 20 I 16~1 4.01 89.7 1 21 I 2~1 .51 90.2 1 22 I 2~1 .51 90.7 1 23 ,1~1 .31 90.9 1 25 I 1°~1 2.51 93.5 1 26 I 1~1 .31 93.7 1 28 I 1~1 .31 94.0 1 30 ~~I 2.51 96.5 1 31 I 1~1 .3/96.7 1 32 I 2~J .51 97.2 1 33 I 2~1 .51 97.7 1 35 ~~I .81 98.5 1 40 I 3~1 .81 99.2 1 45 I 1~1 .31 99.5 1 53 ~~/.3/99.7 Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 88 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 100.0 Cumulative Percent 1 70 ~~I .31 100.0 rotal ~~I 100.0 I IMissing 10K/REF but at least one year ~~I I ITotal ~ll I Language of interview IIFrequency I Percent IValid Percent I V81idIEnglish!395~1----9-8.-8·rl------9-8-.8-1 FI 5~1 1.311111----10-0-.0-1'-------1 Descriptives I Descriptive Statistics I FFFF Std. Deviation Importance:Desalinated water is an alternative rill,source ofwater that can reduce our dependence on imported water and precipitation Importance:Desalinated water is extensively and rilllsuccessfullyusedinmanypartsoftheworld Importance:Desalinated water is soft water and rilrieliminatestheneedforwatersofteningmeasures Otay Water District Desalination Swvey Report 89 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 28.021 Std.Deviation Importance:The desalination process must not harm .1384 "1 ~1602 [i:6i7theoceanI.I .I Ivalid N(liswise)r~ll~ Descriptive Statistics JN~~FIlr-q--'-1-6-a-nd-q--'-16~a-r-ec-co-m-b-i-ne-d-:---1 3621 01 100 I 45.441~----29-.-6-02-1 Iq7 and q7arec combined FI 0 I 100 I 47.53 1 It-q-g-a-n-d-q-g-ar-e-c-c-om--b-in-e-d----!3641 0 1 100 1 50.81 1;-..----28-.-g5-4-1 /validN(IiSWiSe)Filii Descriptive Statistics Effectiveness:Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply Effectiveness:Desalination eases the potential effects of the water crisis Effectiveness:The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water Effectiveness:Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future Effectiveness:Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water suppliers Ivalid N (Iiswise) Otay Water District Desalination Survey Report 90 Rea &Parker Research December,2010 Effectiveness:Operator of Rosarito Desalination facility is public traded,well-established global company Descriptive Statistics FIMlnlmum IMa~mum IMean De~~iion rE-ff'-e-ct-iv-e-n-e-ss-:-D-e-s-a-lin-a-te-d~w-a'-te-r-w-::iI~I b:-e~c1:-o-se-:I-Y--138.6.~17.71.5.70 [1.B94 monitored by CA Dept.of Public Health I I I r~lrl~ r-clva-li-dN-(-lis-tw-iS-e)--------13S1 r-Ilr- ilElapsed Time ilElapsed Time Descriptive Statistics 00:00:00.00°1 00:00:00.000 1 Std.Deviationr-~I Maximum IMean I ''-p-er-s-o-ns-p-er-h-o-u-s-e-ho-I-d---I 3971 1 '-----9jWi-I-----1-.-S-37-1 Ivalid N (Iistwise)~II II Dtay Water District Desalination Survey Report 91 Rea &Parker Research Decembel;2010 AGENDA ITEM 4 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee MEETING DATE:February 15,2011 DIV.NO.AllVariousPROJECTI SUBPROJECT:Daniel Kay ~<'.... Associate Civil Engineer Ron Ripperger ~ Engineering Manager Rod posad~~ Chief,Engineering Manny Magana~~ Assistant General ~ager,Engineering and Operations Informational Item -Construction Management and Inspection Services Practices SUBJECT: APPROVED BY: (Ass!.8M): APPROVED BY: (Chief) SUBMITTED BY: GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item for the Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee to review and receive a summary of the District's Construction Management and Inspection Services Practices. COMMITTEE ACTION: None. PURPOSE: To update the Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee about the District's Construction Management practices. ANALYSIS: This staff report was prepared in response to a Board member's inquiry about how the District performs Construction Management and Inspection Services (CMIS).Attachment A of the staff report is a binder which details the methods the District uses to implement CMIS.It includes a memorandum,a history of the District's CIP projects since 2007,comparisons to "industry standard,"and other attachments representing the benefits of CMIS.Please see Attachment A for specific information. FISCAL IMPACT: None. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District's Mission statement,"To provide the best quality of water and wastewater service to the customers of the Otay Water District in a professional,effective,and efficient manner,"and the District's Strategic Goal to,"Design and construct new infrastructure -satisfy current and future water needs for Potable,Recycled,and Wastewater Services." LEGAL IMPACT: :::HJ!