MPRWA Final Agenda Packet 06-12-14 PDF

Agenda
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Regular Meeting

7:00 PM, Thursday, June 12, 2014
Council Chamber
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, California

ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORTS FROM BOARD DIRECTORS AND STAFF

PUBLIC COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on any
subject which is within the jurisdiction of the MPRWA and which is not on the agenda. Any person
or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the Authority may do so by addressing the
Authority during Public Comments or by addressing a letter of explanation to: MPRWA, Attn:
Monterey City Clerk, 580 Pacific St, Monterey, CA 93940. The appropriate staff person will contact
the sender concerning the details.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. May 8, 2014 Regular Meeting - <name_author>

2. March 13, 2014 Regular Meeting - Milton

AGENDA ITEMS

3. Receive Update on the Pure Water Monterey and Ground Water Replenishment Projects -
Israel

4. Receive Update on the Status of the Peoples Desal and the Pacific Grove Water Recycling
Projects - Kampe

5. Approval of Checks and Projected Year-End Financial Report - Milton

6. Receive Report, Award a Contract for a Value Engineering (VE) Study for the Monterey
Peninsula Water Supply Project to Value Management Strategies, Inc (VMS),
Reimbursable by Cal Am With a Not-To-Exceed Cost of $109,035.70, Approve a
Contingency of $11,000.00, and Authorize the President to Execute The Contract for
Professional Services - Cullem

7. Receive Report on Progress of Securitization Bills in the State Legislature and the Status
of Settling Parties Joint Comments on Ruling Requesting Comments on Surcharge
Options and Proposals - Burnett

Thursday, June 12, 2014
2

8. Receive Report and Discuss Latest California Public Utilities Commission Schedule for the
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project - Burnett

9. Discuss the Marina Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Monterey Peninsula
Water Supply Project Slant Test Well - Crooks

10. Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding The Detailed Critical Path Method (CPM)
Schedule for all Permits and Approvals for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project -
Cullem

ADJOURNMENT

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority is committed to include the disabled in all of
its services, programs and activities. For disabled access, dial 711 to use the California Relay
Service (CRS) to speak to staff at the Monterey City Clerks Office, the Principal Office of the
Authority. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services
24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a
meeting, dial 711 to use CRS to talk to staff at the Monterey City Clerks Office at
(831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a device or for information on an agenda.

Agenda related writings or documents provided to the MPRWA are available for public
inspection during the meeting or may be requested from the Monterey City Clerks Office at 580
Pacific St, Room 6, Monterey, CA 93940. This agenda is posted in compliance with California
Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.

MI NUTES
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)
Regular Meeting
7:00 PM, Thursday, May 8, 2014
COUNCIL CHAMBER
580 PACIFIC STREET
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Directors Present: Edelen Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alt. Director Talmage, Della Sala

Directors Absent: None

Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Clerk

ROLL CALL

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
Alternate Director Talmage was present representing Vice President Burnett.



No reports were made.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

President Della Sala invited public comment for items not on the agenda.
Libby Downey, Monterey City Council Member thanked the Authority for working to
obtain public funding to decrease costs to the ratepayers, spoke to the notion of
hospitality versus residents and thinks the residents will be penalized with the new tier
funding. She expressed concern that the Directors were not representing their full City
Councils, then requested the Directors help with the source water negotiations, which
are holding up progress on water projects.
Nelson Vega spoke against Ms. Downey's comments indicating that the direction is very
clear, to find a source of water to lessen the impact of the water cliff. He spoke in
support of the Directors efforts and actions.
Tom Rowley spoke representing the MPTPA regarding the May 5, 2014 newsletter
outlining their position opposing Measure O and indicated resident are being mislead
and given incomplete information regarding the impacts if it passes.
David Lifland expressed concerned with the proposed plans for the basin including over
drafting, plant sizing, storage capacity and the mixing of the different types of water. He
is concerned that the capacity is not adequate for what is projected to be produced.
George Riley requested that the Authority agendize revisiting the contingency plan due
to resistance for source water agreements. He expressed concern that if the GWR
project is not advanced enough in development it will not assist with a relaxation of the
CDO and requested that the Authority elevate its attention to this issue.

President Della Sala responded to Ms. Downeys comments speaking to the transparency
efforts of the Authority including agenda notifications, televised meetings, City Council updates
MPRWA Minutes Thursday, May 8, 2014

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority
Regular Meeting Minutes - Thursday, May 8, 2014
2
and the fact that all of the Directors will also be impacted by the water supply project no
different than any other ratepayer. He cited a statement taken from the July 5, 2013 CPUC
Decision 13-07-41 that residential users consume 68% of the peninsula water and they pay
70% of the costs and closed by saying that it is critical to stay united on the MPWSP.

CONSENT ITEMS

President Della Sala invited public comment for the consent calendar. George Riley requested
that Agenda Item 1 be pulled for discussion.

On a motion by Director Rubio, seconded by Director Edelen, and carried by the following vote,
the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved the consent items as presented
with the exception of Agenda Item 1.

AYES: 6 DIRECTORS: Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alt. Director
Talmage, Della Sala
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSTAIN: 2 DIRECTORS: Kampe, Agenda Item 2 only
Talmage Agenda Items 2 and 3 only
RECUSED: 0 DIRECTORS: None

1. Minutes from March 13, 2014 Regular Meeting

Mr. Riley questioned a statement recorded on the minutes of March 13, 2014 during Agenda
Item 8 discussing commissioning a study of the implications of a public take over of Cal Am. He
requested clarification if a staff report was submitted to the Authority or to the Mayors
Association and that the TAC discussion regarding the item was not reported to the Directors.

On a motion by Director Edelen seconded by Director Kampe, and carried by the following vote,
the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority continued the minutes from March 13, 2014
for review: Director Talmage Abstained.

AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Edelen Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della Sala
ABSTAIN: 1 DIRECTORS: Talmage

2. Minutes from March 27, 2014 Regular Meeting
Action: Approved

3. Minutes from April 10, 2014 Regular Meeting
Action: Approved

4. Approve and File Checks through May 8, 2014
Action: Approved

5. Adopt Resolution Accepting the Amended Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and Adopting the Fiscal
Year 2014-15 Operating Budget

3
Action: Approved and Passed Resolution 14-03

AGENDA ITEMS

6. Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction on Public Outreach
Action: Report Received and Direction Provided

Public Outreach Consultant Ashley Beleny spoke to public outreach efforts since her contract
was executed including reorganizing the website, conducting outreach at a public event,
creation of presentation materials, coordinating speaking engagements, and participating on
the joint outreach committee. Ms. Beleny made recommendations for continued outreach
opportunities including speaking engagements, newsletters, regularly scheduled media and a
potential public forum to re-align the peninsula following the results of the June 2, 2014
election.
Director Edelen spoke in support of a public forum re-adjoining the community, regardless of
the election outcome. Director Talmage spoke to a presentation made by Mr. Stoldt and the
moving targets. Executive Director Cullem spoke to a previous forum held at the City of
Monterey, and to a City of Seaside presentation regarding all of the four projects and suggested
a similar forum format. He also spoke to questions of pricing, noting it is not appropriate for the
Authority but may be during the forum.

President Della Sala invited public comments on the item.
Tom Rowley spoke to previous speaking engagements regarding water and the water
policies. He indicated that people want the facts but currently the information is
saturated and encouraged continuing outreach after the election has concluded.
Nelson Vega indicated the public outreach is underfunded. He encouraged directing a
water update be made at all Member City Council meetings. He encouraged the
discussion and outreach regarding what is at stake as a result of the CDO.
Libby Downey indicated that defacto replenishment should be explained, along with all
the other projects. The function of all the other projects should be outlined. Ms. Downey
spoke to an analysis of the City of Felton ad finding it inaccurate.

The Directors requested that Ms. Beleny move forward with the possibility of holding a forum in
July with the intent to provide a brief explanation of each project under timeline, as well as the
accomplishments of the Authority since inception.

7. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction on Presentation from the Monterey Peninsula
Water Management District Regarding the Deep Water Desal Project

4

Dave Stoldt, General Manager from the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District spoke
to the item including the purpose and efforts the MPWMD has committed to with the Deep
Water Desal project. Mr. Stoldt outlined the business model and spoke to the differences in the
project from the MPWSP, which include a synergistic relationship between the desalination and
the data center. He noted the project is over two times the size of the MPWSP and the concept
remains intact for a regional solution. He spoke to the timing of the projects and the
environmental report status indicating studies have been completed for entrainment and
impingement for intakes, brine discharge, review of alternative intakes, including open water
intakes. The intake pipeline study is in process and product water pipeline is being examined
for distribution north and south.
Mr. Stoldt spoke to timing expectations indicating that the EIR consultant should be hired by the
State Lands Commission by August and certified around June 2015. Negotiations for the site
land is occurring and on June 16, 2014, all of the experts will gather for a science symposium.

President Della Sala requested clarification on the meaning of a "data center project" to which
Mr. Stoldt explained the economic development aspects and the symbiotic relationship the data
center has with the desal component.
David Armanasco spoke on behalf of the Deep Water Desal project expanding on Mr. Stoldt's
comments explaining DWD believes that the ocean was owned as part of the public trust and
will ultimately give rights to the control of water to the local JPAs. He informed the Board that
the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation coordinated all of the scientific studies, funded by
DWD.
President Della Sala invited public comment on the item.

Nelson Vega questioned if this is a for-profit project, and if so, what is their profit margin
and who will they contract with to run the facility. He requested to see the information in
writing, otherwise he discouraged support.
David Lifland questioned when the Tenera Environmental report will be available citing
concerns expressed within the SPI report indicating the temperature increase in the
data cooling process may promote additional scaling on the RO filters. Mr. Armanasco
indicated that all information will be made public when submitted to the State Lands
Commission. He then responded to Mr. Lifland that there is an MOU for solar panels but
could not confirm if that was still a viable project component.
George Riley requested to agendize revisiting the issue of contingency planning due to
changing conditions and progress made or not made on other projects. He informed the
Board of a concerning meeting with Cal Am, Members of Monterey County and
representatives from the Salinas Valley regarding moving the intake from the proposed
site and expressed concern that the meeting was secret and would result in significant
stranded costs.
Dale Heikhus congratulated the promising concept for a new water source presented by
DWD. Expressed concern regarding the many jurisdictional authorities to contend with
and encouraged the Authority to assist in any way possible.
Ian Crooks from Cal Am spoke to Mr. Rileys comments and acknowledged that there
was a meeting regarding the desal plant and Protrero Road location, because the
Protrero Road site was identified throughout the process as an alternate location and
will be listed in the EIR as such. He denied any conspiracy efforts.

5

Public Comment was closed and Mr. Armanasco responded to Mr. Vega's comments regarding
profit margin indicating the DWD desal component would be turned over and sold to a JPA for
ownership and operations. The other components of the project is where DWD will receive
income and profit: the data center, carbon sequestration plant, and other small components.

Director Kampe spoke to the Authority position to maintain a contingency and has been
supportive of the MPWMD for their contingency planning efforts and is pleased to see the
progress made toward the alternative while the Authority works with Cal Am for the success of
its project. President Della Sala reminded that the Authority requested the CPUC to look at all
projects as equal in the EIR for the MPWSP. Report was received and no action was taken.

8. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Presentation from Monterey
Regional Water Pollution Control Agency Regarding Negotiations for Source and Product Water
for the Ground Water Replenishment Project

Keith Israel, General Manager of Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency presented
regarding the status of the GWR or "Pure Water Monterey" project. He spoke to the
Independent Advisory Panel who provided a review with recommendations and a technical
panel independently appointed to report back to the department of public health. He outlined
the project phasing, the status of the testing and demonstration facility and discussed the
meeting with the related parties for negotiations for source water agreements reporting the
elements of the agreement need to be completed by the end of June before submission of
information to the EIR. He spoke to the regional synergies of the project and that by working
together it benefits all parties. If built, this would be the first time an integrated project would be
done and he is confident that the project could succeed.

President Della Sala questioned the cost of water to the Salinas farmers after processing to
which Mr. Israel responded that he is confident that the end cost will be one that they can
afford. Director Rubio spoke to his involvement in the water negotiations and reported positive
interactions with the growing community and that near future meetings appear to be promising.

President Della Sala invited public comment on the item.
Tom Rowley spoke to previous concerns expressed to timeline slippage and expressed
new concerns regarding the Monterey County Board of Supervisors differing position of
that from the peninsula cities regarding water ownership.
Nelson Vega questioned the proportionate charges for water for the peninsula to that of
the growing community.
David Lifland expressed concern regarding confidential negotiations

Mr. Israel spoke to questions posed and indicated the MRWPCA users cannot subsidize the
Agricultural community and then identified several different potential funding mechanisms
including differing quantity charges, or creating new rate categories for interruptible flows.

6

9. Receive Report, Discuss and Approve Adopting a Resolution Amending the Governance
Committee Agreement to Authorize the Governance Committee and Water Authority to
Advertise and Award The Value Engineering Contract

Legal Counsel Freeman spoke to the item requesting minor changes to the Governance
Committee Agreement which would grant the authority for the facilitation of the Value
Engineering Contract for the MPWSP. He informed the Board it was approved with an action at
the previous meeting and this is to formalize the changes requested.
President Della Sala invited public comment on the item and had no requests to speak.

On a motion by Director Rubio seconded by Director Talmage, and carried by the following
vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved the recommendation to
modify the Governance Committee Agreement as presented to authorize the ability to facilitate
the Value Engineering contract.

AYES: 6 DIRECTORS: Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Alt. Director
Talmage, Della Sala
ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS: None

ADJOURNMENT

Having no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.

ATTEST:

Lesley Milton, Clerk of the Authority Chuck Della Sala, President

MI NUTES
MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY (MPRWA)
Regular Meeting
7:00 PM, Thursday, March 13, 2014
COUNCIL CHAMBER
580 PACIFIC STREET
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Directors Present: Burnett, Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Della Sala, Rubio

Directors Absent: None

Staff Present: Executive Director, Legal Counsel, Authority Clerk

ROLL CALL

The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.



There were no reports from Directors. Executive Director Cullem reported on changes to the
printed packet materials and questioned direction on how to proceed with Cal Ams request to
reduce Surcharge 1 from 15% to 4.5% and extend the period of time it was charged. The
Directors requested he handle it administratively.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

President Della Sala invited public comment for items not on the agenda.
Tom Rowley spoke to the Government Affairs Committee meeting where Nichole
Charles reported regarding SB 936. He requested re-ordering the agenda to take up
Agenda Item 8 first.
Doug Wilhelm questioned the proposed reduced surcharge asking if it would increase
the total amount of money over the course of the loan. Executive Director Cullem
responded that it would not.
George Brehmer advocated strongly for residents to take care of themselves and
encouraged individuals to obtain personal rain water and grey water catchment, and
other self sustaining water supply systems.
Darby Mossworth spoke concerning future legislation that would allow unlimited
amounts of money to be contributed to elections.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

On a motion by Director Pendergrass, seconded by Director Edelen, and carried by the
following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved the minutes for both
January 30, 2014 and February 13, 2014.

AYES: 6 DIRECTORS: Burnett, Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della
Sala
MPRWA Minutes Thursday, March 13, 2014

Regular Meeting Minutes - Thursday, March 13, 2014
2

1. January 30, 2014 Special Meeting
Action: Approved

2. February 13 2014
Action: Approved

AGENDA ITEMS

3. Approve and File Checks for the Period of February 2014.
Action: Approved

Authority Clerk Milton reported regarding checks processed during February 2014. Under public
comment David Lifland requested an update regarding reimbursement from the County of
Monterey and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, both which are still pending.
On a motion by Director Rubio, seconded by Director Kampe, and carried by the following vote,
the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved to file the checks for the month of
February 2014

Sala

4. Authorize Staff to Send Letter Nominating the Salinas and Carmel River Basins Study for
Funding Under the Bureau of Reclamation's FY14 Basin Study Program

Dave Stoldt, General Manager of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District spoke to
the item which would focus on assessing long term climate change on the local water supply
from the Salinas and Carmel river basins. Mr. Stoldt requested a letter of support nominating
this study to the Bureau of Reclamation to accompany the application put forth by MRWPCA
and MRWMD. In closing, he informed the Directors he would not stay for Agenda Item 8 to
maintain the neutrality of the MPWMD. President Della Sala invited public comment on the item
and had no requests to speak.

On a motion by Vice President Burnett, seconded by Director Rubio, and carried by the
following vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority authorized staff to send a
letter nominating the Salinas and Carmel River Basins study for funding under the Bureau of
Reclamations FY 14 Basin Study Program.

Sala

3

5. Adopt Resolution Approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP (Brownstein) as Special
Counsel for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, Authorize the Executive
Director to sign a Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest, and Authorize the President to
execute the agreement for legal services.

Executive Director Cullem spoke to the item regarding extending the legal services contract
through December 31, 2014 and authorize changing the firm from being the Authoritys
Attorney of Record to being Special Legal Council.
President Della Sala invited public comment on the item. Salfwat Malek questioned the total
cost of the contract. Mr. Cullem indicated the budgeted amount is not to exceed $194,000 for
2014.
Mayor Rubio questioned if there was any ability to align the contract with the fiscal year. Mr.
Cullem spoke to the administrative effort required to process, renew and track all contracts at
one time. Director Kampe spoke to the substantial costs for the legal services but defended the
costs by saying that these are substantial projects which require a large level of collaboration,
cooperation and perseverance and that this is a very modest budge considering the total cost of
the project. The Directors spoke in support Mr. McGlothlin's efforts and experience noting that
although expensive, his efforts saved rate payers over 120 million dollars between the
Settlement Agreements and through Governance Committee structure and participation of the
RFQ and RFP process.

On a motion by Director Edelen and seconded by Director Rubio, and carried by the following
vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority approved the staff recommendation and
adopted Resolution 14-02 Approving Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP (Brownstein) as
Special Counsel for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, authorized the
Executive Director to sign a Consent and Waiver of Conflict of Interest, and authorized the
President to execute the agreement for legal services.

Sala

6. Authorize Extension of Contract with the City of Monterey For Executive Director Services

On a motion by Director Rubio and seconded by Director Edelen, and carried by the following
vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority authorized extending the contract with
the City of Monterey for Executive Director services.

Sala
Authority Clerk Milton reported on the item requesting the Authority to authorize extension of
the contract for Executive Director services with the City of Monterey. President Della Sala
recused himself as mayor of the City of Monterey, the contracting agency. Vice President
Burnett invited public comment on the item and had no requests to speak. The Directors spoke
to the outstanding job Mr. Cullem has been doing.

4

7. Adopt Financial Policies and Procedures

On a motion by Director Edelen and seconded by Director Kampe, and carried by the following
vote, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority adopted the presented Financial
Policies and Procedures as amended.

6 5 DIRECTORS: Burnett, Edelen, Kampe, Pendergrass, Rubio, Della
Sala

8. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding Issues, Implications of
Commissioning a Study Regarding a Public Take Over of Cal Am.

Executive Director Cullem began the item by informing the Directors of the discussion which
occurred during the February 3, 2014. Water Authority TAC meeting which discussed the
issues and implications of commissioning a study regarding a public acquisition of Cal Am and
recommended that the Authority first consider if the issue was appropriate for consideration and
authority under the formation agreement, and second, how the action may be interpreted by
state agencies, as well as any impact on future bond funding. Mr. Cullem outlined the following
four options for consideration should the Water Authority decide to consider conducting a study
of an acquisition of Cal-Am:

1. Commission a study of a public takeover of Cal-Am with the intent to provide information
prior to a vote by the public.
2. Commission a study of a public takeover of Cal-Am with the intent to provide a Water
Authority recommendation prior to a vote by the public.
3. Defer consideration of study until some undetermined time after a vote by the public.
4. Determine that commissioning a study of the subject is outside the purpose of the Water
Authority.
President Della Sala invited public comments on the item.
Executive Director Cullem provided the report and recommended adopting a policy that more
clearly outlines the procedures and operations with regard to financial operations for the
Authority. Director Kampe requested adding language to the whistle blower policy to report to
the President and/or Vice President any concerns.

5

Tom Rowley, Nelson Vega, John Narigi and Rick Heuer said the public needs correct
facts regarding the impacts if the ballot measure passes and spoke in support of the
study.
Safwat Malek and Mike Baer spoke in support of publicly owned water utilities in the
county and expressed concern regarding costs and the PUC.
Phil Wellman, Darby Mossworth, a citizen, Sal Cardinale, Melanie Krislock, Charlie
Check, Alan Ebels, Andrew Bell, Doug Whilhelm, John Hall, Dan Turner, George
Brehmer, Jay Rowland and Jessie Williams requested the Directors to support Public
Water Now and spoke against Cal Am.
Dan Presser suggested having a public forum as a way to inform voters of Measure O.
Kevin Tilden from Cal Am spoke to the comments regarding water spikes and requested
anyone who experiences a spike should contact customer service who will help
recognize the leak and fix it. If it is identified and fixed they are not penalized. He
indicated that all political advertisements paid for by cal am are clearly labeled and most
are not done at rate payer or customer expense. He urged an impartial, factual analysis
and spoke in support of the study.
George Riley expressed disappointment regarding the TAC discussion of this item and
did not think that the staff report was objective or includes all the information available.
He spoke in support of Public Water Now and publicly owned water.
David Lifland Spoke in support of public water but indicated that the community should
focus their efforts on obtaining a water source first.
Ron Cohen Managing Director of Public Water Now spoke against the study indicating
the amount of money projected would only politicize the issue but not analyze it.
Public Comment was closed.

Director Edelen spoke to the Cease and Desist Order imposed and the requirement to find a
new water source and spoke to the challenges that the desal project is up against. He spoke in
support of the study, as an independent analysis from to provide factual information back to the
Board and the public.
Director Rubio spoke to the purpose of the Authority and to the need for non-biased, factual
information to help the voters understand the impacts of the Measure.

Director Burnett spoke to the TAC discussion on the item reiterating it was a regular, publicly
noticed meeting with an agenda distributed prior to the meeting and there was minimal public
participation. He spoke against comments that there was not an opportunities for proper or
equal debate. He spoke to the community debating water for generations and the Authority is
moving toward a decision. The TAC recommendation was for the Board to conduct an analysis
which focuses on the purpose of the Authority as written in the mission statement and listed the
reasons that this project falls within the scope of the authority.

6

Director Kampe questioned the election dates and the ability to complete the project prior to the
election and then spoke to public sentiment of priorities presented 1.5 years ago within his
jurisdiction with the priority being sufficient water supply. He spoke in support of low cost water,
but noted it was more important is having sufficient water first. He lastly indicated that no matter
how objective the report is, it will always be viewed as partisan and also did not think that it
would be a wise use of money for timing purposes.
Director Pendergrass spoke against a study that the results will be taken as the Authority
position and will perpetuate skepticism. He spoke to the history of the failed desal project
which caused the formation of this group to provide governance of the public site. He reminded
the public of the concession by Cal Am to allow public oversight.
Vice President Burnett indicated we are operating in the realities of a water-constrained
environment faced with a regulatory guideline in the way the CDO was intended. This is not a
question of if we like or don't like Cal Am, it is about what will deliver a water supply solution to
have sufficient water, cost effectively with appropriate governance. He expressed fear that the
single greatest risk is losing the consensus that the community has built in the last two years.
This issue has the potential to be divisive enough to leave us in a position not to be able to
petition for a relaxation of the CDO because no project will be complete by January 1, 2016 and
the ramifications are severe because there will be no water supply, regardless of ownership.
Vice President Burnett then outlined the accomplishments of the Authority over the last two
years of its existence including the tenants of the Authority Governance committee and the
benefits it provides, the profit cuts achieved through the public financing work saving the rate
payers over 20 million dollars and then he spoke to the hurdles yet to come.
The Directors discussed their authority and weather the public would be better served by the
Authority taking a position or if the public would be better served by laying out impartial, factual
information. The Directors spoke against the study due to timing, unknown true cost charged
back to the member jurisdictions and many will not change their minds based on the report and
suggested taking a position as peninsula mayors.

On Motion by Director Rubio and seconded by Director Pendergrass and passed by the
following vote the Authority directed staff to write up and bring back for approval a document
which outlines the Authority position opposing ballot Measure O, described this evening, and
verify the legal ability to take such a position.
Sala

President Della Sala adjourned the meeting to recess at 10:09 p.m.

9. Receive Report, Discuss and Provide Recommendation on the Status of Monterey Peninsula
Water Supply Project

7

The meeting reconvened at 10:14 p.m. Executive Director Cullem provided an update on the
status of the borehole construction project noting the second bore hole drilling was about to
begin and the results of the water analysis will be released once certified. He then spoke to the
power purchase agreement status and indicated the report regarding the capital costs of the
engineering solution will be published by the end of march. He further reported on the slippage
being reflected in the CPUC schedule reflected as a total 6-month delay being imposed by the
CPUC.
The Directors discussed the timeline and indicated that the City of Marinas ultimate approval
sped up the process by months and should be recognized and that the schedule as presented
is doable unless something else delays the project. President Della Sala invited public
comment on the item.
Tom Rowley expressed concern regarding lack of data in the draft EIR from the test
slant wells indicating since it is new technology it will be challenging and will invite
criticism. Suggested having the TAC review.
David Lifland requested getting Point Blue to sign off on a well, requested an update on
the remaining reports due to the City of Marina and asked if the Authority should or
could intervene.

Ian Crooks, Engineering Manager for Cal Am spoke to the issue of getting viable slant well
technology and reported that nearly all reports due to the City of Marina have been completed
and the consultant will have a draft MDNA ready in April for public review. Chair Burnett
indicated that if there is any desire by the Board for additional review or analysis of the Draft
EIR, or the issue of brine disposal it should be agendized in the near future.

ADJOURNMENT

Meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m.

ATTEST:

Lesley Milton, Authority Clerk Chuck Dells Sala, President

Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 3.

06/12
FROM: Executive Director Cullem

SUBJECT: Receive Update on the Pure Water Monterey and Ground Water Replenishment
Projects - Israel

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Water Authority receive an update from Keith Israel, General
Manager of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency on the status of
negotiations for source and product water, and on the prospects of PWM/GWR
remaining competitive as part of the MPRWA portfolio of water supply projects.

DISCUSSION:

The Pollution Control Agency has conducted a series of critical negotiating sessions
with the Salinas Valley agricultural interests in an effort to work out a compromise to
allow PWM/GWR to remain a viable water supply option for the Peninsula.

As noted in item 8 of the Authority agenda, the schedule for meeting CPUC
requirements to include GWR is getting very tight. Critical decision points are
approaching and one of them concerns GWR.

Keith Israel will provide additional details verbally at the Water Authority meeting.

Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 4.

06/12

SUBJECT: Receive Update on the Status of the Peoples Desal and the Pacific Grove Water
Recycling Projects - Kampe

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Water Authority receive an update from Director Kampe
and/or staff on the status of Pacific Grove participation with the Peoples Desal project,
and the status of the Small Pacific Grove Water Recycling projects.

DISCUSSION:

On June 8, 2014 Pacific Grove posted a notice of a public hearing concerning the
certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for its Storm Water
Management Project.

Pacific Grove has been developing a storm water management project that can reuse
and recycle water for landscaping purposes, freeing up potable water as part of the
Small Pacific Grove Water Projects component of the Water Authority portfolio of
water projects.

Pacific Grove had also had involvement with the Peoples Desal project as its public
partner. The City has been requested to update the Authority on the status of that
arrangement.

FROM: Authority Clerk Milton

SUBJECT: Approve and File Checks through June 12, 2014 and Projected Year End Financial
Report

RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the MPRWA approve and file the accounts payable payments made during
the period of April 10 through June 12, 2014. Total Accounts Payable for the above referenced period
is $27,891.77. It is recommended that the Authority approve the below checks and receive the report
regarding year-end projected expenditures and balances.
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting on September 12, 2013, the Authority Board approved a staff recommendation to
provide the Directors a listing of general checks issued since the last report so that it can inspect and
confirm these checks. Each invoiced expense has been reviewed and approved by the Executive
Director and Finance personnel prior to payment to insure that it conforms to the approved budget.
The following checks are hereby submitted to the Authority for inspection and confirmation.
$ 450.00 to Access Monterey Peninsula for Video Production Services
$ 900.00 to Environmental Relations for Public Outreach Services
$ 6,963.91 to Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber and Schreck for Legal Services
$19,577.86 to City of Monterey for Reimbursement of Executive Director Services.

FISCAL IMPACT
The listed checks have been budgeted and paid from the various funds, as appropriate and the
attached Budget to Actual report. All of the above expenses are within the contracted not to exceed
amounts outlined in the agreements.
There are still outstanding invoices from the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District and the
County of Monterey for their fair share of the Separation Processes Inc. Services. The MPWMD has
approved the reimbursement request and the invoice has been submitted for processing. It is
anticipated to be received prior to the close of the Fiscal Year.
The County of Monterey payment was received for the fair share contribution of $83,000 for Fiscal
Year 2012-2013. A fair-share contribution request for the Fiscal Year 2013-2014 and for Fiscal Year
2014-2015 have been made and staff attended the Budget Committee meeting on June 10, 2014 to
answer questions about the current and next fiscal year fair-share contribution requests.
The bank balance as of June 5
th
, 2014 is sufficient cover the above checks and the remaining fiscal
years encumbrances therefore, staff is recommending approval of the above checks.

For the remainder of the fiscal year, expenses are not expected to exceed the budgeted amount for
any budget line item or the current bank account balance. Any remaining funding will be rolled over
into the next fiscal year and may work to offset future member funding requests.