}i7Fi P:\WORKING\Ripper\Construction Management Manual Update\Construction Management Practices Memo\EO&W Committee Meeting 02-15-11,Staff Report,Construction Management Practices,(DK-RR)odoc DK/RR:jf Attachments:Attachment A -Construction Management &Inspection Services Practices Binder PresentaOtion 2 !SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various ATTACHMENT A Informational Item -Construction Management and .Inspection Services Practices SEE ATTACHED BINDER Quality Assurance Approval Sheet Subject:Informational Item -Construction Management and Inspection Services Practices Project No.:Various Document Description:Staff Report for the February 15,2011 Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee Meeting Author: QA Reviewer: Manager: Daniel Kay Printed Name /Signat Gary Silverman Printed Name Signature Ron Ripperger Printed Name 2/S---/f( Date Date Date The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information;being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors;accurately presenting calculated values and numerical references;and being internally consistent,legible and uniform in its presentation style. Method 1 District Staff District Staff <$2.5 11 61%$729,146Million Method 2 Consultant District Staff <$5.0 3 17%$1,454,114Million Method 3 Consultant Consultant >$5.0 4 22%$14,569,371Million Totals 18 100%$80,550,767* 2/11/2011 1 2/11/2011 2 2/11/2011 3 2/11/2011 4 AGENDA ITEM 5 5TAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Regular Board Daniel Kay ~"- Associate Civil Engineer MEETING DATE:March 2,2011 PROJECT:Various DIV.NO.ALL SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: (Chief) APPROVED BY: (Asst GM) SUBJECT: Ron Ripperger ~ Engineering Manager Rod Posada ~"'" Chief,Engineering Manny Magan~~ Assistant General ~nager,Engineering and Operations Informational Item -Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2011 Capital Improvement Program Report GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District)Board of Directors (Board) accepts the Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2011 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)Report for review and receives a summary via PowerPoint presentation. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Board about the status of all CIP project expenditures and to highlight significant issues,progress,and milestones on major projects. FISCAL IMPACT: ANALYSIS: To keep up with growth and to meet our ratepayers'expectations to adequately deliver safe,reliable,cost-effective,and quality water, each year the District Staff prepares a six-year CIP Plan that identifies the District infrastructure needs.The CIP is comprised of four categories consisting of backbone capital facilities, replacement/renewal projects,developer's reimbursement projects,and capital purchases. The Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2011 update is intended to provide a detailed analysis of progress in completing these projects within the allotted time and budget.Expenditures through the Second Quarter totaled approximately $8.0 million.Approximately 28%of the Fiscal Year 2011 expenditure budget was spent. --=1UcN None. STRATEGIC GOAL: The CIP supports the District's Mission statement,"To provide the best quality of water and wastewater service to the customers of the Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,and efficient manner,"and the District's Strategic Goal,in planning for infrastructure and supply to meet current and future potable water demands. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Ge ager P,\CIP\CIP Quarterly Reports\2011\Q2\Staff Report\BD 03-02-11,StafE Report,Second Quarter FY 2011 CIP Report,(RR-RP).doc RR/RP:jf Attachments:Attachment A -Committee Action Presentation 2 C:II~I lEer Various ATTACHMENT A Informational Item Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2011 Capital Improvement Program Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering,Operations,and Water Resources Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on February 15,2011.The Committee supported Staff's recommendation. NOTE: The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval.This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. Quality