ATTACHMENTS:
Budget to Actual Report as of 6/5/2014
2:30 PM
06/05/14
Accrual Basis
Profit & Loss Budget vs. Actual
July 1, 2013 through June 5, 2014
Budget Jul 1, '13 - Jun 5, 14
Ordinary Income/Expense
Income
47200 Program Income
47230 Membership Dues 424,563.00 424,562.00
47240 Program Service Fees 0.00 0.25
47250 Reimbursement SPI Contract 18,562.00 0.00
47260 Reimburesment VE Contract 200,000.00 0.00
47200 Program Income - Other 0.00 0.00
Total 47200 Program Income 643,125.00 424,562.25
49900 Uncategorized Income 0.00 0.00
Total Income 643,125.00 424,562.25
Expense
60900 Administration and Clerical
60901 Clerk of the Board 35,000.00 35,000.00
60902 Executive Director 90,680.00 34,196.06
60903 Principal Offc of the Authority 0.00 0.00
60904 Financial Services 0.00 0.00
60905 Misc Admin Expenses 0.00 0.00
60900 Administration and Clerical - Other 0.00 0.00
Total 60900 Administration and Clerical 125,680.00 69,196.06
62100 Legal Fees
62110 Board Counsel 59,000.00 27,000.00
62140 Special Counsel 186,000.00 129,723.09
62100 Legal Fees - Other 0.00 0.00
Total 62100 Legal Fees 245,000.00 156,723.09
62800 Contract Services
60801 Public Outreach 15,000.00 7,559.19
60806 Contract VE 200,000.00 0.00
62802 Audit Services 6,700.00 6,700.00
62803 Televised Meeting 10,000.00 4,237.50
62804 Contract Services & Studies 3,000.00 0.00
62805 Contract SPI 35,000.00 27,843.43
62800 Contract Services - Other 0.00 0.00
Total 62800 Contract Services 269,700.00 46,340.12
65000 Insurance 7,000.00 6,701.88
65100 Travel Expenses 1,000.00 828.74
66000 Payroll Expenses 0.00 0.00
68300 Contingency 2,000.00 734.78
Total Expense 650,380.00 280,524.67
Net Ordinary Income -7,255.00 144,037.58
Other Income/Expense
Other Expense
Page 1 of 2
2:30 PM
06/05/14
Accrual Basis
Profit & Loss Budget vs. Actual
July 1, 2013 through June 5, 2014
Budget Jul 1, '13 - Jun 5, 14
80000 Ask My Accountant 0.00 0.00
Total Other Expense 0.00 0.00
Net Other Income 0.00 0.00
Net Income -7,255.00 144,037.58
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 6.

06/12

SUBJECT: Receive Report, Award a Contract for a Value Engineering (VE) Study for the
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project to Value Management Strategies, Inc
(VMS), Reimbursable by Cal Am With a Not-To-Exceed Cost of $115,000 and
Authorize the President to Execute The Contract for Professional Services -
Cullem

RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Water Authority award a contract to VMS for a VE Study of the
MPWSP as approved by the Governance (GC) Committee on May 23, 2014, at a price not-to-
exceed $109,035.70, approve a contingency of $11,000.00, authorize the Executive Director to
administer the contract and to approve changes up to a total of the contingency, and authorize
the Authority President to execute the contract.

DISCUSSION:
Section V., Category A.2 of the Governance Committee Agreement specifies that the
Governance Committee (GC) shall make a recommendation to California American Water (Cal-
Am) on selection of professional engineer to perform a value engineering (VE) study for the
Desalination Project at the 30% design level. At its meeting of March 31, 2014, GC voted to
have a public agency award and administer the contract as well as make the consultant
selection.
Since the GC has no staff to award or administer contracts, an amendment to Section V. was
approved by the Water Authority on May 8, 2014 to allow the Authority to do so on behalf of the
GC. Following a review by the GC and the TAC, a RFP for a VE Study was advertised on April
17 and two (2) proposals were received on May 8.
A selection committee reviewed the proposals and recommended a preferred firm to the GC. On
May 23 the GC accepted the committee recommendation and approved the selection of Value
Management Strategies (VMS) for a fee not-to-exceed $124,000.00, the price proposed by
VMS. The GC also authorized the MPRWA Executive Director to meet with VMS to negotiate
changes in the scope of work in an effort to reduce the costs without compromising the
effectiveness of the VE Study.
Following negotiations between the staff of VMS, Ian Crooks of Cal-Am, and Jim Cullem of the
MPRWA, minor changes were made to the scope of work, primarily in reduced hours for the
ENVISION evaluator, and the substitution of equally qualified, but less costly, VMS staff to

conduct the VE Study. These changes resulted in savings of approximately $12,000.00.
Adjustments to administrative costs, including the elimination of printed draft & final reports,
saved an additional $3000.00.
The original VMS Proposal and Cost Proposal are at Exhibit A. A letter from VMS describing the
negotiated Scope and Fee Modifications is at Exhibit B. The modifications have been
incorporated into the contract for services, at a revised cost of not-to-exceed $109,035.70, is at
Exhibit C.
Although additional contract modifications are not anticipated, it is advisable to provide for a
contingency of 10%. Accordingly, the Executive Director requests approval of a contingency of
$11,000.00 and authorization to approve contract changes up to a total of that amount.
It is also requested that the Water Authority authorize the President to execute the contract on
its behalf.

BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS:
Since the Water Authority FY 2013-2014 budget has already been increased by $200,000.00 to
pay for the VE Study, the recommended expenditures are well within budgeted amounts. In
addition, the total of the negotiated contract plus the contingency is less than the $124,000.00
approved by the Governance Committee.
Actual final costs will be paid by Cal-Am per the Governance Agreement, and per an agreement
to deposit funds into a reimbursement account in advance of payment of consultant invoices.

EXHIBITS:
A. Resolution
B. VMS Proposal and Cost Proposal
C. Scope and Fee Modifications
D. Contract for VE Study
E. Letter from Cal Am Regarding Escrow Account

MPRWA RESOLUTION NO. 2014-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
AWARDING A CONTRACT TO VALUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. (VMS) FOR A
VALUE ENGINEERING (VE) STUDY FOR THE MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY
PROJECT

WHEREAS, the Governance Committee requested the Monterey Peninsula Regional
Water Authority (MPRWA) to advertise for, to interview, and to recommend selection of, a firm
for a Value Engineering (VE) Study of the California American Co. (Cal Am) Monterey Peninsula
Water Supply Project (MPWSP) desalination facility design currently at 30% completion by
Camp, Dresser, McKee (CDM), and;

WHEREAS, following review and recommendation by a selection committee, the
Governance Committee selected the firm of Value Management Services, Inc.(VMS) to conduct
the VE Study at a price not-to-exceed $124,000.00, and;

WHEREAS, the Governance Committee further authorized the MPRWA Executive
Director to engage in negotiations with VMS with the goal of modifying the proposal in ways that
would not significantly compromise the study but that might result in cost savings;

WHEREAS, the Executive Director and VMS, in coordination with representatives of Cal
Am, negotiated a reduction in the cost of the VE Study to a not-to-exceed price of $109,035.70,
and;

WHEREAS, the Executive Director recommends a project contingency of $11,000.00
and requests authority to administer the contract and authority to approve any necessary
contract modifications up to the total of the contingency, and;

WHEREAS, all costs of the VE contract are to be reimbursed by Cal Am in advance of
Water Authority payment to VMS and the price for the VE study is within the currently approved
budget of the Water Authority for FY 2013-2014,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the President of MPRWA is hereby
authorized to execute a contract with VMS for a Value Engineering Study of the Cal Am
MPWSP Desal facility design at a price not-to-exceed $109,035.70, and;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the MPRWA does hereby approve a project
contingency of $11,000, authorizes the Executive Director to administer the contract and to
approve contract modifications up to a total of the contingency, and authorizes the Director to
insure full and timely reimbursement from Cal Am.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL WATER
AUTHORITY this 12
th
day of June 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: 0 DIRECTORS:
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS:
ABSTAIN: 0 DIRECTORS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Chuck Della Sala, President

Clerk to the Authority

PROPOSALFORSERVICES:ValueEngineering
MontereyPeninsulaWaterSupply
ProjectDesalinationInfrastructure
May2014
Preparedby
ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.
Date: May8,2014
MontereyPeninsulaRegionalWaterAuthority(MPRWA)
Attn:JamesM.Cullem,ExecutiveDirector
735PacificStreet
Monterey,CA93940
Subject:ValueEngineeringStudyProposalfor
MontereyPeninsulaWaterSupplyProjectDesalinationInfrastructure
ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.ispleasedtosubmitthisproposaltoconduct
a5dayValueEngineering(VE)studyfortheMontereyPeninsulaWaterSupply
Project(MPWSP)DesalinationInfrastructure.PertheRequestforProposal
scopeofserviceswereceivedonApril17,2014,thefollowinginformationis
respectfullyenclosedintheattacheddocument:
Understandingofthescopeofwork,withproposeddeliveryschedule
QualificationsandexperienceofproposedVEfacilitatorandteam
Briefbiographiesoftheproposedpersonnel
Alumpsumfeeproposalissubmittedunderseparatecoverfromthis
technicalproposal
WeproposeMarkWatson,PE,CVSLife,PMPtofacilitatetheVEworkshopanda
highlyexperiencedteamofsubjectmatterexpertsfromHDRtoperformthis
study.Weareconfidentthattheproposedteamwillprovidethehighestlevelof
serviceduringthisVEstudytoensuretheobjectivesareachieved,resultingin
optimalprojectfunctionalityandperformance.
IamtheVMSofficerauthorizedtonegotiatethiscontractonbehalfofVMS,Inc.
Thankyouforyourconsiderationofourproposal.Welookforwardtoworking
withyou.
Sincerely,
VALUEMANAGEMENTSTRATEGIES,INC.
RobertBStewart,CVSLife,FSAVE,PMP,PMIRMP
President
ValueLeadership
CORPORATEOFFICE:
900CanterburyPlace
Suite330
Escondido,CA92025
T:7607415518
F:7607415617
Portland,OR
T:5039579642
GrandJunction,CO
T:9702425531
Bothell,WA
T:2067063055
Merriam,KS
T:8162060067
Sacramento,CA
T:9162249812
Chicago,IL
T:7027556876
LasVegas,NV
T:7203084205
Proposal to Provide Value Engineering Services Value Management Strategies, Inc.
ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.
7607415518www.vmsinc.com
TableofContents
1. IntroductionandFirmOverview.........................................................................................1
1.1 Introduction
1.2 ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.FirmInformation
2. UnderstandingofScopeofWork........................................................................................2
3. ProposedMethodologyandDeliverySchedule..................................................................2
3.1 VEStudyWorkPlan
3.2 VEWorkshopMethodology
3.3 VEStudyAreasofFocus
3.4 DeliverySchedule
4. QualificationsandExperience.............................................................................................7
4.1 TeamQualifications
4.2 RelevantProjectExamples/Experience
5. BiographiesofKeyPersonnel............................................................................................10
5.1 VETeamLeader:ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.
5.2 VETeamMembers:HDREngineering,Inc.
6. References.........................................................................................................................12
6.1ProjectReferencesandReviews
6.2Firm/TeamLeaderReferences
7. OtherConsiderations.........................................................................................................13
7.1 QualityAssurance
7.2 CostControl

MontereyPeninsulaWaterSupplyProjectDesalinationInfrastructure 1
1.0 INTRODUCTIONANDFIRMOVERVIEW
1.1 Introduction
ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.(VMS)ispleasedtosubmitthisproposalforthefacilitationofa5day
ValueEngineering(VE)workshopontheMontereyPeninsulaWaterSupplyProjectDesalination
InfrastructurefortheCaliforniaAmericanWaterCompany(CAW)andtheMontereyPeninsulaRegional
WaterAuthority(MPRWA).
ForthiscontractwehaveteamedwithHDREngineering,Inc.toprovidethetechnicaldepthnecessaryto
successfullycompletetherequestedVEeffort.TheindividualsselectedforthisVEstudyincludesome
ofthemostexperienceddesignandconstructionpersonnelavailableintheindustrytoday.Inaddition,
ourteamhasexperienceworkingwithandforMPRWAonValueEngineering/ConstructabilityReview
workshops,ProjectCostandScheduleEstimatingassignments,and/orProjectDesign.
WhileVMSunderstandsthepotentialbenefitofbringingtogetherdiverseexperienceandperspectives,
thesynergyaffordedbybuildingateamofHDRsubjectmatterexpertsfaroutweighsanybenefitsof
buildingateamfromdifferentfirms.AmajorchallengethatoftenfacesVEteamsnotaccustomedto
workingtogetheristhetimeittakesduringthestudytobuildfamiliarity,strongcommunicationanda
goodworkingrelationshipamongallteammembers.Thisissueisentirelyeliminated,fortheproposed
teamoftechnicalexpertsfromHDRisfamiliarnotonlywiththistypeofworkingeneralandMPRWA
projectsspecifically,butalsowithmunicipalagenciesinthestateofCalifornia,andworkingtogetheras
ateam.AlloftheirenergyandeffortwillbefocuseddirectlyonthegoalsandobjectivesoftheVEeffort
ratherthananyteambuildingtypicallyneededtogetuptospeed.VMShasobservedthatthemost
successfulVEstudiesandgreatestresultsaregenerallyachievedbyteamsofhighlyexperiencedsubject
matterexpertswhohaveworkedtogetherbefore,andenjoydoingso.Itisforthesereasonswe
selectedtheHDRteam,andlookforwardtosharingtheirexperienceandstrongworkingrelationship
withyou.
Specialattentionwasgiventoensuretheselectedteammembershaveexperiencewiththistypeof
project,withparticularemphasisondesignandconstructionexpertiseinwatertreatmentfacilitiesand
seawaterdesalination,inclusiveofpriorexperienceconductingsimilarvalueengineeringreviews.We
believeourteamisespeciallyqualifiedtoprovidethetypeofvalueoptimizationneededtomakethisa
successfulworkshopintermsofmeetingthestatedobjectivesofoptimizingprojectperformancewhile
balancingcost,andschedule;improvingprojectvalue;reviewthe30%designforpotentialissuesrelated
toconstructability,durability,adaptability,operability,safetyandmaintainability;identifyingsolutions
thatenhancetheprojectssustainabilityprofile,andreducingrisk.Additionalobjectivesidentified
duringtheprestudyphaseoftheworkshopwillbeincorporatedintotheprocesstoprovidethemost
comprehensivevalueengineeringeffortpossible.
1.2 ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.FirmInformation
VMSwasfoundedin1990,andisacertifiedsmallbusinessbasedinSanDiegoCounty,California.VMSis
structuredtoaddressthespecificandlocalizedneedsofourclients,andtomanage,plan,coordinate,
conductanddocumentcomprehensivevaluebasedservices.Wespecializeintheapplicationand
facilitationofValueAnalysisandValueEngineering,ConstructabilityReviews,RiskAssessmentand
Management,QuantitativeModelingandAnalysis,andTraininginordertoassistclientsintheirgoalsof
successfullydeliveringtheirprojectsandprograms.VMSteamleadershavefacilitatedover3,000value
focusedstudiesandreceiveexcellentfeedback,resultinginmanylongstandingclientrelationships.