Assurance Approval Sheet Subject:Informational Item -Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2011 Capital Improvement Program Report Project No.:Various Document Description:Staff Report for March 2,2011 Board Meeting Author::J-/8-/I( Date Daniel Kay Printed Name QA Reviewer: Manager:s~e~~;------ Ron Ripperger Printed Name Date Date The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information; being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors;accurately presenting calculated values and numerical references;and being internally consistent,legible and uniform in its presentation style. CAPITAL IMPRO,VEMENT PRO,GRAM Seco,nd Quarter Fiscal Year 20,11 1 (thr'ough December 31,2010) Background The approved CIP budget for Fiscal Year 2011 consists of 82 projects that total $,28.5 rnillion.These projects are broken down into four categories: 1.Capital Facilities: 2.Replacement/Renewal: 3.Capital Purchases: 4.Developer Reim,bursement: $16.2 million $10.0 millio'n $2.3 million $0.0 million Overall expenditures through the Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2011 totaled $8.0 millio,n,which is 28%of our fiscal year budget through the second quarter. 2 Fiscal Year 2011 Report (through December 31,2010) %% CIP FY 2011 FY 2011 FY 2011 Total Life-to-Total Life-to- CAT Description Budget Expenditures Budget Date Budget Life-to-Date Date Expenditures BudgetSpentSpent 1 Capital Facilities $16,181,000 $5,004,000 31%$180,969,000 $45,186,000 25% 2 Replacement! Renewal $10,006,000 $2,362,000 24%$44,053,000 $16,822,000 38% 3 Capital Purchases $2,249,000 $656,000 29%$13,450,000 $6,413,000 48% 4 Developer Reimbursement $12,000 $0 0%$7,882,000 $1,000 0% Total: $28,448,000 $8,022,000 28%$246,354,000 $68,422,000 28% 3 Major CIP Projects 4 MAJOR CIP PROJECTS P2451 -Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System P2466 -Regional Training Facility R2094-Potable Irrigation Meterto Recycle Water Conversions P2467 -San Diego Formation Groundwater Feasibility Study P2473 -711-1 Pump Station Improvements P2481 -Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater well P2434 -Rancho Del Rey GroundwaterWell P2399 -PL-30",980 Reservoirs toHunte Parkway ®~• P2488 &P2489 -Helix WD &Otay WD Agency Interconnections ..P2502 &P2503 --803-1 and 850-2 Pump Station Modifications48P2505&P2506 -657-1 &657-2Reservoir Coating •P2511 -North District I South District Interconnection System ..R2048-OtayMesa Distribution Pipelinesand Conversions •R2058 --Airway Rd RecycledWater PipelineeR20n--Alta Rd Recycled Water Pipeline G.-R2087 -Wueste Rd Recycled WaterPipeline G)R2091 -944-1 R RecycledWaterPump Station Upgrade •R2096 -Ralph W.Chapman WaterReclamationFacility - Upgrades and Modificationse52019,52020 &52022 --Sanitary Sewer Replacement (!)P2440 -SR905 Utility Relocations @VP2490&P2492-1296-1&2Reservoircoating @)P2496 -Otay Lakes Road UtilityRelocationseP2009-PL-36"SDCWA OlayFCF No.14 to OWO Regulatory SiteoS2021-Jamacha Rd 8-lnch SanitarySewer Replacement N.T.S. .4t, s 0 PLANNING-3 DESIGN -16 0 CONSTRUCTION - 3•COMPLETED IN USE - 2 GJ District Boundary LEMON GROVE CIP'Prol-ects in Constructionr---------~Il"IJIII........--------------...... 5 CIP Projects in Construction D 129'6-1&2 Re'servoirs Coating Projects Key Component:Interior and exterior coatings on the 1296-1 &.2,Reservoirs. Schedule:A construction contralct was awarded to West Co,ast Industrial Coating,Inc.,o,n Februa,ry 3,20,10.Project is app'foxima,tely 70°10 comlplete.Project completion is anticip,ated for March 201,1. Cost:The combined FY 201,1 project budgets for CIPs P2490 and P2492 are $680,000,of which $466,0'00,or 69°/0 was spent. The life-to-date project budgets are $900,000,of which $6,78,000,or 75,0/0,have been spent. Significant Issues:Contractor's production has been sliower than the sublnitted schedules,.S.taff is monito,ring the contractor's progress to address the productio,n issues. Highlights:None. 6 CIP Projects in,Constructi'on 7 CIP P'rojects in Co,nlstruction D Potable Irrigation .Meters to Recycled Water Conversions Key Component:In,stallationl of a 12-inch recycled pipeline allong O'tay Lakes Rd. and c'onverting existing potable water irrigation systems.to use recycled water. Schedule:Construction started in May 2010.Southland Paving comp,leted the installation'of the 12-inch recycled water'm,ain (approx.4,200 LF).They are currently