Althoughasmallbusiness,VMSisthelargestandmostexperiencedVEfirminthecountrywith15
employees,9ofwhomareCertifiedValueSpecialists.Todaywefacilitateover200valuefocused
workshopseveryyearfororganizationsaroundtheworldonawiderangeofprojects.
2.0 UNDERSTANDINGOFSCOPEOFWORK
VMSteamleadersapplytheirfocusandeffortonthefacilitationofstudiesusingthesameVEprocessoutlined
inMPRWAsRFPscopeofservices.TheVEJobPlandefinedbySAVEInternationalandthespecifictoolsand
techniquesimplementedbyVMSrepresentatestedandprovenmethodologythatwillleadthestakeholders
andprojectteamtowardthestatedobjectivesinanefficient,professionalandenjoyablemanner.
Accesstothefollowingdocuments(listedintheRFP),willproveinvaluabletotheVEteamseffortandwill
supportthestudysrelevanceandultimatesuccess:
Preliminarysiteplans
Floorplans
Elevations
Geotechnicalreport
Schematicsfortheprocess,treatmentresidualshandlingandchemicalsystems
Preliminarycostestimate
Energyconsumptionmodel
Withsubmissionofthisproposal,VMSacknowledgesitsunderstandingoftheobjectives,expectationsand
timelinesstatedfortherequested40hourVEeffort.VMStakesprideinworkingwitheachofourclientsto
providethehighestqualityofworkinaflexibleandefficientmannertomeettheneedsofeachproject.The
requestedstudydatesofJune2327,2014areeasilyaccommodatedbytheproposedCVSfacilitatorandVE
teammembers,asisthetimelinesetforthforthedeliverablesubmittalsincludingthepreliminaryandfinalVE
reports.
3.0 PROPOSEDMETHODOLOGYANDDELIVERYSCHEDULE
3.1 VEStudyWorkPlan
Baseduponourextensiveexperienceconductingsimilardesignandtechnicalreviewservices,VMS
believesthatthemosteffectivewaytoorganizeandconductthisVEstudywillbetofollowtheValue
MethodologyJobPlan.UsingthecoreprinciplesoftheValueMethodology,theprocesswouldconsistof
thefollowingelements:
Amultidisciplinaryteamofengineers,sustainabilityexperts,stakeholdersandowner
representativesadministeredbyaCertifiedValueSpecialist(CVS).
Athoroughpresentationbyprojectmanagementandthedesignteamoutliningspecificissues
andconcernsrelatingtotheprojectsdesignandconstruction.
Asystematicreviewoftheprojects30%plans,costestimate,andenergyconsumptionmodels
bytheVEteamutilizingasystematicanalysisprocessandasystemofchecklistsandformsto
documentrecommendations.
AformalpresentationoftheVEteamsrecommendationstoprojectmanagementandthe
designteam,andadiscussionofthesefindings.
PreliminaryandFinalReportsdocumentingtheresultsofthestudyincludingtheVEteams
recommendations,theanalysesperformedduringtheworkshop,supportingdocumentation.

AsnotedintheRFPScopeofWork,theVEeffortwillconsistofa5dayworkshop.Thefirstdaywill
includeaworkshopkickoffmeetingtoincludetheVEteammembers,CAWprojectrepresentativesand
designteammembersatorneartheprojectsite,andasitevisit.Thestudywillcontinuewithadditional
informationgathering,functionanalysis,creativity,evaluationanddevelopmentofVEalternatives,prior
toaformaloutbriefheldthefinaldayoftheworkshop.TheoutbriefpresentationwillprovideMPRWA
andtheirdesignconsultantsanoverviewoftheVEteamsfindingsandprovideanarenafordiscussion
toclarifyanyoftheconceptspriortopublishingthePreliminaryVEreport.
Animplementationmeetingwillbescheduledat/aftertheendoftheVEworkshoptosupportdecision
makingandimplementationactivities,aswellastodocumentanyadditionalcommentsorresultsofthe
study.FeedbackanddecisionsfromthisimplementationmeetingwillbeincorporatedintotheFinal
ValueEngineeringReport,indicatingcompletionoftheproject.Furtherdetailsofeachstepofthe
processareincludedinthefollowingsection.
3.2 VEWorkshopMethodology
VMSproposestoutilizethetools,techniques,andjobplanfromtheValueMethodologyandSAVE
InternationalbestpracticesasaguideandformatfortheVEworkshop.Themethodologytobe
employedwillutilizeafunctionbasedsystemthatquicklyfocusesteamsonatask,facilitates
communication,buildsconsensusandachievesresultsintheoptimizationoftheprojectwithrespectto
functionalperformance,initialcost,lifecyclecost,anddurationforconstructiondelivery.
Thedirectandactiveinvolvementoftheprojectsstakeholdersisatthecoreofthisprocess.TheVE
teamleaderwillguidestakeholdersthroughthemethodology,usingthepoweroftheprocesstodistill
subjectivethoughtintoobjectivelanguagethateveryonecanrelatetoandunderstand.Thedialogthat
developsthenformsthebasisfortheVEteamsunderstandingoftherequirementsoftheprojectand
towhatdegreethecurrentdesignconceptismeetingthoserequirements.Fromthisbaseline,theVE
teamcanfocusonidentifyingissueswiththecurrentdesignandperhapsidentifyalternativeconcepts
thatwillquantifybothperformanceandcost,contributingtoanimprovedprojectvalue.
OurapproachtoperformingaVEstudyyieldsthefollowingbenefits:
Buildsconsensusamongprojectstakeholders(especiallythoseholdingconflictingviews)
Supportsabetterunderstandingofaprojectsgoalsandobjectives
Developsabaselineunderstandingofhowtheprojectmeetsperformancegoalsandobjectives
IdentifiesareaswhereprojectperformancecanbeimprovedthroughtheVEprocess
Developandunderstandtherelationshipbetweenperformanceandcostindeterminingvalue
Usesvalueasthetruemeasurementforselectingtheoptimaldesignconcept
ThefollowingnarrativeprovidesanoverviewofthespecificactivitiesproposedfortheVEworkshop.
PreStudy
MeaningfulandmeasurableresultsaredirectlyrelatedtotheworkperformedpriortotheVEworkshop.
Allorpartofthefollowinginformationwillbedeterminedduringtheprestudyphase:
Cleardefinitionofthecurrentsituationandstudyobjectives
IdentificationofVEteammembersandprojectstakeholders
Definitionofhowstakeholdersareimpactedbytheproject
Identificationofkeyissuesandconcerns
Identificationofcriteriatobeusedforevaluationofprojectperformance
GatherprojectdataanddistributetoVEteammembers

InpreparationfortheVEworkshop,theteamleader(CVS)willmeetwithMPRWAandstakeholdersto
confirmandfinalizetheworkshopprocessandagenda,initiatedatagathering,refineworkshopscope
andobjectives,coordinatewiththeVEteammembers,andfinalizestudyplans.Followingtheinitial
planningmeeting,theteamleaderwillreviewthedatacollectedfortheprojectanddevelopacost
model.Theteamleaderwillalsoconsultwiththetechnicalspecialiststopreparethemforthe
workshop.
VEWorkshop(Study)
VMSproposesa7phaseJobPlanforthisVEstudy.Theelementsandactivitiesconductedduringthe
studywillinclude:Informationphase,FunctionAnalysisphase,Creativephase,Evaluationphase,
DevelopmentphaseandPresentationphase,followedbyImplementation.
1. InformationPhase:AtthebeginningoftheVEstudy,thebackgroundanddecisionsthathave
influencedthedevelopmentoftheprojectorprocessarereviewed.TheVEstudybeginswitha
meetingwithrepresentativesofthestakeholderagencies.Analysisoftheprojectproceedsbasedon
thedataprovided.Theanalysisincludesreviewingthecostmodel(s)andbecomingfamiliarwiththe
issuesandconstraintscommunicatedbythestakeholders.Eachofthefocusareasidentifiedinthe
previoussectionwillbediscussed,andspecificcommentsandrecommendationswillberecorded.
2. FunctionAnalysisPhase:Developmentofthefunctionalrequirementsofaprojectarekeyto
assuringastakeholderthattheprojectwillmeetthestatedcriteria.Theanalysisofthesefunctions
intermsofactualcostisaprimaryelementinaVEworkshop.AFunctionAnalysisSystemTechnique
(FAST)diagramisdevelopedtohelptheteambetterunderstandthefunctionalrelationshipsofthe
project.CostandperformancearerelatedtotheprojectfunctionsontheFASTdiagramtodirectthe
teamtothefunctionswheretheyshouldfocustheirefforts.
3. CreativePhase:Duringthisphase,theVEteamgeneratesasmanyideasaspossibletoprovidethe
necessaryfunctionsfortheprojectandmeetthecriteriaidentified.Judgmentoftheideasisnot
permittedduringthisphase,andallideasarerecorded.
4. EvaluationPhase:TheVEteamevaluateseachideawithrespecttothefunctionsandevaluation
criteria.EachideaisevaluatedagainstthespecificperformancecriteriaestablishedbyMPRWA
duringtheInformationPhase.Onceeachideaisfullyevaluated,theideaisrankedbaseduponthe
teamsconcurrenceofitssignificancetoprioritizethedevelopmentoftheideas.
5. DevelopmentPhase:Duringthedevelopmentphase,eachideadeemedworthyofadditional
considerationisexpandedanddocumentedonVEAlternativeforms.Eachrecommendationis
documentedwithabriefnarrativetocompareitwiththeoriginalconcept,includingsketches,
discussionofperformanceandrisk,andcostcomparisonsasapplicable.
6. PresentationPhase:ThefinalstepoftheVEstudyisaformalpresentationofthestudysresultsto
theprojectstakeholders.ThiswillprovideMPRWAanopportunitytopreviewtherecommendations
developedbytheVEteambeforethePreliminaryVEReportispublished.
7. WrittenReports&ImplementationPhase:FollowingthecompletionoftheVEstudy,theteam
leadercompilestheinformationdevelopedduringtheVEstudyintoaPreliminaryReport.This
reportdocumentsallrecommendations,andwillbeprovidedtoMPRWAunderthestated
deliverabletimeline.ThereportincludesanExecutiveSummary,detaileddescriptionsofeach
recommendation,andallsupportingdocumentation.

OncethePreliminaryReportreviewiscompleteandcommentsarereceivedfromMPRWA,the
reportiseditedtoreflectthecommentsandanyimplementationdecisions,andisreissuedasthe
DraftFinalVEStudyReport.Furthercomments,editsandfeedbackwillbeaddressedpriorto
publicationanddeliveryoftheFinalVEStudyReportasindicatedintheRFP.
3.3 VEStudyAreasofFocus
ThefollowingparagraphsidentifysomeoftheareasthatVMSbelievesmayrequirespecialattention
withrespecttotheMPWSPVEeffort.AdditionalelementswilllikelybeidentifiedduringtheVE
workshop;thelistbelowillustratestopicswewillcovertoensureathoroughreviewoftheproject.
1. DesignConceptEnhancements:Identificationofchangestotheprojectdesignthatwill
improve/enhancetheessentialfunctionsandconcept(s)atalowerinitialcapitalcostorlifecycle
costasproposedinthedesigndocuments.
2. OperationsandMaintenance:Reviewofthedesignconcepttoidentifytheoptimalconfiguration
thatbestrepresentsidealoperability,reliability,maintainability,andpersonnelsafety.
3. DesignConceptValidation:Reviewofthebaselinedesignconceptforvalidationoftheeffectiveness
ofthedesigninensuringitrepresentsthemostefficientcombinationofcost,performance,and
reliability.
4. NewAlternatives:Identificationofnewfunctionalapproachestooptimizingtheessentialfunctions
oftheproject,solvingissues,andmeetingthegoalssetforthfortheprojectforthebestoverall
value,includingincorporationofthelatesttechnologiesandadvancements.
5. SustainabilityAssessment:Reviewandvalidationoftheprojectforidentificationofopportunitiesto
attainanEnhancedlevel(equivalenttoSilver)ofsustainabledesignundertheEnvisionrating
systemoftheInstituteforSustainableInfrastructure.IdentificationofopportunitiestoattainaSilver
awardlevelofdesignundertheUSGreenBuildingCouncilLEEDRatingsystem.
6. ArchitecturalComposition:Suggestionsthatwillalignthedesignofthefacilityintermsofoptimal
functionalperformanceandoperationsandaestheticpresencewiththeenvironmentandlocation.
7. FutureDesignConsiderations:Recommendationstothedesignerregardingspecificideas,
components,details,materialsorproductsthatshouldbeconsideredasthedesignprogresses.
8. Staging/Access:Assessmentofwhetheradequatespaceandfacilitiesareavailabletostagethe
projectincludingtheprovisionofutilities,andifaccesstothesitewillberestrictedwithalternatives
providedtomaketheflowoflabor,equipmentandmaterialsmoreefficient.
9. EnvironmentalImpacts:Areviewoftheprojectsenvironmentalimpactstoassurethatthe
constructionprocesscanmeettherequirementsoftheEIRpermittingagencydemands,defining
alternativesthatwilladdressandsupportconflictresolution.
10. ConstructionImpacts:Ideaspromotedtominimizeoreliminateimpactsofconstructiononthe
existingstreambedorexistingfacilitiesandinfrastructure.Thisareawillalsoconsidertemporary
environmentalconditionsrelatedtoconstructionactivities.
11. CostControl:Nottobeconfusedwithcostcutting,thisareawillfocusonmaintainingthedesired
budgetorprovideamorecosteffectivewaytoachievethesamedesignobjectives.Thisincludesa

cursoryassessmentofthecostestimatefortheselectedalternative.
12. ScheduleControl:Recognizingtimelycompletionisimportantrelativetooverallriskreduction,this
areawillfocusonthepotentialtomeettheprojectscheduledeadlinesorthepossibilityof
completingtheprojectaheadofschedule.
13. AdditionalConstructabilityIssues:Suggestionsregardingprojectconstruction,atafeasibilitylevel,
thatwillassessspecificareasofconstructiondifficulty.Keysubjectsinclude:
Reducingtotalconstructiontimebycreatingconditionsthatmaximizethepotentialfor
concurrent(ratherthansequential)construction,whileminimizingworkandwastedtime.
Reducingworkhourrequirementsbycreatingconditionsthatpromotebetterproductivityor
creatingdesignsthatdemandlesslabor,minimizingtheneedforhighcostspecialequipment.
Reducingpotentialchangeorders,workdelaysandaddedcostsbycheckingthedrawingsand
specificationsfordimensioningerrors,omissionofnecessarydetail,interdisciplinaryconflicts,etc.
Identifyingtheappropriatenessoftheprojectsconstructioninstallationtechnology,
methodologyandmaterials.
Identifyingprojectspecificissues,theirprobableconsequences,andproposedmitigation
recommendations.
14. RiskAnalysis:Giventhepotentialprojectcomplexitiesrelativetotechnicaldesignissues,
environmentalandpermittingissues,andconstructionissues,VMSproposestoconducta
QualitativeRiskAnalysisoftheprojectduringtheVEworkshop.ThroughitsRiskAssessmenttools
andtechniques,VMSwillworkwithprojectstakeholderstoidentifyandprioritizethoserisksmost
inneedofproactiveresponseandmanagement.Thisallowsissuesthatmayotherwiseresultin
significantimpactstobeaddressedbydevelopingproactiveriskresponsestrategiesandactionplans
tominimizethreats,maximizeopportunities,andoptimizetherelationshipsofprojectandprogram
performance,cost,andtime.
3.4 DeliverySchedule
VMSteamleadersareequippedwiththeexperienceandtoolstoquicklytransformtheproject
information,analysesperformedandtheelectronicorhandwrittencontentdevelopedduringaVE
studyintocomprehensive,professionalqualityVEreports.VMSsupportstaffassistteamleadersin
documentingtheresultsofeachstudytoensurethereportsbeingdeliveredarepolished,easyto
navigateandarriveontime.VMSpracticesahighlyeffectiveQA/QCproceduretoensurethecontent
andformatofeachprojectsdeliverablesareproducedquickly,consistentlyandaccurately.
TheVEstudyiscurrentlyscheduledfortheweekofJune2327,2014.ThePreliminaryVEReportwillbe
submittedperRFPrequest,three(3)daysfollowingcompletionoftheworkshop,onJune30,2014.An
implementationmeetingwillbescheduledafterthedesiredreviewperiod,atwhichpointVMSwill
consolidateandincorporateallcommentsanddecisions.TheFinalVEReportwillbeissuedwithin14
daysofreceiptofcommentsandconfirmationfromtheprojectmanagerthatnofurthercommentsor
changesareanticipated.
VMSproposestodeliverthePreliminaryandFinalVEreportsinelectronic(PDF)formatviaemailbyor
beforethedeadlinesstatedabove.Hardcopydeliveryofprintedreports(6copies)andCDs(2copies)
foreachsubmittalcantypicallybeexpected23businessdaysfollowingtheemailsubmittalduetothe
lengthoftimerequiredtoproduceandshiphardcopiestotheMPRWAoffice(s).