wo,rking'on punchlist items.Project comp,letion is anticipated for February 2011. COlst:A Reim!bursement Agreement,e,xecuted between the City of Chula Vista (City)a'nd the District dated March 2,2010, required the District to submit a deposit to the City for the estinllated construction costs o,f $1,100,000 (which includes a 10%contingenc.y). The co,mbined FY 2011 project budgets for CIPs R2094 and P249'6 are $695,000',of which $139,000,or 20,%was spent. The life-to-date project budglets are $3,350,000,of which $2,510,000,or 750/0,have been spent. Significant Is,sues:None. Highlights:None. 8 Consultant Contract Status (through December 31,2010) Original Total Revised Approved % % Date of CIP Contract Change Contract PaymentTo Change Project Signed End Date of Consultant No.Project Title Amount Orders Amount Date Orders Complete Contract Contract PLANNING RANCHO DEL REY GROUNDWATER WELL AECOM P2434 DEVELOPMENT $1,561,62500 $-$1,561,625.00 $1,292,224.50 0.0%82.7%1/20/2010 12/31/2010 NORTH-SOUTH SERVICES AREA INTERTIE MWH AMERICAS INC.P2010 STUDY $119,505.0C $11,500.00 $131,005.0C $118,314.41 9;6%90.3%10/22/2009 6/3012011 SALVADOR LOPEZ-CORDOVA P2451 DESALINATION PROJECT $45,000.OC $-$45.000.00 $2,012.90 0.0% 0.0%9/15/2010 8/14/2011 SANITARY SEWER CCTV INSPECTION TRAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS S1201 AND CONDITION ASSESSMENT $560,025.00 $-$560,025.00 $334,095.32 0.0%59.7%1/20/2010 6/30/2013 DESIGN CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY Varies SOLAR POWER FEASIBILITY STUDY $34,400.00 $-$34,400.00 $2,700.00 0.0%7.8%5/18/2010 6/30/2011 CPM PARTNERS Varies AS-NEEDED SCHEDULING SERVICES $175,000.00 $-$175,000.00 $78,472.50 0.0%44.8%5/18/2010 6/30/2012 AS-NEEDED TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DARNELL &ASSOCIATES Varies SERVICES FOR FY2010AND FY2011 $175,000.00 $-$175,000.00 $137,097.50 0.0%78.3%1/20/2010 6/30/2011 ENGINEERING PARTNERS INC,THE Varies ELECTRICAL SERVICES $100,000.00 $-$100,000.00 $85,930.00 0.0%85.9%3/19/2007 6/30/2011 AS-NEEDED ELECTRICAL DESIGN ENGINEERING PARTNERS INC,THE Varies SERVICES $100,000.00 $-$100,000.00 $54,320.00 0.0%54.3%101712009 6/30/2011 HDR Varies TEMPORARY LABOR SERVICES $150,000.00 $35,000.00 $185,000.00 $167,475.00 23.3%90.5%6/30/2010 6/30/2011 P2502, HVAC ENGINEERING INC P2503 HVAC SERVICES FOR 850-2 PS &803-1 PS $19,421.00 $-$19,421.00 $-0.0% 0.0%9/17/2010 12131/2011 LEE &RO INC P2009 DESIGN OF 36-INCH PIPELINE $580,183.0C $61,629.00 $641,812.00 $627,786.00 10.6%97.8%9/11/2008 6/30/2011 AS-NEEDED ENGINEERING DESIGN LEE &RO INC Varies SERVICES $175,000.OC $-$175,000.00 $20,692.50 0.0%11.8%6/30/2010 6/30/2012 NORTH DISTRICTISOUTH DISTRICT LEE &RO INC P2511 INTERCONNECTION $2,769,119.00 $-$2,769,119.00 $22,891.63 0.0%0.8%11/4/2010 12/31/2015 AS-NEEDED GEOTECHNICAL MTGLINC.Varies CONSULTING SERVICES $175,000.00 $-$175,000.00 $21,460.00 0.0%12.3%6/23/2010 6/30/2012 R2096, R2095, MWH AMERICAS INC.S2018 RWCWRF UPGRADE PROJECT $458,813.00 $122,048.00 $580,861.00 $244,456.28 26.6%42.1%10/14/2009 6/3012011 PBS&J Varies HYDRAULIC MODELING SERVICES $45,000.00 $-$45,000.00 $32,298.55 0.0%71.8%11/20/2009 6130/2011 PBS&J P2511 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS $5,000.00 $-$5,000.00 $-0.0%0.0%12/9/2010 6130/2012 9/29/2010 PHOTO GEODETIC CORPORATION P2399 SURVEYING SERVICES $3,425.63 $-$3,425.63 $3,150.00 0.0%92.0%8/24/2010 COMPLETE REPROHAUS Varies AS-NEEDED REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES $20,000.00 $-$20,OOO.OC $7,345.81 0.0%36.7%2/16/2010 12131/2011 SCHIFF &ASSOCIATES Varies PROFESSIONAL CORROSION SERVICES $250,000.00 $36,000.00 $286,000.00 $187,910.37 14.4%65.7%11/20/2009 6130/2011 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL Varies AS-NEEDED GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES $175,000.00 $11,761.37 $186,761.37 $177,823.83 6.7%95.2%101712009 6/30/2011 1218/2010 S.R.BRADLEY &ASSOCIATES,INC.P2434 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES $5,100.00 $5,100.00 $5,100.00 0.0%100.0%10/11/2010 COMPLETE 8/1112010 SUPERIOR TANK SOLUTIONS P2491 803-2 Reservoir Visual Inspection $250.00 $-$250.00 $250.00 0.0%100.0%7/15/2010 COMPLETE 9 Consultant Contract Status (continued) Origmal Total Revised Approved %%Date of CIP Contract Change Contract Payment To Change Project Signed End Date of Consultant No.ProjectTitle Amount Orders Amount Date Orders Complete Contract