4.0 QUALIFICATIONSANDEXPERIENCE
4.1 TeamQualifications
Asstatedpreviouslyinthisproposal,VMSisthelargestpurevalueconsultingfirminthecountry.VMS
specializesintheapplicationofValueAnalysisandValueEngineering,BusinessProcessImprovement,
DecisionAnalysisProcesses,RiskAssessmentandManagement,QuantitativeModelingandAnalysis,
andTraininginordertoassistclientsintheirgoalofmakingsounddecisionsandgettingthemostoutof
theirprojectsandprograms.With9fulltimeCertifiedValueSpecialistfacilitatorsonstaff,VMShas
conductedover3,000studiesduringits24yearsofprovidingvalueservices.
VMShasprovidedVMservicesforamultitudeoflocal,state,regional,andfederalgovernment
agencies.Typesofprojectsincludeplanninganddesignofwater/wastewatertreatment,healthcare
facilities,offices,andadministrativebuildings;planning,design,andimplementationoftransportation
andtransitfacilitiesandsystems;recreationalfacilities;equipmentandmaintenancefacilities;housing;
firestations;andanarrayofotherprojects.Asaresultofourinvolvementwithnumerousprojectsfor
variousgovernmentandlocalagencies,VMShasdevelopedathoroughunderstandingoffederal/state
governmentregulations,constructionmethods,andcoordinationrequirements.
Finally,ourlonghistoryandtrackrecordofbuildingsuccessfulVEteamsprovidesVMSaccesstosome
ofthemostexperiencedandsoughtafterconsultantsinthevariousengineeringdisciplines.Basedona
wealthofexperienceworkingonregionalwaterauthorityprojectsandwithgovernmentagenciesinthe
stateofCalifornia,theproposedteammembersfromHDREngineering,Inc.areseasonedveteranswith
extensiveexperiencedesigning,optimizingandconstructingsimilarprojects.Thefollowingteam
membersareproposedforthisVEeffort:
ProposedRole NameandCredentials
CVSTeamLeader/Facilitator MarkWatson,P.E.,CVSLife,PMP
Civil/StructuralEngineer OmidTavangar,P.E.
Architect&LEEDCertifiedEvaluator MichaelLambert,R.A.,LEEDGreenAssociate
Electrical/Instrumentation&ControlsEngineer BillEttlich,P.E.
OperationandMaintenanceExpert CraigClose,P.E.
ENVISIONEvaluator,HDRProjectManager DaveReardon,P.E.,ENVSP
VMSstrivestoprovidethemostcosteffectivemeansofdeliveryvalueimprovingservicestoourclients.
Asaresult,pleasenotethatsomeoftherequestedroles/teammembersforthisVEstudyhavebeen
consolidated.Thishasbeendonewiththeintenttoprovidetheproperexperienceinthemost
streamlinedandcosteffectivemannerpossible.Withtheparticipationofadditionalstakeholder
personnelbeingprovidedbyCAWasstatedintheRFPscopeofservices,theteammembersproposed
hereinprovidethenecessarylevelofexperienceandexpertiserequiredforthesuccessofthisstudy.
4.2 RelevantProjectExamples/Experience
ThefollowingprojectsrepresentasmallsamplingofrelevantVEandwater/wastewaterproject
optimizationeffortstheproposedVEteamhasfacilitatedorparticipatedoninthestateofCalifornia.
JosephJensenWaterTreatmentPlantSolidsDewateringFacilityandLagoons,GranadaHillsMark
WatsonfacilitatedtheVEstudy,foraprojecttoconstructamechanicaldewateringfacilitywithbelt
presses,conveyors,andacakestoragearea,aswellasaseriesoflagoonsforairdryingsolids.These
facilitieswillallowLAMWDtoreliablyprocesssolidsatallanticipatedproductionrates,whilecomplying

withwaterqualityregulationsandexistingpermitconditions.Theestimatedcost,includingallmarkups
andcontingencies,is$22,740,000forContractNo.1and$13,130,000forContractNo.2.
TheobjectivesoftheVEstudyweretoreviewthedesignrelativetoprojectpurposeandneedtoidentify
moreeconomicalalternativesinprovidinganewsoliddewateringfacilityandlagoons;andtodevelop
VEalternativesthatimproveaspectsofthesolidsprocessingbyeitherreducingcostorimproving
performance.
TheVEteam,throughtheapplicationoffunctionanalysisandcostmodeling,evaluatedthebaseline
concept.TheVEteamobservedthattherewereopportunitiesforsignificantcostsavingsbyrelocating
theBeltPressBuildingtolocationsofbettersoilsandawayfromthesightlinebetweenthe
Administration/ControlBuildingandlagoons.Further,giventherelativelyhighcostsrelatedtothesoil
remediationmeasures,theVEteamfocusedonidentifyingothermethodsthatresultinreducedcosts
andimpacts,reducedschedule,andreducedriskofmovementanddamageduringanearthquakeevent.
Further,theVEteamfocusedonthedewateringprocessitselftoidentifyalternativesthatmaximize
passivemeansofreducingthewatercontentofthesolidsandsimplifyingtheremovalofthethickened
solids.Finally,theVEteamfocusedontheconstructionscheduleandcontractpackagingtoreducerisks
andcoordinationissuesofearlycriticalpathitemsandmultipleconstructioncontractors.TheVEteam
developed12alternativesforimprovementoftheproject,7ofwhichwillbeconsideredfor
implementationwhenthedesignreachestheappropriatephase.Ifallalternativesareacceptedas
proposedasavingsofnearlyof$20millionmayberealized.
SeasideOzoneTreatmentFacility,MontereyThe$3.2millionconstructionimprovementstothe
SeasideOzoneTreatmentFacilitycompletedin1964.TheMPWMDimposedabuildingmoratoriumin
1992citingthelackofwatersupplyontheMontereyPeninsula.Althoughitwasapoliticalmove
attemptingtogainsupportfortheproposedNewLosPadresDam,itactuallycausedapublicbacklash
towardsMPWMDandCalAm.CalAmagaintookaleadershiprolebydiscovering"new"groundwaterin
theNorthernCoastalAquiferinnortheastSeasidealongtheFortOrdborder.Anew2500gpmwellwas
constructedtoproduce2000afyofadditionalwatersupplyforthePeninsulacommunities.The
MPWMDBoardapprovedonlya1000afyallocationandtiedtheliftingofthebuildingmoratoriumwith
thestartupofthenewwell.However,thenewParaltawellhadhighlevelsofhydrogensulfideandwas
constructedonasmallresidentialbuildinglot,insufficienttobuildanytreatment.
CraigClosewasresponsibleforfindingasolutionandconstructingafacilityimmediatelytoavoidpublic
criticism.Heevaluatedbothhydrogenperoxideandozonetreatmentprocesses,sinceusingGAC
pressurefilterswasnotfeasibledueeconomic,spacelimitations,andbackwashwastedisposal
problemscreatedbythehighH2Sconcentrations.Aninlinetreatmentprocesswasconsideredthebest
solution.Thehydrogenperoxideprocesswaseliminatedduetothelargequantitiesofchemicalsneeded
andthelongcontacttimenecessaryforthechemicalreactiontoconverttheH2Stosulfate.Therefore,a
5mgdozonetreatmentplantwasconstructedatCalAm'sOrdGrovewellsite,treatingboththeParalta
andOrdGrovewells.Two60lb/dayozonegeneratorswereusedtosupplyozonetotheinjectors30
feetupstreamofthefacilityina24inchheaderpiperoutedthroughthechemicalcontainmentareaof
thetreatmentbuilding.Zincorthophosphateforcorrosionprotectionandsodiumhypochloriteforpost
disinfectionusedatthefacility.Theozonetreatedwaterwouldthengothroughanozonedestructunit
priortoenteringthe0.5MGOrdGrovetanklocatedadjacenttothetreatmentbuilding.Finishedwater
wasthenpumpedoutofthestoragetankintothedistributionsystemviathreesubmersiblecanpumps.
Thefullyautomatedtreatmentfacilitywentonlineinearly1994.TheSeasideOzoneTreatmentFacility
wasthefirstozonefacilityintheAmericanWaterSystem.

VE,DesignDocumentQA/QC,andCostEstimatingforSacramentoRiverandE.A.FairbairnWater
TreatmentPlantsRehabilitationProjects,CityofSacramentoOmidTavangar,P.E.andBillEttlich,P.E.
ofHDRprovidedtheStructuralandElectricalengineeringservicesforaVEstudy,designdocument
QA/QC,andcostestimatingservicesforrehabilitationupgradestothecitystwosurfacewater
treatmentplantstoreplaceagingfacilitiesandprovidenewsolidshandling.Improvementstothe160
mgdSacramentoRiverWaterTreatmentPlantwerevaluedat$145millionandincludedanew80mgd
flocculation/sedimentationbasinwithmixers,eightnewdualmedialfilters,retrofitoftheexistingfilter
wastewashwaterbasinswithmechanicalsludgecollectionsystemandlarger2,500gpmpumpswith
variablefrequencydrives(VFDs),sludgelagoons,twothickeners,newtwostorydewateringbuilding
with1,200poundperhourcentrifugeswithconveyor,pavedsludgedryingareaintheearthenlagoon,
replacementofthetreatedwaterpumpingstationwithahighservicepumpingstationwithfour600hp
verticalturbinepumps.
Improvementstothe200mgdE.A.FairbairnWaterTreatmentPlantwerevaluedat$16millionand
includedretrofitofmechanicalsludgecollectionsystems,twosludgethickeners,anewsinglestory,
6,000squarefootdewateringbuildingwithtwo1,200poundperhourcentrifugesandconveyor,
expansionofthechlorinegasfeedsystem,andanewmediumvoltagetransformer.
SoscolWaterRecyclingPlantVEStudy,NapaSanitationDistrict,NapaDaveReardonparticipatedas
sustainabilityexpertandfacilitiesoptimizationconsultantforaVEworkshoptoreviewthe100percent
contractdocumentsandconstructiondrawingsforthe11.8mgdSoscolWaterReclamationFacility
design,aswellasawetlandsfacilityforthetreatmentofprimaryeffluent.TheVEteamwascalledin
afterthis$55millionprojectwasbidoverbudget.AreasoftheVEstudyincludedheadworks,primary
clarifiers,aerationbasins,secondaryclarifiers,effluentfiltration,chlorinedisinfection,reclaimedwater
pumpingstation,dissolvedairflotation(DAF)thickening,anaerobicdigestion(eggshaped)beltpress
dewatering,supportfacilities,yardpiping,andelectrical/instrumentationsystems.Generated156
alternativeideasandevaluated51indetail.Despitesevereconstraintsplacedonchangesformanyof
thekeyprocesses,39ideaswererecommendedforconsiderationbytheowneranddesignengineer
thatrepresentedsavingsofover$5million.
LodiSurfaceWaterTreatmentFacility,CityofLodiHDRistheDesignerandArchitectofRecordforthe
city'snew11.5mgdsurfacewatertreatmentplant,whichincludesrawwaterpumpingstation,
sedimentationbasinfollowedbyautomaticstrainersforpretreatment,8mgdPallMicrozapressure
membranesystem,chemicalanddisinfectionsystems,platesettlersforresidualhandling,stormdrain
system,10mgd(25mgdbuildout)highservicepumpingstationwithendsuctioncentrifugalpumpsand
CMUbuilding,3milliongallon(MG)prestressedconcretetank,watertransmissionmain,modifications
of26groundwaterwells,operationsbuilding,chemicalbulding,andcorrosioncontrol.Thearchitecture
ofthisplantwasinspiredfromlocalresidentialneighborhoods.Craftsmaninspireddetailingof
raftertails,windowproportionsandtrellisfeaturescontributetotheresidentialtheme.Materialsused
werecontemporary;examplesbeingstandingseammetalroof,concretemasonry,andcompositewood
panels,butincorporatedintotraditionalforms.Therearefourbuildingstotalinthisplant:
Administration,chemical,highservicepumpingstation,andrawwaterpumpingstation.Therawwater
pumpingstationisastandalonebuildingonaseparatelotclosertotheintakesource.Itislocatedjust
outsideahistoricdistrictinWoodbridge,California,whereatleasttwobuildingsareontheNational
RegisterofHistoricPlaces.

5.0 BIOGRAPHIESOFKEYPERSONNEL
5.1 VETeamLeader:ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.
CVSFacilitatorMarkWatson,P.E.,CVSLife,PMP
MARKWATSONisaregisteredProfessionalEngineer,CertifiedValueSpecialist(Life),andProject
ManagementProfessional.HehasadegreeinGeologicalEngineeringfromtheUniversityofMissouri
Rolla(nowtheMissouriUniversityofScienceandTechnology).Mark'sexperienceincludes15yearsof
facilitatingvaluestudiesonawidearrayofprojectsthatcoverthegambitofthedesignandconstruction
industry.Hehasconductedover200valueanalysis,valueengineering,andvalueplanningstudieson
water/wastewaterfacilities,roads,bridges,transitfacilities,airportfacilities,anddrainagefacilities,as
wellasbuildingsforeducation,healthcare,prisons,U.S.military,andU.S.embassyandconsulate
operations.Thesizeoftheseprojectsandprogramshasrangedfromafewhundredthousanddollarsin
capitalcoststoashighas$6billion.Markhasfacilitatedworkshopsonprojectsinallstagesofdesign
fromtheschematic/planningstageto100%complete.
OneofMarksparticularspecialtiesisthefacilitationoflarge,diversegroups.Overthecourseofhis
career,hehashadtheopportunitytofacilitateteamsrangingfromsmall,technicallyfocused
participantstolarge,managementbasedparticipantstoteamsofmultiplestakeholderswithmultiple
technicalbackgroundsandobjectives.Markhasdevelopedabroadrangeoffacilitationtechniquesthat
allowhimtoadapthisstyleandapproachtosupportthedynamicsofthegroupbeingfacilitated.In
addition,hehastheabilitytocommunicatethedetailedtechnicalaspectsofprojectsandalternativesso
allstakeholderswillunderstand,regardlessoftheirtechnicalbackground.
5.2 VETeamMembers:HDREngineering,Inc.
Civil/StructuralEngineerOmidTavangar,P.E.
OMIDTAVANGARisaCaliforniaregisteredprofessionalcivilengineerwithmorethan30yearsof
experienceascivil/structuralengineerforwaterandwastewaterprojects.Hisexperienceincludes
designandconstructionofwaterandwastewatertreatmentplants,solidshandlingfacilities,pumping
stations,pipelines,andstoragefacilities.Hehasexpertiseinanalyzingandimprovingstructuralsystems
toachieveoptimumcosteffectiveness.Heisalsoeffectiveinfacilitatingcommunicationbetweenthe
clientandprojectteam,andhasaprovenrecordformaintainingschedules.Mr.Tavangarrecently
participatedinthevalueengineeringeffortsforCityofSacramentostwoWaterTreatmentPlantsand
SunnyslopeCountyWaterDistrictstreatmentplantimprovements.Hewasstructuralengineerforthe
barrierwatertreatmentimprovementsprojectforWestBasinMunicipalWaterDistrict,whichprotects
thetreatmentplantagainstsaltwaterintrusion.
Architect&LEEDCertifiedEvaluatorMichaelLambert,R.A.,LEEDGreenAssociate
MICHAELLAMBERTisaCaliforniaregisteredarchitectandcertifiedLEEDGreenAssociate.Asaproject
architect,Mr.Lambertisresponsibleforsynthesizingclientprogramneedsintoexcitingarchitectural
solutions.Hehasmorethan29yearsofexperienceinallphasesofarchitecture,withemphasisin
projectmanagement,programming,designdevelopment,masterplanningandconstruction
administrationforavarietyofprojecttypes.Hisspecialtiesincludewaterandwastewaterdistribution
andtreatmentfacilities,andcodecompliance.Mr.Lambertrecentlyparticipatedinvalueengineering
effortsforCityofSacramentostwoWaterTreatmentPlants.

Electrical,Instrumentation,andControlsEngineerBillEttlich,P.E.
BILLETTLICHisaCaliforniaregisteredelectricalandcontrolsystemsengineerwithmorethan55yearsof
technicalandmanagerialexperienceinwaterandwastewatertreatmentfacilitiesdesigninboththe
consultingengineeringandprocessequipmentfields.Hisexperienceincludesthedirectionofwaterand
wastewatertreatmentprojectsthroughallphases,includingplanning,design,construction,field
services,operatortraining,and/orstartupassistanceforover250water/wastewaterfacilities.He
providesprocess,controlandinstrumentationdesignformanyoftheprojectshedirects,anddesigns
telemetrysystemsforvariouswaterandwastewatersystems.Havingdesignedanddirectedinto
operationanumberoffullyautomatedtreatmentplants,heiswidelyrecognizedasatelemetryand
automatedcontrolspecialist.Hehasalsoservedastheelectrical,instrumentation,andcontrol
engineeringspecialistonover15valueengineeringstudies.
OperationsandMaintenance(O&M)CraigClose,P.E.
CRAIGCLOSEisaVicePresidentwithHDRandservesastheNationalBusinessClassDirectorfor
ManagementandPlanningServices(MAPS)businessunit.Heprovidesprofessionalandproject
managementservicestomunicipalagenciesandprivatecompaniesencompassingtheengineering
planning,design,permitting,andconstructionmanagementofunique,complex,andinnovativewater
andwastewaterinfrastructureandfacilityprojects.Hehasmorethan33yearsofengineering
experienceinthewater,wastewater,andelectricalpowerindustries.Hisuniquewaterandwastewater
operationalmanagementexperienceprovidesanowner'sperspectiveinsolvingincreasinglychallenging
technicalandregulatorycomplianceissues.
Mr.Closebringsabroadanddiversebackgroundtohisclientsthatwerefoundedfromhislongtenure
atAmericanWaterServiceCompany.HeservedastheVicePresidentofOperationsfortheWestern
RegionCompaniesofAmericanWaterWorksCompany.Hewasresponsibleforthedaytodayoperation
ofwaterandwastewaterutilitiesownedbyAmericanWaterthatservedover500,000peoplein26
communitiesandfourstates.Hisresponsibilitiesincludedthemanagementofthetechnical
departmentsthatsupportedthedistrictoperations,whichincludedplanningengineering,construction,
waterquality(includingtheoperationoftwostatecertifiedlaboratories),riskmanagement,customer
serviceandbilling,andraterecovery.Duringhistenurehere,hewasveryinvolvedintheearlystagesof
theMontereyPeninsulaDesalinationproject;hisfamiliaritywiththeprojectlocationandhistorywill
providevaluableinsightotherO&Mconsultantswouldnotprovide.
ENVISIONEvaluatorandHDRsProjectManagerDaveReardon,P.E.,BCEE,ENVSP
DAVEREARDONisHDRsNationalDirectorforWater/WastewaterSustainabilityandprocessengineer
withmorethan41yearsofconsultingandengineeringexperienceforwaterandwastewaterfacilities.
HeisaCertifiedISIEnvisionSustainabilityProfessionalandVerifierandaCaliforniaregistered
professionalcivilengineer.Mr.Reardonoffersextensiveexperienceintheareaofprocess
troubleshooting,facilityoptimization,andenergyconservationforwater,wastewater,andindustrial
facilitiesnationwide,andisconsideredoneoftheleadingexpertsintheindustryintermsoflower
energy,demand,andchemicalusage.Hehasconductedover125sustainabilitystudiesatwaterand
wastewaterfacilitiesnationwide,andhasalsoparticipatedinover10valueengineeringstudies.
Beingmindfulofoverallstudycost,itisbeingproposedthatMr.ReardonperformhisENVISION
evaluationfromhisofficeinFolsom,CA.

6.0 REFERENCES
6.1 ProjectReferencesandReviews
GalvestonChannelPelicanIslandStudy,USACEGalvestonDistrict,2011 ExceptionalRating
TheAEisratedasExceptionalbecausetheVETeamcameupwithpractical,creativewaysof
addressingissueswiththeplannedplacementarearehabilitation.ThereporttheVETeamdeliveredwas
aqualityproductthatpresentedtheVEproposalsverywellandwasthoroughinitsdiscussionsofthe
proposals.Thereportwaswelllaidout,formattedwell,andconcisesuchthatitwasaneasy,
understandablereadandgottothepointoftheVEstudyresults.TheVEReportwasformattedas
prescribedbytheSOW.AfterdoingseveralVEstudiesfortheGalvestonDistrict,theAEhasestablished
aconsistenttrackrecordofmeetingorexceedingtheGalvestonDistrict'sexpectationsasevidencedby
theVEproposalstheVETeamscomeupwiththathaverelevancytotheprojectsstudiedandwhere
thoseprojectsareintheirdevelopmentandbythefactthatseveraloftheseideashavebeen
implementedwhichhasresultedinsubstantialcostsavings.
ACASSEvaluation,JonPlymale,VEOfficer,4097666375
JohnDayMonolith/DrainageRepairsVEStudy,USACEPortlandDistrict,2013 ExceptionalRating
VMSdidagreatjobofgettingtherightteammembersandfacilitatorfortheVEstudy.Alldidagreat
jobACASSEvaluation,JasonWeber,VEOfficer,5038084799
NewYorkOfficeofManagementandBudget,ValueEngineeringServicesonTaskOrderBasis,2012
ExcellentRating
Theschedulesfortheassignedcomplexprojectswereveryaggressiveandtheconsultantworked
diligentlytoaccommodatetheshorttimeframes.Theproductionofdeliverableswasonamore
demandinglevelthanpreviousassignments,andtheconsultantwasabletomeettheserequirements.
Thetechnicalfacilityoftheconsultantstaffandsubconsultantsisatahighleveloftechnical
sophistication.Weareveryimpressedwiththequalityoftheteamworkandrelyontheconsultantto
produceoutstandingdeliverables.JillWoller,NYOMB,2127886137
6.2 Firm/TeamLeaderReferences
JonathanTat
MetropolitanWaterDistrictofSouthernCA
OncallVEServices:3consecutivecontracts(8yrs)
jtat@mwdh2o.com
2132176682
FrankVicidomina,ValueEngineeringOfficer
U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,NewOrleans
IDIQValueEngineeringServices
frank.vicidomina@usace.army.mil
5048621251
RichardStricker,ValueEngineeringOfficer
U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,OmahaDistrict
richard.a.stricker@usace.army.mil
4029952412
JohnPlymale,ValueEngineeringOfficer
U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,GalvestonDistrict
jon.e.plymale@usace.army.mil
4097666375

7.0 OTHERCONSIDERATIONS
7.1 QualityAssurance
VMSiscommittedtoprovidinghighquality,effectiveserviceswithoutunexpectedchangestothe
projectbudget.OurinternalQualityAssurance(QA)andCostControlProgramsarestructuredtoensure
wenotonlymeet,butexceedthecustomersexpectationsforourservices.VMSrealizesthateachclient
hasspecificrequirementsthatneedtobeaddressedtoassurequalityandcontinuityintheirstudies.As
weworkwithnewclientsweseekfeedbackonourservicestobetterservetheirneeds.Inaddition,we
analyzewhattheyaretryingtoaccomplishanduseourcollectiveexperiencetosuggestwaystoimprove
theirprogramandensuredeliveryofservicesinthemostefficientandeffectivemannerpossible.
VMShasinternalqualitychecksincludingtechnicalediting,internalreviewsbyallkeystaffofproject
deliverablesanddocuments,andaclientfocusedreviewprocessthatassurestheproductsandservices
providedbyVMSexceedexpectations.
7.2 CostControl
Costcontrolswillconsistofassessingweeklyprogressandmeasurementofhoursutilizedincomparison
totheplannednumberofhoursfortaskcompletion.Thisisconsistentwithanearnedvalueapproach
thatwillallowsforbothcostanddurationtocompletiontobeforecastedandmanagedsuchin
collaborationwiththeclient.Thisearnedvalueapproachensurestheexpecteddeliveryscheduleand
allocatedbudgetwillbemanagedeffectively.

ValueLeadership
CORPORATEOFFICE:
900CanterburyPlace
Suite330
Escondido,CA920253856
T:7607415518
F:7607415617(alloffices)
Sacramento,California
T:9162249812
GrandJunction,Colorado
T:9702425531
Merriam,Kansas
T:8162060067
LasVegas,Nevada
T:7203084205
Portland,Oregon
T:5039579642
Bothell,Washington
T:2066798029