Contract CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 1485-1 PUMP STATION-TREE 9/8/2010 BRADLEY CONSULTING GROUP P2172 CONSULTING SERVICE $500.00 $-$500.00 $500.00 0.0%100.0°./0 917/2010 COMPLETE 12/31/2010 MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC Varies TEMPORARY LABORSERVICES $150.000.00 $130,000.00 $280,00000 $274,050.00 867%97.9%1/5/2009 COMPLETED 8/25/2010 PROWESTAPPRAISALS P2172 APPRAISAL SERVICES $2,827.50 $-$2,827.50 $2.600.00 0.0%92.0%8/12/2010 COMPLETE RBF CONSULTING P2009 36-INCH PIPELINE $1,088,785.00 $46,995.00 $1,135,780.00 $1,129,658.75 4.3%,99.5%1/2812008 3/112011 R2058,CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT R2077,SERVICES FOR THEOTAY MESA RBF CONSULTING R2087 RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY LINK $708,560.00 $708,560.0C $13,960_00 0.0%2.0%3/24/2010 12/31/2011' S2019,10/612010 RBF CONSULTING S2021 CONSTRUCTION MANGAGEMENT $5,000.00 $-$5,000.00 $5,000.00 0,0%100.0%8/5/2010 COMPLETED AS-NEEDED CONSTRUCTION VALLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTAND INSPECTION MANAGEMENT Varies SERVICES $175,000.00 $175,000.0£$92,670.00 0.0%53.0%3/17/2010 6/30/2012 ENVIRONMENTAL A.D.HINSHAW Varies CONSULTING SERVICES FOR JWA's CEQA $34,625.25 $-$34,625.25 $6,865.83 0.00/0 19.8%3/25/2010 6/30/2012 12/31/2010 BRG CONSULTING INC P2143 1296-3 RESERVOIR ENV SVCS $125,000.00 $-$125,000.00 $124,498.54 0.0°./0 99.6%4/11/2006 COMPLETED FORENSIC ENTOMOLOGY SERVICES P2494 SCIENCEADVISOR REVIEW $4,000.00 $-$4,000.00 $0.00/0 0.0°.10 9/30/2010 6/30/2011 ICF INTERNATIONAL(akaJONES &SAN MIGUEL HABITATMANAGEMENT STOKESASSOCIATES)P1253 AREA $987,807.00 $-$987,807.00 $636,694.98 0.0%64.5%2/3/2009 12/31/2011 R20581 ICF INTERNATIONAL (aka JONES &R20771 OTAY MESA RECYCLED WATER SUPPLY STOKESASSOCIATES)R2087 LINKPIPELINES $213,087.00 $9,115.00 $222,202.00 $222,143.98 4.3%100.0%5/1/2009 6/30/2011 ICF INTERNATIONAL (aka JONES &AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL STOKES ASSOCIATES)Varies CONSULTING SERVICES $375,000.00 $-$375,OOO.OC $36,028.39 00%9.6°.10 9/9/2010 6/30/2013 DR.MARY ANNE HAWKE P2494 SCIENCE ADVISOR REVIEW $4,350.00 $-$4,350.0C $0,0%0.0%9/9/2010 6/30/2011 10/12/2010 PHOTO GEODETIC CORPORATION R2096 AERIAL MAPPING $2,400.00 $-$2,400.00 $2,400.00 0.00/0 100.0%9/15/2010 COMPLETE RAHN CONSERVATION CONSULTING P2494 ADVISOR REVIEW $4,000.00 $-$4,OOO,OC $3,000.00 0.0%75.00/0 9/15/2010 6/30/2011 RECON P1253 PREPARATION OF THE SUBAREA PLAN $270,853.00 $-$270,853.0C $161,861.61 0.0%59.8%3/28/2008 3/28/2011 TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES Varies CONSULTING SERVICES FOR JWA's NCCP $34,625.25 $-$34,625.25 $28,731.52 0.0%83.0°,/0 4/5/2010 6/30/2012 WATER RESOURCES MIDDLE SWEETWATER RIVER BASIN AECOM P2481 GROUNDWATER WELL PILOT PROJECT $1,065,037.00 $-$1,065,037.00 $265,085.15 0.00/0 24.9%5/21/2009 5/31/2011 BI-NATIONAL DESALINATION FEASIBILITY CAMP DRESSER &McKEE INC P2451 STUDY $94,552.00 $18,005.00 $112,557.00 $98,577.34 19.0%87_6%3/1912008 6/30/2011 WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY CITY OF CHULA VISTA R2093 STUDY $150,000.00 $-$150,000.00 $86,900.50 0.0%57.9%9/24/2009 2/28/2011 MICHAELR.WELCH P2481 ENGINEERING PLANNING SVCS,$40,000.00 $-$40,000.00 $19,440.00 0.00/0 486%3/25/2009 6/30/2011 PUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLED WATER PLAN CHECKING, AEGIS ENGINEERING RETROFIT,AND INSPECTION SERVICES MANAGEMENT Varies FOR DEVELOPER PROJECTS $300,000.00 $-$300,000.00 $143,947.09 O~O%48.0%1/20/2010 6/30/2012 RECYCLED WATER PLAN CHECKING, AEGIS ENGINEERING RETROFIT,AND INSPECTION SERVICES MANAGEMENT Varies FOR DEVELOPER PROJECTS $300,000.00 $-$300,000.00 $4,40750 OrO%1.5°.10 11/3/2010 6130/2013 TOTALS:$6,136,009.00 $204,115.00 $6,340.124.00 $3,359,021.18 3.3% 10 Construction Contract Status (through December 31,2010) 0 REVISED T TAL %%EST. CONSTRUCTION CHANGE CONTRACT EARNED OF CHANGE PROJECT COMPo CIP NO.PROJECTTInE CONTRACTOR ORDERS AMOUNT TO DATE ORDERS"COMPLETE DATE Jamacha Rd. P2009/36-lnch Pipeline &CCl Contracting $16,189,243 ($1,781,299)$14,407,944 $14,407,944 -11.00%100%September P2038 12-lnch Pipeline 2010 Replacement S2021 Jamacha Rd.8-lnch A.B.Hashmi $91,320 ($2,226)$89,094 $89,094 -2.44%100%September Sewer Replacement 2010 1296-1 &1296-2 West Coast MarchReservoirCoating&Industrial $690,000 $2,580 $692,580 $454,690 0.37%66%2011Upgrades TOTALS:$16,970,563 ($1,780,945)$15,189,618 $14,951,728 -10.49% 11 Exp,en,d itu res (through December 31,2010) ($000) FISCALYEAR-TO-DATE 12131110 LIFE-TO-DATE Project FY2011 Expense to Comments CIPNo.Description Manaaer Budget Expenses Balance Budget%Budget Balance CAPITALFACILITYPROJECTS Construction is complete;projectclose-out in P2009 PL-36-lnch,SDCWA ata'FCF No.14to R"",ulatorv Site Riocer~er $21'~..!2,543 $1343'116%$21000 $1,517 rocess. P2033 PL -16-lnch.1296Zone.Melodv Road -CamoolPresilia Rioceraer - -0%1.826 1,821 Develooerdriven. P2038 PL -12-lnch,978Zone,Hidden Mesa Road Kav 130 30 100 23%2,378 196 Construction comolete Part ofP20091. P2083 PS -870-2 Pumo Station Reolacement128 000 GPM1 Riooeraer 50 -50 0%12581 12001 Moved to Phase III. P2143 Res-1296-3 Reservoir 2 MG Kav 5 106 fl0l 2~~~~;,,__J'~~~I 59 Construction comlliete. P2172 PS -1485-1 Pump Station Relliacement RipperQer 5,10 (5 26 Finalizino remainin"easements. P2191 Res -850-4 Reservoir2.2 MG Kav 5 27 (22 540%3410 (9)Proiectcomplete. P2267 36-lnet'~u!!!eQ!!!~3'-~}!-AirNacuum Venti!~on-'nl'!"I[~ttons fI1un()_~-I --0%435 201 NIA P2318 PL -20-lnch 657 Zone SummitCross-Tie and 36-lnch Main Connections Cameron 100 2 98 2%600,.,527 Preliminary design complete;begin design. P2357 PS -657-11850-1 Pumo Station Demolition Kennedv 50 7 43 14%300 293 In desian:to be combinedwith P2471. P2370 Res -DorchesterReservoir and Pump Station Demolition Kennedv p7.,-67 0%150.137 In desi'm'to be combined with P2471. Rosarito Desai projectpreculdes the needfor this project hence no expenditures are plannedfor FY ....E2391 PS -Perdue WTP Pump Statio,'.!il,(),Q9.Q.,GPM1 Peaslev 5 21 {161 420%.11900 11,854 2011. P2399 PL -3D-Inch.980 Zone 980 ReservoirstoHunte ParkwaY Silverman 200 '67 133 34%3.600 797 In desion. .....!:?i31 Res -980-4 B.!'.§.ervoir 5 M_G K_~5 -§0%5900 5.900 Moved to Phase III. The Board authorized execution ofa professional services agreement and change ordernumberone Ifor engineering and developmentofthe Rancho del Rey Groundwatermonitoring and production well.Well drilling activities havebeen completed. AECOM has completed all the work and the AECOM contract is essentaillycomplete as well. P2434 Rancho Del Rey Grou.~w"~_""'~I[)~~m.ent Pea~l~..__,_1~Q.99 873 127 87%;..-4?50 2,111 FY-l1 budget revised.Project on hold until fourth P2451 Rosarito Desalination Facility Conveyance and Disinfection SYstem Kennedv 1,000 179 821 18%30000 29.346 C1Uarter FY-11 . This projectbudget has been expended;may be increased to coversome minorfuture expenses. P2466 Reaional Trainin,o Facilltv Cobum-Bovd 24 13 11 54%252 3 This project is jointly funded bySWA and Otay. TheSDCWA awarded a LISAgrantto SWA to fund up to 50%ofthe cost ofthe effort.Monitoring wells in the OtayRiverhave been completed by USGS.Data gatheringon well informationwithin the San Diego Formation continues.OtayRiver participation agreement between SWA and Otay hasbeen approved bythe Board. P2467 San Dieoo Formation GroundwaterFeasibilitv Studv Peaslev 600 -600 0%1.800 1,041 12 Expenditures (Continued) ($000) FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE,12131/10 LIFE-TO,oATE Project FY2011 Expense to Comments CIPNo.Description Manager Budget Expenses Balance Budget%Budaet Balance CAPITALFACILITY PROJECTS P2471 ,850/657PRS at La Presa Pumo Station Silveanan 240 7 233 3%310 255 In desi~n. This project budgetisforwater supplyfeasibility study efforts.MWH completed the preparation a briefstudy including costestimates forsupplyfrom the SWA Perdue WTP and the North District to South District Interconnection. ~2472 WaterSuooly FeasibilityStudies Peaslev 30 30 0%175 149 P2473 P1i_::2.11-1 P"!!'p StationJ--,"Ge.roY~!!!e.nt Kav 200 27 173 14%'500 428 Purchasinq equipment. P2474 Fuel Stora<Je Covers and Containment Kennedv 50 16 34 32%120.83 PDR comolete. .....J:.2_lli_E\LI'111!..$.!i!!!2,!£ig'J::n!!!@!lt Installations.Kennedv 45 10 35 22%55 .~Pro'ect comolete. P2481 MiddleSweetwater River Basin GroundwaterWell Feasibmly Peasley 50 33 17 66%1820 1,414 Groundwater developmentplanning efforts have P2488 Del Rio Road Helix anQ...9-'1!Y.