Date: June4,2014
JamesM.Cullem,P.E.
ExecutiveDirector
MontereyPeninsulaRegionalWaterAuthority
580PacificStreet,Room6
Monterey,CA93940
Subject: VEStudyNegotiationScope/FeeModifications
MontereyPeninsulaWaterSupplyProjectDesalinationPlant
DearMr.Cullem:
ValueManagementStrategies,Inc.(VMS)ispleasedtotransmittherevisionstoour
originalValueEngineering(VE)studyproposalqualificationsandfee.Changesare
theresultofthescopeandfeenegotiationsbetweenVMS,yourself,andIanCrooks
thatoccurredJune4,2014viateleconference.Perthediscussionandnegotiations,
theresultingchangesaresummarizedbelow:
Negotiationsresultedinareductioninlaborandotherdirectcostsfromthe
originallyproposedfeeof$123,977.22by$14,961.52orroughly12%.The
revisedfeeis$109,035.70.Pleaserefertotheattachedrevisedfeethat
representstheagreementnegotiatedforscopeandfee.
TheVEstudydateswereconfirmedtobechangedbytheMontereyPeninsula
RegionalWaterAuthority(MPRWA)andCaliforniaAmericanWater(CAW)to
July711,2014.ThechangeinstudydatesfromtheoriginalRFPdatesresulted
inmodificationstotheproposedVEteammembersbasedonavailability;
however,theVEteammembersubstitutionshaveresultedinequivalentor
greaterexperiencelevelsofteammembersatareducedcostofconductingthe
VEstudy.PleaserefertotheupdatedVEteammemberqualificationsprovided
inthismemorandumfortherevisedVEteam.
TheEnvisionSustainabilityreviewscopewillbeconductedaspartoftheVE
studyforthebaselineconceptdesigninareducedcapacityfromtheoriginal
proposal:
o Thescopehasbeenreducedintermsoftheoriginallyproposedlevelof
effortresultinginareductionofteammemberhours.
o CoordinationwiththeVEteamcostestimatorwillbeperformedto
identifypotentialcostsofcertaincreditsand/orcostsofadditional
creditsforvariouscertificationlevels.
OnerentalcarwaseliminatedfromtheOtherDirectCosts,resultingina
reductionof$450.00.
Allreports(Preliminary,DraftFinal,andFinal)wereoriginallyscopedforhard
copypaperproductionanddelivery,butwillnowbedeliveredonly
electronicallyinPDFformat.
June4,2014
Page2
1.0 QUALIFICATIONSANDEXPERIENCE(REVISED)
TeamQualifications
VMShasprovidedVMservicesforamultitudeoflocal,state,regional,andfederalgovernment
agencies.Typesofprojectsincludeplanninganddesignofwater/wastewatertreatment,
healthcarefacilities,offices,andadministrativebuildings;planning,design,andimplementationof
transportationandtransitfacilitiesandsystems;recreationalfacilities;equipmentand
maintenancefacilities;housing;firestations;andanarrayofotherprojects.Asaresultofour
involvementwithnumerousprojectsforvariousgovernmentandlocalagencies,VMShas
developedathoroughunderstandingoffederal/stategovernmentregulations,construction
methods,andcoordinationrequirements.
Finally,ourlonghistoryandtrackrecordofbuildingsuccessfulVEteamsprovidesVMSaccessto
someofthemostexperiencedandsoughtafterconsultantsinthevariousengineeringdisciplines.
Basedonawealthofexperienceworkingonregionalwaterauthorityprojectsandwith
governmentagenciesinthestateofCalifornia,theproposedteammembersfromHDR
Engineering,Inc.areseasonedveteranswithextensiveexperiencedesigning,optimizingand
constructingsimilarprojects.ThefollowingrevisedteammembersareproposedforthisVEeffort:
ProposedRole NameandCredentials
CVSTeamLeader/Facilitator MarkWatson,P.E.,CVSLife,PMP
Civil/StructuralEngineer OmidTavangar,P.E.
Architect&LEEDCertifiedEvaluator VicDuran,R.A.,LEEDAP
Electrical/Instrumentation&ControlsEngineer LarrySmithey,P.E.
Operations&MaintenanceSpecialist ChristopherMalinowski,P.E.,ENVSP
ENVISIONEvaluator GregBrink,CVS,PMP,CCE/A,ENVSP
VMSstrivestoprovidethemostcosteffectivemeansofdeliveringvalueimprovingservicestoour
clients.Asaresult,pleasenotethatsomeoftherequestedroles/teammembersforthisVEstudy
havebeenconsolidated.Thishasbeendonewiththeintenttoprovidetheproperexperiencein
themoststreamlinedandcosteffectivemannerpossible.Withtheparticipationofadditional
stakeholderpersonnelbeingprovidedbyCAWasstatedintheRFPscopeofservices,theteam
membersproposedhereinprovidethenecessarylevelofexperienceandexpertiserequiredfor
thesuccessofthisstudy.
2.0 BIOGRAPHIESOFKEYPERSONNEL(REVISED)
2.1 VETeamLeader
CVSFacilitatorMarkWatson,P.E.,CVSLife,PMP
MARKWATSONisaregisteredProfessionalEngineer,CertifiedValueSpecialist(Life),andProject
ManagementProfessional.HehasadegreeinGeologicalEngineeringfromtheUniversityof
MissouriRolla(nowtheMissouriUniversityofScienceandTechnology).Mark'sexperience
includes15yearsoffacilitatingvaluestudiesonawidearrayofprojectsthatcoverthegambitof
thedesignandconstructionindustry.Hehasconductedover200valueanalysis,value
June4,2014
Page3
engineering,andvalueplanningstudiesonwater/wastewaterfacilities,roads,bridges,transit
facilities,airportfacilities,anddrainagefacilities,aswellasbuildingsforeducation,healthcare,
prisons,U.S.military,andU.S.embassyandconsulateoperations.Thesizeoftheseprojectsand
programshasrangedfromafewhundredthousanddollarsincapitalcoststoashighas$6billion.
Markhasfacilitatedworkshopsonprojectsinallstagesofdesignfromtheschematic/planning
stageto100%complete.
OneofMarksparticularspecialtiesisthefacilitationoflarge,diversegroups.Overthecourseof
hiscareer,hehashadtheopportunitytofacilitateteamsrangingfromsmall,technicallyfocused
participantstolarge,managementbasedparticipantstoteamsofmultiplestakeholderswith
multipletechnicalbackgroundsandobjectives.Markhasdevelopedabroadrangeoffacilitation
techniquesthatallowhimtoadapthisstyleandapproachtosupportthedynamicsofthegroup
beingfacilitated.Inaddition,hehastheabilitytocommunicatethedetailedtechnicalaspectsof
projectsandalternativessoallstakeholderswillunderstand,regardlessoftheirtechnical
background.
2.2 VETeamMembers
Civil/StructuralEngineerOmidTavangar,P.E.
OMIDTAVANGARisaCaliforniaregisteredprofessionalcivilengineerwithmorethan30yearsof
experienceascivil/structuralengineerforwaterandwastewaterprojects.Hisexperienceincludes
designandconstructionofwaterandwastewatertreatmentplants,solidshandlingfacilities,
pumpingstations,pipelines,andstoragefacilities.Hehasexpertiseinanalyzingandimproving
structuralsystemstoachieveoptimumcosteffectiveness.Heisalsoeffectiveinfacilitating
communicationbetweentheclientandprojectteam,andhasaprovenrecordformaintaining
schedules.Mr.TavangarrecentlyparticipatedinthevalueengineeringeffortsforCityof
SacramentostwoWaterTreatmentPlantsandSunnyslopeCountyWaterDistrictstreatment
plantimprovements.Hewasstructuralengineerforthebarrierwatertreatmentimprovements
projectforWestBasinMunicipalWaterDistrict,whichprotectsthetreatmentplantagainst
saltwaterintrusion.
Architect&LEEDCertifiedEvaluatorVicDuran,R.A.,LEEDAP
VICDURANhasproject,program,andconstructionmanagementexperiencewithmorethan34
yearsofexperienceintheplanning,management,anddesignofbuildingsforwaterand
wastewateragenciesandfederalfacilities.Hehasalsomanagedanddirectedteamsduringthe
designandconstructionofvariousprojects,includingpostal,military,educational,criminaljustice,
andretailfacilities.Hisexperienceincludesarchitecturaldesign,project,programand
constructionmanagement,qualitycontrol,claimsandlitigationsupport,estimating,bidding,CPM
schedulingandconstructionsuperintendence.Mr.DuranparticipatedintheVEstudyofthe
ModestoJuniorCollegeWestCampus,SierraHallInstructionalFacility,whichidentified$2million
incostsavings,aswellasaVEstudyforBeachChaletVisitorCenterandBrewpubRestaurantin
SanFrancisco,CA.
June4,2014
Page4
Electrical,Instrumentation,andControlsEngineerLarrySmithey,P.E.
LARRYSMITHEYhasmorethan27yearsoftechnicalandmanagerialexperienceproviding
electrical,instrumentation,andcontroldesignsforover100waterandwastewatertreatment
facilities.Hisexperienceincludestheplanninganddesignofwaterandwastewaterprojects
throughallphases,includingplanning,design,construction,fieldservices,equipment/system
purchasing,operatortraining,andstartup.Electricalsystemsincludepowerdistributionatthe
mediumvoltageleveldowntocomponentlevel.ControlsystemsincludebothPLCbased
distributedcontrolandcentralmicrocomputerbasedsystems.Instrumentationsystemsinclude
fullinstrumentationdesignforbothmunicipalandindustrialwaterandwastewatersystems.
Mr.Smitheysrecentvalueengineeringexperienceincludesthe121mgdPointoftheMountain
WaterTreatmentPlantforMetropolitanWaterDistrictofSaltLakeandSandy,Utah.Hewasalso
theelectrical,instrumentation,andcontrolsengineerforCityofColusasWastewaterTreatment
PlantExpansionVEstudy,whichidentified30ideasforatotalsavingsof$3million.Additional
relevantprojectsincludeprovidingelectrical,instrumentation,andcontrolsdesignforthereverse
osmosisdesalinationfacilityforU.S.BureauofReclamationsSanLuisUnit.Healsoservedasthe
leadelectrical,instrumentation,andcontroldesignforimprovementstoprotectagainstsaltwater
intrusionforWestBasinMunicipalWaterDistrict.
OperationsandMaintenance(O&M)SpecialistChristopherMalinowski,P.E.,ENVSP
CHRISTOPHERMALINOWSKIrecentlyjoinedHDRwithresponsibilityforthedevelopmentofHDR's
O&Mbusinesslineinboththemunicipalandindustrialsectors.Hehasmorethan28yearsof
experienceprovidingstartup,commissioning,operations,andmaintenanceservicesforwaterand
wastewaterfacilities.HeisacertifiedwaterandwastewatertreatmentplantoperatorinTexas,a
P.E.,andanENVISIONSustainabilityProfessional.
CurrentresponsibilitiesincludeO&Mcontracts,startupandcommissioningservices,asset
management,plantdecommissioning,operabilityreviews,operationstroubleshooting,and
operationalefficiencystudies.Mr.Malinowskisexperienceincludesthemanagement,design,
O&M,andprojectdevelopmentofwaterandwastewatersystems.Hisexperiencealsoincludes
developingprojectstrategies,pricing,developingteamingarrangements,runningandinterpreting
financialmodels,andpreparingprojectproformas.Mr.Malinowskihasextensiveexperience
operatingmunicipalutilities,andawidevarietyofindustrialsites.AsVicePresidentofOperations
andMaintenanceforSouthwestWaterCompany,Mr.Malinowskihadoverallresponsibilityfor
over300waterandwastewatersystems.
ENVISIONEvaluatorGregoryBrink,CVS,PMP,PMIRMP,CCE/A,ENVSP
GREGBRINKisproposedastheENVISIONsustainabilityevaluatorforthisstudy.Inadditiontohis
vastexperiencewithriskmanagement,valueoptimization,costestimatingandproject
management,hehasprovidedENVISIONreviewandevaluationservicesforanumberof
infrastructureprojectsincludingwater/wastewaterpumpingfacilities,municipalinfrastructure
projectsandbilliondollartransitandhighwaytransportationprograms.
Mr.Brinksknowledgeandapplicationofsustainableconstructionpracticesprecededhis
certificationasanENVISIONSustainabilityProfessionalbyseveralyears,ashehaslongbeen
June4,2014
Page5
applyingUSGBCLEEDGreenBuildingprinciplestoenhancethesustainabilityofconstruction
practicesandimprovevaluefortheU.S.DepartmentofStateandU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers.
Mindfulofoverallstudycost,itisbeingproposedthatMr.Brinkparticipateviateleconference
andperformhisENVISIONevaluationfromhisofficeinLasVegas,NV;therefore,notravelis
includedforhisparticipationintheVEstudy.Mr.BrinkslevelofeffortfortheVEstudywillfocus
solelyonconductingtheEnvisionSustainabilityevaluationfortheproject.
3.0 REVISEDVESTUDYFEE
VMSunderstandstheneedfortheVEstudytoprovidetheproposedservicesatthelowestpossiblecostand
bestoverallvaluetoMPRWAandCAW.ThechangestotheVEteamhaveresultedinincreasedexperiencein
technicalteammembersatareducedcost.Inaddition,negotiationsintermsofscopeandtotalfeeresultedin
furtherreductionstotheplannedfeeforconductingtheVEstudy.Thefollowingistherevisedfeeresultingfrom
teammembermodificationsandnegotiations:
Item Name Hours Rate Cost Total

Program Manager Stewart, Robert 4 $290.22 $1,160.88
VE Team Leader Watson, Mark 24 $220.32 $5,287.68
Assistant Team Leader/Technical Writer Brink, Mariah 2 $92.53 $185.06
Project Coordinator Kramer, Cheryl 8 $158.61 $1,268.88
Civil/Structural Engineer Tavangar, Omid 8 $238.00 $1,904.00
Architect & LEED Evaluator Duran, Vic 8 $274.00 $2,192.00
Electrical, Instrumentation, and Controls Engineer Smithey, Larry 8 $231.00 $1,848.00
Operations and Maintenance Malinowski, Chris 8 $247.00 $1,976.00
Envision Evaluator Brink, Greg 8 $211.39 $1,691.12
$17,513.62
Assistant Team Leader/Technical Writer Brink, Mariah 50 $92.53 $4,626.50
Civil/Structural Engineer Tavangar, Omid 40 $238.00 $9,520.00
Architect & LEED Evaluator Duran, Vic 40 $274.00 $10,960.00
Electrical, Instrumentation, and Controls Engineer Smithey, Larry 40 $231.00 $9,240.00
Operations and Maintenance Malinowski, Chris 40 $247.00 $9,880.00
Envision Evaluator Brink, Greg 24 $211.39 $5,073.36
$60,315.86
Project Coordinator Kramer, Cheryl 2 $158.61 $317.22
QA/QC Stewart, Robert 4 $290.22 $1,160.88
$8,986.50
Project Coordinator Kramer, Cheryl 2 $158.61 $317.22
QA/QC Stewart, Robert 4 $290.22 $1,160.88
$9,682.72
$96,498.70
POSTWORKSHOP - VE Preliminary Report
Total POSTWORKSHOP - VE Preliminary Report :
POSTWORKSHOP - Implementation Meeting and Final VE Report
Total POSTWORKSHOP - I mplementation Meeting and Final VE Report:
Labor SubTotal:
Total PREWORKSHOP - Preparation and Coordination:
WORKSHOP - VE Study
Total WORKSHOP - VE Study:
REVISED VE STUDY FEE
Monterey Peninsula Desalination Plant - 5 Day VE Study
Monterey, CA
PREWORKSHOP - Preparation and Coordination
June4,2014
Page6

Category UM Number Rate Cost Total
Watson, Mark
Airfare Study and Implementation each 2 $800.00 $1,600.00
Round trip transportation each 2 $100.00 $200.00
Rental Car - 1 car Day 8 $75.00 $600.00
Meals and Incidentals Day 7 $71.00 $497.00
Lodging/Hotel Day 8 $145.00 $1,160.00
Parking-hotel Day 7 $15.00 $105.00
Baggage Fees each 4 $30.00 $120.00
$4,282.00
Brink, Mariah
Airfare each 1 $700.00 $700.00
Lodging/Hotel Day 5 $145.00 $725.00
$2,011.00
Tavangar, Omid
$1,691.00
Duran, Vic
$1,151.00
Smithey, Larry
$1,151.00
Malinowski, Chris
Airfare each 1 $700.00 $700.00
$2,101.00
Miscellaneous Direct Costs
Shipping - Preliminary, Draft Final, Final Reports LS 0 $300.00 $0.00
Reproduction - Preliminary, Draft Final, Final Reports EA 0 $100.00 $0.00
Miscellaneous Supplies - CDs, Labels, Paper LS 1 $150.00 $150.00
$150.00
$12,537.00
$109,035.70
Total:
Total:
Total:
Total:
Total:
Other Direct Costs
Other Direct Cost SubTotal:
TOTAL COST PROPOSAL
Total:
Total Misc. ODC:
June4,2014
Page7
ItwasapleasurespeakingwithMPRWAandCAWonbehalfofVMSforthisVEstudy.Welookforwardto
conductingthisVEstudyandimprovingvalueforthisexcitingproject.Ifyouhaveanyquestionsorcomments
concerningthismemosummarizingthenegotiations,pleasedonothesitatetocontactmeat(720)3084205or
emailGreg@vmsinc.com.
Sincerely,
VALUEMANAGEMENTSTRATEGIES,INC.
GregoryBrink,CVS,PMP,CCE/A,PMIRMP,ENVSP
Director
Copy:(PDF)Addressee
(PDF)IanCrooks,CaliforniaAmericanWater

1

EXHIBIT C
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Agreement for Value Engineering Services

THIS AGREEMENT is executed this __ day of June 2014, by and between the Monterey
Peninsula Regional Water Authority, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Authority",
and Value Management Strategies, Inc. (VMS), hereinafter called "Consultant".

IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Scope. Consultant hereby agrees to provide to the Authority, as the scope of
services under this Agreement, Value Engineering Services as described on the following
attachment: Proposal for Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project Desalination Plant VE
Study (attached hereto as Exhibit A), and as modified by VMS letter dated June 4, 2014
(attached hereto as Exhibit B).
2. Timely Work. Consultant shall perform all tasks in a timely fashion, as set forth
more specifically in paragraph 3 below. Failure to so perform is hereby deemed a material
breach of this Agreement, and Authority may terminate this Agreement with no further liability
hereunder, or may agree in writing with Consultant to an extension of time.

3. Term. The work under this Agreement shall commence no later than June 1,
2014 and shall be completed by July 31, 2014, unless Authority grants a written extension of
time as forth in paragraph 2 above.

4. Compensation. Authority agrees to pay and Consultant agrees to accept as full
and fair consideration for the performance of this Agreement, a payment in a total amount of
not-to-exceed one hundred nine thousand thirty-five dollars and seventy cents
($109,035.70). Compensation under this Agreement shall become due and payable 30 days
after Authoritys approval of Consultants submission of a written invoice to the Authority
Executive Director. Written invoices shall include a copy of timesheets or invoices from sub-
consultants. The payment of any compensation to Consultant hereunder shall be contingent
upon performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement to the satisfaction of the
Authority. If Authority determines that the work set forth in the written invoice has not been
performed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, Authority shall not be responsible for
payment until such time as the work has been satisfactorily performed.

2

5. Additional Services. In the event that Authority should request additional
services not covered by the terms of this Agreement, said services will be provided by
Consultant and paid for by Authority only after a fee for said services has been agreed upon
between Consultant and the Authority Executive Director, only after the Authority Director
provides written authorization for the additional work.

6. Meet and Confer. Consultant agrees to meet and confer with Authority or its
agents or employees with regard to services as set forth herein as may be required by Authority
to insure timely and adequate performance of this Agreement.

7. Indemnification. Consultant hereby agrees to the following indemnification
clause:

To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, without limitation, California Civil Code
Sections 2782 and 2782.6), Consultant shall defend (with legal counsel reasonably
acceptable to the Authority), indemnify and hold harmless the Authority and its officers,
designated agents, departments, officials, representatives and employees (collectively
"Indemnitees") from and against claims, loss, cost, damage, injury expense and liability
(including incidental and consequential damages, court costs, reasonable attorneys' fees,
litigation expenses and fees of expert consultants or expert witnesses incurred in connection
therewith and costs of investigation) to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to, the
negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, any Subconsultant, anyone
directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone that they control (collectively "Liabilities").
Such obligations to defend, hold harmless and indemnify any Indemnitee shall not apply to the
extent that such Liabilities are caused in part by the negligence, or willful misconduct of such
Indemnitee.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the above paragraph, Consultant agrees to indemnify
and hold harmless the Authority from and against any and all claims, demands, defense costs,
liability, expense, or damages arising out of or in connection with damage to or loss of any
property belonging to Consultant or Consultant's employees, contractors, representatives,
patrons, guests or invitees.

Consultant further agrees to indemnify Authority for damage to or loss of Authority
property to the proportionate extent they arise out of Consultant's negligent performance of
the work associated with this agreement or to the proportionate extent they arise out of any
negligent act or omission of Consultant or any of Consultant's employees, agents, contractors,
representatives, patrons, guests or invitees; excepting such damage or loss arising out of the
negligence of the Authority.