~9.e!190.!1t.![.co!1~~C!ipn Kav 120 11 109 9%150 78 f>'!pject awarded for Construction in Januarv. P2489 Gillisoie Drive Helixand Otav'j\aen<:v Interconnection Kav 135 29 106 21%150 91 Pro'ect awarded for Construction inJanua'V. ~249L So,?lar Po~~r Feasi~lll!Y-§!u.gv Kennedy 150 10 140 7%250 210 Preparing draft RFPforreview. P2502 803-1 Pump Station Modifications Silverman 50 24 26 48%200 '176 PDR updated:HVAC desion in process. P2503 850-2 Pump Station Modifications Silverman ,150 32 118 21%650 618 PDR updated:HVAC desil:n in process. P2510 Operations Yard Improvements Kay 25·-25 0%370 370 PDR complete. P2511 North District-South Districtlntercoonection S stem Silverman 800.-146 654 18%37300 37154 Pro'ectinorelimi.narv desi"n. R2034 RecRes-860-1 Reservoir4 MG Kav 200:-200 0%3.800 3.776 Pro'ecton hold. R2048 RecPL -Otav Mesa Distribution Pioelines and Conversions Ka',250 122 1281 49%2,200 2_006 In desion. 1,000 I Reimbursement Agreementwill consume most of R2058 RecPL -16-lnch.860Zone.Airwav Road --Otav Mesa/Alta Kennedv 128 872 13%3.500 2,431 this budoe!. Reimbursement Agreementwill consume most of R2077 RecPL -24-lnch,860 Zone,Alta Road -Alta Gate/Airway Kennedy 1.750 92 1.658 5%4500 3,699 this budeet. Easement acquisition budgetforthe Cityof Chula Kennedv Vistaand the City of San Diego.Revise budget to _~f.Q§L RecPL.:.24-lnch.927Zone,Wu~e.l39''<:!.:_.olvmpiclOtav WTP 3378 108 3,270 3%7,000 6,175 1$300for FYll. R2088 RecPL -3~-inf~u860 zoned!Cou~1 --Roll Reservoir/860-1 Reservoir Kennedv 240 6 234 3%3500 3,437 Revise Budget to $20Kfor FY-ll. KeePti~9:---IIII'SI3"I Qjl"g {1lJ;OllITGPIVInu<JY~I~" Riooeroer 90%design complete.R2091 Enhancements 1,250 120 1,130 10%3.950 3,582 R2092 Dis -450-1 Reservoir Disinfection Facilitv Kav 2 (16 18 -800%742 3 In warrantv. The City of Chula Vista City counsel and the Otay WD Board of Directors have approved the MBR ,participation agreement to focus on the treatment facility and related requirements.TheCity of ChulaVista awarded aconsulting contractto RMC1'0 accomplish the scope of workwhich iswell underway.A draftreport has been prepared and the City and Otay WD staffs haveprovided RMC R2093 MBR City ofChula Vista Feasibilitv StudY Peasley 120 100 20 83%210 65 with review comments. R2094 Potable Irrioation Meters to Recvcled Water Conversions Charles 500 121 379 24%,3100 1,760 On bUda"!. I Total Capital FacilityProjects Total:16,181 5,004 11,177 180,969 I 135,783 13 Expenditures (Continued) ($000) I ,FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE 12/31/10 L1FE-TO-DATE Project FY2011 Expense to CIPNo.Description Manaller Budget Expenses Balance Budget%Budget Balance Comments REPLACEMENTmENEWALPROJECTS Pending board approval,planning $333,000 ~..l.~~_.APCD Engine Retllacements and Retrofits Rahders 442 1 441 0%,3.213 1.453 urchase in this cateoorv in March or Anri!. P2382 SafelYand Securilv Imorovements Munoz 102 94 8 92%1635 2'41 f!i:'_n to soend the fijil amount. P2416 SR-125 UtilitvRelocations Kennedv 50 -50 0%963 49 Q9B.£OIIecting from SBX. _E'24,!Q....1-90!Ll,It~.i!:iBelocations Silverman 100 42 58 42%1.600 36 95%construction complete. P2453 SR-l1 UtiliiVRelocations -KaY"-50 1 49 2%-155 151 CalTrans driven. P2456 Air and Vacuum Valve Upllrades Acuna 450 286 164 64%2722 384 On track. P2458 AMR Manual Meter Reolacement Keeran 1500 407 1,093 27%10,448 6.024 On track. P2477 Res -624-1 Reservoir CoverReolacement Kennedv 5 1 4 20%450 422 On budoet and on schedule. P2484 Larae WaterMeterReolacement Prooram Keeran 100 107 m 107%._.,._..__~5 307 On track. P2485 SCADACommunication Svstem and Software Reolacement Stalker 350 51 299 15%1325 992 Plan to soend the full amount. P2486 Asset Manaaement Plan Condition Assessment and Data AcQuisition Stevens 600 140 460 23%1.150 775 Plan to soend the full amount. P2490 1296-1 Reservoir Interior/ExteriorCoatino Kav 240 98 142 41%350 192 Proiect underconstruction. P2491 850-3 ReservoirExterior Coatin!!Kav 10 1 9 10%300 298 Proiectto be done in FY-12. P2492 1296-2Reservoir Interior/Exterior CoatinQ K""440 368 72 84%S50 30 Project in construction. P2493 624-2 ReservoirInteriorCoatin!!Kav 5 -5 0%950 949 Project to be done in FY-12. P2494 M.1!!!!J<!'tfu!.ecie~Conservation Plan Coburn-8~170 123 47 72%s30 166 This budaet will be soentthisfiscal vear. f-'p2495 San M~Habil,'ilH"'anagement/Mitioation Area Coburn-Bcr-id 250 104 146 42%1.725 1,343 This budoet will be soentthisfiscal year.f-P'2496 Otav Lakes Road Utilitv Relocations '-Kav'-195 18 177 9%250 133 Proiect underconstruction. P2504 ReoulatOrv Site Access Road and Pipeline Relocation Cameron 200 1 199 1%-~-,..-J!Q.O 599 Devel""erdriven. P2505 657-1 Reservoir Interior/ExteriorCoatino Cameron 325 26 299 8%375 349 Award complete.Construction starts 03 ~2,5..Q.~_~7.:~~e~~~i!J!1~.~or/ExteriorCoatino Cameron 325 22 303 7%375 353 Award comolete Construction starts 03 P2507 East PalomarStreet UtilitYRelocation Cameron 20 7 13 35%500,.493 CalTrans driven.,Selection for CathodicAs-Needed consultant P2508 Pioeline CathodicProtection ReDlacement Prooram Kennedv 50 -50 0%;.150 150 reouired to start. (R.J.Donovan Prison WaterMeterUOMade No funding in this FY,Part ofOps budget.Meter P2509 Ril2e!illler ---0%60 60 will be reolaced nextauarter. The projectschedule has changed so thatnot all 0 ~?.Q!!LJ3'!!-CWRF -Uoorades and Modifications Coburn-Boyd 1200 232 968 19%2,500 2,028 the oroiected budoet will be soentthisfiscal vear. The SVSD expenditures are typically billed by SVSD and paid within the fourth quarterofthe S2012 SVSD Outfall and RSD Reolacement and OM Reimbursement Peaslev 642 1 641 0%.4392 3,798 fiscalyear. S2019 Avocado Boulevard 8-lnch Sewer Main Improvement Cameron 1515 95 1420 6%1730 1491 Deskin comalete:acoLlirina easements 52020 Calavo Drive 8-lnch SewerMain Reolacement Cameron 360 6 354 2%426 378 Desiam comolete;acouirina easements. S2021 Jamacha Road S--Inch Sewer MainJi~~.ffi!l!'t Kav 40 109 69 273';'-160 4 Pro'ect comolete. S2022 Hidden Mesa Drive 8-lnch Sewer Main Rehabilitation Cameron 120 5 115 4%150,132 Desion comolete:acauirin9..E!§l,s,~meflts. S2023 Celavo Drive Sewer Main UtililvRelocation Cameron 50 £4~H'k 65.1 54 County ofSan Dieao driven. .-gi!_q?~_qampoRo~~Sewer Ma!'2.~~acement Cameron 75 2 73 3%---~§Q_~3,248 To be assessed in the SewerMasterPlan. S2025 .WieghorstWay ~ewerMain Retllacement Cafll~r~!O,25 12 13 48%17?163 County Proiect. ~1III Total Replacement/Renewal Proiects Total:10,006 2!~__..7.~.44.0531 21,231 14 Expenditures (Continued) ($000) FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE 12131/10 UFE-l:O·DATE Project FY 2011 Expense to CIPNo.Descrjption Manager Budget Expenses Balance Budget %Budget Balance Comments CAPITALPURCHASE PROJECTS , Currently $252.847 encumbered against account P2282 Vehicle Caoilal Purchases Rahders 540 79 461 15%4.945 2.862 awatting delivery ofvehicles: P2285 Office Ecuiomentand Fumiture Caoilal Purchases Dobrawa --0%481 42 N1A P2286 Field Eauillment Callital Purchases Rahders 201 '-09 92 54%1527 680 'P'lan 100%elCDense in thiscateQOIV. P2443 1'!f2!:!:1!':!]'!."TechnologyMobile Servi~.~Jenkins 250 40 210 16%1552 664 Plan to ""end the full amount bvvearend. P2461 Records Man""ementSystem Uoarade Sleve~s 150 -150 0%406 201 Plan 10 soend the full amount bvvearend. P2469 Inf'!!ID.!'JlQ!LT.'lcD!lg~elwork and HOiLc;tware Jenkins 300 132 168 44%1921 1052 Plan to soend the full amounl bvv""rend. P2470 tel!lLcation SYstems Develoomentand Inlearalion Stevens 408 180 228 44%2218 1252 Plan to soend thefull amount bY year end. P2501 Telecommunications Eauioment UDcrade Jenkins 400 116 284 29%400 284 Plan tosoend the full amount bv year end. Total Capital Purchase Projects Total:2,249 656 1,593 13,450 7,037 DEVELOPERREIMBURSEMENTPROJECTS P2104 PL-12-lnch,711 Zone.La Media Road -Birch/Rock Mountain Charles ---0%8:\3'833 N/A P2107 PL -12-lnch,711 Zone Rock MountainRoad -La Media/SR 125 Charles --.0%722 722 N/A PL -10"to 12"Oversize.1296Zone,PB Road -Rolling Hills Hydro PSIPB P2325 Bndy Charles 1 -1 0%50 50 Awaitina Develooe~s reouestfor reimbu!~1!'!lliL P2402 PL -12-1nch 624Zone.La MediaRoad -Villaae 7/0ta.Vallev Charles --.0%444 444 N1A P240_3 PL ~12-lnch.624 Zone.Herilaoe Road·OlvmoiclOlav Vallev Charles ....-0%925 925 N1A R2028 RecPL -8-lnch,680 Zone Hemaoe Road·SantaVictoria/Otav Vall..,Charles ......0%600 600 N1A R2042 RecPL -8-lnch 927 Zone Rock Mountain Road -SR-125/EastLake Charles --..0%140 140 N1A R2047 RecPL -12-lnch 680 Zone La Media Road -BirchlRock Mountain Charles --..0%450 450 N1A R2082 RecPL -24-lnch 680 Zone.0!i':!Y<ic P..§l!~-Village 2JH"rt!a£!.e Charles 5 -5 0%1747 1.747 Awaitino Develoo~s reouest for reimbursement. -B..4983 RecPL-2D-lnch,68~tZ.2.n!!~taae Road-Villaae 2JOlvmoic Charles 5 -5 0%400 400 Awaitina DeveloDe~s reauest forreimbursement. ~~084 RecPL-2D-lnch.680 Zone,Villalle 2 •HeritaaelLa Media Charles 1 -1 0%971 970 Awaitina Develooe~s reouest forreimbur~..~rn_e.!'.t_ R2085 RecPL -2D-lnch 680Zone.La Media·State/Olvmoic Charles - --0%600 600 N1A Total Developer Reimbursement Prtrecls Total:12 -12 7.882 7~1 I GRANDTOTAL $28,448 $8,022 $20,426 $246,354 $t77,932 15