8. Insurance. Consultant shall submit and maintain in full force all insurance as
described herein. Without altering or limiting Consultant's duty to indemnify, Consultant shall
maintain in effect throughout the term of this Agreement a policy or policies of insurance with
the following minimum limits of liability:

3

Commercial general liability insurance: including but not limited to premises, personal
injuries, bodily injuries, products, and completed operations, with a combined single limit
of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate.
Professional Liability Insurance: Consultant shall maintain in effect throughout the term
of this Agreement professional liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000
per claim and $2,000,000 in the aggregate. Consultant will either maintain or cause to be
maintained professional liability coverage in full force or obtain extended reporting (tail)
coverage (with the same liability limits) for at least three years following Authority's
acceptance of the work.
Commercial automobile liability insurance: covering all automobiles, including owned,
leased, non-owned, and hired automobiles, used in providing services under this
Agreement, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Workers' Compensation Insurance: If Consultant employs others in the performance of
this agreement, Consultant shall maintain workers' compensation insurance in
accordance with California Labor Code section 3700 and with a minimum of $100,000
per occurrence for employer's liability.
Other Insurance Requirements:
A. All insurance required under this Agreement must be written by an insurance
company either:

admitted to do business in California with a current A.M. Best rating of no
less than A:VI; or
an insurance company with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A:
VII.

Exception may be made for the State Compensation Insurance Fund when
not specifically rated.

B. Each insurance policy required by this agreement shall be endorsed to state
that Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority shall be given notice in
writing at least thirty days in advance of any cancellation thereof, except 10-
day notice for nonpayment of the premium.

C. The general liability and auto policies shall:

Provide an endorsement naming the Authority, its officers, officials, and
employees as additional insureds under an ISO CG 20 10 07 04 or ISO 20 37
07 04 or their equivalent.
Provide that such insurance is primary and non-contributing insurance to any
insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Authority.
Contain a "Separation of Insureds" provision substantially equivalent
to that used in the ISO form CG 00 01 10 01 or their equivalent.

4

Provide for a waiver of any subrogation rights against the Authority via an
ISO CG 24 01 10 93 or its equivalent.

D. Prior to the start of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall file
certificates of insurance and endorsements evidencing the coverage required
by this agreement with the Authority. Consultant shall file a new or amended
certificate of insurance promptly after any change is made in any insurance
policy which would alter the information on the certificate then on file.

E. Neither the insurance requirements hereunder, nor acceptance or approval of
Consultants insurance, nor whether any claims are covered under any
insurance, shall in any way modify or change Consultants obligations under
the indemnification clause in this Agreement, which shall continue in full force
and effect. Notwithstanding the insurance requirements contained herein,
Consultant is financially liable for its indemnity obligations under this
Agreement.

F. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved
by the Authority. At the option of the Authority, either: the insured shall
reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects
the Authority, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or Consultant
shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the Authority guaranteeing
payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and
defense expenses.

9. Ownership of Work. Upon completion of the work under this Agreement,
ownership, and title to all materials and deliverables produced as part of this Agreement will
automatically be vested in the Authority and no further agreement will be necessary to transfer
ownership to Authority.

10. Licensing. Consultant represents as follows: that it is experienced in the
professional services and a specialist in the work performed under this Agreement; is duly
organized, existing and in good standing under applicable state law; and is properly licensed
and/or certified to perform the work specified under this Agreement, including but not limited to
possession of a current City of Monterey business license, and will only employ persons and
sub-consultants with all required licenses and certifications.

11. Substitution of Consultant Personnel. The key personnel of Consultant or any
sub-consultants listed in Consultants proposal and assigned to perform the work under this
Agreement may not be substituted with or replaced by other personnel or sub-consultants
without the advance written consent of the Executive Director of the Authority.
12. Termination. Termination. This agreement may be terminated by either party
upon ten (10) calendar days written notice to the other party. In the event of such termination
Authority shall pay Consultant for all services performed to the satisfaction of Authority to the
date of receipt of notice of termination. An itemized statement of the work performed to the date
of termination shall be submitted to Authority. In ascertaining the services actually rendered
hereunder up to the date of termination of this agreement consideration shall be given to both

5

completed work and work in process of completion, and to complete and incomplete drawings
and other documents whether delivered to Authority or in the possession of the Consultant.

13. Agency. In performing the services specified under this Agreement, Consultant
is hereby deemed to be an independent Consultant and not an agent or employee of Authority.
14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the
parties hereto and supersedes any and all prior agreements, whether oral or written, relating to
the subject matter thereof. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if it is in
writing signed by both parties hereto.
15. Validity. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will continue in full
force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.
16. Assignment of Interest. The duties under this Agreement shall not be assignable,
delegable, or transferable without the prior written consent of Authority. Any such purported
assignment, delegation, or transfer shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement upon
which Authority may terminate this Agreement and be entitled to damages.
17. Conflict of Interest. Consultant hereby certifies that it does not now have, nor
shall it acquire, any financial or business interest that would conflict with the performance of
services under this Agreement.
18. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of
which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts.
19. Laws. Consultant agrees that in the performance of this Agreement it will
reasonably comply with all applicable State, Federal and local laws and regulations. This
Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
California and the City of Monterey.
20. Venue. Should either party to this agreement bring legal action against the other
(formal judicial proceeding, mediation, or arbitration) the venue for the matter shall be Monterey
County, California.
21. Notices. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given by either
party to the other, shall be considered fully received when made in writing and deposited in the
United States mail, certified and postage prepaid, and addressed to the respective parties as
follows:

James M.Cullem, P.E.
Executive Director,

6

_735 Pacific Street__________________
Monterey, CA 93940
CONSULTANT:
___________________
___________________
___________________

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is entered into by the parties hereto on the
day and year first above written in Monterey, California.

AUTHORITY CONSULTANT

__________________________ __________________________
President of MPRWA Value Management Strategies, Inc.

511 Forest Lodge Road
Suite #100
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
P: 831-646-3217
www.amwater.com
*
CALIFORNIA
AMERICAN WATER
June 10, 2014
James M. Cullem, P.E.
Executive Director
Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)
580 Pacific St, Room 6
Monterey, CA 93940
Re: Value Engineering (VE) Escrow Account
Dear Mr. Cullem,
As we discussed and agreed, the MPRWA should establish an escrow account to pay for the VE
contract services with VMS. California American Water will provide a check in the amount of
$109,035.70 for direct contract services plus $11,000.00 for contingencies. Any remaining
escrow balance will be refunded to California American Water within thirty (30) days of the
completion of VE work under the contract with VMS.
Please send an invoice in the amount of $120,035.70 to my attention in order to process the
check.
Sincerely,
Manager Engineering
C: Richard Svindland, P.E. Vice-President, California American Water
Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 7.

06/12

SUBJECT: Receive Report on Progress of Securitization Bills in the State Legislature and
the Status of Settling Parties Joint Comments on Ruling Requesting Comments
on Surcharge Options and Proposals

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Water Authority receive an update from Director Burnett and/or staff
on the status of the Securitization bills in the State Legislature and the status of proposed
changes in the surcharge schedule being considered by the CPUC.

DISCUSSION:

On May 23
rd
, the State Senate voted 32-0 in favor of our securitization legislation. It is now
being taken up in the Assembly. A more detailed update will be provided verbally at the Water
Authority meeting.

Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 8.

06/12

SUBJECT: Receive Report, Discuss latest CPUC Schedule for the Monterey
Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP)

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Water Authority review and discuss the current CPUC
schedule for the MPWSP as annotated by staff.

DISCUSSION:

Attachment #1 is the latest staff revision (12 June 2014) to the initial 7 October 2013
CPUC schedule for the MPWSP including the activities needed for a successful and
timely GWR project.

Italicized dates represent the most recent completion dates while standard type reflects
the dates established during settlement negotiations (10 September 2013).

Items shown in red are suggested by staff to be critical, those in yellow as approaching
critical. All others do not seem to be critical or near critical as of this date.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Focused schedule dated 12 June 2014.

October 7, 2013
015621\0002\11340073.1
6/10/14
Revised Schedule and Task List for MPWSP Post Settlement (REV 12 JUNE 2014)
Italics are changes. Red are actions past due. Yellow are near term.
CPUC Calendar Dates
Task Due Date Responsible Party Notes
Comments on
Settlement Agreements
Due
August 30, 2013 Complete
Reply Comments on
Settlement Agreements
Due
September 13, 2013 Complete
Prehearing
Conference: Status of
Settlement Motion (if
any), of CEQA work
& other matters
September 16, 2013 Complete
Quarterly Check-in Call
with Settling Parties
October 2013 MPRWA In Progress
Informational Hearing
on Settlement
Agreements
December 2-3, 2013
January 2014 MPRWA
DEIR circulated for
Comment
3
rd
Qtr 2014 DEIR out in June 2014
April 2014 MPRWA
Cal-Am to file and serve
a common outline for
legal and policy briefs,
after consulting with
parties
15 days after issuance
of DEIR

Comments on DEIR
Due
of DEIR
DEIR to be published 1
st

Qtr 2015
Common Outline
Opening Briefs filed and
served on legal and
policy issues

60 Days after Issuance
of DEIR
15 days after Issuance
DEIR- Cal Am to
file/serve common
outline for legal & policy
briefs
Reply Briefs filed and
served on legal and
policy issues
of DEIR

FEIR published 1
st
Qtr 2015

Proposed
Decision addressing
certification of FEIR and
issuance of CPCN
1
st
Qtr 2015
July 2014 MPRWA
Target for Commission
Action on Phase I
1
st
Qtr 2015
Quarterly Check-in Call October 2014 MPRWA
October 7, 2013
015621\0002\11340073.1
6/10/14
January 2015 MPRWA

October 7, 2013
015621\0002\11340073.1
6/10/14
GWR
File Motion for
Bifurcation of the
GWR Decision
August 2013 MRWPCA Complete and Granted
Board Actions to
Approve Revised
Governance Committee
Agreement
October 2013
August/Sept 2013
MPWMD, MPRWA,
County, & Cal-Am
To be Completed in
October
Executed Agreements
for GWR Source Water
and/or Declaratory
Relief

June 23, 2014

MRWPCA Meet & Confer in
Progress

Draft WPA
Mar 2014

MPWMD & MRWPCA
Obtain Representations
from DPH re Use of
Extracted GWR Water

Oct 2014

MRWPCA
Obtain Representations
from RWQCB re Use of
Extracted GWR Water

Oct 2014

MRWPCA
Storage Agreement
with Seaside Basin
Watermaster

Jul 2014

MRWPCA & MPWMD
GWR Basis of Design
Complete with At Least
10% Design

Jul 2014

MRWPCA
GWR Financing Plan
Sufficient for SRF
Funding

Aug 2014

MRWPCA & MPWMD
Agreement on Terms of
WPA

May 2014

Cal-Am, MRWPCA,
&MPWMD

Perform Revenue
Requirement Analysis
Including Any Debt
Equivalency Effect

Jul 2014

MRWPCA & MPWMD
Perform Assessment of
GWR Positive and
Negative Externalities
for Any Premium
Showing
June 2014

MRWPCA & MPWMD
DEIR Circulated July 2014 MRWPCA
Dilution Water
Requirements
July-October 2014 MRWPCA
Project Approved and
FEIR
October 2014 MRWPCA
All Permits for GWR
Construction Obtained

???
January 2015
MRWPCA

October 7, 2013
015621\0002\11340073.1
6/10/14
Source Wells

Drill Exploratory
Boreholes
Sept. 2013 February
2014
Cal-Am PENDING
Commence
Hydrogeologic Study
and Technical Report
August 2013 Cal-Am / SVWC Draft completed. ?
Permits for CEMEX
Site Test Well
January 2014
Aug 2014
Cal-Am MND circulated in May
2014
Drill CEMEX Site Test
Well
February 2014
Nov 2014
Cal-Am DELAYED
Results of Test Well
Operation Obtained
February 2014
February 2016
Cal-Am DELAYED
Hydrogeologic Study
and Technical Report
Complete and Results
Filed with CPUC

June 2015
Cal-Am DELAYED
Necessary Agreements
from CEMEX for
Source Wells
Nov. 2015, or sooner Cal-Am ?
All Necessary Permits
for Construction of
Source Wells Obtained
Nov. 2015, or sooner Cal-Am ?
October 7, 2013
015621\0002\11340073.1
6/10/14
Securitization
Initial Revision and
Redline of Legislation
Early September 2013 MPWMD Complete
Obtain Cal-Am Input on
Draft Legislation
Late September 2013 MPWMD, MPRWA, &
Cal-Am
Complete
Retain Necessary
Additional
Financial/Legal
Consultants (Charles
Atkins)
October 2013

MPWMD In Progress
Revise Financial
Comparison of
Securitization v. Cal-Am
Financing
October 2013 MPWMD & Cal-Am In Progress
Meeting with
Community/Interest
Groups and Cities
October-December
2013
MPWMD & MPRWA In Progress
Further Revise
Legislation as
Necessary
October-November
2013
In Progress
Draft Summary of
Legislation
December 2013 MPWMD Complete
Introduce Legislation January 2014 Complete
Lobbying Effort February-April 2014 MPWMD, MPRWA, &
Cal-Am
In Progress
Legislation Adopted April-May 2014
?
Passed Senate
Unanimously; Referred
to Assembly
Initial Draft of Motion for
Financing Order
April 2014
?
MPWMD
Perform Analysis to
Demonstrate Annual
Customer Benefits
Exceed 1.0% of Total
Annual Revenue
Requirement
April 2014
?
MPWMD & Cal-Am
October 7, 2013
015621\0002\11340073.1
6/10/14

Motion for Financing
Order
May 2014
?
MPWMD
Obtain CPUC Financing
Order

?
Order on securitization
financing on satisfaction
of remaining criteria
from Settlement K
Preliminary Discussions
with Bond Underwriters
September-December
2014
MPWMD
Drafting of
documentation for bond
requests
September 2014-April
2015
MPWMD & Cal-Am
Preliminary Discussions
with Rating Agencies
February-April 2015 MPWMD
Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 9.

06/12

SUBJECT: Receive Update and Discuss the Marina Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP) Slant Test
Well.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Water Authority receive an update from Cal Am on the
Marina Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Test Slant Well, and discuss the
impact on well installation and on the MPWSP schedule.

DISCUSSION:

The test slant well has undergone an extensive environmental review process that has
resulted in Marina circulating an MND in May 2014. Cal Am will provide more details on
the MND and its impact on the MPWSP schedule at the Water Authority meeting.

ATTACHMENTS

The above referenced documents are very large and are hosted by the City of Marina.
They can be accessed through the following links:

Marina Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Cal Am slant test:
http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/documents/14/16/459/Slant%20Test%20Well%20Draf
t%20IS-MND_051614_201405191103365137.pdf

MND Appendicies: http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/4541

Agenda Report

Date: June 12, 2014
Item No: 10.

06/12

SUBJECT: Discuss and Provide Direction Regarding the Detailed Critical Path
Method (CPM) Schedule for all Permits and Approvals for the Monterey
Peninsula Water Supply Project.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Water Authority discuss tracking of all future permits and
approvals for the MPWSP through the development by Cal Am of a critical path
schedule or equivalent.

DISCUSSION:

At the Governance Committee meeting of May 23 and the TAC meeting of June 2
nd
, the
Executive Director recommended that the Authority begin tracking all future permit and
approval requirements by means of a Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule or its
equivalent.

The Director would suggest that Cal Am provide the schedule by August 1, and that the
TAC add tracking the permit and approval schedule to its annual work plan.

MPRWA Final Agenda Packet 06-12-14 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MPRWA Final Agenda Packet 06-12-14 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agenda

Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA)

Proposal to Provide Value Engineering Services Value Management Strategies, Inc.

Item Name Hours Rate Cost Total

You might also like